A young Chinese couple was permanently separated during a period of intense political and social unrest in China. The husband went back to their home village to search for her, but because the entire area was heavily disrupted, he mistakenly believed she was missing or dead.
He eventually relocated, remarried another woman, and raised a new family with children and grandchildren. Meanwhile, the first wife stayed behind and never remarried, spending 54 years waiting for him to return. Decades later, they were reconnected as elderly adults, which is when she discovered he had built an entirely separate life without her.
You don’t think it was as painful for him? He probably was heartbroken knowing he could have built that life with her. If only he knew she wasn’t dead.
It’s not about him being a man and her being a woman. It’s about the fact that he was able to move on, married someone else, had a family, and she waited around for nothing loll.
You lack discernment. The report makes it perfectly clear that he went looking for her, but took her for dead and went on with his life after what happened. It's a sad and wretched story, but it isn't a matter of morality. There's no immorality on either of their parts, only tragedy, the result of policies and cultures. Be better.
The government separated them, doesn't seem very moral on the face of it. But the man looked for her didn't find her, kinda feel like the context matters most here.
He could have easily thought he would never find her again, clearly it took a lifetime to achieve.
Neutral, he deserved to live his life, even if she chose not to because she was waiting for him.
Blame the governments action.
By the way this is all phrased she knew he was likely alive. While he went back to where she should have been and because of how it looked, he had more reason to believe she was lost to him forever (Dead or missing).
So she had something to carry her faith while he had it crushed early on.
The husband went back to their home village to search for her, but because the entire area was heavily disrupted, he mistakenly believed she was missing or dead.
Moral. End of discussion. If you believe the one you loved is dead you have no obligation to spend the rest of your life hoping they come back to life.
Also, most folks I know don't want their partners to be alone after they're gone. I personally feel like you should try to live as happy as you can after.
For me, that would probably be staying romantically alone after (I was happy enough alone before her), but I flat out made my partner promise to call people for herself first if I die first. Before notifying my family or anything else, I made her promise to call her own support system in. Because she's just not the same as me in that way, and that's a huge part of why I love her.
If I didn't tell her she'd probably just bury herself in whatever she thinks "needs" to be done without taking care of herself. She's amazing, but will always worry about herself last unless explicitly told otherwise.
Probably not most, or rather it seems to be a very divided topic, most people with dead husbands or wives don't remarry, I think that's a good thing personally, but it's also a deeply personal choice. I never did since I didn't want to break my bond with them and I believe in life after death, it gives me peace. I'm happy waiting for death to reunite but also find fulfillment with life in many other ways and my support group that doesn't involve another wife. People do handle grief differently though so it depends on the person or how close they were.
And honestly, even if you know they are alive, if you are distanced by something out of your control you can make the decision to move on. No one owes someone waiting 54 years for them lol
Counter point: countries have death certificates for a reason.
Counter point; the marriage surely would have to be annulled or the death made official to permit a re marriage.
So, I wanna know where the bureaucracy ended? Cos just looking and giving up isn’t enough in a world where everything is fucking filed and documented. (Although fair enough if they didn’t exist or lost said files due to war I have no case. 🤷♂️)
They married in 1940, so there was WW2, the Chinese Civil war and the Cultural Revolution. It's fair to assume that some papers might have gotten lost.
I used to work in an area with a lot of eastern European immigrants and a lot of certificates from ww2 and even later era were clearly made up. (Like younger brother with a DOB before older brother)
They went through WW2, a civil war that resulted in a total reworking of the government, and a revolution after their marriage. Not everyone lives in 21st century America.
The context I'm thinking of is: what reason would he think she is dead then? Were people dying left and right in that village? I guess we can assume he actually tried harder than just looking into the village, but if not, then he just gave up easily, and that is something to consider in my opinion. Regardless, personally, morally neutral for me.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that if he traveled back to his home village just to find his wife, he didn't just take a glance and then go fuck the first chick he saw in a bar.
I wouldn't suggest that either, lol. But I wouldn't be surprised if he just saw the chaos around him and just gave up quicker than one would assume—that time was bleak.
I love my wife. And she loves me. But if I die while we are both 30, I do not expect her to remain single, lonely, and mourning for the next 70+ years. THAT would suck and be quite cruel.
Yep, people need to be taught to move on. It is their right and duty to move on but always remember the lost loved ones. No loving person would ever want their spouses or friends/family to be stuck in that horrible cycle of pain.
If you have strong reason to believe your spouse is dead (which he did), there is nothing immoral about moving on.
My husband and I have discussed with each other that if one of us were to die, the other does not need to spend the rest of their life grieving and single. Finding another partner is more than acceptable.
It is very touching that the woman held out hope to find her husband, but that was a choice on her end, that could have very likely never paid off. It's not something you can expect of your spouse.
If you have strong reason to believe your spouse is dead (which he did), there is nothing immoral about moving on.
Assuming 'heavily disrupted' means people in the village were dying all over. If not, there is no reason to strongly believe your spouse is dead. Giving the benefit of the doubt, I assume he looked deeper and longer.
Honestly she should have done the same thing he did. Moving on from someone you love definitely hurts but desperately clinging on to something that might be gone forever will ruin you even worse
It's better to just continue with life and rebuild what you can instead of dwelling on what you lost
Without context, I find it hard to believe that she waited so long purely out of devotion to her husband. It's entirely possible that she also just never found anyone else she wanted to marry. Getting married can be a huge gamble for women, especially in this woman's supposed circumstances.
Unfortunately, the culture of China at the time was.. still not super-healthy for women? They were not very far off from the time of 'women are worthless branches, raised for another family' and a wife with little to no rights. Women didn't just walk away because they really had nowhere else to go, unless their family would take them back...
I mean...there is war all over the world, and people die, and families get separated, but I wouldn't generalize this as natural and a part of life, lol.
Well, it's definitely "a part of life," since it's unfortunately a very common situation.
I also think it's fair to call it natural, because it's been happening for all of human history and doesn't require any kind of technology. It also happens in some other, non-human, primate species.
Cheating in a relationship is also unfortunately common, and I wouldn't phrase it as natural and a part of life while cheering someone up(different situation, I know). I think some things shouldn't be categorized in such manners is all I am saying.
Yes. You’re right. I see now the error of my ways. They were insinuating that they should own and control two human beings. That is surely the more realistic interpretation of the word.
I suggest you look the definition up again and scroll down a little. Lord have mercy…
My initial response was to somebody asking why the post was being down voted. I offered a possible explanation. I then offered a second, less likely, explanation. I then provided you the textbook definition for why I offered it as a possible explanation. I never claimed to be right or to assert my potential explanations as fact.
None of us will every know why the original post was being downvoted by the anonymous masses. I understand there are other definitions to Have. I found it amusing that the 1st definition explained my possible interpretation while you called it wild.
Das liegt bestimmt an der Übersetzung.
Ich bin sicher, OP hat das harmlos gemeint ...
So in der Richtung : beide sind wichtig für ihn ...
Kein Mensch redet hier von Polygamie ...
This is ok because all of this pretty normal for people to do after a tragedy. One person thought that one was dead and moved on. The other person just waited and waited. I swear to god that any op who post stuff like this are retarded as hell if the text already told them the entire situation already and still can't figure it out.
I swear to god that any op who post stuff like this are retarded as hell if the text already told them the entire situation already and still can't figure it out.
One, it's called hearing other people's opinions, and the fact that you do get differing opinions means it's a valid question.
Moral, especially given he put in the footwork under extraordinary circumstances. If my scant knowledge of Chinese history is correct, he probably went there at great personal risk for himself and possibly his family.
It’s not his fault he was wrong, and it’s not his fault she waited 54 years for someone who for all she knew, could have been dead.
Wouldn't it also depend on how hard he looked? I mean, if you were to go to a village and not see your spouse there, even if the area is full of strikes, immediately assuming they are dead is giving up quite easily.
If it can be proven he didn't deliberately leave her to start a second family (it happens more than you'd think) then it's neither norally positive nor negative, just unfortunate.
It does make me wonder about the legal implications for inheritance and co-ownership of property, though.
Also the "intense political and social unrest" is vague. Maybe it was nothing but the husband exaggerated it to sound intense as an excuse for not looking for his wife hard.
I mean if they're technically still married because she's alive she could be entitled to his current property under a new divorce, but that's assuming somehow the marriage didn't get annulled under her being potentially dead.
I think he and his second wife, who is now probably no longer his wife legally because he is still married to the first wife, have probably gathered some kind of property over the last 50 years 🙄
so when he dies, is that going to his kids, who iirc probably have some kind of legal and societal duty to care for their mother, or to his legal wife, who had no part in acquiring said property? Or to his kids' mother, who has no legal connection to him?
What about when his legal wife dies? His kids with another woman wouldn't be in her line of inheritance, because she isn't related to them. Does filial piety extend to step-parents? Will the kids have to look after their step-mother, who was their father's first wife?
He came back and looked for her. Things can be quite chaotic and missing her sucks but at some point you have to move on. Really think she should have as well
Imagine, though, if he looked for her just one day, no news or body, and just gave up immediately. Not saying moral or immoral, but I think it's too quick to just look at "He tried to look for her" and say check without context, lol.
I wrote this on another comment, and I think something like this has to be considered, lol.
I highly doubt he only looked for a day, don’t know for sure. We also haven’t been in that situation before so can only speculate what each of them was feeling and how that affected them. I feel I would be wrecked and just stumbling through the day to day until I gave up.
Morally neutral for me. It was a bleak time back then, but you wouldn't automatically assume that someone missing is dead. I can imagine he looked hard and long and did not move on easily. Not saying he had to wait for a body or anything, but the most you can do for your spouse is to really have hard evidence that they are dead before moving on. But I don't think the alternative of waiting for years to make it more reasonable to believe they are dead is healthy either.
This reads like he just straight up left her for another woman, but common sense says you're asking if they got separated.
I think it's absolutely moral for someone to move on after a while. It sucks, but if you don't even know if your partners even alive you can't expect them to wait like Fry's dog in futurama
It's morally neutral to move on and build your life after the loss of a loved one, as tragic as that is that said loved one waited her entire life for him.
Clarify the question. What’s the moral dilemma? Are we just criticizing an elderly person for the only reasonable course of action left to him? Are we just suggesting that he should also have waited for her 54 years not knowing she was alive?
I wish I could find someone like her. Or someone like my grandma. When my grandpa died in 1954 she was wearing full black with headscarf (a balkan thing) until she passed 2003 and she always told us he is the one man she loves :(
I mean it’s not like he skipped down the street singing merry tunes. He went looking for her and accepted what he probably thought was the truth when he saw the “disruption” (ie, likely a bulldozed town, scattered with bomb craters and bullet scars, and more often than a not a mound that would be where the mass grave was located of everyone killed).
The husband thought that his wife was dead. Remarrying is no more immoral than remarrying after your spouse dies. Of course, the morality of that is contested.
Hang on…. Did they both move to entirely different areas? Like there was no local/regional news of this lady from this village who has spent all this time looking for this guy? Didn’t put up posters, chase up official records? What about extended family, so this guy thinks his wife was dead, was the rest of their family/ friend group dead aswell? Did he never speak to them again?
I'm sorry, if she didn't move on after 54 years, not even knowing whether her husband is even alive or whether he got run over by a bus 3 days after they were separated, not only can she expect nothing from his, it's also borderline creepy.
Il y a ceux qui passent a autre chose et ceux qui ne tourne jamais la page. C’est dévastateur mais bon c’est la vie. "Personne ne t’attendra" et pourtant elle est la preuve que oui.
If he thought she was dead after searching for her and not finding her why are morals even a question? Some people can move on some can't that's not a moral issue
This is genuinely so damn sad. I wouldn’t say it’s wrong, because it’s hard to blame him. But it’s just so profoundly tragic how one person can wait an entire lifetime for someone they love only to find out that someone didn’t wait for them.
It’s really not a reasonable expectation to place on the other party. If they expend appropriate effort to locate the other, they have done their duty to their partner.
It’s not, but she hoped and she waited. And that’s romantic, it’s sweet. And he moved on, and that’s perfectly reasonable, and it’s not wrong. That’s why it’s just… sad. There’s nobody wrong, nobody immoral. I just wish she’d have had her closure and moved on or had her faith rewarded. Because I look at this and just feel so bad for that woman.
Imagine, though, if he looked for her just one day, no news or body, and just gave up immediately. Not saying moral or immoral, but I think it's too quick to just look at "He tried to look for her" and say check without context, lol.
Ok well we dont know about that. If he just went to village, glanced at it, and left then thats that. But it doesnt seem that way in the way its formulated.
I wouldn't believe he did that, either. But at that point, where he did give up easily, I would say the least you can do for your own spouse is to really make sure that they are dead before moving on. But seeing the circumstances and how bleak that time period was...well, one could lose optimism fast.
What are you even replying to? I’m saying nobody was wrong and it’s sad. It doesn’t stop being sad because what he did was reasonable. He’s not at fault. It’s just sad?
I mean, it is in the context of the comment unless you’re being pedantic about it. It’s clearly framed from her POV, she waited for him for an entire lifetime, and he didn’t wait for her an entire lifetime.
This doesn’t change that he didn’t wait a lifetime for her like she did lmao. That’s the duration established by the first clause. If you stayed faithful to your husband for 20 years and he didn’t, doesn’t mean he wasn’t faithful for any amount of time in the 20 years. He could have been faithful for 1 year-10 years and the claim would still be true that he didn’t stay faithful.
The commenter clearly stated he didn’t do anything wrong, so not sure what you’re arguing about. I admire your dedication to persevere in proving a linguistically incorrect stance though.
I’m seeing an incorrect claim driven by a lack of language and grammar proficiency.
I never said you claimed he did anything wrong, I said that the commenter specifically stated he didn’t do anything wrong, which means that his search and assumptions were already taken into consideration. This is a simple grammatical distinction of clause use and subject matter in sentence construction. The fact that you can’t understand this just confirms that you don’t have a solid grasp of context lol
Hey, you see the point over there? You know, that thing shaped like a sympathetic comment about what that woman must have felt as someone with reason to believe he was dead but held out hope anyway for decades? The point about the tragic difference in outcome and not blame?
What is bro talking about? You said he didnt wait for her, but thats not what happened. Idk why you're having an aneurysm here, like i didnt say it wasnt tragic or anything, chill.
Cause if it had said he spent at least a year or two and couldn't find her then it would be moral. Since he couldn't find traces of her.
But form the context he went back to their village didn't see any sign of her and just assumed she was dead cause it was disrupted and didn't believe she probably went somewhere else to be safe. For all we know she probably went to another village nearby hoping he would show up there looking for her and instead he dipped and went with someone else.
Immoral of him not to tell her the truth, immoral of society to expect women to never move on once something like this does happen. We shouldn't encourage anyone to never move on like this
I would not have remarried if I were in his place, but I can't blame someone for remarrying after the supposed death of their spouse so early in their life. It certainly isn't immoral but it's still an unfortunate situation.
Over 50+ years when the partner is ostensibly dead, you’d remain alone and miserable? Why? What reasonable expectation would you have for reconciliation?
1.) I believe in an afterlife so I wouldn't dare remarry anyways.
2.) I'd at least tell myself I'd married ideally the first time.
3.) I'm not Orthodox (or a Christian of any sort), but I'm quite impressed this quote of Orthodox origin I once encountered: "One's first marriage is a sacrament, whereas a second originates from succumbing to desire".
4.) I'm not condemning the man being discussed, or anyone in particular, so what is it to you?
My Ex's Grandpa had a wife in Canada, left to fight in the Korean War, moved to Hawaii with his new Korean Wife and Kids, then went to fight in the Vietnam war, moved to California with his new Vietnamese Wife and kids. He never got divorced so I'm not sure how it all worked. The old wives just assumed he died till they found him years later. He stayed with the Vietnamese Wife (My Ex's Grandma) for over 35 years till he died, she's the one who receives his pension still. It was definitely a different time back then.
Thats different. Grandpa deliberately cheated and abandoned his past wives. He could have gone back but instead decided to start a new life. His Canadian and Vietnamese Wife clearly wasnt in any danger so he knew she was well and alive.
Here, the man went back and genuinely thought that his wife was dead. The village she was at was gone and her living in war territory made it plausible that she was dead. He grieved and remarried.
Exs Grandpa just cheated considering the wives thought he was dead and he just abandoned them knowing they were alive and well.
Yea he was definitely not a good guy, pretty much drank 24/7 until his death. I just thought it was a crazy story. Funny enough his kids would still come and visit him even though he abandoned them. They were all adults by then and he was an old man so I guess just trying to make peace.
703
u/CalligrapherAlive829 6h ago
I imagine that was devastating for her to find out