From: [email-masked] (Subbarao Kambhampati)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 91 21:54:35 PDT

Path: leland.Stanford.EDU!stanford.edu!agate!ucbvax!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rice!titan.rice.edu!dorai
>From: [email-masked] (Dorai Sitaram)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: Velli Vasthaanu/Au Revoir (*not* Asthra sanyas, though ;-)
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Date: 2 Jul 91 03:34:38 GMT
References: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked] (News)
Organization: Rice University, Houston
Lines: 54

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Subbarao Kambhampati) writes:
>This is just to mention that the time has come for me to move on from
>the active membership of sci.  The 1.5 years of my active

		      The Fall of Bhishma

The noble son of Ganga had routed the armies of sci, chasing them all
the way to their very camps.  "All is lost," moaned Arun K. Gupta,
"The flower of sci is being slaughtered by the thousands.  Ten days
have we waged battle, but the great Bhishma shows no mercy, even
though he knows we hold him in the highest esteem."

The Lord Neeraj Bhatnagar consoled the weary Arun, "Be not despondent,
illustrious son of Kunti.  Do not be swayed by false respect.  The
evil Bhishma is your foe.  We shall kill him ere sundown today yet, if
you will but gather up your courage.  Have the noble Shyamala
Parameswaran lead the forces into the fray.  Bhishma will not flame
her.  He is a feminist."

Racked with endless doubt and agony about battling his kinsman, Arun
commanded his army into the field, and the skillful Shyamala at the
head offered battle to the veteran Bhishma by unleashing a volley of
arrows.

The son of Ganga, winded by the fresh assault from an unexpected
quarter, turned to face the new enemy, only to freeze in his tracks at
the sight of the redoubtable Shyamala.  The latter was equally
demoralized and lost her will.  "I cannot fight this noble man," she
cried, "He has a great following.  He is very popular.  He is too."
So saying, she prepared to leave the field.

The alert Neeraj shouted to Arun, "This is your moment.  Shoot the man
now."  "But," dithered the Arun to his charioteer slash battle-
strategist, "the man before me is more than friend to me.  Many is the
time that we battled as one against the enemies of Indraprastha.  How
can I attack him now?"  "Stop pussyfooting around," screamed Neeraj in
anger, "Would you really have us all destroyed so that you can indulge
in the silly luxury of sentimantiliy.  This moment will never arrive
again.  Shoot."

And shoot Arun did.  The arrows penetrated the shield and armor plate
of the veteran warrior, and he rolled to the ground -- "like a ceiling
fan with a screw loose," says the poet Vyasa.  "These are not
Shyamala's arrows," said the mortally wounded Bhishma, astounded at
the searing pain caused by the three-way arrows, "They are too full of
statistics and odd facts from the library to be from anybody other
than Arun.  Neeraj, you have made Arun shoot me!"  But there was no
rancor in his voice.

Thus it was, that on the tenth day of the Bharata war, great Bhishma
fell. 

<somone in mail>

July 1, 1991

Dear Rao,

I was intrigued, entertained and educated by the discussion on the 3
way ticket marriage et. al. on sci. Needless to say, I ftp'ed the
whole record from your machine immediately (sorry about the cycles
:-), and perused it in one sitting last night. As someone rather
unqualified to participate in the discussion (now, since when has that
stopped anyone?), I have kept a low profile, but, I feel, now that
everything has blown over, it might be a good idea to see what has
really been achieved.

Clearly, there seem to be two distinctly different schools of thought,
and any middle ground, if any, has been obscured by the long-range
Nintendo battle. I do believe that many of the participants on both
sides raised many important points. The most important points that you
and those in your camp raised were the importance of sensitivity, of
treating women as people with a mind of their own, and their right to
be treated as individuals. The opposing camp largely considered the
3-way ticket marriage as a fact of life, given their choice in
location and career in the US, and also believed strongly in the
strength of traditional, arranged marriages.

Given the skewed demographics of Indians in the US, obviously, few men
will be able to find spouses in the US (assuming, of course, that they
wish to have an Indian wife). The obvious (and easy) alternative, is
the 3-way ticket marriage. You have repeatedly stated that there
aren't really just two choices, but a spectrum of choices. I am afraid
you have failed to show that. All the alternatives you have proposed
just amount to quantitative, rather than qualitative differences -
more trips to India, 10 way marriages, spend more time in India etc.
Now, most of us have spent lots of time in regions with this kind of
skewed demographics - namely first the IITs and now the US. Any male
who wishes to win the heart of a female under these circumstances
needs, more than anything else, to be an excellent communicator and
aggressive (now, by aggressive, I do not mean obnoxiously so - I am sure
you understand me on this point). Their 'success' with women will
depend more on their ability to project themselves, than any intrinsic
virtues they may possess (I do not claim that they do not possess
other significant virtues, but, these might be secondary to what is
more obviously visible). A case of survival of the fittest, perhaps?
Many, for whatever reason, are not even willing to enter the 'battle'.
Even if they wanted to, given the traditional upbringing of most of
us, few have the required social skills to do full justice to the
effort. Given the already unfavorable odds, the battle is probably
lost even before it is begun.

Why do Indian women put up with the humiliation of the 3-way ticket
marriage? Maybe, for the same reason we are willing to queue up at the
US consulate all night, kowtow to the great white man who controls our
destiny. Many leave India in search of knowledge, and stay away for a
different life, one of glamour and excitement and wealth. Perhaps many
women are attracted by the same prospect. Many Indian women are
conditioned from birth that their greatest achievement in life would be
to make a brilliant match, and what better opportunity than a well
heeled man in the land of milk and honey? Using a very crude metaphor,
Indian men in the US are buying in a sellers market, but, in India,
find themselves in a buyers market. The obvious follows.

In what sense can we expect the Indian male in the US to be more
liberal, modern, or Westernized? Maybe, encountering more women
professionally and socially helps him develop more social skills and
to look at women as people. Would he expect a potential bride in India
to have the qualities that he has got used to seeing in western women
- independence, self-esteem? Is he willing to permit her that? Does
his manner of selecting his bride as a filly in a horse market
automatically make him think less of her? How does the system really
work? Are Indian women, in general, better off in terms of self worth
married to our GC holder, or to someone in India? The answers to all
these questions are likely to be as numerous and varied as the number
of individuals involved.

So, I have asked many questions. What, if any, are my answers? Indian
men, as a rule, for very good reasons, prefer Indian wives. Nothing
unusual there. We all agree that demographics preclude their finding
their own brides in the US, and compulsions of career preclude an
extensive search in India (even an extended stay in India is no
guarantee of any kind of success in this endeavor). So, we use the
'old boy network', namely, the much maligned parents, whose dearest
wish it is to see you happily married. So, you provide your parents
your requirements, perhaps, they add theirs, and in your brief visit
to the homeland, you are presented with the not necessarily pleasant
task of making a selection. What can you do to make this procedure as
civilized and considerate to all concerned? A few simple rules:

 - do treat every woman you meet with every courtesy
 - never be in a hurry. If your 'shortlist' already has too many women
in it for your timeframe (yes, give it more time, you are probably
going to make a lifelong commitment), you are probably already going
wrong. 
 - your meeting with them should be a two-way street. Give them a
chance to say what they want in life. Listen. Let them ask you about
yourself. Be honest with them. Surprise! It might really help!

I am sure there are many more I have left out, but this gives the
general idea.

---------------

An aside on a different, but related, tack.

For most of us, marriage is the first time a person has made this kind
of commitment. S/he may not have put in as much time as (as a netter
pointed out) in the purchase of a new car, but the level and
expectation of commitment is much higher. Yes, whether you agree or
not, the man has done more than acquire a piece of furniture to adorn
his home. Is there any way we can hope to predict how a man will treat
his wife, given that there is no precedent? Actually, in most cases
there is a 'precedent'. Most, if not all, have shared an apartment
with others at some point as a grad student. Now, before you reach for
your flame thrower, I do recognize the enormous differences. The most
important is that sharing an apartment is usually an arrangement of
convenience, and much less effort has been made in the selection. The
level of commitment is lower. Independence is much greater. If it
doesn't work out, we can always find someone else next year. In any
case, each person will go his/her own way in the next 2-5 years.
However, I do believe that the consideration a person shows for
his/her roommates is indicative of how they will treat their spouses.
A good friend/colleague who believes that looking after an apartment
is an imposition, is unlikely to change his/her views after marriage.
Perhaps, a person who respects the independence and individuality of
another sharing the same roof could be expected to treat a spouse with
similar regard? Could we treat this portion of our life as a training
field for a better future?
-----------------------------

The discussion so far on sci has generated more heat than light (but
where there is heat, there must be light :-). Perhaps, I have just
added some smoke.

To summarize, I do not see a 'spectrum of alternatives' to the 3-way
ticket marriage, nor have I seen anything in the discussion so far
that has even remotely articulated this concept, beyond stating that
it exists. Given the framework, I believe it is up to the men here to
make the process as civilized and equitable as possible. Sorry, I have
nothing earthshaking to offer.

I have sketchily outlined my ideas on life with roommates as a
precursor to married life. If you like the idea, I am sure you could
articulate it better than I. I'd appreciate your comments on it.

P.S. Obviously, most of the above is in direct response to the debate
on SCI. My views have been shaped to a great extent by personal
experiences and observations. I have refrained from making any
anecdotal references since, though they have shaped my views, do not
add to my arguments.