Is man the head of the house?

[MisterrSingh]

47 minutes ago, RajKaregaKhalsa1 said:

I think this is meant to mean that the first person if necessary to go and fight is the man, then the woman because she will raise the kids (obviously the man will too). Not sure correct and forgive me I'm wrong.

Every human act doesn't necessarily need a metaphorical religious or spiritual justification in order for it to make sense. Some things just are. You can search the scriptures for all manner of reasons to justify nearly anything you like, but that doesn't make it any more valid.

[puzzled]

Every Guru, prophet, angel, avtar, rishi etc that has been sent down to lead mankind has come in the form of a man 

[puzzled]

They say everything has order/ dharma, when society forgets or changes this order then everything collapses. Currently, men have become lousy, forgotten their responsibility and women have decided to take things into their own hands in their own little crafty ways. thats why society is collapsing and producing weak men.  the state of society today is because that order has been changed. 

i think the government and other higher powers in society want men to be weak and lose that spark, they want men to be submissive, they do this through media and thats why porn and feminism was introduced.     no difference between porn and feminists  same thing 

[MisterrSingh]

21 minutes ago, puzzled said:

Every Guru, prophet, angel, avtar, rishi etc that has been sent down to lead mankind has come in the form of a man 

And there's nothing wrong with it.

To be fair, though, there have been a few notable women who managed great feats in the name of God.

[puzzled]

25 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

And there's nothing wrong with it.

To be fair, though, there have been a few notable women who managed great feats in the name of God.

off-course nothing wrong with it, god intended men to be leaders thats why every human god sent down to earth to guide people have been men. Even the panj pyare were men. 

Women find this hard to digest these days, thats because media encourages women to challenge everything. 

interesting how the more freedom and independence women are getting the more depressed they are becoming lol   

i read somewhere how women were less depressed during the world wars than they are now despite all the "freedom"

freedom is not breaking traditional ways and orders and barriers, you can be free from all social barriers and limits but still be unhappy, in fact most are. 

 

most the slappers you see today that think they are "free"  will be the lonely old cows of tomorrow 

[puzzled]

ਨ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਮਾਤ ਸੰਗਾ ॥

Na Pareeti Maata Saangaa ॥

੨੪ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਨਿਹਕਲੰਕ - ੪੦/੩ - ਸ੍ਰੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ

ਅਧੀਨ ਅਰਧੰਗਾ ॥੪੦॥

Adheena Ardhaangaa ॥40॥

They will have no affection for their mother and the people will become subservient to their wives.40.

੨੪ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਨਿਹਕਲੰਕ - ੪੦/(੪) - ਸ੍ਰੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ

[MisterrSingh]

1 hour ago, puzzled said:

most the slappers you see today that think they are "free"  will be the lonely old cows of tomorrow 

Never underestimate pathetic men who'll abandon their principles for a bit of attention and companionship. And thus the woman is rewarded and gratified despite her earlier indiscretions.

[Ranjeet01]

My 2 paise:

I think a lot of women will think men being leader of the house is some kind of privilege but actually it is responsibility. 

Men are the rock solid stoic structure of families.

Women look for leadership from their men. Don't follow their words, watch their actions. 

[dallysingh101]

2 hours ago, puzzled said:

ਨ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਮਾਤ ਸੰਗਾ ॥

Na Pareeti Maata Saangaa ॥

੨੪ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਨਿਹਕਲੰਕ - ੪੦/੩ - ਸ੍ਰੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ

ਅਧੀਨ ਅਰਧੰਗਾ ॥੪੦॥

Adheena Ardhaangaa ॥40॥

They will have no affection for their mother and the people will become subservient to their wives.40.

੨੪ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਨਿਹਕਲੰਕ - ੪੦/(੪) - ਸ੍ਰੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ

I think you might be decontextualising that. 

If you look at CP in the DG, it also gives umpteen examples of men being made fools of by their wives which must have reflected at least some contemporary events (unless people are suggesting that the examples given in CP didn't reflect the nature of society around at the time? which would be a strange conclusion to draw to my mind)

Do people actually think that there was a time when relationships between genders was simple and straightforward? hhmmmm

Okay, I think there is truth in - the more options certain jananis are given the more this can mess them up. You see this with LOADS of gorian, who've been able to choose their own partner in their own time, and then decide he wasn't what they wanted after x amount of years. So social pressure obviously plays a massive part in fidelity. 

But even some gorian are rejecting the new gora introduced norms, which I think just facilitates promiscuity and an easily compliant workforce for obvious economic and personal sexual advantages (for a culture of men who aren't really that concerned with fidelity compared to others). Dating used to be a way of meeting potential life partners not long ago - not what it is now:

 

Social media plays a big part in this. 

[BhForce]

On 4/3/2019 at 12:57 PM, puzzled said:

In our faith or in Sikh culture is there a structure in the household?  Is man/husband the head of the house? 

Yes. Obviously. That is, ideally.

On 4/3/2019 at 12:57 PM, puzzled said:

What does Sikhi say about this? is the man supposed to be the head of the house?   

That's the entire reason the man is in front. The woman holds on to his palla, not the other way around. Grabbing a hold of someone's palla means that you attach yourself to him and he is responsible for you. Following behind him signifies that you see his as who you follow.