Everyone doesn’t have a right to touch others, especially the women in the family. As in, a (Indian) father or father-in-law may object to a male ex-classmate of his (Indian) daughter’s / (U.S. / Indian) daughter-in-law’s hugging her as they run into each other after a long time. Only some of the people that are related to the daughter / DIL would have that right, in his perpective. A friend does not meet that criterion. A brother, an uncle, a grandfather do. A male cousin does not usually, unless he’s really old or much, much older or married; the he’s ’safe’.

In some families, a friend might qualify if he has had long-standing relations with the family and both he and the gal say that they are like brother and sister. Meaning, either you are related or you manufacture a relationship if a hug is to be deemed acceptable.

The other thing is that a hug is like a devalued currency (similar in value to a feigned smile) in Western countries since your entire office could come hug you knowing it is your birthday, but the very next day some of those same people will backbite and continue with their negative behaviors.

In India, a hug is a high-value currency which is usually given purely as a sign of closeness and affection (restrictions apply — see above). So, even to some that have been in the U.S. a long time after spending some part of their childhood in India, it seems like a manifestation of hypocrisy to hug someone and follow it up with negative behavior or to hug someone and then never keep in touch since now ‘you don’t work there anymore’.

There, it has to be part of something on-going to warrant a hug whereas here, it could be just a one-time thing where you meet a friend of a friend when you go out and you never see the person ever again!

Maybe he should just be firmer in his stance and say something like, “to be fair to Neo and her parents, we are going to give you the same amount of time and energy that we give them – no more, no less, equal”

I think if his mom had an active social life outside of the home that she would not be so “needy”.

But traditional desi moms often only live for their kids, particularly their sons. Its a big deal just for the son to move out and live on his own, what to speak of live with another woman, and not under the same roof as his parents. These things would already be seen as “huge compromises” on the part of his mother.

Is there anyway she can become involved in something beyond herself and her family? Like a project or something? Maybe she can adopt Michael Jackson's kids;)

(and just wait til your first baby pops out! she will want to be with her/him 24/7)

All I can think of is now is major compromise from both R and my end. I hope it happens relatively quickly — my ovaries are getting old! HAHaa

Desi culture also has that mata-pita -seva concept going on – service to the mother and father. There's a famous myth around someone who was so good at serving his parents that he got some type of “boon” from some god or other.

Also, think about if one or both of your parents got to the point where they needed to be put in a nursing home. People get lonely, neglected and even abused in those places sometimes!

On the other hand, I can't not but see your side too. As an independent woman who LOVES her privacy, I totally get it.

Absolutely not will I be solely shouldering the burden of physically taking care of his parents. Traditional or not, again, my parents don't expect or want this of me and I already told R I'm not doing it. If they end up living with us at this point nurses and aides will be hired.

I'm so tired of hearing all this “daughter in law” does this and that. R's mom NEVER had to do any of this and never will. There seem to be plenty of convenient loopholes for R's family (and plenty of other traditional Indian families) as far as I'm concerned, and of anyone I think I have the biggest: I'm American!

Beyond that, in American and many Latin cultures, it is mostly the responsibility of the daughters to take care of their parents. R's mom has been a full time nanny for his sister for 5 years with her two kids. I will never ask or expect something out of her… but yet the obvious person to take care of them is R??? Come on… I call bullshit!

This is where it all gets very sticky.

Good luck!

“When I would let his parents live with us”. hmmm…

He wants them to live with y'all? Permanantly.

Have you ever asked him how he would feel if YOUR parents lived with you?

(i know they probably would never want to, but just on principle, have you asked?)

This is the stuff, girl. This is the stuff.

I always like what you have to say. I am currently working through the very independence/Indian community issues that you speak of. This will probably always be R and my core fight . I think I perhaps underestimated how much I needed my space and independence throughout our “courting” phase but now that we are moving closer to the marriage route, we have become acutely aware of this issue. In short, R is just used to having the Indian community all up in his biz and I'm not. It's not like his family is all over me now, but I worry they will be as the years go by. Part of me hopes maybe I be more OK with this stuff as I settle in the relationship. We are really working on hammering out the details and it is tough (i.e. when I would let his parents live with us/how often we visit/etc.) Bottom line is that it's never going to be enough for his parents regardless and we are always going to have to work through issues with how many family members do we let stay at our place, etc.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? I know me being a super independent gal isn't the best mix for his traditional Telugu culture. But I'm hoping it can still work out–R's my man!

Muslims have a higher divorce rate in India than Hindus do (adjusted for population size), but still, that rate is very low compared to the divorce rate in the USA.

That might be a good idea. Smaller area, smaller mistakes.

I think Christianity also forbade divorce at one point in time, and maybe some sects still do.

In India, though a Hindu may obtain a legal divorce, still, it goes so much against the grain of the culture, it will be a long time before it gains acceptance. And you always get those folks who say, “there is no such thing as divorce in Hindu culture. This is western innovation”. Then of course there are some “vedists” who say in old, ancient “vedic culture” way back when, there was divorce.

In India there are separate legal laws for Christians and Muslims. There is not one uniform “civil code” in India. In matters of “personal and family law”, there are different laws depending on which religion you belong to.

Bottom line: the divorce rate in India is mad low, dude.