Muslim Rashtriya Manch (MRM), an affiliate of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has said it will run awareness campaigns across the country in support of raising the minimum marriage age of Muslim women.

The Union government has introduced the “Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021” in the winter session of Parliament last year. The Bill seeks to increase the age of marriage of women from 18 years to 21 years. The Bill has been sent to the Parliamentary standing committee for examination.

Mohammed Afzal, the national convener of MRM said his team will visit all the districts of Uttar Pradesh to raise awareness on raising the Muslim women’s minimum marriage age. He further said the Muslim community should be made aware of the ill effects of various issues plaguing the community.  These are triple talaq, halala, polygamy, hijab, the marriage of girls attaining puberty, etc.

The Manch has called for a nationwide discussion on these issues. The discussions will be held with the cross-section of the Muslim community. “Various cells of the Manch will prepare a plan of reforms by taking together different sections of the society and will implement them in a sequential manner across the country,” he said.

The MRM is a Muslim organisation that’s inspired by RSS ideology. It was formed in 2002 in the presence of the then RSS chief K.S. Sudarshan with the stated aim of bringing Muslim communities close to Hindus in India. MRM has 10,000 volunteers and its website is www.muslimrashtriyamanch.org.

The MRM has also expressed support for many of the causes espoused by the RSS, including the banning of cow slaughter. It also supported the singing of ‘Vande Mataram’. “Our Muslim brothers should understand that Vande Mataram is the national song and every Indian citizen should respect and recite it,” said Afzal adding that those Muslims who refuse to sing it are opponents of both Islam and India.

In August 2008, MRM organised a Paigham-e-Aman (message of peace) yatra from the Red Fort in Delhi to Kashmir in support of land allocation for the Amarnath pilgrimage.

In November 2009, the MRM organised a Tiranga yatra (march in honor of the national flag) leading to the Gateway of India in Mumbai, protesting against terrorism. One thousand volunteers took a pledge against terror and vowed to campaign against it in their home districts.

In September 2012, the MRM organised a signature campaign to revoke Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, which granted limited autonomy to the state of Jammu and Kashmir, and claimed to have collected 7,00,000 signatures.

When questioned about Modi’s involvement in the Gujarat riots, Afzal stated, “Had Mr. Modi been involved in the riots, his police would not have fired 1,200 rounds and killed over 200 rioters. Every court has acquitted him. And there has not been a single incident of communal violence in Gujarat since 2002.”

The MRM has also expressed its views that ‘Yoga’ has nothing to do with religion. It further stated that “Namaaz is one sort of Yoga asana”. His statement was supported by the Union Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga, and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, and Homoeopathy (AYUSH), though many Hindu organisations had objections to it.

*Views expressed are the author’s own. Syed Ali Mujtaba is a journalist based in Chennai.

Related:

UP elections: Right-wing continues to push its communal agenda
Hijab ban: Multiple Dimensions
Condemn Haridwar Dharma Sansad remarks: RSS’ Muslim Wing woos voters for BJP

The post MRM pushes for raising Muslim women’s minimum marriage age appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the right, under Article 21 of the Constitution, while considering a petition of a couple who had attained majority as per law and wished to live together. Justice Alka Sarin held that parents cannot dictate with whom their child chooses to spend her life with.

Both petitioners, above 18 years of age, filed this petition seeking protection of their life and liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. When the parents of the petitioner no.1 became aware of their relationship, fights took place between the families. The parents of petitioner No.1, the girl, gave her severe beatings and decided to marry her against her wishes, confined her into a room, snatched her mobile phone and threatened to kill her if she kept any kind of relationship with petitioner No.2, the boy. Further, since the boy was still not of marriageable age, they decided to live-in together till they could get married.

The court held that the girl, being more than 18 years of age, is a major and well within her right to decide for herself what is good for her and what is not. The court further held that the fact remains that both the petitioners in the present case are major and have a right to live their life on their own terms and parents cannot compel their major children to live a life on their terms.

The court observed, “The petitioners are both major and have every right to live their lives as they desire within the four corners of the law. The society cannot determine how an individual should live her or his life”. Considering the fact that the boy was a major but not of marriageable age, the court held, “Merely because of the fact that petitioner No.2 is not of a marriageable age the petitioners cannot possibly be denied enforcement of their fundamental rights as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners, both being major, have decided to live together in a live-in relationship and there possibly may not be any legally justifiable reason for the respondents to object to the same”.

The court directed SSP, Fatehgarh Sahib to decide the representation moved before him by the petitioners contending that their life and liberty is in grave danger at the hands of family members of the girl. The court however clarified that its order should neither be construed as an expression of opinion on the veracity of the contents of the present petition, nor as a stamp of this Court on the validity of the alleged live-in relationship.

The complete order may be read here.

Related:

Allahabad HC reunites interfaith couple, provides police protection

UP: 3 arrested for alleged attempt to forceful conversion to Christianity

Inter faith unions: Lawlessness widespread in Uttar Pradesh

The post Major couple even if not of marriageable age can live together: Punjab and Haryana HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In another month, a high powered task force set up by the Parliament, will submit its report on whether the minimum legal age for marriage for women in India needs to be changed from the current 18 years. The Union Ministry of Women and Child Development had notified the committee chaired by veteran politician and activist Jaya Jaitly. The committee has been formed under the Women Welfare Division, of the ministry and was notified in the Gazette on June 4.

The taskforce is mandated to study the implications of the age of marriage of girls, age of childbirth on the health and mortality rates of both infants and mothers, in India. It is expected to submit its findings by July 31. The meetings have begun, and inputs on various elements have been sought from subject experts from across the country. 

Chairperson Jaya Jaitly, told SabrangIndia that the broad issues that are being examined include legislative measures, the various existing laws and how they intertwine, perhaps even contradict each other. “We will study the social inputs, as well as the laws and status on  health and education. For example the impact on education of girls, of Swacch Bharat, the mid day meal schemes,” she said. The committee has already held two meetings, and in its future meetings will also study the international precedents on what the ideal age of marriage is in various countries. “We need to look at best practices,” says Jaitly, “we can’t just give a wishlist and idealism.” She says the task force will study the following broad elements, “We need to look at health,  law, primary education, secondary education etc.” The proposal, once accepted, may be discussed in Parliament, and eventually become law. 

According to sources, the task force’s recommendations may pave the way for the amendments of  key laws including Protection of Children from Sexual Offences; Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).  

The issue was highlighted by Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in her Budget speech this year. She is quoted in the Gazette saying, “Women’s age of marriage was increased from fifteen years to eighteen years in 1978, by amending erstwhile Sharda Act of 1929. As India progresses further, opportunities open up for women to pursue higher education and careers. There are imperatives of lowering MMR as well as improvement of nutrition levels. Entire issue about the age of a girl entering motherhood needs to be seen in this light. I propose to appoint a task force that will present its recommendations in six months’ time..” 

The taskforce members include: Dr. Vinod Paul, Member (Health), Niti Aayog, Dr  Najma Akhtar (VC Jamia),  Vasudha Kamath (VC, SNDT Univ, Maharashtra), Dr  Dipti Shah (leading gynaecologist, Gujarat) as well as secretaries from the ministries of Health and Family Welfare, Women & Child Development, Higher Education, School Education & Literacy, and Legislative Department. 

The task force will also invite experts from other fields, especially those working on child rights’ issues, to consult with them in future meetings. The meetings remain virtual under the Covid-19 conditions, and the task force has been provided secretarial assistance by the NITI Aayog. 

The official terms of reference for  the task force are:

Examine the correlation of age of marriage and motherhood with (a) health, medical well-being and nutritional status of mother and (b) neonate/infant/child, during pregnancy, birth and thereafter

Suggest measures for promoting higher education among women

Suggest suitable legislative instruments and/or amendments in existing laws to support its recommendations

Work out a detailed roll-out plan with timelines to implement its recommendations 

The reason health is foremost on the list is the expert opinion that motherhood at a younger age increases infant and maternal mortality. Some others argue that an older woman has lesser reproductive years ahead of her. 

According to a report in the Economic Times, Indian government’s move to revise the legal age of marriage for women, may have been triggered by a 2017 Supreme Court ruling on marital rape “exemption”. The ET reffers to the said judgment “which held that child marriages should be rendered void-ab-initio (invalid from the outset) to shield women from marital rape, had set the ball rolling for the Centre to amend the existing law to declare child marriages invalid.” 

The Hindu then had also reported that, “Exception clause to the heinous offence of rape allows a man to have sex with his wife who is not aged below 15.”  According to a PTI report carried by The Indian Express, “The apex court, however, sought to know as to whether Parliament debated the aspect of protecting married girls, between the age group of 15-18 years, from the forced sexual acts by their spouses. It also asked whether the court could intervene to protect the rights of such married girls who may be sexually exploited by their spouses. The apex court also said that marriage of a girl, who is below the age of 15 years, was ‘illegal’”.

“Yes, many contradictions already exist,” said the veteran leader, “the minimum age of marriage was raised from 16 to 18.” She added the task force still needs to study again the marriage age, in relation to the changes in education and health, beyond what the law on age is. There may also be a discussion on the parity between genders and the legal marriageable ages for each. At the moment young men who are 21, and young women who are 18 years of age can marry under the law. According to sources, the recommendations are likely to propose that the minimum age of marriage for women in India be raised 21, at par with the men. 

Though Jaitly herself has said that the task force’s discussions are in an early stage yet, and many factors, laws, precedences are yet to be examined. She says, the “best practises” need to be drawn from.

The focus should now be on “incentives rather than punishments,” said Jaitly when asked about the flouting of the existent anti child-marriage law, among some socio-ethnic groups in the country. The committee will also closely look at the various clauses in Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006. It may also consider if it is better to have the same age of marriage for both genders and what that age should be. “After all, the voting age is the same, but I look at my grandson who is almost 18 years old, and I can’t imagine him thinking about marriage. Teenagers have many other worries…” said Jaitly, on a lighter note.

In the early inputs, the figures on the application of various government welfare schemes aimed at the girl child, especially her education, have been submitted and are being studied. More reports, especially on health are expected to be submitted to the task force soon. According to sources, it has also been suggested that the members of the task force perhaps invite the major stakeholders: the young women and men who will be directly impacted, to offer their opinions. In the current situation, this may be done over video conferencing, or a virtual town hall. Though this too is just an idea that one of the task force members have voiced and needs to be discussed further. 

“Yes, a member suggested we reach out to the stakeholders, (perhaps via) the youth, and sports ministry. We need to (hear from) young voices,” confirmed Jaitly.

The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 has a number of punishments, such as:

Solemnising a child marriage—Whoever performs, conducts, directs or abets any child marriage shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment which may extend to two years and shall be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees.

Promoting,  permitting, attending, participating in the solemnisation of child marriages shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend up to one lakh rupees.

The marriage of a minor child is declared to be void if the child is:

Taken or enticed out of the keeping of the lawful guardian; or by force compelled, or by any deceitful means induced to go from any place.

Is sold for the purpose of marriage; and made to go through a form of marriage or if the minor is married after which the minor is sold or trafficked or used for immoral purposes. 

According to UNICEF, India has the highest absolute number of child brides in the world. The situation is explained in detail by Girls Not Brides, a global partnership of non government organisations that work to end child marriage. Their studies elucidate that child marriage in India is driven by gender inequality, level of education, and poverty. Points that Jatly also said will be examined. 

Girls Not Brides, also adds other social factors that lead to marriage of young girls such as ‘to preserve the purity’, or ensuring that there is no ‘risk’ of pre marital sex, or worse, sexual assault. However, the partnership adds that “child brides in India are at greater risk of sexual and physical violence within their marital home.” According to the website India has committed to eliminate child, early and forced marriage by 2030 in line with target 5.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals. 

The post 21 years to be minimum legal age of marriage in India for women too? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: The Hindu

In what can only be termed as an ingenious appeal, Ganesh Devy – Thinker, Professor and Cultural Activist started a fast to call in the attention of the youth of Maharashtra to move beyond caste and religion while considering marriage.

The fast, which lasts for 8 days, starting on Gandhi Jayanti, rests on a very unique condition. In this period, Professor Devy, 69, will not consume any solid food until he gets a commitment of a 100 people every day to join him in his movement against communalism. He promises to eat only if the criteria of a 100 youth committing to the cause is fulfilled every day, else he only survives on water.

His appeal is for fostering secularism and for a modern India and he says, ““We cannot create modern India as long as intolerance and violence in the name of caste and religion does not end.”

He also plans to ask the consenting young people, who associate with this movement, to assemble in Nagpur in the last week of December for a two day sammelan called ‘The Mainstream India’. He is confident of at least 15,000 – 20,000 people attending the event

An email id (rsd@beyondcaste.com) and a Google form (https://forms.gle/U25bdt4uysMYMDoj7) which has been made available for the youth to register with the movement, has already garnered 900 responses from the young people of India in just 2 days of its commencement.

Who is Ganesh Devy and what does he stand for?

Ganesh Devy, as most know him, is a literary scholar, cultural activist and institution builder. He is best known for the People’s Linguistic Survey of India, and is popularly called the ‘man who discovered 750 languages’. He is also the creator of the Adivasi Academy.

Back in the 70s, he along with his wife, Surekha, would set out on his scooter every Saturday morning to a neighboring village in Baroda, where he resided earlier. He visited the villages to understand the people and spend time with them. This absence of an agenda and belief in equality among people—nullifying traditional hierarchies between the observer and observed, scholar and subject—won him not only the trust but also the faith of Adivasis.

Ganesh Devy decided to shift base from Vadodara to Dharwad after the murder of MM Kalburgi. Kalburgi’s death was the last straw for Devy who was deeply disturbed by the killings of NarendraDabholkar and GovindPansare.

He has since taken the lead in many agitations of writers and thinkers with focus on pluralism and the right to free expression. He says that these values are even more threatened today when the makings of a modern India are threatened by forces of communalism.

On asking why he took up such an innovative movement, he said that he wanted the youth of the country to fly out of their cage. The youth, he said, were being trapped in the cages of caste and religion which was fanned by hate by extremist groups. He said that neither did he nor his family members and even his children pay attention to caste while deciding their marriages. They simply got into the union as ‘human beings’.

What His Appeal Is and What It Is Not

Ganesh Devy says that his appeal is a step towards change. He knows that even in this grim atmosphere of hate, people are capable of change. He believes that people are capable of love and compassion.

His appeal is not a political stunt or a media event. His belief ‘love is the true religion’ is the only message he wants to give the youth. He has stood by this principle his entire life and wishes to take this plea of humanity to the young people of India.

His only wish is to see a country that has risen above the shackles of caste and religion to achieve its true potential.

We, at Sabrang India, stand with Professor Ganesh Devy in his noble movement. Do you?
 

The post “Go beyond caste and religion when you’re thinking of getting married”: Cultural Activist Ganesh Devy appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Suya Mariyadai Iyakkam (Self-Respect Movement) is perhaps among the most radical and progressive aspects of the Dravidian Movement. The Dravidian Movement itself is often traced back to the founding of the South Indian Liberal Federation in 1916. In the then Madras Presidency, it consisted of an anti-Brahmin position by people coming together around a common south Indian identity. By the following year, it became the Justice Party. The history of the Justice Party is long-winded: it ran into several hurdles due to varying linguistic identities within it and pro-British leanings that did not stand the test of Independence sentiments. It is only meaningful to this discussion in so far as that it soon was not a federation of identities based on several south Indian languages, but only Tamil and would later become closely associated with Periyaar and the Suya Mariyadai Iyakkam. Meanwhile, Periyaar who until 1925, had been a part of the Tamil Nadu Congress Committee (TNCC) stepped down, feeling that there was a strong Brahmin bias within the party and that leaders like Gandhi were not doing enough for oppressed castes¹. Between the mid-1930s and the 1940s, Periyaar began the Suya Mariyadai Iyakkam, took over the leadership of the Justice Party, threw out British loyalists and  brought in the demands of his movement instead-creating a split. Those who stayed with him, stayed under the banner of the Dravida Kazhagam (Federation). The remains of the Justice Party eventually died out.

The call for a separate Dravidian homeland, the anti-Hindi, anti-Brahmin, anti-British stance is well-known. Periyaar was an iconoclast for whom all organised religions were a problem, but he harboured a special dislike for Hinduism. To him the Sanskritised Brahmanical stranglehold was what endorsed caste-based discrimination and patriarchy². His travel to the Soviet Union and Europe in the 20s and 30³ made him sympathetic towards socialism, communism, and anti-Imperialist movements. Perhaps, this contributed to his belief that the desire for private property and patriarchy were closely allied⁴. In the chapter on marriages in his book Penn Yean Adimaiyanaal (How Women were Enslaved), he calls the ritualism and especially the term “deyviga kalyanam” – loosely, a wedding ordained by the gods themselves –a scam and really just a means to keep a woman “shackled” to her husband.⁵ He despised the notion of a nuptial contract that kept a woman subservient to a man in every way including sexually. It is interesting to note that born E V Ramaswami Naicker, he came to be called “Periyaar” first at the Tamil Nattu Permagalir Manadu (Tamil Women’s Conference), 1938 by Neelambikai Ammaiyar.⁶
 
The criticisms levied against Periyaar then and now though not without substance, can hopefully been seen alongside the lasting fractures he made within traditional Tamil society. The Suya Mariyadai Kalyanam was at once a rejection of oppressive gender and caste hierarchies. It recognises only marriage vows that accept both members as equal companions in life, doing away with the holy fires, priests, and any ritual that designates the woman as subordinate to her husband. It has become a sanctuary for inter-caste marriages. Speaking to the Indian Cultural Forum, Isai Inmban, representing the Periyaar Marriage Bureau in Chennai, tells us: “More than 90% of the weddings we conduct are inter-caste in which one of the couple is adi-Dravidar (the term for dalits used by the DK amongst others) and are eloping” He also added that, “the point is not only to reject caste and orthodoxy, it is ultimately to destroy it. It was also created on the principle that women specially should be able to retain their dignity (though “suya mariyadai” is translated as “self-respect” the essence of the Tamil term is dignity and the right to self-determination,  as opposed to the indignities of caste-oppression.)” The vows are simple declarations of equality. Isai Inmban who also writes for the Tamil Journal, Vidutalai (Liberation) which was launched by Periyar and is still functional, recited them: 

“Vaazhvil erpadum inmba, thunbangallil, sama pangerkkum, sama urimai padaitha, otra nanbargallaga vazhvom endru uruthi kuurugiren. Vaazhvil enidem irunthu enna enna urimigallai thangalluku ethirpaarka urmiyundo, athe urimaygalli eithirpaarka urimai enakum undu.”

The vow translates as, “In all of life’s joys and troubles, we swear to share equal responsibility and equal entitlement/right, living as firm friends/companions. Whatever privileges you have the right to expect of me in our future, I have equal right to expect the same of  you”.  The couple must be at least 21 and need to furnish name, age, and address proof. They also have to be accompanied by four witnesses. A senior DK member presides over the ceremony as they exchange their vows and garlands.

C N Annadurai, Periyaar’s lieutenant of many years, broke away from the DK in 1949 over ideological differences, the aspiration for entering electoral politics (by his founding of the DMK), and a 72 year old Periyaar’s marriage to Maniamaal, a 25 year old party functionary. Despite this, when the DMK formed the state government in 1967 for the first time, he was instrumental in ensuring that the Suya Mariyadai Kalyanam was legally recognised. Under the Tamil Nadu Act 021 of 1967: Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1967, “an Act further to amend the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in its application to the [State of Tamil Nadu]. Whereas it is necessary to render valid suyamariyathai or seerthiruththa marriage” an incredibly progressive attempt at social reform passed into law.

While this looks like Tamil Nadu bounded forward towards social justice and reform, the continuing reality of caste and gender oppression is dire. The state ranks amongst those with the highest number of cases of caste atrocities registered. The latest report of the National Commission of Schedule Castes that is available on the website is for 2016-17. As per the report, based on NCRB (National Crime Records Bureau) data from 2015, 1782 cases were registered under the POA Act (Prevention of Atrocities Against Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes, 1989) For some perspective I must add that the numbers from UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh are much higher. In the same year, Tamil Nadu also features in the list of top ten states of ‘Incidents of riots on SCs by non-SCs’, coming up at the top three with 185 such cases. According to an analysis by IndiaSpend, conviction rates between the years 2006-2016 in Tamil Nadu are depressingly low – less than 10%. All of this begs the question, if these are the official figures, what are the unofficial cases/incidents of casteist violence and how many of them are due to inter-caste marriages?

November 2018, in Soolakondapalli, 13 kilometres from Hosur, a 25 year old Dalit man’s body clad in a blue T-shirt with the words “Jai Bhim” emblazoned on it, was found assaulted almost beyond recognition. In the following days his wife’s body, split open to “remove” a three month old foetus, her head shorn was also recovered. Swati belonged to the powerful Vanniyar caste and had been brutalised and murdered by her own family. The Vanniyar community who while on the one hand regularly prey on dalits, enjoy considerable political sway in the state.  The Hindu reports that in 2016, in the AIADMK state government, 19% of the MLAs were Vanniyar. Caste continues to play too successful role in state politics with various MBCs and OBCs warring it out and choosing allegiances based on it. This has in fact been one of the foremost criticisms of the Periyaarist and the rest of the Dravidian Movement, that it in many ways, abysmally failed the most marginalised communities within the state.

Kausalya and her husband V Shakti | Image Courtesy: The Hindu

In December last year, the wedding of anti-caste activist, Kausalya, came as a desperately needed act of resistance. Kausalya’s story is one of many despicable cases of “honour killings” – this euphemism for bigotry, brutality and murder remains baffling. Her first husband also a dalit, was set up on by men from her own family, who are from the Thevar caste. He was killed in the Udumalaipet market in the Coimbatore district in 2016. In 2017 her parents and others were finally lodged in the Coimbatore Central Prison. In December 2018, she did a Suya Mariyadai Kalyanam with parai drum artist and band member, V Sakthi at the Thanthai Periyaar Dravida Kazhagam office in Coimbatore. The parai drum always reviled by caste Hindus as unclean and symbolising an ill-omen as it is played traditionally  by dalits at funerals, has now in itseld become a symbol of dalit resistance.

As the Suya Mariyadai Kalyanam was legalised as an amendment to the Hindu Marriage Act, it has to be registered under the same. The Periyar Mariage Bureau, which is run by DK functionaries, conducts the weddings and gives the couple a signed certificate that can be used to register their marriage. When asked what those of other faiths who wish for a Suya Mariyadai Kalyanam can do, Isai Inmban agreed that this a drawback. He told us that the DK has requested the DMK to make a provision for inter-religious marriages to also be included. He added that inspite of this, they offer what advice and assistance they can to inter-faith couples who are eloping, in terms of what legal options they have.  Mr Inmban was confident that if the DMK were to return to power in the state, they would take the necessary steps. We will have to wait and see when the Legislative Assembly elections happen, if this indeed does make it into the party manifesto.

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum

The post Self-Respect Marriage: A Promise of Equality and Companionship appeared first on SabrangIndia.

After a whole decade of increases in the national marriage rate, China witnessed its second year of decline in the number of newly registered unions in 2015, with a 6.3% drop from 2014 and 9.1% from 2013. This was accompanied by a rise in the age of marriage, which has increased by about a year and a half in the first ten years of this century.

The decline and delay of marriage in China is part of a global trend. The United States, most OECD nations, and Japan, have all undergone a similar process in recent years, as have other major Chinese societies. Hong Kong and Taiwan, for instance, both have much higher ages of first marriage than mainland China.

But in a culture that puts great value on family, parents are alarmed by even the tiniest likelihood that their offspring will remain unmarried and childless. They fear the breaking of family lineage, or that there will be no one to look after their unmarried children when they’re gone.
 

Causing worry

While the traditional practice of arranged marriage has been illegal in China since the 1950s, parents remain heavily involved in their children’s marital decisions. Many Chinese parents relentlessly try to persuade their children to enter wedlock through much-dreaded interrogations during festive family gatherings.

Some go to “matchmaking corners” where parents gather to exchange information about their single children and arrange blind dates – often without the knowledge of or against the will of children themselves.

Couples wait to participate in a staged mass wedding, part of a matchmaking event to inspire singles to get married, Shanghai 2013. Carlos Barria/Reuters

The Chinese government hasn’t sat idly by either. In 2007, the Ministry of Education publicly shamed women who were 27 years or older as “leftover women”, urging them to lower “unrealistic” standards during their search for a partner. While still alive and well in the public discourse to refer to both genders, the term “leftover” has been criticised by scholars and resisted by young women.

In 2016, the government cancelled the extra seven-day honeymoon leave that had been granted to couples who married “late” (older than 25 years for men, and 23 years for women). The hope was that this would spur young people to marry (and eventually, bear children) as soon as possible.

The state is especially worried about the millions of surplus men in China, who were born after the 1970s as a result of gender-selective abortion and are now looking for brides.

The number of these “leftover” men varies depending on the age group, and whether one talks about the current situation or the future. According to state media, it may be 24 million or 33 million.

Typically rural and impoverished, these unwed men – upset “bare branches” who are not able to add offshoots to their family tree – are considered a threat to social stability because of the financial, social and sexual frustration they face.

Chinese women receive no effective protection from the law in case their marriage dissolves. Carlos Barria/Reuters

People’s Daily recently stressed that “leftover” men constitute a more pressing crisis than women in a similar situation, quoting a survey on unmarried rural men that found some of them engage in criminal activities such as gambling, prostitution, and human trafficking.
 

A different path

But young people follow their own mind. And while romance and coupledom are much endorsed by both men and women in their 20s and 30s, marriage as a legal institution is no longer a must.

Growing up with more diverse values than previous generations, Chinese youth born in the 1980s and 1990s see options beyond the linear life path leading up to the baby carriage. Many prioritise work over partnership – either willingly or with reluctance.

Government statistics also suggest that more than 85% of both male and female migrant workers – a third of whom are at marrying age – work more than 44 hours a week, which leaves them little time and energy to build relationships.

Others are simply exploring alternative lifestyles – with or without a romantic partner. Cohabitation is increasingly commonplace. And thanks to affordable technology, casual sex is also easier to access than ever.

Then, there’s the sea of books, films and television series that portray other ways to live. For young, professional Chinese urbanites who have access to modern entertainment, a cool, an enriched life can well be spouse-free.
 

Gender disparity

Young Chinese women are particularly vocal about the institution of marriage. An advertisement by cosmetic company SK-II, showing young women voicing their protest against parental and social pressure, for instance, went viral in China.

It’s not that single women are uninterested in having a love life – many are actually keen to get married – but too much is at stake. In a country where gender equality has been stalling, if not deteriorating, over the past decade, women face enduring discrimination in education and the workplace.

The Chinese government relaxed its one-child policy in October 2015, allowing all couples to have a second child. But the state didn’t take account of the change in welfare policies for families or employers. So the majority of career women said no to the offer out of fear of being further devalued on the job market.

Unlike their counterparts in the developed world, Chinese women receive no effective protection from the law in case their marriage dissolves. Knowing that bleak career prospects and a non-existent safety net await them, these women have every reason not to trade their career or personal freedom for a wedding.

Empowered urban Chinese women have a tough choice to make between intimacy and autonomy – but at least they still have a choice. Behind them are their rural sisters, who have much less control over their own fates.

Deprived of educational and social resources by patriarchal tradition and a capitalist economy, rural women have little bargaining power compared to their urban counterparts against unwanted marriages, inequality between spouses, or even violence within or for the sake of marriage.

Chinese state media are certainly aware of marriage decline as a potential social problem, although most of their sympathetic attention has been channelled towards bachelors who cannot exercise their “right” to acquire a wife. Their struggles are vividly depicted, and are often attributed to women’s rising demands for bride wealth (money that the groom’s family pays the bride’s family); the rise in economic disparity; and sometimesto the nation’s skewed gender ratio.

Poverty relief programs or allowing women to have more than one husband (polyandry) have been suggested as possible solutions to their difficulties.

But there’s no discussion of what could be done for the urban women who might face the glass ceiling at work, or for rural ones who are married but suffering as the result of patriarchal traditions.

A better way to enhance the lure of marriage could start with the underprivileged in Chinese society. That means giving the decision to marry or not back to young people; promoting family-friendly workplace policies; and finally, securing women’s rights.

Xuan Li, Assistant Professor of Psychology, NYU Shanghai
 

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The post China’s marriage rate is plummeting – and it’s because of gender inequality appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Divorce may no longer be  such a traumatic experience for women in Bangladesh. If the country adopts  the Uniform Family code (UFC), women will have a greater say in marriage, divorce, maintenance, inheritance and child custody. The proposed uniform family code seeks to reform existing family laws to make them more humane and beneficial to women. By reforming laws to end discrimination against women in these matters, the UFC seeks to give equal rights to women belonging to all religions. 

The UFC, which is presently under consideration by the government, is the brainchild of the Bangladesh Mahila Parishad (BMP). The BMP has been working for women’s rights over the last 30 years. “We realised that women are subject to oppression and discrimination in matters relating to personal rights. They are also denied access to opportunities for development, despite the Constitution guaranteeing equality to men and women,” explains Ayesha Khanam, general secretary, BMP. 

Since they provided legal aid, BMP members were conversant with all laws, particularly those relating to women. According to Khanam, although 85 per cent of the population in the country is Muslim, the demand for a uniform family code cuts across all religions. “Although laws for women do exist, like the Cruelty to Women Ordinance, Dowry Prohibition Act, and the Family Court Ordinance, structural weaknesses limit their efficacy,” contends Khanam. It is these limitations that the UFC hopes to redress. 

In the first part, which deals with marriage and divorce, the UFC makes it mandatory for every marriage and divorce to be registered. It also lays down the minimum age of marriage for boys at 22 years and for girls at 18. “Many girls are married as soon as they reach puberty, sometimes even earlier. These are rarely, if at all, registered. So the girls are deprived of their rights if they are abandoned or divorced by their husbands. If marriages and divorces are registered, it will give women legal grounds to get what is rightfully theirs,” points out barrister–at–law Tania Amir. 

In a bid towards gender equality, the UFC gives women equal rights to property acquired during the course of the marriage. The UFC also outlines grounds for divorce for both men and women. While there are eight grounds on which men can claim divorce, women have 10. 

Besides the usual reasons like immorality, impotency, and physical and mental torture for which women can claim divorce, the UFC also puts down dowry demands as a valid ground. Inability to pay maintenance for two years or disappearing for the same period also gives women reason to demand divorce. In fact, even if the husband is addicted to drugs of any sort, divorce claims are valid. A husband can also ask for a divorce in the event of his wife being a drug addict. 

However, although the UFC gives husbands the right to seek divorce if the wife is a lesbian, it does not give women the same right if their husbands are gay. Says Khanam, “This aspect could be looked into later. We first want men and women to understand that a woman cannot be divorced merely on the whims of her husband. The reasons have to be in accordance with the laws. Women are often taken for a ride because of their ignorance.”
In the second part, the UFC provides for maintenance to become compulsory and uniform, thus transcending religious customs and traditional laws. While laying down the grounds for maintenance, it also outlines the course of action that can be taken if the maintenance amount is not paid. 

“The number of abandoned women is on the rise,” contends Farida Arif, executive director of the SERWTCI Trust, a quasi-governmental body that looks after the socio–economic development of distressed women. 
“Organisations like ours try to make women economically independent. But if maintenance becomes their right by law, their aspirations for self–sufficiency will become greater and reduce their dependency on others,” says Arif. 
The third part of the UFC deals with the appointment of guardians of minors and lays out eligibility conditions for guardians and their duties and rights. It also provides for regulating the conduct of guardians if they act against the welfare of the minor or the property they have been nominated to protect. 

The uniform law of adoption forms the fourth part of the UFC. It simplifies adoption procedures for married couples. But it has still not made a provision allowing single women or men to adopt children if they so desire. 
The most important aspect of the UFC is the uniform law of inheritance. Property rights are often the most contentious. This law lays down that women, whether married or unmarried, shall have equal rights to property. In fact, it also makes provisions for children born out of wedlock — it gives them the right to their maternal property. 

“Property rights are one of the most important tools for empowering women. This helps them control their resources and become independent,” avers Aroma Dutta, chief of the PRIP Trust, a Dhaka–based non–governmental organisation (NGO) working towards women’s empowerment. 
New dreams and aspirations are stirring within Bangladeshi women. Education is helping more women realise that they are entitled to certain rights under the Constitution. But since structural contradictions of laws still exist, reforms are imperative to make these dreams come true. 

Women’s organisations pushing for the UFC have received considerable political support, not just from the coalition parties in power but also from the Opposition led by former premier Begum Zia. Since a woman Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, is in the saddle at present, hopes are high that the Uniform Family Code will be adopted soon. 

The post Breeze from Bangladesh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to the teachings of Islam, marriage is a social contract between two consenting adults for which no moulvi or kaazi is essential. All that is needed are two Muslims respected by the local community, willing to be witnesses to the contract between a man and a woman to marry each other on mutually agreed terms. But because the poor Muslim does not know this (or chooses to be ignorant), he continues to be a slave of the moulvi saheb anyway.

Why blame the poor moulvi saheb alone? The moment he puts his signature on the nikaahnama (wedding document), his role is over. This is because while a Muslim male marries in an ‘Islamic’ way he divorces in a totally ‘secular’ fashion. A post-card, a telegram, now an e–mail, is all that he needs to snap the marital bond without a moment’s notice either to his wife or to any moulvi saheb. 

And once the post-card, telegram or e–mail has been served on the hapless wife, even a well–intentioned moulvi saheb is totally helpless because of his belief that though socially abhorrent, the triple talaaq practice is theologically unobjectionable. Even if he were to subsequently intervene and convince the errant male to rethink, its too late. The only way out for the summarily divorced wife is to find another man who will marry her, consummate the marriage and give her an instant talaaq. Only then can she remarry her first husband.

Make no mistake. The moulvi sahebs and the kazis who adorn the All–India Muslim Personal Law Board are no hermits who need a ‘dialogue’ with this or that group of Muslim women to become aware of the plight of Muslim women. If indeed they are concerned with Islam getting a bad name, they should ask themselves why they so obstinately continue to resist change. One has only to go through the preceding two articles to realise how far the Muslim woman in India is behind her sister even from ‘backward’ Bangladesh. 

Be it Bangladesh, Pakistan, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, or any other Muslim society, one thing is obvious. In each of these countries, the impetus for pro–women reforms has come from other societal or state institutions, while the bulk of the clergy remains opposed to change. How can it be otherwise in case of India?
As in all other organised religions, the Muslim clergy, too, is entirely male-dominated. And its but natural that a male-centred body — be it a ‘Men Only’ club or a religious body — will be male–oriented in thought and in deed. 

No one can deny that when Islam was born, the teachings of the Quran and the sayings of the Prophet were radically pro-women, far in advance of the then prevailing social ethos. But we are not talking here of Islam or its Prophet. We are talking instead of the male–dominated Muslim clergy that through the centuries has subverted the egalitarian thrust of the Quran in the matter of man–woman relations. The MPLB is part of that subversive tradition. 

It is not to be denied that some men of religion, who occupy important positions in the MPLB hierarchy, are genuinely concerned about the pathetic plight of Muslim women in India. But to expect such a body to be an agent for change is to ask for a miracle. To believe that the same clergy that has been the bulwark of patriarchy, orthodoxy, conservatism and worse, elsewheres in the world will through some magical process in India be the harbinger of change.

Archived from Communalism Combat, May 2001 Year 8  No. 69, Cover Story 5

The post Indian Muslims and the bumble-bee appeared first on SabrangIndia.