Debating Caste in India: A Gendered Perspective on Hierarchy and Power

Caste remains one of India’s most enduring social structures, shaping lives from birth and creating profound inequalities. When viewed through a gendered lens, caste reveals how intersecting systems of oppression weigh most heavily on Dalit women, who face discrimination based on caste, gender, and economic status. Understanding caste is essential to comprehending the complex power hierarchies that continue to define Indian society.

Conceptualising caste: Beyond social stratification 🔗

Caste is far more than a simple system of social ranking. It functions as a foundational feature of Indian society, producing hierarchical power structures inscribed from birth. The system operates through stratification, pluralism, and interaction, all governed by unique cultural norms that determine one’s place in the social order.

The ideology of caste creates psychological impacts, embedding a deep sense of hierarchy and oppression in those at the bottom. The system maintains itself through practices like endogamy, requiring marriage within one’s caste group to preserve rigid boundaries between pure and polluted communities. Dalits occupy the lowest place in this hierarchy, relegated to occupations deemed polluting and subjected to practices of untouchability.

Scriptural sanctions and hegemonic legitimisation 🔗

Religious texts provide powerful justification for caste hierarchies. The Manusmriti, an ancient legal text, codifies caste ideology and prescribes deeply misogynist roles for women. One rule states that women should remain under male control throughout their lives-first their fathers, then husbands, then sons, with no recourse to independence.

These scriptural sanctions create a hegemonic foundation for discrimination, defining untouchable men and especially untouchable women as the most polluted within the social order. The religious legitimization makes challenging the system particularly difficult, as it frames inequality as divinely ordained rather than socially constructed.

The genesis and theories of caste 🔗

Scholars have long debated the origins of India’s caste system. Historian Arnold Toynbee proposed models of extermination and assimilation to explain how caste developed. Other theories emphasize acculturation through social contact between different groups.

French anthropologist Louis Dumont linked caste to a pan-civilizational notion of hierarchy rooted in ritual purity. British anthropologist Edmund Leach emphasized the networks of economic, political, and ritual relationships that sustain the system. Max Muller’s Aryan theory connected caste formation to racial categories, though this approach has been widely criticized for its scientific racism.

Listing and governmentality: From colonial to post-colonial 🔗

The British colonial census profoundly shaped modern caste politics. Scholars like Bernard S. Cohn argue that British census operations significantly influenced India’s current social and spatial demarcations. The categorization process began formally with caste enumeration from 1881 to 1931.

The Government of India Act of 1935 introduced the term “Scheduled Castes” and established reservation of seats for Depressed Classes in legislatures. Post-independence, the First Backward Classes Commission under Kaka Kalelkar grappled with defining “backwardness,” leading to caste-based data collection in the 1961 Census to inform policy. This practice of listing and scheduling castes-what Foucault might call governmentality-continues to shape contemporary caste politics.

Nomenclature and identity: From Harijan to Dalit 🔗

The struggle over naming oppressed castes is deeply political and gendered. Mahatma Gandhi used the term “Harijan,” meaning “children of God,” believing it would bring dignity to untouchable communities. However, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and many Dalit activists rejected this term as condescending and paternalistic.

The term “Dalit,” meaning “broken” or “oppressed,” gained currency in the 1970s through the Dalit Panthers movement. This self-chosen nomenclature represents political agency and resistance. Scholar Gopal Guru argues that “Harijan” imputes resigned fate while “Dalit” provides a militant alternative rooted in lived experience. For Dalit women, this naming debate is particularly significant, as euphemisms like Harijan can suppress their voices within caste and gender hierarchies.

Caste, geography, and stigmatised labour 🔗

Caste determines physical space and occupation. Dalits are typically forced to live in separate enclaves on village outskirts, reflecting their “polluted” status. Labour in India remains intrinsically caste-determined, creating rigid divisions among workers.

Dalit women bear the heaviest burden of stigmatized work. An estimated 1.3 million Dalits, mostly women, work as manual scavengers-cleaning human waste by hand from dry toilets and sewers. This degrading occupation, illegal since 2013 yet still widely practiced, exemplifies how caste and gender intersect to create the most dehumanizing forms of labor. Non-Dalit women avoid such work entirely, making Dalit women the primary carriers of caste-based stigma.

Sanskritisation, social mobility, and resistance 🔗

Indian sociologist M.N. Srinivas introduced the concept of Sanskritisation in the 1950s to describe how lower castes attempt upward mobility by adopting upper-caste customs, rituals, and lifestyles. This might include vegetarianism, wearing the sacred thread, or prohibiting widow remarriage.

However, Dalit scholars critique Sanskritisation as reinforcing caste hierarchy rather than dismantling it. While individual castes may improve their position, the system itself remains intact. Moreover, Sanskritisation often intensifies patriarchal control over women as communities police female behavior to prove their “purity.”

Assertive Dalit movements offer alternative paths to dignity through education, political mobilization, and everyday resistance. These movements challenge both caste-based oppression and internal patriarchy, fostering self-dignity without conforming to upper-caste norms.

Caste, race, and transnational solidarity 🔗

The comparison between caste and racial oppression has fostered important transnational alliances. At the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism in Durban, activists highlighted parallels between caste discrimination and racism, though the Indian government resisted this framing.

These connections have created solidarity between Afro-Americans and Dalits, theorizing caste as a form of descent-based discrimination. This neo-transnational solidarity reflects globalization’s potential to connect oppressed groups across national boundaries in their struggles for dignity and justice.

The evolving nature of caste: Fluidity and discourse 🔗

Despite its apparent rigidity, caste demonstrates remarkable fluidity. It has transitioned from traditional forms to new manifestations linked to modern resources, power, and opportunities. Colonial census operations created caste communities where none existed previously, showing caste’s constructed nature.

Caste now operates as a discursive category, with caste-based associations functioning as modern pressure groups. These organizations mediate ideology, indoctrinate members, and influence political vote banks. This transformation shows how caste adapts to changing contexts while maintaining its fundamental power to exclude and stratify.

The triple oppression of Dalit women 🔗

Dalit women face what scholars call “triple oppression”-discrimination from upper-caste men, upper-caste women, and men within their own community. This intersectional marginalization places them at the bottom of both caste and gender hierarchies.

Dalit women are vulnerable to sexual violence and exploitation due to their combined caste and gender status. They face economic insecurity, lack land rights, and have low educational status, positioning them as a dispossessed majority. Between 95-98% of manual scavengers are women, demonstrating how the most degrading work is reserved for those facing multiple forms of oppression.

Yet Dalit women also demonstrate powerful political agency. Movements like the Bodh Gaya land struggle show their capacity for collective action. Contemporary Dalit women’s movements are growing stronger, connecting across borders and demanding recognition of their intersectional struggles.

What do you think? How can understanding the gendered dimensions of caste help us challenge systems of inequality more effectively? What role should international solidarity play in supporting Dalit women’s movements for justice and dignity?

References

1. https://gender.study/gender-based-violence/gender-caste-patriarchy-india/
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskritisation
3. https://www.hrw.org/report/2014/08/25/cleaning-human-waste/manual-scavenging-caste-and-discrimination-india
4. https://cofemsocialchange.org/sexual-gbv-dalit-women-girls-india/
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_British_India
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduled_Castes_and_Scheduled_Tribes
7. https://ramachandraguha.in/archives/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-term-harijan-the-telegraph.html
8. https://www.thequint.com/news/india/dalit-history-of-term-political-social-usage
9. https://www.india-seminar.com/2018/710/710_gopal_guru.htm
10. https://idsn.org/key-issues/manual-scavenging/
11. https://womensmediacenter.com/women-under-siege/indias-women-manual-scavengers-caught-between-illegal-exploitation-and-desperation
12. https://journals.library.brandeis.edu/index.php/caste/article/download/292/77/1339
13. https://thesecuritydistillery.org/all-articles/caste-oppression-and-gender-security-in-india
14. https://www.theglobaljusticenetwork.org/index.php/gjn/article/view/54
15. https://www.epw.in/engage/article/manual-scavenging-women-face-double-discrimination-caste-gender
16. https://idsn.org/key-issues/dalit-women/