In India why does the girls's family pay dowry?

[Ray]

I just said, "common practice", and I don't think "pay dowry to the girl's family" is better than "pay dowry to the boy's family", or reverse. I just would like to discuss the reason to form different traditions. If you can't discuss politely, please leave this post. Thanks.

The very idea of payment is flawed.

Next there will be a new tradition of paying each other to have a child out of respect for bringing in a new one in the family.

 

[pmaitra]

Today I just see a post about Indian dowry in a Chinese forum, it puzzled a lot of people. Because this tradition is just reverse to Chinese tradition, in Chinese tradition it is the boy's family should pay gift or money to the girl's family. The reason is the girl's family raised such a good girl, the boy and his family should express their thankfulness and respect.

In Chinese tradition, when a groom pays money to the bride's family, it can be construed as the groom purchasing the girl. Although the practice is not a bad thing, since it is only fair to pay the bride's family as they brought up the girl since childhood and is now giving their girl away, it can create a perverted impression in the minds of others, and if one is hostile to PRC, like the BBC, will spin it into something like "Chinese selling girls like cattle."

Dowry is the money the bride brings along with her as her share to start a family with the groom. Just like in the west, the bride and groom both have a job, and pool their resources together to start a family, the same thing happens here too, except that traditionally, Indian girls don't work in a regular job, so she brings in her share of money into the new family that she will be starting with her to be husband.

 

[Ray]

A dowry is a transfer of parental property at the marriage of a daughter.

Dowry contrasts with the related concepts of bride price and dower. While bride price or bride service is a payment by the groom or his family to the bride's parents, dowry is the wealth transferred from the bride's family to the groom or his family, ostensibly for the bride. Similarly, dower is the property settled on the bride herself by the groom at the time of marriage and which remains under her ownership and control. Locally, dowry is called dahej in Hindi, jahez in Arabic, çeyiz in Turkish, dot in French, and in various parts of Africa as serotwana, idana, saduquat, mahari, mugtaf, and wine-carrying.

Dowry is an ancient custom, and its existence may well predate records of it. Dowries continue to be expected, and demanded as a condition to accept a marriage proposal, in some parts of the world, mainly in parts of Asia, North Africa and the Balkans.

Anthropologist Jack Goody's comparative study of dowry systems around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas demonstrated that dowry is a form of inheritance found in the broad swath of Eurasian societies from Japan to Ireland that practice "diverging devolution", i.e., that transmit property to children of both sexes. This practice differs from the majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice "homogenous inheritance" in which property is transmitted only to children of the same sex as the property holder. These latter African societies are characterized by the transmission of the ill-named "bride price," the money, goods or property given by the groom or his family to the parents of the bride (not the bride herself).

China
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ge_closeup.jpg/220px-Jade_cabbage_closeup.jpg
Jadeite Cabbage - Jin received it as part of her dowry for her wedding to Guangxu, in 1889; originally displayed in Forbidden City (Beijing), it is now in National Palace Museum (Taipei City).

Dowry was common in different historic periods of China and continued through the modern history. Locally called Jiàzhuāng (嫁妝), the dowry ranged from land, jewelry, money to a collection of clothing, sewing equipment and collection of household items. Mann and others find that dowry was a form of inheritance to daughters. In traditional China, the property owned by a family, if any, was earmarked for equal division or inheritance by sons only. Dowry was the only way assets were transferred to a daughter. It include immovable property such as land, and movable property like jewelry and fine clothing. The dowry she brought with her was typically sequestered from the property of her husband and other male members in a joint family. She would often sell this property for cash to overcome hard economic times or needs of her children and husband. In few cases, she may transfer the property she brought as dowry to her daughter or daughter-in-law. Dowry assets once transferred in turn constituted separate wealth of the woman who received it (sifang qian, etc.). Often a woman who brought a large dowry was considered more virtuous in Chinese culture than one who didn't. In parts of China, both dowry and brideprice (pinjin) were practiced from ancient eras to the 20th century.
Dowry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To add to the debate about the subject and also to indicate what it is in China too. The rationale is similar to India.

 

[Khagesh]

Stridhan or Indian dowry is a woman's estate/ownership, over things like:

Gifts and bequests from relations
Gifts and bequests from non-relations
Property acquired by self exertion, science and arts
Property purchased with the income of stridhan
Property purchased under a compromise
Property obtained by adverse possession
Property obtained in lieu of maintenance
Property received in inheritance
Property obtained on partition

Paying to get the bride in marriage was practiced in Indian Hindu communities also. However the tradition as documented/advised is that this be avoided and recognized as being wrongful basis of marriage. The exposition on good customs followed, as documented in the Smritis, would not be different in the reverse case too where the bride's side has to pay to get the groom.

If despite these clear headed enunciation of customs, if these problems are termed as social problems, then we must ask how? A thing already accepted as bad in customs cannot off course be customarily acceptable, merely because the law is unable or clueless to provide against and the policing structure is inadequate to stop. It is the weakness of the law and order mechanism which gets transferred onto the social structure of India, because by doing this some people can 'feel relaxed about a separate enlightened life of, blissful and willful, ignorance and indolence'. A feeling that for some reason some people yearn for.

About the interesting case raised about - what would happen to the girls from poor families, if dowries keep happening. Why does the law waste its time registering marriages instead of provide for registering of affidavits/contracts which clearly and expressly, in mandated language, spell out the conditions as present at the time of marriage. Let both parties state that there is no duress involved and specify, what and how much is the Stridhan.

I would say the very fact that such provisions do not exist raises a doubt on the intent of the doubtful thomases. Why don't the so called civil society ever raise a demand for this. I have over time reached the conclusion that there is an intent not to raise these demands and instead to indulge in verbal competition and the answer to the verbal competiton of the so called civil society is a counter verbal competition to pull them down from their self anointed thekedari.

 

[Ray]

Dowry system is not wrong. Dont be a sheeple and follow whatever BS western media throws around . Think for yourself. Its not that hard a thing to do

My wife bringing me dowry is just bringing her part of the wealth when starting a family, for she is not entitled to inheritance to her family fortunes like her "brothers" if she had them. I bring my family inheritance to the table, why should the woman be free from bringing her share of wealth for starting a family? I take inheritance of land and wealth from my father and in turn should give my sisters their share of wealth as dowry. Since Hindus gave property right to the sons, they gave dowry to their daughters. There is nothing wrong in either of that.

But, a girl can go to court of course regarding the share in he parent's wealth, but if the parents/brothers prove that she was given a fair share of the family wealth as dowry, then the court will rule in favor of the brothers because the girl recieved her fair share of the heirloom as dowry


@Mad Indian from another thread @RedDragon if u really interested

That rationale is no longer valid that dowry is just bringing her part of the wealth when starting a family, for she is not entitled to inheritance to her family fortunes like her "brothers".

Here is why:

Hindu Succession Act : Girls born before 2005 law change now have equal rights to property too

The amendment to the Hindu Succession Act giving daughters equal rights to ancestral property is applicable even for girls born before the law was changed in 2005, the Bombay High Court has said.

"Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by the Amendment Act of 2005 is retroactive (taking effect from a date in the past) in operation."

. "In other words, the provisions of the amended section 6(3) do not and cannot impinge upon or curtail or restrict the rights of daughters born prior to 9 September 2005,"

The amendment
The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, originally didn't give daughters equal rights to ancestral property. This disparity was removed by an amendment that came into force on September 9, 2005.
The issue came up before the bench of chief justice Mohit Shah, judges MS Sanklecha and MS Sonak after conflicting views on the matter expressed separately by a single judge and a division bench.

A division bench had opined that the amendment applied to daughters born on or after September 9, 2005. As regards daughters born before 9 September 2005, the judges held that they would get rights in the property upon the death of their father-coparcener (head of a joint family) on or after September 9, 2005.

Difference in opinion
But a single judge disagreed with the view of the division bench and stated that the amendment was retrospective in operation, that it was applicable from June 17, 1956, the date on which the Hindu Succession Act came into force. It would apply to all daughters of a coparcener who are born either before or after September 9, 2005 as well as daughters born before or after June 17, 1956.
Hindu Succession Act : Girls born before 2005 law change now have equal rights to property too | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

 

[Ray]

I don't give fu** what court/law says.If today 90% ppl following it,tomorrow law banned it.It doesn't mean 90% stopped it as a respectable citizens.

Anyway this discussion is futile,on one condition

If my family giving money to another family voluntarily in form of gift/dowry is i need govt approval for that. Giver is happy taker is happy beech mey tumhara kya jata hai *******
Note:voluntary not FORCE,if u apply force court/police are always there.

It is because of you folks who don't care for the Law that all the woes of India falls on the shoulders of those who respect Law.

If the Govt jailed a couple of your type and threw away the key, then you would come to your senses.

Are you aware that so many families are ruined because of the dowry system, that had a value in yesteryear times, but not so now.

There are many neat ways to suggest dowry.

One does not want dowry since it is against the law, but then he also says that "If you give your daughter a house, car and so on, who am I to object?" Neat. Where is the Force in this case?

Are you suggesting that the family you are giving your daughter to are kangals (वह व्यक्ति, जिसके पास कुछ भी धन न हो या न रह गया हो।) that they require help?

Folks from the cow belt require to be educated so that they realise the value of human kind and not treat women as chattel.

The cow belt mentality is what that gives scoundrels like that woman Udwin to slander India based on one depraved insane individual steeped in the cow belt psychology of man chauvinism and machismo.

It is time to keep pace with the times and like Suttee, which too if one looks at it from purely a sociological angle, has its merits in those days, when society was not as loose and liberal as today, but it got banned and it is no longer practiced, except for some stray cases in the past, in Rajasthan. Was banning Suttee wrong? What if a woman actually loves her husband want to jump into the funeral pyre, would that be kosher for you?

We have to keep pace with the society and keep improving it and make it more humane for every strata of society.

90% follows?

But does the cow belt signify India?

The cow belt mentality will give the e shopping portals a great time.

One will just have to check the best of the deals and filling the shopping cart and then track the order.

 

[Khagesh]

Indian Dowry is in the nature of a gift and is a subset of a woman's overall ownership.

Inheritance law can be different types but it is not a gift, to begin with. In any case inheritance is a whole new discussion.

Indian Dowry is however a necessity because even today young people usually are not financially strong enough at the time they are biologically at their peak. There is no point in getting married when your genetic utility is down and nearly out. But the modern BA MA type use less education ensures that people are simply not allowed to work for long parts of their early youth in any useful and profitable manner. You can begin to fcuk around 16, work around 18 but you still have to remain in college at 20/21. Should you decide to go in for some certification exams then put 3/4 extra years thereafter. All the while you will be making less money than a beggar. By the time young people save they are already well into genetic poverty. End result Thalassemia! Cow belt and beyond, starting from Punjab and well into Bengal, you will find youth that are suffering from diabetes with lethargic lives. What good is this long but poor quality life spent in chasing skirts and never actually getting it.

Marry at a proper time when you are capable of enjoying your sex life instead of first salivating with a non-existent sex life and then spending the rest of life supporting the liberal cause of sexual freedom and having to satisfy your own natural urges with a person who is exactly as lethargic as any modern person can get.

What the hell the families are more than willing to pay for the traditional lifestyles. You just have to say yes to sticking to one woman/man.

 

[Ray]

Sir u are missing something FORCE.Sex is not CRIME but if u apply FORCE it is called RAPE.

So don't preach me.

I'm personally against dowry but 2 persons/families giving/taking voluntarily why govt/u put finger in it.



Again u missing something,if groom family force extra after mrg go to court or divorce.But 2 MAJORS/families make a contract/mrg beech mey tumhara kya jaata hai

I have shown you how dowry can be obtained with loaded suggestion without force.

 

[Ray]

Indian Dowry is in the nature of a gift and is a subset of a woman's overall ownership.

Inheritance law can be different types but it is not a gift, to begin with. In any case inheritance is a whole new discussion.

Indian Dowry is however a necessity because even today young people usually are not financially strong enough at the time they are biologically at their peak. There is no point in getting married when your genetic utility is down and nearly out. But the modern BA MA type use less education ensures that people are simply not allowed to work for long parts of their early youth in any useful and profitable manner. You can begin to fcuk around 16, work around 18 but you still have to remain in college at 20/21. Should you decide to go in for some certification exams then put 3/4 extra years thereafter. All the while you will be making less money than a beggar. By the time young people save they are already well into genetic poverty. End result Thalassemia! Cow belt and beyond, starting from Punjab and well into Bengal, you will find youth that are suffering from diabetes with lethargic lives. What good is this long but poor quality life spent in chasing skirts and never actually getting it.

Marry at a proper time when you are capable of enjoying your sex life instead of first salivating with a non-existent sex life and then spending the rest of life supporting the liberal cause of sexual freedom and having to satisfy your own natural urges with a person who is exactly as lethargic as any modern person can get.

What the hell the families are more than willing to pay for the traditional lifestyles. You just have to say yes to sticking to one woman/man.

Even if one has his or her biologically at it peak, one does not require an opulent environment to fulfill one's requirement.

All one requires is a room with a gas/ kerosene stove and a cot.

Have you seen Piya ka Ghar?

 

[Mad Indian]

It is because of you folks who don't care for the Law that all the woes of India falls on the shoulders of those who respect Law.

If the Govt jailed a couple of your type and threw away the key, then you would come to your senses.

Look, you need to drop this "law is the ultimate morality nonsense". I already pointed it out but you dint get the point and you shouted it down using your authority. Right now, homosexuality is illegal by Indian law. So is it amoral for MSM to practice their sexual orientation?

Law =/= morality.

Just because dowry is banned as a law does not make it amoral.

Are you aware that so many families are ruined because of the dowry system, that had a value in yesteryear times, but not so now.

There are many neat ways to suggest dowry.

Actually there are two sides to this story - the story of groom's side and the story of the bride's side. But I am guessing people like you, .ie most women's right activists only look at the side of the bride and not that of the groom.

One does not want dowry since it is against the law, but then he also says that "If you give your daughter a house, car and so on, who am I to object?" Neat. Where is the Force in this case?

Why are the bride's family willing to marry the daughter off to the groom then? Is there a force involved? How about the bride's family say no to such bride groom? Why dont they go looking for a bridegroom who wont demand such things from the bride's family? So how about someone who demands lesser dowry than the groom you have in question? For example, lets say I demand 1 crore as dowry for my wife, and some one else demands only 10000Rs. as dowry, why don't the bride's father marry his daughter to the person demanding lesser dowry of 10000Rs. ? Surely, not every bridegroom demands a car?

@Bangalorean, this is the kind of thought I was talking about. Always looking the issue from the supposedly perpetual victim(bride or woman) and the supposedly perpetual abuser(groom or man).

I propose an alternative - an alternative where the bride's and the bridegrooms's family agree upon a preset amount as dowry, breaking the deal of which by either side is an offence. Now that would be fair. But how is it fair that women wont bring dowry but are allowed to inherit the man's family fortunes while the man has no such reciprocity.

Are you suggesting that the family you are giving your daughter to are kangals (वह व्यक्ति, जिसके पास कुछ भी धन न हो या न रह गया हो।) that they require help?

Folks from the cow belt require to be educated so that they realise the value of human kind and not treat women as chattel.

The cow belt mentality is what that gives scoundrels like that woman Udwin to slander India based on one depraved insane individual steeped in the cow belt psychology of man chauvinism and machismo.

And people who make such asinine comments on cow belt because they are brainwashed into believing some ideas are superior are somehow better than cow belts how?

It is time to keep pace with the times and like Suttee, which too if one looks at it from purely a sociological angle, has its merits in those days, when society was not as loose and liberal as today, but it got banned and it is no longer practiced, except for some stray cases in the past, in Rajasthan. Was banning Suttee wrong? What if a woman actually loves her husband want to jump into the funeral pyre, would that be kosher for you?

So people who are getting dowry equal to people supporting murder(Sati is nothing more than glorified murder) now? Talk about strawman

You are attacking a position(Pro Sati) which none of your opponents(Dowry is not necessarily evil kind of guys) in this debate is holding -attacking the strawman

We have to keep pace with the society and keep improving it and make it more humane for every strata of society.

Moving forward not the same as moving for a better future

90% follows?

But does the cow belt signify India?

The cow belt mentality will give the e shopping portals a great time.

One will just have to check the best of the deals and filling the shopping cart and then track the order.

Yeah, cow belt mentality is stupid. Bengali ideas are awesome. Fyeah.

Again, this whole boils down to big adhominem on the mentality of people practicing it instead of whether their position is right or wrong. But who cares right?

 

[Khagesh]

@Ray,

Yes it was a lovely movie. There were other directors also that had the power of observation to make similar movies, adequately capturing the man-woman relationship in its varied forms. Those days are perhaps gone.

Now a Sallu shaking his pants is and short skirts is the epitome of all entertainment and all the essence of a man-woman relationship. And we must also protect the system that produces this because if we don't then we risk becoming Unglobalized Indian. Global Citizenship is more important than Indian shiti-jan-ship.

Anyhow my concern was more for thee practical aspects of ensuring a bunch of things using our existing social structure:
1) Adequate sexual contact without turning it all into a titillation of 30 year olds watching porn and stags hanging around outside pubs.
2) Adequate inter personal contact between young woman and young men where they both learn and teach each other, exactly how to take up responsibilities and become leaders of the social system as they grow
3) Have kids when they have adequate quantities of telomeres required to have a healthy cell division.
4) Have some financial way of making sure that these young men and women themselves do not end up becoming a drag on their parents and the society around.

Any system that does these is worthy of following.

Everyting that fails to do this and instead begins to talk a lot about 'rights and fundamental rights' without simultaneously talking of duties/responsibilities discharged towards the social system (not interpersonal contractual bovinecrap), must be dropped from practice.

 

[salute]

After see some programs of the "Satyamev jayate/Truth Alone Prevails", I think I have get some ideas. Aamir Hussain Khan is really a brave and respectable man.

he is fake, dude,

actor never engages in social matter and if they do then its only for publicity,

in reality he was never active in social matters,he just talks about it on show and earns 3 crore PER show.

 

[Bangalorean]

Interesting discussion.
@Mad Indian, your theory of "supply and demand" being used to arrive at an "appropriate dowry amount" won't work because of casteism and intra-community marriage in India.

If I ask for 1 crore dowry and another man asks for 1000 rupees token amount, but if that other man happens to be outside the community, the 1 crore offer will still be the only valid option. So, "eradication of dowry" is linked with "eradication of caste".

The more "accomplished" the man is, the greater dowry he can demand. A 1 crore dowry may be demanded by a post-graduate vice-president of an MNC and zero dowry may be demanded by a clerk in a small bank. Of course its the girl's parents' choice now, what they wish to do.

I think a truly "free society" will see dowry being decided as per free market rules. If the girl is also accomplished and in a very senior position and agrees to marry a lower-status guy, the guy's parents may have to offer dowry. Assuming the caste system gets eradicated completely and caste/community ceases to be a factor while choosing one's mate, depending on a variety of factors such as status, education, wealth, property, looks, etc. dowry amounts will be adjusted based on free market.

 

[Khagesh]

@Bangalorean, beg to differ ji. You have just trivilized the whole discussion by bringing in the same old same old.

There is absolutely no guarantee, not even a inny miny tiny unsecured probable guarantee, that a criminal mentality will not scheme. This implies that both the 1 Crore guy and the 1K guy have an equal likelihood of being one.

So long as we avoid focus on criminality, merely because we have no control over criminality, we will keep looking for false solutions. People tend to avoid having to deal with the issue of criminality because deep down they know that there is no final solution for it which makes them insecure and in search of an illusive security they begin talking about several other probable solutions which makes them believe they are in the control. A control they have earned by slogging in their respective lives.

Unfortunately this does zilch/sifr/sunya to convince the criminal mentality to abjure his habits. What is not remembered is that a criminal mentality too has earned his criminality by working hard at it for a long long time in his life.

Reality simply cannot be avoided that crime is much much higher in those countries that try to preach 'social change'. If these westerners were so capable then they would have ensured a better life for their own people. What they have is a monied life for their people also a longer life. But if it was better then one aam aurat from India would not have been dead in Sydney today.

First admit that crime awareness is lacking. For gods sake we do not even have the data on how many of the rape victims report after the first 48 hours of the crime when their chances of having a medical proof has diminished substantially. We are driving blind.

Teach crime awareness and basic law to responsible adults in good educational institutes. Remove the troubles and stigma around the system of police+courts+hospitals. Make it easy for the witness to give testimony. Make it a social objective to inculcate in people a responsibility towards the weaker sections of society. Re-establish a trust relationship based social structure instead of a rights based social structure. This will prevent crime and also the near vacuous debate where a lot gets talked but nothing gets achieved.

 

[Bangalorean]

@Khagesh, the discussion is not about law & order in general, and I agree with you that almost all problems are in essence, law & order problems.

But here, the question which people are trying to answer is, "why do Indian women have to give dowry", and "is dowry really bad", etc.

 

[DingDong]

In majority of cases women want dowry for themselves because it is the last chance for them to extract something from their parents and siblings.

 

[Khagesh]

Indian women don't have to give dowries. Most Indian woman even if well educated, don't have the savings to pay a dowry. The payment is by the girl's families almost always. They pay not for the benefit of the whole of the grooms family. In law to In law relations are a matter of general fun and a lot of rivalry.

At times this rivalry become vicious mainly on account of latent criminality. In case there is no criminality involved or where the adults involved have a healthy self respect, the rivalry remains mainly social.

If you have to bring social issues into it then you also should be willing to explain how the millions of marriages that do not involve dowry deaths, function well.

 

[Mad Indian]

Interesting discussion.
@Mad Indian, your theory of "supply and demand" being used to arrive at an "appropriate dowry amount" won't work because of casteism and intra-community marriage in India. If I ask for 1 crore dowry and another man asks for 1000 rupees token amount, but if that other man happens to be outside the community, the 1 crore offer will still be the only valid option. So, "eradication of dowry" is linked with "eradication of caste"

How is castism anyway related to supply and demand? Is there a caste with no men in them that they have to pay hefty dowry to get their girls married off? Your assumption that supply and demand is sqewed because of castism is false as all the castes have more or less equal proportion of men and women

The more "accomplished" the man is, the greater dowry he can demand. A 1 crore dowry may be demanded by a post-graduate vice-president of an MNC and zero dowry may be demanded by a clerk in a small bank. Of course its the girl's parents' choice now, what they wish to do.

Exactly. Nothing stopped the girl's family to marry their girl to someone who does not require any dowry. In my place, the dowry expectation for a software engineer is something aroung 100 sovereigns of gold and 1 lakh or 2 lakh rupees. There are also bridegrooms who have no jobs who takes no rupees as dowry. And I am talking about the same community

If the girl's parents find the 100 sovereign gold groom as immoral, they can always marry their girl off to the jobless dowry averse guy.

I think a truly "free society" will see dowry being decided as per free market rules. If the girl is also accomplished and in a very senior position and agrees to marry a lower-status guy, the guy's parents may have to offer dowry.

Its very rare for that to happen. Women always upmarry. You will see a lot of divorces in couple where the men earn lower than women. Its in their nature. You will see lot of divorces being initiated by women if they are earning more than their husband. The feeling that they could do better than the husband will settle in them

Assuming the caste system gets eradicated completely and caste/community ceases to be a factor while choosing one's mate, depending on a variety of factors such as status, education, wealth, property, looks, etc. dowry amounts will be adjusted based on free market.

Caste system has nothing to do with any of this. I dont know why you think caste system is even relevent. Both men and women are likely to be at the same level of social mobility and economic mobility for a particular caste. Is there a caste which you know of , where the bride's family is exclusively poor and the groom's family is exclusively rich?

 

[Mad Indian]

@Khagesh, the discussion is not about law & order in general, and I agree with you that almost all problems are in essence, law & order problems.

But here, the question which people are trying to answer is, "why do Indian women have to give dowry", and "is dowry really bad", etc.

Dude, here is how it goes - if I marry a girl and get a good dowry, I wont ask her to sue her brothers for her part of the inheritance of family wealth. If I dont get dowry, then I should be entitled to her part of the inheritance of her family fortunes, just like how she is entitled to my share of my inheritance.

Again, this is the problem with thinking with a preset idea that something is bad or good. "Dowry is bad" is clouding your eyes to see this objectively

 

[Mad Indian]

In majority of cases women want dowry for themselves because it is the last chance for them to extract something from their parents and siblings.

Several women make pre-marriage demands from the grooms' family to ask for "so much and so much" for her as dowry from her parents.