Draupadi, the epic wife of the Pandavas, was a pioneer of sorts. She figured in the list of Indian Panchakanyas - five women, the very thought of whom, one is told, would cleanse one of all sins. Akalya, Draupadi, Sita, Tara and Mandodari - goes the list of women, known not only for their extraordinary courage, but also for enduring with serenity a life that would have been scary for most women.

For all her fiestiness, Draupadi did not have a say in her marriage. Arjuna was the one who won the right to be her husband, thanks to proving his skills in archery. But due to forces beyond her control, she was coerced into marrying his four brothers as well. She was the first Hindu woman in an epic, to marry more than one, hence a pioneer in that way.

She had no way of knowing what the natures of the other four men were. And many a time, she was not valued or cherished for the princess that she was. This despite having not one, but five husbands. But she bore it all with dignity and stayed married to them.

Shankari's blog at http://uthinksour.blogspot.com/2006/01/addiction.html wonders why she endured this life, that ran so contrary to her nature. And asks that isn't it sad, that despite having five husbands, it was Krishna - an outsider - who stood by her, and saved her honor during the vastraharan, when she was humiliated in public view.

In all her trials, be it the vastraharan, or the food crisis when she had to feed several sages headed by Durvasa, when she had nothing to give - it was Krishna who stood by her and Draupadi's devotion to him was unparalleled. So one could say that her faith saved her. Faith was what kept her from becoming depressed, and helped her through her trials.

Sometimes I wonder how much of it is faith and how much a strategy that many women are familiar with but don't acknowledge: the outsourcing of emotional support, and unconditional acceptance/validation. Draupadi was a pioneer in such outsourcing. She openly and fearlessly outsourced her need for protection, validation, and support in a crisis - and called upon Krishna time and again. She hid from none, her devotion to Krishna, and got away with it! (Perhaps Krishna being an avatar of God, made it easier)

How many marriages are to true soulmates, who love, understand and care unconditionally, accepting us as we are? How much of it is a charade, constantly having to appear to be 'above' certain emotions when we bleed silently inside? To Draupadi, the emotional friend/soulmate was Krishna. Don't many of us have such anchors? And aren't these anchors the ones that save us from the chasm within, and keep us in good humor.....the ones that keep us healthy in mind, and oftentimes save marriages by supplying something the marriage can't provide?

The anchor could be anyone - a sister, a male/female friend, a parent. Anyone. But most women in less-than-happy marriages/relationships survive because of this anchor. I use the term 'women' but the post is gender-neutral in that it also applies to men who are in similar situations. Loneliness is a human condition, after all. And loneliness in a marriage, while appearing to be an oxymoron, is nonetheless something that happens. All around us.

Nobody wants to live this way. But oftentimes, life ends up being a compromise. We need to balance what we want with so much else: the practicality of realizing it, the perceived necessity to keep everyone happy - parents, relatives, children.....Many of us don't stop to ask - what do I want?

Many of us don't stop and think: what does marriage mean to me? Is it a social contract - something that satisfies all social and practical aspects, something 'approved' by those around us and looks good from the outside - or is it a deeply personal one?

Draupadi did not have the time or the choice to ask herself what she wanted and follow her heart. Many women don't have this choice even today. And those of us that choose, do so at a very young age, where love overrules everything, and the heart refuses to listen to the mind, catapulting life into a quagmire. Once in the situation, the pressure is on to grin and bear it. To ignore the dissatisfaction, dismissing it as 'it happens to everybody'. Sometimes a person even wonders if he/she is a misfit in this world, feeling so intensely and wondering about true sharing and other such 'impractical' stuff when everybody else is going about merrily.

But what does do if one has a need for a deep personal bond, but cannot express themselves freely to the spouse? What if the husband and the wife had different intimacy thresholds - with one wanting more warmth and the other being of a detached mindset - someone who considers marriage to be purely a social and practical contract with some physical benefits?

Some negotiation can happen, for starters. The one wanting more warmth can speak up, and ask their spouse to give that support. But the spouse may not understand - and even if they try to, if their nature isn't a warm one, an artificial "display" of warmth would wear them down, causing them to detach even further. At this point starts the nag-detach cycle, with each party trying to come to terms with the other and still be themselves. This may spiral into a lose/lose situation, with each partner not meeting the other's needs, and exacerbating the rift.

Finally, the warmer person gives up: not totally, but at some level. Gives up hope that he/she will be able to share an emotional and intimate part of themselves with the spouse. They get too scarred by their attempts to connect, and build a wall around themselves, not daring to be that vulnerable ever again.

Sometimes the need becomes a raging river that can't be bounded by walls. If the wall is too strong, the river goes underground, plunging the person into deep depression, or causing them to withdraw completely and become a mask. They have successfully quenched all feelings on the surface, while torrents rage underneath - leading to their lashing out at people.

If the person is lucky and the wall is weak, the river will flow over, and explore unexplored paths. This could mean an affair, or just a very deep and emotional bond with a person outside the marriage - a friend or relative. This person now becomes the emotional rock for the warmer spouse, a safe place to vent and find acceptance in a way they never could with the spouse. A person who could make life more meaningful to live, an oasis in a desert wasteland of social marriages. A safe haven that makes it bearable to live in a social marriage - where practical and physical needs are met, but not much else. And voila! we have emotional outsourcing.

Acknowledging this openly is hard. One has to, at all times, maintain the facade of a perfect marriage/relationship. So most people will not acknowledge this. But if we look within our hearts, Krishna will smile at us in some form or other, saying "Despair not - I am here."