The Paradox of Tradition and Modernity in Upper-Caste Dating Dynamics

I would like to open a discussion regarding a trend I have observed regarding women from upper-caste backgrounds (specifically Iyer, Namboothiri, Ambalavasi, etc.) and how they navigate the modern liberal world.

There seems to be a disconnect between the traditional "pedestal" these women are placed on by society and the reality of their modern lifestyles. It often feels like the community grants them a high degree of social entitlement based on their background, yet this persists even when they adopt very liberal lifestyles (such as live-in relationships) that contradict those traditional values.

My argument is that this creates a difficult dynamic for men—particularly those who are atheists, neutral Hindus, or from outside the immediate community—who enter relationships with them. These men often find themselves in a loop where the woman’s emotions and "reality" are treated as absolute truth, leaving no room for rationalism or a second opinion. It feels as though the "traditional power" of their caste status is being leveraged even in a liberal setting.

This creates a massive, often invisible gap between these women and the general population. It can feel like a trap for men who don't understand these deep-seated entitlements, leading to relationships that feel unbalanced or even narcissistic. Has anyone else noticed this contradiction where traditional privilege is used to shield modern behavior?
 
I would like to open a discussion regarding a trend I have observed regarding women from upper-caste backgrounds (specifically Iyer, Namboothiri, Ambalavasi, etc.) and how they navigate the modern liberal world.

There seems to be a disconnect between the traditional "pedestal" these women are placed on by society and the reality of their modern lifestyles. It often feels like the community grants them a high degree of social entitlement based on their background, yet this persists even when they adopt very liberal lifestyles (such as live-in relationships) that contradict those traditional values.

My argument is that this creates a difficult dynamic for men—particularly those who are atheists, neutral Hindus, or from outside the immediate community—who enter relationships with them. These men often find themselves in a loop where the woman’s emotions and "reality" are treated as absolute truth, leaving no room for rationalism or a second opinion. It feels as though the "traditional power" of their caste status is being leveraged even in a liberal setting.

This creates a massive, often invisible gap between these women and the general population. It can feel like a trap for men who don't understand these deep-seated entitlements, leading to relationships that feel unbalanced or even narcissistic. Has anyone else noticed this contradiction where traditional privilege is used to shield modern behavior?

Is this " traditional privilege" also seen in men?
 
I would like to open a discussion regarding a trend I have observed regarding women from upper-caste backgrounds (specifically Iyer, Namboothiri, Ambalavasi, etc.) and how they navigate the modern liberal world.

There seems to be a disconnect between the traditional "pedestal" these women are placed on by society and the reality of their modern lifestyles. It often feels like the community grants them a high degree of social entitlement based on their background, yet this persists even when they adopt very liberal lifestyles (such as live-in relationships) that contradict those traditional values.

My argument is that this creates a difficult dynamic for men—particularly those who are atheists, neutral Hindus, or from outside the immediate community—who enter relationships with them. These men often find themselves in a loop where the woman’s emotions and "reality" are treated as absolute truth, leaving no room for rationalism or a second opinion. It feels as though the "traditional power" of their caste status is being leveraged even in a liberal setting.

This creates a massive, often invisible gap between these women and the general population. It can feel like a trap for men who don't understand these deep-seated entitlements, leading to relationships that feel unbalanced or even narcissistic. Has anyone else noticed this contradiction where traditional privilege is used to shield modern behavior?
(specifically Iyer, Namboothiri, Ambalavasi, etc.) and how they navigate the modern liberal world.

hi

i belong to this one of the category.....i know other 2 catagories too....its difficult with tradition...

i know especially iyers...they are very flexible...not much ultra modern too....other 2 catogaries

changing slowly....but iyers migration is very fast.....from village to nearest town ...then

madras/bombay/delhi/ calcutta...especially palakkad iyers moved very fast and reached many

in modern gulf muslim countries....without loosing much traditions....its my observation...
 
Is this " traditional privilege" also seen in men?
I think we are talking about two different axes of power. I am not denying that men have 'gender privilege.' I am pointing out that 'caste privilege' exists independently of gender.

In the specific context I mentioned (upper-caste backgrounds), women often inherit a high degree of social capital, community protection, and 'cultural correctness' that protects them even when they break rules. My observation is about how this specific form of entitlement where one's feelings are treated as absolute truth due to their social standing creates an imbalance in relationships with partners who don't have that same safety net. One privilege doesn't cancel out the other.
 
That is a great observation regarding the migration patterns and flexibility. However, I would argue that 'moving without losing tradition' is exactly the root of the issue I am describing.

Because they carry that traditional status with them into modern spaces (like Bombay or the Gulf), they often expect the high regard/pedestal of the past while enjoying the freedoms of the present. My critique is that this 'flexibility' often feels like cherry-picking to a partner: they leverage tradition when they need respect or authority, but switch to modernity when they want freedom. It creates a confusing double standard for those of us on the outside.
(specifically Iyer, Namboothiri, Ambalavasi, etc.) and how they navigate the modern liberal world.

hi

i belong to this one of the category.....i know other 2 catagories too....its difficult with tradition...

i know especially iyers...they are very flexible...not much ultra modern too....other 2 catogaries

changing slowly....but iyers migration is very fast.....from village to nearest town ...then

madras/bombay/delhi/ calcutta...especially palakkad iyers moved very fast and reached many

in modern gulf muslim countries....without loosing much traditions....its my observation...
 
Back
Top