Friday, November 21, 2008

Social rules

Overheard this conversation at the airport between a young lady and an older lady:

 

Older Lady: “So beta, when do you plan to settle down?”
Young Lady: Hesitatingly. “Umm, don’t know yet auntie, let’s see. As of now I am still settling in my job.”
Older Lady:” Nahi beta, this job and all is ok, but you need to settle down, you are getting older. You should get married soon, settle down and have children.”
Young Lady: Trying to be firm. “No auntie my career is important too, I am not sure if I want to take on the responsibility of a marriage and children just yet.”
Older Lady:  Grumbling. “Oh come on, you children these days, all misplaced values…”

 

This is a typical conversation that you will hear whenever an auntie type of a lady meets a younger woman/man. Men get away with the career excuse, women cant. Men are expected to work and support the family; women are still expected to tend to the family! Which is all very well, I don’t intend to try and change the traditional social balances or opine on them, but what if there are some exceptions? In today’s world everyone needs to be independent and most women want to have a career, not just a job. So is there something wrong with that?

I know that there are women who are thrilled at the thought of marriage, who are terribly excited that they are pregnant and that’s a reaction expected out of all women. But what if some woman can’t be thrilled or excited about marriage? What if the thought of having a child is not joyous for a particular woman? What if she does not want to have a child? Just because she is married, does she have to want to have a child?

But she is expected to follow a certain pattern, the milestones for her life are pretty much defined:

1.      Complete education,

2.      Get a job, (if at all she wants to prove something to the world, if not this is not a must)

3.      Get married,

4.      Have children and

5.      Take care of family (her job may continue if she can manage it along with her family).

But if some woman does not want to live this life cycle and wants something different, is she wrong? Does she have to procreate to keep mankind alive? Is it right if she is not allowed to make these choices for herself and has to live her life as per the defined life-cycle?

Whenever someone tries to do something that does not fit with the norms of the society it always attracts a lot of brickbats. Men and women, both are equal recipients of these brickbats. If everyone sticks to the a standard type of behavior with standard type of actions and reactions, will we not be more like software programs running on the operating system of this earth? The society is extremely averse to any individual who does not want the same things like everyone else wants in life.

Which makes me wonder, are we living our lives based on our choices or are we programmed to live as per our defined life cycle milestones? Is the society turning human beings more and more in to programmed beings? Are we more human or are we becoming more of human-robots? Can we ever break free from these norms and rules and do what appeals to us without having to face the burden and the hurt of all the brickbats? Will not living by these norms make us people with misplaced values? When will we learn to let people live by their choices, be free, be happy with achieving what they want to achieve in their lives? Will we ever?

 

Friday, October 31, 2008

The last word

What is it about the human mentality that makes one want to have the last word? Whether it is a conversation, argument, opinion or a debate there is always someone involved who needs to and must have the last word.

I don't understand this desire in people. Will having the last word make the person more correct than everyone else? Does it signify that he/she has "won" the battle of words? Sadly, it's not just in verbal battles that this funda is displayed, it is even displayed in normal conversations. For e.g. I have a friend who must always have the last word when we chat or sms each other. If while chatting on a communicator she types bye and then I type bye, she will still reply back with an "OK bye"!!! Same thing when it comes to messaging.

I am a part of a few discussion forums and I have seen that there are always people who will intervene in a heated debate to try and act as peace-makers, state their opinion and then end their reply with "we must end this conversation now" or "please do not post anymore on this subject after my post" or even "in my opinion the issue should be closed now". Don't they realize that just like they have vented out what they feel, there may be many more who wish to do the same? Why can't such people try and let others opine all they want, if you don't like it, don't read it. What gives these people authority to decide when a conversation should end?

The 'last-word' concept is something that most of us have experienced first-hand as kids. On innumerable occasions parents tell their children "my decision is the last-word on this topic, no more discussions on this". Does it create such a huge impact that these children grow up and emulate their parents? It's probably good to be someone whose opinion is considered as the last word on a subject, but to be a self declared prophet who must have the last word is simply ridiculous! I think it is their supreme ego which makes them believe that they are the know-it-alls and hence must be given due respect by accepting their word as final. It is one thing to be authoritative with a child and another to be egoistic with mature adults. I see many parents today who will still try and use this technique with children and claim that whatever they say must be done and followed to the T, they will argue with their children about something and even if the child is right they will end the conversation by stating their opinion and declaring it as the last word!

Maybe it is time we learn that everyone is entitled to their opinion and has the freedom to express it. Having the last word does not prove anything, it may only prove that the person you are debating with has given up on you and has chosen to let you live with your opinions and to let himself live with his own.

To end on a lighter note here is a quotation that I came across "In every argument between a husband and a wife, the wife always has the last word. Anything the husband says after that is the beginning of a new argument".

Feel free to leave me your comments for I am not the one to say that this is the "last-word" on this topic :-)

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Live In Legally

 “Maharashtra Govt. Seeks to Legalize Live-In relationships” screeched the headlines. My first thought “Wow”! My second thought “hang on…when was it ever illegal??!!”

This really made me sit up and think about it. The news was all over the papers, the TV, the radio, the internet and even in cafes. And as with any new govt. regulation this too got mixed responses.

Frankly I don’t see the need for legalizing Live-Ins. The more I think about it the more I am convinced that it is a move made by the govt. to discourage such relationships rather than to support people in such relationships. If I think as a woman I am tempted to think that such an action will help me, but will it really?

What exactly is a live-in relationship? As far as I see it is something that a couple decides to do when they do not want to commit themselves to the institution of marriage, for whatever reasons be it lack of belief in the sanctity of marriage or fear of commitment.  Couples, who do not wish to make lifelong commitments, prefer to live together before getting married. Some do it as they feel a need to know each other better before they decided to finally be legally bound in a relationship, something like a test drive before actually buying a car. And then there are some who live together purely as a matter of convenience like saving some money by paying rent for one house. A live-in is essentially just like a marriage but without any legal papers involved. There is still a certain amount of commitment that is required and compromises certainly need to be made in such relations too. To me a Live-in = Marriage – In Laws.

If a couple is faithful to each other does it really matter if you are living-in or married? When a woman agrees for such a set up, it is obvious that she too does not want to get married..at least not right away, maybe later. She is aware that the law does not recognize her as a “wife” and hence she is not entitled to the legal support and benefits that a wife gets. She is however protected against domestic violence, whether she is in a live-in or she is the “other-woman” and that is sufficient. If the woman wants legal protection and all rights for a married woman…she can very well get married, no one has stopped her from it. If she wants to claim alimony and ‘her share’ from his assets she should get married. She enters a live-in knowing very well that there is nothing that gives her the status of a wife. And let’s assume here for a minute that she does want to marry her partner, but he does not want that commitment nor does he want the legality, in such a case this legalization of the live-in may help her, but honestly, if she wants a legal relation and this is not something that he wants, and neither are willing to compromise on this, isn’t it time they decided if they should be together at all?

And when it comes to deciding if they want to be together or not should they decide to split, assuming that they have been in a live-in for a reasonably long time, it is up to them to manage the scenario. The relationship is between the two individuals based on their mutual consent while being aware that it does not have a legal standing and it is for them to figure out how they will manage the show if the relationship fails… it is not the responsibility of the state to decide or dictate anything.

But now with the new law if a man and a woman are living together as husband and wife for a reasonably long period, the man shall be deemed to have married the woman according to customary rights of either party. Not only that the definition of the word 'wife' will now be amended to include a woman, living with the man like his wife for a "reasonably long period". The woman would even be entitled to alimony. The problem with this is that the definition of "reasonably long period" is missing and hence we can’t be sure how this may be (mis)used.

But this kind of legalization may help should the couple in a live-in ever opt to have children out of wedlock and then after some time decide to separate. In such a case there may be court battles where child custody is concerned. What happens in regular divorce cases will be repeated in cases where live-in couples choose to split.

Having said that, it is important to remember that in our society a marriage after all is very final and lives get messy when there is a divorce. It is normal for men and even women to get tired of a relationship and split with a partner in the live-in arrangement with relative ease as compared to a divorce. And this is one of the reasons that a live-in proposition is more attractive to some as compared to a marriage proposition. This legalization will not make splitting so easy. It may make it just as messy as a divorce.

So who stands to benefit side after the legislation? Women who are in non-martial relationships which end - either amicably or because they are deserted by their live-in partners – currently cannot seek alimony. Now the new law will protect "the pecuniary interests of a woman who was living with a man like his wife for a reasonably long time".

Who stands to lose after the legislations? People who does not want to seriously commit to a relationship and do not decide for a ‘considerably amount of time’ whether he or she wants to be married or not. This person will now be considered as good as married. This basically defeats the purpose of a live-in.

Considering this, should one of us have the choice between a marriage and a live-in, it would make no difference what we opted for.  The live-in for all legal purposes is now just like a marriage. Which brings me to my fist point: is this legalization a move made by the govt. to discourage such relationships rather than to support people in such relationships?

 

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Expectations

Almost a decade ago I came across a quotation that said “Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups”. I can’t remember who said this, but it rung so true that I lived by it for a very long time. Eventually I have come to realize that while this quotation is absolutely true, there us a truer corollary: Assumption is the mother of all Expectations, which in turn is the mother of all Screw-ups.

Thus Assumptions and Expectations are inextricably linked. You start expecting when you make certain assumptions. You expect people to behave in a certain way when you assume that they belong to a selected category in your head. A child expects his mother to come and console him when he cries, since he assumes that it is his mother’s job, simply because she has done this in the past. I read once in a Sidney Sheldon novel, where one character tells the other that when you ASSUME, what you actually do is ASS-U-ME i.e. when you assume you make an ass out of you and me!

We make several assumptions on a minute by minute basis which give rise to expectations which in turn cause disappointment and unhappiness. Alexander Pope once said “Blessed is the man who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed”, and I think this is unquestionably true.  It is true that all problems start when we expect from others, but then, can we truly live without expectations? Is it wrong if we expect something from our life partners? How do we define the people from whom we can have expectations that will be met and those from whom it makes no sense to have expectations? Or can we have expectations from members of our immediate family?

In that case, if a parent expects something from their child, or vice versa, is there a chance that they will face disappointment? Or if we expect something from our best friend is there a chance that they will not live up to our expectations? I think the answer on both counts is an unfortunate resounding YES! At the end of the day we are all human, and we cannot keep living up to the expectations of others, be it parents, partners, children or friends. Socially we are required to carry out some duties and responsibilities towards each other, but we may not always do so. If all of us decide to base our expectations on the social norms, we can never be happy; in fact we will end up as disappointed and angry people.

Maybe we should only have expectations from ourselves. That way we can do all the good we want to and are happy in ourselves. The problem arises, when we think that if I can do so much for this person, can I not expect this person to do just a few good things for me? The answer my friends, is NO. We need a paradigm change in how we think. When we do something good for someone else, do we get pleasure out of it? Most often we do. So basically we do something for someone else because it gives us a sense of accomplishment and happiness. Now, if we choose to remember this as the first and foremost principle, rarely will we face disappointment.

The next time you cook something very special for your partner, think of the joy you got out of seeing their happy face. Then remind yourself that what you did was for your own joy, the fact that your partner felt great about it is just a by-product of your action. The objective of doing this was to achieve joy, which you did, period. Then you will not expect your partner to turn up with flowers or gifts the next day and will thus save yourself the disappointment, if they don’t turn up with anything! Make it your own responsibility to keep yourself happy, and then do what it takes. Sounds selfish? Not really, because more often than not you will get happiness by doing things for your family and friends, this makes them happy and makes you happy too…wow, now isn’t that a Win-Win for all!

Very often, in soap operas and in real life, I’ve heard a mother telling her child “I took care of you in my womb for 9 months, changed your diapers, fed you, stayed up with you and took care of you when you were sick, bought you things and made you a good grown up individual just to see this day?”. This anger comes from her frustrated expectations. She forgets that she bore a child because she wanted to be a mother, she took care of child because she got joy out of the motherhood it was not something she did as a favor to this person. Don’t misunderstand, I am not saying the child should be ungrateful and should not care for the sacrifices made by the mother. But at the same time the mother too should not expect her child to be eternally grateful for all that she did, it is not humanly possible. We humans are selfish, in everything we do we expect some return or the other; the return could be a simple sense of fulfillment, nothing wrong with that. By bearing a child and bringing that child up the mother experiences a sense of being complete, which is great. But to expect anything more than that can give rise to disappointment. One school of thought will say that the child should be grateful to the mother eternally, it is only fair. But that reminds me of what Dennis Wholey, an old American television host, once said that “Expecting the world to treat you fairly because you are a good person is a little like expecting the bull not to attack you because you are a vegetarian.”

The world is not fair, it can never be. It is crazy to expect it to be fair. Be assured, the quickest way to achieve unhappiness, anger and disappointment is to expect from others. Life cannot be based on expectations. To quote Charlotte Bronte “Life is so constructed that an event does not, cannot, will not, match the expectation.” The only person you can have expectations from is yourself, because it is then up to you and only you to realize those expectations and to live by them. 

Stop expecting your in-laws (parents-in-law and children-in-law) to live by your fundas, stop expecting your parents or children to pull you of bad situations, stop expecting every friend of yours to be there for you, stop expecting the government to do something good for you, stop expecting people to be nice to you, basically STOP EXPECTING. Start DOING what you want to do, for yourselves and for others and always always always remember, that you are doing what you are doing, because you are getting joy out of doing it. Don’t do it if you are getting no happiness out of it. It’s not worth it. Have great expectations, but only from yourself, not from others. It is up to you to be happy and not up to others to make you happy, don’t expect anyone to do anything to make you happy, that way when someone does do something that gives you happiness, it will be a pleasant surprise and will double your joy. Simple isn’t it...well not really, but I think we owe it to ourselves to try and do this, for our own sake.

And finally to end with the words of Mark Twain, remember, Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get! J

 

 

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Tolerant Indians

India is known as a secular and tolerant country, which makes us Indians tolerant and secular. We are secular and tolerant, no doubt about it but do we need to be so secular and so tolerant?

On 5th October, a few Bangladeshi immigrants were unhappy as they were not able to “express their freedom” and out of frustration they hoisted Pakistan’s flag at three places in Assam. It is beyond me to understand why Bangladeshi immigrants who are considered as Indians by the govt. of India would want to hoist a Pakistani Flag to express their freedom??? What did the govt. do about it? Nothing!

If you visit the BBC Country profile of India and see the map of India there, you will see that Kashmir is divided in 3 parts;

Part 1: India-Controlled Kashmir
Part 2: Pakistan-Controlled Kashmir and
Part 3: North-eastern most part of Kashmir that is shaded off in grey and is clearly not a part of India or Pakistan-Controlled Kashmir seems to be a part of China!

(See the map here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/country_profiles/1154019.stm)

And what has the govt. of India done about it? We’ve been fighting this war for ages and the result is still nothing!

At this rate the day is not far when half of the north eastern India would come under Bangladesh, Arunachal Pradesh would be taken by China and maybe Manipur would come under Myanmar.

But we are a tolerant country so maybe we will continue to tolerate that, just the way we tolerate so much bullshit all our lives! If someone passes a negative remark about Indians we just smile and say that their opinion why get in to a fight about it, we are tolerant. If someone occupies our land we say let’s “talk” about it, even if we talk for more than 50 years, we are tolerant. It is as if this gene of tolerance in us.

Day after day we adjust to our surrounding and make huge sacrifices because we are tolerant. The roads in India are bad, the govt. is not doing a good job, people take us for granted but we sit quietly, we get stuck in traffic jams for 25Kms, our policemen work purely on bribes as is the case with most govt. officials, but it is all ok, why? Because we are tolerant.

Not only that at our workplaces, if we work for 12 hrs as opposed to our foreign counterparts who work 8 hours, we don’t say anything about it. If people take credit for our work again we are tolerant and accept it. We tolerate everything that may seem unfair simply because we are trained to do so.

When family members violate our personal space, we tolerate it. When people misbehave with women, most women ignore it. When married women are mistreated by in-laws she is expected to tolerate it. Even with the dowry system becoming illegal, people still give and take dowry and we tolerate it. So much so that parents of a girl child will go to an astrologer and ask him, will my daughter ever divorce her husband and come back to our house; do you see that in her future? It is such a dreadful thought for them to have their daughters fighting with their husbands/in-laws against their torture/cruelty/lack of respect and finally leaving them and returning to her parents. Every daughter is told to compromise and adjust once she gets married. Every daughter is told that her husband’s house is her home now and she has to live there for the rest of her life and that she has to keep everyone happy. Even if the daughter sometimes complains to her parents that she is being treated badly, the parents still hesitate to ask her take action, they still tell her to be tolerant. It is as if we are trained to tolerate as much bullshit as we can, sometimes even more than what we can.

I still remember this incident that someone narrated to me. This happened in US, there was an Indian father who was scolding this 6yr old daughter and he was so upset with her that he raised his hand to hit her. This little girl, very calmly told her father “You don’t want to do that dad, if you hit me, I will call 911 and complain about it. My teacher told us in school today that it is not ok for parents to hit their children, so don’t do it”. The father was so shocked that he was absolutely speechless. This 6yr old has already learnt to not tolerate anything that may violate her space and her respect, and here we are, a lot older than this 6 yr old, but still tolerating everything that comes our way.

Why do we do it? What will it take for us to finally accept that we have a right to a good life, a safe life and a happy life? When will we learn to stand up and get what we deserve instead of just accepting every piece of shit thrown at us?

 

Friday, September 26, 2008

Hypocrisy and Interference

hy·poc·ri·sy: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

in·ter·fere: –verb -fer·ing: to take part in the affairs of others; meddle (often fol. by with or in): to interfere in another's life

 

What is the one thing that you hate the most?

Ask this question to the kids who’ve just turned in to adults and the prompt response of most of them is ‘Hypocrisy’. Ask the same question to mature adults and again, most of them will respond with ‘Hypocrisy’. 

But there lies a huge difference in the both these responses; while the young adults genuinely mean it and will spend a considerable number of years of their life in ensuring that they do not indulge in this, the mature adults response itself is a personification of hypocrisy. Ok, now don’t attack me for this, but it is true; most of the adults in today’s world are hypocritical, whether we like it or not. Maybe it runs in our blood, maybe it’s in our genes. It is amazing how many people on a daily basis practice the art of hypocrisy; it is just called different names. When politicians are being hypocrites it’s called being diplomatic, when businessmen do it, it is called being strategic and when families do it is called being Mother in laws!!!

How is it possible for someone to have 2 set of rules so different from each other for different sets of people? I completely understand that close family members can take certain liberties which others can’t and that’s ok, but that’s different from having 2 sets of rules for even close family members! I can’t understand how an individual copes with it. Fir e.g. let’s assume that a mother has 2 children, one son and one daughter (How ideal!! ;-)). Now this woman, somehow, over time manages to develop 2 sets of rules which she goes by; one for her son and one for her daughter. And before you assume that I am talking of the differences between a male and a female child, let me clarify that what am taking of are the rule books for her children’s partners. This mother has certain expectations of what her daughter’s husband should and shouldn’t do and how he should treat her daughter, which is all very well. However she is never too thrilled to see her own son doing all that with his wife, here she has different expectations. She wants her Son in law to pamper her daughter, buy her gifts, take her out often be caring and supportive, but should her son do all this then he gets lashings for it. He is labeled as “biwi ke pallu se bandha hua”, a wife’s doormat basically. For instance, if the son in law does not support her daughter when she is unhappy with his mother, then the son in law gets labeled as a mamma’s boy, which is just so terrible. But should her own son support his wife in any family argument, then immediately he is the bad guy and gets taunted as being ‘under control’ of this wife. Our entire life runs on these principles of hypocrisy and yet we have the audacity to say that the one thing we hate the most is hypocrisy; that answer in itself is the most hypocritical statement ever!

 

Come to think of it, this actually stems from a problem graver than just hypocrisy i.e. the problem of interfering.

What is it about being a parent that makes one forget all boundaries and makes one feel compelled to control children? Why do they continuously try to be so deeply involved with their children that individuality had no meaning for them? Why should institutions of a family interfere with the institution of marriage? While the two are deeply connected and are even related they have their own boundaries. It is true that the institution of marriage eventually gives rise to the institution of family, but when members of the institution of family move on to participate in the institution of marriage they need to be given space. One must remember that they too will start a new family one day and for that they need to be allowed some space and some distance from the older family. Parents need to learn to draw these lines; they need to learn to enjoy their life with each other instead of revolving their entire life around their children. I am by no means demeaning how their sacrifices for their children, but look at it this way, if you spend a large chunk of your life making sacrifices for your children, why not take some time out and enjoy your life for yourself. Once your children are married, let them manage their affairs, let them build their families, let them do what they want, after all you have provided them with the right values and hopefully taught them how to make the right choices in life. Let them put that knowledge to use while you try and catch up with all that you missed out on. Stop interfering with your children’s life and families, don’t try and control or monitor them, let them make mistakes, get hurt if they have to, but they’ll learn, they’ll move on, after all they have all your values and teachings to guide them. Let them rely on those; you don’t need to remind them of those teachings day in and day out by monitoring their lives.

 

I know it’s difficult, especially after you have sacrificed so much of your life on nurturing them, but it is also necessary. Recently someone asked me why my parents (who are now 50+) still continue to run their respective businesses, especially my mother, considering that they have only one daughter who is now happily married and settled down. The logic of the question is, since the only child is now married and settled, what is the need to earn more money and fill their coffers! My answer is simple, it’s not about the money honey, they do it to keep themselves occupied. An empty mind is a devils workshop, and with all the silly soap operas and other crazy control freak parents around, it does not take too long to put that empty mind to work- for all the wrong reasons of course. So if my mother at the age of 51 is as physically and mentally active as a 30 yr old that’s great. If she has the enthusiasm for life, an eagerness to try out new things, an urge to enjoy her life I think it is outstanding! Like all other mothers she was not like this all her life, she too made innumerable sacrifices not just for her child but also for her family, she too gave up on a lot, but today she is making up for it. She now has her own life which she enjoys with my father. She watches the latest movies, goes shopping, has lunches with friends, all this while managing the house and her business. She is indeed some lady. Maybe I should get my mother to go and talk to some of these empty minded ladies about how to learn to enjoy their life, how to catch up on lost time and how not interfere with their children’s lives.

 

I think we as women owe this to ourselves, we are the next generation and it is up to us whether we continue the legacy or turn to a new leaf...

 

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Time to let Children be Children and Adults be Adults

There is something drastically wrong with today’s parenting style. Parents egg on their children to behave like adults and talk like adults, to such an extent that they lose all their innocence. And once these children actually become adults and start having a life of their own, they treat these adults more and more like kids!
We see dozens of kids on TV today participating in reality shows and saying things which at their age we did not even think of! They are superb politicians, playing the reality game so well that you almost fall off your chair. Talk to these little people and you will hear some of the most amazing things from them. They discuss unimaginable topics with you, are terribly street-smart and make comments that even we would hesitate to make. They are Bold and Ready to take on the world, all at an age when they should be in the play grounds having fun. Even when they are playing, it’s not the old “House-House” game or snakes and ladders or ludo, they are playing “Office-Office”, they are role-playing their parents, pretending to be taking business calls, booking themselves in first class on flights and flying all over the world for work, just like Mom/Dad. Is this growing too much too soon or is it a part of adapting to the new world? Frankly, I am not so sure. The parents love this about their kids, boast about it and show off as if it’s a major Gold win at the Olympics.
But then as soon as these kids become adults, get jobs, get married and have their own life, these same parents suddenly realize that their “kids” want to cut off the umbilical cords, and this is somehow not acceptable to them. The kids are now full grown adults but somehow parents can’t see this, can’t accept this. Actually its very confusing, on one hand these parents want to become grandparents as soon as their kids get married, conveniently forgetting that this means their kids will have to become adults and more importantly parents and on the other they still want their umbilical cords to remain intact!
And God forbid, if they move to different cities, well phone companies will make crazy loads of money! It’s amazing how they have a need to talk not only on a daily basis but multiple times on a daily basis! And if they miss one call then it’s like all hell breaks loose, they panic and worry as if one missing call means the worst possible has happened to you. Have they never heard about “No news is good news”? Do they not realize that if something goes wrong they’ll definitely hear about it? It is too much of an expectation to keep that children will call their parents multiple times and give them a report of their daily life, and frankly what can you talk about every single time? Does it not become a mere formality then, and if it does, then why do it at all?
Do the children not need some space of their own to bond, to grow together and have a family-life with each other as well? It is necessary to remember that it is only when these “kids” realize that they are grown up and have responsibilities that they will be able to start their own families. It would be wise if parents realized that the kids are now adults and need to be treated as such. In a relationship with our partner we can always talk of how we need ‘space’ but how do you explain this to parents?
Parents today need to acknowledge the fact that there is an age for everything, when your children are small; that’s when you can monitor them, guide them, question them, keep tabs on them and interfere in their lives to help them become good adults, that’s when you can let them be kids, but once they grow up, you can’t control them anymore and boss them around. They are individuals with a mind and life of their own which they have a right to live
It is necessary to realize that it’s not nice to see small kids talk and behave like adults and it’s definitely utterly displeasing to see adults being treated like children. It’s best to let children be children and adults be adults, that’s the only natural way to live happily and that’s how everyone deserves to live.

Friday, August 29, 2008

My first post

Well I've finally done it, after years of contemplating I have finally created my own web space, one where I can pour out my thoughts. Its a huge achievement! Ok so thats all Ive got for now, i will be back..with more...i little later :)
Till then BYE!