posted January 22, 2009 04:48 PM              

Practice sometimes disguised as suicide or accident
August 18, 1996
Web posted at: 11:30 a.m. EDT (1530 GMT)
NEW DELHI, India (CNN) -- In parts of India, husbands regard their wives as property that apparently can be disposed of at will. Indian police say that every year they receive more than 2,500 reports of bride-burning -- a form of domestic abuse often disguised as an accident or suicide.

These women are burned to death over wealth -- because their husbands or in-laws are unhappy with the size of the dowry that accompanied them into the marriage.

The number such cases reported to police is rising, due either to an increase in the number of burnings or to more willingness by victims to report them. And should the woman survive, the toll is heavy.

Three years ago, Sunita Bhargava was married with children -- and, she said, emotionally abused by her husband and mother-in-law.

"My mother-in-law used to say that my husband was too educated for me, that he didn't get a fair dowry," said Bhargava, who now lives alone in a New Delhi slum.

The emotional abuse eventually turned physical, she said, when her husband and his mother scalded her with boiling water. Desperate and in pain, Bhargava dowsed herself in kerosene and set herself on fire, severely burning 40 percent of her body.

"I miss my daughter and fear the evil that may befall her," she said. "Though I passed these times, somehow, to my children I am dead."

Police have set up special offices where women can report cases of domestic abuse, but Mohini Giri, head of India's National Commission for Women, said she believes the authorities need to do more.

"Fire was used by most people who did this kind of crime ... (because) they thought that they will not leave any evidence behind," she said. "Whereas if you use a knife, there is an evidence that someone else has done it."

posted January 22, 2009 04:49 PM              

The term, "dowry" as a quantifiable offering in a marriage does not have its roots pertaining solely to the Indian culture. It has been noted to be part of the customs practiced in early 12th century Europe and was often reflected in European fairy tales and literature making such references to a woman's "dowry" as offerings of a "straw mattress", a "wooden stool" or "farm animals". The exchange and amount of "money" for a dowry depended on the relative status of being a rich or poor woman. Monetary exchanges also had the function of preserving the aristocracy as a class and having marriages arranged as a means of cultural and economic determination. An interesting utilization of dowry, symbolizing both marriage as well as an union of aristocracy and colonial dominance was in 1662 when Charles 11 of England was given the Indian city of Bombay as a dowry for marrying Catherine of Braganza of Portugal. At that time the Portuguese owned Bombay.

It is ironic that in India dowry was originally designed to safeguard the woman and it was the provision of " Sthreedhan" ("Sthree" meaning woman and "dhan" wealth) in the form of money, property or gifts given solely to the woman by her parents at the time of her marriage. "Sthreedhan", an inheritance was meant to exclusively belong to the woman at the time of her marriage. The abuse of this custom eroded and aborted the original meaningful function of dowry as a safety net for the woman and was corrupted to become the price tag for the groom and consequently the noose for the bride. The price of the Indian groom astronomically increased and was based on his qualifications, profession and income. Doctors, Chartered Accountants and Engineers even prior to graduation develop the divine right to expect a "fat" dowry as they become the most sought after cream of the graduating and educated dowry league. A reactionary preliminary wave of preserving oppressive practices of dowry demands, harassment and placing Indian males as high commodity line of goods, appeared to surface also in the West and other countries where immigrants of Indian origin established themselves.

The steady rise of the gruesome scenario of dowry deaths in India brought with it a sense of hopelessness in light of the lack of legal provisions and avenues made available to families who lost their daughters in the expansive and intricate dowry wedding web. In 1961 with the Dowry Prohibition Act, dowry was officially outlawed but in reality eradication was far from accomplished. In 1986 harsher legal amendments to the 1961 Dowry Act such as Section 174 CrPC enforced investigations of suspicious bridal deaths and punishment of seven years to life in imprisonment and possibly death for those found guilty and convicted of bride burning. In spite of these legal breakthroughs, shocking statistics on dowry deaths continued to show up in Indian newspapers. The 90's showed a steady yearly increase in bridal death tolls with many more deaths unreported. Like clockwork every 12 hours a dowry related death claimed to have taken the lives of over 20,000 women across India between 1990 and 1993. And the dowry death statistical beat goes on…live, time, emit, evil…

In India not only was there an apparent increase of dowry-related deaths from kitchen fires but from this weed other covert forms of related oppression sprouted. Some of these led to psychological torture, suicides and murder of married women, desertion by their husbands, rampant abortion of female fetuses, and poor families resorting to female infanticide for fear of not being able to provide dowry.

In 1995 there was much media exposure about the Ambati family and the legal encounter with India's Dowry Act. The Ambatis, resided in the United States and were U.S. citizens of Indian origin. The Ambati family a prominent, educated family was also famous in that the groom's brother at 17 became the world's youngest graduate and doctor. The family was very involved and known for their commitment to social and community service and educational pursuits through their establishment of a charitable educational foundation.

In the June of 1995 the Ambati groom, a young doctor, married his bride in India. The bride accompanied the groom back to the U.S but the marriage was short lived and the bride returned to India. Months later when the Ambati family visited India to receive a prestigious and well publicized award from the Raja Lakshmi Foundation, the bride filed a claim with allegations of dowry harassment against the Ambati groom, and his family. Indian authorities arrested the Ambati family the instant they revisited India. For almost 4 years the Ambatis battled the courts of India. In a recent update which appeared in The India Monitor (Jan 9 - Jan 16, 2000 issue Vol.X, No.464, p.16) it was announced that the Ambati family "has now been acquitted of all charges" and that, " Kolar Gold fields sessions judge K.S. Venkoba Rao pronounced the order of acquittal on April 28, 1999."

The article also stated, that, "during the course of the trial the Ambatis produced a tape " in which the bride's father " demanded US $500,000 to drop all the charges". Very soon thereafter the bride " wrote to the Ministers for Home Affairs and Law & Parliamentary Affairs that she was " unconditionally withdrawing" all charges against the Ambati family".

The significance of the Ambati case and its recent legal outcome illustrates two things. One being the emergence and surfacing of dowry related problems entering the domain of family law and matrimonial life on foreign soils, stretching far beyond India's cultural and social perimeter. More importantly it also depicts the possibility of the Dowry Prohibition Act being abused.

Inspite of the Indian government banning practices of dowry harassment, extortion and demands through its provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act, as a preventive means to abolish dowry deaths, the social evil of dowry deaths continues. The recent update and legal outcome of the Ambati case illustrates the other side of The Dowry Prohibition Act, the possible abuse of it. The legal system has the task of weeding out legitimate allegations from those that appear to abuse the law by filing false dowry claims as a possible counter mechanism to blackmail and extortion via matrimony. There is a growing number of "passport weddings" where Indians living in India seek matrimony with non resident Indians(NRI) holding American and Canadian citizenships. Once they get their foreign passports, arrive on the desired foreign soil , many of these "con artists" resort to tactics that extract more "dollars" from the (NRI) family they married into with the males trying to extract more dowry and the females crying false allegations of dowry harassment. When the mentality of dowry demands, along with accusations of extortion and harassment whether true or false start to be part of the imported and migrating baggage, it marks a nouveau scenario among some immigrant marital problems and family law cases. The autopsy of some arranged marriages which extended beyond Indian soil and resulted in separation and breakdown started to reveal traces of carrying the burden of this imported baggage as the norm for negotiating marriages and staying "happily" married.

Social laws are required where culture has failed to institutionally stop injustices of dowry deaths, the killing and abandoning of female infants, the banishment of women who fail to produce sons and family breakdown due to dowry harassment. More importantly there needs to be a cultural rethinking on the status of women which can occur only through education. The problem is compounded by the fact that 63 percent of the female population in India is illiterate. Perhaps a good starting point is population control and compulsory education for boys and girls alike.

The Future of Dowry Death in the Era of the Digital Cultural Revolution

The continuance of internal contradictions calmly coexisting with the cultural ethics of dowry, arranged marriages and the rights of young girls and women remains a challenge. Ultimately social responsibility will rest upon the initiative and mentality of that segment of the Indian male population having a belief system entrapped in the extortion of dowry. This particular male group mentality has no other choice but to accommodate to the outcome of these practices being eradicated or fight to withstand societal pressure in the era of Digitalism* . It is inevitable that the stamina and resistance of this strain of population has no prospect for longevity as a homogenous group simply by the nature of the evolving world no longer being a simplistic dichotomy of black and white. Sexual differentiation itself is challenged by sexual preferences. The era of Digitalism* allows the constant movement and fusion of various fields, visions and interest groups crossing paths placing the big bang upon rigidity and stagnation and opening a totally nouveau form of literacy determined by technological advantage.

The demands of any rapidly modernizing country dictates the need to grasp the random selection of cultural values thrust by the need to evolve, adapt, survive, and be aggressive enough to want and have all "the right stuff" in the shortest span of time and space. However along with these demands so also is cast the enigmatic task of balancing acts of good and evil. The quest and random selection of the "right stuff" of tools, skills, intelligence and emotion marks the evolutionary drama of mankind's ultimate production … human culture.

Today as we live within the universal framework of the Digital Cultural Revolution, social crimes such as dowry deaths are no longer allowed to exist in isolation or overlooked for decades on end. Just as instant as the click of a mouse so can emotions of shame and disgrace be instantly transmitted, breaking the dowry death beat of live, time and emit evil. The ultimate potential to maximize change in the era of Digitalism * will lie in the hands of those with the best digital tools and with those who invent future tools. The ethics of change again is a balancing act of good and evil, or in terms of the era of Digitalism* it will be determined by the use and misuse of bytes and brains. In many ways the Internet is a most powerful Diva, a world wide network communicator singing out to Homo sapiens digitus eventually providing each digital citizen with the opportunity to know, vote and participate. This digital connection makes paths go beyond the geographical barriers and walls of every citizen's culture and nationality enabling each to engage in a network of virtual united nations.

A digital connection is the most technologically advanced participatory grassroots form of democracy allowing one to create his or her own chat channel, ICQ messages, form groups based on common interests or tell and document history to the world. A digital connection crosses geographical, cultural and political barriers enabling faster and continuous development of new world legal and ethical value systems determined by techno-economic functional investments, techno-literacy needs and feedback systems. This ultimately increases the challenge for Homo sapiens digitus to balance acts of good and evil, deal with constant change, scan evidence and face opposition literally with the wealth in bytes and brains.

posted January 23, 2009 04:02 AM              

quote:

---

Social laws are required where culture has failed to institutionally stop injustices of dowry deaths

---

What one needs when trying to examine the dynamics of dowry deaths and looking for that magic pill that can heal this ulcer - is a look at the Social Dynamics involved.

As most studies note in fine print - it is not the educated, upwardly mobile class that is making India a superpower - that rellshes such acts of barbarism.

Its the uneducated, lawless lower classes - that underbelly of poverty and ineducation where every penny - no matter its source has scavengers fighting each other for it.

I found myself shaking with rage and demanding of a woman and her son who were convicted of violence against a girl for dowry.

This was homeless duo that had hoped his education at the cost of her life-savings would be compensdated by the family of the girl.

Afterall - hasnt it been a way of life for women to marry above them, how many women do we know who would like to voluntarily , out of choice marry a bloke who makes lesser than them and lives in a smaller home.

I know none.

Marriage has always been more about economics and less about love.a study of history is in order here.

As per hindu laws of succession the daughter is entitled to a dowry - depending on what her parents can afford - it is HER share of her fathers estate given to her so she and her husband can use it as they see fit for their new life.

Thus if a woman wants to marry above her , she is expected to contribute to the family - that is hers now.

My dad plans to give me a large dowry out of love, and our laws can jail him for it. Of course he is going to make it a legal gift but thats not the point.

the point is dowry was a safeguard - it was intended to make sure a woman - who under hindu laws can leave her husband - does not need alimony or child support .

Nor does she need to bang at the doors of the govt . for justice.

she can walk free as she wills.

posted January 24, 2009 01:16 AM              

quote:

---

so in truth there are no safe guards to insure that money will be there if she so chooses to leave? the money is taken by her husband and then she is beaten because it was not more? so, should she choose to then leave, how many of those woman get thier money back to live on?

---

No, apart from the social taboo , there are leagl provisions that aside from a reasonable alimony make sure the woman gets back what was given to her by her parents.

The idea was to make society independent of any dependence on the governing powers so they could not control social dynamics.

Look at it this way, there aint no free lunch. All women , and i speak of american and indian, traditional or not - unless they have no choice in the dating market - choose someone above their level and failing that of their own level.[/b]

I refuse to date someone who does not have the same values and lifestyle - as would any woman .

In the past , in all cultures, even in the U.K. and America , a woman could marry above her - if she was exqusitely beautiful or talented or her parents were willing to provide for her a large dowry --- WHY ?

So the groom would know her reason for marrying above her was not HIS money.

the fact that the said woman had her own financial security - was an assurance that she would run off with her in-laws money, that she really wanted a better lifestyle that in those days implied better values .

Did you ever think about that ?

i want to marrry someone who can atleast give me the same lifestyle my parents have - my dowry is my contribtuion to the needs of my new family - and my own safeguard so my hubby knows i will not rape him for alimoney when we get divorced - and that money will not be my motive to stay with him if our marriage is not working.

Having said that - Now that women are educated , the groom's who are educated do NOT ask for dowry but leave it to her discretion if she wants some additions to his lifestyle - for herself

Because a woman is educated and can earn her own living the husband knows he will not be a bank - account that she can exploit.

Its a whole different tragedy that the feminist bullied media never gives one side of the story.

In all my life i have , as an upper middle class person never heard anyone i know demanding for a certain amount as dowry.

It is left to the girls family - most parents choose to gift their parents with a Fixed bank account that cannot be broken more than once- in case of emergency .

The only difference is that in the U.S. - this has been replaced by ALIMONEY and Parents have been replaced by Govt.

- which is no less insulting , is it ???

If women think it is oppressive to contribute to the resources of their new family as EQUALS -

why do they ask for a HALF of what they have not earned when they leave ???

i know all dont - but they are a minority arent they and isnt it antithetical to being empowered ?

Why , if i am an equal and empowered do i need my husband's money AND that of the taxpayers's - so i can leave my husband. ?

posted January 24, 2009 01:28 AM              

quote:

---

you and your family have saved and will be giving a generous dowry, who is to say your future husband will agree it is generous? 1 out of 4 don't think it is enough and beat thier bride. will you then belive you deserve it because you are marring above your social station? most brides of course being under the age of consentual sex.

---

Like i have said above - what you say exists outside of my social class - and obviously i am not in any way responsible or even knowledgable apart from what i have encountered in the course of my own work.

i have only worked with one lady directly - in Hyderabad whose centre was discussed in Oprah.

She and her husband have spent their whole lives in creating social awareness and effecting social changes so the very root of this is removed.

For one, that 1 in 4 statistic is just plain wrong .

The last time i was working with SFF which is a foundation that works for family welfare - not just women welfare -

they came up with a painstakingly researched report that in the past 3 years alone more than 60 % of the dowry and domestic violence cases were false.

and as someone who has really worked and lives in the social dynamics that are alien to you, i would say i am in a better postion to know the ground reality.

The laws made to protect women are used to harass not only husbands but their entire families that can be jailed without trial at the mere complaint - no proof asked for.

I personally know of 3 such women who used dowry laws for personal gain - and you can imagine how many more exist.

i will try to get some friends to mail me any recent studies if they can.

quote:

---

most brides of course being under the age of consentual sex.

---

er..dont get me wrong , dont 90 % of teens in the U.S. have sex below the age for consentual sex ?

How does the fact that the sex involves marriage make it worse

apart from that - not my community - but some in India - with the approval of their children marry them around the time -

that kids in the U.S. start making out or sneaking off to oral sex parties or worse..

Only here the parents give them a steady partner - that they approve of if at all.

Most of the boys and girls continue to live separately and at the age of 18 or after they have completed their education the now- adult husband and wife are allowed to live as a couple.

posted January 24, 2009 01:37 AM              

as for the healing working - i am a pranic healing practioner but i havent really had a private practice.

All my work until now had only been with Welfare homes , though in conjunction with their own counselllors because in our country there is a trend to combine psychiatry with alternative ways.

Until now i have worked with a centre for Trafficking victims ( rehab and employment ) and a Family welfare centre that sponsors my workshops in rehab homes for domestic violence victims , rape, child abuse etc.

I have never done any of this without their own guidelines and inputs though - all the workshops were a partnership with their own in-house counsellors.

And i havent done any healer work here in San Jose i must clarify. The export house needs constant back and forth between the US and India and i am not permamently here so i havent approached any organisation here.

posted January 24, 2009 01:53 AM              

quote:

---

From the record it is evident that more than 94% of the 498A cases filed by Living women are only for extrotion and Blackmailling and innocent people had been arrested only against the false and fabricated alligations without any evidence,

---

posted January 24, 2009 02:08 AM              

quote:

---

many women die for this.
as in, lose thier lives to thier husbands violence, him thinking he can get another wife and another dowry. monsterous.

---

And our legal system makes sure the perpetrators whether the women involved are living or dead , whether the claims in the case of the living are true or false ,are sentenced for life...so whats the point ?

If the government and the social forces are doing all that they can think of and still there are those who would rather risk a term in jail how does it involve us personally - unless we choose to help in any way we can ?

or just enjoy being spectators marvelling at our perfect lives and living off the sense of self-righteousness that comes from NOT knowing ALL the dynamics involved .

And speaking of it being monstrous ...

The number of homicides cimmitted by men and women , year after year - inspite of existing laws and media awareness of the outcome , why cant the U.S. govt. control and destroy such monstrosity ?

Why do men and women in the U.S. commit such monstrous acts of murder and abuse when they know they could get jailed and always are ?

Why do 1 million children go missing year after year in the U.S. inspite of all the law enforcement infrastructure ?

Why can no government anywhere in the world inspite of strict law enforcement not save their citizens - men , women and children who die in homicides ?

quote:

---

what is the womans life worth?
there is no price.
these women deserve to be safe

---

everyone deserves to be safe, not just women and not just these or those women.

the least you can do is not make them out to be special victims because no one cares for them in their own country or no one is willing to help them.

Because that is not the case.

And because thats as bad as killing them all over again.

Irrespective of gender any crime against any human being is as monstrous -

how does the fact that women are burnt as brides by men make the murder of men by women or men any less monstrous ?

If you believe in equality why are crimes against men , adults and children not as horrific to you and to MOST WOMEN SO FAR ON THIS BOARD ?

posted January 24, 2009 03:09 AM              

quote:

---

venus, who see the obvious INTENT of dowry is to give the woman some worth of her own, can advocate the PATRIARCHAL family where mr man earns, owns and dispenses as he sees fit all the money in the family...? fathers in this country also give their daughters money (if they can afford it) to start married life with.

---

well, i dont know about other families but in my religion and community that is not what being a FAMILY involves .

Both the parents have equal footing.

and i never used the word Patriarchy , YOU did.

On the assumption that if we are not in a state of war with men then we are a patriarchy , the same old feminist propoganda, so embarassingly transparent and so clearly not processed by you Kat.

Here is a question for you Kat.

If 70 % of the population , both male and female is employed , in the agricultural sector , both earning the same is it a Patriarchy ?

If 20 % of the remaining population engaged in manufacturing industries where the men and women are fully employed is a Patriarchy ?

If of the remaining 10 % , 5 % are women who work in the service sector , in desk jobs like any american woman - a Patriarchy ?

And if of the remaining 5 % , the women choose on account of good financial conditions to be homemakers -

Does that make India a Patriarchy ?

My dad and the men i know of, given we are the upper middle class, have never if their wives are not employed ,ever given them an allowance or the like, the income is subject to joint expenditure after joint discussion.

i am not in any position to know how men of different religions behave though for the past 5000 years we have been a Matriarchy - spiritually and that is why it is considered a man's obligation to make sure he fulfills his duties to the women in his life.

ever heard of Durga and Kaali ?

Being empowered does not mean one needs to go ball busting for no reason whatsoever and throw logic to the catfood dump.

Lexx said

quote:

---

how she really feels about the rights of women?
Or is she self employed and licensed?

---

And just how do YOU know WHAT i feel about the rights of women ?

and isnt Liberalism about letting be ?

Or is it subject to personal prejudices ?

quote:

---

With her antiquated patriarchal views concerning women and men in relationships

---

Again, i never used the word Patriarchy, the word does not exist in the 5000 languages that are spoken in India, YOU did.

So i am not allowed my freedom to think and be now ,am i ?

And just where have i put my views on relationships that so offend you ?

Do you mean the part where i said women should contribute to the relationships as much and in all the ways as men and be held equally responsible and accountable just like men are ?

Or the part where i noted that [b]a majority of women, since history have aspired to marry above them, have been as equals expected to contribute to their new family - if that be the case.

Or the part where i said every women who is given rights be responsible for the consequences of her actions on herself and others ?

You do know Lexx, that rights and responsibilites are two sides of a coin and one has always implied the other since antiquity irrespective of the actions and consequences ?

If you do believe in equality of the sexes then do you agree that both sexes be responsible equally for their actions ?

Or should the fact that a woman had perpetrated the action make the consequences any less consequential ?

if so why ?

If you find it misleading do take a look at the reality of the dating scene around you.Women do not date men uglier or in a lesser economic condition than them.

If you want MY antiquated views i find little difference in the dating practices here in California and outright Prostitution.

Women at work and in the clubs i frequent date men even they dont like them as long as the man foots the fine-dining expense and lavishes them with gifts.They will sleep with him maybe once to keep the fling going and then find another man to milk for his money.

80 % of the profiles on dating sites list " Fine -dining " as a first date requirement by women , young and old, fat and ugly, thin and hot.

Do you think THEY foot the bill of the first date or does the man pay ?

Are you telling me it is " Patriarchial " that an indian woman brings her share of resources to her marriage and home so that she can leave without begging for an alimoney - which is money the husband has earned ?

Here is another question Lexx..and i asssume u have made it a point , to read and digest what i have explained above the Philosophy of a woman being secured by her parents rather than by the legal system.

Do you think alimony should exist ?

If so why ?

Thats all i ask of you to explain and since you have questioned me, my employment,my values and the like i'd say its a fair deal if YOU answer my questions with as much honesty as i have tried to answer the questions you and everyone else has raised.

posted January 24, 2009 10:43 AM            

quote:

---

Do you think alimony should exist ?

---

quote:

---

Do you think THEY foot the bill of the first date or does the man pay ?

---

quote:

---

If you want MY antiquated views i find little difference in the dating practices here in California and outright Prostitution.

Women at work and in the clubs i frequent date men even they dont like them as long as the man foots the fine-dining expense and lavishes them with gifts.They will sleep with him maybe once to keep the fling going and then find another man to milk for his money.

---

quote:

---

If you do believe in equality of the sexes then do you agree that both sexes be responsible equally for their actions ?

---

quote:

---

Or should the fact that a woman had perpetrated the action make the consequences any less consequential ?

---

posted January 24, 2009 12:55 PM              

Isnt it amazing how some women when suggested they ate accountable for their misdeeds find it more intelligent to get defensive ??

posted January 24, 2009 12:58 PM              

quote:

---

Nope. Both women and men should be treated equally in all conditions

---

Even as parents ?

and even when it is politically incorrect to even imply so ?

------------------
A powerful woman with Mars conjunct Pluto and i am ENTITLED to my right to be responsible for my own mess and i will be damned if i let any taxpayer pay for it.

I love my rights and i love my responsibilities and i will be damned if i let a FAILED ideology tell me i am so weak i need my the government to make everyone else except me be responsible for me.

If i kill someone , i will ask for the death penalty and i will be damned if i let anyone let me off on grounds of sadness.

I am a powerful woman with Mars conjunct Pluto and i will be damned if i let a FAILED ideology tell me i am a VICTIM and everyone needs to cut me some slack.

Dont tell me what my rights are tell me what i am responsible for and i will do the work of 10 entitled women with only rights but no sense of responsibility.

posted January 24, 2009 01:46 PM            

quote:

---

Again, i never used the word Patriarchy, the word does not exist in the 5000 languages that are spoken in India, YOU did.

---

quote:

---

This secure environment is known as the patriarchal structure and it produces family. Men make patriarchy. No men—No patriarchy. No patriarchy—No family. No family—No security. No security produces depressed women.

---

posted January 24, 2009 02:05 PM            

quote:

---

I am a powerful woman , and i will be damned if i compete a man for power.

---

quote:

---

I said:[quote] Both women and men should be treated equally in all conditions

---

quote:

---

Even as parents ?

and even when it is politically incorrect to even imply so ?

---

posted January 24, 2009 02:14 PM            

quote:

---

Isnt it amazing how some women when suggested they ate accountable for their misdeeds find it more intelligent to get defensive ??

---

posted January 24, 2009 02:26 PM            

quote:

---

Look at it this way, there aint no free lunch. All women ,
and i speak of american and indian, traditional or not -
unless they have no choice in the dating market -
choose someone above their level and failing that of their own level.

---

quote:

---

I refuse to date someone who does not have the same values and lifestyle - as would any woman .

---

quote:

---

In all my life i have , as an upper middle class person...

---