Who controls a woman's body?

If a woman is asked this question, can she boldly say that her body is truly her own? Or are there other stakeholders? Very recently, I came to know about a 52-year-old Dutch woman who was tattooed around 250 times by her partner. She was in an abusive relationship, and he tattooed his name, initials and the tagline 'Property of Hans' all over her body. Reports claim that the tattoos covered nearly 90 per cent of her body, including her face, and she had to undergo numerous painful laser-removal sessions. How scary it is for a woman to become someone's private property! How painful it must be when a relationship unleashes so much toxicity that even her body turns into a tool to impose the so-called owner's authority?

In classics, fairy tales and myths, we have often come across voluptuous feminine bodies that tempted male desire and became the reason for fierce wars and never-ending expeditions. Time and again, the female body has been portrayed as a territory to be conquered; a prize to be won. If we look at the socio-political scenario even today, a woman's body continues to be a medium through which different power structures extend their authority. Within the family, her body becomes a tool of honour. Within religious structures, it is viewed in terms of purity and modesty. In the visual entertainment industry, her body is commodified. In social media spaces, it becomes a source of voyeuristic pleasure. And in intimate relationships, a woman's body is often reduced to her partner's "private property".

Patriarchy has always asserted its authority over women's bodies through modest dress codes, purity norms and beauty standards. Those who violate patriarchal expectations of "being feminine" are often subjected to domestic violence and slut-shaming, which are frequently dismissed as "normal" in married life and expected to be silently endured by the "good wife". Patriarchy teaches that only through such painful endurance can a woman become the embodiment of love and sacrifice. I have noticed that the word consent receives attention mainly when an atrocity like rape occurs. But is a woman's consent sought when patriarchy uses her body to impose its politics? Do all her pregnancies happen with her consent? Does every sexual relationship happen with her willing consent? Does she consent to all the emotional trauma inflicted upon her? These questions take the discussion beyond physical violence and into the realm of coercive control.

When I saw the photograph of the Dutch woman with the "Property" tattoo, I could not help comparing it with the traditional symbols of marriage such as the mangalsutra, thali, sindoor and wedding rings. Are these also subtle patriarchal ways of communicating to society that she is now someone's "private property"? Of course, these markers may simply be explained as symbols of marriage. Patriarchy will always have explanations to convince us. Then why are married men not expected to wear equivalent symbols to publicise their marital status? The same patriarchy that eagerly issues a visible "private property certificate" to married women spares married men from carrying any such ownership markers. As always, patriarchy remains generous to men. Even after marriage, men are rarely treated as their partner's private property. Ownership, it seems, is expected to flow only in one direction.