Quote:
Originally Posted by onetspvanilla
perhaps it's a difference in our respective upbringings, but to me, just because a man gives a modest mehr, doesn't make him any less undedicated or committed to a marriage than a man who shells out more. excuse my bluntness, but using the amount of mehr as a gauge of a man's willingness to "invest" in a marriage is just dumb.
but if one wishes to get married solely to be financially secure for the rest of her life then by all means, she should demand a high mehr and wait for the right bank account, er man to come along. however, by condemning all men who don't cough up extorbiant sums of mehr as "not worth marrying", it comes off as slightly naive.
btw, your take definitely doesn't seem feminist at all, because from what i take from it (correct if me i'm wrong) you are insinuating that for a woman, marriage is *the* designated route to financial stability. which i don't agree with but that's a different thread for a differnet day...  |
I think you misunderstood my point. If a man can afford to pay more, then why should women have to accept less than what they would normally demand. I see people here talking about $20. Are you kidding me? That's less than what you'd pay for Nike shoes. If a man can afford to pay more, then why can't a woman demand more?
Women don't need marriage to be financially secure, mind you. We're not living in the 16th century anymore.
Mahr can be put to many uses, like saving up for the kids' future, or education, or even charity. It's not like one has to pay mahr every year. It's a one time thing, so why not make it a worthy gift.
And then saying that the Prophet (sAaw) gave as mahr an equivalent of $20, for example, won't change the fact that the strength of a currency and the living standards by then were totally different. Ten years ago, a $5 bill could buy much more than a McDonald's meal.