Man-woman relations are as old as their existence on the earth and that’s natural. From the very beginning and inception of this universe, they aligned naturally to procreate and preserve the human race. The oldest reference that comes to mind of such union is of Adam and Eva. What may theology say, it is principally proved and true that all living organisms procreate to survive and expand their number for their existence. Primitively, as we witness in the animals, birds and other organisms, these relationships were chiefly akin to that of animalistic coitus and strikingly in occurrence among the humans, where men and women used to live freely without any prohibition to wander, lovemaking, copulate and procreate. Since nature has bestowed the role to woman to bear and rear the child, her role was more prominent. The clan developed around her and she was pivotal to it. Her position was magnanimous and she was Centre, around which family and social group arisen. With time, her role saw sea change but the role of bearing and rearing of the child was unchangeable and irreplaceable which was given to her by the nature. The society passed through different stages and phases of social development and with that her position and authority also continued to be transformed predominately against her. The social development has never been uniform in any part of the world. Today, we find all forms of the societal and human relationships ranging from primitive free living to today’s complex man-women relationships.
Polygyny is the most common type of polygamous practice involving one husband with multiple wives. Some famous historical instances of polygyny include kings like Rajaraja Chola I around 1000 AD who had numerous consorts, and the wealthy landlord JC Bose of Kolkata who married more than a 100 times. Polygamy has existed in the Indian subcontinent since ancient times, largely driven by religious beliefs, socio-economic factors and cultural norms of various communities. References to polygamy are found in ancient Hindu scriptures and texts like the Upanishads, Puranas and epics Ramayana and Mahabharata. Kings and warriors often had multiple wives for political alliance and expanding progeny. The arrival of Islam in India normalized polygyny practices under religious sanction. Mughal emperors and Nawabs had large harems with hundreds of wives and concubines. Concubinage was also prevalent across communities. Even in modern India, polygamy persists among certain Muslim sects and indigenous tribal communities. Some reasons for continued polygamous marriages are producing male heirs, cementing political and business alliance, religious sanction and cultural acceptance.
Polyandry involves one wife marrying multiple husbands. Fraternal polyandry was traditionally practiced in some Hindu communities like the Todas of Nilgiris to mitigate division of property. The wife would be shared by all the brothers in a family. It has been observed that some Hindu communities practiced polyandry to control population and land division. Overall, polyandry has been relatively rare in India owing to its taboo status in both Hindu and Islamic traditions.
Sexual relations in primitive times were likely influenced by survival needs, kinship structures, and cultural practices. These societies often had communal living arrangements, with less emphasis on monogamy and more fluid sexual norms. The concept of marriage as we understand it today might not have existed, and sexual behaviour was likely regulated by social customs and rituals.
India is a land of diversity. Hence, the rules of marriage were never generalized. Every religion had its own set of rules, customs and traditions. However, with respect to polygamy, they all shared the same sentiment. Monogamy was the preferred system of marriage but polygamy was allowed under specific circumstances.
During the Vedic period, Upanishads, sutras and smritis governed the regulation of marriage amongst Hindus. It was believed that a Hindu husband is permitted to marry again during the lifetime of his wife, though such marriage, when contracted without just cause, is strongly disapproved. Manu has justified this suppression of wife and remarriage during her lifetime on the basis of barrenness, ill-health, ill-temper, and misconduct on the wife’s part. This suppression of the first wife has been justified and explained in Mitakshara and Subodhini. Manu says, “A wife who drinks any spurious liquors, who acts immorally, who shows hatred to her lord, who is incurable of a disease, who is mischievous, who wastes his property, may at all times be superseded by another wife. A barren wife may be superseded in the eighth year, she who brings forth stillborn children or whose children die all infants die in the tenth, she who brings forth only daughters in the eleventh and she who speaks unkindly, without delay.” Manu has also stated that the first wife is married from a sense of duty and the others are regarded as married from sexual motives.
The British brought about a change in the Indian society and how marriage was practiced. Amongst other social reforms, polygamy was also banned vide section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Later on after independence, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 prohibited polygamy as a practice among Hindus. Muslims, however, could still have four wives.
The societal attitudes toward polygamy have undergone change over the decades. While largely accepted earlier, modern education and values have generated greater resistance to the practice. Polygamy is seen to enforce gender inequality, undermine women’s status and cause disadvantages for children. However, pockets of Indian society still accept polygamy as a pragmatic. Over time, with the development of civilizations and the rise of organized religions, attitudes towards sexuality evolved. Many societies began to formalize marriage, often as a means of property transfer, alliance building, and social stability. Religious institutions played a significant role in codifying sexual norms and practices, often promoting monogamy and discouraging extramarital relationships.
Today’s era is altogether different from the ancient times and what was practiced a few decades back. But fact remains that the status of women is still not equal to man in mate selection. It is highly oriented by the male psych and predominance. Today’s so-called modern societies across the castes and religion has reduced the mate selection is predominantly a bride market. Although this market is not equitable for all the adult males. Now family lineage, education and economic status, business and job of the males determine the better access to brides in the market. Although, the same things and determinants have given a leap and influence to girls but to a limited extent.
Girls whether they are educated or otherwise, having good job or not are paraded before the families of males as if animals on sale in a livestock fair. They are posed with an unending questionnaire. Her credentials of character, prettiness, good and sharp features, education, homeliness, whether she knows cooking and other domestic chores etc. are tested by the potential bridegroom and his family.
A girl in most homes is mere a living thing whom one day will depart the family by imposing waste of precious resources and huge investment of wealth in her marriage and perhaps therefore, her birth is considered largely as an omen. Investment on her rearing and education is considered as a burden. Moreover, finding and selection of a mate for her is taken as a challenge. Her conduct, mingling with her peers particularly males and her movements in the society are under strict vigil and supervision. Her existence is just a burdensome happening with parents and family. The worry of parents enhances on her getting puberty and from that point of time, an elaborate exercise starts to find a spouse for her against her will, choice or say. This malaise is more emphatic in the middle class and neo-upper middle class. They talk big of equity, fairness, ills of dowry and of social values but in practice they behave quite differently; needs well educated, beautiful, all-rounder in all fields such as good manners, manage households, caregiver, street smart, work outside to garner income, restricted outside contacts, seek the concurrence of her activities and so on. For groom, she should be akin to a diva, pretty doll, soft spoken, not mingle with males of home and surroundings and act like a slut in bed. She is supposed to adhere with the unwritten dictates of the family and norms constructed against the females, always be a giver and raise no voice.
We are now in the end of the first quarter of 21st century but our behaviour, conduct and aspirations are not much far behind the feudalistic societal mindset. We are talking about human values, equality, transparency in conducting ourselves in society, priorities to fairer sex but mentally inclined to regressive approach to life particularly for women and girls. Double standards are the hallmark of our personality and our treatment to our girls. Our attitude and mindset is a stumbling block for the construction of just and fair social order. How hypocrites we are!
No comments:
Post a Comment