Why Marriage Is No Longer a Safe Space for Women — And Never Was

In every era, a woman who becomes aware of her own self is treated like a threat. Not because she is violent. But because she is no longer easy to control.

Today’s woman is not asking for dominance, or revenge. She is simply asking for what her grandmother was never allowed to ask for — freedom. Freedom to speak, to rest, to say no. To live without being defined by others. To exist for herself, not merely as someone’s daughter, wife, or mother. But this awakening has shaken the foundations of a patriarchal society that was built on the silence of women.

So the labels begin: "difficult", "too modern", "chalak", "selfish", "rebellious", "bad wife", "bad mother". The modern woman is not "new" — she is simply the older woman, finally realizing she had a right to more.

And nowhere is this awakening more resisted than within marriage. Historically, marriage was not a partnership. It was a social contract to transfer control of a woman from her father to her husband. She brought dowry, labour, chastity — and in return, was given protection, a household, and the illusion of respect. Even today, the rituals may have modern settings, but the subtext remains: she is entering a role, not a relationship. The ideal wife is expected to be many things — nurturing, patient, forgiving, endlessly accommodating — but never truly herself. She must serve her husband’s family without question, carry emotional burdens without complaint, and accept silence as her language of love. Her success is measured by how little space she takes and how smoothly she blends into the needs of others. This isn’t partnership. It’s erasure. Men in traditional marriages are celebrated for being financial providers — even if they’re emotionally unavailable or domestically absent. Women, on the other hand, are expected to excel in every emotional, physical, and moral department, often without recognition. Her sacrifices are normalised. Her exhaustion is dismissed. Her rebellion — even the smallest one — is treated as betrayal. Women in marriages are often the default caretakers of everyone’s emotions — the peacemakers, the therapists, the event planners, the unpaid nurses. She absorbs the stress of in-laws, smooths out the husband’s rough moods, and keeps the family emotionally afloat. But who holds her when she crumbles? Who checks on the one doing all the checking? She earns money, but she must also cook, clean, parent, and please. Society now allows her to have a career, but not if it affects her “home duties.” She is expected to juggle tradition and ambition, success and service, confidence and humility — all without complaint. The “modern” version of marriage looks progressive, but still demands the same old female servitude, just wrapped in prettier clothes.The clever daughter-in-law — the one who speaks up, sets boundaries, or simply notices hypocrisy — is branded chalak (cunning). Why? Because she is aware. Aware of manipulation disguised as culture. Aware of emotional abuse masked as “family expectations.” Awareness in women is feared, because it threatens control. A woman who sees through the system cannot be contained by it. A woman who says no, who wants to sleep in, who doesn’t want children, who sets limits — is still considered deviant. In most marriages, obedience is mistaken for love, and individuality is mistaken for arrogance. The wife is not allowed to be tired, or unavailable, or uninterested. She must serve with a smile — or she is “too much.” Not every unsafe marriage is violent. Some are emotionally barren, mentally degrading, or spiritually suffocating. A husband who doesn’t listen, who dismisses her voice, who expects service without reciprocity — is not a partner. He is a beneficiary. The absence of physical abuse does not make a relationship safe. The absence of respect does.
A man who walks out of marriage is considered unlucky or seeking peace. A woman who does the same is seen as broken, difficult, or immoral. Divorced women face social exile, whispers, and unsolicited pity — even if leaving the marriage saved her sanity. Her desire for peace is questioned. His neglect is excused. Many women of earlier generations accepted their fate because they were never told they had a choice. Their silence was mistaken as consent. Their endurance was romanticized.

But their daughters are asking. Not because they disrespect their mothers — but because they want more for themselves. And for the next generation.

Feminism is not about hating men. It’s about recognizing the structure that keeps women unequal. Marriage is one such structure — not inherently evil, but deeply unbalanced. From “pati parmeshwar” (husband is God) to concepts like “suhaag” and “karva chauth,” culture has often deified the role of the husband and glorified female sacrifice. Even religious texts have been selectively interpreted to make endurance a woman’s virtue, and freedom her curse. But any spirituality that requires a woman to shrink is not divine — it’s distorted. Marriage can be a space of love, safety, and mutual growth — but only if it’s not built on control. A marriage where a woman is not afraid to rest, to speak, to be imperfect — is still rare. Too many women are in marriages where they are alive but not living, surrounded by people but deeply alone. For centuries, marriage has revolved around the man — his needs, status, and comfort. But what if we centered the woman? Not just on the wedding day, but every day after? What if her joy mattered? Her fatigue was honoured? Her growth was supported — not tolerated?

Marriage has never been a safe space for women because it was never designed with her as an equal. But now that she is aware — she will no longer shrink for tradition’s comfort.

So here’s the real question:
If marriage as we know it cannot hold a woman’s full self — is it the woman who must change, or the institution itself?

Explore the latest trends and tips in Health & Fitness, Travel, Life Hacks, Fashion & Beauty, and Relationships at Times Life!