“It is women who usually lead men astray.”
A harmless joke? Or a deeply rooted cultural script?
Why is it that men who are raised to be decisive and powerful suddenly become helpless victims after marriage?
This piece explores the strange disappearance of male agency—and the convenient resurrection of the ‘cunning wife’ trope in our social imagination.
Let’s talk about accountability, patriarchy, and the politics hidden in everyday language.
The Innocent Sentence That Isn’t Innocent
There is absolutely nothing problematic about spouses acknowledging each other’s support. Marriage is, ideally, a partnership.
But language is never neutral.
When a man declares that “women usually lead men astray,” even jokingly, he is not merely making a personal observation. He is drawing from a deep reservoir of cultural imagination—one that Kerala knows all too well.
We have heard versions of this story before.
When a man changes after marriage—becomes distant from parents, makes decisions the family dislikes, shifts priorities—the whispered explanation often follows:
“Poor fellow. After marriage, he is no longer himself.”
The culprit? The wife.
The Curious Case of Vanishing Male Agency
Here lies the paradox.
Before marriage, men are described as decisive, rational, authoritative. Society repeatedly affirms their agency. Boys grow up being told they are future heads of households. Masculinity is intertwined with power, independence, and decision-making.
And yet, after marriage?
Suddenly, some men are portrayed as helpless beings—seduced, manipulated, and misdirected by their wives.
It is a fascinating transformation.
This may be the only context in which patriarchy willingly strips men of their agency—only to weaponize that loss against women.
When men act generously, wisely, or responsibly, the credit belongs entirely to them.
When men act “ridiculously” or make decisions that displease extended families?
Ah. The wife must be behind it.
The Archetype of the Cunning Wife
Hidden within these everyday conversations is an ancient stereotype:
The husband is straightforward, innocent, perhaps even naive.
The wife is strategic, conspiratorial, emotionally manipulative.
This is not new. Literature, cinema, family gossip, and even casual jokes reproduce this figure endlessly.
It is easier to believe in a scheming wife than to accept that adult men make conscious choices.
But what does this narrative reveal?
It suggests that the years of relationships a man had—with parents, siblings, friends—can be erased by a woman who entered his life later. As though bonds are so fragile that they dissolve at the whisper of a wife.
Is that not, in itself, an insult to men?
“Take Good Care of Your Husband”
Another familiar phrase echoes in wedding halls:
“Please take good care of your husband.”
Rarely does anyone tell the husband to take good care of his wife, unless she has a medical condition.
If the husband loses weight, the wife must not be feeding him properly.
If he gains weight, she must not be regulating his diet.
If he falls ill, perhaps she did not “look after him.”
Grown adult men, fully capable of employment, driving, voting, and property ownership, suddenly become dependent bodies whose health rests solely on the efficiency of a woman’s care work.
Are twenty-one-year-old men legally old enough to marry but not old enough to manage their own diets?
The Age of Agency
In India, the legal marriageable age is:
21 for men
18 for women
By that age, society assumes individuals possess judgment, identity, and decision-making capacity.
And yet, we nurture boys from childhood with the idea that masculinity equals authority. They are told they will lead, decide, command.
So why does this script collapse after marriage?
Why is the narrative re-written to suggest that men are easily swayed, morally fragile, and powerless before their wives?
The Comfort of the Misogynistic Script
The answer may lie not in men’s weakness—but in patriarchy’s convenience.
Blaming wives performs two cultural functions:
It preserves the myth of male moral purity.
It sustains the archetype of the dangerous woman.
In this script, men remain inherently good. If they err, it must be because someone—usually a woman—corrupted them.
It is an elegant system.
Men keep their structural power.
Women inherit moral blame.
Who Really Benefits from This Story?
When we repeat that “women lead men astray,” we are not merely joking. We are reinforcing a gendered imagination that:
Infantilizes men,
Demonizes women,
And protects patriarchal authority.
If men are indeed rational and powerful, then they must also be accountable.
If they are accountable, then their decisions—good or bad—are their own.
Perhaps the real question is not whether wives mislead husbands.
Perhaps the question is:
Why are we so uncomfortable admitting that adult men make their own choices?
And why does society need wives to carry the burden of those choices?
Maybe it is time we retire this old script.
Not because marriage is sacred.
Not because women are perfect.
A harmless joke? Or a deeply rooted cultural script?
Why is it that men who are raised to be decisive and powerful suddenly become helpless victims after marriage?
This piece explores the strange disappearance of male agency—and the convenient resurrection of the ‘cunning wife’ trope in our social imagination.
Let’s talk about accountability, patriarchy, and the politics hidden in everyday language.
“It Is Women Who Usually Lead Men Astray” — A Familiar Script in a New Voice
I stumbled upon the sentence while casually flipping through Malayalam television channels:
“It is women who usually lead men astray.”
The speaker was no fringe commentator. He was a well-known, well-educated public official—widely respected, articulate, and socially influential. He sat there beside his wife, smiling, explaining that he was fortunate to have a partner who shared his values and supported his life choices.
On the surface, it sounded harmless. Perhaps even affectionate.
And yet, something in that statement lingered.
“It is women who usually lead men astray.”
The speaker was no fringe commentator. He was a well-known, well-educated public official—widely respected, articulate, and socially influential. He sat there beside his wife, smiling, explaining that he was fortunate to have a partner who shared his values and supported his life choices.
On the surface, it sounded harmless. Perhaps even affectionate.
And yet, something in that statement lingered.
The Innocent Sentence That Isn’t Innocent
There is absolutely nothing problematic about spouses acknowledging each other’s support. Marriage is, ideally, a partnership.
But language is never neutral.
When a man declares that “women usually lead men astray,” even jokingly, he is not merely making a personal observation. He is drawing from a deep reservoir of cultural imagination—one that Kerala knows all too well.
We have heard versions of this story before.
When a man changes after marriage—becomes distant from parents, makes decisions the family dislikes, shifts priorities—the whispered explanation often follows:
“Poor fellow. After marriage, he is no longer himself.”
The culprit? The wife.
The Curious Case of Vanishing Male Agency
Here lies the paradox.
Before marriage, men are described as decisive, rational, authoritative. Society repeatedly affirms their agency. Boys grow up being told they are future heads of households. Masculinity is intertwined with power, independence, and decision-making.
And yet, after marriage?
Suddenly, some men are portrayed as helpless beings—seduced, manipulated, and misdirected by their wives.
It is a fascinating transformation.
This may be the only context in which patriarchy willingly strips men of their agency—only to weaponize that loss against women.
When men act generously, wisely, or responsibly, the credit belongs entirely to them.
When men act “ridiculously” or make decisions that displease extended families?
Ah. The wife must be behind it.
The Archetype of the Cunning Wife
Hidden within these everyday conversations is an ancient stereotype:
The husband is straightforward, innocent, perhaps even naive.
The wife is strategic, conspiratorial, emotionally manipulative.
This is not new. Literature, cinema, family gossip, and even casual jokes reproduce this figure endlessly.
It is easier to believe in a scheming wife than to accept that adult men make conscious choices.
But what does this narrative reveal?
It suggests that the years of relationships a man had—with parents, siblings, friends—can be erased by a woman who entered his life later. As though bonds are so fragile that they dissolve at the whisper of a wife.
Is that not, in itself, an insult to men?
“Take Good Care of Your Husband”
Another familiar phrase echoes in wedding halls:
“Please take good care of your husband.”
Rarely does anyone tell the husband to take good care of his wife, unless she has a medical condition.
If the husband loses weight, the wife must not be feeding him properly.
If he gains weight, she must not be regulating his diet.
If he falls ill, perhaps she did not “look after him.”
Grown adult men, fully capable of employment, driving, voting, and property ownership, suddenly become dependent bodies whose health rests solely on the efficiency of a woman’s care work.
Are twenty-one-year-old men legally old enough to marry but not old enough to manage their own diets?
The Age of Agency
In India, the legal marriageable age is:
21 for men
18 for women
By that age, society assumes individuals possess judgment, identity, and decision-making capacity.
And yet, we nurture boys from childhood with the idea that masculinity equals authority. They are told they will lead, decide, command.
So why does this script collapse after marriage?
Why is the narrative re-written to suggest that men are easily swayed, morally fragile, and powerless before their wives?
The Comfort of the Misogynistic Script
The answer may lie not in men’s weakness—but in patriarchy’s convenience.
Blaming wives performs two cultural functions:
It preserves the myth of male moral purity.
It sustains the archetype of the dangerous woman.
In this script, men remain inherently good. If they err, it must be because someone—usually a woman—corrupted them.
It is an elegant system.
Men keep their structural power.
Women inherit moral blame.
Who Really Benefits from This Story?
When we repeat that “women lead men astray,” we are not merely joking. We are reinforcing a gendered imagination that:
Infantilizes men,
Demonizes women,
And protects patriarchal authority.
If men are indeed rational and powerful, then they must also be accountable.
If they are accountable, then their decisions—good or bad—are their own.
Perhaps the real question is not whether wives mislead husbands.
Perhaps the question is:
Why are we so uncomfortable admitting that adult men make their own choices?
And why does society need wives to carry the burden of those choices?
Maybe it is time we retire this old script.
Not because marriage is sacred.
Not because women are perfect.
But because agency, if claimed, must also be owned.
Comments
Post a Comment