Though neither will admit it in public — at least
not before the divorce is finalised — it was a poor
match to begin with. As with many Indian marriages,
the wife had to pander to every whim of the husband
from the very first day, or behave as if she was
doing so. The man would do nothing whatsoever on the
home front. Indeed, he was a husband who neither
pulled his weight at home, nor earned an income for
the household, nor even cared to be considered a
part of the family — on the ground that he was
“supporting her from outside”. As far as I know,
most men who support a woman from outside are known
to be more devoted to the needs of that woman than
the husband. That was not the case here. There were
odd occasions of reluctant support, often after much
hectoring and finger wagging. And for each such
miserly instance, the husband tried to extract a
heavy price one way or another.
The poor woman suffered silently. For one, she had
initiated the marriage — and could hardly admit to
the world that she was seriously wrong in her
judgement, especially in the first couple of years.
For another, she kept deluding herself that somehow
things would actually work out. Such denials happen
to most women in the initial years of a love
marriage going sour.
Moreover, there was the issue of who controlled the
estate. On the sideline was the enemy from whom the
woman had wrested the property by a whisker, who was
dying for revenge. Little did she know then that the
enemy would repeatedly shoot himself in the foot and
become a limper of repute. For her, it was better to
join forces with an errant husband to keep the rival
at bay. Also, she truly believed men eventually come
around.
Well, this one didn’t. He had no intention to. The
girl was not his type, nor ever would be. He, too,
had agreed to “a relationship of convenience” to
keep the enemy out — and to use the time so gained
to explore other possible alliances.
For close to three years, this unhappy marriage
continued. Often, the wife would be forced to
neglect the household and the needs of the estate to
pander to the husband’s demands. The property needed
many things to be done for it to bring greater
prosperity for the next generation. The wife knew
was needed. But like a traditional Indian woman, she
always asked her husband’s permission. Very rarely,
she got a surly nod of assent; generally she was
refused flat-out. And, quite often, while drinking
cups of lemon tea with his mates on the veranda of
the manor, the husband would criticise the wife
loudly enough for the poor woman to hear as she was
cooking dinner or folding clothes.
One day the wife sensed a great opportunity. A
powerful guy with whom she was developing warmer
ties wanted to cut a major deal — one in which she
could keep her honour and develop new ties, while he
was willing to forget the past. After hard
bargaining, she got a good deal. That made the
husband go ballistic and threaten dire consequences.
For months she tried convincing him. No go. “It is
either me or the deal”, said he.
It was the last straw. The woman, while still
conciliatory, stiffened her spine. “I look after the
estate. The deal is on”, she said. Now a divorce is
on the cards. The woman thinks that even without the
husband, she has a slim chance of holding on to the
estate — perhaps with other partners. Besides, she
realises that it is better to live with honour than
cringe like a household slave.
Should she wait for the husband to humiliate her yet
again, before he leaves the household that he did
nothing for? Or be a modern Indian woman, call the
shots, and throw the man out? You tell me.
Published: Business World, October 2007