Is it all right to move into your beau's place and live together, and vice versa? My thought on this is that you lovebirds should wait for marriage before you do so. A little patience always pays. Do I sound moralistic? At any rate, I am not a prude trying to wedge moral spokes in your personal love life, which I encourage with all my cupid eagerness. My reasons for disapproving this form of pre-marital arrangement are rather practical.

You may have your own solid reasons and they are probably along these lines: to save money, to test-run a marriage, or to stave off loneliness. Very well, fine thank you.

But first, this is not America, where people have the most liberal ideas on anything from the way they dress, work, live, socialize and play. In their society, almost anything can pass as normal, as long as it doesn't infringe into others' lives. Nobody will bat an eyelid at you for your personal preferences, however awkward they are. You can be straight, bisexual or homosexual in your orientation, but you are not going to lose sleep because of it for the simple reason it is not an issue for them. It's-my-life attitude reigns supreme there. Virtues like chastity and fidelity on which we place great premium in our society are a rare commodity; on the contrary, divorces, extra-marital affairs, live-ins are as common, if not accepted, as common cold.

Contrast this to the customs, traditions and value system of our society. Ours is a society that is obsessed with nebulous concepts like purity of relationship, personal character and moral uprightness. The gravest slur that a woman in our society can suffer is when her morality is questioned. We frown on women who are 'independent'. We expect our sisters to return home before the sun sets in the west. We disown them when they 'stray' away beyond the bounds of social propriety. Our men are selfish: they won't touch any women who have had eloped with someone else, and so on.

Such gender discrimination is unjust and unfair--we must admit--but this is the sad reality. As in any other conservative society, we are incorrigibly biased against our womenfolk. Unfortunately, this unequal gender equation is not in a hurry to reform itself too soon either.

In such a social milieu, why our youths, especially those studying outside Manipur, increasingly adopt live-in relationship is a paradox. The only explanation that I could think up is that we are at heart the most fun loving hedonistic people who would do anything given an opportunity. That opportunity to do anything that one pleases is lying galore when you live in a metropolitan city, where you are free from parental restrictions. It could be a boon for people who love to do their own things, who in their nature can't brook any interference in their pursuit for excellence in a particular field, but it could also mean free-for-all debauchery for others. Freedom is a great thing if you know how to tap it, and also a nuisance if abused.

Nevertheless, I am not the authority to pass judgment on the moral aspect of live-in arrangement that is becoming a norm among the students here - that is left to the parents, religious heads and those adopting it as lifestyle choice. But I can't help worrying for them anyway, especially the women involved. I have seen enough such arrangements collapse that affect the women in such a way that they can't begin anew a relationship with any other man again. A woman who has lived with a man and fallen out is forever a tainted slut to be isolated--an untouchable. Aspersions are cast on her character, while the male partner gets away unscathed. The only true moral story is this: the day the arrangement goes out of kilter, you are only as good (or bad) as a used typewriter ribbon. It is an irony how large a gulf exists between our enthusiasm to embrace a part of an alien culture and our lack of a corresponding mindset to tide over its pitfalls.

The darker side of cohabitation before marriage may not befall every couple, but despite that, it remains a cumbersome and inconvenient arrangement. There are many reasons for it, one of which is having to lie to your parents and relatives perpetually, who may disapprove of your conduct if the truth is told. In this respect, live-in couples are remarkably resourceful and ingenious people, and they will do anything to hide the fact that they are living under the same roof with their lovers and perhaps sharing the same bed. Maybe there's nothing wrong in that. The only reprehensible part here is the lies that they tell their unsuspecting parents back home. The lies become messier and more practical when relatives or parents visit you, and you have to spirit off your love to his/her friend's house and you lying to them that you stay alone or alternatively you get some friend (of your gender) to stay with you till your parents/relatives leave you in peace. Its comical, hilarious, amusing and plain idiotic: if you are staying with that someone special of yours, have the guts to tell it to your parents, or don't stay with her/him at all. It is about taking a stand. It is about respecting your parents, which is different from fooling them with your acrobatic mind games.

However, the couples don't always consider cohabitation as a petty game. For them, it is a deal for stability: a ticket to marriage. Man takes it as a way to hook a woman forever while a woman thinks it is the surest path to getting emotional support. Sometimes, it lives up to their expectations and sometimes the arrangement simply fails, either because one of them changes his/her mind or mutual incompatibilities that lie dormant before appears more vigorously. A failed live-in relationship has serious repercussions for the woman than on man. For a woman, it is like staking all her bets on a single chance. When she loses it, it is all over--a personal disaster.

Even in America, the epitome of such premarital bonding, suspicion about fragility of live-in relationship is confirmed by a recent report which said: if you live together before you get married, you're putting your future marriage in danger. The report prepared by sociologists David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead of Rutgers University found cohabiting to be so counterproductive to long-lasting marriage that unmarried couples were warned against living together. It seems there is no such thing as premarital bliss.

The best way to avoid this catastrophe is not to step into such arrangement. This has nothing to do with the inevitable moral question, which is left to public conscience and society to decide. So my suggestion is: be practical and weigh all pros and cons before you "test-run" a marriage. Cohabitation is never a test; it is a decision, a decision that you can't reverse in a 'conservative' society like ours. Be patient, and don't let things go out of control. Keep your basic instinct in check.