A huge debate in India is whether or not the government should make choices for people – usually women – and decide for them how they should live their lives. It’s part of a larger debate on the role of the government throughout the world. The US Supreme Court for example, upheld the ban on affirmative action, the US version of reservations, following the famous quote from Roberts “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race”. The underlying theme is this: To what extent should the government interfere in social realities?
I of course feel that laws should ignore social realities, and merely describe the ideal society with strong law enforcement. But what about dowry? Indian laws make it illegal to ask for dowry. While in no way condoning the practice, and though I feel that anyone who asks for a dowry is a giant douche, isn’t all dowry voluntarily given? And if so, does the government have the right to ban it?
When I say “voluntarily”, I mean that it’s not taken by force. No one’s bank account is hacked and no one has a gun to their head to sign a cheque. It seems that dowry is merely a “price” for the marriage. How then, is it any different from a shopkeeper asking for a price for their goods? If I go to a restaurant and I find the price on the menu too high, do I simply walk away from the restaurant, or do I take the owner to court for specifying the terms of the contract?
People marry for different reasons. Some marry for love. Others to satisfy their parents. Some do it for the money. And the best part is that none of this is forced. Two parties marry willingly – again in the sense that no one holds a gun to the head of either the man or the woman, both of whom are over 18. Nowhere either in the Constitution, or the law does it state the reasons for marriage. It’s legal for two perfect strangers to tie the knot overnight. So who is the government to specify what the terms of a marriage should be?
How is dowry it any different from a shopkeeper asking for a price for their goods?
The most common response to this is that not every woman can just walk away from the marriage and say “no”. Does it make me a heartless person to say “That’s her problem?”. The law assumes that all adults are responsible for their own lives. If a woman over 18 signs a legally binding contract, can she complain later that she didn’t know what she was getting into? Can she say that she was pressurized to sign it by her parents?
The state endows us with all kinds of rights when we turn 18. The right to vote. To drive. To have kids. To drink. To marry. To enter into legal obligations of our own free will. But all these hinge on the assumption that adults are capable of taking their own decisions. If we accept that there are some women who are unable to take their own decisions, should we not then also take away their rights since they are not capable of wielding them? How do we know for example, that a woman is not coerced into voting for a particular party? How do we know she wasn’t browbeaten into signing a contract?
In my opinion, the right to give and receive dowry is a personal matter between the bride and the bridegroom (or their parents). The government should not assume that a woman over 18 can be coerced like a child. If it does, then it must continue to treat them like a child and forbid them to marry in the first place.
When we have laws treating women like children, is it any surprise that people and even judges are starting to do the same? One ridiculous statement from the Kerela HC said that parents have a legal say in the marriage of their children. Isn’t it obvious how much harm gender based laws are causing?
What’s the resolution? Is a woman who turns 18, an adult or a child? Do we need new definitions of these concepts?
If prenups are legal, I don’t see why dowry should be illegal. There are many social circumstances where people feel “forced” to give gifts that are way above their comfort level – either as a reciprocation or a show of status. Dowry is just one manifestation of this type of gift giving.
Though I have to disagree that dowry is like a shopping transaction. Because where else on earth do you hand over your “goods” and money?? Usually one person has the money and the other has goods and they are exchanged.
In reply to Clueless
Prenups are a sort of legal gray zone in India, mostly because the law doesn’t view marriage as a contract. But yeah – dowry is a gift. If someone can’t give a gift, then no one is forcing them…
I guess here the “goods” is the awesome privilege of getting married to the guy lol!
In reply to bhagwad
Prenups are illegal in India except in the state Goa.
Difficult to disagree. Our beloved Lawmakers often confuse basic concepts of Right when framing laws. Dowry harassment is a crime, so is domestic-abuse. Offer/Acceptance of dowry should not be a crime. It is a willful social dealing between people.
Similarly offering a bribe should not be a crime, no matter whether it was coerced or not. Taking a bribe to facilitate/favor something/somebody is a crime, because it is against the accepted duty of an official. Ordinary people have not such duties. They can offer anything they own to anybody.
Abusing SC/ST or anybody should not be a crime. It is freedom of expression. Discriminating them in “Government” work (only) alone should be a crime.
… and so on.. and on..
People have a right to be bad/stupid/cheap/chauvinistic/racist/sexist. The only thing people should not do is to infringe on others’ rights.
In reply to Murali
I agree.
Off topic, but the age 18 is such an arbitrary number. A boy/girl who has PHYSICALLY matured (ie a girl who started her menses and a boy who had his first wet dream/ejaculation) should be considered of age in which a legally binding document is on them.
And yes, dowry’s should be perfectly legal. Who is the government to say anything otherwise?
In reply to Western Point of View
I think it has been proven for quite some time now that physical maturity and mental maturity do not coincide for humans. The human mind continues to grow well after kids hit puberty.
That combined with the fact that puberty comes earlier for the newer generations, we would be making 10 year olds adults and legally responsible for their actions.
In reply to Clueless
With that in mind, the human mind does not reach maturity (scientifically speaking) until into the 30s. Does that mean People that are in their late 20s cannot make conscious decisions themselves?
THe mind does continue to grow–until you reach around 30-35 when it plateus. Should we change the legal ages from 18 to 30?
In reply to Western Point of View
There is a difference between “continues to grow” and “is capable of making and being responsible for decisions” dont you think?
In reply to Clueless
So the age “18” is arbitrarily chosen based on the ability of continuing to grow? Heck, if you want to give it an age, at least lets compromise–say 15 is an appropriate age. Kids can drive when they are 15, at least give them the ability to sign off on contracts as well.
I have to say I agree with you.
We need fair laws that ought to be backed up by strong courts and robust law enforcement.
Society currently lags behind the laws in most of India, but in some pockets it has evolved to a point where now the laws are lagging behind.
Apart from women, religious and cultural minorities are also similarly legally mollycoddled. It’s all getting rather dysfunctional.
On a related note, I was watching an old TV program where Vir Sanghvi espoused a Uniform Civil Code that was ‘opt in’.
Maybe that’s the best we can do, create(yet) another gender-neutral code relating to marriage,divorce,inheritance and adoption which doesn’t recognise dowry as an offence that interested citizens can sign up to be governed by!
In reply to Desi Daaru
Maybe we also need to make adulthood optional! Either have a test to determine whether or not a person can be an adult, or make them explicitly sign a piece of paper saying that now they are responsible for their own actions and their own welfare…
In reply to bhagwad
All people should be responsible for their own destiny–we don’t need a “test” to determine if someone is an adult. We don’t need big brother imposing his will on the people. Unless certified insane, all people can make their own free choices. What does an adult mean? Someone who is physically mature. Lets call it 14-15 years old.
In India, everything remains a gift untill marriage lasts, everything(even expenditure incurred in marriage ceremony) becomes dowry the moment relationship breaks.