“It’s a girl”, still remains a harrowing news for most men, and women.
No matter, how much a father of “well settled & well raised daughters” elaborates to deny the inauspiciousness of a female foetal; it only serves to accentuates the discourse and apprehensions surrounding the rearing of a female child.
These remarks are common and heartrending today, yet, each hold a key cultural concern, not only the increasing apprehensions about loss of moral and honour ground but also how women are imagined and brought up as financial burden.
“I do not feel particularly uneasy about having a girl, obviously a new responsibility after a wife and one’s parents; it is just that – I have a preference for a male child. This is the core reason behind my lack of excitement and interest. I know once born, I will cherish her more than you.”
“I prefer, no rather, I do see myself moving back to homeland if its a girl. The atmosphere and training in a foreign space is unsuitable for a female child. Do you know they talk about all adult content right before puberty?”
Thus arises the question, what are the most culturally acceptable and practical prerogatives for the parents of a female child in terms of moral education and financial liability?
But here arises the plausibility and limit of raising a contrasting question. Do other persons, such as the relatives and friends of the child, hold any obligation or have any active role in terms of moral education and financial support?
Do you feel that there is a need to explore, define and articulate the different roles and spheres of action, restraint, freedom and encouragement with regards to moral education and financial support? There must be someone out there to make it less vague and complex?
In some modern religious thought, a lady whose first child is a female is considered lucky. In yet other cultures, the eldest daughter is considered a key to upholding and maintaining manners and honour of the whole family. So having said that a female is still imagined and raised as a core defining honor and morality for herself and her whole family.
Secondly, a male remains “superior” with respect to the rights, obligations and responsibilities as father, brother and husband, and this superiority is legitimized by financial support.
Only as a mother, a female is superior to all other competing relations.
Therefore, initially and largely, it seems to fall on a mother’s shoulder to use her energies to be more effective in the moral domain, as the bearer of honour, the key to the quality of future generation and the privileged bonding person for the whole family. And all the financial arrangement seems to fall on the father, husband and sons.
But don’t you think, if one isolates individual scenarios and settings where morality and financial concern becomes relevant, the prerogatives will be more clear and justified.
I believe, each one of us holds a key role in defining the society, its morality and cultural diversity. No matter, who you are, if you see wrong, you are obliged to point it out. If you see confusion; tendency for conflict or ignorance, and despite holding a capacity to act, you chose to neglect or run away, you will remain blameworthy person, no matter how small is your space for action as a friend, a neighbour, a mere acquaintance, a co worker. Of Course, one can not ignore that each person has its limits to be resourceful/effective defined by their capacity and relation.
The more resourceful you are in wealth and knowledge, the more burden you carry in all of your association and affinities.