Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
For 5 years while in college, I dated an Arab Muslim. Lived with him for 4 years while his parents stayed in denial and pretended not to know. I didn't answer the phone in my own home. While I value the relationship as a learning experience about another culture and religion, I also learned that for me an interfaith relationship wouldn't work and maintaining a secret relationship is unacceptable.
I went into the relationship as a young adult who thought that love could conquer all, and that all the naysayers were just lame. But on the interfaith thing, I realized that it's important (for me) to share such things as faith with my partner. On the secrecy thing, I agree with the LW that it felt like I was the "other woman." I allowed myself to be put in that disadvantaged position because I didn't know any better, but never again.
And to the guys whose families won't approve of you dating/marrying that XXXX girl? Do us all a favor. If you're going to end up obeying your parents anyway and are so afraid of what they'll think -- only date those "acceptable" girls. You'll save everybody a lot of time and trouble.
The issue here isn't culture or language or heritage; not at all, because as people here can attest (as can I), those things can be overcome if a couple is united and willing and strong enough to press forward. This man is not. In fact, families with combined cultures can be very beautiful, loving and healthy. That doesn't seem to be where this is headed.
It's very clear that culture is only an excuse. The fact that he has lived with you for so long without mentioning marriage AND kept you from the important people in his life (regardless of their feelings) means that he doesn't want to take this relationship anywhere, which means he most likely doesn't want to get married. This reality is heartbreaking and doesn't mean there's anything inherently wrong with you, except that you have tolerated it for so long. At the very least, you deserve someone who can say to his parents and everyone else, "This is the woman I love, I hope you love her; because I do."
My belief is that if his parents were not the way they are, then there would be another issue ie., "I'm not sure if I want to give up having kids" or "I just don't feel ready" or "My father is sick" or "Let's wait until the wind changes" or any number of other reasons men use to live with women for long periods of time without marrying them. There must be some other indications of this in his personality. Has he permanently committed to anything, like buying a house? Has he been married before? Does he freak out if you want to go to a wedding together? etc., etc., etc...
It's sad that he is shifting the blame here, but it just seems to me that his parents' cultural bias is a convenient way for him to avoid being totally honest. The fact you have characterized him as "cowardly" and "infantile" suggests that you already know this. I'm so sorry.
why does LW need to force this issue? she and the "boyfriend" are LIVING TOGETHER -- which does not necessarily denote a lifelong commitment.
the boyfriend has a commitment to his parents -- until he and the LW are married, the relationship to his parents must come first. what's the big deal if they don't know that they're living together, seriously? if the relationship w LW doesn't work out, the boyfriend is left with two damaged relationships...
the problem with this society is that we don't do enough to honor our parents. the LW knew what she was getting into when she started dating her boyfriend. she should respect his wishes. whether or not he tells his parents doesn't necessarily have anything to do with how he feels about her. perhaps he doesn't want to tell them because he doesn't want them to have ONE MORE THING to hate her for.
it sounds like she's putting to him the ultimate test: them or me? which is unfair and selfish. if you love someone, you don't make him choose.
In my twenties, I did this to someone. At the time, I thought it was because I didn't want to hurt my parents. But really it was because I was a cowardly ass and I didn't think the relationship was worth stirring up too much trouble about. I knew it would end before my relationship with my parents did. And, of course, it did.
My guess is that your boyfriend has his doubts about how permanent your relationship can be and is afraid to tell you. On some level, he agrees with his parents that this is not the right relationship for him. Ask him, and if there's hesitation, show him the door. He should feel lucky he found you, not fearful of discovery.
I have had 3 close friends from India/Pakistan. One Hindu (man, born in US), one Muslim (woman, born in US, Pakistani family), one Parsi(man, from India, born in India).
*Please bear with my generalizations. I don't mean to offend anyone, this is just my experience.
What struck me about all three of them, in spite of the differences in the background, religions, and nationalities, was their willingness to obey their parents' wishes and do what is best for the family, rather than pursue their own lives, goals, desires.
The woman drank alcohol, dressed in a completely western fashion, went out to nightclubs, had diverse friends, was pursuing a master's degree in finance. But, she told me one day, she didn't believe in love, she simply had to marry someone who was from the same esoteric branch of Pakistani Islam as herself, and that she wants an arranged marriage. The branch of Islam only has 3,000-4,000 people living in the US, yet she would get a husband from that branch of Islam, and arranged, too. Now, she's got her wish, living with her European-born doctor-husband from that branch of Pakistani Islam, in Europe. I always thought that her protestations about love were a coping mechanism with the fact that she had decided to acquiese to her family's desires about her marriage, but perhaps she really didn't believe in love.
The Hindu guy was also highly accomplished, born in the US. He had rebelled against his family because instead of becoming a doctor, he was studying economics. Apparently, if he had said "art history," he would have been disowned, so economics was already a rebellion. However, he was also wistfully talking about his impending arranged marriage, and how this would make his family happy. Eventually, I found out he was in a secret relationship with a girl not from the right caste, had finally kissed a girl, at the age of 24, and was working on trying to somehow marry the girl, even though his family would all have heart attacks if they found out he wanted to marry for love, and a woman from the "wrong" caste. Note, castes apparently still apply even though he was born in the US and his family was living in the US. I don't know what happened to him.
The Parsi guy, he was studying medicine. He was a flatmate, so I had many chances to ask him about his culture. He simply said, that's what i'm doing because that's what's best for my family, end of story. His own interests, goals, were not important. He loved photography, and airplanes. But that didn't matter. He was also going to marry a Parsi woman he had met only once at a Parsi conference. Marrying someone non-Parsi was completely out of the question.
Family, lineage, the good of the clan, it seems, are much more important than in the individual. In the western tradition, at least since the enlightenment, the individual is paramount. Individual thought, rights, freedoms, the idea that your life is your own and the noblest goal is to live your life exactly as you want to, is not prevalent in indian subcontinent countries and cultures. This was shocking to me, as a secular westerner, when I found it out.
Again, perhaps i'm completely off-base. This has been my experience with 3 people from the indian subcontinent who were good enough friends that we could talk about this stuff.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
