1. People who are lucky enough to experience true love in their lives know that it's human nature to express that love. You want to tell the world that you are in love. "I want the world to know that you're in love with me" is the way people feel. Wedding, even if that's a simple affair, gives the opportunity to show that publicly.
2. Legal marriage has a social value. If we didn't have this binding, anyone can go live with anyone else. Then they'll have a bunch of kids who will grow up without proper identity. Humans need the concept of a family to grow up. They need a father figure and a maternal caregiver, which is not possible in broken homes.
3. Unlike marriage, live-ins don't have a legal age. So, technically a teenager can decide to live-in with her boyfriend. Which is disastrous.
4. I don't know where to start from if I want to talk about kids of live-in families. They are given up for adoption, abandoned or brought up with a whole bunch of half siblings. Most of the time the parents are immature, young and don't have decent jobs to support them. All these lead to terrible parenting and bringing up of a generation on weak morals.
5. Also, if some people claim that they have a strong enough commitment that doens't require a legal binding, I ask them, if they are so confident in their relationship why are they scared to give their relationship a legal name?
6. If a couple gets divorced, the parents still have the responsibility of bringing up the kids. If they shun that, there is the Court. This is not possible in live-ins. Fights for custody can take ugly turns too. Most of the time single teen moms are left to fend for themselves and their babies.
7. In the pre-historic days people didn't have the concept of marriage, but then they decided that a formal bonding is necessary to thrive in the society. It is not for nothing that ALL religions, cultures and societies all over the world, so different in all other aspects are unanimous in this respect. They all rever the "holy wedlock". A married couple is looked up to. They are wished happiness and blessed by all. From the Sanskrit mantras saying that marriages last for more than one birth, and the famous Corinthians verse 1:13 of "Love is patient, Love is kind" to the general saying of "Marriages are made in Heaven" we see that marriage is still honored as the culmination of love.
9. On top of that, as marriage is a legal bond, you'll need to pay less income tax if you are married. Your life insurance would automatically go to your spouse if you are a WA resident. These are practical points not to be neglected :-)
10. Another point some live-in people said is, they want to stay and test if the person is right for them before they get married. How many people will they live with to test their "trial and error" process?
11. Why are same-sex couples fighting for legalizing their relationships? Just because they know that having a legal commitment is necessary to live in society.
I can only think of one reason in favor of a live-in is that when you already know you are going to marry this person and you are engaged, then instead of renting two different apartments, you can live together. Or, if you are waiting for your wedding after getting the marriage license!!
In my opinion, people who are not confident in their decisions and who want an easy way out from their responsibilities would want to live in. In that way they can gain the advantage of having a relationship but not the responsibility that comes with it.
There's nothing facinating in live-ins. So think about the pros and cons of marriage versus live-ins before you start to show yourself off as a so called "free thinker". Marriage has stood the test of time and I do believe it'll keep on binding the socitey as it has done always.
12 comments:
sob bole diyechho... ebar debate hole ami sure ete first prize pabo... jio jioo...
Sayari, I am very bad at logical thinking. I admire you!
I really don't know (or care) who is right. But it is funny when married people proudly announce that they got married because of family, relatives, visa, green card etc. etc....and to be frank it was "just" mangalsutra and sindoor...in fact it can hardly be called a marriage, more like extension of a friendship.....and then they go ahead and prove that for the rest of the world there is really no excuse for getting married.
People are very weird.
kuntala, tomar comment ta bujhte parlam na... [keno k jane !!]... kuntala or pret, pls explain
Kuntala-di, all arranged marriages are because of family, some are results of family pressure as well. Marrying because of visa is rampant and there are some subtler versions of it too. For example, a girl might want to piggyback to US by marrying a guy already settled there, instead of herself taking the pains of taking GRE or finding a job to relocate. Yes, and these people are proud of their "achievements" as well.
How many people seriously understand what it means by marriage? I think 70% still go by just the physical part. And if you add material pleasure to it, 98% would be happy in that marriage. I don't know if you have read "Emono dine" by Saradindu. There he says a successful marriage needs match in physical, mental and intellectual levels. I don't think many people can achieve that.
People who are not confident in themselves would never have any confidence in their marriage, and for that matter in any marriage and they'll go saying that there's no point in getting married!!!
S.Bhut, Kuntala-di ja bolchhe seta holo onek manush ache jara khub weird biye kore (family pressure, green card er lobh, etc), jader biye ta sei orthe biyei na. Tarpor tarai abar ulte sobai ke bojhate chay je biye korar kono manei hoy na. Right Kuntala-di?
na ami asole thik seta bolte chaichhilam na. amari dosh, karoN amar comment-ta Sayarir boktobyer sathe khub ekta prasongik noy.
Sayari biyer sopokkhe jukti dekhiyechhe, ebong hoyto ekisathe live-in somporker bipokkhe jukti dekhiyechhe. amar boktobyota chhilo ei live-in somporker pokkhe jNara kotha bolen, tNader ekti bishesh sreNiike niye.
ami janina biye bhalo na live-in bhalo. karoN ami konotai korini. ami anekke dekhechhi jara biye korechhen athocho live-in er sopokkhe jukti den. tara bolen je tara live-in kortei parten, kintu poribar, kaaj, paperwork ityadir jonyo biye korte badhyo hoyechhen. abar biyeta je ato seriously hoyni seta bojhanor jonyo bolen je amra to "just" snidur/+ mongolsutro porechhilam, ar kono ritual palon kora hoyni. (ei juktita ami bujhina karoN amar bishwas Kalighate giye biye korleo seta biye, anyo kichhu na.) tarpor tara nanarokom jukti diye promaN kore den je keno biye bhul ar live-in thik. bakider jonyo of course.
ami eder hypocracy-r kotha bolte cheyechhilam. tobe seta prosonger baire bolei amar comment ta sposhto hoyni bodhhoy.
kuntala, tomar comment ta ami keno prothome bujhte parini jani na... BUT ota kono bhabei oprashongik noy...
amazed to know je " "just" snidur/+ mongolsutro porechhilam" bole biyer gurubhar ta kichhu kom tnader.. really ppl are weird...
can ppl.[pret/kuntala] tell me sumthing, apart from doing away with the complex legal part of divorce, how is live-in different fro marriage? does the partner more flexible and less demanding? or sumthing different? i think, the compatibility matters.. so y is live-in held high?
Manusher mone mone jilipir pyanch!!
I liked this post very much. Very logical and precise arguments - I agree with everything here. I too, never understood why people are afraid to get into a commitment when they feel they completely trust each other. I feel this is actually shirking responsibility.
Kuntalar comment ta besh interesting laglo. "Just sindur+mangalsutra" ta je puropuri biye noy, seta ami jantum na. Kato ki shunchhi aajkal!
Hey Sayari, feels great to read your blog. Great going, dear :-)
Well, regarding the debated topic of live-in relationships, I cannot agree less in some of your points.
First of all, live-in relationships no way shun away from commitments. If two persons choose to stay together without any legal bonding, I personally feel that's a greater commitment, indeed! Coz they ain't bound to stay together; it's their own choice to stay together and that's, in my opinion, is quite beautiful.
Second, pardon me if I'm too dumb, I really don't get it when you say "If we didn't have this binding, anyone can go live with anyone else"! Well... is marriage some kind of "bondage" that prevents the significant others straying away from one another? We sure not deny extra-marital affairs or divorces. Rather, live-in relationships don't come with the pseudo-commitment mask. In fact, I believe infidelities can be dealt much more maturedly (read with more self-esteem) in a live-in relationship than in marriage. Coz it comes without the social taboo of a broken marriage.
As for the monetary gains, breakups in live-in relationships save one the cost of alimony and the payment of lawyers' bills :-P
Well, of course, I don't support teenage pregnancy. But then I cannot hate something just because it doesn't come with a legal age. I feel something which doesn't have the legal stamp needs to be handled with care and maturity.
There are a lot of other points that I would love to discuss in this regard, but don't wanna bore you any further ;-)
What I personally feel is, if two matured persons (legally by age as well as mentally) make a decision regarding their personal lives, be it marriage or live-in relationships, let them live their own lives!
Thanks for your comments guys. Doyel, to answer your questions, live -in relationships do shun away from commitments. They seek an easy way out of lawyers fees, alimonies, etc like you mentioned. That's why they choose to live-in. They can move out any day they want. By no means is their commitment more. Anyway, I don't know how you can measure commitments. As they don't have the legal bindings, they also care less about their kids and can abandon them quite easily. That's one point I mentioned in my post.
For your second point, yes for people who want to stray they can and will always do so, but the percentage would be more if there was nothing legal between them. There would be no family values as the word "family" would not have any meaning.
How many teenage mothers do you think have enough maturity to have and bring up kids? If they had that maturity would they want to become moms at that age? Would you let an 8-yr old boy drive a car on the freeway even if you were sure he's mature enough to drive? Or a 9-yr old vote even if she has enough idea about politics?
There is a reason why there's a "legal age" and there's also a reason why people still regard legal marriage as an essential thing in society. Think about it.
Well, my whole point has been I don't want to tag someone's personal choice as good or bad.
I still believe just because live-in relationships do not have a legal stamp, I won't conclude they are lacking in their commitment. I feel dragging a ruined marriage owing to the inability to pay up for the alimony is worse than a breakup in a live-in relationship.
I mentioned the monetary gains in a live-in relationship on a lighter note, just as you've mentioned about getting married for the sake of tax benefit :-)
Looking after kids is quite a different issue. It depends upon the individual responsibility. It's more about parental affection. A broken relationship or a ruined marriage -- both can severely affect the kids.
And yeah, I completely second you regarding teenage pregnancy. But why tag something bad just because someone misused it. Live-in relationships require a lot of maturity, strength and independence - both financially as well as mentally. It's not at all a child's play and I totally agree that I wouldn't recommend a teenager to get into it, just as I won't allow a kid to drive a car. I'm not against a "legal age"; but for two matured persons, let not society dictate how they are going to lead their personal lives.
Can we deny the strength of Abhaya's character in SaratChandra Chattopadhyay's 'Srikanto'?
Doyel, I also don't think tagging someone as good or bad based on their personal choices is a nice thing to do. Unless people try to do something illegal or immoral, I don't think I'll term them "bad". I am not saying the people who opt for living in are "bad" or that they always lack commitment. What I am saying is I don't see any reason in favor of living in.
Have you read Saradindu's "Bidrohi" and its sequel "Swakhato salil"? It has given the exact idea of what legal marriage is. As you mentioned Srikanto, the relationship between Srikanto and Pyari was also much out of the ordinary. There are definitely some exceptional characters both in fiction and real life, but they belong to the tail ends of the bell curve :-)
Post a Comment