This article tries to discuss the existing undertones of casteism and heteronormativity in the modern day dating apps and their influence on personal desirability. The article navigates from explaining institutionalization of ideologies to the ability of such ideologies to underlie beneath the lines of modernity while continuing to influence the norms of desirability.
INSTITUITIONS AND IDEOLOGIES
In Sociological terms, all Ideologies such as Casteism, Heteronormativity, Liberalism, Sexism, Feminism have been reproduced and reinforced through Institutions. The Oxford bibliographies define ‘Institutions’ as
“an organisation or other formal social structure that defines, governs and constrains a field of action” 1
Each and every such institution gains life and sustenance from the benefit it provides to its practitioners. The institution and the propagated ideology shall continue to exist till the benefit is relevant and beneficial. Reformation in the institution happens either when the benefit becomes irrelevant or when the practitioners identify a greater benefit. For example, Monarchy as an ideology slowly lost its relevancy with the inception of industrial revolution. This was because the benefit it provided was a justification to gain political power. In a society where man was subject to the constrains of nature, the idea of a monarch being the god sent representative with the innate right to rule over the masses was widely accepted. But the Industrial revolution changed the dynamics between man and nature, wherein the man with monetary backing was able to overwhelm the constrains of the nature, making the benefit of the ideology irrelevant in due time.2 But the said realisation of the irrelevance or identification of the greater benefit doesn’t happen to all practitioners concomitantly but rather happens through a process during which violation or non-conformity to the institutionalised norms by a non believer shall be met with powerful sanctions from the practitioners who still believe in the benefit. This process, proportional to the deep rootedness of the ideology and the rigidity of the institution, makes the reformation easier or harder. Lastly, an ideology, until the extinction of the benefit, shall exist in several forms either expressly or tacitly.
CASTE, HETERONORMATIVITY AND FAMILY
In Indian context the ideology of casteism and heteronormativity has been deeply embedded in the social lives of Indians. Similar to monarchy, Caste also provided a reliable justification (benefit) for sustaining a hierarchy in the Indian society. The upper layers of the said hierarchy enjoyed social, economical, and political agency which is observed to reduce proportionally with every subsequent layer. Similarly, Heteronormativity was strictly adhered to, because it gave a justification(benefit) for the gendering of other concurrent institutions. Further, anything beyond the gender-binary was viewed as an obstacle to the patriarchal norms.
Families are institutions through which humans reproduce and receive primary socialisation3. This can be seen in the article
“Primary socialization is under the control of significant others. Significant others are those (parents, grandparents, siblings) who positively or negatively affect the life, personality, and orientation of children by exposing them to certain experiences, values, and roles, as well as restricting them from undesirable influences”
It’s well accepted understanding that
“Considered the most important stage, primary socialization shapes the identities, outlooks, and resources… 4”
Thus family was used as the primary tool for propagating caste and heteronormativity in India. Indian Families, in addition to externalising the said ideologies to the subsequent generations, through arranged marriages also went on to restrict any viable opportunities of non-conformity or inter caste agency. Therefore economy of procreation was run on the lines of the existing heteronormative, caste systems. The criteria of desirability of an individual were fixed by families and was usually based on his/her caste and economic position. Individual decision based love marriages, which were the major avenues for intercaste transmission, were highly condemned and fewer in number.
TECHNOLOGICAL INTERVENTION
But with the advent of technology and internet, there was a direct surge in the access to knowledge, economic activity and job opportunities. This helped the subsequent generations break from the bounds and direct control of familial structure by gaining economic independence5. This is observed to have kick started the process of non-conformity in a larger scale as the next generation was starting to lose the relevance of the prior said benefits and ideologies. The avenues of mating, has evolved from a familial structure to an individual level. But presently the Indian population majorly consists of the people of a generation prior to the technological intervention. Therefore respective sanctions for non conformity can be seen in various forms ranging from honour killings, family abandonment to constrained familial relationships etc.
UNDERTONES OF CASTEISM IN MODERNITY
The current generation is the first generation to have a first hand experience with technological intervention. But this generation has also received their primary socialisation in a pre-technological world. Thusly, the struggle amid this contradiction between the primary and secondary socialisation they have internalised can be seen in several instances. Pre-existing notions of caste purity and heteronormativity can be seen from individual preferences of such a generation. In an all inclusive platform for mating and socialising, mild undertones of casteist pride can be seen from the tinder and Instagram bios that identify the individual as Brahmin or Jatt for the simple sake of gaining desirability. This might have rooted from the primary socialisation that the individuals received about his or her higher caste position in the caste hierarchy or from the stereotypical notions of desirability propagated among their parent and grandparents.
CONCLUSION
Therefore the claim that – “The era of dating apps promising a greater agency as imagined in terms of accessing and practicing desires beyond the heteronormative familial control propagating caste purity” though made possible through technological intervention, has been limited by the primary socialisation received by the present generation. This dynamics might change with the next generation, unless this generation inherently externalises the undertones they execute to the next generations.
1 Rajos F, “Institutions” (obo)
2 Though several other factors weighed in to replace monarchy with democracy, industrial revolution played an essential part in disproving the former’s benefit in particular.
3 McCoy , David B. “(PDF) the Impact of Socialization on Personality Formation ...” Researchgate.net, Research Gate , Jan. 1990, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234645134_The_Impact_of_Socialization_on_Personality_Formation_and_Gender_Role_Development
4 Berger, Peter, and Thomas Luckmann . “Berger Social Construction of Reality - per Flensburg.” Http://Perflensburg.se/, Penguin Books, http://perflensburg.se/Berger%20social-construction-of-reality.pdf
5 It’s important to note that Technological interference has an relieving effect only on the individual agency restrictions but not on the privileges or disadvantages that’s passed from his/her/their past generations.