GS Paper 1 12.5 marks · 200w 14 min Medium
How do you explain the statistics that show that the sex ratio in Tribes in India is more favourable to women than the sex ratio among Scheduled Castes?
Subtopic: Indian Society · sex ratio, gender and social structure
How to structure your answer
Introduction (Census figures: ST sex ratio well above SC and national averages) → Women's economic value in tribal livelihoods → Marriage practices: bride price, remarriage, matriliny → Weaker Sanskritic-patriarchal norms and low sex selection → Why SCs fare worse: internalisation of mainstream patriarchy, dowry, son preference → Caveat: eroding tribal advantage → Conclusion
Detailed model answer
248 words · target 200 words · 14 min
Census 2011 recorded a sex ratio of 990 among Scheduled Tribes against 945 among Scheduled Castes and 943 nationally. The gap is best explained by social structure, not income — both groups are poor, yet their gender orders differ.
Why tribal sex ratios are more favourable
- Women are central to tribal livelihoods — shifting cultivation, collection of minor forest produce and wage labour — so daughters are economic assets; ST female work participation is the highest of any social group.
- Marriage customs differ: bride price is common rather than dowry, and widow remarriage, divorce and choice in marriage carry little stigma. Some tribes (Khasi, Garo) are matrilineal.
- Son preference tied to property inheritance, lineage and funerary ritual is weak; sex-selective abortion is rare (reinforced by limited access to ultrasound technology).
Why SC ratios are lower
- Despite exclusion, SC communities live embedded in mainstream agrarian society and have internalised its patriarchal norms — a Sanskritisation effect: spread of dowry, son preference and restrictions on women.
- Poverty combined with discrimination produces higher girl-child mortality through neglect in nutrition, immunisation and healthcare-seeking for daughters.
- Landholding aspirations and dowry burdens among SCs sharpen the perception of daughters as liabilities, a calculus far weaker in tribal economies.
The comparison shows that patriarchy, not poverty alone, drives the deficit of women — two equally poor groups produce very different sex ratios because their gender norms differ. The caution is that displacement, assimilation and the spread of dowry into tribal belts are eroding the tribal advantage — an argument for protecting, not just celebrating, tribal gender norms.
What an examiner expects to see
- Anchor with data: Census 2011 sex ratio — ST 990, SC 945, all-India 943.
- Tribal women's high economic participation (forest produce, cultivation, labour) makes daughters assets, not liabilities.
- Bride price instead of dowry, easy widow remarriage and matrimonial choice reduce the perceived cost of daughters.
- Weak Sanskritic son preference and negligible sex-selective abortion among STs.
- SCs have absorbed mainstream patriarchal norms (dowry, son preference) via Sanskritisation despite their own marginalisation.
- Poverty plus discrimination produces excess female child mortality among SCs through nutritional and healthcare neglect.
- Caveat: the tribal advantage is narrowing with displacement, assimilation and the spread of dowry into tribal areas.
Concrete cases, schemes and judgments
- Census 2011: ST sex ratio 990 vs SC 945 and national 943.
- Matrilineal Khasi and Garo communities of Meghalaya where lineage and property pass through women.
- Prevalence of bride price (e.g., among Gonds and Santhals) in contrast to dowry in caste society.
- M.N. Srinivas's concept of Sanskritisation explaining upward-imitative adoption of patriarchal norms.
- High female work participation rates among STs relative to all social groups in Census and PLFS data.
Terminology to weave into the answer
sex ratiobride priceSanskritisationfemale work participationson preferencematriliny