Kerala 2005 - of Planning Commission

CHAPTER 7
RECKONING CAUTION: EDUCATED UNEMPLOYMENT AND GENDER UNFREEDOM
119
was partly because it was initially almost nil. Reporting
is a serious factor in the low levels of sexual harassment
(for Kerala and India). It is significant that analysis of two
high profile cases of sexual harassment recently revealed
the strong disincentives (of time, resources, effort and
legal procedure) attached to reporting sexual harassment
(Devika and Kodoth, 2002). In contrast, rape and dowry
death being more heinous are more likely to be reported.
It is striking here that Bihar, which ranks 30 and 18 in
dowry death and rape respectively, ranks much lower
(in the group with low rates of crime) in all other
categories. It may be reasonable to expect that States
reporting high levels of dowry murder would have high
rates of cruelty at home as well. In fact, the rate of cruelty
at home is consistently higher than rate of dowry death
for all States. Notably then, Bihar, UP, Delhi, and Punjab
are in the highest group of States in dowry death but show
significantly lower ranks for cruelty at home (see also
Mukherjee, 2001).
Between 1995-2000, the rate of dowry deaths in Kerala
remained steady at a level significantly lower than for
India as a whole. It is well known that dowry deaths and
related crime are concentrated in the north. Kerala was
for long considered free of this crime (Menski, 1999) in
association with its matrilineal traditions and customary
regulation of dowry among patrilineal groups. However,
dowry deaths being reported consistently in the State is an
indication of significant shifts in marriage practices.
Kerala ranks in the highest group of States in cruelty at
home and there is a concerted and sharp increase in rates
of cruelty at home between 1995-2000. This is an area
where we have primary studies, which corroborate the
serious dimensions that this form of violence has attained
in the State. 14 Women in Thiruvananthapuram reported
similar levels of physical violence as women in Vellore
and Lucknow (ranging between 21 and 26 per cent)
according to a study of domestic violence undertaken
between 1997 and 1999 in seven cities of India (INCLEN/
ICRW, 2000). The study also revealed that over twothirds
of the sample women in rural and a little lower in
the urban non-slum area had experienced psychological
violence, which was considerably higher than in the
other sites. A more recent study of domestic violence in
Thiruvananthapuram (rural and urban) found that overall
35.7 per cent of women reported experiencing at least one
form of physical violence at least once in their married life.
At 64.9 per cent, the figure was considerably higher for
psychological violence (Panda, 2003: 44).
The socio-economic correlates of domestic violence
investigated by these studies are instructive. Taking all
the sites together, the INCLEN study revealed that gender
gap in education and employment was significant in
explaining violence. Violence was more frequent when
the woman respondent was more educated (>2 years)
and had a better type of employment. Nevertheless, the
unemployment status of the husband was significantly
and positively associated with both measures of violence.
These are indications of the importance of work status
to male identity. Existing evidence for India and Kerala
also points to the negative association between socioeconomic
status and domestic violence (INCLEN/ICRW,
2000; NFHS-2, 1998-99; Panda 2003). In particular, Panda
(2003) found that education status of men and women
was negatively associated with life time prevalence of
violence and that women engaged in irregular/casual
employment were more likely to experience violence
while regular employment was likely to reduce violence
(Ibid, 56). However, as INCLEN/ICRW (2000) point out, it
is entirely open to interpretation whether women of higher
socio-economic levels actually experience lower levels of
violence or merely report it at lower levels. It is instructive
that ownership of property (land and house) by women
was found to reduce both physical and psychological
violence against women (Panda, 2003: 66). Existing work
converges on a set of reasons that are seen as inciting
violence. The INCLEN study found male dissatisfaction
with women over domestic responsibilities, including
disobedience, infidelity and alcoholism, were key causes
of violence. While these were important in Panda’s study
too, he also noted that 30 per cent of women who had
arranged marriages cited dowry as a factor in violence
(Ibid: 51). Clearly, these provide strong indications of
patriarchal structures underlying violence against women,
most clearly in the gendered expectations that they
sustain.
District-wise information on crimes against women
reveals that the incidence was high in Kozhikode and
Wayanad, both districts figuring prominently in recent
episodes of rape. Domestic violence is above the State
average in a number of districts, particularly Kollam,
Malappuram and Kozhikode. These are areas which
need further enquiry.
14 Primary studies deal with lifetime prevalence, while crime statistics are based on reported violence from year to year. It is also important to note that primary surveys
probe closely into respondents’ experience of violence.