By: Atul Kumar Yadav (a student of Ramjas College, University of Delhi)
Marriage in India has transitioned from a social custom to a contract to a larger extent because of the industrial/capitalist outlook of the society which is keener on ‘surplus value’. If we look into the paintings of prehistoric India, the women are depicted as rearing their children whereas men are portrayed as hunting. Over the years, it has become an obligatory duty for men to raise resources for the family and somewhere it is prevalent in today’s society too. Because of the single-handedly raising of resources by the men, they started accumulating surplus, thus making them dominant over the women. Here, we can see from the Marxian angle that the incapability of women to raise resources for themselves and their families succumb to the clutch of patriarchal submission. This notion over time translates into a custom that earning is the domain of the men and women can simply perform expressive roles like looking after children, adjusting male personalities, and providing emotional support to male members. The submissiveness of women made them inferior in terms of resources. Thus, it leads to the unequal sharing of power relations enfeebling women, creating a tussle leading to the thwarting of marital relations.
Further, ‘commodity fetishism’ makes women vulnerable because of their more consumption nature, and since patriarchy and capitalism are complementary to each other which is evident from the fact that patriarchy provides a permanent consumer base to the capitalist. This can be argued from the fact that patriarchy poses restrictions on women’s mobility for work and when they live within the four walls, especially after wedlock, they will look after their bodily desires and needs which in turn makes them susceptible to buy clothes, bags, beauty products, etc. Due to restricted mobility, they sponge off their husbands because of their increase in concocted endless desire to consume. In case the demands are not met then that might create dissatisfaction in the relationship leading to disruption of a marital relationship.
If we analyze Indian society, there are two completely contrasting statuses of women -on one hand, girls are withdrawing from the Female Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) which is evident from the fact that girls are now going for higher education, delayed marriage, etc. but this ‘social fact’ is limited to the upper middle class or upper class whereas, on the other hand, women from lower echelon are doubly burdened with working for life sustenance and looking after their households and children. This gloomy condition is primarily because of early marriage and not being emotionally capable of running a family. Because of being inconsistent with the instrumental role performance at work while expressive role at home, women often tend to not depend on their male counterparts. Their long working conditions, from household chores to breadwinning, make them robotic and instill a sense of estrangement in them. Such disenchantment leads to the thwarting of the concept of ‘household’ in the family. Additionally, because of the nagging of the responsibilities of children and burgeoning workload like ‘short-circuit’, men and women argue with each other. Thus, they are left with no choice except to get separated.
Earlier, the basis of marriage was also economic stability that was expected to be fulfilled by male members. With the rapid changes and development, the concept of ‘new woman’ emerged as hyper-independent because of financial gain and they see practically no reason for getting into a marital relationship which is not according to the role that they want to perform after marriage. On the one hand, patriarchy is so deep-rooted it affects women without being noticed in society as it is a norm in society that not to go outside for work after marriage and be completely submissive and dutiful to their husbands and families. On the other hand, working women don’t prefer to leave their work and fulfill the socially constructed normative orders of wives. Thus, women juggling between professional work and caregivers creates a situation of ‘dual burden’ which is also a reason for incompatibility issues.
Since marriage is a transaction that requires equal weight on both sides- the bride’s and groom’s sides. The menace of dowry is still prevalent in our society, not only because of the objectification of women but also because of the traditional consideration of them as a liability to husbands. Generally, men’s pockets are also seen so on this ground they are objectified too but telling women that they are a liability and financial burden of husbands so they seek dowry is wrong. Moreover, labeling women as a liability is against their dignity, which is ensured under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Dependency and trust go hand-in-hand as the dependent woman never asks for freedom and they believe that whatever the husband does is only for their welfare. But, as women started becoming independent, power equations changed and they started looking at men with suspicion that in case of marital breakdown in the future, they could live their lives happily even without their husbands. This trend of increasing distrust is another reason for marital breakdown.
Conclusion:
Marital compatibility as well as companionship is required for a happy and fulfilling life which includes understanding, cooperation and sharing responsibility. If the marriage persists on the foundation of love and values then breaking of marital relations would be reduced. Women too need space for the exercise of their choices and in this way, our upcoming generations should ensure gender parity and healthy relationships that will have a good impact on our nation’s development.
