|
arranged marriage |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 34567> |
| Author | ||
Shasta'sAunt 
Senior Member 
Female Joined: 29 March 2008 Status: Offline Points: 1930 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 04 August 2008 at 5:14pm |
|
|
"Any woman (I mean any including my own mother who is dead gone) marries a man simply because he is financially wealthy is an immoral gold-digger."
Israfil, you have stated many times here that you would not marry a woman who did not have a good job and who was not willing to work. Doesn't that put you in the same category as women who look for a mate in a good financial situation?
|
||
|
�No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.�
Eleanor Roosevelt |
||
 |
||
|
Israfil
Senior Member
Joined: 08 September 2003 Status: Offline Points: 3984 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 August 2008 at 7:33pm |
|
|
Israfil, you have stated many times here that you would not marry a woman who did not have a good job and who was not willing to work. Doesn't that put you in the same category as women who look for a mate in a good financial situation?
No. the difference is I am a professional who works part-time in law enforcement, and part-time as a practicing Neuropsychologist. So my time is divided in these two fields. For a materialistic gold-digging woman, most likely she is not a professional, does not work and if she does its not in an academic or professional field. when I said I want a woman to work means that I would like a contributing partner who shares in the financial load. Because i live in California and the housing prices are high nowadays it would be important to have a partner who shares in the financial obligations. This is not the same as a woman who marries simply for money. There is a HUGE difference.
|
||
|
||
|
Shasta'sAunt
Senior Member
Female Joined: 29 March 2008 Status: Offline Points: 1930 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 August 2008 at 8:48pm |
|
|
[QUOTE=Israfil]
Israfil, you have stated many times here that you would not marry a woman who did not have a good job and who was not willing to work. Doesn't that put you in the same category as women who look for a mate in a good financial situation?
No. the difference is I am a professional who works part-time in law enforcement, and part-time as a practicing Neuropsychologist. So my time is divided in these two fields. For a materialistic gold-digging woman, most likely she is not a professional, does not work and if she does its not in an academic or professional field. when I said I want a woman to work means that I would like a contributing partner who shares in the financial load. Because i live in California and the housing prices are high nowadays it would be important to have a partner who shares in the financial obligations. This is not the same as a woman who marries simply for money. There is a HUGE difference.
You have previously stated that you would not even consider marrying a woman unless she has a good career and will work. In fact, I think you even stated that she had to be financially responsible for half of the income.
I don't really see a huge difference between you not even considering marriage to a woman who is not making enough money to meet your requirements and a woman who won't consider marrying a man who is not making enough money to meet her requirements. In fact, I would say it is exactly the same. The fact that you are working does not change the fact that you are basing your marriage choice on fianancial requirements.
The area I have highlighted in bold is of particular interest. It shows a certain bias, even prejudice on your part. Apparently if a woman is a professional or has a degree it is permissable for her to marry for money, such as the way you view yourself. However, if she is not a professional or degreed and she chooses to marry for money she is a gold digger. Is this what you meant? If the woman has a degree then she cannot possibly be a gold digger but if she doesn't then marrying someone financially more stable makes her a gold digger?
Also, you mention high prices as part of reason for marrying only a financially solvent woman, yet I gather it is somehow different if a woman, without a degree, looks at the same factors when choosing a husband?
Edited by Shasta'sAunt - 04 August 2008 at 8:52pm |
||
|
�No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.�
Eleanor Roosevelt |
||
|
||
|
Israfil
Senior Member
Joined: 08 September 2003 Status: Offline Points: 3984 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 August 2008 at 11:09pm |
|
|
"You have previously stated that you would not even consider marrying a woman unless she has a good career and will work."
Can you please find where I said she needs to have a "good" career?
"In fact, I think you even stated that she had to be financially responsible for half of the income."
I just mentioned that in my previous post. However I'll clarify that that rule of mine is nullified when she becomes pregnant. Obviously, I'll want her to rest and focus on child bearing rather financial expenses anyway. But yes I do want a woman to at least pull her own weight. It not only shows ecnomical independence, I at least know that she doesn't need me to support her. Rather, in marriage there is a mutual co-dependency of each other. This is the essential element of a partnership in marriage in my opinion.
"I don't really see a huge difference between you not even considering marriage to a woman who is not making enough money to meet your requirements and a woman who won't consider marrying a man who is not making enough money to meet her requirements. "
first off, don't manipulate my words if you have to say "I think you said" please accurately define what I said. Either copy and paste or cite previous words I've used in this thread. When you have to say "I think you said this and that" you lose credibility because there is a possibility that you may have either (1) forgotten what I said, or (2) you "think" I said that when (in reality) I didn't.
Like I said it is a huge difference. Let me clarify that there is no economical standard I live by except she is at least pulling her own weight prior to our engagement. Of course, as a professional it would be nice to meet another professional either in my field, similar or whatever. If she is a pre-school teacher or buses tables it doesn't matter. At least it shows some independence on her part. However in my view love transcends beyond the material as well as the physical. I can fall in love with a simple woman if the chemistry is there. However in these trying times it is important that two contributing partners work its a way of life here in California. You don't necessarily have to want to live in a rich neighborhood, but just struggling financially effects a lot of people. Am I basing some of my requirements on what a person ought to have? Yes. But only partly. She could be a single mom working from a 9-5 if she at least is showing effort then that is fine with me. Gold-digger look for someone to take care of them. This is not the case with me since i'm already established already thus me saying there is a HUGE difference.
"Apparently if a woman is a professional or has a degree it is permissable for her to marry for money, such as the way you view yourself."
Sigh* I was highlighting the fatc that most materialistic woman who want someone to take car eof them don't have careers nor are independent, if they do why else are they looking for someone to spend money on them? Just because someone is professional does not give them the right to gold-dig and yes there are professional women who do but we are talking about the likeliness of a person. For one, I do know myself and what I want so the latter portion of your comment is thus nullified and irrelevant in my book.
If the woman has a degree then she cannot possibly be a gold digger but if she doesn't then marrying someone financially more stable makes her a gold digger?
Read my comments again.....
Also, you mention high prices as part of reason for marrying only a financially solvent woman, yet I gather it is somehow different if a woman, without a degree, looks at the same factors when choosing a husband?
If you have voluptuous women hanging around entertainers and sports atheletes and personnel or women who marry 80-year old tycoons what do you think? This is a no brainer. Yes they sure do go after these individuals and sometimes trap them in a biological bind when they become pregnant and have their babies then all of a sudden the man is paying out of pocket in alimony and child support. S.A. no matter how you put it there is no excuse for these types of women professional or not.
|
||
|
||
|
Shasta'sAunt
Senior Member
Female Joined: 29 March 2008 Status: Offline Points: 1930 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 August 2008 at 11:50pm |
|
|
Israfil, I don't have to "think" you said you would not marry a woman who wasn't working and paying half the bills. You have stated this on numerous occasions. I am not trying to manipulate your words, I am just reminding you of what you have stated. I am sure you know that you have stated this on numerous occasions, on one occasion you even stated that Allah knows your reasons for not following Islam in this matter.
I still do not see a difference between you refusing to marry a woman who is financially independent, financially stable, and willing to work and any woman anywhere refusing to marry a man who is financially independent, financially stable, and willing to work.
Other than gender, what exactly is the difference?
"The criteria of a person marrying someone else fort their finances is not an altruistic trait its about selfishness."
These are your words, yet you yourself base your choice of mate on their finances. You will not marry a woman who does not work or take financial responsibility for her share of the bills. 50-50 as you stated in one post.
Edited by Shasta'sAunt - 05 August 2008 at 12:10am |
||
|
�No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.�
Eleanor Roosevelt |
||
|
||
|
Chrysalis
Senior Member
Joined: 25 November 2007 Status: Offline Points: 2033 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:05am |
|
Yes there are Gold-Diggers out there. . . but they are not a majority, nor are they restricted to a specific gender i.e. females. For every Anna Nicole out there, there is a K-Fed.
Also, just because one of the criteria is financial stability, does not make a woman an 'immoral gold-digger'. I think (yes, I'm gonna use 'I think', cz I do not remember which post it was, nor do I remember the exact words)
you're going to agree that 'morality' is a relative term. And just because you have had some bad experiences or feel strongly about an issue, does not mean something becomes immoral. Only if a woman is a Serial-Wife, and purposely seeks out men for thier money, then abandons them to start a new life is she immoral.
Also, ever since the Neanderthals (or as far back as we can think of) Women have been choosing mates on the basis of thier 'provider status'. This doesnt neccassarily translate as so-so bank-balance, but a certain provision ability. Which can be anything. . . Infact, if some women choose intelligent men over rich men, perhaps they interpret the 'provider' aspect differently. They think that an intelligent man will be capable of pulling through any circumstance and take care of/maintain/provide for his mate and family versus a rich man who may be useless once the finances go down the drain.
So if you Inshalah find a woman who wishes to marry you for your intelligence, rest assured - at the end of the day, the primitive reason is still your provider/maintainer ability. Its just a different 'provider' ability.
Although I'm sure you did encounter gold-diggers. . . but questions like that are essential when thinking/talking about Marriage! You expect a woman to marry you, just after an engaging, intellectually stimulating conversation - without knowing personal details about you such as your job, qualification, etc etc? How is that bieng materialistic? Nobody wants to risk marrying a loser (both men & women) . Unless ppl ask Q's like that how do they know whether thier prospective spouse is a lazy bum/ jobless etc. And before you berate me on using the term 'loser' . . . any man/woman who can afford to, or doesnt have a valid reason, yet still does not gain an education/qualification and is wasting time is a loser/lazy bum etc. Infact such questions are not only restricted to women but Men also wish to know all the above details about a prospective wife. Ofcourse if the conversation is about where we live, what car we drive, how much we earn, etc - then one can say theres something fishy about the person's intentions. Edited by Chrysalis - 05 August 2008 at 8:20am |
||
|
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."
|
||
|
||
|
Chrysalis
Senior Member
Joined: 25 November 2007 Status: Offline Points: 2033 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:32am |
|
Although I have no problem with each individual having thier own personal preferences when choosing a spouse, I disagree with ppl/men who think it is a woman/wife's obligation to earn, contribute financially. Its ok if due to personal circumstances or preferences, an individual desires a financially stable wife. . . but they shouldnt defend it as a norm, or the way to go. Infact, if thier wives work, they should take it as extra help or good-will on thier part. . . not as thier right.
Women have to go through a whole lot more emotional/physical trauma compared to men . . . and no! Even if they wanted to, they possibly cannot share the natural burdens of bieng a female. Its only fair that they should be given other burdens by nature (or women), and be asked to relieve women of atleast thier financial/emotional burdens. If an individual women feels that she is capable of/wishes to do more. . . then subhanallah. . . but it should not be expected of her. Nor should it be treated as a requirement or responsibility.
Edited by Chrysalis - 05 August 2008 at 8:33am |
||
|
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."
|
||
|
||
|
Chrysalis
Senior Member
Joined: 25 November 2007 Status: Offline Points: 2033 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:38am |
|
The 'woman can be . . .men are' thingy was just a joke. . .
 I'm aware of the role hormones play in the life of both genders. . . .especially females.Edited by Chrysalis - 05 August 2008 at 8:39am |
||
|
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."
|
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 34567> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Israfil wrote:
)