Triple Talaq: Patriarchy not just a 'women's issue', marriage no holy cow

From academic jargon, the word 'patriarchy' has come a long way in the Indian public sphere. But it has a long way to go yet.

Contrary to the impression one gets from the popular social media usage these days patriarchy is not simply a system of male-dominance over women. According to bell hooks, “Patriarchy has no gender”. Elsewhere she says, “Patriarchy is political-social system that insists that males are inherently dominating, superior to everything and everyone deemed weak, especially females, and endowed with the right to dominate and rule over the weak.”

Patriarchy is not just ‘women’s issues’

It is an entangled problem of power. It is a problem for all those that are deemed weak.

It is regrettable that many women’s right activists who critique patriarchy and root for gender justice among Muslims ignore the social and cultural impact of economic 

exclusion and exploitation of Muslims. While intersectionality of identities is important it is also equally, if not more, important to see the interlinkages of political and economic conditions. Advocates of women’s rights who also have a commitment to secularism face a dilemma – as do Muslim women who do not wish to align with Hindutva elements – lest they forfeit the security and right to dignity of the entire community.

ALSO READ: HC judge backs #MeToo, says judiciary also plagued with sexism, patriarchy

It is more difficult to demand (and win) changes in economic relations that will make women’s lives better than to demand and win laws on violence against women. When we look at the actual use of these laws to bring the responsible to book and convict them, it is easy to understand why.

If the demand is for a law that provides the majoritarian oppressor an opportunity to dominate the weak (yes, all men are not equally powerful) the task is easier. Without broader changes in outlook on the forms of discrimination Muslims face, it will be difficult for all to share the view of the criminalisation of arbitrary triple talaq as a ‘victory’ of Muslim women.

Personal law is not just ‘women’s issues’

The Uniform Civil Code in India is often understood simplistically as abolition of Muslim Personal Law, which has been declared oppressive for Muslim women. In fact, legal pluralism itself is declared gender-unjust. This perspective prevails not only among those who are prejudiced against Muslims, but also among many well-meaning people.

Business Standard

What the women's movement today can learn from 19th-century social reforms

How Raja Rammohun Roy and Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar helped abolish the sati system and 'permanent widowhood'.

Business Standard : Indian society is witnessing the commission of abusive, discriminatory and violent acts, both verbal and physical, against women from different strata and walks of life. What is abhorrent is that these acts of sexual predation have received wide social approval and acceptance, reflected through the deep apathy existing within institutions, irresponsible and insensitive remarks of community leaders, and tacit support by those in powerful positions. Although the recent opposition to these acts and the society’s acceptance of them has been quite loud, these reactions are partisan and piecemeal, often ignoring the crucial issues that are central to the discussion of the ‘women’s question’ in India.

At this crucial juncture, it is pertinent to analyse, first, how social reformers like Raja Rammohun Roy and Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar understood and raised the women’s question in 19th century India; second, what legal and educative mechanisms they employed to tackle social evils like sati and ‘permanent widowhood’; third, lessons learnt from their initiatives that may be relevant today and applied to address contemporary issues reflected through the #MeToo movement.

Roy and Vidyasagar understood the women’s question through their own family experiences, acquired knowledge and inherent personal convictions about differentiating the right from the wrong. They studied the socio-religious, economic and political factors that gave impetus to cruel practices like the sati and the harsh rules of widowhood. For instance, Roy is said to have been shattered when he witnessed his sister-in-law burn herself alive on the funeral pyre of her husband. This experience made him realise the adverse impacts of such practices on the society, particularly women, in the long run.

First, women were stereotyped as servile and submissive beings wholly incapable of having an individual identity, independent existence and autonomy. 

Second, males in the Indian society had understood that religion was a very important tool that had enabled them to keep their women’s social and economic position intact, thereby limiting chances of a potential challenge to male superiority. Third, the male patriarchs had realised that making education inaccessible and unavailable to the Indian women was the best way to prevent an awakening among the women folk, thereby continuing with male dominance in the society. As such, the dominating Indian male would never let the balance of power tilt in favour of the women folk. To that extent, they vociferously resisted the blooming of the seeds of social transformation in the Indian society.

Roy and Vidyasagar adopted a technique of gradualism, taking one step at a time. They designed and raised the women’s question with extreme care and caution. The reformers did not seek to offend and oust the Indian patriarchy in the process of uprooting practices like sati and widowhood. Rather, they sought to make them active participants in the social movements for the upliftment of Indian women... Read More