United Un-tied
These days the mantra of being un-tied has got on in to the minds of the youth. My casual talking with the youth and vice-versa has not stopped and their candid confessions too keep flowing and inspiring me to write more. Thus keeping me away from my frustrated state of affairs.
'Salaam Namaste', 'No strings attached', these are the mantras that the youngsters tell me. On asking them Why So? They would look at me and give a typical sounding answer “Uncle look at you, and also the other case in my family and one there and here and so on….”
“Live In” is also what they call. That is quite opposite in the commitments to Marriage. Funnily but sensibly enough, Opposite of “Live In” in other terms may also be called as “Die Out”. Which means if
'Salaam Namaste', 'No strings attached', these are the mantras that the youngsters tell me. On asking them Why So? They would look at me and give a typical sounding answer “Uncle look at you, and also the other case in my family and one there and here and so on….”
“Live In” is also what they call. That is quite opposite in the commitments to Marriage. Funnily but sensibly enough, Opposite of “Live In” in other terms may also be called as “Die Out”. Which means if
"No-Strings-Attached" = "Live in",
then it’s opposite "Marriage" = "Die out".
And why not with such one side binding win lose laws. Be it a 406 or 498a or whatever. It is either Lose Lose or Lose Win.
But with “Live In”, Should one recall those happy ones as “…and they remained happily unmarried ever after…” Or I would call this situation as “United Un-tied.”
But in Live In what the new generation perceives as Win-Win I would perceive as a pukka “Lose-Lose”. To escape the misuse of law this solution has turned out to be surrogate solution. But both parties are actually loosing out on binding.
But, rather than a surrogate solution, I would still hang on with improvement in the law and making the marriage practices (like not accepting dowry) more practical through mass awareness instead of a blind laws. And recommend the 7 Habits of highly effective people and families and would atone the practice of the very divine 7 vows and rounds that make a successful marriage.
What do you all think?
Jinesh Zaveri.
But with “Live In”, Should one recall those happy ones as “…and they remained happily unmarried ever after…” Or I would call this situation as “United Un-tied.”
But in Live In what the new generation perceives as Win-Win I would perceive as a pukka “Lose-Lose”. To escape the misuse of law this solution has turned out to be surrogate solution. But both parties are actually loosing out on binding.
But, rather than a surrogate solution, I would still hang on with improvement in the law and making the marriage practices (like not accepting dowry) more practical through mass awareness instead of a blind laws. And recommend the 7 Habits of highly effective people and families and would atone the practice of the very divine 7 vows and rounds that make a successful marriage.
What do you all think?
Jinesh Zaveri.
posted by IndianHusbands | 9:48 PM
4 Comments:
“United Un-tied.”---yes thats the call of the day, our generation and the coming generations.
Also most people who live in 'live-in' dont do it because they want to escape the misuse of dowry law only, rather as initially rightly pointed by you 'no strings attached' which means that no huge expenses of wedding, no hassles of divorce proceedings, fees to lawyers, attending courts, property rights, alimony and bitter court battles and yes to some extent even escape the dowry threat etc.
They are free individuals in the relationship with no questions asked. Their idea of commitment is only temporary or as long as they get along. The irony is that thats not what tradition concept of 'commitment' means.
Once the couple or oops I forgot the 'live-in' couple figure out that they dont get along, they can smoothly happily part ways hassle-free instantly as 'no strings attached'.
Unfortunate though for those people who believe in the institution of marraige as this a bitter slap on them as they are hanging in there in between in a pathetic dilema, where they are made fun of if they defend the instit of marriage even more so if they come from a broken marriage(it only justifies others to live-in), but good for those who are comfortable in these live-in situations. Its only going to increase more and more.
And I guess its best to accept them.
Because no law amendements can change this new trend.
Regards
AJ
We have seen 21st century , let wait for 22nd century . The way our goverment and NCW along with all thier sister orginasation with the help and funded by outside country to kill the institution of marriage , the day will not be too far when thier will not be any difference between a Human and A animal .
Stop this Men vs Women fight , stop this legal terrorism in india , otherwise we wonder any one thought , if the institution of marriage get killed who will suffer more men or women ??
Who will suffer more common people or criminals ??
We have strong dought , we really want to give a comfort life for our future child .
21st century dekha , 22nd century dekhna hai ........... legal terrorism in India - Misuse of 498a , anti dowry law .. stop or not !!
Live-in/Going Steady/Long term Boy friends: Elementary Mr.Wattson.... its all evolution of social situations in view of the draconic laws and conditions being imposed on the time-tested institution of marriage.
In this context it would be interesting to examine, why at all marriage came into existence: it was plain evolution of societal norms in view of the survival of Man(the species): the top most instinct programmed into any living being; that of self-propogation of its species.
In primitive societies men could have sex with any women of their tribe/group, and have children from all of them. This situation resulted in the Killing of Women and Children in the times of famine(and hence competition within the tribe, for food, water and other resources- which meant the stronger men would eliminate the weaker women and kids in face of hunger, and this would lead to destruction of the tribe itself in the long run). Its in this context marriage and single-partner rule came into existence in primitive societies, which served good for accountability, survival and self-propogation of Man.
But now the same survival instincts and self-propogation drives men to evolve into Live-in relationships, so that they can evade being under the purview draconian marriage laws(498a especially) and still hope to give birth to children; albiet a bit bastardly in nature!(wherein the child would have to introduce you as "Mom's long term Boy-friend".... sad......... and so is the way evolution is being forced to take course).
Cultures are ever-changing, so will be the society and norms.... until the changes tip over the delicate balance of survival(the same survival which was once safe in the hands of Institution of Marriage)... to Destruction or 'Pralaya', neccesitating a revival and resurgence of mankind, leading to an emergence of a "Brand New world".
Yes we need to await the Resurgence..... its gonna get us for sure and fast.
Marriages and live-in relationships are man-made social arrangements. Being a mother or father is a biological issue. If a couple is willing and able to bear and raise a child successfully in the Indian society (which is quite difficult) then the child still has a mother and father and there should not be anything bastardly about the child. If live-in relationships are accepted, then people have a choice of entering or staying out of legal contracts. Either way, it is the friendship, love and respect between two individuals that matters. When these ingredients are missing there is no meaning in co-existence. Under such circumstances, live-in relationships allow an easy way out. Bad marriages can ruin lives if they are sustained (affecting physical and mental health and well-being) or if they are terminated (you guessed it - being 498aed and all the good stuff that ensues).
There are a lot of wonderful men and women. Life can be great when shared with the right person. So, find a good partner, be reeeeeeeeally sure that he/she's the person you can co-exist with and then decide whether to marry or just stay together because if you love and respect each other, it does not matter which option you go for. Being married is more practical though in the context of most countries.
Post a Comment
<< Home