Err... what's the whole point of not marrying if you are going to be anyways saddled with a "legal" partner... isn't that what a wife or husband is? I don't know why the debate is whether we are ready for live-in relationships. I mean - if it's legal, then it's ok?
Live ins have been happening for a long time now. Those who are in such relations are in social circles where it is okay and don't care about what others say AND others don't really care about it so much now. Who has the time???? People, especially in cosmopolitan cities have become more accepting and open about such things. Perhaps it's also easier for the live in couples because family most of the times are not in the same city - so there aren't any pressures etc. Many times it just makes economic sense.
But why legalise it? I have not understood the whole point. To protect women from domestic violence? But that doesn't apply only to a wife. Anyone with whom you share your living space and beats you up will be booked under the Domestic Violence Act. Think about it : is it okay for your bro or sis (let's be fair) to beat you up?
There's this story of a woman who was in a 5 year live in relationship. Then she accuses the man of rape and violence. Now she has a case against him and is demanding Rs. 10,000 as monthly upkeep. What shit is this man? Is this the point of legal live ins? Why didn't she just walk away from the man? And why does she want him to pay for her upkeep? What sort of regressive bullshit are we talking about?
Are feminists seriously okay with this sort of assumption about "the weaker sex". Is a live in woman, who has anyways broken traditional boundaries unable to take care of herself? The relationship ends and now she is this sniveling sore woman who has nowhere to go? Who will take care of her? Boo hoo hoo....
The next argument: There are people who have two wives. Oh well, maybe it makes sense in the case of an innocent, naive woman who is so blissfully unaware of her husband's dual life. Yes, she definitely is a pitiable creature and can be protected thanks to this legal "status". If she knew all along, and was okay with it, then why should anyone meddle? That's her way of saying, I can manage on my own. Why don't we let her? Why does society insist on keeping her dependant?
But the argument that makes most sense is this: If we split, who gets to keep what? Aaaahh... now we're talking. It seems that things always boil down to the moolah. Yes, yes, definitely get a court to decide this part for us immature babies - who thought we were real smart in avoiding the complications of married life.... Baaahhhh!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
As far as I know and understand, legalized live-in relationship between a man and woman is called marriage.
One thing I can see here is... the (so called weaker sex) woman gets some bargaining power to extract some money from the man...
There is still one difference... If you are married to a wrong person and want to get out of it, there is a big legal loop. In a live-in, you can pack your bags and walk-out and start living-in with another person (if you have found one) the next day without any legal issue (except in case of a man - looking for money to pay-off the first one)...
Again... what is that pay-off for? I do not think any self-respecting woman will ask for money for the time spend together with a man. I may be a little harsh here.
Post a Comment