These are despatches sent in by the convenors of Community Cafes around the country on December 5, 2021, afternoon at different locations around India. Almost all the convenors have all worked with Prajnya in 2020-21.
****************
A Note from the Coordinator of the Community Cafes
But how does one approach this topic among people for whom this problem does not exist in its crude form? The essential aspect was realising that productive discussions about this topic involved more than just denouncing dowry; but also understanding the pressures of weddings, the norm of marriages, and the social non-acceptance of relationships outside of marriage. Our theme, Love, Sex, Relationships, Marriage, reflected this.
Naturally, the target audience for this was young people in that stage of life where marriage is a possibility, and who would be most affected by the social understanding of everything that comes with it. The conversation needed to be more open and collaborative and less lecture-like. Prajnya’s Community Café has always been a place of reflection and informal discussion. When you remove the constraint of a formal conversation that is limited in scope and guarded by rules of professional engagement, a wider arena of possibilities opens up. New perspectives rise and the discussions become less predictable.
On day 11 of the campaign, December 5, six different Community Café sessions were held with people from different socio-economic backgrounds with the goal of sharing ideas and expectations, coming out better prepared for social pressures, and working just a little bit more towards fighting for the culturally unacceptable.
Farheen Nahvi
Prajnya Intern and student, Sciences Po, Paris
****************
3 p.m.
I invited my friends from my undergrad and postgrad with whom I had
already had similar conversations on love, sex, relationship and marriage. It
was a mixed group of people including a female friend who was married, an
outspoken girl from my postgrad, the not-your-common next-door-girl from my
undergrad, and two unsung feminist boys who support women and voice out for
their rights when women themselves hesitate.
I’d informed them about the Community Cafe and the integral part
programmes like these play in Prajnya’s undertakings. They were so ‘down to
begin’ the moment I mentioned the topic and RSVP’d as soon as I shared the
invites. I shared a common link and around 3pm all 5 of them logged in. I
thanked them for being present despite it being a Sunday afternoon. As soon as
I threw the ice breaker question asking their favourite food and what they had
for lunch after they introduced themselves, I could see that the gang bonded
over steamed momos and a hot bowl of Maggi.
We began the discussion talking about marriage–the devoid contract that
trampled over choice, dreams and happiness. One of them mentioned marriage as
the best example of an over-promised but under-delivered form of relationship sugar-coated
with the promise of a lifelong friendship. My married friend shared her
insights on what exactly was on the other side of the line (for her). She said
that her wedding had to deliver extravaganza just to meet societal expectations
despite her not wanting so. We then went on to discuss flaws like dowry, marital
rape, choice of child/abortion, and the hypocrisy where women demand luxurious
weddings.
During the discussion, we found ourselves talking about how people fail
to recognize the mental and emotional adjustment every woman has to endure in
the initial stages of a marriage. On the same lines, another person mentioned,
“Marriage in the initial days is like living in the Big Boss house–instead of
cameras, we have desi aunties”.
The conversation slowly shifted to marriages during the pandemic and how
child marriage was at its peak. A few strong points were stating financial
insecurity being one of the major reasons for the pandemic marriages.
The conversation also briefly touched upon teenage pregnancies and the
importance of sex education. We discussed how schools that already had sex
education as part of the syllabus needed to modify it in order to make it more
inclusive. We also made progress on the topic of masturbation and self-love,
and why it is still seen as taboo when the conversation pops up in an all-girls
gang. Followed by which we discussed same-sex relationships and how society has
still not recovered from love shaming, let alone sex-shaming. We also addressed
the increase of dating and party culture. A friend shared an incident where
school girls and boys are falling prey to it without having a proper idea of
what they are getting themselves into, “Just for the sake of exploring their
youth, they make rash decisions which can impact their entire life”. We further
went on to on sexual harassment and how it has been experienced by both women
and men.
The conversation towards the last 15 minutes completely focused on how
the law has addressed/handled such sensitive issues. Though there was
disagreement on the impact of the laws and how its implemented from state to
state (the session had people from Maharashtra, Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil
Nadu) all of us came to a consensus that socially aware judges, sensitization
to the bureaucrats, education and awareness to the public followed by a strong
faith in the constitution can only address the issues of the modern society and
evolving family systems. Since most of us were students of political science,
we also discussed how politics and politicians play a major role in the law (be
it facilitators or hindrances). We also discussed the capitalist economy and
the billion-dollar businesses surrounding the concept of marriage and what we
would do as responsible citizens of the present and the future.
Sandhya Srinivasan S
****************
Tambaram, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
4 pm
Community cafe in Tambaram started off with fun introductions of Shilpa Reddy,
Aishwarya Krishnan, Ajay Bhardwaj, Swetha Muthuswamy, Akshaya Nagarajan and
Nirupan Muralidharan.
We began the conversation with marriage, love from traditional
relationships to modern relationships, emotional intimacy, dependant connection
and interconnection of feminism and families. We majorly spoke about Indian
parenting style, children's needs, social institutions and stereotypical
systems!
I also threw a personal question for all my friends regarding dowry and
marriage in their own households. We also spoke about sex, consent,
contraceptives, abortion, choices, motherhood and fatherhood. Many of them
emphasized on individual preferences and respect towards their own choices than
societal norms and stereotypes.
I personally felt that even though we had similar opinions, we had different
perceptions and approaches towards life. As youngsters we concluded our
community cafe by taking pledge to improve the society and should be more
responsible towards citizens obligation.
I thought we'll end the session with 1 hour but since many of my friends
had lots of things to share we extended it to another 1.5 hour
Niroopini Muralidharan
New Delhi
4 p.m.
We commenced our session by playing a round of word association with the
word “marriage” which sparked a conversation surrounding dowry, family, and
unity. This led us to discuss how marriage, in most cases, feels more like a favour
that we owe to our parents in return for all the basic resources and
opportunities that are provided to us. We also explored how the possibility of
never wanting to get married for some of us was very high due to the very
patriarchal root of this institution that’s drenched in gender roles. This made
us think about how our family dynamics have influenced the way we see marriage
as an institution and enabled us to call out the obvious flaws that have been
overlooked by the women of our families for generations. Interestingly, at this
point, my other friend mentioned that one of the reasons she wishes to get married
someday was to start a family and to be able to break patterns of inherently
problematic marriages.
As the conversation progressed, one of my friends mentioned how she
doesn’t correlate sex with love, and that they’re two different completely
unrelated concepts for her. This motivated us to talk about the importance of
physical intimacy and emotional intimacy and how these two different kinds of
desires are subjective because different people exhibit different levels of
emotions and physical feelings.
We concluded the conversation by talking about how grateful we were to
be able to have such conversations that help us make intersections and
connections not taught in schools or credential programs–between caste, gender,
and poverty–that can sometimes perpetuate imbalance in relationships. Allyship
is only possible when partners holding more social power/privilege
(heterosexual folks, able-bodied people, cisgender people) are interrogating
and deconstructing that privilege.
Niharika Tripathi
****************
4:30 p.m.
The Community Cafe is a great concept for a no-pressure conversation
among friends, and that’s exactly how it went over at the virtual Srinagar
session. We started with a rapid-fire game of word association to get the gears
going; love, divorce, compromise, band-baaja- these words gave us the
opportunity to explore our ideas and bring forth what’s on everybody’s mind,
setting the tone for the rest of the session. It was a fun activity that
revealed a lot about the notions we associate with relationships- like how some
people think of compromise as “mostly necessary” or “healthy”; or that
the word forever is synonymous with “monogamy” for other people.
A significant portion of the conversation revolved around marriage and
its aspects, starting with its relevance, its importance, and whether or not we
see marriage as an option for ourselves. There were different perspectives
about this particular topic as everyone reflected on their own experiences and
social situations. We talked about how different sexual identities need to
consider the matter of legality on top of social stigma for marriage in India;
we also talked about societal expectations placed upon women, and how it’s
easier to get married when the alternative invites endless questions and
pressure from society. Someone pointed out that in a society where marriage is
considered the norm, it would also be professionally and socially advantageous.
What I found particularly interesting, however, was how after listening to all
the things that people who identify as non-heterosexual and non-cisgender have
to consider regarding marriage, one of the (male, heterosexual, cisgender)
participants pointed out how easy it was for him to think of marriage in much
simpler terms. While on the topic of marriage, we discussed the politics of it-
from traditional dowry and more evolved forms of pressure on the bride’s
family, to how social relations and expectations of a certain standard of a
ceremony have made a wedding into an institution and a market. It opened up a
conversation about what kind of wedding we would want for ourselves, and how
much role society would play into the planning of the same. There are a lot of
different factors that affect our experiences- like our parents, or education,
and factors that are yet to come into play in our future. There was an
understanding among us that what we knew right now might change in the future,
and as humans we are constantly evolving.
The participants were very involved; asking questions of their own,
furthering the discussion through anecdotes, and sometimes posing
self-reflective queries about love and relationships. We agreed on a lot of
things, and we disagreed on others, but the topic wasn’t black and white, and
the discussions reflected that.
Farheen Nahvi
Pallavaram, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
5:00 p.m.
The community cafe at Pallavaram, Chennai began with a quick round of
introductions - with Avani Binish, Vaaishnavi, Prayatna and Siddharth (who had
to leave midway, unfortunately). We hit it off with an ice-breaker where we
spoke about dowry, destination weddings, and abortions, the words that come to
our mind when these words are mentioned. One of my friends, at this point,
touched upon how the theme of the CC is quite interconnected. Because you have
a concept of love, with or without which sex exists. You also have
relationships and marriage that can be viewed as a Venn diagram intrinsically
linked to the topic. And, then, you have themes like divorce and motherhood
that go hand-in-hand with the theme of the CC. An intrinsic part to this entire
structure is the taking and giving of dowry - that the value of women has to be
proven. The participants stressed that it is an evil that continues to exist in
our society because our families get to ‘govern’ our actions.
A major part of the discussion addressed perceptions and stereotypes
with regard to love, sex, identities, and relationships in queer spaces, as
well as outside of it. My friends had all agreed that there is a lot of
casteist and classist roots when we look into the theme of love, sex, relationships,
and marriages, our own parents engaging in some of these problematic thoughts.
Parents are often not open to the concept of 'love'. They aren't pro-choice.
They also stress on the importance of marriage because 'motherhood' seems to be
the ultimate destination. There is a gap in how the society views love, sex,
relationships, and marriage and how individuals view it. My friends also spoke
at length about queer circles, where there is this pressure to identify and
label yourself, but, always, the society seems to think they know you better.
It is essential to understand orientations go beyond sexual, gender, and
romantic, there is so much on the spectrum of orientations that impacts the
various facets of the CC [love, sex, relationship and marriage].
The CC ended with all of us opening up about how the relationships
around us, with our parents/relatives/friends, have impacted our ideas of love,
sex, relationship, and marriage. It was an hour (but, we wish it could have
gone for longer) of warmth and solidarity where we navigated around intimate
moments, unfamiliar territories, and experiences of love.
Meghna Menon
Room #523 (Cuddalore, Karur, Bangalore,
Tirunelveli, Salt Lake City, Chennai
7:30 p.m.
The community café I facilitated was one among a group of friends who
met during our undergrad education at St. Joseph’s College of Engineering,
Chennai in 2015. We lived together, learnt together, and stuck together through
the years as roommates in our dingy and messy little hostel room, until jobs,
higher education, and familial responsibilities forced us in different
directions. The Community Café served as a long overdue get-together of sorts,
and helped us understand our lives after college better.
The conversation began with discussing the depiction of romance in Tamil
cinema, and how this distorted portrayal affects the lives of impressionable
young people. The movie Remo (2016) was used as reference to talk about
stalking, consent and how pop culture informs and shapes opinions. As someone
who doesn’t follow cinema very keenly, it was disappointing (but not shocking)
to know how the relationship between the male protagonist and his
“well-meaning” mother was portrayed. This mother of a harmless boy,
head-over-heels in love with a girl he barely knows blithely and
enthusiastically cheered him on. It was alarming to see so many things
dangerously wrong with a movie that was only released in 2016, when mainstream
pop-culture had already begun taking up a “woke” facade.
The topic of parental involvement in the romantic lives of young people
remained central to most of our discussion. As a group of people to whom the
proposition of marriage is becoming more and more real every day, views were
shared about how marriages were forced to become in the name of culture. We
spoke about how our careers and aspirations were being side-lined by parents
who, otherwise, ‘wanted the best for us’. A few of us even spoke about how
belief in astrology was validating our parents’ anxieties about their unmarried
daughters.
We also talked about how the excesses of giving away immoderate dowries
under the pretext of financial security (for daughters) was forcing families of
brides into debt in many cases. All of this forms the basis for a shaky and
uncertain future for the lives of unwilling brides and their families, but is
still viewed as non-negotiable. Someone very rightly brought up how financial
literacy and financial independence was seen as less important in the lives of
girls despite how household upkeep and financial management was demanded of
being a “housewife”.
Despite being off the agenda, we found ourselves talking about the
relationship between mothers and daughters often. About how mothers are made to
bend and fold and not make a sound. About how mothers are expected to rear
their daughters in the same way. About how the relationship between a mother
and her daughter is both lovely and cruel because of societal pressures, family
structures and generational differences. About how lives are spent seeing each
other as the enemy when we’re living the same lives.
The discussion took many interesting turns before we decided to set a
time and day and make these conversations more regular. Through this hour of
chit-chat, we realised how our lives, despite our different choices,
sexualities, and familial situations, were still connected by a string of madness.
The madness of time (read: ability to be marriageable) being limited.
Maryam
Nayaz
********************************************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment