For Better or Worse

````As divorce rates rise and people become more receptive to this disturbing trend, it provokes one to think as to what are the advantages and disadvantages of women’s growing awareness in this society.````

so what else is new --

why shouldn`t the divorce rates rise sky high -- in the unnaturally arranged marriages and conjugalites -- forcing total strangers to go to bed with the very first night --

that is -- forcing total strangers mostly upon diffident subcontinental women -- in the name of trashy `tradition` and crummy `culture` -- (if I may be excused for excessive politeness)

looks pretty uncultured to the entire world the way the dumb subcontinentals forced their daughters, sisters to go away -- disappear with a total stranger..

OR if not with an unfamiliar stranger then with very famiiar first cousin...

``of women`s growing awareness in this society`` -- hello -- wake up -- and smell the detesteronated coffee --

this is 2003 -- -- not 1003 --

there are no ``disadvantges`` of ``growing awareness``-- only advantages -- of MEN growing up -- for a change.

the Testeronated subcontinental MEN -- must learn to treat Estrogenated subcontinental Naris and Khatoons -- as Equal Partners -- as it is being done belatedly in the West -- ``in health and in disease -- ``in advesrsity and in prosperity`` -- Half n Half --

NOT -- that old subcontinental maxim -- what is mine is mine and what is yours is also mine.

if they want to avoid another looming Mahabharata -- f NOT then they should just head for the mountains -- before the final battle...

Two golden Rules for a successful marriage:

1. Never try to win an arguement with your wife.

2. Just do what she says.

Like I said, almost EVERYTHING a desi believes about love is wrong.

Its funny if you look at our artistic culture... What aspect of life is idealized the most? Name one half successful NDN movie that didnt idealize the concept of love... as opposed to western movies which are after power/respect. What does that say for our longing to correct our most backward institution.

Again, love is the most beautiful aspect of life, yet our backward culture represses it. This repression is evident in nasahs points where men and women are not even able to socialize freely, thus the only way for them to get married is through the help of their relatives. And what do these idiots look for in a mate? Look at white mariatal ads ``im looking for someone funny, someone i can relax with..`` Then look at desi ones ``5`5 brown eyes 123-124lbs college degree.``

We should all be ashamed. We`re the offspring of Ram and Sita and we`re THIS fukkin backwardz, amazing. Parents need to honestly wake the hell up.

And the only reason why the divorce rate in desiland is not at 90% is because a desi would rather live in a bad marriage then have people think s/he is in a bad marriage.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#2jinab,that is not true,unlike a man.
scenorio lies with men.by gone are the days when man was the only bread winner.inthis time of the financial burden,only man cannot provide a good life.the very few people who offered every thing in golden plate,their motive behind is also subjugate the wife.it``s high time for men to accept equality for both .take off his mask of ego no doubt compromise is the key to sucess but for both.marriage is a serious commitment and a moral responsibality.so save yourself of fustration and conflict in future,changing your self should be a mutual deceision.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

In your words : ``Compromise is the key to success in a married life.`` You have summed up everything true and relevant. Great Article! Well done :)

Love is about making compromises, it is about forgiveness...it means having to say you`re sorry over and over again, don`t believe that `Love Story` crap.

I know of a woman who did have to ask her husband for money on a constant basis, a woman who was told before they got married that she had to quit her job, which she was successful at, otherwise there would be no marriage. and she did, because she loved this man and was willing to compromise. i think she compromised too much on this score, but she has no regrets about having not worked, and raised her four children. And SHE raised them. He can talk about having worked all day long to bring home the food they eat, and to maintain the roof over their heads, but he lost out on getting to know his children and being a part of their lives. Her marriage was never the best of marriages, but she chose not to get out of it because he held the threat of taking away her children over her, and her children have always been the most important people in her life. They still are.
and this was no arranged marriage....it was a so-called love marriage.

DRUMZy...there are other reasons besides `...because a desi would rather live in a bad marriage than have people think s/he is in a bad marriage.` Yes, sharam (shame) has always been a factor, and so has preserving the all-important khandaani naam that have kept bad marriages alive, but i know women who have stayed in bad marriages out of fear for themselves, out of fear for losing their children, because believe me, in a country where women can be made out to be the guilty party in the case of rape, they can most certainly be made out to be unfit mothers when it comes to having any custody of their children.

i don`t disagree with the fact that there is a need for a better family life, BUT, I, myself come from a broken home that was broken long before my parents were divorced, and i feel that our childhood and transition into adulthood would have been just a tad bit healthier had the divorce happened back when we were children. If love, and respect and a certain amount of compromise are not there to begin with, be it an arranged marriage engineered by strangers, or a love marriage. . .the struggles of married life are bound to be even tougher.

#3 by DRUMZ on June 8, 2003 8:09am PT

...And the only reason why the divorce rate in desiland is not at 90% is because a desi would rather live in a bad marriage then have people think s/he is in a bad marriage.


lets us make this argument the only reason that you can accept a check in west and expect it to be cashed is because the implementaiton of laws is strict..

..Social pressure is a good thing. When the west talks of rights of women etc it forgets the rights of children? dont children have the right to grow up with their parents and families intact?

Lets face it there will be no social rule which will be sacrocant untill it is backed with some kind of pressure. other wise there will be the sexual anarchy as in the west. which results in break down of the family.

If the institution of family has to survive then the vaules relating to sexual behaviour, understanding and respect between spouses, sociteal pressure etc have to be applied.

Remember that for all the bad blame family (as you claim that 90% of the marriages would end up in divorce) preforms a very vital role in socitey.

The family(in which the wife stays at home and possibly with more members of the family like grandparents, uncles, aunts etc) is where the baby sitter is found, the family is where the traditons of story telling etc flourish (no harry pottter needed here) the family is where extra help is available for the wife, the family is where the place where all members find company (no need to go to bars for company). the family is where food is manufacutured(no need to depend on other women to serve you in resturants, or to can tomattoes in the factory), the family is where the therapist is available(in form of elders or peers who provide comfort in times of stress), the family is where the adolocent can went his anger out to comforting ears of non-parents(no need to do drugs here), the family is where the nurse is there when one falls ill, the family is where the suppurt group is (for those stressed out with taking care of aling parents), the family is the retirement home of the old(despite the claims of wanting independence in media all the old people I have met in the west want company the most). Family is the gergratic care of the old. The family is where you can get pass your time (no need to watch endless hours of TV to kill time)

The family is a lot of things if you care to realise it. sure some people have problems with it. Sure we have had terrible suppression within it earlier. and surely todays socitey doesnot value the role the family plays in socitey. If people in the west are able to divorce to get away from their spouses it does not mean that they are getting what they want when they remarry (since they usally marry again)In the wake of all this they leave broken families and maladusted kids who have very little stake in socitey. the west was never this way though it was different from the east, this is a recent phenomena the price of which the present Rich socitey is able to pay becuase of its wealth. However the actual costs will come in future when a couple of such generations come.

Dear Writer,

You are going way too deep in an institution which is losing value in itself. This whole compromise nonsense is very much a traditional rubbish promoted in the East to keep people together. People should stay with each other ONLY for they can connect to each other. If they cannot then they better not waste their time and life and get out of such unions. The fact that you are treating women as some special beings in the picture and are not considering them equivalent to their male counterparts is the biggest flaw in your article. And, probably in your approach as well. The very beginning of your article is indicative of male insecurity. And, this is a typical approach of male chauvinistic and deranged societies.

Note: My comments are targetted towards the approach taken in this article and not towards the writer`s persona. Just wanted to clarify, since men can be very sensitive at times and women tend to ignore that. Being a sensitive person, I do not want to ignore the writer`s feelings.

The rest of the article is full of archaic views and seems to be addressing the issues from 1930s - 1940s vs. 2003.

Probably, the writer needs to wake up and smell the fresh and fruity scent of Hannae Mori in Year 2003.

Happy Writing.

#7 by Studebaker on June 8, 2003 10:56am PT


incedently the argument for colonialism (much before any western colony was established )was releated to climate and how it influenced people.

this argument is still accpeted by the ideologes of the west albeit in very slightly different manner.

ie we are not destined to be better than the west in any case.

#9 by ana_dobarah on June 8, 2003 1:54pm PT

I hope that given your experiences you also see the importance of stronger marriages(by that i dont mean suppression) where there is first the recognition of the value of family to all involved this includes the children and socitey and not just the two individuals.

I have noticed that western journalists often start ranting about the progress made by socites towards modern values by taking in to account of one or two stories of young women who do not want to marry but pursue work. I have nothing against working women there are many in my family but this badmouthing of women who dont work is just plain rubbish.
I know many women colleagues who now in their mid careeer want to go back to home so that children (I have noticed that most of the couples have very serious problems with their children)get the right attention.

It seems that many people are discovering that raising a family is more than earning money and providing the comforts needed. there is no replacement for parental time and guidance in bringing up children.

``Compromise is the key to a successful marriage but what happens when neither party is willing to do that?``

Get a divorce?

Umer M.

ali87:
i think the choice of women working or not working is a choice that women should make, and not one that should be foisted on them. and it is with this in mind that i say there is no reason to badmouth women who choose not to work. I have a friend who is expecting, and who would like to be able not to work once the baby is born, and i think that`s great.

a strong marriage to me is one where as Zahra has said, two people connect, and work through the struggles brought upon them in the world we live. it is one where there is love, and give and take on both sides. it is one where once children come into the picture, they are valued. The fact that both husband and wife work doesn`t mean the children lose value in their eyes...it has practically become a necessity for both husband and wife to work in order to make ends meet. but a balance is definitely key...as well as communication in making a marriage work and keeping a family together.

Writer: Just wanted to make sure that I give a reference to Hanae Mori, in case the writer being a male is completely unaware of the fragrance and the story behind the fragrance. You must read the story on Hanae Mori. I love the fragrance only in the very early two months of Summer.

``Unrivaled doyenne of the domestic fashion industry, Hanae Mori demands the kind of respect that even her universally lambasted multicolored capes for the Japanese Olympic team cannot detract from. ``

http://metropolis.japantoday.com/biginjapan/369/biginjapaninc.htm

Yes, the story in the picture is of a Japanese Woman, but read how even a villager created ripples in the world based on her dreams. That is also a picture of Asia, where men are pretty damn chauvinistic and hold their egos equally high. The woman in the story did marry a man, most probably one who was open minded enough to let his wife be a successful woman and pursue her dreams. According to the story, he was quite affluent as well, but his wife never relied on that affluence and worked hard and harder to have her own standing.

All this nonsense and rubbish in Pakistani Culture, where the word ``compromise`` comes first before you even tread the path of marriage should be damn alerting to any sane and secure woman. No Woman with her right mind(that`s also important since the % of Women with their minds in their rights places is also few and far between) should overlook this deceptive web of ``compromise.`` Probably, this whole sacrifice & compromise drama conducted in the Pakistani Society is to hide the insecurity and lack of competence of some Pakistani Men, in general.

A secure woman ought to consider only and only a secure man, the rest should be completely disregarded. I cannot say vice versa since many men have a tendency to opt for insecure women since those insecure women add to the male`s ego and have a tendency to lean onto a male for all her needs. Being a female, it`s just an observation. I`ll welcome a sane male`s viewpoint in that regard. Both Urstruly and Sherdil are most welcome to enlighten.

On top of it, the biggest and silliest mistake women make is to have a child with a man who they cannot connect to. It`s criminal and simply disgusting to even go that far. Both should be penalized for bringing an innocent life into this world. Probably, in NWFP, the Sharia Law should also incorporate the above clause. By including the above in the Sharia System, the Muslim World wil be saved from having unbalanced men and women.

But with all said and done, I agree with one point of the writer:On having a house and making a home. To create a home, a woman`s presence is necessary. Period! But you do not have to be a housewife to create a home necessarily. Most of the times, in my observation, all my working family and friends are the best of the home keepers. In fact, most of them are also the owner of their houses. From the standpoint of a companion their is a dependence on a man that is naturally created by the nature. Yes, in order to marry someone a woman needs a man. And, in order to procreate(if she wants to have a baby - more thougts will be follow on this topic later), she does need to have a father for the baby.

In general, mothers are put on a pedestal for many things, but in any balanced family the role of a father is equally important as that of a mother.

More education will be provided to the writer and his ilks later...

#14
where ther e is love,give and take..
in fact couples who under stand each,communicate frequently ,they can solve their proplem amiably.my friend was just simple m bbs but with support of her parents and her husband,now she is mother of two,she done FCPS(higest degree in gyne).still young enjoying their life.kids are also happy.so don``t influenceby west.they marry after long datingand then marriage failed.compromise have to be done in both the cases ,liking or arrange.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

ali: Im not sure why people are fixated on this East VS West dichotomy. Look at it in this sense: the east shuns love and the west ignores it. Niether of those approaches are beneficial in my opinion. I think a middle ground recides in EMBRACING it. Love should be acknowledged and respected in all its forms in every society.

Making it out to be evil dehumaizes sources of love in the east (relationship, women etc). Ignoring it allows a generation to grow without proper initiation into its mysteries. Without proper guidance, the west is percieved as being morally currupt.

As for families, I think ana does a good job of addressing your point. Its all relative to what the couple deems best. A large family is not good for all people, and the lack of one does not make one morally weaker.

ana: Im sorry to say we`re on the same page again (quick, distance urself from my post, lol)

A good raging debate!

Here is my observation of married life:

When the wife is really worked up on an issue and you do not agree, just keep quiet. Let her keep speaking and exhaust herself out. You may even nod your head in the Affirmative.

She would be highly pleased and get relaxed. After a while, she will again pick up the subject. This time you can put forward your arguement in a low key manner.

90% of the times, she will agree with you.

Working out a marriage is as simple as that.

A good raging debate!

Here is my observation of married life:

When the wife is really worked up on an issue and you do not agree, just keep quiet. Let her keep speaking and exhaust herself out. You may even nod your head in the Affirmative.

She would be highly pleased and get relaxed. After a while, she will again pick up the subject. This time you can put forward your arguement in a low key manner.

90% of the times, she will agree with you.

Working out a marriage is as simple as that.

A good raging debate!

Here is my observation of married life:

When the wife is really worked up on an issue and you do not agree, just keep quiet. Let her keep speaking and exhaust herself out. You may even nod your head in the Affirmative.

She would be highly pleased and get relaxed. After a while, she will again pick up the subject. This time you can put forward your arguement in a low key manner.

90% of the times, she will agree with you.

Working out a marriage is as simple as that.

Marriage is perhaps the most important decision that one makes in his/her life. Let this extremely important decision not flow in the gust of emotions. The couple should perhaps make a list of the important questions and then express their views about them (before marriage of course). If their view points vis-a-vis a majority of these questions is the same then perhaps they should proceed.

nazarhayat #22 you are obviously a wise man. here is a ``scientific basis`` for what you say: there is a psychological test called the Meiers-Briggs index that defines different personality types. There are four different dimensions to it, the relevant one for this discussion being the ``thinking`` vs. ``feeling`` type, or T vs F for short. For type T, WHAT you say is important. For type F, HOW you say it is important. Here is how I have taken this concept and applied it to my personal life: I think for the wife the F side of the personality is in full swing when it comes to marital relations. SO: make the effort to demonstrate love and affection, and never ever say anything in a nasty manner (as we do all the time on chowk, heh! heh!).
Another tip: if the wife seems to be going on on a subject, assure her you are listening by doing things like ``verbalize understanding`` (i.e. repeat what she said and ask her to confirm if you understood her properly) and by ``probing`` (this means asking questions, in case you had other ideas coming to your head). Once assured that you heard and registered what she said, the need to go on and on by the wife will disappear.

tahmed # 32

I agree. Actually, the wives, poor souls, do not ask for too much from their husnands.

They only want to be spoken to. They only want to be a part of the decision making. They only want to be listened to. That is not too much.

A great husband goes a little beyond the above. He fondles with her hair. He looks at her and smiles with happiness. He talks about her dress and about her food. He praises her in front of others. Periodically, he gives a peck on her neck for the heck of it. That is not too much.

I can not do the Para 2. I am poor at expressing open love. So I compensate it by delegating all the decision making inside the house to her.

I think those people who have children and then divorce are the most terrible people on this planet.

nazar #25 From your post it appears that the fire is gone between you and the missus, if I may be so bold as to say so. Please try Dr. Ahmed`s guaranteed Elixir of Marital Bliss (special discount to chowk posters): First, go to the gym along with the missus every day, six days a week. This will tone up body and spirit. Second: medidate every night before going to bed on the following fact - Even Jennifer Lopez and Cameron Diaz have the same two legs (if again I may be so bold as to say so) as the missus does, as well as the same two ears and so forth.

Try the gym and medidation for three months. If at the end of three months you are not performing all of those in para. 2 AND more that we need not get into (wink! wink!), please write back and you shall get your money back for the above-mentioned Dr. Ahmed`s Elixir.

#26.
that judgment seems rather unfair. what do you suggest instead, that couples stay together just for the sake of their children??? I`m not sure that`s entirely for the best either. Children then are exposed to the tension and the fighting between their parents, and it can be a traumatic thing to go through. It isn`t as if divorce is always the easy way out, it certainly wasn`t so for my mother, or possibly even my father. I think such a judgment is unfair when you don`t have all the facts.

tahmad # 27

Salajit is also known to make bells toll.

ana

No it is not unfair. What I am trying to say is that the couples who have children must make extra efforts to make compromises, even if it means involving arbiters etc. A couple who can share a bed to produce children can also make compromises. I dont beleive that pelicans deliver babies.

#14 by ana_dobarah on June 8, 2003 5:40pm PT

I know we are talking genrealities but sitll we should not discount the power of social thinking.
The utopia of the decision being left to the women does not take into account the peer/social/economic(imagined or real) pressure that affects this choices.
On the other had there is negative pressure on remaining at home.
I feel that for socitey as a whole if there a social value(values usually works in from of celebrating and thus putting a sort of soft pressure)in the woman taking care of family or at least recognising the fact that for most people balancing the family with work is almost impossible.

I know closely eight women who work I know that these are all Indivdual cases which need not reflect the the general experiences.
Let us examine some of them. However in all cases the power of the social values and proaganda of the western (or influenced)culture is to be seen and the affects of it on the people taking decisions.

One is a colleague who is married to a guy who at first seemed to be very emancipiated. first two years went fine then they had a baby, changed city and joined a new company(all at the same time) they invited the guys parents to live with them to help out (as this was a curical time in their careers). It turns out that the parents do not want to keep a servant(becuase they are bharmins) and I used to see this lady go home every 2-3 hours to feed the baby and usually ended up staying late in office to make up for time. In the first six months she lost 10Kgs(she is very slightly built, and has not gained any till date ie 8 years since) they both were earning at that point approx 13 thousand each. At that point In Hyderabad this was a reasonable salary for one to live by.

they now have shifted to bangalore and both work in different companies the wife earns about 10lakh perannaum and the husband earns 7lakh both being managers. The parents both refuse to move out of the house and at the same time give no help either in house hold work or with the kids. This lady works demanding 9-9pm job and gets up at 5 to cook for herself, husband kid and Inlaws who expect the food to be normal and proper. She drops the elder kid to school and goes to office. once she comes back she cooks for the family. They have purchased a 4 bedroom flat costing 40 lakh. Now they are in US where the husband wants to go back in just 8 months stay because the he says that his job profile is not good. The wife is not working and is being pressurised by both the husband and father in law to work since home repayments are high and other household expenses are nearly 40 thousand a month!!

these are the people who just 9 years back had a total income of 12 thousand and were living happily. Now all justifications for the harrasment of the lady come from western values.

similary there is another couple where the husband is a senior finance professional and the wife is a manager in a software company. They have a kid. a few years back they moved to singapore with us and the husband also got a job there in a MNC albiet in a smaller post than what he was used to. they stayed for a year and the husband was thrown out of job because of non preformance and life was hell for the lady. who used to go through a similar routine at the one in the earlier example.

They subsequently returned to India and now they follow a fully american lifestyle. The husband has found a job again he goes to play badminton in the morning when his wife and kid are sleeping and then returns when both his wife and kid are gone to school and work. he returns late and so does she. luckily there is a servant to bring the kid home and feed the kid and now the husband has accepted food being prepared by the maid.
they brought a bigger three bedroom flat now (because the kid does not allow his grandparents to sleep when they are visiting). The kids bringing up is being based on what they call modern values of giving independent room and never scolding (hurts the inner development of the child). Now the wife is thinking of leaving her well paying job(after getting a half time work permission from her employer Intel) after she has discovered how much well behaved her child has become since she has been at home and how much he now hates her going away to office. But she is wondering if they could afford for her not to work.

My sister is another type. She works as a teacher for an inconsuental salary(she spends more on travelling and eating out since she is working). Though my brother in law is was not too happy about this he never raised any objection. Though working has given her a teremdous self confidence she tottally neglects the home front. going to her house you would think a tornado has hit it. food prepared is usually pathetic when it is. My brother in law has not voiced any opinoin on all this except for some (vauge and mild discontent) my mother encourages all this saying that it is good for people to work.
My brother in law is a business man who works 12 hours a day. Now my neices are well behaved(because of having my parents as well as my brother in laws parents who are frequently entrusted the responsiblity)But they have not picked up basic skills like being organised, regular in work and cleanliness(except personal hygine) if a couple of more years pass then they may be past the age of learning such skills.

I know a number of such cases and among the people that I know mostly couples come first belive the myth that working and managing home is not too diffiuclt. The even never learn how their behaviour with each other is affected by the demands of work. Most dont seem to understand what exactly is economic need. for instance the couple in the second case earn about 3 lakh a month and have a accumulated savings and investemnts of more than 60lakhs (all in rupees).

In fact this allround misunderstanding of what constitutes modernity is causing alll these problems. on the other hand I have met couples who have been living in USA for the last 15+ years or more (thus have seen the modern socitey and its pitfalls) are more realistic in this. the also have happier marriages their kids are also more well balanced.

We should not forget to include the affects of modernity as understood by people and its affects on families and socites.

I am not for forcing the women to stay at home but to deglamorise the working woman and to renew the emphais of the role palyed by homemakers in soctey and giving it due importance. Also we need to recognise the pressures that working woman has in todays business envoirment.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

urstruly #30 I dont think the problem is getting the bell to toll, and so salajit may not be the right medicine.
The problem as I understand from nazar`s post is: ``For whom the bell tolls?`` We are trying to make sure that this ``whom`` is the missus.

The crux of the article is highlighted below. For the sake of assisting the writer in resolving his queries the interactors should rip apart the following questions.

[How can we better deal with the counter issues as a result of this awareness? Can a man be a little more broad-minded and open up to the presence of women in the workplace? Can he loosen up his ego and stop having an upper hand over her? Can a woman give up her double standards of asking for her rights to work and at the same time expecting her husband to support her for everything? Can she accept that along with the awareness, she should stop having expectations of being pampered for everything and learn to support herself?]

Since the writer`s intentions are good, therefore the following suggestion must be incorporated in his plan to invoke a change:

- Having ``gender studies`` included in the core curriculum of all schools and colleges in Pakistan. Special emphasis needs to be given to communication.

[Of course, we all come from different schools of thought regarding women’s awareness, which also matters. For a lot of people, certain opinions mentioned here would be from a conservative, old fashioned, paranoid male. ]

100% True, I would also add narrow-minded. Conservative to me is something different. But your sincerity in bringing the issue to the table is pretty evident and appreciable. As a reader, I have issues with the approach and not with the substance.

ali87: while i do see what you`re saying, i don`t think that women making choices is a utopia. of course not all women are going to make choices without taking their environs into consideration. i agree that economic pressures force both men and women into working. i also agree that that women as homemakers should be celebrated just as much, because being a homemaker is plenty of work in itself. What I am referring to is the fact that women should not be given ultimatums, or pressured by men especially. what i am saying is that if a woman has a good job that would not interfere with the bringing up of her children, then she should not be given the ultimatum of quitting it or else he quits her. THAT is what i have a problem with. this is not a generalization i`m making here, i`m referring to specific people i know this has happened . And I really don`t want to bring the east vs. west dichotomy into this, because i don`t believe it`s relevant to what i`m saying. you have some interesting observations, but i am not convinced that women making choices about their lives is a utopia, nor am i convinced that it`s purely a western thing. A husband or a father-in-law or even a father should not be the only decision maker in a wife/daughter-in-law or daughter`s life. this kind of thinking keeps us centuries back. . .

Time for some serious stuff:

I do not know how the other religions ordain the treatment of a wife. But I have some working knowledge of Islam. The Islamic injunctions about marriage may have been a great stride forward in the 6 Century Arabia but now with a vastly changed environment, these need to be reinterpreted and reformed:

As a Muslim, I find it very difficult to logically convince a non-Muslim on the following:

(a) Man can have four wives but women can not have four husbands. (earlier arguement in favour was that the husband can not be traced. Now with DNA, that logic is not sufficient)

(b) Man can have slave girls and legally get children out of them. But woman can not have slave men and get legal children out of them.

(c) Quran says that man can beat his wife with stick if she does not listen to him. But wife is not permitted to beat him with stick if he is being unreasonable.

(d) Wife is explicitly required to make herself available for conjugal rights when the husband so desires. But the husband is not required to make himself available for the conjugal rights when the wife so desires.

(e) Quran had specifically permitted only the prophet to have 11 wives at one time. I want to know the rational behind it.

(f) Similarly, prophet had married Aysha who was 8 or 12 year old girl. Our Mulla`s also try to follow this example by marrying young girls as a religious preference following the Sunnah. I am not very comfortable with this.

(g) Man can give divorce by calling it thrice. Wife can not do it.

(h) Man is required to pay bride money to wife after consummation of marriage. Why is the wife exemepted from paying such a fee to the husband?

Any takers?

ZahraJ: Thanku for ur valuable input and ofcourse `education.` I would like to add that this was not an attempt to convey a chauvinist perspective of the situation rather the whole point was to talk in terms of the general social stereotypes which continue to engulf our society. Point being... we want to address an issue which is hardly talked about on such platforms.

ali87: I do agree with you on most of the stuff!

nazarhayatkhan: These are exactly the questions that need to be answered by religious scholars. If you do hear from anyone regarding these queries... do share!

nazar#37
i agree with you.i wonder really these commands were from god.don``t u feel is he a male?we are like children to him ,he should have treated both equally.

Nazar great post --

these are such shameful anomalies in our 1400 years old immutable religion -- ``of all times`` -- that there will be few takers for your very pointed THORNY questions about the dire need for REFORM in Islam -- for modern times.

However -- there is one about four wives -- that a Mullah with some knowledge of biology came up with the following macabre answer:

the women can have four husbands any time they want to -- if -- they can come up with one million ova (ovums) in every ejaculation.

Tehmed32 #27

As usual, you are witty with cutting-edge language and lots of fresh ideas. Thanks.

With the quantity of your prolific posts, it seems that Mrs. Tehmed32 and kids are with in-laws.

Nazar sahab,

Though far from being a scholar (except between the hours of 9 and 9 when I`m cooped up in the library dungeons cramming) allow me to attempt to answer at least some of your queries. This is the way I understand them.

(b) Man can have slave girls and legally get children out of them. But woman can not have slave men and get legal children out of them.
Where does it say that? The only circumstances in which a sexual relationship is permitted between a man and a woman is when they are married to each other. Thus, as soon as a woman marries a man, she ceases to be a slave-girl, and whatever that means, and assumes the status of his wife, with all the rights and privileges associated. There are no clandestine arrangements. You have to remember that as Muslims we believe that God is watching us all the time and that we are absolutely accountable for all that we consciously do. Not even a particle of good or bad is discounted from a person`s behaviour.


(f) A girl cannot be married without her consent, and consent is based upon a certain sensibility. Ibn Majah and some other transmitters report the following hadith: A girl came to the Prophet (peace be on him) and informed him that her father had married her to her cousin against her wishes, whereupon the Prophet (peace be on him) allowed her to exercise her choice. She then said, `I am reconciled to what my father did but I wanted to make it known to women that fathers have no say in this matter.`


(g) This, I was told, was a stipulation of the marriage contract in this part of the world. Woman seldom read the contract themselves and are generally unaware of the legal aspects, and their rights, within the marriage bond.


(h) The mahr is not mere bride money but a gift from a man to the woman who will be his wife. It is an act of love. Islam has simply legalised the tradition but has not associated any amount with it.
I remember reading of an incident where a woman, I believe she was Anas ibn Malik`s mother, asked for her mahr that her suitor convert to Islam. That conversion to the principles of Islam would be his gift to her.

---

A lot of what we see Muslims practising today is not necessarily directly derived from the two sources of the shariah of Islam, ie the Holy Quran and the Prophet`s sunnah, but are actually legal adaptations of these two sources that were originally meant for a particular time and place, a set of circumstances that may be greatly different from our own. These have persisted in the culture of the communities they originated from and have hardened into true legalities even though they were only meant to serve a temporal purpose. And perhaps that`s why Muslims seem to be at such odds with their current circumstances, because they have forgotten what their religion really asks of them, and instead choose to practise a set of rules, long after they have expired.
Though, it needs to be mentioned, that this does not mean that now Islam can immediately be bent to pander to popular culture. The truth is immutable and valid through all time. The need now is for Muslims to return to the original sources and allow that wisdom to inform us in our current circumstances.
Ultimately though, whether it be marriage or the legalities of food and drink or whatever area of human endeavour, one should always keep in mind that one is accountable to God for his actions. As long as a person is conscious of God, he will necessarily stay away from bringing harm to himself or others.

``Allah desires to make clear to you and to guide you to the ways of the (righteous) people before you and to turn to you in mercy; and Allah is Knowing, Wise. And Allah desires to lighten your burden, for man was created weak.``
Surah an-Nisaa, ayahs 26-28

#35 by ana_dobarah on June 9, 2003 8:58pm PT

what I meant was that women (and men too) dont make choices in isolation. There is a prevailing trend in the media (both in news/analysis as well as entertainment and advt)that seeks to change our values with some very illinformed and at times tottally wrong information. We need to recognise the presence of this and to recognise that it influences behaviour. Presently we are like ostirchies who say that the media is a reflection of socitey or reflects the aspriations of scoitey(It can be that posibbly) More often media has a goal ie to sell and at times it gives out the version of aspirations of a class which itself is confused and had very little understanding about socitey and its issues. However since the reach is trememdous it starts to have a very unhealthy influnce in the choices we make.
We need to recognise this influence and accept it for what it is and to make adjustments accordingly. Socitey is more than what the media potrays. Unless there is a strong recognised and channled values by the socitey the media will pretty much play havoc.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#37 by nazarhayatkhan on June 9, 2003 9:43pm PT

I will avoid giving a completely technical analyis but deal with the questions with common sense.

First thing is that one need not be logically convinced of everything. Somethings that we call logic are simply matter of preference or commonsense.

(a) Man can have four wives but women can not have four husbands. (earlier arguement in favour was that the husband can not be traced. Now with DNA, that

.... That is the same reason why Hugh Hefner is seen with a series of women on his arms and you dont see Maddonna flaunting her various boyfriends at the same time. We could go into the logic of this but I doubt if we will reach any conclusive resoultion.
Question to be asked is are women clamouring to have 4 husbands?
It is our nature to be so. One of the reasons being that usually the marriage is for family(now let us not get into disupute on this)ie children and women carry the child bearing responsiblity. They obviously cant be cavorting around with other men while carrying a baby of other. Remember that a woman needs emotional stabality as well as financial stability at time of pregency and after it. similarly a child requires attention of a mother (as well as a father) and considerable investment in terms of emotion, time is needed by some one. And till date it is found that women are better at this than men. I know we could argue the finer points of all this to death but commonsense is what most people understand except the educated morons.

(b) Man can have slave girls and legally get children out of them. But woman can not have slave men and get legal children out of them.

..I havent had much thought to this. So I wont comment.

c) Quran says that man can beat his wife with stick if she does not listen to him. But wife is not permitted to beat him with stick if he is being unreasonable
It is not listen but only when she is being extremely destructive that too the qualification is to beat as light as a feather. Ie symbolic the act of being reprimanded physicaly itself can be a great matter of shame for many people(Physical beating is not advised at all). In singapore when a ticketless traveller is detected nothing is done except a new ticket is given. People are so ashamed that they hide their faces and getoff the bus.

d) Wife is explicitly required to make herself available for conjugal rights when the husband so desires. But the husband is not required to make himself available for the conjugal rights when the wife so desires.

.. No the husband is expected to satisfy the desires of the wife too. Only the route for restoration of this right is slightly different. A wife can divorce on basis of not being satisfied sexually. Now this is a matter of Implementation of law. Theorically a woman can say she is not satisfied even if a sexual activity is there every day.

e) Quran had specifically permitted only the prophet to have 11 wives at one time. I want to know the rational behind it.

the rationale is that since Islam was in its Infancy and most tribes treated marriage as a method to cement relations this was the permission given to the Prophet so as to enable the nacent Islamic nation to gain strength.

f) Similarly, prophet had married Aysha who was 8 or 12 year old girl. Our Mulla`s also try to follow this example by marrying young girls as a religious preference following the Sunnah. I am not very comfortable with this.

early marriage was not a problem in any socitey till a recently ie last hundred years.

Earlier socitey number of professions were limited and they did not require lenghty studies. Life has become more complex today. People have to master many aspects of knowledge and skills before they are able to make a living. Thus they are not capbable of supporuting themselves till a much later age. girls are similarly expected to match at least some of these skills(as a mother she has to suitable to bringing up childeren who can compete in the present circumstances) thus the marriageable age is higher in our socitey.
earlier socitey the family grouping was a source of security and thus the girl could marry earlier as all that she had to learn was how to bring up children and do some basic chores. since families were either joint or close to each other and interdependent more than they are now there was a suppourt sturcture avaiable for the young girl to cope with the task of raising children and looking after the family.
Todays socitey it is no longer so. However this varies to a large extent from place to place. You will find that in richer families women tend to marry early since they are able to find husbands who depend on family wealth and dont need to struggle too much to suppourt a family. If ones checks with the womens entrepruners groups in India you will find that many of the successful entrepruners have had pretty early marriages at times even finishing college after marriage and raisign childern to a age of about 7-10 they have got involved in business. Ie they took thier time getting comfortable with their family resposnibilites and then ventured out to do other things. There are a few women writers too who were married at 15(this age was quite common earlier for marriage) and found that they lost nothing at all in their lives. Generally a girl is considered to be sexually capable when she reaches puberty usually this is around 12-13 and typically it takes about a year or so for the menustration cycles to stabilize. Since it is the nature of humuans to have sex when they are capable(as evidenced by sexually active teens all over the world) a early marriage has no harm usually. However in todays stressfull and chalengeing socitey where family suppourt is not what it was before this can lead to very bad situations. Therefore it is sensible to postpone the marriage age by a few years. However all people dont have this problem and thus marriage at 15-18 should be ok at least in a few cases. In any case there are more early teen pregancies in the west than early teen marriages in our countries. Usually these teens giveup thier children for adoption. I feel if socitey is kinder then it will suppourt such families to adjust with the situation for a few years so the family (ie mother , father and child) remain one unit.
However there is a social myth in the west which calls for discovering themselves and making the right choice (however it seems that they dont reflect that with all the discovering they still make the wrong choices going by the divorce rate)

g) Man can give divorce by calling it thrice. Wife can not do it.

.... this is a peculiary sunni practice. I doubt wethere it will stand the test of time. while the provision is there for divorcing by calling out there is also clear indication that this has to be done with an intervening period of one month(no matter howmuch you call the divorce within the period).
The shias dont accept this method. Divorce is done by the same method as is the marriage ie through writing. Similarly there is a waiting periond of a month after which if there is no reconciliation(reconciliation is mandatory but not implemneted by most law, this is a matter of practice which can be changed). if there is a reconciliation or a indecision the man can take back his wife however the limit is three such times after which the divorce becomes final no matter wether he wants to take her back then or not(ie he cannot for ever threathen to divorce her and then tell that he will take her back)
Singapore implements the Muslim personal law in the above manner. Ie all divorce has no value till it is written and in front of court oppinted officals. Martial consuelling is compulsary after notice of divorce isgiven and is done through court appointed mulsim functoinaires. similarly the withdarwal of intent to divorce is done in writing. Malaysia and Indonesia are also considering these laws(there is opposition of course)

(h) Man is required to pay bride money to wife after consummation of marriage. Why is the wife exemepted from paying such a fee to the husband?

I think this is answered earlier so I dont need to add.

In comparing logic one cant do it in isolation especially in subjective cases. can you make the logic of a man having no penalty in breaking his marriage vows and also having to take responsibility of his offspring out of any union even as he is married and the opposition for bigamy in the modern systems?
Islam allows more than one wife with the permission of the other wives(ie wifes have objeiction then they can seek divorce) while there is punishment if a person betrays his marriage vows and cheats. If the wife agrees then he can marry another woman (ie if he wants to have sexual relations he has to take up financial as well as moral responsibility of both wife and children). However in modern law there is no penalty for cheating. a man (or woman )can cheat all that they want without fear of punishment. However the woman has no choice in objecting to this at all with the exception that she can divorce the man. The man however is free to have relations with the other woman without taking any financial resposnibility of either the woman or her children(they can calim for maintannence after the fact ie it is not automatic theyhave to go through a expensive court process for it.)

I dont think I could have given cold logic to such subjective issues but those are some of the ways you could look at those issues.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#37 by nazarhayatkhan

I would like to field these questions though they have been discussed ad nauseum and have been answered every which way possible:

(a) Man can have four wives but women cannot have four husbands. (earlier arguement in favour was that the husband can not be traced. Now with DNA, that logic is not sufficient)

One must understand that allowing men to marry up to 4 woman is not the only edict in Islam, there is almost every aspect of personal and social life of human beings that are discussed at length in Qura`n and Hadith. The spectrum ranges from very personal matters of a human being to the conduct of nations. So it is better to understand this issue in the perspective of the whole picture. In other words Islam dictates a complete code of life, which not only trains the conduct of an individual but also forms a society with a collective outlook.

While the issue of paternity remains the crux of the argument, there are also personal, legal, biological, psychological and social matters that are inter-related and are also effected. In the end it all boils down to human nature. It is not in the nature of man (or woman) to attach oneself to the seed of other. Yes you can determine paternity by DNA and you can enact a law that forces people to take care of their offspring but you cannot make a law or force someone to love another. This is something that comes from inside. This is the human nature. A human child is not a puppy. It takes years of dedication and love to create an individual that ultimately benefits society.

Polygamy and polyandry have been and still are in practice in almost every society around the globe. Islam however, prescribes only one way of having a relationship between man and woman and that is through Nikah which in turn imposes certain responsibilities on the participants – and that is necessary to keep the order in the society. In other words conduct of individual affects society. That is the reason an elaborate set of rights and responsibilities has been prescribed by Islam. If we look at the issue of four husbands vs. four wives through the prism of those rights and responsibilities the arrangement of four husbands does not fit in.

This is a multifaceted issue, which has facets of sociology, psychology, biology, economics, and jurisprudence. People address this issue usually discussing one facet at a time since the subject is vast. It doesn`t mean that one argument has more value than the other but on the other hand every argument is like a building block that completes the picture. So a better way to ask this question is if you put it like ``What are the biological reasons women are not allowed four husbands`` or ``what are psychological reasons why women are not…?``.

Would you want to rephrase your question?

(b) Man can have slave girls and legally get children out of them. But woman can not have slave men and get legal children out of them.

Ansari has already answered this question in detail. But allow me to add that vice versa is also true, that is, a woman can ``have`` a slave man and get legal children out of him too. The only way to do that, however, is through nikah – and it is applicable to both men and women. A Muslim man and woman is not allowed to have sex with slaves and cannot force slaves to have sex with someone for money etc. There is an elaborate body of Islamic law, which deals with these issues. A sample of such decrees can be found here at Imam Malik`s Muwatta. Holy Prophet (pbuh) married his freed slave Zaid to his first cousin Zainab thus abolishing the concept of slaves and master and upper and lower classes in the society.

(c) Quran says that man can beat his wife with stick if she does not listen to him. But wife is not permitted to beat him with stick if he is being unreasonable.

Qura`n doesn`t say that and therefore, the question is wrong. There is only one circumstance when a man is allowed to hit his wife ``lightly`` but only after when he has fulfilled certain other requirements. This issue was discussed in detail at chowk. Click

(d) Wife is explicitly required to make herself available for conjugal rights when the husband so desires. But the husband is not required to make himself available for the conjugal rights when the wife so desires.

The truth is contrary to that. It is made incumbent upon man to sexually gratify his wife, whereas vice versa is not. A man is not allowed to force his wife to have sex when she doesn`t feel like it. This is an issue between man and woman. But what if either man or woman cannot resolve this issue by themselves? The Muslim jurists, old and new, have ruled on this issue through several angles, which makes it a thorny and controversial issue because it involves the interference of state into the extremely personal matter of a couple. This matter can be controversial in any society, given its nature. However, the contention in the question is inaccurate.

(e) Quran had specifically permitted only the prophet to have 11 wives at one time. I want to know the rational behind it.

Again the question is wrong. Qura`n doesn`t specifically address this issue of 11 wives. However, some of the Hadith address this issue. One must, however, keep in mind that Islam did not descend upon Muslims (through Prophet (pbuh) in just one instance – like Moses who got all his instructions during one visit to the Mount. It took 23 years to complete the message of Allah. The divine order of prohibition of liquor came sometime in 12th year of prophet-hood, before that Muslims used to drink. Even some of the closest of his friends are known to have imbibed. Similarly, the custom of marriage also changed as orders were descended along the time. The permissibility of up to four wives was also such an order which came when Holy Prophet and several of his companion already had several wives. So people asked question as to what to do with their existing wives whose number exceeded four. Such issues are discussed in hadith. But since Qura`n has a precedence over Hadith, when Islamic Law was being formulated under the five fiqah (schools of thought) the maximum number of wives one can have was set at four.

But if you look at the Qura`nic edict that ``permits`` four marriages, deeply, you might be able to comprehend the wisdom in it. You will see that Islam actually promotes monogamy. It sets the bar quite high to be able to marry more than one woman. See the verse ``Marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one or one that your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.`` (Qur`an 4:3)

So what does it mean by …``but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them….``? What is the justice between wives? Can we quantify it? The first condition is that the first wife must buy into the idea that bringing in a second wife will be just to her since she is the most affected party. Hence Muslim jurists have imposed the first condition that the man should have expressed permission from his first wife. Another, Islamic edict forbids a woman to force her suitor to divorce his first wife. A woman cannot legally or morally impose this condition. Then Islamic laws also designate man as to bear the full financial responsibility of his family. If a man doesn`t have financial means he can be prevented by state to commit second marriage. These are very old laws and have been in practice for centuries. If people violate these laws then the laws are not bad, it is their enforcement. For example, the shariat court in Morroco has argued that the condition under which men were permitted four wives was after the battle of Uhad (the second battle) when a lot of Muslim men died in the battle leaving widows and orphans. And since now there is no such situation therefore, a moratorium can be imposed for more than one marriages. The law is in effect in Morroco.

(f) Similarly, prophet had married Aysha who was 8 or 12 year old girl. Our Mulla`s also try to follow this example by marrying young girls as a religious preference following the Sunnah. I am not very comfortable with this.

This contention is wrong, Mullah`s have actually done contrary to that. But first one must understand that under Islam law the age of consent for woman is not set at some arbitrary number. For example, in Canada the age of consent is 16, which according to United States standards make all Canadians pedophiles. In US this age is arbitrarily set at 18 years of age. In Islamic law, this age is set, basically, at the onset of puberty. Muslim jurists discuss the signs of puberty in detail – one such sign of course is the time when woman starts her reproductive cycle, which is triggered by the onset of menses. But this trigger mechanism varies from individual to individual. Some girls menstruate at 8 and some don`t menstruate until they are 16 or older. The knowledge when a woman starts menstruating is not a public matter it is a very personal matter. A woman can conceal her menstrual cycle from the closest of her relatives if she wants to. On the other hand a parent might force his underage daughter to marry someone for greed etc. declaring that she already has passed the age of puberty. When five fiqah of law were being formulated, these questions were discussed at length. Imam Abu Hanifa the founder of Hanfi fiqah has thus ruled based on these scenarios that the age of consent for a women should be arbitrarily set at 16 years. The Muslim Family law of Pakistan, of 1962 sets the age of consent at age 16, which is based on Hanfi law. Imam Malik, set this age at 15 years.

In order to keep a double check, Islam also introduces the concept of Wali. A Wali is a parent or a legal guardian. A woman cannot marry unless she has an express permission of her Wali. But it doesn`t mean that Islam restricts women to marry their own choice. In case a woman is of age of consent and she wants to marry but her Wali doesn`t allow, then state acts as her Wali. Now state as a Wali has the obligation to confirm that the woman is of the age of consent. Similarly, under Hanfi law the age of consent for boys is 17 years. Please keep in mind that the term ``age of consent`` has a different meaning in Islamic law, since the only sexual relationship permitted between man and woman is through Nikkah (marriage).

So if you feel uncomfortable to allow your 16 year old daughter to marry someone you as her parent have a right to forbid her but then she has the right to involve state in it. That is the current law in Pakistan and most of the Islamic countries.

(g) Man can give divorce by calling it thrice. Wife cannot do it.

This was true at the time when Muslim fiqah (law) were not established (i.e. prior to the rulings of the five Imams) but Islamic law of divorce has grown to be quite complex after that. For example, the three talaq become invalid if the woman was pregnant at the time, according to Hanfi law. The fiqah allows a lot more intrusive role as an arbiter to the state now.

My perception, however, is that by giving men an easier way to divorce God has placed more responsibility on their shoulder as compared to women.

(h) Man is required to pay bride money to wife after consummation of marriage. Why is the wife exemepted from paying such a fee to the husband?

Under Islamic law, a man is legally responsible for the maintenance of his wife and household. Woman, although, is allowed to work but her earnings are her to keep. Similarly, she doesn`t have to share anything if she receives a gift or dowry from her father. Man is also responsible to contribute financially to the good causes in the society, whereas a woman can but she is not required to. Similarly, the bride money or mehr is an agreed amount that husband must pay his wife ``before`` consuming the marriage. That is her right given to her by Allah. A man when dies cannot prevent her wife from getting his inheritance. Man is also responsible for financial maintenance of his daughter, sister, and mother whereas woman is not responsible to maintain her male relatives. The man on the other hand inherits double the portion of his female counterpart. So the short answer to your question is that it is a part of financial arrangement between men and women. It is a part of big picture.

nazarhayat #41 thanks. :-) like i said, you are a real good sport and i really appreciate your having a good sense of humor and not getting easily offended. we need more people like you on chowk.

i do indeed write more on chowk than i should. its not that there is any shortage of things to do. its just that this place is too much fun given the variety of backgrounds the posters come from - i doubt if you could get such a diverse chat group together in real life. by now i have become such an expert on chowk that it really does not take long to click the mouse button to take the computer out of hibernation and to belt out a couple of posts in between things.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Looks like we have highjacked this discussion again.

This was about accomadation within marriage. I think we should not flood a discussion like this especiall when the women here have some very close to heart topics to discuss.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

ansari#40
i am thank ful to you.i sought the answer of my questions which kept me haunting so long.

Urstruly # 48
Ansar # 40

Thanks.
I respect your views and logic. This logic is sufficient to convince you on these issues. But this may not convince a non-muslim who otherwise may be a sane logical person.

The fact is that no holy scripture can justify to claim as a complete code of life. The holy books can not be all - history, geography, legal, socialogy, political etc books. These are at best general guidelines in accordance with the age and time these came into being. Only the spirit in these holy books is relevant for all ages and times. Implementing them line by line creates a chaos that we continue to find in the Islamic world.

As for the logic, the faith may be accepted blind because no religion can stand the test of logic.

A priest can give a convincing logic to prove the truth of Christinaity.
An equally good logic can be given to prove the truth of Hinduism and so on.

In fact, if the majority`s opinion is to be accepted, Christianity should be the true faith since majority of the world believes in it.

So my humble submission is to keep the religion as a personal fuzzy possession for guidance only. And everyone should be governed by the existing temporal law of the society that runs on a democratic basis.

#51 by Tipu on June 10, 2003 10:33pm PT

Uhh.. Like I said we are not discussing what was being disucssed by the women here.

They too need some space within this forum. Many may not feel like particapting in the somewhat coarse discussions that usually go on here hence a bit of focus on what they are saying is in order.

Sheharyar: aapne woh O`Henry ki kahani parhi hai, The Gift of the Magi?

Writer,

(Just between you and me)

Few leading points:

- My immediate reaction on reading this article was to write a rebuttal but then I realized it`s not worth my time (no offense meant).

- My second reaction was to hammer some flaws in your approach point by point. On further thought, I realized that I do not even subscribe to 80% of the viewpoints discussed in this article why even bother to respond - be indifferent. Somehow I found the latter step slightly unfair. If someone has sincerely laid out their perspectives in black and white and they have genuine questions then by keeping my thoughts to myself I will be depriving the writer of all the constructive feedback and unique viewpoints I can contribute. No ehsaan on you. As a male writer who believes in granting women certain rights and evaluating the pros and cons later on, I wanted to educate you as a female interactor and put your perspectives in the right place.

- My first note was intentionally (and not inadvertently) provoking. I like testing the waters. In my not so humble view, the word ``compromise`` was not clearly put forth. To give you an example, compromising on Green Tea vs. Oolong Tea is quite different from compromising on Purdah vs. No-Purdah.

- Your article is only capturing a certain class. It`s not applicable to all and sundry. Each class has its own challenges. So, your sincere intent has an audience constraint. If that`s the intent then you should have laid that out upfront.




Addressing your questions (with an open mind):
-------------------------------
Q1. How can we better deal with the counter issues as a result of this awareness?

Answer: Education and Communication. By education, I do not mean that you need a PhD to analyze and discover the nuances. How do you do that? I cannot define the answer off the top of my head, but I would say that my earlier suggestion should be taken into consideration here. Or each male and female in Pakistan must go for a courtship prior to settling down --- Part II of Sharia Law!

Q2. Can a man be a little more broad-minded and open up to the presence of women in the workplace?

Often times, in healthy places where men and women work together, you will find both men and women developing into healthy individuals vs. men or women. So, the working environment is not only a 9-5 thing. You work with human beings and you learn a lot from that interaction. At times you may be able to connect to your colleagues/peers at a level that may not be possible with your own spouse. A good number of men won`t give a damn for what dream their wives intend to pursue and all about the nonsense personal growth plans. But there is a certain % who will look into that since they aren`t insecure. This is in the context of Pakistani Culture and also applicable to Pakistanis who have migrated/born and bred elsewhere.

In reference to the Pakistani Working Environment, it varies from field to field. Since I have been away for quite sometime, I cannot say for sure what`s happening except for what I hear from family since most of my close friends who pursued a professional career (medicine and engineering) have migrated to either US or UK. But I would share with you a myth that we used to hear as kids in late 80s and early 90s while attending college/university or going for internship. It was an observation that most of the men with wives sitting at home were fine with working with women. Some received their basic education on communication with women outside of their own home in that environment. Everyone did not have ego problems. Yes, the chauvinists had issues with women because of you know what. The cheapsters would preach their female colleagues on marriage. Not necessarily with them, but it was their religious duty to tell the females of their role and why God created them. Lastly, there was a decent kind as well who wanted women to come forth and explore their potential and they would serve as their mentors. It all depends on your vertical and the kind of people you are amongst. The rules of the game are very different in different industries. In the absence of equal rights and clearly slated policies, no business is accountable for any unfair treatment against women. What a riot! Only multi-nationals used to/would have high degree of concern due to certain obligations. I assume that the government jobs may have some accountability factor aside from the select multi-nationals/private sector.

Q. 3) Can he loosen up his ego and stop having an upper hand over her?

Answer: This is a very blanket statement and also a naive question thinking that a man is always/100% capable of having an upper hand on the woman. Secondly, this is not even 100% applicable to the sweet category of men I like and can tolerate; commonly know as ``secure beings.`` Probably you were in mid-evil (…) times while you stated this question.

Q. 4) Can a woman give up her double standards of asking for her rights to work and at the same time expecting her husband to support her for everything?

Answer: This is a very sensitive point. It also varies based on the economic strata you have in your mind. But in general, it`s my observation that responsible workingwomen do pitch in without any choon charan.

Let`s be unkind here for a few minutes: Why the hell should a woman ask for her right? Why the hell should not that right be taken for granted? It`s not that she is committing adultery or whipping the hell out of a man. Do men ever ask when they are committing murders, adultery, and any other crimes? Who the hell gave this species the right to even stand in the middle of what a woman deserves as a basic right?That`s where you need to educate yourself. Next time, if you forgot to keep your audience in mind, your argument may get torn apart without any recoverable traces.

Let`s proceed....

I was talking to someone last year on my very brief trip to Pakistan and this lady shared with me her dream of expanding her education business. She has been conducting some technical courses from her own home. Based on what she was making and how she was progressing she ended up supporting her husband towards his higher education and for better prospects in life. This person hailed from lower middle class. I want to mention that in particular since her desire to rise up was not only in the air but was very much on her agenda. Well, woman proposes and God disposes. But she has to propose to see the outcome......The other commendable part was the support of her own family in meeting her plans aside from her husband. She is a mother of two and I was seriously amazed since I always chant right and left on how the women from lower classes in India have stood up. It was nice to hear about the awareness and the progress in our own backyard.

Q. 5) Can she accept that along with the awareness, she should stop having expectations of being pampered for everything and learn to support herself?

Answer: This is again a very weak question. Who says that a housewife gets more pampering? What if her husband cannot afford her pampering treatments and can only afford running the house?

On a different note, why do not you get some statistics on Pakistani Women from World Bank, ADB, UNICEF and Unifem. You can also get a feel for that from your local newspapers.

In general, if women are earning and are responsible then they will certainly pitch in running their home. If they are not then you should not be surprised. Unlike men, women are not perfect human beings. And, they will never be; no matter how Rumi or Mir or Robert Browning or Byron portrays them.

Sorry for the exhausting response, but then you asked for it!

Nazar sahab: kya aap aaj kal Karachi main hain? In case you are, would you like to meet? My email address is: pediatrishun@yahoo.com


Urstruly: thank you for that post; i learnt from it.

Can u guys handle these idiotic muslim debates somewhere else. Fukkin brainwashed idiots and their pseudo intellectual acrobatics.

Islam is Sexist. Deal with it.

#58 by DRUMZ on June 11, 2003 9:53am PT

.. while you are the real intellect of this forum.. nothing Pseudo about you.. We know.. We know..

Zahra,

Nicely answered! :)

Writer,

Jawad Asad`s opinion is clearly based on a lack of knowledge of the kinds of work the largest populations of women working West perform. Few women can afford cleaning and cooking services, women are paid less dollar for dollar than their male colleagues, and are also expected to conform to gender stereotypes when it comes to maternity leave (a woman will be expected to take ``disability`` leave after giving birth-paternity leave is not even acknowledged by mainsteam American business culture. Asad also conveniently omits the kinds of work that immigrant women perform both inside and outside of the home-in both spheres they are paid low-to no wages for low skill labor.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#60 by Saminasha on June 11, 2003 11:56am PT

While women have always been working from ancient times it is usually poorer women. It is only in recent times that it has become common for richer(by that I mean middle class or one who need not necessarialy work for survival)women to work as a matter of choice.

However I feel that we cant exclusively view work of women in just those terms we need to view it in the broader prospective of the role of Family in social life.
The need to recognise the role of family as the cruical hub of our social life is very imperative. The contribution of the family structure (both unitary and larger) to a range of human requirements needs to be acknowledged.
and beyond that the role of women (as well as men) in creating the family structure and maintaing it should be stuided carefully. I dont know how it is for pakistani women but increasingling the middle class urban educated women are increasingly under pressure to work even when there is no dire economic need. I have seen many younger families where women work as if there is no choice and without realising the implications of both wife and husband working on their relationship, children and long term family stability.
That apart there is quite a bit of relecutance on part of males to accept female bosses especially from those people who come from areas where fedual socitey is a bit stronger. However in some industries there is no systemic impediment towards givng women their due where women loose out some times is in the inablility to form buddy groups which men form to futher their growth.(on the other hand many men too suffer from this at times simply because they are from a differnt language group or area of the country...Im talking about India here) half the women I know in my profession earn more than their husbands in India entierly because of their capability and choice of profession.

ali: No sir, kindly go into detail about why your allowed to ``lightly`` beat a woman by warping anything which remotely resembles logic.

If this sh1t fools u idiots its because u are idiots.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

ZahraJ: I wish I had much time to respond to everything you mentioned below but unfortunately.. CANT!

I am not surprised that your ideas are in a complete contradiction with what my article states. Not that I am trying to justify my logic here but the way u have responded to this issue explains why women have to work on a lot of other things before getting into a career.

just a quick response to some of ur ideas...

``This is a very blanket statement and also a naive question thinking that a man is always/100% capable of having an upper hand on the woman. Secondly, this is not even 100% applicable to the sweet category of men I like and can tolerate; commonly know as ``secure beings.`` Probably you were in mid-evil (…) times while you stated this question.``

=> This might not be 100 percent applicable but the article is meant to reflect the greater majority in our society and the question here is not about the capability of a man to have an upper hand rather its about what REALLY goes on. Justified or not... thats another debate! As for the ``secure beings`` YOU prefer, that is good for you and AGAIN, this article was a reflection of the majority BASED in Pakistan and NOT what the privileged FEW settled abroad prefer!

``This is a very sensitive point. It also varies based on the economic strata you have in your mind. But in general, it`s my observation that responsible workingwomen do pitch in without any choon charan.``

=> There we go! An evident double standard. Why is this a ``sensitive point``??? Why do issues that need to be addressed clearly become SENSITIVE? I am sure working women contribute or pitch in but then why is it assumed that the man should provide the food and shelter for the kids and sponser their education? Why cant the mother do that being a parent? NOW dont rub in pointless examples of the counted few you know who do that because this isnt about people you know... This is about what is CLEARLY VISIBLE in the majority of Pakistani families irrespective of their social status. Even if a woman comes out to help her husband, it is still assumed or rather taken for GRANTED that the major FINANCIAL responsibilities of the house need to be taken care of by the man.

``This is