Editorial Viewpoint
Whatever happened to baby Jer?
The Bombay Parsi birth figures for 2011 released by the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC) through the consistent efforts of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) shows a disproportionate sex ratio: 108 boys to 87 girls!
What happened to all the missing daughters? Is it possible the BMC made an error or omission in calculation? After all there are hundreds of thousands of births to record and the Parsis constitute a minuscule fraction in the city’s vast multitude.
In 2010 birth figures were a respectable 106 boys to 104 girls. If seen over the past six years — the period for which we were able to trace records from our archives — the totals are 565 boys to 507 girls. This works out to an average annual sex ratio of 113 to 101!
The acceptable sex ratio globally is assumed to be 105 males to 100 females. This is referred to as the secondary sex ratio calculated at the time of birth. The primary sex ratio is at the time of conception. Of those conceived, how many survive to full term may never be known. We do know many parents abort a fetus if they know the sex of the unborn baby is female. Do Parsis also follow that practice?
“Sex ratios may be considerably skewed by factors such as the age of mother at birth and by sex selective abortion and infanticide,” states Wikipedia citing US Department of Health and Human Services at the National Center for Health Statistics. According to the Central Intelligence Agency website, The World Fact Book, the current worldwide sex ratio at birth estimate is 107 boys to 100 girls. For India it is 112 to 100 and for Pakistan 110 to 100.
The skewed Parsi birth figures mean that contrary to popular belief, it is not possible for every Parsi male to marry a Parsi female. At least 58 boys, or around 10 percent of the male population born in the last six years will perforce have to marry non-Parsis or remain single (same sex marriage not being legal in India nor polygamy — having more than one spouse at a time). That means of the 39 percent who married out in 2011, around 10 percent really did not have an option.
We should be grateful that other communities offer their daughters in marriage. But instead we treat the daughters-in-law with disdain. They are for the most part unwelcome in their new homes and the progeny of such marriages are derogatorily referred to as half breeds, pariahs. If they occupy trust housing meant only for Parsis, the threat of eviction is always present, more so if they are licensees instead of tenants.
When the Parsi husbands go to the fire temples, their non-Parsi wives will be denied entry. The men worship alone. If the children of such a union are still to be navjoted, some orthodox priests or lay person may object to their entering the agiary. In many gahanbars non-Parsi spouses are barred. Would a Parsi and his children be willing to partake in a meal where the non-Parsi spouse is denied entry? Would such an attitude not drive a wedge between the family and the community?
If the Parsi male and his offspring opt for consigning their corpses at Doongerwadi, his wife (and the children’s mother) would not be permitted to sit in the bungli during the funerary ceremonies. Nor will she be entitled to view the face of her departed husband or children before the bodies are consigned to the dakhmas. If they opt for alternative means of disposal they are further castigated and told their souls will roam in purgatory. In life or in death, they are reviled.
At family jashans, some relatives make the non-Parsi spouse unwelcome, assuming they don’t bar her entry to begin with. Dastur (Dr) Firoze Kotwal and other priests refused to partake or even sit in the audience at the time of a public jashan to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Kaikhusru Pallonji Katrak Dar-E-Meher in New Delhi last December because non-Parsis were present. The prayed upon food cannot be consumed by non-Parsis. If any is left over it is to be fed to dogs, birds, etc.
The fate of the non-Parsi male who marries a Parsi female is probably worse. After all why should a woman have a right to marry out of her ilk, more so when her offspring are not legally considered Parsis? In a male dominated, chauvinistic community, women are institutionally of lower standing. Parsis may have been pioneers in female education but not female equality. The equality of sexes enshrined in the Indian Constitution seems to be an alien concept to the community.
A Parsi woman, her non-Parsi husband, their children and her in-laws may be unwelcome in Parsi circles, but the male’s community will not have the same institutionalized prejudices. Personal dislikes are another matter. The children of such a union will be welcomed in his faith (except among the Jews where the mother has to be a Jew for the children to be part of the faith, but conversion is permitted).
But whether a Parsi male or female marries outside the faith, many are lost to the community. Our declining numbers are thus further decimated. Anjumans such as Delhi of course are liberal and allow children of either Parsi parent entry into the fire temple; so also in the case of the Karachi anjuman. And of course Iran permits entry to all, including non-Zoroastrians. Women can even be priests.
With around 200 births a year and 800 deaths, the last thing we need is to alienate the few Parsis that we have left. The marriage figures for 2011 show 39 percent marrying out, 67 men and 45 women. In 1988 the percentage was 14. At the recent Holiday Programme for Youth the students who had just completed their tenth standard were asked how many would marry a Parsi. Nearly every hand went up. They were told the reality was that probably half of them would marry out of the faith when the time came!
While they have been informed of what the future possibly holds for them, what they may not know is the pain, humiliation and suffering they and their new families will endure. A member of the traditionalist Parsi sect was told by another member that her daughter was marrying outside the faith. She shrugged her shoulders and said wistfully, “Sukhi thai tau saroo (if they are happy, that will be good).” “No,” retorted her unsympathetic friend. “Dookhi thai tau saroo (if they are unhappy, that is good).”
That unfortunately appears to be the sentiment of many in the community.
What happened to all the missing daughters? Is it possible the BMC made an error or omission in calculation? After all there are hundreds of thousands of births to record and the Parsis constitute a minuscule fraction in the city’s vast multitude.
In 2010 birth figures were a respectable 106 boys to 104 girls. If seen over the past six years — the period for which we were able to trace records from our archives — the totals are 565 boys to 507 girls. This works out to an average annual sex ratio of 113 to 101!
The acceptable sex ratio globally is assumed to be 105 males to 100 females. This is referred to as the secondary sex ratio calculated at the time of birth. The primary sex ratio is at the time of conception. Of those conceived, how many survive to full term may never be known. We do know many parents abort a fetus if they know the sex of the unborn baby is female. Do Parsis also follow that practice?
“Sex ratios may be considerably skewed by factors such as the age of mother at birth and by sex selective abortion and infanticide,” states Wikipedia citing US Department of Health and Human Services at the National Center for Health Statistics. According to the Central Intelligence Agency website, The World Fact Book, the current worldwide sex ratio at birth estimate is 107 boys to 100 girls. For India it is 112 to 100 and for Pakistan 110 to 100.
The skewed Parsi birth figures mean that contrary to popular belief, it is not possible for every Parsi male to marry a Parsi female. At least 58 boys, or around 10 percent of the male population born in the last six years will perforce have to marry non-Parsis or remain single (same sex marriage not being legal in India nor polygamy — having more than one spouse at a time). That means of the 39 percent who married out in 2011, around 10 percent really did not have an option.
We should be grateful that other communities offer their daughters in marriage. But instead we treat the daughters-in-law with disdain. They are for the most part unwelcome in their new homes and the progeny of such marriages are derogatorily referred to as half breeds, pariahs. If they occupy trust housing meant only for Parsis, the threat of eviction is always present, more so if they are licensees instead of tenants.
When the Parsi husbands go to the fire temples, their non-Parsi wives will be denied entry. The men worship alone. If the children of such a union are still to be navjoted, some orthodox priests or lay person may object to their entering the agiary. In many gahanbars non-Parsi spouses are barred. Would a Parsi and his children be willing to partake in a meal where the non-Parsi spouse is denied entry? Would such an attitude not drive a wedge between the family and the community?
If the Parsi male and his offspring opt for consigning their corpses at Doongerwadi, his wife (and the children’s mother) would not be permitted to sit in the bungli during the funerary ceremonies. Nor will she be entitled to view the face of her departed husband or children before the bodies are consigned to the dakhmas. If they opt for alternative means of disposal they are further castigated and told their souls will roam in purgatory. In life or in death, they are reviled.
At family jashans, some relatives make the non-Parsi spouse unwelcome, assuming they don’t bar her entry to begin with. Dastur (Dr) Firoze Kotwal and other priests refused to partake or even sit in the audience at the time of a public jashan to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Kaikhusru Pallonji Katrak Dar-E-Meher in New Delhi last December because non-Parsis were present. The prayed upon food cannot be consumed by non-Parsis. If any is left over it is to be fed to dogs, birds, etc.
The fate of the non-Parsi male who marries a Parsi female is probably worse. After all why should a woman have a right to marry out of her ilk, more so when her offspring are not legally considered Parsis? In a male dominated, chauvinistic community, women are institutionally of lower standing. Parsis may have been pioneers in female education but not female equality. The equality of sexes enshrined in the Indian Constitution seems to be an alien concept to the community.
A Parsi woman, her non-Parsi husband, their children and her in-laws may be unwelcome in Parsi circles, but the male’s community will not have the same institutionalized prejudices. Personal dislikes are another matter. The children of such a union will be welcomed in his faith (except among the Jews where the mother has to be a Jew for the children to be part of the faith, but conversion is permitted).
But whether a Parsi male or female marries outside the faith, many are lost to the community. Our declining numbers are thus further decimated. Anjumans such as Delhi of course are liberal and allow children of either Parsi parent entry into the fire temple; so also in the case of the Karachi anjuman. And of course Iran permits entry to all, including non-Zoroastrians. Women can even be priests.
With around 200 births a year and 800 deaths, the last thing we need is to alienate the few Parsis that we have left. The marriage figures for 2011 show 39 percent marrying out, 67 men and 45 women. In 1988 the percentage was 14. At the recent Holiday Programme for Youth the students who had just completed their tenth standard were asked how many would marry a Parsi. Nearly every hand went up. They were told the reality was that probably half of them would marry out of the faith when the time came!
While they have been informed of what the future possibly holds for them, what they may not know is the pain, humiliation and suffering they and their new families will endure. A member of the traditionalist Parsi sect was told by another member that her daughter was marrying outside the faith. She shrugged her shoulders and said wistfully, “Sukhi thai tau saroo (if they are happy, that will be good).” “No,” retorted her unsympathetic friend. “Dookhi thai tau saroo (if they are unhappy, that is good).”
That unfortunately appears to be the sentiment of many in the community.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive