Exploring the Roots and Impact of Women’s Movements in Colonial India

Women in colonial India did not simply wait for change to arrive – they demanded it, organized for it, and in many cases paid a heavy price for it. But to understand women’s movements in colonial India, we first need to step back and ask a foundational question: what makes any collection of people a “movement” at all? The story of women’s mobilization in this era is inseparable from the broader dynamics of social movements – and it is a story that stretches from quiet religious dissent to mass political action.

What is a social movement? 🔗

A social movement is more than a protest or a moment of unrest. Sociologist Charles Tilly describes social movements as sustained campaigns in which ordinary people make collective claims on those in power – through public gatherings, demonstrations, petitions, and the formation of associations. Political scientist Sidney Tarrow similarly defines them as collective challenges based on common purposes and solidarity, carried out in sustained interaction with authorities and opponents. What distinguishes a social movement from spontaneous collective action is precisely this durability and organization: a shared identity, a clear grievance, and coordinated strategies for change.

Research on social movement structure identifies several key features: a strong organizational base with leaders and members; a political or social agenda; collective actions oriented toward clear objectives; and interpretive frameworks that define a problem and motivate others to act. When we apply these criteria to women’s movements in colonial India, we find not a single, unified campaign, but a layered, evolving set of mobilizations – each shaped by time, class, caste, and colonial context.

The colonial backdrop: Why women’s movements emerged 🔗

The women’s movement in India began as a social reform movement in the 19th century. It emerged from the same historical circumstances as the broader reform efforts of that era – efforts sparked by the collision of traditional Indian society with British colonialism and European Enlightenment ideas. The British colonial project brought English-language education, initially designed to train Indians for administrative roles, which created an upper-class Indian elite that began questioning existing social practices. British missionaries also entered the picture, establishing schools and homes for widows, opposing practices like sati, child marriage, and purdah.

This produced a paradox that historians have noted closely: Indian reformers, exposed to Western rationalism and liberalism, sought to build a modern society – yet one still rooted in Indian tradition. The “woman question” became central to this effort. How women were treated was seen as a measure of a civilization’s progress, and colonial critics used the condition of Indian women as a justification for British rule. Indian male reformers responded by taking up women’s causes – but largely on their own terms.

Early forms of dissent: Religion and culture as sites of resistance 🔗

Before there were organized women’s organizations or formal campaigns, resistance existed in cultural and religious forms. The history of feminism in India can be divided into three phases: the first beginning in the mid-19th century with reformists advocating for women’s rights through educational and social change; the second from 1915 to independence, marked by women’s organized participation in the nationalist movement; and the third emerging post-independence around legal equality and political representation.

The earliest phase was primarily driven by male reformers who spoke out against practices that severely restricted women’s lives – sati (widow immolation), child marriage, the prohibition on widow remarriage, and restrictions on women’s education. These were not abstract concerns: they shaped the daily existence and survival of millions of women. Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s campaign against sati represented a watershed moment in Indian women’s history, combining religious argumentation – he contended that Hindu scriptures did not sanction the practice – with public advocacy through his newspaper Sambad Kaumudi.

Other reformers followed. Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar championed widow remarriage, leading to the Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act of 1856. Reform organizations like the Brahmo Samaj and Ramakrishna Mission became institutional vehicles for these causes. Due to the efforts of Raja Rammohan Roy, William Bentinck made the practice of sati illegal under Regulation XVII of 1829 of the Bengal Code. Legislative change followed social pressure – a pattern that would define women’s movements throughout the colonial period.

Women finding their own voices 🔗

While early reforms were largely driven by men, women were not passive recipients of these efforts. By the late 19th century, educated women began to assert themselves – writing, organizing, and speaking directly about their own oppression.

Savitribai Phule: Pioneer of women’s education 🔗

In 1848, Savitribai Phule and her husband Jyotirao Phule opened the nation’s first girls’ school at Bhidewada in Pune, with a curriculum that included mathematics, science, and social studies – in direct defiance of strong social opposition. Savitribai, who became India’s first professionally trained female headmistress, carried an extra sari to school because conservative opponents would pelt her with stones and dung on her way. By the end of 1851, the Phules were running three girls’ schools with approximately 150 students enrolled. Savitribai Phule raised the problem of women’s oppression and argued that women must receive an education as they were in no way inferior to men. Her literary work, including her 1854 poetry collection Kavya Phule, also challenged caste hierarchy and patriarchal tradition simultaneously – making her arguably India’s first feminist philosopher.

Pandita Ramabai: Challenging religion and patriarchy together 🔗

Pandita Ramabai was a pioneering advocate for women’s education and social reform in 19th-century India who believed education was the key to empowering women and freeing them from oppressive traditions. Born in 1858 into a Brahmin family, she mastered Sanskrit at a time when this was almost unheard of for women, earning the title of “Pandita” (scholar) from Calcutta University. She went on to found the Arya Mahila Samaj in 1882 in Poona to educate women and address child marriage and other harmful customs, and later established the Sharada Sadan – a residential school that offered academic education and vocational training specifically for child widows. Pandita Ramabai’s critique was distinctly intersectional: she challenged not only gender oppression but also the caste system and religious orthodoxy that underpinned both.

Tarabai Shinde and the beginnings of feminist writing 🔗

Tarabai Shinde wrote India’s first feminist text, Stri Purush Tulana (A Comparison Between Women and Men), in 1882 – a direct and sharp critique of male double standards and the social norms that oppressed women. These early feminist writings, often in regional languages, reached women who were not part of formal organizations and planted seeds of consciousness that would grow in the decades that followed.

From social reform to organized political action 🔗

The expansion of women’s education in the late 19th century produced a sizable number of English-educated middle-class women who made their presence felt in political activities. This shift from education to organized activism was gradual but significant. Women moved from being beneficiaries of reform to architects of it.

The early 20th century marked a decisive turn. Under Gandhi’s leadership, women’s participation in nationalist movements was not incidental – it was integral. Gandhi actively sought women’s involvement in the Non-Cooperation Movement (1920-22) and the Civil Disobedience Movement (1930-34), framing women’s participation in terms of sacrifice and moral strength that resonated across class and regional lines. The Non-Cooperation Movement and the Civil Disobedience Movement saw significant participation from women across different regions, as they joined boycotts, led marches, and courted arrest in large numbers.

Leaders like Sarojini Naidu, Annie Besant, and Kasturba Gandhi inspired thousands of women to join protests, marches, and boycotts against British rule. These figures were not just symbols – they held leadership positions within the Indian National Congress and demonstrated that women’s political agency was both possible and necessary.

Organized women’s institutions: The All India Women’s Conference 🔗

The establishment of formal women’s organizations marked a new stage in the movement’s evolution. The All India Women’s Conference (AIWC) was founded by Margaret Cousins in 1927 and held its first conference at Fergusson College, Pune, aiming to build a society based on social justice, equal rights, and opportunities for every individual, irrespective of birth or gender. Its founding members included figures like Sarojini Naidu and Kamla Devi Chattopadhyaya. The AIWC connected social reform with nationalist politics and operated closely with the Indian National Congress, making mass mobilization of women an integral part of Indian nationalism rather than a separate feminist concern.

The AIWC’s work spanned education advocacy, campaigns against child marriage, demands for women’s suffrage, and attention to women’s economic conditions. These associations emphasized women’s education issues, developed livelihood strategies for working-class women, and organized national-level women’s associations. The organizational infrastructure built during this period would outlast colonialism itself – continuing into independent India as the institutional backbone of women’s rights advocacy.

Intersectionality and the limits of the movement 🔗

Any honest account of women’s movements in colonial India must acknowledge their significant limitations. The social reform movement before independence first addressed the woman’s condition within Hindu society, but this was largely restricted to women in the upper castes and was sponsored chiefly by men who left the patriarchal social structure untouched. The concerns of Dalit women, Muslim women, working-class women, and women in rural areas were frequently subordinated to the agendas of upper-caste, educated, urban reformers.

Savitribai Phule and Pandita Ramabai were among the exceptions who explicitly addressed caste alongside gender – making their work distinctly more radical than mainstream reform efforts. But the structural dominance of upper-caste women in leadership roles created blind spots that would persist in Indian feminist organizing long after independence. This has led to the creation of caste-specific feminist organisations and movements that continue to challenge the dominant narrative of a unified women’s movement.

The lasting impact: What colonial-era women’s movements built 🔗

Despite these contradictions, the women’s movements of colonial India produced tangible and lasting change. They generated legislation – from the abolition of sati in 1829 to the Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act of 1856 to a series of property and marriage rights reforms in the early 20th century. They built institutions: schools, residential homes for widows, training centres, and national organizations. And they created a political consciousness among women that would prove critical to India’s independence movement and its constitutional promise of gender equality.

The movements also demonstrated something conceptually important about social movements themselves: that they are never singular or uniform. Women’s mobilization in colonial India was diverse in ideology, strategy, class base, and regional character. It operated simultaneously at the level of cultural critique, religious reform, educational activism, legal advocacy, and mass nationalist politics. This multidimensional quality – rather than being a weakness – reflected the complexity of the oppressions being challenged.

What do you think? The women’s movements in colonial India were largely initiated by upper-caste, educated women – does this mean the concerns of marginalized women were structurally excluded from the start, or did these movements still create meaningful openings for broader feminist organizing? And given that early reforms were largely led by men speaking on behalf of women, at what point do we consider a movement truly “women’s”?

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movement
2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10162496/
3. https://www.insightsonindia.com/modern-indian-history/other-dimensions/women-movement/
4. https://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/41972/1/Unit-1.pdf
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism_in_India
6. https://socio.health/gender-and-society/colonial-women-movements-india-social-reforms/
7. https://pwonlyias.com/udaan/women-social-reform-movements/
8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savitribai_Phule
9. https://journals.calstate.edu/jet/article/view/2359
10. https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/pandita-ramabai/
11. https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/social-reformers/
12. https://delhipathshala.in/history-of-the-womens-movements-in-india/
13. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0049085712454052