Loved this! When I worked as a social worker, I was constantly aware of the gap between the realities I witnessed on the ground and the issues that came up in my social circles afterward. But I am also conflicted in how to think about it. I think our problems always feel big to us even while others may be carrying struggles of an entirely different scale, and that is valid.
Agree completely...as someone coming from privilege myself, I think there is some disconnect also with regards to these problems...women of privilege are not able to see or empathize truly with these daily atrocities that majority of women face...we also need to sensitize elite women to these in order to make significant difference in the days to come
The feminist movement, in all its diversity, is a struggle against patriarchy. Patriarchy does not confine itself to one domain - it shapes women’s lives at home, on the streets, in legislatures, and in workplaces, both elite and non-elite. The battle must therefore be fought on multiple fronts: against dowry and domestic violence, against moral policing, against unequal domestic responsibilities, and against discrimination in corporate and political spaces. To set these struggles against each other is to weaken the collective fight.
When women claim their right to public space at night, it is not only the “elite” club-goer who benefits but also the working woman returning from a late shift who hopes to travel without fear. When laws against workplace harassment are won, they apply not only to corporate executives but also to teachers, nurses, domestic workers, and factory employees. Gains won in one arena strengthen women across many.
“Elite” women are not free from patriarchy either. Their “choices” - how to dress, when to travel, whether to prioritize career or family are shaped by systemic expectations. Feminism also interrogates this illusion of “free will.” To draw a strict line between “ordinary” and “elite” women overlooks the layered, overlapping nature of patriarchal oppression. A woman may face dowry-related abuse at home and sexual harassment in her workplace; her experiences cannot be compartmentalized.
History, too, shows that transformative movements are often spearheaded by those with relative privilege. Many of the women who first organized for suffrage, education, or property rights came from elite sections, not because their struggles were trivial, but because their access to resources allowed them to challenge norms that later benefited wider groups. That’s how progress has historically been achieved.
This logic applies beyond feminism. In hindsight, had we shunned the larger fight for independence from the colonizers (led again by “elites” and incorporating “elite” demands such as a place in the executive councils) because the ordinary person was dying in famines, would it not have ensured that we continued to live as subjects? Similarly, dismissing women’s fights in boardrooms or legislatures because dowry deaths persist risks narrowing our horizons. It is like saying we should not focus on the dangers of AI at the moment because poverty exists. The two struggles are not mutually exclusive; neglecting one only weakens our ability to meet future challenges.
Finally, dowry itself is not separate from broader patriarchal structures. It persists because women are denied inheritance, excluded from property rights, and left without support systems after virilocality. To address dowry without confronting the larger architecture of patriarchy is to fight with one hand tied.
Every demand, whether for workplace safety, freedom from dowry, or an end to moral policing, is a demand to dismantle patriarchy. These are not competing concerns but interconnected ones. To fragment women’s struggles into “elite” and “ordinary” is to risk emaciating the movement. Our fight is collective, and every victory on any front brings us closer to a society free of patriarchal violence.
Your comment is a misreading of what I have said. I am arguing that elite women have a responsibility to take up mass issues instead of getting fixated on own niche issues.
Categorisation of the women's issues into "niche issues" and " mass issues" is symptomatic of complete misunderstading of women's issues. Suppose if some women are demanding reservation for women judges into Supreme Court, how do you categorise this ? "Niche issue ". But that one extra seat in the Supreme Court may result into many landmark judgements that will help into women empowerment.. so fight on every front. Don't categorise these issues..
I doubt if these many women are being killed for dowry. There could be other reasons, but very likely not dowry. I come from a very rural area and violence for dowry has literally stopped. I haven't heard of any such cases in years and all the cases that have been filed (that I am aware of) are made up (of course the oppressive families deserve the cases but the reasons are almost always different than the demand for dowry). I see various stats and almost all the stats come from NCBI, but the stats don't reflect on the ground reality I see.
Obviously the crimes against women need to be taken seriously and must be dealt with, but if we've got the reasons wrong, it's going to be difficult to solve the problem.
So your sample set is your Village and you are extrapolating to whole country and claiming that NCBI data is not correct or misleading ......how that sounds to you ?
It’s time we name the emotional labor women are forced to inherit—not as “natural caretakers,” but as the universal fixers of patriarchy’s mess. Every time society expects us to coddle grown men, we lose another ounce of ourselves. In my latest letter on the hidden costs of “happily ever after,” I break down why choosing your own sanity is the ultimate rebellion.👉 Read: https://vostrength.substack.com/p/swiping-right-on-misery
Loved this! When I worked as a social worker, I was constantly aware of the gap between the realities I witnessed on the ground and the issues that came up in my social circles afterward. But I am also conflicted in how to think about it. I think our problems always feel big to us even while others may be carrying struggles of an entirely different scale, and that is valid.
Loved it totally:)
Agree completely...as someone coming from privilege myself, I think there is some disconnect also with regards to these problems...women of privilege are not able to see or empathize truly with these daily atrocities that majority of women face...we also need to sensitize elite women to these in order to make significant difference in the days to come
The feminist movement, in all its diversity, is a struggle against patriarchy. Patriarchy does not confine itself to one domain - it shapes women’s lives at home, on the streets, in legislatures, and in workplaces, both elite and non-elite. The battle must therefore be fought on multiple fronts: against dowry and domestic violence, against moral policing, against unequal domestic responsibilities, and against discrimination in corporate and political spaces. To set these struggles against each other is to weaken the collective fight.
When women claim their right to public space at night, it is not only the “elite” club-goer who benefits but also the working woman returning from a late shift who hopes to travel without fear. When laws against workplace harassment are won, they apply not only to corporate executives but also to teachers, nurses, domestic workers, and factory employees. Gains won in one arena strengthen women across many.
“Elite” women are not free from patriarchy either. Their “choices” - how to dress, when to travel, whether to prioritize career or family are shaped by systemic expectations. Feminism also interrogates this illusion of “free will.” To draw a strict line between “ordinary” and “elite” women overlooks the layered, overlapping nature of patriarchal oppression. A woman may face dowry-related abuse at home and sexual harassment in her workplace; her experiences cannot be compartmentalized.
History, too, shows that transformative movements are often spearheaded by those with relative privilege. Many of the women who first organized for suffrage, education, or property rights came from elite sections, not because their struggles were trivial, but because their access to resources allowed them to challenge norms that later benefited wider groups. That’s how progress has historically been achieved.
This logic applies beyond feminism. In hindsight, had we shunned the larger fight for independence from the colonizers (led again by “elites” and incorporating “elite” demands such as a place in the executive councils) because the ordinary person was dying in famines, would it not have ensured that we continued to live as subjects? Similarly, dismissing women’s fights in boardrooms or legislatures because dowry deaths persist risks narrowing our horizons. It is like saying we should not focus on the dangers of AI at the moment because poverty exists. The two struggles are not mutually exclusive; neglecting one only weakens our ability to meet future challenges.
Finally, dowry itself is not separate from broader patriarchal structures. It persists because women are denied inheritance, excluded from property rights, and left without support systems after virilocality. To address dowry without confronting the larger architecture of patriarchy is to fight with one hand tied.
Every demand, whether for workplace safety, freedom from dowry, or an end to moral policing, is a demand to dismantle patriarchy. These are not competing concerns but interconnected ones. To fragment women’s struggles into “elite” and “ordinary” is to risk emaciating the movement. Our fight is collective, and every victory on any front brings us closer to a society free of patriarchal violence.
Your comment is a misreading of what I have said. I am arguing that elite women have a responsibility to take up mass issues instead of getting fixated on own niche issues.
Categorisation of the women's issues into "niche issues" and " mass issues" is symptomatic of complete misunderstading of women's issues. Suppose if some women are demanding reservation for women judges into Supreme Court, how do you categorise this ? "Niche issue ". But that one extra seat in the Supreme Court may result into many landmark judgements that will help into women empowerment.. so fight on every front. Don't categorise these issues..
I doubt if these many women are being killed for dowry. There could be other reasons, but very likely not dowry. I come from a very rural area and violence for dowry has literally stopped. I haven't heard of any such cases in years and all the cases that have been filed (that I am aware of) are made up (of course the oppressive families deserve the cases but the reasons are almost always different than the demand for dowry). I see various stats and almost all the stats come from NCBI, but the stats don't reflect on the ground reality I see.
Obviously the crimes against women need to be taken seriously and must be dealt with, but if we've got the reasons wrong, it's going to be difficult to solve the problem.
So your sample set is your Village and you are extrapolating to whole country and claiming that NCBI data is not correct or misleading ......how that sounds to you ?
It’s time we name the emotional labor women are forced to inherit—not as “natural caretakers,” but as the universal fixers of patriarchy’s mess. Every time society expects us to coddle grown men, we lose another ounce of ourselves. In my latest letter on the hidden costs of “happily ever after,” I break down why choosing your own sanity is the ultimate rebellion.👉 Read: https://vostrength.substack.com/p/swiping-right-on-misery