Opinion: Hindu women are working abroad but why less in urban India? look at these figures

Author: Alice Evans
Today, employment of Hindu women in Britain has increased to 58%, while their Muslim counterparts lag behind. Yet female labor force participation is low among religious groups in South Asia, the Middle East and North Africa. This paradox provides fascinating insights into the mechanisms of patriarchy and possible paths toward equality.

Let’s take a step back in history

To understand this, we have to examine how Hindu communities adopted and enforced the seclusion of women. Before the 14th century, gods and goddesses were depicted in art as aggressive protectors. Often semi-nude, without any covering or modesty. When Central Asian rulers conquered India and established their administrations, they brought with them ideals of women’s seclusion, creating zenanas and latticed palaces. The Hindu elite began adopting these practices to gain patronage and prestige. This imitation spread through architecture throughout North India. From the inclusion of curtained quarters in Rajput palaces to the adaptation of curtains by administrative classes such as Kayastha. Yet where Mughal control was weak, women maintained greater public prominence.

But how did these practices spread beyond the courts to remote villages, where peasants never saw a glimpse of an aristocrat? The answer may lie in the caste system of India. The upper castes maintained their status through elaborate rules of purity and pollution. This hierarchy created a drive for upward mobility. As the lower castes acquired wealth, they sought to transform it into a higher ritual status by adopting the customs of the upper castes, which sociologist MN Srinivas calls ‘Sanskritisation’.

Entire castes collectively adopt the practices of the upper castes, including seclusion of women. A peasant caste may exclude women from agricultural labor and impose strict purdah, even if the economic costs are high. The local dominant caste served as their model, who themselves adopted these practices from the higher ranks. Individuals cannot resist easily. If a family allows its women to work in the fields or roam around without a veil, the caste council can break their marriage networks and social ties.

respect vs earning

Purdah prestige and caste control became clearly visible in India in the early 20th century. In 1900, there were riots in Kanpur for five days. Then the medical authorities tried to forcibly take a tradesman widow suffering from plague to the hospital. This was a violation of his/her privacy. To quell the massive social unrest, the colonial government stepped back, and made exemptions for respectable women.

Historian Charu Gupta says that women’s public appearance and working as laborers stigmatized the entire caste. Agraharis were ostracized when their women started working in shops, Khatiks faced stigma when their women started selling produce on the streets and some Gujjar families suffered losses when their women went out for business. Charu Gupta elaborates that castes responded by tightening restrictions. Even when these restrictions affected income, castes prioritized honor over economic gain.

paradox of reputation

Technological progress paradoxically strengthened these restrictions, enabling large-scale ideological propaganda. Hindu preachers could reach small towns and villages. Caste unions published pamphlets shaming lower caste women for their ‘rudeness’. Although Hindu propagandists repeatedly cited purdah as a cause of Islamic rule, they nevertheless supported this source of dignity.

The surprising thing is that these patterns persist even in the 21st century. Analysis of recent India Human Development Surveys shows that as families rise economically, they significantly increase restrictions on women’s physical mobility and practice isolation. Sociologist Megan Reed has found a particularly strong effect among Dalits and other backward classes, as well as among poor or rural communities and those with the least education. Concerns remain, with only 55% of Indian men believing their neighbors would support women working outside the home.

Employment of Hindu women increased abroad

Yet beyond India’s borders, culture changes. In Britain, where casteist policing and veiling are weak, employment of Hindu women has increased to 58%, while participation of Muslim women remains at 38%. These religious differences persist even when controlling for education, wealth and fertility, suggesting factors beyond migrant selectivity.

Even in poor Singapore of the 1970s, 42% of Indian women worked, which matches the urban female labor force participation of Tamil Nadu today! Hindu migrant women work in large numbers across the world. This pattern shows an important thing. Hinduism does not mandate veiling.

My global comparative analysis shows that the extremely low labor force participation of Indian Hindu women arises not from religious principle but from the lasting impact of the pursuit of caste-based prestige through Sanskritisation. Bollywood can help change expectations in a big way by celebrating daughters becoming software engineers, sending earnings and bringing honor to their families. By reimagining dignity, India can bring millions of women into the workforce and reap economic benefits.

(Evans is a senior lecturer at King’s College London. Views are personal)