Nho...chu`m [WAS: Phu. Nam Phu. Nu+~]

[Hai-Tri Le <haitril@microsoft.com>]

Hi, chi. My Huyen va` anh Tien

Nga`y xu+a to^i cu~ng thu+o+`ng bi. ca'c nie^n tru+o+?ng nho^`i va`o
dda^`u ca'i thuye^'t "tam to`ng" na`y. To^i cu~ng dda~ ddu+o+.c ba?o
ra(`ng "to`ng" trong "tam to`ng" la` theo, la` nghe lo+`i, la` phu.c
tu`ng. 

Lo+'n le^n ddo^i khi nghi~ la.i thi` to^i cho ra(`ng "to`ng" na`y cha('c
kho^ng co' nghi~a ha.n he.p nhu+ va^.y. To^i nghi~ o+? dda^y "to`ng"
vu+`a co' nghi~a la` theo, vu+`a co' nghi~a la` ho^? tro+., phu. giu'p,
support.

To^i kho^ng thuo^.c pha'i "nho chu`m", co' le~ cu`ng pha'i "hu? le^'u"
vo+'i anh HLV. Ba'c na`o "nho" dda^`y vu+o+`n tham gia ba`n lua^.n nhe'.

Ti`nh tha^n,
HL

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	My Huyen Nguyen [SMTP:M.H.Nguyen-iq1b7756@lmu.ac.uk]
> Sent:	Thursday, March 13, 1997 4:16 AM
> To:	Multiple recipients of list
> Subject:	Re: Phu. nam Phu. nu*~
> 
> Dear Mr Tran,
> Sorry that I'm not sure if Tam Tong Tu Duc in Tu Thu Ngu Kinh is .
> In my opion every human being is equal to each other . Nobody has to
> depend on another one , physical as spiritual. Tam Tong says: Ta.i gia
> to'ng phu .  ->> I accept it ( but not for 100%)
> Xua^'t gia ' to'ng phu  -->> Why do women have to depend on their men
> if
> they can go to work , if they have the same education ? Is it not a
> pressure mentioned in this phrase ?  
> Phu tu*? to`ng tu*? ( I have it this time correct ;-)) ->> it means
> that
> sons( daughters are not counted as childreen in the family) has more
> to 
> say than their mothers ? I can't imagine that my son eg. says to me
> : Mom , you don't have a right to say something in my house . You have
> to
> do what I want you to .Eo o*i cha('c tui pha?i xin la`m co^ng qua? cho
> kie^p na`y qua' qua'
>  
> Ich habe vielleicht nicht richtig ausgedrueck was ich eigentlich
> schreiben
> wollte. Aber das kann doch jeder von uns erkennen , woran die Frauen
> unterdruckt werden. Ich meine , diese alte Idee existieren noch leider
> in
> manchen Gedanken unserer Maenner . 
> It scheint so , dass Du nicht zufrieden bist mit meiner Meinung .
> Sorry
> that I don'nt have the same opinion as you do 
> 
> On Thu, 13 Mar 1997, Tran Minh Tien wrote:
> 
> > > 
> > > What about the thinking :
> > > Tam To`ng tu*' ddu*'c ho*? Mr Tran ???
> > 
> > Oh, could you explain me what "tam to`ng" mean, Miss My ?
> > Why do you think that "tam to`ng" is "tro.ng nam kinh nu+~" ?
> > Are  you sure that you understand "to`ng" correctly ?
> > Btw, could you eilighten me who had proposed "tam to`ng"?
> > Are you sure, "tam to`ng" have been mentioned in "Tu+' thu+,
> > Ngu~ Kinh" ?
> > 
> > Thank you in advance,
> > 
> > Tran Minh Tien
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Ta.i gia to`ng phu.
> > > Xua^'t gia' to`ng phu
> > > Phu tu*? to`ng tuu*?
> > > 
> > > Ta.i sao la.i pha?i to`ng nhie^`u qua' dzi. ??? DDo' co' pha?i la`
> > > pressure ma` phu. nu*~ VN pha.i chi.u in the past ?
> > > 
> >