Desicritics Comments on The 'M' Word Part 5: Obsessed With Age

Comment by lieben

Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:33:39 EST

Interessante Informationen.

Comment by lieben

Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:33:05 EST

Interessante Informationen.

Comment by Saakshi O. Juneja

Wed, 3 Oct 2007 02:27:52 EDT

Deepti - Lol ! ;-) Kim - Thanks. And yes I do intend to take my own sweet time, even if means dissapointing a few close people. Tanay - Will surely have a look.

Comment by Tanay

Wed, 3 Oct 2007 01:22:39 EDT

Sakshi, just before reading this post, I was at Uma's post @ DC 'A Few Thoughts On A Tolerant Society'. Check that if you wish to. Her post has some basic questions, which are interesting to answer and I feel those would throw some light on the way the society thinks about marriage. Why don't more people take the trouble to understand what is really going wrong? Why don't they speak up about all that they see and feel? Isn't it evident that about the only way to encourage an ordinary person to be a part of the world in the true sense is through a widespread dialog in which some of the blocks are examined? Why is it not happening? Also, Sakshi this is my view. Your parents and your mausi and others live in a society and these elderly and respected people are more bothered about the society and the eco-system that they live in. I feel these people also have their own opinions and views but are strongly bitten by the 'Woh Kya Kayega/Kaheinge, Woh Kya Soochaingye' bug. Guess you got the 'Woh' factor which is a predominant force, don't you think so ?

Comment by Kim

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:51:54 EDT

Sakshi, sweetie. You are in a great place right now. Only one set of a family to worry about you not being married. I have been there, done that. Stage two is worse, you have two families, twice the number of relatives, neighbours and general busybodies who stress about why there are no children from the union yet. Believe me, afore mentioned stage one is easier to go through because your own family normally knows how far they can push you and where to draw the line. The newly acquired family takes time to learn this and until then it can be extremely testing on ones patience and sweet nature. LOL But take your time and don't settle for anything less than what you deserve. ultimately you know best what works for you. More power to you !

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 12:14:59 EDT

Two points on this article. 1. Biologically, from the standpoint of physical health alone, a woman probably should have babies in her early twenties. But a woman who is older, in her thirties, is likely to be a better and more devoted and mentally secure mother. She's likely to want the child more as opposed to a younger woman who is having babies as part of a "baby making club" where all the "girls" get "preggie" at the same time. My own wife is like smallsquirrel and had her first successful childbirth when she was around 35. The doctors classified her as "an elderly primagravita". 2. Sakshi, what you describe reminds me very much of my own parents' attitudes towards marriage and womens' ages. In their eyes, a woman over thirty was a spinster. My parents were raised in the first decade of the 20th (Christian) century.

Comment by Deepti Lamba

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 10:35:27 EDT

And you would be stalker number? There is a queue did you know?;)

Comment by Gaurav

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 10:32:52 EDT

Saks, I totally adore you. Will you marry me, please?

Comment by Deepti Lamba

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 09:56:00 EDT

SS you mean the womb isn't god gift for compulsory procreation? And yet the same people who say this refuse to pay heed to the clit;)

Comment by smallsquirrel

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:18:18 EDT

saakshi.. and women are successfully having babies later, too. I just had my first and I am over 35. so don't worry. and who's to say that every woman should even have to have one? after the stress you get from family about marriage comes the CONSTANT nagging about babies. that too should go out the window. I do not buy into the myth that every woman is not complete until she has also given birth!

Comment by Uma

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 06:20:43 EDT

If human beings weren't so hung up on morality one could have a kid when the time (in the biological sense) was right and marry later. Of course this would only be possible in a society which was genuinely open and supportive of individuals rather than centered around convention. But if society were that caring, marriage wouldn't be the problem it is today.

Comment by Saakshi O. Juneja

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 03:08:12 EDT

Deepti - Thanks. But you seriously think I will bother myself over this - no way yaar. I am at a good place now (in life) and would prefer to stay here for some more time. Aditi - I so agree with you. Marriage is a big commitment and most of us are expected to stick to only one for the rest of our lives. So therefore it's best to cent percent sure of what you are getting into cause later regrets will only end up ruining many lives. Deepa - So true. Agreed age is a crucial factor for "reproduction" but then again it isn't the only thing marriage is all about. Plus even if one can't have their own, there is always the possibility of adoption. Find a compatible partner is the most crucial aspect for a relationship. No use having children in a household that lacks basic understanding and love.

Comment by Deepa Krishnan

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:35:34 EDT

Saakshi, it's related to child-bearing. A woman's fertility peaks between the ages of 20 and 24. Between 30-35, it is 15-20% less than the maximum. The risk of miscarriage increases after age 35; by the early 40s, more than 50 percent of pregnancies end in miscarriage. http://health.discovery.com/centers/pregnancy/americanbaby/fertilityandage.html Until we change the notion that the fundamental function of marriage is procreation and the propagation of the vansh, this will not change.

Comment by Aditi Nadkarni

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:09:52 EDT

I think that the idea of having to spend a lifetime with Mr.Terribly Wrong should probably be scarier than never finding Mr.Right, no? :) I detest how people's lives have to revolve around romantic relationships. Even Sex & The City had everybody all settled down with their boyfriends and hubbies. Its like a happy ending has to have a couple walking into the sunset. A lone man or a lone woman cannot do it. It just ruins the scene for people. Also, the scene is equally upsetting for men. So many families turn the heat on when guys reach a certain age that men too end up getting hitched just to put an end to the endless nagging. It is sad that one has to make decisions that will affect them for a lifetime based on social pressure and expectations. Its like setting up a relationship for potential trouble. If marriage is a gamble, social pressure sure puts the odds in favor of a serious loss.

Comment by Deepti Lamba

Tue, 2 Oct 2007 00:50:37 EDT

My younger sister is 27 and my mother is worried about her marriage scene. We had a weird conversation last night over the phone where my mom told me that she was tensed about my sister and I told her that being tensed wont get my sister married. I told her to leave it to providence and that being married does not entail being happy. Parents want whats best for their kids but putting their worries and tensions on the children is just not right especially over matters that take time. I too have gone through the ordeal so know what you are feeling. Take your time Sakshi. Better to wait than to go through a heartbreak post marriage and even then the world doesn't come to an end. Be strong , be happy:)