I don’t think joint families benefit even all the men – for example, fathers of Indian girl children do not benefit from Patriarchy, they are not even seen as Senior Citizens. Ever heard someone complain about lack of elder care from their sons in law (Jamai Raja) or from paraya dhan?
Patriarchal Joint Families empower Parents of sons (i.e. future all powerful in laws), to control how girl children are viewed, raised, educated, controlled, protected, valued, disinherited, hated and killed in the Indian society. For most Indians, the paraya dhan are with the parents only until they go to their ‘own home, which is their future spouse’s parents’ home.
The sense of entitlement of the future in laws of Indian Paraya Dhan is rarely questioned. Until recently the parents of Indian daughters felt they had no option but to teach the girl to somehow make the best of the situation, please, obey, see happiness in suffering and abuse, and accept lack of freedom and happiness as her destiny.(Divorce, widowhood or remaining single were not permitted to women). Some parents of paraya dhan send their daughters to schools that train them to be obedient, mostly the training is provided at home.
The idea is so deep rooted, that they fail to see women, probably in their own neighborhood, living happy lives – doing, wearing, opining, driving, eating, drinking what they like (despite patriarchal moral policing) and living happy lives.
This is why rigidly patriarchal societies like India and China hate and kill future non-men (girl children).
Do you agree with this comment?
I will never live in a joint family, it has its roots in patriarchy and benefits only men.
In India when a woman and man get married only the woman’s life changes. The man gets to continue living the way he always has.
Marriage should be about comprising on both sides husband and wife.
If I like to eat dinner at 9 and they all like to eat early who will have to change. The dil or 5 members of the family.
In a nuclear set up both husband and wife will compromise and might eat at 7. A middle ground, a compromise for both.
That was just an example but thats what marriage is supposed to be; give and take and compromises from both parties.
In the joint system it doesn’t work that way. Women are expected to “adjust” while men continue living the way they always have. Indian men have such a sense of entitlement in this system.
Its not about women being stubborn about change, its the fact that it is only expected of them.
I know i will have to adjust to change, compromise and sacrifice when i get married but i also want my husband to do that for me. It has to be a two way street.
Here’s how we react if we think men might need to adjust: