Wow, you must be so proud. How liberating for a woman to go around asking men for sperm. Must make her feel so independent. What an awful job of writing. And completely inaccurate. I am Indian and women like these are not just miserable, they are also pitied by everyone.

Maybe it has a bad case of the madonna syndrome. case in point: http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/article5662099.ece

This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.

Tom Friedman called this years ago

This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.

gora here, married to desi, cohabitated and married for 7. i encourage more and more indian women to embrace the modern self actualized woman. Indian women are much more pressured to become doctor's marry doctor's and chop veggies with a kid in tow while curing the sick. american women are much more accepted by family for personal choice to delay or not marry. Jai ho to the self fulfilled Indian professional woman!

Wow LtCol -- I never realized the spiritual^, non-violent^^ and marital heaven^^^ that I lived here in the great US of Assholes!

^ - "God-fearing" is not spiritual, whatever your crazy, hypocritical priest in Appalachia might tell you.
^^ - Gun-related violence in the US !? Makes Peshawar seem, sometimes, like the Wisconsin State Fair in Milwaukee.
^^^ - Divorce rate is 50% here...perhaps you shouldn't be mouthing-off on marital issues here.

It's all very good, people forget how liberal India has been historically, in fact, if you look at how all the things that modern Liberals associate with had deep roots in India
1. Kama Sutra was written in India
2. Pot/Weed was first used there and is still legal in a different form during Holi, a spring festival
3. The first schools of Atheism - Carvaka and Lokyata were in India
4. Women were very liberated and free in ancient India
5. We've had a history of strong women - the first woman leader of a national party in India was chosen in 1925, 50 years before MT for England, and we've already voted for 2 women PMs
6. And finally, just like all Liberals, us Indians consider ourselves spiritually and mentally superior to others, but still we fell prey to the two biggest frauds of the 20th century - Gandhi and Teresa

All this unnecessary info/opinion left aside, I really think that the pick-up line was cheesy/wannabe-ish. Seriously, donate sperm? C'mon, you can do better than that. I've seen a lot of elite Indians trying to ape the West, and frankly speaking, it's just sad. And LtCol, I couldn't read your first comment, but judging from the response, I see that you had written God-Fearing in your post as a good habit. Yup, that's something that you have in common with suicide bombers. Please, don't talk about this nonsense of religion being associated with morality. Religion is just stone age philosophy and should be left to that. It is no coincidence that the countries with the lowest rate of belief - excluding Communist countries - France, Sweden, Japan, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands etc. seem to be doing so much better than the countries with the highest - Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Zambia, Congo etc.

mufasa, I somewhat agree with you, that women's liberation accompanied by extreme feminism, if forced upon as the only thing for women, is almost as bad as women's oppression, because it is somewhat oppressive mentally as well. What I'm saying is that if a woman says that all she wants to do is stay home, cook, and look after the kids, she should not be looked down upon by "feminists". Like Lois Griffin of Family Guy said, "Feminism is about choice".

Somebody flagged my post because it offended their delicate sensitivities. I never said anything about religion or "God-fearing". I said something to this effect:

Wow, and I thought that vapid, self-absorbed, class-driven women in their late 30's and early 40's who think everybody should come running when they finally "decide to have a family" were an American (and more specifically NYC) phenomemon! For any men who aren't interested in younger women and who have no problems with being riddled with AK-47 bullets, blown to shreds, or captured and decapitated during a simple night out on the town, then Mumbai is the place for you!

I'm sure that the douche who flagged it the first time because they can't handle opinions different than their own will do so again. And then they will try to make it seem like I said something about religion.

It's interesting how the subject of women leading lives that are financially independent cranks up accusations of 'feminist' and 'selfish'.

Here are some U.S. facts courtesy of the American Institute on Domestic Violence.

- 85-95% of all domestic violence victims are female.
- 5.3 million women are abused each year.
- Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women.
- Women are more likely to be attacked by someone they know rather than by a stranger.

These U.S. statistics alone should explain the common sense reason for why a lot of women are on their own, or should have the ability to be independent. Males are often the children mothers are trying to protect. And those are just the situations dire enough to make the statistics.

The mythological family unit of protection and care that we'd all like to believe is not a given. And no, this isn't an anti-man rant. This is about what our culture accepts as ok behavior from all of us -- I think men and women are very equally complicit.

I spoke to a former case worker who was retired from the child services division of our state. I asked her if domestic violence was worse now or just more reported. She said the latter, she wasn't even allowed to report most of what she saw throughout her career.

So don't be surprised if women embrace independence while longing for a good partner. It's not anti-man. It's pro-life.

The main problem as I see it is that the modern single Indian woman, much like her American counterpart, wants it all. Just like the men who have been doing it for years. Career, partying, traveling, sex, etc. And settled down after she had her fill. But unfortunately, and almost universally, it is not working out that way, especially when the woman is well into her thirties and beyond. She is just not what an 'eligible' guy wants to marry especially with all the baggage she brings with her, when there so many other choices for these men. And the choices are indeed wide for men, because they have no problem going way 'below' in status to equal or higher in seeking a mate. Whereas the successful experienced older single woman wants only the ones equal or 'above' her, and these males generally do not want her.
This is the unfortunate fact and there seems no getting around it, not at least in the next 20 years!

The institution that most strongly protects mothers and children from domestic abuse and violent crime is marriage. Analysis of the 1999 findings of the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has conducted since 1973, demonstrates that mothers who are or ever have been married are far less likely to suffer from violent crime than are mothers who never marry.

1. Again:
mothers who are or ever have been married are far less likely to suffer from violent crime than are mothers who never marry.

Marriage dramatically reduces the risk that mothers will suffer from domestic abuse.

The incidence of spousal, boyfriend, or domestic partner abuse is twice as high among mothers who have never been married as it is among mothers who have ever married (including those separated or divorced).





Mothers who have never married--including those who are single and living either alone or with a boyfriend and those who are cohabiting with their child's father--are nearly three times more likely to be victims of violent crime than are mothers who have ever married.

Children of divorced or never-married mothers are six to 30 times more likely to suffer from serious child abuse than are children raised by both biological parents in marriage.

Never-married mothers experience more domestic abuse. Among those who have ever married (those married, divorced, or separated), the annual rate of domestic violence is 14.7 per 1,000 mothers. Among mothers who have never married, the annual domestic violence rate is 32.9 per 1,000.

Never-married mothers suffer domestic violence at more than twice the rate of mothers who have been or currently are married.

Never-married mothers suffer more violent crime. The NCVS provides data on total violent crime against mothers with children under the age of 12. Total violent crime covers rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault committed against the mother by any party. Total violent crime covers violence against mothers by former and current spouses and boyfriends as well as by relatives, acquaintances, and strangers.

Violence Against Children:

Rates of victimization of children vary significantly by family structure, and the evidence shows that the married intact family is by far the safest place for children.4 (See Chart 3.) Although the United States has yet to develop the capacity to measure child abuse by family structure, British data on child abuse are available. These data show that rates of serious abuse of children are lowest in the intact married family but six times higher in the step family, 14 times higher in the always-single-mother family, 20 times higher in cohabiting-biological parent families, and 33 times higher when the mother is cohabiting with a boyfriend who is not the father of her children.

You can read more at:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1535.cfm


And the bonus is that the kids have a Daddy.

Daddies are important to children. Children are people, too.
And they have needs besides those that mommy has.

Feminism is about doing the right thing.

If you are woman enough you will.

Liberated, strong independent women in charge of their own lives and destiny have always been a big part of Mumbai. Women executives, bankers, doctors, lawyers, politicians, small-business owners, etc. have made an indelible mark on the city since the 1960s, and increasingly over the past decade as gender-biased glass ceilings have been shattered. Most professional women in Mumbai have, however, pursued their careers within the traditional boundaries of progressive modern urban Indian values - higher education, followed by marriage, children, and the parallel pursuit of a career largely enabled by progressive spouses, in-laws, and cheap domestic help. With few exceptions, this remained the basic paradigm, even for the millions of women pursuing mid-level clerical and support staff jobs out of sheer economic necessity - a multi-income household is often the only choice for the striving middle class in India's most expensive city. This paradigm, however, is slowly shifting. The economic liberalization of the past 15 years has brought with it increasing opportunities, diminishing gender bias, and most importantly access to credit for modern housing, cars, and other essential necessities, allowing women to chart professional lives outside the traditional support system of extended families and marriage. This phenomenon is the ground-breaking one, and not the glamorous lifestyle of nightclubs and high-end South Mumbai restaurants which have always been a staple of Mumbai. Unfortunately, only a fortunate few have this choice. Lack of rental housing meeting the aspirational standards of Mumbai's professional class (courtesy of Mumbai's antidiluvian rental laws), home purchase prices that often match those in New York and London, and worsening safety standards (courtesy of Mumbai's lackadaisical and increasingly corrupt police force) make full financial and personal independence an unattainable goal. Unless, or until, changing social mores are matched by infrastructural changes, cosmopolitans with the girls at sundown may just have to suffice.

Nice to read the article, though Shobha De has been writing this life style for decades now. So it is 'passe' now and 7you cannot use it to define Mumbai realistically. The rich people of society in India have been living this way for decades and it is nothing new. The difference is that it gets published now openly whereas it was a limited access literature earlier. I like Keshni's other article on Bobby Jindal and thus ended up readin this article too. I would say that she has engaging way of writing. This article does not have anything new to offer though (with all due regards).
-rajeev