Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Marriage...

I will in no way deny that marriage is a legal, economic and dominant social institution, which provides a veritable treasure trove of rights, privileges and responsibilities and it is also a significant cultural symbol of sorts. I mean, why wouldn’t anybody want to marry? Surely, it is understandable that people would want to partake in it. But that is definitely not to say that it is without terrific flaws. For all the progressive ideals we frame in our minds as to the division of labor, the surname, work etc. and all the rosy ‘everything will be shared equally between both of us’ type plans, it never really happens, does it? Consciously, or unconsciously we fall back into the age old trap of performing duties which comply with heavily gendered roles and power differentials laid out for us by cultural and societal norms and practices.

And this brings me to,
Reason number 1: Marriage is terribly male-friendly.

It is. Internalized gender role-ing will tell me otherwise, but after a long and hard struggle with my inner demons, I’ve come to realize that marriage does in fact, overwhelmingly favor the guy. On the outset, it seems like we have entered into an age of elysian gender equality within marriage where men and women discuss equal sharing of duties and suchlike and stick to their plans, but that hardly is the case. Once things start sliding into gendered role and power differentials typifying the ‘traditional’ marriage, we tell ourselves that marriage is work, we tell ourselves to be realistic, we fit our brains around that power differential which heavily favors the male, and we settle.

Reason number 2: It is up to the women to make that choice to stay in the workforce or not.

Take childbirth, for instance. Irrespective of the job a woman is in, if there is a question of one spouse leaving his/her respective job to care for the child, most of the damn time, it is the woman who leaves her job. Childbirth just happens to be an extreme example. Take any circumstance which requires one spouse to leave her/his job. To no one’s surprise, it is the woman who usually forgoes her job. Now I do know that most women will say that it is their choice. But we have to look at the cultural relativism and the gendered power equations behind that choice, because most women will simply respond to an internalized gendering of power in such situations and call it their choice.
And yes, you can show me examples of stay-at-home dads’ who opt out of the workforce to take care of their kids. But the percentage of men who do actually opt out are abysmally low, no thanks to the power differential yet again, and the levels of ridicule such men face generally and in terms of them being called ‘henpecked’, ‘pussy whipped’ ‘husband to a ball-buster’ and so on, mostly by other men, extended family and even women, in some cases.

Reason number 3: The ‘wife and mother’ ideal.

Let me state on the outset that I have nothing against women who are good wives and mothers. I do have a problem however with the enormous pressure being ladled upon women, generation after generation to be the perfect wife and the mother, where both require a great deal of subservience on part of the woman, by societal and cultural standards.
A married woman is principally judged by how well she balances and performs her wifely and motherly duties, and there is little or no scope for anything related to her individuality. While in severe contrast, a married man is not judged by how he services his wife, but how best he establishes his individual hegemony in his household, how best he climbs up the ladder of success. Popular models of femininity, compliance and sexuality are built upon this unattainable ‘wife and mother’ ideal, over and over again and shoved down every women’s’ throats, lest they defy the norm and dare to act contrarily.
And I can’t take it anymore.

Reason number 4: The ol’ ball and chain.

Why is marriage supposedly the centre of a woman’s existence? Why isn’t it the centre of a man’s existence? But no, it never was, it never is, and it never will be. The wedding is always and forever will be a ‘bride’ thing, because it’s her day, a day when she gets to be the princess, a concept which I find, extremely problematic partly cause' all that the guy is expected to do, is show up. Because you see, when a guy is engaged to be married, he is perceived to have somehow lost his freedom (while actually I feel, its just the other way round!), that the life ahead of him is sure to be filled with drudgery and venal boredom in anticipation of you know, being tied down to the ol’ ball and chain.
And then there is the pukeworthy sleaziness of the bachelor party. Spending the rest of your life with a person who desperately celebrates his last day as a free man by entertaining himself with contorting naked women, should surely paint a very pathetic picture in your mind as to how your near-ambrosial future would be.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Gurudeb once said 'Apan hote bahir hoe baire dara, buker majhe biswaloker pabi sara'. Though it was in a different context, 'Apan hote bahir hoa' is a key to any kind of upliftment. We need to detach ourselves from a situation to understand that properly. Most problems in life occur because we are not able to detach ourselves and take things personally. You are far ahead in this detachability. Go ahead...

Shopno said...

Well said - yes I also agree with you that you have to rise above the conflict/situation and only then you will be able to close it. All our negative emotions can be overcome, only if we rise above the plane where it occurs.