DECLINING SEX-RATIO IN PUNJAB AND HARYANA
MALE CHILD IS THE DETERMINING FORCE FOR FEMALE FOETICIDE AND
INFANTICIDE
• Male child is an old age insurance
• Male child brings social status
GIRL CHILD IS AN INCREASING LIABILITY
• Perceived as the “other”, over which parents have no claims.
• Dowry exchange is crucial in preventing the birth of a girl child.
• Penetration of the market has appropriated male child preference to promote
consumption patterns through large scale celebrations of birth, lohri, mundal,
namkaran etc.
• Celebrating rituals associated with the birth of a male child and his
life stages are becoming status symbols.
• Technology is differentially utilised to practise male child preference.
• Revivalism of the fundamentalist movement and identity assertions
• Women perceived as the group’s honour
• Imposing codes of conduct
• Restrict mobility
• Norms of seclusion.
• Small family norm has displaced the girl child
• Segmented initiatives to promote women’s development have marginalised
the girl child
• Property laws in peasant patrilocal society have resulted in increased
dowry and resentment towards the girl child
• Shagun scheme at the level of norm has endorsed the view that the
girl child is a liability therefore provided compensation for by
government.
INTERVENTION STRATEGY
Any strategy to combat female foeticide and infanticide needs to address all factors that
determined
male child preference and those that enhance the worth of the male child.
The core elements of
patriarchy (gender typed roles, male descendancy and
inheritance, defining the male as the earner and protector, the vanguard of family
lineage and inheritor of resources and property) ensure the male child to be the
preferred sex at birth. The initiation into each life stage revolves around these
prototypes and reinforce them. This differentiation between male and female continues
around the life cycle initiated by different institutions and practices at different junctures.
Thus the coming of age of both male and female adolescents charter their
respective responsibilities and functions in accordance with their gender placement.
Female mobility gets restricted, dress and conduct codes and imposed, as is earnest
harnessing of capacities to be dictated towards being a
home-maker,pro-creator and
nurturer. The male, on the other hand, is encouraged to acquire productive income
earning skills. The institution of marriage and death-related practices form part of the
gender determined constructs with unfolding of each life stage the hegemony of the male
is dictated. Therefore, intervention cannot be restricted to birth, pre-birth or post-birth
activities that discriminate between the male and the female. It is the entire life cycle and
associated institutions (gender structures that attach a high value to the male child and
lower the worth of the girl child), practice through differentiating roles have to be
undermined. In other words, the male child preference does manifest starkly in the
preferred birth of a male child, but the hegemonic importance of the male is instated at
every juncture of life with different social mechanisms and processes supporting the
difference. It has also been found that while patriarchy does ensure the importance of the
male child with the male being the preferred child at birth, intervening external factors
interlink with patriarchy to ensure that the girl child is received as a burden and the
importance of the male child is enhanced. The penetration of the market has ensured that
celebration for the birth of a male child, dowry exchange and associated marriage
ceremonies have acquired the dimensions of status symbols.
Market forces have thus transformed normative rituals, practices or customs into an
entity, valued for their material and resource worth. For instance, celebrations at the
time of the birth of a male child are seen as a status symbol enhancing social worth of
the family in terms of popularity, goodwill, in providing an occasion to display its
opulence. The politics of fundamentalist extremism and identity assertion have glorified
the female as the family’s honour posing bodily restrictions in terms of appearance,
codes of conduct and mobility. The added burden of visible control over female
sexuality and reproduction has reinforced the sense of liability of a female while also
targeting her for avenging honour. These fundamentalist assertions continue to fuel the
culture of violence in Punjab which promotes violence as a method of conflict
resolution. This regenerates violent masculinities be it for martyrdom or for heroism.
Shedding blood for one’s land or women has a mandate, increasing the value of
protection – male to provide the protection over female. The culture of violence may
perhaps even be providing acceptability to acts of violence including female foeticide and
infanticide.
Simultaneously, the adoption of the
small family norm has displaced the girl child in this
milieu of increasing importance of the male child.
Other development initiatives such as
property laws in the peasant patriarchal society and subsequent increase in dowry has also
impacted towards the negative worth of the girl child. Implementation of schemes to provide
positive discrimination to the female and the girl child, such as favourable labour laws have
ousted women from the formal sector. The Shagan scheme which at the level of norm has
endorse the view that the girl child is a liability and, therefore, the provision of
compensation. These initiatives could be effective measures to check the discrepant male
female worth only when these are contextualised in a gender sensitive environment. In
other words, simultaneous efforts at the level of practice, norms and values have to address
the practice of differentiation between the male and the female.
