Society and Institutions
On marriages, love or otherwise
Ok. I know the whole world and his dog are debating the abortion issue. So, must I too? No thanks. I am not qualified to comment on either abortion or pregnancy see as I have had neither. So, let me not venture into that dangerous territory. This post by Nita, on the other hand, is something I can talk about. She wonders if love marriages are any different from arranged marriages because short-listing according to one’s preferences is going to happen anyway.
Well, I agree. And I don’t. Confused? Actually, I have pretty ambiguous views on the issue. Personal experience dictates that I defend love marriages passionately. No, I am not married. But I am in love. So, I can talk. Oh yes! I can. First, Nita asks if someone looking for a potential partner would not hang out at a place he/she like so that chances of meeting someone with similar tastes is greater. Well, I really don’t know. Not many people are actively looking for a mate. Ok. Let me modify that statement. Not many people I know who eventually fell in love, actively looked out for a mate. It happened. To me too. You can’t exactly blame me for going to work can you? That’s where I met him. So, I am really not sure people mentally shortlist people before falling in love. If I may say so, he is not the kind of person I would have considered perfect 5 years ago. But once I met him, everything changed. Including the idea of perfection. So, are we filtering unsuitable candidates? I somehow doubt it.
And as far as physical attributes are concerned, I suppose it is true to a large extent. Of course everyone wants a husband who looks like George Clooney, Tom Cruise, Abhishek Bachchan, hell…I don’t know. Whoever you think is good looking. I have no clue what I liked when I was in my teens. But I certainly know that that dream is nothing close to the reality I so adore today. About that teenage bit. Everyone wants the latest heartthrob as husband when they are 13. Whether they would actually marry the person, given the chance, when they are 25 is anyone’s guess. And mine is, no.
Having disagreed with Nita for so long, let me say that I found that example rather amusing. She knows someone who wants a guy with a head full of hair!! Excuse me? How do you actually think so much? As far as I am concerned, if I gel well with the guy, that will do. Wavelength. That’s what I call it. And I have an extremely cheeky question. What would you do if the guy lost all his hair after marrying you? And developed that forbidden paunch and put on lots of weight? Ditch him? A question to ponder. 😛
Elitist education?
I saw this link via Nanopolitan. And, I must say the author’s arguments hit home rather well. As Abi says, some of them are broad-brush generalisations, but on the whole, he makes a lot of sense. For instance, when he says that people tend to look down upon others simply because they did not go a certain university, he successfully drives home an important point: that, unconsciously, graduates of elite institutions (I like to believe that Sciences Po is elite) look down upon those who do not "belong" there. I am guilty of that myself. I am proud I got into Sciences Po. But sometimes, I too have displayed that annoying arrogance of someone who is among, as Deresiewicz says, is among the "best and brightest." I am probably not. I am probably just very lucky. Or not even. I also agree that graduates of elite schools tend to judge themselves, and others, by numbers: SAT, GRE, GMAT scores.
In the Indian context, the equivalent is probably IIT and IIM. In this regard, I would like to point you to a brilliant post by Nita. (as always). It is a brilliant analysis of what IIM graduates are doing, how much they are getting paid, and what kinds of jobs they prefer. Beyond all this hype about the IITs and the IIMs, I would like to ask one question. What does an IIT graduate have that any good engineer from a decent engineering college does not? This is an honest question. I do not know. Any answers are welcome.
On a related note, I was rather surprised, even shocked to hear that many of my students have no idea how to write a CV. In fact, even those who are working have never written a CV because they were recruited on campus, and they simply had to fill up a form and take some technical tests. I do agree that BITS Pilani, the IITs and other institutions send out brilliant engineers. But, is brilliance a result of the college in which you studied? I know many people who come from nondescript and even unrecognised institutions who are capable of giving an IIT-grad a run for his money. I simply believe that excellence can exist anywhere, even in the slums. We are, as a society, too caught up in the rut of exams, degrees and marks to see that intelligence is unrelated to most or even all of these factors. What’s more? We are refusing to allow our children to exercise their fundamental right to dissent. Any difference of opinion with school, college or teachers is quickly suppressed. "Just write what is in the text book. Otherwise you will not get marks." These are the words I hear from parents of all ages, day in and day out.
This reluctance to question is so ingrained in the Indian psyche that my grandfather tells me I must not question the analysis that appears in newspapers because those writing for the media are obviously better qualified than me to talk. Pray, why must I shut up when I see a journalist talking nonsense? Because the writer is a professor at JNU? No. I will not shut up. As long as I can substantiate my arguments, I have a right to say what I please. What people like my grandfather conveniently forget, is that we, as Indians, have a right to disagree. Even if we are engineers and not social scientists or strategic analysts. In short, we Indians give more respect to a piece of paper than to real intelligence. We must get out of this. If we want to innovate rather than replicate, we must encourage dissent. There is nothing like a good argument to foster new ideas. We must learn this fundamental truth for our own good.
Are all-women’s colleges really that bad?
Well, I really do not know. When I was in college, I was pretty irritated by the fact that WCC did not admit men. It cannot. Simply because it is the Women’s Christian College. But today, when I read a few posts on same-sex education, it got me thinking again. Like Chandni and Sunita, I too was a vigorous advocate of co-educational schools for much of my life. But now, I am not so sure. What sporadic blogger said in her post is quite true.
“We are who we are, largely because we studied in an all-girls institution. And by that, I mean, we grew into people who are confident of their, our, ability. In several co-ed colleges, one sees that very few girls ever occupy union positions. If they do at all, they are elected into positions that are traditionally seen as a female domain-cultural representatives, literary representatives.”
This, to a certain extent is true. I studied 14 years in a co-ed school. Three years in a women’s college instilled the confidence that 14 years of co-ed failed to do. I was always rather talkative, but college channeled that urge to talk into something constructive and made me a debater. Now, let me say that any college could have done that. But the fact that I was accepted for what I was in WCC made a huge difference. Let me give you a rather personal example here. When I was in school, I was constantly judged on how I looked, how tall, how fat, how thin, how beautiful I was. I was judged on what boys (immature and even superficial young men) thought of me. If the class “cool guy” thought I was not worth talking to, nobody would. Not even the equally “un-hep” reject of the class. I stepped into college with a lot of apprehension. I constantly looked over my shoulder to see who was scrutinising my actions and judging my appearance. To my utter surprise, nobody cared about what I wore or how fair or how dark I was. To them, to the hundreds of girls I was surrounded by every day, I was normal. For the first time in life, I felt at home.
This was a personal experience. I will not say that co-ed is bad. But I would like to disagree with one point that Chandni makes. She says,
“In college we found girls who were 18 plus, behaving with the opposite sex, in a fashion that we did when we were 13. You know, the whole excitement and hype regarding “boys” when the hormones are in full swing and you suddenly see the “pests” with new eyes!”
Uhm…I do not agree. At 18, girls are not all that mature. Maybe growing up in a co-ed environment makes girls more confident. But, crushes do happen. At 18 or even at 23. Judging a girl as immature because she crushes on a cute guy is not fair. I blushed like hell when I first went out with my boyfriend. And I was at the ripe old age of 23. Hell! I still do sometimes. So?
I admit, at WCC, we definitely were excited at the prospect of culturals because they meant that guys would come. But we were barely out of our teens for goodness’ sake! And we were women. Of course we wanted them to come to college. As someone points out in the comments section, not all women from all-girls’ institutions behave like blubbering idiots in front of men. Some co-ed girls do so too. I think it’s hardly fair to blame a type of education system for that.
I just think that each has its advantages. I for one loved my time at WCC. I could do what I pleased (as long as Mrs. Phillips didn’t hear of it). I did not care a damn what I wore most of the time because we were all women. I have friends who used to turn up to classes in their nightsuits and pajamas because they woke up at 8:25 for an 8:30 class. It’s all fun. The shopping, the gossip, the late-night secret chats over cell-phone (because my hostelite friends had sneaked it in without the warden’s knowledge), everything was fun.
Yes, I love to cook…so?
I intended to link to this post a long time ago. I kept putting it off until I decided it was too late to link to. But, something happened this afternoon that made me blog it (rant?) with a vengeance. I was at Alliance francaise. That’s not unusual. But, someone I knew a long time ago came up to me and said hi. I was not exactly thrilled to see this person, but I said hello nevertheless. I was trying to fight tiredness and sleep, and get home soon, when she started talking.
“So, what did you do in France?”, she asked.
I explained that I did my Masters in International Affairs. She rants for some time about being away for long, touring the world with her sailor-husband, and then asks me how I managed being a vegetarian.
“I cooked”, I said.
She looked at me with stunned disbelief.
“You cooked?”
“Well, yes…I did.”
“You still do?”
“Of course I do.”
Then she launches into this tirade about how women are forced to cook for their gluttunous husbands and how they normally hate the job. She then looks at me, and in a rather patronising voice states,
“I think you should refuse to do such nonsense. You are a post-graduate after all.”
Eh? Pardon me if I am being ignorant, but just what does being a post-graduate have to do with cooking. What irked me even more was that she cloaked her general inability/unwillingness to cook in the garb of feminism and free will. I have said it before and will say it again. I am not a feminist if this is what feminism means. I believe in equality of the sexes but that’s it. And yes, surprising as it may seem, I actually like cooking. Just as I like teaching, listening to music or reading. It’s a hobby, a passionate interst and an essential survival tool.
Nita talks about the devaluation of cooking, and I see it happening everywhere. Today’s incident reminded me that cooking is not just devalued but actively scorned and criticised as useless and as a waste of time. I disagree. Cooking can be therapeutic for someone who likes to do it. There is nothing more satisfying that a well-cooked meal. To me, it is a labour of love. I don’t cook for every passer-by. I only cook for those I love. And if I have cooked for any of you at any point in life, it probably means we share a lasting friendship, at the least. Lastly, I cook. But that does not mean I am incapable of doing other things. Conversely, the fact that I am capable of doing other things does not render my ability to cook meaningless. I love to cook. Period.
Of etiquette and stupid advice
I came across, not one, but three posts, all ranting about a Mumbai Mirror article by a professional counsellor and psychologist, Uttam Dave. All three are perfectly justified in their ranting. I am equally outraged by all the stupid, sexist and absolutely one-sided advice that Dave is spouting, in a newspaper no less. But, when I first read Chandni’s post, I was dismissive of the article as the rants of an old man who was yet to get out of the 13th Century. I am assuming he is old, but if he is younger, then I am even more scandalised at the attitude. I have nothing to add to what Chandni, Nita and SC have to say.
But then, what outraged me more than the article was this site, that Nita pointed me to. This “finishing school” trains women in “etiquette” and “home management”. Now, wait a sec. I do understand that getting married means taking on a lot of responsibility, most of the time, of the kind we are not used to as we live with parents who do the job. But, does that not apply to men too? A lot of men have no idea about home management, budgeting, entertaining guests or organising parties either. And, just why is this kind of work considered the exclusive domain of the wife? If marriage is a partnership, both partners must learn how to manage a home. If there is a finishing school that teaches women how to cook, clean, change sheets and go grocery shopping, men must learn them all too. After all, men must contribute, at least partially, to housework right?
As Nita says, the woman (more often than not a girl in her early 20s) leaves familiar surroundings, parents, friends, her home city and even her country to go and settle down with a family that is so reluctant to accept her. What she needs, is not stupid advice telling her to “adjust”, but a reassurance from husband and in-laws that all will be well. The article, while sounding sexist and one-sided, also portrays all in-laws as cruel and insensitive. To their credit, many modern families go the extra mile to make the transition easier. It’s time we stop giving such sexist advice and understand that it takes two to tango.