Asking A Father's Permission

nc19

Barely There wrote: »

Most wouldn't, but some would.

The fact that you can't understand why, despite posters supplying their reasons, is more a reflection on your ability to comprehend some fairly straighforwaed reasoning than it is on them..

Thinly veiled insult originating in feminism

Zubeneschamali

Adalyn Scrawny Goalkeeper wrote: »

You do realise its very lightly to happen as its common practice.

I think it's unlikely that anyone who knows me at all would try this, but it would be a good chance to learn something about his character.

The scene where he catches on I've been pulling his leg, and myself and my daughter wet ourselves laughing at him might be revealing.

Zubeneschamali

nc19 wrote: »

Thinly veiled insult originating in feminism

Feminists? Where?

Quick, call the parish priest for an exorcism!

nc19

ash23 wrote: »

But if the roles were reversed and your wife was planning on proposing to you, would you have minded her asking your parents seeing as you felt that way about them?

Not at all

Scarinae

Adalyn Scrawny Goalkeeper wrote: »

I actually don't understand how someone would be insulted by it apart from actually trying to be insulted by it, its bordering on off the wall feminist claptrap saying stuff like it "implies the woman is owned by her father". I actually don't even know any woman who would be offended either for that matter. Most women I know are extremely close to their fathers and would/did very much want this type of bonding experience between their future husband and father.

I’m extremely close to my father, but I’d find it strange if he was asked to consider my potential engagement before I was. I don’t like this implication that women who would prefer to be asked first have some problem with their fathers.

Barely There

Czarcasm wrote: »

Not that I believe in luck, but of course we talked about that aspect, and my wife understood where I was coming from, so we avoided any unnecessary ball kicking, thankfully!

Well then, like I said, you must be very lucky.

Two people deciding to get married is one of the most important life decisions you will ever make, bigger than buying a house together and on a par with deciding to have children,

To willingly give a right of veto to an external party over such a choice is not a decision that the vast majority of women in modern day Ireland would find palatable I'd imagine.

Shakespeare's Sister

"It's out of my deep respect for him but if he says no I'm gonna marry her anyway... therefore undermining this "respect" - stupid.

curioser

Haven't had a chance to read most of the posts preceding so apologies if this has come up already - I recall many years ago Phil Lynott impregnated Leslie Crowther's daughter. Crowther later told of how Lynott came to him and asked for his daughter's hand in marriage. Crowther replied that seeing as he had already taken everything else he might as well go ahead.

Shakespeare's Sister

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

"It's out of my deep respect for him but if he says no I'm gonna marry her anyway... therefore undermining this "respect" - stupid.

I think the vast majority who ask know what the answer will be, but they still ask as a mark of respect to the family they are going to become a member of.

Zubeneschamali

Adalyn Scrawny Goalkeeper wrote: »

I think the vast majority who ask know what the answer will be

"To win my daughters hand you must perform 3 tasks!"

tigger123

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

"To win my daughters hand you must perform 3 tasks!"

"And answer me, these questions three...

Question the first..."

Czarcasm

Barely There wrote: »

Well then, like I said, you must be very lucky.

Two people deciding to get married is one of the most important life decisions you will ever make, bigger than buying a house together and on a par with deciding to have children.

Well that's a matter of opinion really, it's not one I personally would share, as to me buying property (I'll bet you missed the irony) is only a matter of bricks and mortar, I've bought it, sold it, and made decisions from a business perspective on the value of the purchase or sale. I've seen enough arguing over property when marriages break down and if my marriage broke down, my wife is welcome to the property as I'd want nothing to do with it.

Having children, well, again, I personally would see that as a much bigger decision than marriage. People can walk away from a marriage, or they can have children without being married. Marriages aren't a permanent contract any more, thankfully. Unfortunately for some though, they think the same idea applies to their children. Once a child is born, there's no putting them back up there!

To willingly give a right of veto to an external party over such a choice is not a decision that the vast majority of women in modern day Ireland would find palatable I'd imagine.

That's about all any of us can do here really, but to extrapolate our opinion out to wider society and claim that our opinion is in the majority, based on nothing more than because it's the way we feel about the issue?

That'd be an assumption, and assumptions, even when based on overwhelming evidence, can often be wrong. Just ask anyone who bought property on on the word of celebrity economists, when people closer to them tried to warn them they were paying over the odds. Where are all the celebrity economists now - Hobbs, McWilliams, etc.

Just like some posters here, they'll be nowhere to be seen when the shìt hits the fan.

Barely There

Czarcasm wrote: »

Well that's a matter of opinion really, it's not one I personally would share, as to me buying property (I'll bet you missed the irony) is only a matter of bricks and mortar, I've bought it, sold it, and made decisions from a business perspective on the value of the purchase or sale. I've seen enough arguing over property when marriages break down and if my marriage broke down, my wife is welcome to the property as I'd want nothing to do with it.

Having children, well, again, I personally would see that as a much bigger decision than marriage. People can walk away from a marriage, or they can have children without being married. Marriages aren't a permanent contract any more, thankfully. Unfortunately for some though, they think the same idea applies to their children. Once a child is born, there's no putting them back up there!.

Okay, but unless you're arguing that marrying somebody is not really a big deal, then I don't see what point you're trying to make in quibbling its importance wrt to other major life events - let's just say that deciding to get married is a fairly important milestone in life.

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's about all any of us can do here really, but to extrapolate our opinion out to wider society and claim that our opinion is in the majority, based on nothing more than because it's the way we feel about the issue?

That'd be an assumption, and assumptions, even when based on overwhelming evidence, can often be wrong. Just ask anyone who bought property on on the word of celebrity economists, when people closer to them tried to warn them they were paying over the odds. Where are all the celebrity economists now - Hobbs, McWilliams, etc.

Just like some posters here, they'll be nowhere to be seen when the shìt hits the fan.

So basically you're contending that it's possible that most women wouldn't be put out by the notion that their father should have a right of veto over whether they should get married?

Well I can't 'prove' you wrong as I lack the time and resources to carry out a poll of a sufficient sample size that you'd be likely to accept - but let's just say I'm really, really confident that you are indeed, very wrong.

In fact any woman I know, would look on it as a fairly harmless tradition, but would be horrified at the thought of someone else being able to dictate to them if they could get married or not.
I'd be very surprised if all these women were a statistical anomaly.

Perhaps you should pose the question to some of your female friends - other than your wife - and see what they would think of it.

Czarcasm

Czarcasm wrote: »

you can think whatever way you want, as if it'll make any difference.

I can not think whatever way I want - I can only think where the current data I have leads me. If you have more data - but are unwilling to give it - then I can not rethink my position based on data I do not have.

I can only say that given what you have offered - not what you are withholding - it simply appears you have the power of veto in both cases - whereas your wife had not. And I find that to be a double standard.

Your family object - you could over ride that. Her family object - she could not override it because you were intending to bypass her veto - the veto you yourself exercised over your own families feelings on the matter - and take her families objection as final. Her veto on it would have been worthless and meaningless.

She had no veto anywhere, you did. That was all my point was and is.

Czarcasm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I can not think whatever way I want - I can only think where the current data I have leads me.

...

She had no veto anywhere, you did. That was all my point was and is.

Your personal bias is clouding your analysis of the data. Perhaps it would have met your standards of discussion if I had said - you can choose to believe what you want about my mindset. You've already made enough judgements based on assumptions in the absence of data, which leads me to conclude that your interest is not in understanding my mindset, but in lording it over me with your self-perceived superior intellect.

I'm only going on the data you've presented and of course mixed that in with my personal opinion to form judgment upon your opinion. That's why I'm not particularly interested in furnishing you with any more ammunition data.

Now you are just making it personal with comments like "self-perceived superior intellect." and inventing a bias for me I do not have. There is no need for that - and I will not be responding in kind.

I have no bias on the issue nor do I feel it is clouding anything. I am evaluating the facts that you gave and the facts tell me that:

1) Your families objection was vetoed by you and you proceeded all the same.
2) Her families objection - had there been one - could have been vetoed by her but in vain - because you would have went with their decision rendering her veto useless.

So you had a veto over your families decision. She - technically - did not. Those are the facts as you have presented them - without bias of any kind on my part.

AudreyHepburn

Tarzana wrote: »

Genuinely interested - why does it show respect? Why the father? What marks him out? I'm interested to try and understand the thought process behind it.

I suppose it's the tradition of it...the father used to be seen as the head of his family and so you would have ask his permission to join the family etc.

Nowadays though I think it is more to with looking for his blessing than permission.

After all as I said, my Dad is the man who helped give me life, raised me, cared, for me, loved me before any other man, was always and is always there for me. And in my personal case, my Dad and I are extremely close, and his feelings and opinions matter a lot to me.

I think it's a lovely way of showing that my partner understands all that and understands how a father might feel watching his daughter get married.

Czarcasm

Barely There wrote: »

Okay, but unless you're arguing that marrying somebody is not really a big deal, then I don't see what point you're trying to make in quibbling its importance wrt to other major life events - let's just say that deciding to get married is a fairly important milestone in life.

Well what I said was that to me, the decision to get married to my wife wasn't a big deal. Like I said - I knew from the moment I met her that I wanted to marry her. Deciding to get married was never going to be a big milestone for me personally, but I wasn't daft enough obviously to assume that everyone else would feel the same way I do.

You may feel that the decision to get married is nobody else's business but the couple involved, and that's what works for you, but because I value the opinions of other people who will be affected by the consequences of my decisions, I think it's best that I don't make assumptions on their behalf.

So basically you're contending that it's possible that most women wouldn't be put out by the notion that their father should have a right of veto over whether they should get married?

No, I'm not contending that at all, that's your contention based on your interpretation of what I actually said. Your previous contention is based on what you imagine. My contention was that's all you can do - imagine.

Well I can't 'prove' you wrong as I lack the time and resources to carry out a poll of a sufficient sample size that you'd be likely to accept - but let's just say I'm really, really confident that you are indeed, very wrong.

That's exactly my point - you can say what you like really, based on what you believe, but without proof, your assumptions have no basis in reality. They're firmly confined to your imagination.

In fact any woman I know, would look on it as a fairly harmless tradition, but would be horrified at the thought of someone else being able to dictate to them if they could get married or not.
I'd be very surprised if all these women were a statistical anomaly.

So it's not really a fact then, as you're assuming what their response would be, and even more than that, you're assuming they would be a statistical anomaly without ever having undertaken a sniff of research?

Yet you'll berate me for what you assume were assumptions I made on behalf of one woman?

Between myself and yourself though, I had no guarantee or 'proof' if you like, that my wife would even turn up on the day, and didn't assume she would actually marry me until she had signed her name on the register!

One thing I've learned about people is that making assumptions about the way they think or how they would behave in a given situation is a really bad strategy. They can indeed often surprise you.

Perhaps you should pose the question to some of your female friends - other than your wife - and see what they would think of it.

Ahh, you're alright, I think I'll leave that research to you -

Czarcasm wrote: »

Can't answer that one, but it'd be interesting to find out alright, I must ask around and I'll come back to you (if I'm still in one piece after they're insulted by thinking I'm proposing to them ).

Malari

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I suppose it's the tradition of it...the father used to be seen as the head of his family and so you would have ask his permission to join the family etc.

Nowadays though I think it is more to with looking for his blessing than permission.

After all as I said, my Dad is the man who helped give me life, raised me, cared, for me, loved me before any other man, was always and is always there for me. And in my personal case, my Dad and I are extremely close, and his feelings and opinions matter a lot to me.

I think it's a lovely way of showing that my partner understands all that and understands how a father might feel watching his daughter get married.

I would say exactly the same about my dad, but I'd be disgusted if he was consulted, informed or asked about marrying me before I knew about it.

To me it's less to do with being property and more to do with respect for me. Getting married is a decision only me and the person I'm marrying make, it has nothing to do with anyone else. My dad would feel the same way, and my boyfriend knows this.

To the people who think it's the same as a bride wanting to have her father give her away (as property) it's totally different as SHE gets to make this decision. It appears that she does not have any say if her father is asked about marrying her without her knowledge.

That said, if someone likes that kind of thing, go for it, but be pretty sure you know you are both on the same page! It certainly isn't for me and it certainly says nothing necessarily about the relationship you have with your father.

Barely There

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I suppose it's the tradition of it...the father used to be seen as the head of his family and so you would have ask his permission to join the family etc.

Nowadays though I think it is more to with looking for his blessing than permission.

After all as I said, my Dad is the man who helped give me life, raised me, cared, for me, loved me before any other man, was always and is always there for me. And in my personal case, my Dad and I are extremely close, and his feelings and opinions matter a lot to me.

I think it's a lovely way of showing that my partner understands all that and understands how a father might feel watching his daughter get married.

What if he said 'No'?

Barely There

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's exactly my point - you can say what you like really, based on what you believe, but without proof, your assumptions have no basis in reality. They're firmly confined to your imagination.

Well I can't 'prove' that women would prefer their perfume to smell of wildflowers as opposed to cow sh;te - but I'm pretty sure they do.

AudreyHepburn

Malari wrote: »

I would say exactly the same about my dad, but I'd be disgusted if he was consulted, informed or asked about marrying me before I knew about it.

To me it's less to do with being property and more to do with respect for me. Getting married is a decision only me and the person I'm marrying make, it has nothing to do with anyone else. My dad would feel the same way, and my boyfriend knows this.

To the people who think it's the same as a bride wanting to have her father give her away (as property) it's totally different as SHE gets to make this decision. It appears that she does not have any say if her father is asked about marrying her without her knowledge.

That said, if someone likes that kind of thing, go for it, but be pretty sure you know you are both on the same page! It certainly isn't for me and it certainly says nothing necessarily about the relationship you have with your father.

Once again it's not about asking your father's permission any more. It hasn't been for a very long time.

It's about asking for his blessing and maybe assuring him that you'll be well treated, loved etc.

It's no more misogynistic nowadays than engagement rings or walking your daughter up the aisle.

AudreyHepburn

Barely There wrote: »

What if he said 'No'?

Well then I'd have to listen to his reasons. I'm not saying I'd necessarily agree nor refuse to get married, but I'd at least let him explain why he said no.

krudler

Easiest way to avoid any and all confusion on this issue with partners is just talk about it at some point during the time you're building a relationship together. It'd like never discussing how you'd raise any potential kids or if you'd prefer a small/big wedding etc. I don't mean in a clinical "this is how things will pan out to the letter based on agreed stipulations" way, but in a general "hey if you had the choice which would you prefer" general chat way.

Malari

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Once again it's not about asking your father's permission any more. It hasn't been for a very long time.

It's about asking for his blessing and maybe assuring him that you'll be well treated, loved etc.

It's no more misogynistic nowadays than engagement rings or walking your daughter up the aisle.

That's why I specifically said "consulted, informed or asked". I don't care what the reason is, I don't need his "blessing" and he doesn't need assurance. I just don't like the idea, for me, and I would want to be able to go as a couple to my parents and tell them for the first time.

Czarcasm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Now you are just making it personal with comments like "self-perceived superior intellect." and inventing a bias for me I do not have. There is no need for that - and I will not be responding in kind.

Tax that wasn't me trying to get personal, I'm only doing the same as what you're claiming you're doing and evaluating the evidence. I have no particular bias on the issue either, I'm not trying to tell anyone the way they think is wrong. You do what feels right to you and who am I to pass judgment? I couldn't put myself in your shoes on any long term basis (tried it, wasn't for me), but I would never be so presumtuous as to tell you what way you think. I'd at least make an attempt to understand where you're coming from instead.

I have no bias on the issue nor do I feel it is clouding anything. I am evaluating the facts that you gave and the facts tell me that:

1) Your families objection was vetoed by you and you proceeded all the same.
2) Her families objection - had there been one - could have been vetoed by her but in vain - because you would have went with their decision rendering her veto useless.

See what you're doing there? You're making up a situation that didn't arise, so you really can't say you're examining facts. You're just hypothesising.

You're inventing stuff to try and make a ridiculous attempt at a double standard, completely ignoring the fact that my wife has a mind of her own, while arguing that I'm the person who thinks my wife has no mind of her own.

Just because my wife paid no heed to my parents opinion, doesn't mean I had to do the same, that's not a double standard, that's two people who think differently. Spin it whatever way you like and perceive it whatever way you like, but don't then try and tell me you're not introducing your own personal bias.

FWIW though, I can think of better examples of plenty of issues where I apply double standards, but this isn't one of them, and they're not relevant here.

So you had a veto over your families decision. She - technically - did not. Those are the facts as you have presented them - without bias of any kind on my part.

I had a veto over my family's decision for myself, my wife (who's 'she', the cats mother?), had a veto over her family's decision for herself.

'Technically', or whatever other way you choose to spin it, those are the facts. I'm really not sure why you're finding this so difficult to accept. I see it one way, you see it another. I'm not sure what you hope to gain by forcing the issue.

Czarcasm

Barely There wrote: »

Well I can't 'prove' that women would prefer their perfume to smell of wildflowers as opposed to cow sh;te - but I'm pretty sure they do.

I know what you're saying BT, but it's meaningless without any sort of evidence or even the opinion of one other person. It's like a mate of mine that likes to shower herself with men's perfume (Tom Ford something or other, smells like she just crawled out of... somewhere musky anyway! Basically it's brutal!). I find it the strangest thing, but she tells me loads of women do it. I can't prove her wrong, but I'd have my doubts that too many women would want to smell like a laundry basket! I'm sure they exist, just not sure how common it is! :pac:

Shakespeare's Sister

If it's about who provided for the woman when she was growing up, then why not also run it by her mother?
How come there's no asking the father/mother if a woman is asking a man to marry her?

As I've said, I don't mind it at all as just a sweet, well meaning (if a little clueless) gesture, but the reasons being given for it, beyond just being nice, are pretty spurious.

Czarcasm

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

If it's about who provided for the woman when she was growing up, then why not also run it by her mother?
How come there's no asking the father/mother if a woman is asking a man to marry her?

As I've said, I don't mind it at all as just a sweet, well meaning (if a little clueless) gesture, but the reasons being given for it, beyond just being nice, are pretty spurious.

Well that's all it ever was for me - a well meaning gesture, I grant you perhaps a little clueless based on the fact that I was never very au fait with the way these things are done, it's not like I get married every day and marriage didn't come up that much in offline conversation aside from my wife and her family, and they didn't particularly feel any need to correct me on my way of thinking, but to ascribe motives to me like I viewed my wife as property and so on, that's what for me is equally as spurious.

Other people are of course entitled to see it whatever way they want and infer some sort of insidious significance in my motivation for asking for her father's approval, but the way I view it, they're on a digging expedition for something that just doesn't exist, and in doing so, trivialising the significance of something else entirely.

Wompa1

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

the reasons being given for it, beyond just being nice, are pretty spurious.

That's marriage all over