Banned from askhistorians after getting gilded and praise from a mod (for not posting references to block quoted text).

robbphoenix · 14時間前

Regarding your last question, The earliest Hindu writings, the Rig Veda show that Caste was not considered hereditary.

The Vedas and the Upanishads never mention any restrictions based either on gender or on varna. Vedic Hermeneutics | K. Satchidananda Murty

The Upanishads assert that one's birth does not determine one's eligibility for spiritual knowledge, only one's effort and sincerity matters. Classical Hindu Thought: An Introduction | Arvind Sharma

Dharmasutras and Dharmasastras, such as Paraskara Grhyasutra, Gautama Smriti and Yajnavalkya Smriti, state all four varnas are eligible to all fields of knowledge.

Also mentioned in the Rig Veda:

“I am a bard, my father is a physician, my mother’s job is to grind the corn……” (RV 9.112.3)

The editor of the Vedas, and author of Mahabaratha Krishna Dwaipayana (Veda Vyasa ) was born to a fisher woman, and Sri Krishna who delivered the Bagavad Geetha, himself was a yadhava by birth, Ramayana was written by Valmiki ,again a shudra by birth. Another example is Satyakama Jabala a Vedic sage, who first appears in Chapter IV of the ancient Hindu text, the Chandogya Upanishad.

The varnas were not allowed to compete with one another. Varna divisions were based on individual temperament, and which were not immutable. Originally varnas were assigned to people based on their aptitude and qualities, but in later periods they were assigned based on birth. However, there are a number of exceptions in the entire period that shows the flexibility of the system.

There were four varnas: brahmin, ksatriya, vaisya and sudra. The basic idea was division of labor in the society. Brahmin was defined as brahman nayati iti brahmin. People who preached spiritual teachings to the society and lived spiritual lives were called brahmins. Ksatriya was defined as kseeyate traayate iti ksatriya. These were the people who protected the society against external attacks and maintained internal order. Vaisya was defined as visati iti vaisya. Businessmen, traders and farmers came under this category. Sudras were the people engaged in services. Carpenters, blacksmiths, goldsmiths, cobblers, porters etc., fell under this category. This system ensured that the religious, political, financial and physical powers were all separated into four different social classes.

In the beginning, there was only one varna in the ancient Indian society. “We were all brahmins or all sudras,” says Brhadaranyaka Upanisad (1.4, 11-5, 1.31) and also Mahabharata (12.188). A smrti text says that one is born a sudra, and through purification he becomes a brahmin. According to Bhagavada Gita, varna is conferred on the basis of the intrinsic nature of an individual, which is a combination of three gunas (qualities): sattva, rajas, and tamas.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/varna-and-caste-system-of_b_877981.html?section=india

Many such examples exist and are mentioned throughout.

Satyakama Jabala from the Chandogya Upanishad was son of Jabala, a prostitute but became a Brahmin.

There are several such examples across various Puranas.

The word “Shudra” is mentioned in Vedas around 20 times. Nowhere has it been used in a derogatory manner. Nowhere it mentions that Shudras are untouchable, birth-based, disallowed from study of Vedas, lesser in status than other Varnas, disallowed in Yajnas. In Vedas, Shudra means a hard-working person. (Tapase Shudram – Yajurved 30.5). And that is why Purush Sukta calls them as foundation of entire human society.

In the Mahabharata (which was written much after the Vedic age bet. 400BC-400CE), Yudhisthira is asked by a snake (Yaksha in disguise) “who is a Brahmin?”:

The python asks the Pandava brother, “Tell me, oh king, who is a Brahmin ?”

Dharmaraja’s answer is clear. He says, “He who speaks the truth, who is patient, and is compassionate, whose character is without any blemish, who gives alms – he is a Brahmin.”

The Python continues, ” What if a Shudra has these qualities?”

Without any hint of hesitation, Dharmaraja replies, “A Shudra who has these qualities is not a Shudra. if a Brahmin does not have these qualities, he is certainly not a Brahmin.”

The python is not satisfied. It asks further, “If it is the character which makes a man a brahmin, what is the use of the caste system? What role does birth play?”

Dharmaraja continues calmly: “These days castes are very mixed. Therefore the caste cannot be determined by birth alone. ..

The Mahabharata however also contains several stories about caste discrimination too (such as the characters of Karna and Ekalaviya).

Also the later medieval Hindus understood "caste" itself differently, this was closely tied with the Hindu concepts of Karma and reincarnation.

The word caste is not a word that is indigenous to India. It originates in the Portuguese word casta which means race,breed, race or lineage. However, during the 19th century, the term caste increasingly took on the connotations of the word race. Thus, from the very beginning of western contact with the subcontinent European constructions have been imposed on Indian systems and institutions. To fully appreciate the caste system one must step away from the definitions imposed by Europeans and look at the system as a whole, including the religious beliefs that are an integral part of it. To the British, viewing the caste system from the outside and on a very superficial level, it appeared to be a static system of social ordering that allowed the ruling class or Brahmins, to maintain their power over the other classes. What the British failed to realize was that Hindus existed in a different cosmological frame than did the British. The concern of the true Hindu was not his ranking economically within society but rather his ability to regenerate on a higher plane of existence during each successive life. Perhaps the plainest verbalization of this attitude was stated by a 20th century Hindu of one of the lower castes who stated: "Everything lies in the hands of God. We hope to go to the top, but our Karma (Action) binds us to this level." If not for the concept of reincarnation, this would be a totally fatalistic attitude but if one takes into account the notion that one's present life is simply one of many, then this fatalistic component is limited if not eliminated. Therefore, for the Hindu, acceptance of present status and the taking of ritual actions to improve status in the next life is not terribly different in theory to the attitudes of the poor in western society. The aim of the poor in the west is to improve their lot in the space of a single life time. The aim of the lower castes in India is to improve their position over the space of many lifetimes. It should also be borne in mind that an entire caste could rise through the use of conquest or through service to rulers.Thus, it may be seen that within traditional Indian society the caste system was not static either within the material or metaphysical plane of existence. With the introduction of European and particulary British systems to India, the caste system began to modify. This was a natural reaction of Indians attempting to adjust to the new regime and to make the most of whatever opportunities may have been presented to them. Moreover, with the apparent dominance exhibited by British science and medicine there were movements that attempted to adapt traditional social systems to fit with the new technology. Ref

robbphoenix · 15時間前

referring to it as the "natural state"

I can't find anywhere where I wrote that. A fellow redditor commented something in that vein which I dismissed in a followup stating that history was ever changing and evolving and had no natural state.

Regarding the second point, that might have been true during the later part of history during the medieval era, but that was certainly not the case earlier. Breasts weren't sexualized, there is nothing sexual about breasts, there is no evidence to show that in an unstigmatized society, the exposing of breasts would lead to sexual violence. It was the rise of Mughals in India that was responsible for changes in Indian women’s attire like covering the head and the breasts.

Theupper garment was worn by ladies, but it was mostly for ceremonial, decorative or formal purposes but not really "necessary". This trend existed across most of Central and South India.

Chantal Boulanger writes on this eloquently:

“Educated Indians are nowadays only too eager to pretend that their womenfolk have always been as puritanical as they are supposed to be today. They associate nudity with the loose morals attributed to Westerners. They have fully adopted the views of Moslems and Victorian Britons that the only way to control sexuality is to hide women’s body."

This is evidenced across several paintings and artwork until about 1200 AD.

The Ajanta murals tell the Jataka stories of the lives of the Buddha in images of supreme elegance and grace. The artists produced images that explore a wide variety of human situations through portraits of compassionate Bodhisattvas of otherworldly beauty swaying on the threshold of Enlightenment.

An apsara ie female angelic spirit, depicted in the Ajanta caves

Another such scene

A princess and her maid

Chola ie the most powerful S.Indian empire's bronze of the godess Parvati ie among the most venerated godesses

Chola bronze of Queen Sembiyan Mahadevi.jpg)

Sri Lanka's royal ladies in the frescoes...displayed their breasts. The ladies in waiting wear...a firm 'breast bandage' or thanapatiya."

"The royal ladies in the frescoes wear pleated robes from the waist upwards, save for necklace, armlets, wristlets, ear and hair ornaments and displayed their breasts. The ladies in waiting wear waist clothes, few ornaments and a firm 'breast bandage' or thanapatiya. The Sigiriya style of clothing — Sigiriya frescoes depict women wearing the cloth gracefully draped like a dhoti tied in a knot at the front and pulled down to expose the navel — must have survived a few centuries in Ceylon".

"The Sigiriya frescoes illustrate the initial absence of social taboo relating to upper class women exhibiting their breasts.

A "high caste" Nair woman from 1914

For many women in rural India, blouses and bras aren't the norm anyway even today.

I'll answer the last question separately.

especially your obvious veneration for, and idealized vision of, Vedic society. You repeat some common right-wing talking points about that era

Yeah the Vedic society was cool, but so were the Egyptians and Sumerians. I express even greater admiration for the pre Vedic Indus Valley Civilization, I've made a post about it here

PS: I'm an atheist British Aerospace Engineer who is interested in Indian history and philosophy. I don't have a horse in this race. I'm fairly neutral about it since it doesn't affect me in the slightest whether the Indians had a "morally good past" or not.

robbphoenix · 17時間前

Horses were venerated too.

Hayagriva is such an example. He is also considered an avatar of Vishnu. He is worshiped as the representation of knowledge and wisdom, with a human body and a horse's head, brilliant white in color, with white garments and seated on a white lotus.

Origins about the worship of Hayagriva have been researched, some of the early evidences dates back to times when the ANI worshiped the horse for its speed, strength, intelligence. Hayagriva is one of the prominent deity in Vaishnava tradition. His blessings are sought when beginning study.

The Horse Avatar of Lord Vishnu is seen as pulling the sun up to the heavens every day, bringing light to darkness. Hayagriva’s consort is Marichi, or Lakshmi ), the goddess of the rising sun, more accurately the sun’s light which is the life force of all things, and which is seen as the female [in, yin] aspect of Hayagriva.

One popular legend says that the two demons Madhu and Kaitabha stole the Vedas from Brahma and that Vishnu took the Hayagriva form to recover them. Since Hayagreeva rescued the Vedas, which were believed to be the essence of all knowledge, many Hindus worship Hayagreeva as the God of Knowledge.

In some texts, Hayagreeva is also considered as the Guru (teacher) of Saraswati (the godess of Wisdom/learning).

Yet another legend is that he is the original author of the Vedas.

Hayagriva is listed as one of the ten incarnations of Vishnu in Canto 10 (skandh 10), chapter 40 of the Śrīmadbhagavatam (one of Hinduism's eighteen great Puranas or "Histories").

Obviously there are several legends associated with him, several of them are contradictory (as is the nature of Hinduism), Hayagriva was associated with the Vaishnava tradition (a school of thought in Hinduism which believed in the supremacy of Vishnu).

robbphoenix · 22時間前

The British ruled India for around 200 years. That is nearly as old as the entire American history. The Muslims for 500 years before that. The "natural state" as followed by the Vedic society was over 3500 years ago. History isn't black and white, it is evolving, complex and cyclical. Our human minds can't readily process such time scales.

Let me take a different example to illustrate how culture can flip drastically in a couple of 100 years.

You could take is the current prudish attitude among the Indians. As evidenced by the works of Kamasutra and the "lost temple" of Khajuraho, this was not so in the past. Until very recently, Indian women used to only don a skirt and sometimes draped a saree (without a blouse) esp. in South India which was relatively buffered by the North from Muslim rule, this slowly changed under Muslim rule followed by the Victorian idealists who saw such strange dressing and sexual practices as barbaric and uncivilized.

The lack of clothing above the waist for both females and males was the norm in traditional cultures of North America, Africa, Australia and the Pacific Islands until the arrival of Christian missionaries, and it continues to be the norm and acceptable in many indigenous cultures today. The practice was also the norm in various Asian cultures before Muslim expansion in the 13th and 14th centuries.

This is more marked in countries such as Sri Lanka(which never had Muslim rule) and whose women frequently wore only a skirt until the British rule. Sri Lankan's who learnt English and achieved positions in the government started dressing in Victorian styles and began to cover up. Such Victorian attitudes are still followed in the nation.

Malayali people of Kerala required women other than Brahmins and Kshatriya class to strip to waist in public until 1858 when the Kingdom of Travancore granted all women the right to cover their breasts in public. Toplessness was the norm for women in several indigenous peoples of South India, including the Tamils along the Coromandel Coast, Tiyan and other peoples on the Malabar Coast, Kadar of Cochin Island, Toda, Nayar, Cheruman (Pulayar), Kuruba, Koraga, Nicobarese, and the Uriya until the 19th century or early 20th century.

The same was the case in Thailand and Indonesia. These days however the culture has flipped and even though the UK has progressed from Victorian ideals (partly due to its proximity to France), people from Asia have turned strictly conservative and large sections in India would even view Jeans, shorts and sleeveless shirts to be promiscuous and provocative.

Finally the modern Indian government too codifies the caste system by offering a sort of affirmative action to bring a level playing field. Persons of lower castes get "reservations" in highly coveted civil services, public sector jobs and sort after universities. This is a sore point among the Indian community since high caste people of low economic status aren't afforded the same opportunities. Nearly 50% of "seats" are reserved to persons of SC (Scheduled Castes), ST (Scheduled Tribes) and OBC (Other Backward Classes) with significantly less "cut offs" needed for entry. A person could use these reservations repeatedly and frequently the sons/daughters of those who've benefited from the system and are economically well off tend to use it again. The current system has too many leakages and has loopholes which are being misused through fake caste certificates or fake income levels or rich kids. This is also the reason why many of the immigrants into the US are of the Brahmin caste (they are frequently rich or save up all their lives to send their children abroad), in the British Raj only the Brahmins and Kshatriyas were allowed into administrative and civil service roles.

Local political parties have played a dangerous game stoking these differences to clinch the "caste vote" and stay in power.

robbphoenix · 22時間前

Not all barber castes were considered untouchable, they were almost universally classified as Shudra (servant class).

In Singapore, Tamil barbers were primarily members of the Ambattar caste who were not strictly untouchable, but were considered to be a "polluting caste", due to their daily contact with human hair. Their shops in street stalls contained boxes and drawers with holes for customers to drop their payment into the help them avoid having to touch the hands of the barbers.

A Subaltern History of the Indian Diaspora in Singapore By John Solomon

In general any persons dealing with "leftovers" were deemed untouchables. The premise is that all leftovers including body emissions, food, water etc are impure or defiling. Leather workers and barbers are usually classified as untouchables. Skins of dead animals constitute "leftovers", perhaps symbolic equivalents of feces and so also hair from human heads. Even some weavers were considered to be untouchable as wool is a by-product, just like human hair. Once it has been removed from the sheep, it is a "leftovers" and anyone who works with it is automatically polluted.

Two tales of crow and sparrow: a Freudian folkloristic essay on caste and untouchability by Alan Dundes

Barbers were obviously allowed to touch the hair but they usually weren't allowed into houses or to live alongside those with higher castes or draw water from the village wells. It was customary to take a full bath after one got his/her hair cut by a barber. You can still see this custom in Modern India, where people in traditional households take a bath the first thing after cutting their hair (eventhough saloons these days wash the hair.

Also as could be expected, the barber castes of Brahmins and Kshatriyas were Shudras but weren't untouchables. The fact is this was an extremely complex system which developed over 1000's of years. A blanket rule could never be applied since there were "if's", "but's" and exceptions based on the region, time period and type of people served etc. In most situations in India there isn't any rigorous physical sepration of Untouchables. Caste Hindus have alwars come into close proximity with untouchables for eg. how could a Brahmin landholder direct a Chamar ploughman without talking to him? But sharing food, drink and particular kinds of bodily contact with a barber were treated with great caution.

The Untouchables: Subordination, Poverty and the State in Modern India By Oliver Mendelsohn, Marika Vicziany

robbphoenix · 1日前

What exactly?

You could perhaps dispute certain lines by but none of that is fantasy.

I'll be adding sources later (its late night and I have work tomorrow). In the mean time you could just copy and search lines into google to read more about the relevant points.

robbphoenix · 1日前

In India the warrior castes ie Kshatriyas were also the rulers/warriors/administrators, There were several Nobles ie kshatriya kings in history who were weak, frail or simply not that interested in fighting. Some of them were the equivalent of medieval knights (though archery was their favorite method of combat), participated in hunting and sometimes led battles, many of them simply collected taxes, governed provinces/villages etc.

Similarly "learned" castes ie Brahmins were poets/priests/teachers/scholars/mathematicians/healers, "commoner" castes ie Vaishyas were Merchants/artisans/musicians/farmers/herders, "worker/servant" castes ie Shudras were Servants/labourers in service of the other 3 castes. Some shudra groups; for example, washers, tanners, shoemakers, sweepers, barbers, gravediggers and scavengers were relegated to the status of untouchable as they were considered to be unclean and lived away from all the others as pariahs (in fact the word pariah comes from the Tamil word “Paraiyar” who were a caste of untouchable drummers)

In many armies, the bulk of the fighting force came from the Vaishya groups. The farmers used to take arms during the times of wars and go back to their fields during peace time. Many of them even lead armies and some (such as the Nayaks) even managed to throw out the existing people in power and begin new kingdoms/empires (thus beginning a new dynasty were they are kshatriyas). The Kshatriyas most often wielded bows (despite being trained in swordsmanship, archery was their preferred method of combat) and often rode on chariots or on elephants. According to several ancient Hindu scriptures such as the Mahabharatas, archery was strictly only taught to Brahmins and Kshatriyas.

You have to remember that birth based caste system and caste discrimination isn't mentioned in the original Hindu scriptures ie the Hindu Vedas. What the Vedas (ard 1500 BC) describe are the different kind of jobs that people perform in a society and an allegorical representation of them (Shudras being the workers are compared to the foot, providing the foundation of the society). Everyone is born a Shudra and one attains different roles according to the knowledge and skill they learn. In the Vedic society, one could change roles like jobs depending on what they were skilled in.

However the system stratified over centuries due to people at the top wanting to keep power within their hands, thus a person born to a Shudra remained a Shudra all his life since the other castes refused to teach them anything different (the Brahmin teachers used to avoid educating Shudras as evidenced in the popular Ekalavya story from the Mahabharata). The Shudras were never taught the written language (esp. Sanskrit) in which all religious works were written and were muted from religious debate.

This was eroded by the Buddist/Jain/Ajivika reformations (around 500 BC) which abolished the caste system and became the majority religion in the subcontinent. This was also the period when hugely powerful Nanda empire was established by the son of a Shudra barber called Mahapadma Nanda described in the Puranas as "the destroyer of all the Kshatriyas", the Nandas are said to be the first empire builders in Indian recorded history. They were overthrown by the Mauryan dynasty (another hugely powerful empire established by a Kshatriyan Chandragupta), but the Ajivikas (who were absolute determinists and Atheists but believed in the central Hindu premise of the atman) found patronage with the emperor Bindusara of the Mauryan empire and later the Buddhists found patronage with his son, the emperor Ashoka (whose "lion capital" of 4 lions on an elaborate base was adopted as the state emblem of India, you can see it on Indian passports and bank notes).

However these reformations was lost again over centuries due to the popularity of the Mimasa schools of Hinduism and the works of later Hindu scholars such as Manu (around 300 AD), and finally attaining its modern form around the Gupta period (around 400 AD), who were themselves from a Vaishya caste.

Professions were determined by caste though not very rigidly. For example Brahmans followed trade, architecture and service as professions. They had even become kings. The Gupta emperors were Vaishyas. The Kshatriyas followed commercial and industrial vocations. There were many sub-castes among the Vaishyas and Sudras than among the higher castes. Sudras also could become traders and agriculturists like the Vaishyas. Outside the main settlements untouchables lived. They stroked a piece of wood while entering the city so that men might know of their coming and they could be avoided. They were engaged in hunting, fishery, scavenging and similar professions.

This continued upto the early medieval era, there were several people who "jumped castes" especially in Southern India. Some examples include the Reddy Dynasty (1325–1448 CE), Nair kingdoms of Kerala (around 1200 CE), Vokkalingas of Karnataka, Thanjavur Nayak dynasty (1532–1673). There was some level of fluidity and it was generally not as rigid as you might imagine.

From the 12th century onwards, much of Northern India was ruled by Muslims. These rulers reduced the power of the Hindu priestly caste, the Brahmins. The traditional Hindu rulers and warriors, or Kshatriyas, nearly ceased to exist in north and central India. The Vaishya and Shudra castes also virtually melded together. Nonetheless, during the six centuries of Islamic domination (c. 1150-1750), the caste system evolved considerably. For example, Brahmins began to rely on farming for their income, since the Muslim kings did not give rich gifts to Hindu temples. This practice was considered justified so long as Shudras did the actual physical labor.

Still it was extremely discriminatory towards the persons of the lowest castes, ie the ones who were deemed to be "untouchables" (who were in professions such as butchery, waste disposal, cleaning, leather working, grave digging etc) , and I'm not aware of any community of "untouchables" who jumped castes. Some of the people from this community left India, likely due to persecution (they were the forefathers of the Gypsy community such as the Romas).

Although the varnas and jatis have pre-modern origins, the caste system as it exists today further stratified as the result of developments during the post-Mughal period and the British colonial regime, which made caste organization a central mechanism of administration. The caste system became legally rigid during the Raj, when the British started to enumerate castes during their ten-year census and meticulously codified the system. Between 1860 and 1920, the British segregated Indians by caste, granting administrative jobs and senior appointments solely to the upper castes. The British colonial officials used the census-determined jatis to decide which group of people were qualified for which jobs in the colonial government, and people of which jatis were to be excluded as unreliable.

Colonial administrator Herbert Hope Risley, an exponent of race science, used the ratio of the width of a nose to its height to divide Indians into Aryan and Dravidian races (which was proven to be a myth by modern genetic studies), as well as seven castes. The colonial government prepared a list of criminal castes, and all members registered in these castes by caste-census were restricted in terms of regions they could visit, move about in or people they could socialise with. In certain regions of colonial India, entire caste groups were presumed guilty by birth, arrested, children separated from their parents, and held in penal colonies or quarantined without conviction or due process.

However, during the "reformation era" many Hindu as well as British reformers advocated change and many Indian customs concerning the lower castes were outlawed. During the 1930s and 40s, the British government made laws to protect the "Scheduled castes" - untouchables and low-caste people. Within Indian society in the 19th and early 20th there was a move towards the abolition of untouchability, as well. In 1928, the first temple welcomed untouchables or Dalits ("the crushed ones") to worship with its upper-caste members. Mohandas Gandhi advocated emancipation for the Dalits, too, coining the term harijan or "Children of God" to describe them.

Edit : I'm tired now and typed most of it from memory, I'll add references within 48 hours.

robbphoenix · 1日前

More like meter high club.

robbphoenix · 1日前

I hope he can stick to that sentiment when his son receives "20 mins of action" in prison.

robbphoenix · 1日前

You know we as a species are fked when people show more "concern" for a healthy animal rather than a handicapped homeless human. Oh shes worried about the dog in the "heat" eh? Dog's don't "need" homes and shelter, humans do. Give a dog a bone and some companionship and he'll be over the moon.

That animal might be that poor guys only friend, seems to be healthy and lovingly well taken care off, what kind of heartless monster would want to rip that away from that poor guy? This animal rights bullshit has gone truly out of hand.

Most of us eat cows and pigs here right? I do. Have of you interacted with a cow or a pig? They are sweet, intelliegent, "innocent" animals, almost dog like, yet none of us have any qualms about butchering them (because they don't look as "cute" like a cat, dog or rabbit). But if a homeless guy is taking care of his mongrel friend (which would most likely be euthanized when taken to an animal "shelter"), somehow her moral "alarm bells" go ringing, maybe she even did it with a bacon wrapped beef burger in hand, for an extra dose of that irony.

robbphoenix · 1日前

There is a problem with women's safety in India, of that there is no doubt. Any female who has traveled to India (or an Indian woman who has travelled to say Japan/Singapore/UK etc would be able to tell you that. A simple indicator could be how safe a woman feels walking alone in the streets of say, Washington vis a vis Delhi. There me be a few exceptions (such as Detroit etc) but the fact remains that *MOST women can walk in MOST streets late in the night in MOST developed countries without any fear. *

I wouldn't be surprised if the reported percentage is 0.1%, and that is for only the ones which fall under India's loose legal definition of rape, let me explain.

The ‘Study on Child Abuse India 2007’ carried out by the Ministry of Women and Child Development in India revealed that more tha*n 53% of children in India have probably been sexually abused *and many have never shared the fact of this abuse with anyone. It is estimated that 150 million girls and 73 million boys under 18 have been subjected to forced sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual violence. Thats almost *1 in 2 children *who have been sexually abused or harassed. This is an unacceptable figure for an aspiring country like India.

Hey, maybe that's a fabrication by the media to "stereotype India"? But it was conducted by the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) (http://www.childlineindia.org.in/Ministry-of-Women-and-Child-Development.htm) in India? Never mind: out of sight, out of mind, right?

The fact is it is very likely that "MORE than 99.9% of what a western country such as Sweden would be considered as a rape would go unreported in India".

“So, you got raped by your uncle? I’ll just ask him to pay for the abortion if you get pregnant and you can go back to work tomorrow. We haven’t eaten rice in three days.”

That was a response Promila got from her mother when she walked up to her one morning and told her she was raped and impregnated.

“We don’t complain against our uncles. They’re family and it’s against the rules,” said Promila when I asked her why she wasn’t seeking legal help.

She left me thinking. In a country as culturally and ethnically rich as India, we’re asked to abide by cultural norms or “rules” as we call them. Does that mean an uncle isn’t a rapist? Does that excuse you from the truth that you’ve been raped? Absolutely not.

Promila resumed her work the next morning. She washed clothes and she ran daily chores at my neighbor’s house. I watched her turn into a recluse who never spoke to anyone.

I called the police station one morning.

“We have no records for anyone under that name, Ma’am,” the officer told me over the phone. “No one exists by the name of Promila Das.”

How can you say you’ve been raped when you don’t even exist?

Sweden, USA and Finland look much worse than India only because the "definition" of rape varies widely from country to country. In Sweden, what matters is only that a women said "no", she might have given him a strip tease, a BJ and rubbed her naked groin against you, but if she says no and you proceed to do the deed - rape conviction. As in the case with the Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, that case would have been laughed out of court in India.

Meanwhile in India, marital rape is not even considered as a crime. This places India in the company of a handful of reputable countries including China, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Do you think even if the law were changed an Indian women would dare to complain against her husband even if he rapes her everyday? Her own family would advise against it. Believe me, I know.

In fact the issue of "marital rape" was brought in front of India's esteemed law-makers, who rejected it in a report which argued:

it “has the potential of destroying the institution of marriage,”

“If marital rape is brought under the law, the entire family system will be under great stress,” adds the report.

[Why India Allows Men to Rape Their Wives - India Real Time - WSJ]( (http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2013/03/26/why-india-allows-men-to-rape-their-wives/)

"A new study has revealed 26% of women in Pune, 23 per cent in Bhubaneswar and 16% in Jaipur often have sex with husbands against their desire."

That's almost one in four married women being raped by their own husbands often - in cities, imagine the villages!
Marital rape is an ugly reality

In early 2000, two-thirds of married Indian women surveyed by the United Nations Population Fund claimed to have been forced into sex by their husbands. Even as recently as 2011, in a study conducted by IMAGES (International Men and Gender Equality Survey), 1 in 5 Indian men admitted to forcing their wives to have sex. 1 in 5! That is only counting the men who were shameless/clueless enough to admit it.

Yet many Indians will never acknowledge it as rape, since rape is such an integral part of marriage right? I've seen highly educated Indians holding Masters degree argue with me that a wife has no right to deny her husband sex and the husband can "take it when he wants'. The idea that such a thing would be rape doesn't even register.

Does it make any sense to compare statistics when the definitions are so different?

Besides aren't you ignoring India's culture of patriarchy and misogyny?

India’s politicians blame rape on Chinese food, cell phones, jeans.

“The victim is as guilty as her rapists. … She should have called the culprits brothers and begged before them to stop.”

– Spiritual leader Asaram Bapu on the Delhi gang rape and murder

..

“Boys are boys, they make mistakes.”

– Mulayam Singh Yadav, Samajwadi party chief

..

“For their own protection on public beaches, women should not wear bikinis. Pub culture is not Indian culture and we don’t want Western culture. Young people go drinking and it often leads to law and order problems. The [practice of] young girls going to pubs in short dresses does not fit in our culture. What will happen to our Goan culture, if we allow this? This must stop.

Sudin Dhavalikar, Goa Public Works Department minister

..

Choose between a “promiscuous culture” and a “safe environment”.

– Satyapal Singh, Mumbai police commissioner, after the Shakti Mills gang rape in Mumbai

..

“Rape is a social crime which depends on the man and the woman. Women display their bodies and indulge in various obscene activities. Women are unaware of the kind of message [their actions] generate.”It is sometimes right and sometimes wrong.”

– Babulal Gaur, BJP politician and Madhya Pradesh home minister

..

Women are “equally responsible” for crimes committed against them.

– Vibha Rao, chair of the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission

..

“Women should not venture out with men who are not relatives.”

– Samajwadi party MLA Abu Azmi on increased incidences of rapes in India

..

“I have no hesitation in saying that about 90% of the girls consensually go with men and become targets of rape,

Dharamveer Goyat, Hisar Congress spokesperson

..

Pretty women” who protest against rapes are “dented and painted”.

– Abhijit Mukherjee, Indian politician and son of president Pranab Mukherjee

..

If women dress provocatively (meaning jeans etc), then “rapes are not in the control of the police”.

– Dinesh Reddy, police chief of Andhra Pradesh

..

Rapes are on the rise because “men and women interact with each other more freely now”.

– Mamata Banerjee, chief minister of West Bengal

..

“Just because the country attained independence at midnight, is it proper for women moving at midnight?”

– Andhra Pradesh Congress Committee president Botsa Satyanarayana on the Delhi gang rape

..

What about the villages? Panchayat leaders are village leaders who have the authority to pass village punishments after discussion with the Panchayat (which is a village council).

“We should pay more attention to where our girls are going. A mobile phone is like a disease. It should be banned. We should stop our girls from wearing jeans.”

Ranvir Singh, Haryana Khap Panchayat leader

..

“Girls should be married at 16, so that they have their husbands for their sexual needs, and don’t need to go elsewhere.”

— Sube Singh Samain, Haryana Khap Panchayat leader

..

“Chowmein leads to hormonal imbalance evoking an urge to indulge in such acts.”

– Jitender Chattar, Haryana Khap Panchayat leader

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/5/8156881/india-rape

Just because these cases were popular for a couple of years lately, does that mean the mindset and culture has changed and everyone is taking it seriously now? Say that to the people of this village: Village defends Bengal gang-rape accused - (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/Village-defends-Bengal-gang-rape-accused/articleshow/29269076.cms)

Rape will remain a problem as long as we try to cover it up. Are girls any safer on Indian streets now? Does your sister, mother or daughter feel comfortable going out at night wearing whatever she likes? Have you been abroad? Have you ever felt how different you feel when walk with/as a girl outside India? Indians are nowhere close to that standard when it comes to safety for women.

If there is food left rotten in your house, will you just cover it up, spray some freshner and proclaim everything is good? Of course not. Indians must acknowledge the problem and deal with it (many good steps have been taken) instead of blaming the "Western Media" of fabricating a rape-crisis!

PS: I agree that the problem of "shaming and projecting a bad image" is also quite real, but it is much smaller compared to the REAL issue at hand. It's as if my child were sick, but instead of rushing her to the hospital, I put her in the attic and claim she never existed.

robbphoenix · 1日前

Yeah but doesn't mean everybody got to eat the same food. The prime cuts of meat and servings went to the household and honored guests. Only the leftover bread and gravy went to the servants. Also they were seated in a separate table (a bench) in formal settings but in smaller settings they weren't and either had to stand or sit on the floor or retire to the kitchen.

In other words the wealthy "ate with the servants" the same way you eat meals with your dog when you throw him leftovers during dinner.

robbphoenix · 1日前

The soundtrack made it for me.

robbphoenix · 3日前

They don't only follow that certain tenant, rather they just ignore a particular teaching of a particular guru. The same reason why Christians eat shellfish, don't punish adultery with death, marry divorced women, wear mixed cloth, accumulate wealth like goblins, don't return slaves to owners and discard the entire old testament.

People pick and chose in religion. Its okay as long as you follow the "essence of the belief system". Religion (esp. Indian religions) are fluidic and forgiving, things aren't as black and white as Abrahamic religions.

robbphoenix · 4日前

Can't find it, can only find the arxiv link, there is also a copy on the Hubble site over here: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2011/30/related/

If you can find the journal link send it to me and I'll post it.

robbphoenix · 5日前

This is after they are defeated and captured. You don't slaughter people without trials during peace time, that would be called a witch hunt.

During war the American government will do anything to win. Hiroshima set that precedent.

robbphoenix · 5日前

Moderate ISIS? Can you give an example?

Anyways, it's not like we put them up a wall and shoot all of them, even the Nazis had the Nuremburg trials.

robbphoenix

トロフィーケース

本日のreddit gold目標額達成率

reddit gold Since June 2016	Verified Email
One-Year Club