Editorial Viewpoint
A marriage of minds
Community matrimonial meets, websites, speed dating, youth congresses, picnics, paintball competitions, New Year get-togethers for the young. With all these efforts one would think the percentage of Parsi/Irani to Parsi/Irani marriages would increase. But no, the 12 months of 2010 saw the highest percent of interfaith marriages over the last 21 years, save one, and that was a leap year.
In 1989 when Parsiana first obtained and computed the figures of those who married within and without, the figure for out marriages was 14 percent in Bombay. Seven years later in 1996 the number doubled to 28 percent. Two years later in 1998 it rose to 31 percent and remained there for much of the following 12 years. Only in 2003 did the percentage rise to 36 and in 2008, a leap year, the figure soared to the highest ever, 44 percent. Superstitious Parsis avoid tying nuptials in a leap year and with a 10 to 12 percent divorce rate in the community that precaution may be justified. But how many of those divorcees were married in a leap year as versus the other years would be an intriguing study to undertake. In 2009 the percentage of out marriages once again came down to 31. So the figure of 38 percent for 2010 is a source of concern (see “Milestones” pg 37).
Some may argue that the matrimonial efforts picked up tempo in the last two years, namely after the new trustees were elected and Zoroastrian Youth for the Next Generation (ZYNG) was formed. But even prior to that matrimonial meets were arranged as far away as Ahmedabad under the auspices of the then president of the Ahmedabad Parsi Panchayat, Areez Khambatta. Years ago Mancherji Joshi Colony social worker Mithoo Jessia organized matrimonial meets as did many other well meaning Parsis. The notorious WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) Page also carries free matrimonial advertisements.
Throughout the world families exhort their young “to stick to your own kind” (as Anita instructs Maria in West Side Story). Many threaten to disown their children if they disobey. Some remain single because they are unable to find a spouse from within the clan and rather than offend their parents remain unattached or wait till their parents are no more. But by then they are often past the reproductive age. Numerous families have been torn asunder over the issue of out marriage and many never reconciled.
Several years ago the Bombay Parsi Punchayet matrimonial bureau had introduced videos of prospective individuals so that people could view one another even if they resided in other parts of the country or the world. The Federation of Zoroastrian Youth Associations of India held and holds numerous youth congresses throughout India. Add to this all the individuals who devote considerable time to bringing suitably matched young people together, the casual social meetings at weddings, navjotes, nataks, New Year get-togethers, the frequent encounter between singles in the various colonies and baugs. Considerable and conscious efforts have been made and continue to be made to keep the unmarried in the fold.
So what is going amiss? Why the seven percent leap in interfaith marriages? Is the community going about matters incorrectly? Is there another way or a right way?
When the Parsi population started to decline after 1940, several well-meaning but uninformed people laid the blame on inadequate housing. “No houses, no spouses” ergo no children, they claimed. But housing colonies had been around much before the population decline. And yet the colonies did not stem the fall. It was only after people realized that population growth is not a factor of housing or money alone, that the subject was studied objectively. Housing is a quality of life issue. It is not the determining factor in getting married or having children. One can live with one’s parents or rent a flat in the distant suburbs or move to another town. After all how did Parsis in Bombay manage before Nowroz Baug, the first housing colony for Parsis was built a little over 100 years ago? Flats were available then but the rents were not always affordable. The Rent Control Act came in later. Still, the population grew.
After building over 6,000 flats Parsi numbers continue to diminish. Even providing monetary incentives and subsidies has not stemmed the tide. There are many who argue the numbers decreased because of migration to other lands. The Parsi wanderlust that once galvanized our forefathers to leave Iran in search of verdant fields a 1,000 years ago still stirs in our genes. But the global figures don’t add up. The downward spiral is inexorable.
Populations have declined in the developed world. Women’s emancipation, education, urbanization, the breakup of the joint family, birth control techniques, the stress of both parents working, the cost of raising children, the time needed to spend with the family, the pressures of school and college studies, the need for more leisure time, all contribute to the desire to have small, compact families. No government in the world has reportedly succeeded in reversing a population decline. The only option to augment those countrys’ numbers is to permit entry to immigrants.
As regards interfaith marriages, the news media is full of stories of honor killings. Some hapless son or daughter defies the parents’ edicts and marries a person of another caste or faith or even village. Tragedy ensues. In Rajasthan couples are disgraced, shunned and even killed if they marry someone from the same village! And yet young lovers defy their elders knowing they may have to pay with their lives or at least one of their lives.
If in the forsaken villages and bye lanes of India, the traditionalists cannot have their way what chance has a relatively urban community of turning the clock back? Yes one may threaten such couples, one may even try and mar the navjote ceremony of their progeny, or attempt to deny them their legal rights. But can all this stem the tide? Or will it only worsen matters?
In the not too distant past objections were raised if a member of an athornan family married a behdin. Pitched battles were fought over the issue. Later behdins considered it a bad omen for one of their offspring to marry into the priestly fold. Today as long as a son or daughter marries a Parsi/Irani, the parents are relieved. As the former Census commissioner J. K. Banthia commented, a time would come when a Parsi marrying another Parsi would be a day of national celebration.
What matters is not the time of day or the season or the year one marries in. Nor the color of the skin, differences in height, or age or horoscopes or education. Compatibility is what counts. We live in a world of individual liberties and the more barriers we create to peoples’ freedom the more bitterness ensues. The revolts in Tunisia and Egypt demonstrate the human longing for self-determination.
The Indian Government is taking the enlightened route and not giving in to the demands of various pressure groups who want restrictions on who one can or cannot marry. Civil society favors the individual’s right to marry a person of his/her choice.
We can wish our young well and welcome the spouses they select, whether judiciously or not. That way at least we can help preserve their marriages and eventually our community.
In 1989 when Parsiana first obtained and computed the figures of those who married within and without, the figure for out marriages was 14 percent in Bombay. Seven years later in 1996 the number doubled to 28 percent. Two years later in 1998 it rose to 31 percent and remained there for much of the following 12 years. Only in 2003 did the percentage rise to 36 and in 2008, a leap year, the figure soared to the highest ever, 44 percent. Superstitious Parsis avoid tying nuptials in a leap year and with a 10 to 12 percent divorce rate in the community that precaution may be justified. But how many of those divorcees were married in a leap year as versus the other years would be an intriguing study to undertake. In 2009 the percentage of out marriages once again came down to 31. So the figure of 38 percent for 2010 is a source of concern (see “Milestones” pg 37).
Some may argue that the matrimonial efforts picked up tempo in the last two years, namely after the new trustees were elected and Zoroastrian Youth for the Next Generation (ZYNG) was formed. But even prior to that matrimonial meets were arranged as far away as Ahmedabad under the auspices of the then president of the Ahmedabad Parsi Panchayat, Areez Khambatta. Years ago Mancherji Joshi Colony social worker Mithoo Jessia organized matrimonial meets as did many other well meaning Parsis. The notorious WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) Page also carries free matrimonial advertisements.
Throughout the world families exhort their young “to stick to your own kind” (as Anita instructs Maria in West Side Story). Many threaten to disown their children if they disobey. Some remain single because they are unable to find a spouse from within the clan and rather than offend their parents remain unattached or wait till their parents are no more. But by then they are often past the reproductive age. Numerous families have been torn asunder over the issue of out marriage and many never reconciled.
Several years ago the Bombay Parsi Punchayet matrimonial bureau had introduced videos of prospective individuals so that people could view one another even if they resided in other parts of the country or the world. The Federation of Zoroastrian Youth Associations of India held and holds numerous youth congresses throughout India. Add to this all the individuals who devote considerable time to bringing suitably matched young people together, the casual social meetings at weddings, navjotes, nataks, New Year get-togethers, the frequent encounter between singles in the various colonies and baugs. Considerable and conscious efforts have been made and continue to be made to keep the unmarried in the fold.
So what is going amiss? Why the seven percent leap in interfaith marriages? Is the community going about matters incorrectly? Is there another way or a right way?
When the Parsi population started to decline after 1940, several well-meaning but uninformed people laid the blame on inadequate housing. “No houses, no spouses” ergo no children, they claimed. But housing colonies had been around much before the population decline. And yet the colonies did not stem the fall. It was only after people realized that population growth is not a factor of housing or money alone, that the subject was studied objectively. Housing is a quality of life issue. It is not the determining factor in getting married or having children. One can live with one’s parents or rent a flat in the distant suburbs or move to another town. After all how did Parsis in Bombay manage before Nowroz Baug, the first housing colony for Parsis was built a little over 100 years ago? Flats were available then but the rents were not always affordable. The Rent Control Act came in later. Still, the population grew.
After building over 6,000 flats Parsi numbers continue to diminish. Even providing monetary incentives and subsidies has not stemmed the tide. There are many who argue the numbers decreased because of migration to other lands. The Parsi wanderlust that once galvanized our forefathers to leave Iran in search of verdant fields a 1,000 years ago still stirs in our genes. But the global figures don’t add up. The downward spiral is inexorable.
Populations have declined in the developed world. Women’s emancipation, education, urbanization, the breakup of the joint family, birth control techniques, the stress of both parents working, the cost of raising children, the time needed to spend with the family, the pressures of school and college studies, the need for more leisure time, all contribute to the desire to have small, compact families. No government in the world has reportedly succeeded in reversing a population decline. The only option to augment those countrys’ numbers is to permit entry to immigrants.
As regards interfaith marriages, the news media is full of stories of honor killings. Some hapless son or daughter defies the parents’ edicts and marries a person of another caste or faith or even village. Tragedy ensues. In Rajasthan couples are disgraced, shunned and even killed if they marry someone from the same village! And yet young lovers defy their elders knowing they may have to pay with their lives or at least one of their lives.
If in the forsaken villages and bye lanes of India, the traditionalists cannot have their way what chance has a relatively urban community of turning the clock back? Yes one may threaten such couples, one may even try and mar the navjote ceremony of their progeny, or attempt to deny them their legal rights. But can all this stem the tide? Or will it only worsen matters?
In the not too distant past objections were raised if a member of an athornan family married a behdin. Pitched battles were fought over the issue. Later behdins considered it a bad omen for one of their offspring to marry into the priestly fold. Today as long as a son or daughter marries a Parsi/Irani, the parents are relieved. As the former Census commissioner J. K. Banthia commented, a time would come when a Parsi marrying another Parsi would be a day of national celebration.
What matters is not the time of day or the season or the year one marries in. Nor the color of the skin, differences in height, or age or horoscopes or education. Compatibility is what counts. We live in a world of individual liberties and the more barriers we create to peoples’ freedom the more bitterness ensues. The revolts in Tunisia and Egypt demonstrate the human longing for self-determination.
The Indian Government is taking the enlightened route and not giving in to the demands of various pressure groups who want restrictions on who one can or cannot marry. Civil society favors the individual’s right to marry a person of his/her choice.
We can wish our young well and welcome the spouses they select, whether judiciously or not. That way at least we can help preserve their marriages and eventually our community.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive