Discussion on Bullying, Nindya & How to handle Nindya like Bhagat Kabir Ji.

[Guest]

I do not think paapiman meant it in harmless way because I remember reading that thread where he said it. He added that Devi don't want women bodies they only want men bodies and that being born a woman is considered a downgrade in Gurbani. 

Actually he is wrong the tuk he mentioned says a man who thinks of women [in lust] in moment if death will be reborn a woman prostitute. In reality it's not saying women are downgrade but that by objectifying women even in his last moments will be reborn as the position of those he objectified. What better way to understand how his treatment of them hurt them than to experience it first hand? But he took it to mean. Woman body is lesser than a male body. 

But since it was in same post about manuki deh I don't think he meant women are not men but that he thinks women are not fully human. 

[GurpreetKaur]

3 minutes ago, BhagatSingh said:

Its another fake compliment to boost my ego!

Btw it's the "Le Leny" Face.

 

@Rock

Has someone tried that? Link!

Lol no a mean comment :)

[Rock]

3 minutes ago, BhagatSingh said:

Has someone tried that? Link!

I dont have twitter or else I would. Maybe you should try it & then a write a field report. No I just chose a random quote. lol .

 

[BhagatSingh]

4 minutes ago, GurpreetKaur said:

Lol no a mean comment :)

A mean comment.... to boost my ego?

[GurpreetKaur]

1 minute ago, BhagatSingh said:

A mean comment.... to boost my ego?

No to make me feel good about myself lol 

[CdnSikhGirl]

Actually @GurpreetKaur All humans start out in the womb as female. Its only through bathing in testosterone, that one is turned into a male. In fact, when people do sex changes, the key factor is testosterone. Suppress testosterone in men, and feminine qualities emerge.  Add it to a woman, and masculine properties emerge.  Aside from the actual sex organs, you can turn a female into a male and vice versa by playing with testosterone. And that includes the chemical changes in the brain. Women given testosterone become more aggressive, more competitive have more energy for working out and can gain muscle mass much easier. When testosterone is suppressed in males, it makes them less aggressive, less prone to competitiveness etc. We are more alike than some want to think. Even the reproductive organs are created from similar parts. The penis is analogous to the clitoris, testes to the ovaries, vulva to the scrotum etc. Males have nipples, why would they have nipples if they never had to nurse a baby? Even more interesting is that men can be made to lactate! And it doesn't take much! A man was stranded with his infant and the mother had died, he had no food but to soothe the infant he let it suckle.  After a few days he actually started to produce milk.  This was an actual recorded true story!  

There should be no competition. Most women I know are not even keen on fighting. It's the men who are the ones who want to place restrictions on us.  The women usually just want to keep the peace and can't be arsed to do anything about it.  But it hurts even if they dont say so.  It hurts to be called inferior, it hurts to be told you cant do something because you are only a woman.  In our religion especially, all positions should be available to everyone and based purely on merit and avastha and not gender (or any other reason like money, power etc). 

And @BhagatSingh Ji, it really really hurt when you said husbands need wives to 'obey'.  That means you think women should not have freedom of choice over their own existence, but their husbands should. If you don't also say that the husband should also obey the wife, then you are condemning a hierarchy where the woman is put in an inferior position. To be told you should be in an inferior position simply because of what gender you are (something you had no control over) hurts.  Alot.  You don't know how many times I cursed myself for being female. Or how many times I prayed to Waheguru and asked why was I made female. I even contemplated (for only a moment, no I wouldn't do anything stupid) what it would be like to end it so I could be reborn male.  

This position of being seen as the one who should obey instead of lead, to be seen as lesser. To be told you can only do certain seva because you are female, to be told you are utterly disgusting because of biological functions given by Waheguru, it all hurts. And yes its really really difficult to not say anything. I dont think you can ever understand how crappy it is to be female. I wish even for one day I could have the respect that men get!

[BhagatSingh]

[Rock]

4 minutes ago, BhagatSingh said:

I am totally saving this.

[BhagatSingh]

27 minutes ago, CdnSikhGirl said:

And @BhagatSingh Ji, it really really hurt when you said husbands need wives to 'obey'.  That means you think women should not have freedom of choice over their own existence, but their husbands should.

Husbands will do that, if their wife takes control, they will let her and become passive themselves.

The wife's ancestors, her "mothers", have selected for men that were leaders, that were high testosterone-filled men, who lead them. Over a period of millions of years, through the current of evolution, her being has developed to seek men who are leaders because that benefits her the most.

Her being tells her that her husband should be a strong leader. So when the wife takes control and starts leading her husband, what does she feel?

She no longer feels satisfied, she no longer feels happy, and she loses her attraction for him.

She feels stuck.

She also feels betrayed because her husband, who was leading and courting her before marriage, is no longer leading her now. He seems different after marriage.

 

Why do you think 70-80%of divorces are initiated by women?

This is because they have fundamentally lost attraction for their men.

 

Why do you think women's happiness has dropped in the past several decades of feminist teaching instead of increasing due to it?

This is because they are no longer happy with the arrangement that is most fundamental to the experience of a woman - her relationship with her partner.

 

Look at this video - This is not a Christian Pasture talking, this is a Feminist talking about this phenomenon.

 

[Guest]

You can't label everyone the same. And marriage works fine if both have leadership qualities. Neither one should have authority over the other as nobody likes every aspect of their lives dictated to them especially by the one who is supposed to be their partner in life. I am female and I want a partner not a boss to marry. If I want a boss I will get a job.  I don't want my husband dictating to me and him expectations me to obey his every whim as if I have no say in things. Some women might like to be dominated but even then I can't see any self respecting woman expecting to have to ask permission to do everything or be expected to blindly obey everything he demands. Husbands can be pretty demanding especially with housework which both should contribute to. The wife is not a live in maid who puts out. She's not on a time clock getting paid. 

[Guest]

Also maybe now women don't need high testosterone men. So now they are selecting the ones who are less apt to dominate them. So in future maybe evolution will favour men who don't need their women to obey them. Sorry but I could never obey either I'm with CdnSikhgirl.

[BhagatSingh]

One person is always backing down. If you are leading, your partner is backing down.

If both of you want to lead equally badly, then you will get this -

 

[Guest]

Lead by example. If you want to be a leader then first thing men should do is lay down their own desires and ask her what she wants. And never expect someone to obey. In a partnership of only two you don't need one person to always lead and the other to always be a doormat. They can lead in which situations they excel in. For example I am good with finances as I am an accountant. I would expect that if he is less good at it that my decision will be final in finances (because I have more knowledge and experience) but I would take his wishes I. Consideration . I am not good with vehicles so he can say what goes with the vehicle we drive etc as long as he also takes my wishes into account. Etc. But nobody should be dictating make me a sammich type of thing. Nobody should infringe on the right of an adult to exercise authority over their own being. And vast majority of decisions can be made together by talking. Communication is a wonderful thing! But yes I am also a strong leader so I would obviously not look for a man who likes to dominate and wants a doormat. 

[BhagatSingh]

I find your use the term 'doormat' rather interesting. I find that this term is not only demeaning to our/ my ancestral mothers but also it is demeaning to any person who follows.

For example, an ideal sikh follows the guru all the time.
Guru sahib says that we should follow waheguru as a wife follows her husband.
ਜੇ ਧਨ ਖਸਮੈ ਚਲੈ ਰਜਾਈ ॥ ਦਰਿ ਘਰਿ ਸੋਭਾ ਮਹਲਿ ਬੁਲਾਈ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਕਰਮੀ ਇਹ ਮਤਿ ਪਾਈ ॥

The sohagan-khasam (wife-husband) relationship is talked about at length in gurbani and it becomes blueprint for the life of a sikh-guru, sikh-god relationship.

So is the ideal sikh a doormat?

Is guru sahib saying wives are doormats?

Is guru sahib a doormat because he too follows?

 

Where does that leave us?

How does 'doormat' help us understand what is going on here?

It neither helps us understand the husband-wife relationship, nor does it help us understand gurbani, which uses this husband-wife as teaching for sikhs.

That's the end of discussion isn't it? I can't see where we would go from 'doormat'. At least, it's a not a pleasant place to go, is it?

 

So this type of terminology doesn't help because not only does it not accurately describe what we are discussing, it also leads to place where there can be no honest discussion about the topic, which is already quite nuanced so as to be easily cluttered.

Meaning that this topic is like a flower, when handled roughly, the flower is destroyed.

[CdnSikhGirl]

I am sorry I have to agree with the guest.  I would feel like a door mat too.  I have desires, wants, opinions, and furthermore I have leadership qualities, and skills that should not simply be swept aside in a relationship as being unimportant. I believe the reference was to my bringing up the idea of obedience.  Obedience means more than just following.  It means giving up your own will completely so that someone else can follow their opinions, their desires, their wants, etc.  Why should a wife have to be the one to give up her own identity, and everything she brings to the table so that the husband can stroke his ego and feel like he is in charge?  Why does anyone have to be in charge at all?  My husband and I make decisions together, sometimes he leads sometimes I do. He doesn't feel like his manhood is in jeopardy if I make a decision! Similarly I dont mind him making half the decisions because I know he values when I do.  We both follow each other, we both lead each other.  I would suffocate if I was forced into following all the time. Actually I'd feel downright oppressed. What if I did not agree with what he wants to do? What if I STRONGLY disagree with something he wants to do? You will say I as the wife have to just grin and bear it and let him lead. But lets turn the tables, if it were fair then when I want something you would think that even if he feels strongly against it, he would not stop me.  But noooooo you are saying even then it's me who should give up my will so he can his way all the time. That is not fair.  

Fair enough I agree there are some women who like playing the submissive. (some go as far as wearing a collar even to denote they are owned by their husband). There are men who also wish to play the submissive role too and be told what to do and how to do it.  But majority of adults wish to keep their ability to exercise their own right over their life and liberty themselves. In your model, it sounds like women in the past just gave up their freedom and ability to make decisions for themselves, in exchange for protection from wild animals etc. We don't need that model anymore as we no longer live in caves. I know you think I would shun all leadership from my husband but nope.  Mostly I will do whatever he asks because I LOVE HIM. Not because I feel obligated as a female to obey.  But I ALWAYS reserve the right to refuse something I really just don't want to do. In return, I expect that if I ask him to do something, he will also do it because HE LOVES ME. And any and all decisions affecting both of us we talk them out together and we are so in tune that neither one has to lead. We are in agreement in vast majority of things. If we ever reach an impasse we have agreed to walk away first , come back and discuss later with clear minds, and if that fails and it's a major decision , then we have someone mediate as a third party. In fact we both decided flipping a coin in a deadlock would be better than one person always getting veto power. When you have a relationship where one person always has veto power and authority over the other, that other person has no power at all.  It may have been endured in the past but was not ideal. 

[BhagatSingh]

@CdnSikhGirl

You (and guest) are really just arguing with yourselves, with your preconceived notions of things.

I get what you are saying but you didn't respond to what I said.
You responded to what you thought I was saying, rather than what I was actually saying.

Your basic premise is "don't treat people like shite"

I may not be coming across as such but I am trying to build up on that and explain the nuances of something that goes further than "don't treat people like shite".

But instead of having a nuanced discussion, you would rather repeat "don't treat people like shite"  ad nauseum, which I read similar to "good is good, evil is evil".

"Good is good and evil is evil" - that's a such a boring type of discussion. It's not something I am that interested in. I am more interested in exploring what good and evil actually is in more nuanced terms. What makes something good and what makes something evil. 

Similar to that -

I am interested in what makes an ideal husband-wife dynamic. A dynamic which yields the most well-being for most husbands and wives. And how this dynamic becomes a blue-print for the Sikh in Guru Granth Sahib.

 

Yes "don't treat people like shite" is part of that.

Don't get me wrong, a big part of this dynamic is not treating your partner like a doormat, which can go both ways, no matter if you are leading or not. A leader can also be treated as a doormat. A follower can also be a treated as a doormat. Being treated like a doormat is not gender or position-dependent.

But there is more to this discussion than "don't treat people like shite" because there are certain behaviours that maximize well-being. And it becomes terribly difficult to get to that discussion if we all we discuss is "don't treat people like shite" and if we build up walls of preconceived notions.

You get what I am saying?

 

I see this topic as a flower. Approaching it with a heavy hand will squish it. Since it is a nuanced discussion, it requires a light and careful touch. There are subtleties here that invisible otherwise. There can only be a discussion at the level of subtlety.

So if you are interested in that type of a discussion then let me know.

[paapiman]

10 hours ago, GurpreetKaur said:

Also manukh Milan ki eh deh Teri bariya, I know it's wrong but it's like saying your only chance to meet god is this manukh deh. No don't go like paapiman saying only men can achieve salvation lol

When did Daas say that only men can achieve salvation?

Sister, women can also achieve salvation. There is no doubt in it.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[Guest]

22 hours ago, Guest said:

Think of it this way.  There is no other but Waheguru. Everything which happens happens inside Waheguru. And in turn Waheguru is within everything and everyone. You can't go to any place and be nearer to God than any other place. Guri Nanak Dev Ji showed us this when he went to Moslem holy place and slept with feet pointed to kabba. God is everywhere and nowhere any more than any other place. We don't have to go to far away places to find God as the divine is inside us. 

Now we are also told in Gurbani that Guru IS God. So do you really think it matters if a bibi is 10 feet away sitting in Sangat or sitting on the tabiya? Or even at home? God is always with her as God is inside her always. In fact God is all there really is. 

So if periods are disgusting then how could God reside in all women all the time? You can't get any closer than that to the divine!

The utter disgustingness is your own mind only. 

Here is the proof : a male must ishnan after a night fall not because of any physical dirtiness but because semen spilling is due to kaam. It means he is giving in to lust. Same with sexual intercourse. In other words it's in the mans mind. The ishnan is just a means of allowing him to focus on cleaning his mind before doing seva. Periods however are not related to kaam. 

What I find utterly disgusting is the idea that a male can masturbate spill semen then just wash his body like nothing happened and only short while later do seva like it never happened?? But a bibi is being told she can't do seva when her mind is not on lust at all just because she is experiencing a biological function given to her by God to create life. 

Now I am not talking about cleanliness as hygiene. Everyone doing this seva should have clean hands etc. And it's no different for women. But there is nothing wrong with women doing seva while on periods as long as they wear protection. And that's only to prevent embarrassment. There is nothing impure about menstruation. 

 

your line of reasoning is skewed.  you are deliberately confusing impurity and hygiene.

we can say urine is not impure also.  does that mean you would not mind if a chef went to the toilet, didnt wash his hands, and then came to cook you a meal?

using your unpleasant example from above.  the woman is bleeding will still be bleeding while doing seva.  And the smell of blood will carry into her environment.

if i suffer urinary incontinence, i can wear a adult nappy etc but i will still smell like urine and i could urinate involuntarily at any time.  in such an instance i would myself not want to be a stage Paathi, from my own sense of respect and consideration.   seriously who are you angry at, these guys or nature?

i don't understand this agressive desire about 'doing seva'.  you do realise that seva goes beyond being a Paathi?  this seems more like desperation to grab the spotlight.  sorry to disappoint you but being a Paathi isnt going to invest you with any power.  probably you are only thinking about accumlating good karma foryourself, but such a desire is not fitting for 'seva'.  Doing seva is indeed keeping God lovingly in mind, which is equal when it is done anywhere.  you do not need to be on Gurdwara stage to do this seva/

infact I wouldnt even be allowed to be a Paathi because I don't keep kesh.  but you don't see me throwing opportunistic fits about it.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

so what is bullying?  we see it here on this thread.  I would see it as this:

1. making personal insults at the pers0no themselves

2. not allowing people to be entitled to their individual views, but holding ongoing and agressive grudges towards them, going on to making attacks on them outside of the thread where they even said it.

people are entitled to their opinions.  even if someone wants to believe something you don't like, etc so what let them.  why do you want to control them so badly? live and let live.  by all means point out the flaws in their reasoning.  but wanting to aggressively control what they think is beyond sinister.  just because you do not agree with them, doesnt mean you should constantly attack them.

3. making continous jokes at a persons expense, insintuations their character.

to be honest, the person i see being persistantly bullied is paapiman, just because people do not like his personal views.  but i have not seem him try and enforce his views on anyone else (unlike other people here).  people are also harrasing Chatanga constantly.  even though Chatanga doesnt come across as a pleasant person, that does not mean its right to be continually attacking him. 

[Guest]

Don't forget Satkirin she is always being bullied as well. 

[CdnSikhGirl]

1 hour ago, Guest guest said:

so what is bullying?  we see it here on this thread.  I would see it as this:

1. making personal insults at the pers0no themselves

2. not allowing people to be entitled to their individual views, but holding ongoing and agressive grudges towards them, going on to making attacks on them outside of the thread where they even said it.

people are entitled to their opinions.  even if someone wants to believe something you don't like, etc so what let them.  why do you want to control them so badly? live and let live.  by all means point out the flaws in their reasoning.  but wanting to aggressively control what they think is beyond sinister.  just because you do not agree with them, doesnt mean you should constantly attack them.

3. making continous jokes at a persons expense, insintuations their character.

to be honest, the person i see being persistantly bullied is paapiman, just because people do not like his personal views.  but i have not seem him try and enforce his views on anyone else (unlike other people here).  people are also harrasing Chatanga constantly.  even though Chatanga doesnt come across as a pleasant person, that does not mean its right to be continually attacking him. 

Nobody on here has been attacked more than I have!  I have been called transexual fat, ugly, 'thing' for tying a turban. Not by one person but by two now! I have been called liar because I pointed out to the forum how chatanga tried to get me to leave the forum in a PM, I have been called nindak, guru nindak, etc because I questioned charitars, chatanga has now even lied about me saying the gurus were false which I never did (as someone earlier pointed out).  I have been called heretic ( again because I questioned the charitropakhian) and recently I have been called utterly disgusting because I believe our Gurus spoke out against menstruation being a mark of impurity or uncleanliness by our Gurus (in Gurbani) and that seva should be able to be done by anyone at any time as long as their heart / mind are pure.  Show me anyone who has been called any worse on this entire forum!   But any time I try to defend myself against any of it, its like everyone sees what they want and have blinders to what I was subjected to!  Except @Koi thanks so much for saying something in that thread about turbans. I really appreciated it!  

Even worse a few members from my local sangat have been on here recently and have been seeing it.  They keep telling me why do I keep coming here? 

[delibeli]

10 hours ago, CdnSikhGirl said:

I am sorry I have to agree with the guest.  I would feel like a door mat too.  I have desires, wants, opinions, and furthermore I have leadership qualities, and skills that should not simply be swept aside in a relationship as being unimportant. I believe the reference was to my bringing up the idea of obedience.  Obedience means more than just following.  It means giving up your own will completely so that someone else can follow their opinions, their desires, their wants, etc.  Why should a wife have to be the one to give up her own identity, and everything she brings to the table so that the husband can stroke his ego and feel like he is in charge?  Why does anyone have to be in charge at all?  My husband and I make decisions together, sometimes he leads sometimes I do. He doesn't feel like his manhood is in jeopardy if I make a decision! Similarly I dont mind him making half the decisions because I know he values when I do.  We both follow each other, we both lead each other.  I would suffocate if I was forced into following all the time. Actually I'd feel downright oppressed. What if I did not agree with what he wants to do? What if I STRONGLY disagree with something he wants to do? You will say I as the wife have to just grin and bear it and let him lead. But lets turn the tables, if it were fair then when I want something you would think that even if he feels strongly against it, he would not stop me.  But noooooo you are saying even then it's me who should give up my will so he can his way all the time. That is not fair.  

Fair enough I agree there are some women who like playing the submissive. (some go as far as wearing a collar even to denote they are owned by their husband). There are men who also wish to play the submissive role too and be told what to do and how to do it.  But majority of adults wish to keep their ability to exercise their own right over their life and liberty themselves. In your model, it sounds like women in the past just gave up their freedom and ability to make decisions for themselves, in exchange for protection from wild animals etc. We don't need that model anymore as we no longer live in caves. I know you think I would shun all leadership from my husband but nope.  Mostly I will do whatever he asks because I LOVE HIM. Not because I feel obligated as a female to obey.  But I ALWAYS reserve the right to refuse something I really just don't want to do. In return, I expect that if I ask him to do something, he will also do it because HE LOVES ME. And any and all decisions affecting both of us we talk them out together and we are so in tune that neither one has to lead. We are in agreement in vast majority of things. If we ever reach an impasse we have agreed to walk away first , come back and discuss later with clear minds, and if that fails and it's a major decision , then we have someone mediate as a third party. In fact we both decided flipping a coin in a deadlock would be better than one person always getting veto power. When you have a relationship where one person always has veto power and authority over the other, that other person has no power at all.  It may have been endured in the past but was not ideal. 

You are so completely engrossed with silly mundane worldly matters, when do you have the time to contemplate the more serious matters enunciated in the SGGS?  Do you not think they are more important and worth allocating some time to?  At the end of the day does it really matter to you that much what Bhagatsingh, pappiman or guest think of women or how they should be treated?  Do you not think that you are just wasting your time arguing with these people considering that they have not been blessed with western way of thinking or western cultural backgrounds? I understand their comments are very hurtful to you and empathize with your pain, but do you really think you can change these staunch supporters of an evil ideology or belief that has long been eradicated from your part of the world?  In fact, even the Sikh  gurus tried to eradicate it from this religion, believe it or not!  Besides, you don't even know them personally...... so, why let their thinking affect you so badly? You are the only one that can control how you feel when you read and hear hurtful comments, they also know this.  I understand you are married to a Sikh man, what are his views on this issue?  It is really his views that should matter to you most and not the views of people you don't even  know.  Is he a good man, does he treat you nicely, is he attentive to you and does he view your marriage as an equal partnership?  If the answer to all these questions is 'yes' then this is all you need for a happy life.  Don't let these strangers over here upset you, just ignore them, they are really not worth it !!

 

Yes, you are correct.  "Obedience' is a word we should use very carefully.  This word has no place in a husband wife relationship.  They used to use this word in olden days in the school environment, where children were 'told' to obey their teachers' orders and be obedient.  It was used in the context of teacher\pupil\child relationship.  Hardly an equal relationship. In equal, sensible and mature adult relationship such as 'marriage' the usage of this word is completely dehumanizing and totally derogatory.  The word is oppressive, insulting, cheap and has no place in a happy marriage.  Shocked!!  Are you finding that you have to compromise your western values just because you are married to a Sikh man?  If so, is it very difficult?

In my humble opinion, I doubt it very much if there are that many women willing to play a role of dumb, submissive wives.  If they are, then they are either dumb because of lack of education and not aware of the Sikh values of gender equality or they are too scared to speak up and take control.  We do things for each other, because we LOVE and CARE.

[CdnSikhGirl]

@delibeli Actually no my husband and his whole family believe in equality.  My husband and I are actually so well tuned that we practically finish each other sentences. He actually works with women empowerment and he actively fights for equal rights of women including in Sikhi. I am very fortunate he is my husband!!  He is an amazing person. Some of the guys on here would think that because he doesn't order me around, that somehow I am using my husband as a doormat. I am not.  Full equality of husband and wife are totally possible! I don't think I am exaggerating when I say that rather than one of us dying for the other in a fight, we'd rather fight side by side and die together. THATS how close we are. I can't explain it. We have a spiritual connection that is beyond words.  

Exactly you hit the nail on the head. Marriage is about LOVE and CARE for EACH OTHER.  It's not about who is in charge and barking orders. 

Also I never understood this idea that in a partnership of only two that one person always has to lead and the other always has to follow.  It can work when both are leaders. They will divert to each other and lead together.  Butting heads will only ever happen if husband and wife are so out of tune with each other that they can't agree on something. If they love each other they will compromise. Maybe one time he will and the next time she will. More often than not, they will both prefer to give the other what they want and then the issue is not that each wants their own way but that each wants the other to!  LOL.  Yes this has happened.  Small story:

At a restaurant, Chinese.  I wanted springrolls. He was trying to get me to select something less greasy and more healthy he had something he wanted to order.  But I had not eaten much the few days prior and spring rolls really sounded good.  I didn't know what else to order so I told him to pick something then because I really didn't know what else I wanted.  Know what happened? We got the springrolls AND what he was wanting. LOL And we both enjoyed both! hahaha

[GurpreetKaur]

12 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

Husbands will do that, if their wife takes control, they will let her and become passive themselves.

The wife's ancestors, her "mothers", have selected for men that were leaders, that were high testosterone-filled men, who lead them. Over a period of millions of years, through the current of evolution, her being has developed to seek men who are leaders because that benefits her the most.

Her being tells her that her husband should be a strong leader. So when the wife takes control and starts leading her husband, what does she feel?

She no longer feels satisfied, she no longer feels happy, and she loses her attraction for him.

She feels stuck.

She also feels betrayed because her husband, who was leading and courting her before marriage, is no longer leading her now. He seems different after marriage.

I think she is talking about situation where men control women so horribly that women have no choice but to listen to them and they cry whole night since they are trapped. You are talking about where a woman wants a guy who will not dominate her all the time but have a mentality that she can depend on him for her weakest points ( @CdnSikhGirl most of the women are sensitive and emotionally, physically weak by nature, some men are too but why do you think they say women are from Venus and men from Mars, I will never marry a guy who will Dominate me like crazy and I will never marry a guy who will listen to me like crazy with out using his own Mat). Obeying word is not used the way you think, lets put it that way if a woman choose to make sandwich she is not doing it since she is a "Doormat", that's her way to show love. Equal rights are already there, but you are giving opinion over a very very backward type of society, where women are being treated like crap and don't say nothing. It does not work in west that way and even in India too these days. 

Men and women will never be equal. I will always and I mean always depend on my husband if I am being attached and he will always depend on me for making a Family. We need to put a petition so god can provide equal rights so after marriage me and my husband can share monthly pain and even labor pain. 

10 hours ago, CdnSikhGirl said:

 

 Mostly I will do whatever he asks because I LOVE HIM. Not because I feel obligated as a female to obey.  But I ALWAYS reserve the right to refuse something I really just don't want to do. 

That's it, "Love". Women are not dumb, when they "listen" to their husbands they do it so they can make them happy and only happiness brings more love in relationship. And yes men do things for women too, their way is different you just need to see it. Our ancestors mothers when said "hanji" to everything were not being doormats and when our ancestors fathers said " my order" in anger they were not being true Sikhs either. 

[CdnSikhGirl]

9 minutes ago, GurpreetKaur said:

I think she is talking about situation where men control women so horribly that women have no choice but to listen to them and they cry whole night since they are trapped. You are talking about where a woman wants a guy who will not dominate her all the time but have a mentality that she can depend on him for her weakest points ( @CdnSikhGirl most of the women are sensitive and emotionally, physically weak by nature, some men are too but why do you think they say women are from Venus and men from Mars, I will never marry a guy who will Dominate me like crazy and I will never marry a guy who will listen to me like crazy with out using his own Mat). Obeying word is not used the way you think, lets put it that way if a woman choose to make sandwich she is not doing it since she is a "Doormat", that's her way to show love. Equal rights are already there, but you are giving opinion over a very very backward type of society, where women are being treated like crap and don't say nothing. It does not work in west that way and even in India too these days. 

Men and women will never be equal. I will always and I mean always depend on my husband if I am being attached and he will always depend on me for making a Family. We need to put a petition so god can provide equal rights so after marriage me and my husband can share monthly pain and even labor pain. 

That's it, "Love". Women are not dumb, when they "listen" to their husbands they do it so they can make them happy and only happiness brings more love in relationship. And yes men do things for women too, their way is different you just need to see it. Our ancestors mothers when said "hanji" to everything were not being doormats and when our ancestors fathers said " my order" in anger they were not being true Sikhs either. 

Physical protection does not require obedience.  

How often does a situation arise where your life would actually need to be protected? Don't you think that maybe some seld defence classes will help too? 

What about the rest of 99% of the time? I am talking decisions like what car to buy, how to spend finances on home etc.  DO we need a new TV, etc.  There is no reason that the husband should have final say on everything and the wife has to obey.  We are talking about normal every day life.  Forget about life threatening situations for a moment.

I am talking about those husbands who demand their morning coffee, demand their supper and wont help. Demand the wife do all the baby diaper changes etc. And they both could have worked all day at jobs too.  But the in the evening the husband will come home sit on his butt watching tv while the wife has to work even more to meet his demands. Yes she might do it all out of love while he gets to rest and she doesn't. But is it fair? 

Also yes I hope I can depend on my husband, but I also hope he feels he can depend on me (and not for domestic stuff LOL he KNOWS I am not good with domestic stuff actually he cooks good and likes to cook, and I hate it so we have an understanding).