Category: Culture of India

Michael Sandel, a renowned philosopher, highlighted moral questions in Indian society, particularly in same-sex marriage, and criticized contemporary liberalism. The Supreme Court of India must consider Sandel’s perspective.

Concept of Bracketing Moral Issues

• Bracketing moral issues involves temporarily suspending personal or societal beliefs in public discourse to promote fairness and inclusivity. In same-sex marriage, this involves a broader perspective that prioritizes equal rights and fairness for all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Supreme Court’s Neutrality and Constitutional Morality

• The Supreme Court of India must maintain neutrality in moral matters, ensuring equal concern for all individuals regardless of social or personal morality. It does not take sides on moral issues or judgments on practices or institutions, focusing on legal rights and protections within the Constitution.
• Constitutional morality guides the Supreme Court’s decisions, aligning with the Constitution’s values and principles. It emphasizes equal concern for all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation, and upholding individual rights.
• Neutrality and constitutional morality guide the Court in protecting citizens’ rights, particularly in cases related to same-sex marriage, ensuring that individuals’ rights are not violated due to their sexual orientation.
• The Court must balance societal values and perceptions of marriage with equality and individual rights, navigating tensions between same-sex couples’ rights and traditional heterosexual marriage. Its decision-making process involves careful examination of legal and moral principles, considering individual rights and societal values.

Neutrality’s Obstacles

• When the Court is presented with issues involving serious moral and ethical questions, neutrality becomes difficult. Same-sex marriage is one such case in which the Court must strike a balance between individual rights and community values.
• Public Opinion and Backlash: When public opinion and societal attitudes substantially favour or oppose a certain moral stance, neutrality might be tested. In circumstances such as same-sex marriage, when societal norms and traditional beliefs may conflict with equal rights for LGBTQ+ people, the Court’s neutral approach may meet resistance, backlash, or criticism from various segments of society.
• Judicial Activism vs. Restraint: Neutrality might be mistaken for judicial restraint, in which the Court refrains from actively establishing societal or moral norms. However, detractors may claim that the Court’s authority to address societal challenges and promote social justice should not be limited by its neutrality.
• Interpretation of Constitutional Morality: The concept of constitutional morality can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Different judges may have different interpretations of what constitutes constitutional morality, resulting in differing views on how neutrality should be used in moral problems.
• Maintaining Consistency: Applying neutrality consistently across diverse circumstances and contexts can be difficult. The Court must ensure that its rulings are not arbitrary or influenced by outside considerations.
• Individual Rights and Societal Values: The Court must strike a difficult balance between safeguarding individual rights and upholding societal values. Determining the point at which cultural values may infringe on individuals’ rights is a difficult issue that requires significant research and investigation.

Two primary approaches: equality and intrinsic value in terms of same sex marriage

Equality:

• Equal Rights: According to the equality perspective, denying same-sex couples the right to marry is a form of discrimination. It emphasises the importance of all persons, regardless of sexual orientation, having equal access to the institution of marriage.
• Anti-Discrimination: Equality advocates claim that limiting marriage to heterosexual couples fosters unfair and unequal treatment. They think that marriage should be founded on individuals’ equal respect and dignity, regardless of their sexual orientation.
• Human Rights: From the standpoint of equality, same-sex marriage is a question of human rights and civil liberties. It claims that barring same-sex couples the right to marry violates their basic rights to equality, privacy, and free speech.
• Legal Protection: Recognising same-sex marriage as a matter of equality would offer same-sex couples with legal protections and benefits such as inheritance rights, access to healthcare, and parenting rights. Its goal is to provide same-sex couples with the same legal and societal benefits as heterosexual couples.

Intrinsic Value:

• Social Importance: The intrinsic value approach emphasises the social importance and significance of marriage as an institution. It contends that marriage provides as a foundation for family, procreation, and societal stability.
• Cultural and Traditional Values: Proponents of intrinsic value emphasise marriage as a cultural and traditional union between a man and a woman. They say that sustaining the traditional definition of marriage is critical for the preservation of societal values and traditions.
• Stability and Well-Being: According to the intrinsic value approach, the conventional institution of marriage contributes to individual and family stability, societal order, and well-being. It implies that departing from this customary perspective may have societal ramifications.
• Preservation of Honorific Value: Those who advocate for intrinsic value claim that extending marriage to same-sex couples may jeopardise the honorific worth of marriage. They argue that if non-traditional unions are included, the distinctive significance and cultural meaning of marriage will be weakened or destroyed.

Citizen Initiatives and Engagement in the Future

• Citizen Initiatives: Citizen initiatives serve as a platform for grassroots mobilisation, allowing individuals to band together and push for social change. Grassroots movements can raise awareness, gain support, and influence public opinion in favour of progressive principles like same-sex marriage.
• Public dialogue and Dialogue: Citizen participation promotes open and inclusive public dialogue on moral issues. It encourages people from all walks of life to engage in talks, express their ideas, and engage in constructive dialogue in order to establish common ground and mutual understanding.
• Strengthening Democracy: Citizen initiatives help to strengthen democracy by encouraging civic participation, engagement, and active citizenship. Citizens may construct a more inclusive and equitable society by actively participating in conversations and decision-making processes.
• Studying International Case Studies: Learning from successful citizen initiatives in countries like as Ireland and Finland, where significant progress on LGBTQ+ rights has been made through public participation, can inspire and guide such efforts in India in the context of same-sex marriage.
• Strengthening Democracy: Citizen initiatives help to strengthen democracy by encouraging civic participation, engagement, and active citizenship. Citizens may construct a more inclusive and equitable society by actively participating in conversations and decision-making processes.
• Studying International Case Studies: Learning from successful citizen initiatives in countries like as Ireland and Finland, where significant progress on LGBTQ+ rights has been made through public participation, can inspire and guide such efforts in India in the context of same-sex marriage.

Conclusion

• As India’s Supreme Court considers same-sex marriage, it is critical to recognise the limitations of a strictly liberal framework and engage in a broader public discourse. Embracing public engagement and developing inclusive debates would assist ensure long-term and progressive improvements that are consistent with Indian society’s evolving ideals and ambitions.

Source: https://m.economictimes.com/news/india/bar-council-of-india-passes-resolution-opposing-legal-recognition-of-same-sex-marriages/articleshow/99710930.cms

Recent wrestler protests reveal limitations of middle-class activism, highlighting ineffective mobilization and lack of support in civil society movements.

What is mean by Middle-Class Activism?

Middle-class activism involves participation in social, political, and civic activities for social change.

Historical Perspective

• India experienced a vibrant associational culture in the early 20th century, promoting socio-economic initiatives and uplifting individuals from lower social strata.

Retreat of Middle-Class Activism

• Middle class gains control over power networks, consolidates positions, and engages in state-centric politics. Fragmentation along segmental loyalties and caste/community-based organizations narrow civil society engagement and focus on broader social issues.
• Middle-class activism retreat resulted in limited inclusivity, neglecting marginalized communities, and loss of associational culture, limiting engagement on social issues and fostering pluralism.

Resurgence of Middle-Class Activism

• Middle-class activism against corruption during UPA grew, led by Anna Hazare, highlighting dissatisfaction with political system corruption and demand for transparent, accountable governance.
• Middle-class activists mobilized large-scale protests and demonstrations to demand change, addressing corruption and governance issues.
• Social media and technology enabled them to connect, organize, and mobilize, increasing visibility and impact. They actively participated in civil society organizations, contributing expertise and resources to drive change.

Critiques and limitations associated with middle-class activism

• Middle-class activism’s exclusionary focus overlooks marginalized communities, perpetuating inequalities and hindering broader social issues.
• Lack of intersectionality in middle-class activism leads to narrow understanding of social issues and exclusion of marginalized voices, limiting grassroots engagement and perspectives.
• Middle-class activism often favors technocratic solutions, but may overlook deeper social issues and inequality. Lack of sustained commitment and co-option by existing power structures can limit activism’s impact and hinder lasting change.

The Changing Indian Sensibility

• Technocratic Outlook: The changing sensibility emphasizes progress and development through technocratic governance and entrepreneurialism.
• This shift in perception of politics stems from disillusionment with traditional mass-based systems and a desire for a more efficient, meritocratic system.
• Professionalism rises, with a professional middle class valuing education, expertise, and meritocracy, emphasizing professional accomplishments, entrepreneurship, and career success as markers of progress and social status.

The Role of Organizational Activism

• Mobilising Support: The role of organisational activism is to mobilise individuals and communities behind common aims and concerns. These organisations frequently provide a forum for like-minded people to gather, share information, organise actions, and develop solidarity.
• Advocacy and Lobbying: Organisational activists use advocacy and lobbying to influence public opinion, shape policies, and effect legislative or institutional change. They seek to advance their causes by interacting with legislators, organising campaigns, and utilising various communication platforms to spread their messages and demands.
• Organisational activism may strengthen grassroots communities by giving them a collective voice and a platform to address their concerns. These organisations frequently collaborate with local communities, encouraging participatory decision-making and empowering marginalised people to express their needs and rights.
• Expertise and research: Many organisational activists are knowledgeable about specialised topics such as human rights, environmental conservation, labour rights, and gender equality. To support their lobbying activities, they do research, collect data, and present evidence-based arguments.
• Accountability and monitoring: Organisational activists frequently serve as watchdogs, keeping tabs on government policies, corporate practises, and societal issues. They contribute to openness, accountability, and the promotion of ethical practises through their monitoring efforts.
• Coalitions and Alliances: Building coalitions and alliances with other like-minded organisations, movements, or community groups is a common feature of organisational activity. They can use collective strength, pool resources, and multiply their effect by forming partnerships and collaborative endeavours.
• Organisational activism seeks to effect social transformation and change by addressing systemic concerns, challenging power structures, and fighting for justice and equality.

@the end

The wrestler demonstrations demonstrate the limitations of middle-class activism, emphasising the need to move beyond superficial and celebrity-dependent paradigms of civil society engagement. A democratic process of developing permanent, programmatic solidarities is required to transcend segmental loyalties and build a more inclusive and effective civil society. Only by taking this strategy can civil society activism effectively address social challenges

Source: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0891241612467202

A tribal council’s decision not to grant a Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificate to any Khasi person who takes her or his father’s surname has sparked a verbal brawl in matrilineal Meghalaya.

Meghalaya Matrilineal Society

• Matrilineal descent is practised by several tribes in Meghalaya, northeast India.
• The main tribes addressed in the essay are the Khasi and Garo.
• The Khasi are referred to as “Ki Hynniew Trep” (The Seven Huts), while the Garo are referred to as Achik.
• These tribes are proud of their matrilineal tradition, although there are fears about their decline.

Background

• The Khasi people are an ancient tribe with the world’s largest surviving matrilineal society.
• Khasis, along with other subgroups like as the Garo, live in Meghalaya as well as territories bordering Assam and Bangladesh.
• The Khasi people have a matrilineal tradition that is unique in India.
• The Khasi tribe’s mythology, folklore, and origin stories emphasise matrilineal principles.
• The reference to “Nari Rajya” in the epic Mahabharata is most likely related to the matrilineal culture of Meghalaya’s Khasi and Jaintia Hills.

Rights, Functions, and Responsibilities

• Women are dominant in Meghalaya’s matrilineal society.
• Ka Khadduh, the youngest daughter, receives ancestral property.
• After marriage, husbands reside with their mother-in-law.
• Children are given the surname of their mother.
• If a couple does not have any daughters, they can adopt one and give her property rights.
• The birth of a girl is honoured, and there is no societal shame attached to women remarrying or having children outside of marriage.
• Women have the right to marry outside of their tribe.
• Independent, well-dressed unmarried women prefer not to marry because they value security.
• Women run a large number of small enterprises.

Practises of the Garo and Khasi are compared

• In 1994, Bina Agarwal contrasted Garo and Khasi practises. (Aspirants with Sociology optional will undoubtedly recall the sociologist’s name.)
• Garo also practises matrilocal post-marital living and matrilineal inheritance.
• Both tribes tolerate premarital sex by women, although female adultery is penalised.
• The Khasi use duolocal post-marital housing, in which the husband stays apart from the wife’s parents.
• Cross-cousin marriage is frowned upon by the Khasi.

Men’s Roles and Political Representation

• Children are cared for by their moms or mothers-in-law.
• Khasi men see themselves as having a lower position and have created groups to preserve men’s rights.
• Women have little representation in politics, the legislative assembly, village councils, and panchayats.
• Women believe they handle money better and have more economic flexibility.

Matrilineal rather than matriarchal

• Society is matrilineal, but not matriarchal. In previous monarchy of the realm, the throne was inherited by the son of the king’s youngest sister.
• Even now, women have little representation in the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly, village councils, or panchayats.

Problems with the system

• Some Khasi men consider themselves to be second-class citizens.
• They have founded organisations to safeguard men’s equal rights.
• They declare that Khasi males lack stability, do not own land, do not control the family business, and are almost worthless.

Source: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/row-over-adopting-fathers-surname-in-matrilineal-meghalaya/article66856681.ece

As the Supreme Court considers whether to broaden the definition of marriage, it becomes clear that legal rights do not always translate into social acceptability. The debate centres on whether laws should mirror existing cultural morality or push the edge by allowing unions to form despite social consent.

Parliamentary Debates and Historical Context

• Former Member of Parliament Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit argued for the ability to choose one’s partner during the legislative debate on the Special Marriage Bill. While the law may not have immediate takers, she predicted that an emancipated next generation would demand this right.
• Many female MPs believed that the new bill would improve women’s lives. Concerns were voiced, however, about the possibility of society breakdown and the multiplication of sexual urges, with even brief mentions of gay partnerships accompanied by discriminatory insults.

Marriage Reform Obstacles

• society Resistance: One of the most significant obstacles to marriage reform is society resistance, which is rooted in deeply held cultural, religious, and traditional values. Marriage reforms are frequently greeted with opposition from people who fear the erosion of traditional values or see such reforms as a danger to established social standards.
• Opposition from the Conservatives: Conservative groups and individuals, motivated by intellectual and religious beliefs, frequently passionately oppose any changes to the current definition of marriage. They contend that changing the definition weakens the sanctity of marriage and may have far-reaching societal effects.
• Lack of Political Consensus: Due to varied perspectives among parliamentarians, achieving political consensus on marriage change might be difficult. Political parties may hold opposing ideologies or be concerned about losing their voter base, resulting in a lack of consensus and a delay in making significant reforms.
• Legal Difficulties: Marriage reform frequently necessitates the reframing of legal frameworks, rights, and obligations linked with marriage. These complications can make it difficult to create legislation that effectively meets the concerns and rights of all stakeholders.
• Institutional resistance, including resistance inside bureaucratic structures, can stymie marriage reform initiatives. Bureaucratic processes and administrative impediments may delay the seamless implementation of new marriage equality laws or regulations.
• Cultural and Religious Diversity: Enacting consistent marriage changes in India is difficult due to the country’s diverse cultural and religious landscape. Different religious communities may have different rules and customs governing marriage, making it difficult to reach national consensus and consistency.
• Inadequate Public knowledge and Education: A lack of public knowledge and comprehension of the need of marriage reform might stymie progress. Misconceptions can be dispelled, prejudices challenged, and a more inclusive understanding of marriage promoted through education and awareness initiatives.
• Existing Legal Precedents and Interpretations: Existing legal precedents and interpretations can have an impact on the trajectory of marriage reform. The breadth and direction of reforms may be shaped by courts’ interpretations of constitutional provisions and earlier judgements, providing obstacles for those asking for significant changes.

Marriage reform faces bureaucratic and vigilante difficulties

• Bureaucratic Overreach: Bureaucratic problems arise when officials, motivated by personal biases or reflecting social beliefs, go above and beyond their legal powers to block or delay marriage change implementation. This includes refusals to provide marriage licences, extra administrative impediments, and arbitrary interpretations of existing legislation that discriminate against specific individuals or couples.
• Recognition Denial: Marriages that deviate from established norms, such as inter-caste, interfaith, or same-sex marriages, may be denied recognition and validity by bureaucratic systems. This denial has the potential to perpetuate cultural disparities as well as impede access to legal privileges and protections that married couples should have.
• Lack of Clarity in Legal Processes: In the lack of defined norms or procedures for registering non-traditional marriages, bureaucratic practises can become confused and inconsistent. This ambiguity can lead to different interpretations and applications of the legislation, making it difficult for couples seeking marital registration.
• Vigilante organisations and Social Stigma: Driven by societal preconceptions and intolerance, vigilante organisations may take it upon themselves to impose their own vision of social morality on persons involved in non-traditional marriages by intimidating or threatening them. Such groups can employ extra-judicial tactics to block unions and inflict societal fines on couples, thereby creating a fearful and insecure society.
• Exclusion and Discrimination: Individuals in non-traditional marriages may face exclusion and discrimination as a result of bureaucratic and vigilante hurdles. This might show in a variety of ways, such as denial of legal rights, social exclusion, or a lack of access to critical services and benefits often enjoyed by married couples.
• Individuals seeking non-traditional weddings may have their privacy violated due to bureaucratic processes and vigilante activities. Public notice requirements or intrusive queries into personal details might infringe on persons’ rights to privacy and subject them to unjust scrutiny and judgement.

What is the necessity for Rights Reaffirmation and Transformations?

• Maintaining Equality: It is critical to reaffirm rights and promote changes in marriage laws in order to maintain the idea of equality. It assures that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, caste, or community, have equal access to marriage and the legal rights and protections that come with it.
• Individual Autonomy Recognition: Marriage reform recognises and respects individuals’ liberty in choosing their life mates based on their own free will and preferences. It turns the emphasis away from society expectations and conventions and towards the fundamental notion of individual agency in making personal marriage decisions.
• Overcoming Discrimination: Changing marriage laws aids in the elimination of discrimination and social biases within the institution. It promotes a more inclusive and egalitarian society by challenging societal stereotypes based on gender, caste, and community.
• Reaffirming rights through marriage reform empowers marginalised people, especially the LGBTQI+ community, by providing legal recognition, rights, and protections. It allows previously marginalised people to reclaim their proper place in society and have their connections recognised and recognised.
• Advancing Social Progress: Marriage law reforms advance social progress by challenging established conventions and practises that perpetuate inequality and injustice. It fosters a society that cherishes variety, individual choices, and human rights by encouraging a change towards more inclusive and progressive attitudes.
• Reaffirming Rights and Transformations in Marriage Laws: Reaffirming rights and transformations in marriage laws fit with constitutional ideals of equality, non-discrimination, and individual liberties. It improves the foundation of a democratic society by ensuring that laws and policies match the constitutionally stated core principles.
• Marriage reform encourages social knowledge and acceptance of various relationships and identities. It promotes debate, education, and participation in order to combat preconceptions and prejudices, thereby promoting a more inclusive and accepting society.
• Reaffirming Rights and Transforming Marriage Laws: Reaffirming rights and transforming marriage laws lays a solid basis for future generations. It establishes the foundation for a society that values equality, individual autonomy, and social progress, ensuring a more inclusive and just society for future generations.

@the end

In India, the argument over marital equality involves a delicate balance between legislation and public morals. As the Supreme Court considers broadening the definition of marriage, it is critical to remember that legal rights and societal acceptance do not often coincide. While dissent and resistance remain, the law should try to enhance the lives of marginalised people while also reaffirming the rights of all citizens. Moving towards marital equality can help India build a more inclusive society that values individual choice and recognises varied identities.

Source: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-many-benefits-of-marriage-equality/article66773272.ece#:~:text=Intangible%20benefits%20include%20gaining%20legitimacy,is%20ready%20for%20this%20change%3F