Why marry?

When I was growing up, the idea of remaining single was considered impractical, radical (in a bad way) and even stupid. When men and women reached “the marriageable age,” they were more concerned about the kind of person they wanted to marry rather than whether they wanted to be married at all. It was assumed that everyone wanted to be married - of course, they did.

Men who tried to get married later or who were hard to please were adviced by all and sundry to 'settle down.' Visions of hot meals, clean houses and happy children were dangled in front of them. Men who didn't jump at the first chance of marriage, despite these temptations were viewed suspiciously – 'Surely there is someone.' Their parents were pitied and they went around airing their woes to all and sundry with scant regard for their children's privacy. 

Women who didn't want to get married were largely ignored, their reluctance put down to shyness and they were married off anyway. Excessive resistance was again viewed with suspicion, because parents believed that they were already in a relationship. If no such evidence was found and the parents were too liberal to force the girl into marriage, they threatened their daughters with depictions of sexual harassment, ostracism and, of course, loneliness. (It is interesting point that men were recommended marriage as a temptation while women were recommended it as a protection.) Parents, in extreme cases, threatened to hurt themselves if their offspring did not marry. Both men and women who wanted to stay single, were attacked with warnings of lonesome old age. 

None of these is a legitimate reason for marriage any more. Old age, regardless of marital status is, for most people, a somewhat lonesome stage of life. One is living life at a different pace from those around, often with reduced faculties and memories of a more productive and rewarding life. A spouse may be good company at this point, but not necessarily so. A bad spouse can be a terrible burden to the overflowing cup of elderly woes.

Both men and women can get good food and a clean house by hiring cooks and maids. They are professionals who do a better job and involve less trouble than a partner – whether you are married or co-habiting. And as long as you pay them fairly, and treat them courteously, many will go out of their way to make you happy.

As for sexual harassment, it is a sad reality for every woman – race, culture and marital status notwithstanding. Most random sexual abusers tend to target younger women, and it is true that perhaps a sindoor or a mangalsutra does act as a deterrent for many roadside abusers, but this is definitely not a rule. Any independent, successful or wealthy-looking woman is always viewed as a threat by weaker men. Even if they don't want them for themselves, they would still like to take them down a peg or two. Being married means nothing under those circumstances.

Unmarried people are targeted and even ostracised in closed communities. Even in upwardly mobile, urban communities, a less extreme form of boycott does happen - in family and social gatherings. Many single men and women feel a little "off" with a group of married people. Married people (especially women) seem to talk predominantly about family. (Or perhaps I'm just meeting the wrong kind of married women.) Even independent, successful single people are made to feel a little inferior to the married people. They get slight-condescension-mixed-with-pity vibes around them, even by those who are less successful. After all, they have failed the big one – marriage.

Despite these inconveniences, singlehood seems a haven from the evils of a traditional Indian marriage. For a few decades now, some people have been arguing that marriage is an outdated institution. With men and women becoming more educated and better paid and able to afford more services and security, the only sensible reason to tie oneself in matrimonial knots is if marriage is going to make you happier than you are. And a concoction of compromises, which forms the basis of the old-fashioned marriage, does not seem to be a great way to be happier.

Even today, across the board, married women are treated like ignorant dependants by imposing the yoke of “culture” upon them. Since we were raised by a generation that had still not shaken off the said yoke, we too bow down to many of the expectations placed upon us, despite access to education and a healthy self-esteem. Many of us say that though we are feminists, we still “adjust” and “compromise.”

Few of us would dare to walk out merely because we were not treated as equals. We take it as a given that sometimes our opinions are ignored, sometimes the spouse and/or his family is rude to us, sometimes we are not allowed to do certain things, sometimes we are not included in decisions that are made about our children, sometimes we are expected to undertake religious or cultural duties that we don't believe in, sometimes our dress code is dictated to us.....

The list of these 'sometimes' is pretty long. Some times, it is so long that almost all the time, we are made to behave in a manner which is opposed to our own nature/inclinations/beliefs. There are very few times that a woman is able to be true to her own nature. The merits of staying true to your convictions is portrayed in the Tamil-language film "Kalyaana Agathigal" (Prisoners of marriage). The film features a group of 7 women in a women's hostel who rebel against a patriarchal society. 

The least feminist of them, the orphaned Amulu (played beautifully by actress Saritha) listens to all her friends' rants but remains cheerful and positive and happily in love with a Christian news-reporter. At the end of the film, as each of the women find resolution in their own way, Amulu too gets married. 

Her mother-in-law "allows her" to pray to her own God, but forbids her to display the idol openly. Amulu, with a low-paying job and no family and still very much in love with her husband, walks out of her love marriage the morning after the wedding and returns to the hostel. 

Her friends feel that it was a small compromise that she could have made, but she decides that it is better to be herself than change for the unreasonable, narrow minded caprices of someone else. And she does not want to stay with her man who cannot ensure that she is free and independent in her marriage. 

I don't know how long it will take for women to take such decisions and have the guts to face the backlash. Or for men to let their wives be.