This refers to Kanika Datta's column "Paternalism in women's rights" (Swot, December 19). While I agree with her overall view that the degree of success of gender laws depends on how the society at large and men in particular accept such a change, I disagree with her remark that "the egregious institution of the Arranged Marriage, [is] itself a reflection of rampant gender inequality". The epithet of "egregious" is subject to different meanings such as remarkable, absurd, important, terrible, deplorable, lamentable, etc. In this context of her writing, she probably meant deplorable, terrible or absurd. She has also said that arranged marriages are partially responsible for the dowry system. One needs to realise why the system of arranged marriage exists even now. It is a reality of life that many boys and girls do not find marriage partners in colleges or at workplaces. You cannot compel a person to fall in love or choose a partner for marriage. Being an uncle myself and having had to search for brides and grooms for my nephews and nieces via matrimonials, I say that there are many eligible people searching for their better halves. There is no point in deprecating the institution as deplorable or absurd because the situation is inevitable. And it is also not responsible for the dowry system. Even in love marriages, the same amount of gifts are given. If you see the number of divorces, there is nothing to choose between arranged marriages and love marriages.
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
Sukumar Mukhopadhyay New Delhi
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number