Live-in CHILD

Supreme Court will change the Indian social landscape. Steven and Stephen illustrated in their book Freakonomics, Michigan (or some other state) has less number of crimes because of the legalization of abortion for teenagers in 1970s (due to which there were less number of orphans). Our politicians will keep mud slinging on each other, over women reservations, dalits, temples, mosques, elephants, parks, names to be dedicated, without trying to look at the social fabric and taking the nation away from its old parochial systems.

Picture: (Maybe John and Bipasha are the icons of live-in relationship)

Supreme Court was loud and clear in the case of actress Khushboo. Article 21 of Constitution gives Right to Life, Fundamental Right. Two adults can stay together under one roof without any (registered) relationship, as they wish to. The Court’s lambasted the system for taking complaints against the actress, for her remarks on pre-marital relationship. We are not talking about morality or principles. It’s an individual’s choice, whether to marry or live-in. “Lord Krishna and Radha lived together”, the Court stated.

The Law needs to incorporate these changes and perhaps move a step forward towards registration of live-in relationships. Long live-in relationships as good as marriage was ruled in another ruling. Of course, this path was taken when the relationship lead to reproduction. But now, the case of reproduction has taken us to the next level. Why is it that a man and a woman require a stamp to prove their relationship? Perhaps for the following.

A man is denying his alleged relationship with his live-in partner with whom after living for years together and a baby, he denies any role in reproduction of the baby. What is the fault of the little angel for the choices, two individuals make in their life? Or perhaps realizes he was born by mistake. The female wants compensation from her man for the upkeep of the child. I hope Supreme Court will more likely rule in the lady’s favour.

Shouldn’t such men be ostracized from the society?

Women have choices under such circumstances. Whether to dump the man or accept him?

What Priety Zinta portrayed in movie, Kya Kehna in early 2000 is seeking society’s acceptance and demands not be banished but to be appreciated.

In my teens, after watching movie, I repeated the movie promotions to everybody, “kya app sochte hai, priya (Priety’s protagonist in the movie) ne jo kiya, woh theek kiya” (You believe what Priyadid was right). Most of the people wore an astonished expression. And then would smile/laugh at the stupid question of the youngster. But the question is there and we should have an answer for the question, whether we get or do not get into such kind of situation?

When our economy is growing, our society should also grow, to result in overall Development of the Nation.

The answer, do watch the movie?

As for the case, asking and taking the compensation is the most important aspect. Whether or not to use the money is the woman’s choice.

Road to Shaadi

When I was a kid, everybody asked me, “what do you want to become in life?” I’d reply flashing my teeth, “papa”. Like every child, whose role models are his parents, I was way too flattered and excited at the authority my father commanded at home and in his professional life. Now 20 years hence -

Turning 25, 26 or 27 or perhaps 28, 29, 30, for those who are left out, is a vulnerable stage of your life, every single person you meet asks the same question, “SHAADI”. I sheepishly smile and question, “kiski”. The other person laughs and replies, “aapki”. I really enjoy such conversations wherein we turn the sides of the tables. Luckily I have a genuine excuse to evade such sorry queries, my elder brother is yet to get married, and I still have some time on my side. Why can’t we begin our conversations, with are you enjoying your life, your job, or are you trying to do something else in life? After marriage, the practical transition of question will be, “kids”, we do discuss and we do talk about it with our friends, relatives, colleagues, but I feel certain awkwardness about the same. Why can’t we let the other do, what he/she wants in life and when he/she wants? We need not force everybody through the same organic process of human existence. Actually, when everybody questions the same thing about your life, you are compelled, forced and pushed to the corner?

Now getting back to the whole Shaadi affair, our generation is sitting at crossroads and stuck between the older and the next generation of societal rules, rules which are broken but not shattered and rules which are yet in conception stage. Either we should be forced to marry with the boy/girl of our parents’ choice (like our parents did) or be allowed to decide the path of life on our own, wherein we hope to find somebody with whom we can share our life. Shaadi should be sharing our lives and not spending our lives. Don’t you feel, spending sounds burdensome?

While talking about the shaadi affair? If somebody says YES, I am in the process, then the next question, “How many?” Most of my friends have run through a dozen proposals. If the friend is a female, then it is two dozen or closer. Perhaps for the betterment of the society, men are facing more rejections these days than women.

To find a suitable person, those who feel, that yes we are in love and ready to respect and accept the responsibility of marriage, things are pretty easier for them, even convincing parents, if they are dead against the fact? This was hard part for Mr. Bhagat, but that is history.

Our parents are searching for a girl, who is educated (masters even if the son is matriculate), good looking (fair in complexion), knows cooking (dal, roti), wears jeans (rarely) and Indian wear with élan, and we are looking somebody who is smart (does not mean to be fair), intelligent (education helps but not the pre-requisite), working (maybe a diploma in fashion designing) or maybe wear a skirt, at times. Expectation mismatch from one person, how do we expect so much from a female? Ask the guy and his family, what are you willing to bring on the table.

If they are seeking a groom, he should be well educated (bachelors means highly educated), earning well (legal or illegal means), good looking (which is defined by his earnings), with strong values (no drinking or smoking) and the girl expects better educated than her, decent earning (respectable), handsome (this is controversial), good values (social drinking is fine). Again the definitions for the same person go for a toss.

The best part is parents’ like to seek their children’s consent for the same. It’s difficult to find the parents’ and children’s on the same plank or rather almost seems impossible to bring on the same plank. So that is why, things start working/moving after crossing the minimum number of 12/24 or whatever.

Here comes the harder part, young, single, independent, have been through flings, strings, affairs or maybe heart breaks, it is the same for both sexes. We all have been through our share, every person whom we meet adds to us as a human being, as a person. As we move ahead, we keep on adding the items to the ‘YES’ and ‘NO’ list for our marriage/life partner. Particularly in case of women, they have a very clear list of “NOT’s”. The hard part is always along the way, we fall in and out of love and then hunt for the same love, which is the recipe for disaster and the whole range of invariable human emotions that comes with this process of finding the right person.

I’d still say, enjoy the process with the hope, we are destined for the best.

Till then, “IN THE PROCESS” status may help.

Calling hubby names not cruel, says HC

Calling the husband ‘bhondu’, ‘pagal’, ‘bewakoof’ and making fun of his low educational qualifications does not amount to cruelty and is not a ground for divorce, the Bombay high court has ruled.

Imagine Bombay HC saying this thing, it has hit the last nail in the coffin. The dividing gap amongst the power in the household in the hands of a female has been evident since ages. The female was always an in-charge of the household and the man posed as the head of the family. Now in these modern times of Fundamental Rights, I believe men need to assert for their rights to equality. We are losing ground fast, really fast.

Couple of months back, SC said, ‘biwi jo kehti hai woh sunoh’ (listen to your wife and do as she says). Now Bombay HC gives the woman more rights to even rebuke and insult a man. I don’t know if it allows in front of other people.

A division bench of Justice P B Majumdar and Justice R V More dismissed an application filed by a 33-year-old Pune resident seeking to end his 2003 marriage with his wife, with whom he has lived for barely 20 months.

“The husband should not have been so sensitive even if a few words were uttered by the wife,” the judges said. “In family life, between a husband and wife, occasionally there may be some exchange of wit, anger, jokes or satire; that itself may not be treated as an act of cruelty,” the judges remarked, saying this could not be grounds for dissolution of the marriage.

I know women have better understanding of society, people and managing household and in turn lives. God has blessed women with their dynamic nature. But still that does not mean, that men should be frowned upon. They need their share of respect from the society.

Please My Lord (an appeal to our Hon’ble Judges), Kindly look at the plight of men than pity. Rather they should advise and say, KISS and make up.