Originally posted by: tia.o
I agree. Dating is a vague term even in India. Almost always it ends with a kiss (cheek/lips) and often involves alcohol. Since Arnav and Sheetal were in Harvard and not Haridwar, it stands to reason that should they have wanted/carried away to take it to physical level there were ample opportunity to do so.
At no point of time Arnav had said that Sheetal and I never had any physical relationships whatsoever. Khushi, being an old fashioned girl can't ask, but Arnav, a modern man of today, can't state that clearly to his wife?
If Arnav was a saint before marriage who never had any live-in relationships because he does not believe in physical relationship before marriage, Khushi would never wonder.
But she knew how he was before marriage. It's not that she doesn't trust him, she doesn't believe the man he was before she walked into his life.
I asked my husband that if one of your ex turns up with your exact replica and I have a doubt that the child is yours and try to find out the truth even though you told me that relationship meant nothing or you were just dating, would you get angry with me?
His answer: No. If that child is my exact replica, then your doubt is justified.
However, if I tell you that the child can no way in hell can be my son as that said ex and I never had any physical relationship ever, sober or drunk, then I'd expect you to trust me. But if you can't and insist on a DNA test, I'd do it. I have nothing to hide or worry about. What the hell I care? It's just a piece of my hair or nail.
But dating is a vague term. So if I just tell you we dated, then that had a lot of interpretation based on our age, location, sensibilities etc. Then you can go ahead and insist on a DNA test because well, I didn't give you any reason that why I think that child, can no way in hell, be mine right?
This answers were not from an Indian man. It was from a Canadian man who is as westernized and modern in his thoughts as ASR.