FIFTH COLUMN

Fidelity versus economy

It must have stirred many a funnybone to hear one of our highly honoured parliamentarians declare that if women are given property rights, it will give rise to infidelity. It sure succeeded in tickling the sides of many emancipated women so much, it hurt. Jokes apart, if the quality of marriage of these women were poor, they would walk out of their marriage in dignity and not have to suffer in it like many other unfortunate women. And these women do not have access to their parents’ property.

The visionary gentleman must have envisioned a pretty threatening picture of emancipated, economically empowered women having their way and no longer afraid to confront their husbands, no longer afraid of the economic consequences. Is it not another way of admitting many women are stuck in marriages just because they do not have any alternatives? Wouldn’t marriages and lives be better if women chose to stay with their partners out of love and many other positive reasons rather than out of fear of being homeless or penniless?

If such is the mindset that represents the decision makers of our country, then all the women activists should really think about restructuring their strategies and recharging their activities - for it is sure to take a lot of lobbying and generating awareness, where it matters - before equality in all respects can be granted to women.

If fidelity were guaranteed by sheer economic domination, then very little can be said about the self esteem of the men who came up with the bright idea of keeping their women in the dark ages. One controls, one dominates and one stoops to conquer when one is insecure, when one is afraid and when one is unsure that one is doing the right thing.

Democracy might be here but autocracy in terms of this kind of attitude exists in a majority of homes in our country. It is ironical that equal property rights for women should generate such a hue and cry in this country and most of the politicians are afraid to touch the issue even after so long. Some parliamentarians have admitted that the issue is sidelined on one pretext or the other. Nobody seems to be willing to stick their neck out. After all, saving one’s seat overrules anything and everything else.

The PM declared that it should be left to the parents to decide to whom they would like to leave their will. Supporting legal amendments that makes it no longer the birthright of sons to inherit their parents’ property would be one way to ensure that old parents are taken good care by their children and children in law.

Making an eye wash of equal rights by granting equal property rights to an adult female with the clause that she would lose the rights once she gets married is a very twisted approach. Why should a girl lose her rights once she gets married? Her offsprings too are a part of the family extention. The property is going to a daughter and her children. And females in our society have proven to be preservers of what they have, not squanderers. The present outdated laws need to be changed to suit the needs of today. Letting dark attitude overrule the reality will only weaken our society more.