Tuesday, 30 March 2010

Live-in or married

I watched Barkha Dutt's talk show on NDTV after the Supreme Court of India said there was nothing wrong with premarital sex or live in relationships. I honestly never realized it was a crime, if the partners were over a certain age and had consented to the act.

Having heard all the excitement on what I call the channel of "lipstick journalism", I looked up the news and realized the Courts have long since maintained this, but NDTV is our crusader for all the Western values including gay rights, pub culture, live in relationships....spends hours of precious prime time TV to these issues, while the country reels under corrupt governance and slow progress in areas of crucial importance such as infrastructure, health and education at grassroot level.

Khushboo (the actress who had 20 cases against her for saying it is alright to indulge in premarital sex as long as one uses precautions), her lawyer said- "Living in should not be an aspirational value, as values such as these have broken Western societies and the world is looking up to India simply because of its unique social fabric which is a result of its traditional values..."

Probably commissurate with my grey hair and teenage daughter, I completely agree with this. Yes, people do have rights and should not be harrassed if they are living together, but in spite of the law of the land, I would prefer it never to recieve "social sanction", even though that remains only a dinosaurish wish on my part.

A 20 year old man said on the show-"Marriage has to go." Uh o ok...what can we say? Shaadi. com guy said- "Institutions have to be challenged and then they emerge stronger" All the sugar and clarified butter in your mouth, pal. (Tere muh me ghee shakkar) May your business scale the skies- may our children get married and live happily ever after.

In the UK though, married, single, single with partner, separated, divorced....all are in equal proportions in the society and I meet so many young nurses or midwives who decide to get married, after a few years (and a few children) of living together. It seems like a huge waste of few thousand pounds on a lavish wedding, (dress, cake, hall, food, drinks...etc) and I have often questioned the rationale-"do you feel any different as Mrs so and so?".

Most of the time they are emotional and romantic and see it as a confirmation of the man's love and commitment to the relationship. Some believe one should be married before having kids, others think names of children and money matters are better managed. Yet, I dont get a satisfactory explanation and most of them are happier

I think a change is always nice. However, it is not so easy for married couples to change status-"chalo ek baar phir se ajnabi ban jaaye...hum dono" No, one can't do away with the familiarity of marriage, where the allegation is that the partners take each other for granted and the dynamics is different.

Listening to Kalpana Lajmi who has been living with Bhupen Hazarika for past 38 years, it seems she didnt marry lest she be asked to cook dinner and dress in a sari, everyday. But the dynamics in marriages today are different anyway. Who can be expected to dress and cook traditionally? Not the present jean clad, texting generation brought up on McDonalds and Pizzahuts.

Then there are the celebrities who love to marry in style, in castles and fortresses only to realize they want time out. Simon Cowell is the latest eligible half century old bachelor who has offered a prenuptial contract of God knows how many thousands of dollars and home worth what they will be living in at the time, to his fiancee, who it is predicted, will jump at the offer. So you marry with a back up plan about how to split amicably. How strange and unromantic, might as well just live together, but then I am already a dinosaur.

The Supreme Court and National Commision for women believes that if the rights of women are same if they are married or in a long term relationship, the charm of a live in relationship, which curiously is attractive because of the "No strings attached" clause will fade and the institution of marriage will remain strong.

Wonder what the twenty somethings in urban India think about that. Being a gynaecologist exposes you to the dynamics of relationships everywhere you work, be it UK, Bahrain, South Delhi (designer class) or Noida (call centres).

Live in and party out or get married and stay put? Choice is yours....

3 comments:

rajiv rattan said...

If you think really deep, it stems from a desire to pander to one's own ego or the so called "free spirit" - Mujhe independence chahiye! That love is nothing but sacrifice - putting someone before your own self - in whatever relation in life - this bare fact is totally lost on the new generation! Can the courts replace core human values?

Saras said...

hey brightspark,needs vary, social mores change with time and generations and validity of prevailing systems need updating in accordence with who or under what circumstances one is. the discussions merely brings out various view points.

brightspark said...

Absolutely...it sounds cool to me too, listening to all view points but I am not sure how cool I will find it when it is my own offspring involved.