Threatening wife

Originally posted by : Ranee.......
	@need justice, i have two daughters and going to have 2 son after their marriage. 4 off springs ?? @author breaking relationship is nt the solution.Be firm and take transfer.Also be dutiful to wife

Thats the reason family planning does not work out in india . We would shortly surpass the population of china  in a few years 

@author - your wife may have become upset and may be feeling cheated that you plan to move to your  native place.

I dont support her reaction but you try to get your mother to your current residence and take care of her.

Try to explain to your wife and assure her that she is also important.

If everything fails then there are other options. Try to make peace without resorting to any illegal or unethical demands first. If she is too selfish and callous and doesnt respect your mother at home - you can make a decision.

In PARALLEL you consult a good advocate and prepare your defense (AB etc.) Today's Indian Husband has an added

responsibility - LEGAL DEFENSE. that comes with the package.

Dont worry too much about your wife - she is CAPABLE of deciding what she wants (she may have already decided). She is neither worried about divorce (she is educated and working, she is very ok living alone also), nor is she concerned about keeping her marriage happy. Her will and wish is what matters to her. 

Ultimately, it is your wife who will MAKE or BREAK (directly/indirectly) your marriage.

Relationships are tested during distress, not during moments of bliss.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Indians have become master copycats.

All this new age thinking is primarily due to western influence - when the West realizes that its' society has broken down and there are no family values left behind (it is ALREADY happening in UK/US), the West will start a new trend of going back to the roots (original culture of joint family, etc. etc.).

Then we INDIANS, will follow the West again.  Just like Vegetarianism, Yoga, Ayurveda and now Vedic Mathematics.

*****People, let me also join the bandwagon of mother vs wife.******

Bad Wife -> becomes Bad Mother -> NEXT HER careless, selfish,unfit Daughter  -> SHE becomes an irresponsible Wife -> same trend continues.

Kids spend most of their time with their MOTHER, so a bad wife/mother will continue this chain reaction for posterity, in most cases if not all.

1) Both are EQUALLY important. One primarily till adulthood, second through adulthood and oldage.

2) But you WORSHIP only your mother NOT your wife.  Not until the wife has shown that she really cares about her H

You make more sacrifices for a mother (not just because of wht she has done for you or what she will do for you, but because what she wants FOR YOU, her intentions are always NOBLE for the child). A mother's first priority is her child's health and safety. Wife's first priority is RARELY noble -  it varies from gifts, position, fun, excitement etc. etc. to money for her parents. Only few good wives would make their husband top priority over any other.

   The marketing and advertisement agencies are becoming very successful. Ex:

               - buy a diamond ring to win your wife/gf's LOVE.

               - Take her on a vacation- so she can LOVE you

               - Be a Yes Man - so she can be dominant with no brains.

               - Many more and STILL be responsible for her financial, physical, mental safety.

               - A husband is now an INSURANCE POLICY to a greedy wife !

I kind of feel that a Mother is a gift from God, whereas I'm not sure if I feel the same about a wife.

3) Of course with changing society - and modernized women, it is important that old inlaws also walk some distance to allow some harmless changes. (trendy dressing is ok, smoking/drinking and late night parties obviously are objectionable to many).

4) Posterity - agree that is part of our lifecycle.

5) In Indian society where the wife joins the husband's house (still prevalent in most parts of the world except where feminism is super strong or society is Matriarchal), husband SHOULD make some effort to balance his mother and wife's expectations. This is very important, but more patience is expected from the wife (coz she is young and strong) and mother is obviously old (and probably beaten up by all those years she toiled for her family). Once the mother/dil realize the importance of each other in their son/husband's life, they will automatically become cordial since both of them will have common love.

And just to compare, the wife's parents themselves would also be in the same mental condition as the husband's parents. So AT wife's residence, the same kind of special care is expected for her old parents. So nothing special is being done at husband's place. A wife's brother - when he gets married the same drama might happen there.

6) Oldage:  I have posted this before also, with old age come many ailments. Some are very healthy till 90 also, however, their day to day activities take a hit as they are less capable now. They definitely need a helping hand and a caring person in their lives. I feel it is a SIN to abandon them at old age - and why? mostly for physical pleasure. Cut the romance out of the wife, then you will know who is more valuable.

@NJ

good point, she has 2 daughters - now it is anybody's guess what values she is instilling in them. guys would avoid them like plague.

but alas, she wont succeed. I hope that by the time her daugthers grow up, 498a would be a house hold term - like chain snatching, theft, mugging, day light robbery and fraud. 420giri. it would be treated like TB. Cure and move on. or society may gather enough guts to beath them with chappals !

No guy would be surprised by 498a then.  Hopefully advocates and cops would discourage women from filing or There will probably be no arrests at all until the allegations are proven.

With every 498a gang losing the battle, it will die its natural death. this would happen only if present victims continue to battle it out and not compromise. and no credit to the lawmakers.

To dream, 498a would be fully amended or abolished.

ha ha . thanks. That you spent time thinking for my daughters.I believe LCI do not represent the whole world.There thousands of good boys and families against whom 498 case hs nt been filed.I shall try my best to get such boys who hs never seen an advocate or visited legal portal. thankyou.

@Harsh I wish India is more of a true copy cat and completely mimicked the west..in lack of corruption atleast for citizenry, transparency and service. Equality for all irrespective of race, caste, religion, s*x or national affiliation. In terms of public safety  In terms of respect for labor and individual freedom

What India has are PARASITIC wives/LAWS incapable of delivering justice or equality and framing laws based on stereotypes not ground realities.

@random girl

im confused. who is thinking about someone's daughters? I am definitely not, is anyone else? ragz/nj... are you?

madam - you want to find an innocent guy (who has never visited an advocate and doesnt know the law/legal portal). well it is good to expect innocent guys, only if you are worth it. But YOU yourself have been on this portal for god knows how long, and reading,learning and absorbing various inputs by various members, getting in to debates with Ld Experts (whether you qualify for it or not is obvious).

lagta hai ki prepare kar rahe ho apne sweet daughters ke liye. Jo karna hai kar lo.

Aise hi hota hai, criminals target innocents. tell me something NEW.

Also agar vo legal portal pe kabhi aaye nahi, tho kya hua. aapki meherbaani se ajaenge, koi mount everest thode hi chadna hai.

@Charu - whenever i read your comment i get puzzled that why such a nice lady with so much sense is going through these things, but each story has other side as well. Your each wordings suggests that now you are repenting your acts done in past and that's the reason you have beome so humble and down to earth type. I too had a very bad experience about married life, initially its womens and in laws show their charecter and pushes the boys and his family to wall and when boy and his family experienced all the available tricks on them, they refuses to accept the girl back, then this girl becomes humble, down to earth and keeps fighting for her so called rights.

 

Mr Harsh why r u in arguments with me? Do u want to prove that you are the most innocent person in the world?.You compared my daughters with plague, though this does not matter but shows your mentality .Have you seen anywhere asking me queries for help in 498a?Why i am here i don't need to explain you.Stop researching on me. Gud bye!

@Tajobsindia.  Sir, we do not need to make very big arguments to discount father and mother.  Very simple question, "Did you ask and give birth to me?  You have given birth to me at your own sweet will.  If you had asked I would have told, I don't want to be your child...and even if I am born from your womb it would not be my responsibility to look after you.....as you made the mistake of not asking me before giving birth to me it is not my responsibility to look after you".  It appears very reasonable at the same time very crooked too.  How something that is reasonable is crooked as well?

 

Marriage is a social contract.  Relationship between parent and child is a natural contract.  There is no obligation for a parent to look after the child.  If he or she throws away the child in a dust bin nobody will ask. But parent knows by natural instincts his/her responsibilities.  If they have spent 20 to 25 years of their lives devoting to us, it is with the expectation that we will look after them in old age.  Here also you can make an argument like this :  You have looked after me for 21 years, till I am employed so I will also look after you only for 21 years.  Even this is a reasonable argument but crooked argument.

 

But you see, it is not about parent and child alone.  The parent had looked after his parents for lifetime and hence, he expects that his son would look after him the way he served his parents.  I was very inexperienced legislative drafter during 2008.  My later drafts were more matured.  But it reflects the earnestness of the author who drafted it from his own experiences of life.

 

 

These responsibilities cannot simply be shunned because a beautiful (compelling) wife entices a man to have a nuclear family to enjoy the comfort of not taking the burden of entertaining and looking after the old father in law and mother in law.  When a man marries a woman, there is a presumption that she will be part of his family and that she will serve his parents whatever way possible like she would have served her own parents if she had not been married.  The presumption is not that she breaks the husband's family and takes him away from home so that his parents do not enjoy the privilege of being part of society of their son and son's children. And hence I believe that law should be stringent against Daughter in laws who with a view to enjoy comfort of not taking anyone's responsibility force their husbands to form nuclear families.  Such women, in my view are animals.  Men should get rid of such animals by hook or crook.

 

They should not even be paid any maintenance if divorce is granted or even on separation.  It is very sad that in our country women's laws means laws of Daughter in laws only not the law of Mother in laws.  Why?  Mother in law is not a woman?  She does not have any rights over her son that a wife enjoys over her husband?  Senior Citizens Act is there but it is only for destitute parents.  It does not speak about the rights of parents who are not abandoned by children.  It is not only the money factor, there are many other expectations the parents can have over their children.

 

It is not the wife who brought up her husband and made him capable of doing a job.  His parents did that job.  They (parents) made him into an asset and she (wife) took away the asset that they have created out of their love, sacrifice and labor at no cost.

 

I had a trainer when I was trained in ING Vysya Bank Ltd.  He was saying, about people quitting the organization immediately after receiving training and he sees it as unethical behavior.  He joked, people in the new organization who took the candidates he trained called and congratulated him saying, "you have trained them very well".  You see, a company, after all a company feels it is a right to force the employee pay the costs of training if he leaves immediately after training or during training.  Bond is illegal under Indian Contract Act.  But employer who trains is entitled to receive the training costs that he incurs on trainees. 

 

A bullsh*t company/bank that trains a candidate for six months or one year feels such a right over its trainees that it feels so bad about some rival organization taking the candidate that it trained, how much a parent who brought up his/her child should feel who toils 20-25 years to educate child, bring him up and making him an asset to earn money is taken away by daughter in law to form a nuclear family?

 

Which law takes care of their interests?  Read this law that I made with anger and frustration against such stupid males who run away with wives to form nuclear families.

Correction:

This sentence in third para may be excluded and added to the last para as concluding sentences.

I was very inexperienced legislative drafter during 2008.  My later drafts were more matured.  But it reflects the earnestness of the author who drafted it from his own experiences of life.

A company which is a creature of statute, an artificial person can have such a claim over the person it trained, and the parents being the creatures of god, the natural guardians do not even have the right to invoke the jurisdiction of law if their DIL forces their son to abandon them to form nuclear family.  They can invoke their rights only as beggars when they are abandoned by children not otherwise.  Are we still living under the rule of East India Company that our law give such an importance to Company over Parents?

@ Chandrasekhar

Ever heard these?

A woman, carrying her child, went to the future Buddha's tank to wash. And having first bathed the child, she put on her upper garment and descended into the water to bathe herself.

Then a Yakshini, seeing the child, had a craving to eat it. Taking the form of a woman, she drew near, and (after a little chat) carried it off.

But when the mother saw this, she ran after her, and cried out, “Where are you taking my child to?” The Yakshini boldly said, “Where did you get the child from? It is mine!” And so quarreling, they passed the door of the future Buddha's Judgment Hall.

(When they agreed to abide by his decision) he had a line drawn on the ground; and told the Yakshini to take hold of the child's arms, and the mother to take hold of its legs; and said, “The child shall be hers who drags him over the line.” But as soon as they pulled at him, the mother, seeing how he suffered, grieved as if her heart would break. And letting him go, she stood there weeping.” (The real mother would give up her child rather than risk its safety, as the Bodhisattva and King Solomon both knew she would).

With Easter barely over and Buddha Purnima coming up this month, it’s testimony indeed to the universal power of bhakti that these stories were told so long ago and people risked life and limb ever after to serve them.

Questions you should ask yourself:-

Did once parent tell you; a male before and or at time of marriage that taking dowry is crime when the Law is there since you were even born in 60’s ?

Did once parent prepare you; a male before, during marriage and anytime afterwards how to balance between once parent-wife-sister when it is imbibed into Asian cultures customs?

Did once parent prepare you; a male for marriage at all?

Let be honest about above questions and more you stir the more you are getting trapped into past-present and future for a simple fact; a male takes things for granted in Indian feudal customary way of life and when one faces such stark realities then talks of emotions and sentiments in very articulate ways.

BTW, in reference to context of this brief nothing was happening in male queriest scheme of parental dealings till he got married and sometime during marriage asked his wife on relocation and then all hell broke? Question is why did he not knew that one day his mother-father is going to become old and be widow and may be woman he marries off to will not like his indulgence to look after either of them and for the same he should not have married off first of all. He should have clarified before marriage the inevitable question on relocation one day or other which was bound to happen then would have agreed for marriage. Ideally he should nto have left the native place in search of green bucks or should have taken old parent whereever livign for an earning. For all these Law does not come into picture it is pure self answering above three questions but alas it is now too late for simple fact you are now married and facing the big question whom to please now; past or future……..    

Even before East India Company days world over law protects 'wife' over 'once parents' in various degrees. Search and discover forms of such protection from international Laws yourself. So there is nothing new in codified Indian laws at all though lot of work on gender balance needs to be done in most of them that is all !

You are confusing readers by bringing emotions and sentiments typical Asian mindset which is what I feel from your last few large postings.

Note:
You = generic used in reference to context nothing personal.

@Tajobsindia.  I like your story.

 

There is no emotion in what I have written.  It is purely logic.  You have not commented on the basic question that I raised.  XYZ is officer in bank.  Mrs. XYZ married the officer in Bank.  He is officer in bank because he is son of Shri A and Smt. B.  He is not officer in Bank because Bank had raised him or Mrs. XYZ had raised him.  If Shri A and Shri B have thrown Mr. XYZ into a dustbin after he is born and if he had been raised as a street child without care of parents, Mrs. XYZ would not have chosen him as her husband.  Mr. XYZ has a perfect position to say to his wife, "You see, I am what I am because of my parents not because of you, nor because of my employer.  And you have chosen me because I am what I am.  Hence you have no right to separate me from my parents".

 

Given this background, the simple question I am framing is : XYZ is what he is because of his parents.  Is Mrs. XYZ  entitled to deny his parents?

Sure I can reply with same logics.

But, donot street children get married? Answer it first in a case where son is from Mr. A and Mrs. B as you should factor that too instead of placing logics only for ‘earning’ males.

BTW what bringing up and earning has to do with looking after once parents? Is it some kind of new age or some middle ages return –of- investment formula you are now trying to push forward.

Do street children grows up to become men donot get married and not balance looking after parents and wife?

A well maintained home over once head - full stomach - taking care of his under belt needs is what makes a married male sustain ‘that bank job’ is my view inspite of past investments done by Mr. A and Mrs. B.

It is obvious that future wife of a person does not come into picture when a child is being raised so the question that husband asks his wife does not arise. Same way a wife can also tell her husband “I married and came to your home you so that you look after me and not your parents-sister, there is no law that you were supposed to live with me in my natal home?  

Pick history lessons a successful man always has a understanding wife behind his success and not mother rarely one will find such parallel in history for world’s successful men. Same way in your eg. what the bank job he is going to do if his wife / children are not going to live with him and in few years his mother / father will be dead ?

Wives get the glory. Mothers make babies and then men out of the babies. This wife glorification will be well appreciated by rabid feminists.