Jump to content
Guest Question

Rishta problem

Recommended Posts

Guest Question

So a rishti wali had given my mother a potential match for me to go a visit, the girl ticks all the boxes in what we are looking for, she is tall, pretty, educated and her family are quite well off.

I went to meet her and the family along with my mother, father and two sisters and we thought the family came across nice, the mother of the daughter was a little over bearing but we just put it down to nerves, I had some "alone" time with the girl in the front room and I got to chat a little with her, she seems down to earth and is even more pretty in real life than on the photo, I must admit i do fancy her abit.

after the meet up my mother told the girls mum that we will let them know in a few days time but before that will be doing some check, the girl mum looked abit taken aback that we wanted to do checks but agreed.

anyway long story short, my mother has found out that the girl has an older sister that we were not told about and this sister has been gone from the family for over 10 years now. Apparently she has ran away from home and is own with a Muslim guy. The family hasn't seen her since but I'm not sure if this rishta is right?

i do like the girl but it's strange that her sister ran off, why did she run off, what if the girl is like her sister, I find it worrying that the family of the girl didn't tell us about there other daughter when we asked how many siblings the girl had, they never mentioned the oldest sister.

should we decline the rishta or should I give it the benefit of the doubt and go ahead with the rishta? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Guest Jacfsing2

You haven't mentioned enough to actually judge to situation, did she run off while she was engaged? 

Just as a note, you can tell that the family doesn't approve of this, especially since they haven't met since her departure. Also judging someone based on what their family is, isn't the right way of going things: like I'm an Amritdhari and my family isn't. (Should I be judged that they haven't taken Amrit?)

If you trust her the person, go and say yes, if not say no, but don't waste everyone's time, (in most traditional Subcontinental Rishte you have to make the decision then and there, this family has already been lenient enough to wait long enough).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jacfsing2 said:

(in most traditional Subcontinental Rishte you have to make the decision then and there, this family has already been lenient enough to wait long enough).

There and then? Says who? Don't be silly, that was like 30years ago, you can have time to decide, it's a decision that affects the rest of your life, and it would be stupid to expect to give an answer on the spot. Same goes for the girls side too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there's doubt, then bring this issue to an end amicably and without any form of tamasha. You don't have to burn your bridges.

An overbearing female presence was the first alarm. That type of woman usually unwittingly transfers her behavioural patterns to her daughters. If the girl you're interested in, through no fault of her own, believes that's the norm in all families you WILL be dominated and pushed around after marriage. Her initial docility and agreeable behaviour is standard procedure when hoping to attract a partner through the Punjabi engagement framework. It's a facade that will be discarded once the relationship has been solidified.

The missing sister admittedly is none of your business at this stage, but now that you know, it's another warning signal. Don't let your male brain lure you into something unsavoury because you find the girl attractive. Whilst it would be unfair to tar all siblings with the same brush due to the actions of one, you need to judge the situation in a manner that goes beyond, "She's fit so she's perfect in every way." Are you capable of adjudging a woman's relative strengths and weaknesses dispassionately? 

Hopefully you're strong enough to listen to those doubtful voices that moved you to create this topic, but something tells me you're hoping for replies to encourage you to go ahead with the engagement. I hope I'm wrong. 

Edited by MisterrSingh
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2017 at 10:14 PM, Guest Question said:

So a rishti wali had given my mother a potential match for me to go a visit, the girl ticks all the boxes in what we are looking for, she is tall, pretty, educated and her family are quite well off.

I went to meet her and the family along with my mother, father and two sisters and we thought the family came across nice, the mother of the daughter was a little over bearing but we just put it down to nerves, I had some "alone" time with the girl in the front room and I got to chat a little with her, she seems down to earth and is even more pretty in real life than on the photo, I must admit i do fancy her abit.

after the meet up my mother told the girls mum that we will let them know in a few days time but before that will be doing some check, the girl mum looked abit taken aback that we wanted to do checks but agreed.

anyway long story short, my mother has found out that the girl has an older sister that we were not told about and this sister has been gone from the family for over 10 years now. Apparently she has ran away from home and is own with a Muslim guy. The family hasn't seen her since but I'm not sure if this rishta is right?

i do like the girl but it's strange that her sister ran off, why did she run off, what if the girl is like her sister, I find it worrying that the family of the girl didn't tell us about there other daughter when we asked how many siblings the girl had, they never mentioned the oldest sister.

should we decline the rishta or should I give it the benefit of the doubt and go ahead with the rishta? 

 

Where about is the location of this Ristha? 

The reason I ask is because if its from certain parts of Birmingham or Bradford I would stay clear. People from those parts have a bad reputation.Also you mention the older girl has run off.  Siblings tend to mimic each other and as the younger of the siblings she may have learnt bad traits from the older sibling such as dating around ect.  I cant say for certain that is the case but you must proceed with caution. It was also bad that they were not upfront with the older sibling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
20 minutes ago, simran345 said:

There and then? Says who? Don't be silly, that was like 30years ago, you can have time to decide, it's a decision that affects the rest of your life, and it would be stupid to expect to give an answer on the spot. Same goes for the girls side too. 

😄 That was meant to be silly, (you can tell that I'm saying the truth since I'm straight-up). But what I will say is this and this is legit none of that joke 😑: you can live with someone your entire life and not know a single thing about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

😄 That was meant to be silly, (you can tell that I'm saying the truth since I'm straight-up). But what I will say is this and this is legit none of that joke 😑: you can live with someone your entire life and not know a single thing about them.

That's true also. But as life goes on you do get to know them more, which is what happens mostly after marriage. Before, you will only know bits and bobs. 

@Jacfsing2, by the way, don't you ever sleep over there. When it's our day, you're online then. Chakkar ki a ? 😏

Edited by simran345
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
10 minutes ago, simran345 said:

@Jacfsing2, by the way, don't you ever sleep over there. When it's our day, you're online then. Chakkar ki a ? 😏

It's a little bit before Noon. (I have to wake-up early for college most of the time, so right now it's considered late morning for me).

13 minutes ago, simran345 said:

That's true also. But as life goes on you do get to know them more, which is what happens mostly after marriage. Before, you will only know bits and bobs. 

I agree, but sometimes there are times when I feel like I don't even know who I am. So forget anyone else, I feel like I know myself, but when I see people much better than me, (this isn't me being humble), I realize how little I know about myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

It's a little bit before Noon. (I have to wake-up early for college most of the time, so right now it's considered late morning for me).

I agree, but sometimes there are times when I feel like I don't even know who I am. So forget anyone else, I feel like I know myself, but when I see people much better than me, (this isn't me being humble), I realize how little I know about myself.

What you about. Noon da lagda. Thought you was in USA? Which country are you in? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
1 minute ago, simran345 said:

What you about. Noon da lagda. Thought you was in USA? Which country are you in? 

I am, for me it's around noon, (the official time in my area is around 8:00).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

I agree, but sometimes there are times when I feel like I don't even know who I am. So forget anyone else, I feel like I know myself, but when I see people much better than me, (this isn't me being humble), I realize how little I know about myself.

Sounds like you have repressed homosexual tendencies aching to break through to the surface. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
2 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Sounds like you have repressed homosexual tendencies aching to break through to the surface. 

No, nothing like that. I'm talking about in a situation of sometimes viewing myself as this good person, but when I see the pure-hearts of others, it makes me understand how terrible I am. 😢 But no it's not related to my sexual orientation, or anything remotely related to sex, more on my personality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/04/2017 at 10:14 PM, Guest Question said:

So a rishti wali had given my mother a potential match for me to go a visit, the girl ticks all the boxes in what we are looking for, she is tall, pretty, educated and her family are quite well off.

I went to meet her and the family along with my mother, father and two sisters and we thought the family came across nice, the mother of the daughter was a little over bearing but we just put it down to nerves, I had some "alone" time with the girl in the front room and I got to chat a little with her, she seems down to earth and is even more pretty in real life than on the photo, I must admit i do fancy her abit.

after the meet up my mother told the girls mum that we will let them know in a few days time but before that will be doing some check, the girl mum looked abit taken aback that we wanted to do checks but agreed.

anyway long story short, my mother has found out that the girl has an older sister that we were not told about and this sister has been gone from the family for over 10 years now. Apparently she has ran away from home and is own with a Muslim guy. The family hasn't seen her since but I'm not sure if this rishta is right?

i do like the girl but it's strange that her sister ran off, why did she run off, what if the girl is like her sister, I find it worrying that the family of the girl didn't tell us about there other daughter when we asked how many siblings the girl had, they never mentioned the oldest sister.

should we decline the rishta or should I give it the benefit of the doubt and go ahead with the rishta? 

If you don't want the rishta because of these doubts, move on.

There are plenty of other girls.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The US are only the in Syria region because they had their arms twisted to get rid of ISIS. The reason? Because Russia was there doing that job. Russia was good buddies with Asad's regime and they are allied with Iran. USA are not on good terms with Iranian regime and wants to get rid of them. Asad is Druze (they are a Shia sect) and this minority rules Syria which has a Sunni majority as well as your regular Shias and Christians. There is no way that the US wants Iran to have influence in the region. Lebanon has a very large Shia  population,  that is where Hezbollah come from and they have traditionally allied with Syria regime and Iran (Shia boys united). Hezbollah rule South Lebanon and have given Israel loads of grief in the past. Saudi cannot stand Iran and they don't like Syria. They want to play a part in dismantling Iran's influence. ISIS has had a lot of their insurgents from Saudi, they want to get rid of Asad. Iran in turn supports the Houti rebels (Shias in Yemen) and Shia majority areas in Saudi which is coincidently where Saudi's oil fields are based. Iraq which is now run by Shia's in the south and Kurds in the north. Saddam Hussain was Sunni and the Iraqi Sunni are no longer in power.  That is where a lot of ISIS support comes from as well as Saudi and as well as Turkey who also hate Syria. They think Israel is complicit in this as they all have common interests.  So you have Syrian regime + Iran + Hezbollah + Yemeni Houthis + Iraqi Shias + Russia vs Saudi+ Israel + Turkey. Turkey has been growing it's Islamic ness in the last few decades and with Erdogan are flexing their muscles, they want to be Ottomans again. The Ottoman Empire controlled large parts of the Middle East and controlled Mecca and Medina, Islam's holy sites. Iraq is controlled in the north by the Kurds. Kurds are not Arabs, they are an Iranian speaking people. It is a de-facto Kurdish republic. The pisses off the Turks because they do not want their Kurds in Turkey to get any ideas. Also there is a lot of oil in the Kurdish controlled Iraq. With instability in Syria and the Asad regime not being in total control, it means that there is a vacuum in power. It stands to reason that the Kurds in Syria will fight back against ISIS and it stands to reason that the Kurds in Iraq will support them. So you end up with two Kurdish controlled regions. One in Iraq and one in Syria. The Turks are s****** themselves. What happens if these two regions become one breakaway country? They have oil too. The Kurds in Turkey will want to breakaway. (The govt in Turkey don't like calling the Kurds Kurds, they want to call them Mountain Turks.) The only thing they don't have is the pipelines to export it. That is why Turkey was interested,  they can control that area and build oil pipelines to the Mediterranean so they can export the oil. Erdogan's family is complicit in the traffiking of the oil supplies. Turkey's Turk population is experiencing a serious decline, the Kurds have a higher birth rate therefore the Turks are scared that the Kurds may become a majority.  What I have explained so far is far too simple and it goes beyond even that.
    • Here is some history about the Ottomans. They were a turkic people like the Mughals.  Like the Mughals who bred with Rajput women, the Ottomans did the same with the locally conquered women: https://www.thoughtco.com/ottoman-sultans-were-not-very-turkish-195760
    • Thread from an Albanian friend of mine (Albania is a formerly part of the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans) so he has far better understanding than I ever will.
      There are aspects that can be related to our people and the history of partition (but this guy does not like Greeks or Turks very much), but I suspect if you ask a Greek he may have different point of view:


       Okay thread.

      Topic:

      TURKEY HAS "LEGAL RIGHT" TO ETHNIC CLEANSE THE KURDS.

      Not a joke.

      1/

       During the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, ethnic groups were spread out across the empire.

      Once ethnic states started to appear with the creation of Greece by Germans in 1827, a chain reaction ensued across Ottoman Rumelia (aka Land of Romans), the mess started.

      2/
       Long story short, Bulgaria, Serbia, Romania, Montenegro, Albania, Turkey etc were created over the course of 100 years from the Roman Revolution in 1822, now known as the Greek Revolution.

      3/ During these 100 years, from 1822 to 1923, (literally 101 years), was to find a way to pinpoint all borders in order to avoid ethnic conflicts, within each new ethnic state multiple ethnicities resided, which itself had multiple religions, which was normal for the ottomans.

      4/
       There were Orthodox Greeks and Muslim Greeks, orthodox bulgarians and muslim bulgarians, orthodox serbs and muslim serbs, orthodox albanians and muslim albanians, orthodox turks and muslim turks.

      And all were spread UNEVENLY across the collapsing empire.

      5/
       In the meantime what we now call Western Europe, was going through an ethnic consolidation as well, as German elite was trying to create Unified Germany, which they achieved in 1871, excluding the Austrians, who refused to be Germans.

      6/ Long story short, by late 1870s onward, Ottoman elite was getting together with the western elite, aka Big Powers, to solve the mess.

      It started with Congress of Berlin in 1878, then Treaty of London in 1913, it ended with Lausanne Treaty in 1923.

      7/ During these years, Balkan Wars occurred and the weakest links were sacrificed to achieve some kind of managed peace in the Balkans.

      It started with Otto von Bismarck, the first Chancellor of the unified Germany declaring:

      "The Albanian nation does NOT exist".

      8/
       So, the only way to find any solution was to assert that X nation does NOT exist at all or does not exist in X area, there was no other way.

      9/
       So, that is what they did.

      What is now called Greece, it used to be a mixture of Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Vlachs (Romanians) and Turks.

      Baaaaam, nobody else exists, only Greeks. Decision made.

      10/
       The only reason that Albanians now exist, is because at last moment a Hungarian prince raised the issue with the Austro-Hungarian emperor, that if Albanians do not exist, then Serbia/Russia would have access to the Adriatic.

      The Emperor freaked out. Albanians exist he said.

      11/
       Long story short, after 101 years, all comes down to the Lausanne Treaty in 1923 between Greece and Turkey.

      12/
       In the Lausanne Treaty, it was codified the practice of deciding whether a nation exists or not.

      Venizellos and Mustafa Kemal, one orthodox greek and the other muslim greek (Ataturk spoke greek fluently), simply decided that any orthodox was Greek and any muslim was Turk.

      13/
       So, within Greece, per Lausanne Treaty now codified as international treaty supported by big powers, all orthodox were forced to be hellenized, all albanians, bulgarians, vlachs and turks.

      14/
       Per the treaty as well, codified as international law, anybody inside Turkey, whether turks, greek, albanian, bulgarian, or ....KURDISH, simply did not exist, there were only Turks in Turkey.

      15/
       Hence per the treaty, anybody had to be Turkified, like in Greece anybody had to be hellenized.

      The problem here, and I understood this by reading Taleb saying "scale matters", the problem is that it takes long time to Hellenize and Turkify large populations.

      16/
       Based on past practice now codified in international law, Greece and Turkey intensified now openly what they say "population exchange", which was LEGAL MUTUAL ETHNIC CLEANSING, now codified in international law.

      17/ Greece, per the law, ethnic cleansed all muslims from Greece, except for the ones in Thrace, which was part of the treaty.
        Turkey per the law ethnic cleansed all orthodox from Turkey, except the ones in Constantinople, which was part of the treaty, they moved to Greece. 18/ These ethnic cleansing did not happen instantly, it took decades to be completed, literally decades. In 1945, Greece ethnic cleansed "muslims" from Chameria per the Lausanne Treaty, they were all Albanians. 19/ Yugoslavia, made a deal with Turkey in the 1960s to have about 400k "muslims" moved to Turkey. The offer from Ankara was 1 horse for 3 muslims (no joke, as they were all Albanians). The serbs replied: take them all for free, as long as all albanians leave. 20/ The tricky part of this one is that Turkey wanted these 400k Albanians to displace the Kurds in East Turkey. Of course Albanians refused, they settle in West Turkey. So, the plan to ethnic cleanse the Kurds by use of Albanians, failed. 21/ In 1999 Abdullah Ocalan, Kurdish fighter against Turkey was arrested in Kenya after the Greek government delivered him into the hands of the Turkish gov, fully complying with the Lausanne Treaty. 22/ So, as you see, it is Turkey's right legally, per lausanne treaty, to ethnic cleanse the Kurds. 23/ The only difference here is USA. USA does NOT recognize international treaties which come against its interest, it is in the US constitution. Hence, USA disregarded the Treaty of London of 1913 giving Kosovo to Yugoslavia, simply invaded KS away from Serbia. 24/ USA is disregarding Lausanne Treaty as well now, by organizing the Kurds together against Turkey. It takes time, but they will do it, as Turkey is now basically an enemy. 
      Give it 20-25 years, just like with Kosovo. 25/ END  
       
    • Erdogan in June 2015:

      “I’m addressing the whole world. Whatever the cost it might be, we will never allow a state established in Northern Syria”

      Why does he not want a Kurdish state in Northern Syria? I know why, does anybody know why?
    • What caste pride do I have? Only Juts have caste pride? Let's get back to the question of Kurds. Instead of looking at the situation from the filter of only British colonialism and caste, what do you actually understand about the whole situation of the Kurds in it's entirety? Do you understand the history of the Kurds, their relationship with the Ottoman Empire, their role in exterminating the Armenians from Eastern Anatolia (1915 genocide) the carving up of former Ottoman lands (sandjuks) in the picot sykes agreement. The effect of the Lausanne Treaty between Greece and Turkey. The role of the Young Turks and Ataturk. The relationships of the Kurds in the 4 countries I have mentioned with Shias/Sunni Arabs/Turks in those respective countries. The relationships and groups within those Kurdish groups, the demographic changes in Turkey. The effect of Erdogan and his family's relationship with the intention of supporting ISIS so that the gas/oil pipelines can be transmitted through Turkey. That is just the tip of the iceberg. There are whole geopolitical implications here that involve Iran, Iraq, Eastern Med, Russia, parts of the caucuses, even parts of the Balkans are impacted. It is very complex and far more nuanced. Compared to that, subcontinental politics is a picnic. You'd be really shocked to see the level of hatred between these people. A real eye opener. You might make some synergies with struggles of our panth with the Kurds but that is an over-simplification.  If you want to do rajniti, you have to understand everything in it's entirety and not what suits us.      
×

Important Information

Terms of Use