The “D” Word

Re: # 212 SR

But hope is what keeps us going!!!
Thankyou for your kind words.
I have learned a lot from life and i do believe if you trust and believe in yourself there is always a reward. Truthfully, I am thankful to my parents and my family who have supported my decision and loved me . I could not have done it without thier support. My biggest strength is my cute 7yr old daughter and I wonder how can such a little package give me so much strength.
The rest of the Pakistani people here in my community are beyond my understanding. What is wrong with them?

Obviously, when a man is almost 24x7 on Chowk then his wife will have to take some serious measures.

``I think you are missing the point. The context in which virginity seems to become an issue is when the boy/girl in question is single (never married). Not when they are divorced / widowed.

A person (boy or girl) who has slept around to his/her hearts content before marriage, WILL have an impact on what kind of wife/husband, mother/father he/she will turn out to be. I am not saying that he/she will turn out to be a bad parent necessarily. But it will reflect in the upbringing he/she will impart to children.`` Malik99

Malik Sahib, Please read your own words, and reflect!

shoresahib # 230 - Did you even read my post # 227?

Your post reflects your personal opinions about virginity / nonvirginity, which is perfectly fine for you to share. However, I never even alluded to the things that you have ``responded`` to. I did not even comment on the character or the ``value as a human being`` of a sexually promiscuous person. How can you ``respond`` to something I never said?

Now let me get even. So shoresahib, now that you have rationalized why you like the idea of having more than one wife, how would you make sure that you protect their rights equally?

You see my point??

ShoreSahib Sahib #228:“How is the analogy valid between gay marriage and marriage between siblings.....Marriage between siblings is incestous and abhorrent to the sensibilites of both South Asian and western societies be they secular or religious. American Psychiatric Association classfies homosexuality as normal human behavior whereas incest is considered sexual deviation.``

There was a time when marriage between blacks and whites was also considered abhorrent to the sensibilities of Western societies. I am sure the American Psychiatratic Association considered it deviant also, back then. Even now, gay marriage is considered abhorrent to the sensibilities of, “societies be they secular or religious.” Every single public vote supporting gay marriage, in any US state, has always lost. It is only the judiciary in places like Massachussetts, which has brought it in.

Gay marriage and marriage between brothers and sister (or brothers and brothers, for that matter) are considered equally taboo in societies like Pakistan. Marriages between first cousins are considered taboo in the USA. In fact, 24 out of the 50 Unites States actually prohibit cousin marriages (though it is legal in Europe and Canada). Interestingly 20% of the marriages in the rest of the world are between cousins. Making it the most common form of marriage (in comparison to marriage with neighbors, co-workers etc.). Thus, every society has its own taboos and its own Psychiatric Associations norms.

If you use this statistic, a high portion of Pakistani interactors on this site, who live in the USA, are probably married to first cousins. And may be living in a US State where such a marriage in prohibited. And, thus by US social and legal standards are, already, in an incestual relationship.

I hope you get the point.

The point being that the whole purpose of Secularism was get the State away from deciding strictly, on the basis of social sensibilities (most of which were based on religion; specifically whom one can marry or not). The social (and legal) sensibility of what constitutes a marriage in the USA is, however, still based on a Christian concept of male and female, i.e. Church has not separted from the State.

Secularism demands that the State move away from this religious definition of marriage (regardless of what the religious groups or any Psychiatric society state). This is separation of Church and State, i.e. even though gay marriage is considered socially unacceptable (according to all surveys in the USA), the State still has to accept it, as long as it is between consenting adults, because the State has to treat all adults as the same, regardless of religious beliefs. The same legal premise is being used by polygamists in Utah to present their case for allowing polygamous marriage in the USA. And the same logic can and will be used by anyone trying to get into any kind of marital union…….And under separation of Church and State it has to be accepted, as long as it is with consent of all parties involved.

For many people, gay marriage is as abhorrent as incestual marriage. For many people first-cousin marriage is incestual (like marriage between brothers and sisters)………For many people, the State declaring Ahmedis to be Muslims is abhorrent. If one is going to push Secularism, one cannot become religious half-way through it, based on one’s one definition of what is abhorrent. Getting rid of that condition was the main purpose of introducing Secularism………

Re: # 227
I dont think I am missing the point at all. Rather, I think the point has totally alluded you.
One can be not a virgin even if they have had sex once or a hundred times. Is it any of my business to know whether a particular person has had sex before once or many times. Maybe if a girl isnt a virgin, is because she was sexually molested as a child, or was raped, or chose to have sex upon her own volition. With men, there is no way of knowing whether they are virgins or not.
Tell me this, How does having consentual sex before marriage depreciate a person`s character. How does it effect their personality and future roles as spouses, parents or lovers negatively.
How do you if someone has slept around to his/her`s hearts content? Did they tell you personally, or were you a witness to their every sexual encounter, or did you just believe rumors.
Even if a person slept around to his/her`s heart`s content, How does that make them any less of a person. Are they any less valuable as humanbeings simply because how they choose to conduct their personal sexual lives.
What kind of upbringing does a promiscous person impart to his/her future children.
If I would have children, I would not tell them not to have sex, or that sex is not fun. Because that would be a lie. I would rather get them sex education classes, and trust my children to make informed decisions whether to have sex or not.
Who am I to judge someone on their sexual life.
Virginity should never become an issue no matter what the context. It is usually an issue for women as there is no way to prove male virginity or lack thereof. I think if women choose abstinence before marriage, it is their choice. If they choose to have sex before marriage it is their choice and right, and does not decrease their value whatsoever.
Though I do believe that subjecting women to this ridiculous and medieval expectation of virginity before marriage dehumanizes them.

#226 Romair
You`re too much of a poet - ``Breathing down .. throats?`` Gives a completely different picture from the one you probably mean to convey.

Re: # 219
How is the analogy valid between gay marriage and marriage between siblings.
Marriage between siblings is incestous and abhorrent to the sensibilites of both South Asian and western societies be they secular or religious. American Psychiatric Association classfies homosexuality as normal human behavior whereas incest is considered sexual deviation.

shore sahib # 225 - you write ``What does being a virgin have to do what kind of wife or mother a woman will be?``

I think you are missing the point. The context in which virginity seems to become an issue is when the boy/girl in question is single (never married). Not when they are divorced / widowed.

A person (boy or girl) who has slept around to his/her hearts content before marriage, WILL have an impact on what kind of wife/husband, mother/father he/she will turn out to be. I am not saying that he/she will turn out to be a bad parent necessarily. But it will reflect in the upbringing he/she will impart to children.

SR #221: ``Dear Romair sahib, I have not taken you up on many of your earlier contradictory points out of courtesy and consideration because you already had your hands full with two open fronts (urstruly and hamidm). However, this one I can not let pass.``

Please feel free to engage me, anytime you wish. Even with hamidm and Urstruly breathing down my throats (with me trying to breath down theirs). I think I am pretty good at multi-tasking, and I tend to enjoy a good debate.......

``You have huge contradiction here.....It appears from the above quoted statement that in the Romair household what is good for the goose is evidently not good enough for the gander.....You won`t hit and she won`t cheat. That seems to be the unwritten covenant. However, the reverse is obviously not true.``

I am not sure how you have concluded that the reverse is, ``obviously`` not true. When the reverse was never commented upon. The reverse is actually true. Why wouldn`t it be? The comment of her hitting me, was more in jest than anything else. It was a flying orange, or grapefruit or tangerine (I don`t recall the exact citrus), that I never saw coming and struck me in the head..........

The reason hitting and cheating were presented was becasue, traditionally, in our societies, these are considered the biggest taboos or fears from the female and male side, respectivley. Men keep their radar out for their wife cheating on them, before they are worried about being hit. Women keep a radar out for being hit, before their radar for cheating comes out.

So, as much as I find Saminashah`s idea of the Iranian mut`aa marriage interesting. I have no interest in indulging in it. And just like everyone else, I have had plenty of opportunities.......

Re:209 Saminasha regarding Mutaa
Sigh
Very very sad. Poor girl, I feel so bad for her. Muslim Men`s insistence on marrying virgins. I dont get it. What is the compulsion for getting married to virgins? What does being a virgin have to do what kind of wife or mother a woman will be?
Or is it that the men are very insecure sexually, that they feel that a non virgin woman will compare them to her previous experiences.
Or do they want to live through the experience of deflowering a virgin
Or do they want to live up to society`s expectation
But I still dont get it. None of these reasons are valid.
Muslims are always harping about following the Prophet`s Sunnah..
Last time I checked wasnt his first wife a divorcee and 15 years older than him.
Follow that Sunnah, O Momineen.
Lord Have Mercy.

romair - one of the basic premise of a good debate is to not put words in other`s mouth. i never said Bukhari was a prophet. that would be contradicting quran, wouldn`t it? but yes, i trust (with some what skeptical eye) the hadiths and the teachings of Prophet (saw) as put forward by bukhari and others. that is not any ``addition`` to quran. that is merely an ``explanation`` of quran.

i believe that Prophet (saw) wouldn`t do anything which contradicted the teachings of Quran. therefore, i ask for references when someone quotes a hadith that seems to me a bit out of place. and if you remember, that was what started this whole debate - I asked urstruly to provide reference to support his post where he stated that no one will go to jannah until he/she has been approved by husband / mother.

therefore, i would request that you do not close your mind. as long as you keep ``my glass is full`` mentality, you would close yourself to new ideas. the fact that you seem to be preaching the virtues of arranged marriage proves my point. even prophet (saw)`s first marriage was a love marriage. or would you not believe it since its not mentioned in quran?

SR, hehe, this is like cross-examination.

#222 amit, I had a indian punjabi colleague who was severely physically abused by his wife. At least he told me he was at those times when he begged me to let him sleep in my apartment.

Re:SR#221

Whoa, looks like Pakistani women are a lot more fiesty than I had ever imagined. First SR and now Romair are admitting that they were hit by their spouses. We Indians had this notion that Pakistani women were all wilting lillies who were dominated by their ghairatmand macho husbands :-). I have never heard any Indian guy complaining about being hit by their women.

Re: # 220 [``...marriage is based on trust. ... my wife has faith... that I will never hit her. ..she has hit me, ... I haven`t. ...I have full faith that she will never cheat on me... I could have hit her ... she could have cheated on me. But it never happened. ... I don`t remember us setting any pacts...``]

Dear Romair sahib, I have not taken you up on many of your earlier contradictory points out of courtesy and consideration because you already had your hands full with two open fronts (urstruly and hamidm). However, this one I can not let pass.

You have huge contradiction here. Your statement demonstrably betrays double standards. It appears from the above quoted statement that in the Romair household what is good for the goose is evidently not good enough for the gander.

You won`t hit and she won`t cheat. That seems to be the unwritten covenant. However, the reverse is obviously not true. She has hit you, and that was okay. So does it follow that the cheating provision only applies to her but not to you?

...SR

I don`t think it is a good idea for either the husband or the wife to lay down any kind of, ``restrictions`` when they get married. The only one I believe in is the mehram (enforced Islamic pre-nup for Muslim women), which a woman should be allowed to set to any limit she wants, and should be paid out by the guy, if they end up being divorced.

Other than that, I cannot imagine telling my wife, before she got married, that she must do, ``this and this,`` otherwise I would not marry her. That would be ridiculously selfish (and naive). ``You must make the chappati perfectly round, every time, otherwise I will leave you.``

Friendship, companionship and love does not grow from setting pre-marriage restrictions on the other person (man or woman). It is nothing more than a sign of insecurity and a sign that the person is not ready for marriage, because he/she is scared. If a person is nice, they will treat their spouses nicely. If the person is not nice, no amount of pre-marital sign-ups will force that person into good behavior. It a person does not yell at the other person for 36 years, they are just a nice person (not because they made a pact before marriage).

A good marriage is based on trust. For example, my wife has faith in me that I will never hit her. It doesn`t matter what the hell happens, we may yell and scream and go spend the night in different rooms, but I will never hit her. Infact, she has hit me, though I haven`t. Similarly, I have full faith that she will never cheat on me, regardless of what the situation. There have been plenty of situations where I could have hit her and where she could have cheated on me. But it never happened. And I don`t remember us setting any pacts before marriage.

P.S. Anyone going into a marriage assuming they will leave the other person (man or woman) if he/she yells at them, is, in 99.99999% of the cases, setting themselves up for a big disappointment........It may be possible, but the odds are heavily stacked against it.......More than likely they will end up divorced if they enforce this pact.