Debate Mansion

   

BEING A FEMALE - ANOTHER SIDE (Page 2)

Post Reply New Post

Page 2 of 4

Page 1
Page   of 4
Page 3 Page 4

krystal_watz

IF-Sizzlerz

krystal_watz

Joined: 10 August 2009

Posts: 10119

Posted: 24 June 2013 at 2:47am | IP Logged
You're right about the physical attachment of women towards their children. However, that doesn't mean that a Father has no attachment at all towards the child. He might not have produced the baby from his body, but he knows it is his own flesh and blood. The general assumption about mothers invariably caring for their children more than fathers isn't always right either. And as far as staying home and taking care of a child goes, you can do it even without having nurtured it within your womb. (Re: Your question about what a man is supposed to do all day if he stays at home)

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "BEING A FEMALE - ANOTHER SIDE (Page 2)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

samvi.

IF-Dazzler

Joined: 29 March 2012

Posts: 3166

Posted: 24 June 2013 at 3:03am | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

_Angie_

IF-Rockerz

_Angie_

Joined: 21 February 2008

Posts: 9888

Posted: 24 June 2013 at 3:38am | IP Logged
Originally posted by maha2us


1. In one family, it happened both the husband and wife had been unemployed for around the first fifteen yrs of the marriage. Both of them lived in the pension of the husband's father which was meagre. The wife could consistently nag the husband during a later period that he never went for job. The society also blamed him. But then the wife was not blamed for not going to job. Neither could the husband nag her as a lazy person. Does the society believe the husband has to financially take care of the wife? The society also ridicules the man when the husband lives in the income of his wife. But not the same way if the wife lives in her husband's income. Isn't this way the society behaves favorable to females?
 
Being unemployed does not necessarily mean that the man was not earning his livelihood. A person could be self employed in his own bussiness. However from what is written here I assume that the guy was a good for nothing chap who got married without a thought towards how he was to support his wife and kids.
 
Its an irony  that the old father with a meagre pension put up with the expenses of his son and his family for 15 long years ! If the other thread on should children be legally obliged to look after their parents-  is any indication most children wouldnt bat an eye before abandoning their old , sick or poor parents.
 
When you say that the society did not blame the woman for not getting a job it indicates that that society wasnt much in favour of the woman earning in the first place. It is therefore possible that she was never allowed to look for a job. It is not uncommon for men to forbid their wives from working outside their home. At times it constitutes a pre condition to marrying that woman. Under the circumstances it is unreasonable to expect the society to blame the woman for not getting a job.
 
Coming to the issue of the husband not  nagging the wife for being lazy- Mr Maha 2us -FYI a  woman being unemployed in no way translates to her being lazy as the amount of household work and family care that a woman in a household with only source of income being the FIL's meagre pension for 15 long years would be tremendous! The question of nagging the wife for being lazy simply  does not arise unless the husband happened to be doing all that household work himself which I doubt very much.
 
To your questions-
Does the society believe the husband has to financially take care of the wife?
Where social norms are being followed and society does not approve of the woman working outside home it becomes the husband's sole responsibility to shoulder the financial burden.
So either bear it or get approval for the wife to work ;)
 
 The society also ridicules the man when the husband lives in the income of his wife. But not the same way if the wife lives in her husband's income. Isn't this way the society behaves favorable to females?
 
If the husband is taking care of the home and children and the wife is earning  there is no  reason to ridicule him. However, there will be  people who will ridicule and that cant be helped. Women too put up with a lot of undeserved ridicule , to name one instance,  inability to bear a male child.
The society cannot be considered to be behaving favourable to females on the grounds put forth for the simple reason that the society had predefined her role without letting her an opportunity to exercise her freedom of  choice . That according to me is most unfavourable.

The following 5 member(s) liked the above post:

peridot.KwitKattscharminggeniereturn_to_hadeskrystal_watz

reeha...k

IF-Rockerz

reeha...k

Joined: 05 September 2006

Posts: 7550

Posted: 24 June 2013 at 3:54pm | IP Logged
1. In one family, it happened both the husband and wife had been unemployed for around the first fifteen yrs of the marriage. Both of them lived in the pension of the husband's father which was meagre. The wife could consistently nag the husband during a later period that he never went for job. The society also blamed him. But then the wife was not blamed for not going to job. Neither could the husband nag her as a lazy person. Does the society believe the husband has to financially take care of the wife? The society also ridicules the man when the husband lives in the income of his wife. But not the same way if the wife lives in her husband's income. Isn't this way the society behaves favorable to females?
This might be a cultural difference or perhaps even a regional difference but I will give my answers based on my geographic location and perspective. 
i. What would I call both people living off of their parents/inlaws pension? Lazy. And this is something I would say that is conditioned via the Parents. There are multiple questions which need to be addressed in your example:
- When they were married, was it understood that the wife would not work ("homemaker") and that the husband does not work? Usually in anytype of marriage- arranged, love- these items are discussed or at least known at some sort of level. 
ii. I'm wondering which type of Parent condones or allows their child to leech off of them from their "meagre" pension and not ask them or expect them to work- even in a joint family. I'd understand if there was affluence, but in this case there isn't. 
iii. I don't know about your society, but in mine when men are Homemakers they aren't mocked- it's unconventional yes, but no one question's another's place or masculinity.
iv. I don't think society "favours" females- it's simply a gender socialization aspect which has been in place for centuries: Men have welded the power and authority in the home, and it has been expected for women to take care of the home and children. That hasn't been a choice, you know. Women didn't sit back and say, "Hey, let's be unpaid slaves at home, and not have an education while we can be controlled, financially and emotionally dependent on a man" that's not how it panned out, and thankfully this is slowly being phased out. 

To be honest I think your example is...well...a bit off kilter and a poor attempt to look at a serious issue through "rose" coloured glasses. 

2. Whenever there is a case in which the husband and wife don't want to live with each other, the question magistrate asks to he husband is, 'Do you want to take care of your wife?' and the question he asks the wife is, 'Do you want to live with him?' Why the judge asks different questions to both the partners? Doesn't it seem the judge only sees the responsibility of the male and not that of the female?

Again, I don't know where this is, but here...not so much. And if this question IS asked, again it's because of gender socialization. Your society has obviously made women the "subserviate" gender which needs to be "taken care" of. The Judge - if this is the case- is seeing what your culture and society has deemed acceptable. A bunch of women didn't sit around deciding this- and mind you, you're glossing this over exponentially: What about son preference, female fetocide? Educational standards, occupational standards, gender stigmatization? 

3. If a woman complains about her husband and her in-laws to the elderly people living in the same street or in the same colony, those persons all scold the husband and tell that he and his parents are responsible for her agony and they are not taking care of her well and they are harassing her. They give no importance to the husband or his parents' point of view. This is the experience of many males and their old parents. Why could not those people try to understand the point of view of both the partners and try to find how both of them could be made more responsible?
? Really? I find this a bit too one sided. What about women who complain and no one listens to their screams? What about the women who are abused and burnt alive? Or have acid thrown on their faces. I think it's insulting that you're painting this petty picture of "poor us" when this case may be 1 in a million. I feel as if many Indians have this "Don't ask, don't tell, and don't talk" mentality. That even when they hear a victim screaming they don't call the police or the police don't give a damn because the victim can't cooperate (due to fear) and that it's a "private/homely" matter. In all fairness I think your example can and does happen but it is so minuscule of a level that to place this over the plight of millions of women is short sighted. Really short sighted. This isn't the issue at hand- the day it becomes half the size of the first, we'll have some sound bases of concern. Till then, it's just like false rape accusations- it happens but it is no where near the amount of actual rape victims and their perpetrators. 

4. When a court orders mediation, those officers in charge of the mediation treat the wife with utmost courtesy but they all speak harshly to the husband as though he is guilty. Is the husband only guilty or is he the only person responsible to make a marriage work?. Why?
Seriously? I don't even know if you're being sincere or trolling? Is this REALLY that big of a plight? what about rape victims who are not taken seriously? Or the ones told that they should have called their rapist "Bhia" to stop? Or that they "were asking for it".


I pose another question for you:
How many more rapes, beatings, deaths is it going to take for Indian males to realize that this nation has very big gender socialization problem? That there is a sense of entitlement just because one is born with a Y chromosome (not all, but hey, it's there).
When will there be proactive measures to acknowledge and make a change at the foundational level instead of evading the topic, making excuses and playing victim card when they clearly are not. 






Edited by reeha...k - 24 June 2013 at 3:53pm

The following 3 member(s) liked the above post:

KwitKattsDonnaHarveykrystal_watz

maha2us

IF-Dazzler

maha2us

Joined: 29 October 2007

Posts: 2798

Posted: 24 June 2013 at 8:31pm | IP Logged
Thanks for all those who participated in this thread. I definitely have to reply to you all as you have all given good comments and I will do it within a few days because today I am stuck up with a few problems.

_Angie_

IF-Rockerz

_Angie_

Joined: 21 February 2008

Posts: 9888

Posted: 25 June 2013 at 12:54am | IP Logged

Originally posted by maha2us

 

In continuation to my replies to the rest of your questions  ...

 

2. Whenever there is a case in which the husband and wife don't want to live with each other, the question magistrate asks to he husband is, 'Do you want to take care of your wife?' and the question he asks the wife is, 'Do you want to live with him?' Why the judge asks different questions to both the partners? Doesn't it seem the judge only sees the responsibility of the male and not that of the female?

 

When you say  that a husband and wife dont want to live with each other I dont understand  how the two questions arise!    When you say "care" I suppose you mean financial compensation .  If the wife has been devoting all her time to the household and family and not earning any salary for all the work and time she invested in it , It is only fair that she gets some financial compensation if the two separate and she has to set up her own new life. The wife has a right to get compensated for her contribution.  

 

Again it is not clear what responsibility of the wife you expect  the judge to address in this case. In most cases she would have fulfilled her "responsibilities" of  the services like cooking, washing, social obligations, care of family members and many more. Try calculating the amount the husband would have to pay for all those services to hired help that too minus the reliability factor guaranteed by the wife!  The maintenance or alimony may pale in comparison.  We are not even discussing any compensation for the lost opportunities she may have faced due to restriction imposed on following a career of her choice.   

 

 

3. If a woman complains about her husband and her in-laws to the elderly people living in the same street or in the same colony, those persons all scold the husband and tell that he and his parents are responsible for her agony and they are not taking care of her well and they are harassing her. They give no importance to the husband or his parents' point of view. This is the experience of many males and their old parents. Why could not those people try to understand the point of view of both the partners and try to find how both of them could be made more responsible?

 

Do you seriously think one can control what other people should or should not think !? How important is that ?  People are likely to form impressions based on their own experience or on what they see around them. The rapport one has developed with the neighbours and communication skill  could also influence the impressions formed. When there is no satisfactory resolution of the conflicts  at home they spill over to the neighbours, friends, relatives and finally to the courts.

 

4. When a court orders mediation, those officers in charge of the mediation treat the wife with utmost courtesy but they all speak harshly to the husband as though he is guilty. Is the husband only guilty or is he the only person responsible to make a marriage work?. Why?

 

Seriously!? The entire set of questions present a feeling of victimhood at best.

 

I like to know the views of all of you based on these realities.

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

peridot.return_to_hades

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20461

Posted: 25 June 2013 at 8:38am | IP Logged
Originally posted by maha2us

1. In one family, it happened both the husband and wife had been unemployed for around the first fifteen yrs of the marriage. Both of them lived in the pension of the husband's father which was meagre. The wife could consistently nag the husband during a later period that he never went for job. The society also blamed him. But then the wife was not blamed for not going to job. Neither could the husband nag her as a lazy person. Does the society believe the husband has to financially take care of the wife? The society also ridicules the man when the husband lives in the income of his wife. But not the same way if the wife lives in her husband's income. Isn't this way the society behaves favorable to females?


Traditional gender roles dictate that men are the providers while women are the caregivers. This is absolutely untrue. Unfortunately, due to years of gender stereotyping we have it ingrained in our minds that a man should be the wage earner, the man should always have a job, the man should be earning more and things like that.  So much so that men who earn less than their wives are made to feel insecure and stay at home dads become the butt of all jokes. In a relationship both partners have equal financial, social, and emotional responsibility to their families. How they share those responsibilities is up to the couple.

For some people the traditional working man and housewife works, for many the exact opposite works. Contrary to popular belief, just how women can be competitive, aggressive and career oriented men can also be very attached to kids, would love to spend time more with them, and actually enjoy cooking for and cleaning after their kids. That is why many countries and progressive companies include paternity leave for fathers. Many people are becoming accommodating towards work-at-home soccer dads or stay at home dads and changing their negative stereotypes.

Traditional gender roles are not partial to females. They are unfair to both men and women. Expecting men to be a breadwinner can sometimes hamper a woman's career aspirations too. To me true gender equality is not accomplished unless the wishes of both men and women are respected. It is unfair to expect the woman to sacrifice her career for family, and it is unfair to expect men to sacrifice family to be the breadwinner.



Originally posted by maha2us

2. Whenever there is a case in which the husband and wife don't want to live with each other, the question magistrate asks to he husband is, 'Do you want to take care of your wife?' and the question he asks the wife is, 'Do you want to live with him?' Why the judge asks different questions to both the partners? Doesn't it seem the judge only sees the responsibility of the male and not that of the female?


Traditionally, since the man was the provider and breadwinner, he had to take responsibility for wife and kids. In many divorces the woman didn't have a job or income to rely on. That is why courts began having men pay alimony and child support. There was also a false importance to maternity, so women tended to get full custody. This isn't always fair to women, because women who didn't want to or incapable to take responsibility of kids were socially expected to despite the man being more willing.

 

Courts are changing now. In most of the world, the higher earning partner is responsible for alimony and child support payments. They are more pragmatic in custody battles, not leaning to men or women but making them share custody depending on willingness and ability to care for kids.

 

Indian courts still can be very traditional and it will take time for the justice in India to mature.



Originally posted by maha2us

3. If a woman complains about her husband and her in-laws to the elderly people living in the same street or in the same colony, those persons all scold the husband and tell that he and his parents are responsible for her agony and they are not taking care of her well and they are harassing her. They give no importance to the husband or his parents' point of view. This is the experience of many males and their old parents. Why could not those people try to understand the point of view of both the partners and try to find how both of them could be made more responsible?

Originally posted by maha2us

4. When a court orders mediation, those officers in charge of the mediation treat the wife with utmost courtesy but they all speak harshly to the husband as though he is guilty. Is the husband only guilty or is he the only person responsible to make a marriage work?. Why?


Domestic issues, marital abuse and violence investigation of these all these are another very complicated subject. The gender stereotypes and statistics associated with it, is a whole new can of worms. Maybe I'll address my views later.



The following 3 member(s) liked the above post:

charminggenieANNMT.krystal_watz

maha2us

IF-Dazzler

maha2us

Joined: 29 October 2007

Posts: 2798

Posted: 10 July 2013 at 2:35am | IP Logged
Thanks again for all your posts.

@DonnaL You need not apologize. There is generally some amount of misandry in every human being especially the males.

I will reply for your comments one by one. What you said is all informative.

1. You say, ';Everything you said is true except @bold.
If this were in fact favourable, one would not seek independence. When a woman becomes financially dependent on her husband, she loses the power to make decisions for herself.'

That is all fine. I will accept a woman would like it if she gets independence. And we will accept if she becomes financially independent, she will feel better. Also good men like to get married to an independent woman who could decisions for herself instead of getting married to a door mat. But why are the feminists in India not preparing women that way? If the laws are such that women are getting employments and also there are conditions which favor her, it will be fine. But what we see is the laws are such that men are stripped off their posessions and are forced to part with the women when divorce happens. A PhD woman craves for a man's property and fights for that instead of trying to be independent. Does she deserve respect?

2. You say, 'The assets acquired after marriage are split 50-50 unless there is a pre-nup. In fact, a battered woman who won a million dollar lottery had to share with her husband in prison because she was still married (though separated) when she won & there was not pre-nup. See, I have ancedotes too.'

I guess you live in USA or Canada. I will be happy if that were the case in India. The laws are not biased in favor of women here as in India. I also know something about this law and division of assets as I had lived in USA and in many stated division is a complicated process. In India, the Govt and feminists are hell bent on making law in which men have to part with 50% of all the properties they have when they divorce based on irretreivable breakdown. Still it is not proper answer for the exact question I had asked. I have to accept again what you say when you say the judge could ask those questions ro husband and wife because of his biased value judgement.

3. What you say is right. There are people living with obsolete values. But that can be painful for those persons living in that street.

4. You say, 'Again, not where I live. But, in general bureaucrats are not your friend. They are not here to make peace but to pick your brains and get some bribes along the way. Not one visit to an Indian anything government related (building/office/courthouse) is a pleasant one, regardless of your gender. ' 

I do wish I could live in USA or Canada where there are no gender biased laws. But what you say is right. Those who are harsh on the males try to be that way because they want to extort money probably from the males and they could do so only against the males because of the biased Indian system. And in India, a male working in public is looked down if he is hard on females even if he tries to be just.

But as another interesting fact, in the courts it is generally believed the females won't lie and also we see if a female cries in the court, cross examination is not done to her. What will happen if a male cries?

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
BEING A FEMALE...

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 14 15

meghasingh 112 4672 25 June 2013 at 12:42am
By krystal_watz
Why only killing a female embryo is wrong?

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 12

The_Other_Woman 92 3464 01 February 2013 at 10:30am
By BirdieNumNum
Millions of female foetuses aborted in India topnotchfm 9 652 09 June 2011 at 3:03am
By Summer3
Bachelor parties - Male and Female

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 15 16

Ice-Thinker 120 5659 01 May 2010 at 6:31pm
By Ice-Thinker
Overrated Actors&Female roles Bollywood

2 3 4 5

Vinzy 39 3407 01 November 2009 at 11:23pm
By -Sneha

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.