Do you guys agree with Mumtaz's take on Boney/Sridevi? - Page 9

I get it. .. Dharminder got married at 19 .  Not the ideal age to make such a big choice.  So you can  sympathise with him if he fell in love with a woman much later in life who was maybe more relatable.  But cheating is cheating and I agree with Blueice, the least we can do is call it what it is. Also it's worth noting that the first thing he said about Hema was "Kudi badi changi hai ". She translates that in her own book as him calling her very pretty, when he saw her at some event.   That makes me wonder if his penis had a major say in this issue but then we never know , I shouldn't take his comment out of context. 

It's Prakash Kaur who needs more sympathy. She was shortchanged .  If he was a victim of an early marriage so was she, more so being the woman and not being able to do much to fix her own life when he found 'love' elsewhere. 

Originally posted by: TrollikaDevi

It's Prakash Kaur who needs more sympathy. She was shortchanged .  If he was a victim of an early marriage so was she, more so being the woman and not being able to do much to fix her own life when he found 'love' elsewhere. 

Dil Lagane Ke Liye Chale Jaana

Gairon Ki Tum Baahon Mein

Yaad Meri Hi Aayegi Dekhoge Jab Tum

Unki Nighaon Mein 😆😆

Originally posted by: TrollikaDevi

With due respect I don't know if Selena Gomez and Taylor Swift are the wisest poets around lol. Either way I disagree with them.   The heart wants all kinds of things but one of the lessons you learn while entering adulthood is that you don't get everything you want ...and that there's a price for everything.   Not chasing your 'love' needn't mean you live a double life .  It could mean being a responsible adult who doesn't act on impulses.  Someone who thinks about others around them too.  Secondly love is a tricky word.  When people say love, they often mean infatuation. Or at best a kind of feeble love with lots of lust thrown in.  Obviously we are not the ones to decide for others , but does it make sense to wreck your family for love and then realise later on that it was only lust?  Thirdly, what if you end up falling in love again? Would it have been okay for Dharminder to leave Hema and 'marry ' another woman if he had fallen in love with her? At what point do we say it isn't worth uprooting a bunch of people to carry on like a suitcase on a carousel ? I'm all for the nuances of relationships and the complicated nature of infidelity but I just can't see falling in love as a good reason to dump your spouse with whom you got along well until then ( assuming that's the case here ) .  It's based on the myth that you need to be madly in love to stay married. 

@ bold : In this case the wife didn't have the option of moving on.  Being a divorcee and a mother of two decades ago pretty much meant that was it for you. It's not as if she could have gone to a pub to meet men again.   She d have had to lead a life of loneliness or wait for that person to come along ,in a society where people still think divorced women are damaged goods.  Which is why she begged him to not give her divorce and agreed to this weird ass negotiation of sharing him with the other woman.  As far as I know the latter went into depression, idk how true that is but I wouldn't be surprised. 

While Swift is right about the idea of a woman 'stealing' a man as if he has no agency of his own, it doesn't make the woman any less culpable if she lets him commit adultery with her. Just because he's to be blamed too ( a lot more ) it doesn't mean she's not a  part of it.  

This is the thing. Falling in love might not be under your control, but what you do about it definitely is. The 2nd part is what often gets ignored.

2nd Bold: agreed. Adults need to take responsibility for their actions.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Quoting both of you here.

3rd opinions called scientific research has proven time and again that living with father and mother under the same roof is significantly better for the kids. Emotional support outside of marriage is not the same according to the same scientific research. By the way, at least one study I know of included gay couples who adopt. 

This thing about staying together for the kids then becomes more than an argument over ethics. It's science. Some facts might be inconvenient, but they don't go away no matter how hard one might cross fingers and wish for them to disappear.  ie, they don't become white noise. In fact, they grow louder and louder as the adverse impact on the children becomes clearer. 

Calling someone high-handed and entitled for  stating such facts is merely shooting the messenger. 

So yeah, once you have kids, they do come first. Because they are dependent on you. And because millennia of evolution in the animal kingdom has shown us how child-rearing works. And because decades of research has confirmed what most people knew instinctively. 

Making it clear that I'm not talking about toxic marriages, merely the mundane one one or both of spouses may be bored with: and yeah, those parents who put themselves ahead of their own children when they find a better option for a partner do need to be knocked. 

There is a huge difference between the above and those have no option but to walk out. The latter need all the support they can get. 

Re: unhappiness in a merely mundane marriage. The spouses involved, one presumes, are both adults. They are expected to know their responsibilities and modify their behaviors. If they can't zip their mouths even for the sake of their children, once again, they need to be knocked. 

Expanding the definition of a bad marriage to include the boring doesn't change facts. ie, children fare better when parents stay together. Ditching the kids for romance partner vX.0 under the pretext of *oh, it's better for the kids if I'm not unhappy* is mere camouflage for selfish behavior. 

Re: Deol kids being in their 20s when Dharam married Hema. I didn't know that. If that's the case, I withdraw the whole argument.

I have nothing to say in defense of bollywood philanderers who don't think twice before taking their kit off ... just because they can. Leaving the first wife in ruins and then setting out to build a taj mahal for your new "dream girl" is not a fairy tale by any means. I'm also of the opinion that people who can't keep it in their pants or cheat just for thrills belong in a hedonistic island of their own.😆

I jumped in seeing all the studies you were citing here and found that strange. Scientific studies and their conclusions don't really govern people's emotions, love lives or relationships, now do they? Putting science backed facts out there to make a case for your argument is one thing but shaming people for departing from the "control" group and writing them off as irresponsible, reckless, etc. is another ... and that's what caused me to jump in here. Haven't really read other arguments being made here but just wanted to convey that people simply don't refer to these studies or surveys before making their life decisions, that's all.

Originally posted by: SmittenKitten

I have nothing to say in defense of bollywood philanderers who don't think twice before taking their kit off ... just because they can. Leaving the first wife in ruins and then setting out to build a taj mahal for your new "dream girl" is not a fairy tale by any means. I'm also of the opinion that people who can't keep it in their pants or cheat just for thrills belong in a hedonistic island of their own.😆

I jumped in seeing all the studies you were citing here and found that strange. Scientific studies and their conclusions don't really govern people's emotions, love lives or relationships, now do they? Putting science backed facts out there to make a case for your argument is one thing but shaming people for departing from the "control" group and writing them off as irresponsible, reckless, etc. is another ... and that's what caused me to jump in here. Haven't really read other arguments being made here but just wanted to convey that people simply don't refer to these studies or surveys before making their life decisions, that's all.

Did I shame them? 

Am pretty sure I didn't shame anyone, but yeah, putting kids second to your own adult wants is selfish. That's just a fact. I don't remember using the word reckless in this context, either, but it certainly is irresponsible. 

Also, I didn't say people should refer to scientific studies before making decisions on their love life. 

As said before, most adults know already kids are dependent and need to come first. The research simply proves it is all. 

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Did I shame them? 

Am pretty sure I didn't shame anyone, but yeah, putting kids second to your own adult wants is selfish. That's just a fact. I don't remember using the word reckless in this context, either, but it certainly is irresponsible. 

Also, I didn't say people should refer to scientific studies before making decisions on their love life. 

As said before, most adults know already kids are dependent and need to come first. The research simply proves it is all. 

Skimming through the posts came across that way yesterday, just the overall tone if not the words. but my apologies if that wasn't the intention. 

Leaving aside the bollywood philanderers, putting yourself first doesn't always indicate selfishness when you are a role model for kids who literally depend on you for financial and emotional needs either. 

My perspective might change later on but as of right now, I'm all about taking care of yourself and your needs, having a good support group/social circle and making sure you're in a good place. Others around you, especially kids, absorb your vibes like a sponge and you don't want to be running on empty for that.

Originally posted by: SmittenKitten

Skimming through the posts came across that way yesterday, just the overall tone if not the words. but my apologies if that wasn't the intention. 

Leaving aside the bollywood philanderers, putting yourself first doesn't always indicate selfishness when you are a role model for kids who literally depend on you for financial and emotional needs either. 

My perspective might change later on but as of right now, I'm all about taking care of yourself and your needs, having a good support group/social circle and making sure you're in a good place. Others around you, especially kids, absorb your vibes like a sponge and you don't want to be running on empty for that.

And that's where the scientific studies show what society says is true after all.

Kids do significantly better when parents stay together under the same roof.

Excuses of children absorbing unhappy vibes are just that: excuses for self-centered behavior. If labeling selfishness and irresponsibility for what they are is shaming, so be it. 

When your reproduce, you have the responsibility to take care of your offsprings' needs first. 

Meeting a better version for romantic partner simply doesn't cut it as adequate reason to mess up your kids' lives.

Once again with the caveat that none of this applies to bad marriages. 

Edited by HearMeRoar - 2 years ago

Originally posted by: BlackWitch

To be fair, Dharmendra really wanted to break his first marriage to be with Hema. His wife did not want a divorce due to the social stigma and out of respect for her wishes, he decided to convert to Islam to marry Hema Malini.

I think he went to extraordinary lengths for his love. I can’t help but respect him for this heart on his sleeve approach. I see his sons Sunny and Bobby respect him too and I think he must have really tried to be fair to everyone in his family.

 

Dharmendra wanted to break it off?? Why would she (his first wife) want to stay with a man who clearly didn’t want her?? I always it was a case of him being a coward and not wanting to divorce his wife for the kids or something that he converted to Islam. Why did the wife want to hold to him if he was willing to let go?? 😢😢 

They should ask Mumtaz about Shammi Kapoor 😆

Originally posted by: Beautyful_Mess

Dharmendra wanted to break it off?? Why would she (his first wife) want to stay with a man who clearly didn’t want her?? I always it was a case of him being a coward and not wanting to divorce his wife for the kids or something that he converted to Islam. Why did the wife want to hold to him if he was willing to let go?? 😢😢 

This happened back in the 70s. The wife would've been ostracized, and the children would've found it difficult. And importantly, finances would've been an issue. She could trust Dharam to support his kids😆 just as she probably trusted him to keep his vows. Her decision was not what someone with resources might have taken, but it perhaps was the only one available to her.

Edited by HearMeRoar - 2 years ago