"She's definitely capable of evolving with the times."
The reality series Indian Matchmaking on Netflix has generated a lot of debate around arranged weddings and traditional Indian customs.
Sima Taparia, a professional matchmaker, is portrayed in the show, but it has drawn flak for upholding gender norms and supporting antiquated assumptions.
The techniques used by Sima for matchmaking resemble those of dating apps, widely used in the Western world, and the show presents arranged marriages as normalized to Western viewers by portraying the process as similar to browsing through Tinder or Hinge.
Indian Matchmaking dangerously endorses gender-based double standards, excessive familial involvement in romantic relationships, colourism, and casteism.
It is crucial to explore these potential consequences in light of Netflix’s recent release of the show’s third season.
DESIblitz investigates if Indian Matchmaking is an obsolete programme that perpetuates antiquated notions.
Arranged Marriages in India
Arranged marriage is a custom where a matchmaker, friends, or family introduce two individuals with the intention of marriage, and the families usually make the partner’s choices and decisions.
As a result, the couples have minimal pre-marital interaction.
According to first impressions, Indian Matchmaking resembles its counterparts Love is Blind and The Bachelor in that it follows people’s relationships while they look for a spouse.
On closer inspection, the programme celebrates arranged marriage as a safe, enjoyable alternative to dating while omitting its turbulent background.
In India, arranged weddings have a long history and are still widely used today.
Although arranged marriages may seem archaic to viewers in the West, they are still a common practice in many regions of India.
Sima Taparia matches her clients with suitable partners in Indian Matchmaking based on a range of criteria, such as family background, educational background, and career objectives.
The show raises concerns about the place of conventional gender norms in these weddings while also highlighting the process of finding a partner through arranged marriages.
Reinforcing Outdated Stereotypes
The fact that Indian Matchmaking perpetuates archaic assumptions about gender roles and physical beauty is one of its key complaints.
For instance, the show focuses a lot of emphasis on selecting brides who are fair-skinned, and many of the male customers are depicted as giving traditional gender roles priority while looking for a relationship.
The way that some of the female clients are portrayed in the show also supports the notion that women should put their families and marriage before their jobs.
The show often advises female clients to “adjust and compromise” in ways that could drastically alter their lifestyles, such as relocating or giving up their careers after marriage.
Meanwhile, male clients are not held to the same standard, revealing a gender double standard that places the burden of relationship maintenance on women.
By normalizing arranged marriages, there is a danger of justifying reduced personal autonomy in selecting a romantic partner.
In the first season of the show, Preeti, Akshay’s mother, openly shares her expectations for her future daughter-in-law, including her domestic abilities.
Although the show presents Preeti’s demands as somewhat humorous, Sima Taparia still considers them.
This emphasizes one of the fundamental aspects of arranged marriages – the need for family approval.
Criticism and Response
Indian Matchmaking, according to creator Smriti Mundhra, aims to spark conversations about real-life issues.
However, the show received criticism from viewers for perpetuating harmful stereotypes, including colourism, sexism, body shaming, and heteronormativity, through casual comments made by the matchmaker and clients.
Cast members have also expressed criticism, with Aparna Shewakramani citing a difference in values as the reason for not working with the matchmaker in the second season:
“The tension was that I’m more progressive and I view partnerships as equal between a man and a woman if it’s a heterosexual woman.”
Additionally, fans were disappointed with Sima Taparia’s inability to create successful matches despite her claims of a high success rate.
Sima Taparia, however, claimed that success in matchmaking is determined by destiny:
“This is all destiny, nothing is in my hands. If the destiny is there, if the couple is aligned together, then it happens.”
Smriti Mundhra explained that the limited database of potential matches contributed to the homogeneity of the cast:
“Sima is the matchmaker on this show. She’s an old-school lady.”
“She’s definitely capable of evolving with the times, but she is a woman of her generation and a product of her generation.”
Arranged marriages and traditional Indian values have been the subject of much discussion since the release of Indian Matchmaking.
Although the show depicts a long-standing custom that is still practised in many regions of India, it has come under fire for perpetuating antiquated views on physical appearance and gender roles.
Ultimately, one’s viewpoint and cultural upbringing will determine whether or not Indian Matchmaking is an outmoded programme.
However, the show’s detractors serve as a reminder of the necessity of opposing biases and conventional gender roles in all facets of society.
Loading ...