Why marriage is a losing game for urban men?

The social reality for any kind of marriage has changed in India, I think after year 2001 or so. (Maybe it coincided with large scale job creation for middle classes).

Now, a woman who earns 1/3rd income of husband and gets housework done through maids etc paid for by husband; still thinks she is in some way superior to husband.  This is the effect of financial freedom (read parasitic freedom) and easy social environment for women in large cities at least.

Some women may actually be doing good work in managing both career and household, but the point I am making is not about contribution to family, but about respect for both spouses in marriage.

For example these days in urban areas, if a woman earns 5K per month, hubby earns 15K per month.  The power equation is not same as if woman earned 0, and hubby earned 10K.

Taking another example, a woman earns 15K per month, hubby earns 45K per month.  The power equation is not same as if woman earned 0, and hubby earned 30K.

In all such cases, woman has become more powerful, due to influence of like minded earning-women, and constant media talk of woman empowerment.  The gender biased laws are the final weapons for unscrupulous women which give them that audacity to go out to police and courts, and create havoc.  Much larger is the number of women who do not openly threaten their husbands but are simply dominating, and disrespectful to their men.  Men at the receiving end of such relationships may continue to suffer the abuse because:

1. They are used to the marriage, marriage is a one in a lifetime affair for most Indians, and no one is prepared to even think about life after a broken marriage.
2. Men with children fear for future and upbringing of children in a broken marriage.
3. Many men are somewhat aware of the gender biased laws which wives/in-laws can use and make men run around courts, lawyers for long time to come, given pathetically slow justice in India.
4. Men have the burden of manhood thrust on them by society.  A broken marriage casts automatic suspicion on man of being not manly enough in some way to be able to ‘control’ his wife.  Imbecile may be too strong a word, but many men worry about being labelled something close to that if their wife leaves them

========================================
Coming back to the analysis, how is a woman earning 15K vs hubby earning 45 K /mth become more powerful than hubby?
========================================

Well if she is one of feminist supremacists, she is.

She can file for DV, maintenance etc and expect to get 12-15K per month as maintenance.  Or more likely she will get hubby to knees by threat of legal and criminal cases and extort some financial favour and property etc.

So after maintenance case wife's income: 15K + 12K = 27K
And hubby's income: 45K - 12K = 33 K

Now they have come close to each other in terms of income.  And woman still has sympathy of society because no one is ready to believe yet that Indian women will tell outright lies about marriage.

If she has child with her, she can extract more in name of child, so she now becomes financially equally powerful as husband.

Most Indian courts will give custody to mothers unless the mother does not want custody and leaves child(ren) with husband.  So a man is set to lose both money, property, and children in case a woman is determined even a little bit to stick it to him.  The rest is taken care of by greedy lawyers, corruptible mediators, and a meek judiciary who cannot bear to stand up to women organisations’ (read feminists’) propaganda.

The laws and social reality in cities has tilted in favour of married women who want to bend the system to their will.  The system is ostensibly created to support needy and oppressed women, but in reality laws like Domestic violence act (PWDVA) etc were always meant to be abused to favour female supremacists’ agenda and create income for lawyers.

Women empowerment – Chinese way

Some Chinese women have taken to dancing on streets in underwear in a bid to attract men/husbands.  And I thought the sex-ratio in China was skewed towards men, so actually it should be men doing a show on the street to attract women for marriage!

Well girls, don’t blame men if you can’t find husbands.

http://current.com/1pl3c4c

A group of masked women caused controversy in China by dancing in the street in their underwear in a bid to find husbands.

The eight young women said they were coming under intense pressure from their families to settle down before "it was too late".
They braved the weather to strip down to their bras and pants outside a subway station in Guangzhou, capital of Guangdong province, and danced for passers-by.

The girls handed out sheets of paper with their personal details and the kind of men they hoped to marry, reports Guangzhou Daily.
And they held boards with slogans such as: 'Brother, marry me!', 'My mom is pushing me for marriage!', and 'Time flies, let's date!'.

God save Indian women -- NCW says no swayamvar for them

After Rakhi Sawant’s swayamvar reality show where she chose her husband (or so we thought), a new show has started where Rahul Mahajan will be choosing a wife for himself. Nothing gets Indians so excited than prospect of seeing a marriage party! However NCW does not seem to be too happy about people making their own choices in marriage.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/NCW-trains-guns-on-Rahul-Mahajan-reality-show-/articleshow/5524923.cms

NEW DELHI: National Commission for Women has written to I&B ministry asking it to ensure prevention of indecent portrayal of women in a forthcoming reality show on a bride hunt for Rahul Mahajan.

"I have seen the advertisement only. However, we have written to the ministry asking it to ensure that there is no indecent portrayal of women in that reality show," Girija Vyas, NCW chairperson, said.

She said the show — `Rahul Dulhaniya Le Jaayega Swayamvar Season 2' — is yet to be telecast and the letter was written before that because NCW wanted to ensure that there was no inappropriate depiction of women in the show. Vyas also took exception to the use of `swayamvar' in its title, saying it suggested commodification of women.

"Swayamvar is a word which denotes commodification of women. Why should men or women be portrayed as objects," she asked.

It is common knowledge in India that swayamvar was historically a well-accepted and respectable form of marriage for women and especially mentioned in many Hindu epics including Mahabharata. It is astonishing to see how NCW chairperson has decided that it means commodification of women? NCW did not object to Rakhi Sawant’s swayamvar show so evidently the only reasoning seems to be that NCW is unhappy that a man is being given the same choice of choosing a life partner that was given to a woman in earlier reality show.

Let’s read some basic definition of swayamvara below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swayamvara

The literal meaning of swayamvara is given below based on Sanskrit words used:

Swayamvara (Sanskrit: स्‍वयं‍वर), in ancient India, was a practice of choosing a life partner, from among a list of suitors, by a girl of marriageable age. Swayam in Sanskrit means Self and Vara means choosing or wanting.

So according to NCW chairperson, if a woman chooses her husband by her own will somehow it results in commodification of women. God save Indian women from NCW!

Indian woman thinks of marriage as pious bonding, but sex before marriage is ok!

A recent Delhi High Court judgment has ruled that having sex with fiancée and then breaking off engagement will be taken as crime of rape.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Sex-with-false-promise-of-marriage-is-rape-HC/articleshow/5525620.cms

Justice V K Jain refused to grant bail to the man, Nishant (name changed), who had filed a petition for anticipatory bail in a case where he is accused of raping a girl who was approved by his family and had even got engaged to him.

On one hand society is getting permissive in terms of sex, what with 3-4 sex surveys being done every year in weekly magazines, reality shows where women mouth obscenities as much as men do; so it would seem that at least in urban India, women are not the coy stuff they were supposed to be earlier and having sex before marriage is not a big deal.

The court thinks that the girl in this case did it so as not to disappoint her future husband. Why? was she ready to disappoint everyone else in case the marriage was called off?

"If a girl surrenders herself to a boy who comes in contact with her for the first time only in connection with a proposal for her marriage and then enters into a formal ceremony of engagement..she does it not because she loves him or wants to have pleasure with him, but because she doesn't want to disappoint her future husband,'' the HC held, rejecting the argument of the accused that it was consensual sex.

The other question is what would a court rule where a man was pushed or persuaded to have sex with fiancée but afterwards it was her who broke off the engagement. Can the man get her punished under any Indian law? The answer is obviously no. But the HC thinks that it is perfectly ok to prosecute and punish a man for crime of rape in such situation.

The HC said if a view was taken that persuading a girl to have physical relations on the false promise of marriage, despite having no such intention, does not constitute rape, "this will amount to putting premium on a conduct which is not only highly reprehensible and abhorable but also criminal in nature.''

Further the high court has gone ahead and made statement on the general nature of Indian women:

The courts cannot and should not give such a license to those who keep on looking for opportunities to exploit the sentiments and vulnerability of Indian girls who perceive marriage as a pious bonding and not a union of two bodies, the court said.

So here the HC thinks that Indian women would think of sex only within marriage, but we don’t know how the court came to conclusion that this particular woman was fine with having sex in order not to disappoint future husband. She is only into pious bonding, but will do it anyway in order not to disappoint future husband? Makes sense to anyone?