'If the house is in my name, they (the husband's family) can't throw me out, can they?' The young women's thoughts - although foolish and immature - are a clear reflection of what they've seen when growing up: The hoary tradition of the joint family is built upon the oppression of women and individual choices and there's nothing funny about it. This is not to say that a son or a daughter should stop caring for their parents, but is it necessary for a bride to live with her husband's family, subjecting herself to their often oppressive diktats, for this to happen? What's so wrong about a couple wanting to live in their own space? Why is it alright for a daughter to leave her parental home but never a son? Unless we question these ideas, how will we ever turn things around? Why is this a funny or unreasonable choice? One of the prime reasons why female foeticide and infanticide are rampant is the belief that while a daughter would marry and leave her home, the son would live with his parents forever. The young woman's response - that perhaps she'd live with her husband separately - drew mocking laughter from the anchor and the mothers. When one of the young women said that she'd like her parents to buy household appliances for her new home, Gobinath asked her why she'd need all that since her husband's home was likely to have them already. Known as 'thani kuduthanam', the desire to move away from the husband's parents has been the hallmark of a 'villi' in Tamil society as well as popular culture.

Why would the sons want anything 'in return' when their gender privilege ensures that everything is handed over to them on a platter? Although Gobinath did make a point about girls being unwanted in their homes later in the show, the tone of the narrative was largely an indictment of their 'greed', rather than analysing how tilted the equation is.ДЄlso worrisome was how the young women's wishes to stay independent of their in-laws was viewed. Now when we ask for things at the time of marriage, they say they can't give. This, after at least two women on the show spoke about having to do a less expensive course because their parents were only willing to cough up that much money for the boys in the family.ДЄs one of the women put it, 'Whenever we (girls) asked for something as children, it was denied to us and we were told the money was being saved for our wedding. He added that her job in an IT company was the 'dowry' her parents had given her. In between the arguments, anchor Gobinath injected his thoughts once in a while - when a young woman protested the fact that she'd been forced to hand over her entire salary to her family all these years and that she was only asking for the money back through dowry, Gobinath said that if she'd been a son, she'd have done this without expecting anything in return. When she comes, she will get her gold and come. When one mother said she will give some gold to the daughter-in-law who comes into the house, her visibly hurt daughter flared up and asked, 'I was born in your womb. Silver vessels and other items were preferable. On the other side, a mother flatly refused to give her daughter fixed deposits because that would be an invisible gift which would do nothing to elevate their status in society. 'Only if you give me double that of what the groom's family demands, will they treat me with respect,' reasoned one young woman. Neither party disagreed that a woman's worth in her marital home was measured by how much dowry the bride brought. You could see it in the clear son preference among the mothers - why would we give you, the daughter, the house when you will anyway get married and leave?

Neeya naana latest 2017 husband vs wife