Having read the above just a few days ago, I began to ruminate on my mashi (aunt) who is in her early seventies, living a retired life with her husband in Kolkata. 

In 1971, having returned to India, after years in London, pursuing a Masters and Ph.D, she married a man who was a good match if not better to her intellectual excellence. Both having, returned from abroad, in times when few heard of such things in our Bengali middle-class families, they decided to approach their marriage, with a difference. Both maintained separate Bank accounts. Neither was in any way curious about the salaries drawn by each other, properties bought even after their wedding was in the name of the person who paid for it. There were no joint finances in household management. Rather, they paid for different activities and expenses separately and having come to a consensus on who would bear the cost of that service. What was most important was the fact that, her husband never interfered in her continuous distribution, donation and financial help rendered to the less fortunate in our family.

I was always fascinated by this aunt. In fact, for many of us, in my generation, she was a role model. She was intelligent, studious, kind, gentle yet at the same time, vivacious.

Many of us, in later life, chose women who were like her. I certainly did.

When I started getting into long term relationships or even in the case of friendships with both genders, I maintained the egalitarian principles. Equality between partners, democracy in thought and action and  finances on equal share basis. This came from watching other relationships and the power balance between partners and friends, vis-à-vis, money. And also from being a feminist.

My partner and I are not bra-burning feminists. She pursues academics. I am a writer, but also have a very strong business background. Both of us write on issues that are feminist concerns, but hers is very solid and academic.

Right from the beginning we laid out certain rules. We are joint participants in household expenses, unless I am being visited by my family or friends. Then, I am cautious to see that I do not burden to her purse. We also have separate bank accounts and separate houses that we own. I am unaware of her remuneration as she is of mine. When, traveling together, we jointly bear the expenses of the trip. We have no joint properties and will never have one, unless, one or the other decides out of love and affection to gift a property to the other. Not all nomination to my properties, bank accounts, savings and investments are hers after my death. Neither am I a nominee in hers. 

Yet, we have a loving and giving relationship and a great bonding intellectually and I should say, spiritually. But, this account is to place before an audience, what in fact, to me means working towards an egalitarian relationship. The heart has not been allowed to mix and mesh in every area of our lives together. 

And, it has never been an easy task to achieve. I come across many feminists and other working women, who work it out totally differently with their partners. The areas of sharing/ individual responsibilities vis-a-vis family and finances, are not so clearly defined. Many times it is taken for granted that one or the other takes care, even if both are working.  

So what are we talking about? Is this a plausible way to work out relationships in metropolitan India? Or is it to cold and buisinesslike?    

As far as I am concerned, I like things clearly cut out. Especially, as women partners we have no legal rights in India. I feel the measures taken as per the listing above, make for democratic relationships, your's or mine and keep out oppressive/suppressive or exploitative relationships/ friendships at bay. As humans, we are all fallible, at any time. 

I like this difference between – let’s have dinner together as against let me take you out to dinner. In the first case, two or more are going to have a dinner together, but all are going to pay their separate bills/or are going to share the bill equally. In the second case, I am taking someone out for dinner and I will therefore foot the bill for both of us.

Normally speaking, as soon as I give a gift to someone, I get one back from that person. This, in my understanding keeps the balance perfect, without tilting it on one side too much. It also keeps the friends sharing dignity towards each other.

Abundance is an attitude. So is lack. Life exists as relative and hence, poverty, wealth is assessed in relation to or in the context of a certain thing/s. There are no altruists really in the world – for everything, there is a price to pay, in cash or kind. So why not keep at least our relationships/ friendships clean and egalitarian?

My questions are:

1. Am I a crusader for equal rights? And Equal participation? Perhaps not among those who are economically challenged, but among those who are in the same standing as I am?
2. What is the perfect balance vis-à-vis the fact that economics play a determining and dynamic role in the power balance among partners/friends?