The confusion between the popular fact, and the preferable choice (2/2)

         To continue in the same last topic, which shows many sides of both choices that people applies in life nowadays, I’ll try to show more opinions about it and make you all think with me while reading there.

It’s right that even with marriage; the life’s complications can lead to a bad end and get divorced, so may someone says that it doesn't matter if people are married or not. but the divorce is a resort we need to use just when life becomes impossible for two people to remain together. It's a logical solution to fix it, and also exceptional because that doesn't happen always, but breaking up is easier than divorce. don't you all think so?

Because breaking up can be a one side decision and sudden, and can happen in one glance, just like that. Whereas the other partner can't do anything to keep things better except to accept by force the consequences. That’s of course if we keep aside the person’s personality, because some people aren’t good at all in any way, and that’s because they don’t want to be good and they even have not intention for, or just they don’t feel the need to be so. And whether in marriage or in relationship, they just can’t function properly.

         Whereas divorce takes many procedures and agreement of two people too, also it takes time to end up. And because of that people may think to solve their problems more than to think about divorce, they act more logically than anything else. Whereas in a relationship it's easy for someone to escaping any time.

All that disagreement with marriage comes from the feelings of insecurity, that’s why many avoid getting married and prefer sharing life with someone without any official commitment. Every side is afraid to be deceived, and getting married is like a big risk for them. In this case, since they can’t trust each other so far, so why do they start their relationship? Furthermore; the argument of being more free out of marriage, is somehow a way to express the disappearance in any moment as a very possible choice, sooner or later, isn’t it? I mean once the person feels that s/he must be responsible on something, then s/he will find it easy to escape from that and just disappear like s/he has never been there before.

Keeping a family is better than breaking up or making one parent families, studies all confirm that the best for a child is to live between two parents instead one parent. And better to live in family than in an orphanage, Better for psychological reasons, social skills, better for communication skills, and for stability in personality...etc

It’s not bad at all to take from new things and benefit from their advantages, but it’s bad to reject all from everything only because it’s a part of a social heritage which maybe refers to mean an old thing. We don't neglect love and romance, but also we can't rely only on that for facing the hardships of life.

The relationships in our world today (Part 1)

     In my opinion ; I see about the relationships without passing through marriage, has many disadvantages really, one girl told me that old people for example in her country (from previous generation) see that is not good to be in full relationships before marriage or being engaged at least, and many are thinking same so in different countries more or less.

     And what changed now in societies, i don't mean a country in particular, but that's in everywhere now, because it’s the new and modern culture through "the globalization". the new generations are obsessed to the freedom in way they claim to fake freedom (if we think deeply about that, it'll be more painful than they imagine, why? because now they prefer to be free from any obligation or any value came from the past, to guarantee their absolute freedom, which became the only value to look for as a reference and to care about, whereas that's not true always and doesn’t work in all cases of course,

     The humanity's traditions and customs say along the ages and centuries that the marriage is the act between two people to make a family, (although those conceptions are redefined, and have got many updates), but let's start from a question I’ve heard :

     "How can someone meet a girl? i mean to find out about her personality, character,beauty, hobbies etc. unless be with her for a while, then to know if she matches with you properly?"

      In the context; I’ll bring the real definitions that must do exist into any society, the marriage that i meant (as it was always in past), it's not to prevent meeting between the two concerned ones in the issue, of course marriage won't be a blind act without knowing each other, right. but the fact to preceed the marriage (official act) by a relationship (for fulfilling the desires) is the reason that causes many problems and break hearts to have failed and sad endings.

     A few decades ago; relationships were more successful than in the today life, with their previous definition, and the problem is in the changes that happened in societies, which means the changes in people's mindsets, concepts, social relations and social values aswell. when two people are in relationship and spending alot of time together and do everything possible to do, together, talk so much, and appearantly the feelings are growing up but not in the proper way that they should be in order to lead to a successful ending.

     And for a while, they're learning about each other (this is the main reason that people rely on, just to convince themselves they're right, and no way except that one). for example now friends know a lot about each other, they know about hobbies, mindsets, characters, behaviors, thoughts, what each other like or dislike, their interests, and tendencies,....etc, they know a lot about each other really, but does that mean they're in relationships ? of course not,

     Moreover; why do we love some people without any condition to that love? (like family; with parents or siblings). Simply because they make a part of us, whatever happens they’ll stay in same position from us, and generally have same attitude from us towards them. The same when it’s a husband/wife and father/mother or parent/children. And the last thing they should think about is the divorce, not because it’s difficult to doing, but because it's not preferable as a choice.

     When two people take the long time together without any official link in between (justifying the reason to knowing more about each other and if they can bear each other or not...etc), in this way; their feelings will be drained completely to the bottom. whereas they think the feelings is growing up, but that's not true in the fact. when they enjoyed each other enough and shared almost everything, and each one pleased the second enough, then of course there will be some boredom between, and one day (sooner or later), one of the two people (or both) will have a sudden change and find no more benefits from the second one. because the life's interests are changing constantly, and that staying along the time ends up to someone with no more interest in him/her, and like that; the breaking up comes for any casual reason maybe, because this one (or maybe both) already feel satisfied from each other, and everything is already done. so why they need to continue in this case?

     Surely the human self (in this case) will look for new passion  and something else, and to look for being out of that routine; to have more satisfaction for desires, or just more adventures, since there is no steady link to preserve their being together. and that style; broke the hearts of many people unfortunately, because no guarantees for their social, neither psychological  nor emotional rights. that's what the modern life gave us from redefining many concepts like about social life here. Shouldn’t we think again about those concepts and how do they affect on our lives?

The marriage as an institution

     Many people aren't interested in committed relationship beneath the marriage institution, they prefer more freedom without marriage, or sometimes for fewer responsibilities avoiding any urgent way they may have. and many who’re against the marriage, for silly reasons, like to marry just to fix problems (or let’s say fixing their mistakes), If there are children. And I found that -according to their constitutions, Unfortunately-the law causes most of changes in people’s interests, so instead paying a lot for marriage’s stuff, they prefer to live together instead (regardless to all the advantages of marriage like the incomes of family and health care better). 

      Or maybe fears from cheating of the second person, even living together for years can’t guarantee the enough trust between. So the fears from divorce in future (in case of marriage)remain constantly, then they can’t change certain notes on their documents forever, because it’s not a relaxing fact to taking the name of the man even after the separation; which means certain dependence and kind of reminder in case if things didn’t go properly in their past. Also there are who prefer that as a choice to get more benefits, like being able to win scholarships for their studies, that as married can’t get them. And I found that the majority of people prefer such choice to be into a “free & sperated relationship” (if I can say so), since in any moment it ends and can happen that we can say there was no relationship at all, and then nothing remain anymore, especially like those who aren’t religious people, free of every controller of belief I mean, like those whom the religion doesn’t make a part of their lives at all.

      But in fact we can't find better than the marriage to guarantee the rights of two people, (within certain rules of course , not necessarily as the laws say nowadays), especially the social and psychological rights for the two people alike. And not easy for any side to just leave his/her duties when the mood and desire says so; and the situation when there are children between, they shouldn’t be a tool to fix the problem or mistakes of someone are counted from adults, that’s even a wrong view when they think about child as a mistake they did unfortunately, unjust to define that as a mistake.

      Moreover; the studies confirm that the marriage can help one or two people to be committed in certain healthy relationship due the psychological security that can bring to them, and even to avoid certain bad behaviors that can trouble the health of person (like some diseases) or the health of relationship (like drugs or drinking), these advantages are only because the huge affection and influence that the continuous presence of the second partner can provide - at least psychologically -, in comparing with the unmarried people while in one glance can disappear – and with obscurity why exactly -.

we can see that (such reasons like : to take another surname and be related to it, ...etc), and all those changes in lifestyle were mainly coming from decision makers, or the parliaments before decades, who defined the societies in way to commanding in people's thinking way in somehow, then that caused the changes into people's priorities, and their attitudes in life aswell, right?

      Then we assume if you [woman]can keep your surname, and you can keep your rights that the man can't leave just because he wants to do, in other words, he can't get rid of his responsibilities, so would that be better for the woman?  i meant also; when it happens and you divorce, you simply recover your surname again and only, can that reform the attitude to avoiding of this choice -marriage- from her?

      Those fears from cheating are in two directions between them, and the instability due the missing of guarantees and commitment, are not disadvantages of marriage, but the problem can be in morals of one or the two people, and their social values. Because marriage in fact; must refrain that instability and then to bring enough guarantees and relief for both to stabilize their relationship.

the imbalance in spending our care and feelings (3/3).

    We talked before about the fact of overstating in our dealing with animals, and in fact what it’s expressing about. Compare that view to the second one now, I watched a document which following the trajectory of the life of elephants, it was interesting to find out about the nature. During the way; one female fell sick when the caravan couldn’t wait it except its son which stayed nearby. Logically I was waiting when I’ll see the help to treat the elephant, but instead to offer that necessary care, they preferred to keep filming the end how it will be for hours to record that dramatic end.

    I don’t mean the situation like to saving a gazelle from a tiger, that’ll be a wrong interference in the nature and breaking the nature’s principal laws, so offering the help when it’s needed (as we said before) doesn’t mean to transgress on the normal process of the nature, also doesn’t mean to overstate in the care, right, but to help a wounded animal is something else and different to the two figures. Here where the animal’s welfare is required, instead of the previous figure that’s definitely legal and lawful.

    I didn’t find an explanation to this doing really, except the personal interest. Of course we have to care about animals –as we do with nature- by the necessary and treat them in proper way with mercy, but we can’t be as good as their lives in nature. We should do that for humans who deserve this kind of care like orphans or refugees of wars –as an example-.

    So when the matter requires care, usually people purely look for their interests without mercy nor care about the things around them. And in the same time they go far in the care and provide all kinds of mercy, whereas the matter can be controlled by keeping the middle distance in the dealing. In my opinion I don’t think it’s the right way to show the suitable care for animals and both are extremists in somehow.

    I my opinion, it’s not more than exaggeration in the two sides to the extremities, and it’s not more than tries to doing changes differently than the usual (when it becomes unbearably boring), and the freedom eased that way to try and be convinced with, maybe certain approbation comes from religious aspects and healthy results that someone get in fact, but not to be in the way that it’s in real life now.

    Recently, I’ve see a report showing some annoyance from animals rights organizations from those who possess animals, because they took them to special saloons, to colour them strangely and apply some weird cut hairs by shaving it. Really it’s not bad to possess animals and to give names to your pet like cat, horse, or dog, of course I don’t see all in black, some studies confirmed that the being with animals is bringing more happiness to elderly, they’ve some advantages surely, like when they give them reasons to move and be active in the life at least on a personal level (while those people are caring about something).

    And what I blamed here is: the dissociation in the social and family ties, furthermore; it’s not bad to care about animals -in reasonable way-, but when we check statistics and see around the world, we can find how many people are in need to help before any exaggeration to do with an animal, just keeping the reason with.

        To care about animals; it’s always necessary of course especially when it’s needed as we see in some governmental programs for protection from the human also (what the strange paradox). But the question for us as individuals; do we do that in the correct way as it should be done? Everyone can find the answer by himself and think about, probably there is something to rectify, don’t you think so?

the imbalance in spending our care and feelings. (1/3)

    I got a question from a friend: why we’ve names? Briefly I said that the name refers to his owner, usually it puts its traces in the personality of the person from the first times when he understands its meanings (name’s meanings) also from knowing stories of great people who got the same name and they play the role of models for him/her, and it effects on feelings towards the name as well.

    “Why we give animals names? Do they understand too the meanings too?” my friend continued so

    “Of course no” I replied, what people do today is a part from the social luxury. That’s from one side, and it's, just an interpretation for the need to live socially in the life. or just a picture of modern life, besides, the human is exaggerating to care about animals (especially pets) because of many reasons like the shortage in the human interactions, and less of social communication between people, social connection (even family ties) became weaker, that’s why people look for a different way to skip the situation, so animals become like a last outlet to cover that shortage in the life, especially when animals don’t demand a lot nor conditions for relations with.

    Regardless to the new life’s challenges and people do getting dogs often for more security, that’s great of course, but that you love animals so not necessary to have into your room on bed or sofa, you can be close to them by your care or going to park, right. They're not toys made for our fun and good mood, ok. So don't make all your interests in something like that and only, right

    And maybe if you’ve the enough social live (familiar life) you won't have time for animals as you do now, because you'll have something more precious to spend time with, because usually that (overstatement in) the interest - in pets- comes from the loneliness that people are living in life, unfortunately. So to trust animals and love them because they also love the human in return without conditions and easier to get them from, that’s what promoted this impression.

    And when you're so interested in what you've at home, you'll be thankful for your life and all graces you've got, animals won’t be for you more than a creature that requires a help and care from you only when it's necessary, maybe we can exclude dogs and cats, but some animals can’t be as pets really and preferably (to this creature) to leave in the nature that it's created in. then it will enjoy and feel the life better than being at homes,

    According to what’s termed by “the positional arms race” in the social life of people, which redefine again what’s “adequate and enough” for the person in his ordinary process of life. It becomes today a part of lifestyle and people exaggerate in that way by more care, and treat them like their kids or maybe more, in this case we can call them humans instead animals, am I right? And I’m sure many people do call their pets like that, because they were failed from society around and couldn’t find the good companionship

    Even about using animals, I make a difference between putting them in parks like nature reserves, in way to protect the type of certain animals from extinction, AND the fact of using animals for fun and impose cruel exercises on them like in circus or home’s cages. They’re created to help you get your purposes but not to be games between your hands.

The loneliness is a personal advantage or a social disease

   When the life is going for nothing useful, the person feels himself in empty circle, especially when this feeling is mixed with impression of no goal to like for and no need to be exist in this world. Those feelings lead to a sadness and make this person disappointed from the entirely life.

   People in those situations prefer to stay alone for a while, although the world became like a small city and all this big jam of social communication in different ways and means, but many people stay feeling by the loneliness in life because of no true people in fact beside, nobody cares. This feeling increases when you really don’t find anyone beside in times when you need to have someonein time when the family ties are broken more and more.

   The society looks coherent but if you check inside (nearly) you find out that many people are separated and living separately in their thoughts, their feelings, their goals ( regardless to living near of far from people). Everyone sings a different musical piece without harmony between them, this is the fact in our societies.

   And the loneliness becomes a kind of lifestyle for many people, because they don’t interact enough with others, sometimes it’s depending to personal convictions that everyone can live by himself and only. And for some reasons they don’t trust people, so they prefer the loneliness as an inevitable choice, their eyes start see the darkness without any bright face to the world.

   But the human life is based on social interactions and deal with people, so we can’t continue a normal and ordinary life if we choose to go mentally far from the society and stay alone when we’re obliged to remain within it.

   That’s why some people look for companionship through new technologies when they failed to find suitable mates that in daily life, not just to enjoy their time, have fun or make friends, but because they suffer from loneliness in real life whereas they’re surrounded by a lot of people and everything important for living.

    If we see the matter generally we find: when the people get encouragement, they work seriously to achieve what they’re working for. Whereas they give up when they don't get attention or enough care…etc. and that’s what happens in fact.

    We learn the success from successful experiences and people in the world when you spend your life with others, you’ll find the solidarity spirit, giving help, the morally and physically support, standing by side of each other…etc, you'll be ready to provide help in the same way that you wish to get when you need it.

   But I can say that those qualities disappeared today (in different degrees from place to another) unfortunately because of majority are looking only for themselves regardless to world around.

Other victims in the societies (part 02)

   Another face to the same situation: (the details of laws in several articles in order to organize well the relationships, the labour market, families, upbringing and care of children), this large quantity or different articles make the social life more difficult because of immobility in these laws. When these articles are detailed to provide more protection and care for different categories in society. But the fact is looking a little different, when these laws bring some risks on family ties and probably to destroy its relations because of no flexibility in the laws and all articles are written by some bare minds from any emotional senses or humanitarian aspects, it’s an abstract law and not enough to cover all society’s sides and circumstances.

   Sometimes I think that we can make robots to manage issues and to announce provisions, without any need to human in these judgments. To tell the truth; the human legislations can’t never cover all matters occur in the society; therefore we need always a proportion of moralities and interference of the human aspect to complete the shortage of the abstract laws.

   Honestly the world today creates many fears. I saw many families can’t live together because of illogical reasons because the law imposes on the family members to live separately when the parents can’t provide the suitable care for children, therefore the government takes them to orphanage, or the separation between couples from different nationalities in reason that they don’t demonstrate substantial evidences for their living together under the same roof. A lot of issues are so clear to make decisions about them, but the details in laws through some articles hamper to go directly to this decisions and the problem  expands more and more.

   It hurts me a lot when I see some families can’t live a normal life like every family, when the laws make the life difficult to some people because the missed link in the matter is the emotional part and our laws are empty from every sense of humanity. And for example, instead to help the low-incomes’ families by governmental programs, they demonstrate their no-ability and spend more expenditures on making solutions for these demonstrations.

What we should do in that situation now?

   I know that the laws are unjust sometimes for some people because they aren’t enough to treat certain issues. But when you can’t get what you want like I said the first example above; why do you think its failure? Maybe only because the results can't come quickly, they need a little time more to come, you should be patient in your steps, to don't give up, and this is an important factor to continue the life normally. And the livelihoods’ ways are available constantly to everyone, only the necessary conditions didn’t gathered yet together, soon that’ll be changed and that’ll be your chance. In other words; never lose your hope about circumstances better for you than you are now.

    I appreciate very much the associative activities from several associations to help these people to fulfilment their goals in life and realize what’s necessary for them to continue a normal life, also the local agencies which provide some services to integrate people in context of certified lifestyle with some innovative solutions to avoid many social problems and conflicts, these activities can allowing to governments to look back in previous steps and correct some rules to reform better the society and give certain rights for a normal life to a wide segment in society. 

our relashionships .. with family memebers (2)

    The family is considered the basic cell in the society and we can’t reach to stability of society if we don’t reform this important element. The contemporary lifestyles touched a lot the strength of family ties and affected on them, and many families stay only relied by the same name, and that’s only what gathers them in fact. Sadly these situations hurt many people in different degrees.

    When the parents were playing with their children for a long time, today the technology takes the mission from them. The lifestyles today with these new technologies and a lot of business, all that let people in family like machines, and they rarely meet themselves and sit in the same place. Therefore the care of family - almost - has no priority in the human life and the relations became weak more and more.

    I said in the previous article that some families are like enemies, and I repeat again now: if someone in in family turns back on you, you don’t do the same and turn your back on him (her, them) you should confront the bad treatment by the good treatment that it proves your high qualities. I confirm to you to think again and take a step to reform your relations. I don’t tell you it’s easy to do it, but it can be easier if you look from another aspect to the matter, and the pains disappear (or -at least- they’ll decrease) when we forgive less than when we keep a certain distance away from them.

   I wonder from one thing; when someone didn’t talk to his (her) brother (or sister, parents) for months or for few years maybe, so what’s the meaning of the brotherhood in your dictionary? Which meaning do you have for the words: brother, sister, parents, family; if you can’t forgive the mistakes of your brother, or sister, or any member in family? I tell you: you can’t define clearly them to me now if you’re in this situation, and you can't give a strict definition. Because these words have no sense and the meaning is empty from your side.

   if you want to satisfy yourself and give yourself some answers about your truth, I ask you to strengthen your relationships with family by “respecting the elderly members, visiting family members, checking on them, helping them, showing mercy to youngsters, offering support to all in times of joy and sorrow.”(Dr.Al-Nabulsi)

   All this good treatment brings you the happiness and expresses your real value in the life. That’s the way to give us finally reformed society (for our safety) by strengthening the family ties, because it’s the missed thing in the world and it’s the spirit of the civilization.

     In brief: I ask you to care more about these matters in your life with family, especially with parents of one of them. Because you won’t give them their rights on you whatever you do good for them.