9 Family/Community as a Site of Violence

Poulomi Ghosh

Introduction

The United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women (UN General Assembly 1993) defines violence against women as “any act of gender based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivations of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life”. Women experience violence across a wide continuum: in private, public, and virtual domains- from strangers, familial people, intimate people, etc. Current research and factual data have shown that different types of abuse and violence takes place within the family but at the societal level, family is still considered to be a private domain which falls outside the bounds of legal observations and sanctions. A recent study by the World Health Organization (WHO) reports that family violence cuts across almost all countries in the world. In India, the Indian National Family and Health Survey officially recorded data pointing to the existence of domestic violence, from different states. The new bill for the prevention of domestic violence was passed in India after a lot of struggles and efforts. Though commendable, these efforts are hard to implement because of the „culture of silence‟ that shrouds gender relations within the family. It then becomes very important to look into the socio-cultural factors and reasons that are enmeshed with such issues.

The traditional norms of Indian society, being largely patriarchal in nature tend to condone and shelter the existence of such gender based violence which are not only engraved in individual socialization but also they get embedded in the structural formations and institutions of society. There is an escalating need to study and examine these societal constructs which lead to such behavior in order to have more informed and action oriented policy directives which could be formulated and implemented to counter-act family violence. Research needs to focus, among other things, on clearing the myths and ideas surrounding family roles, gender hierarchies, their relation with the larger world and the manipulation of material and rights that take place through them.

Among all social institutions, family enjoys a unique and special place in the social imagination of people, as an ideal unit. It is seen to have the most crucial and more importantly the most private of existence. Thus any scrutiny into the sacrosanct space of family is often met with resistance and doubt. The view of family as a site of power contestation, domination or subjugation is met with adversity and is wrought with tugs amongst religious discourses, individual identity versus community identity, etc.

In India, an individual‟s identity is subsumed under and reflected by his or her family and community, which is further enveloped in caste, religion, cultural and other such affiliations. The institution of family continues to be the primary site for gender relations and family and kinship ties play crucial role in establishing such relations and also the rules and norms for power hierarchies and resource allocation. Kinship, which is one of the most important factors for organizing social relations, also becomes the basis for organizing economic, cultural, as well as sexual and reproductive practices. Marriage and family, in India, are seen more of in collective interest rather than individual interests or desires. These institutions are underlined with values like „honor‟, „shame‟, „respect‟, „sacrifice‟, and „placing family before everything else‟. All these values are geared towards making family the representative of the larger community and hitherto putting all its actions under the scrutiny of whichever community it belongs to. This sense of collective honor and shame leads to violence in the face of any transgressions that might occur, which put at risk the honor or status of a particular community. Furthermore, these acts of violence are usually meted out towards women as the notion of honor in the Indian patrilineal structure is closely tied to the chasteness and movements of the women of the family or community. The patrilineal fact of controlling women‟s sexuality leads to violent lash-back towards any kind of transgression by women, such as going against caste and community lines for marriage, or within the family- for not adhering to norms set down by the male members.

According to Dube (1988), gender roles are conceived, enacted, and learnt through a complex system of relationships which is embedded in the family structure and wider context of kinship. The family structure performs two very important functions-one, it reflects the rule of recruitment and marital residence and in what way one generation replaces the next; two, its configuration of role relationships which decided allotment of resources, sex based division of labor, and socializing children for future roles. In India, the family structures and patterns of kinship are largely also tied to the institution of caste. The membership of caste groups is determined by birth and has a strong component of boundary maintenance, the onus of which falls on women because of their role in biological reproduction. The patrilineal set up condones certain acts of violence which are meant to be preventive measures against women taking control of their own sexuality which could lead to the disruption this system of material and resource allocation. Acts of violence like female feticide, dowry deaths, domestic abuse, rape, etc work and sustain themselves under the patriarchal banner which permeates community and family life and is also internalized by men and women at an individual level which in turn leads to such values and ideology permeate into state machinery and legal institutions and their policies.

According to Kumari (2009), the process of globalization sweeping throughout the globe is imposing another set of complications and contradictions on this notion of family and community. The new meanings of family and community are increasingly being dictated by market forces and this has both positive and negative outcomes. On the one hand, this has lead to greater freedom and democratization in the sense that in order to have better standards of living, women have been educated and allowed a modicum of autonomy in order to move and work freely. This modernity has allowed for policy intervention for the purposes of women empowerment, economic and political power for women, legal reforms, etc. On the other hand, women seem to lack control over their resources and earnings and suffer from discrimination and violence.

In Kumari‟s view, even though women have entered the public arena of formal work and labor, their private arena of family values and violence is a strictly guarded private arena from which they cannot cut away. She mentions in her article that studies indicate that one of the definite fallouts of globalization and marketization has been an increase in the rates of domestic violence on women. The nature of arranging marriages have changed from being based on the physical attributes of the bride and the economic standing of the groom to the intellectual and earning potential of the bride and the economic potential of the groom. Numerous marriage bureaus help in selecting and deciding marriages based on such criteria within a dominating larger criterion of religion, caste and sub-caste. One of the major influences of globalization has been the over-exposure to worldly pleasures and luxury items which form the essential items of dowry. The practice of dowry and consequent dowry related violence causing death was one of the reasons why the conjunction of family and violence came to the forefront. In addition to all the traditional criteria of physical attributes, religion, caste, etc women and girls now have to deal with the additional criteria of being educated, worldly and working. At the same time globalization is causing dowry demands to grow, due to the want for new and better resources available in the market. The records of the National Crimes record Bureau shows that dowry deaths and incidents of torture by husbands has increased by 10% between the years 1998-2003 (Kumari, 2009). In the following segments, this paper will follow the logic of shame/honor and how it underlines violence in families and the ways in which they are acted out.

PATRIARCHY, SON_PREFERENCE, “IZZAT” OR HONOR- REASONS FOR VIOLENCE

For Patricia Uberoi, the family is often a site for exploitation and violence but even academics sometimes tend to overlook this fact. This is probably because family is deemed as a cultural ideal and focal point of identity. The matter is compounded by the surrounding environment which limits interaction between the professional academic and the private sphere of the family, thus rendering it inviolable. Further complications arise from the notion of „izzat‟ or honor that the family holds which enables a culture of silence and exploitation to flourish within the family system and at the same time is unavailable for questioning from outsiders. This notion of honor propagates violence as well as inhibits women from seeking help against violence. The honor of a family or community is embodied and represented by the women of that family or group. It is embodies in the sense that, women‟s bodies are seen to be as property of their family and as a body to be protected from violation from outside. This makes it imperative for families and communities to lay down strict rules for the purposes of controlling women‟s sexuality as a preventive measure to the threat on their honor. Women have to adhere to strict rules regarding mobility, interaction, marriage, etc. it is regarded as the moral responsibility of the woman or girl to uphold the honor of her family and any transgression or even perceived transgression can lead to violent outbursts from the family and the larger community.

Kandiyoti (1998) describes classic patriarchy as a system where girls are given away in marriage to a household which is headed by their husband‟s father and here they were subordinate not only to the men but also to the more senior women. This patriarchal system shapes gender relations in which include construction of masculinity and femininity for men and women to adhere to and be socialized into. Numerous attributes are prescribes not only for women but also for men which are tied directly to their feminine and masculine social identities. Women, historically having being viewed as caretakers of children and the household, fulfilling the roles of daughter, wives and mothers are expected to be passive, non-expressive about their sexuality, meek, obedient, etc. Men on the other hand, seen as protectors and bread earners have to be controlling, strong- physically and emotionally, etc. These norms are enforced and reinforced through media and popular culture, state and religious institutions. In both public and private spheres, men are charged with the responsibility of upholding their honor, family‟s honor and that of the larger community‟s. This notion of honor is strongly connected to the notions of masculinity and femininity and is maintained by adhering to social rules/norms regarding the same. Transgressing these norms is seen as detrimental to not only the individual but also tarnishes the reputation of the family and possibly the community to which they belong. There is a pervasive understanding that honor is embodied by the woman but in India, the personal honor of a man is tied to that of the women in his household and family. Hence, patriarchy provides certain incentivized methods of protecting honor like restricting women‟s mobility, seclusion or „purdah‟ to limit interaction, and violence. Honor based killings are defined by the Human Rights watch as “acts of vengeance, usually death, committed by male family members against female family members, who are held to have brought dishonor upon the family”.

As patriarchy places a much higher value on males, as they are seen as the heirs and it is through them that a lineage is forwarded- it ideologically condones the practice of son-preference. Women in this system are seen as being temporary members of their natal families as they have to move to their husband‟s house after marriage. Thus they are excluded from inheriting land which is a key clan asset. Their temporary membership to the natal family causes their lack of value and the existence of the practice of dowry further lowers their desirability in a household.

Dowry is seen as a drain of wealth that is caused by daughters for which reason their birth is seen as a burden and thus leads to and leads to violence in terms of sex selection in favor of sons during conception. It also leads to large number of female infanticides and abandonment, in order to free oneself from the burden of building a dowry and bringing up a daughter who has the potential to bring about loss of face and honor in society in contrast to sons who are protectors and will continue the lineage. Financial support during the course of life of the parents, especially in old age is expected from sons as they continue to reside with their parents and also the expectation of spending time with grand children form some of the personal reasons for preferring sons over daughters. While culture cannot be directly blamed for practice of violence, it does shape and mediate how abuse and violence take place in different groups in different times.

The process of socialization in India actively reinforces the values that justify and strengthen existing power relations in the social system. A high premium s placed on conformity, dependence and inhibited self-identity. The dominant image of women that is circulated in media is that of a mother and wife and these representations are meant to create a sense of inadequacy in women and consequently a need to internalize these roles into their own behavior. This is an effective method of controlling women by shaping their perceptions about life and setting values and norms that women themselves have no handing in formulating.

Surveys and studies show that women validate and rationalize acts of violence against them within their families as they see them as acts which are to be expected and not socially deviant. Thus they accept and tolerate such acts of violence within their families which shows how big role socialization plays in the lives of both men and women, for them to not only internalize such acts but also validate them. The moulds that are created- of loving mothers and obedient wives-create oppressive structures and circumstances which limit the way women think and grow and also limit their opportunities as free citizens. On the other hand, boys are trained to be aggressive, competitive, and controlling so that their glorified role of a bread-winner can be achieved by them. The shroud of silence that is worn by women is powerfully institutionalized throughout our society. Through idioms of lost izzat, public disgrace, shame and dishonor, women are kept silent about their subjugation. Even in professional counseling, women are asked to focus on keeping the marriage intact rather than breaking away and think about ways of coping, understanding, and adjusting rather than changing the way things are. This is an effect of the patriarchal nature of our society and state and thereby their reform institutions as well.

To understand the nature of violence in India, it is also important to understand the status of women in the structure of material production. There is a need to question the extent to which the institution of family is responsible for creating and maintaining structures and ideologies of subordination and silence, structures that limit the participation of women in decision-making, and help in maintaining existing hierarchies of power relations. According to Kelkar (1985), violence runs along the lines of power in the sex/gender system and the family as the primary institution with its division of labor by sex, underlies the sex/gender system. Thus studying family authority relations is an important means in making visible violence that is organized around it. The subordinate role of women in the family is duplicated in the larger society which can be seen in lower wages, sexual harassment at the work place, poor healthcare and educational facilities to women, etc, which have been justified by the assumption that since men are main bread winners and head the family, women‟s employment opportunities and their concerns are not as important as that of men‟s.

Following are the types of gendered violence that are associated with the family, i.e., these acts of violence may happen within the family and larger community to which it belongs because of son-preference, transgression of caste and community lines, transgressing the norms of the household, and acts of violence arising from a sheer position of dominance.

FEMALE FOETICIDE/FEMALE INFANTICIDE:

Feticide is the practice through which the sex of the fetus is determined with the help of ultrasounds, in-vitro testing, scans etc and then the fetus is killed through the process of abortion. Female feticide then is the practice through which the fetus is aborted once it is determined that the sex of the fetus is female. It is also called sex-selective abortion.

According to the results of the 2001 census, the deficit of young girls compared to young boys, especially being pronounced in the states of Punjab, Haryana, and western areas of Uttar Pradesh. The practice of female infanticide which was rampant during the colonial times was presumed to have died out with the prevalence of social reforms aimed at empowering women. With the advent of new reproductive technologies like amniocentesis and ultrasound which van used to determine the sex of the unborn fetus, it is sex-selective abortion that is gaining ground, i.e. female feticide. The simplicity of the tests and the ease of their availability, along with prevalence of son-preference made female specific abortions very popular. India pioneered in legalizing induced abortion under the medical termination of pregnancy act 1971, which specifies the reasons under which abortion may be performed. One of the stipulations under the act is that abortions not performed by trained doctors in facilities registered for performing abortions are deemed illegal. At the same time, the limited number of facilities and lack of access to them by people lead them to seek illegal facilities which put them at risk. The increasing number of female feticides led to the passing of another act- the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques Act of 1994 which denied individual practitioners, clinics or centers to conduct tests to determine the sex of the fetus or inform couples about it. Even with these measures and monitoring, in many places this act has been violated because of the need created in the market by the underlying desire of sons by majority of people.

The state propagated family planning method of two children and a small family has been widely accepted but it also leads to the unintended propagation of female feticide as most families want at least one son if not two. In case the first child is a girl, then most families opt for sex-selective abortion to better their chances of having a son. In states like Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh, which are economically prosperous, the prevalence of female feticide is remarkably unprogressive. According to Bose (2007), the main reasons seem to be: (1) easy access to medical facilities such as ultrasounds and abortion facilities: (2) no lack of money to pay for these tests and abortions; (3) good infrastructure like roads which cut down cost and time in travel. Causes that contribute this abhorrent practice are the fear of dowry but families who are rich and can afford to pay dowries also partake in these practices and that, according to Bose is largely due to the high esteem and social status that is awarded to families with sons. One of the causes could also be that sons lack restrictions in mobility and can migrate in search for better opportunities and jobs which are of value to their family. Globalization which has lead to mobility in terms of labor has added on to this phenomenon and become one more reason to continue this practice. The practice I supported by: the demographic composition of the household and also marriage and gift-giving practices that make girls sexual, social and economic burden. According to Patel (2007), the ability or inability to reproduce has cultural meanings. Sonography provides people with the ability or at least the potential for desirable biological outcome thereby reducing the difference between desirable and actual outcomes. Societal pressures and the process of socialization lead to women understanding their ideal a being mothers- more importantly being mothers to sons if they want to rise in social stature. This combined with their lack in decision making in the sphere of family planning makes them susceptible to agreeing to such practices and even perpetuating them.

DOWRY RELATED VIOLENCE:

In the 1950‟s, dowry was seen as the problem of giving expensive weddings and unreasonable demands that prevented many middle-class families from finding suitable grooms for their daughters. In addition to the demands made before or during the wedding, there were often periodic demands of more money and items. The failure of the bride‟s natal family to meet these demands often led to the harassment of the bride by her husband and in-laws and sometimes even death, which were termed as dowry murders and were usually committed by burning young women in the house. The dowry prevention Act passed in 1961 did not do much to curb these incidences because according to the law, the families that gave dowry were as guilty as the family who demanded them and thus no complaints were registered for a long time. Consequently women‟s groups started focusing on these dowry deaths more actively and started calling them forced suicides and murders. In the year 1979 there were 358 cases of women‟s deaths by „accidental‟ burning. These numbers kept on increasing and in 1982, Saheli a small-scale women‟s centre was opened to provide counsel and shelter to endangered women. Increasing numbers of dowry deaths led to the amendment of the dowry legislation (passed in 1986) but it still did not curb the practice. The dowry deaths bought about a decade of great legislation but unfortunately for its implementation, the state depended on men whose view of women and their place had not changed. Eventually the fact of violence against women in the form of dowry related deaths and harassment was mixed with issues of communalism and thus side-tracked. Dowry related deaths occur for a multitude of reasons. One of them being, the apparent subservient nature of the bride‟s natal family in relation to the marital family because women being devalued causes the grooms family to be on higher ground. The fear of losing face or „izzat‟ in the community lead to most families of the bride paying the dowry demands so that their daughter would not be returned to them in disgrace. Even with all the legislative change that was brought about by the agitations of various women‟s groups, the practice of dowry and related violence still continues. In connecting dowry deaths to greed for dowry, the state names dowry as the main culprit rather than addressing the subjugation and devaluation of women. a belief that simply eradicating dowry will lead to drastic improvement in women‟s lives is to ignore the prevalence of other kinds of violence against women like sexual harassment, female feticide, forced marriage, etc which all have the same underlying current of female subjugation.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE:

Violence is often used as a tool to socialize family members into behaving according to prescribed norms and rules, and in India, within an overall perspective of male dominance and control. The family and its operational unit- the household are sites where oppression and deprivation of individual rights are a part of a structure of consent and obedience. Physical violence as well as other forms of aggression is used to ensure obedience, mostly from in-marrying women and children. The term domestic violence is preferred over the term family violence because the former situates violence within the physical location of home or the house. Domestic violence can be differential treatment of family members depending on their sex which can lead to physical impairment or emotional trauma- like inadequate nutrition to girls in relation to boys, sexual abuse, wife-beating or intimate partner violence, even dowry related abuse, etc. Domestic violence entails the following:

• Physical violence including slapping, kicking, beating, hitting, pushing, choking, burning, and threatening, and assault with a weapon.
• Sexual violence including sexual coercion, sexual harassment, and rape;
• Psychological abuse including demeaning, insulting, threatening, isolating and abandoning behavior;
• Financial abuse including deprivation of material goods, control of money and control of assets.

There are different forms of domestic violence that can exist:

1. Intimate Terrorism- this form is almost entirely male perpetrated and is found in studies of women experiencing long term abuse and harassment from their husbands.
2. Violent resistance: form of violence that some victims of intimate terrorism use to resist their partner‟s control.
3. Situational couple violence: it does not come from a partner‟s need to enforce control over the other but rather arise from certain circumstances or situations which give rise to tension and conflict.

Wife beating is the most common form of abuse worldwide, irrespective of class, community, and religion and even caste background. It has been argued that it is not only a woman‟s dependence which makes her susceptible to violence but even working women are subjected to domestic violence. One important characteristic of intimate partner violence or domestic abuse is that a lot of women do not report it or even acknowledge it as abuse. The occasional slap or rebuke is taken as a part of being a woman and it is only when the abuse is extremely violent or deathly that women seek help. There is a wide-spread tolerance for wife-beating and some reasons are also considered justifiable- like, disobedience, neglect of household duties, etc. myths surrounding wife-beating like it only takes place amongst lower classes and backward classes, etc were broken when delhi based organization Saheli came out with its findings that wife-beating was common to all social classes. The difference was in the pattern of violence that was followed in the different classes. For example, the beating of a woman in slum was witnessed by all dwellers, whereas the beating of a middle-class wife was secretive and hushed.

Marital rape is another form of violence under the umbrella of domestic violence and is a much hushed topic. Like child rape, marital rape is under-reported and women mostly do not talk about it. As of yet, India has not passed any legislation to include rape within marriage as an issue. It is an extreme form of sexual abuse.

From the 1980‟s, feminists developed new organizations and new institutions, galvanized by the endemic violence against women. by now, violence against women was a not a new topic or a phenomenon that had risen during the colonial times. It existed in pre-colonial India as well with reports of dowry deaths and sati or widow immolation as well but whenever feminists had brought up these issues, they were recast to serve some or the other male political agenda. Sati had become a religious issue rather than a woman‟s issue. During the struggle for independence whenever women brought up domestic violence they were instead asked to focus on nationalist struggle and after Independence women were asked to prioritize nation-building.

Initially, cases of domestic violence suffered from poor law and tardy litigation. The police saw domestic violence as a family or „private‟ affair and often used their cells as spaces for mediation and compromise. Such indifference towards domestic violence caused more and more women to file false or exaggerated charges of dowry harassment, because anti-dowry laws promised legal action against abusive husbands. The introduction of new legislation that criminalized violence in the home –the Dowry Death Law (Section 498a) and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 have been successfully passed. This law does not differentiate between married and unmarried couples and focuses instead on intimate partner violence. One of the more important features of the 2005 Act was to secure the women‟s rights to the marital home in the event of eviction or abandonment. It also provides protection against harassment from the husband towards the wife or her family members along with protection from confiscation of her property. This Act had substantially changed the way the public views domestic violence (Menon, 2008). It has been the state‟s first comprehensive response to domestic violence and implants the concept of human rights in the heart of gendered relationships and the family. It re-defines the borders of privacy and the extent of public intervention (Nandy, 2013).

HONOR KILLINGS:

Honor killings are acts of retribution or vengeance, usually perpetrated by a male member of the family towards a female member who is perceived to have brought dishonor upon the family or the community. This perceived dishonor could be for one of the following reasons: (1) going against the cultural norms of dressing and attitude or behavior. (2) Wanting to terminate one‟s arranged marriage or marry according to one‟s choice, especially inter-caste marriages; (3) engaging in sexual acts outside of marriage; (4) involvement in a non-sexual relationship perceived as inappropriate. Honor based violence like acid throwing and honor killing, occur in societies where there are collective notions of honor and shame. Such crimes are usually justified as protection of traditional values and societal norms. At the core of these norms is the woman, the control of whose sexuality and its bestowal in marriage with its intrinsic importance as to who controls her reproductive and productive labor, which is crucial to patriarchal forces. Therefore, honor and shame are often linked to the expected behavior of families and individuals, specifically those of women. Honor in this sense revolves around the public perception of the individuals rather than their actual behavior. Causing a scandal or becoming a topic of gossip in your community or group is usually the reason for offense against honor- of your family and the extended community.

According to Chowdhary (2007), the norm of arranging marriages in India is contingent upon following the prescribed caste, class, and other marriage norms. Breaches in these norms are not tolerated and lead to inciting violent backlash from communities. In matters of marriage, the overarching ideology of patriarchy, kinship, and caste are further compounded by the ideology of guardianship of women i.e. a female, either minor or adult, is always under guardianship, specifically male guardianship- father, husband and son. A breach in the ideology of guardianship is considered very threatening because it could mean a potential loss of control over the woman‟s reproductive and productive labor. An assertion of one‟s choice in marriage is also seen as an affront to the most virtuous concepts of modesty and chastity. In situations where marriages are arranged by senior members of the family, an independent assertion or love-marriage disrupts the family hierarchy and power relations within the family as well as the social hierarchy. The confrontation and violence increase drastically when these individual assertion of marriage are inter-caste in nature. The overwhelming concern with caste endogamy overtakes all other traditional concerns regarding marriages.

In rural areas, most inter-caste marriage alliances are dealt with at two levels: the immediate family, its kinship network, and/or at the level of community acting through the traditional panchayat; and by the state which acts upon modern egalitarian principles. The community or „biradari‟ acts through open shows of disapproval and actions like social and material boycotting of the family and of the individuals who are perceived to have transgressed the norms and in case of severe transgressions, punishments van escalate to violent and public killings which may include the entire community- like lynching, burning, hanging, etc. in case of the state, which operates through the local police, these transgressions are often recorded as „sex crimes‟ with charges of kidnapping, abducting and rape on the male among the run-away or eloping couple. Thus the run-away couple become state fugitives and are hounded and chased and when caught, the girl is usually hounded into indicting her husband as an abductor and rapist. The reason for the state apparatus to function in this way is simple- the state apparatus is also made of people who are drawn from the local areas, holding the local community views and beliefs (Chowdhary, 2007).

Contentious marriages and relationships are a reflection of the tensions in society. In Chowdhary‟s view, such couples raise unexpected questions against traditional authority, power, legitimacy, and law. By expressing their own agency in their acts, they activate other sources of power unlike just traditional sources which lead to a conflict between the traditional and non-traditional sources and in this process give rise to violent lash-backs from the former.

CONCLUSION

Despite legislations and state interventions, the notion of family privacy continues to feature prominently among attitudes and perceptions of the subjects. According the 2009 monitoring and evaluation report, 86% of protection officers in Rajasthan and over 50% in Delhi agreed with the statement that „domestic violence is a family affair‟. These studies conducted by the Lawyer‟s Collective Women‟s Rights Initiative and ICRW, repeated in 2012 revealed that more than half of the officers still agreed with the statement and also believed that the aim of counseling under the PWDVA is to save families from breaking down and strike a compromise despite the fact the Act states that only and if only the court feels that counseling may lead to end in violence and empowerment of the woman should the court direct counseling (Nandy, 2012). It becomes apparent that even such legislation has not put a dent in the privacy of the family but at the same time it is questioning patriarchy in its private sphere by opening up the law to include un-married couples and couples of either gender.

In the Indian socio-cultural imagination, family continues to hold the special place of private veneration and idealization which is seen to be outside the realm of laws and state led reforms. With years of feminist activism and women‟s rights movements, the state finally gave cutting edge legislation against domestic violence informed by feminist thinking and human rights perspective but it is also shown that public regulations can be rendered ineffective by ever present notions of privacy that promote and perpetuate the culture of silence around issues of family related violence. The reason for the institution of family to still be enmeshed in a culture of privacy and intimate, or that which lies outside the purview of public scrutiny is the high moral, cultural and political stature which is allotted to the hetero-normative family unit, which is constantly validated by law and religion. The thread of violence against women, lie in the economic rights of women in personal and secular laws, socio-culture notions of honor and shame, patriarchy, nationalism, communalism, popular media, etc. Change requires a calculated push which unsettles the traditional norms and beliefs of identity, power, and hierarchy entrenched in the institution of family and community.

Power is seen as the central characteristic of gender relations, and is at the core of gender violence. Gender relations are not natural or born out of biological determinism but are rather experiential in nature and they are socially and culturally constructed. Hence, strategies for countering gender based violence have to be embedded in these experiences, aimed at reversing the intrinsic power structure in gender relations. In order to do this, the foremost thing is to acknowledge the institution of family/community as a site of violence and violent acts. The state and fundamentalist discourse and has located the role of woman amidst the family and community, thereby redefining equality as harmony. In this discourse, a women‟s pursuit of identity and rights is seen as selfish and as going against the needs of the family, community and the nation. It is then important to open up other discourses which situate women with their own identity and wants within the society, discourses that are based in notions of equality and human rights.

Finally, it must be remembered that there is no easy way to respond to how to create and implement laws concerning gender based violence. Creating special laws also lead to reinforcing traditional gender norms and ideas about the privacy of the home. By creating special laws that apply to the domestic sphere of life can lead to re-entrenchment of the notion that family or the household is the domain of women. There needs to be more constructive analysis of the family in terms of it being a social and economic unit instead of taking that at face-value and the spreading of the belief that the family does not lie outside the purview of law and state intervention.

REFRENCES:

• Chowdhary, Prem. “Contentious Marriages and Eloping Couples: Gender, Caste, and Patriarchy in Northern India”, (2007). Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
• Datta, Bishakha (ed). “Degrees of Justice”, (2010). Zubaan, New Delhi. Karlekar,  Malavika.  “Domestic  Violence”  (1998);  Source:  Economic  and  Political Weekly; Vol. 33, No. 24; pp1741-1751; Economic and Political Weekly. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4406963
• Kelkar, Govind. “Women and Structural Violence in India”, (1985). http://www.jstor.org/stable/25164242
• Mathur, Kanchan. “Countering Gender Violence: Initiatives towards collective action in Rajasthan”, (2004). Sage Publications.
• Menon, Niveditha. “Domestic Violence in India: Identifying types of control and coping mechanisms in violent relationships”, (2008). Pennsylvania State University.
• Mohamad, Maznah. “Family Ambiguity and Domestic Violence in Asia: Concept, Law, and Process”, (2013). Sussex Academic Press. Source: Women‟s Studies Quarterly, Vol 13, No. ¾, pp16-18; Feminist Press at the City, University of New York
• Subramaniam, Mangala. “The Power of Women‟s Organizing: Gender, Caste, and Class in India”, (2006). Lexington books.
• Visaria, leela.  “Violence  Against  Women  in  India:  Is  Empowerment  a  Protective Factor?” (2008). Source: Economic and Political Weekly; vol. 43, No. 48 (Nov 29-Dec 5), pp60-66; Economic and Political Weekly http://www.jstor.org/stable/40278238