A guy wrote the following letter to the “Dear Prudence” column at Slate.com:
I am a 25-year-old Indian-American who has been in this country since I was 5. I started dating a Caucasian classmate four and a half years ago in college. The romance bloomed, and we are still together. She is kind, loving, beautiful, and a great inspiration. I see us together for the rest of our lives. There is only one problem: My parents are very traditional Indians and have told me since I was a young boy that they wanted me to have an arranged marriage, and if I did “bring home an American girl” that they would disown me. After two years, I told them about the relationship, and they were rightfully hurt and upset I’d kept it a secret. They say now that they were “joking” about disowning me and that I should have come to them. But it is close to three years later, and my girlfriend has still never met my parents. I greet holidays with a sense of dread because I feel pulled in two different directions. Even when I bring her up in conversation, they quickly change the subject or just walk away. They say that my relationship is just “a phase” and that I will “come to my senses.” I also feel a sense of embitterment from my girlfriend for being completely shunned by her potential in-laws. My parents have told me that they will accept my girlfriend when we become engaged, but by then I fear that their attempt to build bridges will be too little, too late. I know that my parents love me and want the best for me, but is there anything I can do to unharden their hearts? (link)
Prudie’s advice in response to this was pretty good, I thought (read the column to see). But I was wondering — what would you tell this person? Would it be better for him to push his parents, and demand they accept his girlfriend, or is it better to kind of wait and see (until, say, getting engaged)? Do parents really mean it when they say “we’ll disown you,” or is it just something they say?
Finally, do people have experiences of their own along these lines they want to share?
Disownership is basically all you can really do to a person, realistically (barring honor killings and the like – throwing that in for Suki Dillon’s sake)
Thanks for that, and also think I own you an apology for thinking that you were jatt. I just thought from disagreement on other posts about punjabi culture in the west that we have had. I for some reason thought punjabi’s who were other caste’s were not hung up on the culture as much.
Amitabh marriage isn’t so black and white. Part of your vows is your unconditional commitment to each other. No one should be expected to disown parents or treat them like dirt. But disagreeing with your parents and siding with your wife does not equate treating them like dirt as is often implied in our culture.
When a man gets married in our culture the fact that he now has a new important relationship in his life with a person who he is responsible for and has to spend the rest of his life with, is almost disregarded as a non event.
In the desi culture parents still expect the man to behave exactly as he did and make exactly the same decisions as he did before and have the same priorities as he did before marriage (ie putting parents first). Marriage doesn’t work that way. And often it isn’t about right or wrong it’s about making things balance in a relationship you are in day to day for life.
Having said that by all means those vows don’t necessarily any wife can treat any inlaws like dirt without justification and be expected to have support by default. But then those relationships have already gone dysfunctional at that point.
.
All I can say American Wife is power to you. I can’t relate at all because once a man goes thru with marriage with someone else and allows his life to be dictated to that extent it pretty much is a deal breaker for me.
I don’t know if anyone has posted this very relevant video so far:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=C_QuHZJD9eM
it’s really funny, watch till the end.
what about the hapless arranged marriage bride who seems to have been discarded between the lines, like so much collateral damage in a michael bay movie?
251 · Suki Dillon said
Suki, I hope this teaches you not to be narrow-minded about your prejudices. You should extend your stereotype to all Punjabis, instead of restricting it only to Jatts.
Definitely. And what of his first wife – seems like she got a super-raw deal…
one thing that i’ve noticed is that in an south asian-man/white-woman marriage/relationship, the south asian guy mostly goes for blondes. it’s the south asian man fetish.
oy. this is a really stick situation. but i’ve seen cross-cultural relationships work well. honestly, it’s the parents & society that cause problems with the relationship, not the couple themselves. by saying there would be “too many cultural differences,” i usually interpret it as too many cultural differences between the PARENTS and the partner, not the two partners themselves.
seriously, intercultural/interracial relationships aren’t anything new. indian-american parents in particular need to get a grip and deal with the fact that their children are AMERICANS and might actually want to marry an AMERICAN. (gee what a novel idea /snark )
You hit the nail on the head. The difference isn’t between the two partners it’s the difference between the partners and the parents. One difference is mitigated by the common bond of a lifelong relationship, with a child, so that the child could be invariably different but it doesn’t matter because it’s a default relationship. Along comes someone who could be very much exactly like the son/daughter but happens to be of a different race/skin and voila we have a “difference” issue.
And this difference doesn’t just become apparent in interracial relationships, even people with the same backgrounds, same language, culture, food can have parental units with very different perception of what their child really is. My husband and I are both from the exact same culture, food, language etc and our commonality however isn’t either of those things but rather other things that make up our relationship.
The parents however put the weight of the success of the relationship on the cultural commanility but let me tell you at the end of the day it’s not the culture that makes our relationship work, the common view on life, common goals, and common desires and above all love is what makes it work but desi parents because they haven’t had to ever examine their relationship in any other format than in terms of culture don’t really understand that external commonality.
When recently a cousin’s relationship failed with his wife of a number of years the family immediately brought up the fact that she was Punjabi and he was Marathi. The truth is that they were just poorly matched from day one and it had absolutely nothing to do with cultural differences. In their relationship, inside their 4 square walls there was no difference. The relationship failed becuase of a lot of other issues. This is a hard concept for a lot of parental units to grasp.
I am really wondering what is the fraction of Indian-American parents who are so strict and why ? Life is so short… enjoy without any hangups. There are so many other practical issues wrt to compatibility and marriage to take care of instead of wasting time harping on race. As far as losing ones traditions I think there are enough Indians ( world’s largest population pretty soon) to take care of it instead of some few thousands/million Indian-Americans.
disagree. it’s all about whether the man has the respect.
I keed. 🙂
But seriusly. logic has little to do with relationships. what worked in the parents’ generation works even today. people stay in unhappy marriages willfully in spite of having the means to escape.
i agree with you JOAT. it’s extremely sad, imo, that many desi parents (at least in my experience) haven’t had the experience to examine their relationship outside of a cultural context. i’m going to be frank here when i say that cultural compatibility has done nothing for my parents’ marriage, and i don’t expect cultural compatibility to do much for any of my (future) relationships. in my personal experiences, having an indian-american partner would bring too baggage to the situation.
to an extent, i agree with suki that if people want to preserve their cultural traditions 100%, they should have stayed in their native cultures. (note that i think diversity for the most part is positive, and i’m not saying that 100% assimilation is the best thing. but parents need to realize that when they immigrate to a different country/culture and intend on raising their children in that particular society, THEY SHOULD EXPECT THEIR CHILDREN TO ADOPT THE NORMS OF THE SOCIETY THAT THEY ARE IN. (i.e. desi parents migrate to the U.S., raise their children in the U.S., and therefore, their children are going to be american.) this is a very simple concept that amazingly falls on the deaf ears of many desi american parents.
253 · gulab said
it’s kind of funny and only because of awasthi ji. why do the makers assume that female’s lib is second to freedom for men ;)?
241 · Rahul said
Wow, that gives an entirely new meaning to ‘yummy mummy.’
And as to my advice to that poor hapless soul (assuming he is still not independent ) – just go underground with the relationship (i.e. all secret) for some period of time; become financially independent i.e. get a good career/job etc. then pooh-pooh the traditional parents. Then have a kid and they will pretty soon come to their senses.
bridget dude. this isnt unique desitude. here’s a word to the boys dont be fooled by them classic ploys. the pickings are sparse and if to human bondage you are inclined, seal the deal pronto with a suitable behind.
I personally know someone in my family, an ABD girl, who, after dating a white Catholic-American for 5 years, married him. However, 4.5 years later, he dumps her for another woman (a white). I’ve seen this all happen with my own eyes, and this white guy, I swear I’ll never forget this, was a devout Jesuit Catholic guy. He even had his picture taken with Mother Theresa in India, before he had met the Indian girl.
I totally resent white guys who are nominal third-world-lovers, but they’ve got no friends from the third-word. I don’t know what to call these people – “poseurs”? This Jesuit boy has been to Guatamala, India, and other parts of South America to help build churches, but none of his friends are non-white. They’re all, in fact, ex-frat-boy type of white guys, who pre-judge even me. What a hypocrite.
Heh
Maybe using shaadi.com would help some of us out. I mean our ancestors did learn to love. I mean, I don’t want to be cynical, but most people don’t marry out of love; he’s the best for her, and she’s the best him. Then they elope.
This might be news to you but cheating on/dumping of women isn’t exclusive to white people or Catholics for that matter. There would have been no guarantee to your relative if she’d married someone her parents picked.
270 · JOAT said
It is best to ignore Boston Mahesh’s tedious anti-catholic rants.
252 JOAT,
While taking potshots at desi culture and parents is all fine and dandy, it is a sweeping statement to say that they all expect their son or kids to put the parents first even after their marriage! Desi culture is what, only about 7000years old and they haven’t yet figured out how marriage works!!
Man, this has got to be the faith that moves mountains. I agree with JOAT, that once a man marries another woman I generally take that as a divine sign to move on!!!
wow! really, is this what bothers you people most about the entire story? what a free-thinking adult does with her life is more troublesome to you than the callous discarding and rejection of a woman who was unwittingly led down the garden path into a marriage with a duplicitous, craven pathetic excuse for a human being?
242 · Rahul S said
thanks man – i appreciate it.
And you know this…how? You assume one woman has agency and the other one doesn’t because…? Etc
GGM’s take on this
to an extent, i agree with suki that if people want to preserve their cultural traditions 100%, they should have stayed in their native cultures. (note that i think diversity for the most part is positive, and i’m not saying that 100% assimilation is the best thing. but parents need to realize that when they immigrate to a different country/culture and intend on raising their children in that particular society, THEY SHOULD EXPECT THEIR CHILDREN TO ADOPT THE NORMS OF THE SOCIETY THAT THEY ARE IN
I speak from personal experience, and don’t want anybody to deal what I had to do. And it was all cause of backward people in my family who came to the west, but still thought they were living in 1950’s villages of the Punjab.
263 · portmanteau said
Spoken like a true feminist, portmanteau 🙂 If you were trolling, well, you got me, so I will answer this one.
The point is not that the freedom of women is secondary to the freedom of men. The point is, that, in a patriarchal society like India’s, if even men don’t have the freedom to marry someone of their own choosing, freedom of women in the true sense of the word looks like a really long shot. The purpose is to provoke the viewer by poking fun at the society.
Are you married? I’m not trying to be trite but do you know what a massive adjustment it is for all parties involved? Especially parents who have to watch a situation change in front of their eyes? Why would we expect it to be super smooth all the time? Have you not heard of marital strife with parents? There are websites dedicated to just this phenomenon.
And lets get real we live in a patriarchial society, it’s always the woman that is expected to make adjustments and change and so many of those changes are taken for granted. What are expectations off a groom from his inlaws? Seriously? I used to think like you until I got married. It’s interesting how much baggage culture heaps on you in terms of expectations the minute you cross that threshhold and hell it doesn’t even have to come from your in laws or your husband, it’s just the general environment.
No one is taking pot shots. I don’t know too many people in my parents generation who think of marriage outside of duty and culture and stereotypical roles of husband/wife, it’s very difficult for them to fathom something that doesn’t fall within those boundries.
Oh no the whole thing bothers me where do I begin. The callousness, the immaturity and deception of it all. I choose to point out the biggest thing that bothered me first.
279 · gulab said
guilty as charged. yeah, i saw what is funny about that ad (and for what it’s worth i really like the production house that makes these ads, code red, but this one is definitely one of their ‘lesser’ works, although still pretty good). i was just making the point (for what little it’s worth) that there is no reason to subordinate either of those claims (men’s lib v. women’s lib, after all it is the same set of norms that is constraining for both*) to each other (except for humorous effect). after all one of feminism’s basic tenets is that men and women both should not be forced into scripted roles. anyway, minor point wrt this thread, but a major one wrt life.
we good?
PS: someone (karl rove?) needs to come up with a better/catchier phrase for ‘arranged marriage.’ it is pretty medieval sounding. we need a new more empowered phrase for the ‘india shining’ era. is there any reason to accept this orientalist phrase, probably coined by our imperial masters? get creative mutineers!
281 · portmanteau said
Ok, I’ll play along. How’s this for a start: a cultural bonding or cultural binding. (depending on whether you are an epoxy or an s and m kind of person).
I’m attaching an article from the NYTimes, written a couple years ago where it lists questions couples should ask before marriage. It’s certainly not meant as an exhaustive list (nor necessarily the most important questions) but I would hope it frames a discussion about marriage more than simply about whether it’s brown or white or x vs. y and rather about questions that go to the core of a relationship. (ignoring of course the question about a TV in the bedroom). Hope it helps.
Pro-culture marriage (you know, as opposed to the anti-culture crowd).
And lets get real we live in a patriarchial society, it’s always the woman that is expected to make adjustments and change and so many of those changes are taken for granted.
What’s so wrong about this expectation when it’s one that women themselves are complicit in creating? If women use a man’s willingness to spend money (on her) as an indicator of [insert quality here], doesn’t that support the idea that a man’s role is one of caretaker, provider, what have you? And furthermore is it not reasonable that the woman should be more pliant as she’s set herself up in a position as being “cared for”?
I’d allow the argument if the powers of contribution aren’t exactly equal in a situation and for whatever reason the woman doesn’t care to establish or reassert her own identity, living etc. In today’s modern world however where the contribution is equal from the man and woman and no one person is taking more care of the other in any shape or form, it is archaic.
284 · HMF said
it is true that setting oneself up in a position requires a high degree of pliancy. HMF, you surprise me everyday. First, I find out that you’re a martial arts practitioner, and now you’re a proponent of yoga!
it is true that setting oneself up in a position requires a high degree of pliancy. HMF, you surprise me everyday. First, I find out that you’re a martial arts practitioner, and now you’re a proponent of yoga!
Just like 8 years as 1st lady doesn’t qualify as “experience” , Being a certain someone’s 1st lady around here, doesnt mean you’re nearly as witty.
In today’s modern world however where the contribution is equal from the man and woman and no one person is taking more care of the other in any shape or form, it is archaic.
See, this I do not agree with. You’re right, it is an archaic practice to have one person act as the “caregiver” for another, yet isn’t that the very relationship a woman is setting up if she uses as demonstration of high value: the guys willingness to pay, and just general assertiveness, and ‘taking control or charge’ that women so often hold as high value qualities?
Take a very simple example, when a girl expects a guy to pay on the first few meetings (or devalues the guy for not paying) isn’t she reaching back to the very archaic “unequal powers of contribution” that you speak of?
But on her worst day, she is still better than a crabby curmudgeon with regressive ideas who throws temper tantrums, and believes his delusional view of the world is actually reality.
crabby curmudgeon with regressive ideas who throws temper tantrums, and believes his delusional view of the world is actually reality
Oh gee, what a surprise where you land on this debate. Of course, you’ll continue to find more eloquent ways to describe my views as ‘delusional’ without actually providing a shred of reasoning as to why that actually is.
So, do you prefer McCain over Hillary?
Sure women are faced with challenges everyday that threaten to throw them back to the neanderthalls however we are talking about marriages here not the first date. Lets leave that measure of argument for another thread. Where two people are working, contributing equally, bring equal assets into the relationship, manage their challenges equally, it is still the woman in the Indian culture (and most patriarchial cultures) who has to bend/change/compromise/adapt and all those bullshit words desi’s throw around like they are going out of business. It is still the woman who has to deal with inlaw issues, raising of children and it is still the woman who carries the burden of blame and consequences if the relationship fails.
Marriage today has changed from marriage from my parents generation so why should the same rules that that generation abided by still be followed today when they don’t necessarily apply?
Sure women are faced with challenges everyday that threaten to throw them back to the neanderthalls however we are talking about marriages here not the first date.
I see your point, but remember, “first date” in many cases sets the stage for the relationship’s foundation (in the cases where the parties see a potential relationship, so, if a girl just goes out to get free sh*t, then all the power to her)
The cornerstone for how marriages are formed are indeed created in those first meetings (in a small way), but I’ve found as the relationship progresses, women simply reinforce some of those very same “archaic powers of contribution.”
A woman that maintains an unequal contribution of power (not necessarily even financial, just decision making in general) throughout the dating or “courtship” period, can’t just whisk it away during marriage.
Marriage today has changed from marriage from my parents generation so why should the same rules that that generation abided by still be followed today when they don’t necessarily apply?
You’re right, they shouldn’t apply, but then ALL rules from that generation should be cast away. ie men shouldn’t have undue pressure on them to take jobs for the sole purposes of earning money (which, disproportionately effects men) as just an example.
290 · Rahul said
Why, of course! HMF is Sepia’s Self-Styled Straight Talk Express.
293 was me, and that handle is supposed to be:’It Takes A Village [Idiot]’.
HMF is Sepia’s Self-Styled Straight Talk Express
Your point? Everytime I try speaking in Lombard street language, I just can’t help but go back to making sense.
“Where two people are working, contributing equally, bring equal assets into the relationship, manage their challenges equally.”
JOAT where does this happen though? My circle of friends are involved in the arts, literature, and film. In my crew or married friends; to put it bluntly the padma-salman model (though it failed) is the most common. Svelte, pneumatic woman pairs with more powerful man. Its like clockwork. Both parties are happy for a time then leave to repeat pattern. I do it myself. I have a degree of success which attracts a degree of beauty. It may seem archaic…but look around you the world is archaic. If we don’t take that into account can we make a realistic argument?
If we don’t take that into account can we make a realistic argument
How dare you! you’re a crumudgeon! and you have crabs! and you’re throwing a temper tantrum! don’t you see this? No, you must be delusional. or support Mccain, which is the same thing. and I need a youtube link.
Sure and women shouldn’t have the pressure to procreate as well right? 🙂 We can go in circles on this. But let me give you an example of why there is an inherent problem with your argument.
People are allowed to change their minds to suit their happiness. I had the same argument made to me regarding a certain married couple where the woman agreed to live with his parents after marriage, however after her life became unbearable and she was really happy and having tried for 2 years and their marraiage on the verge of falling apart they moved out. Smart decision for all parties involved. However certain people involved kept insisting that she made a deal she should have known better and not made the deal. But she didn’t make a deal for unhappiness now did she? And if someone is unhappy they are allowed to change their mind.
Real world = gray matter. Black and white arguments work well on paper but in practice they aren’t quite practical. What may have sounded like a good deal at one point given the assumed circumstances may not come to fruition exactly as planned. We are all of course responsible for our actions but there is far more gray matter when it comes to marriage especially where the relationship is affected by families and black and white expectations come up short.
Sigh I don’t know a single Padman/Salman type. Man I live a boring life. 99.9% of marriages I know adhere to fairly straight lines of marriages today so it’s hard to relate. Everyone I know earns or contributes even degrees to the marriage/family so the beauty and the beast scenario is something I haven’t really seen. Personally I would think anywhere balance is lopsided in terms of power or money in the marriage there is intense threat of failure.
Why did she become unhappy? What was so unbearable? Was it ALL the in-laws fault? Or does she share some of the blame? And please leave out any baises you may have in general against women living with their in-laws when you answer. I’m asking you about this specific case.
Sure and women shouldn’t have the pressure to procreate as well right?
No, they shouldn’t. but this isn’t a counterpoint to the male being pressured to be the breadwinner. Women are pressured to procreate because they are the only ones physically possible to do so! So take it up with God, we didn’t put the uterus in the female body. but if that’s your starting point, then men and women can never be equal, no matter how much we dance around that idea.
Real world = gray matter
Fine, but it’s just convenient that the “gray” area happens to come up when I bring up points of “archaicness” that trickle into a woman’s demands/expectations/contributions, etc… yet when it comes to points of women adhering to that same archaic “deal” , all of a sudden it becomes black and white, ie you’re question of , “Why should the rules be followed now?” You just can’t be selective like that.
And it’s unclear how your example has any relevance to my argument. I mean, are you saying that women can pick and choose which “male-female relationship” traditions they keep and which they decry? Sure, but don’t claim any kind of consistency, or adherence to a underlying belief in equality. As I understand it, questions like the one’s you asked in #291 stem from a belief in equality between men and women. You can’t sustain that as an underlying belief if you allow selective choice in when and where that gets applied.
Sigh I don’t know a single Padman/Salman type. Man I live a boring life.
JOAT, aren’t you the one that happens to know/have a connection to the most esoteric points out there? I remember you said you lived in the Kitty Genovese apartment, and dated a NYC cop or something, and God knows what else. And you mean to tell me you don’t know a woman that’s used her looks to attract a more financially secure/famous/powerful man? I just find that ridiculously hard to believe.
That’s like saying you’ve tried every exotic meat dish in the world, but never seen a mcdonalds hamburger.