Of course the definition of this word differs according to the part of the world you live in. I've heard that in parts of Africa, it means "bride price" and is a gift given to parents of the bride by the groom, for trusting their daughter into his care. But for those of the Indian sub-continent, it is different.
It is the price the parents of a girl or woman, pays to the family of the bridegroom for being so kind enough to take the responsibility of their daughter from their hands. Yep, that's how they see it. I mean, not the parents of the bride, the bridegroom and his parents. Well, at least those who believe they have the right to take the dowry from the bride's parents. And mind you, in most of the cases, they belong to the female of the species themselves; they are the proverbial “mothers-in-law.
But those who fastidiously believe in the dowry system don't see any negativity in it. They have given the place of God to the male of the species and the place of a doormat to the woman of the species. This means that “He” gets all the benefits while “She” gets to do all the work. It is a man's “right” to take the dowry from a woman. It is the “duty” of a woman to slave away her life for him. This negative aspect (yes I call it totally negative) of the Indian culture has permeated to all the surrounding countries of its sub-continent.
Some sub-cultures seem to be gradually going away from the dowry system. But others cling to it like leeches. Even my own mother-in-law believes in the system. (She's a darling in all other aspects except this). She doesn't want her sons to have “hardships” in life. So her daughters-in-law have to come equipped with their own house. Strangest of all, she wants the parents of the daughters-in-laws to give the deed of the house to her. She calls it her son's rightful inheritance! And she will be the one to hand it over to the daughter-in-law, as if she built the house with her own hard earned money! For me this is ridicule in its extreme! Thankfully it did not happen when I got married.
I would have demanded that my own father give me the deed of whatever property he is willing to give me, with his own hands. Why should my father give the credit for the property he obtained through his own hard earned money to someone else who had no hand in it? That credit is his own. And that is my rightful inheritance. Not her son's.
She should be the one to provide her son's rightful inheritance, or better still as my husband says it, her son should be the one to provide the house for his own wife if he is man enough. When you think about her getting daughters-in-law to provide a house, in order for her sons not to “undergo hardships” to buy or construct a house, couldn't God give other hardships in life? A man can be suddenly made redundant. A man can spend ages looking for a job. An abnormal child born for the son can wreak havoc in life.
Sudden losses of all worldly things owned by the son could occur due to thefts or environmental catastrophes. Likewise, for a man who is man enough to accept only his wife without the accompanying worldly goods, couldn't God provide him with a prosperous life, a sudden promotion, an opportunity to sell an unused property for a very high price? a sudden opportunity to do a highly paid job….
I mean where does a man stand? Overall, he doesn't actually have to do a job at all. Why bother? His wife or in-laws provide him with a house, car, jewellery for his wife, and a substantial amount of cash for whatever expenditure he would need. He is only there to beget children, to see that the generation does not stop from there. As far as I am concerned, all women victims of dowry should go in for attaining motherhood through the sperm bank. That way they wouldn't need a man since their parents provide them with the means of living. They could avoid all torture linked to dowry this way. Besides, they could keep their own dowry instead of giving it to a man!
Fortunately my small home town (situated in the Indian sub-continent, but not in India) too has gradually come to see the pain and the ludicrousness of it. Many in-laws in my area are saying “no” to dowry saying their sons are perfectly capable enough to shoulder the responsibility of a wife and children. The reason for this is religious awareness. From living totally compliant with dowry taking Indian culture they are gradually moving towards compliance with Islamic culture.
You see, in the Islamic culture, it is the man who has to provide everything, including any dowry, to the bride. He has to provide her - within his means of course - with “shelter” in its broadest sense: shelter for physical, mental and spiritual wellness. That includes all types of accommodation, clothes, jewellery, and all those she-names-it he-should-have-it things!
Whatever she inherits from her parents is totally hers and he can take control of it only if she so wishes. Sorry guys! But isn't it superb for women? Well it is, especially if you're from the Indian sub-continent hearing horrific stories because of the male dowry taking system.
