Saturday, May 05, 2007

Live-in Relationships Are a Sign of Progress....(?)

In a random conversation with a few friends (an international group) on cultures, norms and beliefs across countries, one of my Indian friends made a comment which stayed with me for a while and got me thinking. The comment was "India is making progress. Today you can see many more live-in relationships in the major cities."

I was silent. A strong proponent of individuals making their own choices on a life-partner, even having argued with my mother on many an occassion that live-in relationships are great, I was suddenly, strangely, in doubt. The more I thought about it the more stongly I felt the opposite. Live-in relationships were NOT a sign of "progress". They were, if anything, a sign of movement from a 'family-based' society to an 'individualistic' society.

For quality of life in general, having lived most of my life in the former and having spent almost two years in the latter, I strongly prefer the former - 'family-based' society. I look back at my parents lives, at my aunts and uncles, neighbours, everyone. Most of them went in for the so-called 'arranged marriage' route. Yes most were arranged, but its still self-selection, there was no force. They entered their lives marrying someone they had not really known. In the case that it was not arranged, still they went in with relatively lower expectations to today's generation. They had their dreams and their fears. However they came in ready to compromise. They came in believing that they have to keep the boat rocking till the end. They came in knowing that no matter how long you live with a person you will always have to make adjustments and compromises. As long as one has love for the other, for kids, for the family, one will be willing to make compromises to keep the institution of marriage secure. Why? Because instability in a marriage not only affects the two individuals concerned, but society at large. Starting highest from the individuals, to the kids, to the parents, to the siblings, to the friends, to society at large, the effect is felt.

Hence, in their journey of life, they made many adjustments, compromised with many of each other's quirks, lowered expectations when necessary. The primary objective was to keep the boat sailing. What was the result? The kids had a better life than otherwise. They had both their parents there for them together. They had their ups and down too, but they had a stable home to come back to. In the process they were taught to compromise, to learn to accept, to be tolerant. A very valuable lesson. Life throws googlies at us (sorry for the cricket jargon). We need to be mentally prepared to face them, catch them and live with it when we cant catch. We need support, however strong we are, we need to be loved and love and feel that there are people who care for us. The system that I grew up in gave me that feeling. Gave me that sense of belonging. I asked multiple people, my mom, dad, aunt, uncle, neighbour, cousin, friend. They all said the same. Yes, it has its downsides, but at the end of the day the upsides, the satisfaction, the fulfillment and the joy of seeing your family together makes up for all the pain and individual gains one gave up. Again this is a matter of personal choice. So I dont say one is better than the other. The 'individualistic' society has it upsides too. However my choice lies with the former.

Thus to me, 'live-in' relationships signify a lowering of the tolerance levels, a movement towards the 'individualistic' form of society, which is good for some, but for me its a little scary. I question my own desire of going into a marriage 'fully-knowing' my partner. I question whether that is realistically possible. I question whether I should give up individual wants for my parents preferences. Though I feel very grateful for my parents not imposing their beliefs on me. Then I wonder if I am losing out on benefitting from their experienced judgement and foresight of who's good or bad for me by taking up the task myself. I wonder if I am brave enough, self-less enough to say yes, I am ready to keep the institution of marriage, the boat, giving up some of my own strong wants. I wonder....

With many individualistic people like me today, I wonder if the future generation, our kids, will have the same security, the feeling of oneness, the so-many-people-care-for-me feeling that I grew up with, that I so took for granted until I came to the US where for the first time in my life I felt all alone........

Labels: ,

8 Comments:

Blogger Unknown said...

very similar experience to yours Ms.C, until I came in here - I didn't realize the values that were imbibed in us when we were kids & has definitely kept me in good stead (in my 3 & half years of stay in US) there have been moments/situations & our 'family-based-societal' upbringing (viz., in B'lore to be specific) is what makes our culture a bit more valuable than the western one (though any culture has its pros & cons)though another sad part is...with the high influence of the western values in major cities like b'lore,mumbai,delhi etc....i've also come across individuals who feel their choice of 'live-in' is justified...but the question remains....would that help in the 'progressive evolution of any society'? to which i must totally disagree...even given our freedom to choose partners the institution of marriage is presides over a 'live-in' relationship

4:03 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Everything depends on how people thinking and how they accepting things in their way! Its not depend on region or country and anything. How they give respect to values and morality and importance.And we can't say anything its is different is revolution or sign of progress! Progress is their way of thinking and way of adopting their values, values are in the sense related to our culture and emotions and society not other than that. More and more relations with others.

6:01 AM  
Blogger Shalini said...

I feel in someways like you do Chai.. I am not sure how good live-in relationships are, but I wouldn't really consider them as 'progress'!!(??!?) It looks like an extension of 'ME', 'EGO'.. where you would stay with a person of your choice, without committing yourself to him, but judge every move and mood of his to decide whether you would really like to legalize your togetherness!!

Well, now that I said that - there is also an element of insecurity in you, which says, 'Don't expect me to commit, I really don't want the responsibility of supporting you and taking care of you!!'

11:12 AM  
Blogger Deepak Krishnan said...

interesting points!! as someone who stays in a state which has legalized live ins (Maharashtra - of course this needs to be actually made into a law; but the cabinet has given its nod)I feel that there are a lot of grey areas with regard to this:

1. Many enter live in relations since they are in the same city as someone they are seeing/are committed to

2. In some cases, live ins happen due to the stupidity of house owners who refuse to let out houses to single guys/gals

3. For some its a matter of being "modern" and "progressive"

Of course, I second your opinion when you say that this is not a sign of progress!!! And three cheers for the family-based atmosphere that I have had in Namma Bengaluru :D

9:25 AM  
Blogger Vaibhav Khire said...

Indian culture has always voted in favour of society being greater than individual. Arranged marriages, caste system, prohibited remarriages for the most part, marriages within caste are all the different forms in which society controls the individual. And we all know places when it gets suffocating.

West on the other hand gives the utmost freedom to individual, with no care what-so-ever for the society. Hence multiple divorces, single parents, no bonding with family result out.

Both have their own pros and cons but I would personally vote for a stronger society than a stronger individual. 'To sacrifice one for the many' is an accepted golden rule. Hence even the kings go to forests to preserve father's wishes and a king lets go off his wife to respect the subjects' whims. But this society lasted 5000 years and to the most part has been able to preserve the sanity of the individual. Without the support of the society, how far can an individual go in today's world?

To take it a step further, the real individual is within and only a shadow is cast on the outside. The soul, the 'atman', the 'I', the 'Consciousness' is the real individual, rest all are mere projections. How many individualists can say that individual is free in them and not playing to society's whims?

Society has to step in to prevent the degeneration of its constituents, and individuals in turn have to rise from time to time to prevent stagnation of the society. Balance, I guess, is again the key.

Nice post, good thoughts and sorry for the tangential comment. :)

9:31 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

longchamp pas cher, ray ban sunglasses, tory burch outlet, longchamp outlet, tiffany and co, louis vuitton, christian louboutin outlet, oakley sunglasses wholesale, louis vuitton, prada outlet, chanel handbags, jordan shoes, christian louboutin, longchamp outlet, gucci handbags, tiffany jewelry, nike roshe, polo ralph lauren, nike air max, louis vuitton outlet, nike air max, louis vuitton outlet, uggs on sale, ray ban sunglasses, louboutin pas cher, prada handbags, cheap oakley sunglasses, ugg boots, ugg boots, sac longchamp pas cher, jordan pas cher, nike free, replica watches, michael kors pas cher, burberry pas cher, oakley sunglasses, oakley sunglasses, replica watches, kate spade outlet, oakley sunglasses, air max, louis vuitton outlet, nike free run, longchamp outlet, polo outlet, ray ban sunglasses, christian louboutin shoes, nike outlet, christian louboutin uk

5:35 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

herve leger, gucci, bottega veneta, new balance shoes, louboutin, iphone cases, north face outlet, hollister clothing, vans outlet, nike roshe run, p90x workout, mac cosmetics, nike huaraches, longchamp uk, hollister, converse, babyliss, celine handbags, jimmy choo outlet, beats by dre, soccer jerseys, reebok outlet, chi flat iron, ferragamo shoes, giuseppe zanotti outlet, timberland boots, mont blanc pens, nike trainers uk, wedding dresses, asics running shoes, abercrombie and fitch, north face outlet, insanity workout, oakley, vans, baseball bats, soccer shoes, instyler, lululemon, valentino shoes, ray ban, nfl jerseys, hollister, nike air max, hermes belt, converse outlet, ralph lauren, nike air max, mcm handbags, ghd hair

5:39 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

coach outlet, swarovski crystal, hollister, thomas sabo, canada goose outlet, moncler outlet, marc jacobs, toms shoes, links of london, karen millen uk, canada goose, canada goose, louis vuitton, louis vuitton, moncler outlet, lancel, louis vuitton, montre pas cher, ugg uk, wedding dresses, canada goose uk, juicy couture outlet, pandora charms, barbour, pandora uk, pandora jewelry, replica watches, moncler, ugg,ugg australia,ugg italia, ugg pas cher, barbour uk, moncler uk, canada goose jackets, canada goose outlet, moncler, ugg,uggs,uggs canada, supra shoes, canada goose outlet, moncler, pandora jewelry, louis vuitton, moncler, louis vuitton, ugg, doudoune moncler, juicy couture outlet, canada goose, swarovski

5:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home