The Judge

Re: Saima Shah

``If you and I and others realise the immense value of people and family, //we can evolve a culture where family does not necessarily equate loss of individuality//. The best of East and West is what we should focus on.``

Unfortunately compromise is synonymous with marriage. Individuality is inherently contradictory to family - from Latin familia, - group as opposed to individual. I do agree though

that if there is sufficient common ground, compromises come easy, - because you compromise for something you value as more important.

The Best of the East and West is an ambigous

goal. Most Pakistani expatriates in the West

aim for it, - unfortunately or fortunately

depending on the generational perspective the

West overwhelms us. The lure for the almighty

``I`` is just too strong, It frees us from the

bondage of responsibilities, and gives life

a frivilous tinge.

Unfortunately happiness is not a community activity, I wish it were, but it is not. No

amount of political correct rationale will absolve us of the demons present in all of us .

``I know that compromises on issues of the heart are considered almost noble in the East.

`` the family-pride people take rishwat, steal, dump girl-friend, boy-friend, live out unhappy marriages``

The aforementioned list is as prevelant in the WesT as in the East. The East embraces and relishes in tragedy. The West in contrast seeks refuge in fantasy from reality. Affairs of the heart, though essential are as overrated in the West as they are underated in the East.

Having said that, we all need to create our own sense of perspectives, and our own reasons for happiness, and share those with ones that we really care for.

RE: Syed Ahmed

In reply to your last post:

``People work so that they may live. They dont live to work. Profesions and careers, although they bring immense satisfaction, they fade in comparison to things that really matter, family,
children etc``

I entirely agree with you. The Judge, however, is an existentialist reflection of the way our soceity`s ethics and sense of responsibility is tilted towards the man and how a woman is not considered an individual but a means to an end. That any one who breaks that wall is penalized. I think the price our Saira`s pay for crimes
they did not commit too high, especially in changing times where the concept of
female utility or worth is NOT solely how many male children she has produced or how much money she brings in marriage. That she has a chance to prove her worth as an individual. That the assumptions of morality we as a society make about divorced people can be dramatically wrong.

``In our culture where women are denied opportunities, they assume that the working place is xanadu, - it brings independence, self-confidence, mucho dinero etc .... ``

I again agree rather than disagree. But the fact is that it gives a chance to find worth.
South Asian`s in general have low-self esteem. South Asian women have been repressed and side-lined in matters of decision-making too long.
Fools are not born but made.

If you and I and others realise the immense value of people and family, //we can evolve a culture where family does not necessarily equate loss of individuality//. The best of East and West is what we should focus on.

Speaking of compromises, it is not my stand that men do not make compromises therefore women should
not. I don`t think we should confuse compromises with noblility. I know that compromises on issues of the heart are considered almost noble in the East...for the sake of the family-pride people take rishwat, steal, dump girl-friend, boy-friend, live out unhappy marriages. How long can the lies we tell ourselves, provide support to the edifice
of family and clan? Some objective principles are required for us to forge a stronger community and evolve from being tribes to becoming a community.

I agree with Saima that indeed a man should not go around looking for a desi barbie and then expect her to be in tune with responsibility, intellectual wavelength, priority issues. Of course thats possible but, using the barbie yardstick it is like a lottery, the probability of your hitting the jackpot is inversely proportional to the number of chaand see biwi/bahoo seekers. SAme applies to women, Ken with heaps of money/great job is not necessarily a guarantee of marital happiness/satisfaction.

Both men and women in our society need to focus on the intrinsic qualities when looking for a marital partner/soul mate. But then again how is that possible when the mothers/sisters/aunts are using THEIR criteria in the search of the perfect `bahoo`/`daamaad`.

Keep in mind that DIVORCE/separation is not the only ugly thing that could happen to/in a marriage. there are a number of successful-failed marriages in our society-Both partners being disappointed & finally indifferent/giving up on the stagnant relationship.

Re: Saima Shah

:1.Should women go on giving up their :individuality for the good of home and hearth?

No they should not. But like their spouses, they need to compromise. Men compromise too you know.


:2.Is this sacrifice still required with the :growth of opportunities and options and the :complete change of the work arena?

People work so that they may live. They dont live to work. Profesions and careers, although they bring immense satisfaction, they fade in comparison to things that really matter, family,
children etc etc.... Ask any person in his
senior years what was the most immportant thing
in their life, and they invariably look at pride at their family. ( man or Woman).



In our culture where women are denied opportunities, they assume that the working place is xanadu, - it brings independence, self-confidence, mucho dinero etc .... It also
brings stress, hardship, strained relationships,
anxiety etc ...


Pakistani expatriates in the West particular the two income power couples of our parents generations ( ie. 60`s emigres) are seeing the results of their failure to compromise either one of their careers for their familes, - dysfunctional families aboound, children that donot relate or even get along with their parents,
a breakdown of communication between generations,
and the subsequent havoc that it unleashes on the lives of your progeny. Divorce rates among Muslims raised in U.S ( figures vary) run as high as 65%. ( that is more than the US divorce rate -ie 51%). As the first generation comes of age caught between the cultural dichotomies of East And West, - with parents too involved to ever realise until it is too late.


But then again, perhaps men are from mars and women are from Venus :-)

Re; Mr Asif would be husband

I am thrilled that somebody replied in as personal and open a fashion as Mr Asif. We must articulate these concerns and by-products of the transition into Western society and our cross-cultural evolution. Your reply is well worth the effort in terms of the opportunity for dialogue.

Okay, so young women with ambition are immature and irresponsible. They expect too much from the men they marry. they expect to be babied. But, the slightly spoilt ones or the ones with other options don`t want to pay the cost of the implicit suppression of being a wife ( Please understand I speak of the role of wife rather than the individuals).

These women are suffocating for men. True. If I were a man, I`d hate to be married to someone who did not share in my aspirations and ideals. I can understand the stifling of personality that men must go through after marriage in this case.

Problem is I don`t see why women `should not` feel equally stifled if the husband does not share in their ideals and aspirations and ambitions. I am happy that you realise the immense sacrifice that our mothers make for the stability of the home and family. The questions I want to ask are:

1.Should women go on giving up their individuality for the good of home and hearth?
2.Is this sacrifice still required with the growth of opportunities and options and the complete change of the work arena?
3. Does the suppression of ANY member of a society lead to its overall quality? In other words, is this just?

Perhaps if men did not look for pretty young dolls chosen solely on the basis of their appearance by them or their mothers and instead looked for wonderful female-people when they think of marriage, we would have women who are aware, responsible individuals and HAPPY wives.

Re: Mujtaba Hamid

All one`s life one hears that the bad side of Islam (law of inheritance, legal status of women and capital punishment/violent retribution) are because the `vested` nasty old mullahs presented it that way. Somehow, every little family, community sect, thinks `we` know the real Islam. I too suffered from the naive belief that the West has somehow made my religion appear bad.

Without going too much into theology and justifications about the times in Mecca and Medina at the time of the Quran, I would like you to read the Surat Nisa. Then have a look at the Shariat laws. I shall write down some salient features of all of these:
1.To prove rape, a woman needs four witnessess. Her testimony holds little if any value.
2.She cannot serve as a single witness to any crime/event. She cannot witness the signing of legal documents without the corollary of another woman.
3. She cannot disobey her husband. If she does she may be struck. In one surah of the Quran, the prophet is chastized for being too lenient with some of his 12 wives.
4. A woman is to always cover her ornamental attributes, lest the eyes of men stray. (Her beauty is somehow the only thing worth gaurding).
5.She cannot serve as head of a state.
6.She can only receive half the inheritance of the male sibling.
7. Orphans, illegitimate children do NOT inherit any share in the father`s property, inspite of the acknowledgemet of the father as his children in case of illegitimate children.
8. Polygamy

Let me cite some practical interpretations of these divine guidelines:

1. Female circumsion.
2. Usually no right of divorce in the Nikah nama.
3. Women do not serve as either vakils, or witnesses on the Nikah nama.
4. Women have neither real nor imaginary no right of vote in any communal or other activity. Effectively they are silenced for all time to come. Since the Quran is considered a tamper-proof document.

Hazrat Ayesha was nine years old when she married the prophet. Islam has no legal minimum limit for marriage. She may have been a courageous woman 1400 years ago, but do tell me how many/ or what proportion of Muslim women do anything in the public sphere NOW?

You may water these laws down as much as you like but perhaps the bad side of Islam is not the conspiracy of either the Mullahs or the West.

Should we realise this and bring in modifications in line with modern needs? Yes.

I think that the cost of female suppression is ultimately borne by the male as well. As so brilliantly illustrated by Mr Asif:-).

Saima,

Yes, the penalties for divorce are almost exclusively for women in our society, but what about marriage itself as a penalty?

How many women do we all know who feel they must get married to a man just because they have `gone out with him` have been seen/associated with him for any length of time? God help the women who have actually slept with a man without being married to him. Our society gives them two options: marry him or die! Not all, but SOME bad marriages could be avoided if women did not HAVE to marry the men they have ever been interested in.

Haan?

syed: i aggree with you regarding making marriage
a more pragmatic affair, with knowledge of the partner etc.
And divorce is a very serious thing, no doubt.

I blieve there is a hadith that says that it is the least
liked of all the allowed things by Allah.

However, in order for it to become more
pragmatic, society needs to also allow men and women
to make their choices. it is not as a simple matter
as having the courage to say ``no.`` There are
consequences to this saying ``no.`` And in anycase
hindsight is usually 20/20.

Re: bhimji

I agree perhaps my analogy of being ``fired`` to being ``divorced`` is way of base. Nonethless
the crux of the matter remains unchanged,
Divorce is failure of marriage-, Divorce is
a very serious affair, - This implies that you better make sure what you are getting into before
you get married .. - as opposed to making divorce
some nonchalant affair.

So Rather than making divorce more socially acceptable, why not make marriage a much more serious and pragmatic affair.

Re: Saima

I agree with most of you assertions. E ven Affairs of the heart have to have some pragmatic
basis - how come we dont fall in love with beggars
and street urchins. :-). Nonethless I agree, passion & love are key ingredients in a marriage, if you feel for someone, - compromises come easy, and marriage is bliss.

As for Saira, what a heavy price to pay for indecision and silence before marriage, if only she could muster the strength before the nuptials to consider the consequences of her docility.

Re: Syed Ahmed

A thought provoking analogy. Saira`s husband is somebody who is used to the status quo. If u notice, he does not think Saira should be anything except his wife. I think that is clear in the story. Of-course, they could have worked out their differences. If the husband had acknowledged their differences. He was sure of his utter rightness to such a degree that negotiation was out of the question. Imagine the self-importance of a man who denies divorce to a woman for 3 years for no reason, but that he is male. Did this man make any concrete conciliatory attempts? no.

If anything this man`s concience was a victim of his belief in his demi-god status.

Remember also that Saira was a typical inarticulate girl unaware that her rights mean anything. That a woman`s rights are legitimate. That her pain and suppression is of some value. A woman is a silent spectator of herself and that self`s violation with Judges all too ready to pronounce judgement. It was a long hard road for her. In hindsight she could have done a lot, but in reality she was not psychologically empowered to prevent anything.

I am afraid that there are many many more Saira`s out there who are abused in every which way possible, who never come out of the `cave` of darkness.

Society gives the final grade I agree. Divorce is a unique failure. But we must persevere. We must value the individual above the Judge. * * * *//The Judge only apportions blame. It is the individual who forgives, loves and heals society// * * * *.

Regarding marriage being like a job. Well, that`s a favoured method of choosing a life partner with due attention to cost and benefits.

I don`t agree. Costs and benfits are all in the mind and matters of perception. Great for financial investments usually but even that is debatable. Marriage or rather any commitment is about the heart.

Any endeavour should be undertaken with passion. As the great poet said, Ishq and Khudi are what make even God take notice of you!

Lastly, Saira is not expecting succour from society. She is strong enough on her own to fight and live. It is society who will benefit from her. Her enlightenment will change old motheaten nasty ideas for the next generation/decade.

Syed: divorce = failure

Why is divorce similar to being fired?

I think it is more similar to leaving a job that one
does not particularly care for, and finding something better.

Infact it takes few tries to get the job that one wants.
Which is why the westren model of serial monogomy makes more
sense, in some ways, as it allows for a change in partners, if
it turns out that it did not work.

Being ``fired`` implies that there is a boss (the spouse?) who
kicked out the employee (the spouse) because of something wrong done.

Infact divorce, in my view, is more of people coming to their
senses and realizing it does not work, in this case.

The problem is society`s non-acceptance of people who are divorced.

There may have been a time when leaving a job would`ve meant perpetual
unemployment. No more. Especially not these days, one can job hop, gain
experience, and then find something that one has a real passion for.
And stay with it for a long time.

Marriage is about compromise, but not about compromising one`s core
dreams.

Basically if there is something that one doesnt like in the spouse (within reason)
one has to just live with it, and learn to appreciate it...

NO Saima, Saira should not have accepted the status quo. She should worked out her differences with her spouse. After all, she married because she liked him, and he liked her. Assuming that the husband was not a irrational idiot ( Contrary to popular opinion :-)), the could have come up with solutions, to the satifaction of both parties. She could have gone to school, gotten her degree, then have kids, then resumed her career, In the meantime he would have been a loving supportive husband, willing to help her out, and being there for her.

The problem I have with this story line is that men are assumed to be static and rigid, and totally uncomprising which is not entirely correct. I have heard of innumerable laments from my married friends about being caught in the cross fire between the spouse and the in-laws. :-). They are victims of circumstance as well.


Life is not a win or lose game. But life is about compromise, dreams unfullfilled and the stark reality of living, - and more importantly making the most of what you have, not wallowing in self pity for what you donot have.

Society is a paradox - it is fair weather friend, and a conniving companion. We donot marry for the greater good of mankind. We marry for individual satifaction, et al. Independent thinkers rarely have satisfied domestic lives, they are heretics while the live, saints when they die. Just imagine
yourself as paraplegic and think how many of those friends that you cherish ( whose opinions you value) will come to your assitance, - definitely parents, maybe some siblings, a friend or two and if you are lucky that insensitive SOB that you call your husband.

Marriage and (maybe love) donot have to with the best options available to us in life. It has do with the choosing the things we do inspite of having better options. Marriages are not based
on the ``Best Deal`` , they are based on the deal we choose given the fact the fact that they are ``Better deals`` around.


Divorce implies ``FAILURE``. It does not delegate blame, but it is a failure. People being rational
tend to marry people that involve less risk ( marriage being a risky business). Just like
in an employment scenario,we tend to give preference to a fresh candidate, as opposed to a candidate that has been fired. Or go to a
physician who does not have a malpractice claim
against him/her. This does not imply that divorced people are unworthy, or non-marraigeable material,
- but this is the stark reality - Man or Woman.


Our society is not perfect, and certainly women have gotten a raw deal. But there is hope, Each successive generation is more the enlightened about the inequities in our culture, and things are bound to get better. I cannot claim to represent the masses of Pakistan. but certainly, urban educated women, do certainly have the choice to decide their future destiny - It better that they excercise that before marriage than after.

Re: Syed Ahmed

I am delighted with your response. It is great that somebody ACTUALLY wrote down how they feel about divorce and divorcees.

To paraphrase your comments, Saira should have accepted the status quo. She should have realised that her worth in society was derived through her marriage and kept on. But then we would have a liar as my main character. A very RESPONSIBLE liar ( is that possible?). But a liar. Lies eventually lead to horrible twistings of the soul and spread into the world and make it worse still. Saira would have become like the Judge. She would be safe,right but not the kind of friend one wants in a sticky situation.

Saira viewed oppression of her mind and spirit as her basic problem-the fact that it came through marriage is additional detail.

Saira does not see life as a win lose game. Saira is stupid perhaps but she takes truth very seriously. There are people like that. Why should she become socially dysfunctional? Having an independent mind is not criminal. History is full of examples of how much independent thinkers
gave to society and the world. Why is then society afraid of the Saira`s of the world?

The conclusion of the story is that Saira is a person now. Not a plastic doll whose decisions whether happy or sad can be made by other people. She has strength of mind and spirit. She is the kind of person I would like to keep as a friend for life. I hope everyone finds a `Saira` type person somewhere in this horde.

I don`t think the West is all that enlightened. I am terribly sorry for the people who are afraid of divorced women or men. Obviously, the Judge has wiped out their minds.

I quote, ``Saima does make a valid point that marriage in our culture is a mere rite of pasage, particularly for young women, - but the blame falls on Saira as well, she was an adult, and should have voiced her opinions before marriage``

I ask you in turn,

Do women have independent opinions in Pakistan?. Does anyone expect or want women to have an independent mind?. Young/old women are echoes of father, brother, mother, husband, clan. Saira saw an attractive man wanted to marry her. This was great. This meant she was beautiful and worthwhile. Ammi Abbu liked him. Perfect.

I think Saira has been taking more than the fair share of the blame/judgement. The Judge has been relentless, but Saira has been strong. Who knows, the future may be beautiful with kinder judges?

Once again, I enjoyed your pragmatism and the listing of `facts` as they stand. Isn`t it time we changed them?? :)

Let me be the devil`s advocate on this one.
I tend to agree with Sabrina`s assesment of the situation. Marriage offers a poor substitute for
low self-worth. Sabrina problems had little to
do with her marriage or her husband, Disagreements
can be worked provided the spouse is reasonable,
in-law problems eventually dissipate by making
alternative arrangements. Saira viewed the marriage as her problem - perhaps it was her
expectations of the marriage that were wrong. Marriage is not fairly tale land ( it can be) but is not necessarily so. Marriage is about basal human needs - companionship, friendship, an emotional and physical relationship that all homo
sapiens desire.

What of the final result, the social inequities not withstanding, Saira was free to do what?, pursue a career, be successful professionally, be happy and satisfied - but what happened to her social, emotional and biological needs. The desire to have children, the need for companionship etc ... . Things in the short term look very good for Saira, - but what of the long term , What will she feel at 30 at 40, at 50. ( Assuming she remains single). Look around at the older single people in our culture and society - it is a solitary and lonely existence. Most of them are eccentric or socially dysfunctional.

Ands the talk about divorced people ( give me a break) - A very low percentage of divorced people in Pakistan tend to get remarried, Even here on the chowk ( in enlightened Western land) people are very apprehensive about marrying a divorcee.
While the very same people advocate divorce as an
alternative to martial discontent without
attempting to make a serious effort to work out their differences.

So the Saira`s out there should be pragmatic about matrimonial situations, divorce is an option, only when the marriage is physically and/or emotionally abusive and/or when all other methods of reconciliation have failed. I did not see Saira or her spouse making any such attempt. This was divorce based on ``irreconcilable differences`` - without a serious effort to bridge them.

Saima does make a valid point that marriage in our culture is a mere rite of pasage, particularly for young women, - but the blame falls on Saira as
well, she was an adult, and should have voiced her opinions before marriage ( better that then a miserable existence later).

Re: Ashim

Where have you been???? Been thinking the same..

I am glad you liked the story. If it has got you thinking put the story down on paper (plastic:-)

Looking forward to it.

PS: How are the styrofoam cups? Get your own mug, maybe clay, is what I have been wanting to say for ages.:-)

thanx for a very intreasting piece

think all women need to make a contract specifiying that they have the right to divorce, as well as other key issues, such as ``polygamy.`` Iran, i believe has somekind of pamhlet that serves a s a general marriage contract, and so doesnt carry the stigma that saima points out in her article.

altaf

Re: Temporal

Thank you for your comments. Saira is more than Saira. She is the representative of a unique form of the exploitation of innocent. The fact is that the very means of protection for women i.e., marriage and husband can sometimes become her worst exploiters.

The Judge protects when you know your rights and their legitimacy. Money is a facade of protection. The best facade going but still, a facade. True power is of knowledge.

PS: I have left a reply in Ajrak.

PPS: I am looking forward to the poem.

Re: Mujtaba

I echo your question, `what scares parents/society to give away their daughters without giving any right of divorce?` A man can divorce a woman in 30 seconds, unilaterally. A woman, only if the man agrees. Can we then say that we have justice?
If anything, this kind of power has been given to men so often that it makes some of them as small, as arrogant and power drunk as Saira`s husband.

There is nothing shameful about being a woman, a daughter or a divorced woman. //Women can make mistakes and live lives of dignity//. Unfortunately, they have to constantly fight for this right in our culture. But they must believe in this right...that`s the crux of the story.

I don`t totally agree with your citing the Prophet`s life and action as an example of female liberalism. Also, Islam`s current legal code is heinous in its injustice towards women, It needs drastic revision to bring it in line with modern ideals of justice.

Islam has many humanitarian features but rights of women are sadly neglected.

I agree wholeheartedly with Sabrina. ``Living with
someone`` is equivalent to ``being married``, esoterically speaking. Living with someone has a lot of merit to it and is commonsensical. And common sense to an uncommon degree is what is called wisdom. What does signing a piece of paper mean anyway?

``At least the educated woman,liberated(finacially secure of course)women, should set the example by refusing to marry 33 year old `boys` thrusted on them.Instead, lead an independent life or do the impossible go for a live-in relationship``-Analyzer

I believe you have missed the whole point. Here is my take on the main idea in the story. It was not so much that women are being forced to marry, or that they are in abusive marriages (which is a factor that should not be ignored) but that women need to have some sense of self-worth before they can fully appreciate married life. Otherwise, marriage is stifling, oppressive and worse still it kills the spirit for life. A burden. Note that Saira was not abused-little petty arguments are usually not grounds for divorce at face value. It appears frivolous. But that she did not want to continue tells that this woman`s heart is/probably never was commited to seeing it work. It was merely something to do-get into the next stage of life. Is that her fault, the story seems to ask? As did the Judge to Saira. She came out with a no in the end.

What does it all say? Don`t get married to `boys` parents recommend, look out for `love` and enter `live-in relationships`? It does not change anything. It is all inside-Be someone you can live with first and then all else follows naturally.

It has nothing to do with refusing 33 year old men. It has to do with finding self-worth; make yourself proud of You.

DOES THE JUDGE REALLY PROTECTS US?

Saira is more than Saira.

She is our inner self. Lowly peasant, clerk,
unskilled labourer, trembling middle order officer,
student, babu, almost anyone of the spineless multitude in the sub continent.

Money, and the power that comes with it is the sole nourishment for the spine. When the judge is looked in the eye it is this spine alone that provides motivation for protection.

Good read, Saima.

P.S. One of these days I expect a response to my query on the AJRAK inter act.

P.P.S. I am searching for a poem by Ikbal Khan on a similar subject. Shall post it here if I can find it.

Re: Amin

As ever, thrilled with your compliment. So, how about you writing something for chowk?

Re: Pete

Thanks for the wonderful appreciation. It means a lot to me. I feel though that Chowk houses much that is good/novel. I hope you find it interesting as well and keep telling us what you think.

Thank you everyone for so much appreciation. It is rather generous of everyone.

Re: BG
Thank you. Here`s to more Saira`s without Saira`s pain. One of the real question that I want to ask I guess is that `why is it that a woman`s happiness is not legitimate?` there are of-course rams for you to pick up on female circ. and the `moral` denial of the pursuit of selfish happiness for the sake of social stability. How about BG on this one?

Re: Amber
Interesting comments and Thank you for your appreciation but I don`t think it is women who don`t understand morality. I think it is morality that does not understand/(forgive) women! In other words, a woman is a social commodity rather than an individual. Saira`s `obstinacy` is a tongue in cheek slant on the fact that individualism in a woman is NOT tolerated easily. Many matkas have to be broken before enlightenment!

Saima, too good, yaar.

I `love` the judge, I mean the way you have depicted him. Its so true. I am so glad Saira`s judge is diminishing. Its just that he keeps sustenance from the outside, so its a game of constant vigilance. We all have to watch out.

And, to whoever said, thank God for something other than nuclearesque issues -- aye.

re that clause in the nikah-nama: most maulvis just cross it out without even asking what the doolhan-doolha want. guess that`s standard industry practice. i had to ask for it to be left intact. and, though my in-laws and husband were supportive, i was made to feel like a criminal, a deviant to have insisted for a right that men naturally have!

regards,
BG

Brilliant as usual.

Your comment on the Nikah Nama (In paragraph no. 7 of the Nikah Nama (marriage deed) it was clearly asked, ``Does the groom give the woman the right of divorce?``) made me realize that even after 5 years of marriage, I really did not know what was on it. Except for having signed the contract, we never give it a second thought on what we are actually signing. I think the whole process should be done well before the nikah ceremony (something like a civil marriage before a religious one) which would give both sides to contemplate on the contract.

The only thing we discussed was Haq-Meher, in the context of why people put ridiculous pittance of an amount in there or put a fast depreciating currency like Rupees. But today I don`t know what was actually put on our Nikah Nama.

Anyway, a touching story.

Very nicely written Saima!
I am sure that your message will help some Sairas who have been condemned to the hell of self conflict and self inflicted pain by the Judge. We women are at fault when we mistake injustice and maltreatment for moral and religious obligation. Though we are equally wrong when we fail to differentiate between obstinacy and upholding our self esteem.

Best Wishes,
Amber

Oh Saima - we`ve missed you Sooooo much!

Finally!

For a long moment I thought the stream of ``nuclear waste`` would never end.

Incredibly well-expressed.

Welcome back, Chowk.