illegal marriage

hey so i know i dont usually post about romanian things but i need to say this

so last night (yes, in the middle of the fucking night, like the filthy thieves they are) the romanian government passed a law that, basically, makes corruption legal (if its under 45k euros, which is a LOT) AND they’re going to let all the (few) people who (they barely) arrested for this out of prison… 

i know this isnt as important to america as trump, but this is HUGE to us. there were (as far as i know) 90 thousand people protesting last night (the last time there were protests this big was in 1989 when communism fell, just to give you a perspective) and there are going to be even more today

this country has had problems with corruption since the dawn of time but i dont reckon it ever being made LEGAL. i just figured id bring some awareness to this…

here and here are two sources

It is many years in the future. A disease has wiped out 90% of the men on earth. Marriage is illegal and men are encouraged to breed with as many women as possible. Life is easy… until you fall in love.

yellow-eyed-monsters  asked:

I have a question that may come out sounding kinda rude, but why can't writers write poc as people, put them through the same trials and tribulations as caucasian characters? This may come out sounding different that what I've asked in my head so if that's the case, I'm terribly sorry

Writing About PoC Trials and Tribulations

I understand where you’re coming from, because it looks unequal when you take it simply as “humans struggle, so why can’t we write about PoC struggling?”

What Topics To Avoid isn’t talking about struggle in general, which is where the confusion comes from.

Yes, you can write PoC struggling. This is not the question at hand.

What that post was pointing out is PoC struggle is rarely individual trials and tribulations like white characters.

When a white character struggles, they are struggling with something that is an individual struggle that is treated as a universal narrative for that person’s individual issues (like, everyone’s felt like an underdog at one point for various reasons). But if you look at the dominant stories for PoC, the struggle is directly because of their ethnicity, such as segregation, or a racial-based war, and/or colonialism, to name a few. The plot falls apart when the ethnicity/situation is changed.

We are asking you to look at why you are attracted to struggles that come directly as a result of being a certain ethnicity. 

Starcrossed lovers are fine, but why does every starcrossed lovers story involving a PoC have to be set at a time when interracial marriage was illegal, and/or in a setting where one side’s family hate the other for their skin tone?

An underdog with less experience is fine, but why does every underdog involving a PoC involve somebody who came from an impoverished background and low quality schools because it’s in a predominantly PoC neighbourhood?

The question we want white writers to ask is: “does my character struggle and experience pain primarily because of their ethnic background, does my character experience a unique struggle because of their ethnic background, or is my struggle primarily because of individual circumstances that are informed by the ethnicities at hand?”

If they experience a struggle primarily because of their ethnic background (ie- segregation), then that is a very nuanced narrative that should be left alone by outsiders because it’s exploiting another person’s pain for your plot.

If they experience a struggle heavily informed because of their ethnic background (ie- underdog because of racism, navigating a system that has particularly potent institutionalized racism like the psychiatric system), then that is an identity story that should be left alone by outsiders because it’s treating various isms (racism, classism, colourism) as a tragic backstory to overcome.

If they experience a struggle where their ethnicity plays a part but only minor events change if you switch around ethnicity (ie- starcrossed lovers where one side is very closed off), then it’s primarily because of individual circumstance that can be written by outsiders who do enough research.

I recently saw a very cute concept where a boy falls in love with a Muslim girl who keeps halal. He tried to win her heart by cooking, but she refused to eat it because it wasn’t halal. Once he discovered what the issue was, he learned all about halal cooking and made her halal meals to win her heart.

This story is only moderately informed by the girl’s customs. The story could be simply that she’s a picky eater, allergic to some foods, or has specific tastes. Because you can swap out a few things for it, this story isn’t About Being Muslim. The plot would’ve changed based on what it was, but the actual plot point could be anything.

But if there was a similar “guy falls for Muslim girl” situation and his family was Islamophobic, that would be using Islamophobia for plot pain and reinforcing all the gross stuff Muslims go through because of Islamophobia.

Hope that clears things up.

~ Mod Lesya

MARCH 3: Japan celebrates its first same sex marriage  (2013)

Happy fourth anniversary to Koyuki Hirosho and Higashi Masuhara, who were married on this day in 2013 at Tokyo Disneyland and became Japan’s first same sex couple to tie the knot! 

Koyuki and Higashi pose with a fellow iconic couple, Mickey and Minnie Mouse. (x)

Although same sex marriage was not legalized in Japan at the time, Koyuki and Higashi were the first couple in the nation to override the law and hold a ceremonial wedding. Tokyo Disneyland initially told the couple that they would only be allowed to host the wedding at the park if they were “dressed as a man and a woman,” but Koyuki and Higashi ignored that bigoted rule as well and were both married in white wedding dresses. Higashi was quoted by the Huffington Post in 2013 as saying, “We may not have a law that applies to us, but when someone congratulates us for the wedding, I will proudly say, ‘Thank you!’” 

In November of 2015, Koyuki and Higashi made history once again by being the first same sex couple to officially receive a certificate from the Japanese government recognizing their marriage. While same sex marriage remains illegal in the whole of Japan, the Tokyo ward of Shibuya voted to legalize gay marriage in March of 2015. The ward Setagaya also voted in favor of same sex marriage a few months after Koyuki and Higashi’s historic marriage. Although the certificates that are given out through these ordinances allow same sex couples the rights of hospital visitation and joint apartment rentals, they more closely resemble the concept of civil partnerships rather than fully legally binding marriages. However, this small fact could not bring down Koyuki and Higashi’s happiness on that Thursday afternoon in 2015. The Huffington Post once again quoted Higashi as saying, ““I am exhilarated that the city I am living in has recognized my partner as my family.”

Koyuki and Higashi proudly display their new 2015, state certified marriage certificate. (x)


  • Kageyama: I am really bothered by the fact that basically the only reason why gay marriage is illegal is because some people think it’s disgusting. You know, I think peas are disgusting but we’re nOT MAKING THAT ILLEGAL ARE WE?
  • Hinata: What’s wrong with you peas are delicious.
  • Yachi: Gay people are delicious too.
  • Kageyama: No dessert for you until you eat all your gays.
  • Tsukishima: What the fuck just happened here?
  • Yamaguchi: Be quiet and eat your gays.

The idea of the law being ur moral compass is so very flawed. Like, look back at history, even now in certain countries, and tell me that the law upholds ethical ideals. Newsflash but slavery was literally legal! Killing and imprisoning gay people was (and is in certain places like Chechnya) legal! Same-sex marriages were illegal! Interracial marriages were illegal! Putting Japanese-Americans in camps and taking their land was legal! Like, I’m sorry to tell u this but just bc the law in ur country says something is okay, doesn’t mean it is. So stop hiding behind ur laws like they’re an absolute when it comes to morality.

“We can’t let homosexuals marry! It’s defined as between a man and a woman in the marriage act!” is the worst argument against marriage equality because it’s literally saying “we can’t change the law! It’s the law!” Like ??? What do you think a vote is? That’s not an argument against changing the law that’s just a statement that a law exists and you also don’t understand the function of a government. SPOILERS: There’s no law that says changing the law is illegal. SHOCKING I KNOW!
India's first LGBTQ radio show aims to broaden the country's concept of love
Harish Iyer, host of the Gaydio show in Mumbai, has opened up about his struggles as a gay Indian. His show is the first of its kind in a country notoriously hostile to sexual minorities.
By Shashank Bengali

“Just your average Sunday afternoon radio fare — except that the host was Harish Iyer, perhaps India’s most outspoken gay rights activist, and his guests were a transgender woman and her straight husband.

They were speaking on “Gaydio,” the first radio show dedicated to LGBTQ issues in India, where homosexuality is taboo, same-sex relations are officially illegal and most marriages still take place within socially prescribed boundaries of caste and religion, not to mention gender.”

And with that, I’m signing off as your guest moderator! Thank you G3S for giving me this space to curate a week exploring various queer Asian activisms. Hope y'all enjoyed your weekends! ^_^
-James (@semajaime)

has anyone considered that in order for “allosexual privilege” to be a thing, you have to believe that “aphobia” is a harsher and more structurally enforced system of oppression than homophobia.
you have to believe that current authoritative power structures view gay attraction, sex and relationships as preferable to no attraction (or whatever levels of attraction supposedly differentiate ace/aro people from non-ace/aro people). you have to believe that the government/police force/society at large celebrate and validate gay attraction, and see gay attraction as a preferable alternative to being ace or aro.
aaaand given that laws criminalizing gay sex remained on the books in the US up through the early 2000s and gay marriage was illegal in the US until just a few short years ago, and conversion therapy with the goal of ensuring gay people live “sinless” celibate lifestyles is still pretty common practice, I’m not buying that.

anonymous asked:

"Do westallen shippers recognize how there’s nothing remotely progressive about interracial relationships?" What's your opinion on this?

😂😂😂 I just saw this post and was debating whether or not to respond. I was telling myself to let it go like Elsa when your ask came through, so lemme just say of course I disagree.

There are still people alive who were around when interracial marriage was illegal. There are still people who think it’s weird or wrong. And specifically in the context of fiction, WOC (black women especially) are often still fetishized or stereotyped and put in boxes that would never in a million years include “love of the hero’s life who actually gets to survive and thrive.”

Are y’all gonna tell me that Iris would have survived any other show’s equivalent of the S3 storyline? In the world where Abbie sacrificed herself for Ichabod and Veil sacrificed herself instead of being saved by Sunny? The fact that Iris West, a black woman, was treated as someone whose life was precious, whose life was the greater good, who was worth a white man sacrificing himself to save… That IS different.

So no, I’m not gonna play oppression olympics, but yes I do think it’s progressive in and of itself even if there are a lot of ways that Flash fails to be progressive.

So I just stumbled upon the umpteenth post on incest, and decided to clarify in the simplest way possible once and for all:

1. Why is incest considered morally wrong

2. Why is incest to be avoided

To answer 1., I need to specify two things: why is incest considered morally wrong here and now, meaning, in our society and in our times. Because if you look back in time you’ll find mutliple examples of incest which was totally fine with everyone:

  • The ever so mentioned Middle-ages noble European dinasties, who frequently married between cousins, uncle and nieces, aunt and nephews
  • A number of the members of the Ptolemaic dinasty, last but not least the famous Queen Cleopatra who was supposed so hook up with her half-brother
  • Deities in mythology. In particular in the Greek-Roman mythology, pretty much all deities are related and all want to hook up. Oh and Japanese mythology. Quite possibly other mythologies I don’t remember.
  • Cain and Abel both wanted to marry their sister. In fact, it is said Cain killed Abel precisely over this. Then Abraham, and others, who married nieces.

This clarifies that a mindset on incest varies depending on where and when we were born. As such, statements such as “You don’t disapprove incest!!” are much like “You are pro/versus abortion!!”: At the end of the day, they depend of one’s personal views and education.

Moreover, going over Wikipedia you’ll find that:

  • Most countries in the world allow cousin marriage
  • A number of countries allow uncle-niece, aunt-nephew - the first one is much more common though - incest, there’s wasn’t a graphic on this, it was just me reading the entire Wikipedia page, you’re free not to trust my memory and read it yourself.
  • What is widely not allowed is incest in direct line, which is incest between direct descendants and ancestors, meaning parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, and so on - for Westeros examples, we have Craster and his daughter-wives, which was made even worse by the fact that he was an abuser and condamned his sons to become popsicles. Incest between siblings is also widely illegal today, from the relationship itself being a punishable offense, to the sole marriage being illegal. But it’s not illegal everywhere.
  • The definition of incest according to law varies much from country to country: in some countries it’s up to third cousins, in others it considers only direct descendants. This too proves how the mindset varies even more and that you may or may not find people who consider it a taboo.
  • In many countries where incest, however defined, is illegal, a permission can be asked to marry a close relative - for example in Italy you can turn to a tribunal to obtain permission to marry your aunt/nephew.
  • Macro-Religions like Catholicism, Hebraism, Hinduism and Islam ban incest. But if you look it up, religions like Catholicism and Islam often granted and grant concessions to marry close relatives - though never in direct line. And then maybe used that same excuse to annul marriages - see Henry VIII of England and his first wife. Not to mention how reading the Ancient Testament you’ll find so many examples of incest to make you think that religion simply cared or cared not based simply on what was convenient at the moment.

But this is just a list to exhibit that the where and when of my first question do change the answer. This is a concept called “cultural relativism” in anthropology, which means exactly what you think it would: “our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes.” . And our civilization comprehend our society, our family, our education, our country, out history…

So let’s talk here and now, which would be today in a average western country: why is incest considered morally wrong?

The answer lies in psychology and anthropology. The so called Westermark effect explains that children who grow up together develop a reverse sexual imprinting, which means that as grown-ups, they tend not to feel sexual attraction towards each other, whether or not they are actually blood-related. This explains why you don’t often see adoptive siblings getting married, because they develop a sense of vicinity that excludes sexual attraction and eros and so on. And in it lies also why we as individuals mostly feel incest as “icky”: because psychology says that in most cases we don’t want to hook up with our siblings. I don’t want to hook up with any relative of mine. I’m ready to bet half of you wouldn’t as well. Then again exceptions exist, both here and in Westeros, Lannister kids or not.

So this is why some people feel icky about Jaime and Cersei, Jon and Daenerys: because we don’t want the same for us. Personally, I’d have no problems with Cersei and Jaime either, if not for the fact that’s she’s kinda the incarnation of evil and all that follows, because I couldn’t care less about what others do, as long as they don’t hurt each other or a third party - which Jaime and Cersei sadly do.

But keep this in mind: the Westermark effect doesn’t apply to Jon and Daenerys: they did not grow up as siblings or cousin or even remote relatives. The effect doesn’t work on amount of DNA shared - let alone they couldn’t even know about that in Westeros -, but on having grown up together as family. This is why, even if we teleported Jon in our time and society, he’d have a harder time hooking up with either Arya or Sansa, because despite them sharing less DNA than with Daenerys, they share a sense of “family” that tends to exclude any sexual attraction.

In statistics terms, it’s huge bad luck that out of all the people in the world you fall in love with your nephew/aunt, but the point of my explanation is that they fell in love precisely because they don’t know.

And also maybe because of the so called “Genetic Sexual Attraction”, look it up.

And also because they’re both good-looking.

And also because they have similar characters and goals and a steady will to help people.

What else?

Oh yeah, maybe, just maybe, because they’re the fricking song of Ice and Fire and the center of the whole saga - blame Martin not me.

Proceeding to number 2: why is incest to be avoided?

Having already discuss the moral reasonable let’s move on to the scientific ones, specifically, genetics: simply put, because inbreeding genetic disorders. One example? Dwarfism. In a realistic world, which Westeros is not, Tyrion’s dwarfism can be blamed on his parents being first cousins. Other examples are albinism, fused limbs, microcephaly, misshapen skull, and so on. There’s a small island close to Sardinia where all the inhabitants have terrible eyesight, because they are descendants of a small group of people with bad eyesight and kept marrying between each other over years. In the Brazilian village of Araras the same happened, with the difference that here the inhabitants developed a terrible condition that doesn’t allow them to stay in the sun. Examples are endless.

Analyzing a Targaryen family tree, which again savvy people on Reddit did, you’d notice that clearly our world’s genetics doesn’t apply to the Dragon Lords, because if it did, most of the members would be severely malformed and probably wouldn’t live long, instead of being the super-human beauties that they are. Leave out Jon and Daenerys, because all their ancestors wouldn’t have lived to begin with. For this reason we can infer that a child between him and her shouldn’t have particular problems, so the genetics argument doesn’t apply here either. And the genetics argument is the only completely impartial and objective counterargument that can be used against incest in our world: all the others are subject to cultural relativism. I hear a lot people stating that Westeros isn’t the real world and as such we shouldn’t apply our views on it, but they use this argument incorrectly, because they refer to simply liking it or not, when the science itself is different - in a world where winters last for years - and so, to make an hyperbole, you might as well try to apply our science to an alien.

I wrote this as a clarification for people who mindlessly apply standards that don’t belong and notice that in all of this I never said “it’s a fictional story, you can do as you like”, bevause there’s no need to come to that.

The argument “you ship Jon and Dany, therefore you support incest” is the stupidest thing on Earth because it all depends on how you define incest, then cultural relativism says you may approve of it or not and no-one can give you shit for it, but most importantly, the Westermark effect assures you that shipping relatives doesn’t imply you’re shipping yourself with a relative.

It took all of this to simply state: you may, actually, ship whoever you want. An argument that was initiated by Jaime ages ago: “We don’t get to choose who we love.”

Knot because I love you, just because I care

A drabble for @nickillian cos she loves fake!married tropes


*unbetad,sorry for the awful title 😂

“You know you have to actually lift the glass to your lips to drink the vodka.”

Emma lifted her gaze from the glass of icy spirit and smiled.

“Funnily enough I had heard that before, Jones.”

“And here I was thinking that I had stumbled upon something revelatory.”

He gestured to the seat beside her and she nodded, waiting until he ordered a drink.

It was Tuesday and The Rabbit Hole sports bar was just about as empty as she had ever seen it. She was glad of it - the last thing she needed now was to deal with a bunch of drunks even if she really wanted to get drunk herself.

His order came, alongside another vodka for her, and he paid with a crisp ten pound note before settling into the stool beside her.

“So, Swan, what brings you to Wimbledon’s only American sports bar tonight?”

He grinned, his smile bright despite how tired he looked.

“I could ask you the same,” she replied, nodding at what remained of his business attire - tie askew and shirt sleeves pushed up.

“I asked first,” he quipped, “But since you must know today I got a new job and I thought it appropriate to celebrate.”

“The one at Graham’s company?”

He nodded. “Yep, you are looking at the new deputy marketing manager for Mills Media.”

Emma smiled. She knew how much Killian had wanted a promotion and it just wasn’t happening in his current position. At least someone had good news that day.

“That’s great,” she sighed softly, staring longingly into her vodka, before quickly adding, “My visa renewal was declined today.”


Keep reading
#LovingDay: 50 Years After The Loving Verdict, A Photo Essay Looks Back On Their Love
Remembering the couple who brought down anti-miscegenation laws in 16 U.S. states.

Monday, June 12, marks the 50th anniversary of the landmark United States Supreme Court decision Loving v. Virginia, which quashed anti-miscegenation laws in 16 states around the nation, ushering restrictions against interracial marriage to the wrong side of history.

The date is now remembered as Loving Day in honor of Richard and Mildred Loving, the couple who defied the state’s ability to dictate the terms of their love based on their skin color. Mildred, who was of African American and Native American descent, and Richard, who was white, wed in 1958 in Washington D.C., because interracial marriage was illegal in their native rural Virginia, as well as 15 other Southern U.S. states.

When the Lovings returned to Virginia, however, local police raided their home one early morning after being tipped off by another resident. They declared the Lovings’ marriage license invalid within the scope of the state, placing the couple under arrest.

The Lovings pled guilty to “cohabiting as man and wife, against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth,” and were sentenced to one year in prison. A judge later agreed to suspend the sentence if Mildred and Richard left Virginia and did not return for 25 years.

The couple relocated to Washington, D.C., but they did not end their story there. In 1964, attorneys from the ACLU filed a motion on behalf of the Lovings, requesting the charges and sentences against the Lovings be dropped. The Lovings appealed the local ruling all the way to the Supreme Court, where their sentence was unanimously overturned in 1967.

“Under our Constitution,” Chief Justice Earl Warren said in his decision, “the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”

Two years before this verdict, in the spring of 1965, Life magazine photojournalist Grey Villet spent time with the Lovings, as well as their family and friends, documenting the lives of a couple whose love had transcended the everyday to become the stuff of legends.

Villet’s photo essay, titled “The Lovings: An Intimate Portrait,” captures Mildred and Richard when word of their civil rights battle was spreading throughout the country and the fate of their relationship remained unknown. Through black-and-white images, the photographer captures the subtle glances, spurts of laughter and moments of quiet determination that, together, comprise a love story whose power echoes today.

We commemorate the Lovings’ bravery and tenacity in the face of prejudice and the systems of white supremacy. Villet’s photos help us remember the Lovings not just for what they represented, but who they were. The simple moments of connection, support and companionship that provided the strength to change the world.

The Lovings: An Intimate Portrait is available on Amazon.

anonymous asked:

I'm worried about how Jonerys' relationship will turn out. Someone told me avunculate marriage is illegal in Westeros. How will they be endgame if they can't get married?

That would actually be news to me. I’ve seen a lot of people talking about how even the Starks and Lannisters have done it. So if it is “law” then Robert Baratheon must have implemented it and since he had been an illegitmate fuler in Daenerys eyes because he got there through rebellion I’m pretty certain that if this rule existed it would be obsolete now or if Jon and/or Dany take the Throne anyway. The Targaryen have always married between siblings and aunt/uncle/cousins and they ruled before the rebellion. 

I don’t know if Jon and Dany get to marry anyway. It would be amazing to see them get married the same secret and intimate way Rhaegar and Lyanna did  but I guess that there is no time for that. On the other hand does Jon know how it feels to grow up a bastard so maybe he would want to get married when he finds out about the possible pregnancy (I definitely believe in a Jonerys baby btw.). It all depends on how Jon will react to everything. So maybe we’ll get lucky!

Analysis: Kalagang Sex Scene 1/2

Hi! I am going to explain one of the most expected and commented scenes of second season of Sense8. If you didn’t watch it, please stop reading!

The analysis has two parts:

First part: Analysis: Why does Kala look for Wolfgang?
Second part: Analysis: Kalagang Scene

We start with the first part:

The first question I’ve come across is: Why does Kala wake up and think about Wolfgang? To answer that we need to go to episode 5.

1st theory (this is what I thought the first time I watched the season): Kala dreams - but it’s real - about Riley’s concert where What’s going on? is playing. Do you remember something familiar?

It would have been a magnificent explanation but it is impossible. The meeting between Wolfie and Kala doesn’t happen that night - I can not determine the exact time that elapses, only one night? I don’t know - It’s true that Kala wears the same clothes, so that if it’s daylight in Berlin and at night in Mumbai, Riley’s concert has to happen at four o'clock in the afternoon and in the escape we see that it is night in London so that it’s at night in Berlin.

[My opinion] I think this explanation would have better this explanation to understand Kala’s sexual awakening towards Wolfgang. The fact that she remembers the first connection with him which happened in a dream and with that song. It is the perfect and justified excuse for her acts. Sincerely, I think this was the first idea in script but this changed in post production because the temporal mistake. [The End]

IMPORTANT DETAIL: The Kalagang scene should be separate from Zakia/Capheus because the timeline isn’t correct if we add Nairobi to the equation. Next graphic:

Is this a mistake? [My opinion] Personally, I would have liked it if these scenes had been separated in two different ones, because Kalagang has a very long and emotional story and deserved more importance. [The End]

2nd theory: Heart or logic? + Perfect Family? + Perfect Job? + Fear never fixed anything = Sex

Heart or Logic? We find Kala totally distracted in her father’s restaurant. Kala always go there when she needs advice or she needs to feel like in home.

The problem: “Sometimes all my good fortune makes we wonder whether I’m actually appreciating it enough. And if I’m honest, I have to admit that, no, I’am not sure I am. Which then makes me think that there must be some flaw in my personality or my brain chemistry, which means I just have to get used to the fact that no matter what happens I’m never going to be a person who can ever just feel happy”

Kala cannot be happy, if she is with Rajan -logic- as she is with the person who she doesn’t love but her family is happy and if she is with Wolfgang she hurts Rajan and her family. In both case, she isn’t happy.

Sanyam tells her: “Few children in the world ever smiled as easily as my daughter did” 

And Kala tells him: “What happened to that girl?” Sanyam resolves her doubt, he tells her about when she was a little girl and she wanted a specific doll above all things - Now that dolls is Wolfgang - And when she got the doll in her birthday she didn’t care anything anymore. Moreover she could see that doll -Wolfgang- among other presents - Rajan, family, ethics, the good or bad things…- And Sanyam says: “As adults we learned to carefully open all the rest of the presents, we are taught to smile and to pretend that are equally important to us. But our heart…always knows the truth”.

When Kala was a child she was pure hearted, she was directed by her feelings, but as everyone, when we grow up we are forced to include the logic in ours lives. And the logic in Kala produces this doubt:

Her father is thinking but he doesn’t say anything. [My opinion] I think Sanyam know about Kala’ feeling, that she doesn’t love Rajan, but Sanyam doesn’t want to intervene in Kala’s decisions like others people usually do. [The end]

Kala says: “There are times I wish I could go back to being that little girl, my life was much easier then”

She knows that when she was a little girl it was easy to make decision, but now she is a woman and she has to acting as such.“But I’m a woman now and part of being a woman is understanding that hearts are complicated things” Kala knows that when we are adults it is impossible to have it all, because we don’t want only a doll, we want some more complicated things and we have to choose the correct option, sometimes with the logic and other times with the heart. What will make her really happy despite the consequences?

After we can see Kala in a lunch with Dandekar and Rasal families where Manendra and Sanyam have a discussion about terrorism and the life. Manendra says: “Not everyone is born to be a great leader, just as not everybody’s born to be a cook” and Sanyam tells him: “Well, spending a lifetime in the kitchen learning how to cook was my destiny, just as inheriting a fortune was yours”

Sanyam with this message says something clear, that in life sometimes you must fight to get what you want and sometimes you get it without you asking for it. Both options have pros and cons, but none makes you a better or a worse person. Kala is a worthy daughter of her father she is fighter and her heart knows she wants. However, Rajan has gotten what he wants easily thanks to the fate and consequences of the acts of others people, which in a way has pushed Kala into his arms. [My opinion] Rajan is a manipulator, with words he knows how to manipulate Kala and that she does what he wants. I do not trust him.[The end]

(look that face)

In this discussion, Kala realizes that the familiar union is not as perfect as she believed. Nothing is perfect. And Rajan knows this is problem for his marriage and he decides to run away.

Moreover, we have other problem: Rajan’s business. For Kala her job is very important, she has fought- like her father - to get it. Kala finds mistakes in the company reports and she asks Rajan for explanation but he tells her: “What matter is that we ship on time”

The only important thing for Rajan is get money and he doesn’t allow Kala make something to fix it. For me the final message he send us is: I love you but do what I say and shut up. And Kala’s face says us this:

(Disappointment and sadness)

That is, first Kala keep doubting between her feeling and how to be happy. She is a grown woman and she has to deal with her problems alone. She took the decision to get married, no one forced her - apparently - and she has to live with her decision. But all important things (like family, work or ethics) keep up the LOGIC like the good decision are being destroyed. 

Family: The perfect union of families isn’t perfect and for her the family is so important but both families don’t accept each other. No body is happy with the union.

Work/Ethics: In the beginning Kala is convinced that Rajan likes her potential but now she realizes that Rajan just wants her to do what he needs to keep everything okay and to keep the company making money - This is clear in Chapter 7 - Here Kala can see how Rajan uses her for the company and that Rajan is forgetting that she loves her job and she is ethical person. She would never do something illegal, even in her marriage she is being ethical and that is costing her own happiness.

Kala right now is very vulnerable and she just need one thing more: COURAGE.

It’s not Wolfgang’s words it’s the general feeling they are sharing in the end of the episode: without the risk you cannot win.  

How does she know loving Wolfgang is a bad decision if she has never tried it?

For all this, I think it would have been better if Kala had looked for Wolfgang on the day of the concert, and not apparently a day later. Definitely, she is going to look for him, she trusts in her heart ‘cause the logic is failing, the logic isn’t making her happy. And she believes it’s time to give the heart a chance.

Sorry for my english, it’s not my first language! I hope you can understand everything and tell me your opinion. The second part coming soon!

Thanks to @sun-is-bae for the help with my english!