From: [email-masked] (Subbarao Kambhampati)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 91 14:19:02 PDT

Path: leland.Stanford.EDU!stanford.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!caen!dali.cs.montana.edu!milton!sumax!ole!ssave
>From: [email-masked] (Shailendra Save)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: marrying in the old country [Important Consumer advice included]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Date: 2 Jul 91 17:23:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: ole.2057
References: <[email-masked]>
Organization: Cascade Design Automation, Bellevue, WA
Lines: 45

>From article <[email-masked]>, by [email-masked] (Rakesh Kumar Sinha):
> In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Shailendra Save) writes:
>>  they aren't.  I think that the level of compromise in an Indian
>>  couple is much, much higher than Western couple.

> I do not believe that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the
> system of arranged marriages. I also agree that compromise is
> essential for continuation of marriage. But please let us not lose
> sight of the reality: friction does not occur either (1) there is no
> reason for it or (2) there is complete subjugation. After all, there
> were very few racial problems in US before the civil right movements,

    This is not really true!  Slavery was there, and if you think that
  that was not a racial problem, then I don't know what was. If you
  think that slaves did not want freedom, there can be no arguement at
  all.

> and early Indian history does not document many caste related
> violence. 

    True. But did this mean that there were *no* cases of caste
  related violence?  I don't think so. Documentation, statistics, etc
  are all western concepts. I don't think that because there was no 
  written proof, there weren't any. In fact, any good history book will 
  tell you otherwise.
> 	
> 	Agreed that the level of compromise in an Indian couple is
> much much higher ... the important question is who makes the
> compromise. If the marriage is working because wife is making all the
> compromises, it is perhaps better for it to fail in divorce or
> separation. 

     I agree with you cent percent. That is why I had said to Mr.
  Murphy that he was lucky to have met Anuradha despite having such a 
  convoluted attitude.  I don't for a moment doubt that usually (note
  the use of the word "usually") the woman makes the compromise in a
  family. To a lesser extent in some cases, more in others. Sooner or
  later, things like the "bread-winner" aspect of family life will have 
  to be redefined, I don't know whether it will be for the better or
  worse, and I don't have any problem with seeing these changes.

> -regards, rakesh

  Shailendra
  [email-masked]