News0 min ago
It Is A Strange, Strange World
I don't know if this couple will be successful in their attempt to 'encourage' their son and d-i-l to start a family.
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by wolf63. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Naomi, that is somewhat stating the obvious.
In this instance, there are examples where arranged marriages fail, but that does not negate the entire cultural approach involved.
FGM on the other hand also belongs to a different culture to ours, but is morally indefensible.
I am sticking to the subject, how about you?
In this instance, there are examples where arranged marriages fail, but that does not negate the entire cultural approach involved.
FGM on the other hand also belongs to a different culture to ours, but is morally indefensible.
I am sticking to the subject, how about you?
//It is not for us to look down on others because they willingly make different life choices from us.//
But the people subject to the consequences of those life choices are not the ones making them, Andy, either willingly or otherwise. The younger generation are having decisions foisted upon them by their elders which are decisions that they should make themselves. Nobody - of any culture, race or religion - should choose another person's life partner for them and nobody should be subject to having that choice made for them. This is about exercising control over other adults' lives by coercion. The coercion comes either from physical threats or threats of "spiritual injury", convincing the victims that to go against their parents' wishes is contrary to their culture and so is unacceptable.
I cannot see how anybody would commend the practice of making lifetime decisions on behalf of one's children, especially when non-compliance is threatened with all sorts of consequences. If the culture "card" had not been played there would be no possible justification whatsoever for it. But the cultural aspect does not even come close to justifying it.
But the people subject to the consequences of those life choices are not the ones making them, Andy, either willingly or otherwise. The younger generation are having decisions foisted upon them by their elders which are decisions that they should make themselves. Nobody - of any culture, race or religion - should choose another person's life partner for them and nobody should be subject to having that choice made for them. This is about exercising control over other adults' lives by coercion. The coercion comes either from physical threats or threats of "spiritual injury", convincing the victims that to go against their parents' wishes is contrary to their culture and so is unacceptable.
I cannot see how anybody would commend the practice of making lifetime decisions on behalf of one's children, especially when non-compliance is threatened with all sorts of consequences. If the culture "card" had not been played there would be no possible justification whatsoever for it. But the cultural aspect does not even come close to justifying it.
NJ, my point is that, although to us, the notion of such important choices should be left to the individual, to other cultures, the idea of choosing a spouse without parental supervision and final word would seem as alien to them, as their choice does to us.
We must respect the rights of other cultures to live as they choose, which we would expect them to do where our, different choices are concerned.
We must respect the rights of other cultures to live as they choose, which we would expect them to do where our, different choices are concerned.
//...to other cultures, the idea of choosing a spouse without parental supervision and final word would seem as alien to them, as their choice does to us.//
There are some things that are plainly and simply wrong. Cutting off the hand of a thief is plainly and simply wrong. Stoning to death an adulteress is plainly and simply wrong. The Hindu practice of "Sati" where widows were encouraged to throw themselves on their husband's funeral pyre (often "helped" on their way) is plainly and simply wrong. Sending small boys up chimneys to clean them is plainly and simply wrong. And yet all these things were (and some still are) perfectly acceptable in some cultures. None of them can be defended in any circumstances.
So it is with this. Those arranging their adult children's marriages go much further than advising and supervising. They choose the partner and their children have no say in the matter. The only way they can have a say is to defy their parents and the result is then conflict and anguish (for both sides). There is often money involved, which makes it even worse.
//We must respect the rights of other cultures to live as they choose, which we would expect them to do where our, different choices are concerned.//
No we don't. Not when their practices are so plainly and simply wrong. A practice that is so wrong cannot be defended on the basis of culture. There are some things that go beyond that. Choosing a life partner is a fundamental right to be exercised only by the participants concerned and nobody else, parents or not. It is every bit as much of a right as retaining both your hands having been caught stealing a loaf of bread. What we must do is not be afraid to denounce practices that are so wrong, simply on the basis of cultural habit.
I'm probably out now because I will not agree that arranged marriages as an acceptable practice under any circumstances.
There are some things that are plainly and simply wrong. Cutting off the hand of a thief is plainly and simply wrong. Stoning to death an adulteress is plainly and simply wrong. The Hindu practice of "Sati" where widows were encouraged to throw themselves on their husband's funeral pyre (often "helped" on their way) is plainly and simply wrong. Sending small boys up chimneys to clean them is plainly and simply wrong. And yet all these things were (and some still are) perfectly acceptable in some cultures. None of them can be defended in any circumstances.
So it is with this. Those arranging their adult children's marriages go much further than advising and supervising. They choose the partner and their children have no say in the matter. The only way they can have a say is to defy their parents and the result is then conflict and anguish (for both sides). There is often money involved, which makes it even worse.
//We must respect the rights of other cultures to live as they choose, which we would expect them to do where our, different choices are concerned.//
No we don't. Not when their practices are so plainly and simply wrong. A practice that is so wrong cannot be defended on the basis of culture. There are some things that go beyond that. Choosing a life partner is a fundamental right to be exercised only by the participants concerned and nobody else, parents or not. It is every bit as much of a right as retaining both your hands having been caught stealing a loaf of bread. What we must do is not be afraid to denounce practices that are so wrong, simply on the basis of cultural habit.
I'm probably out now because I will not agree that arranged marriages as an acceptable practice under any circumstances.
I agree with NJ, culture is not an excuse... they might vary, but emotions are the same the world over, and forcing someone to live with, or have a child they don't want, is inhuman. In any case, their son may have well done "his part" in producing a grandchildren and had sex with his wife. Maybe she doesn't want one- and they chose the wrong bride.... which would be their fault. Maybe the son should sue them?
NJ - // There are some things that are plainly and simply wrong. Cutting off the hand of a thief is plainly and simply wrong. Stoning to death an adulteress is plainly and simply wrong. The Hindu practice of "Sati" where widows were encouraged to throw themselves on their husband's funeral pyre (often "helped" on their way) is plainly and simply wrong. Sending small boys up chimneys to clean them is plainly and simply wrong. And yet all these things were (and some still are) perfectly acceptable in some cultures. None of them can be defended in any circumstances. //
This is an extremely rare occurrence for you - instead of your standard cogent and excellently reasoned argument, you are countering my point with extreme instances of physical harm and danger which bear no relation to the concept under discussion.
I put your bizarre reasoning down to your serious dislike of arranged marriage - something on which we agree, but not in its entirety - and its clouding your judgement on this occasion.
Normal service tomorrow, I am quite sure.
This is an extremely rare occurrence for you - instead of your standard cogent and excellently reasoned argument, you are countering my point with extreme instances of physical harm and danger which bear no relation to the concept under discussion.
I put your bizarre reasoning down to your serious dislike of arranged marriage - something on which we agree, but not in its entirety - and its clouding your judgement on this occasion.
Normal service tomorrow, I am quite sure.
pixie - // I agree with NJ, culture is not an excuse... they might vary, but emotions are the same the world over, and forcing someone to live with, or have a child they don't want, is inhuman. //
I disagree.
Emotions are entirely bound up in cultural acceptances.
What may appear 'inhuman' to us. does not appear so to an entire culture who see things competely differently.
And I repeat my point - simply because we see arranged marriage as 'wrong' does not make it so.
For that to happen, we would have to assume that our moral view is the only correct one, and enforce it on the rest of the world's population.
History has shown us in the past, and in the case or Ukraine now, that simply holding a view does make it right, or give anyone the power to enforce it on other people.
I disagree.
Emotions are entirely bound up in cultural acceptances.
What may appear 'inhuman' to us. does not appear so to an entire culture who see things competely differently.
And I repeat my point - simply because we see arranged marriage as 'wrong' does not make it so.
For that to happen, we would have to assume that our moral view is the only correct one, and enforce it on the rest of the world's population.
History has shown us in the past, and in the case or Ukraine now, that simply holding a view does make it right, or give anyone the power to enforce it on other people.
//or give anyone the power to enforce it on other people.//
But they are. Abuse is abuse, in any language or culture. It was cultural and legal in the UK, for husbands to rape their wives- until 1991.
We are no better- and US is just as uncivilised. But abuse, with lack of consent, of who you have to have sex with, bear children- is always a human right, and nothing to do with culture.
It's the behaviours I'm looking down on, not different cultures.
But they are. Abuse is abuse, in any language or culture. It was cultural and legal in the UK, for husbands to rape their wives- until 1991.
We are no better- and US is just as uncivilised. But abuse, with lack of consent, of who you have to have sex with, bear children- is always a human right, and nothing to do with culture.
It's the behaviours I'm looking down on, not different cultures.
One more go and then I really am out.
Let's move away from my comparison with "extreme instances of physical harm and danger" (but which were in reality simple manifestations of culture). Let's look at something less harsh and closer to home. Not that long ago, here in the UK, homosexual acts between consenting adults were illegal. They were punished by imprisonment or the "offer" of chemical castration. We've moved on. Although an acceptable part of our culture during those times we've now become more enlightened and it is now understood that such views and practices were plainly and simply wrong.
I would argue that it is nothing actually to do with culture; it's simply realising that some things are wrong. Denying young people the right to choose their own life partners is similarly wrong. Parents who insist in taking that decision away from their children are denying them a basic right in just the same way as those who wanted to enforce their own model of sexual activity on everybody else were. Some things are simply wrong and eventually most mature cultures accept such a fact.
Let's move away from my comparison with "extreme instances of physical harm and danger" (but which were in reality simple manifestations of culture). Let's look at something less harsh and closer to home. Not that long ago, here in the UK, homosexual acts between consenting adults were illegal. They were punished by imprisonment or the "offer" of chemical castration. We've moved on. Although an acceptable part of our culture during those times we've now become more enlightened and it is now understood that such views and practices were plainly and simply wrong.
I would argue that it is nothing actually to do with culture; it's simply realising that some things are wrong. Denying young people the right to choose their own life partners is similarly wrong. Parents who insist in taking that decision away from their children are denying them a basic right in just the same way as those who wanted to enforce their own model of sexual activity on everybody else were. Some things are simply wrong and eventually most mature cultures accept such a fact.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
ChatterBank6 mins ago
Crosswords8 mins ago
