After reading the whole thread ( i cant believe i did ) I do agree with some of the responses but disagree with a lot of them as well, khair responding to PCGs original question, in our culture this is an unfortunate truth that yes it is acceptable for men to have pasts and not girls and it is a sad reality, however is it correct, well i do not agree with that, my thinking is that and i stand by it that if i had a past i should be man enough to accept the girl for who she is now and not judge her by her past, we were all young and while hormones are high things happen, emotions are on a high, i know a lot of ppl might come back and say well "i dint do anything while i was in that age" well good for you mashaAllah, I hate the double standards of desis that guys can do whatever before marriage but for marriage they want a shareef see Virgin larkee, I mean c`mon, uss larkee ka kya jis ko aapney khwaab dikhaaye, kaam kiya aur phir key aisee larkee key saath kon shaadi karega jo shaadi sey pehley hee itnee free hai? Khair I do agree with SHAZ1 that donon key consequences different hotay hain and larkiyaan have a lot more to loose and a lot more to suffer lekin** if a guy has done that to a girl then should be man enough to support her as well in those times. **Khair i can ramble on all day about this and not make sense. But guys with experience and as an advise to the younger crowd here all of this LOVE and relationship ka panga is very tempting and initially is very nice but seriously its not worth it, I am not going to bring Islam into this lekin apart from that as well its not right to either.
Good luck guyz !!!!
Regarding the bit in bold, my Mum told me once that sometimes in villages 'back home' if a boy is known to have gotten a girl pregnant he is forced to marry her. Perhaps if this was more common and these idiots were made to follow thru on the consequences of what they've done they'd change their attitudes.
Regarding the bit in bold, my Mum told me once that sometimes in villages 'back home' if a boy is known to have gotten a girl pregnant he is forced to marry her. Perhaps if this was more common and these idiots were made to follow thru on the consequences of what they've done they'd change their attitudes.
After reading the whole thread ( i cant believe i did ) I do agree with some of the responses but disagree with a lot of them as well, khair responding to PCGs original question, in our culture this is an unfortunate truth that yes it is acceptable for men to have pasts and not girls and it is a sad reality, however is it correct, well i do not agree with that, my thinking is that and i stand by it that if i had a past i should be man enough to accept the girl for who she is now and not judge her by her past, we were all young and while hormones are high things happen, emotions are on a high, i know a lot of ppl might come back and say well "i dint do anything while i was in that age" well good for you mashaAllah, I hate the double standards of desis that guys can do whatever before marriage but for marriage they want a shareef see Virgin larkee, I mean c`mon, uss larkee ka kya jis ko aapney khwaab dikhaaye, kaam kiya aur phir key aisee larkee key saath kon shaadi karega jo shaadi sey pehley hee itnee free hai? Khair I do agree with SHAZ1 that donon key consequences different hotay hain and larkiyaan have a lot more to loose and a lot more to suffer lekin if a guy has done that to a girl then should be man enough to support her as well in those times. Khair i can ramble on all day about this and not make sense. But guys with experience and as an advise to the younger crowd here all of this LOVE and relationship ka panga is very tempting and initially is very nice but seriously its not worth it, I am not going to bring Islam into this lekin apart from that as well its not right to either.
The creator of this thread, PCG, simply posed a question. She wasn't bashing the men. YET......the few men who HAVE responded to this thread have so quickly jumped to labeling thinking women as "Feminists." Oh how hilarious.
It seems to me that a woman becomes a "feminist" when she chooses to think critically about issues. A woman becomes a "feminist" when uses her brain. A woman becomes a "feminist" when stands up for herself and her** basic** rights. And a woman becomes a "feminist" when she gets upset and complains or if she has preferences and opinions. And overall........a woman becomes a "feminist" if she begins to make more sense than a man.
And what shall we call a man who can't even comprehend the most simplest and basic of concepts? A **Neanderthal? **It seems a more fitting label than "chauvinist."
