Indian Matchmaking: Deepening gender stereotypes ​​

The recent Netflix show called “Indian Matchmaking” was criticised for different reasons ranging from promoting gender stereotypes, portraying people in a bad light and being a scripted show in the garb of a “reality” show. As gender geographers, we decided to watch and discuss the show for its transnational outreach and the controversy surrounding it. The show revolves around a transnational Indian matchmaker Sima Taparia who matches men and women through her database of eligible profiles. The two women protagonists on the show who hold strong views about their choice of men are described as “fussy” and “arrogant” by the match-maker who writes them off as “difficult” women to work with.   ​ One question that came up in our discussion was why people based in the US would rely on a matchmaker in India. Diasporic communities of South Asia have their own local mechanisms of matchmaking. Given the current context in which individuals in the US have access to dating websites and social networking options, it seemed curious that they were relying on an India-based matchmaker. The show seems to have shifted the international spotlight on the reliance of Indian men and women in the US on traditional matchmaking practices in India. The matchmaker is shown to be a judgemental person who reiterates the commonly held belief in India that women have to be more “adjusting” and “flexible” in the marriage market. The matchmaker and the couples and families she works with serve to reproduce tropes of traditionalism associated with India and Indians vis-a-vis the US.  ​ Some themes that emerged out of discussion: How relevant are arranged marriages in India today? Are the narratives of traditionalism represented in the series accurate? The series focused on the dating experiences and the relationship between the couples. These are character driven and do not really say much about the intense pressures that women in particular face when it comes to marriage. A young scholar from India who was at our discussion session shared about the immense pressure she faced from her family to get married. The series Indian Matchmaking engaged with the dating experience and to some extent the issues of parental pressure.  For instance a male lead in the show is constantly pestered by his mother to finalise a bride for himself or she would have to do it for him. Indians based in America were thus portrayed as still living under the control of their parents unlike other young people in America who are dating and finding partners without the interference of their family. ​ Marriage is also more of an economic transaction in the Indian cases that were shown in series. For example, all the families that were picked from India belonged to the elite class and based in cities. They were seeking families from similar class backgrounds for matrimonial alliances. The materiality of marriage is however highlighted more in the Indian case where the mother of one of the male leads has already prepared a huge trousseau of clothes and jewellery for her prospective daughter-in-law. In India, dowry is still a big part of the matrimonial alliances except in the North Eastern communities which are generally viewed as more gender egalitarian and some of them are even matrilineal. In the American context the show emphasised more on compatibility of the prospective couple rather than the material aspects. The diasporic community consisted of highly educated professionals seeking similar profiles. They were professionals who believed in gender equality and were more focused on compatibility rather than the material exchanges associated with traditional Indian marriages in India. ​ And yet there were some efforts to show that things are changing in India also. For instance the show also portrays the changes in the urban educated women in terms of their increased agency to make choices with more education and employment opportunities that are available to them. For instance, the Delhi-based woman called Ankita on the show was very clear that she was career-oriented and would not fit the bill of a “conventional Indian daughter-in-law”. She was looking for a partner who would accept her as an independent person. Usually North Indian families expect the daughter-in-law of the house to put hot meals on the table and be available at home to take care of the elders and children. This trend is however changing in metropolitan cities where young women are choosing to stay single to focus on their careers or agree to get married only after they have negotiated their career arrangements with the grooms’ families.  ​ I felt uneasy while watching this show for several reasons. The foremost was that it portrayed the anxiety and obsession of Indian youth and their parents to be “married” in a heterosexual arrangement. It shows that Indian communities both at home and abroad are stuck in between maintaining their traditions and embracing modernity. Matrimony is still the end-goal for many young people and their parents alike. In the present day there are multiple ways of making a family. The heterosexual marital arrangement is not the only way of doing “family”. During the discussion, some YES! Members shared that they were not able to watch the show beyond the first fifteen minutes and others who continued watching said that they found it very offensive in certain places especially where the traditional gender stereotypes are emphasised. The show was oppressive since it did not touch upon alternate ways creating families and leading a happy life. Overall as a group we felt that Indian families need to embrace the concept of “happily single” for all the men and women who choose not to get into matrimonial alliances, remain single or take alternate routes to make families. Perhaps we need to make more progressive shows that display the diversity and alternatives to the heteronormative family rather than shows like “Indian Matchmaking” that promote traditional, sexist ways of forming alliances.  ​ Kanchan Gandhi is a postdoctoral fellow at IISER, Mohali. She specialises in urban, disaster and gender studies. She is trained as a geographer-planner and has over 12 years of professional experience spanning the academia and the development sector in India.