Love & Conversion

Ghulam Mohammed, a 65-year-old orchard-keeper, was brutally murdered last week in Bulandshahr. His crime: his nephew ran away with a Hindu woman from the neighbourhood. Now reverse the situation: had Ghulam Mohammed바카라�s niece run away with a Hindu man would he have met with a similar fate? Absolutely not. Communal politics, hatred and othering apart, the issue of revenge and honour killing over a woman is all about the ownership of a woman바카라�s soul and body. The contest really is between the woman바카라�s family and a new, 바카라�illegitimate바카라� claimant, who doesn바카라�t have the sanction of the woman바카라�s original owners, primarily her father and her male siblings and then the rest of the extended male family, to get a title transfer done.

So, even if she elopes with a perfectly 바카라�eligible바카라� person from her caste and religion, the contest does occur because of lack of sanction. Her family would still be 바카라�ashamed바카라� of the woman seeking a partner on her own and exercising rights over her body by possibly indulging in pre-marital sex. So, crimes over inter-caste, inter-­religious marriages need to be classified as crimes of pat­riarchy first, rather than as instances of caste or religious violence. This is not to argue that caste oppression and communal hatred do not play a big role in dominant groups violently hurting a vulnerable community. This is just to join the dots between the Tirupur tragedy of a Dalit boy and the Bulandshahr brutality against a Muslim man.

In fact, while unleashing violence over a woman바카라�s soul, religion plays a huge role. The woman is often forced to convert to the man바카라�s religion for the family to accept her as a bride. Just as women are expected to change their surnames, they are forced to drop a god for another. And this tragedy gets exacerb­ated in situations where a competing religion expects followers to eschew all other beliefs as inferior and evil. The more fanatic the man바카라�s religious order, the greater the subjugation of the woman. Sure, there are instances of even the man having to convert to the woman바카라�s religion, but those are rare instances of the woman바카라�s family wielding greater resources, often with feudal trappings.

The term 바카라�love jehad바카라� originated in 바카라�progressive바카라� Kerala, of all places, and was coined probably by someone in the Christian clergy or among Church-going parents against Muslim boys getting their daughters converted. There is really no need for a person to convert from one바카라�s religion to get married. If love is the bond, where does religion come in? If religion is more important than love, then why get involved with a person of some other religion? Conversion is actually hiding the real debate over inter-religious marriages. Patriarchy in all its terrible aspects will get manifested only when we blow away the clouds of conversion.

Let all inter-religious marriages be done under the Special Marriages Act and let the State protect couples from their own families. After all, is not the State suppo­sed to protect our life and property? Why just inter-religious marriages, any union that violates our moth-eaten mores ought to be done under a liberal version of the Special Marriages Act (right now it is so cumbersome that I have been living in sin for the last 21 years with a Catholic, who continues to retain her surname, though excommunicated for similar patriarchal reasons). It is natural for a nation, long colonised, to have deep insecurities about itself and its belief systems. While coming out of these insecurities we need to ensure that we don바카라�t turn against ourselves, our women. Let us keep patriarchy out of the wedlock.