A woman’s life in most areas of India is usually tied culturally, socially, and emotionally to the men in her life. She was someone’s daughter from birth, later someone’s wife, and eventually someone’s mother. Her individuality is seldom developed as a separate thing from male identifiers. One of the bleakest expressions of this ideology is the manner in which marriage is visually and socially asserted using symbols such as sindoor (vermilion), mangalsutra, toe rings, bangles, and bindi—ritualistic symbols which announce her marital status. But what happens when her husband passes away? These symbols are removed, and with them, one often, her identity, autonomy, and dignity.

This article examines the extent to which patriarchal traditions root so deeply that they instil a taboo regarding women having a life outside or beyond their husbands—particularly after marriage—and how this leads to the social “othering” of widows in India.

Symbols of Marriage: A Cultural Branding

Indian society has had a codified framework for centuries to signify a woman’s marital status through bodily adornments. These include:

Sindoor: Used in the parting of the hair, this red powder is the most conspicuous symbol of a married Hindu woman.

Mangalsutra: Black-gold necklace that the groom fastens around the bride’s neck during the wedding ceremony.

Toe rings (bichiya): Typically worn on the second toe of both feet.

Bangles (choora or glass bangles): In some communities, after marriage, particular colors or types are worn.

Bindis: While today a fashion accessory, traditionally, the bindi also indicated marital status.

All of these ornaments are more than mere adornment; they are, in many ways, a brand, marking that the woman “belongs” to a man. They are incredibly culturally, religiously, and emotionally significant, and their daily maintenance is typically learned by women as part of their duty—their dharma—to their husbands.

While a man can wear a wedding ring or not wear one, a woman is supposed to be acting out her marital status on a daily basis, and doing so happily, as a matter of honour.

Widowhood: The Silent Exile

The sudden stripping of these symbols once a woman’s husband passes away is not only an expression of bereavement—it is usually a coerced and agonising rite of passage. Sindoor is erased. Bangles are shattered. Mangalsutra is unbuckled. In certain communities, widows are commanded to dress in white for the remainder of their lives. Their hair is shaved, jewellery is prohibited, and they are commanded to lead a life of renunciation, piety, and silence.

This ritualistic “erasure” of self stamps the widow not as a person in mourning, but as one whose sole reason for being—her husband—is deceased, making her socially superfluous.

Widowhood in India is thus a personal bereavement, as well as a social death.

The Cultural Message: You Are Because He Is

Beneath these ceremonies exists a strongly embedded patriarchal notion: a woman is worth something because she is a wife. Her adornments are not so much indicators of her marriage as they are indicators of her legitimacy in society. As soon as the husband disappears, the woman becomes incomplete, as if the very purpose of her being has been lost.

This is such a deeply ingrained system of beliefs that even educated, enlightened families in the modern age carry it on. Widows will be kept of ritual celebrations such as weddings or baby showers, allegedly to keep the evil eye at bay. They will be instructed to stay away from festivals or even religious ceremonies, suggesting unobtrusively that their status carries defilement or ill luck.

This is cultural ostracism dressed as piety, not cultural tradition.

The Psychological Cost to Women

These traditions are symbolic in more ways than one; they have deep psychological effects on women. To many widows, the coerced move to a life without hue, without ornament, and without festive celebration is a second death—a murder of the self.

The woman is frequently made to feel burdensome. Her sexuality is more strictly policed. She might be persuaded-or—or forced—to live with relatives, forfeit property rights, or even enter a spiritual retreat.

She is deprived of the fundamental human right to grieve in her own manner, to rebuild her existence, to rediscover joy and love once more. Widows’ remarriage, while officially allowed, remains deeply stigmatised across communities, especially for those above a certain age or with children.

Modern Women, Traditional Chains

Ironically, this empowerment of women through widowhood is in direct contrast to the picture of an empowered cosmopolitan Indian woman that one sees in cities, movies, and boardrooms. Yet the reality is that the patriarchal concept that a woman lives for a man still exists across class, caste, and geography.

Even within educated families, women are quietly socialised to view marriage as the key event of their lives. Phrases such as “What will your in-laws think?” or “Does your husband permit you to work?” reflect the prevailing notion that a woman’s choices, actions, and self-expression must revolve around the man in her life.

This frame of mind is then further supported by mainstream media, in which heroines are seldom depicted with rich lives beyond romantic or wedding stories. Movies glorify women who “give up everything” for their husbands, idealising suffering as love.

A Gendered Double Standard

Significantly, men are not put through the same scrutiny or ritual following the death of a spouse. Widowers are seldom asked to sacrifice colour, joy, or companionship. They are not asked to symbolically “kill” their love or sexual identity. Rather, widowers are compelled to remarry—so they can regain stability, be happy, or have someone to “take care” of them.

This two-tiered standard exposes a root imbalance: while a man’s existence goes on after his wife’s passing, a woman’s existence must come to an end when her husband passes away.

Changing Winds, But Slowly

There have been hints of change in recent years. Feminist movements, liberal religious leaders, and a younger generation more conscious of their rights are now challenging these traditions. Some women opt to keep on wearing their mangalsutra or sindoor even after widowhood, recasting their symbols not as signs of male presence but of memory and love. Others drop them altogether, insisting that their identity is not marital status.

In urban communities, discussion of remarriage, dating, or companionship for widows is gradually picking up. Legal reforms have also benefited widows by facilitating the acquisition of property and the establishment of rights. Groups such as the Guild of Service and Sulabh International are working proactively among widows, particularly in regions such as Vrindavan and Varanasi, providing them with education, employment, and dignity.

But these changes are gradual and uneven. In rural communities, the traditional ways are still deeply ingrained. Social stigma, economic dependence, and ignorance still bind many widows in circles of isolation and deprivation.

What Needs to Change

For this taboo to be broken and a woman’s identity remade to go beyond her husband, a multi-faceted approach is required:

1. Reeducation of Culture: Schools, religious groups, and media should counter the myths of female sacrifice and dependence.
2. Policy Change: Increased enforcement of widow protection laws, financial assistance, and vocational education can economically empower women.
3. Community Discussion: Widows’ families and communities need to mainstream remarriage, companionship, and independence.
4. Symbolic Freedom: Women should be free to decide whether or not they wish to remain in marital symbols—be they of marriage or widowhood.
5. Media Representation: Depictions of women as complete persons—apart from being wives or mothers—can generate new cultural blueprints.

Conclusion: A Woman Is Not a Shadow

It is time to destroy the notion that a woman’s worth lies in a relationship to a man. A woman is not an absence; she is her presence. Her dreams, identity, and worth are not smothered by the presence or absence of a husband. The practices that impose silence and invisibility on widows are not sacred—they are oppressive. And they must be challenged.

To actually celebrate the spirit of equality, Indian society needs to go beyond the romanticisation of suffering and instead build a culture in which all women—whether married, single, or widowed—may live with dignity, autonomy, and happiness.

.    .    .