And assumption of remaining in saat parda with limited interaction with the opposite gender also doesn't completely remove the possibility of infidelity.
Here's the thing, I'm not disagreeing with the idea that interaction with the opposite gender needs to be balanced carefully and that certain interaction is either on its face inappropriate or is a recipe for disaster.
All I'm saying is that platonic friendships between guys and girls is possible and shouldn't be a conclusion of a bad character of either of a person.
Basically we are all saying the same thing, albeit, in different words.
I think it's really presumptious for women to assume that men in the workplace are out to lure them via lunches and dinners and whatnot. Guess what, most men (yes, goras too) are decent, shareef people just like you. Things get weird if you make them. There is nothing wrong with having friendly conversations with your colleagues, male or female, or even calling/chatting with friends of the opposite sex. As long as you know your limits and maintain your dignity, things will be fine.** If a colleague or friend starts acting inappropriate,** you do have the option of ending the acquaintance then and there.
Not always!
Ek ho to baat ho! I was a field engineer a little while ago and did not have a single woman at my workplace. I had to be blunt many times to many men at work. They will retaliate if you reject their advances. I had to be mean! I am not normally mean. I am speaking from experience.
Sometimes your only option is to change jobs (which I did) because you can't escape the prying eyes or being judged. I have come to know that most men (married or not) will take as much advantage of you as they can if they can get away with it. They will not stop until you reach your boiling point.
And assumption of remaining in saat parda with limited interaction with the opposite gender also doesn't completely remove the possibility of infidelity.
Here's the thing, I'm not disagreeing with the idea that interaction with the opposite gender needs to be balanced carefully and that certain interaction is either on its face inappropriate or is a recipe for disaster.
All I'm saying is that platonic friendships between guys and girls is possible and shouldn't be a conclusion of a bad character of either of a person.
No one is talking about avoiding the opposite sex, and suggesting that is misleading. We're clearly talking about specific people, who you are not married to, whom you spend a significant amount of time with. And I did state, repeatedly, that platonic friendships are possible but require some careful boundaries. I also stated that having a platonic friend should not be taken as a slight on someone's character.
My replies have been to people who would deny that boundaries aren't needed, and that male-female friendships are no different from same sex friendships.
/thread
Said that like 2 pages ago but yes. At the same time, avoiding same opposite sex friendships is within the bounds of Islam. I am not religious at all, and I'm surprised that, since most of you are, I have to be the one advocating for people who want to do so, without being called dinosaurs.
The only issue I take is with the religious insulting people who do have platonic friendships.
Said that like 2 pages ago but yes. At the same time, avoiding same opposite sex friendships is within the bounds of Islam. I am not religious at all, and I'm surprised that, since most of you are, I have to be the one advocating for people who want to do so, without being called dinosaurs.
The only issue I take is with the religious insulting people who do have platonic friendships.
I am not religious :D
I can understand your point, however say you're married and your co-worker is a bombshellbabe, okay sorry BSB, would you really think about getting it on with her? And do you really think you would ever fall under the temptation to do so?
I don't agree with that. If a person truly loves their spouse then atleast there should be self-control.
Also as for friendships that need boundaries, if someone hasn't been steamy with a friend before marriage why would they suddenly break that tradition after marriage?
Obviously I’m not married but out of curiosity (read an article on it) I decided to research infidelity and this book came up a lot. I read quite a bit of it too, but long story short, humans are animals and you put us in the right situation, with the right people, and even “happily” married people can stray. This is not my opinion. This is what research into extramarital affairs has proven. Puts a bit of a hamper on liberal pseudoscience.
Let me repeat that: Even happily married people can stray if they put themselves in compromising situations.
To suggest that you have to be unhappy to cheat is apparently one of the biggest misconceptions about affairs. If you’re curious I suggest reading the book but reading the reviews on Amazon is an eye opener as well. And just as an fyi, the woman who wrote the book is a proponent of platonic relationships (but with boundaries), and actually had a very successful one with her research partner, who was a male.
I hope I don't offend anyone but there seems to be a bit of hypocrisy in Desi culture in regards to interaction between the sexes. People don't seem to have any issue with interaction between the sexes EXCEPT in regards to "rishtas." Everyone is quite fine with mixed parties, mehndies, weddings and other mixed gatherings and is quick to point out how mixed gatherings are a personal decision but God forbid people interact when it comes to anything even remotely related to "rishtas."
Also, the same girls who whinge about "oh, the double standards" in regards to themselves later employ those same double standards when it comes to looking for a spouse for their own brothers. Hypocrisy, much?
thing is, nobody likes to admit that they don't have self-control or common decency. but i think if something keeps hitting you in the face enough times.. it just piles on the pressure to cave in. i guess that is why nipping these things in the bud is essential. and that doesn't necessarily mean just cut all contact, it just means being aware of the situation and dealing with it accordingly.
I don’t disagree much on the work related topic, however my definition of ‘compromising’ is different to yours. I don’t consider having lunches (not lunch but lunches) with an attractive person a compromising situation, if I am reading your posts correct you do. I do consider going out separately outside official hours with non-work related reasons potentially compromising yes.
As for friendships we have heard of people cheating with brother in laws or sister in laws. What then? Should we restrict their relationships too? And I don’t get your boundaries statement, how do you mean? If you mean not messaging 24/7 or meeting 24/7 or putting such relationships above marriage then me and you are on the same page. If you mean not being emotionally dependent on someone else or going and having a cry on their shoulder when a guy should be doing that with his wife then me and you are on the same page as well. Otherwise I don’t understand what you mean.
thing is, nobody likes to admit that they don't have self-control or common decency. but i think if something keeps hitting you in the face enough times.. it just piles on the pressure to cave in. i guess that is why nipping these things in the bud is essential. and that doesn't necessarily mean just cut all contact, it just means being aware of the situation and dealing with it accordingly.
You've misunderstood me entirely. I never said if someone is hitting someone in the face and being flirtatious means that should not be dealt with. That should be dealt with quickly and that person should be told to either cut it out or ignored.
What I meant was a normal woman and a normal man who during office hours having food together or their interaction is work related even if it s everyday. I don't see that being an issue, even if the person is smoking hot. If someone can keep it in their pants before marriage in similar situations then he can do so after marriage too.
