kimstu:
The ERA wasn’t needed as the United States already has laws in place recognizing the equality of the genders.
Aren’t you restricting yourself to just one statistic regarding spousal murder in India and comparing it against all statistics for same in the United States?
Ding ding ding! You’re a winner!
Without wishing to argue with the excellent information you have provided, there is a minor contradiction in your statement. If the Dalits are still “largely wretched,” then (as I suspected) de-stigmatization has only begun. As my own post mentioned, the fact that there is mandated representation in government (a somewhat recent feature of India’s political landscape) for the Dalit caste shows this process has begun. Despite India having had a woman prime minister, so long as sutee and its marital equivalent (“kitchen accidents”) continue to exist, it indicates still larger strides awaiting this vast and populous nation. Please do not think I refuse to applaud their progress.
Thanks, Kimstu, for your post. I’d read the article that Fark linked to and was horrified. I see that I was a little uninformed and reactionary, making assumptions about India that really are incorrect. It’s good to see a different perspective.
This is absolutely true. My grandfather had two brothers. The three of them now all have children and grandchildren. Of my generation, I am the only girl.
But I must agree with Kimstu that generalisations are being made. However, I think what I would have said has been said, so I’ll leave that alone.
Ironically, I’ve been told many times by relatives that I must do this and I must do that or no nice boy will ever want to marry me. I’m not prime marriage material - I’m an NRI, will not drop my studies for marriage, and I’m almost certain I’m bisexual (but no-one knows :)).
Ah, well. I guess I’ve wavered from the point a little, but the OP gives me a nice warm fuzzy feeling.
Tell the winner what he gets.
Flamed for daring to possibly malign the U.S.! clears throat
Oh my god, h9ow dare you inslut the USOFA!!! Why dont you go to IRAQ if you dont like it here!!! Say hello to Saddam and OSAMA!!! REMEMBER 9/11!!!
I am in eye-raQ.
Sad-damn waves
This is incorrect. The process actually began during the independence movement. The Congress Party and its leaders (Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, et al) were adamant that caste discrimination should not exist in an independent India.
Shortly after independence a whole litany of measures were put in place to achieve this goal. These included a massive land redistribution program, a ban on company-store type practices and a ban on tenant farming, as well as the previously mentioned quota system. The proportional representation system for Dalits is not a beginning, it is another measure in a long line of measures dating back well over fifty years.
Aside from legal protections, there has also been a dramatic cultural change in the past fifty years. For example, prior to independence, it was quite common for Dalits to be barred from entering a temple. In my trips to India over the past thirty years, I have never seen this happen, not once. It may still happen in some rural areas, but is unlikely, since the government would clamp down on it pretty quickly. Similarly, there used to be a bizzarre notion that Dalits were polluted, and if you touched them or their shadow fell on you, you’d be polluted and would have to do a religious ceremony to become unpolluted. Once again, I have never personnally witnessed this happen anywhere in the past 30 years. I’m sure it still does happen in some places, but really these notions have been discredited for a vast majority of the population. Does India still have a long way to go? Sure. But the change that’s occurred since independence is quite remarkable.
There is one more thing to be mentioned. India has many distinct cultures, and the role of Dalits and women in these cultures is radically different. The traditional role of women in particular was very different and more modernized in areas like Karnataka, Gujurat, and Kerala (particularly Kerala). I mention this because the practice of suttee was largely historically confined to Rajasthan and seems to be peculiar to Rajasthani culture.
Thank you so much for putting my wrong notions to rest, BrightNShiny. I was aware of the the entire “unclean” concept about the Dalits and the purification rituals accompanying these diseased superstitions. This was due to having a Siek history teacher in the eighth grade. I’m much relieved to know that such absurd ideas are fading quickly from popular practice. In my defense, India’s culture is one of the oldest on earth so even 50 years back is recent times. Admittedly, independence was such a milestone as to make my own estimation irrelevant.
I have heard about sutee repeatedly in the past and was horrified to think this might be an even remotely common practice. I knew that there had been an intense crackdown on this but was not aware of it being so restricted to a single region. Again, thank you for the clarification. I still find the whole “kitchen accidents” farce to be rather disgusting. Do you have any statistics as to how common this really is? I’d appreciate your first-hand knowledge.
NBobody is putting down the entire Indian country or culture. Definitely, Inadia is an example in many ways for other countries in the region. It has a pretty stable and democratic political system which is more than can be said about many countries in that part of the world. But it has certain things that are very shocking for a westerner. I remember a documentary about eunuchs. they still exist by the thousands in India. There was a scene where they showed the actual castrating of a young bouy of about 9. No anesthia or anything. One sharp cut of the knife and his penis and testicles were cut off as blood gushed out and the poor boy collapsed in pain. I tell you I have seen few things as shocking in my lifetime.
Indian checking in:
I have been reading all these posts with a great deal of interest and was particularly impressed with the knowledge taht some people have about that country. Let me get on the soapbox a bit here and address some of the topics raised:
Sati
There was one incident almost two decades ago and the government cracked down on it like crazy. They arrested some people and posted a police picket to ensure that the site was not turned into some memorial or something. There have been no sati incidents since then.
Dalits/Untouchables
You have to remember that India is a relatively young country and many of the policies have been place only for a few decades. The constitution has made untouchability a totally unlawful and affirmative action for people of “backward castes” ensures that thy have representation in government, education, jobs etc. There are a huge number of politicans from the Dalits including past Prime Ministers, Presidents, umpteen Cabinet and State Chief Ministers etc
The affirmative action has been place almost since Independence in 1947 and despite frequent reviews continues to this day. So much so, that non-Dalits like me, had plenty of trouble getting college admission.
Women
The dowry system although banned by law is still prevalent in all kinds of subversive ways. Although it is becoming increasingly less common nowadays. “Kitchen accidents” on the other hand are pretty rare nowadays.
The dowry system does have a very interesting history and like all customs got corrupted. The dowry was gift to the bride from her parents so that, in case the husband died or the family ran into trouble, the dowry resued the woman. It is very important to note that before laws were changed wherein the son and the daughter had equal share of the estate, this was the way that a father ensured that the daughter got her share of the family wealth. Dowry, as a rule, was never supposed to be demanded and was always at the discretion of the parent of the bride.
Would have loved to talk more about this, but the wife calleth…
Peace
But polyandry on what terms? I can easily envision of form of near-slavery in which several men share what is essentially their private prostitute. Not exactly empowerment for the woman involved.
I realize the tone of my first post was a little harsh, and I apologize for that. I am merely trying to clarify some misconceptions here.
Zenster, I don’t have any good stats on the “kitchen accidents,” because I believe that a number of these events were recorded as accidents, and not murders, particularly during the late eighties.
It is a bizarre phenomenon, though, as it seems to have appeared in the eighties and peaked in the early nineties. It’s actually quite the topic of debate, since it is really a rather recent phenomenon.
In communities that traditionally practice dowry, there is usually a ceremony at which the terms of the dowry are fixed, and this ceremony is the traditional equivalent of a binding contract. For some reason, which I don’t think anybody really has a good idea, in the eighties, people began using this system as a money-making scheme. The local governments were slow to clamp down on it, because they’re pretty much slow to do anything, but also, I believe, because the perpetrators tended to be from well-connected families. I can’t even attribute this to some backwards, rural folks, since there have been a number of cases in large cities. This crime seems to occur more frequently in northern areas, though, but I don’t get the impression that it is widespread.
One more thing, dowry is, I believe illegal in most states in India for non-Muslims. I’d have to look up whether or not Muslims are allowed to practice dowry. But the practice of demanding more than the agreed-upon dowry is definitely illegal now for everybody.
ashtayk, if no one else here has done so, please permit me to welcome you aboard(s). All factual input is more than welcome. Thank you.
It is worth pointing out that the extent of abuse of the dowry system (and the prevalent use in itself) vary dramatically across the country. I think there was an intensification in the past few decades, but it is not an universally Indian malaise. Right now, it is slowly dying in the cities, though it has also become a pseudo-voluntary system where the bride’s father provides gifts on his own “choice”. The morphing into pseudo-volunteerism makes it harder to control the abuse.
Also, in some cultures, the dowry system is reversed. The guy gives gifts to the bride’s family. I remember reading somewhere that this was prevalent in older India and is the genesis of the modern dowry system.
Lastly, the credit for steps to reform Indian society should not only go to the Indian National Congress but also to various regional reformers from the British-ruled era. Raja Ram Mohan Roy et al fought against suttee, child marriage, women’s education etc. More recently, we have the Dravidian movement, a social reformation movement (spawned a powerful political legacy too) that emphasized education, rights of women and lower castes etc.
I trust you mean, for “women’s education …”
Of course!
Well, firstly, no one was claiming it was empowerment. Secondly, why would you automatically envision it as sexual slavery? There is scant information on Indian polyandry on the web, though more information on the (fraternal) polyandry in the Himalayas. From this site:
From this site:
There may well be negative aspects to it - certainly the problem of creating extra spinsters has been one (at least in the Himalayas, where there is less gender imbalance to start with, AFAIK) but nothing about sex slavery turns up on web searches.
Most of the links seem to be about the practice in ancient India. Others are about a predicted return to it, because of the gender imbalance.
Interestingly, one of my Indian friends is from Kerala, with the surname Nair. I will ask him about the practice!
Am I the only one who finds the erstwhile bride-to-be a tad less than heroic?
Remember, she and her family freely agreed to an arranged marriage, freely agreed to paying an obscene dowry (including a bonus to her groom-to-be’s brother).
Her father, a big believer in arranged marriage, has drawn a lesson from this episode, but it has mainly to do with the fact that he feels cheated by having got a lower-status family than they represented themselves as being, which is his explanation for the whole imbroglio: “Today he recommended that fathers of brides check the bona fides of prospective in-laws. His potential son-in-law was not a computer engineer, he said, but a computer instructor. The mother was not a vice principal of a private school, but a gym teacher.” (From N.Y. Times article).
To me, this sounds like a crass nouveau riche economic transaction (on all sides) gone awry, with the participants fighting like cargo cultists over the home theater systems and other flashy status symbols, not like any kind of female empowerment (except economic empowerment) fable.
That she’s chosen to cast it in political terms is understandable, but remember, she and her family, by all accounts, were quite willing for her to be sold off (and presumably enjoy the concomitant social and economic advantages of marriage to a high-status, wealthy family) until the pimp-brokered deal soured economically.