Caste, family and gendered stereotypes: Romantic relationships among Nepal’s Dalit and non-Dalit Maoist ex-combatants

0Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This study examines the gender dynamics of inter-caste romantic relationships (Dalit/non-Dalit) among Maoist combatants during Nepal’s insurgency (1996–2006). Sixty open-ended interviews were conducted in 2018–2022 with former combatants and leaders in mid-west Nepal, where the Maoist insurgency originated and spread. Drawing on a feminist intersectional perspective, the study reveals that despite the Maoist Party’s ideological promotion of inter-caste marriage as a revolutionary praxis, combatants’ lived experiences exhibited deep contradictions. Despite their ideological commitments, combatants considered broader practices, such as family expectations and societal perceptions, when selecting partners. Women combatants (Dalit and non-Dalit) expressed significant apprehension and actively sought family approval due to the fear of social rejection and future instability, whereas men largely bypassed familial consultations. Furthermore, partner selection frequently relied on enduring caste stereotypes, gendered expectations of labour and ‘worldly’ criteria such as occupation, physical appearance and talent, mirroring broader societal norms that the revolution sought to dismantle and reflecting both the limitations and adaptability of the Maoist ideology in navigating personal and social identities. The study concludes that intimate relationships are a critical site at which revolutionary ideology falters, failing to overcome entrenched patriarchy, caste hierarchies and social constraints, particularly for women, thus highlighting the limits of structural transformation within the movement.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aryal, C. P. (2026). Caste, family and gendered stereotypes: Romantic relationships among Nepal’s Dalit and non-Dalit Maoist ex-combatants. Feminist Review, 143(1 Currents), 48–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/01417789261440916

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free