Women's Issues

Why we hate our girls for Mint Lounge

This was a tough piece to write because you had to get the tone right. Many rewrites; many inputs from editors. Here it is at Mint’s site and pasted below

Culture
Why we hate our girls
The 2011 census reveals our abysmal child sex ratio. Is it poverty, deep-rooted cultural conditioning or our ignorance about what it means to be a woman? An IAS officer may not have the remedy, because India needs to convert minds subliminally for a real change
Shoba Narayan

Some stories find you. This one began with bags—1,000 unbleached cotton bags, to be specific. My sister-in-law in the US needed them to hand out to guests at a new Hindu temple in Southwest Florida. I started trawling online sites and spamming friends for recommendations. Days later, a stranger named Namrata Vora emailed me. There was an orphanage for girls named Aarti Home in Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, she said, with a tailoring unit that could make the bags. After discussing shape, size, price and design, we ordered 1,000 bags.

A 2007 BBC documentary titled India’s Missing Girls, which can be found on YouTube, features Aarti Home. Its remarkable founder, Puchalapalli Sandhya, speaks about India’s gender bias with understanding and compassion. She cradles a beautiful two-year-old girl whom they have named Harshita—abandoned at birth in a basket with a feeding bottle. “We don’t know who her parents are, or her name or her birthday. But since today is an auspicious day, we are celebrating her birthday,” says a smiling Sandhya in the documentary.

There are many poignant moments. A grandmother walks into Aarti Home and hands a day-old girl to Sandhya. The baby’s mother, her daughter, is missing, she says, and walks out. Thirty-six hours later, the premature baby dies. Sandhya speculates as to whether the mother tried to abort the baby using crude methods or eating poisonous herbs. The foetus survived the womb to die just after birth.

The case that spears your heart is of a pregnant woman who once worked at Aarti Home. She knows she is pregnant with a girl and wants to abort her baby. “I’ve had such a tough life,” says the woman. “Why should I subject my daughter to it also? Maybe I will give up my baby to Aarti Home.”

She eventually doesn’t abort her daughter or give her away to Aarti. “Once I saw my daughter’s face, all my love came pouring out,” says the woman in Telugu. “How can I give her away?”

The 100 girls at Aarti Home range in age from a few months to more than 18 years. Many have been abandoned at birth; some have been rescued from brothels when they were seven or eight years old; some of the older girls have found jobs and moved out. They return occasionally and are received with joyous cries of “akka” or elder sister. The Home invites young men to become elder rakhi-brothers to the girls. Sandhya posts advertisements on Telugumatrimony.com, trying to marry off the older girls on the condition that no dowry shall be asked for or given. The Home has three grandchildren, says the website proudly, and it will remain the “maternal home” for every girl who passes through it.

The 2011 census has brought forth India’s abysmal sex ratio, something that even our vaunted economic growth has been unable to stem. The number of girls per 1,000 boys has fallen 13 points, to 914, in the 0-6 age group in the past decade. Authorities admit that the programmes they had initiated to stem female foeticide and infanticide are not working.

It’s not just among the poor. The latest census figures show cities don’t fare too well either—in Delhi, for instance, the ratio is down 2 points, to 866. In the BBC documentary, a rich woman in Ahmedabad left her husband because he forced her to abort her five-month-old foetus when they discovered it was another girl. In 2007, more than 90 female foetuses were found stuffed in polythene bags and dumped into a well near an ultrasound-scanning clinic in Odisha, even though sex determination is illegal.

Why do we kill our daughters?

Economists have long tried to explain the “missing women of Asia”, first noted by the Nobel prize-winning Amartya Sen as early as 1990 in a seminal paper he wrote for The New York Review of Books. In it, he tried to wrap economics around biology and explain why 50 million women in China and 100 million women in India were “missing”. At birth, he said, boys outnumber girls everywhere. But women are hardier than men. They live longer and have a higher survival rate. Women outnumber men in much of the developed world. Even in sub-Saharan Africa, ravaged as it is by calamities and enervating poverty, women outnumber men. In Asia, however, particularly in India and China, the opposite is true. Even within the countries, there is a difference in sex ratios. Punjab and Haryana have a lower sex ratio relative to Kerala. “These numbers tell us, quietly, a terrible story of inequality and neglect leading to the excess mortality of women,” writes Sen in an oft-quoted line. Two explanations, one cultural (the East is more sexist than the West) and the other economic (women fare better in developed economies) have been “implicitly assumed”, as Sen says, to account for the lower number of women. Sen dismisses both explanations—read his paper for reasons—and lays the blame squarely on gender discrimination, suggesting that employment, literacy and economic rights, including property rights, are factors that would help right the wrong.

Later, economist Emily Oster questioned Sen’s view and suggested that the prevalence of the Hepatitis B virus in Asia would account for the higher survival rates of boys. Oster later publicly admitted that her hypothesis was wrong. Hepatitis B, as it turned out, had nothing to do with the survival rates of girl babies.

The most hopeful research, and the one that interests me the most, is by Monica Das Gupta, a senior demographer at the World Bank’s Development Research Group. In her paper Is There an Incipient Turnaround in Asia’s “Missing Girls” Phenomenon?, Das Gupta and her colleagues use data from South Korea to show that the son-preference reduces as societies develop, not simply because of economic improvement but because of “normative changes across the whole society”. Normative—I looked up the term—means a complex conglomeration of values, standards and judgement. It is what society thinks of as “normal”. Son-preference is strongest in patrilineal societies such as China, India and, until recently, South Korea. They viewed having sons as superior and normal. As patrilineal societies modernize, they develop political, legal and social tools that recognize “patrilineages as a threat rather than an asset to society”. This is slowly happening in India. Second, urbanization and industrialization will render women as valuable as men, both in their own minds and in society at large. The norms, in other words, are changing, even in India (I’d like to think). The modern state, says Das Gupta, has “unravelled” the underpinnings of a society’s son-preference.

Unlike Das Gupta, who views the world in wide swathes, I am not a demographer. I am a storyteller. I am interested in the psychology of India’s son-preference; about why we value sons more than daughters; and how we can change this.

The home front

Aloma Lobo and I are sitting in Bangalore’s Caperberry restaurant sipping wine and nibbling on canapés. Lobo is a medical doctor who used to be the chairperson of Cara, or Central Adoption Resource Agency. She continues to work with the Karnataka chapter of Cara and has six children—three boys and three girls. “Must you say that my girls are adopted?” she asks before giving permission.

I meet Lobo once a month at foodie events in Bangalore. With her slim frame, short hair and Herve Leger-type bandage dresses, she cuts an elegant figure. Her youngest daughter, Nisha, is visually impaired and has ichthyosis, a genetic condition that causes the skin to become scaly and flake away. Adoption specialists say that girl-babies with special needs are the hardest to place, something Lobo knows first-hand. “You know, our daughter didn’t come from a poor family,” she says. “Nisha’s parents were well-off but they still gave her away because she was challenged. The other day, she asked me, ‘Mama, what will you say if you meet the people who gave birth to me?’ I said, I would thank them because they gave you to us. I asked her: ‘What would you say?’ My Nisha said, ‘I would ask them why they weren’t there for me when I needed them most.’”

When my second daughter was born, I have to admit that I felt a pinch of disquiet. It would have been nice to have one child of each sex. I’d like to think that I would have felt that same disquiet had I given birth to two sons. But now, it is hard to fathom life without my little Malini. Could I adopt? I didn’t think so. When we contemplated adopting before my second child was born, I told my husband that I was worried I would treat the adopted child different from my own. Worse, I would treat the adopted child as more special, just to overcompensate. My husband was more sanguine. He had no qualms that “after the first few hours, your heart will embrace the newborn—any newborn—like it was your own”. Then I got pregnant and we didn’t do it. But I think to myself, why don’t we place adoption centres and orphanages beside IVF clinics so that people who try so hard to have a child know there are other options? Why don’t we build orphanages in districts such as Jhajjar, with India’s lowest sex ratio? The irony is that there is a waiting list for people who want to adopt girls and across the psychological border, there are parents who abandon or kill their daughters.

The oft-quoted, and very real reason why daughters are not desired is dowry; but it goes much deeper than that. To even begin to address India’s skewed sex ratio requires vision, extraordinary empathy, and a leap of imagination. Simply quoting numbers, getting on the moral high ground and condemning the parents who kill their daughters is not enough. “Indian women have been raised to devalue themselves and we perpetrate this on our daughters,” says Lobo. “I get very irritated when women tell me that they won’t eat before their husbands. Do it if it’s important that you have a family dinner. But don’t do it because he is the man. Till we learn to value ourselves, we won’t value our daughters.”

Valuing ourselves has to do with self-esteem, but it also has to do with the psychological burdens that women bear. Before you condemn the woman who kills her daughter, think about the sleep-deprived despair and fury that you have felt at whiny, cranky babies night after night. Were there moments when you wished the child would keep quiet; wished the child away? Now transpose that quiet rage to a different self. You are dispossessed; live in a hut in arid interior Rajasthan; work like a farm-horse; are malnourished and barely literate. You have never experienced maternal love (your father killed your mother in a drunken fit when you were a child), let alone the milk of human kindness, and civilization’s little courtesies that we city dwellers take for granted. In this morphed form, your body and mind have hardened like the land around you. You are already on edge and you know that you are carrying a girl. You dread the eyes that will view you with pity and censure when your daughter is born. You have no food for yourself or your first daughter. And now another? What are you going to do?

In Usilampatti taluk in Tamil Nadu, women give the newborn milk laced with erukkam paal (sap of Calotropis gigantea). The infant sucks the milk greedily and dies within an hour. Penn-sisu-kolai (girl-baby murder), it’s called. Mothers did this, but more often, mothers-in-law, by mixing pesticides, sleeping pills, rat poison or saps with mother’s milk and feeding it to the newborn girl.

It is not true, what they say, about maternal instinct gushing forth when you see your newborn. That happens in movies where the heroine sheds tears of joy and violins pierce the high note. In parts of India, the fierce, protective maternal instinct that those of us sitting in comfort feel for our children, is submerged, staunched and often runs dry—especially when the newborn happens to be a daughter. Maternal love is a luxury for poor, despairing women in Usilampatti, Jhajjar and other areas. They have no control over their lives or destiny; they lack individual identity, let alone self-esteem, education or financial independence. Most important, they believe they have no choice but to kill their daughters. If there were street plays or television campaigns in these villages with images of smiling, well-off parents who look these desperate mothers in the eye and say, “I will take care of your daughter,” they wouldn’t kill her. They’d give her up instead.

Many state governments, including Tamil Nadu, have attempted solutions for women teetering on the edge. They leave cradles outside orphanages for mothers who are ready to dump their daughters; have caseworkers monitor pregnant women.

While easier access to adoption agencies and orphanages might address the problem of female infanticide, it doesn’t prevent female foeticide, which requires step-by-step checklists and engineering solutions, along with a good dose of female psychology. Make sex determination illegal? Done. Shutter ultrasound clinics that violate the law? No. Slap fines on ultrasound technicians who reveal the sex? No. The PNDT (Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques) Act needs to be enforced because seeing an infant daughter’s face can change a mother’s mind.

Psychological issues are more complicated. Women feel like failures when they give birth to daughters; they feel victorious when they bear sons. The son is the carrier of the family name and business; the daughter takes away the family wealth. Sons take care of you in your old age; and they can light your funeral pyre. But all that is no longer true; not even in traditional or rural homes. As numerous microfinance institutions that lend mostly to women have figured out, it is the women who earn and save money. If you’ve ever employed a maid with a drunkard husband, you know that he is the burden and she is the financial provider. The problem is that this anecdotal evidence doesn’t apply to large swathes of India where women are painfully dependent upon and dominated by their fathers, husbands, and then sons. Among middle-class or wealthy families, the son-preference has to do with passing on businesses. Even here, daughters like the Paul and Reddy sisters have shown that girls can run and elevate a father’s businesses just as well as any son and they too keep their family name, even after marriage. You can make logical arguments like these to convince women to keep their daughters, but at the end of the day, they just aren’t enough. India needs to convert minds subliminally to displace centuries of cultural conditioning.

The problem is that this bias is so culturally ingrained and so complex that it is hard to know where to start. People say the oddest things. When my second daughter was born, an educated feminist sympathized with me because she came from a family of girls. My conservative mother, on the other hand, rejoiced over my daughters because she comes from a family of four brothers and one sister (my mom). She didn’t have the baggage associated with being a girl. A close friend in New York told me to try for a son who could light my funeral pyre. I expected this statement from a Brahmin priest, not from an investment banker. It is moments like these that make you a revolutionary.

Bollywood can help; as can our cricket heroes. If Sachin Tendulkar or M.S. Dhoni urge fathers to cherish their daughters, would it change minds? I love masala movies, but I cannot think of a single one, either here or in Hollywood, where a woman does Mission Impossible or is a Don. Why can’t Farah Khan or Kathryn Bigelow make women-centric movies? For that matter, why can’t Vishal Bhardwaj or Rajkumar Hirani change the paradigm, by using heroines as the “3 Idiots”? Easy to say, but in order for successful directors to embrace this concept, you need one runaway women-centric hit. Would that J.K. Rowling had written her series using her own daughter as heroine, instead of Harry Potter. That would have changed the minds of countless young girls, who currently have fairy tales in which the prince “saves” them as opposed to stories where they take charge of their destinies and save others in the process.

Reimagining realities is a central component in the fight against female foeticide. If I were Sonia Gandhi and I were serious about rebalancing the sex ratio of our country, I wouldn’t just hire a politician or an IAS officer to head this effort; I would hire a crackerjack team of demographers, caseworkers, implementers, ad men (or women) and media people. Lest I sound self-serving, let me add that in her paper, Family Systems, Political Systems, and Asia’s “Missing Girls”: The Construction of Son Preference and its Unravelling, Das Gupta concurs. “Studies of the impact of the media suggest that states can accelerate the resultant decline in son preference through media efforts to help parents perceive that daughters can now be as valuable as sons,” she says.

We are all stakeholders in this battle to save the girl child. Census 2011 is the tipping point beyond which the pendulum should not swing. If Indian society doesn’t save our girls, we will spiral downwards into the realm of science fiction decades later in ways that boggle the mind: inflicting sex-change operations on effeminate-looking boys in Nayagarh, Odisha, for instance, simply to provide a bride for a family of brothers. Holding Mahabharat-like swayamvars in families who have the daughters that society suddenly finds valuable; and killing off those boys—Greek-mythology style—who don’t qualify. You think this is impossible? As the country prospers and birth rates drop, who will be wives and mothers if there are no girls?

India needs to save our girls. The future of our boys, and indeed our civilization, depends on it.

Till we change our minds, we cannot change our world.

Shoba Narayan writes a popular weekly column The Good Life for Lounge.

Write to lounge@livemint.com

8 comments

  1. I think maybe you are putting the shadow before the person.

    The basic problem is that girls are considered “sunk cost” and boys are considered “assets”. The poor and ignorant villager is not thinking about employment or literacy or woman-issues, his basic concern is that he has to spend more (of his already impoverished) money for the girl.

    Other issues (e.g. MSDhoni or Katherine Bigelow-ish action heroes or whatnot) can be tackled only if that villager has some incentive at that moment to not destroy the little girl. It is like first tackle nutrition and disease then handle education and development and growth and all that…

    Other question I will ask to all these Miss Universes and film actresses and social workers is they spend all their money on schools and education and development – all that is good for the girls who survive infanthood. Instead of their “glamorous welfare” they should do more “grassroots welfare”. For example a program in villages where infants are supervised by armed security personnel and must be brought back every week for check up etc. This is the only way we can stop the horrendous female foetecide.

    Like

    1. Thanks, Reena. I hope that this will change from “sunk cost” to “asset” in our lifetimes. I agree with you that it all has to begin with the grassroots. But I am stuck (for now) in an urban environment 🙂

      Like

  2. Your site is really interesting to me and your subject matter is very relevant. I was browsing around and came across something you might find interesting. I was guilty of 3 of them with my sites. “99% of blog managers are guilty of these five errors”. http://is.gd/w4g8Ml You will be suprised how fast they are to fix.

    Like

  3. Showing 8 comments

    Sort by Subscribe by email Subscribe by RSS

    Sowmya Rajendran Yesterday 06:25 AM
    Like many others have already said, I disagree with the ending- the problem lies in the fact that women are constantly looked upon as serving reproductive value. We need to save the girls not because we need wives and mothers. We need to save them because we need their perspective. The immense talent and variety that this country loses out on. We need to save the girls not because our civilization depends on it. It’s because we cannot call ourselves civilized until we do.
    4 people liked this. Like Reply

    Bansal Garima Yesterday 04:08 AM
    Shobha, your article is realy very good. I couldn’t stop my tears to flow out while reading some lines. I have found many people saying that they are happy that they have girls and they are bringing up their daughters like boys. I feel very irritated by this comment. Why cant we bring up our girls like girls and make them feel proud od being girls.
    1 person liked this. Like Reply

    Jimkumar 04/10/2011 01:48 PM
    Nice article, but you messed it up at the end Shoba.
    What was the need for saying “who will be wives and mothers if there are no girls” at the end?????
    Is that the final point of all womanhood? To be wives and mothers????

    And I desperately hope that that last line is not blamed on “editorial compulsions”, Shoba. Cos it’s your name at the end.

    Regards,
    A LiveMint Fan.
    1 person liked this. Like Reply

    Mansi T. 04/10/2011 04:50 AM
    Beautiful note.
    I beg to differ from the last few thoughts though. Our concern for ensuring girl child is not killed should not ONLY be because we are worried about ‘Who will be mothers and wives?” but rather who will make the world a better place to live in, who will take the world forward, who will bring empathy and humanity to the cold, gruesome world?
    6 people liked this. Like Reply

    shubha 04/10/2011 10:44 AM in reply to Mansi T.
    I agree with your comment in principle, however you forget that this is about marketing the value of women to a society that only thinks in terms of ‘faydaa’ (profit) or nuksan ( loss).

    Middle class Indians have lost whatever little spiritual connection they had with God – and have fully embraced a materialistic hedonistic culture – with the ocassional Mata ka Jagran thrown in.

    So no point in raising issues like ’empathy and humanity… if this culture had ever valued any of those feelings ( outside of schmaltzy bollywood movies) we wouldnt be in this position in the first place.
    Like Reply

    Chandni Gupta 04/09/2011 11:56 PM
    Shobha, I love this article of yours. I am currently working on a project related to the gender asymmetry in India. I myself used to blame only the girl child’s mothers for killing their own daughters. But after reading this, i am able to see that they have no option but to do that. They cannot see their daughters go through the same thing they did..
    1 person liked this. Like Reply

    Daniela 04/09/2011 10:55 AM
    Dear Shoba,

    Though I liked this article for the facts and some of the suggestions it provided, I thought it tilted toward common prejudices toward the end.

    You cite popular culture and complain the lack of girl power in movies. “Tomb Raider” comes to mind as a female penchant to Mission Impossible. Miss Marple has long solved the trickiest of murder mysteries, and an entire bunch of girl power animation hits have streamed out of Japan: Lady Oscar, Sailor Moon, Georgie, … they are all female and they are all super heroes. This stuff exists aplenty, but India watches Hanuman.
    Secondly, this age old excuse of Fairy Tales is very boring. I come from the land of the Brothers Grimm where all of us grow up on those stories, yet there is no problem of son-preference. It is a prejudice that all fairy tales contain a damsel in distress. Ariel the Mermaid not only saves the life of the prince but also trades in her voice for a pair of legs so she can explore the world beyond the sea. Belle from The Beauty and The Beast not only saves her father, but stays in the scary castle, behaves very witty toward the Beast and can see much deeper than most feminists today who blame Fairy Tales for everything that goes wrong. Yes, more woman-centric popular media can help change perspective, and stories of strong women will help, but not at the cost of teaching young girls to be ashamed of their feminine side.

    I think the avenue that is explored very seldom when Indians discuss this son-preference is a) language and b) religion. From personal experience I have learnt that Indians refer to their daughters as Beta and when I object to anyone addressing my daughter such they inform me that this is to show respect. That the girl is as respected as the boy. What a warped sense of equality! It’s like a linguistic penis that is attached to the girl. Also, why can sisters not call their brother by his first name? What with festivals like Rakhi or Bhaiya Dooj where the brother is styled to be the protector? It may be painful to revisit culture and all the festivals one associates with one’s own family and childhood, but there is evil in those tiny every day gestures, just like I found most poojas during pregnancy to be covered prayers for sons.

    Maybe India’s son-preference find it’s fodder a little less in pop-culture and a little more in every day life?
    9 people liked this. Like Reply

    Godugunur Naga 04/09/2011 01:55 AM
    I see only a common thing in all this one is being girl child the other who is woman wether its mother or mother in law and lady doctor declares for few chips, its like “You too Brutus most unkindest” The race should change women should change politician can never change
    1 person liked this. Like Reply
    Reactions

    YourRainyDayBk 04/10/2011 12:31 PM
    From Twitter
    The Missing Women of Asia http://tiny.cc/wal84
    propertyandhra 04/08/2011 09:37 AM
    From Twitter
    Why we hate our girls – Livemint http://goo.gl/fb/3B8rj
    propertyandhra 04/08/2011 09:37 AM
    From Twitter
    Why we hate our girls – Livemint http://goo.gl/fb/oTv5A
    hbvnews 04/08/2011 09:07 AM
    From Twitter
    Why we hate our girls http://bit.ly/hEDrGQ
    wendyrawley 04/08/2011 08:24 AM
    From Twitter
    Why we hate our girls: I am interested in the psychology of India’s son-preference; about why we value sons more… http://bit.ly/eAKDMz
    casper_jack316 04/08/2011 08:23 AM
    From Twitter
    Why we hate our girls: I started trawling online sites and spamming friends for recommendations. Days later, a s… http://bit.ly/fXn9zA
    theiriseproject 04/08/2011 08:00 AM
    From Twitter
    Why we hate our girls: Valuing ourselves has to do with self-esteem, but it also has to do with the psychologica… http://bit.ly/gYIMpH

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s