The most offensive they usually get is when it comes to men (these older women have all been heterosexual). Last night Mrs. S was talking about her friend and neighbor, D, whose daughter moved in with the guy she was dating. I was always under the impression that D was concerend about this because her daughter is only 20, but Mrs. S seems to believe that it's because D's daughter isn't married to this guy. More specifically she said something along the lines of, "mothers are always concerned about their daughters and want the best for them, and feel sad when they go against what they're taught
Now I have to admit that it reminded me of the talks my mother used to give me back in middle school saying, "gotta wait for him to put that ring on your finger!" and blah blah blah. It just seems so antiquated first of all, and second of all, who is anyone to judge or pity someone if they're happy, even if it's different from what they would do? Now, being the devil's advocate I can sometimes be, I asked Mrs. S to explain her statement. Why is it such a concern? Because she's not married to this guy. Why is that such a big deal? Because, Ronni, there's a level of commitment that comes with marriage that doesn't come with just living with someone. Then R piped in with the 'if he gets the milk for free why would he buy the cow' argument, [which I had to try very much not to just simply argue] so then I asked, "Is this about sex? I thought it was about the relationship and commitment?" Then R, whose easily better at debating then her mother, said, "well, if you think of sex as just sex, but if you tie the two together" blah blah blah. So really, for R, it came down to sex. If a man and woman live together, it's assumed they're having sex. And if they are and they're not married, it's a tragedy, because they will most likely break up and the girl's gonna get hurt (the guy was never the subject for concern here). I brought up that marriages also fail, which they know very well, but this didn't seem to have an effect, because it's about preventing as much hurt as possible, apparently. I also said that non-married relationships work out fine a lot of the times, too. They seemed dubious about this. So for Mrs. S it was down to sex, too, but she really couldn't explain herself at all beyond "people should get married first, that's how it should be". And that's my real problem with it. There was no real reason. It was just different than she would do and didn't align with her long list of rules and regulations on how life should be lived, and therefore couldn't possibly work or be valid. Worst yet, she'll judge anyone else who doesn't abide by the same rules.
You can believe all you want, whether you're religious or not, but don't try to control everyone else around you. Don't judge or pity someone if you can't control them. ALSO DON'T BELIEVE SOMETHING WITHOUT HAVING A REALLY GOOD REASON FOR IT. Being raised on the philosophy and thinking "that's just how it should be" is not nearly good enough. How much conviction can you have if you can't back it up with any actual thoughts or feelings on the matter? Come to think of it, doesn't it show VERY poorly on your opinion in general of men? That you ASSUME all they want is sex and if they don't get it they leave and if they get it "without the commitment of marriage" they'll never want to commit/ get married? How many thousands of couples every day prove this wrong? Oh and btw, actually live happily every after? Ugh the whole thing just pisses me off.
We don't know ANYthing about this girl or her partner. They could be the most committed couple in the world. They could just be living together for the convenience of it. They might break up. They might be together until they die. They might get married. They might not.
LIVE AND LET LIVE
JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED
and freaking get with the times already.
The sad thing I just realized is that these women have had the worst experiences with men. I wonder if their opinion would be less fervent if they had better relationships with better guys.
