Marriage

Tattoos in Society Even though tattoos are sometimes viewed as unprofessional and offensive, tattoos are just a form of art because tattoos should not hinder someone from anything in life and people with tattoos are just as human as everyone else. Tattoos have been around for a long time and have always been a subject that causes conflicts and contradictions, both negatively and positively. Some companies do not allow their employees to have visible tattoos, some do. There are jobs out there that are strict with the dress code and grooming conduct.

Where I work, one of the dress code restrictions are that if you do have visible tattoos or body art, they are to be covered by either band-aid or sleeves, if anyone has a or piercing other than the ears they have to cover them up with a band aid or wear clothing that cover the tattoos. On the flip side there are other jobs that do not have a problem at all with employees having visible tattoos. They are allowed to have then and show them freely. Society is forced to make a choice as to whether they should accept them or not.

People now days especially those of younger ages, are more open to the idea of tattoos and the reason for having them. There are still people that believe that having a tattoo either means that you are a or that you’ve been to jail, or that people use them as a way to rebel against society. Individuals who think that about a person are stereotyping without knowing the real meaning of them. Whatever the reason is for getting a tattoo be ready to get attention from it, it might be in a good way or in a bad way. There are many different reasons why people get tattoos.

In tattoos were mainly used as status symbols, amulets, and signs of religion. Now days they are mainly used as a form of expression, adornments, a way to show their individuality, or also as a declaration of love. People get tattoos with their loved ones name or a symbol that would represent them. They also get pictures of things that have a special meaning to them or something that reminds them of something important in their lives. Religious tattoos are very common in some religions and in others they are een as a sin or a way to rebel against your religion, for example in the Buddhist and Hindu religions tattoos are a big part of their religion. They use them to represent their culture and their religious beliefs. In the Christian and Jewish religion tattoos are seen as a bad thing to do to your body, they believe that the body should be kept clean or without any modifications. For some individuals peer pressure from the new society to have tattoos makes them want to get one even when it means to break your religious rules. In the the women get really creative tattoos in different parts of their bodies like on their hands.

These are usually done when they get married, the tattoo artist will create a design on the palm of the brides hand and in the design they incorporate the name of the bride the groom has to find it first in order for them to consume their marriage. These traditions are still used today just like they were used for thousands of years. As time goes by tattoos are being accepted more in society, and they are seen differently. There will always be those who still disagree with them and that are still against them and that they would judge those who have them. Tattoos have been around for years.

We believed that the oldest known tattoos have been found on Egyptian mummies, until in 1991 there was a mummy that was named The Ice Man and it is believed to be about 5,200 years old. It was discovered in the Italian-Austrian border. In Egypt, scientists have discovered the oldest tattooing tools dating back to 1450 BC. The oldest tattooed mummies found were mostly women it seems that men were not getting as many tattoos as women did. Excavators believed that these women were marked because it was believed that they were woman of “dubious status” as the author Joann Fletcher from the Smithsonian magazine mentioned it.

This could be a reasonable reason for having found more mummies that were women. The tools used back in ancient times were described to be a sharp point set in a wooden handle, flattened needles that when tied together would provide repeated patterns of multiple dots. Now the tools have evolved but are still the same concept a needle that pierces the skin repeatedly creating the same effect on the skin. It was a painful process back then and it has not changed. You get severe burning when getting the tattoo and sometimes the person cannot take the pain and they have to stop the process, o they are left with a tattoo that is halve way and the they have to go through the removal process if they wish to remove it. Although the tools are more advanced the pain you get when getting a tattoo is still the same. The most used color in the Egyptian culture since ancient times has been black and in other cultures it has been the brighter colors that were most common. Now all of the colors are as equally popular. There are some that are more popular than others like Red, Green, Yellow, Blue, and White these colors are usually used as tint.

There are different types of pigments that are used now days, there are organic based, mineral based, and plastic based, and the plastic based pigments are the one’s used for brighter colors. The ink used is usually FDA approved but there are still places that use the illegal ink, some of the ink that people use is not for the skin and this will result in an infection. As time goes by the pigments fade in the skin as they have sun exposure and with time the pigment goes deeper into the dermis so the image fades and becomes less recognizable.

The colors that are more likely to fade are red, yellow, and pink. You can use sunscreen lotion to help protect the skin from the sun that in the long run will help maintain the look of the tattoo and it will help from fading. One of the cons of tattoos other than the rejection from society is the bad side of tattoo removal. When you decide that you made a bad choice on a tattoo or you decide it’s not something you want anymore you have the choice to remove it with a laser.

The procedure is said to be pain full and the tattoos are not removed in its entirety it still leaves a scar. You also run the risk of catching an infection when getting the tattoos since the skin is getting pierced several times and it is left open after the tattoo is done. The worst case scenario would be if you catch HIV, this happens when a person that is infected with this deadly virus has gotten a tattoo and the tattoo artist did not disinfect the needle properly so the next person that gets a tattoo will run the risk of getting infected.

The different countries that use tattoos the most are Japan, , Africa, and New Zealand. They all have different parts of the body that they prefer to get tattoos; in New Zealand they tattoo the face to represent status, lines of decent and tribal affiliations. These tattoos are called “Moko”. In India and Thailand they preferred tattoos on the arms and legs they use the tattoos to show strength. In Africa they used tattoos in a different way; since it is very hard to see the tattoos on their dark skin they would make indents in the skin like Braille.

In and Rome the Persians would tattoo the woman with exotic beauty marks. In Central America the Mayas would use tattoos as a sign of courage. The most common tattoos now days are those of the zodiac signs, names, pictures of family members, or someone they admire. In the ancient times the most common tattoos were of symbols that were used as amulets or were part of the religion. Now most tattoos are colorful and there are even tattoos that glow in the dark.

These are not so common since you can only see then under a black light; they are becoming very popular in clubs. Tattoos have evolved throughout time and people become more and more fascinated by them. Society will always have different opinions about tattoos, People’s religions and their different beliefs will always play a major roll in the way people perceive tattoos and those who have them. Society should consider the opinion of the opposite side before judging and before stereotyping someone.

The people that have tattoos should also consider the other persons point of view and their reasons for not liking a tattoo or not wanting a tattoo. If we educate ourselves more about the reasons for some to have them and the reasons of those that oppose to them we would be more open to the subject of tattoos. http://www. smithsonianmag. com/history-archaeology/tattoo. html http://historyoftattoos. org/ http://www. essortment. com/all/historyoftatto_rkyb. htm http://www. colourlovers. com/blog/category/articles http://www. livestrong. com/article/12437-tattoos-and-tattooing/

Family Institution (High Divorce Rates) Have you ever been to a traditional wedding? They are the most beautiful breath taking experience that you have ever seen; many symbols like the exchange of rings, uniting candle, flowers, bride’s maids and best man, and the bride in a beautiful white dress. Also weddings are a lot of fun too. They are the start of a family institution. On the flip side they are expensive and stressful for the couple at hand and the odds of staying together are only one out of every five marriages ended divorced within the first five years.

Nowadays unlike the past more people are living together without getting married. According to the Associated Press the divorce rate was down to the lowest at 3. 6% (per 1000) since the 1970. The peak of divorce was in 1981 it was 5. 3% (per 1000). Some experts still say that marriages are as unstable as ever, but because couples are living together instead of marrying the rates are lower for marriages too. So it makes sense that the divorce would be down because not as many couples are getting married and living together instead and there is no data that shows at break-up unlike divorce has data.

Nowadays, divorce is one of the most serious social problems that American society is currently facing. This is why it is extremely important to find out the main factors contributing to the growth of the divorce rate and possible solutions of the problem. Families are structured through marriage and reproduction is needed to keep the family institutions health and operating in society. There are many causes of divorce, just to name a few: changing woman’s roles, lack of stability, domestic violence, and lack of communication, which are highlighted below.

Some solutions to these problems are needed because divorce plays a very significant role in the life of society, family and each individual. The first significant cause of recent rise in the rates of divorce is that women completely change in roles. In the past, men had to earn all the money to afford the expense of family, whereas woman only do housework, since women have no money leading to depend on husbands’ money. Because of these situations, it is too difficult for most women to separate from their husbands. Nonetheless, these situations entirely changed nowadays. The quality between men and women in roles are very clear at the moment, thus women can work outside to earn money, while men share the household tasks such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes as well as caring for children. It can be clearly seen that women are independent from money as they can earn money by them to support their living cost. But this as I stated has been huge changes and not always accepted in all marriages. Next let’s look at stability with the high rates of company down sizing. Many people are losing their highly paid job and either can’t replace it or have to replace it with a much lower paying job.

This is a big problem because couples are not able to make their monthly mortgages and the relationship because very stressful. Many even have to turn to other resources such as government funded programs. Stress like this leads to divorce in some cases. Domestic violence is another big reason couples are getting divorce, because of the no-fault divorce it is more accepted that if you want out of the marriage just go get a divorce. Prior to 1969, countries which permitted divorces also required proof by one party that the other party had committed an act incompatible to the marriage.

This was termed “grounds” for divorce (popularly called “fault”) and was the only way to terminate a marriage. Most jurisdictions around the world still require such proof of fault. In the United States, no-fault divorce is now available in all 50 states and the a District of Columbia-New York, the last state to still require fault-based divorce, passed a bill this year (2010) permitting no-fault divorce.

According to Time magazine women are simple happier with out men and father are not necessary. Media has a high impact on the belief that shows like Sex and the City are the new shape of society. Women are financial stabile and don’t need men for financial stability. Family Institution (High Divorce Rates) Have you ever been to a traditional wedding? They are the most beautiful breath taking experience that you have ever seen; many symbols like the exchange of rings, uniting candle, flowers, bride’s maids and best man, and the bride in a beautiful white dress.

Also weddings are a lot of fun too. They are the start of a family institution. On the flip side they are expensive and stressful for the couple at hand and the odds of staying together are only one out of every five marriages ended divorced within the first five years. Nowadays unlike the past more people are living together without getting married. According to the Associated Press the divorce rate was down to the lowest at 3. 6% (per 1000) since the 1970. The peak of divorce was in 1981 it was 5. 3% (per 1000).

Some experts still say that marriages are as unstable as ever, but because couples are living together instead of marrying the rates are lower for marriages too. So it makes sense that the divorce would be down because not as many couples are getting married and living together instead and there is no data that shows at break-up unlike divorce has data. Nowadays, divorce is one of the most serious social problems that American society is currently facing. This is why it is extremely important to find out the main factors contributing to the growth of the divorce rate and possible solutions of the problem.

Families are structured through marriage and reproduction is needed to keep the family institutions health and operating in society. There are many causes of divorce, just to name a few: changing woman’s roles, lack of stability, domestic violence, and lack of communication, which are highlighted below. Some solutions to these problems are needed because divorce plays a very significant role in the life of society, family and each individual. The first significant cause of recent rise in the rates of divorce is that women completely change in roles.

In the past, men had to earn all the money to afford the expense of family, whereas woman only do housework, since women have no money leading to depend on husbands’ money. Because of these situations, it is too difficult for most women to separate from their husbands. Nonetheless, these situations entirely changed nowadays. The equality between men and women in roles are very clear at the moment, thus women can work outside to earn money, while men share the household tasks such as cooking, cleaning, washing clothes as well as caring for children.

It can be clearly seen that women are independent from money as they can earn money by them to support their living cost. But this as I stated has been huge changes and not always accepted in all marriages. Next let’s look at stability with the high rates of company down sizing. Many people are losing their highly paid job and either can’t replace it or have to replace it with a much lower paying job. This is a big problem because couples are not able to make their monthly mortgages and the relationship because very stressful. Many even have to turn to other resources such as government funded programs.

Stress like this leads to divorce in some cases. Domestic violence is another big reason couples are getting divorce, because of the no-fault divorce it is more accepted that if you want out of the marriage just go get a divorce. Prior to 1969, countries which permitted divorces also required proof by one party that the other party had committed an act incompatible to the marriage. This was termed “grounds” for divorce (popularly called “fault”) and was the only way to terminate a marriage. Most jurisdictions around the world still require such proof of fault.

In the United States, no-fault divorce is now available in all 50 states and the a District of Columbia-New York, the last state to still require fault-based divorce, passed a bill this year (2010) permitting no-fault divorce. According to Time magazine women are simple happier with out men and father are not necessary. Media has a high impact on the belief that shows like Sex and the City are the new shape of society. Women are financial stabile and don’t need men for financial stability.

It is true that marriage relationships are becoming increasingly equal, but to an extent. Since the early 1900’s the stereotypical ‘housewife’ role has changed, dramatically. This allowed men to try out, on what would have been seen as ‘Women jobs’ such as childcare, cooking and cleaning, and also women to do some ‘Men jobs’ which were mainly ‘behind the computer’ jobs and more leisure time, women also had a say in purchases and money matters, something which would have not been possible without this experience in change of gender roles.

Young and Wilmott were functionalist sociologists who came up with a theory that; ‘Marriage roles are becoming more equal.’ They called this the Symmetrical family, this is when the husband and wife have similar roles and share tasks and work equally. They claimed to have proven this theory by interviewing 1700 or more women and only asking them one question which was “Did you’re husband contribute to housework at all this week?”

Ann Oakley criticised Young & Wilmot’s methodology as her personal views were extremely diverse to theirs. She concluded it could vary from a miniscule to a large amount, making it unfair. The people who get interviewed are only allowed to answer ‘Yes Or No’ this makes it really hard to know as no additional details are included such as; when did they do this, how often do they do this and how they contribute to the change in stereotypical gender roles.

After Ann Oakley Criticised Young & Wilmot’s theory, she made her own theory. She divided her questionnaires into four groups, which consisted of; Housework, Childcare, Decision making and leisure.

Ann Oakley states that women are increasingly becoming more equal to their husband, but they are unfortunately still doing 70% of all housework. This portrays that, women are more equal in decision making, work and the outside life but still in their stereotypical gender role at home, with housework and child care.

She also states that men only contribute to nice, easy, clean and enjoyable things within the household and childcare; such as playing with the children, purchasing them toys or gifts, sending them to parks, washing one plate once in a whilst and may also cook occasionally. However, they never seem to be cleaning up the house, changing dirty nappies or even cleaning up the children’s sick or mess. These are all unfortunately left for the ‘housewife’ to do.

Overall, Ann Oakley has successfully proved that Young and Wilmott are incorrect in their conclusions on ‘marriages becoming more equal within the household,’ because of their imprecise interviewing techniques on collecting data. However, research shows that marriages are increasingly becoming more equal in the household, even though it is increasing slowly.

A young man may marry at the age of twenty-two, if he is the only child in the family. If he has brothers or sisters, he is likely to marry when he grows older. A girl usually marries at the age of eighteen. At these ages young men and women generally know how to support themselves. If a young man wants to marry he may tell his parents, so that they may choose the daughter of one of their close relatives for him. If he wishes to marry a particular girl, he may tell them so, so that they may think about it in making a final decision.

If they agree to their son’s choice, they will send word regarding their intention to the girl’s parents. If the boy’s request is acceptable to the parents of the girl, then the latter may fix a day for nanya bini, when they can discuss formally the rules they will follow at the wedding of their children. A day or two prior to nanya bini, the young man’s parents will inform their relatives about the coming wedding of their son to the girl he loves.

They also request that three men and three women who are very closely related to them join them in meeting and discussing the coming marriage with the girl’s parents on the nanya bini day. The nanya bini meeting between parents of the future bride and the bridegroom may take place either during the day or at night. If it is held during the day, the young man’s parents and relatives will come early to the girl’s room. On their arrival the men are asked to take a seat on the mats which have been spread for this purpose along the girl’s family’s upper gallery, while the women are invited to take a seat in the family room.

At about 10 a. m. , after the visitors have been entertained with drinks, the girl’s father calls all the people of the longhouse and his relatives who have arrived from other villages to gather at his lower gallery in order to hear his discussion with his visitors. After the people have taken their seats the parents of the bride and the bridegroom inform their friends arid relatives that they have agreed that their son and their daughter should be married if the bridegroom’s parents agree to the payment of adat nikah (marriage price) demanded by the bride’s parents as follows: 1.

A bride’s wealth of $100 to $300, depending upon the family background of the bride-to-be, and lower than $100 if she is of low birth. 2. A sigi alas muda, $4. 00, to sigi rusa, $8. 00, of bunga pinang (ceremonial wedding fee), and sigi jabir, $1. 00, to sigi panding, $2. 00 again, if the bride is of low birth. 3. One medium size brass gun (bedil) for batang pinang and one bendai gong for tandan pinang if the bride and the bridegroom are of distinguished families. People of common background would not demand the batang and tandan pinang presents from the bridegroom’s family.

If the bridegroom’s parents agree to pay the marriage price, then a genealogist (tukang tusut) will recite the bride’s and the bridegroom’s family trees to see whether the marriage is incestuous or not. Incestuous means in this connection that the couple is kin of different generations. If their union is incestuous to this sense then the bridal parents should inform the Penghulu (district chief) that the coming marriage ceremony of their children will be celebrated with besapat ka ai or bekalih di darat depending on the category of the incest as discussed earlier (cf, pp. 29-30).

At the end of the discussion of nanya bini, the groom’s parents leave a silver girdle (lampit) with the bride as a deposit to bind their promise. A day is then set for the melah pinang or marriage ceremony which must be held within three months. If it is an incestuous marriage, it must be held as soon as possible after the besapat ka ai or bekalih di darat ceremonies in order to avoid kudi (disaster). A few days after this, the groom’s parents will gather the people of their longhouse to inform them that their son’s marriage has been agreed upon in discussion with the future bride’s parents.

The groom’s father also tells them of the day agreed upon for the wedding festival. From this time onwards the groom’s family starts to make cakes and accumulates the derian fees. The marriage festival (melah pinang) is held in the bride’s house. About one week before the Melah Pinang festival is held, the groom’s parents again call all the people in their longhouse to meet at their gallery as they are to send the belanja (expenses) to the bride’s parents. At this meeting each family in the longhouse presents whatever money its members have agreed to con-tribute to finance the feast.

After the groom’s parents have sent their belanja for the Melah Pinang feast, the girl’s parents will begin to pound rice, brew jars of tuak wine, and buy the necessary bulls, pigs and drinks for the oc¬casion. Four to five days before the ceremony, the girl’s parents call for a meeting of people on their house gallery. At this meeting, the girl’s father enquires from the heads of each family whether they have finished making preparations for the ceremony. If all preparations have been made, then the bride’s father will inform the people of how many neighboring longhouses he intends to invite to the feast.

The people of other families in the longhouse will naturally agree to this and one man is sent to invite the guests upriver while another man is sent downriver. The two men inform the guests to come to the wedding festival early that day so that their reception can be properly perfor¬med. By this point the agreement to marry is considered binding on both par¬ties, and compensation must be paid if either wishes to break the agreement. 1. If a young man makes a promise to discuss his marriage with a girl’s parents and fails to do so according to his promise, he is fined sigi jabir, $1. 0, and sigi panding, $2. 00, for the cost of pinang sirih wasted by the parents of the girl. If he refuses to pay the fine, the case is brought to the court of the Penghulu for further hearing. 2. If a bridegroom fails to marry his bride after the melah pinang day has been fixed, through no fault of the later, the former is fined sigi panding, $2. 00, and sigi alas, $4. 00, respectively, the later for the cost of wasted pinang sirih. If the bridegroom refuses to pay the fine, the case is brought to the Penghulu’s court for further judgment.

Marriage, Divorce, and Military Families Marriage, Divorce, and Military Families Marriage is a conduit through which God’s grace flows to the couple and their children. The church understands marriage between a man and woman to be a sacrament, a visible sign of the grace that God gives them to help them live their lives here and now so as to be able to join him in eternity. Marriage is social as well as religious, but its religious aspects are very important. The Bible repeatedly compares the relationship between man and wife to that between God and Israel or between Christ and his Church.

For marriage is a holy vocation. Since the Church sees marriage as holy, it believes it must be treated with reverence. It also recognizes that marriage is basic to the health of society and therefore a public institution that must be defended against harm. Marriage is a public institution. Consequently, proposals that could harm the institution of marriage must be subjected to the same sort of objective analysis that we give any public policy question. Marriage is not just a private matter of emotion between two people. On the contrary, its success or failure has measurable impact on all of society.

Rational analysis yields solid, objective reasons for limiting marriage to one man and one woman-reason anyone can agree with on purely secular grounds (Zinn, B. M. , D. Eitzen, S. , Wells, B. , 2008). However, one of the downsides to redefining marriage would be the weakening of the meaning of marriage, which would be divorces. Human nature being what it is, if the meaning of marriage is weakened, it will be psychologically easier for even more people to divorce. Look at what happened when “no-fault” divorce was legalized. The divorce rate skyrocketed.

If the nature of marriage is further undermined in the minds of couples then when things get rocky, more couples will be tempted not to work through their problems and get happy again but rather to divorce and find someone else (Hogan, P. , , R. , 2010). That is a bad idea, because most marriage therapists agree that divorce generally “doesn’t work. ” Divorce doesn’t solve the problems that caused the first marriage to break up. Divorced people bring the same problems to their new marriages that broke up their old ones. That’s why second and later arriages are statistically far more likely to end in divorce than first marriages are. Also, a large majority of couples who contemplate divorce but stay together describe themselves as “happily married” five years later. So staying together “works” better than divorce. The Romans had an interesting view towards marriage – ‘matrimonia debent esse libera’ or ‘marriages ought to be free’. This meant that either spouse could opt out of the marriage if things weren’t working out for them. Centuries later, Victorian England had a vastly different view (Bouvier, 1856).

People got married and stayed together for better or for worse. Society frowned on divorce and divorced people were likely to find themselves social pariahs. In the present century, both these views prevail. It depends on which part of the planet you live in and in what kind of culture. “Divorce rates are higher in European or American countries, where individual freedom is given higher stress, than in, say, Asian or African ones, where familial and social opinions cause higher stress. With globalization, of course, the ‘backward’ countries are catching up.

Women, especially, with access to higher education and higher salaries, are less willing to put up with traditional roles and expectations” (Devine). Social and cultural moralists are having a field day, predicting, like always, dire consequences for the ‘social fabric’. No, divorce isn’t joy-inducing, but then neither is a corrosive marriage. In such a case, splitting up is preferable to staying together ‘for the children’ or to keep up social appearances. Anyway, it all really depends upon the kind of relationship you have.

Some relationships are worth working on, some aren’t. There are many different and complex causes and reasons for divorce, each of them specific to that particular couple’s marital relationship, their individual experiences and personal problems. None of them may seem ‘common’ to the people going through a divorce, of course, but many of the reasons recur enough to warrant the term. These causes for divorce may vary from the lack of commitment to the marriage to the lack of communication between spouses; infidelity; abandonment; Physical, sexual, or even Substance Abuse, etc.

Furthermore, it takes a very special person to stand and accept that the rest of their lives are devoted to something larger than themselves and their own little worlds. It takes an incredible commitment and an enduring love to withstand a life supporting someone else who may not be there by their beside on days when you are feeling blue, and who may not hold you in those times when the life around you is not so sweet. Now, marriage is hard enough, there are times when all husbands and wives question the sanity of a relationship that requires such hard work.

Couples get through this by being together and keeping at it as a team. Sadly, many military relationships do not have this luxury of being together to keep things on track. This is when the military husband or wife just has to sort through “couple issues” alone (Rentz et al, 2007). Only the strongest committed individual can carry the weight of two in a relationship, and it takes a strong intimate trusting bond to make it at all possible. The military eases the lives of service members and their families in some very significant ways. Paychecks are regular.

Benefits, such as healthcare and legal assistance, are unparalleled in the civilian world. And, in a time of economic uncertainty, the job security provided by the armed forces is a true blessing (Rentz et al, 2007). However, every positive aspect of military life is matched by at least one negative, especially for married service members and their families. Military and civilian marriages face the same marriage-stressors and marriage-killers, but the challenges faced by military marriages are both compounded and additional (Banner, 2008).

Danielle Rentz and associates argues that the impact and stress of war may occur before, during, and after deployment and extend beyond the military soldier to include stress and emotional disturbance for his or her family. Anticipation of deployment can lead to feelings of anger, resentment, and hurt within the family. Separation during deployment may create the assumption of new family roles by the partner left behind, disruption of family routines, uncertainty about the service member’s safety, and the inability to plan for the future (Rentz et al, 2007).

They base their discussion on the research and studies on the Effect of Deployment on the Occurrence of Child Maltreatment in Military. Betty Myers writes a testimony of her days married to a military man and unravels a story from past that lead to divorce. Her story is yet another cause for divorce within a military family. The stress of war and unknowing of what occurs to a spouse takes a toll on a marriage. This is a testimony of her personal experience and this will assist my paper for the causes of divorce (Myers, 1988). Bennington Banner analyzes the statistical data of military divorce rate in every branch of the Arm Forces.

He states that the long and repeated deployments required of many troops have been widely blamed for unprecedented stresses on military couples. Spouses at home must manage families and households without their partner. He concluded that there were an estimated 10,200 failed marriages in the active duty Army and 3,077 among Marines, according to figures obtained by The Associated Press for the budget year ended Sept. 30. His data can help me prove the point that the numbers of divorce in the Arm Forces are staggering (Banner, 2008). Joseph Devine explains that military marriages undergo a very specific set of strains.

They face the possibility of sudden moves to far-off locales, rapid deployments, and even premature death. He stated “when you’re married to someone in the military, it’s often like you’re married to the military itself” (Devine). Your life revolves around what the military wants from you and your spouse, and there’s not a whole lot you can do about it. In summary, the ways in which each military marriage survives are all personal and unique to their own, but the emotional journey is one that can really be understood only by another military spouse .

The one thing all military spouses have in common with each other is their ultimate pride in their husbands and wives, and to survive the journey as a military spouse, their shared pride of place alongside their incredible military husbands and wives. While military marriages are an entity of their own, the non-military couples could learn many things from them. The special goodbyes for instance are important. A military husband or wife knows the value of not leaving issues unresolved, and has learned the art of letting the silly things go (Hogan, P. , , R. , 2010).

They do not have until the afternoon, or the next day or the day after that to get over it, they are too aware that tomorrow is unpredictable. A military marriage does not have the time to wallow in unimportant debate. The most important thing to them is to be sure to let the one they love know that they are appreciated. Petty unimportant arguments have a way of clouding the unconditional love that holds a marriage together.

References

1. Banner, B. Divorce rate up in Army, Marine Corps. (2008, December 3). Retrieved February 3, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1606239161). Bouvier, J. (1856).
2. Matrimonia debent esse libera. (n. d. ) A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. Retrieved April 27 2010 from http://legal-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com/Matrimonia+debent+esse+libera
3. Devine, J. Divorce and the Military. Retrieved from http://ezinearticles. com/? Divorce- and-the-Military=3605202 Hogan, P. , , R.. (2010). Marriage and the Military: Evidence That Those Who Serve Marry Earlier and Divorce Earlier. Armed Forces and Society, 36(3), 420. Retrieved May 4, 2010, from Career and Technical Education. (Document ID: 2002732321).
4. Myers, B. (1988). Story Of A Thrown-Away Military Wife. Minerva, VI(2), 77. Retrieved February 3, 2010, from ProQuest Central. (Document ID: 624746591).
5. Rentz, E. D. , Marshall, W. S. , Loomis, D, Casteel, C. , Martin, S. L. ,  Gibbs, D. A. (2007). Effect of Deployment on the Occurrence of Child Maltreatment in Military and Nonmilitary Families. American Journal of Epidemiology, 165(10), 1199-206. Retrieved February 3, 2010, from ProQuest Health and Medical Complete. (Document ID: 1268687131).
6. Zinn, B. M. , D. Eitzen, S. , Wells, B. , (2008). Divorce and Remarriage. (Ed. 8) Diversity of Families (pp. 393- 410). Prentice Hall

Introduction

A significant and often heated debate has been in progress for years regarding the effect of divorce on the family, and more specifically, on children of different ages. On the one side, there are writers, theorists and scholars who argue that divorce does not affect the children over the long term and on the other side are those who argue that divorce has a negative effect on the children for all their lives. It is indeed impossible to make a clear and definitive conclusion based on the research studies that have been conducted over the years.

Each investigator argues strongly for their own conclusions, providing statistical evidence to support those conclusions. Does divorce have a negative impact on children, regardless of age when the divorce occurs? Does divorce have more impact on specific age ranges of children? If divorce has a negative impact on children, then, how long does that impact last? Do adult children of divorced parents find it easier to blame all their failures and pitfalls on their parents’ divorce instead of taking responsibility for their own actions through the years?

These are the only some of the questions that underlie the problem: What impact does divorce have on the children. Very few definitions are needed regarding this investigation: •Children means the children of the parents who get divorced, regardless of age. Thus, “children” refers to adolescents as well as younger children. When a specific age range is meant, that will be clarified in the text. Divorce means that the couple has gone through the legal process of divorce and are, thus, no longer legally married. Absent father refers to those fathers who do not keep in contact with their children subsequent to a divorce.

Also, the absent father does not contribute to the children’s support. Custodial parent refers to the parent who has legal primary custody of the children. First a brief overview of what marriage and divorce was throughout history, and what would happen to those children after the divorce was finalized Marriage and Divorce in History The roots of marriage can be traced back to time of the Romans and Greeks. For the Greeks and Romans marriage wasn’t really something of a choice. It was more of a family obligation and a way to help the family gain higher status. Marriage in Roman times was often not at all romantic. Rather, it was an agreement between families. Men would usually marry in their mid-twenties, while women married while they were still in their early teens. As they reached these ages, their parents would consult with friends to find suitable partners that could improve the family’s wealth or class. ”(PBS) Women really didn’t have a choice in who they married, they were chosen by their fathers. And even for the men, love wasn’t taken into account because it was up to the parents who they married.

The actual marriage in Roman times was very simple. The couple would just have to declare their desire to live with each other in front of both families. Divorce in this time was just as easy as marriage. “Just as marriage was only a declaration of intent to live together, divorce was just a declaration of a couple’s intent not to live together. All that the law required was that they declare their wish to divorce before seven witnesses. ” (PBS) Divorce was a very common thing for the Romans. The only condition was the woman would get her dowry back, and she would move back in with her father.

If the wife was divorced because of adultery only half of her dowry was given back. The laws did not mention anything about husbands as they could not be divorced because of an adulterous they have committed. It is assumed that children were left with the father as men were the law in Roman times. Not much is known on what happened to the children after a divorce, whether they are allowed to see their mother or not, if the mothers were allowed to keep the children, or if the child’s best interests were ever a factor for who got to keep them after the divorce.

Marriage in African countries was relatively similar to the Greeks and Romans, but with a few changes. Marriage signified a union between two families. “The death of a husband did not terminate the union of families. Upon a husband’s death a relative would assume his role. ” (Simon and Altstein) Marriage was more of a binding contract than anything else. The woman being married didn’t really matter in the long run either as if she died or was unable to bare children, a younger sister would take over her role as the wife “But the wife wasn’t fully excepted until she gave birth to her first child. (Simon and Altstein) The actual marriage didn’t really require that much, just consent from both parties and their guardians, as well as some form of payment from the husband’s family to the wife’s. This would most likely be cattle. There wasn’t really any ceremony like today; it was more of a series of rituals. Divorce was a simple thing for Africans. Grounds for divorce were; adultery, desertion, insanity for at least seven years, and being imprisoned for more than five years. The children would normally have been given to the father, but in more recent times the child would go with whichever parent was more able to take care of them.

If a child was old enough to make up their own mind the court would consider who they wished to live with, but that didn’t always mean the child’s pick would be the one he/she would be given to. In the 1500’s after the Reformation, a change in how marriages and divorces were performed occurred. The peasants were allowed to marry whomever they choose, but the nobles still kept with the arranged marriages to keep their line pure and to improve their power, this would go for royalty as well. Marriage then became a public affair, and it was considered part of the earthly kingdom instead of the heavenly kingdom.

This meant that vows would be made in public before the church consummated the marriage. Prior to this the Church was in charge of marriage and divorce but they lost that power with the coming of the Reformation. “Marital disputes would be tried before a civil court, not a Church court. The Church did not have legal authority over marriage. ”(Simon and Altstein) Also laws that prohibited the marriage of clerics, monks, and nuns were also rejected. Divorces were allowed as long as there was just cause. Cause included impotence, sexual incompatibility, abuse and acts of incest. ” (Simon and Altstein) The average length of a marriage was only fifteen years at the time, but this was caused more by death, than by divorce. In more recent times a decision was made by the courts of the United Kingdom that they will not longer decide which parent the child should custody of. The parents were to make the decision together and stick with it, only if they can not agree will the court make one, this decision can not be argued. In the United States of America, arriage is “the legal union of a man and a woman as husband and wife, and a spouse is a husband or wife of the opposite sex. ”

Only men and women are allowed to be married to each other, in some states though same-sex civil unions are allowed. The church is where the marriage is held but the state must approve the marriage for it to be final. The laws of marriage vary from state to state. In the United States of America divorce rates are very close or over fifty percent. Divorce varies on the state as well but some form is permitted by every state. Thirty-four states have adopted no-fault divorce in addition to traditional grounds for divorce. ” (Simon and Altstein) As for the children, their wishes are considered by all but four states. The effects in which those children concur will be explained later. Literature Review The literature regarding the impact of divorce on children is voluminous. It is also highly contradictory and heated in terms of debate. Anyone investigating this topic can find research studies to support their own opinions no matter what that opinion is. We begin by offering some data regarding divorce.

In the United States, one out of every two marriages will end in divorce (Marano, 2000). Despite this devastating statistic, 90 percent of Americans will marry (Marano, 2000). Of those individuals who divorce their first spouse, 75 percent will remarry, even though their first marriage ended (Marano, 2000). Given that so many divorced individuals simply live with other persons or combine the homes with others without the sanction of legal marriage, the figure for “remarriages” escalates significantly when these people are included (Marano, 2000).

Out of all second marriages, 60 percent end in divorce (Marano, 2000). It is not just in the U. S. that a large proportion of marriages fail. The BBC reported that one in seven marriages (16. 4 percent) end in divorce in the United Kingdom (2000). The divorce rate differs dramatically by location in the UK, for example, in Biggleswade, only 6 percent of marriages end in divorce but in Skelmersdale in Lancashire, 32. 4 percent of marriages end in divorce (BBC, 2000). The divorce rates have risen in most European countries, as well (Bjornberg, nd).

The highest rates are found in Denmark, Sweden, Estonia and the United Kingdom (Bjornberg, nd). In the year 2000, there were 45,500 divorces, a new high (Victorian State Conference of Teams, 2001). Anyone who has kept up with public mass media also knows that the divorce rate in China has escalated to as much as 25 percent in recent years. It has become such an issue that the government began debating about a new law that would make adultery a crime and that would put further restrictions on divorce in that country.

Most of the research regarding the impact of divorce on children has been conducted in the United States and the United Kingdom. Two of the primary and most discussed studies contradict each other, which has come to be known as the “Hetherington-Wallerstein debate–a battle of superstars” (Corliss, 2002, p. 40). Hetherington argues that “75% to 80% of children of divorce function well, with little long-term harm to their adult lives” and Wallerstein argues that “the damaging effects of divorce on children are cumulative, and the major impact comes in adulthood” (Corliss, 2002, p. 0). Wallerstein first published her findings in a book in 1971; this was then updated in another book entitled The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25 Year Landmark Study in 2000 (Corliss, 2002). In the most recent book, Wallerstein concluded that divorce leads to depression, juvenile delinquency, poor grades, among other things and that the divorce affects people well into adulthood (Corliss, 2002). Hetherington published her findings in a co-authored book (with John Kelly) entitled For Better or For Worse: Divorce Reconsidered (Corliss, 2002).

In this book, Hetherington and Kelly argue “that 75% to 80% of children of divorce are functioning well, with little long-term damage” (Corliss, 2002, p. 40). Hetherington and Kelly tracked nearly 1,400 families and more than 2,500 children, some for three decades and concluded: Within two years of their parents’ divorce, the vast majority of children are beginning to function reasonably well again (Corliss, 2002, p. 40). 70 percent of divorced parents are living happier lives than they did before divorce (Corliss, 2002, p. 0). Some women and girls turned out to be more competent, able people than if they had stayed in unhappy family situations (Corliss, 2002, p. 40). In Hetherington’s study, 25 percent of the children from divorced families had serious emotional, psychological or social problems (Corliss, 2002). This compares to 10 percent of children from families that remain intact (Corliss, 2002). Still, it is a much smaller proportion than many other studies, including Wallerstein’s.

Cudina and Obradovic summarized a great deal of the research, most of which concludes that children from divorced families are “more aggressive and depressive”; “more prone to anxiety”; and “of a generally poorer adjustment than children living in intact families” (2001, p. 247). The instability of the marriage also affects boys and girls differently, for instance, “boys are more often found to be more vulnerable” and “more aggressive and displayed more behavioural problems than girls” (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001, p. 247). It should be pointed out, however, that the gender differences found have not been consistent.

Another finding is that the reaction of children seem to differ according to age when the divorce occurs (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). For instance, the research suggests that “emotional response being more intense for children younger than 6, and for those in early adolescence at the time of parental divorce” (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001, p. 247). There is also a substantial amount of research that concludes that “prolonged parental marital distress could be even more damaging to the child’s emotional and social development than parental divorce” (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001, p. 47). Fighting, conflict, violence all combine to make the child feel insecure and unstable as well as fearful (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). Mitigating factors that affect the impact of divorce on children have been identified as the availability of the noncustodial parent, the relationship between the parents after the divorce, the quality of the parent-child relationships with both parents, and the degree of economic hardship and stress the child experiences after the divorce (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001).

Because the overwhelming majority of research has been conduced in English-speaking countries, Cudina and Obradovic studied the impact of divorce on children in Croatia, a society that is very different in many ways from the United States and other English-speaking nations (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). Croatia is smaller, has a relatively low GNP and in most ways can be considered a developing nation (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). The divorce rate in Croatia has increased over the last 30 years, rising from 13. 5 percent in 1962 to 17. percent in 1996 (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). The Croatian family reflects a myriad of both traditional and modern values (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). Nonetheless, there is still a stigma attached to divorced individuals in Croatia (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). Cudina and Obradovic found that Croatian children respond in much the same way as children in other countries – children of divorced parents are more emotionally unstable and more depressive than children from intact families (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001).

The study did not support the premise that children suffer equally negative effects from living in a home where the parents are in conflict as do the children from divorced parents (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). They study also confirmed that the degree of impact is related to age – younger children showed more emotional distress than did older children (Cudina and Obradovic, 2001). Hyatt reported that the adjustment of the children is primarily dependent on the parents and how they behave after the divorce (1999). Hyatt was reporting a study conducted at Iowa State University and reported in the Journal of Marriage and the Family.

Simons, who led the research investigation team, said that “Even though divorce more than doubles the risk for emotional and behavioral problems in both boys and girls, the good news is that the vast majority of children from divorced families do just fine. What is essential for kids is that they be parented well. If mom and dad continue to persevere in their parenting, are warm and supportive, monitor the kids and are consistent in discipline, the risk for conduct problems is no greater than in two-parent families. This is a more optimistic scenario than is often assert” (Hyatt, 1999).

This was also a longitudinal study that involves 600 families and is ongoing (Hyatt, 1999). Theoretical Foundations Attachment theory would seem to be the most appropriate theory to discuss in terms of the effects of divorce on children. Beginning in infancy, the child develops an attachment to the parent through interactions with the parent. According to Bowlby, an interruption or disruption of the attachment relationship can result in psychopathology (Garelli, 1997). Research indicates that the formation of attachments in infancy and childhood contribute to healthy adulthood (Galston, 1996; Fields, 1996).

Research also indicates that when the attachment is disrupted, the child may well suffer both emotional and physical traumas affecting their ability to function today and in their future life (Galston, 1996; Fields, 1996). Divorce is an event that disrupts attachments. Attachment theory asserts that children do develop attachment feelings to people, places and objects. Research concludes that attachments are essential for good mental health. One study in Israel concluded that “Attachment between parent and child plays a crucial role in the healthy development of the child.

Accordingly disturbances in parental bonding will be linked with the development of mental disorders later in life” (Canetti et al, 1997, p. 381). Note that the need for attachment is for all children. Divorce does not necessarily mean that the child’s attachment to the noncustodial parent would be eliminated by the divorce. Discussion, Summary and Conclusions As can be seen from the few research studies presented, there is a heated debate and strong controversy regarding the effects of divorce on the family. There is equally strong evidence to support either side of the debate.

That leaves the reader with a strong question as to how much divorce actually does affect the future development and adult life of the divorced family. There is no perfect study, which means that every study has its limitations. More studies suggest that children face significant effects when their parents divorce. It does seem, however, that the impact of a divorce on a child would be dependent upon the circumstances and the subsequent behaviors of the parents involved. More studies in recent years are pointing to this premise.

If the parents both continue parenting and they parent well, a far smaller proportion of children will experience significant negative effects than what has been said in the past. If the parents continue their fighting and place the child in the middle of that fighting, then, common sense would tell us that the child will have any number of psychological and emotional problems as a result. It is important to note the studies that have compared children of divorced parents to children of parents who stayed married but whose relationship was so unstable.

Certainly, living with verbal conflict and loud fighting between the parents has a devastating effect on the child. Living with parents where spousal abuse is prevalent would have tragic effects on the child, worse effects than would a divorce. Even the researchers who conclude that a small percentage of children experience serious problems after a divorce, clearly state that they are no promoting divorce and that children will develop more securely and more positively if the family is kept intact – except when violence and abuse is present.

The conclusions, in other words, do not support divorce; they are simply saying the outlook for these children is not as bleak as has been publicized. There is another issue that one must also look at. These kinds of studies rely a great deal on interviews with the survivors of divorce. It is very convenient for many of these adults or older adolescents to blame all the problems in their lives on their parents’ divorce. Scapegoating is very prevalent in today’s society – people simply do not want to take responsibility for their own lives. The conclusion of this paper must be that:

1. Divorce will have an effect on children – to think otherwise is naive.
2. Children of divorced families do not automatically develop serious emotional and psychological problems.
3. The full effect of divorce on children will depend on how the parents behave after the divorce, the degree of attachment that was in existence prior to the divorce and the child’s own mental state/stability at the time of the divorce.

References

1. BBC. (2000, November 15). The capital of happy ever after. Retrieved April 05, 2007, BBC Web Site: http://news. bbc. co. uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1024000/1024963. stm Bjornberg, Dr. Ull. (nd).
2. Children and their Families/Children and Society. 2002, Retrieved April 05, 2007, Council of EuropeConseil de l’Europe Web Site: http://eurochild. gla. ac. uk/Documents/CoE/Reports/estud/Estud_2. htm
3. Canetti, Laura, Bachar, Eytan, Weisstub, Esti Galili, De-Nour, Atara Kaplan & Shalev, Arieh Y. (1997, Summer). Parental Bonding And Mental Health In Adolescence. Adolescence 32(126), 381 – 395.
4. Corliss, Richard. (2002, January 28). Does Divorce Hurt Kids? Time 159(4), 40 Cudina, Mira & Obradovic, Josip. (2001, Spring).
5. Child’s Emotional Well-being and Parental Marriage Stability in Croatia. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 32(2), 247.
6. Field, Tiffany. (1996, Annual). Attachment And Separation In Young Children. Annual Review of Psychology 47, 541-562. Galston, William A. (1996, June). Divorce American style. The Public Interest, 12 – 27.
7. Garelli, Juan Carlos. (1997). Controversial Aspects Of Bowlby’s Attachment Theory. Bowlby’s Theory of Attachment. Retrieved April 03, 2007, Attachment Research Center at St. John’s University Web Site: http://rdz. stjohns. edu/lists/bowlby-l/
8. Hyatt, Kay. (1999, November 19). Children’s Adjustment to Divorce Largely in Hands of Parents. Retrieved April 03 2007, National Council on Family Relations Web Site: http://www. cfr. org/pdf/childr_1. pdf
9. Marano, Hara Estroff. (2000, March). Divorced? Psychology Today 33(2), 56.
10. Simon, R. J. , & Altstein, H. (2003). Marriage and Divorce (pp. 5-7, 29-34). New York: Lexington Books.
11. Victorian State Conference of Teams. (2001, October). Looking forward in Confidence. A Married Couple’s Movement: Conference Reports & Proceedings Web Site: http://www. tol-oceania. catholic. org. au/publications_vicconf. htm#Victorian%20State%20
12. Conference Weddings, Marriage & Divorce. (n. d. ). Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://www. pbs. org/empires/romans/empire/weddings. html

Women’s Rights The social position of Muslim women differs tthroughout time periods and countries, such as Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan. The consequences of breaking the laws in these nations differ as well. In addition, different social factors affect the way Muslim women are treated. These social positions are perceived differently amongst men and women in Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan. In Afghanistan, the leaders of the past Resistance turned Muslim Afghanistan into a strict theocratic state by incorporating religion into the state laws.

This theocratic state, also known as the Islamic state of Afghanistan, along with the mujahideen, limited women’s rights in 1992 (Goodwin, 2003:78). Specifically, women are required to follow a strict dress code of wearing proper veils and are banned from watching television or listening to the radio. When a Muslim woman gets married, she becomes her in-law’s property. Women are also prohibited from working, wearing perfume, receiving an education, participating in political elections and showing any body part that can be considered erotically enticing.

In addition, a Muslim woman cannot talk to men that are not related to her (Goodwin, 2003:78-79). One reason women’s rights are restricted is the lack of education and illiteracy of Afghan women. Being illiterate prevents a woman from studying Islam. Therefore, when someone tells her something is Islamic, she automatically believes him because she has no way of knowing otherwise. Not only does illiteracy prevent Muslim women from studying Islam, but it also prevents them from studying their legal rights and the Qur’an. Studying the Qur’an and legal rights would cause women to understand what really is Islamic.

https://donemyessay.com/sociology-exam-3-chapters-6-8/

Women may lack knowledge of how women live in other nations. Therefore, these women do not resist their lack of rights because they are uninformed of alternative lifestyles of women. In 1921, women’s rights drastically changed. The veil was banned and the first school for girls opened (Goodwin, 2003:88 and 90). In 1964, the constitution of Afghanistan granted equal status to men and women and coeducation (Goodwin, 2003:89). Communism did take over Afghanistan after that event and Aghanistan’s laws for women became much more conservative.

Hamida, a college-educated Afghan woman had to stay home with other women and wear the traditional veil due to the drastic change in women’s rights. She greatly suffered and experienced many physical problems due to the drastic change in rights. Her level of education may have been a factor to her sthrong reaction (Goodwin, 2003:91). Hamida’s reaction demonstrates how educated women have a sthronger negative reaction than uneducated women in terms of restrictions. In Iran, women must wear their hijab properly and remain entirely covered in public as soon as they are mature enough to be married.

Women are considered mature enough to marry by the age of 9 (Goodwin, 2003:107). According to Zahra Qasim, a store clerk in Iran, dress restrictions are not always formally written down, so rules are somewhat unclear, which leads to women being punished due to laws they are unaware of (Goodwin, 2003:108). Banning the veil could be perceived just as oppressive if not more, than requiring women to wear a veil. Due to banning the veil, some women feel uncomfortable going in public without a veil, causing women to avoid going out in public whenever possible (Hoodfar, 1993).

Therefore, wearing the veil in Iran is part of culture and society in Iran. Another reason behind the dress restrictions is husbands feel in control when their wives wear a veil (Goodwin, 2003:109). Rahnavard has a different perspective on the veil. She believes “women in the west have been enslaved by fashion, makeup, and turned into objects of sexual attention. “The veil frees women from the shackles of fashion and enables them to become human beings in their own right,’ she claimed. Once people cease to be distracted by women’s physical appearance, they can begin to hear their views and recognize the inner person’” (Goodwin, 2003: 112-113). Therefore, Rahnavard believes Western women are more oppressed than Muslim women. The veil protects women from being judged and discriminated based on physical appearance, something western women are not protected from. Despite the positive perspectives of the veil in Iran, there are discrepancies between the rights of men and women. Despite the positive perspectives of the veil in Iran, there are discrepancies between the rights of men and women.

Maryam Rajavi ran the mujahideen with her husband and mobilized Iranian women against suppressive regimes, which was the cause of many supporters of Shah to attempt to assassinate Rajavi. Although they did not assassinate Rajavie, they were successful in executing two of her sisters (Goodwin, 2003: 122). Such aassassinations demonstrate how many Iranians sthrongly appose a change in women’s rights. When women fail to follow the rules Iran reinforces, the common punishment involves whipping the woman. Jan Goodwin explains the experience of being whipped as “The lack of power, being robbed of all dignity.

It was a disgusting experience, so degrading, and as violating in its way as rape” (Goodwin, 2003: 112). Within Iran, there are inequalities amongst men and women. For instance, laws in terms of execution differ among genders. Girls have to be at least 9 years old to be executed while boys have to be at least 16 years old (Goodwin, 2003:115). Women can not divorce without the husband’s consent. When a divorce does occur, the husband typically gets custody of the children (Goodwin, 2003:114). In addition, women must remain virgins before mmarriage. Within the Islamic religion, it is believed virgins automatically go to Paradise following death.

This is not necessarily the case for women that lose their virginity before mmarriage. If it is discovered that an unmarried woman is not a virgin, they may be forced to get married (Goodwin, 2003:115). Ssimilarly to Iranian laws, Pakistan also prohibits sex before mmarriage, which is termed as Zina laws. A large ppercentage of the women in Pakistan experience punishment for committing Zina. When a woman commits Zina, despite whether or not she had sex voluntarily, the woman is punished and the man is not. Men often report that a woman committed Zina as a form of revenge of the woman’s close male relative, despite if she really committed Zina.

One can only attest that an assault occurred if there are at least four male witnesses that were present during the act and agree that it happened (Goodwin, 2003:51-53). 75% of women in jail are charged with Zina (Goodwin, 2003:52). Such a high ppercentage demonstrates the commonality of charging someone with Zina. The value of a woman’s life is considered half that of a man’s in Pakistan (Goodwin, 2003:55). Women’s lives are so restrictive they are sometimes only allowed outside their home three times in their lifetime, when they are born, when they get married, and when they die.

In addition, the windows are frosted so no outsiders can see the woman in her house (Goodwin, 2003:56-57). The cause of the lack of women’s rights is due to education; Pakistani women lack knowledge about their rights (Goodwin, 2003:71). Socioeconomic class plays a factor in women’s rights in Pakistan. The elite rich live in a westernized lifestyle. For instance, the elite have a lifestyle full of materialism. Women often have boyfriends in private, participate in sexual aactivity prior to mmarriage, drink alcohol at parties, and watch movies that have been banned in Pakistan.

Unlike the lower socioeconomic classes, the elite women are not considered property to her husband and do not have to live a domesticated lifestyle because they frequently hire people to perform the chores wives are expected to do in a lower class. In this elite class, the parent’s of sons arrange their mmarriage with a well-educated woman. The parent’s of daughters look for a husband that is professional with an American green card (Goodwin, 2003:68-69). The film, A Matter of Honor, informs the viewer that in Pakistan, Honor Killings are when a woman is killed due to acts that are prohibited through the religious laws the country follows.

Family members commit Honor Killings for the sole purpose of preserving the honor of the family. Honor Killings are more common among rural and uneducated people because they do not know how to read the Qur’an to build perceptions from the accurate meanings of the verses. Honor Killings are technically illegal in Pakistan, but they are rarely enforced. Muslim women’s rights are different among different countries and there are many opposing perspectives on Muslim women’s rights. In addition, the reasons why women’s rights continue to be restrictive differ as well.

One commonality among Afghanistan and Iran is the wearing of the veil. There are several different perspectives as to why the veil is worn. There are other laws regarding what women can and can not do in which Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan enforce. Not only are there different laws that are enforced, but they way they are enforced differ amongst different factors as well. Despite the trends in the way women are treated in these countries, it is important that people do not generalize these practices among all Muslim women, as this habit leads to false assumptions.