women domination

[biswa]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

hey TBS,
you wrote:


You wrote Putra is used and not Putri..I am sure you know in Sanskrit if we want to say 2 Putrah we say Putrau.
If we have 1 Putrah and I Putri we also say Putrau to denote 2 children.
In sanskrit when the are 2 genders used the male gender words are used as preference.
So Putra in that line just means Progeny.

I think we should just use the Punjabi version: puttar (which they use for both girls and boys).

 

[renuka]

Wait, how did the topic of this thread change so quickly from "Women domination" to "Male domination of women"?

See there is not much scope for any woman dominating topics after 1 or 2 post it will die down but about man dominating topics the list can go on and on.
Last night while driving home from mums house I was thinking why woman and children are sometimes abandoned when man decide to go on the Quest for the Truth and typed my thoughts here..rest is History.
OMG you guys also dominate in History..Its His Story!!!

 

[tbs]

Hey TBS,

Shouldn't that be a Sandhi?
Anyway it does not fit in any Sandhi Rule too.

hi Rekka,

may be sandhi....not samasa....sorry akka....may be GUNA SANDHI....

regards
TBS
s

 

[renuka]

hi Rekka,

may be sandhi....not samasa....sorry akka....may be GUNA SANDHI....

regards
TBS
s

No problems TBS Tambi,

Since Rekka sounds nice so we can call it a Samosa!!!

 

[renuka]

If SeetA had decided to live with RAvanA, then do you think anyone will pray her as SeetA mAtA?? :decision:

Did Seeta really want us to adore Her as Seeta Maata?

 

[sangom]

Hey TBS,

Shouldn't that be a Sandhi?
Anyway it does not fit in any Sandhi Rule too.

In Malayalam it is called "madhyama lopi", middle akshara disappearing. "Vaakkatthi" means "vaaL + katthi" sword-like knife.

 

[sangom]

May I say that it is a Man's world in the entire gamut of our scriptures, except perhaps the brahma vaivarta purana which glorifies Radha as equal to Krishna and even elevates her on sone occasions beyond Krishna. Hence, there is no point in seeking any support for women from our so-called glorious hinduism.

As to people like Raghavendra, I consider if those accounts are true (because I feel there is always some hagiographic exaggerations in such legends), then those men must have been sub-normal or abnormal in their psychological aspects. The religious opiate must have been so strong that he had no human consideration for his wife and children!

I know of one Tabra whose father, after fathering about 9 or 10 kids, suddenly became seeker of "aatma-jnaana" and abandoned the whole family and disappeared. The eldest (son) somehow passed SSLC, took up various jobs, and studied also alongside and ultimately became a senior engineer in AIR. He got all his younger siblings married and settled in life, when the (rogue of the ) father returned from his "sanyas" because he had several diseases and was in penury. He said he wanted to give "his love and affection" to his children before quitting this world

The engineer simply closed the door on his father's face and forbade anyone of the children entertaining that fellow. The mother persuaded her son to take back his father but the son sternly refused but gave the mother a choice to go along with her husband for ever or to live with himself (son) till her demise. The mother thought it better to forego her erstwhile unreliable husband.

This is the type of treatment that all such swamijis should have got but instead we elevate them to God status and worship such fellows. There are even TV serials on their life, I am told A religion gets the divinities it deserves, I would say!

 

[C RAVI]

Many of the culture/traditions were desigened in due course of evolution by humans in society to please themselves in some or other way.

Shaving off the head of the widow and depriving her from adoring herself with her feminine qualities and the desires were the dirtiest act of those days men and women. IMO, I believe, such concepts were not the sole product of those days MEN.

We now got much civilized and such nasty social acts were been totally iradicated, atleast for the past few decades. In this era with many reformations and liberalizations, I dont think, discussing on out dated social practices would be of any use for the present times.

At present (for the last few decades) we have a different social set up and different life style.

Discussing on different social topic/issues, considering the present scenario would be apt to be focused on sharing what we have today and how the things are moving, IMHO.


As far as the subject matter of this thread is concerened, I believe women domination at home is quite interesting and in many cases meaningful/needful. I believe, a man as husband and a women as wife got different mind set and attitude in a day to day family game. Things can move on smoothly if both have their fair upper hand and still consider each others stand in their own percpectives/natural behavior pattern etc.

If husband or wife found to be dominating unreasonably for a particular thing and if found unfeasible, than they should have the maturity, patience and the ability to be tactical for better and to make other understand what is what, in a manner that the other can understand and accept it.

 

[C RAVI]

Since this thread is about woman dominance I wonder how many will share the same thoughts with me on what I am going to bring up.
Before that I hope I am not misunderstood and only bringing up salient points and not to find fault with religion and divine personalities.

In history we have seen that men have abandoned wife and family in the pursue for the Truth.
I will give examples; Swami Raghavendra left a young wife and a child who couldnt fend for themselves and His wife ended up committing suicide and giving up her child for adoption.
I am not finding fault with Swami Raghavendra but I find it hard to imagine sometimes that if a householder still has dependents like wife and child who were starving without food was it fair to the wife and child for him to become a Sanyasi when his duties are not yet over?

Another example is Lord Buddha who left his young wife and child too in the dark of the night but His wife was a bit better off cos she was in a palace and may be she could accept the fact that her husband has left for the quest for the Truth but wasn't the child deprived of a father?

Even King Bhagiratha had left at a young age to preform tapas to bring down Ganga and his wife does say that he is too young to do this and wait for old age which he doesnt agree with her and goes ahead to redeem his ancestors.

The point I am trying to bring up is that a woman is always told even to put prayer on hold till she has served her husband and her family but why such rules were never imposed on a male?

I feel if a male decides to leave his young wife and child to fend for themselves he should make sure that he gets his wife remarried and make sure everyone is cared for before going on his path for Truth.
Cos when he has given up all forms relationships even if his wife is remarried it shouldn't matter to him anymore.

I wonder how many here share the same thoughts with me on this.

That's why I still hold Ravana with high esteem cos he was willing even to marry some one else's wife and keep her well.
He never abandoned anyone.


P.S : this post is purely to discuss options for the abandoned young wife and children of sanyasis and not running down religion.Please discuss it from the academic point of view.

Dear Renuka,

During olden days either men got some kinda enlightenment, went out in quest of finding truth about GOD and became sanyasi OR they wanted to escape from their family responsibilities, either due to financial constraints or due to lack of self esteem due some reasons and became a sayasi. The later cases might be also due to no more interest in getting into marriage with another lady. So instead of opting for divorce from the first marriage, may be they ran away to become a sanyasi.

Women in olden days, couldn’t do so, because 1) They are more responsible and much emotionally attached with their children, 2) They could not dare to live alone as a lady (in olden days), 3) Their ordeals would be more gruesome as a women living alone THAN living with her children (if not with her husband).

So, men, left women stranded and escaped to remote areas for their own peace, unmindful of the pathetic conditions of their wives.

In today's era, we can not find a single guy running away to become a sanyasi (in true sense), to get rid of his wife/marriage. As well, girls are much capable to live independently with their financial independency. And could guard herslef well with her awareness.

Now a days the couples opt for divorce and if interested/possible/could succeed get remarried. If they don't/couldn’t marry again, they have the capabilities to live alone.


Dear Renuka,

As per your statement -

"The point I am trying to bring up is that a woman is always told even to put prayer on hold till she has served her husband and her family but why such rules were never imposed on a male?"


IMO, may be women were considered much sensible, emotional, reasonable, affectionate, caring etc compared to men, who can manage, protect and flourish a family set up much better than men. So, they were been taught to be focused on those qualities more than being too pious and fail to administer her fine qualities.

 

[renuka]

If SeetA had decided to live with RAvanA, then do you think anyone will pray her as SeetA mAtA?? :decision:

I wonder whether we realized that Seeta objected to each ordeal she faced.
She didnt embrace each ordeal with consent and Yes Sir Yes Sir attitude.
She questioned Rama on His decision for the fire test and also questioned Lakshmana as why Rama decided to abandon Her in the forest(while she was pregnant) and she was upset that Rama didnt even tell Her a word about it.

Neither did She agree to go through another ordeal to be a happy family again with Luv Kush and Rama but decided that She had had enough and went back with Mother Earth.

She was well aware of Her rights all the way through its just that She had not much of a choice.

I often wondered why Rama decided to abandon Her.I knew as an Avatara Purusha who came to show us how a ideal man should be Rama would have a different agenda all togather.

But some how I feel that what would have been the reaction of many if He had decided not to abandon Seeta bur rather install Lakshmana as the new King and left the Kingdom with Seeta and lived happily with her and Luv and Kush.

He was willing to give up the Kingdom for the sake of His Father's promise to Kaikeyi and let Bharata rule instead at the very begining.

He was caught finally between pleasing His subjects or to choose His wife.
So if Rama had installed Lakshmana as a new King, Rama would have provided an equally perfect King for His subjects and at the same time be a perfect husband/father to His family.

Wonder how Ramayana would have sounded if Rama decided to do this.

P.S. All my post are purely for discussion purposes and not to run down any Avatara Purusha as I know Divine play is sometimes not within our scope of understanding.

 

[Raji Ram]

Wait, how did the topic of this thread change so quickly from "Women domination" to "Male domination of women"?

Dear Sir,

Men dominated 'those' days! And women dominate these days!!

Hence past and present are discussed... Thats it.

Raji Ram :typing:

 

[Raji Ram]

.............
Wonder how Ramayana would have sounded if Rama decided to do this........

RAmAyaNA is an epic written long long ago and we do not know whether it is a real story!! (oxymoron)

There are many questions about RAmA's decisions but the ultimate reply given is 'after all he was in human avtAr!!'

We can not rewrite the epic and change the story. It gives lot of scope for debates... right?

:argue:

 

[Raji Ram]

.......Mrs RR, from what you have written in this forum, I think you can be a leader on this issue, giving aid and comfort to young girls coming of age in this male-dominated sanatana dharma environment......

Leader... ME!! No dear Prof. Sir! குருவி தலையில் பனங்காய்..
(remember to have given the same quote in another thread) :ballchain:

 

[kunjuppu]

sangom, renu, ravi,

we do not have to go too far back in history to have prime examples of prominent men abandoning care of their families.

the father of the nation, gandhi, has publicly gone on record that he was a poor family man, who utterly neglected his wife and children. and in
typical gandhian honesty with 100% truth to it.

a man of strong sexual urges in his younger days, he fathered 4 sons, harilal being the eldest, felt most neglected, and did a lot of crazy things in his grown up life, including conversion to islam, all in madras, believe it or not.

his wife, he made wash latrines in south africa, whether she liked it or not. we really do not know what kasturi felt about being the 'mother' of the nation.

male domination all along. maybe she did something to mohandas in bed, that he was turned off sex in latter part of his life!

 

[sangom]

Many of the culture/traditions were desigened in due course of evolution by humans in society to please themselves in some or other way.

Shaving off the head of the widow and depriving her from adoring herself with her feminine qualities and the desires were the dirtiest act of those days men and women. IMO, I believe, such concepts were not the sole product of those days MEN.

We now got much civilized and such nasty social acts were been totally iradicated, atleast for the past few decades. In this era with many reformations and liberalizations, I dont think, discussing on out dated social practices would be of any use for the present times.

At present (for the last few decades) we have a different social set up and different life style.

Discussing on different social topic/issues, considering the present scenario would be apt to be focused on sharing what we have today and how the things are moving, IMHO.

Dear Shri Ravi,

I fully agree with your aforesaid views. But my doubt is why, even a person like you with such forward-looking ideas, shrink back to the shell when it comes to certain other facets of the so-called "Sanatana Dharma". Theoretically, is it not probable that, just as the disfiguring of the widow was one of the dirtiest acts of those who made such rules, other dicta like caste-groups, untouchability, and may be even the practices like sacred thread, sandhyaavandan, gaayatree, etc., might have been similar dirty inventions and prescriptions of the very same group of people? This is my doubt.

As far as the subject matter of this thread is concerened, I believe women domination at home is quite interesting and in many cases meaningful/needful. I believe, a man as husband and a women as wife got different mind set and attitude in a day to day family game. Things can move on smoothly if both have their fair upper hand and still consider each others stand in their own percpectives/natural behavior pattern etc.

"both having their fair upper hand" is a near impossibility imho.

If husband or wife found to be dominating unreasonably for a particular thing and if found unfeasible, than they should have the maturity, patience and the ability to be tactical for better and to make other understand what is what, in a manner that the other can understand and accept it.

In practice what may work best is clear demarcation of areas of responsibility and authority. While this may be so in almost all the working households, I have found quite a few households in which the husband is only a mere earning machine and all authority is vested in the wife. Of course, that also results in eminently viable and successful households. These men also enjoy the absence of responsibility which goes with authority and are mere "figureheads" of the family. May be it was some of this kind of husbands who got attracted by the addictive "Bhakti" and went off completely away from the family, in the olden days, and some of them went on to become venerable swamijis, I don't know Just a guess.

 

[amala]

Domination is clearly seen in language as well. Its very interesting and at the same time slighty sad to note that while we have nymphomaniac for women there is not similar word for the men, at least none that I'm aware of.

Men are studs, stallions, alpha males while "uppity" women are bi*ches, sluts, whores and tarts and so on and so forth. Women were expected to be ideal. Infallible. Todays women are different, changing. Perhaps some people feel they are going too much the other way. I dunno if its a good thing or not but every dog has its day

 

[renuka]

Dear Kunjjupu,

You wrote:

his wife, he made wash latrines in south africa, whether she liked it or not. we really do not know what kasturi felt about being the 'mother' of the nation.

I just came back from my mums home and she was just telling me the same thing you wrote that Gandhi made his wife wash latrines and my mum said Kasturi was not happy about it.
My mum was telling me that some men like to maintain a public image of perfection at the expense of their family and she said since Manava Seva is Madhava Seva men should not forget that serving their own family too is Madhava Seva.

 

[renuka]

Domination is clearly seen in language as well. Its very interesting and at the same time slighty sad to note that while we have nymphomaniac for women there is not similar word for the men, at least none that I'm aware of.

Men are studs, stallions, alpha males while "uppity" women are bi*ches, sluts, whores and tarts and so on and so forth. Women were expected to be ideal. Infallible. Todays women are different, changing. Perhaps some people feel they are going too much the other way. I dunno if its a good thing or not but every dog has its day

I fully agree with what you wrote.Hey Amala there is some terminology for the male with the unsatiable apetite for you know what!! I wil tell you by e mail.

 

[asananth]

Gret times to be young .

Hello Kunjuppu,

Will Durand in his History of Civilisation says "Do not judge a historic or mythological person by the values of our times". I am not referring to your message about Gandhi but to an earlier one about kings and Gods.

There is no point citing how many men have betrayed their wives. I suppose one can quote equal examples of women who have betrayed men. But that is not relevant.

All of us are products of History and economics of the time we live in and cultural modes,faith are greatly influenced by them.

One of the anthropologist(I forget who it was) argues in his book about peruvian civilization that prior to agricultural revolution, which began with the invention of plough, food was mainly obtained by gathering them in the fields which was more reliable than hunting which was uncertain. Since the woman bought in a steady supply of food every day whilst men were away hunting which was uncertain, woman's status was equal to that of women. But plough which required physical strength tilted the scales. Taking it further one might extrapolate and say till 1970s operating machinery, waging wars, farming all required physical strength,more than the intellect. Woman naturally were naturally restricted to desk jobs,nursing, teaching and the like. Technology has changed everything and the emphasis is more on the skills,intellect, drive and leadership which I suppose women possess in equal measure. However there is always a lag in accepting the changes . You will agree that compared to three decades ago there is more visibility of women in all fields including academics,science,industry, politics and the numbers can only grow. At least the younger generation of both sexes seem to accept equality betwen them as a matter of fact having seen each other in not very different numbers in MBA, Medical and in Engineering in IT. Truth cannot be hidden very long. I think it was the famous scientist James Jeans(I am not sure) who said there are no converts . The non believers die and for the new generation it is all a simple matter of fact like the planets going around the Sun. My generation will fade away along with our prejudices . Hard for us to change our hard held belief however untrue they might be and the younger generation will wonder what was the fuss we were all making. Nice to be young in this fascinating world and nicer to be a woman with all the avenues denied so far opening up.

Have a great day!!!

 

[amala]

Hello Kunjuppu,

Will Durand in his History of Civilisation says "Do not judge a historic or mythological person by the values of our times". I am not referring to your message about Gandhi but to an earlier one about kings and Gods.

There is no point citing how many men have betrayed their wives. I suppose one can quote equal examples of women who have betrayed men. But that is not relevant.

All of us are products of History and economics of the time we live in and cultural modes,faith are greatly influenced by them.

One of the anthropologist(I forget who it was) argues in his book about peruvian civilization that prior to agricultural revolution, which began with the invention of plough, food was mainly obtained by gathering them in the fields which was more reliable than hunting which was uncertain. Since the woman bought in a steady supply of food every day whilst men were away hunting which was uncertain, woman's status was equal to that of women. But plough which required physical strength tilted the scales. Taking it further one might extrapolate and say till 1970s operating machinery, waging wars, farming all required physical strength,more than the intellect. Woman naturally were naturally restricted to desk jobs,nursing, teaching and the like. Technology has changed everything and the emphasis is more on the skills,intellect, drive and leadership which I suppose women possess in equal measure. However there is always a lag in accepting the changes . You will agree that compared to three decades ago there is more visibility of women in all fields including academics,science,industry, politics and the numbers can only grow. At least the younger generation of both sexes seem to accept equality betwen them as a matter of fact having seen each other in not very different numbers in MBA, Medical and in Engineering in IT. Truth cannot be hidden very long. I think it was the famous scientist James Jeans(I am not sure) who said there are no converts . The non believers die and for the new generation it is all a simple matter of fact like the planets going around the Sun. My generation will fade away along with our prejudices . Hard for us to change our hard held belief however untrue they might be and the younger generation will wonder what was the fuss we were all making. Nice to be young in this fascinating world and nicer to be a woman with all the avenues denied so far opening up.

Have a great day!!!

Agree totally. One of the best times to be female right now. But hopefully let us all both female, male, people of colour etc never take these freedoms for granted and remember "the good fight" to get this far

 

[nachi naga]

dignity of labor was/is a big deal in some countries.cuckoose cleaning chore is something one has to do while living in the west.no velai karan/aari unless one is super duper rich i think thats the fundamental psyche change to be incorporated in lifestyles.women domination men domination happen all the time evrywhere.some are subtle some are obvious.domination by virtue is an ugly thing.its like demanding respect instead of commanding respect.

 

[sangom]

Hello Kunjuppu,

Will Durand in his History of Civilisation says "Do not judge a historic or mythological person by the values of our times". I am not referring to your message about Gandhi but to an earlier one about kings and Gods.

There is no point citing how many men have betrayed their wives. I suppose one can quote equal examples of women who have betrayed men. But that is not relevant.

All of us are products of History and economics of the time we live in and cultural modes,faith are greatly influenced by them.

One of the anthropologist(I forget who it was) argues in his book about peruvian civilization that prior to agricultural revolution, which began with the invention of plough, food was mainly obtained by gathering them in the fields which was more reliable than hunting which was uncertain. Since the woman bought in a steady supply of food every day whilst men were away hunting which was uncertain, woman's status was equal to that of women. But plough which required physical strength tilted the scales. Taking it further one might extrapolate and say till 1970s operating machinery, waging wars, farming all required physical strength,more than the intellect. Woman naturally were naturally restricted to desk jobs,nursing, teaching and the like. Technology has changed everything and the emphasis is more on the skills,intellect, drive and leadership which I suppose women possess in equal measure. However there is always a lag in accepting the changes . You will agree that compared to three decades ago there is more visibility of women in all fields including academics,science,industry, politics and the numbers can only grow. At least the younger generation of both sexes seem to accept equality betwen them as a matter of fact having seen each other in not very different numbers in MBA, Medical and in Engineering in IT. Truth cannot be hidden very long. I think it was the famous scientist James Jeans(I am not sure) who said there are no converts . The non believers die and for the new generation it is all a simple matter of fact like the planets going around the Sun. My generation will fade away along with our prejudices . Hard for us to change our hard held belief however untrue they might be and the younger generation will wonder what was the fuss we were all making. Nice to be young in this fascinating world and nicer to be a woman with all the avenues denied so far opening up.

Have a great day!!!

Shri Ananth,

Though the above post is addressed to Shri Kunjuppu, since there is a reference therein to "to an earlier one about kings and Gods", and since you have not specified which posters you have in mind, I think my interfering will be permitted.

I agree that we we live in the cultural modes and faith of our lifetimes. But here we have to keep in mind that even during the times of Rama (king-God), Swami Raghavendra (Saint, now deified!) or Mohandas Gandhi (glorified by history as the Mahatma of the twentieth century), the cultural norms required a man to look after his family (wife, children and aged parents) first and foremost and to adopt vaanaprastha and/or samnyaasa only after all his responsibilities to the family were duly completed and the person had the good health required for an ascetic's life.

Of course people like Sankara, Ramana, etc., took to sanyaasa very early in life; they did not contract a family through marriage and did not produce children. Sankara's duty was only towards his mother and there can be difference of opinion as to whether he discharged that duty properly, but he did not drag in an unsuspecting girl in the prime of her youth to be his wife, enjoy family life (sexual pleasure) with her, produce some children, and then one sudden day, leave her in the lurch and make grandiose spiritual claims.

Now, in the case of Rama, he was a case of indecisiveness that he would act on hearing some common man's gossip with his wife, without even consulting the eminent gurus like Vasishta (his kulaguru), Sadaananda (Janaka's kulaguru) or Vishwaamitra (who taught him many things including the balaa and athibalaa mantras). Therefore, whoever wrote Uttarakaanda - this is now generally held to be a later addition to the original Ramayana of Vaalmeeki - might have had a score to settle with the Ramaayanists and wanted to paint Sita as a personality towering above even Rama, imho. What Raghavendra did cannot be justified except on the premise that the Madhva matham of Sudheendratirtha wanted a successor and Raghavendra felt it to be acceptable, eventhough his decision resulted in the suicide of his wife of less than 25 years age. I, therefore, hold the firm view that Raghavendra's action cannot be justified under any circumstances and those who value women's role in society, should boycott him and his ashram.

MKG was an abnormal person imo. He was definitely obsessed with sex which he covered as "brahmacharya" and did many things which will shame any ordinary person. He is better not discussed because people will not be able to evaluate him as yet another ordinary human being and the discussions may result in yet another flare-up. Nevertheless, even during MKG's times the general rule was that if a man gets married and takes a wife, then it is his duty to provide for her and the children born of such wedlock until the children are adults. The case of the irresponsible tabra which I have mentioned in my earlier post, happened during the early 1900's and is thus contemporaneous to MKG. So, we can compare the two.

Last but not least, you state, "All of us are products of History and economics of the time we live in and cultural modes,faith are greatly influenced by them." I do not think we can refer to the "history of our times"; we make the history of our times through our thought and action. The "history of our times" will follow after our time, and will become "history" for our succeeding generations. The history which we follow is the cumulative result of our understanding of all the past history and what we choose to adopt therefrom during our times. Please let me know if my above understanding is wrong.

 

[C RAVI]

sangom, renu, ravi,

we do not have to go too far back in history to have prime examples of prominent men abandoning care of their families.

the father of the nation, gandhi, has publicly gone on record that he was a poor family man, who utterly neglected his wife and children. and in
typical gandhian honesty with 100% truth to it.

a man of strong sexual urges in his younger days, he fathered 4 sons, harilal being the eldest, felt most neglected, and did a lot of crazy things in his grown up life, including conversion to islam, all in madras, believe it or not.

his wife, he made wash latrines in south africa, whether she liked it or not. we really do not know what kasturi felt about being the 'mother' of the nation.

male domination all along. maybe she did something to mohandas in bed, that he was turned off sex in latter part of his life!

Shri Kunjuppu,

Still, MK Gandhi's and Kasturibai's are by-gone days...

Today, if we find any such Mr.Gandhi, with all such force doing on his wife and neglect care to her and children, for the sake of the country/society, the wife would make her way out...

In present scenario, the couples are withstanding marriage purely on fair deal and fair game if not on true love.

In fact, the level of love is depending on the level of husband's earning potentials, in this materialistic world.

Where a woman is not working and be a dependent on husband, she tend to consider her husband's dominations as his glory, as long as he is not harming her. I wish such ladies should not be ill treated and put into hardship by their selfish and ruthless husbands.

Husband and wife relationship and its outcome are purly based on the cosciousness of each one of them.

If we don't include eminent personalities who are fanatics some way like M.K.Gandhi, Barthiyar and few others and just look around for common folks in our society, we can find many ladies dominating their husband and vice versa, in a day to day family life.

Around 10 years ago, I could find few such ladies in our neighbourhood, who had upper hand in almost all and for everything including within their family and outside in society. Their husbands can not do anything unless there is a green signal from their wivies.

Whether it is for attending relatives marriage, to pay off MOI, to attend functions of their neighbours, to decide how to manage with finances, giving pocket money to husband etc..etc.. are all decided by their wives.

Without any cruelty and just with kind of upper hand, a husband if has on his wife, outsiders tend to say in a lighter vain in a sympathetic way that, this lady has no liberty due her husband. But if a husband is dominated by his wife transperantly visible to all outsiders, he will be tounted to the extreme and would be considered hen-pecked. He would be looked down by men and women, surrounding him.


Isn't the reality of common folks in our society?

Since this thread is about the possible existence of women domination in this present world, I happened to think on those lines and thus was my previous post

 

[Raji Ram]

dignity of labor was/is a big deal in some countries......... no velai karan/aari ...........

Do you think, Sir, that EACH house has vElakkAran / kAri for cleaning the toilets in India?

It is one of the 'do it yourself' jobs. Our servant maid in Singaarach Chennai washes only

the portion in which we have our bath and gets Rs.300/- for 'cleaning the bathroom'!!

:bathbaby: Note: In most of the houses it is the 'illaththarasi' who cleans the other portion!

 

[sangom]

These days wife only wants to have her way in most of the households.Onmmany occasions she is liable to go wrong in many decisions.Is thjai a social problem? Refuasal to comply with her wishes means the family peace wrecked.

In most households with which I have sufficient contact, all major decisions are taken by the husband and wife after mutual consultation; if there are grown-up children, their views also count, sometimes even overruling the parents'. But there are some households in which either the husband or the wife "dominate" and in such households only one person's thinking works; others are like passengers in a plane with only one pilot The actual reasons and circumstances for the dominance of one partner is not easy to analyze and the actual history will be as varied as the number of samples we consider. Then there are a few households in which the wife goes out and talks (always) in an uppity manner and this gives an impression to outsiders that she must be dominating her husband inside the home also; but careful observation will show that some of these ladies will talk in highly authoritative manner about all extraneous topics like philosophy, religion, politics, etc., but not about her household. At times some discussion may arise about what their household will do for some function or how much they will donate for some piblic event like temple festival, some marriage, etc. And if you take the trouble to verify, her bragging on such matters will not be the actual happening. In these houses the husband or earning son or both together control finances and all the major decisions of the house and allow the lady of the house to have the pleasure and satisfaction of showing herself off as a dominating woman to the outside world. (In fact there is one example in our neighbourhood. She will catch hold of any "victim" who happens to come along and start giving lectures on Bhagavatham and it will never end! If you make the mistake of questioning her conclusions/interpretations, you will suffer an hour's further lecturing

Therefore, my opinion is that even if there is women domination and even if it is on the increase, let us leave that aside and get on as best as we can with our lives. Let each household find its own modus vivendi and equilibrium.