Marriage in India is not just romance. It is reputation. It is family honour stitched into silk sarees and gold chains. It is lineage, legacy, and neighbours asking questions before dessert is served. And in that pressure cooker of expectation, a quiet underground market exists—half survival strategy, half emotional gamble. It is called a Lavender Marriage. Or, in modern code, an MOC: Marriage of Convenience.

The phrase “Lavender Marriage” did not originate in India. It was born in 1920s Hollywood, during the era of the morality clause. Back then, major studios controlled actors through strict contracts. If an actor was exposed for “immoral conduct”—which often meant being gay—their career could collapse overnight. So studios arranged marriages to protect their investments. Rock Hudson famously married Phyllis Gates to silence rumours about his sexuality. In the West, lavender marriages were corporate damage control. They were about money, image, and PR. In India, the stakes are different. Here, it is not contracts that threaten you. It is silent at the dining table. It is relatives whispering. It is the word “normal” hanging like a verdict.

India’s lavender marriages are rarely glamorous. They are secretive. Emotional. Often desperate. After the partial reading down of Section 377 in 2018, same-sex relationships were decriminalised, but marriage equality remains legally unrecognised. That gap between legality and acceptance created a difficult reality. Families still expect heterosexual marriage. Society still assumes children will follow. Many queer individuals find themselves trapped between authenticity and obligation.

On Reddit threads, Telegram groups, and encrypted forums, gay men and lesbian women post coded messages seeking discreet alliances. These are not love stories. They are negotiations. Two strangers agreeing to protect each other from societal fallout. They meet, discuss boundaries like those of business partners, and sometimes draft private agreements on living arrangements, finances, and how they will perform in front of family.

The psychological toll is rarely discussed openly. Living in what researchers describe as a “double closet” means hiding your sexuality while also performing a marriage. Smiling at wedding photos. Posing at anniversaries. Sharing space publicly but leading separate emotional lives privately. Cognitive dissonance becomes routine. You are both married and not married. Both protected and confined.

China offers a parallel. There, the practice is called Xinghun—formality marriage—driven by filial expectations and the continuation of lineage. Dedicated platforms match gay men with lesbian women for cooperative marriages. Agreements often outline financial arrangements, parental visits, and even IVF plans. It resembles a business merger more than romance. India’s version remains less organised, more secretive, and emotionally complex.

In contrast, a new twist has emerged in parts of the West. Young people facing economic instability experiment with platonic life partnerships—marriages based on friendship rather than romance, designed for shared housing, tax benefits, or medical security. Unlike traditional lavender marriages, these arrangements are transparent and not rooted in hiding identity.

In India, however, lavender marriages remain closely tied to stigma and safety. Reports document individuals who entered heterosexual marriages under pressure and later sought divorce due to emotional strain. Legal scholars highlight how personal laws complicate separation, exiting socially and legally difficult.

The most complicated chapter emerges when children enter the arrangement. Some couples agree to have children to satisfy expectations. What began as mutual protection now involves another life. Decisions around IVF, custody, and financial responsibility intensify emotional and ethical dilemmas.

Is a lavender marriage a survival in a restrictive system? Or does it reinforce the norms it seeks to escape? The answer varies with each story. Some arrangements evolve into companionship. Others dissolve quietly. All exist because social structures leave limited room for authenticity.

Lavender marriages are not simply about deception. They are about systems shaping choices. When legitimacy is narrowly defined, individuals innovate in grey spaces. Until authenticity is safer than performance, these underground agreements will continue to exist.

A wedding album may show smiling faces, rituals completed, and families satisfied. The ceremony is real. The vows are spoken. The guests applaud. Yet behind the frame lies a silent agreement—two individuals navigating duty, fear, identity, and survival in a society still negotiating what marriage truly means.

References:

• The Swaddle – What Is a Lavender Marriage, and Why Is it Still Popular in India?
• Times of India – Sec 377 defanged, many homosexuals trapped in hetero marriages take divorce route out
• Journal of Legal Research and Juridical Sciences – Lavender Marriages and the Conundrum of Marriage Laws in India
• Theraverse – Lavender Marriages in India, Rebranded!
• The Yale Globalist – The Rise of Xinghun Marriages in China
• Mic – China's Fake Marriage Phenomenon and LGBT Rights
• ResearchGate / Southern Illinois University – Analysis of Xinghun Advertisements
• Daniel Dashnaw – The Rise of Platonic Life Partnerships
• Newsweek – Why Gen Z Is Rejecting Traditional Relationships
• The Knot – Meaning and History of Lavender Marriage
• Parade – What Is a Lavender Marriage?
• Wikipedia – Lavender Marriage History & Global Context

.   .   .