urmiladuhan
New member
The fact is that the "deal" when sealed was for monetary gain - lots of people can fall in love with the monetary gain!
Live in relationships ..?
- Thread starter ravinderpannu
- Start date
The fact is that the "deal" when sealed was for monetary gain - lots of people can fall in love with the monetary gain!
Urmila ji not all the "deals" are sealed for monetary gains. Exceptions are always there. In fact all the marriages cannot even be termed as "deal". Majority of marriages are virtually love marriages as boys and girls are getting adequate opportunities to know and interact with each other and in the process they develop some sort of emotional bond which leads to their wedlock. So calling these marriages a deal is, I think, not appropriate.
Not that it is important, but so many holes can be dug into this hypothesis. Just at the top of my head:
1. Who is this monetary gain for? And how do you establish it? Let's take dowry first. Does the girl gain from it? I would say no. This is the scam in India- give something to the girl at marriage and then cut her off from all property rights thereafter. The entire anti-dowry campaign without a campaign for girl's property rights is just going to strip the girl child of whatever little she was getting from what was rightfully hers.
Do the in-laws gain? Difficult to say. They are now responsible for all the material needs of the girl through her life. They also run the risk of the girl turning hostile and making their life worse through legal (anti-dowry laws) or emotional means.
2. And what is to say that this "love for monetary gains" is restricted to marriage? It can happen in live-in relationships as well. A girl can see a rich guy (or viceversa) and go for a live-in aiming for better lifestyle/gifts, etc. While she won't have done it with the same guy if he was poor. If anything, it is much easier in a live-in as compared to marriage (To borrow a management term, the barriers to entry are much lower. You need to trap just one person as compared to one family in arranged marriage.)
Needless to say, this monetary gain theory is an extremely cynical view of human affairs. I don't subscribe to it- I was just playing along with your assumptions to take them to their logical end. There are lots of factors that make people enter into relationships whether in live-in OR love marriage OR arranged marriage or whatever form. Whenever a new form comes in the society, there will be conflict. To support one form doesn't mean you abuse the existing forms!
urmiladuhan
New member
A relationship that is gotten into for any number of reasons, OTHER THAN LOVE, is a deal. Prostitution is a form of a DEAL! Now people who subscribe to getting married without the focus on the person and personality of the person to whom one is getting married to, may not like the use of such harsh words, but that does not change the facts.
The real and genuine thing will always stand out!
Deal is not an appropraite word to be used for relationships. I don't whats your definition for love?
Seeing your posts one don't feel like saying you are just keeping your views, infact its like to much emphasization which is nothing but forcing something.
You are contracting yourself "For relationships you are saying it should not forced n here is you are forcing your idea".
You have full right to keep a perception which you think is right,but over emphasizing on this subject matter is just like you just want to prove that you are the sole person who is right.
It is by no means to offend you or counter you, but please get over it.
You are elderly to me and I respect you for your views, just wrote what I percieved.
As there nothing good or bad about keeping views about any topic, but self analysis is a must.
Seeing your posts one don't feel like saying you are just keeping your views, infact its like to much emphasization which is nothing but forcing something.
You are contracting yourself "For relationships you are saying it should not forced n here is you are forcing your idea".
You have full right to keep a perception which you think is right,but over emphasizing on this subject matter is just like you just want to prove that you are the sole person who is right.
It is by no means to offend you or counter you, but please get over it.
You are elderly to me and I respect you for your views, just wrote what I percieved.
As there nothing good or bad about keeping views about any topic, but self analysis is a must.
urmiladuhan
New member
Let us allow everybody to share their opinions/views. That is why I am not countering.
I don't want to give kindergarten lessons here. Man is a mammal. Dog is also a mammal. Doesn't mean man is dog or dog is man! (Arranged marriage is a deal (lets agree for a moment), prostitution is a deal-> so arranged marriage is prostitution???)
This is nothing but pretension to honesty and moral principles. What is this LOVE that lives independently of everything else in your world? Surely, it is not programmed into an individual's head when he/she is born. On the contrary, it is based on the individual's conditioning. How many people here can fall in love with a poor dalit/tribal? Consciously or unconsciously, several factors (looks, social status, education, parental sanction, etc) influence people's choices of a partner. You can't then strip that choice of those factors.
Case 1: A sees B, thinks she is really beautiful, B thinks A is handsome. They agree they are in "love" and decide to live-in.
Case 2: A and B have arranged marriage. One year down the line, they agree they are in "love".
Now to say that case 2 is morally inferior than case 1 is pretentious (rather than real/genuine) and probably a sign of one's own bias (Living together due to bodily attraction is morally superior than living together due to arranged marriage).
urmiladuhan
New member
Kapil - you think too much!!! ha ha ha ha
Morality is like royalty - not everybody likes it - but it is superior!Are you for real?
urmiladuhan
New member
Are you drunk?
May be or may be not but that wan't related.
Anyway more than your live-in-relationships I think these forums expose (or reveal) a person better.
I recommend before committing ask him/her to join these forums and monitor for a year at least.
No social issues in this scenerio, I guess.
A point here! But then this brings up the question of how do you define "LOVE"?
Is there a "love" in passion, interest, social welfare, and what not?
Is LIR a Deal? Or could it be "Love" as well? Getting very complex!
Last edited:
Could the criteria be:
LOVE - Emits from emotions (but then so does "HATE" -> Is hate also not a deal then?)
DEAL - Emits from understanding (outcome of a thought decision)
urmiladuhan
New member
you are talking non sense - since when did I own up the LIR (You say "YOUR LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP"). It is best to ignore such non sense posts.
Even though, I know, its a futile discussion but today somehow doesnt have much to do.
Now, since my college days I knew that people fall in love because they are attracted or they share something in common or they have some other sort of interest or they dont have any other option. Most of the time this love is conditional. 1% may be exception ( I leave 1% just to be safe).
So it is also a sort of deal. You might want to call it prostitution.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing------------ My teacher used to say.
I didnt say you own them ! Its just a way of expression.
On the one hand you say its best to ignore such posts on the other hand you always reply such posts.
Make up your mind
To whomsoever it may concern 
When one person say he don't agree to you that may be his/her problem, when the second one say he too don't agree to you that may also his problem.
But (within double quotes
) "Everyone has same perception about an individual than the problem lies with the individual."
When one person say he don't agree to you that may be his/her problem, when the second one say he too don't agree to you that may also his problem.
But (within double quotes
) "Everyone has same perception about an individual than the problem lies with the individual."When one person say he don't agree to you that may be his/her problem, when the second one say he too don't agree to you that may also his problem.
But (within double quotes
Not something you want to believe in my friend. Great scientists like Galielo, Darwin, etc. were ridiculed by most people for their views in their lifetimes; only to be proven right after their death. Minority of 1 could be right while majority of a million could be wrong.
There are definitely no Darwins here. But we can still argue with logic rather than fingers.
Your point is taken kapil bhai....but the names of the scholars you are writing here were ridiculed for the undiscovered things.
Here in the scenario is different we are discussing an issue which I think most of us are well aware of.
I will keep your point in mind too.
Cheers!!!
Here in the scenario is different we are discussing an issue which I think most of us are well aware of.
I will keep your point in mind too.
Cheers!!!