srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (11/12/84)
* Tonight I saw Morley Safer's report on "60 Minutes" about
the practice of burning Indian brides to death. Here's a
quick summary from memory:
Dowrys are illegal in India. So is Murder. Nonetheless,
in New Delhi alone, a woman is burned to death every
twelve hours for failure of her family to make ongoing
"dowry" payments. There are groups working to stop the
practice, but it is deeply ingrained. Such deaths are
reported as accidental (the stove exploded).
The pattern is that a marriage is arranged. Continual
and increasing payments from the bride's family are
extorted until there is no more to be had. Then the
bride is burned to death and the husband is free to
remarry. This avoids the scandal and support expenses
associated with divorce.
The main point of this posting is to comment on (flame
about) Morley Safer's editorial commentary. He begins by
contrasting the fight against this practice with the fight
here for the ERA -- implying that American women's problems
are small by comparison. He fails to see the parallel
between the horrors that he's reporting and the systematic
terrorizing of American women. Rape. Violent pornography.
Domestic violence. Lobotomy and shock treatment. "Random"
violence. Mass murders.
Do you remember the appeal in net.general the other day for
help in locating a young woman who'd disappeared? Later she
turned up dead. There are a lot of such disappearances in
the news. The story usually ends with the discovery of a
young woman's body and the revelation of details that
frighten every woman. I wonder how the frequency of such
stories compares with two women per day from the enormous
population of New Delhi. Is Morley Safer's smug chauvinism
justified, or are there horrors in America as bad as those
in India?
Safer ended his story by saying that India has a lot of REAL
problems, so it's not surprising that they haven't solved
this one. Well maybe this problem isn't large numerically,
but the underlying hatred of women that it shows so dramati-
cally is a worldwide problem--and the USA is far from
exempt.
--
Richard Mateosian
{amd,decwrl,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPAbeth@umcp-cs.UUCP (Beth Katz) (11/12/84)
I watched the 60 Minutes show on burning brides in India and have also
read articles in the Washington Post about this. Although I deplore some
of the treatment of women in the US, I see the burning of brides to be
much worse. New Delhi may be big, and the practice may be most prevalent
in the cities where people have more need for money, but two women killed
this way every day is appalling. This is not random violence committed
by men against women. In-laws are involved, and it is almost socially
acceptable. However, I don't think that there is much we can do about it.
This type of story makes me very happy that I live in America where I can
marry for love.
Beth Katz
{seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!bethraghu@rlgvax.UUCP (Raghu Raghunathan) (11/12/84)
> > Dowrys are illegal in India. So is Murder. Nonetheless, > in New Delhi alone, a woman is burned to death every > twelve hours for failure of her family to make ongoing > "dowry" payments. There are groups working to stop the > practice, but it is deeply ingrained. Such deaths are > reported as accidental (the stove exploded). > I saw the 60 minutes report too. And as an Indian who has witnessed such horrors at close hand (a young women in the village I come from in India was dumped into the village well and died of injuries - and the local police justified the atrocity on the grounds that the wife broke her part of the contract (payment of dowries) and therefore had to suffer the consequences), I must shamefully admit that the report was largely accurate. My sister in India runs a "help-center" (to use a euphemism) in Bombay for such wives, and I constantly hear horror stories about bride-burning and other forms of torture. Please be informed however that torture on account or dowry is not as widespread as 60 minutes would have us believe. It probably affects not more than 1% of all the marriages, and the number of deaths resulting from it are much less (maybe 1 in 10000). Even so, in a large country like India, the numbers are significant. > The pattern is that a marriage is arranged. Continual > and increasing payments from the bride's family are > extorted until there is no more to be had. Then the > bride is burned to death and the husband is free to > remarry. True. Basically (in the illiterate societies) a women is looked on as a liability to be got rid of at any expense (within reason) and men as assets who will generate income by accepting these liabilities. Note that the in-laws who abet in abusing their daughter-in-law have daughters of their own who they expect to be abused in a similar way. So, in a way, they use their sons as weapons to avenge the abuse suffered by their daughters. > (Morlay Safer) begins by > contrasting the fight against this practice with the fight > here for the ERA -- implying that American women's problems > are small by comparison. In don't mean to belittle American Women's problems, but I have to agree that they pale into insignificance compared with the inhuman treatment suffered by women elsewhere (like in India). How many american girls (at ages 10 -20) have to worry about being tortured by their future husbands under the very nose of the law? How many american girls are constantly reminded by their parents that they are a financial burden? How many girls in america have to suffer through silent humiliation as their parents go "shopping" in the marriage markets to find the cheapest price they can get rid of their daughters for? > Is Morley Safer's smug chauvinism > justified, or are there horrors in America as bad as those > in India? I don't think Morley Safer was being smug at all about American women, he was just being realistic in his comparisons. I can go on for pages on this subject of dowry but I am too sick of the subject to argue without getting emotional. When I was in India this past May, a woman friend of the family took me aside and asked me what price would my parents ask for me when I married. I was so disgusted that I haven't spoken to her since. Raghu Raghunathan.
rry@homxa.UUCP (R.YADAVALLI) (11/14/84)
>this way every day is appalling. This is not random violence committed >by men against women. In-laws are involved, and it is almost socially >acceptable. However, I don't think that there is much we can do about it. > Beth Katz > {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!beth Saying that burning of brides is socially acceptable is asinine. Considering the number of women raped and sexually assaulted everyday in New York City alone is it fair to say that rape is socially acceptable in the US? What about the child abuse that is going on? Is it socially acceptable? Three people burnt everyday (even this number is questionable) constitutes a very small percentage of the total population of India. It does not mean that burning people for whatever reasons is excusable either. >This type of story makes me very happy that I live in America where I can >marry for love. It can happen in India too. I married someone of my choice and my parents were magnanimous in accepting our marriage. I have no problems with arranaged marriages either. I believe that my parents are my well-wishers and that they will do what's best for me. It is nice to be able to rely upon their experience when making a decision that will affect the rest of my life. Marriages in India don't HAVE to be arranged. They typically are arranged for the following reason: The social structure doesn't allow free interaction of unmarried men and women. Leaving the reasons for isolation of the sexes aside for the moment, men and women who don't have any preferences leave the task of finding a compatible partner to their parents. The maturity of the parents helps the young and inexperienced look beyond the physical and emotional aspects of "love" and consider pragmatic aspects as well. In a country as culturally diversified as India, cultural compatibility is quite significant. This system has resulted in a stable society for ages and is still working. Why then, in America where one "can marry for love", is the divorce rate so high? Let's give India credit where it is due. Indians elected a woman to hold the most prestigious office in the country almost twenty years ago! This is not the first time in Indian history a woman ruled the country. There are instances in Indian history when women went to war and fought for the country. Raghu Yadavalli AT&T Bell Laboratories Holmdel, NJ
beth@umcp-cs.UUCP (Beth Katz) (11/16/84)
I guess the person who decided to flame my comments about the burning
bride issue decided to send this to net.flame as well. I don't read
that anymore, but I guess I should followup there as well.
I made some initial comments where I mentioned that burning brides in
New Delhi was "almost socially acceptable." I'd like to stress the
"almost." When the police don't prosecute, when some parents accept it
as a given, and when the neighbors won't intervene even when they see it
happen, I think it verges on being "socially acceptable." Although it
is by no means of the same magnitude, it's like drunk driving. I think
it is deplorable. I realize that it doesn't happen everywhere in India,
and I realize that India is a big place. ( As an aside, I just looked
up the population of New Delhi in a dictionary that appears to be about
ten years old [sorry, it's all I have here]. New Delhi had 324,000 or so
people then. Waahington DC had 760,000 or so people. Even if New Delhi
has doubled in size, it is about the size of DC. I don't know how many
rapes occur in DC in a day, but murders generally are still reported as
they occur. Two burnings a day would still be quite a few and would
definitely constitute a problem.) I also realize that not all or
even most marriages in India are arranged. But a heck of a lot more
marriages are arranged in India than are arranged in America. I don't
think that all marriages that are made for love in either America or India
are always going to be filled with love. I don't know anything about the
divorce rate or whether divorce is allowed in India. Like any reasonable
person, I deplore rape, burning of brides, child abuse, and all other
abuse of people. I just thought that this was a particularly nasty thing
that had become an expected way of life/death for some people.
I will stick by my guns about being happy to live in America. No matter
how bad it is here (and yes, we have a lot of problems), we (okay, I'll
include Europe for the most part and maybe Japan) are much better off
than the majority of the people in the world. Maybe women aren't free to
do everything they want to do, but they can do quite a bit. For the most
part, I think I am accepted and treated as a person first and a woman
second. I don't feel as though I will be expected to be subserviant to
my husband. We are equals. Maybe a good portion of the women in America
don't feel that way, but I sure wouldn't trade my life here for that in
many other countries.
I thought I was trying to say, in my first message, that the burning of
brides issue made some of the problems we face pale by comparison. It
certainly seems to be a big problem in New Delhi.
{I'm going away for Thanksgiving; I'll answer any mail and read news
when I return in a week.}
Beth Katz
{seismo,allegra,rlgvax}!umcp-cs!bethjpexg@mit-hermes.ARPA (John Purbrick) (11/16/84)
> Why then, in America where one "can marry for love", is the divorce rate so > high? In the West you can marry for love--or divorce for the lack of it.
jhull@spp2.UUCP (11/20/84)
In article <1851@nsc.UUCP> srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) writes: >* Tonight I saw Morley Safer's report on "60 Minutes" about > the practice of burning Indian brides to death. > > The main point of this posting is to comment on (flame > about) Morley Safer's editorial commentary. He begins by > contrasting the fight against this practice with the fight > here for the ERA -- implying that American women's problems > are small by comparison. He fails to see the parallel > between the horrors that he's reporting and the systematic > terrorizing of American women. Rape. Violent pornography. > Domestic violence. Lobotomy and shock treatment. "Random" > violence. Mass murders. > I see some lack of parallelism in Mateosian's argument: the Indian situation is directed only at women while the American parallel he draws affects both genders. I fail to see that the ERA will have substantive effect on the American situation he describes; all the things he mentions are already legally the same for both genders (all are illegal no matter who the victim is except "lobotomy and shock treatment" which are regulated by medical professionals). -- Blessed Be, jhull@spp2.UUCP Jeff Hull trwspp!spp2!jhull@trwrb.UUCP 13817 Yukon Ave. Hawthorne, CA 90250
srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (11/23/84)
> I fail to see that the ERA will have substantive effect on the > American situation he describes; all the things he mentions are > already legally the same for both genders (all are illegal no matter > who the victim is except "lobotomy and shock treatment" which are > regulated by medical professionals). Sorry if I gave the impression of tying ERA to those things. The point was to show that mysogyny was not confined to India. By the way, better than 70% of shock victims are women, and I believe it was even worse with lobotomy. Why don't you read Mary Daly's Gyn/Ecology for an interesting perspective on the "medical professionals" who "regulate" these "treatments." -- Richard Mateosian {amd,decwrl,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA