BA LLB Second Semester

Indian Society (SOCIOLOGY)

PAPER CODE – BALLB 110

UNIT 1- FAMILY, MARRIAGE AND KINSHIP

a) KINSHIP STUDIES: ALLIANCE AND DESCENT APPROACHES.

What do you mean by kinship?

It refers to the culturally defined relationships between individuals who are commonly thought of
as having family ties. All societies use kinship as a basis for forming social groups and for
classifying people. However, there is a great amount of variability in kinship rules and patterns
around the world.

What is descent system?

It can be traced through one of the parents, either through one's mother or father. Several people
can trace their lineage back to a single person/entity. It could be a person or even a mythical
entity like an animal, tree, thunder, etc. A group comprising all the people who have a common
ancestor is a descent group.

Descent theory

Kinship was regarded as the theoretical and methodological core of social anthropology in the
early and middle part of the 20th century. Although comparative studies gradually abandoned an
explicit evolutionist agenda, there remained an implicit evolutionary cast to the way in which
kinship studies were framed. Indeed, scholarly interest in the cross-cultural comparison of
kinship institutions could be traced back to a set of questions deriving from the cultural
evolutionists.

The central problem addressed by anthropologists of the early 20th century was directly related
to the colonial enterprise and focused on understanding the mechanisms for maintaining political
order in stateless societies. Given that such societies lacked centralized administrative and
judicial institutions—the bureaucratic machinery of the state—how were rights, duties, status,
and property transmitted from one generation to the next? Traditional societies accomplished this
task by organizing around kinship relations rather than property. This distinction arose out of the
models that had been developed by Maine and Morgan, in which cultural evolution was driven
by the transition from status to contract forms of organization and from corporate to individual
forms of property ownership.

Prominent British social anthropologists of this period, such as Malinowski, Radcliffe-

Brown, Evans-Pritchard, and Fortes, generally advocated a functionalist approach to these
questions. The major premises of functionalism were that every aspect of a culture, no matter
how seemingly disparate (e.g., kinship terms, technology, food, mythology, artistic motifs), had
a substantive purpose and that within a given culture these diverse structures worked together to
maintain the group’s viability. For instance, these scholars saw the family as a universal social
institution that functioned primarily to rear children. From their perspective this function was to
a large degree self-evident and cross-culturally constant. The wider groupings recruited through
kinship, which were the basis of political and economic organization, were much more culturally
variable and hence of greater interest.

Fortes distinguished between the “private” or “domestic” domain of kinship and what he called
the “politico-jural” domain. It was nevertheless true that Fortes in particular gave considerable
explanatory weight to the emotional power of kinship. According to Fortes, what gave kinship
its moral force was the “axiom of amity”—the idea that in the last analysis it is kin who can
always be relied upon to help you out and who are the people you turn to when other help fails.
Yet if this emotional content was the source of the power of kinship, it was also an area that lay
beyond the province of anthropology. Fortes had been influenced by Freudian psychology, but
his approach placed analyses of emotion and the unconscious mind in the domain of
psychologists rather than anthropologists. Thus, British social anthropologists explored the ways
in which kinship provided a basis for forming the kinds of groups—discrete, bounded, and linked
to a particular territory—that were seen as necessary for a stable political order. Their
explanations of these mechanisms became known as the descent theory of kinship.

Kinship is always “bilateral”; that is, it consists of relatives on both the mother’s and the father’s
sides. Of course the relatives on both sides of any individual overlap with those of others,
creating a web of interconnectedness rather than a discrete group. However, the recognition of
one line of descent and the exclusion of the other provides the basis of a “unilineal” kinship
system. In such systems descent defines bounded groups. The principle operates similarly
whether the rule of descent is matrilineal (traced through the mother in the female line) or
patrilineal (traced through the father in the male line).

Unilineal kinship systems were seen by British anthropologists of this period as providing a basis
for the stable functioning of societies in the absence of state institutions. Generally, unilineal
descent groups were exogamous. They also acted as corporations: their members held land in
common, acted as a single unit with regard to substantive property, and behaved as one “person”
in relation to other similarly constituted groups in legal and political matters such as warfare,
feuds, and litigation. That is, the members of a lineage did not act as individuals in the politico-
rural domain, instead conceiving themselves to a considerable extent as undifferentiated and
continuous with each other. This corporation was the basis of the stability and structure of a
society formed out of unilineal descent groups.

The distinction between matrilineal and patrilineal systems did not have any
obvious implications in terms of women’s political status, although it is sometimes assumed that
a matrilineal kinship system must imply women’s greater political power. Anthropologists make
a clear distinction between matrilineal and matriarchy, however: the former denotes a method of
reckoning kinship, while the latter denotes a system in which women have overall political
control to the exclusion of men. Similarly, patriarchy denotes political control by men to the
exclusion of women.

Although women may be more highly valued in matrilineal than patrilineal cultures, the
anthropological data clearly indicate that hierarchical political systems (whether matrilineal or
patrilineal) tend to be dominated by men and that no period of absolute matriarchy has ever
existed. Despite plentiful evidence to the contrary, a notional era of “pure” matriarchy has
been invoked as a theme in some very diverse contexts, including not only 19th-century cultural
evolutionism but also the more recent discourses of environmentalism (especially
ecofeminism), Neo-Paganism, and the so-called Goddess movement.

Alliance theory

While British social anthropologists were focused on the existence of social rules and the ways
in which members of different societies acted within a given framework of ideas and categories,
French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss had a very different starting point. His work was
motivated by the question of how arbitrary social categories (such as those within kinship, race,
or class) had originated. He was also concerned with explaining their apparent compulsory
quality, or presence within the “natural order,” in societies. In The Elementary Structures of
Kinship (1949), Lévi-Strauss turned to kinship to try to answer these questions. His model
became known as the alliance theory of kinship.

Reciprocity, incest, and the transition from “nature” to “culture”

Profoundly influenced by the work of Marcel Mauss on the central role of reciprocal gift giving
in “primitive” societies, Lévi-Strauss held that the transition from the animal world of “nature”
to the human one of “culture” was accomplished through the medium of exchange: it was in the
act of giving that the category of the self in opposition to another, or of one’s own group to
another group, was actually constituted. Thus, the first social categories originated not in the
realm of ideas but through the exchange of gifts.

Lévi-Strauss suggested that, because women’s fertility is necessary to the reproduction of the
group, women are the “supreme gift.” With no fair return for a woman except another woman,
they must have been reciprocally exchanged rather than simply given away. The simplest form
of exchange in this schema involved men exchanging their sisters. According to Lévi-Strauss,
this set up a distinction between those who give wives (“wife givers”) and those who receive
them (“wife takers”), thus creating the first kinship categories. Later, more-complex forms
of exchange marriage were developed.

But what had encouraged this notional exchange of women in the first place? According to Lévi-
Strauss, two factors obtained: the principle of reciprocity and the incest taboo. He suggested that
the principle of reciprocity, essentially the recognition that gifts set up a series of mutual
obligations between those who give and receive them, lies at the heart of human culture. Because
women were unique in value, reciprocity ensured that men who gave their sisters away in
marriage would in turn receive the sister (or sisters) of one or more other men.
Lévi-Strauss invoked the incest taboo as the second condition upon which the exchange of
women was based, noting that it had the peculiar status of being well-documented as both a
universal human phenomenon and one in which specific forms were culturally variable. That is,
every culture proscribed sexual relations between some kin categories, but the particular
categories of kin with whom sexual relations were prohibited varied from one culture to the next.
He posited that, in being not only universal but also culturally variable, incest taboos marked
humanity’s transition from “nature” to “culture.”

Elementary structures

Most anthropologists viewed incest taboos as negative prohibitions that had a biological basis (to
prevent the inheritance of negative genetic traits) or reflected a particular nexus of cultural rules
about marriage. In contrast, Lévi-Strauss saw incest taboos as positive injunctions to marry
outside the group. These “positive marriage rules,” which state that a spouse must be from a
certain social category, were the titular “elementary structures” in The Elementary Structures of
Kinship.

Within sets of elementary structures (or positive rules), Lévi-Strauss made a further distinction
between systems of “restricted exchange” and those of “generalized exchange.” Restricted
exchange involved just two groups of men exchanging women (for example, their sisters). Here
the reciprocity was direct and immediate. Generalized exchange involved three or more groups
exchanging women in one direction (from group A to group B to group C and back to A). Here
exchange was delayed and indirect but held out greater possibilities in terms of the scale and
number of groups involved.

For Lévi-Strauss, positive marriage rules combined with the rules of reciprocity as the basis for a
general theory of kinship that emphasized exchange as the central principle of kinship and indeed
of “man’s” break from nature. He subsumed relations of consanguinity (blood ties) to those
of affinity (marriage): whereas British structural functionalists saw descent ties—based on filial
relations within the group—as paramount in kinship, the relations between groups had priority in
Lévi-Strauss’s structuralist analysis. He also held that affinal relations framed the most basic and
irreducible unit of kinship—what he called the “atom of kinship.” Where descent theorists
defined a set of parents and children as the core of kinship relations, Lévi-Strauss defined it as a
husband and wife, their son, and the wife’s brother. The presence of the wife’s brother signified
the importance of marriage as a relation of exchange between men rather than a mechanism
concerned only with ensuring reproduction.

Lévi-Strauss’s work demonstrated that human kinship was fundamentally cultural. Originally he
had intended to proceed to an analysis of “complex structures” (those without positive marriage
rules). There, he argued, the same principles of exchange and reciprocity were present but
were implicit and hidden rather than explicit. In fact, he never completed this work but instead
went on to a monumental study of myth. Anthropologists in France, however, have pursued
Lévi-Strauss’s analysis of complex and “semi-complex” systems.

b) PRINCIPLES OF DESCENT AND DESCENT GROUPS: PATRILINEAL AND

MATRILINEAL.
 Patrilineal Descent :
What does patrilineal mean? The patrilineal definition involves tracing lineage through a
singular male line of relatives. Within this system, an individual would first of all be seen
as belonging to their father. That individual's family would be further traced through their
father's bloodline, through male relatives: his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and
so on.

Matrilineal descent:

In matrilineal kinship systems, lineage and inheritance are traced through a group's female
members and children are part of their mother's kinship group.

Matrilineal vs. Patrilineal Descent

Matrilineal descent and patrilineal descent are two different ways of tracing ancestry or creating
lineage groups. A lineage is a group of people who trace their descent to a common ancestor. A
lineage group is another word for a clan, a group of people who consider themselves descended
from a common ancestor. A clan or a lineage group is similar to a family, but any individual may
belong to more than one clan or lineage group, through birth or marriage. People often use the
phrase ''my family'' to refer to the total list of clans to which they belong.
What is the difference between matrilineal vs. patrilineal descent? Matrilineal descent traces a
lineage through women to a founding female relative or ancestor. Conversely, patrilineal descent
traces a lineage through men, to a founding male relative or ancestor. Systems of tracing descent
are important because they might determine certain factors in an individual's life, such as their
surname, social status, property inheritances, and residence patterns.
Whether a descent system is patrilineal or matrilineal does not depend on the gender of the
individual in question, but rather on the gender of the common ancestor who is being used to
establish lineage or membership in a particular clan. Either lineage is established through relation
to a common male ancestor, traced through a multi-generational line of male relatives, or lineage
is established through relation to a common female ancestor, traced through a multi-generational
line of female relatives.
Unilineal Descent: Unilineal descent is a system of tracing lineage through a single line of
descent. In unilineal descent, an individual can be seen as belonging exclusively to their father's
line of male relatives, or exclusively to their mother's side of female relatives. Only one line of
descent, traced through a single-gender, can be used in a unilineal descent system.
The three subcategories of unilineal descent are matrilineal descent, patrilineal descent, and
ambilineal descent. In an ambilineal descent system, the individual can only inherit property,
status, and clan membership through one parent, but the choice of which parent to inherit from is
open. Some Polynesian and Micronesian cultures are ambilineal. The choice of which parent or
''side'' of the family to inherit from might be influenced by factors like economics, relationships,
and living situations.
On the other hand, a system that does use multiple lines of descent to trace kinship is called a
cognatic descent system. A cognatic descent system includes all of an individual's relatives,
regardless of gender, within a certain range (for example, three generations). When children
make family trees where they are in the center and both ''sides'' of their family are shown, this is
a visual depiction of a cognatic descent system. Spanish naming customs are a cultural example
of a cognatic descent system.

C) FAMILY: BASIC CONCEPT, FUNCTION, DYSFUNCTION, TYPES AND

TRENDS:
Definition of Family:
According to Sociologists, the family is an intimate domestic group of people related to one
another by bonds of blood, sexual mating, or legal ties. It has been a very resilient social unit that
has survived and adapted through time. So, the element of time referred to above, is again
present here.

The family acts as a primary socialization of children whereby the child first learns the basic
values and norms of the culture they will grow up in. a child needs to be carefully nurtured,
cherished and molded into responsible individuals with good values and strong ethics. Therefore,
it is important to provide them the best childcare so that they grow up to be physically, mentally
and emotionally strong individuals.

Similarly, The United States Census Bureau (2007) defines the family as a relatively permanent
group of two or more people who are related by blood, marriage or adoption and who live under
the same roof.

Stephen (1999) defines the family as a social arrangement based on marriage including
recognition of rights and duties of parenthood, common residence for husband, wife and children
are reciprocal economic obligations between husband and wife.

The family is seen as the main pillar block of a community; family structure and upbringing
influence the social character and personality of any given society. Family is where everybody
learns to love, to care, to be compassionate, to be ethical, to be honest, to be fair, to have
common sense, to use reasoning etc., values which are essential for living in a community. Yet,
there are ongoing debates that families’ values are in decline. Moreover the same family is
viewed as an ‘oppressive and bankrupt institution.

Functions of family:

The family performs several important functions:

First, the family is the primary unit for socializing children -As previous chapters indicated,
no society is possible without adequate socialization of its young. In most societies, the family is
the major unit in which socialization happens. Parents, siblings, and, if the family is extended
rather than nuclear, other relatives all help socialize children from the time they are born.
Second, the family is ideally a major source of practical and emotional support for its
members- It provides them food, clothing, shelter, and other essentials, and it also provides them
love, comfort, help in times of emotional distress, and other types of intangible support that we
all need.

Third, the family helps regulate sexual activity and sexual reproduction -All societies have
norms governing with whom and how often a person should have sex. The family is the major
unit for teaching these norms and the major unit through which sexual reproduction occurs. One
reason for this is to ensure that infants have adequate emotional and practical care when they are
born. The incest taboo that most societies have, which prohibits sex between certain relatives,
helps minimize conflict within the family if sex occurred among its members and to establish
social ties among different families and thus among society as a whole.

Fourth, the family provides its members with a social identity - Children are born into their
parents’ social class, race and ethnicity, religion, and so forth. As we have seen in earlier
chapters, social identity is important for our life chances. Some children have advantages
throughout life because of the social identity they acquire from their parents, while others face
many obstacles because the social class or race/ethnicity into which they are born is at the
bottom of the social hierarchy.

DYSFUNCTIONS OF FAMILY:

First, the family as a social institution contributes to social inequality: Because families pass
along their wealth to their children, and because families differ greatly in the amount of wealth
they have, the family helps reinforce existing inequality. As it developed through the centuries,
and especially during industrialization, the family also became more and more of a patriarchal
unit (since men made money working in factories while women stayed home), helping to
reinforce men’s status at the top of the social hierarchy.

Second, the family can also be a source of conflict for its own members: Although the
functional perspective assumes the family provides its members emotional comfort and support,
many families do just the opposite and are far from the harmonious, happy groups depicted in the
1950s television shows. Instead, they argue, shout, and use emotional cruelty and physical
violence. It often becomes a source of jealousy, partiality and domestic violence towards women.
Conflict within a family also stems from patriarchy. Husbands usually earn more money than
wives, and many men continue to feel that they are the head of their families. When women
resist this old-fashioned notion, spousal conflict occurs.

Low-income families are much more likely to experience negative events such as death, poor
health, unemployment, divorce, and criminal victimization. When these negative events do
occur, Life becomes harder and more brutish at the bottom.

TYPES OF FAMILY:

Matriarchal Family
The matriarchal family known as mother centered or mother dominated family. The mother or
the woman is the head of the family. She exercises authority and manages the property. The
descent is traced through the mother hence it is matrilineal in descent. Daughters inherit the
property of the mother. The status of the children is decided by the status of the mother.
Matriarchal family is matrilocal in residence. After the marriage the wife stays back in her
mother's home. The husband pays occasional visits to the wife's home. In theory mother
exercises authority and power in the matriarchal family. She is the head of the family and her
decisions are final. But in practice some relatives of the family, her brother exercises authority in
the family. The maternal family brings together the kinsmen and welds them in a powerful
group.
Patriarchal Family
The patriarchal family is also known as father centered or father dominated family. The father is
the head of the family and exercises authority. He is the administrator of the family property. The
descent, inheritance and succession are recognized through the male line. Patriarchal families are
patrilineal in character because the descent is traced through the male line. Only the male
children inherit the property. Patriarchal family is patrilocal in residence. Sons continue to live
with the father in his own house even after their marriages. Only the wives come and join them.
Women have secondary position in these families. Children are brought up in their father's
family.

Nuclear Family
The individual nuclear family is a universal social phenomenon. It can be defined as a small
group composed of husband and wife and children that constitute a unit apart from the rest of the
community. The nuclear family is a characteristic of all the modern industrial societies in which
a high degree of structural and functional specialization exists. The nuclear family comprises a
cohabiting man and woman who maintain a socially approved sexual relationship and have at
least one child. The traditional nuclear family is a nuclear family in which the wife works in the
home without pay while the husband works outside the home for money. According to Lowie it
does not matter whether marital relations are permanent or temporary; whether there is polygyny
or polyandry the one fact stands out beyond all others that everywhere the husband, wife and
immature children constitute a unit apart from the remainder of the community. T.B.Bottomore
states that the universality of the nuclear family can be accounted for by the important functions
that it has been performing. The nuclear family has been performing the sexual, the economic,
the reproductive and the educational functions. The indispensability of these and few other
functions has contributed to its universality. A major factor in maintaining the nuclear family is
economic cooperation based upon the division of labor between the sexes. The structure of the
nuclear family is not same everywhere. Bottomore makes a distinction between two kinds of
family system.
The Joint Family
The joint family is also known as undivided family or extended family. It normally consists of
members belong to two-three generations: husband and wife, their married and unmarried
children and their married or unmarried grandchildren. The joint family system constituted the
basic social institution in many traditional societies’ particularly Asian societies like Indian. The
joint family is considered as bedrock on which Hindu values and attitudes are built. The joint
family is a mode of combining smaller families into larger family units through the extension of
three or more generations. In joint family the members are related through blood and spread over
several generations living together under a common space and work under common head.
According to Iravati Karve, the joint family may be defined as a group of people who generally
live under one roof, who eat food cooked at one hearth, who hold property in common and who
participate in common family worship and are related to each other as some particular type of
kindred.
The Patriarchal joint family is father centered and the matriarchal joint family is mother
dominated. The patriarchal joint families are found among the Nambudaris of Malabar, the
Mundus of Chotanagpur and the Angami Nagas of Assam. The Nambudaris joint family is
generally described as illom. The matriarchal joint families are found among the Nairs of
Malabar, the Khasis and Garos living in the Garo hills of Assam. The Nair joint family is known
as Tarawad.
d) HINDU JOINT FAMILY - TYPES AND TRENDS, FUNCTIONS AND
DYSFUNCTIONS:

Ramakrishna Mukherjee while giving five types of relations—conjugal, parental-filial, inter-

sibling, lineal and affinal—has maintained that a joint family is a co-resident and commensal
kin-group which consists of one or more of the first three types of relations and either lineal
and/or Affinal relations among the members.

While I.P. Desai has given five types of family—nuclear, functionally joint, functionally and
substantially (in terms of property) joint, marginally joint, and traditional joint, K.M. Kapadia
has given five types of family: nuclear (husband, wife and unmarried children), nuclear with
married sons (what I.P. Desai calls Marginal Joint and Aileen Ross calls small joint family),
lineal joint, collateral joint, and nuclear family with a dependent (widowed sister, etc.) Aileen
Ross has given four types of families: large joint, small joint, nuclear, and nuclear with
dependents.

Taking all these types of families together as given by different scholars, a joint family may be
defined as ‘a multiplicity of genealogically related nuclear families, joint in residence and
commensal relations and functioning under one authority. M.S. Gore has said that a joint family
should be viewed as “a family of coparceners and their dependents” instead of viewing it as a
multiplicity of nuclear families. He holds that in a nuclear family, the emphasis is on conjugal
relationship while in a joint family, emphasis is on filial and fraternal relationships.

According to Gore, joint family is of three types:

1. Filial joint family (parents and their married sons with their offspring),

2. Fraternal joint family (two married brothers and their children) and

3. Filial and fraternal (combined) joint family.

Trend of Joint Family:

The concept of joint family has varied with different scholars. While Irawati Karve regards
‘coresidentiality’ as important in jointness, Harold Gould, LP. Desai, S.C. Dubey B.S. Cohn and
Pauline Kolenda do not regard coresidentiality and commensality as essential ingredients of
jointness. F.G. Bailey and T.N. Madan give importance to joint ownership of property,
irrespective of the type of residence and commensality. I.P. Desai gives importance to fulfillment
of obligations towards kin, even if residence is separate and there is no common ownership of
property.

According to Irawati Karve, the traditional ancient Indian family (Vedic and Epic periods) was
joint in terms of residence, property, and functions. She has given five characteristics of joint
family: common residence, common kitchen, common property, common family worship, and
some kinship relationship. On this basis, she defines joint family as “a group of people, who
generally live under one roof, eat food cooked at one hearth, hold property in common,
participate in common family worship, and are related to each other as some particular type of
kindred”. The word ‘common’ or ‘joint property’ here (according to the Hindu Succession Act,
1956) means that all the living male and female members up to three generations have a share in
the paternal property. According to I.P. Desai, co-residence and common kitchen are not as
important dimensions of joint family as intra-family relationships are. He thinks that when two
families having kinship relationship are living separately but function under one common
authority, it will be a joint family. He calls it functional joint family. He calls a traditional joint
family as one which consists of three or more generations. He calls two- generation family as a
marginal joint family.

FUNCTIONS OF JOINT FAMILY:

● It has familistic organization, i.e., individual’s interests are subordinated to the interests
of the family as a whole, or the goals of the family are the goals of the individual
members.

● The family functions on the ideal of joint responsibility. If a father takes loan to marry his
daughter, it is also the responsibility of his sons to repay the loan.

● All members get equal attention. A poor brother’s son will be admitted to the same
school as rich brother’s son.

DYSFUNCTIONS OF JOINT FAMILY:

● The authority in the family (between men and men, men and women, and women and
women) is determined on the principle of seniority. Though the eldest male or female
may delegate the authority to someone else yet even this delegation is based on the
principle of seniority, which limits the scope for the emergence of individualism.
 ● It has an authoritarian structure, i.e., power to make decisions lies in the hands of the
head of the family (patriarch). Contrary to the authoritarian family, in a democratic
family, the authority is vested in one or more individuals on the basis of competence
and ability.
● The filial and fraternal relationship gets preference over conjugal relationship, i.e.,
husband-wife relationship is subordinated to father-son or brother-brother
relationship.
● The authority in the family (between men and men, men and women, and women and
women) is determined on the principle of seniority. Though the eldest male may, this
limits the scope for the emergence of individualism.

LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP, SAME SEX MARRIAGES AND DIVORCE:

Live-in Relationship is a relationship which does not create any rights and responsibilities that a
perfectly valid marriage creates. Neither the man is bound to maintain the women nor the women
have any kind of responsibility towards the man. It can be defined as a walk-in and walk-out
relationship. Both the individuals with each other’s consent live together not because they are
married but because they want to live together. The big question arises is this kind of relationship
recognized. The answer is yes although live-in relationship is not recognized in any statute or
any other government legislation. But the Supreme court of India through various judgment has
given live in relationship a legal backing.

● For the first time, the question of whether live-in relationship is a legal relationship came to the
supreme court in the case of Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation.
● In the present case the parties were living in a live in relationship for almost 50 years and the
question before the court was whether their relationship be granted the same status which is
granted to a married couple and the apex court’s decision was in favor of the couple and the
apex court granted legal status to their 50 year relationship.
● In the case ofIndra Sharma v. VKV Sharma the Supreme Court held that if at any point any
male who is not married lives with a women who is also not married and they also shared the
same house then that will come under section 2(f) of Domestic Violence Act and if at any point
of time domestic violence occurs then the aggrieved person can seek relief under the chapter IV
of the Domestic Violence Act.

Moral and Social Issues Related to Live in Relationships

● In India marriage as above mentioned is a sacrament however it is very difficult to trace the
origin of marriage; under Hindu rites and traditional marriage is a concept that started as soon as
the man came into being.
● The main purpose of marriage was to give legitimacy to the sexual relationship between man and
women and second the child born out of that marriage will be a legitimate child.
● Under Indian Society the concept of marriage is so deeply engrossed that if any two people of
opposite sex either engage in sexual relationship without getting married it is considered as a
taboo and hence those couple have to face the crunch of the society, marriages in India is not
only the tie up of men and women but also a tie up of the families and therefore a great degree of
caution is taken care when two people are getting married, but when two individual of opposite
sex live together in live in relationship the society not only doubt their character but also start
questioning their family upbringing and hence parents sometimes are also not supported for live
in relationship.
● However, things are changing in metropolitan cities like Bangalore, Delhi, Mumbai, and Chennai
people are accepting live-in relationship as a legitimate form of relationship, but in rural India,
the situation is not the same. People in rural India do not have a positive outlook towards live in
a relationship.
● In contrast in western societies’ marriages are seen as an individual choice rather than a family
decision and hence individual liberty is more than in Indian society.
● Many people in India believe that live in relationships are just a way to fulfill the sexual desires
and hence it is the same as prostitution, however this kind of mindset needs social conditioning
and people need to understand that people do not go for live in relationship just because they
want to fulfill their sexual desires but the major reason behind opting for live in relationship is
that before marriage both the couple want to see whether they are compatible with each other,
this is good in the sense that marriage is a lifelong relationship and before entering into that
sacred relationship everyone has the right to decide whether his or her partner is perfect or not.
● Another problem that the Indian society attaches with live in relationships is that it makes a man
and women shrug away from their responsibilities and hence make them careless, many
conservatives are of the view that live in relationship is a bad influence on the Indian society by
the western world.
● This kind of mentality needs a rethinking as society accepts only those influences with which the
people are comfortable and if it is not harmful.
● Individual liberty and freedom are the essences of democracy and hence these two principals
must be respected in any democratic society.
● Thankfully the new generations are much more open-minded and are broad-minded when it
comes to live in relationships and they have released that societal restriction must not harm the
individual freedom and it must be left to the individual themselves to decide which practice is
harmful to them and which are not.

Whether live in relationship is a substitute of Marriage?

● The big question that arises is that whether the Indian Society is ready to accept Live in
relationship as a substitute of Marriage, the Supreme court in the case of Badri Prasad v. Dy.
 Director of Consolidation granted a legal status to the couple who lived-in live-in relationship
for almost 50 years.
● Therefore, one thing which must be taken into consideration while granting a legal status to a
live-in relationship is that the couple should be living together for some reasonable period of
time.
● it is obvious that marriage and living together are two different things, not every time a live-in
couple will end up marrying each other and hence these two concepts cannot be mixed with each
other.
● Live in relationship as discoursed above is a very recent development in the Indian context and
therefore it would not be completely accepted in one go and that in one way is completely fine,
live in relationship is a western concept and hence it becomes more important to analyse the both
sides of the coin before reaching to a conclusion, as of now the Indian Society does not grant the
same position to live in couples than married couples and therefore even in 21stcentury a couple
who is married is given more respect in the society than a couple who is not married.
● One big issue that is associated with live in couples is that what would happen to the
children who are born out of live in relationship, as per Hindu Marriage Act,1955 children
born out before marriages are considered to be the legitimate children of their parents,
however the problem arises when the couple decide to live apart and none of the parent is keen to
take responsibility of the child, in that situation the court or the legislators must ensure that one
of the parent must take the responsibility of the child, for securing the rights of the child the
court must appoint a guardian, and the child must get all the rights to take in the property of his
father as well as his mother.
● In the case of Bharata Matha it was held by the Supreme Court that a child born out of live in
relationship is a legitimate child and he has the right to access the property of his parents
excluding the ancestral undivided property.
● With all these issues it can be said that practically live in Relationships cannot be a substitute of
marriage, however, it can be an alternative to marriage as if the couple are eager to live together
but not get tied in marital responsibilities then it is completely fine if they go for live in
relationship.
● The question that arises is whether live-in relationships be recognized by the government and if
yes why not make a law on it.
● Former Union Law Minister Mr. H.R. Bharadwaj in 2008 showed interest in the making
legislation for legalizing live-in relationships and proposed that if the society is ready for it then
the government has no problem making a law on it, however no such concreate steps have been
taken to further the issue.

SAME SEX MARRIAGE:

Same-sex marriage is marriage between partners of the same sex and/or gender identity. For
example, a marriage between two men or two women. In 2003, Massachusetts became the first
state in the U.S. to legalize same-sex marriages, paving the way for many other states to consider
legalizing same-sex marriage.
 INTRODUCTION OF LGBTQ LAW CINTRIBUTED TO A GREAT UPLIFTMENT:

The increased empowerment of LGBT people has brought about even more open and virulent
anti-gay hostility:

● Although unrelated to an individual's ability, sexual orientation can still be the basis for
employment decisions in both the public and private sectors in most states and municipalities.

● Violent hate crimes, such as the 1998 murder of Wyoming student Matthew Shepherd, depict a
grisly backlash against LGBTs or people perceived to be gay.

● LGBT students and teachers face daily harassment and discrimination in the schools, and LGBT
student groups in high schools and colleges still face roadblocks.

In 1986, after more than two decades of support for lesbian and gay struggles, the American
Civil Liberties Union established a national Lesbian and Gay Rights Project. Working in close
collaboration with the ACLU's affiliates nationwide, the Project coordinates the most extensive
gay rights legal program in the nation. Increasing opposition from a well-organized, well-funded
coalition of radical extremists and fundamentalists promises many battles and challenges ahead.

DIVORCE:

Divorce is nearly always a tragedy, for it generally means blighted faith, broken truth and severe
disillusionment. It is a complex and difficult experience for all family members. Anthropologist
Paul Bohannan (1970) has identified six overlapping experiences which arise from divorce.
Bohannan calls them ‘six stations of divorce’.

These are:

1. Emotional divorce, which represents the problem of the deteriorating marriage.

2. Legal divorce, based upon the grounds on which the marriage will be dissolved.

3. Economic divorce, which deals with the division of money and property.

4. Co parental divorce, which includes decisions regarding child custody and visitation rights.

5. Community divorce, the changes in friendships and institutional ties that a divorced person
experiences.
6. Psychic divorce, focused on the person’s attempt to regain autonomy and self-esteem.

Unit 2 – Social Structure:

Caste: concepts and features, relation with power, trends and mobility:

Caste can be defined as hereditary endogamous group, having a common name, common
traditional occupation, common culture, relatively rigid in matters of mobility, distinctiveness of
status and forming a single homogenous community.
The caste system in India is mainly associated with Hinduism and has governed the Hindu
society for thousands of years. Some of the features of caste system in India include the
following:
Segmental division of society: It means that social stratification is largely based on Membership
to a caste group is acquired by birth, on the basis of which people are ranked in relative to other
caste groups.
Hierarchy: It indicates that various castes are categorized according to their purity and impurity
of occupations. Just like a ladder, castes are ranked from higher to lower positions. Pure caste is
ranked at the top and impure is ranked at the
Civil and religious disabilities: These comprise of restrictions based on contact, dress, speech,
rituals etc. and are placed on every caste group. It was done in order to maintain purity of
specific caste groups. Example, lower caste groups had no access to wells, they were restricted
from entering temples
Endogamy: Members of a particular caste have to marry within their caste only. Inter- caste
marriages are prohibited. However, in urban areas, the phenomenon of inter- caste marriage is
Untouchability: It is the practice of ostracizing a group by segregating them from the
mainstream by social Untouchability was a corollary of the caste system, wherein the
untouchables (those belonging to the lowest caste groups) were deemed impure and polluted.
Restriction on Food and Drink: Usually a caste would not accept cooked food from any other
caste that stands lower than itself in the social scale, due to the notion of getting polluted. There
were also variously associated taboos related to food. The cooking taboo, which defines the
persons who may cook the food. The eating taboo which may lay down the ritual to be followed
at meals. The commensally taboo which is concerned with the person with whom one may take
food. Finally, the taboo which has to do with the nature of the vessel (whether made of earth,
copper or brass) that one may use for drinking or cooking. For eg: In Norcth India Brahmin
would accept paka food (cooked in ghee) only from some castes lower than his own. However,
no individual would accept kachcha (cooked in water) food prepared by an inferior caste. Food
prepared by Brahmin is acceptable to all, the reason for which domination of Brahmins in the
hotel industry for a long time. The beef was not allowed by any castes, except harijans.
A Particular Name: Every caste has a particular name though which we can identify it.
Sometimes, an occupation is also associated with a particular caste.
The Concept of Purity and Pollution: The higher castes claimed to have ritual, spiritual and
racial purity which they maintained by keeping the lower castes away through the notion of
pollution. The idea of pollution means a touch of lower caste man would pollute or defile a man
of higher caste. Even his shadow is considered enough to pollute a higher caste man.
CASTE AND MOBILITY:
By social mobility we understand the process by which individuals or groups move from one
social status to another in the social hierarchy. Social mobility can be either upward or
downward.
Sociologists observe that in spite of the closed nature of caste system, there have been changes in
caste hierarchy and its norms from time to time. Caste mobility as a process of social and cultural
change has been explained by Srinivas in his concept of sankritisation. Sanskritisation is a
process whereby low Hindu caste changes its customs, rites, rituals, ideology and way of life in
the direction of high and frequently twice-born castes. This has paved the way for mobility to
occur within caste system.

Caste and the Ritual Sphere:

The notion of hierarchical gradation of caste groups drawing legitimacy from religion and the
concept of purity and pollution has changed with the passing of time. The structural distance
between various castes defined in terms of purity and pollution has been changed.

Caste and the Economic Sphere:

The ideology of caste prescribed specific occupation for specific caste groups which had a
specific place in the social hierarchy. The vocations of the upper castes were considered to be the
most prestigious while occupations of the lower castes to be polluting.

The advent of the British saw new economic opportunities flowing out and reaching the masses.
Caste monopolies enforced by family inheritance came under attack. Ownership of land provided
principles governing wealth and a yardstick by which the local prestige system was measured.
The low caste thus was able to surmount the obstacles posed by tradition. They began to
participate in the economic process. Market economy, daily wages, and hired labour eroded
steadily the functioning of the traditional jajmani system. Bailey in his study of Bisipura village
has shown how certain low caste groups flourishing in the wake of new business opportunities
invested their profits in land. The breakdown of the traditional economic system and the
Increased economic status of lower caste groups undermined the Brahmin dominance especially
in Tanjore, Tamil Nadu.

Caste and Politics:

Before the introduction of democracy, the upper caste persons were playing a dominant role in
the village panchayat which was quite different from the concept of order panchayat. They
decided the disputes within the village. In villages traditional caste panchayats and leaders were
powerful means of social control. The advent of democracy and decentralized politics in the
form of the three-tier Panchayati Raj system, witnessed politics carried down to the grass-root
level. Caste became a prominent variable in electoral politics.

The decline of the traditional economic systems, caste-free occupations and mobilization of caste
groups have all resulted in the decline of the traditional political role of castes. Yet we find that
caste retains its political significance. This is evident, for example, in the case of political
mobilization of caste groups in Madhopur, U.P. In this village, the ranks of Noniyas, the salt-
makers and Chamars, the leather-makers, joined hands in opposing the locally dominant upper
castes. The situation is same in other states such as Karnataka, Gujarat, Maharashtra, M.P. etc. It
is not politics that gets caste-ridden, it is the caste that gets politicized as says, Rajni Kothari.

It is important to mention here that no social change can bring about total changes in the society.
It is found that the traditional social organization exemplified by the caste system has undergone
several changes. Mobility of caste system has been an important feature. Yet it continues to exist
in Indian society performing some old and some new functions.

B) Change through sanskritization, civil disabilities:

Sanskritization is a process by which scheduled castes, tribes and other low Hindu castes change
their way of life, customs and rituals in the direction of upper castes. It is followed by a claim to
a higher position in the caste hierarchy than traditionally concealed to the claimant caste by the
local community. Such claims are made over a period of time, sometimes a generation or two
before they are conceded.

Effects of Sanskritization on society: Sanskritization has an influential effect on society in

many ways.

● More Equality and Liberty: Some scheduled castes adopted upper-caste names, discovered
myths about their origin and changed their traditional occupations. Now they sit along with
the higher caste on the cots without any fear or hesitation.
● Behavioral change: Lower caste adopted other castes living patterns which gave them the
liberty to sit and stand before other castes. For example, lower caste people were not keen to
keep a clean atmosphere but due to Sanskritization, they started maintaining hygiene. They
have left prohibited food. They also keep their houses clean and put on dresses like higher
castes.
● Value Transmission: It helped in socio-economic and cultural value transmission in several
groups of society.
● Exposure to New ideas: Sanskritisation is not just the adoption of new customs and habits,
but also includes exposure to new ideas and values appearing in Sanskrit literature. Some of
the most common Sanskritic theological ideas like Karma, dharma, Paap, Maya, Samsara and
Moksha, which become common in the talk of people who are Sanskritised.
● Redefined Caste System: Sanskritisation challenged the then prevalent idea that caste was a
rigid and unchanging institution. The concept of Sanskritisation addressed the actual
complexity and fluidity of caste relations. It brought into academic focus the dynamics of the
renegotiation of status by various castes and communities in India.
● Societal Up-gradation of lower caste: The low caste individuals are inclined towards
Sanskritization because in that way they can elevate their social status and get higher status
in the caste hierarchy.
● Reduced Untouchability: Now the situation is that the untouchable practice is almost
abolished from society.
● Professional Changes: The lower caste people have given up un-cleaned occupation to raise
their economic status because clean trades are a symbol of social light.

Many scheduled castes and tribes changed their dressing style and eating habits in a similar way
of upper castes. But they had to face a lot of violence by upper castes for following their way of
life. Though the process is followed by many, only those that are politically or economically
powerful succeeded in the process. After the independence of the country, the issue of social
mobility became more complex and cases of Sanskritization, de-Sanskritization as well as re-
Sanskritization were observed. Due to the policy of positive discrimination adopted by the Indian
government now an increasing number of groups laid claim to backward status rather than high
status. Some of them claim a backward status in state matters and a forward status in society.

Civil Disabilities: Civil Disabilities refers to a condition of a person who has had a legal right or
privilege revoked as a result of a criminal conviction. A convicted criminal may be imposed with
numerous civil disabilities apart from the sentence that is imposed upon him/her on conviction.
Civil disabilities may adversely affect an offender during his/her incarceration and after his/her
release. It includes denial of certain privileges like voting, holding public office, obtaining many
jobs and occupational licenses, entering judicially-enforceable agreements, maintaining family
relationships and obtaining insurance and pension benefits. S/he will be in a state of civil
incapacity in the eyes of law. An individual who has lost his/her civil rights and capacities is
accounted dead in law.

c) Class: Marxian and Weberian concept, Classification of Society- rural and urban

For Marx, classes are defined and structured by the relations concerning (i) work and
labor and (ii) ownership or possession of property and the means of production. These
economic factors more fully govern social relationships in capitalism than they did in
earlier societies.

Marxian class theory asserts that an individual's position within a class hierarchy is
determined by their role in the production process, and argues that political and
ideological consciousness is determined by class position.[1] A class is those who share
common economic interests, are conscious of those interests, and engage in collective
action which advances those interests.[2] Within Marxian class theory, the structure of the
production process forms the basis of class construction.

To Marx, a class is a group with intrinsic tendencies and interests that differ from those of other
groups within society, the basis of a fundamental antagonism between such groups. For example,
it is in the laborer's best interest to maximize wages and benefits and in the capitalist's best
interest to maximize profit at the expense of such, leading to a contradiction within the capitalist
system, even if the laborers and capitalists themselves are unaware of the clash of interests.
Marxian class theory has been open to a range of alternate positions, most notably from scholars
such as E. P. Thompson and Mario Tonti. Both Thompson and Tonti suggest class
consciousness within the production process precedes the formation of productive relationships.
In this sense, Marxian class theory often relates to discussion over pre-existing class struggles.
Weberian class definition:
Like Marx, Weber also believed that class was a basic form of stratification in society. He
defined the term ‘classes according to the Marxist criterion, namely, in relation to ownership of
property. Property and lack of property, according to him, were the basic categories of all class
situations. He went on the distinguish Weberian Theory between two types of property-
ownership and non-ownership of goods and services. Those who owned property offered goods
while those not owning had only their labor power or skills to offer. Thus a factory owner can
offer goods which were produced in the factory. His workers, on the other hand, can offer only
their labor power in exchange of wages.
Another aspect of class that Weber stressed on was ‘life-chances’. This term related to the
opportunities an individual got during the various stages of his or her life. An individual born in
a worker’s family receives a particular type of education, which in turn equips him or her for
specific jobs. The education will not be as expensive or as intense as the education of a child in
an upper class family. The employment opportunities for both are different. Their different
family backgrounds also make them part of different classes. The same pattern can be seen in
social interaction and marriage. A person from a working class background will interact mostly
with other members of his or her class whereas a person from the upper-middle class will have
acquaintances mainly from his class. Thus Weber found that life-chances was an important
aspect of class formation. The son of an industrialist may become a worker because of his
abilities or other circumstances. But these, Weber pointed out, were exceptions and not the rule.
He pointed out that what was more important was the fact that the life-chances or members of a
class were similar. This is what gave permanence to that class as the next generation too joined
the same class. Therefore the definition of life chances, according to Weber, is sharing of
economic and cultural goods which are available differently for different groups. The life-
chances of an individual were largely determined by the market situation. The son of a worker
became a worker because this was the best occupation available to him given his background.
The market situation becomes more important for the property less as they have to depend
mainly on the production of services as they posses only their skills. They cannot market
anything else for their existence. The property owners on the other hand can depend on the
income they get from their productive property. Hence for Weber class had two basic aspects.
Firstly it was an objective category. It was determined by the control or lack of control over
productive property of the members. Secondly, all members of a particular had similar life-
chances, which in turn distinguished these members from others. The life-chances of 44 Theories
of Stratification individuals depended on their market situation in the case of those not owning
productive property and on the ownership of productivity for those owning these. Based on his
definition, Weber identified four classes in capitalist society. These were: (a) Upper class that
comprised those owning or controlling productive private property. This class was similar to the
bourgeoisie (capitalist class) in Marx’s analysis, (b) White-collar workers. This class included all
those who were engaged in mental labor -managers, administrators, professionals, etc. (c) Petty
bourgeoisie. These were the self-employed and they included shopkeepers, doctor’s lawyers, etc.
(d) Manual workers. These people sold their physical labor in exchange for wages. The working
class was included in this class. Weber thus divided society into four classes as opposed to
Marx’s two-class model. Hence though Weber found the basis of class formation was similar to
that of Marx he differed with Marx on the types of classes in society.

Classification of society- rural and urban:

The major differences between Urban and Rural are as follows:

Urban Rural

Urban areas usually refer to cities, suburbs Rural areas usually refer to villages
and towns.

Urban areas have more development in Rural areas usually don’t have much development in
terms of access to infrastructure and terms of infrastructure.
connectivity like airports, ports, railways,
housing, roads etc.

Land in urban areas is used for development Rural areas usually have a lot of vacant lands without
activities. There is usually not much land much development.
available which has not been used for
developmental activities

Urban areas are densely populated Rural areas are sparsely populated

As of 2018, approximately 34% of India’s More than 65% of India’s population lives in rural areas
population lives in urban areas as per 2018 figures. From 2008 to 2018 there has been a
steady decline in the percentage of the population living
in rural areas of India, due to migration.

Although the total population living in urban The population density is less in rural areas compared to
areas is much less compared to Rural areas, urban areas.
the population density is very high in urban
areas

Urban areas have a scarcity of land Rural areas do not have land scarcity.
There is very high pollution in urban areas There is not much pollution in rural areas compared to
due to high population density, vehicles and urban areas, due to lesser vehicles, lower population
industries. density and lesser industries

There is not much greenery in urban areas of There is more greenery in rural areas of India
India, since most of the land is occupied by
buildings and roads

Jobs are concentrated in the services Jobs are concentrated in agricultural activities.
industry, manufacturing industry, trade and
commerce

In urban areas, the problem of social barriers In rural areas of India, there is always a lot of difference
is minimal, there are equal opportunities for in social status in rural areas due to gender, religion, caste,
jobs, education etc. culture etc.

d) Gender : Sex and Gender, Women as weaker gender, third gender and gender
justice:

SEX - Sex refers to a set of biological attributes in humans and animals. It is primarily
associated with physical and physiological features including chromosomes, gene expression,
hormone levels and function, and reproductive/sexual anatomy. Sex is usually categorized as
female or male but there is variation in the biological attributes that comprise sex and how those
attributes are expressed.
GENDER - Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, expressions and identities
of girls, women, boys, men, and gender diverse people. It influences how people perceive
themselves and each other, how they act and interact, and the distribution of power and resources
in society.

WOMEN AS WEAKER GENDER: REASON

Gender inequality has been historic worldwide phenomena, not a human invention and based on
gender assumptions It is linked to kinship rules rooted in cultures and gender norms that
organizes human social life, human relations, as well as promotes subordination of women in a
form of social strata. Amartya Sen. highlighted the need to consider the socio-cultural influences
that promote gender inequalities In India, cultural influences favor the preference for sons for
reasons related to kinship, lineage, inheritance, identity, status, and economic security. This
preference cuts across class and caste lines, and it discriminates against girls. In extreme cases,
the discrimination takes the form of honor killings where families kill daughters or daughters-in-
law who fail to conform to gender expectations about marriage and sexuality. When a woman
does not conform to expected gender norms she is shamed and humiliated because it impacts
both her and her family's honor, and perhaps her ability to marry. The causes of gender
inequalities are complex, but a number of cultural factors in India can explain how son
preference, a key driver of daughter neglect, is so prevalent.
Patriarchal society
Patriarchy is a social system of privilege in which men are the primary authority figures,
occupying roles of political leadership, moral authority, control of property, and authority over
women and children. Most of India, with some exceptions, has strong patriarchal
and patrilineal customs, where men hold authority over female family members and inherit
family property and title. The parents of the woman essentially lose all they have invested in
their daughter to her husband's family, which is a disincentive for investing in their girls during
youth. Furthermore, sons are expected to support their parents in old age and women have very
limited ability to assist their own parents
Son preference
A key factor driving gender inequality is the preference for sons, as they are deemed more useful
than girls. Boys are given the exclusive rights to inherit the family name and properties and they
are viewed as additional status for their family. In a survey-based study of 1990s data, scholars.
found that son are believed to have a higher economic utility as they can provide additional labor
in agriculture. Another factor is that of religious practices, which can only be performed by
males for their parents' afterlife. All these factors make sons more desirable. Moreover, the
prospect of parents 'losing' daughters to the husband's family and the expensive dowry of
daughters further discourages parents from having daughters. Additionally, sons are often the
only person entitled to performing funeral rites for their parents. Thus, a combination of factors
has shaped the imbalanced view of sexes in India. A 2005 study in Madurai, India, found that old
age security, economic motivation, and to a lesser extent, religious obligations, continuation of
the family name, and help in business or farm, were key reasons for son preference. In turn,
emotional support and old age security were the main reasons for daughter preference. The study
underscored a strong belief that a daughter is a liability.
Discrimination against girls
While women express a strong preference for having at least one son, the evidence of
discrimination against girls after they are born is mixed. A study of 1990s survey data by
scholars. Found less evidence of systematic discrimination in feeding practices between young
boys and girls, or gender-based nutritional discrimination in India. In impoverished families,
these scholars found that daughters face discrimination in the medical treatment of illnesses and
in the administration of vaccinations against serious childhood diseases. These practices were a
cause of health and survival inequality for girls. While gender discrimination is a universal
phenomenon in poor nations, a 2005 UN study found that social norms-based gender
discrimination leads to gender inequality in India
Dowry
In India, dowry is the payment in cash or some kind of gifts given to bridegroom's family along
with the bride. The practice is widespread across geographic region, class and religions. The
dowry system in India contributes to gender inequalities by influencing the perception that girls
are a burden on families. Such beliefs limit the resources invested by parents in their girls and
limits her bargaining power within the family] Parents save gold for dowry for their daughters
since their birth but do not invest so they could earn gold medals.
The payment of a dowry has been prohibited under The 1961 Dowry Prohibition Act in Indian
civil law and subsequently by Sections 304B and 498a of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) despite of
the laws dowry abuse and domestic abuse is raising. Several studies show that while attitudes of
people are changing about dowry, the institution has changed very little, and prejudices even
continue to prevail.
Marriage Laws
Men and women have equal rights within marriage under Indian law, with the exception of all
men who are allowed to unilaterally divorce their wife. The legal minimum age for marriage is
18 for women and 21 for men, except for those Indians whose religion is Islam for whom child
marriage remains legal under India's Mohammedan personal laws. Child marriage is one of the
detriments to empowerment of women.

Third gender and gender justice:

Third gender is a concept in which individuals are categorized, either by themselves or by
society, as neither man nor woman. It is also a social category present in societies that recognize
three or more genders. Often called transgender by outsiders, Indian society and most hijras
consider themselves to be third gender—neither male nor female, not transitioning. They are a
different gender altogether.
LAWS REGARDING THIRD GENDER:

Transgender people are individuals who differ from the stereotypes and existence of only two
genders that is man and women; they have different appearance, personal characteristics and
behavior. Being different from the other gender, transgender people have been subject to social
oppression as society does accept their gender identity and they suffer from the physical violence
which is inflicted upon them.

The main problems from which they suffer are lack of education, unemployment, homelessness,
lack of health care facilities, depression, alcohol abuse and discrimination throughout their life.
To protect their rights and to solve their problems, The Constitution of Indian has provided them
with their own rights and The Supreme Court has given them the right to be recognized as "Third
Gender" and provided them with some welfare measures. Transgender are the person who have
suffered discrimination for ages as earlier their gender identity was not recognized either in eyes
of law or by the society and they were forced to write male or female against their gender. The
Supreme Court of India recognized transgender as the third gender to eradicate the
discrimination suffered by them and to safeguard their rights.
The court asked the center to treat the transgender as socially and economically backward classes
and to allow them to get admission in the educational institution and employment on the basis of
their third gender category. In the landmark Judgment of National Legal Service Authority v
Union of India[3] the third gender gained legal recognition in the eyes of law as the Hon'ble
Supreme Court ruled that the fundamental rights should be available to the third gender in the
same way as they were provided to the male and females.

The court provides the transgender with equal rights and protection under the Article 14, 15, 16
and 21. The court stressed out on the importance of right to dignity and gave due recognition to
their gender identity which was based upon reassigned sex after undergoing Sex Reassignment
Surgery as the person has a constitutional right to get recognized as a male or female. Thus, the
transgender where entitled to legal protection of law in all the spheres of state activity including
the education and employment.

The rule of law is supreme and everyone is equal in the eyes of law in India. Yet, the transgender
community is in a constant battle as they have to fight oppression, abuse and discrimination from
every part of the society, whether it's their own family and friends or society at large. The life of
transgender people is a daily battle as there is no acceptance anywhere and they are ostracized
from the society and also ridiculed.

However, the Supreme Court of India in its pioneering judgment by the division bench of
Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and A.K. Sikri in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of
India & Ors. [4][Writ Petition (Civil) No.400 of 2012(NALSA)] recognized the third gender
along with the male and female. By recognizing diverse gender identities, the Court has busted
the dual gender structure of 'man' and 'woman' which is recognized by the society.

"Recognition of Transgender as a third gender is not a social or medical issue but a human rights
issue," Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan told the Supreme Court while handing down the ruling.

The right of equality before law and equal protection of law is guaranteed under Article 14 and
21 of the Constitution. The right to choose one's gender identity is an essential part to lead a life
with dignity which again falls under the ambit of Article 21. Determining the right to personal
freedom and self-determination, the Court observed that "the gender to which a person belongs is
to be determined by the person concerned." The Court has given the people of India the right to
gender identity. Further, they cannot be discriminated against on the ground of gender as it is
violative of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21.

The Court also protects one's gender expression invoked by Article 19 (1) (a) and held that "no
restriction can be placed on one's personal appearance or choice of dressing subject to the
restrictions contained in article 19(2) of the Constitution”. The Court recognized the right to as to
how a person choose to behave in private, personhood and the free thought process of the human
being, which are necessary for the fullest development of the personality of the individual. The
Court further noted that a person will not realize his dignity if he is forced to mature in a gender
to which he does not belong to or he cannot relate to which will again hinder in his development.
The Supreme Court has given certain directions for the protection of the rights of the transgender
persons by including of a third category in documents like the election card, passport, driving
license and ration card, and for admission in educational institutions, hospitals, amongst others.

Human rights are basic rights and freedoms which are guaranteed to a human by virtue of him
being a human which can neither be created nor can be abrogated by any government. It includes
the right to life, liberty, equality, dignity and freedom of thought and expression.

The Supreme court in National Legal Service Authority v the Union of India[5] was concerned
with the grievances and suffering of the Transgender Community as they seek a legal declaration
of their gender identity rather than the identity of male/ female that was assigned to them at the
time of their birth and their prayer was that non- recognition of their gender identity is violation
of Article 14 and 21 of the Indian constitution.

The Hon'ble court interpreted the meaning of Article 14 and held that the article provides
protection to any person, and person here includes the transgender person as well and hence, they
are all entitled to legal protection of law in all the spheres of state activity like any other citizen
of this country. The court also held that Article 15 and 16 is not just limited to biological sex
male or female but it intended to include those people too who consider themselves to be neither
male nor female.

Further the court referred to Article 19(1)(a) and 19(2) and concluded that transgender
personality can be expressed by transgender' s behavior and presentation and it cannot be
restricted or prohibited. Lastly, the court referred to Article 21 and held that "Hijras/ Eunuchs
have to be considered as third gender, over and above binary gender under our constitution and
the laws". The Supreme Court in its final judgment declared that transgender apart from binary
gender, should be treated as "third gender" for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part
III of Constitution of India and the laws made by the parliament and State legislature.

Transgender Right under Indian Constitution:

The preamble to the constitution mandates every citizen Justice: social, economic, political
equality of status.

The Indian state policy that earlier recognized only two sex i.e. only male and female has
deprived the third gender from their several rights as being an Indian citizens, which includes
right to vote, the right to own property, the right to marry, the right to claim a formal identity
through a passport etc. and more importantly their the right to education, employment, health so
on. The basic rights which they were deprived from are their fundamental rights under Article
14, 15, 16 and 21.

The rights of transgender where for the first time considered under the 2014 NALSA Judgment
where the supreme court laid emphasis on protecting and safeguarding the rights of the
transgender person under the principles of Indian Constitution laid down in Article 14, 15,16 and
21.
Article 14, 15 and 16 provides right to equality and Article 21 which provides right to freedom
for each and every Indian citizen but transgender person where deprived from their basic right to
freedom and equality.

Article 14 deals with Equality before the law or equal protection before the law within the
territory of India. Article 14 clearly falls within the expression "person" which includes the male,
female and third gender within its ambit so the transgender is also entitled to legal protection
under Indian constitution in all the spheres of state activity.

Article 15 which deals with the prohibition of discrimination on the ground of religion, race,
caste and sex includes the third gender under its ambit as being the citizens they have the right to
not to be discriminated on the ground of their religion, caste race and sex. They have the right to
protect their gender expression which is majorly reflected through their dresses, action and
behavior.

Article 16 deals with equality of opportunity in the matters of public employment as this article
is used to broaden the concept of sex which includes "Psychological Sex" and gender identity
within its ambit. The transgender being the citizens of India has the right to employment and
equal opportunity in the matters of employment and they should not be discriminated on the
basis of their sexual orientation.

Article 21 which deals with the protection of life and personal liberty states that no person shall
be deprived of his life and personal liberty except according to the procedure of law. For ages
transgender have been deprived of their life and personal liberty. The transgender being the
citizen of India should have full right to protect their right and personal liberty. The Supreme
Court has also recognized the right to dignity by recognizing gender identity within the ambit of
Article 21.

Tribes: CONCEPT AND FEATURES:

The tribes in India form an important part of the total population. It represents an

element in Indian society which is integrated with the culture mosaic of our

civilization. The tribal population of India constitutes nearly 8 percent of the total

population. There are a number of tribes in India, spread over different parts at

different levels of socioeconomic development. They live all over the country from

the foot hill of the Himalayas to the lands tip of Lakshadweep and from the plains

of Gujarat to the hills in the North-East. According to 1991 census, the numerical

strength of the scheduled tribes in India stood at 52.03 million. Bihar leads all
other States as regards the tribal population. It is followed by Maharashtra and

Orissa.

The names of tribes like the Kurumba, the Irula, the Panga in South India; the

Asura, the Saora, the Oraon, the Gond, the Santhal, the Bhil in Central India; the

Bodo, the Ahom in North-East India; are found in old classical Indian literature.

The term ‘tribe’ is derived from the Latin word ‘tribus’. Earlier Romans used this

Term to designate the divisions in society. Latter use suggests that it meant poor

People. The present popular meaning in English language was acquired during the

Expansion of colonialism particularly in Asia and Africa.

The present popular meaning of ‘Tribe’ in India refers to a category of people,

included in the list of Scheduled Tribes. It has carried different connotations in

different countries. In none of the Indian language there were the term tribes. In

India the term ‘tribe’ conveys a meaning of a bewildering and enchanting group of

people. It refers to preliterate, localized social group the members of which speak a

common dialect. The tribal people have been known by various names such as

Adivasi, Vanavasi, Vanyajati, Adimjati, Girijan and Pahari etc. Ghurey has

described them as backward Hindus.

The Indian Constitution has made important provisions for the development and

welfare of the tribes. A list of tribes was adopted for this purpose. The list has been

modified from time to time. In 1971, the list contained names of 527 tribes.

The people who have been listed in the Constitution and mentioned in successive

presidential orders are called Scheduled Tribes. This is the administrative concept
of tribe. A tribe has been defined in various ways. The Constitution, however, does

not provide a definition of a tribe. The people who have been listed in the

Constitution have been termed as Scheduled Tribes. Academicians have been

making their efforts to define tribe. The Dictionary of Sociology defines tribe as a

“social group, usually with a definite area, dialect, cultural homogeneity and

unifying social organisation.

According to the Imperial Gazetteer,

“A tribe is a collection of families bearing a common name speaking a common

dialect, occupying or professing to occupy a common territory and is not usually

endogamous though originally it might have been so.”

Following are some of, the leading definitions of tribe:

According to Gillin,

“Any collection of preliterate local group which occupies a common general

territory, speaks a common language and practises a common culture, is a tribe”. ,

As Ralph Linton says,

“In its simplest form the tribe is a group of bands occupying a continuous territory

and having a feeling of unity deriving from numerous similarities in culture and

certain community of interests.”

According to Rivers,

“A tribe is a social group of simple kind, the members of which speaks a common

dialect and act together in such common purpose as warfare”

Accoding to DN Majumdar,

“A tribe is a collection of families, bearing a common name, members to which

occupy the same territory, speak the same language and observe certain taboos

regarding marriage profession or occupation and have developed a well assessed

system of reciprocity and mutuality of obligation.”

Tribe has been defined as a group of indigenous people having common name,

language and territory tied by strong kinship bonds, practising endogamy, having

distinct customs, rituals and belief etc. Such definitions are not very helpful

because we find lot of variations n life styles of different tribes.

There are a number of tribes in India, spread over different parts at different levels

of socioeconomic development. Contrasting pictures regarding £ H e are visualised

in India. For example, whereas the tribes like Khas, or the Lush, are economically

and educationally advanced to a considerable extent the tribes like Birhor of Bihar

or the Kattunayakan of Kerala are backward and maintain their livelihood through

hunting fishing and food collecting.

Further, we hardly find out any difference between minas of Rajasthan or the

Bhumaj of West Bengal and their neighbours. Therefore, tribes have been

considered as a stage in the social and cultural revolution. For S. C Sinha the tribe

is ideally defined in terms of its isolation from the networks of social relations and

cultural communications of the centres of civilisation. According to Sinha “in their

isolation the tribal societies are sustained by relatively primitive subsistence

technology such as ‘shifting cultivation and, hunting and gathering and maintain an

egalitarian segmentary social system guided entirely by non-literate ethnic.

UNIT 3 - RELIGION
a) Concept and function of religion:
Man has always believed that there exist powers, which are beyond his/her control, which make
things happen that he/she has no control over. Whether primitive or modern the belief in such
powers exists. These powers are called ‘supernatural powers’, i.e., powers which are beyond
man’s control and for which he/she does not have any satisfactory explanation.

Because of this, he/she fears from such powers, and does everything within his/her power to deal
with this fear. The name given to this belief in the existence of supernatural powers is ‘religion’.
Religion fulfills the need of people to deal with their fear of the supernatural powers.

‘Religion is a social institution involving beliefs and practices based upon a conception of the
sacred.’

– John Macionis

‘A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to the sacred things, that is to say,
things set apart and forbidden—beliefs and practices, which unite into one single moral
community called the Church, all those who adhere to them.’

– Emile Durkheim

(Durkheim made use of the word ‘Church’ to refer to any ‘moral community’ based on beliefs
and practices regarding the sacred. A moral community is a community that is united by its
religious practices).

‘Religion is a belief in powers superior to man, which are believed to direct and control the
course of nature and of human life.’

– James Frazer

Functions of Religion:
As one of the basic social institutions, religion performs several important functions.

These are as follows:

1. It helps man to deal with his fear of the supernatural powers. It helps individuals to overcome
pain, fear and anxiety.

2. It is a means used by man to adjust to his belief in the existence of supernatural powers.
3. It gives people explanations regarding the road to salvation or release from the cycle of births
and rebirths.

4. It is a potent and powerful means of controlling social behaviour. The fear of punishment from
supernatural powers for violating religious rule is an effective means of controlling the behaviour
of individuals within society. Each religion has its own code regarding acceptable and
unacceptable modes of behaviour, which is binding on all the individuals who belong to, or
follow a particular religion.

5. It provides emotional and psychological comfort by assuring people that there is a meaning in
life, and there is a purpose even in suffering. It is a great source of comfort and solace in times of
crises.

6. It unites people and brings social solidarity

7. It provides answers to certain basic questions in life—what is the purpose of life, why do
people suffer, why do people die, what happens after death, and so on.

8. It provides guidelines regarding everyday life, societal behaviour, behaviour towards others,
and so on.

9. It helps people to adapt to changing situations, environment and customs. It helps individuals
to adapt to all kinds of social change, including change in marital status, death in the family, and
change in family structure due to death, divorce or separation.

10. It provides individuals with a sense of identity.

B) RELIGION AS SOCIAL INSTITUTION AND PART OF SOCIAL ORGANISATION:

1. Religion is a social institution, as it involves patterns of beliefs and behavior that help a
society meet its basic needs. Sociology of Religion is the study of the beliefs, practices and
organizational forms of religion using the tools and methods of the discipline of sociology.
Sociology of religion is distinguished from the philosophy of religion in that it does not set out to
assess the validity of religious beliefs.
2. Religion is the set of beliefs and practices regarding sacred things that help a society
understand the meaning and purpose of life.
3. There is no society that does not have religion. According to sociologist Emil Durkheim,
religion is an expression of our collective consciousness, which fuses all of our individual
consciousnesses, which then creates a reality of its own.
4. Religion is a social institution that explains why things happen and demystifies the ideas of
birth and death. Religions based on the belief in a single deity are monotheistic. Those that
encompass many deities are polytheistic.

C) CONCEPT OF PROFANE AND SACRED, RITUALS, RITES-DE-PASSAGE:

SACRED - Pertaining to or connected with religion): sacred music; sacred books. Reverently
dedicated to some person, purpose, or object: a morning hour sacred to study related with
reverence: the sacred memory of a dead hero.

PROFANE - Profane objects, activities and people are ordinary and every day with no special
meaning attached to these objects. For example; even though the bible is a sacred text it is a
profane object which individuals use to strengthen belief systems.

RITUAL - A ritual is a set of actions performed mainly for their symbolic value. It may be
prescribed by the traditions of a community, including by a religious community.

RITES DE PASSAGE - A rite of passage is a ceremony or ritual of the passage which occurs
when an individual leaves one group to enter another. It involves a significant change of status in
society.

D) CONTEXT OF RELIGIOUS PLURALISM: Religious pluralism is a belief that one can

overcome religious differences between different religions and conflicts within the same religion.
For most religious traditions religious pluralism is based on non-literal view of one's religious
traditions allowing for respect to be followed between different traditions on core principals
rather than on marginal issues. It is an attitude which rejects focus on immaterial differences and
instead gives respect to those beliefs held in common. The existence of religious pluralism
depends on the existence of freedom of religion which is when different religions of a particular
region possess the same rights of worship and public expression. Freedom of religion is
weakened when one religion is given rights or privileges and denied to others. Religious freedom
did not exist in communist countries where the state restricted or prevented the public expression
of religious belief and even persecuted the individual religions. In some Middle Eastern countries
where they adhere to one particular religion the pluralism is rather restricted if not overtly
curbed.

E) SECULARISATION, COMMUNALISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM:

Secularization is the transformation of people or a society from identification with traditional,

formal, belief systems or religious values and institutions toward unacknowledged belief systems
or seemingly non-religious values and secular based belief systems.

Characteristics of secularization are :

Secular meaning within religion.

+Modification of religious doctrines and practices to changing needs of members in response

to the changing society

● Refraining religious institutions and individuals from getting involved with educational,
philanthropic, and hospitals
Rational and reasonable

● Man is free to choose what they want. Rationalization is based on making choices
according to reason rather than following them blindly

● Application of logic, intelligence, and wisdom over emotion and sentiments, thus
speeding up secularization in the society

Curiosity

● Every secular man has the right to inquire about the causes and effects of the rituals
performed

● They have freedom of choice and cannot be influenced to follow rituals blindly

Scientific temper and outlook

● Scientific influence forces man to question religion. This makes him a secular individual
and an anti-fatalist who is not forced to follow doctrines and events that were initially
made with the vision that humans were powerless to change them

● The scientific approach revolts against the religious outlook of man from the past

Modernization

● While secularization was brought mere 100 years ago, religious practices were conducted
long before

● With people getting smarter and more intelligent every decade, modern society has kept
itself away from the influence of religious faith and symbols while making everyday life
decisions.

COMMUNALISM: Communalism, in a broad sense means a strong attachment to

one’s own community. In popular discourse in India, it is understood as unhealthy
attachment to one’s own religion.

It’s an ideology that, in orders to unify the community, suppresses distinctions within the
community and emphasizes the essential unity of the community against other
communities.

In this way it promotes belief in orthodox tenets and principles, intolerance and hatred of
other religions and thus, divides the society.
 Positive aspect of communalism stands for the affinity of an individual towards his own
community involving efforts for the social and economic upliftment of his community.

However, in negative connotation, it is an ideology which emphasizes the separate

identity of a religious group in relation to other groups with a tendency to promote its
own interests at the expense of the others.

REASONS OF COMMUNALISM:

The major factors that contributed towards the emergence and growth of communalism in
modern India involves:

● British Imperialism and their Policy of “Divide and Rule”.

● Disappointment and disaffection among young and aspiring middle class youth,
caused by stagnant agriculture, absence of modern industrial development and
inadequate employment opportunities, which is being exploited by political
opportunists.
● Hindu and Muslim revivalist movements

● A communal and distorted view of Indian history, taught in school and colleges
played a major role in rise and growth of communal feelings among the masses.
● Separatism and isolation among Muslims.

● Rise of communal and fundamentalist parties.

FUNDAMENTALISM:

Fundamentalism is commonly defined as the religious militancy which individuals use to

prevent their religious identities eroding. Fundamentalists argue that religious beliefs and
ideologies have become increasingly watered down and under threat.

Religious fundamentalism refers to the adherence to a religion's most traditional values and
beliefs - a return to the basics or fundamental tenets of the faith. It is often characterized by a
degree of militancy, as well as literal interpretations of, and a strict reliance on, a religion's
sacred text.

Characteristic of fundamentalism:

● Religious texts are seen as perfect. As such, they might be read literally – be it the Bible,
the Quran or the Torah. One consequence of this is that fundamentalism rejects religious
pluralism. There is a profound rejection of modern society. Modern society is seen as
 morally corrupt. Living in the modern world is seen as problematic because of the variety
of choice.
● Fundamentalists reject the idea of choice and assert the value of tradition.

● Activism is strongly encouraged. Fundamentalists are vocal in their struggle of good

against evil e.g. media images often focus on fundamentalists protesting against
modernity.
● Fundamentalism reinforces nationalism. Fundamentalists often appeal to deep-seated
fears of ‘strangers’ e.g. Narenda Modi is the Chief Minister of Gujarat State – Human
rights groups have blamed the massacre of over 1000 Muslims in 2002 on his
inflammatory speeches.
● Fundamentalists have a political agenda. Absolute opposition to homosexuals, abortion
and birth control.

UNIT - 4 SOCIAL CHALLENGES:

ISSUES OF UNITY IN DIVERSITY: MELTING POT APPROACH AND BOWL

OF SALAD APPROACH:

MELTING POT APPROACH: The melting pot theory has been used to describe societies that
are formed by an assortment of immigrant cultures that eventually produce new hybrid social and
cultural forms. The melting pot theory holds that, like metals melted together at great heat, the
melting together of several cultures will produce a new compound, one that has great strength
and other combined advantages. While the melting pot theory can be applied to any country that
has integrated new cultures into its own, such as Brazil, Bangladesh, or even France, the theory
is most commonly used to describe the United States as a new world with a distinct new breed of
people amalgamated from many various groups of immigrants. Because of this, the melting pot
theory has become synonymous with the process of Americanization.
The melting pot is a single culture metaphor that is used for a particular society becoming more
homogeneous, here different elements are joined together with popular culture; an alternative is
for a homogeneous society to become more heterogeneous through the introduction of foreign
elements with different cultural backgrounds, which has the potential to cause conflict within the
previous culture.
Some marriages between distinctly different tribes and nations occurred in ancient times as a
result of royalty attempting to establish alliances with or control other kingdoms, or to deter
marauders or slave traders. The phonetic written script and the use of coinage were both
introduced into Ancient Greece as a result of these unions. In such ways, the melting pot theory
can be portrayed.
An example of a melting pot is a place where refugees and people from all over the world come
to visit, work, and exchange their thoughts and ideas, resulting in the formation of a single new
community.

BOWL OF SALAD APPROACH:

A salad bowl or tossed salad is a metaphor for the way a multicultural society can integrate
different cultures while maintaining their separate identities, contrasting with a melting pot,
which emphasizes the combination of the parts into a single whole. The salad bowl theory
asserts that it is not necessary for people to give up their cultural heritage in order to be
considered members of the dominant society. In the salad bowl model, different cultures are
brought together—like salad ingredients—but do not form together into a single homogeneous
culture; each culture keeps its own distinct qualities. This idea proposes a society of many
individual cultures, since the latter suggests that ethnic groups may be unable to preserve their
heritage.

New York City can be considered as being a "salad bowl". A European example is its policy for
"integration of non-European nationals", which finances and promotes integration initiatives
targeting those who are not members of the European Union. This project aims to encourage
dialogue in civil society, develop integration models, and spread and highlight the best initiatives
regarding integration.

The salad bowl idea in practice has its supporters and detractors. Supporters argue that being
"American" does not inherently tie a person to a single culture, though rather to citizenship and
loyalty to the United States. Thus, one does not need to abandon their cultural heritage in order
to be considered "American". Critics tend to oppose the idea in tandem with other critiques on
multiculturalism, saying that America needs to have a common culture in order to preserve a
common national identity.

b) ETHNIC IDENTITIES, INTER ETHNIC AND INTER CASTE CONFLICT:

Types of Ethnic Conflicts:

● Intra-ethnic – In this, there is a different ethnic identity within an umbrella ethnic

identity and the movement strives for the perceived separate benefits for its members.
E.g.: Shea-Sunni conflict.
● Inter-ethnic – Ethnic identity of one group is seen as completely different from others.
E.g.: Assamese against migrants.
● Ethnic group Vs State – Ethnic group sees their identity as different from the larger
state E.g.: the Naga movement.
Approaches to studying ethnic inter-relationship:
85
 ● Ethnic relations can be broadly classified under two categories, namely the ‘consensus
approach’ and the ‘conflict approach’.
● Consensus Approach: The society is like the human body, and is a balanced system of
institutions. Each unit or institution in society serves a function in maintaining that
society. The consensus approach is based on Cultural Assimilation.
● Conflict Approach: In contrast to the above-mentioned consensus approach, the conflict
approach views ethnic groups as interest groups, which are in relation to inequality,
competing for common goals which may lead to a total change in the social system.
Organized civic networks:

● Organized civic networks, when inter-communal, not only do a better job of withstanding
the exogenous communal shocks—like partitions, civil wars, and desecration of holy
places; they also constrain local politicians in their strategic behavior. Politicians who
seek to polarize Hindus and Muslims for the sake of electoral advantage can tear at the
fabric of everyday engagement through the organized might of criminals and gangs.
● Organized gangs readily disturbed neighborhood peace, often causing migration from
communally heterogeneous to communally homogenous neighborhoods, as people
moved away in search of physical safety. Without the involvement of organized gangs,
large-scale rioting and tens and hundreds of killings are most unlikely, and without the
protection afforded by politicians, such criminals cannot escape the clutches of law. Brass
has rightly called this arrangement an institutionalized riot system.
Causes For Rise in Ethnic Movements or Ethnic Conflicts:

● Economic factors and regional disparities.

● Relative deprivation.
● Vote bank politics.
● Historical reasons like colonialism.
● Internal colonialism is wherein the dominant community exploits the minority
community.
● External provocations like funding by enemy countries to boost conflicts.
Manifestations Of Ethnic Conflicts in India:

● The challenge posed by ethnic groups in India have taken the form of (i) autonomy
movements, (ii) secessionist movements, (iii) insurgency, and (iv) violent conflicts on the
basis of identity markers such as language, religion, tribe, caste, etc.
 ● In the Northeast region of India, ethnic conflicts have assumed secessionist and insurgent
proportions.
● Another inter-ethnic conflict that has persisted in urban Indian politics is the one between
the locals and the migrants.
● The Self-determination Movements like Khalistan Movement.
Tribal Ethnic Conflicts

● Reactionary Movements – Tries to bring back the old traditions.

● Conservative Movements – Maintain status quo.
● Revolutionary Movements – Bring radical changes in tribal society.
Ethno Nationalism:

● Ethno-nationalism is a kind of sub-nationalism based upon an ethnic identity of the ethnic

groups.
● In short, ethno-nationalism is the nationalism of ethnic groups such as Muslims, Kurds,
Latvians, Tamils, etc., who define their nation in exclusive terms, mainly on the basis of
● common descent, race, culture, history, and language.
Ethnic Cleansing:

● Ethnic cleansing is the most dreaded dimension of ethno-national conflict.

● In this type of ethnic conflict, the indigenous ethnic group launches a genocide and/or
expulsion of the foreigners (those who do not originally belong to that state).
Ethnic Conflicts in India:

● Over the years, from time to time, we have evidenced a great show of violence and
hostility breaking out between ethnic groups. The question arises as to why people who
have co-existed peacefully for decades, suddenly turn hostile towards one another. The
manifest issues are mostly religion and language. We shall examine a few of these issues
and analyze the latent causes behind this violence.
Language Conflict:

● In the 1980s tension and conflict arose over the issue of language. The Government
selected Hindi as the national language to create a national community by joining all the
members of the different ethnic communities. This attempt at ‘unity in diversity’ had an
adverse effect on the Indian population. We have evidences of violence in the South like
Tamil Nadu, where severe riots took place over the Hindi issue.
 ● According to the non-Hindi speakers, the language policy of the government meant an
advantage for the Hindi speakers, who are perceived to dominate the economic
institutions and have political authority.
Case of Assam:

● Riots broke out in Assam in 1972, between the immigrant Bengali Hindus and the
local Assamese population. These conflicts must be viewed within the economic and
political structure of Assam.
● There are three communities that dominate the different sections of the economic sphere
of Assam.
● Bengali Muslims, who are migrants from Bangladesh, who either serve in the tea
gardens or manage their own land;
● Marwari’s, who monopolize trade; and
● Bengali Hindus, who are migrants from West Bengal, and dominate the administrative
services,.
● The Assamese were unable to avail the opportunities as they lacked in skills and contacts
to take up the banking activities of the Marwari’s. Secondly, they lacked the education to
take up administrative jobs. Finally, they were unwilling to work in the estates at low
wages.
● After Independence, the Congress party that came to power in the State then was
dominated by Assamese and there was a growing emergence of an Assamese middle
class. This middle class with its interest in administrative services considered the Bengali
Hindus an obstacle to their economic advancement. These facts materialized in the
growing fear of economic domination amongst the Assamese middle class who wanted to
prevent the growing economic strength of the Bengali Hindus. It resulted in the Assamese
middle class reacting through an assertive regional identity in order to claim their due
share in the economic development.
Religious Conflict:

● The genesis of religious conflicts in India is often attributed to the advent of Muslims to
this country. But this kind of theorization is erroneous, as communalism, as a socio-
political form is a modern phenomenon. Tensions had prevailed between the Hindus and
Muslims prior to the colonial rule, due to the expropriation or dispossession of power of
the Hindus by the Muslims (Malabar). But these tensions were accentuated later with the
British introduction of electoral policy and the imperialist divide-and-rule policy. This
later materialized in the emergence of the Muslim League leading later to the formation
of Pakistan. Let us look at some examples of ethnic conflict based directly on religion.
Common Features of Ethnic Conflicts:
 ● Ethnic conflicts are a consequence of organized communal bodies. For the conflict to
become a public issue, usually the organized bodies, which are backed by political
parties, have to come to the fore. Thus, communal bodies become institutionalized.
● Ethnic conflicts indicate that whatever be the manifest cause - language, region or
religion - the latent cause is not rooted in cultural disparity. Conflicting economic and
political interests form the basis of the latent cause. The tensions generally arise when a
minority group feels deprived of an equal position in either the economic or political
sphere as compared to the majority group, using the primary ties to motivate and activate
their ethnic group against the dominant group.
● The allegiance or the basis of group loyalty depends on the principle of mutual
interest. For instance, during the 1972 Assam riots, the Bengali Muslims, who share
cultural similarities with Bengali Hindus did not side with them, instead, they supported
the Assamese in exchange for not being ousted from their land, by the politically active
Assamese.
Solutions to the Problem of Ethnic Conflicts:

● A coherent and effective response to ethnic conflicts has to keep in mind, the common
as well as the unique factors, which account for clashes between groups of people. Some
insist that so long as economic inequalities exist, such clashes are bound to persist.
Since it is not easy to end economic disparities between people, ethnic conflicts will also
not be easy to stop.
● Before looking at the long-term solutions to these problems, certain immediate steps can
be taken. The first step towards the sustenance of communal harmony is to identify the
causes that flare up riots. These are:
● Rumors
● suspicion against the other community
● Building up sectarian feelings amongst people by religious heads, local political parties,
and self-styled leaders.
● To overcome these, it is important to induce encouragement in people to widen their
perspectives, to keep an open mind, and to be tolerant towards others. This can be
achieved by encouraging the members of the different communities to have a dialogue,
with each other. This would help in understanding the other community and also reflect
their own limitations and the possibility of overcoming them.
● People favoring these measures also insist that cross-cultural participation must be
more frequent, especially during festivities and ceremonies. The people in the riot-prone
areas must be made to understand not to give ear to rumors unless it is followed with
evidence. Because of the absence of direct communications, politicians, self-styled
 leaders and miscreants circulate rumors, which cannot be verified. This aggravates
tensions.

REASONS FOR INTER CASTE CLASHES IN INDIA :

Caste conflict refers to conflict between two castes or group of castes on specific issues. In
general it is side effect of the problem of casteism. Apart from casteism caste conflict arises
when,

1. One caste attempts to dominate over others,

2. When higher castes exploit the lower castes,
3. When castes perceive other castes as barriers in there mobility and in achieving political
power, and
4. When caste find that they are not able to share in the new economic opportunities or
acquire symbols of high status.
Sociologists like A. Battelle, M.N.Srinivas, A.R.Desai, and Edmund Leach look into caste
conflict as lower caste attempt for social mobility. Conflict is the foundation to social change.
The reason for conflict is desire for space in social life by a group of people which is challenged
by another group. Though caste conflicts found more in the rural areas but they take place in
urban areas as well A number of caste violence cases were recently reported in the urban
localities in Gujarat and Maharashtra. Caste violence occurred mostly in the rural areas of Bihar,
Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, and Bengal Some politically motivated caste conflicts have been reported
from Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh.

Causes of Caste conflicts

1. Dominance of one caste over others

2. Exploitation of lower castes by upper castes
3. Barriers in mobility and achieving political power
4. Competition for economic opportunities and acquiring symbols of high status.
5. Dominance of one caste over others: The analysis of the exploitation of castes by the
locally dominant caste is crucial to the understanding of caste conflicts in rural areas in
India. Occasionally, a caste is dominant in a group of neighboring villages, if not in the
district or the region. According to M.N. Srinivas a caste is ‘dominant’ when it
preponderates numerically over the other castes, when it also wields preponderant
economic and political power, and when it enjoys a high ritual status in the local caste
hierarchy. The number of educated persons and the nature of high occupations people in
the caste are also two important elements of dominance. When a caste enjoys all the
elements of dominance, it may be said to be dominant in a decisive way. But decisive
dominance is not common. The different elements of dominance are distributed among
the castes in a village. Thus, a caste which is ritually high may be poor and lacking
strength in numbers, while a numerically populous caste may be poor and ritually low.
 When a caste enjoys one form of dominance, it is frequently able to acquire the other
forms as well in course of time.
However, this does not apply to untouchable castes. The castes whose members are landless
laborers, tenants, or very small landowners are many a time exploited by the dominant castes.
Sometimes the untouchables also decide to give up performing services such as removing the
dead animals from the houses of the higher castes, beating drums at the festivals of village
deities, and removing the leaf-plates on which the high castes had dined during festivals and
weddings. The upper caste people become annoyed and beat up the untouchables and set fire to
their huts. The attempt to dominate and resistance to dominance, thus, lead to caste conflicts.

● Exploitation of lower castes by higher castes The attitude of the upper castes has
always been to consolidate and maintain their high social status. The intermediate and
lower castes feel deprived and exploited It is thus this attempt of ‘assertion’ of high caste
people which creates caste conflicts. The best examples of these caste conflicts due to
exploitation, economic grievances and deprivation are found in Bihar. Brahmins,
Bhumihars, Rajputs and Kayasht has have always been in conflict with upper backwards
like Yadavs, Kurmis and Koreas, and lower backwards like Dhanuk, Lumbar, Lohar,
Telli, Kahar, etc. Many caste carnages had taken place in Bihar out of rivalry. The most
brutal massacres in the last fifteen years were; February 1992 massacre in Bara village,
40 kilometers from Gaya in which forty-four upper caste Bhumihars persons of Savanna
Liberation Front were killed by1,500 backward caste MCC raiders. December 23,
1991carnage in which ten low caste members and supporters of Maoist Communist
Centre were killed by the upper caste SLF. Eight Harijans were burnt alive by the Kurmis
(rich landlords) in Belchi in May 1977; and in 1978 several landless agricultural laborers
were burnt alive by the Kurmis in Bishrampur. There is long list of such massacres.The
growing escalation of caste-class tensions in Bihar’s countryside is the result of
emergence of private senas on caste-class basis.
Some people describe these killings in Bihar in terms of agrarian unrest rather than caste
conflicts. But the evidence does not prove so since the upper caste persons killed mostly the
middle class peasants who on an average have only five big has of land The upper castes are
least interested in land reforms. They even sabotage schemes like the Jawahar Rozgar Yojana
which aims at helping the poorer sections. They also try to grab the funds meant for distribution
among the poor low caste people. There are upper caste landlords who own up to1, 000 acres of
land. The Minimum Wages Act has also been reduced to a farce. Serfdom continues as a well-
established practice in most regions of Bihar. Thousands of bonded labors continue to be
exploited and are forced to lead miserable lives. The efforts of some voluntary organizations are
sabotaged by the upper caste lords in collusion with the administrative officers.

The above description shows, that the exploitation of the backward castes by the upper castes,
the refusal of the backward castes to render any unpaid labor and sell their products at reduced
rates to landlords and money lenders, the demands of the lower castes for occupancy rights over
their land, stoppage of menial services and payment of nazrana, etc., lead to violent reactions on
the part of landlords and moneylenders mostly belonging to upper castes and result in caste riots.
The reprisals taken by the landlords against the lower and backward castes are: to deprive them
of their lands and to turn them out of their houses on the ground that the houses belonged to the
landlords; refused to allow their cattle to use the ordinary grazing ground and to take water at the
ordinary drinking tanks; and complete social boycott (Jha). In these caste conflicts, the backward
casts and Harijans have moved towards the MCC and the forward castes towards the SLF.

● Barriers in mobility and achieving political power : According to M.N. Srinivas

mobility of individual castes in local caste hierarchy has always been possible. The potent
sources of mobility are: the process of sanskritisation, gaining access to some source of
wealth, appealing to census officers to change the status of assets in the decennial census,
and mobilizing caste groups by forming caste associations. Not only the members of the
higher castes achieved political power as the Marathas, Reddis, Nair’s, Coorgs in South
India claimed, Kshatriyas status through ownership of land but even tribes and
intermediate and low caste people too, became politically powerful and claimed
Kshatriya status. For example, Yadavs Kurmis and Koeries in Bihar, Patidars in Gujarat,
and Pala in West Bengal and Bhumij and Munda tribes in east India established their
claims to be Kshatriyas.
According to Srinivas, many low and backward castes concentrated on acquiring the symbols of
high status that is, possession of political power, education, and a share in the new economic
opportunities. The high castes resented the appropriation of the symbols of high rank by the low
castes. They could no longer rely on the political authority to punish those who dared to
appropriate those symbols. They thought they had the ‘moral authority’ of physically punishing
and ostracizing the low caste people attempting such appropriation. The newly established
institution of decennial census in 1901came to the aid of ambitious low castes. They thought that
by claiming the high caste status in the records of census reports, no one would dispute their
rank.

There was a widespread move among castes to assume new and high sounding Sanskrit names.
Mythology, traditions and particular customs were also cited in support of the claim to high rank.
All this led in caste conflicts, because though initially the aims of low castes were to inform caste
customs and claim a high rank but after independence, these castes became political pressure
groups demanding electoral tickets, minister ship in the cabinets, jobs in administration. Caste
conflicts in Gujarat, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh and in many states in
1970s, 1980s and 1990s were the result of these claims.

In short, the mobility course attempted by the low and backward castes as a means to get rid of
social and economic oppression and to as obtain their legitimate rights, has always been resisted
by the upper castes to protect their own vested interests. This resistance attempt on the part of the
upper castes and mobility movement on the part of the lower castes leads to conflicts between
them.

● Competition for economic opportunities and acquiring symbols of high

status: Though the status of each caste is fixed in the caste hierarchy but in the absence
of clear-cut hierarchy, vagueness characterizes the position of many castes. In
independent India, competition between different castes seems to be the normal situation.
With the passing of political power to the people, castes have become pressure groups
and are competing for power and using power to benefit caste fellows. This tendency has
 increased caste conflicts in the country. Sometimes the desire for successfully competing
with other castes compels small segments to unite and form a single caste category. As
Andre Battelle has pointed out, “Competition for power and office requires a certain
aggregation of segment as individually they cannot compete in the struggle for power.”
When they come together, they are regarded as powerful castes. The example of Kolis in
Gujarat and Yadavas in North India provide an instance of coming together and forming
a single caste category in order to strengthen their political power.
What is important to remember in caste conflicts is that although numerical strength is an
important basis of power for a caste but what is more important is organization. In this regard,
people with some social and economic standing in the caste play a crucial role. Small tenants and
landless laborers have very little power. Far from being able to maneuver for benefits and
privileges, they are not even able to get what they are entitled by law (Andre Battelle). Such
people are sometimes lured by revolutionary organizations to join them and fight for their rights
and status. Caste carnages in states like Bihar and Andhra Pradesh are the result of such efforts.

C) NAXALISM AND TERRORISM AS MAJOR THREAT TO NATIONAL

INTEGRITY:

The term Naxal comes from the village Naxalbari in West Bengal where the Naxalbari uprising
of 1967 occurred. People who are engaged in the insurgency are called Naxals or Naxalite. The
movement itself is referred to as Naxalism. The Naxalite group mainly consists of the Guevarist
armed cadres of the Communist Party of India (Maoist). These areas span parts of Andhra
Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Telangana and
West Bengal.

CAUSES OF NAXALISM IN INDIA :

Tribal discontent:

The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 deprives tribal’s, who depend on forest produce for their
living, from even cutting a bark.

Massive displacement of tribal population in the naxalism-affected states due to development

projects, mining operations and other reasons. Easy Target for Maoists: Such people who do not
have any source of living are taken into naxalism by Maoists. Maoists provide arms and
ammunitions and money to such people. Gaps in the socio-economic system of the country.
Government measuring its success on the basis of number of violent attacks rather than the
development done in the naxal-affected areas. Absence of strong technical intelligence to fight
with naxalites. Infrastructural problems, for instance, some villages are not yet connected
properly with any communication network. No Follow-Up from administration: It is seen that
even after police takes hold of a region, administration fails to provide essential services to the
people of that region. Confusion over tackling naxalism as a social issue or as a security threat.
State governments considering naxalism as the central government’s issue and thus are not
taking any initiatives to fight it.
TERRORISM AS MAJOR THREAT TO NATIONAL INTEGRITY: Terrorism poses a
great threat to national unity and integration. The main objective of terrorism is to create a
climate of extreme fear psychosis and thus, it undermines the confidence of people in the
political system and the government. Violence is a means to achieve the goal of destabilizing the
nation by infusing a spectra of fear in the minds of common people.

The reasons for the growth of terrorism are historical, political, economical and religious. Bomb-
blasting, arsons, hijacking, abduction, killing, maiming etc. are some of the means to destabilize
the country. State-sponsored terrorism is the ugliest manifestations of it pointed to disturb the
unity and stability of other nations.

D) PROBLEMS OF SENIOR CITIZENS AND PEOPLE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS:

● Ageism and a lost sense of purpose- A person’s mobility and dexterity will naturally
decline as they age, which makes completing everyday tasks more difficult. This
gradually makes people to care for themselves and prevents them from being social,
pursuing interests,
● Financial insecurity- While we are living longer, unfortunately, the world of
employment and retirement has not evolved at the same pace. Many elderly people are
able and more than willing to work past the standard retirement age, but the opportunities
are not there. In addition, managing day to day finances and planning for later life can be
challenging for older generations as much is now done online or remotely. This can also
leave them more vulnerable to fraud and scams.
● Difficulty with everyday tasks and mobility- A person’s mobility and dexterity will
naturally decline as they age, which makes completing everyday tasks more difficult.
This can gradually cause people to care for themselves and prevents them from being
social, pursuing interests, or taking part in activities they enjoy. More support is needed
to enable elderly people not only to live independently through products and programs
which focus on safety, balance, fitness, and mobility but also to ensure they can continue
to thrive as an individual.
● Finding the right care provision-When complete independence is no longer practical,
many elderly people require additional care. Sometimes this care can be provided by
family members, but this can place a lot of strain on the caregiver in terms of balancing
this with work and other family responsibilities. These caregivers need to be given the
training, resources, and emotional support necessary to help them deliver the best care
for their loved ones and themselves.In some cases, it is more appropriate for a
professional caregiver to be employed on a regular basis, e.g., when there are complex
medical conditions and/or physical disabilities. With a comprehensive elder care service,
the elderly person is able to remain in their own home.
● Access to healthcare services- Healthcare can be complicated and disjointed for elderly
people, especially for those struggling with long-term conditions. The care requires lots
of different medical professionals and clinics to coordinate delivery of medication and
 other types of care.
THREATS TO PEOPLE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS: People with disabilities also
experience transportation barriers. According to 2017-2021 data from the American
Community Survey, the disability rate is 14.8% in rural communities, which is higher
than the disability rate in metropolitan areas. People with disabilities living in rural
communities often face challenges accessing and using various modes of transportation,
which can impact health and quality of life. People with disabilities in rural areas
perceive healthcare, businesses, and other types of services as less accessible compared
to their urban counterparts, and may need additional support to access transportation both
within and around their community. Many healthcare facilities and services in rural areas
may not be accessible for people with certain types of mobility-related disabilities.
Transportation programs will need to consider specific accessibility modifications to
accommodate the needs of different populations, such as installing wheelchair lifts and
ramps, and using accessible vehicles. Rural communities may lack adequate sidewalks
and paved roads, which can be a challenge for accessibility. Limited public
transportation options create another challenge. In addition, people with disabilities in
rural areas may lack information about different transportation options available to them.
Transportation programs will need to consider how to best implement appropriate
accessibility requirements as well as disseminate information about these programs for
different populations.

E) PORVERTY AS A SOCIAL ISSUE - It can be defined poverty as the condition where

the basic needs of a family, like food, shelter, clothing, and education are not fulfilled. It can
lead to other problems like poor literacy, unemployment, malnutrition, etc. A poor person is not
able to get education due to lack of money and therefore remains unemployed. An unemployed
person is not able to buy enough & nutritious food for his family and their health decline. A
weak person lacks the energy required for the job. A jobless person remains poor only. Thus we
can say that poverty is the root cause of other problems.

CAUSES OF PORVERTY:

There are various causes of poverty but the most important is population. Rising population is
putting the burden on the resources & budget of countries. Governments are finding difficult to
provide food, shelter & employment to the rising population.

The other causes are- lack of education, war, natural disaster, lack of employment, lack of
infrastructure, political instability, etc. For instance- lack of employment opportunities makes a
person jobless & he is not able to earn enough to fulfill the basic necessities of his family &
becomes poor. Lack of education compels a person for less paying jobs & it makes him poorer.
Lack of infrastructure means there are no industries, banks, etc. in a country resulting in lack of
employment opportunities. Natural disasters like flood, earthquake also contributes to poverty.

In some countries, especially African countries like Somalia, a long period of civil war has made
poverty widespread. This is because all the resources & money is being spent in war instead of
public welfare. Countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc. are prone to natural disasters like
cyclone, etc. These disasters occur every year causing poverty to rise.

Effects of Poverty
Poverty affects the life of a poor family. A poor person is not able to take proper food & nutrition
&his capacity to work reduces. Reduced capacity to work further reduces his income, making
him poorer. Children from poor family never get proper schooling & proper nutrition. They have
to work to support their family & this destroys their childhood. Some of them may also involve
in crimes like theft, murder, robbery, etc. A poor person remains uneducated & is forced to live
under unhygienic conditions in slums. There are no proper sanitation & drinking water facility in
slums & he falls ill often & his health deteriorates. A poor person generally dies an early death.

So, all social evils are related to poverty . Therefore, poverty can be stated as a major social
problem in the society.