if your girlfriend/wife contacts her ex-boyfriends, and inverse

[Godobeyer]

My wife once made a comment to me about 'not trusting other women' around me. I kinda scoffed, and she kinda told me I didn't know what women are like (which is entirely true...) but then I just asked her if she trusted me. 'Of course!' Then it doesn't matter.

Putting myself in her shoes, if I saw a bloke hitting on her, and not taking no for an answer, I'd probably want to knock his teeth in, but I have zero fear of her sleeping around, whether I'm there or not. And zero ability to prevent her if I did have such a fear.

It's somewhat akin to flying in a plane. I always assume it'll get to the other end, but I might as well enjoy the ride regardless, 'cos there is basically bugger all I can do about it.

what a statement " Putting myself in her shoes"

Most of posters here , claim never interfere in the life of their partners .

so if your wife decide to drunk and she get ireally drunk status , she decide to drive her car , would you prevent her or let her ?

if someone badly flirt her afront of your eyes , she get angy , why it's important to you to interfere for her ?

If your wife tell you that she start a privet life with some people , and she don't want you to interfere at all in her new life , what will be you reaction ?

if your wife get nerves from you in converstation and tell you " that not your God damn business" , what you will tell her ?

 

[SomeRandom]

Its obviously that hinduism called wife to be obedient her husband and his elders .

No it doesn't. A marriage in Hinduism is the symbol of joining two halves of one whole. One being completely obedient to the other kind of goes against that ideal. A man has a duty as a husband, and his spouse (man or woman) has their duty as a wife/husband. That duty is to ensure no harm comes of their respective spouse. If a man tries to make his wife subservient then you could argue that he is not doing his duty correctly as he is demeaning his wife.

if we suppose that you married a indian man

Umm, Indian Custom dictates that the man is obligated to do exact same thing when he meets the wife's parents. Is he being subservient to the wife because when seeing his mother in law he touches her feet as a sign of respect too?

the curious question , would you touch the feet of your husband or his parents everytime as a kind of respect ?

Touching the feet as a sign of respect is not restricted to married couples doing this to each other's parents. It's basically like bowing in Japan. Everyone older than you is someone who you should (by choice) touch the feet of. Regardless of your gender!
Now a man when getting married, typically shows his humility and respect by kneeling down and touching the feet of both parents (and even other immediate familial elders) of his wife. This is not only seen as a sign of respect, it's often how you get the blessings of the parents/grandparents for your match. The action also sometimes carries connotations of asking forgiveness for past (and even potential future) transgressions. And can also be seen as a sign of the husband putting his wife's parents at the exact same level as his own. Meaning he is essentially calling the wife's parents his own parents by doing this. The wife does the same to the husband's family.
The act itself is to symbolize someone (man or woman) surrendering to the age and wisdom of their elder. It's also how one receives blessings from the elder, like they will like pray for you or whatever.
As for frequency, it really depends on the family actually. Some people do this to their grandparents whenever they visit. Some do so to their aunt whenever they see them. Some even do so to a spiritual leader they see passing them by on the street!
It should be noted that some parents reject such an obligation being put upon their child and/or their younger in law. And refuse the act, typically by stopping the person trying to touch their feet and instead embracing them in a warm hug.

But this is not a thing in Hinduism specifically. It's an Indian cultural custom and it's far more nuanced than you just claimed. I'm sure many Christian, Sikh and even Muslim Indians would most likely do the same.

 

[Kirran]

What I would like to say is the following, if I can be forgiven for being a little off-topic.

There is a set of reasons for which I feel justified ignoring any patriarchal customs which are commonly found practiced by Hindus (not the foot-touching or the spouse-is-God stuff, because as the marvellous @SomeRandom has explained, that's not necessarily patriarchal). Whether or not they are claimed as Hindu practices by said Hindus.

1) Many cultural practices become embedded in the mindset of the people that they think they are religious tenets, and necessary for righteousness. As I alluded to earlier, this has also occurred in Islam in the case of FGM (female genital mutilation a.k.a. female circumcision). Just because people think they are religious tenets doesn't mean I need follow them, when actually they are not universal to the religion. Even if some present them to be so.

2) Maybe sometimes they are scripturally backed up. That is, there will be some clear support for a patriarchal and misogynistic tradition in some scripture. That's fine, Hinduism has a huge amount of scriptures and I have no intention of paying attention to following them all. Different traditions within Hinduism follow different scriptures.

3) Even if it is in the Vedas, or a scripture which I am personally dedicated to, I don't know if it is original or if it has been written in by some Brahmin priest since. So I need to use my common sense about it, rather than follow blindly.

4) Regardless of whether it's genuine or not, that doesn't matter. Within scriptures like the Vedas (in particular the Upanishads - the latter part of the Vedas) there is two kinds of knowledge. There is vidya (right knowledge) and avidya ('wrong' knowledge). Vidya relates to the nature of Reality and of God. This is what is relevant, and it is for these great insights and signposts that I go to a scripture in the first place. Avidya relates to the material world. I have no reason to follow its instructions as regards the material world, it is unimportant, and is all illusory in any case. Anything related to gender relations would come under avidya. So it isn't the infallible revealed truth which is the core of the scripture.

5) Within my general tradition of Hinduism, there is an encouragement to think freely, not to simply blindly accept. One should analyse whether something makes sense, reflect upon it, and if it doesn't make sense, throw it out. Why follow something just for the sake of it? It has to be helpful to people's wellbeing.

As an example, within the Br. Upanishad, a part of the Vedas, a primary set of Hindu scriptures, there is a section which instructs a man to go and have sex with a woman who has just finished her period and changed her clothes. This is something it says a man has to do. If the woman says no, the man must try to bribe her to have sex with him. If she still refuses, he must rape her. This is evidently not something positive, and is a violation of the principle of non-violence (as all misogyny is) and is also not vidya (knowledge of reality/God), as well as being something likely put in by some Brahmin (i.e. not original). So I feel utterly justified in ignoring such an instruction.

 

[Godobeyer]

No it doesn't. A marriage in Hinduism is the symbol of joining two halves of one whole. One being completely obedient to the other kind of goes against that ideal. A man has a duty as a husband, and his spouse (man or woman) has their duty as a wife/husband. That duty is to ensure no harm comes of their respective spouse. If a man tries to make his wife subservient then you could argue that he is not doing his duty correctly as he is demeaning his wife.

thanks for this infos

Umm, Indian Custom dictates that the man is obligated to do exact same thing when he meets the wife's parents. Is he being subservient to the wife because when seeing his mother in law he touches her feet as a sign of respect too?

good to know
as usual Is he did the same with his wife , touch his wife's feet ?

Touching the feet as a sign of respect is not restricted to married couples doing this to each other's parents. It's basically like bowing in Japan. Everyone older than you is someone who you should (by choice) touch the feet of. Regardless of your gender!
Now a man when getting married, typically shows his humility and respect by kneeling down and touching the feet of both parents (and even other immediate familial elders) of his wife. This is not only seen as a sign of respect, it's often how you get the blessings of the parents/grandparents for your match. The action also sometimes carries connotations of asking forgiveness for past (and even potential future) transgressions. And can also be seen as a sign of the husband putting his wife's parents at the exact same level as his own. Meaning he is essentially calling the wife's parents his own parents by doing this. The wife does the same to the husband's family.
The act itself is to symbolize someone (man or woman) surrendering to the age and wisdom of their elder. It's also how one receives blessings from the elder, like they will like pray for you or whatever.
As for frequency, it really depends on the family actually. Some people do this to their grandparents whenever they visit. Some do so to their aunt whenever they see them. Some even do so to a spiritual leader they see passing them by on the street!
It should be noted that some parents reject such an obligation being put upon their child and/or their younger in law. And refuse the act, typically by stopping the person trying to touch their feet and instead embracing them in a warm hug.

I know much about indian culture , i just want to know ,what is the rule of hinduism in obedient wife .

But this is not a thing in Hinduism specifically. It's an Indian cultural custom and it's far more nuanced than you just claimed. I'm sure many Christian, Sikh and even Muslim Indians would most likely do the same.

so everyone Indian wife touch her husband feet , regardless the religion !!

I am not certian Indian Muslims may do the same , they may influenced too .

good to know , thanks for these value information

if not bother you i want a clear answser to my post #138

 

[Kirran]

I know much about indian culture , i just want to know ,what is the rule of hinduism in obedient wife.

Depends on the Hindu

 

[Godobeyer]

Depends on the Hindu

do you affraid to answser to my post #138

you kiding ?
I want to "depends" on Hinduism , not individual .

 

[Kirran]

do you affraid to under to my post #138

you kiding ?
I want to "depends" on Hinduism , not individual .

I thought I had answered it.

You may want that. But Hinduism isn't what you want it to be.

This is likely an issue of thinking all religions work like Islam works, that there is one ultimate and correct form of a religion, even if people might disagree on what it is. Hinduism doesn't have that trait, it is embracing of its diversity. And many different Hindu traditions will teach different things, and so many Hindus will believe different things. So there are many Hindus that might well agree with you that the wife should be obedient to the husband, and I expect some would even say that this was the teaching of Hinduism. But there are many others who would disagree with you.

So to say 'Hinduism says this' on pretty much any issue, let alone one as specific as this, is invalid.

I'm breaking down your post 138 here.

I am little confused , lets back to

is not this site is a religous hinduism ?

I take it you are asking me if that website is about Hinduism. Yes, it is. But that doesn't mean it is an authority on defining Hinduism.

http://www.hinduism.co.za/women.htm

and this scripture and many others , as culture teaching or religious teaching ?
"For a wife during her life-time, the husband is both god and lord alike"

the indians believe/accept in that scripture , as culture or as religious ?

The text quoted by that web page is the Mahabharata. As I have said, the mahabharata is not a scripture.

It is a very important part of the heritage of South Asian culture, and also contains a great deal that is of use in terms of stories used to explain certain concepts and in terms of morality tales. But it isn't by any means infallible, and we should continue to use our reasoning in our structuring of society and in our morality, even if our conclusions contradict the mahabharata.

The Indians have various beliefs.

EDITED TYPO errors:
final question
did you reject or accept that scripture ?

As I say, not a scripture.

 

[Godobeyer]

I thought I had answered it.

You may want that. But Hinduism isn't what you want it to be.

This is likely an issue of thinking all religions work like Islam works, that there is one ultimate and correct form of a religion, even if people might disagree on what it is. Hinduism doesn't have that trait, it is embracing of its diversity. And many different Hindu traditions will teach different things, and so many Hindus will believe different things. So there are many Hindus that might well agree with you that the wife should be obedient to the husband, and I expect some would even say that this was the teaching of Hinduism. But there are many others who would disagree with you.

So to say 'Hinduism says this' on pretty much any issue, let alone one as specific as this, is invalid.

I'm breaking down your post 138 here.



I take it you are asking me if that website is about Hinduism. Yes, it is. But that doesn't mean it is an authority on defining Hinduism.



The text quoted by that web page is the Mahabharata. As I have said, the mahabharata is not a scripture.

It is a very important part of the heritage of South Asian culture, and also contains a great deal that is of use in terms of stories used to explain certain concepts and in terms of morality tales. But it isn't by any means infallible, and we should continue to use our reasoning in our structuring of society and in our morality, even if our conclusions contradict the mahabharata.

The Indians have various beliefs.



As I say, not a scripture.

Thanks for this value and clear answser .

For you opinion how much indians (especially hindu , like you ) will agree with obedient wife , 90 % and 10% disagree, OR 50/50 ?

I don't want to be Hinduism, it's seems it's to be as i though.

 

[SomeRandom]

thanks for this infos

No worries.

good to know
as usual Is he did the same with his wife , touch his wife's feet ?

I don't know of any couple to touch each other's feet. The act is only done when someone is older than you and a marriage symbolizes two souls joining as one, not one higher soul joining with a lower one. But if they respect each other I suppose it's not against the rules for a man to touch the feet of his wife and her touching his.

I know much about indian culture , i just want to know ,what is the rule of hinduism in obedient wife .

There isn't any "rule." Each person's Dharma is different and therefore the expectations of each person in a relationship will depend entirely on the specific couple.
It should be noted that in Indian culture a woman is often expected to be quite intelligent and highly educated.
I have seen depictions on Indian TV and movies (Bollywood specifically) where the ideal couple is where the man treats his wife with utmost respect and almost akin to a Queen. So some men will treat his wife like his equal, sometimes elevating her above himself. Others will be abusive dickholes. It just depends on the family and the couple.
The woman's "role" and the man's "role" in a Hindu marriage will depend on what their respective family believes are traditional values. But both have to protect each other and keep faith in each other and uphold the Dharma of themselves and the community at large. Some families might expect the wife to work, some the man, some either or. It varies greatly.
Where I live, I know not of many Hindu men in the Hindu community who favor or even want an "obedient" wife or husband. But I suppose there's Hindu men out there who would want to be the boss in their marriage.

so everyone Indian wife touch her husband feet , regardless the religion !!

How did you get that a wife is expected to touch the feet of her husband? I don't know of any Indian couple to do this. An Indian person is often expected to touch the feet of their elders or respected religious leader, it's not a marriage thing, it's a social thing.

I am not certian Indian Muslims may do the same , they may influenced too .

I am. It's a cultural thing, not a religious thing.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

what a statement " Putting myself in her shoes"

It means 'looking at things from her point of view'. It's a very common expression.

Most of posters here , claim never interfere in the life of their partners .

Depends what you mean by 'interfere'. What most people have claimed is not to control their partners.

so if your wife decide to drunk and she get ireally drunk status , she decide to drive her car , would you prevent her or let her ?

Prevent her, due to the safety risk to herself and others. That's obviously ignoring the fact she wouldn't drive drunk and the situation wouldn't arise though.

if someone badly flirt her afront of your eyes , she get angy , why it's important to you to interfere for her ?

Why would I interfere? If they want to make a fool of themselves then good luck to them. She's no shy flower, and quite capable of telling them to sod off. If they got in the least sense physically threatening then I'd become involved...I'm bigger and stronger than my wife and would obviously seek to prevent physical harm befalling her. This has nothing whatsoever to do with 'obedience'.

If your wife tell you that she start a privet life with some people , and she don't want you to interfere at all in her new life , what will be you reaction ?

Confusion. The thing with having an equal relationship and one where you dont expect obedience is that it IN NO WAY means your wife will do things to spite you. Quite the opposite. There is a saying which applies here...

If you love somebody, let them go, for if they return, they were always yours. And if they don't, they never were.
- Kahlil Gibran

if your wife get nerves from you in converstation and tell you " that not your God damn business" , what you will tell her ?

That I dont appreciate being spoken to like that and I'll wait until she's calm before I speak to her.
About the same as she'd say to me I guess.

 

[Kirran]

Thanks for this value and clear answser .

For you opinion how much indians (especially hindu , like you ) will agree with obedient wife , 90 % and 10% disagree, OR 50/50 ?

I don't want to be Hinduism, it's seems it's to be as i though.

That's OK. Sorry things got a little tense back there.

As for your question, that's difficult to say. If we look at Hindus globally, my very rough estimate would be that 70% would be misogynist to some real degree, and that about 15% of Hindu men would want an obedient wife in the manner you describe. These are very rough estimates, and based on my own impressions and the Hindus I have met here in the UK and who I've talked to on the Internet, as well as what I have read.

 

[Godobeyer]

It means 'looking at things from her point of view'. It's a very common expression.



Depends what you mean by 'interfere'. What most people have claimed is not to control their partners.



Prevent her, due to the safety risk to herself and others. That's obviously ignoring the fact she wouldn't drive drunk and the situation wouldn't arise though.



Why would I interfere? If they want to make a fool of themselves then good luck to them. She's no shy flower, and quite capable of telling them to sod off. If they got in the least sense physically threatening then I'd become involved...I'm bigger and stronger than my wife and would obviously seek to prevent physical harm befalling her. This has nothing whatsoever to do with 'obedience'.



Confusion. The thing with having an equal relationship and one where you dont expect obedience is that it IN NO WAY means your wife will do things to spite you. Quite the opposite. There is a saying which applies here...

If you love somebody, let them go, for if they return, they were always yours. And if they don't, they never were.
- Kahlil Gibran

That I dont appreciate being spoken to like that and I'll wait until she's calm before I speak to her.
About the same as she'd say to me I guess.

I like to chat with you and Kirran and SomeRandom
Why it's be shame that you order or demand your partner if it's will be in his/her benefits ?

why it's abnormal to someone (husband or wife) be boss in something,in marriage status ?

let's suppose that a wife working in company (or inverse), she always take orders and demands from her boss , so why it's illegale to take orders from her husband (partner) (or inverse) ?

lets suppose that you find her talking with a her EX? when you ask her ,"whats going on?" , she told you " that not your God damn business" , what would be your reaction ?

 

[dawny0826]

Hi all

I discuss this subject with RF member in other thread , she told me that she is on contact with her ex-boyfriends , and her husband knows that .

so do you agree that your girlfriend/boyfriend/husband/wife stay on contact with her/his EX ?

I mean she/he get in privet together or visit each other in privet....etc

What type of committed person does that anyway? Anyone in a committed relationship who would violate the trust of their significant other like that isn't deserving of their relationship anyway.

Healthy committed relationships are built upon trust.

I have to legally stay connected with my ex-husband as we have children together. He's my ex for good reason. My husband has never had reason to question my loyalty and commitment to him.

 

[Kirran]

Why it's be shame that you order or demand your partner if it's will be in his/her benefits ?

1) Because it puts you at a more powerful position (addressed in the next answer below).
2) How do you know you know what's right? We're all fallible. Why do you know better than your partner, who is also an adult human being?

Suggesting and encouraging to do things your think will help, sure.

why it's abnormal to someone (husband or wife) be boss in something,in marriage status ?

let's suppose that a wife working in company (or inverse), she always take orders and demands from her boss , so why it's illegale to take orders from her husband (partner) (or inverse) ?

Because you are explicitly put under the command of your boss. They are employed to supervise you. That is the structure of many companies.

It's not illegal to take orders from your partner. But I am against it because, unlike with one's boss at a place of work, a marriage is meant to be a union between two people of equal merit, and it is explicitly destroying that principle to put one in charge. A marriage is a far more personal and important institution than being in employment, and it is inhuman to sully what should be a supportive and loving relationship by throwing power into the mix.

A boss is put in their position because they are thought to be more competent, and to be skilled at directing the operations of their area of the company. Or they are the head of a business, and are themselves employing people to work for them. This is very different to a marriage, where both parties enter in to support one another, and neither can be said to be more skilled. Neither does one have any degree of ownership of the time or labour of the other (otherwise this basically means that a woman is employed as a man's wife, which is really not what a marriage should be about in my opinion).

lets suppose that you find her talking with a her EX? when you ask her ,"whats going on?" , she told you " that not your God damn business" , what would be your reaction ?

I'd think it was rude, and I would ask her why she felt so upset later on when I felt she had calmed down.

 

[Godobeyer]

What type of committed person does that anyway? Anyone in a committed relationship who would violate the trust of their significant other like that isn't deserving of their relationship anyway.

Healthy committed relationships are built upon trust.

I have to legally stay connected with my ex-husband as we have children together. He's my ex for good reason. My husband has never had reason to question my loyalty and commitment to him.

in your case , there is childern together , that other issue and good reason .

If there is no good reason (as childern), i mean there is no kids , should Wife or Husband stay on tight contact with his/her EX ?

 

[Godobeyer]

1) Because it puts you at a more powerful position (addressed in the next answer below).
2) How do you know you know what's right? We're all fallible. Why do you know better than your partner, who is also an adult human being?

Suggesting and encouraging to do things your think will help, sure.



Because you are explicitly put under the command of your boss. They are employed to supervise you. That is the structure of many companies.

It's not illegal to take orders from your partner. But I am against it because, unlike with one's boss at a place of work, a marriage is meant to be a union between two people of equal merit, and it is explicitly destroying that principle to put one in charge. A marriage is a far more personal and important institution than being in employment, and it is inhuman to sully what should be a supportive and loving relationship by throwing power into the mix.

A boss is put in their position because they are thought to be more competent, and to be skilled at directing the operations of their area of the company. Or they are the head of a business, and are themselves employing people to work for them. This is very different to a marriage, where both parties enter in to support one another, and neither can be said to be more skilled. Neither does one have any degree of ownership of the time or labour of the other (otherwise this basically means that a woman is employed as a man's wife, which is really not what a marriage should be about in my opinion).

I remeber a story of wife worked in company , she always used to make up and dresse up well when she going to work , then when she come back home , she come tired ,and dresse normal .

husband ask her to make up for him as she did for her boss and people, she reject his demand that day .

i forget the end of story .

I'd think it was rude, and I would ask her why she felt so upset later on when I felt she had calmed down.

If she calm down you find the same answser ?

IF discover that your wife contact and talk her EX , behind you ?

 

[Kirran]

I remeber a story of wife worked in company , she always used to make up and dresse up well when she going to work , then when she come back home , she come tired ,and dresse normal .

husband ask her to make up for him as she did for her boss and people, she reject his demand that day .

i forget the end of story .

Well, OK.

If she calm down you find the same answser ?

IF discover that your wife contact and talk her EX , behind you ?

I'd find it pretty strange.

But one's wife going off and having an affair with their ex, if that's what you're driving at, is an entirely separate issue to whether she has equal power in the relationship.

If she wanted to have an affair, I wouldn't care if she did or not. It's the wanting to that's the issue.

 

[Godobeyer]

Well, OK.



I'd find it pretty strange.

But one's wife going off and having an affair with their ex, if that's what you're driving at, is an entirely separate issue to whether she has equal power in the relationship.

If she wanted to have an affair, I wouldn't care if she did or not. It's the wanting to that's the issue.

I am not sure what you mean by "affair" , sex ?

Is she had the right to stay on contact her EX as friends , and she hiding that from you , she also hiding their affairs from you ?

 

[Kirran]

I am not sure what you mean by "affair" , sex ?

Is she had the right to stay on contact her EX as friends , and she hiding that from you , she also hiding their affairs from you ?

An affair is a relationship someone has outside their marriage behind the back of their partner.

What? If she can stay in contact with her ex, then it certainly does not automatically mean she is having an affair with them.

As I say, I don't care whether she wants to have an affair but isn't able to, or if she is able to have an affair. It's her wanting to have an affair that is the problem.

 

[Godobeyer]

An affair is a relationship someone has outside their marriage behind the back of their partner.

thanks for explain it to me .

What? If she can stay in contact with her ex, then it certainly does not automatically mean she is having an affair with them.

behind your back

in this days , that's happened except with angels or old onces

As I say, I don't care whether she wants to have an affair but isn't able to, or if she is able to have an affair. It's her wanting to have an affair that is the problem.

how about wanting/insisting to have a contact with her EX , is not that problem , for you ?