From: moh2@quads.uchicago.edu (Kateri/Mary Anne)
Subject: Re: age of "control"?
Reply-To: moh2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 20:14:50 GMT

>>Purna writes:
>Alok writes: 

>If they 'love' and 'care about' their parents, why won't they listen to
>them ?

Look, Alok, isn't this clear yet?  We *do* listen to our parents, we
just don't necessarily obey.  If their words seem sensible to us
(which they occasionally do), we may agree with them and act
accordingly.  If not, we don't, unless we are physically forced to it.
And, speaking only for myself, if I were physically forced to do
something, I would resent...or even hate...the one who forced me.

>Just because she grew up here does NOT mean that she knows the 
>'right answer' all the time either.

Nobody said we did.  The ideal is to listen to both sides and then
make the best decision you can.  Sometimes you will be wrong.
Sometimes I will be wrong.  Sometimes my parents will be wrong.  I am
unwilling to lay the burden of my life on their shoulders - even if
they are willing to carry it.

I don't attempt to make their decisions for them...although I *do*
give them advice...generally unasked. :-)

>> the solution should be a mutually consented upon decision.  

>Fine, but how do you get to it in a reasonable time and manner ?

You try your best with what you have.  You maybe compromise a little.

>> i don't think you can lay down strict
>> statements like 'the minor should listen to the parent, in
>> the end, if they still disagree'.  

>What would you do assuming you were a parent and the minor whose
>parent you are, continued to disagree with you after several days of
>arguing ?

Depends on the situation.  If they couldn't hurt themselves too badly,
I'd let them make their own mistakes, and hope they learned.  If it
was truly dangerous, (i.e. drug use, unprotected promiscuity, etc), I
would keep arguing until I convinced them or they decided to ignore
me.  What else do you suggest I do?  Lock them up until they turn 18
and can go kill themselves in new and more interesting ways?

>> i don't think 'legal', 'societal', or 'traditional' points
>> are what're important.  

Oh, they're important, and should even be considered.  But do you want
them running your life?

>Legal is very important. Parents are responsible legally, financially
>etc. for a minor.  If a minor 'burns' money, it is most likely parent's
>money. How many of IA minors do work to earn their spending money ?
>Hardly any.

Where is your data?  I've been working since I was 13...and if I had
wanted to ask my parents for money instead, they'd probably have given
it to me - with strings attached.  I preferred the independence of
paying my own way as much as possible, as many other American kids do.
I know several Indian kids in similar situations...although certainly
not all.

>American kids often do some work and earn extra money for their
>expenses. I have been told by many people that IA kids don't do
>that. Their parents are 'too caring' to allow their 16 year olds to
>work in a restaurant or babysit. IA kids are too spoiled to
>put in the effort anyway. They will gladly spend parents money and
>complain if parents ask them to listen to them on an issue which is
>important to them. I am being sarcastic. Also not all IA kids are
>spoiled ...

You should consider the reasons these kids are too spoiled.  Is it
perhaps because they're a) over-protected? b) not allowed to make
their own decisions? c) closeted within the Indian community?

This seems to be a growing trend among the younger Indians in my
sisters' community, to rely completely on parents for direction in
oneeir lives, especially among girls, and it's a trend that worries me.
How will they survive in America if they've only been taught to be Indian?

>If the girl is going out on dates and sleeping around, in Indian
>traditions of marriage (where parents are responsible to find a marriage
>partner for you), it will be hard to find a suitable match for 
>her in the arranged marriage system. It is okay if she does that, but
>then she should not expect to go to her parents and tell them "Ma,
>I cann't find a mate who will marry me, find me a match !".
>Same for a guy who has been 'fooling around'. 
>So when you go out on dates and sleep around, you diminish your parents
>ability to find a suitable match via arranged marrriage system.
>I don't particularly favor one or the other system, but one should make
>decisions in accordance with his/her wishes in the matter. You cann't have 
>the best of both the worlds, especially by just complaining about 
>how cruel your parents are or were.

Alok, I don't know who you've been talking to.  I have as yet to meet
an Indian girl who dates Americans who isn't very aware of what she's
given up in terms of the possibility of an arranged marriage.  She's
generally had it thrown in her face.  Several times.  Some of us count
it well worth the cost...other Indian women don't.  But I believe we
are all aware that we must choose one or the other...we can't have
both.

(Total side note:  This may well be a reason more liberated Indian
women don't date Indian guys....they have given up all right to them
by traditional rules...and they never know whether the next Indian guy
they meet will be shocked and horrified to find out that they've dated
Americans.  It's easier to avoid Indian guys altogether.)

(and, in a later article...)

(comments about daughters dating Americans)

>I think all these questions are irrelevant since I am not opposed to 
>dating. I myself have dated Americans (as well as Indians).
>The issue was more to do with dating characters who are shady, illicit
>and rotten (they could be American or Indian or any race).

But the problem many of us run up against is that Indian parents often
assume that all American men are 'shady, illicit and rotten'.  It's
difficult to persuade them otherwise when they refuse to meet the
Americans, but simply lay down ultimatums.

Alok, you seem to feel that your restrictions are reasonable ones -
but so do they.  You've said several times that one must draw the line
somewhere - I think that's where our difference lies.  As long as you
are drawing a line, you are laying down laws that will seem arbitrary,
and may well be.  I feel that a parent should feel free to give advice
on any issue, but they should be aware that the child may not listen -
whether the child is 12, 16, 18, or 21.

>Also the issue was more to do with how far one goes on a date.
>If she sleeps around with everyone she dates, I certainly would object.
>Since to me, this indicates that she does not know what or who she wants.

Careful, your prejudices are showing.
Maybe she wants to sleep with everybody she dates.

>> the point being that setting arbitrary age limits is unreasonable
>> and talking, listening, and finding out what people you
>> trust have to suggest necessary.  but ultimately, most decisions are
>> left to the individual.................at any age.

>BS. I think you will understand only when you yourself become a parent.

I have to agree with Purna.  Unless you are planning to use physical
force on your child, they *will* make their own decisions...and this
is a healthy thing.  How will they be able to make crucial adult
decisions when they have no practice with less difficlut decisions?

 - Amirthi

>Alok
>> peace,
>> -purna




-- 
The autumn leaves are falling like rain.
Although my neighbors are all barbarians,
And you, you are a thousand miles away,
There are always two cups at my table.		 - A T'ang Dynasty poem
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian