In this article, I explore the complexities of asexuality within the context of Indian culture and marriage. I do this by examining the problematic portrayal of asexuality in the film Satyaprem Ki Katha, where the protagonist Katha uses asexuality as a defense mechanism linked to trauma, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. It makes me want to ask critical questions about whether Indian marriages can accommodate diverse identities and redefine intimacy beyond the physical, ultimately emphasizing the need for greater understanding and acceptance of asexuality in Indian society.

In researching for this article, I was not able to find examples of asexuality in Indian mythology. I turn to the reader to share examples, if they know of any. However, when I was looking for asexual identities in Indian mythology, examples of celibacy often came up instead. Including examples of celibacy to explain the asexual identity would further perpetuate stereotypes, as celibacy is not asexuality and vice versa.

To elaborate, celibacy is a conscious decision to abstain from sexual activity, often for religious or personal reasons, while asexuality is a sexual orientation where individuals experience little to no sexual attraction. The concept of celibacy, particularly in the form of “Brahmacharya”, has significant cultural and historical relevance in Brahminical India. Being a Brahmacharya involves abstinence from sexual activity and is often considered a spiritual and ascetic pursuit.

Also read: Coming to Terms with my Asexuality

Characters like Bhishma and Shikhandi in the post-Vedic epics are notable for their adherence to celibacy. Bhishma took a vow of lifelong celibacy to ensure his father’s happiness and fulfill his duty. Shikhandi, on the other hand, is a complex character often associated with themes of gender fluidity and transformation, though not specifically asexuality.

It is crucial to distinguish these ways of being, so as to avoid conflating them and perpetuating misunderstandings. Asexuality deserves recognition and understanding in its own right, beyond the historical and cultural contexts of celibacy. Platforms such as Indian Aces play a vital role in providing much-needed resources and attention to asexual individuals, whose identities are sometimes overlooked or misunderstood by society and even within the broader LGBTQIA+ community.

In the context of marriages, asexuality presents additional challenges. Marriages in India are often determined by Brahminical authority, and therefore, are not just a personal relationship but are perceived as a societal duty, often tied to procreation and family honor. This compulsion to follow the appropriate conduct in a heteronormative society allows very little leeway for asexual individuals within which they can define their orientation or even hold the desire to do so. Asexual individuals, especially cis-women, often feel compelled to adhere to the expectations of sexual intimacy and reproduction, making it difficult for them to navigate a marital setup that doesn’t align with their personal identity.

Also read: As an Asexual Person, Sex is all the More Important to Me

Cinematic Depiction: Katha’s Asexuality as a Coping Mechanism

In the film Satyaprem Ki Katha, Katha’s claim to being asexual is presented as an excuse to avoid intimacy with her husband, Sattu. This is a rather problematic representation as it trivializes asexuality by portraying it more like a defense mechanism that excuses a person’s avoidance of physical intimacy rather than acknowledging it as an orientation. Katha’s use of asexuality as a defense mechanism perpetuates a harmful stereotype—namely, that asexuality is simply a lack of desire for intimacy, rather than a legitimate identity on the sexual spectrum.

What further complicates this portrayal is the film’s direct link between Katha’s trauma, involving sexual violence, and her asexuality. By claiming that Katha’s repulsion towards any form of intimacy is a mere consequence of the trauma that she experienced in her past, the narrative perpetuates the stereotype that asexuality is solely a learned behavior owing to some psychological injury. This representation reduces asexuality to a pathology, which is not only inaccurate but also damaging to the broader understanding of this orientation. Asexuality does not owe its origins to trauma or depression. It is a sexual orientation just like any other and cannot be compared in this context. Associating it with rape and trauma only deepens the stigma surrounding asexual individuals, particularly in a society that already struggles to acknowledge their existence.

Also read: Bisexuality and Asexuality

Asexuality as an Orientation, Not a Deviancy

A crucial point that needs more emphasis in both media and societal discourse is that asexuality is not a perversion, dysfunction, or necessarily the direct result of trauma. Rather, it is simply little to no sexual attraction. This does not mean that people who identify themselves as asexual are incapable of love, sex, or that they have shallow relationships. While asexuality is often misunderstood as a form of abstinence or repression, it is important to recognize that it is an identity, not something that needs to be “fixed” through emotional support or romantic love.

In Satyaprem Ki Katha, Sattu’s encouragement of Katha is presented as restorative, implying that Katha’s lack of desire for intimacy can be easily corrected with love and understanding. This oversimplification ignores the reality that asexuality is a valid orientation, not something that needs to be cured or reversed. Relationships, including marriage, can thrive even without centering sexual attraction, provided that both partners respect each other’s needs and boundaries.

Also read: Asexuality in Pop Media: Why Nothing Might Just Mean Everything

Asexuality and the Marriage Setup in India

The expectations tied to marriages in heteronormative India, further complicate the experience for asexual individuals. However, such a marriage is not considered a vehicle for self-realization, but a fulfillment of certain expectations from society, especially childbearing. Asexual individuals are often pressured to marry, even when it conflicts with their personal desires. For many, the decision to marry may involve significant internal conflict as they try to balance societal expectations with their own needs and desires.

Asexual individuals may struggle with the societal pressure to conform to sexual and reproductive norms. The Brahminical roles imposed upon men and women—where women are expected to bear children and men to perpetuate the family line—are often at odds with the personal experiences of asexual individuals. This creates an immense psychological burden, particularly on cis-women, who are expected to fulfill both sexual and reproductive duties within a marriage.

However, asexual individuals can still crave the love and family that often comes with marriage. Many individuals may also want children just like everyone else, if they resort to paths to parenthood such as adoption or surrogacy. While they may experience little to no sexual attraction, asexual individuals are just as capable as anybody else of experiencing deep emotional intimacy, which can be equally fulfilling.

Also read: The Surrogacy Bill in its Current Form Needs to go

Beyond Physical Intimacy: A Different Kind of Connection

Asexual individuals are often interested in forms of intimacy that do not center the sexual. Emotional closeness, intellectual connection, and shared experiences can offer a sense of fulfillment and bonding as well. This broader understanding of intimacy challenges the conventional narrative that equates a successful marriage with sexual compatibility. For many asexual individuals, a fulfilling relationship is not defined by sexual intimacy but by emotional support, mutual respect, and shared life goals.

In this context, asexual individuals may find themselves reflecting on what they want out of a marriage. Rather than prioritizing sexual attraction, they might seek relationships based on deep companionship, shared values, and valuing various other forms of intimacy. The question then arises: does the traditional sense of marriage, when penetrative sex is seen as a conjugal duty/responsibility, have room for such relationships?

Also read: Starstruck: A Synastry Cheatsheet to Intimacy

Can Marriages Make Space for Asexuality?

As society continues to evolve, the rigid norms surrounding the legally-sanctioned marital institution are slowly being questioned. However, the idea that marriage must include sexual intimacy and procreation remains dominant. Asexual individuals face the challenge of navigating a system that often doesn’t accommodate their needs or desires. The portrayal of Katha’s character in Satyaprem Ki Katha raises an important question: can marriages make space for asexuality?

In a society where marriage is heavily linked to sexual compatibility, the inclusion of asexual individuals and their experiences remains a distant goal. The growing visibility of asexuality, thanks to online communities and changing social attitudes, offers hope that these narratives will begin to shift. However, the question of whether marriages can evolve to accommodate the diverse needs of asexual individuals remains one that needs further discourse. Can marriage, with all its social expectations and pressures, truly make room for relationships that prioritize various forms of intimacy? Or will asexual individuals continue to find themselves on the margins of this institution? Only time will tell.