Baybay

re abroo

hey, abroo, you got my pseudonymn. thanks for sharing your comments and your experience. i agree, beyone all the disguise, the reason for not wanting an older wife is because they have to be treated like adults. i wish you had joined the disucssion ealier so that other readers could have read your thoughts also.

regards.

Dear Bad Girl:

First of all, I like your pseudonym, it has an in-your-face individualistic quality. In our society, we don t cherish individualism. Although, mere individualism could be viewed as detrimental to a culture, its complete absence, in my view, is one of the causes of our backwardness.

I am writing to you in reference to your article Baybay. There might be some good reasons for men to marry someone a few (or more) years younger. However, the underlying reason for this cultural behavior is male dominance (machismo). This is not restricted to our culture, it is prevalent in almost all societies, albeit more pronounced in ours.

Age brings a certain level of maturity that commands respect (especially in eastern cultures). Most men are not comfortable with women who seem mature and wiser than them. An older woman (when the age difference is significant) must be given a certain level of respect by her younger husband. This could be quite troubling for husband s ego (id and super ego as well). At the same time, it could cause problems for husband s immediate family, since they depend upon him to keep his wife under control.

Since most men do not want to blatantly proclaim their machismo, they usually provide logically feigned arguments. Sometimes these arguments take a utilitarian bent (not being able to bear children after a certain age, etc.). Essentially, these contrived reasons are used to convince women why men should not marry older women. In our culture, where questioning authority and being individualistic is a big negative, particularly for women, it is quite natural for women to accept this flawed reasoning.

Marriage is a bond between two individuals which is based upon a lot factors, such as, emotions, feelings, physical attraction, sex, compatibility, etc. For some people, age difference could be an important factor, but it should not be viewed as a negative or a positive attribute.

My wife is one and half years older than I am. We knew each other for long time before we got married. I didn t know (or cared) about our age difference. We fell in love and wanted to be with each other and that was the most important reason for us to be together.

I very strongly believe that young people in our culture should question and probe any culturally accepted norm or taboo subject (such as religion) which they find contradictory or anachronistic. This is the only way we will be able bring equity and fairness between sexes in our society.

Sincerely,

Abroo Shah

(212) 504-5393

FYI: Quid-e-Azam before marrying Ruttie was married to a relative who was much older than him. Z. A. Bhutto was also married to a cousin who was 16 years senior to him.

re aliya

ouch, ouch, i couldnt stop laughing. touche!!

Thank you for bringing up an important issue that once again highlights the differnces between the islamic and the cultural issues of pakistani marriages. While we often claim that we are muslim we often base our decisions on what is accpetable by our tradiations (note the large excesses and waste at many pakistani weddings-- money that could be very useful and helpful to the newly weds ). And this is not just a pakistani issue as BG notes.

On a simsilar note, I dont know if anyone in Pakistan has looked at it but how often do we see marriages between people in which the wife is taller than the husband. I remember reading an article in the british ``Economist`` a couple of years ago which highlighted this issue in the western society (so its not just a Pakistani thing :) )

Trying to be bit more objective on this suject, i read marriage ads by Pakistanis (both in the US and in Pakistan) on the internet.. The Unsuprising results:

Most women (and/or thier parents) want men taller and preferably older than themselves. Height seems to be bigger issue than age. As one ad by the parents put it ``no one under 5` 11`` should apply as our girls are rather tall!``

Most men want wifes younger than themselves. Some men listed minimum heights but most did not specifically state maximums (which may just be because they do not expect anyone taller than themselves to respond!!)

Interesting issues and hope to hear more about it at Chowk.

Re; Syed Ahmed

``Women do have a choice to raise children and then proceed with a career or not have children and pursue a career``.

Here is a third option, how about she realizes that the child has a father too and lets him stay at home for the child`s `formative years` while she pursues her career. If dad feels( rightly) that he does not want an entry level job at age 50 because the kids are going to need money for college soon,what do you suggest should be dad`s plan of action?

Also, should the full time working mom become disabled/ die unexpectedly, how will dad support his children with that entry level job?( Remember that in U.S, welfare for single parents is on its way out and in Pakistan, it never existed).

``On the contrary, there is so much evidence now that economic independence for women results in better health for them and
their children, increased levels of education in their sons and daughters, improved standards of living, increased life expectancy,
and reduced birth rates.``

Syed Ahmed quotes the above para from me and says:

``This is complete hogwash - please cite your sources, - greater education for women and I shall completely agree but economic independence that is sheer bull.``


Syed Sahab,

You obviously have no background to speak of, in this area, and are way out of your depth.

Take it from me - it has convincingly been shown that economic independence for women is an INDEPENDENT factor correlated with all the variables I cited above.

A study by my husband and colleagues in Orangi (Health, attitudes, and beliefs of working women. Social Science and Medicine 1990;31:1029-1033) showed the following (abstract quoted verbatim):

``A cross-sectional case-control study was conducted comparing [married] working women employed by the Women`s Work Centres of the Orangi Pilot Project with nonworking matched controls [matched for age, level of education, ethnic background, ownership of dwelling, presence of electricity in dwelling]. Differences in the knowledge, attitude,and practice of several variables were elicited.

Working women`s families had significantly higher immunization rates (73% versus 55%), and shorter duration of illness (5.9 days versus 8.8 days), compared to controls. More working than non-working women supported contraception (100% versus 74%), desired equal education for sons and daughters (83% versus 75%; p less than 0.005), and had a dominant role in family health decision-making (48% versus 12%). We conclude that these working women in Orangi have a better set of beliefs and practices than nonworking women and this results in better health of their children.``

Similar results have been found in numerous studies in India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh i.e better health indices are observed even after matching for level of education among families where women are wage earners. A good summary is Caldwell JC: Routes to low mortality in poor countries: Population and Development Review 12, No 2 (June 1986): 171-220.

John C. Caldwell has done tremendous work in the area of fertility transitions and women`s develoment issues.

If you are in the area and crave an enlightening experience, you could perhaps attend a seminar that he is giving in the near future in the Boston area. It is on Dec 1 at 1 pm at the Center for Population and Development Studies, Harvard Square (9 Bow Street).

Anita

Re: Anita Zaidi

`` interpreted by the couple as sharing the responsibility of child rearing, instead
of it always being gender-defined``

The responsibility of raising children is that of both the parents, - nobody denies that, but the fact remains that nature has defined a special bond for child and mother and no amount of paternal love can substitute for that. Ms Zaidi we can connot redefine nature for human expediency or political correctness.

``Also, what is the evidence that makes you think that increased economic independence of women, leads to WOMEN becoming
``UNREASONABLE``, and therefore leads to divorce, which is to be avoided at any cost?``


Nobody is claiming that economic independence for women leads to divorce. What I had mentioned, and I reiterate that economic independence does not guarantee domestic tranquility or general improvement in family welfare. The word ``UNREASONABLE`` is a figment of your fertile imagination Madam, - what I had stated agin eas that people who are career-centric particularly women tend to short-change family responsibilities for professional ones.


MS Zaidi - domestic violence is a result of ignorant and abusive men, - it is independent of the fact that the women are financially independent or not. If we criminalize domestic violence and create societal values that donot condone it eithr through education or through mass media - such practices will become less tolerated and hopefully there shall be a corresponding decrease. I dont wish women to be ignorant or economically dependent, - but economic depndence or independence is a secondary issue, - the primary one is education and pervasive cultural attitudes.

There are 572,000 reported cases of domestic violence in the US, - and these are the cases where the violence is substantial. SO were all these women financially dependent to endure abuse.
Robin Givens, Pam Lee Jones, Halle berry -are all independent women - but were all victims of domestic violence.

I do agree that finacially independent women tend to seek remedial recourse in a quicker time-frame. Nonethless it neither solves the domestic violence problem nor punishes the perpetrator.
It is sort of advocating the purdah as a recourse for avoiding rapists.

Again you take my word out of context, Human beings by nature are endowed was certain gender based advantages, - if the woman has fulfilled her primary responsibilities towards her children than she is free to do whatever she desires. But having children and letting strangers raise them in day care centers is not my idea of fulfilling family obligations and responsibilities -particularly in cases where the additional income is not required
( contingency situations notwitstanding)

``On the contrary, there is so much evidence now that economic independence for women results in better health for them and
their children, increased levels of education in their sons and daughters, improved standards of living, increased life expectancy,
and reduced birth rates.``

This is complete hogwash - please cite your sources, - greater education for women and I shall completely agree but economic independence that is sheer bull. As a matter of fact most american sociologists point to the fact that parenting in the US has been neglected big time particularly in two income housholds wherein day-care centers and school teachers have substitute as parents, consequently the high incidence of duysfunctionality amongst teenagers, alcohol abuse, drug abuse etc....

As a consequence we see an ever larger number of US women taking a haitus from work to raise families.

Ms Zaidi - siege mentality is a poor starting point for advocating any cause. - I agree that we have severe gender based issues affecting outr culture - but to margnalize and broadly paint most Pakistani men as medieval retards is uncalled for. Using your red neck analogy `` love the West or leave it`` pakistani women have the choice of marrying non-Pakistanis, - Madam the grass always looks greener on the other side partcularly from afar.

Ms Zaidi divorce is an easy recourse to suggest to some third party, - and is particularly the placebo for all domestic ills. Emotional abuse
or marriage related stress has to be resolve d within the context of the marriage, - unless it is extremelty severe. Any hard working professional can relate to the job related stress and boss related abuse we face on an ongoing basis. Marriages are about upps and downs, about people screaming at one another and about good times and bad. I wouldnt advocate divorce for minor skirmishes in the marriage - as for physical and recurrent pshycological abusive -one probably needs a remedy in divorce. Nonethless your assertion that the majority of Pakistani women suffer from pshychological and emotional abuse is bunch of baloney. It is paranoid generalizations such as these that are the main cause of a general backlash against femisists
in the US.

By your standards almost 100% of Western or Easterm relationships endure pshyological warfare, either one party threatening to walk out, or by domestic pshychological power-play that is common in most households. This is reality Ms Zaidi - Xanadu does not exist and Cinderella only appears in Disney movies.

Re: Anila

``Women work for the same reasons that men do, by choice and because of necessity. An abusive parental relationship, or extreme
poverty will put a child at a much greater risk than a happy single parent. ``

And to add to that a full time parent will certainly tend to provide a growing child with much better attention and much needed parental affection particularly during the formative years.

Women do have a choice to raise children and then proceed with a career or not have children and pursue a career. Pursuing a career ( financial constraints notwithstanding) and raising the child in a day care center is poor parenting and a complete screwup of proirities in life. There are no if and or buts about it. Women have achoice do what you like but for god sake dont justify greed and personal ambition at the expense of your kids well being as being politically correct or normal.

Re: Anil
For a while there people believed that certain races were incapable of intellectual activity. Fortunately, most (civilized) societies have learnt that have nots shouldn`t remain that way because the dominant people think that that is their role as determined by nature, the same argument applies to gender roles.
If you get the opportunity sometime, you might want to read the old books about what white folks genuinely believed about `negros` and `asiatic` races and their `natural` roles and `limitations`. Our understanding of `biological roles` is often prejudiced by our biases, so lets use common sense instead of biology.

Re: Syed Ahmed
Women work for the same reasons that men do, by choice and because of necessity. An abusive parental relationship, or extreme poverty will put a child at a much greater risk than a happy single parent .

Re: Anita
Informative as usual.

Re: Wasiq/ Ferozk/BG
I think the society`s expectation that marriage will produce children has some bearing too. An older woman is less fertile than her younger counterpart. So essentially a younger woman has a greater potential for producing a greater number of children. The agrarian mindset equates more children with prosperity.

Re: Anil

Am I correct to guess from your post that you`re advocating a supression of women`s rights in order to preserve the society`s sense of peace and security from chaos of such rights?

Granted, all the stats you quoted are right, but no one said that the west was perfect. Granted I am not a fan of Patricia Ireland, or the National Organization of Women nor of any ultra-liberal, or a conservative, group that seeks to create a political agenda out this issue. I agree with you that women`s liberation movements(at the present)have nothing in common with the aim they were founded for: to gain equality with men, but I still support the basic premise.

There is an unsaid hypocrisy in women`s liberation movements; between their words and their deeds. The two do not merge well. Why are all the women, who were crying foul when Anita Hill was being crucified, so silent when it comes to Clinton ? Is there a political justification...yes, there is.

Personally, I do not think that, going back to nature will help the situation. If we want to go back and prevent such sentiments from inflicting disorder in, what we consider to be, order, should we revoke the right of women to hold jobs; should we rescind their right to vote; should we hold them as prisoners to slave in our households; should we deny to them all the rights that make them our equal and should we, in the harmony of nature, relegate them to the status of property ? That way, we can move them around in our world so they blend in with the walls and not upset the delicately maintained order of our sense of decorum.

As we approach the last year of the present fin d`sieclé, let us dust away the cow webs of our institutionalized patriarchal, oliarchical, modes of thinking and instead we should be seeing the world with open minds. There is a word in German, kreigsgefahr, which when translated means mobilization. It is a call to arms; to prepare for war and your post sounded like the rallying cry of a male bastion under seige. Maybe, you should have added the words that the good citizens of Rome were shouting when Hannibal was knocking at the gates of Rome, ``Hannibal ad portas``. Transliteration: barbarians at the gates!

Cheer up ! The sisters of the seventies will still march for equality and I for one intend to stand back and enjoy the parade. Be a good mensch and pull up a lawn chair .....are those hot dogs kosher....oy!

Re: Wasiq

I have already stated in prior posts what I think of older women younger men relations. I am for it. I am not sure just kind of insights you are looking for, but if you can specify, I will certainly try to answer the question, if it falls within my experiences.

It is like one of those laws of phyics - every action has a reaction and since phyics is not concerned with age, neither should this be.

I think that the article raises very important issues, which are very much part of our social fabric. BG, you have done a great job in bringing this issue to light, and the ensuing debate (particularly the eloquent responses by Anita) has been very fruitful.

This issue is obviously not endemic to Pakistan, the question of age is present in all societies. That does not condone any particular behavior, however it does suggest that there are at least two different aspects of this issue. First is the social aspect, which deals with a systematic bias towards one sex. The second is an issue of biological motivations that give rise to social norms, even if they are based upon misconceptions.

It seems to me that there is no one simple solution to this, because both aspects are important ingredients in the decision making process of anyone who is confronted by this situation. However, a lot stands to be achieved, in the removal of the systematic biases and in debunking popular misconceptions about reproductive ability of older women, by simple and candid education.

I would also like to ask the following question to all people who are actively responding to this article (since they care about the issue):

To all the men, how many are associated with women much older than themselves?

To all the women, how many are associated with men much younger than themselves.

Without engaging people who are actually in such relationships, one cannot get a view of the actual dynamics.

Re: Syed Ahmed

And while I am on the subject of spousal abuse in Pakistan, let me also give you data on emotional abuse of women (the previous posting just talked about physical abuse).

The study sponsored by the Aga Khan University shows that 90% of married women in Karachi are subjected to ``psychological`` or ``emotional`` abuse. The terms are defined as ``threatening physical violence without follow-through, threatening divorce or separation from children, exerting Islamic ``male previlege`` in demanding sex, not letting wife meet her relatives (isolation from family), and/or ridiculing and demeaning in front of children or others.

Again, the findings were corroborated by an independent random sample of men who reported the same levels of this type of behavior.

As we wake up to gross human rights violations, systematically targeted against women, especially poor women, in Pakistan, I have a simple solution for you.

Just close your eyes, and imagine a fairy land, where the vast majority, if not all women in Pakistan are very happy in their family life, without ever needing to strive for independence; most girls are born with silver spoons in their mouths to be fed with, and taken care of all their lives, by their benevolent and ``mature`` male providers who believe in ``equity``. Divorce in such circumstances of course, would be unthinkable and entirely unnecessary!!

Anita

Anita

Syed Ahmed Sahab,

I do not think marital relationships should be confrontational - rather that each couple should have the freedom to decide for themselves what it is that they want from their relationship, instead of following some prescribed path. So using priniciples of (as you say) mutual respect and equity MIGHT be interpreted by the couple as sharing the responsibility of child rearing, instead of it always being gender-defined.

Also, what is the evidence that makes you think that increased economic independence of women, leads to WOMEN becoming ``UNREASONABLE``, and therefore leads to divorce, which is to be avoided at any cost?

I wonder what you would say to data that shows 37% of women from low- and lower-middle income groups in Karachi (area where the survey was done) report being physically abused by their husbands, almost a quarter of them severely enough to need medical attention at some point in their life. The most common form of abuse is slapping, followed by pulling hair, pinching, arm-twisting, kicking, and burning by cigarette butts. About 8% of the 37% have been stabbed. The study has been validated by another independent study of unrelated men who report similar levels of spousal abuse in their households. Data from India is also very similar (about a third of all married women are physically abused).

None of the women in Karachi had sought divorce or separation. All of them cited lack of independent economic means to support themselves as the reason they continued to stay. They essentially had no where to go, as their own families couldn`t or wouldn`t support them. Additionally, there was very strong correlation between wife beating and child beating.

One could argue that in these situations, divorce would have been healthier for the wife and children rather than staying in abusive relationships, as you would suggest.

Also, I should refer you to Amartya Sen`s writings which provide very strong indirect evidence of systematic discrimination against women. He refers to this as the ``disappearing women`` problem of South Asia and China (refers to less actual number of women in the population than would be expected, given longer life expectancies of women if one makes a comparison to other countries, even other developing countries), both regions that practice intense discrimination against women from the moment of birth.

Also, it would appear that you hold the view that women should become economically independent only if forced to by circumstances (i.e. husband is poor, disabled, dead). Besides the obvious fact that the vast majority of the world`s women are already in that situation, for those that aren`t, it would mean either of two things - either that they do not acquire the skills to become independent early on (i.e miss out on education and training in their younger years when it would be easiest to learn), or that if they do, they should then waste those skills cogitating at home shackled by multiple children that they shouldn`t have had in the first place. Developing countries can ill-afford this perpetuation of dependency.

On the contrary, there is so much evidence now that economic independence for women results in better health for them and their children, increased levels of education in their sons and daughters, improved standards of living, increased life expectancy, and reduced birth rates.

Syed Sahab, you are still arrested in the pre-industrial era, and unfortunately for us, the women of Pakistan, as well as our future generations, so are the majority of other Pakistani men.

Anita

Re: Anita Zaidi

RElationships particularly marriages are should be based on mutual respect and equity. ANd this can be acheived only if both partners are enligtened and mature. Your basic premise assumes that marriage is a confrontational institution, and women with economic independence are in a better position to negotiate their position. I inhgerently disagree with this premise - because marriage needs to be a complementary institution not a confrontational one.

Both men and women are endowed withe certain distinct and inherent biological advantages, and they are there for a reason. Women do have a choice - if they choose to have a family they must fulfill their obligations as a parent amd nurture their children`s needs to their best ability. A daycare center is shortchanging their child`s needs. And if women are profession-centric they should choose not to have children - like many in the west do and pursure their likes and dislikes.

I think you are referring to third-world projects
like the Grameen bank. THeir the issues are completely different. MOst of the families there are either fatherless or the man fails to fulfill his primary obligations ( either due to health/cultural/financial) reasons, therefore the women are forced to support families, -improving their lot will improve the quality of life because they are direct bread-winners.

NOw what I am arguing is that education and cultural enligtenment brings forth mature and equitable realtionships. Educated women by default tend to be economic independent. BUt arguing that economic independence improves the lot of women or their families is treatinmg the symptoms of the disease and not the disease itself - namely pervasive cultural and traditional attitudes.
I can give you arguments to the contrary - particularly in the west where economically independent women and men who tend to put their own interests and desires ahead of the family interests, consequently fail to compriomise, and as a result divorce. I am sure the beneficial impact of such behavior is evident in their progenys emotional, social and behaviorial well being. COnsequently what you are seeing is the West is a disntegration of the family system as
we perceive it. you just have to look at teh K-12 comparitive rankings betweeen the US and other developed asian countries to see the impact of this on the development of the next generation.
THe whole ``family values`` ring in american politics is an attempt to legislate familty values which could not be engendered at home.

NOw you have brougt about a completely red neck cliche ``love it or leave it``. MOst of us are economic refugees to the West, - and nobody denies, that the puritan values of strong social and collective consciousness, so conspiciously absent in our homeland, are the main reason that the west is developed. But by the same token, rugged and uncompromising individualism which promotes meritocracy and industry in the professional and social realm has often had a detrimental impact in their personal and family matters. The West in general and the US in particular have a `` survival of the fittest `` attitude in the realm of the family - the sick the aged and the elderly are convieniently discarded, or relegated as the responsibility of the state, - personal priorities often supersseed family requirements, consequently uncomprinissing attitudes abound, divorce rate is abominable,
the impact on children and family is disasterous,
- emotional dysfunctionality abounds even amongst bright and successful professionals. THat is the West I donot wish to engender in my children. you just have to look at the ABCD divorce rate of about 67% or the US divorce rate of 52% - to understand that economic independence of women is not a necessary criterion for personal or family well-being, assuming that you believe that most women in the west are economically independent. The reasons for domestic happiness and personal development are far more varied than you would have us believe.

Anita Zaidi:

``Yes, I do think the game of the ``pursuer`` and the ``pursued`` as being gender-defined will change.``

I respectfully submit. At best only 50 percent of our behavior is influenced by learning or environment the other 50 percent is hereditary. Unless we plan on altering our genetic and hormonal make up it would be impossible to change instincts like pursuit, hunter, protector, provider on the male side and the pursued, the gatherer, the nourisher, home maker on the female side.

``The reason that women start looking older (than men), in my mind, has a lot to do with expectations from life. Once the children grow up, and become independent, which happens to most Pakistani women in their late thirties (even 12-15 year olds are pretty independent), all that is left to look forward to in life is the childrens` marriage and grandchildren. Depression sets in, at they feel the lack of utility in their lives. Personal health suffers - and menopause hits as the final nail in the coffin.``

In my experience of Pakistani women I have not noticed any such depression. Fact of the matter is - as the kids grow the power of the woman in the house hold expands and she uses it with complete abandon. The poor man by this time is being relegated to the side line, he is told what is expected of him and all the kids support Mama. This decline in the man`s fortune continues till he is relegated to his room and to frequent trips to the mosque. I am talking in broad generalizations here.