• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Live-ins go sour, trigger suicides

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lalit

Active member
[h=1]Live-ins go sour, trigger suicides[/h]TNN | Jun 21, 2016, 06.18 AM IST



[h=4]HIGHLIGHTS[/h]
  • Live-ins are becoming common in Hyderabad, but break up of such relationships is forcing many young women to commit suicide.
  • At least 15 other women, who have been in live-in relationships, have knocked the doors of the court and subsequently ended their lives this year.


52843796.jpg
(Representative image)Hyderabad: When 21-year-old Maitri (name changed) decided to move into office colleague Vaibhav's house, a live-in lover, little did she realise that her dream of marriage a year later would end in disaster. Vaibhav lost interest in her and questioned her educational qualification, before dumping her. When a peeved Maitri approached court for justice, the man denied even being in a relationship with her and the heart-broken girl committed suicide in February this year.

At least 15 other women, who have been in live-in relationships, have knocked the doors of the court and subsequently ended their lives this year alone, statistics show.


While live-ins are becoming common in the city, lawyers handling such cases say break up of such relationships is forcing many young women to commit suicide.



"In most cases that land up in family courts, it's the male partner who calls for ending the live-in partnership citing minor issues like low educational qualification, family background or compatibility issues. In many cases, men would have secretly married the girl in a temple to convince her, but when asked for a commitment or to legalize the marriage, they completely deny any relationship," said Anita Salabh Jain, who has seen three suicides this year.



"Such suicides are on the rise, especially among the young," explained senior advocate, In fact most young women, who move court, are unable to get justice and many cases are closed with the litigant committing suicide.



Sadly, even in cases where women have strong documentary evidence of a relationship, they give up dejected by the rejection.



http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Live-ins-go-sour-trigger-suicides/







 
Right from college landing in a handsome - salary jobs without adequate time to understand the real world, make the girls to fall as prey to the live-in culture. This culture start from software industries & BPOs.
 
There is too much peer pressure to be so called modern and Indian girls feel they are liberated enough to handle a live in relationship but reality is totally different...the mind of an Indian woman is still very traditional even though she might feel she is ultra modern and the harsh truth is she wont be able to handle rejection as easily as her western counterpart.

This is what happens when Behenjis try to play Liberated Gal..they can't handle it.

So the best is stick to time tested tradition...its easier on the mind.
 
Last edited:
When anyone enters a live- in relationship..one should never have marriage in mind..with that mind set one should be able to handle any break up well.

Or while in a live in relationship...keep options open and have a few other close male friends in waiting ..next in line..so in case there is a break up at least there is someone else to help ease the pain of a break up and that person can be the rebound guy.

No one jumps off the plane without a parachute..so likewise..never have a live- in relationship without another male in stand by mode.

This advice can apply for a male too...have stand by mode female in case live -in girlfriend ditches you..so that no need to become a Devadas.
 
When anyone enters a live- in relationship..one should never have marriage in mind..with that mind set one should be able to handle any break up well.

Or while in a live in relationship...keep options open and have a few other close male friends in waiting ..next in line..so in case there is a break up at least there is someone else to help ease the pain of a break up and that person can be the rebound guy.

No one jumps off the plane without a parachute..so likewise..never have a live- in relationship without another male in stand by mode.

This advice can apply for a male too...have stand by mode female in case live -in girlfriend ditches you..so that no need to become a Devadas.
hi renu,


nice advice..thanks..lah
 
What is the difference between a live-in and a spouse, except for the ceremony and a certificate?
 
What is the difference between a live-in and a spouse, except for the ceremony and a certificate?

Marriage comes with a licence and its a quite a tedious costly process to de-licence....not cost effective.

Live-in does not come with any licence and its virtually free to walk out of the door anytime...cost effective.
 
Marriage comes with a licence and its a quite a tedious costly process to de-licence....not cost effective.

Live-in does not come with any licence and its virtually free to walk out of the door anytime...cost effective.

No more..Supreme court has said that the live in couple will be treated as married..So all responsibilities of parenthood are there in case they chose to get a child or inheritance in case the of death of partner
 
Confused desis imitating the worst of western culture and now paying the price.
The cause is not having a purpose in life beyond wanting to just enjoy life (at the expense any norms or anyone else)
 
A purpose is definitely needed in life and one which is not at loggerheads with the overall good. Otherwise if life is only for pleasures we will only be glorified animals.

I am not saying that those who live -in cannot have a purpose. But the attitude points towards pleasure, away from responsibilities and doing of away of some noble goals which comes from living in a family.
 
Last edited:
Out of the box thinking, creativity and lateral thinking are given more importance these days. And as a consequence, is it not reasonable to infer that existing norms of society would be challenged?

Stripping of all the divinity and holiness of religion, marriage is nothing but a contract between two people on the basis of desire and trust. A bond that is solemnized according to the beliefs of the couple (either through rituals, exchange of rings, registration etc). The society thereafter concludes that the two people love each other and would engage in a permanent union for life taking on the steps necessary to fulfil a family life as is commonly understood. With this understanding, the society enforces certain rights and obligations on each individual.

Live-in probably frees the couple from the rights and obligations while giving enough room to explore the boundaries of compatibility. It should be a well thought out decision, for girls, to deviate from the norm, especially in India where it is a loaded male chauvinistic culture with added stigma of "loss of virginity" and "immoral character", and they should possess the mental maturity to accept the consequences of such a relationship.

In the cases cited in the OP, I believe that the girls were in love with their partners and used live-in a romantic sense. A live-in cannot enforce either party to pursue a married life with the other. It is, sadly, the emotional immaturity of the girl that led to their unfortunate fate.

Things would get better as they learn the true nature of the agreement.
 
Out of the box thinking, creativity and lateral thinking are given more importance these days. And as a consequence, is it not reasonable to infer that existing norms of society would be challenged?

Stripping of all the divinity and holiness of religion, marriage is nothing but a contract between two people on the basis of desire and trust. A bond that is solemnized according to the beliefs of the couple (either through rituals, exchange of rings, registration etc). The society thereafter concludes that the two people love each other and would engage in a permanent union for life taking on the steps necessary to fulfil a family life as is commonly understood. With this understanding, the society enforces certain rights and obligations on each individual.

Live-in probably frees the couple from the rights and obligations while giving enough room to explore the boundaries of compatibility. It should be a well thought out decision, for girls, to deviate from the norm, especially in India where it is a loaded male chauvinistic culture with added stigma of "loss of virginity" and "immoral character", and they should possess the mental maturity to accept the consequences of such a relationship.

In the cases cited in the OP, I believe that the girls were in love with their partners and used live-in a romantic sense. A live-in cannot enforce either party to pursue a married life with the other. It is, sadly, the emotional immaturity of the girl that led to their unfortunate fate.

Things would get better as they learn the true nature of the agreement.

'Out of box' thinking and/or lateral thinking need not be creative or even useful!

Without bringing morality and religion, it is possible to understand a sense of responsibility a society needs to assert, so that the children born do end up having two parents who are supportive in their day today life.

Marriage as an institution can fulfill that responsibility within a society. Single parents, broken households and other arrangements have wounded growing children resulting in violence in a society


Every individual change and the change happens all the time. The amount of time spent by a couple is not going to assure compatibility beyond some initial time of the order of weeks at a social level.

The west has pioneered a myth that live-in would assure the most compatible person, and if it did not work out the person can keep looking for other live-ins . Some of our desis have bought this myth along with other ideas of the west. Now they are paying the price that other societies are paying.
 
I agree that live-in arrangement may not lead to a stable relation.
But I do not differentiate between a live-in and marriage. The Supreme court agrees with that premise.
Women who enter into live-in arrangement are either romantic or worse.
The men who enter into such arrangement are scared of commitment, and are still searching for something better.

The separation is always difficult.
 
Last edited:
A purpose is definitely needed in life and one which is not at loggerheads with the overall good. Otherwise if life is only for pleasures we will only be glorified animals.

I am not saying that those who live -in cannot have a purpose. But the attitude points towards pleasure, away from responsibilities and doing of away of some noble goals which comes from living in a family.
:clap2: Sravna sir!

Those who don't want to take any responsibility have to face the consequences! :sad:

The girls who can meet, mate and part ONLY can choose the live in culture.
 
Marriage, family, cultures are simply words that is changing.
Even in ancient times.
The Gandharva Vivaha (the marriage of the celestials) involves simple exchange of garlands . We find references of this type of wedding in Hindu mythologies and epics. This is equivalent of eloping in today`s world, and couples whose union is not blessed by families seek refuge in this custom.

Gandharva marriage is a form of love marriage. Here the bride and the bridegroom get married secretly without the knowledge of their parents. This marriage reminds us of the love affair of Sakuntala and Dusyanta.

GandharvaMarriage_5539.jpg
Mutual love and consent between bride and the bridegroom, are the only conditions to bring about such a marriage. It is a voluntary union of a maiden with her lover. Parents and kinsmen have nothing to do in such marriages. Kamasutra regards this marriage as an ideal one. Hindu mythology literature abounds in such type of marriages. For example that of Dushyant and Shakuntala; Daksheya and Prajapati, Bhima with Hidimba; Kamdeva and Rati, Kach and Devyani. The two get married prior to informing anyone. It takes place either in a temple depending on their religion. It usually breaks up a family.

Where there is no Yajna and presence of any other person except girl and the boy. Both agreed to marry and continue family life.

In that respect live-in is same as Gandharva Vivah.
Relationship breaks, it is sad. You can not force a relationship to hold by words like marriage, family etc.
So instead of differentiating between "marriage" and "live-in" focus on relationship.
Going back to OP the girls would have had the same results whether they had "marriage" or "live-in".
Instead of blaming the breakup and suicide on the name of the union, blame it on relationship, self respect, guilt and society.
 
Last edited:
hi

freedom with responsibility.....responsibility for boy and girl...its commitment....without commitment...life is useless....

marriage or live in ...in both cases.....women are most suffered...not men....most of the times...children suffered a lot

than both couples...so tamil proverb aptly said.......separation is very hard....depression is the byproduct of separation..

முள்ளு வந்து இலையில் விழுந்தாலும் .....இலை வந்து முள்ளில் விழுந்தாலும் ....இலைக்கு
தான் நஷ்டம்......முள்ளுக்கு இல்லை.....
 
A wedding is considered holy because some rules are to be followed in grihasthAsram. Giving respect to each other,

caring and sharing with family members, entertaining guests, bringing up children as good citizens are all some of the

rules to be followed. The break ups after the wedding happens because these rules are not respected any more. People

are more and more selfish and husband and wife talk of 'en paNam' and 'un paNam'. Very sad indeed!

BTW, live-in started only to escape from these duties! :whistle:
 
A wedding is considered holy because some rules are to be followed in grihasthAsram. Giving respect to each other,

caring and sharing with family members, entertaining guests, bringing up children as good citizens are all some of the

rules to be followed. The break ups after the wedding happens because these rules are not respected any more. People

are more and more selfish and husband and wife talk of 'en paNam' and 'un paNam'. Very sad indeed!

BTW, live-in started only to escape from these duties! :whistle:

Well said Smt.RR
 
'Out of box' thinking and/or lateral thinking need not be creative or even useful!

Without bringing morality and religion, it is possible to understand a sense of responsibility a society needs to assert, so that the children born do end up having two parents who are supportive in their day today life.

Marriage as an institution can fulfill that responsibility within a society. Single parents, broken households and other arrangements have wounded growing children resulting in violence in a society


Every individual change and the change happens all the time. The amount of time spent by a couple is not going to assure compatibility beyond some initial time of the order of weeks at a social level.

The west has pioneered a myth that live-in would assure the most compatible person, and if it did not work out the person can keep looking for other live-ins . Some of our desis have bought this myth along with other ideas of the west. Now they are paying the price that other societies are paying.

I think you might have misunderstood the gist of my post.

The norms of society are changing. Rather than on focus of a "family" as the nucleus of a society, it is now the "individual". The responsibility of children would then shift to the society. There is no "called-for" ownership of children in such a scenario. Rather it would only be to provide food and shelter.

Regarding time spent in live-in. I am of the opinion that it helps a lot to de-glamourize the romance that is built up before marriage. The couple get to see how reality would be. The girl would get to know the extent to which the guy would be of assistance to her. She would know how much he is willing to share the responsibility. Things that might be trivial to a male such as a guy watching the TV without assisting the wife would have enormous stress on the female mind. A live-in tests all other things apart from romance, and would really help them to assess their real requirements.

It might really help to re-evaluate our options on the preferences in a partner, sans the lust.
 
A wedding is considered holy because some rules are to be followed in grihasthAsram. Giving respect to each other,

caring and sharing with family members, entertaining guests, bringing up children as good citizens are all some of the

rules to be followed. The break ups after the wedding happens because these rules are not respected any more. People

are more and more selfish and husband and wife talk of 'en paNam' and 'un paNam'. Very sad indeed!

BTW, live-in started only to escape from these duties! :whistle:

So what is wrong in it?
 
So what is wrong in it?
Dear Sir,

Then why a wedding at all? People can meet, mate and part like animals.

At least, they should NOT produce children and mess up with their lives.

I am reminded of what a speaker told in a pattimandram.

Definition of a family:

In 40s: ThAthA, pAtti, appA, ammA, children, uncles, aunts and cousins.

In 60s: ThAthA, pAtti, appA, ammA and children.

In 80: appA, ammA and child / children.

In 2000: appA is one family; ammA is another family: child/ children live in one of these families! :(
 
There is no fool-proof arrangement for a union of male and female to stay put long. Death may still separate them. What happens today towards a marriage and afterwards is all fashion. Fashion may become victim of generation gap. Traditional Indian marriages are best thought out ideas and the modern lot fail to see the benefits and the finer points of it. Of course any marriage can fail; go back to our puraanaas. Western marriages are based on sex and comforts of life. Here it is opposite and the other things are played subtle. But Indian marriage can be improved slightly according to time. I think I am speaking to myself; others are in a hurry to go nowhere.
 
I think you might have misunderstood the gist of my post.

The norms of society are changing. Rather than on focus of a "family" as the nucleus of a society, it is now the "individual". The responsibility of children would then shift to the society. There is no "called-for" ownership of children in such a scenario. Rather it would only be to provide food and shelter.

Regarding time spent in live-in. I am of the opinion that it helps a lot to de-glamourize the romance that is built up before marriage. The couple get to see how reality would be. The girl would get to know the extent to which the guy would be of assistance to her. She would know how much he is willing to share the responsibility. Things that might be trivial to a male such as a guy watching the TV without assisting the wife would have enormous stress on the female mind. A live-in tests all other things apart from romance, and would really help them to assess their real requirements.

It might really help to re-evaluate our options on the preferences in a partner, sans the lust.

Did not misunderstand anything.

Norms of any society is constantly evolving at any time in human history and at any place. There is nothing new in that.

However there are few things that do not change. Human emotions do not change with time.

Children need father and mother figures.

People, in any culture do get devastated when they lose the person they love.
To be with someone and seeing them with others is not easily accepted by the human heart even if it is done by the human mind

To understand this one must have personal experience or be with people who have gone through such emotional wounds.

Society can adopt but it can create children who are much more violent in a society where there are no respect for institution of marriage
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top