Kaur 1
Domestic Violence against Women in India
There are many individuals around the world, especially women, who face problems pertaining to gender violence. In an attempt to further explain such problems, the topic I will elaborate on is the global perspectives on gender violence and domestic and/or sexual violence and revenge using the film Provoked. As seen through the film Provoked: A True Story, the embedded gender roles and cultural expectations of women in India do not only cause men to act violently towards their spouses, but suppress women to a point of retaliation. While applying the feminist theory, I will examine the causes of domestic violence against women in India and the legislation and resources available to women seeking help in terms of gender violence.
There is a vast significance of the topics of global perspectives on gender violence and domestic violence and revenge in the field of gender violence studies. For instance, it affects the manner in which women are viewed and treated by others within society. These topics reveal the unhealthy, dangerous and vulgar behavior both men and women face. Moreover, gaining knowledge about such topics can lead to a better understanding of the damaging violence perpetrated upon individuals, specifically women, and initiate a positive change within societal norms and/or legislation regarding matters of gender violence.
These topics particularly matter to me for several reasons. I feel it is necessary to impede and prevent such violence from occurring especially since women are mainly the victims in comparison to men. As a woman, reading, watching, and hearing about the violent circumstances women have experienced, I can relate to those victims at times and comprehend the standpoint they are coming from. It is disturbing and shocking to learn about the situations the women were put through. Moreover, I feel it is obligatory for women to stand up for the violent injustices placed on them and/or other women. It is essential for individuals to not be bystanders but rather speak out and support organizations who endorse the purpose of putting a stop to domestic and/or sexual violence. I feel that female empowerment should be emphasized in such violent cases and that women should not have to live their lives with a fear of violence under any condition. I also believe it is compulsory that women take revenge for the wrongdoings they put up with. Although, I do not necessarily believe committing a crime is the most effective and proper way to handle such matters, but rather I think one should attain the help of legal sources such as courts to seek justice.
Provoked illustrated the story of Kiranjit Ahluwalia, a Punjabi women who married an NRI (nonresident Indian) named Deepak from London, who became a victim of domestic and sexual violence. As a result, this led her to unintentionally cause the death of her husband. Like Kiranjit, domestic violence is an issue faced by many women around the world. “In India alone, 70% of women are victim of these violent acts in one or the other form” (“Maitri”). These women are subject to physical, sexual, psychological, financial, and social abuse. The abuse against women is not only perpetrated by their husband, but may involve other family members such as in-laws and the husband’s siblings as well. For instance, it is reported that “cases of cruelty by husbands and other relatives have increased dramatically from 50,703 in 2003 to 81,344 in 2008” (Ghosh 320). And due to the rigid cultures and family structures established in India, such abuse against women occurs and, to a certain extent, is accepted.
There are many factors which lead to domestic violence in a household. It is reported that in India lower education, lower family income, older age, and areas of urban residence are associated with a higher occurrence of domestic violence (Babu and Kar). Although it would be assumed that violence would increase in rural areas, “urban social environmental conditions can be more stressful, alienating, and anomic than do rural areas and such conditions may influence spousal relations” (Babu and Kar). This supports Rhonda Hammer’s interpretation that class and money have mediating effects in relations of violence within the family (136).
Another major cause of domestic violence includes the widely practiced traditions and customs of India. From childhood, girls are told by their parents that they are only “visitors” and that their “real” home is their married home (Niaz 180). Thus, this shows that females have very little or no ownership in their own households giving them less power. It demonstrates how women are defined as property in which they first belong to the father as a virgin and then once they are married they become the husbands according to Mieke Bal (lecture 11/07/11). Alternatively, “at her husband’s house, her only role is of a housekeeper and a child bearer” (Niaz 180). For this reason, it is implied that providing the female other opportunities such as education is considered worthless or insignificant. She is only useful as a housewife doing chores and completing errands exclusively for the house. By showing interest in matters other than those related to her household function a woman would be going outside of her expected realm, otherwise known as interfering in the husband’s matters. This reinforces Hammer’s statement that “violence in the home is connected to sexism and sexist thinking to male domination” (136). It portrays the gender inequality present between married couples and follows the common stereotype where the man goes to work and is the source of capital for the family while the woman is barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. Because the men position the women at a lower status than themselves, when women attempt to step out of the field appropriated to them by the males, the men view it as a challenge to their authority. For example, Heberle states that “batterers say their victim deny them their rightful place as men” (142). Therefore, the women are only awarded for their loving tractability in a patriarchal culture (lecture 11/16/11). Their obedience is what is expected from the women and contesting their decisions or opposing them in any manner is not tolerated.
Women are discriminated upon as they are considered less intelligent and capable than men. This makes an image of the female figure as more dependent and weak in comparison to her husband. For instance, “gender roles are defined in such a manner that sons are more likely than daughters to be of benefit to their parents, both financially and in other ways” (“Domestic violence across”). Sons are known to further carry the family name and assets of the family. Moreover, because female involvement in the business field such as obtaining a career is discouraged, to a large extent, the sons are the source of income for the family. Additionally, due to the dowry system, “the groom's parents gain wealth while the bride's parents lose wealth” (“Domestic violence across”). It is reported that “the number of dowry deaths has increased from 6,208 in 2003 to 8,172 in 2008” (Ghosh). Thus, if a female’s family cannot afford the dowry or they refuse to give the amount demanded by the husband and/or his family, she is prone to undergo abuse which may lead to her death. This supports Hammer’s argument that “family terrorism is the structural position of patriarchal violence and escalating poverty that creates a terroristic situation in which the weaker members of the family or community are subjected to constant threats of violence and brutality” (133). Hence, the women are regarded as the vulnerable members of the family and the male family’s desire for monetary or material gain demonstrates how such economic circumstances are a cause to the violence women endure. Alternatively, what if the wife’s family gives such a big amount of dowry? The female may still face violence as the husband might think that she may consider herself arrogant. Thus, the dowry system as a whole is flawed. As a result of such practiced customs, women are suppressed under the traditional attitudes of society. Therefore, because sons are a greater advantage to their parents than daughters, the desire for male children is higher as they are the heirs. This illustrates how women are devalued and unwanted in society. For this reason, domestic violence is largely evident during stages of pregnancy as “the strong preference for sons has been implicated as underlying both female infanticide and female feticide” (“Domestic violence across”). This supports Gail Mason’s interpretation that “violence is more than a practice that acts upon individual subjects to inflict harm and injury. It is metaphorically speaking, also a way of looking at these subjects” (11). Hence, violence is imposed on women because they are viewed with disrespect and disgust by men as females are not desirable in India, to a certain extent.
Religion is also another cause of domestic violence in India. For example, both Hinduism, which is the largest religion in India, and Buddhism allow polygamy. This lowers the status of women as it depicts them as an object of use for a male. However, why is only the male allowed to have multiple wives whereas the female is not allowed to have multiple husbands? Why is there a double standard? The reason being is that the religious texts and culture are based off of patriarchal norms. Furthermore, “historical customs of burning alive of the wife along with the body of the dead husband in Hindu cultures (SATTI) are some of the well known evidence of expected violence against women” (Niaz 174). This Hindu practice of SATTI describes how the life of a female is useless and she is an irrelevant being as she is helpless without a male figure or husband, therefore, giving more value to him. Hence, the little importance that is given to the female is based on the existence of her husband. Once he is gone, the woman’s existence is no longer deemed necessary. In addition, Hinduism endorses female inferiority.
“On the Indian subcontinent, the “theory of perpetual tutelage for women” was formulated by Manu, the Hindu lawgiver. He preached that education for girls should be stopped; they should be prohibited from public life and must restrict themselves to their homes. His dictum that a wife ought to respect her husband as God and serve him faithfully, even if he were vicious and void of any merit, was accepted as applicable to all women” (Niaz 174).
This supports the psychological abuse women undergo as the Hindu culture is restricting the mobility of women and depriving them of privileges. It explains the subordination of a wife to her husband as she is limited or restricted. This also relates to Hammer’s statement that “Like most women are socialized in our culture, as well as other cultures, the battered woman is trained to make excuses for a man’s imperfections, even at the risk of her own physical well-being. And, equally crippling to her, she is trained to blame herself for some of his worst behavior. If she were a good enough wife, goes her internal reasoning, she could make him stop beating her; he would not have to hurt her” (148). Women place their husband’s at such a superior rank that they do not question the male’s power even if it involves force. This emphasizes Hammer statement that “lots of women believe that a person in authority has the right to use force to maintain authority” (137). Similarly, “in Buddhism it is taught that women lure a man away from the path of NIRWANA or SALVATION […] and they were considered to be temptresses who hinder a man’s rise above the worldly status” (Niaz 174). Thus, it portrays women as a disadvantage or drawback to males placing men at a higher position. It reinforces the notion explained by Heberle that men are the authorized subjects of power and the women are subservient to them as they are the subordinate figures (126).
Female empowerment is a cause of abuse against women in India as well. For instance, “when the woman is somehow getting stronger either by her educational qualifications or economic independence, he tries to regain control by battering or other forms of violent acts until she surrenders” (Niaz 180). This demonstrates that men take such actions to restrict the development and success of women. They do so to keep gender roles intact. The women are assumed that they cannot outgrow or attain more profit than the men. Once they do, the men feel the urge to reverse this process through violence or prevent it from happening in the first place. This backs Mason’s argument that “violence is an instrument of power”. Violence is used as a technique against the women to achieve what the men desire from the females. It is further stated that “In many Indian states, working women are asked to hand over their paycheck to the husband and have no control over their finances. So, if they stop doing so or start asserting their right, there is bound to be friction” (Majumdar). For this reason, the violence perpetrated by the husband is a reaction to his hierarchy being threatened by the wife when she takes on roles “understood” to be manly and less feminine such as working and contributing wealth (sometimes earning a higher salary than the husband) to the household. As a result, “77% of men believed that their masculinity was questioned when females didn’t listen to them” (“Maitri”). Because of the gender inequality present between men and women, gender roles are emphasized and certain aspects are categorized as feminine and masculine. When a female falls out of her expected feminine role, such as not listening to the male and standing up against him, the patriarchal organization is threatened as the female takes on a dominant role perceived to be masculine. This then causes the male to find the need to use violence as an efficient source to maintain power. It would be expected that violence would decrease with an increase in education as, for instance, more individuals would be aware of the negative consequences of such violence and they would be less poverty stricken, however it is shown that this is not necessarily true. There may actually be more marital conflict because of financial concerns.