“I’m looking for an interesting conversationalist; someone who is curious about the world,” reads the matrimonial profile of a Bengaluru-based lawyer. He reaches out to me, and we agree to meet. “Why is marriage important to you?” is the first question he asks me. I am momentarily stunned: I was not expecting a person I barely knew to ask me such a profound question.
I must now confess about a problem I have. I like to ponder. When I am asked for my opinion, I take it upon myself to provide what I think is a well-rounded response. I now know that this is the wrong approach while being interviewed by a prospective suitor. One sentence in, and you can see a smirk. Try to continue with your thoughts, and you will be dismissed. “You are quite a thinker,” one man tells me. I am told later that the translation is: “You’re boring.”
The lawyer tells me that he is not judgmental. This statement comes without a preamble. I wonder why he feels the need to tell me this. A few days later, in the middle of an exchange of text messages, he says, “Wow, you are such a prude. Being this way can interfere with how you connect to and interact with people.” A man who has spent so little time with me has already reached this conclusion. I choose to be silent. There is great dignity in it.
ADVERTISEMENT
He further comments: “Chill. The trick is not to take everything too seriously.” Notice how he interprets my reaction or lack thereof. It is as if I am taking his judgment to heart, and that I should learn to relax.
After a few hours, another message pops up: “I’m sorry if I was a bit indelicate.” You are likely unaware of the non-apology apology. Let me deconstruct it for you. He doesn’t consider it rude to tell a stranger that she lacks interaction skills. He is instead sorry that I took his comments personally. In short, the problem is still with me.
The half-hearted messages stop after some time. I am thus exposed to another dating phenomenon. Ghosting. The abrupt ceasing of all communication without warning or justification. When you ghost someone, you directly send the message that you have no respect for the other person's time. Please scroll through your messages. You were not sending texts to a wall. Someone made an effort to write back to you. She allowed time on her schedule to meet you when she was not obliged to.
ADVERTISEMENT
What part of your self-respect is compromised by thanking someone for their time and respectfully telling them that you do not wish to converse further? Is it part of a status-affirming, vanity exercise to walk out from a conversation just because the woman no longer fits into your constricted interpretation of being engaging?
I am told that “there is a certain something you have to do to be appealing to men.” No one teaches you the mysterious art of attracting the right partner while you are in school. Don’t Indians love the concept of coaching classes? IIT entrance. AIIMS entrance. It’s only reasonable to have one to enter marriage. Crash course on how to get the guy. Worksheets detailing possible questions a man might ask. An answer key which makes you sound fascinating, and makes him want to know you better.
A friend sent me self-help videos made by Matthey Hussey, a British dating coach. An unmarried gentleman sits on a couch and rattles out what women are doing wrong in their love lives. “Don’t work too hard to get the guy, you might be pushing him away,” he says. Each of his videos has more than a million views.
Another video talks about how to create value in the text messages you send your boyfriend. According to Hussey, if you say, “Hey, what’s up,” you are both dull and bored. Instead, you are supposed to send a picture message with a meaningful caption to remind the man of a conversation you have had earlier. “Assertively tell the guy to join you for a weekend activity,” he says. “Show the man you are confident.”
I listen to the last tip many times over because I am unable to understand it. “Use a text message to communicate a standard,” Hussey says. “While telling a man what you expect in a relationship, put a playful wink smiley at the end so as not to overwhelm or scare him.”
I scroll down to read the comments. “I am a fan. You helped me get my boyfriend to commit,” a woman gushes. Is it just me, or is this not subtle manipulation?
Let’s assume for a minute that I used the words this love ‘guru’ prescribes to score points with a man. Would I have to continue using his techniques to keep the man then? If yes, where is the place for individuality?
“Have you been in a relationship?” asks another suitor, a Cambridge-educated technical expert. “No serious boyfriends?”
“No,” I say, the distraction in my voice evident. “Is that a disqualification?”
He laughs. “It could be. It means you don’t know how to co-exist in a romantic relationship.”
My friend had cautioned me: “You are a bore if you say you have no boyfriends. If you were in a relationship, you are a slut. Your morality will be questioned ruthlessly.” At the time, I brushed off her counsel as an over-reaction to the antiquated match-making process. I was wrong. I would be judged even if I had no relationship experience.
I ask him: “What are your expectations from a partner?”
“Well, she should be independent,” he responds with a smile. “Should there not be perks to getting married?” “I expect her to cook for me, and pay the bills. Take care of the household.”
I am not going to come up with an “I am educated, I consider it beneath my dignity to cook or clean” refrain. Equality does not mean each person comes in with rigid viewpoints with no space for compromise. How about, we agree to meet mid-way? Share the responsibilities. Enable one another. Push the partner to be his or her best. Unfortunately, this reasonable definition of equality does not sell. People would much rather buy the incomplete “I am wronged and taken advantage of” narrative. We collectively lose the argument on what constitutes marriage equality only because we are too eager to hold on to a cheap, TRP-rising, sound bite.
In the process of meeting the men my parents have profiled for me, I have been labelled intense and serious. Maybe it’s who I am. After all, I cannot become a stand-up comic, or memorise a bunch of jokes overnight to come across as light-hearted. The truth is, I am absolutely in love with who I am. There is real value in my story. If the men I meet have a let-me-check-boxes-as-I-speak- to-her approach, I will never be able to make them happy. Forget me; no one can be expected to fit into a conformist mould of pre-set expectations.
The peril of modern-day dating is that there is no need to try. Your time is precious. You don’t have the bandwidth to understand a person and discover her quirks and eccentricities. If the woman you meet today doesn’t live up to all your requirements, you can quickly pull out the next profile from the shortlisted stack.
We match the ranking of graduate schools. We match remuneration and looks. Going to a reputed institution or getting a fancy degree sadly does not make you civilised. If you talk down to the woman seated across from you and make her feel inadequate and inferior, your education hasn't served you well. Veiled misogyny and narcissism take away from your deceptive, supposedly polished matrimonial profile.
You may now ask me if I have a checklist. The answer is, no. All I am looking for is a decent human being who lets me be who I am. This requires magnanimity. If a man is going to be quick to judge me, put me down, and place a cap on what I should and should not do, I am going to be severely restrained. Consorting with him would amount not to a happy marriage, but imprisonment.
I assure you that this by no means is a sweeping generalisation. Please do not come to me with a hashtag similar to #notallmen. It is unwise, however, to expect honesty, integrity, and compassion in a dating scene filled with smug, condescending men. Interacting with what I call the perfect-on-paper matches only depletes women of emotional energy.
The search for the elusive, once-in-a-generation, decent man continues.
krithika1409@gmail.com