Debate Contest: What Would You Do? (DM-REMIX) (Page 7)

Originally posted by karandel_2008



Instead of talking about more, I am talking about just 2 people who love each other plus the kid. Read more below.

Other mom will also be a huge support for the kid and she can role play as a father and the biological mom can be the mother.

Playing the role of a father is very different from having a father itself. At the end of the day, regardless of what role the two mothers are playing, they are just two mothers.

Telling everyone about 2 moms/missing dad, in USA, is not a big problem as compared to telling about the missing dad in India. 1) People in USA are not nosy like that in India 2) In addition, the questions that matter most are the ones that "eat" you. They are the recurring questions for which one doesn't have satisfying answers. Both the moms can easily satisfy the curiosity about missing dad/2 moms because a second person will be present physically. She can say that I am like your father and explain the situation. The kid will have some one acting as father. He/she may miss his/her father, but not in a same way as in the case of unwed mom.

On the other hand, the missing father in the case of kid with unwed mom will be like a huge "why?" and he will only have an emptiness to stare at, apart from his mother and some explanations by the unwed mother.

I think both situations are equally taboo in their respective societies. In the 90s, same sex couples were definitely not acceptable. In fact, even today same sex couples aren't completely acceptable in society. And even if same sex couples are given their rightful due, same sex families are not. American society in the 90s for this family will face significant struggle similar to the small town unwed mother in India.

Who said people are not "nosy" in USA? Granted there is no caste system that will banish you from society, but you do become an outcast. Other parents will not want their kids to be friends with a child who has lesbian parents. Life for that child will still not be anywhere near the same as the kids around him.

I think the lack of a father will be a void in both children's life. Having another loved one present does not automatically fill that void. A second person being physically present does not mean that life becomes perfect for that child. Maybe there is an equally loving person present in the Indian child's life, does that make his struggle any less? I do not think so. This argument is similar to saying that there is no difference between a father and a stepfather. (Irrelevant to the discussion, I realize, but I am just using it as an analogy.)

A friend cannot replace a significant other with whom one can share every secret and feeling. Moreover, just the friend factor is same in both cases because lesbian couples will also have friends. But don't forget that it will be difficult for an ostracized person, in the both cases, to make friends in the society.

Family may not be ready to accept the unwed mother and even if they do then unwed mother will have to listen to all the taunts from her family members on her back. Because family members wont take quietly the social burden and frustration that comes free with the unwed mom.

I think the debate is more focused on the child and not as concerned with the mother(s) struggle. Perhaps the mother has not reached fulfillment, but that is not particularly concerned with the child's life.

And considering the unwed mother to be completely alone - without friends or family for support - is an assumption on your part. The debate does not specify that she is completely alone and abandoned.

Small town also means the problems of law and order in India. In Indian society, people blame woman more than the man for adultery. The above 2 factors are conducive for some men (if they are perverted) to make sexual advances.

Since there was no relationship or marriage in the first place, I'm not sure why you are bringing adultery into the scene here. As far as perverted men go, they exist in both societies. If sexual advances made by perverted men is of concern then are you implying that any unmarried woman is in danger? And if that is the case, aren't the two lesbian mothers even more prone to this kind of sexual harassment? How would a strange man trying to make sexual advances on a woman know her sexual orientation?

But, its one of the several inconveniences that unwed mom will have to face. More so if her family decides to abandon her

The scenario given in the debate starts from the point when one is born.

Noted.

Thats an assumption, but what if she will be alone? In that case its better to have 2 people than one.

Should all single women then turn lesbian to ensure that they have another partner? Quantity does not automatically account for quality, Karan. If she is alone, she will deal with it. There are many single parents even in India. Having "two parents" in the US is not an easy task as they do not fit the description of the normal definition of parents as a mom and dad. That second parent will actually make things MORE difficult for the child. The Indian child will only be called upon (by society) to explain the absence of a father. However, the American child will not only have to figure out why he doesn't have a father, but also why his mother is involved with another mother! There are mature adults who do not comprehend same-sex couples, how will a child understand it then? What will his mothers tell him when he asks why their family isn't a normal one?

Originally posted by karandel_2008

While comparing USA environment and Indian environment, some people have written some points as if they despise the sexual freedom (relatively) of society in USA as compared to that in India.

Dear friends let me tell you that this despising of sexual freedom by the Indian society "is" actually the problem of the unwed mother in the first place. If it was not for this despising or taboo and if society would have accepted it then half of the problems of the unwed mothers would have been solved.

So please tell me what is wrong with sexual freedom if one doesn't harm any third party-- in fact tell me that why do you despise it?

Originally posted by *Woh Ajnabee*



At the bolded part -that is treading too much on a debate on homosexuality vs. heterosexuality. And I think that becomes out of scope for this particular debate. If you had something else in mind with that question, feel free to clarify.

Originally posted by *Woh Ajnabee*


If I had to choose between the two lifestyles, I would pick being born to an unwed mother in small town India. Despite the taboo associated with premarital sex and unwed mothers, I think I would be able to live a better life in India as opposed to the US. Although the US has greater opportunities and may be able to provide a better lifestyle, there are kids born in India everyday to middle class families, who lead decent lives.

From bolded text, I take it from here that you agree that US has better opportunities and a better lifestyle. About text highlighted in Red, doesn't it lack conviction when we read the bold part?

Also, what is your definition of leading decent lives in India according to you?


Society may not be accepting of my mother's marital status, but there are many kids in the nation that grow up without a paternal figure in their lives day in and day out. I would be one of them, and I'd have my mother to support me, raise me, and comfort me.
Its sure, that the kid to unwed mother will live his/her life day in and day out, but here we are talking about which is better. What makes you think that just growing means living a better life for those many kids?

 
Because at the end of the day, I think the bigger stigma should be given to my father, who left my mother without marrying her.
No one points a finger towards blank space. They point fingers towards who is in front of them and that unfortunately is the mother and the kid. Moreover, this is the Taboo about which we are talking in the topic. However, unlike in the case of lesbian-mom-kid, this will also effect the unwed-mom-kid because he/she may think that if he was not born in the first place then this taboo wouldn't have existed.


I do not deny that the challenges I will face due to the difficulties of being a fatherless child will be fierce, however, I do think I'll have a much easier life as compared to a child who grows up with a lesbian couple. In society, I will only have to explain only my father's absence as opposed to the American child who will not only have to explain the absence of a father, but also a presence of a second mother.

Discussion about this is going on in other post.

Despite America's more accepting nature, same sex couples were, and in many places still are, looked down upon. The child who is raised in this family would go out and see his friends' parents as mom and dad, and come home to mom and mom. How do you expect a child to not only accept that, but also understand that? Is the absence of a father not enough that now the child is held responsible for dealing with society's view of what is considered moral and what is not?

Granted American society has evolved, but even today, you do not go to school and hear a child tell you about his lesbian or gay parents.

Same as above - Discussion about this is going on in other post.

Society may have accepted same sex couples, but to no degree have they accepted families with same-sex parents.

Soceities have accepted same sex couples, but not same-sex parents? Please elaborate it. Anyway according to you at least they have accepted same sex couples in US. However have they accepted unwed moms in India?


Therefore, I think that a child born to an unwed mother in India will be able to overcome the stigma society has set upon him far easier than the child in America will.

Originally posted by karandel_2008



My question was not addressed to you. It was addressed to people who despise "sexual freedom" in USA. In particular, in this thread, I have seen people calling lesbianism as an illness, and so on.

I take it that you don't despise "sexual freedom" in general. Isnt it?

Rest, my question is still open for them who despise it.
 

Originally posted by karandel_2008



From bolded text, I take it from here that you agree that US has better opportunities and a better lifestyle. About text highlighted in Red, doesn't it lack conviction when we read the bold part?

Also, what is your definition of leading decent lives in India according to you?

Don't tell me you're debating my choice of words here, Karan! I apologize if my words lacked conviction when you read them, but I can assure you that I believe in the side I picked. Having said that, I am not naive enough to say that India provides better economical and educational opportunities. But just because America has a stronger infrastructure than India does, does not in any way entail that all Indians should thereby move to the US. Now does it?

A decent life in India, for me, entails all basic necessities of life, a sense of comfort and belonging, mental along with opportunities for advancement and growth. Although I feel that the US will probably cover the basic necessities of life at greater ease for the American child, I feel in no way will it be able to give the child the same mental peace that the Indian child will have (see other post about hate crimes).


Its sure, that the kid to unwed mother will live his/her life day in and day out, but here we are talking about which is better. What makes you think that just growing means living a better life for those many kids?

See above.
 
No one points a finger towards blank space. They point fingers towards who is in front of them and that unfortunately is the mother and the kid. Moreover, this is the Taboo about which we are talking in the topic. However, unlike in the case of lesbian-mom-kid, this will also effect the unwed-mom-kid because he/she may think that if he was not born in the first place then this taboo wouldn't have existed.

I agree, good point. However, I think that there are many children not with just unwed mothers, but also divorced parents that blame themselves for things that happen between their parents. I think, in this way, the child is somewhat lucky that the father left even before the child's birth. In this way, I think that void will actually help the child. There will not be an emotional attachment in this case. As far as the child's guilt for bring this stigma upon his mother goes, I think that is something he will have to learn to cope with. I don't want to bring emotional sentiments into the picture here, but I am sure that if the mother decided to keep the child she would provide him with enough love to fill that void of a father and help him realize that his mother was willing to put up with all of society if it meant bringing him into this world and keeping him with her.

 Societies have accepted same sex couples, but not same-sex parents? Please elaborate it. Anyway according to you at least they have accepted same sex couples in US. However have they accepted unwed moms in India?

Many people believe in freedom of choice in the US, so they have accepted that there are homosexual individuals present in society - but that is just limited to homosexual couples. The idea of a homosexual family, that not only includes a same sex couple, but also a child that is raised by the couple is not only frowned upon, it is something that conservative America STILL does not recognize.

Also, I said that same sex couples were now being accepted in certain states. Now as in 2010, the debate starts out in the 90's where the whole idea of homosexuality was a taboo.