Need help to understand this (East / West emotional differences?)

I wasn’t sure which forum this belonged in … mods please move if I’ve got it wrong.

I saw something on TV earlier which I can’t make sense of. It was a BBC report from (I think) India, showing mothers who are still looking for their lost children following the Tsunami. It was heartbreaking.

One mother in particular gave a tearful, graphic account of how she struggled to hold on to her two young children, before they were swept away by the wave. Her aunt, sitting beside her, held her and uttered words of comfort.

Or so I thought. The voiceover had her saying “You gave birth to those children. You should *never * have let go of them”.

WTF? :eek:

Assuming the translation was correct (I would think so, as it was a BBC special report) … would this have been an expression of her own grief, or are these people so emotionally different from we Westerners that it is normal to say such a (to me) cruel thing to a grieving mother?

:confused:

Methinks the aunt was a little distraught as well, and likely not thinking straight. “These people” are pretty much the same as us.

I too am going to vote for distraught. But still a bit naive to think that anyone can hold on to someone that’s being washed away by thousand ton waves. It cannot be an easy thing to do. Maybe she was a spiteful person before the disaster. Doesn’t mean that the entire culture behaves like that.

On a side note, are you implying that those of other cultures cannot be different from other cultures? I’m all for diversity and equality, but to deny that people can be different based on cultural learnings? I believe we’re all born with the same basic traits, every thing else is environmental. I wouldn’t deny that there could be emotional differences between people of different cultures. But in this case, I think it was just too much for the women to handle, and maybe, just maybe, she had “issues” before the disaster.

This is exactly it. For all its apparent coldness, the aunt’s words make it clear that children are valued in that culture too. Otherwise she wouldn’t have said anything.

Just my WAG, I have no way of knowing one way or the other, but…
The translation could have not been entirely correct.

“You gave birth to those children. You should never have let go of them.”

“You gave birth to those children. You should never have to let go of them.”

That one little word changes the emotion and sentiment dramatically.

Yeah it does.

I used the term “these people” because I couldn’t remember for sure if it was India - it sounded a bit “off” to me at the time but I couldn’t think of an alternative … no offence meant.

BTW - if you go here and click on “VIDEO BBC TV special” you can see the program - the remark I’m talking about comes at the 3.15 mark. I can’t listen to it again to verify what I heard because I currently have no sound on my &$%&ing PC :frowning: , so I would be grateful if someone else could take a listen and, if possible, verify the BBC translation? Maybe Xash?

i thought, like psycat90, that there was an implied “to” in there. that a child should not precede you into death.

i had to reread the op a few times before i got what y’all were saying. i read it with a “to”.

I just saw the same thing on TV, and it seemed weird to me. :confused:

I can’t claim to be an expert on India, but I have spent some time there, read a lot on the subject, and been close to many Indian people.

The role of women has made a lot of progress, and especially in cities women live lives that are comperable to those in the West. But women are still routinely married off by their families. Women are still secluded. A woman’s most important role is as mother, and most importantly mother of sons. Huge numbers of women die every year in “kitchen accidents” when they don’t bring in enough dowry or children. Female infancide and selective abortion are pretty common- mostly because dowries are a crushing burden.

In many places, a woman’s life is her children. In Hinduism, there are certain rites that men fulfill in ceromonies and women fulfill by getting married and giving birth. To lose your children is a tragedy on a much greater scale than it is here- it destroys your main purpose of life, may affect your chances of remaining married (and not being a beggar on the street) and brands you as unlucky and not devoted enough forever. On a practical scale, your male children support you when you get older. Without male children, you are looking at crushing poverty and lonliness (your husband and male offspring comprise your family. At best, some relative of your husband might take you on as a charity case, but it is a life of little joy) forever. Certainly not all Indian are like this, but it is not uncommon, especially in rural areas.

There are a few emotional differences that I noticed. There is a sense of resignation. A sense of “Well, this is my life and that is how it is and that is that”. Many of the women I talked to watched things like Sex and the City and knew that there was a different life out there- probably one they’d perfer to being married and forever at the whim of their husband. I sat on the bus next to a girl that was my age, and it was the first time she’d been out of the house alone- and it was only for the bus ride between her house and her mother’s. They know what it is like in America, and they arn’t shocked to see the freedom we have- sexually and otherwise- but they have this sense of understanding that that is not what they will ever have there. People feel kind of bad about it (although they disapprove of the number of extramartial affairs that go on here- many people expressed concern for how often Americans cheat on each other) but they accept it.

I think it’s a caste thing. People grow up understanding that there is a place in the world for them, and that is their place to stay. The poor seem much more accepting of being poor. The ultra-rich feel little shame or discomfort at how much better they live than most people. Even crime and criminals are accepted in a way as part of life.

Family is very important there, although I think a lot more people resent the control their familes have over them than we really think. Nepotism isn’t at all considered bad. It is your duty- your role- to help out your family. Your family is, of course, your biggest support system. But there are very intense feelings of guilt and shame and duty related to them. You’ve heard of the overbearing Jewish mother and the overbearing Chinese mother, but I think the Indian mother often wins them all. Very few people just get up and leave and see their families on holidays like we do here. Even if they live thousands of miles away, they still seek their families opinions and approval of things like what job to take.

I noticed that Indians never want to be without an answer. If you ask directions to someplace and they don’t know, they will make stuff up, or run around asking everyone they see, or puzzle at your guidebook maps for an hour. If you ask anyone on the street when the next bus to Delhi comes, everyone will give you an answer, but only a couple will be right.

But what was most interesting to me was despite these differences, we were all still so much the same.

I couldn’t find the video you are referring to on the BBC site, so I can’t comment on the wording or tone of the statement.

However, I would not discount the stress levels and heightened emotional state of the persons involved.

But the answer to the root of your question is that we are all humans, and therefore of similar disposition emotionally, on the average; although very wide deviations from the mean exist, leading to different responses to similar circumstances by different people, even within the same community. IMHO, ofcourse.