So its official now, Malaika Arora Khan and Arbaaz Khan are taking a break from their marriage. The decision comes after 18 years of togetherness. In their joint statement they mention that this is, as of now, a break. Not yet a divorce. They want to figure out things. That reports of Malaika approaching a lawyer is rumor, and that there is no third person in their marriage.
Now we can take ether take their words for it or continue with the rumours and speculation but that’s besides the point. The point here is who are we to judge them? I was reading some of the Twitter reaction and was really surprised that separation comes as such a shock to the society, specially if it happens after 2-3 decades of marriage.
Here are a few reactions from Twitter:
It is beyond me how it takes 2 decades for people to realize they cant be together for life (of whatevers left that is)#MalaikaAroraKhan
— Jaishil Patel (@JaishilRP) March 28, 2016
— Dr Vikram Rajpurohit (@Mgtow_Doctor) March 14, 2016
We live in a country where people are very much influenced by whatever stars do. No wonder so many marriages fail now. #MalaikaAroraKhan
— Aneesh Chandoke (@AneeshChandoke) March 28, 2016
Marriage is a dying institution … It’s showing in India too #MalaikaAroraKhan
— Claudia Ciesla (@ClaudiaCiesla) March 28, 2016
Such loose morals these actors hav for relationships and pity they r being idolised #MalaikaAroraKhan
— ~ अruन ~ (@ramtaxjogi) March 28, 2016
Money overpowers love
Malika must be looking for a second hand rich guy like other actresses in Bollywood #MalaikaAroraKhan
— AVATRSINGH (@singhavtar7653) March 28, 2016
Now this is nothing new, every celebrity couple split meets with same reaction which is understandable because people want to pretend that ending a marriage is a bad thing and that only a marriage that lives on paper till death is an idea.
Truth however is that nothing in permanent in life including marriage. Marriage and relationships are not lifetime imprisonment. Marriage is a social contract, every contract has a termination clause. Lifetime is overrated.
A separation after two decades does not necessarily mean that the relationship was weak from the start and the couple only figured it out now. I bet the couple had a true, loving and beautiful 18 years but with time things change. People change, dreams, desires, expectations change. The best course then is to put to an end to a relationship that is getting stale and move on.
A divorce is no more a failure of the institution of marriage, than it is a failure of the institution of employment when people move on from one company to another after giving several productive years. When CEOs of a company move on to do bigger things in another company, we celebrate. Why can’t we look at marriage the same way?
A separation does not reflect lose morals. Living in a stale marriage as a facade and sleeping outside marriage is. Millions of couples are doing that. Fact that millions of marriages are not ending in divorce does not mean they are successful. Cheating on your partner, abuse and violence in marriage, using marriage as a social card to alleviate your status – these are lose morals.
Divorce is dignified and legal.
It is little wonder that the two men insinuating Maliaka is after money and this separation is merely an opportunity to chase a richer man are ‘Men Rights Activist’ and ‘proud Hindu nationals’. Both waste no time in showing their blatant sexism at every possible occasion. If anything, Malaika is a far more successful person in the entertainment industry than Arbaaz. If money was on her mind, why would she waste 18 years in figuring out better prospects I wonder. Thanks to our great culture a divorce is always an occasion to judge and insult the women, never the man.
There is nothing wrong in looking for a change in life, as change is the only constant. It is sheer madness to imagine that just because the state has put a legal stamp over a relationship it is beyond the scope of change, evolve, improve, deteriorate and become boring. To use love and relationships as a social security, an investment scheme, a safety net in old age, is what is obscene and immoral to me.
Unless we change our attitude towards divorce in India we’d never have gender equality, because it is always the woman who is carrying the corpse of a dead marriage because otherwise she would be judged. Men in such marriages mostly move out without getting a formal divorce and get into other relationships while the woman continue to hold on the children and live a life of sacrifice and celibacy.
Finally, marriage is an institution to control property and women’s sexuality. There is no great value in trying to preserve it. As long as it works, it should be fine, if it doesn’t work, move on.