A decade back when I was in college... the concept of live-in relationships had just started emerging. Many of my hostel-seniors shifted from hostel rooms to independent flats to start living with their partners.. were in one and few of those relationships eventually culminated into marriage.
Last week I was watching 'Salaam Namaste'... starring Saif & Preity Zinta. Yash Chopra could not have found better actors than Preity & Saif... bcoz they both actually do follow somewhat similar pattern in real life other than reel life. Saif since his spilt with wife Amrita Singh was living with his firangi girl-friend Roza and Perity has a live-in boyfriend - Ness Wadia. As far as i can think its the first Bollywood movie showcasing 'Live-in' relationship of a boy and girl. Anyways the focus of my post is not the movie but the theme of the movie.
India still remains a conservative society where the institution of marriage is considered sacred. Plus chastity on the part of a woman is highly rated. The woman with a history of pre marital relations with a man will have less chances of getting married in the future.
I feel... In a live-in relationship people are scared of commitments... so they need a testing period. The margin for error and the tolerance levels for the errors are very low. Most people enter into a live-in relationship to test compatibilty or convenience with the partner. No strings attached is something which does not work for me. Test driving a relationship without the binding of commitment seems so pointless. It resembles of taking a car for test drive. The 'trial period' gives people a chance to discover whether they are compatible. But there is a problem with the car analogy... the car don't have emotions; if the driver dumps it back at the used car lot and decides not to buy it... it will not be hurt. The analogy works great if you picture yourself as the driver but it stinks if you picture yourself as the car... On the other hand... A marriage gives so much of security to both the partners. Both work towards making the relationship successful. There is stability and financial security. Marriage means... I will always be here for you... it encourages emotional investment in the relationship. While live-in relationship seems to mean... I will be here only as long as the relationship meets my needs.
Some parents may approve and support for the live-in relationship and may no longer associate it with sin and social disapproval. But in many families it's still considered morally wrong and embarrassing to extended family members.
With the increase in number of couples opting for 'live-in' over 'marriage'... there are conflicting views on this subject but I would like to know what would you prefer if given the option to choose between the two?
1 comment:
You rightly said,more often then not, the underlying thought of a live-in relationship will be a "test phase".
Personally, I do not feel comfortable with such an idea. Not because of the taboos attached with live-in relationships but cause of the lack of committment between the individuals involved.
No relationship is going to be perfect for ever as no individual is perfect. If you start taking relationships in test phase, they will fail at one stage or the other.
In an ideal world, I would see no difference in Live-in or marriage. When you live together, it just signifies that you can not stay far:)
and when the normal day-to-day conflicts start coming up, you learn how to handle them rather then thinking that this is not going to work.
Post a Comment