Tag:

live-in couples

By Ashi Gupta (Guest Author)

A few years ago, at a family gathering my aunt casually dropped a comment that left everyone momentarily stunned. She proclaimed, “I’ll ask my daughter to live with the guy she wants to marry before they tie the knot. Just to be sure.” It was a bold statement, especially in a family where traditions have often guided major life choices, even though daily life is governed by a fairly progressive mindset. To my shock, my grandmother nodded in agreement and said, “Yes, that makes sense. Times are different now.”

While the conversation was a pleasant surprise, I knew better than to assume that such theoretical approvals would necessarily translate into full-fledged support if the situation actually arose. Still, that moment stuck with me.

Years later, when I decided to live with my partner, reality unfolded much as I had anticipated. My family’s reaction was a mix of acceptance and hesitation. It wasn’t the outright disapproval that most couples face, but it wasn’t as smooth as that earlier conversation.

Unlike couples in bigger cities or abroad, who live together quietly without their families’ knowledge or in ignorance of their disapproval, I didn’t have that option. My partner and I chose to live on my farm, just 30 minutes outside our hometown where both our families resided. It wasn’t just the proximity that made discretion impossible—it was also my upbringing. I grew up in a family that valued openness, honesty, and the freedom to make one’s own choices, so I couldn’t imagine keeping such a significant decision a secret.

The decision to live together stemmed as much from uncertainty about marriage as it did from questioning the institution itself. I was ready for the commitment of starting a life together, but not for the expectations and obligations, particularly for women, that come with marriage. This deeply personal choice unintentionally became a social experiment, testing how my family and the society around us would react to the open, defiant reality of my live-in relationship.

I had always been vocal about my skepticism of marriage as an institution, and my family knew I tried to live by the values and principles I believed in. However, they had been quietly hoping I’d eventually “grow out” of what they saw as a rebellious phase. When I told my parents about my decision, they were surprised but not really shocked. After many deep conversations, they entered what I like to call the “confused-but-trying” zone.

My mom’s primary concern was, “What will people think?” This honestly surprised me because she had always lived her own life by her beliefs, often ignoring societal judgment within certain boundaries. My dad, on the other hand, didn’t care about others’ opinions. His disagreement with my choice stemmed from the lack of legal protection and rights that a live-in couple has compared to a married one. They also worried that my younger siblings might follow my example—perhaps they felt one unconventional child was already enough.

In the village, things were different. People were curious, both about our marital status and why an educated couple had chosen to shift to a farm. “When did you get married? Wedding must have been in the city no” they’d ask cautiously, after some polite warming up—because they had not heard of any function taking place. I would simply smile and let them draw their conclusions. Most decided we must’ve had a secret COVID wedding, which worked out fine for me. Why correct them? It wasn’t as though I could hang the Supreme Court judgment on live-in relationships on my front door, though I was tempted to on several occasions.

The ambiguity worked in our favor. Living on a farm, away from the prying eyes of an apartment complex or colony, limited the gossip. Over time, we became known as “the couple who lives here,” with marriage assumed as a prerequisite. I recognized the importance of safety and discretion, especially in a village where societal judgment could quickly escalate. Thankfully, khap panchayats don’t operate in our region, but given the political climate, I wasn’t about to test the boundaries of tolerance.

In urban settings, however, the ambiguity created confusion. When I introduced my partner as “my partner,” most people thought I was referring to a business arrangement. “Boyfriend” felt juvenile, while “husband” was a term I wasn’t ready to use. My family, on the other hand, stuck to calling him my “friend,” a euphemism that reflected their discomfort with the situation.

In one of our many conversations on the topic, my mother asked, “Why do your LGBTQ friends fight so hard for the right to marry, while you’re choosing to live in and legitimize it instead?” It was an interesting question that forced me to reflect. It also demonstrated my mother’s willingness to discard her discomforts about homosexuality if it would help to change my mind about marriage. For me, living together was about exercising agency and freedom to live a life true to my belief system and having the freedom to test compatibility without the societal and legal bindings of marriage. For my LGBTQ friends, the fight for marriage was about equality and the basic right to love openly.

Live-in relationships are increasingly common in India now. They have been given legal recognition and some rights as well, despite the misconceptions. However, they still exist in a gray area of societal acceptance. Recent cases, like that of Shraddha Walker, where violence in live-in relationships was sensationalized as being caused by the arrangement itself, have only added fuel to the fire. My mother tried to use such cases to argue against my decision until I sent her statistics on domestic violence within marriages.

With time, my family’s discomfort has reduced. Acceptance has also come with the discovery of many of my cousins living with their partners in various cities. My parents still introduced my partner as a “friend,” but now because they think ‘partner’ does not do justice to the relationship. They would like me to choose a better term.

Choosing to live together before marriage in small-town India has been more than just a personal choice; it has been a quiet rebellion against societal expectations. It has been an attempt at carving out a space, albeit a messy one, where love and companionship can thrive on their own terms, even if those terms unsettled others.

My grandmother, the woman who once said, “Times are different now,” hasn’t said a word directly to me about this. I suspect she’s playing the long game, waiting for me to “come to my senses” soon. I have not reminded her about her words either.

But the times are indeed different now, even if the transition has been difficult. Sometimes, progress looks like a passive acceptance of new norms simply because more people are participating in it. Other times, it can look like quietly living one’s truth, trusting that the small-town society will eventually catch up. As for me, I’m just trying to figure out how to balance authenticity with social survival. Maybe one day, I’ll frame that Supreme Court judgment and hang it on a wall. Maybe one day it won’t be needed at all. Until then, I’ll keep smiling and letting everyone fill in the blanks about the status of my relationship on their own.

0 comments 136 views
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Anuj Dahiya

Kriti Sanon and Pankaj Tripathi starrer film, Mimi is the latest attempt by Bollywood to bring the taboo topic of surrogacy back in the mainstream (last being Chori Chori Chupke Chupke 2001). The film showcases the story of Mimi, played by Kriti giving her career best performance, who wishes to become a heroine in Mumbai and for which she is saving money. It is through a typical dance number (Bikaner ki chokri, Santre ki tokri) when an American couple wandering in India for over a year, John and Summer, the intended parents, see in Mimi a potential surrogate mother. Bhanu played by the enigmatic Pankaj Tripathi, plays the broker in here and convinces Mimi to be a surrogate and get compensated in return. Considering the huge money prospects involved, she agrees to it without much delay. The film is set in a small town of Rajasthan in the year 2013. The twist comes when the American couple abandons Mimi and the baby in womb in between and our surrogate Mimi is left all by herself. This tragic turn of events has been the harsh realities for many in India.

Legalised in 2002, India has become a hub of commercial surrogacy, so much that it has been called a baby factory. Commercial surrogacy is legal in Russia, Ukraine and some States of the USA, but considering the cheaper costs, India becomes a preferable destination. A report estimates it to be worth more than $400, but the ethics of the practice has been largely questioned.

As in Mimi, the reference of khet, ganna, beej to the commercial surrogacy, the practise has led to the commodification of reproductive labour and women’s body. It is accused of treating the child as a good, reproduction as a service to be traded and establishing control over women’s bodies. Commercial surrogacy is likened to organ sale rackets. There is also power dynamics involved where the rich try to rent the womb for themselves, the surrogates coming from the lowest economic rungs of society. Coming out of dire property, their consent to be surrogates can hardly be called informed. It is coercive since refusal is mostly difficult. Also, in majority of the cases, they are illiterate and barely get a copy of the contract signed. The broker keeps a major chunk of the compensation.

The commercial surrogacy in India has largely flourished because of absence of regulations and red-tapism. Come 2014 and the NDA government comes up with Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill which intended to ban commercial surrogacies over night. It allowed only altruistic surrogacy from close family members which would cover medical expenses and insurance and will be limited to Indian heterosexual and infertile couples, having completed five years of marriage. This bill was passed by Lok Sabha in 2015 but could not steer through the upper house of parliament and was therefore, referred to a select committee. The Select Committee headed by Bhupendra Yadav, after consulting various stakeholders suggested that widows and divorced women be included, the five year marriage and infertility clause be removed from the bill. The bill accepting the recommendations is still pending in the Parliament.

But the bill has its share of shortcomings even now. It falls short of taking into account the rights of live-in couples and LGBTQ community who wish to start a family beyond the traditional nation of parents. The community has started to get legal recognition in India and their rights need to be protected. Further the interests of surrogates have also been ignored as banning surrogacy straight away leaves them out of economic opportunities and their chance to improve their lot. As Dr Patel of Akanksha Hospital, Anand, Gujarat says, Banning is never the solution. The ban will give rise to an underground market for surrogacy which will only worsen the situation for poor women. 

The movie in the end strikes the right chords by focusing on adoption as a viable option. As it is conveyed, “If the orphaned children were to be a country, it would be the 7th largest in the world.” You can watch Mimi on Netflix and Jio Cinemas.

Anuj Dahiya

A student of Political Science

Instagram: @anuj__dahiya

Twiter: @unujdahiya

0 comments 41 views
10 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
The Womb - Encouraging, Empowering and Celebrating Women.

The Womb is an e-platform to bring together a community of people who are passionate about women rights and gender justice. It hopes to create space for women issues in the media which are oft neglected and mostly negative. For our boys and girls to grow up in a world where everyone has equal opportunity irrespective of gender, it is important to create this space for women issues and women stories, to offset the patriarchal tilt in our mainstream media and society.

@2025 – The Womb. All Rights Reserved. Designed and Developed by The Womb Team

Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?