You live in urban 2015 but dowry exists in various forms, shapes and sizes. It creeps up from behind innocuous masks and plays the role of horror it has always played.



I've studied from the best institutes in the world, have done well professionally and don't really have a lot of problems in presenting myself. All this means a lot of matrimonial attention and makes me worthy of a good amount, you know. But apart from the fact that asking for (or getting without asking) dowry makes me feel like a major parasite, my biggest problem is that it turns the whole affair into a trade. It makes marriage into a business deal, a property transaction and the woman into a commodity that is being traded. I'm sure rounds of negotiation are carried out and final amounts are reached and after that everything is happy and rosy. After all, we've also seen this in hindi movies since childhood where the jerk is ready to marry the woman but only for a huge sum of money - it doesn't feel that alien - or does it ? The only issue is the girl's father does not ask them to buzz off, but instead wait's for the director's instructions to the hero to save the day.

But if we all agree that dowry is a hideous monster and it's unethical and unmanly, what is the point of this article a clever mind may ask. I've been trying to ask myself the question why is it wrong to do give or take dowry. But before that let's imagine a situation where two families getting merged are in principle okay with the concept of giving and taking dowry. I have always believed that if you're doing something that you in your heart feel is right, then it is ethically correct. So being very objective and applying the same theory, if people believe in their heart of hearts that it is morally acceptable, then let's vindicate them of the guilt for a moment.

Let's be super-objective and look at it from a practical point of view. What's the problem with treating a marriage like a deal or trade, even if were ethically justified. Well, the real problem is that when a relation starts like a deal, it will always remain a deal or a trade. How do you ever expect a human being to forget that she was traded like a commodity, and her new family accepted her only on a financial condition that was placed on her original family. How can you ever expect that person to treat the new family like her own?

Every relation in the world is give and take, someone might argue, all of them are trades. But think of the trade you had with your parents. You were little and helpless and mute. But they selflessly served you, gave you everything including material and values and made you independent. They didn't put a condition, but always hoped for your best sacrificing their happiness for yours every single day. And due to this most people end up loving our parents and being loyal to them even though people might not always agree or get along with them after growing up.

But parents don't plan this. Nature has subconsciously taught parents the way to welcome someone into your family. It's through selflessness and acceptance. Let the same knowledge apply to accepting someone into your family after marriage and if the basis for that acceptance is a major condition, especially a financial one, tell me how the person in question will ever forget that. How will that person ever selflessly love the others and how will she ever truly become a part of the family. I've always thought selfless love is a significant part of a marriage, but hey I could be wrong of course. All forms of conditions, pressures and terms just abrade the base of a newly formed relation and that, to me, is not a great starting point.