Almost three decades ago when one started to consciously participate in activism to combat abuses against women, there was a visible absence of dowry violence. Ironically, it took me some years to admit that I myself was a survivor of dowry violence.
Since then, I started raising my voice to establish dowry demand, dowry customs and big fat weddings, bridal burning, dowry injury and dowry death not only as crimes against humanity but specific forms of VAWG and SGBV.
There was a need to establish antidowry legislation, put a ban on expensive weddings and ensuring that dowry demand, dowry death or injury were acknowledged as cognizable crimes. This involved a variety of activies including authoring academic papers and journalistic pieces; producing TV series, street theatres and shadow theatres; organising training workshops, working with legislators, policy makers and other influencers.
A crucial element included enagaging with the youth which was done via supervision of their research thesis and assisting students from any discipline who were including the issue of dowry in their documented printed or visual work.
In an era when issues of VAWG gain instant traction, donors’ support, and visibility on media the question is why did dowry violence not gain the awareness it needed given its magnitude as a necessity to enter into the institution of marriage especially in Pakistan? The question also arises about the failure to get a strong anti-dowry violence legislation in Pakistan in spite of some occasional amendments in the original dowry and bridal gifts prohibition act.
These two large queries may not be answered in this limited space. However, I dare to share my insights gained through practical experiences that may or may not be fit into any complex social, political, or psychological theoretical framework.
To date, the toxic institution of dowry is treated as a tradition that must be followed and attracts social and legal endorsements. Those few who go against it are outliers. Now a days due to the social media influx, they may get some likes or appreciation.
Still, a deeper look reveals that economy in their marriage or dowry-free marriage was more due to financial hostilities than a change in mindset. However, credit must be given to all such brave couples who at least recognised economic burdens and took pragmatic steps by minimising the cost of a wedding.
A larger majority do not admit their financial limitations and opt for a lavish wedding through borrowing and dowry demand. The matter is not simple. Most marriages are delayed because both families or the bride and groom want a dream wedding. This 'dream' is shamelessly marketed by our TV shows and advertisements and promoted with enthusiasm by lifestyle pages of our newspapers and magazines.
There is another extreme too. The same custom that delays marriages also accentuates child marriage aka child abuse as well as mismatched marriages that I call transactional marriages as there is no dowry demand when an older person “buys” a young girl/woman.
In some parts of Pakistan there is an established custom of bridal price that also goes against the woman's self-esteem and limits her autonomy if any in the institution of marriage. This harmful practice also impacts young men unable to pay the required money. This not only delays their marriage but creates anger and frustration in them. The pressure of organising a prolific marriage ceremony not only stifles the spirit of a pure relationship that can nurture through a simpler, more economical marriage ceremony but also deprives both families of their mental health and many morals.
Like the burden of disease, the burden of honour in this scenario too is greater for the women irrespective of their class and caste. Obviously, those with more disadvantages suffer more and in different forms that conform with their socio-economic class. However, what needs to be clearly understood is the irony that many a times highly qualified women suffer more and face more compromises.
For instance, a female doctor who is perceived as one of the most sought out type of daughter-in-law has to bear at least three strains. She has to meet societal expectations in terms of appear physically even after 48-72 hours of non-stop duties as a resident doctor or attending an overcrowded OPD or running a clinic; she needs to be earning enough to contribute to the household making her a money-making machine; and, finally she needs to demonstrate her expertise in household chores including cooking and cleaning.
The recent advertisement of a rather progressive take on this aspect is being highly appreciated but I wonder why in the first place the condition of cooking through any magical recipe prepared spices be considered for any woman doctor or career-oriented woman? Why does a woman have to prove herself as a docile and domesticated one to accelerate in her career as well?
Reverting to the original focus, it is a harsh reality that austere weddings and giving up of old customary practices are not only problematical for the low-income and lower middle classes but also for the higher income groups who are or at least appear to be oblivious of the “demonstration effect” created by their urge to put (at times quite a vulgar) display of wealth in their majestic marriage rituals.
Opting for low-cost marriage ceremonies without unsaid demand of dowry involves thought revolutions at an individual and familial level and that is not everyone’s constituency. But the elephant in the room is the harmful impact caused by dowry free, designers items free, event free, unembellished weddings on corporate interests.
Therefore, there will be no serious, compassionate, and coordinated campaign to change behaviours at structural and individual levels. Resultantly there would be on purpose, only half-baked campaigns if any, designed by amateurs without actual participation of subject matter experts. There would be no tough laws against big fat weddings, marriage expenses and dowry because of the conflict of interests.
As a part of the strategic management by the elites in the industry of social development, Dowry has been reduced to the issue of poor people. The normalisation of different forms of VAWG and SGBV , through the institution of dowry and in-depth examination of the impact, has been totally overlooked.
Ultimately all stove deaths and post marriage psychological issues would rest in the stories of “accident,” “destiny” and “ private matter” of the spouses and their families. There are and will be far stronger and impressive actions to prove that any law cannot eliminate this system or custom and one should focus on individual behavioural change. Hence, no dowry injury and death will ever be investigated and taken as a punishable crime.
The impact on mental health of the woman, who never gets married due to lack of financial resources, or gets into a mismatched marriage, or who face verbal abuse after marriage on not bringing a dowry (that matches the expectations of the in laws), has no priority in the discussions on ending VAWG. In the end, dowry et al remains an excellent case study of the unending elitist consensus and entitlements in our society.
Pakistani intersectional feminist Dr. Rakhshinda Perveen is a volunteer campaigner for causes like anti-dowry violence legislation, gender- & marital-status-based taxation and creating empathy for the forgotten “missing Pakistanis” aka Biharis. She can be reached via Twitter: @Kafekaam