Hey Shubhosree,

Shubho oporanho :-)

Wow!! Always wanted to know a lot about this. This piece has brought out so many things.

"live-in relationship is not bad in itself. It is what you make of it that can turn it sour."
Makes a lot of sense.

Great read!! :-)

Shubhosree,

You have put it all so well. I've always thought what is the difference between a live in relationship and marriage except for the paper work, legal documents and a social gathering. Everything else ought to be the same in both if the couples are staying together becuase they love each other and want to be with each other.

I wonder how far can one go, forget in a relationship, but even in one's own personal space with the attitude of not taking responsibility, committment.

If one enters into any relationship with this whole fear then one is definitley going to enter into a relationship with a defensive attitude. Which I doubt is going to help in any way.

Dear Surya,

First of all, may be its time you teach me some bangla as I have no clue what 'oporanho' means :))

I am glad the piece shed some light on a topic you have been curious about!

Dear Chaitali,

Thanks :)

"I wonder how far can one go, forget in a relationship, but even in one's own personal space with the attitude of not taking responsibility, committment."

Well said!

Dear Shubhosree,

It most likely means 'afternoon' (will check again).

Hey wait a min. ... You'r joking right ... Seems like ppl in here like my legs a lot - easy to pull are they ;-).
(just kidding).
Thanks for the correction - bhalo & that word I used for 'funny' - hashokawr (sure was difficult).

Before I can comment on this piece, I have something to talk about a recent one so I'll do that first and brb.

Keep smiling & spread more of it :)

Great article Shubhosree. Kudos.

Well we have moved from “Livon” yesterday to Live-In today ;-)

Is Live-In relation a fad ? Well even if it is , it’s a fad worth indulging in. In my case the indulgence will be restricted to as a point of discussion :-) .

Frankly the article pretty much sums up what I feel about the whole thing as well.
Like it not being a “question of morality” , the “commitment issues” , “difficulties coming out of it” and so on.

“Slicing it in yet another way, some people endorse live-in relationships saying that it makes breaking up easier. Does it Really” . And just as you had your reservations about it, so do I.

One aspect which we need to discuss is the trend of more and more couples (esp those in colleges) opting for live-in just because of the “easy-sex” aspect. It has nothing to do with responsibilities or for that matter getting to know each other.

Few other thoughts to share on this. Will be back.

Hi Chaitali

Your take on marriage vis-à-vis live-in was great. Simple yet profound.

Hey Surya
“Lagey raho” with your Bangla . “I am Loving it”

Hey Prasun,

Thanks :)

Its a very valid point! More and more people are getting into it just to be a part of the herd (the normal human tendency), to be 'cool;' and 'with it'. In fact, I came across this bit of info while I was researching about this, that, the BPO culture is also bolstering the live-in relationships. And this was confirmed by a friend (who works in one). Mostly the BPOs are located at remote places and it becomes more economical for the employees (mostly all young people) to rent houses nearby and live together. Also as my friend pointed out, many girls come from places outside the city, have no place to live and so end up sharing rooms.

You're also right about live-ins becoming a 'convenient' way for 'easy sex'. They tend to get physical too soon without getting to know each other (as you rightly said) and that makes it a little more dangerous, unless the two people take adequate care both physically and emotionally.

Oh! Prasun don't be so hard on those young people. It might have nothing to do with responsibility but probably independence. But as shubz has put it independence with adequate care and understanding.

As for 'easy-sex' I guess it would be the same for those people whose instances Shubz has cited. Adults getting into live-in-relationships so as to avoid taking responsibility, committment, avoid being answerable and bounded, its convinient etc etc. What the heck are they living together for?

You're right Chaitali,
Its equally applicable for the seniors as well.

As regards the independence factor,thats there. But the fact is I have seen during my college days, couples living-in (especially the out station students )and their parent's not knowing a thing about it.
Can't generalise though.

You're right Chaitali,
Its equally applicable for the seniors as well.

As regards the independence factor,thats there. But the fact is I have seen during my college days, couples living-in (especially the out station students )and their parent's not knowing a thing about it.
Can't generalise though.

ooppps :-(

sorry for the multiple messages

Reminds me of a Movie called Hungama...

Well chosen subject. Why is live-in and live-out can not be Live within the humanity? Why there is a gender difference?

Students live together in many places nowadays in common accommodations. I feel these topics are coming up because sex is still a taboo in Indian context. Isn't it?

How do you differentiate between easy sex and hard sex? It is just a 3 letter word having different interpretations. ......

Pardon me if my thoughts are a bit liberal but it is the same society which has created these biases and inhibitions.

Dear Rudra,

As I said in my piece, its not a morality issue for me. I am not judging anyone who opts for this choice. And I quote myself, "a live-in relationship is not bad in itself. It is what you make of it that can turn it sour."

What I intended to get across through this piece was that, its important to take this decision with understanding and awareness of its implications and consequences. If the two people involved are up for it, then great! As long as THEY know what they are doing, I dont believe the society has any right to stick its nose into it.

Hope that made it a little clearer and you dont have to apologize for expressing your views, liberal or otherwise :)

You won't believe it Shubz for the past two days I have been writing something similar as an essay.
guess I got an ESP that you were thinking about it.

I think it's a wonderfully written piece. The entire thing about "live-in" has been often compared 'VERSUS' marriage... which I think is really weird. Just because there is no legal binding "live-in " doesn't become any different from marriage... Neither does it become an easy come easy go arrangement. In fact the questions that you have raised are really apt.

"Is love subject to an institution called marriage? Is responsibility meant only for married people?"

We talked about love in our earlier postings...
Forget about marriage, responsibility is a key factor in any partnership or relationship. And loving someone primarily also means loving oneself first. You cannot love someone else if you don't love yourself for the way you are.

Those who feel that evading marriage is equal to evading responsibilty, forget one key factor that the primary responsibility is towards oneself first... not the other person....

more often than not people talk about "live-in" casually -- "I can walk out any time I like"... that speaks vloumes about that person's emotional state... At the outset they have already taken their living partners for granted... and they never consider the fact that they could be the one at the recieving end.

In doing so they lack love and respect for themselves as well. I have met scores of people who vouch, "living-in when I wasn young was the biggest mistake of my life."

Which also indicates that people often relate to live-in as a youthful experiment, which dies down with age, maturity and sensibility....

in my opinion -- sensibility or maturity has got nothing to do with age.... neither is live-in anything to do with a particular age group....

there are exceptions where "true love" is the reason of 'live-in'... and people have lived in with same partners for decades... example Chirstopher "superman" Reeves.

I agree that many people get into live-in for convenience .... whether it's the convenience of accomodaion, money, or exploring sexual freedom. No harm in it. But it faces the same problems, if expections are not met -- as in any other marriage....

If one respects his/her partner and their feelings then there is no question of being afraid of responsibility....

I really liked the parts where you said --

"And even if it starts out as one, does it remain that way? Do the emotions of the two people move/change in harmony throughout the period?"

Nothing remains the same... not even in a marriage... yet this entire thing about testing waters sounds like they are using their partners... In the end it is not about the experiment with other people they end up doing many emotional experiments with themselves....

In that scenario people entering any relationship, live-in or marriage, with the end goal "I can go out any time I like" he/she is not only lopsided in his attitude towards a healthy relationship, but also not taking responsibility of his own actions .... cause you never know when that person will become the "CAR" in the test drive.

yes in India not everyone is saif ali khan to fall in love after the break up.... most cases I know of, live-in (knowing too many people in ad world) the break ups are serious, nasty, painful only sans alimony and legal hassles... and it comes with it's own tag of social stigma.

There is fear, but there is uncertainity and fear in everything in life. All the misconceptions give rise to pessimism about marriage. The entire society is thriving on the concept of "loosing freedom when married". Naturally those fond of freedom look for ways to keep it intact and yet have all the fun of the world... resulting in hurrying into a live-in without taking into account the ripple effects.

Sadly there is a whole culture feeding into this fear, which results in --- "A mind conditioned to look at marriage as binding and the person as a prisoner in shackles!"

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU THAT ---
A live-in relationship in itself is not a bad idea but it loses its essence when used as a mere excuse to escape from facing one’s weaknesses and fears. Is running away from responsibility the answer?

-----------------
How far can one run... and how long... besides whom are they running from. It's all in the head.

and about - "How do you differentiate between easy sex and hard sex?"

Well, when we say 'easy sex', what we mean is that in a live-in scenario, sexual activities do not necessarily take place as a natural expression of love. They hurry into it as their hormones go wild (quite natural when a guy and a girl live together under one roof, one room, no one to answer to) and it might just leave one or both of them scarred (emotionally and/or physically) in case the relationship doesnt materialise. Its generally a good idea to give things time and let them happen naturally and not rush into anything in the heat of the moment that they might regret for the rest of their lives!

Again, I would like to reiterate that, if the two people are ready to take responsibility for their actions, its ok. All I hope that this piece would do is give people the entire gamut of possibilities and consequences, so that they can take an informed decision.

Shubhosree ,
u hav written an excellent piece.love is the most important thing .the commitment comes when we fall deeply in love with any one..the heart break always gives a lot of pain whether ur married or hav a live -in or just a relationship..i am not against live - in relationships...but i personally feel the people who hav live in relationships hav issues on commitments which hav to be solved.

Dear Shubhosree,

An wonderful article :). I sat for some time and thought about it. I didnt read any comments for I wanted to see how I felt about the subject.

I feel that a couple has a right to decide its own priorities and if for reaching that decision they need to live together for sometime, well I am not against it. But it is their prerogative.

But seeing things impartially, I see that every relationship passes through a turbulent phase. In a live in relationship that turbulent phase might lead to an easy break up. But in the scenario of marraige and commitment (including the presence of children ) many other forces act to stop such a seperation. Well if things get desperate there is divorce as the final option.

But I believe we should always try to unite people, a live in relationship with its minimum commitment does little for this. It may act to be a good launching pad for self comfort but in the long run will fizzle out if demands and needs are not met.

for this I am a little skeptical about the idea. for it may have love, lust , joy, etc...but when sorrow comes...it also shows the easy way out.

of that I am critical.

even in Salam Namaste it is a sonogram of the young foetus which hits Saif like a bullet and he feels drawn towards marrying zinta.

what do you say?

p.s. somebody might have raised this point before, I wanted to comment in my purity so I didnt go through the prev comments...

Hi Friends, [Bondhu's & Bondhobi's]

Have been irregular at commenting but regular at reading ;-).

Hey Sangeeta,
Really nice to read your shares. Visibly straight from the heart. Good to read your opinions. Hope your essay came out well :-).

Both the Shubhos, Chaitali, Aachi:
As I understand from all of this, the decision has to be mutual and the couple - mature enough to see the responsibilty / repercussions for their actions. Not to forget, that their has to be an understanding of each other's feelings. No pushing, no convincing needed. The best thing I feel in a relationship is to let it move on at its own pace.

Before even thinking about moving-in with the 'other', I guess one should first be sure of one's self.

As I see it, responsibilities are a part of every relationship. but the only responsibility one should really 'worry' about is of one's own.

Eta Ullekh Khoob Bhalo [ :-? ]

Forgot to add [Bhule gaye]:

Something that I feel should never wear out in a relationship - of the 'self' and towards the 'other' - Faith & Sincerity.

And the truth about these two is that one doesn't have to show them, they show for themselves. :-)

Good Morning Aachi (or shall I just say Good Evening :-) )!

I whole-heartedly agree with you when you say - "a couple has a right to decide its own priorities"

That is the bottomline. If the couple knows what it want and what they are getting into, then even if they decide to stick with each other without marriage and children, for the rest of their lives, it would be fine. But the key words here are - IF THEY KNOW WHAT THEY WANT. And if they opt for it without knowing anything and are willing to try it out, thats fine too but then they need to be strong enough to deal with the consequences.

I think Surya said it just right - "As I understand from all of this, the decision has to be mutual and the couple - mature enough to see the responsibilty / repercussions for their actions."

Also as you say - "But I believe we should always try to unite people, a live in relationship with its minimum commitment does little for this." - Well your statement itself shows that there is often a fear of commitment that is the basis of the relationship. And thats bound to make it quite tenuous.

About Salaam Namaste, well, all I can say is that Aachi, it just so happened that Saif was drawn to marry Preity once he saw the foetus and the depth of the bond he shared with her, hit him in big bad ways! But, thats just a matter of chance. The guy may or may not have had a change of heart....

Have a wonderful day!

And a very Good Morning to everyone!! :-)

Dear Surya,

I must say I am very impressed with the pace at which you are learning Bangla! How did you manage a teacher so soon? Or is it the internet? ;-)

Thanks for your take on the subject. Yes, its that in a world full of confusion, it would suffice if one is clear about one's own thoughts and priorities!

"Something that I feel should never wear out in a relationship - of the 'self' and towards the 'other' - Faith & Sincerity. And the truth about these two is that one doesn't have to show them, they show for themselves."

Beautifully put! Couldnt agree with you more :-)

Dear Sangeeta,

Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge on the topic. Amazing, how we thought of the subject at the same time (well, almost) :-)

It is really sad to think that there is such a distorted idea of a relationship that exists. Of course, people get scared and disheartened largely due to the what they see around. But it is for them to realise that a relationship is what YOU make of it. It doesnt have to be binding, doesnt have to be suffocating and doesnt have to be stagnating.

I feel a healthy relationship is where the two can grow TOGETHER, as INDIVIDUALS!

Well Sangeeta lets hope for a better tomorrow (sounds so cliche! but that came from the heart :) )

Dear Shubhosree (and all the others),

I feel that if one takes out the sex (as in sexual intercourse) factor out, then in any situation which involves more than one person (with parents, with friends, with co-passengers on a train), for a healthy relationship, all those things that you all have mentioned- faith, sincerity, committment, responsibilities... need to be present in some degree or the other.

Dear Shubhz

When I started reading your article I thought you were making a case for marriage but then as I read on I realised not:)

This is a really well thought out and articulate piece of writing. Enjoyed reading it. Truly what matters at the end of the day is what you put in to a space. If we're using living in to get away from the responsibilities that sharing a space with another and love brings about then definitely we are just living out fears and patterns of selfishness. However at the same time I am someone who finds the overall institution of marriage quite useless and hypocritical. I dont think that the nature of marriage creates responsibility at all. At the end of the day we're back to trying to understand what love really means I guess.

Hey Anusheh,

You're right. Marriage as an institution does not in any way, guarantee stability or happiness. It boils down to the 2 people concerned and what they make of their relationship, whether in a marriage or a live-in arrangement.

Shubz

Your conclusion says it all! Love is a timeless emotion but often it's expressions are where people make it or lose it. Marriage is a social construct which neither ensures nor claims the flow called love. It offers I think security, durability, visibility and 'propriety'.

Perhaps the question is whether people are clear what they are truly seeking when they set out for coupledom. In a world of growing options and instant gratification maybe the desires/needs/questions we ask ourselves need to be clearer. Perhaps then the 'arrangements' will be more conducive to what we need. Personally I think choices and risks are great for they make us more mature and skilled and of course responsible. SO I am all for whatever options come our way and how people find the courage to push their frontiers. Nothing then is 'experienced' as a loss of love. It can only be known as flowing through, what love has been often called-a 'many splendoured thing.'

Hello all and dear Subhosree;

I think there is a vast difference between being in a marriage and being in a live in relationship. Forget about the advantages marriage provides (social acceptance and all).

Live in relations don’t have to be less caring and less responsible. From my experience as a photographer, I have learnt that a lot of women and men in the entertainment industry prefer live in relationships not because they don’t care for each other but are scared of the word divorce. This tag is not well accepted in the society, and the entertainment industry is no exception ( jasjit, perhaps that’s why marriage is so durable). And through years of conditioning we have made marriage so sacred that divorce has become almost an anti social-offence.

As far as alimony is concerned, aren’t we actually ignoring a woman’s role in supporting her partner’s work, building the family and its wealth. If a woman thinks she has contributed her bit to her partner’s wealth, she has the right to ask for her share. Unfortunately, when most Indian women become involved with their partners, their right to maternal home and property shrinks. For people like us, marriage, alimony and even live in relationships can be a personal choice but for many it may not. And women lose more respect than men and find it tougher after a break-up, both marriage and live in relations. So what’s wrong if woman demands alimony?

As far as fear of responsibility is concerned, is it not true for any relationship? I have come across friends and family who run away from responsibilities within their relationships. In fact I think in marriage many others share and help you fulfill your responsibility (parents, parents- in laws etc), whereas in a live in relationship you have to manage all alone. There is no family and social support. I know a couple who had a live in relationship for years and when they couldn’t handle responsibilities all alone they got married! Now they have the support of the family, the society and the state to be a couple!

Socially I find the most important difference is that you are making a political statement by not getting married to your partner. And I know many friends who are in live in relationship just because they want to make a statement. Yes, some people don’t even have the freedom to make such choices….

After all, if live in relationship is a test drive, marriage is a race. Who would want to be dumped from a racing car?

Dear Ramlath,

Hi there! welcome to the blog :-)

"I have learnt that a lot of women and men in the entertainment industry prefer live in relationships not because they don’t care for each other but are scared of the word divorce."

So you agree that the basis of the live-in is mostly fear - in this case, as you said its the fear of 'divorce'. Thats my point exactly :-)

"If a woman thinks she has contributed her bit to her partner’s wealth, she has the right to ask for her share."

If both are contributing towards running the home, then why should the woman alone ask for her share back? Should the guy not have an equal right to ask for his share back as well?

"Unfortunately, when most Indian women become involved with their partners, their right to maternal home and property shrinks. For people like us, marriage, alimony and even live in relationships can be a personal choice but for many it may not. And women lose more respect than men and find it tougher after a break-up, both marriage and live in relations. So what’s wrong if woman demands alimony?"

I can understand if a woman, who is not financially independent, demands alimony after divorce. But if she is financially independent, then why should she demand it? Isnt alimony then just a way to get your hostility out? And in the case of Live-in, I do not endorse an alimony for the simple reason that if you are getting into a relationship because you dont want to face the legal and social hassles of a 'marriage' and a 'divorce', then isnt the purpose defeated by moving to court ultimately for alimony? Do you think the social and legal hassles are going to be any less or that it will happen without the society getting to know about it? It will all be the same. So I think that its used merely as a weapon to get back, which I dont think is fair because she CHOSE to be in the live-in relationship. It was her decision. Such relationships begin with uncertainty and both the people concerned get into it being fully aware of that. So then dont you think its a little unfair to demand alimony?

About the responsibility factor, I think you have said what I said in the piece and I quote myself, "Is responsibility meant only for married people? "

I must say that I am not sure if its a good idea to get married because the two people are not able to 'manage' on their own. Dont you feel marriage means more than that? :-)

And I totally agree with you when you say that there are many who opt for this arrangement just to make a statement .... because its the 'cool' thing to do! :-)

Anyways, hope I have been able to answer your questions. If you are not satisfied, please feel free to come back :-)

Living with your parents, living with your partner in a married or unmarried form, living with friends... I think all this involves management, sharing, responsibilities in one way or the other.

Frankly I don't see marriage as a race or live-in relationship as a test drive.I see both as two parallel options that people have when they love each other and want to live together. Both have their own set of advantages and disadvantages. It is ultimately upon the two people to work it out.

Hi Ramlath

Weird but just last night I wa telling someone about your amazing adventures in China and today I find you on the blog. Good to see you here.

I absolutely agree that alimony is largely a protection for women since the economic order is pitted against them. So of course they have a right to it.

I guess the critical difference in India still is that people who choose live-in relationships etc are from a completely different class. Only they manage to find the courage to do so and I guess within that social group women are primarily financially independent. Like Shubhosree I too wonder, how a 'reclaimed' space like a live-in relationship actually ends up boxed in the same patterns as marriage when similar 'rights' are sought in something which is about risk-taking and living on one's own terms.

True also that marriage brings social buffers like family support and social sanction etc along while live-in is really a go-it-alone kind of option. But then why compare because we need to choose with understanding. And as you say for many it is a 'political' statement so it must carry the elan of being a 'maverick' at all costs.

Though of course I wonder what it really means when we take something as deep, complex and intimate as love and try and live it as a 'political' choice?

Hi Ramlath...great pictures on your site. What a wonderfully talented photographer you are.
Warm regards
Anusheh

Good evening everyone,

Jasjit, I agree about the economic independence part. And like many, I too believe, while trying to be politically correct we have become less human and more mechanical (and that hurts…). I too believe that choosing to get married is as personal as opting for a live –in relation.

I also think people who choose to be out of any institution exemplify the possibility of such choices for others and therefore they make a statement :0)