unflinching idealism ... since 1997 archivessitemapabouthelpfeedback
where paths intersect
  • Home
  • InFocus
  • Themes
  • Columns
  • Articles
  • Fiction
  • iLogs
  • Gallery
  • Unplugged
  • Writers
  • Interactors
  • Tags
Sign in | Join Chowk
web chowk
  • smalhica
  • Intro & Favorites
  • iLogs
  • Gallery
  • Interacts
  • latest
  • most viewed
  • random
A Stretch of Analogy: National Deterrence to Individual Deterrence
Posted by smalhica Jun 4, 2006 02:16 am
Asad Shah - I for one totally agree with every SINGLE word you have written here. This world and our society in particular is indeed a replica of Jungle and consequently, the laws applicable for survival are no different.
Deranged Arranged Marriages
Posted by smalhica Jun 4, 2006 01:59 am
ahaha - That was one of the best pieces I read this week. I couldnt have put it better Asad! Very refreshing.
Messages
Posted by smalhica Mar 2, 2006 11:11 am
Why all these Bombs? Didnt Bush just say ``I am comin to see my friend!`` !?!?
Meet Me at The Gym!
Posted by smalhica Jun 23, 2003 10:31 am
True!!!
For Better or Worse
Posted by smalhica Jun 13, 2003 12:24 am
ZahraJ: I totally do appreciate the positive criticism and I am not justifying anything here but then I do have a point of view which probably isnt making sense to you. I think I could relate to it since I find your ideas pretty vague at some places. (Just some of them that is) I agree totally with the education part and the correct implementation of law n order.

With reference to the interviews of CAs and Lawyers... I have talked about lower MIDDLE class... Most of the people I interviewd were professionals who came from a very humble background and were self made individuals thus totally understanding the challenges they were facing DESPITE a decent earning. They are struggling their way upto the middle class but most of them are still far from it.

Lastly Bibi.. A piece of advice for u... get some lessons for a constructive Communication. This isnt a battlefield or a platform for ego satisfaction! I wud like to add that I definitely encourage positive criticism but looks like this article has fallen more on your wisdom than on my ego. Plus, unlike the attention craving feminists, I was not looking for a bunch of men supporting me in this. If that was the case I would have joined one of those Chauvinist parties.

I do admit that some of your arguments are totally convincing and make sense. Also your suggestions r pretty considerable but be a little more rational, accomodating and most importantly.. Chillax!

Cheers


Cheers...
For Better or Worse
Posted by smalhica Jun 11, 2003 11:22 pm
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 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? ``

=> Pampering was an alternate term for getting all the basic needs of life in a GOLDEN PLATE! It is no secret that man from sub-continent is pretty laid back and he desperately needs to change his thinking and approach but the woman from this region should be no exception to this either. She needs to GIVE UP her dependency and learn to support herself and partially the kids, THAT IS IF SHE NEEDS HER INDEPENDENCE. You CANT have best of both. You cant have your independence in what you want and be dependent on what you need. If you want Rights EQUAL to that of a man, then dont expect a special treatment ANYWHERE, be it given a priority in a long line outside a bank or financial support at home.


I might sound but i am NOT a chauvinist, not that I care about what I am tagged as. This article precisely is not to suit the idealogies of ``Privileged Begum Sahibas`` spread accross the globe but its a reflection of the Irony faced by women from lower middle class who dont have much exposure and chances to aquire a career, good enough to settle in any other part of the world.

Cheers!
For Better or Worse
Posted by smalhica Jun 10, 2003 12:34 am
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!

  • smalhica
  • Interacts: 7
  • iLogs: 0
  • Gallery: 0
  • Page views: 1139
  • Last visitor: guest
  • Member since: Feb 20 2003
  • Last signin: Sep 4 2008
  • Send a message
  • Add as friend
  • Add to ignore list
  • Add to block list

Featured iLogs

  • smalhica
  • smalhica
  • smalhica

Top 5 Articles This Week

  • Popular
  • Save Me From Charismatic Leaders!
  • Free to Breed
  • Why Zardari Should Be President!
  • There is no ‘honour’ in killing
  • US Commando Strike in Waziristan
  • Featured
  • There are a Lot of Monkeys
  • White Charade
  • Words of a Woman
  • FOX News and the Smelly Shoes
  • Dilemmas of Creative Children
  • 10 Years Ago
  • Life (and Death) etc.
  • A Day with an Orthodox Rabbi
  • Educational Apartheid
  • Full Literacy is no Magic Wand
  • Science and Religion

Write on Chowk Interact Guidelines Privacy policy Terms Contact

Copyright © 1997 - 2008 chowk.com. All Rights Reserved
Reproduction of material on any www.chowk.com pages without prior written permissions is strictly prohibited