The Caste of Violence: Why Gender Cannot Be Understood Without Caste

-Ramphal Kataria

Brahmanical Patriarchy: The Hidden Architecture of Gender Violence in India

For decades, discussions on violence against women in India have been framed in a universalist language—“women’s safety,” “patriarchy,” and “gender justice.” These terms, while important, often conceal the brutal fact that not all women experience patriarchy in the same way. In India, caste determines whose suffering is visible, whose dignity is defended, and whose body becomes expendable.

The violence experienced by Dalit women lies at the intersection of caste hierarchy and patriarchal domination. It is a violence that is structural, historical, and deeply political.

Dalit feminist scholars have long argued that mainstream feminist discourse in India often ignored caste as a fundamental axis of oppression. It was only in the late twentieth century that the scholarship of thinkers such as Sharmila Rege and Uma Chakravarti systematically exposed how caste structures gender relations.

Their work forces a difficult question upon the Indian republic: can gender justice exist without caste annihilation?

Ambedkar’s Feminist Vision

Long before contemporary feminist scholarship emerged in India, B. R. Ambedkar had already recognized that the subjugation of women was central to the survival of caste.

In his seminal 1916 paper Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development, Ambedkar argued that caste reproduces itself through strict control over women’s sexuality—particularly through endogamy, the rule that individuals must marry within their caste group.

Ambedkar wrote:

“The superposition of endogamy on exogamy means the creation of caste.”

Endogamy required elaborate social mechanisms to maintain caste purity. These mechanisms historically included:

• child marriage
• enforced widowhood
• prohibition of inter-caste marriage
• strict control over women’s mobility

Women’s bodies thus became the frontline of caste preservation.

In Ambedkar’s analysis, caste hierarchy could not survive if women were allowed freedom in marriage and sexuality. Patriarchal control over women was therefore not incidental—it was a structural necessity of caste society.

Ambedkar’s politics reflected this insight. As chairman of the drafting committee of the Constitution of India, he pushed for constitutional guarantees that would dismantle caste discrimination and expand women’s rights.

Among these were:

• Article 14
• Article 15
• Article 17

Ambedkar’s feminist commitments became even clearer during his attempt to pass the Hindu Code Bill, which sought to grant women rights in inheritance, property, and divorce.

The bill faced ferocious opposition from conservative Hindu legislators, who saw it as an attack on traditional social structures. When the bill was stalled in parliament, Ambedkar resigned from the cabinet in protest.

His resignation speech remains one of the most powerful statements on women’s rights in Indian political history.

Ambedkar declared that the progress of a community is measured by the degree of progress which women have achieved.

Dalit Feminism: Rewriting the Narrative

While Ambedkar laid the intellectual foundation, it was the work of late twentieth-century scholars who gave shape to what is now called Dalit feminism.

Dalit feminism challenged both upper-caste feminism and male-dominated Dalit politics.

Mainstream Indian feminism—especially in its early decades—was largely shaped by urban, upper-caste women. Issues such as dowry deaths, domestic violence, and workplace discrimination dominated feminist campaigns.

These issues were undoubtedly important.

But Dalit feminists argued that they did not fully capture the realities of women who lived at the intersection of caste, poverty, and gender violence.

Dalit women faced not only patriarchal domination within their communities but also caste violence from dominant castes.

Their oppression was therefore dual and layered.

Sharmila Rege and the Politics of Testimony

The sociologist Sharmila Rege played a transformative role in bringing Dalit women’s voices into feminist scholarship.

In her influential work Writing Caste, Writing Gender, Rege argued that Dalit women’s autobiographies must be treated as critical theory, not merely as personal narratives.

These testimonies exposed the everyday violence that mainstream feminism often overlooked.

Dalit women wrote about:

• sexual violence by dominant caste men
• humiliation in public spaces
• caste-based labour exploitation
• exclusion from education
• policing of mobility

Rege insisted that feminist theory must be reconstructed from the standpoint of those most oppressed.

She called this approach “Dalit feminist standpoint epistemology.”

This framework insisted that knowledge about Indian society cannot be complete unless it includes the experiences of Dalit women.

Without those voices, feminist discourse remains structurally incomplete.

Uma Chakravarti and the Concept of Brahmanical Patriarchy

If Rege brought Dalit testimonies into academic discourse, the historian Uma Chakravarti provided one of the most powerful theoretical tools to understand caste and gender.

Chakravarti introduced the concept of “Brahmanical patriarchy.”

The term describes a system in which caste hierarchy and patriarchal control reinforce each other.

Under Brahmanical patriarchy:

• upper-caste women are controlled to maintain caste purity
• lower-caste women are sexually exploited to maintain caste dominance

This dual system produces different forms of oppression for different women.

Upper-caste women face severe restrictions on sexuality and mobility because they carry the burden of preserving caste purity.

Dalit women, on the other hand, are often subjected to sexual violence because dominant castes view them as socially disposable.

This framework explains why sexual violence in India is frequently caste-targeted.

Violence as a Tool of Caste Power

Sexual violence against Dalit women is not merely a crime of individual pathology. It often functions as collective punishment and social intimidation.

In rural India, dominant caste groups frequently deploy violence to discipline communities that challenge traditional hierarchies.

When Dalit families assert land rights, political representation, or educational mobility, violence against women becomes a weapon of retaliation.

Several high-profile cases have exposed this pattern.

One of the most disturbing examples occurred in 2020 in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh.

A 19-year-old Dalit woman was brutally assaulted and later died from her injuries. The case triggered national outrage when authorities hurriedly cremated her body in the middle of the night without the family’s consent.

The episode exposed deep institutional failures.

Police initially denied that rape had occurred.

Political leaders attempted to downplay the crime.

And the victim’s family faced intimidation during the investigation.

The case revealed how state institutions themselves can reproduce caste power structures.

Crime Data and Structural Inequality

Official statistics confirm that caste-targeted violence remains widespread.

According to data from the National Crime Records Bureau, crimes against Scheduled Castes have steadily increased over the past decade.

In 2022 alone:

• over 57,000 crimes against Scheduled Castes were recorded
• nearly 4,000 cases involved rape of Dalit women

These numbers likely underestimate the real scale of violence because many cases go unreported due to fear of retaliation.

Conviction rates remain distressingly low.

In many rural areas, dominant caste networks influence police investigations, leading to weak prosecutions or outright dismissal of cases.

The Demographic Context: Sex Ratio and Structural Discrimination

Gender inequality in India is also visible in demographic indicators.

The Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India reported that the sex ratio at birth remains skewed in many states.

Despite legal prohibitions on sex-selective abortion under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, cultural preference for sons continues to distort demographic patterns.

The National Family Health Survey shows that the sex ratio at birth has improved slightly but remains uneven across regions.

Economic inequality further deepens gender disparities.

According to data from the International Labour Organization, India’s female labour force participation rate remains among the lowest in the world.

In 2023 it hovered around 25 percent.

Dalit and Adivasi women often participate in labour markets at higher rates than upper-caste women—but largely in low-paid and informal work.

Their economic participation does not translate into empowerment because it occurs within exploitative labour systems.

Law Without Transformation

India possesses an impressive architecture of legal protections against caste and gender discrimination.

Among them:

• Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
• Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
• Criminal Law (Amendment) Act

These laws were strengthened after the nationwide protests following the 2012 Delhi gang rape.

Yet the persistence of violence suggests that legal reform alone cannot dismantle deeply embedded social hierarchies.

Law operates within society, and when social institutions remain caste-bound, justice becomes fragile.

The Politics of Silence

Dalit feminists argue that Indian public discourse often erases caste when discussing gender violence.

Media coverage tends to frame crimes as isolated acts of brutality rather than as expressions of systemic inequality.

The result is a politics of silence.

Without acknowledging caste, society cannot confront the structures that enable violence.

This silence is not accidental.

It reflects the discomfort of confronting a social order that continues to privilege dominant castes even within democratic institutions.

Toward an Ambedkarite Feminism

For Dalit feminist thinkers, the path forward lies in reclaiming Ambedkar’s radical vision.

Ambedkar did not treat caste and gender as separate struggles.

For him, annihilation of caste was inseparable from women’s emancipation.

An Ambedkarite feminism therefore demands:

• land rights and economic independence for Dalit women
• stronger enforcement of atrocity laws
• representation in political institutions
• recognition of caste-based sexual violence
• transformation of social attitudes through education

Without these changes, legal equality will remain a fragile promise.

Conclusion: Democracy and the Measure of Justice

India often celebrates itself as the world’s largest democracy.

But democracy cannot be measured only by elections.

It must also be measured by the dignity afforded to its most vulnerable citizens.

Dalit women stand at the intersection of India’s deepest inequalities—caste, gender, and poverty.

Their experiences reveal the unfinished project of the republic.

The question confronting India today is not merely whether violence against women will decrease.

The deeper question is whether the nation is willing to confront the caste structures that sustain that violence.

Until that confrontation occurs, the promise of equality embedded in the Constitution will remain incomplete.

References

1. Ambedkar, B. R. Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development. 1916.

2. Ambedkar, B. R. Annihilation of Caste. 1936.

3. Rege, Sharmila. Writing Caste, Writing Gender. Zubaan, 2006.

4. Chakravarti, Uma. Gendering Caste: Through a Feminist Lens. Stree, 2003.

5. National Crime Records Bureau. Crime in India 2022.

6. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5), Government of India.

7. International Labour Organization. Women and Men in the Informal Economy.

8. Government of India. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

From Manusmriti to Modern India: The Long History of Caste and Gender Violence

-Ramphal Kataria

Why Caste Still Shapes Violence Against Women

The intersection of caste and gender violence in India cannot be understood without examining its historical roots. Long before the modern nation-state emerged, the social order of the subcontinent was shaped by a deeply stratified system of caste hierarchy. This hierarchy governed not only labour and ritual status but also sexuality, marriage, and reproduction.

Ancient legal and religious texts reveal how the control of women’s bodies was central to the maintenance of caste purity. Among the most influential of these texts was the Manusmriti, which codified a rigid social order based on hierarchy and purity.

The Manusmriti prescribed strict rules governing women’s conduct. It declared that women must remain under male guardianship throughout their lives—first under their fathers, then their husbands, and finally their sons. But these injunctions were not merely about patriarchal control. They were also about safeguarding caste boundaries.

Marriage outside caste—especially between upper-caste women and lower-caste men—was treated as a grave social transgression. Such unions threatened the logic of caste reproduction because they blurred the boundaries upon which hierarchy depended.

The result was an elaborate regime of surveillance over women’s sexuality. Upper-caste women were subjected to severe restrictions on mobility and social interaction. Practices such as early marriage and enforced widowhood emerged as tools for controlling female sexuality.

This system did not apply equally to all women.

Lower-caste women were often excluded from the protectionist ideology that governed upper-caste femininity. Instead, they were frequently subjected to sexual exploitation by dominant caste men. Historical records from medieval India suggest that caste hierarchy produced a dual structure of patriarchy: strict control over upper-caste women and sexual availability imposed upon lower-caste women.

This asymmetry would persist for centuries.

Colonial Rule and the Codification of Patriarchy

When the British colonization of India began to consolidate power in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, colonial administrators encountered a bewildering diversity of customs and legal traditions.

In their attempt to govern the colony efficiently, British officials began codifying what they described as “Hindu law” and “Muslim law.” Ironically, in doing so they often reinforced conservative interpretations of social practices.

The Manusmriti and similar texts were elevated as authoritative sources of Hindu law, even though historically they had not always been applied uniformly across regions and communities.

This colonial codification hardened social hierarchies.

Legal scholars have argued that colonial rule transformed fluid social practices into rigid legal categories, thereby entrenching caste and gender inequalities.

At the same time, colonial reform debates introduced new questions about women’s rights. The nineteenth century witnessed intense controversies over practices such as sati, widow remarriage, and the age of consent.

Reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy campaigned against sati, while others pushed for women’s education and legal reforms.

Yet many of these reform movements were shaped by upper-caste concerns. The suffering of Dalit and lower-caste women rarely entered mainstream reform discourse.

Colonial ethnographies also documented the prevalence of caste-based sexual exploitation. Systems such as the devadasi tradition and various forms of bonded labour often involved the coercion of women from marginalized communities.

These practices reflected the persistence of caste power in shaping gender relations.

Nationalism and the Idealized Woman

The rise of Indian nationalism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries introduced a new symbolic dimension to gender politics.

Nationalist thinkers began portraying the nation as a feminine figure—an embodiment of purity, sacrifice, and moral strength. This symbolism became popular through images such as Bharat Mata.

The nationalist imagination celebrated women as the spiritual guardians of the nation.

But this celebration came with expectations.

Women were encouraged to embody virtues such as modesty, chastity, and devotion to family. The nationalist discourse idealized a particular model of femininity—one that was closely aligned with upper-caste norms.

Dalit and lower-caste women did not easily fit into this idealized image.

Their lives were shaped by labour, poverty, and structural violence. They worked in fields, factories, and domestic labour markets. Their struggles rarely appeared in nationalist narratives.

Thus, while nationalism challenged colonial rule, it often left caste hierarchies intact.

The result was a paradox: the freedom movement spoke the language of universal liberty but often ignored the inequalities embedded within Indian society itself.

It was precisely this contradiction that B. R. Ambedkar sought to expose.

Ambedkar repeatedly warned that political democracy without social democracy would remain fragile.

His critique remains hauntingly relevant today.

Post-Independence India: Law, Democracy, and Persistent Hierarchy

After independence in 1947, the newly adopted Constitution of India promised a radical break from the past.

The Constitution outlawed untouchability and guaranteed equality before the law. In theory, it established a democratic framework capable of dismantling centuries of social hierarchy.

Yet the persistence of caste-based violence revealed the limits of legal transformation.

Despite constitutional protections, Dalit communities continued to face social exclusion and economic marginalization.

For Dalit women, the situation was even more complex.

They remained vulnerable not only to patriarchal violence within their communities but also to caste violence from dominant groups.

The law attempted to address this through special legislation such as the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which criminalized caste-based violence.

But implementation has often been uneven.

Cases are frequently underreported due to fear of retaliation. Investigations can be compromised by local power structures, and conviction rates remain low.

The gap between constitutional ideals and lived reality continues to haunt the Indian republic.

Gender Violence in the Age of Nationalism

In the twenty-first century, debates about gender violence in India have become increasingly entangled with political narratives of nationalism and cultural identity.

The nationwide protests following the 2012 Delhi gang rape marked a turning point in public discourse on women’s safety.

Millions of Indians took to the streets demanding stronger laws and institutional accountability.

The protests led to significant legal reforms through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, which expanded the definition of sexual assault and introduced stricter penalties.

Yet even as these reforms were celebrated, critics pointed out a troubling pattern.

Public outrage often depended on the identity of the victim.

Cases involving middle-class urban women tended to receive widespread media attention, while crimes against Dalit or rural women were frequently ignored or downplayed.

This disparity reflected deeper social hierarchies within the public sphere itself.

Dalit feminist activists argued that national conversations about women’s safety often erased caste.

Without acknowledging caste power, they argued, the discourse on gender violence would remain incomplete.

The Politics of Violence

Gender violence in India is also deeply connected to economic transformation.

Rapid urbanization, agrarian distress, and migration have reshaped social relations across the country.

In many rural regions, traditional hierarchies are being challenged as marginalized communities gain access to education and political representation.

These changes have triggered backlash from dominant caste groups who perceive social mobility as a threat to their historical privileges.

Violence against women—particularly Dalit women—often becomes a tool for reasserting social control.

Sociologists studying rural conflicts have documented how sexual violence is sometimes used as collective punishment against communities that challenge caste hierarchy.

The violence is not random.

It is political.

Media, Silence, and the Hierarchy of Grief

Modern media has the power to amplify voices or erase them.

The digital age has brought greater visibility to issues of gender violence through social media activism and citizen journalism.

But media coverage remains uneven.

Crimes that fit certain narratives—urban settings, middle-class victims, sensational details—receive extensive coverage.

Others disappear into silence.

Dalit feminist scholars argue that this hierarchy of attention reflects broader social inequalities.

Whose suffering becomes national news?

Whose grief remains invisible?

These questions reveal the moral fault lines within public discourse.

The Unfinished Revolution

More than seventy-five years after independence, India remains a nation wrestling with its contradictions.

It possesses a progressive constitution, a vibrant democracy, and a powerful tradition of social justice movements.

Yet the persistence of caste-based gender violence reveals the limits of legal reform without social transformation.

The ideas of B. R. Ambedkar, Sharmila Rege, and Uma Chakravarti continue to challenge the nation to confront uncomfortable truths.

They remind us that the struggle for equality cannot be confined to legal institutions alone.

It must also transform social attitudes, economic structures, and political imagination.

Until then, the promise of justice will remain incomplete.

References

1. Chakravarti, Uma. Gendering Caste: Through a Feminist Lens. Stree, 2003.

2. Rege, Sharmila. Writing Caste, Writing Gender. Zubaan, 2006.

3. Ambedkar, B. R. Annihilation of Caste. 1936.

4. Omvedt, Gail. Dalits and the Democratic Revolution. Sage Publications.

5. Guru, Gopal. Dalit Women Talk Differently. Economic and Political Weekly.

 

 

The Price of Being a Woman: From Ancient Patriarchy to the Pink Tax: A Long History of Control, Exploitation and Resistance

-Ramphal Kataria

Flowers on March 8, Inequality All Year

Introduction: The Quiet Cost of Being Born a Woman

On the surface, the modern world celebrates women.

Every year on March 8, speeches are delivered, flowers are exchanged, and social media fills with slogans about empowerment. Governments release reports on gender equality; corporations launch advertising campaigns with the rhetoric of inclusion. The day is known as International Women’s Day, a global event recognising women’s achievements and advocating their rights.

Yet beneath the spectacle lies a quieter reality.

A pink razor often costs more than a blue one. A woman’s haircut costs more than a man’s. Cosmetics, clothing, sanitary products, and personal care items marketed for women are frequently priced higher than similar products designed for men. Economists call this phenomenon the “pink tax.”

But the pink tax is merely the most visible manifestation of a much older and deeper inequality.

For thousands of years, women have been positioned within social systems that restrict their autonomy, control their sexuality, appropriate their labour, and regulate their bodies. From the patriarchal codes of ancient civilizations to the consumer culture of modern capitalism, women’s lives have been shaped by institutions that often claim to honour them while simultaneously subordinating them.

As the philosopher Simone de Beauvoir famously wrote in The Second Sex:

“One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.”

The sentence captures a profound truth: womanhood has been historically constructed through social structures that define, discipline, and often diminish women.

To understand the real meaning of International Women’s Day—and why it remains relevant—we must trace the long historical trajectory of women’s status in society: from early human communities to modern capitalism, from ancient religious texts to contemporary markets.

This journey reveals a troubling pattern.

Civilisation, for all its progress, has often deepened women’s subordination.

I. Women in Early Human Societies: Equality Before Patriarchy

Anthropological evidence suggests that early hunter-gatherer societies were not necessarily patriarchal in the rigid sense later civilizations became.

Many anthropologists argue that prehistoric societies exhibited relatively egalitarian gender relations. Women participated in gathering food, producing tools, and sustaining communities. In some societies, descent was traced through the maternal line.

The German philosopher Friedrich Engels, in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, argued that early societies had forms of “primitive communism” in which property and labour were shared.

According to Engels:

The historical defeat of the female sex began with the rise of private property.

When agriculture developed and surplus production emerged, societies gradually shifted toward patrilineal inheritance. Property had to be transmitted through male lineage. Controlling women’s sexuality became crucial because men needed certainty about biological paternity.

Thus began the institutionalisation of patriarchy.

Marriage became less about companionship and more about regulating women’s reproductive capacity.

In this system, women were transformed from autonomous members of the community into instruments of lineage.

II. The Rise of Patriarchy and the Domestication of Women

With the emergence of organized states and codified laws, patriarchy became entrenched.

Civilisations across the world—from ancient Greece to Rome, from India to China—developed legal frameworks that positioned women as subordinate to men.

Greek philosophers were explicit about this hierarchy.

Aristotle wrote that women were “naturally inferior,” arguing that their role was to obey men and manage domestic life.

The Roman legal system classified women as perpetual minors under the guardianship of fathers or husbands.

In many societies, the public sphere belonged to men while the private sphere—the home—was designated for women.

The home became both sanctuary and prison.

Women’s labour inside households—childcare, cooking, cleaning, emotional care—was essential to social reproduction, yet it remained invisible and unpaid.

As the sociologist Silvia Federici later argued, the unpaid domestic labour of women became the hidden foundation of economic systems.

Civilization thus advanced not only through technological progress but also through the systematic control of women’s bodies and labour.

III. Religion and the Codification of Female Subordination

Religion played a crucial role in legitimizing patriarchy.

Hindu Texts

Ancient Hindu legal codes contain deeply contradictory ideas about women. On the one hand, women are revered as goddesses. On the other, they are denied autonomy.

The Manusmriti famously states:

“In childhood a woman must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, and after the husband’s death to her sons.”

The text further declares that women must never be independent.

These prescriptions shaped centuries of social norms: child marriage, prohibition on widow remarriage, and strict codes governing female sexuality.

Christian Traditions

Christian theology also reinforced patriarchal hierarchies.

The Biblical story of Eve—who is portrayed as the origin of sin—has historically been interpreted as evidence of women’s moral weakness.

Church fathers such as Tertullian described women as “the devil’s gateway.”

For centuries, women were excluded from religious leadership roles.

Islamic Interpretations

Islamic texts contain both egalitarian and patriarchal elements. While the Quran granted women rights to inheritance and divorce in the 7th century—radical for its time—interpretations in many societies later restricted women’s autonomy.

Across cultures, religious institutions frequently functioned as guardians of patriarchal order.

IV. Capitalism, Industrialisation and the Gendered Division of Labour

The Industrial Revolution transformed women’s roles but did not liberate them.

Factories drew women into wage labour, yet they remained paid less than men and continued to shoulder domestic responsibilities.

The sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild described this phenomenon as the “second shift.”

Women worked outside the home yet remained responsible for housework and childcare.

Capitalism simultaneously exploited and romanticized women.

Advertising industries constructed an idealized image of femininity—beautiful, nurturing, submissive—while selling products designed to maintain that image.

The modern beauty industry is built upon this contradiction.

Women are encouraged to pursue empowerment while being subtly pressured to conform to standards of attractiveness defined by patriarchal culture.

V. The Birth of International Women’s Day

The modern women’s movement emerged from labour struggles.

In 1908, thousands of women garment workers marched through New York demanding better working conditions and voting rights.

Inspired by these protests, the German socialist activist Clara Zetkin proposed an international day dedicated to women’s rights at the 1910 Socialist Women’s Conference in Copenhagen.

The first International Women’s Day was celebrated in 1911 across several European countries.

Its revolutionary significance became clear in 1917 when women workers in Petrograd launched strikes demanding “bread and peace.”

The protests sparked the Russian Revolution, which ultimately toppled the Tsar.

International Women’s Day was born not from corporate campaigns but from working-class rebellion.

VI. The Indian Reality: Progress and Contradiction

India presents a deeply paradoxical picture of women’s status.

On paper, constitutional guarantees promise equality. Women have held the highest offices in politics, from prime ministers to presidents.

Yet everyday life tells a more troubling story.

According to India’s National Crime Records Bureau, 4,48,211 crimes against women were reported in 2023, including rape, domestic violence and abduction.

Domestic cruelty by husbands or relatives remains the most common offence.

These numbers likely underestimate the scale of violence because many crimes go unreported due to stigma and social pressure.

Gender imbalance also reflects persistent discrimination.

Studies indicate millions of “missing women” in India due to sex-selective abortions and higher mortality among girls.

Even in states celebrated for development, sex ratios remain skewed.

In Haryana—where the Beti Bachao Beti Padhao campaign began—the sex ratio at birth reportedly fell to 933 girls per 1,000 boys in 2025.

These numbers reveal a disturbing truth:

The discrimination against women begins before birth.

VII. Economic Inequality and the Feminisation of Poverty

Economic empowerment remains one of the greatest challenges.

India’s female labour force participation rate remains far below the global average.

Recent labour data shows female participation around 34 percent, reflecting limited economic inclusion.

Even when women work, they are often concentrated in informal sectors with low wages and little security.

The Global Gender Gap Report places India among countries with significant gender disparities in economic participation.

Women also carry the burden of unpaid labour.

Globally, women perform the majority of domestic work—cooking, childcare, eldercare—tasks essential to society yet excluded from economic accounting.

Thus the economy runs on invisible labour.

VIII. Violence Against Women: A Structural Problem

Violence against women is not merely a law-and-order issue.

It reflects deeper social structures.

In India, crimes such as dowry deaths, honour killings, trafficking, and domestic abuse remain persistent problems.

The majority of crimes against women occur not in public spaces but inside homes.

Domestic violence alone accounts for a significant share of reported cases.

This reality challenges the common narrative that danger exists only outside the household.

For many women, the home itself becomes the site of control and violence.

IX. The Pink Tax and the Economics of Femininity

In the modern consumer economy, gender inequality often appears in subtle forms.

Products marketed for women—from razors to shampoos—are frequently priced higher than equivalent products marketed for men.

This phenomenon is widely known as the pink tax.

The price difference may seem trivial for individual items but accumulates over a lifetime.

Women also face social expectations to spend more on appearance.

Clothing, cosmetics, skincare, hair treatments, and personal grooming become implicit requirements for social acceptance.

Thus the market monetizes femininity.

Women are encouraged to invest in beauty not merely as personal choice but as social obligation.

X. The Feminist Intellectual Tradition

Many thinkers have exposed the contradictions of patriarchal society.

Simone de Beauvoir argued that women were historically defined as “the Other” in relation to men.

Betty Friedan, in The Feminine Mystique, described the psychological emptiness experienced by suburban housewives trapped in domestic roles.

Virginia Woolf argued that women required economic independence and intellectual space to achieve creative freedom.

Her famous assertion remains powerful:

“A woman must have money and a room of her own.”

These writers revealed that gender inequality operates not only through law and economics but also through culture and psychology.

XI. Women Who Broke the Barriers

Despite structural obstacles, many women have shattered barriers.

Figures such as Rosa Luxemburg, Malala Yousafzai, Marie Curie, and Indira Gandhi transformed politics, science and activism.

Their achievements demonstrate that women’s capabilities were never limited—only their opportunities.

XII. The Hypocrisy of Celebration

International Women’s Day today often appears detached from its radical origins.

Corporations run marketing campaigns celebrating empowerment while paying women lower wages.

Governments release statements praising women while failing to ensure safety and equality.

The day risks becoming symbolic rather than transformative.

The radical writer Emma Goldman once warned:

“The history of progress is written in the blood of women as well as men.”

Her words remind us that social change rarely occurs through celebration alone.

It emerges through struggle.

Conclusion: Beyond Symbolism

The story of women is not merely a narrative of victimhood.

It is also a history of resistance.

From the garment workers of New York to the revolutionaries of Petrograd, from suffrage movements to contemporary campaigns against violence, women have continuously challenged structures of oppression.

Yet the struggle remains unfinished.

The persistence of violence, economic inequality, and cultural stereotypes shows that patriarchy has adapted rather than disappeared.

International Women’s Day should therefore be more than a ceremonial event.

It should be a reminder of unfinished revolutions.

For the question remains as urgent today as it was a century ago:

Can societies truly claim progress while half of humanity continues to bear the hidden price of being born a woman?

References

1. National Crime Records Bureau. Crime in India 2023.

2. Periodic Labour Force Survey, Ministry of Statistics, Government of India.

3. World Economic Forum. Global Gender Gap Report 2023.

4. Simone de Beauvoir. The Second Sex (1949).

5. Friedrich Engels. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (1884).

6. Betty Friedan. The Feminine Mystique (1963).

7. Silvia Federici. Caliban and the Witch (2004).

8. Research on missing female births in India.