Gulabo and the Courage of Our Convictions

Re: unforgiven,

Clauses # 11 and 13. They are optional and upon signing most people leave them out. What one has to do is tick the small boxes beside each of these clauses to get them included.

That`s it.

Re; The Unforgiven

Here is a nice long reply:

``Actually that is not a bad idea. I think all excesses at weddings should be banned.``

And who defines ``excesses``? The excesses you want to ban are cultural institutions serving important `NEEDS` of a society. The loads of jewelry and clothes serve self-esteem needs of the bride/groom/families. They are status symbols. They stand for glamour. If you buy a BMW (hypothetically) who is your Government to tell you otherwise. If you cannot afford to buy a BMW but still steal to buy it, then and only then does anybody else suffer and a case for injustice can be filed. However banning the BMW is a preposterous solution.

``No one is taking out the fun in the wedding. Is eating the only fun thing in the wedding? ``
Point well taken, but a festival that ends before sundown and where there is no food is considered by many to be taking the fun out of the whole thing.

``Oh come on. Guys have the same problem. What should guys do for fun in Pakistan? Why do you think there is so much gun culture, mob mentality, and frustration among the youth ``

Guys enjoy more freedom than girls. Girls in general don`t even step out of their homes unchaperoned.

``There is no ban on girls taking part in sports infact I know that the girls schools have there own intercollegiate competition etc just like the guys do plus there are national teams of cricket, hockey etc.``

``Women`s sports in Pakistan is a rarity. Very few girls play sports. It is not expected of them. They do not compete internationally. They cannot wear normal sports clothes while playing sports. Parents in general fear that men will `look` at them when they run. I remember at Karachi University, our Dean told the girls not play in front of boys or with them for the same reason. Talk about shame.

`Our sense of democracy is so strong that no-one picks- up Karachi s garbage till Lahore is equally dirty`
``The first statement is ethnicity prone. ``

No. It is a tongue in cheek comment on the new clean Karachi drive. Lahore has also become really polluted recently.


``I don t understand this logic. So one should not ban the use of guns because the gun industry will collapse? ``

No. I did not say that. I said that bans have horrid repercussions on industries. When the food ban came, prices of chicken collapsed. The people who suffered were the ones without voices whose livelihood depended on the catering industry. The POOR people suffered.

``I still don t understand why eating is the only fun thing in the wedding. So you are saying slim people of Pakistan never had fun at weddings?``

Although I am amused, you are quoting out of context. Obviously, the tone of the occasion is lost.

``First of all, weddings have not been banned so people can still socialize``.

But Weddings have been. There is a lot of outrage at the ban. For many people the fun of a Wedding has been taken out. It is now even more of a farce than it was. Now people just dress up for the photographs.

``Your statement that wedding is the only activity that allows women a leading role
somehow portrays that maybe this ban was implemented so that this power would
be taken away from women. ``

No, that is not what I meant. I simply meant that weddings mean a lot to women, in the absence of other avenues. Also, to portray how pathetic our social institutions are that a part of the population has to depend on weddings for self-esteem needs. Which is stupid, because essentially weddings should fulfill love and family needs.

`After all the larka chose her from countless others, all using skin lighteners, but Gulabo had`

``If you think it is degrading to be looked at by someone like a piece of decoration and then never to hear from them again, how do you think one feels when you outright ask someone for a rishta and the answer is NO. So Gulabo might have said countless NOs before saying YES.``

True. But The Man can always find another piece in another house, a woman has to wait for a nicer rishta. The risk is far greater, if I may say so. I agree that in both cases it is Not a nice feeling to be rejected.

``Why give this a negative connotation. You are trying to portray that our society is
discriminating against women because of this practice of wedding. Have you ever
given a thought to the other side of the story? A male is supposed to be the bread
winner. From the time he is in his teens this is beaten into him. You MUST be the
bread winner. You HAVE to get into a profession which can earn enough money
to support a family. It doesn t matter what you like or want to do. Now have you
ever given some thought as to who makes these lists for jahez? Also have you
given thought as to who decides that these girls are not good enough for my son?
The guy s mother!! And so it is women creating this discrimination against women.
Don t just absolve the women from the blame of creating this bias. They are an
equal party to it.``

Hey, I like what you have said. I hinted at it myself. I would like to say more. In a culture where men are valued more than women, male values become more important for BOTH men and women. The woman who sees men as superior, derives a LOT of self-worth from having a male child. He is a source of power, a treasure/ a prize-she is the mother of a son. No woman is good enough for her darling. It has been observed in so many contexts that the people with low self-esteem are most suspicious with their own kind. Ever wonder why so many women criticize each other? Ever wonder why Pakistanis are so mean and so critical of their own country`s people? Also, the article IS not about blame. The article is about solving a problem, about creating awareness.

`` Oh talk about generalizations. So you are saying that the fact that a man at a young
age has to worry about becoming a bread winner, then supporting a family etc
amounts to nothing. What about his decision to pursue something he likes which
might not make enough money to sustain a family? What about the shame that he
has to face when he can not support his family? I think most of the men would be
very happy if the females can help out with a job and make some of the decisions
of supporting a family. And sure they will help out in house work.``

I have already said that being ``A Man`` in our patriarchial society is not an easy job, for anyone who is willing to be human. Words like, `zan-mureed`, effeminate and countless derisions are the fate of a man who is seen as soft/incompetent. Well, all I can say is can one of you write about it? Don`t you see it is the same so-called male values at the root of it. A fragile ego is the root of the chest thumping man.

I am glad you agree with the conclusions if not the premises of my argument!

re:altaf,

``I`ve been to several weddings of some of my close friends who are not south asian, and who

also choose to have an ``alternative`` wedding... keeping things simple, with the involvement of

close friends and family, that also included rituals/ and ceremonies that reflected their own

beliefs about marriages, and what it is that is sacred and/or holy. While simple, these weddings

appeared to be so much more of an intimate, and ``sacred`` affair, than so many of the huge

shadis i`ve been to... It appears that the wedding has lost its meaning when it becomes a big

event for the sake of everyone else. ``

That`s an interesting statement, i`ve been to non-desi weddings as well, and I agree it`s a more intimate atmosphere of a ``special moment`` to be shared with close family and friends.

Perhaps this is a reflection of the fact that in arranged marriages, the bride and groom have little or no feeling for each other and hence this is compensated for by staging The Big Wedding?

Regards,

Fozia Zaidi

fozia: thanx for bringing up the perspective of those of us who live in the ``west`` . Really , the shadis are not so much different here than what takes place in Paistan. Much of it being based upon what ``will people say`` if such and such does

not take place, or if such and such is done...

I`ve been to several weddings of some of my close friends who are not south asian, and who also choose to have an ``alternative`` wedding... keeping things simple, with the involvement of close friends and family, that also included rituals/ and ceremonies that reflected their own beliefs about marriages, and what it is that is sacred and/or holy. While simple, these weddings appeared to be so much more of an intimate, and ``sacred`` affair, than so many of the huge shadis i`ve been to... It appears that the wedding has lost its meaning when it becomes a big event for the sake of everyone else. -This is of-course aside from the financial hardship it causes to low-income south asians here in the US as well.

Having said that, i think that many of us have been brought up with the idea of a big wedding, and i would venture to guess that even those of us who are questioning these events may very well want (a secret, if not open desire) to have a huge wedding if/when they do get married :) ...

However, there is the important question that saima shah`s article also asks about the ecnomic benefits of huge weddings, jobs etc. One would hope that more productive jobs could be provided to people than simply depending on weddings. But what does one do meanwhile, while the economy lies in shambles, does this ban not cause even more harm than good?

altaf bihmji

Re: Saima Shah

Well said !

I can not anwser your question if the powers that be in Islamabad have the courage to follow what you suggested, but I can tell you this: A politican confronted with the problem you mentioned, as in Pakistan, will say this to you, ``that was really good and that is a realistic solution, but now give me a political solution.`` Our leaders want solutions that are politically expedident and do not solve the problem.

Saima, their whole reason for being in power is that they promised us that they can solve our problems, but they do not want to, because that would be undermining their own vested interests, i.e. staying in power and promising us solutions to problems they have no intentions of solving!

There is an old Latin saying, that which nourishes you, will destroy you. Our ignorance is what nourishes their power and our eventual enlightenment, God willing, will destroy them and their policies. Even the darkest nights have to end and it is always the darkest just before dawn, and the Pakistani women will surely see the dawn of their social liberation!

Enjoyed this article very much!

My favorite image: ``on stage, with lights, action.....gharara!`` I genuinely cracked up at that one because in so many ways the method to the madness behind a shaadi is just so straaange if you think about it.

A question though -- if Mr. Nawaz Sharif had not banned the food at weddings back in February 1997, don`t you think more people today (including chowkwallas) would be clamoring for this provision? I remember visiting Pakistan at the time it occurred and everyone unanimously felt it was a pretty good idea to stop some silly excesses by people who could not afford the excesses. I also went to India on the same trip and many there felt that it was a good idea. Now, friends of mine who are having a wedding next April in Faisalabad are quite upset about the rule and also with this silliness of having an afternoon shaadi. Can anyone shed light on why this has been ordered?

I apologize for the length of my reply, it is just that all you people said was so interesting! (makhan when all else fails:)

Re Anita Zaidi (12):

``Here is how the thinking presumably goes - let us see, what is it that the people
enjoy doing? Aha, they like eating at weddings. So let`s ban that. Too much
enjoyment is not good for the people``.

Though I am tempted to agree there, I don`t think that the powers that be think in quite so straight and deliberate a fashion. (btw, `think` is a generous term) I believe that the big shaadi is something that a lot of intellectuals were crticizing in the press and on TV for a long time. In our politician`s typical ad hoc fashion, they banned the symptom of the problem. It was easier plus they believe they will get political mileage. If you notice this is an obvious `bad` : big spending by poor people.

``Incidentally, I am told (by a dejected soon to
be, unhappy-at-missing-his-own-wedding-dinner groom), that the ban applies only
to non-Punjab areas. Is this true? Is it going to be the `khula khaa` approach for
Punjabi weddings only?``

As far as I know this is for every part of Pakistan. The no-food ban has been around for a long time, but to have no weddings after sundown is a recent one.

Re Goga (11)

``Like many other recent Chowk articles, men are being portrayed as culprits for
another social vice for which whole society is to be blamed``.
My reading of Chowk articles is different. In my view, `Men` are not being blamed. Male-dominated values are being cited as a cause for much injustice and unhappiness. Even though the prime sufferers are in many cases women, men also suffer immensely in terms of intellectual and social development. That `suffering` is usually not acknowledged or written about. I think the next article at Chowk should be about the patriarchial male and his incredible loneliness and fallibility. Any ideas on this aspect? Maybe a suitable title could be `my fallible lord`.

``a wedding can cost up to $100,000 which is not possible without fulfilling a barage of
formalities. This is happening in a country that claims equal rights for woman.``

I quite agree. Weddings are a costly affair. One of the points I am trying to make is that weddings are a matter of choice. That it /is/ undemocratic to restrict them. Taking your analogy of the West, for every 100k wedding, there are many many more matches with little spent. Plus in those cases the bride and groom have a choice in the matter to have a big wedding or not. Here, it seems to be serving some /fundamental needs/ rather than wants. Please see Temporal`s personal experience.

``One should also observe that in the West, where only a single marriage is allowed,
adultery is not a crime. So to change the Pakistani law to prohibit polygamy,
adultery would have to be allowed to keep the balance.``
The balance for whom? men or women? Are you trying to say that the sexual needs of men are more important and therefore need to be `looked after`? If so, Chowk`s articles on feminist issues are truly necessary. I DONOT believe polygamy is natural. If it were so there would be more women than men. Quite the reverse is the case, especially in countries where polygamy is pervasive. WHY?

Re: temporal (9)

``Too many cultural, social and religious chips we carry on our fragile shoulders.
Real education, the broadening of mind that follows it, can be the only saviour out
of this mess.``

On a very sober note: I really think our problem is a terrible lack of self -esteem. The way we cling to ritual and clan, or to the West`s approval is painful. I have heard similar stories like yours. Here there are very very few people who break the rules of the status quo. The rules are serving important social needs. Till there are substitutes found to serve those needs, society will not change these rules. Government intervention at the current level is not truly effective as AZ and AS pointed out.

Re: Fozia(8)

``This problem is equally bad (if not worse) in North America, here many families
have had multiple engagement parties for their daughter (I guess they want to make
sure that no desi on this continent is in the dark about their girl`s imminent
marriage). Weddings on Yachts, ranches, etc etc. And with the lovely aid of the
credit card and bank loans, these parents can delude themselves into thinking that
they are no less than billionares too.``

Here is a beautiful example of the pervasiveness of cultural values, across migration. The Big Shaadi is a status symbol for us. Even though expats live in a different society their values/peer groups remain similar to home. After-all, they left home for prosperity/izzat and this is the best time to validate the decision.

Reply #: 6 afrasiyab

Saima said:

``allow the right to witness at par with men``

Reply:

I think there ought to be more discussion about this in the circles of educated and learned Islamic scholars. Personally, I think the issue lacks serious discussion anywhere in the history of Muslims. ``

I agree there should be serious discussion about witnessing at par with men. It is a bit funny that one may sign off hugely serious documents (BG`s, attestations) as an `officer` even though female, and can only witness them with another woman. It would be good if a `learned Islamic scholar` casts light on this one. However, whatever happened to our own brains?? Especially female??

My understanding is that whenever something is implemented from the top without a grassroot understanding of it within a society, it is always doomed. ``
I quite agree. Legislation however, is considered a great leveller of injustice and exploitation; legislation defines the rules whereby people may enter the rat -race and dominate one another. By automatically assigning the greatest `choices` to men, the field is heavily biased. Till we wait for grassroots understanding Gulabo is robbed from going to school, is married at 16, has eight girls and her huband marries the neighbourhood femme fatale. By `top`, I think you mean from the authority figures. Authority figures can be very important in social change, provided the decision addresses the real problem. In a democracy a great assumption is made about the `independent judgement` of the electorate. I don`t think the word `independent` has any real meaning in Pakistan. From politics to economics to religion to legislature we are dependent on others.

Re: TAhmed321(5)

To answer your questions:

Yes, people are entertained (especially women) and the father of the bride keeps his `naak` intact. The ban on food at weddings and restriction on timings serves the purpose of taking the decision out of his hands. Is this sustainable change? NO. Is this reversible? Yes, unless alternative social institutions are created answering the needs that Shaadis do. Specifically:

1/ Places where men and women can meet/mingle without censure.
2/ Freedom for cultural activity; dance, theatre
3/ Female-value enhancing measures in place of jewellery/jahez/food: Education, equality in legislation (right of divorce , witness etc).

Re: Annagul (4)

``Actually, we had the ``official``ceremony at one site, and then, made a surreptitious underground operation of the real party afterwards, at another place (one of my maamoos was good friends with the owner). I wonder how many weddings out there are actually Weddings....
There must be lots more Weddings out there. In this way the ban has failed to be completely effective. Many people at the time of rukhsati send big deghs of food for the groom`s family. Jewellery, Gharara and jahez are just as high. There is a silver lining. I notice that in quite a few weddings, especially where the bride is educated and a working person, jahez and ostentation is becoming rarer. Of-course brides still like to look beautiful, but there is a level of understatement. The understatement may come at a designer price tag (sorry bg:) but one hopes that simplicity may follow. There are quite a few brides I knew who wore simpler and less gaudy clothes. Some even mingled with guests. I thought that was lovely.

In the end, I really think that female emancipation is Just and needs to be seriously addressed. Thanks to women who spoke out (from Simone Bueavoir to Asma Jehangir) , women like me found a voice. Thanks to all who hear and speak, one day Gulabo may be set free.

To everyone who liked the article: Thank you very much. I am thrilled that we can talk about this.

Saima said:

``It would be good if a `learned Islamic scholar` casts light on this one. However, whatever happened to our own brains?? Especially female??``

Reply:

Nothing. They are still intact. Can`t say much about the female brain though. I will say this: You need the right knowledge to come to such conclusions and I believe there are people out there who know about this and are quiet due to the fear of persecution from the establishments in several Muslim majority countries including Pakistan. The ruling elite among ``ulemas`` do not want to have their ``ajaaraadaari`` toppled and so would sometimes go so far as obscuring the facts and misrepresenting the ahadith.

Polygamy is not natural, you are right. But what we cannot do is abolish it just with a stroke of pen at midnight tommorrow. For eg. the ban on alcohol in the late 20`s did not work here because of the cultural orientation. I say it again, it will not work in the long run if it comes from the Government. Once again, there are provisions in the nikahnaama ( agrrement of marriage ) as it is today that allow the automatic annulment of the nikah if the husband marries another wife while the first one is alive and still married to him. Most of the time, parents of the bride choose not to insist on the inclusion of that clause. I remember, I raised a hellbreather over my cousin`s marriage because of this and made sure, in the end, that it was included. The fact is that most people don`t even know that such a clause exists.

I know that this is not the ultimate answer but allow awareness some latitude and trust me it will accomplish great things in the long run, which will bring order to things to a more permanent tune.

Nicely written, Saima.

Prolonged wedding celebrations are a traditional part of our culture, and as you say, one of the few remaining legitimate ways of having fun for women. Thinking that banning food at weddings is somehow going to solve the country`s economic woes is the same as thinking that getting the female newscaster to cover her head with a dupatta will rid the country of its social ills.

Here is how the thinking presumably goes - let us see, what is it that the people enjoy doing? Aha, they like eating at weddings. So let`s ban that. Too much enjoyment is not good for the people. Incidentally, I am told (by a dejected soon to be, unhappy-at-missing-his-own-wedding-dinner groom), that the ban applies only to non-Punjab areas. Is this true? Is it going to be the `khula khaa` approach for Punjabi weddings only?

On a personal note, what I hate about our wedding scene is the multiple events for the same people and the obligation that one has to attend each one, or else risk ex-communication forever. Since weddings get bunched up in the winter months, as well as before Ramzaan, before Muharram etc, certain periods are killer months. Not just somewhere to go to everyday, but multiple places to go to every day, all the time taking care to remember not to repeat joras where the `crowd` will be the same. I just can`t keep up. The shaadi scene is not for me.

Anita

re goga

i agree that extravagance and ostentation are general societal problems not directly due to men. saima`s point about a desi shaadi as an institution based on unequal gender relations is relevant to the ostentation also. the more educated or wealthy a man is, the prettier his wife and the bigger the shaadi arranged by his in-laws. i have almost always seen the man`s side
DEMAND a big reception for their biradiri.

``One should also observe that in the West, where only a single marriage is allowed, adultery is not a
crime. So to change the Pakistani law to prohibit polygamy, adultery would have to be allowed to
keep the balance.``

i dont get it. what kind of balance are you referring to? in pakistan, adultery and polygamy are BOTH prohibited for women, but polygamy is allowed for men. maybe to start with, we should keep the balance between the sexes and allow and forbid the same things for men and women?

Like many other recent Chowk articles, men are being portrayed as culprits for another social vice for which whole society is to be blamed. In New York a wedding can cost up to $100,000 which is not possible without fulfilling a barage of formalities. This is happening in a country that claims equal rights for woman.

One should also observe that in the West, where only a single marriage is allowed, adultery is not a crime. So to change the Pakistani law to prohibit polygamy, adultery would have to be allowed to keep the balance.

All in all, it is hard to take this article seriously.

Saima:

This time some sober reflections, promise.

Courage of conviction? No dice. Doesn`t work.

Two score and five years ago this month, I went back to Karachi to get married. It was sort of arranged mariage--wink, wink. I wanted a simple marriage ceremony, no trosseau no big dawats etc. A simple mosque wedding was my only demand. They were giving away their daughter, what else can one ask for? Had an extremely difficult times convincing me parents. But, I did succeed. Next, they took this suggestion, rather reluctantly, to Meena`s parents. Reasonable folks as they were, and are, they refused point blank. They could not bear the pressure from the extended family-biradari had they acceded my request. Courage of conviction had to be cold shouldered.

Too many cultural, social and religious chips we carry on our fragile shoulders. Real education, the broadening of mind that follows it, can be the only saviour out of this mess.

euphemistically,

re saim
`` The root
cause of the big shaadi is the status of women in Pakistan, and that their lives, their
decisions, their loves and their dreams are the prerogative of men. ``

and may i add, a culture of consumption, greed, materialism and ostentation. a culture (which is pretty global, at this point) in which people feel that the only way to justify life is to flaunt and brandish their brand names -- whether its a mrs.kazmi jora or a 2-carat diamond or a black bmw or a degree from cornell. and a culture where people rationalize that those who have not are `unlucky`, lazy or stupid and our own good fortune is the result of sheer luck, good looks, brains or abba`s hard work. a man is only worth what his car costs and a woman how much her dowry zevar weighs.

Saima,

Your article was a good, humourous read. Yes I agree there are more pressing problems in Pakistan, but I do agree in principle with the idea of controlling the outrageous spending at desi weddings. It`s one thing when Mr. Billionare decides to throw the party of the century for his daughter, however in our culture the problem is every middle-class john doe is a Billionare wannabe so they spend several times beyond their means to throw the big party. This all to impress 500+ people (half of whom they hardly know) and hence hopefully move up the social status ladder.

This problem is equally bad (if not worse) in North America, here many families have had multiple engagement parties for their daughter (I guess they want to make sure that no desi on this continent is in the dark about their girl`s imminent marriage). Weddings on Yachts, ranches, etc etc. And with the lovely aid of the credit card and bank loans, these parents can delude themselves into thinking that they are no less than billionares too.

Personally I think if the parents want to blow so much money than spend it on the bride and groom for items they need, rather than blowing it all on one day and being under a massive debtload.

regards,

Fozia Zaidi

Saima said:

``they should bring in legislation for equal opportunity in schools and offices``

Reply:

A fine idea. No problems there.

Saima said:

``ban child marriages``

Reply:

Good so far. I think atleast 18 should be the age.

Saima said:

``allow the right to witness at par with men``

Reply:

I think there ought to be more discussion about this in the circles of educated and learned Islamic scholars. Personally, I think the issue lacks serious discussion anywhere in the history of Muslims.

Saima said:

``ban polygamy``

Reply:

Here is where I disagree with you.

My understanding is that whenever something is implemented from the top without a grassroot understanding of it within a society, it is always doomed. Monogamy rules work in the western nations because they have their culture oriented around the idea of monogamy. We don`t. What we need is a cultural movement at the grassroot level where we could have more awareness among people in general and women specificaly about what their rights are in the current system and how something like the enforcement of monogamy can be achieved eventually. There are provisions in the current system in Pakistan where a Nikah can be annuled if the groom signs it with the understanding that he cannot marry a second wife without having that agreement annulled.

Personally, I prefer monogamy simply because my understanding is that in the Quran it is as clear as day that I cannot be just with more than one wives. However, once again, I have a serious problem with any govt. stepping in and making this law without any consideration to the orientation of the culture. I think we can stem this problem out in a couple of generations at most and it would be more durable and permanent if it goes from the bottom to the top. We have experimented with the idea of implementation from the top to the bottom. Now let us try the better approach.

The media, educational institutions, and to be a bit more emphatic the media again has to play a greater role in bringing about this change.

A very well written article, by the way. I enjoyed the read thoroughly.

I liked that CTBT part. Do you really think of our Sha`adis (with overdressed people overfeeding themselves, while the poor sucker - aka the bride`s father - dished out his lifelong earnings) were entertainment? I am glad the government clipped those wings (and no, I am not one who thinks much of Pakistani politicians, or any politicians). On finding alternative entertainment for poor Gulabo stuck in the pathetic Pakistani society, here are some possibilities: (a) start a female gang that takes out proven wife-abusers, ``eve-teasers``, dowry demanders, and so on (plenty of these available I believe). (b) start a battered women`s home. (c) start your own business, telling mom-dad you will buy a Pakistani male from your own funds someday; (d) look up at the stars and contemplate how insignificant Pakistani-society is anyway in the Grand Scheme of Things and think of ways you can rise above the dictates of Pakistani society.