321 thoughts on “Misogyny kills”

1. I am not ashamed to be Desi/Punjabi/Sikh at all. Women today do more complaining about doing chores than actually doing them. Suicide is also a cowardly act in my opinion, especially when kill her own children too. Plus, aren’t their better ways to do it than that? Surely they could have taken some pills instead. The men in the community are too honest and naive and because of this others get away with their constant propoganda to make us seem terrible and make our fellow women especially see us in bad light and want to marry a ‘decent’ / ‘enlightened’ gora when they are in fact the ones who are the most deceptive of all. I do not care who marries whom or who does what, what I cannot stand however is in being portrayed as misogynst and evil, we are too honest for our own good.

2. LOL! Ajit #151 typifies a lot of desi male thinking – the kind which gets ABDs into a frenzy – let the games begin!!

3. Razib,

   to take pride implies that you are going whole hog with identification and there is an implicit contract which binds you to a past that you take as your own.

   No, buddy. Let me give you another analogy as an example. I semi-identify with my Hindu Rajput ancestors — although not in terms of their religious affiliation, obviously — but that doesn’t mean I also identify with the more egotistical aspects of their behaviour, the basis of the “purdah” mentality with they appropriated from the Mughals (and the unjust impact it subsequently had on women), or indeed the fact that many (not all) of the aristocracy basically collaborated with the Mughals to enforce the latter’s control over much of the rest of the subcontinent.

   You can be aware of the failings of your ancestors or modern-day compatriots, and you can endeavour not to perpetuate the same negative behaviour yourself, but you do not need to feel ashamed for anything which you have not done yourself.

   Every man’s honour and dishonour is his, and his alone.

   It’s possible we might just have to amicably agree to disagree on this occasion 😉 But at least you understand my own rationale.

4. PKS,

   I have to say, having lived in all three places, that the South Asian community in Britain is very different than that in the US, which is also very different from the Canadian community. It’s foolhardy to draw conclusions about the progressiveness or regressiveness of the US South Asian or Sikh or Punjabi community based on stories from the UK.

   This is what I keep saying over and over again on SM. It’s also misguided to assume that the story Ennis has discussed is an accurate example of what large numbers of British Sikhs are like — many are, certainly, but no more than the more regressive members of pretty much every single other Indian community here. It should also be mentioned that Navjeet Sidhu’s husband was actually a recent emigrant from India; he was not from the British-born 2nd-Generation.

   I am sick of reading comments on SM — and it’s been going on for a few months now — where people base their opinions on what Sikhs (or Indians in general) are supposedly like in Britain when they actually have little direct experience of the country or its desi inhabitants. There is a huge amount of guesswork, assumption and inappropriate extrapolation going on here. People in Britain are not necessarily the same as their counterparts back in India, or the US, or (particularly) Canada, even though there is some overlap and some degree of interaction between all of the aforementioned groups.

   Anecdotally, my large Sikh-Punjabi network, I’ve never seen problems with women being weak in their households. Sikhism teaches gender equality, which might not always be practiced, but is certainly a goal in many Sikh families. ]

   THANK YOU. About damn time someone said this.

5. Amitabh,

   This MIGHT be true IN THE DIASPORA ONLY (if you exclude Pakistanis) but it’s hardly true for India overall.

   It’s not even true for the British-based diaspora. Sikh families as a group may be marginally more conservative than many of their Hindu counterparts here, but huge numbers are not. The problems with misogyny occur right across the board; for people to assume that everything is wonderful for non-Sikhs in Britain and that there is some kind of endemic sexism and oppression amongst Sikhs far in excess of the other desi groups is wildly off the mark. It’s also significantly diluted amongst 2nd-Gen British-born Sikh guys, and indeed younger Indians in general here. Hence my previous point about how the fact that the number of recent immigrants from India here is comparatively small and their cultural/social impact is negligible plays a part in how rapidly the more conservative “traditional” attitudes are rejected.

   The Pakistani community here has much, much worse problems. This isn’t just an anecdotal opinion; survey after survey in Britain yields the same result. This is exacerbated by the fact the incidence of frequent, extended trips “back home” is much higher for them compared to other desi groups, and so is the rate of marriage with spouses from the subcontinent. The latter is decreasing significantly amongst 2nd-Gen Indians in Britain, although it does still occasionally happen.

   Amitabh, you must also have noticed this:

   having said that, i do believe the punjabi community does need to look long and hard at the way they see women. misogyny and oppression exists to a larger degree among them than in any other community in India, although none of them are exactly women-friendly. this week end we were at a punjabi wedding where the bridal family entered the mandap.

   It’s interesting how people assume that Punjabis are one homogeneous community with the same general attitudes across the board. If you look at the text highlighted in bold and its irrelevance to Sikhs, you’ll get my point. (This is just a general observation, and certainly isn’t an attempt to deflect “blame” onto other non-Sikh Punjabi groups).

6. Jai,

   I also disagree with Razib’s statement but for different reasons. The idea of “going whole hog with identification” marginalizes the historical aspect of identity issues- that identity politics (ethnic nationalism, civic nationalism, religious, race, etc) are a modern phenomenon (20th century) and a result of massive and rapid social transformations. The pace of change and the ensuing confusion (highlighted by the most commented threads on SM) over ownership of identity and hyphenation underlines that identity is fungible. It gets rewritten over and over in the nation-state paradigm. ‘Implicit contract’ it is not. Hobsbawn says it better than I can:

   So what do we understand by this collective ‘identity’, this sentiment of belonging to a primary group, which is its basis? I draw your attention to four points. First, collective identities are defined negatively; that is to say against others. ‘We’ recognize ourselves as ‘us’ because we are different from ‘Them’. If there were no ‘They’ from whom we are different, we wouldn’t have to ask ourselves who ‘We’ were. Without Outsiders there are no Insiders. In other words, collective identities are based not on what their members have in common—they may have very little in common except not being the ‘Others’. Unionists and Nationalists in Belfast, or Serb, Croat and Muslim Bosnians, who would otherwise be indistinguishable—they speak the same language, have the same life styles, look and behave the same—insist on the one thing that divides them, which happens to be religion. Conversely, what gives unity as Palestinians to a mixed population of Muslims of various kinds, Roman and Greek Catholics, Greek Orthodox and others who might well—like their neighbours in Lebanon—fight each other under different circumstances? Simply that they are not the Israelis, as Israeli policy continually reminds them. Of course, there are collectivities which are based on objective characteristics which their members have in common, including biological gender or such politically sensitive physical characteristics as skin-colour and so forth. However most collective identities are like shirts rather than skin, namely they are, in theory at least, optional, not inescapable. In spite of the current fashion for manipulating our bodies, it is still easier to put on another shirt than another arm. Most identity groups are not based on objective physical similarities or differences, although all of them would like to claim that they are ‘natural’ rather than socially constructed. Certainly all ethnic groups do. Second, it follows that in real life identities, like garments, are interchangeable or wearable in combination rather than unique and, as it were, stuck to the body. For, of course, as every opinion pollster knows, no one has one and only one identity. Human beings cannot be described, even for bureaucratic purposes, except by a combination of many characteristics. But identity politics assumes that one among the many identities we all have is the one that determines, or at least dominates our politics: being a woman, if you are a feminist, being a Protestant if you are an Antrim Unionist, being a Catalan, if you are a Catalan nationalist, being homosexual if you are in the gay movement. And, of course, that you have to get rid of the others, because they are incompatible with the ‘real’ you. So David Selbourne, an all-purpose ideologue and general denouncer, firmly calls on ‘The Jew in England’ to ‘cease to pretend to be English’ and to recognize that his ‘real’ identity is as a Jew. This is both dangerous and absurd. There is no practical incompatibility unless an outside authority tells you that you cannot be both, or unless it is physically impossible to be both. If I wanted to be simultaneously and ecumenically a devout Catholic, a devout Jew, and a devout Buddhist why shouldn’t I? The only reason which stops me physically is that the respective religious authorities might tell me I cannot combine them, or that it might be impossible to carry out all their rituals because some got in the way of others. Usually people have no problem about combining identities, and this, of course, is the basis of general politics as distinct from sectional identity politics. Often people don’t even bother to make the choice between identities, either because nobody asks them, or because it’s too complicated. When inhabitants of the usa are asked to declare their ethnic origins, 54 per cent refuse or are unable to give an answer. In short, exclusive identity politics do not come naturally to people. It is more likely to be forced upon them from outside—in the way in which Serb, Croat and Muslim inhabitants of Bosnia who lived together, socialized and intermarried, have been forced to separate, or in less brutal ways. The third thing to say is that identities, or their expression, are not fixed, even supposing you have opted for one of your many potential selves, the way Michael Portillo has opted for being British instead of Spanish. They shift around and can change, if need be more than once. For instance non-ethnic groups, all or most of whose members happen to be black or Jewish, may turn into consciously ethnic groups. This happened to the Southern Christian Baptist Church under Martin Luther King. The opposite is also possible, as when the Official ira turned itself from a Fenian nationalist into a class organization, which is now the Workers’ Party and part of the Irish Republic’s government coalition. The fourth and last thing to say about identity is that it depends on the context, which may change. We can all think of paid-up, card-carrying members of the gay community in the Oxbridge of the 1920s who, after the slump of 1929 and the rise of Hitler, shifted, as they liked to say, from Homintern to Comintern. Burgess and Blunt, as it were, transferred their gayness from the public to the private sphere. Or, consider the case of the Protestant German classical scholar, Pater, a professor of Classics in London, who suddenly discovered, after Hitler, that he had to emigrate, because, by Nazi standards, he was actually Jewish—a fact of which until that moment, he was unaware. However he had defined himself previously, he now had to find a different identity.

7. Good post Ennis. Yes it’s terrible and disgusting.

8. Ha Local Community Leaders are the problem

   “don’t let your daughters get too many ideas from these corrupt Westerners they are surrounded by”

   so as a result…

9. Sonia,

   The interesting question is how the people who make those statements become the community leaders?

10. hmm this chauvinistic attitude appears to be across the board – i wouldn’t say it’s restricted to sikh communities – hardly.

11. the asian family context is significant: not wanting to be a ‘burden’ on your family or be seen to have a ‘failed marriage’. when societal concerns are so significant that a person thinks death is a better option it’s a dismal case indeed.

12. Do you think its the same concern-for-what-society-will-think mentality that prevents people (extended family) from helping out or seeking outside help?

    You know what I wish? I wish our religious institutions could assist on these matters. Not that I would want the advice of some of the residents of those institutions but that there could be an open door or, at least, an open dialogue policy minus the stigma. But maybe thats wishful thinking and its best that damage control is left to formal and informal support groups.

    Bah,

13. It’s also misguided to assume that the story Ennis has discussed is an accurate example of what large numbers of British Sikhs are like — many are, certainly, but no more than the more regressive members of pretty much every single other Indian community here. It should also be mentioned that Navjeet Sidhu’s husband was actually a recent emigrant from India; he was not from the British-born 2nd-Generation.

    Jai – thanks for the qualifications. In case it’s not clear, I don’t believe that such behavior is representative of British Sikhs or British Punjabis, nor do I think that it is tied to Sikh theological beliefs (which argue the opposite). However, I think that misogyny is a bigger problem amongst a certain group of immigrants from rural punjab, many of whom call themselves Sikh, and that these communities are visible in certain places. That doesn’t mean that all BritAsians, Punjabis or Sikhs are like this. OTOH, misogyny is a pervasive enough problem in the north Indian immigrant community that I do wish it was tackled more effectively.

    p.s. the first time I went to Southall and found a bar next to a Gurdwara, I was appalled. More interesting, I don’t think the people there had a problem with the arrangement.

14. Thanks for posting that Hobsbawn excerpt, No von Mises.

15. A quick study of Hindu family law and the concept of HUF (Hindu undivided family) will shed light on the reasons for misogyny are firmly entrenched in property laws, and the fear that the newcomer( the woman) will break up the HUF. This is especially true in 1. landed families with joint assets and 2. business families with joint commercial interests. The woman is expected to fall in line with whatever underlying contracts exist. Obviously certain unfair situations exist and the fear is always the spouse of one who is being taken advantage of will upset the apple cart.

    The reason Punjabi families affected by partition, ( as well as bengali families affected by partition) are especially vulnerable to such property related insecurities makes the position fo the woman very vulnerable.

    Also, the kind of families whose professions involve labor, or any kind of professional work are a little less vulnerable to such inequities.

    Of couse, this is not a genralization, ( since there will always be notable exceptions) but another look at this “misogyny” issue. The amount of money is not the issue. Did anyone read about the Ambani split and the rumors flying around regarding the wives being the reason?

    Common property and interests are an important factor. Its not a superficial moral issue to do with “desi men” as some might want to think. any group of men in the world would become insecure if their property was at stake.Or do we truly beleive there are some who are above these material condierations as a race? The idea is ludicrous. When the pie is bigger, obviously the insecurities show less. A prenup is a sophisticated version of the same “misogyny(?),” by the same standards. Isnt it an establishment of a power equation right at the beginning, thereby killing any semblance of equality in the relationship? ( It doesnt matter who intitates the prenup, man or woman?) I wonder if anyone studies if any marriage with a prenup lasts all life…that data would show many things..

    These insecurities are not special to desi men. Not to say desi men and women dont have their own issues to deal with. If desi men are “limited” , desi women (me included)have a much greater sense of entitlement than woman elsewhere about certain things. In the US, it is considered to be a privelege to be able to stay at home with kids. I see woman have no choice in western socieites but to drive themselves hard looking after their kids, work outside, keep themselves fit so their husbands dont stray…..the pressures are immense…and of course, so are the rewards…. Not many desi woman would like to live under that pressure.

    All is never perfect anywhere……that utopia doesnt exist….. either for men or for women…..

    Some reflection (like this thread) never hurts though……

16. Desi Woman

    Interesting post. There was a case a few years ago that made headline news about a British Hindu man who was the inheritor of a large business – a multi million pound business. His sisters claimed their inheritance under British probate laws, giving equal distribution of the business. He refused, claiming that the business and money should be distributed according to Hindu laws of inheritance which should over-ride British law, and in which his sisters would both receive lesser shares. Thankfully, and definitvely, it was defeated.

17. the punjabi community does need to look long and hard at the way they see women. misogyny and oppression exists to a larger degree among them than in any other community in India

    This MIGHT be true IN THE DIASPORA ONLY (if you exclude Pakistanis) but it’s hardly true for India overall.

    I am basing my opinion on the statistics and anecdotal evidence that comes out of INDIA, such as: the number of sex-based abortions that occur and are rising disproportionately in Punjab/Haryana. the number of “dowry deaths” that occur at disproportionately higher rate in this area the number of complaints of molestations and lewd behaviour that occur in Delhi at disproportionately higher number than in other parts of India.

    All of these malfunctional factors are present in all communities across India. But some regions fare far better than others, and generally the south (including Maharashtra) fares better that the North. As for the diaspora, usually the trends remain the same or worse. At least in India there is awareness and ideas are dynamic. These are ossified in the diaspora.

    t’s interesting how people assume that Punjabis are one homogeneous community with the same general attitudes across the board. If you look at the text highlighted in bold and its irrelevance to Sikhs, you’ll get my point. (This is just a general observation, and certainly isn’t an attempt to deflect “blame” onto other non-Sikh Punjabi groups).

    I am sorry, but there may be religious differences between Punjabi Sikhs and Hindus, but the cultural ethos is the same across the region which also extends into Pakistani Punjabis. In theory every community can hark back to its ‘religious’ texts that extols gender equality but this hardly EVER translate to actual practice – be it Christian, Hindu, Islam, or Sikh. It takes personal cognizance to change one’s attitude and action to reflect respect for women as equals and as valuable members of the community. Often this does not happen without public awareness of the problem and remedies that include coercion via legislation of gender and civil rights for women and criminalizing bad behaviour such as violence, abuse, and sexual harassment.

    Suicide is also a cowardly act in my opinion, especially when kill her own children too. Plus, aren’t their better ways to do it than that? Surely they could have taken some pills instead.

    It is not about courage but trying to get attention to a problem that drive women to suicide. Rather than advocating for efficiency in their method it would be better for the children if the women get help in dealing with a bad situation.

18. Red Snapper and Desi Woman,

    I was recently involved in a property case in India (I inherited from my grandmother, who left her estate to my father, who passed away). The will was challenged by my cousins, the children of my aunt. In my discussions with my lawyer, he kept talking about how a sister, especially a married one, only had a ‘sleeping right’ to property. Did not make much sense to me, but in any case, the will was held up. I think the social attitude to these laws is changing drastically, however, as my aunt’s children strongly felt they had a right to some portion of the estate.

19. If desi men are “limited” , desi women (me included)have a much greater sense of entitlement than woman elsewhere about certain things. In the US, it is considered to be a privelege to be able to stay at home with kids. I see woman have no choice in western socieites but to drive themselves hard looking after their kids, work outside, keep themselves fit so their husbands dont stray…..the pressures are immense…and of course, so are the rewards…. Not many desi woman would like to live under that pressure.

    I am not sure what this “sense of entitlement” desi women suffer from. Could you elaborate? In the US I would not call it a “privilege” but about choice to stay home or work. The trend now is for women with successful careers to give it up in order to stay home with their kids. For many women this is not an option.

    In any case it is not clear to me how all this adds up to misogyny and violence towards women in the desi communities.

20. Amitabh wrote: This MIGHT be true IN THE DIASPORA ONLY (if you exclude Pakistanis) but it’s hardly true for India overall.

    Interesting claim. Is misogyny in India worst in Punjab?

    Amitabh says no. The only evidence in favour I can easily find to is the sex ratio at birth. In Punjab, the sex ratio for children between 0-6 is 798 girls for every 1000 boys, the lowest in India. The next lowest? Neighbouring Haryana. Then mutual capital Chandigarh. Delhi, Gujurat, Himachal Pradesh and Rajastan follow. By this standard, North Western india is the most girl-hating part of that country.

    Other stats to look at? Literacy gender gap: punjab ranks quite well (Rajastan is the worst). Female labour force participation: Punjab is near the bottom, between Bihar and Assam, but better than West Bengal or UP.

    (In Canada, Sikhs — used as a proxy for Indian Punjabis — have the lowest gender ratio of any major religion Only 886 girls for every 1000 boys in the 0-14 age group. That suggests that Indian Punjabi gender attitudes respecting feoticide persist in the Canadian disapora. I’d try getting the UK stats, but their census website is a load of shite.)

21. Er — that last comment (#170) was me, not Amitabh. Sorry. SM Intern — Could you fix it?

22. Desi Woman #165 great comment. Completely agree!!! Great point about the luxuries of Desi women’s stay at home option !!!!

23. the wife is an intruder whose role is to eventually oust and marginalize the mother-in-law, until the cycle recapitulates itself as she herself is ousted by a newcomer.

    Long time lurker, first time poster, and all that…

    I thought the above comment was really interesting, if only because it points out what I’ve always suspected. Women are (ironically enough) the worst misogynists of all. It’s not just a desi thing either. I don’t know too many non-desi women who look kindly on their daughters-in-law (or moms-in-law, depending on your perspective).

24. No von Mises, that is wishful thinking.

    Its an interesting contrast between Indian and western religious institutions. In the west, churches have a much bigger social role to play. People plan social activities around their church groups. Atleast in the Hindu context, temples just do not perform the same function. It could be that there is so much caste/communal baggage that comes with them, or maybe, the extended family plays a much bigger role socially and there is no need for our temples to step in.

    Hindu temples in the US seem to approach the same social function that churches provide. That would support the second hypothesis.

25. I for one am glad the Hindu temples keep the hell out of domestic violence or gender-related issues. Their only job should be to provide a place of worship, which they do well. They are not fit or licenced to provide social service or run women’s shelters or counseling.

26. The frenzy of accusation in the British media was amazing. Then the truth came out and not an apology or retraction was made.

    I’m just getting to this post, so I apologize if it’s been said, but in regards to a 13 year old who “willingly” runs away: call me crazy, but wouldn’t a responsible parent call and let a frantic mother know where her daughter is?

    I mean I think that’s a pretty evil thing to do to a mother (let her believe that her daughter has been forcefully taken away)…ethnic man or not.

    I’m just saying…

27. I for one am *glad* the Hindu temples keep the hell out of domestic violence or gender-related issues. Their only job should be to provide a place of worship, which they do well. They are not fit or licenced to provide social service or run women’s shelters or counseling.

    I agree because I wouldn’t want religion to dictate how a woman should be treated fairly and equally because the basis of religion in general does not. It’s like having a tribal council dole out a solve to help a woman by getting 4 men to rape her! Religion has no business personally (unless the abuse is within the institution) in getting involved because 5000 years have proven it is poor in these issues. I rather the experts who deal with this everyday and understand the situation and don’t hide beind the veil of religion to rule in this matter.

28. It’s different when the religious institution IS the life of the individual, as I have seen in the cases of my friends in ISKCON.

    That organization has been tackling these issues for decades now because;

    1. child abuse took place at the hands of gurukula (boarding) school teachers in ISKCON schools world-wide, especially in India, and…

    2. in cases of domestic violence, the institution really has acted as the complete society for it’s members who more or less detach themselves from their blood relatives and “karmi” (materialistic) secular society. This applies to the members who have lived in ISKCON ashramas for a few years or more, not the one’s who join the organization but maintain “secular” jobs outside in the real world.

    Thus, these very topics have been the focus of that religious group for almost the last three decades and their is a struggle between the “conservatives” and the “liberals” therein.

    Alot of ISKCON members propose setting up the Indian caste system throughout the western world!

29. Desi Woman in # 165 regarding pre-nups;

    Don’t you think pre-nups would be a good idea for women in India entering into a marriage?

    I find it very odd that the groom’s family gets a dowry, an unpaid housekeeper and/or cook AND the brides brothers will inherit property from HER parents, while HER husband gets his parents property. It makes more sense for daughters to inherit family property since the sons are more expected to make their own way and their own money via life long careers. I mean, if the men are working their whole lives, why can’t they buy their own houses and let the women inherit family property? The whole system seems upside down. I understand it’s origins – in an ancient agrarian culture when the ethos and mores of the era were different, but nowadays?

    Hema in # 173

    “I thought the above comment was really interesting, if only because it points out what I’ve always suspected. Women are (ironically enough) the worst misogynists of all. It’s not just a desi thing either. I don’t know too many non-desi women who look kindly on their daughters-in-law (or moms-in-law, depending on your perspective).”

    I’ve see alot of love between saas-bahus in India, but what I’ve seen more of, which I think may be at the root of the “male-dominated” culture there, is an interesting twist to the mother-son bond.

    I’ve seen mothers who treat their sons more like their partners than they treat their own husbands. Just to clarify, I am not insinuating anything sexual or even overtly romantic here, but to me it appears that alot of women are trying to get from their sons the kind of attention and affection they should be getting from their husbands.

30. Ennis,

    No problem about my previous clarification. I know you weren’t implying anything negative; my comments were just within the context of this discussion in general, particularly for the benefit of some other commenters who do not have an accurate perception of the reality of 2nd-Generation British Sikh life.

    many of whom call themselves Sikh, and that these communities are visible in certain places. That doesn’t mean that all BritAsians, Punjabis or Sikhs are like this.

    This is a very important point and one which I (and many other participants) made many times when this topic was repeatedly discussed on the Sikhnet Discussion Forum. This is nothing to do with them being Sikh — it’s because they’re Indian, and it’s because of certain nasty elements of traditional Indian culture.

    The conversations on Sikhnet would frequently get quite heated and one of the many conclusions which would arise would be that people perpetuating such unfair and malicious behaviour towards women should not call themselves Sikh — they should just call themselves Indian instead. There is nothing “Sikh” about such attitudes, and these hypocrites are violating some of the most fundamental principles of Sikhism with regards to universal human rights, the intrinsic value of women and their right to be treated with decency, respect and empathy, along with the inalienable equality between men and women as human beings.

    I’ve also argued this point several times previously on SM and also Pickled Politics, as you may know.

    OTOH, misogyny is a pervasive enough problem in the north Indian immigrant community that I do wish it was tackled more effectively.

    Agreed, absolutely.

    By the way, our friend Sunny has initiated a parallel debate over on Pickled Politics which is very interesting and in some aspects has turned into a brainstorming session in an attempt to find suitable solutions. Check it out here. (Shout-out to Sunny if he’s reading this).

    p.s. the first time I went to Southall and found a bar next to a Gurdwara, I was appalled. More interesting, I don’t think the people there had a problem with the arrangement.

    I know; I guess it’s a bit like having a butcher’s shop next to a Hindu mandir, or a lingerie store next to a mosque (with lots of photos in the store’s windows of models wearing such clothes). Slightly inappropriate, eh 😉

31. Mystic Devi,

    I’ve seen mothers who treat their sons more like their partners than they treat their own husbands. Just to clarify, I am not insinuating anything sexual or even overtly romantic here, but to me it appears that alot of women are trying to get from their sons the kind of attention and affection they should be getting from their husbands.

    I’ve noticed that too. I think it’s because the mothers are not as close to their husbands as they ideally should be, especially if it’s a dysfunctional marriage — which many older-generation desi marriages frequently are — and/or the husband is too “overbearingly patriarchal” in his approach towards his wife (ie. it’s not a relationship of equals, based on genuine love and mutual respect). The son partially becomes a substitute for the warmth and consideration which the mother should be getting from her husband instead.

32. Don’t you think pre-nups would be a good idea for women in India entering into a marriage?

    Sure they are but you need to change the Indian law books in order for pre-nups that favor women in case of a split. Also property and inheritance issues aren’t just “old” issues. They are very much a big part of even today’s society. In India any ole relative by association can challenge you on property and inheritance rights. Believe me this is one sore subject in my family and one I’m going to have to deal with when I go to India in November. A vast majority of people that are forced to make decisions that aren’t favorable are simply casulties of being in the wrong relationship in the wrong lifetime.

    I’ve seen mothers who treat their sons more like their partners than they treat their own husbands. Just to clarify, I am not insinuating anything sexual or even overtly romantic here, but to me it appears that alot of women are trying to get from their sons the kind of attention and affection they should be getting from their husbands.

    Can of worms can of worms I see a can of worms…

    I think for women in the Indian context, especially with my mother’s generation, the role of first wife than mother is the only thing that defined them. That is what they found comfort and power in and so to let it go becomes a difficult task.

    I have long believed that in the Indian context women can be their worst enemies at times because they are more inclined to indulge in gossip, cunning behavior and backstabbing than men. The vast majority of “dramas” I’ve seen in my life including in my family were perpetuated by women and not men. And the victim of the drama was usually a woman. Not to mention the innocent bystander also known as the man.

    We come from a culture that applauds the ‘overbearing, nurturing’ mother and no boundries are drawn. Often broundries that naturally appear when a grown child reaches adulthood are never formed and when the man enters into a relationship with another woman a power struggle ensues.

    Like you I have observed unhealthy (non sexual) attachments between mothers and sons where the son’s wife and the dad have been serious casulties. I know of a woman who left her husband after 35 years of marriage because he stood up for the abuse the woman and her son were heaping on the DIL. The father got kicked out of the house. The girl got kicked out but is still struggling with going thru the divorce. In the meantime mom and son are living together and just fine and happy with eachother. The entire family has tried to intervene and has tried to convince her to let her son go for the sake of his marriage. No such thing.

33. Like you I have observed unhealthy (non sexual) attachments between mothers and sons where the son’s wife and the dad have been serious casulties.

    Freud might argue that those attachments were unhealthy for repressed sexual reasons.

    I might even concur. Gross though it sounds, I have seen women who formed odd crushes on their sons, and behaved like a jealous mate when confronted with their son’s significant other.

34. JOAT

    By pre-nups in the Indian context I meant that the brides should draw up a contract of what is to be given to them DURING the marriage, not in the case of a divorce, because divorce is still rare in India today.

    Like for instance, that she should receive in hand a portion of the husbands salary annually, money that she can either choose to spend or save for future emergencies, in the event that she does not have a job/career outside of the home but is serving as the unpaid housekeeper/cook/elderly relative care-giver.

    Anecdotally, I knew one school teacher who works, comes homes, cooks, cleans, serves in-laws AND is expected to turn her monthly pay-check over to “the family” – while her dead-beat husband drinks his life away and roams the streets chatting with shop keepers while she is at work. Yet he is still dotted upon by his mother.

    I would like to add that I have come across several writings and speeches by popular gurus/swamis in India that extol the virtues of celibacy during marriage. While asserting that a man should not see his wife as simply a “sex and baby machine”, they extol the virtues of even emotional detachment from one’s spouse in pursual of higher spiritual attachments. They advise husbands and wives to not sleep in the same rooms and to limit their recreational time together. This is meant to cool down lust and attachment. But no such limiting of affection/attachment is advised in parent-child relationships. So you see these couples who, while cool to each other, are over-heated either towards their parents or children. When I say over-heated I don’t mean in a sexual way, but rather, over-attached to the point of obsession.

    Now, one could argue that nobody they know is the disciple of any such swami/guru. But I am saying, this particular ethos is often IN THE AIR, whether one realizes it or not, has a guru or not, is hindu or not. It’s the vibe. And I think the root cause is ideas like the above; that the husband-wife bond is not a bond for fun or romance, but a functional bond to serve family, community and God.

    Hence, I think you get alot of emotionally (and otherwise) starved women and men who misplace their affections either unto their mothers (if men) and their sons (if women).

    I see that CONTROL and over-obsessing are substitutes for real love and affection. You get mother in laws who are jealous if their son spends too much time alone with his wife, or goes on a vacation with her. I’ve even seen mother in laws who will not ALLOW their sons to go on vacations without taking the rest of the family.

    I always wondered…. why doesn’t the mother in law take her own husband on a vacation? A second (or most likely first) honeymoon type of a trip?

    I can’t imagine going through life in a marriage devoid of romance and excitement.

    I think this is one reason why those women try to get that undue attention and affection from their sons.

    I’ve seen public displays of affection from mothers and sons in India that would definitely raise eyebrows if between two young lovers – excessive hugging and clinging.

    I’m not saying anything is wrong with this, but shouldn’t we be just as welcoming of such displays between lovers or husbands/wives?

35. I overheard Dr.Phil on TV the other day saying that parenting means preparing your kids for the next level of their existence. When babies they have to be prepared for childhood, when children they have to be prepared for adolescence, when teens they have to be prepared for adulthood, and in adulthood they have to prepare for themselves.

    A thought about India came in mind when I heard all that……

    At some point a mother has to let go of her son and let him enter a full-on relationship with his wife. In fact, I would think the mothers would be happy to prepare their sons for that – giving him tips on how to woo and romance a woman, especially if that’s NOT what she ever got and is still hankering for. Seems like she would be able to feel empathy with a newly married bahu in that department.

36. I have seen women who formed odd crushes on their sons, and behaved like a jealous mate when confronted with their son’s significant other.

    My first encounter of this ridiculous kind was my close friend’s MIL throwing a hissy fit at her son for buying my girlfriend diamond earrings on their 1st anniversary. There was just dead silence in the room among everyone when she said “I raised you for 30 years I can’t believe I never got any diamond earrings, you come talk to me when you have a pair for me” and walked out!

    By pre-nups in the Indian context I meant that the brides should draw up a contract of what is to be given to them DURING the marriage, not in the case of a divorce, because divorce is still rare in India today.

    The problem with any legal binding agreement like this is the implication that without this agreement the woman is not going to be treated fairly and that any such treatment would only be doled out by force of the law and under legal pressure. I have a problem with that. Laws shouldn’t be the motivation factor to prevent mistreatment of women, the motivation should come from society, community, family and self.

    I would like to add that I have come across several writings and speeches by popular gurus/swamis in India that extol the virtues of celibacy during marriage. While asserting that a man should not see his wife as simply a “sex and baby machine”, they extol the virtues of even emotional detachment from one’s spouse in pursual of higher spiritual attachments. They advise husbands and wives to not sleep in the same rooms and to limit their recreational time together. This is meant to cool down lust and attachment.

    Dude there are some things about Hinduism that freak me out. This is one of them. Why on gods green earth would man and woman give up the horizontal mambo in all it’s benefits and glory for “disconnection”?????????? I mean I’m simply blown away by anyone even following this!

    And I think the root cause is ideas like the above; that the husband-wife bond is not a bond for fun or romance, but a functional bond to serve family, community and God.

    I agree with you on this but I think this is definitely changing with a new generation that makes phsical and emotional demands from a spouse without those demands being anything out of obligation. I think women are awakening to their needs and forcing the man to satisfy those needs. I think men are learning to be better providers and lovers and treat the woman equally.

    I really really really hope at some point these ridiculous MIL/DIL battles disappear especially in our culture (before someone comes by and says it’s in all cultures) because the abnormality and depth of the problem is so much greater and I’ve lost count of how many problems I have personally seen that stemmed from this need to control and hold onto a son by a mother. Maybe we need to have a “how to keep your aunty happy” training for uncles when their sons reach an age that is going to bring another woman into the picture!

37. the first time I went to Southall and found a bar next to a Gurdwara, I was appalled.

    Why? Do you favor religiously oriented zoning laws?

38. the first time I went to Southall and found a bar next to a Gurdwara, I was appalled.

    Why? Do you favor religiously oriented zoning laws?

    That wasn’t my point, actually. I meant I was appalled that congregants might go to visit one and then the other, without seeing any tension between them. The bar is meant for the congregants – I’ve been inside.

    I was appalled that there was a market for a bar next to a Gurudwara.

39. JOAT – “. Maybe we need to have a “how to keep your aunty happy” training for uncles when their sons reach an age that is going to bring another woman into the picture!”

    It’s a popular book genre here – how to keep a marriage “spicy” in your senior years.

    I think India needs it big time!

    Let’s face it – if a woman is getting what she wants/needs from her husband, will she not celebrate anytime her grown son and DIL are out of the house? I’d imagine her to be like, “you’re only going for 2 weeks? Why not stay for 3?”

    Yes, I’ve often heard “India has over 1 billion population”…. does that make a nation of skilled and expert lovers?

    And it’s not just about the sex. It’s about the emotional bond between an older couple that keeps them hugging and kissing each other well into their senior years, taking each other out to dinner, going for walks/swims together, just spending quality time alone – and enjoying it. I don’t know of any such couple who over-obsess about their grown children – they have each other.

    Maybe I’ve hit an un-tapped market here!

40. To set the record straight, I have a problem with bars being not allowed in the vicinity of a Gurudawara. I am not in favor of such zoning restrictions.

41. I see your point Ennis.

42. Ennis bro,

    I meant I was appalled that congregants might go to visit one and then the other, without seeing any tension between them.

    Well, British Sikhs do like their booze, y’know 😉

    I agree completely about the inappropriateness of having a bar right next to a gurdwara. However, abstaining from alcohol is a much bigger deal for Amritdhari Sikhs (as it should be). As we both know, according to the faith it’s mandatory for them, but recommended for the rest of us.

    [I don’t drink, by the way].

43. JOAT –

    “Dude there are some things about Hinduism that freak me out. This is one of them. Why on gods green earth would man and woman give up the horizontal mambo in all it’s benefits and glory for “disconnection”?????????? I mean I’m simply blown away by anyone even following this!”…………

    The idea is that as one progresses in their spiritual practices (outer growth) and realizations (inner growth), a natural detachment from all temporary bonds unfolds. There is truth to that, but the detachment has to be organic, stemming from a real place, and not enforced by or dependent on external rules.

    If one plans to live a near celibate life within marriage, why get married in the first place?

    The answer is “to serve parents”. What’s the point in serving parents if you are not willing to serve your wife? How is attachment to them any higher than attachment to wife?

    Which came first – the chicken or the egg?

44. Jai – “I know; I guess it’s a bit like having a butcher’s shop next to a Hindu mandir, or a lingerie store next to a mosque (with lots of photos in the store’s windows of models wearing such clothes). Slightly inappropriate, eh 😉“

    Begs the question, at what distance can we place a butcher shop, bar or a lingerie store? (btw, i have been to gurudwaras, where i noticed hawkers selling underwear/kachas,albeit for men only) and, more importantly, who gets to specify the distance? not religious arbiters, i hope?

    personally, i, a hindu by accident of birth, wouldn’t care two hoots, if a temple opened a butcher shop or a bar or even a lingerie shop inside it’s boundary.

45. “At some point a mother has to let go of her son and let him enter a full-on relationship with his wife. In fact, I would think the mothers would be happy to prepare their sons for that – giving him tips on how to woo and romance a woman, especially if that’s NOT what she ever got and is still hankering for. Seems like she would be able to feel empathy with a newly married bahu in that department.”

    Mothers have no clue what it takes to attract women. Because by the time their children reach that age, they are far removed generationally from the social dynamics in the current time. Also, the kind of emotional support, understanding, etc.. that a married woman wants from her husband is radically different than what a single girl wants from a potential mate, during the attraction phase.

46. In fact, I would think the mothers would be happy to prepare their sons for that – giving him tips on how to woo and romance a woman, especially if that’s NOT what she ever got and is still hankering for. Seems like she would be able to feel empathy with a newly married bahu in that department

    Personally I don’t think it’s a mothers place to teach an adult son how to woo and romance a woman. She should have stopped “raising him” at some point when he hit college. I’m not saying parents shouldn’t offer guidance. God knows I still run to my mom for advice. But I don’t need her to make decisions and empower me.

    And a woman who has never had romance and the freedom to seek it isn’t really going to know what it is to teach anyone else. The best thing Indian mothers can ever do is let their son go and be an adult and life his life without interference.

47. Jai – I hate to say this but the whole Sikh way of life is pretty screwed up in the UK (ok, I’m completely generalizing). A bar next to a Gurdwara probably would never happen in the U.S. – I can’t even imagine someone going to Gurdwara and then walking across the street into a bar. What you do in your free time is fine, but to do it in association with a Gurdwara is just wrong. It’s also one thing if it’s a random unrelated bar, but I think there’s one named “Glassy Junction” which is obviously meant to draw the post-langar crowd. I even heard from my cousin’s husband that there are Gurdwaras there that sometimes serve alcohol. Absolutely insane.

    On top of that, most of the Gurdwaras are associated with some caste or another which has absolutely no place in Sikhism. The Gurdwaras in the UK seem to be more social activity centers than religious places. Pretty damn scary.

    Again, I’m totally generalizing – just pointing out some of the extreme cases I’ve seen and/or heard of.

48. Personally I don’t think it’s a mothers place to teach an adult son how to woo and romance a woman.

    Except in clothes I think. Especially if the son is fashion-challenged and his mom works in the men’s department of a major store. What? Haters.

49. (btw, i have been to gurudwaras, where i noticed hawkers selling underwear/kachas,albeit for men only)

    My dear, selling a kachehra is slightly different from selling lingerie.

50. Jai – I hate to say this but the whole Sikh way of life is pretty screwed up in the UK (ok, I’m completely generalizing). A bar next to a Gurdwara probably would never happen in the U.S. – I can’t even imagine someone going to Gurdwara and then walking across the street into a bar.

    Maybe the Sikhs in UK are more liberal and believe in a more liberal interpretation of the scripture. Maybe they believe that God doesnt care about his children having a beer outside a guruduwara.