고정된 트윗
🔻
8.6K posts
🔻
@_UnStrTctureD
Unbiased | Unaffiliated | Unfiltered | Unemployed energy | Unapologetically honest | Uninvited opinions included | Unsolicited thoughts | Unbothered
lost 가입일 Kasım 2023
879 팔로잉1.5K 팔로워
These aren't the old days anymore when men would willingly sacrifice their entire wealth, their lives and everything they owned for a greater cause or for Jihad.
Look around today how many men are actually out there doing that???
You cannot apply the romanticized standards of a completely different era to today’s world...
only Just look at the divorce rates now compared to the past. Homes are breaking at a much higher rate and women desperately need a fallback plan. They cannot blindly rely on their brothers or even their fathers forever. A woman's share must strictly remain to her...
I would never ever advise any woman, no matter how many years she has been married to give a single rupee of her own wealth to her husband or her in-laws. It belongs to you, period!
You can do 70 things for his happiness, you can ask him before doing 70 things but at least in today’s time keep this one thing in your own control....
For his happiness you can ask him what he wants to eat and cook that for him. For his happiness or husn e Mashrat you can even choose your clothes according to his preference, wear the color he likes.
Go out the way he suggests, dress the way he wants. You can adjust and compromise with him... You may even give up many things for the sake of the relationship....
But there has to be a limit.
This kind of approach should not be encouraged at all for this matter...
In fact setting this boundary early on is the ultimate litmus test girlzzzz....
It shows you exactly where the other person stands, how sincere they are and whether they are marrying you or your mumkina assets?
Keep your financial independence so ironclad that his eyes don't even wander toward your pocket....
If a woman willingly chooses to help her husband at some point because they have built an unshakeable bond, that is a different story
(My own mother sold her gold once to help my father and he remade it for her within a year or two because he was a man of his word Even today after a lifetime together she would probably can do it again because they spent decades proving their loyalty to each other)
But even with them I still ask my mother today Why and how did you even risk that???
For every one good story
there are fifty horror stories..
I have seen real homes where women handed over their jewelry out of pure loyalty only to end up facing physical abuse, domestic violence,and being left with absolutely nothing once the marriage fell apart. Where is she supposed to go when she has been stripped of her financial armor?
I could write an entire book with 100 different examples of how this plays out in our current social environment. People who live in bubbles don't realize that those tiny subtle phrases used in lectures or fatwas about "pleasing the husband" are immediately weaponized by men on the ground.....
These lines become the exact tools men use when they want to capture a woman’s wealth or control her assets. They slap a religious label on their own greed to manipulate what is right and wrong completely twisting the spirit of the law for personal gain.
To be absolutely clear, I am talking about the vast majority here, not every single individual but if you step out into the real world and look closely you will see this is exactly how the system is being abused!
🔻@_UnStrTctureD
There should be absolutely no talk about gaining extra husn e Mashrat and shohar ki zaati Khushi when it comes to a woman's own money and assets. In other matters like going to the mosque it is fine to say okay she can go but it is better to pray at home I can still understand that logic. But in financial matters this narrative completely ruins a woman's security. When these kinda fatwas books or lectures tell women to get their husband's permission or focus on pleasing him even with her own wealth it just feeds into control. Now imagine a woman who wants to donate her share somewhere like a masjid or a madrassa or jihad or may be use it independently and then she is told that for the sake of the husband’s happiness or maintaining the household she should still ask permission obviously the husband will say no and expect her to use it on the house or him instead😂 You just have to step outside the religious circles and look at the real world even inside them men are literally sitting around waiting for their in-laws to pass away just to get their hands on the inheritance. They don't want to work hard.... If a husband faces a loss in business the first thing he does is demand his wife's gold saying give it to me I will sell it. But how can any woman trust blindly nowadays??? You give him your life savings and your gold and you don't even know if this person will stay with you or support you tomorrow. I have seen so many homes break where the woman gave up all her jewelry out of loyalty and now that they are separating she has absolutely nothing left to her name because the husband already blew through it all... Men think everything belongs to them whether it is a gift from his own family or stuff she brought from her parents house. They emotionally blackmail the wife saying your things are mine or you cannot spend a penny without my approval. Parents give gold, money or any kind kind of asset to their daughters as a financial safety net for emergencies so she has something to fall back on.... But how can she ever feel secure or use her actual rights when society keeps telling her that the noble way is to just keep the husband happy and hand over the steering wheel. It completely ignores how things actually work on the ground
English
There should be absolutely no talk about gaining extra husn e Mashrat and shohar ki zaati Khushi when it comes to a woman's own money and assets.
In other matters like going to the mosque it is fine to say okay she can go but it is better to pray at home I can still understand that logic. But in financial matters this narrative completely ruins a woman's security.
When these kinda fatwas books or lectures tell women to get their husband's permission or focus on pleasing him even with her own wealth it just feeds into control.
Now imagine a woman who wants to donate her share somewhere like a masjid or a madrassa or jihad or may be use it independently and then she is told that for the sake of the husband’s happiness or maintaining the household she should still ask permission obviously the husband will say no and expect her to use it on the house or him instead😂
You just have to step outside the religious circles and look at the real world even inside them men are literally sitting around waiting for their in-laws to pass away just to get their hands on the inheritance. They don't want to work hard....
If a husband faces a loss in business the first thing he does is demand his wife's gold saying give it to me I will sell it. But how can any woman trust blindly nowadays???
You give him your life savings and your gold and you don't even know if this person will stay with you or support you tomorrow. I have seen so many homes break where the woman gave up all her jewelry out of loyalty and now that they are separating she has absolutely nothing left to her name because the husband already blew through it all...
Men think everything belongs to them whether it is a gift from his own family or stuff she brought from her parents house. They emotionally blackmail the wife saying your things are mine or you cannot spend a penny without my approval.
Parents give gold, money or any kind kind of asset to their daughters as a financial safety net for emergencies so she has something to fall back on.... But how can she ever feel secure or use her actual rights when society keeps telling her that the noble way is to just keep the husband happy and hand over the steering wheel.
It completely ignores how things actually work on the ground
Abroo Rajpoot@4Ypgn
@_UnStrTctureD فتویٰ نویسی کا اصول ہے کہ مفتی حکم بتاتے ہوئے بہتر/افضل/احتیاط/تقویٰ کی جانب بھی توجہ دلائے وگرنہ حکم تو وہی ہے جو بیان کر دیا کہ عورت اپنے مال کی مالک ہوتی ہے!
English
I wish I could properly respond to this but there are so many layers to the discussion that not everyone can digest here....
My intention is not to compete with anyone or argue for the sake of argument. What I genuinely want to understand is:
why is this particular statement being used and what was the social context in wrhich it was written?
I do not deny that such opinions may exist in classical fiqh literature.
In fact I am fully aware of the basis from which many of these rulings or recommendations emerged.
The problem is that sometimes a sentence written centuries ago within a specific social reality is repeated today without examining whether the surrounding circumstances have changed.
Many fatwas are based on earlier juristic discussions and naturally scholars refer to those works.
What concerns me is not the existence of those texts. It is how certain ideas can shape social attitudes when they are repeated without balance.
For example despite clear recognition Islamically and legally that a woman's wealth belongs to her it has become disturbingly normal in many families for husbands or in-laws to expect access to her gold, savings, gifts or even her inheritance. In some cases women surrender these things willingly simply to keep the peace, avoid conflict or make his husband or in-laws happy.
This is exactly why conversations about a woman's financial autonomy cannot be separated from real-world consequences. When people casually repeat that a wife should seek permission before spending her own money they may not realize how such ideas can reinforce existing pressures that already make it difficult for women to exercise the rights they technically possess.
And we should not forget that our religious tradition also contains strong teachings about safeguarding one's wealth, protecting property rights and preventing injustice. Those principles deserve to be part of the conversation as well.
That is the aspect I think is often missing. Perhaps that is the part of the discussion that deserves more attention 🙂
Abroo Rajpoot@4Ypgn
@_UnStrTctureD فتویٰ نویسی کا اصول ہے کہ مفتی حکم بتاتے ہوئے بہتر/افضل/احتیاط/تقویٰ کی جانب بھی توجہ دلائے وگرنہ حکم تو وہی ہے جو بیان کر دیا کہ عورت اپنے مال کی مالک ہوتی ہے!
English
🔻
How Mysticism Became State Strategy??
کیا وجہ تھی کہ تاریخِ اسلام کے وہ جابر اور عیاش حکمران، جو خود دنیا پرستی کے عروج پر تھے، اکثر ایسے صوفیاء اور زاہدوں کی سرپرستی کرتے تھے جو دنیا کو لات مارنے کی تلقین کرتے تھے؟
بظاہر یہ ایک تضاد محسوس ہوتا ہے لیکن اگر ہم اس منظرنامے کا جائزہ لیں تو معلوم ہوگا کہ یہ محض عقیدت کا معاملہ نہیں تھا بلکہ ریاستی اقتدار کو طول دینے کا ایک انتہائی ذہین اور مائیکرو اسٹریٹجک مہرہ تھا۔
🔻Strategic Quietism and the Opium of Disengagement:
حکمران طبقے کے لیے یہ بات انتہائی مفاد میں تھی کہ عام لوگوں کی توجہ سیاسی مفادات اور دنیاوی معاملات سے ہٹا دی جائے تاکہ ان کے خلاف اپوزیشن اور حریفانہ سرگرمیاں کم سے کم رہیں۔
جب ایک مقتدرہ (Elite) کرپشن، ناانصافی یا اخلاقی زوال کا شکار ہوتی ہے، تو اسے سب سے بڑا خطرہ عوامی شعور اور بغاوت سے ہوتا ہے۔ ایسے میں اگر معاشرے میں ایک ایسا بیانیہ مقبول ہو جائے جو یہ سکھائے کہ
"دنیا ایک مچھر کے پر کے برابر بھی نہیں، سیاست ایک گندا کھیل ہے، اور اصل کامیابی صرف تنہائی میں بیٹھ کر روح کو پاک کرنے میں ہے"
تو جابر حکمران چین کی بانسری بجاتے ہیں۔
اسے عافیت پسندانہ سکوت
(Quietist Pacifism)
کہا جاتا ہے۔
زہد اور دنیا سے بیزاری کو بطورِ ہتھیار استعمال کر کے عوام کے غصے اور انقلابی توانائی کو مابعد الطبیعاتی دنیا کی طرف موڑ دیا گیا، جس سے تخت کو چیلنج کرنے والے حریف خود بخود ختم ہو گئے۔
🔻When Renunciation Endangers the State:
سیاسی مقتدرہ شدید اور انتہا پسند تصوف کے خلاف تھی یہاں تک کہ اس کے داعیوں کو جیلوں میں ڈالا گیا کیونکہ وہ پبلک آرڈر کو بگاڑ رہے تھے اور ایک ایسا نظریہ پھیلا رہے تھے جو اگر بڑے پیمانے پر اپنا لیا جاتا تو سماجی زندگی معطل ہو کر رہ جاتی۔
لیکن یہ کھیل ہمیشہ پرامن نہیں رہتا تھا۔ جب صوفیانہ تحریکیں انتہا پسندی کی طرف مائل ہوئیں یعنی انہوں نے معاشی سرگرمیوں کا بائیکاٹ اور سماج سے کلی علیحدگی کی وکالت شروع کی تو یہ ریاست کے لیے ایک وجودتی خطرہ
(Existential Threat)
بن گئیں۔
ایک سلطنت کو چلنے کے لیے ٹیکس دینے والے تاجر، زمینوں پر ہل چلانے والے کسان، اور سرحدوں کی حفاظت کرنے والے فوجی درکار ہوتے ہیں۔ اگر پورا معاشرہ ہی تارکِ دنیا ہو کر خانقاہوں میں بیٹھ جاتا، تو معیشت کا پہیہ جام ہو جاتا اور خاندانی نظام تباہ ہو جاتا۔ چنانچہ، ریاست نے صوفیاء پر تشدد کسی مذہبی دشمنی کی وجہ سے نہیں بلکہ انتظامی دفاع
(Administrative Self-defense)
کے تحت کیا تاکہ پبلک آرڈر برقرار رہے۔
🔻The Red Line: Cost-Benefit Jurisprudence
تاریخ گواہ ہے کہ مقتدر طبقے کا رویہ صوفیاء کے ساتھ کبھی بھی یکساں نہیں رہا۔ یہ رویہ ایک
Calculated Risk
کے تحت بدلتا رہتا تھا:
جب تک صوفی 'بے ضرر' رہا اسے سرکاری وظائف دیے گئے، مزارات اور خانقاہیں تعمیر کر کے دی گئیں، کیونکہ وہ عوام کے سیاسی شعور کے لیے ایک لوری کا کام کر رہا تھا جسے سن کر عوام سوئے رہیں۔
جیسے ہی کسی صوفی نے کوئی ایسا وجدانی دعویٰ کیا جس سے مروجہ مذہبی قانون (جس پر ریاست کی قانونی حیثیت قائم تھی) کو خطرہ لاحق ہوا، تو مقتدرہ نے فوراً اسے "غداری" (Treason) قرار دے کر عبرت کا نشان بنا دیا۔
🔻Internal Diversity and Cross-Civilizational Syncretism
بہرصورت، ایسے صوفیاء اقلیت میں تھے، اور وہ سب کے سب پرامن یا گوشہ نشین نہیں تھے، اور نہ ہی تصوف پر اثر انداز ہونے والے تمام عوامل خالصتاً اسلامی تھے۔
یہ تاثر غلط ہے کہ تمام صوفیاء دنیا سے بھاگنے والے تھے۔ ان میں ایک بڑی تعداد ایسی بھی تھی جو سماجی اصلاح، نظامِ عدل کی بحالی، اور جہاد (جیسے سرحدوں پر رباط قائم کرنا) میں پیش پیش تھی۔
اردو
I've always said this:
whenever he starts talking about feminists and constantly bashing them he has nothing to do with protecting islamic values.... but that is about his own cultural biases and misogyny shaped by a strong village or tribal mindset...
People assume that because someone criticizes feminism he must automatically be a guardian of Islamic values. That is a very naive assumption
Most of these people are quite liberal when it comes to the practices and values they personally prefer. The issue is that they often elevate cultural norms to the level of religion and then present them as if they are Islamic principles.
That is why I'm never surprised when the same individuals who passionately defend certain cultural traditions eventually end up criticizing or mocking sha'air e Islam. Once culture becomes the standard instead of Islam that outcome is almost inevitable.
Saleem Speaks@saleemspeaks2
لو جی خلیل الرحمن صاحب نے بھی فتوی لگا دیا قربانی کی پیسوں سے لوگوں کی مدد کی جاے ۔ عید قربان پر دیے گے پوڈ کاسٹ میں فرماتے ہیں ڈیڑھ لاکھ کا بکرا خریدنے کی بجاے اگر ڈیڑھ لاکھ کسی گھرانے کی مدد کر دی جاے ۔۔ تو کیا یہ قربانی نہی ہو گی ۔۔ اپ لوگوں کو بھی اس مقصد کیلے اگے بڑھنا ہے ۔ مولوی کی بتای ہوی قربانی پر نہی چلنا جس میں بتایا جاتا ہے لیلے ذبح کرو ۔ اینکر نے سوال کیا ۔۔ قربانی کے گوشت بھی غریب میں تقسیم کر کے مدد ہی تو کی جارہی ہوتی ۔۔ خلیل میاں فرماتے ہیں ۔۔ جی بلکل وہ بھی مدد ہے کیوں نہ اک نیا راستہ چن لیا جاے ۔ اس سارے پوڈ کاسٹ کو سننے کے بعد اج پہلی مرتبہ میں کہونگا اس عورت نے اس کی درست ٹھکای کی تھی جسکے ساتھ رات کو وہ تنظیم سازی کرنے پہنچے تھے ۔۔ غریب کی مدد کرو لوگوں کے کام او یہ بھی ہمارا مذہب کہتا ہے ۔ استطاعت اللہ نے دی ہے تو قربانی اپ پر واجب ہے ۔۔ اس پر انکے پیٹ میں مڑوڑ کیوں اٹھتے ہیں ۔۔
English
The "Identity-as-an-Asset" Trap (Anti-Opportunism)
Stable systems require Ontological Integrity. When you allow identity (or truth) to be manipulated for social or political gain you create a precarious and unstable society. In modern terms this applies to the importance of authenticity in branding and leadership—if your identity is purely a strategic performance (like the adopted tribesmen), it lacks the foundation required for long-term trust.
Sociology of Structural Instability
Disown members → Replace with allies → Divided loyalties → Fragmented society.
The pre-Islamic tribe tried to scale by force-feeding external people into the system. This undermined the "kinship" bond which is the foundational unit of trust. We can say that growth at the expense of core cohesion eventually leads to system collapse. You cannot scale a brand or a society if you destroy the unit (the family/individual) that sustains it.
Institutionalized Universalism:
Islam replaced a closed-tribe system with an open-network system.
This is an early form of Universal Social Inclusion and It solved the problem of social exclusion not by forcing people into families they didn't belong to but by creating a broader institutional identity. It is a profound shift from Tribalism (I belong only to my bloodline) to Civilizational Membership (I belong to the society/Ummah)
The Cost of Divided Loyalty:
when you force individuals to compete between their natural ties and sworn political alliances you guarantee role conflict.
When a society rewards people for acting against their natural instincts (like disowning kin for political status) it fosters a culture of dishonesty and anxiety. A healthy system is one that aligns the individual's natural incentives with the social requirements.
English
In an era that often feels full of selfishness and emotional emptiness you are truly blessed if you have a warm social circle and meaningful family gatherings....
If you still have mamu, khalas, phopos, tayas and cousins dropping by without formality sitting together around one table laughing over small things, staying late into the night just because no one wants the gathering to end… then you are far richer than you realize!!
Today people live surrounded by others yet remain deeply disconnected. Genuine closeness has become rare. And that is why being able to reach your people easily, to live in the same city, to gather without scheduling emotions weeks in advance is something sacred.
Relationships are not sustained by blood alone. They survive through effort, softness, presence, patience and sincere intention.....
Sadly many people today protect their ego more carefully than they protect their relationships....
Sometimes people become so emotionally dry so consumed by themselves that even love standing at their doorstep quietly leaves unnoticed....
ہر خاموشی سفاکی نہیں ہوتی اور ہر فاصلے کے پیچھے نفرت نہیں چھپی ہوتی۔
کبھی انسان اپنے ہی وجود کے انتشار ، تھکن اور بے حسی میں اتنا ڈوب جاتا ہے کہ محبت اگر اس کے دروازے پر چراغ لیے کھڑی بھی ہو تب بھی وہ اسے پہچان نہیں پاتا۔
محبت اگر ان کے دروازے پر خاموشی سے دستک بھی دے تو وہ اسے محسوس کیے بغیر گزر جاتے ہیں۔۔۔
Yes some relationships are genuinely harmful and distance can be necessary
But .....some relationships do not need grand gestures. They only need time, humility, consistency and the willingness to keep showing up.
Because at the end of the day there is a kind of exhaustion that only your own people can heal.
And perhaps the most beautiful families are the one where disagreements never become reasons to close the doors on each other!
And your family moral and empathetic values are measured by these gestures I swear....!!
.
.
.
Ps:
If you are ever going to build friendships with anyone I learned this very early in life that observe how they treat their family and relatives. This reflects their empathy and also the moral values of their entire emotional upbringing and bloodline....
Most of my friends who have a strong social circle and strong family relationships stayed with me longer🤝 They are more expressive, caring and more trustworthy
Coz a person who has emotional warmth and depth within their family naturally carries that into other relationships as well.
And sometimes when you feel that someone is emotionally dry or overly complex it can come from the fact that they never experienced that emotional softness in their own family environment.
Not everyone but in many cases people from broken families or divorced parents struggle with expressing and giving consistent love in relationships. They are not always able to fully pour empathy and emotional stability into others.
It is just a self-observation pattern I have noticed over time nothing more🙂
🔻@_UnStrTctureD
Kya matlab itni garmi mein bhi ye log Eid get togethers rakh rahe hain 😭
English
ایکس پر ایسی کئی پوسٹس نظر سے گزریں جہاں لڑکیاں مومنہ اقبال کو کوس رہیں ہیں۔۔۔۔ کہ اس نے بے وفائی کی اور چدھڑ کے سارے پیسے کھا لیے وغیرہ
سب تو نہیں، لیکن ان میں سے اکثر لڑکیاں وہ ہیں جنہیں میں نے خود یونیورسٹی لائف میں دیکھا ہے۔۔۔۔
کیفے ٹیریا میں بیٹھ کر اپنی چائے، فرائز اور کولڈ کافییوووں کے پیسے کبھی انہوں نے خود نہیں دیے، ہمیشہ ان کے میل کلاس فیلوز ان کے بل بھر رہے ہوتے ہیں اور وہاں انہیں کبھی کوئی جھجک یا غیرت محسوس نہیں ہوئی۔۔۔۔۔
What kind of relationship do you even have with a guy that justifies letting him pay your bills?
This level of casual "frankness" is beghairati too okayyyyy....
And let’s look at the ground reality
how many of these university hangouts actually lead to marriage? Barely 1%
سچ یہی کہ ان کو ابھی تک کوئی چدھڑ ملا نہیں، ورنہ انہوں نے بھی کوئی کسر نہیں چھوڑنی تھی۔۔۔۔۔
کیونکہ انسان کے اندر غیرت ہو وہ کسی کا ایک روپے کا احسان بھی نہیں لیتا،
چائے کا کپ تو بہت دور کی بات ہے۔۔۔۔
اب کچھ کہیں گی کہ بھئی 500 1 روپے کا موبائل پیکج کروانا تو کوئی غلط بات نہیں ہے اس نے تو کروڑوں کی فارچونر لے لی ہے!۔۔۔
منافقت کی قیمت بدلنے سے اس کی حقیقت نہیں بدلتی۔۔۔۔
The hypocrisy is wild. If what she did on a massive scale is wrong, then doing it on a micro-level is just as wrong. Wrong is wrong, period.
You cannot condemn a millionaire-scale exploit while actively participating in a pocket-money-scale version of the exact same mindset.
It’s the same greed just a smaller budget!
اردو
@Irum_Fatimaa Okay BUT Please free her scalp from this oppression 😭 loosen her ponytails
English
وَ لَا تَتَمَنَّوْا مَا فَضَّلَ اللّٰهُ بِهٖ بَعْضَكُمْ عَلٰى بَعْضٍؕ لِلرِّجَالِ نَصِیْبٌ مِّمَّا اكْتَسَبُوْاؕ وَ لِلنِّسَآءِ نَصِیْبٌ مِّمَّا اكْتَسَبْنَؕ وَ سْــٴَـلُوا اللّٰهَ مِنْ فَضْلِهٖؕ اِنَّ اللّٰهَ كَانَ بِكُلِّ شَیْءٍ عَلِیْمًا
اور تم ا س چیز کی تمنا نہ کرو جس سے اللہ نے تم میں ایک کو دوسرے پرفضیلت دی ہے ۔ مردوں کے لئے ان کے اعمال سے حصہ ہے اور عورتوں کے لئے ان کے اعمال سے حصہ ہے اوراللہ سے اس کا فضل مانگو ۔ بیشک اللہ ہر شے کو جاننے والا ہے۔
اردو
شوہروں نے تو اپنے دوستوں پہ پیسے اجاڑنے سے پہلے یا ان کو دعوتیں دینے سے پہلے کبھی بیویوں سے اجازت نہیں لی۔۔۔۔
اجازت کیوں لینی ہے
اجازت تو ان کو بھی نہیں لینی چاہیے
لیکن انھوں نے تو کبھی مشورہ نہیں کیا( زیادہ تر نے نہیں کیا ) اور نہ ہی اپنی بیویوں کو بتانا پسند کیا ہے
Perhaps....
I have no problem with the idea of sharing or seeking advice. Even If I buy a gift for a friend I might ask another friend for suggestions or simply share my thoughts with her ... That is how trust and connection work. And the same natural flow of communication should exist in a marriage as well where there is partnership, transparency and mutual inclusion.
But In many relationships a husband keeps his personal life, decisions, friendships and spending separate, living freely within his own space.....
When a wife includes her husband in decisions, seeks his opinion and keeps him informed it is called good companionship.
Fist most of them never do But when a husband does the same why does it seem less common and less expected??
🔻@_UnStrTctureD
بیوی اپنے ہی مال میں سے۔۔۔۔ اپنی ہی ماں کو gift دینے سے پہلے شوہر سے اجازت لے لے۔۔۔۔ کسی دن ہم سنیں گے۔۔۔ بیوی سانس لینے سے پہلے ( Jo Kay hai b involuntary action) شوہر کی اجازت لے لیا کرے۔۔۔ اس سے شوہر کا دل خوش ہوا کرے گا اور گھر چلنے میں بہت بڑا کردار ادا کرے گی یہ چیز🙂 Ps: You’ll notice something very interesting like When it comes to bacho ki eidi these people immediately say: It belongs to the child. It’s their right. You cannot take it or use it even with their permission. But when the conversation shifts to a wife and her own money Then you start hearing things like: She should use her money with her husband’s permission. Maybe they don’t always say it strictly but why is this mindset so normalized in the first place??? The answer could have been much simpler and healthier: A wife has the right to spend her own money however she wants including buying gifts for her mother. There is nothing wrong with that.... Call me feminist if you want but a lot of these things genuinely sound misogynistic to me. I’ve seen too many examples of it at this point.... And honestly I think I’ll start writing more about these things from now on....
اردو
بیوی اپنے ہی مال میں سے۔۔۔۔
اپنی ہی ماں کو gift دینے سے پہلے
شوہر سے اجازت لے لے۔۔۔۔
کسی دن ہم سنیں گے۔۔۔ بیوی سانس لینے سے پہلے
( Jo Kay hai b involuntary action)
شوہر کی اجازت لے لیا کرے۔۔۔
اس سے شوہر کا دل خوش ہوا کرے گا اور گھر چلنے میں بہت بڑا کردار ادا کرے گی یہ چیز🙂
Ps:
You’ll notice something very interesting like When it comes to bacho ki eidi these people immediately say:
It belongs to the child. It’s their right. You cannot take it or use it even with their permission.
But when the conversation shifts to a wife and her own money Then you start hearing things like:
She should use her money with her husband’s permission.
Maybe they don’t always say it strictly but why is this mindset so normalized in the first place???
The answer could have been much simpler and healthier:
A wife has the right to spend her own money however she wants including buying gifts for her mother. There is nothing wrong with that....
Call me feminist if you want but a lot of these things genuinely sound misogynistic to me.
I’ve seen too many examples of it at this point....
And honestly I think I’ll start writing more about these things from now on....
اردو
Maybe I really do need a separate account... Should I permanently delete this one and start fresh?
Sometimes I just feel like writing out my random thoughts but idk for what reason it feels a bit weird to do that here. I feel like this account should remain dedicated to a specific theme or purpose.....
On the other hand I want to interact with various subjects and connect with different people but I always find myself hesitating on this platform.
Anyway I am taking a break from social media for a while especially for the upcoming month of Dhul Hijjah. I will be back later and perhaps I’ll create a completely new account without letting anyone know. Fi Aman Illah!
Please remember me in your prayers; I am in desperate need of them right now.
Ps:
The thought of deleting this account also stems from the fact that I have posted things in the past that I no longer agree with myself. This account dates back to 2023 and over time a person's perspectives, mindset and ideas change completely or gradually!
My current followers probably connected with me because of my older content and opinions. Now ,I feel uncomfortable posting things that might alienate them or go against what they initially followed me for. It just feels like they aren't looking for this evolved version of my thoughts. So maybe it's best to move on from here... Plus there are certain individuals whom I no longer wish to share my space with....
I have learned a lot from this experience....it has been genuinely good and overall everything here has been quite positive.
Maybe I will keep this account and create another one for a different theme or maybe I will keep this one dedicated to a specific purpose....
I’m still not fully sure yet!
I respect all of you.....
your opinions and everything you share. I truly wish you all the bes and I always pray that Allah keeps us steadfast upon the right path and makes us beneficial for the entire Ummah
Ameen!
ngl.link/_thinkfr331
English