Understanding The Madness

According to the 2011 census of India the number of females per 1000 male in our country is 940. This is unfortunate, yet one may find prospect in the fact that this is not a fall but 7 point rise when compared to the census of the previous decade. I for once saw hope in the news but that was until I went beyond the headline. There is one fact stated in the census report which must be heeded to and that is that the number of female children per male child fell drastically through this decade.

Why is it, one wonders, that there is such inequality in our society.  Why is it that after fighting successfully with foreign rulers for centuries we are falling to malice that our own culture has acquired for itself. Why is it that in today’s world of equality we are still obsessed with the desire for a male child? How can a woman who has felt her offspring in her womb get rid of her upon knowing that she is a girl? How indeed. Let us explore for their purposes.

A desire for son is innate to most sections of our society. It is a will that many people openly express. It is so commonly accepted that in a recent case a judge was reported saying that it is acceptable.  The reason being that in most parts of our country a patriarchal system of inheritance is followed where only sons retain the property and the name of their father. There are a few exceptions of course but none in significant majority. Therefore preference to a male child seems like a strategy for preserving the family name.

The social setup in India is such that it is a son who has the responsibility of his parents in their old age. The idea of living with a daughter and her in-laws is simply too imprudent to even consider for most parents. With income as limited as it is in our country saving for retirement is mostly not an option. For this reason most people who are unable to produce a male heir are either forced to work through their old age or to compete for old-age homes. A male child thus is a retirement plan and a daughter simply doesn't fit.

In our country where most people still live below the poverty line, children are often no more than an economic choice. A son can earn his share of bread and more from early days of his life whereas after a certain age daughters, who are not allowed to work because of backward conservative mindset of parents, are commonly accepted as burdens. Thus for many in our society having a girl child is an economic disincentive.

The most important among these factors perhaps is a curse from our past that still haunts millions of women through their life and through them their parents. Yes dowry, the socially accepted form of human trade in our culture, is perhaps the most unforgiving of all the reasons. It is because of this that many families kill their newborn or unborn daughters in fear of the grave financial misfortunes that her marriage would bring along. Whereas a son simply by his marriage can pay a lot of bills and thus the greed makes them covet.

Upon observation we find that there is some rationale in the unjust preference of a son over a daughter. There is some logic, no matter how horrid, behind the gruesome murder of a daughter. And thus there is a plausible reason behind the falling child sex ratio. There is no doubt that the number 914 to 1000 is a taint on the values of the nation. We need to rise and work towards an unbiased future because such an imbalance as this is dangerous for the country.

There are laws in India that were intended to rid us of these evils. There are laws, no matter how lax, that were intended to stop foeticide. There are also laws that were intended to stop the practice of dowry. But the thing worth marking is that there seems to be a lack of will among the administrators and police for implement such laws. This is because they too are a part of this biased society that has dual standards for the sexes. For them to change we the society have to change.

We must remember not to separate the cause from the consequence. Working towards stopping female foeticide would be unfruitful if we do not work towards eradicating the causes behind it. We must first work towards stopping the practice of dowry so that then we can work towards equality. For without equality we can only check the nuisance but we can never stop it. It is only through impartiality between the two halves of the nation that harmony can be achieved.


Further reading :
Dowry laws in India
Satyamev Jayate episode that features foeticide

A Person of Power

Hillary Clinton is in India and that is not the issue. What makes an issue, however, is her choice of person to meet during the visit. As you may have already guessed the person I am referring to is Mamata Banerjee. In today’s politics Mamata’s name is synonymous with authority. She is the leader of perhaps the most important supporting party in the UPA and thus holds a say in state policy like no other person does. She is truly a person of power and that cannot be doubted but what is in doubt is whether she is worthy of it.

Earlier this year an Indian delegation headed by Prime Minister himself visited Bangladesh to resolve the Teesta water sharing issue. Another highly important issue that was to be discussed was of Bangladesh providing India with a railway transit through its land to better connect the North Eastern states with the mainland. Mamata Banerjee was to accompany the PM on his visit but refused at the last moment. She also stalled the agreement thus raising anti-Indian propaganda in Bangladesh.

Mamata is not a responsible person and that is starkly visible in the railway budgets she presented as a minister. Much like her predecessor her idea of a budget was centred on her home state of West Bengal. She completely ignored her duties and responsibilities towards Indian Railway and thus India in order to strengthen grip on her state politics. On a number of occasions she and her party members have been reported voting against the government they support as if playing a power game.

It is really amazement to mark how she enjoys the lime light and the sport. A mention of Nandigram, where she caused more losses to the state then repairable, should be enough of a reminder. I remember how she charged after Dinesh Trivedi for proposing a fair hike in the railway budget. The move revealed the populist nature of her politics and on it someone rightly commented that Mamata was “economically illiterate but politically astute”.

The statement that is perhaps the most befitting is that Mamata Banerjee is not a person who can be trusted to do the right thing for the country yet she is a person with much influence. She is the one who has been a part of both the NDA and the UPA governments and whichever the next is she is bound to be a part of it. This also explains the United States’ interest in her. It seems to be looking for a broker for FDI in Ms Benerjee.

Whether or not Ms Banerjee accepts the job is not important what is important and thus must be noted is that the United States is interfering in our country’s internal affairs. Take two things as my conclusive points for my article. Firstly, think twice before voting for Mamata Banerjee for she is a fair way towards turning into a dictator and secondly take offence in whatever the United Stated is doing as they cannot be allowed to run our country.

Further Reading :

Hillary meets Mamata

Mamata sabotaging India-Bangladesh talks

Trinamool MPs vote against key government bill

How Mamata may be turning towards tyranny