India’s religious right has been taking a public relations beating this past week. The newly formed Consortium of Pub-going, Loose and Forward Women (which, by the way, is the greatest name for a group since the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice) has organized the Pink Chaddis Campaign to oppose the Sri Ram Sena’s despicable actions last month and their impending Valentine’s Day protests:
The group says it will give the pink underwear to Sri Ram Sena (Army of Lord Ram) on Valentine’s Day on Saturday.
[SRS] was blamed for the bar attack in the southern city of Mangalore last month.
Pramod Mutalik, who heads the little known Ram Sena and is now on bail after he was held following the attack, has said it is “not acceptable” for women to go to bars in India.
He has also said his men will protest against Valentine’s Day on Saturday. [Link]
<
p>Let’s just hope that the SRS leaders don’t have a fetish for women’s underwear or this campaign will not have its intended effect.
In other news (perhaps not entirely unrelated) the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), India’s Hindu nationalist group, has decided to start marketing a soft drink that contains cow urine. They see it as a refreshing alternative to Coke or Pepsi. I am sure they would rather young women kick back with a six pack of these instead of be loose at a bar with a beer:
Om Prakash, the head of the department, said the drink – called “gau jal”, or “cow water” – in Sanskrit was undergoing laboratory tests and would be launched “very soon, maybe by the end of this year”.
“Don’t worry, it won’t smell like urine and will be tasty too,” he told The Times from his headquarters in Hardwar, one of four holy cities on the River Ganges. “Its USP will be that it’s going to be very healthy. It won’t be like carbonated drinks and would be devoid of any toxins.”The drink is the latest attempt by the RSS – which was founded in 1925 and now claims eight million members – to cleanse India of foreign influence and promote its ideology of Hindutva, or Hindu-ness. [Link]
<
p>
I am curious, does anyone know how the cow urine aftershave splash has been doing in sales?
Full length sari or nothing IMO.
Defensive much? He didn’t say non-vegetarian teetotalers are scumbags.
Come on, are you telling me that this guy’s overheated prose doesn’t convey a deep disgust for all but the most ascetic lifestyle? I dare say he’d think you’re just as much a scumbag as the exploitative losers you describe. If India wants to evolve a responsible drinking culture, treating drinking as something shameful and illicit, as Gupta does, is precisely the wrong way to go.
He said the people who insist of acceptance of their libertine lifestyles are often the same people that snobbishly turn their noses up at the vegetarian teetotalers.
What evidence does he give of this? He accuses the Consortium’s members of a bunch of heinous crimes (evidently, they look down on working women, domestic workers who get beaten by their husbands, the Brahmo Samaj, and women who pull their pallus over their heads), but he doesn’t give any proof that they hold these opinions. In the comments, some supporters of the Consortium said that they don’t like pubs, but they still support the right of women to live as they please. I’ll take their word over Gupta’s febrile rantings.
110 · NV said
No salwar-kameezes even? Damn that just knocked the pind out right there. Does this sari count? What about this? Are all colors ok? What level of translucence is permissible? Can we go with the older Bengali or Malayali version where saris were worn without blouses or undergarments? It is truer to “our culture, our tradition” after all.
I do hope the commish for vice and virtue charts this out to avoid future confusion.
112 · Amba said
Amba, you need to remember. The only judgmental ones are the “immoral, licentious” pub drinkers. People like Kanchan Gupta don’t judge and certainly have no desire that you behave only in manners they deem appropriate.
111 · Jef Costello said
wouldn’t it be especially not ironical that a bar named amnesia apparently caused us to forget about the biharis (whom india, apparently, collectively agonized till the day before chaddies hit the mainstream).
113 · Jef Costello said
the immorals tell me my handle’s totally awesome, thank you very much.
I think you’re reading into it what you want to read into it.
I guess he can gussy up his subjective appraisal of that subculture’s mentality by attributing it to an interview he did with some people but I don’t see how that would be useful at all. Read the comments from “since you. . .” and you’ll get the same dismissive attitude.
You take the word of anonymous posters over a guy who actually has to answer for his opinions? Sounds like bias clouding your reason.
118 · NV said
Yeah, why bother substantiating when throwing out random allegations which will be eagerly lapped up by the choir will do?
I am not dismissive, just eager for details about acceptable propriety. And very impressed in your ability to see no judgment in the position that people are immoral for not conforming to “your” expectations. Especially, with those subtle and nuanced sketches of swaths of population with statements such as:
Guys, relax. Have a cow ka cola.
120 · sakshi said
You’re right. I’m sorry for getting all pissy.
NV, the light that is being missed in all this heat: a large chunk of the licentious folk you so like to revile dismiss “your ilk” not for living a particular lifestyle, but rather for judging them for choosing their lifestyles. Of course, there is a good deal of painting in broad brush strokes like “the people who insist of acceptance of their libertine lifestyles are often the same people that snobbishly turn their noses up at the vegetarian teetotalers.” that you yourself subscribe to (subculture’s mentality), so is it a surprise that “we, the libertines” tend to think similarly of the vegetarian teetotalers judgmental and snobbish nature?
Except, the libertines only snobbishly turn their noses, the “vegetarian teetotallers” want the libertines to subscribe to their value system, whether it relates to what is acceptable time/location/liquid to imbibe, or what the appropriate fabric length should be so sensibilities aren’t offended.
Who is to decide what is “our culture, our tradition”? As I pointed out in an earlier comment, Kautilya recognized bars and courtesans as an essential part of the culture, enough for each of them to merit a full chapter in Arthasastra. Polygamy was common. Sati was too. The caste system still is, today. I have a friend’s mother who cannot abide working wives and justifies it using tradition, so should all their acquaintances refrain from it? Another cannot tolerate marriages between people from different states, so should anybody in their circle be prevented from indulging in it? Where Kanchan Gupta says that watching couples kiss make him uncomfortable, where you say that certain outfits are too skimpy for your taste, a third will say that mixed company is an outrage. Where does the moral policing end?
We are not talking about simple arguments against alcoholism, in fact, even the pink chaddi folks specifically say that they would like the support of men and women whether they drink or not – I do not see anything at all in their published material that remotely indicates that they consider imbibing a superior moral choice, unlike say, Kanchan Gupta, who thinks that way about the opposite. And I don’t see why the average culture-preserver should see sending pink chaddis to Muthalik an affront unless they identify in a deep way with Muthalik’s value system. The very notion that Muthalik’s attack and the protests for freedom of choice in response, are now a referendum on what is and is not acceptable morality according to some arbitrary cultural values, is mindboggling.
The problem with your approach is not your (seeming–but, I’ll take it as sincere) adherence to liberal principles, but rather your distaste for calibrating responses to the enemies of liberalism. If history teaches anything, it’s that not all threats are alike. So, IMHO, a “real” liberal needs to guard and even expend his firepower against the real threats, not beat on whatever target of opportunity comes along.
124 · rob said
Thanks much, I appreciate your kindness.
Give it time, I say. I’m betting you and I will be around to see my prognostications come true.
So, in this context, who are the enemies of liberalism?
People who are killing people, out of the illiberalism of the perpetrators. Like in Pakistan, Iran, N. Korea.
Why, in light of these atrocities, are you so smugly lying in ‘wait’ for the Hindutvas to commit large-scale atrocities? Them mind boggles. . . .
126 · rob said
What do you know of my opinions about these people? Do you think I sympathize with them? I am hardly smug that India is immune to this kind of garbage like so many others seem to be, in fact I am horrified that Hindutva is dragging India down this very same road – in a decade or so, Abhinava Bharat and Muthalik’s suicide squads will not longer be isolated instances of “muscular Hinduism”, nor will moral policing be about pink chaddis and pink sarees.
126 · rob said
Or Godhra. Or Kandhamal. Or Bhagalpur. Fanaticism and illiberalism lead to similar outcomes everywhere.
Yeah, ok, but why are you lying in wait, conserving your firepower, ’til the Hindus do something bad? There is something f***’ed up about your world-view. Do you really think that the volume of unnecessary violent deaths in the world today are mainly due to the Hindus?
129 · rob said
Isn’t this a blog that for all intents and purposes talks about India? The dominant faith in India is Hinduism. The trend of interpreting this religion as a fanatical and nationalist ideology will lead to the same kind of bad outcomes that have happened in theocracies like Pakistan.
What firepower do you think I am conserving? Will it make you feel better if I say “I don’t want Hindutva to lead to the same kind of chaos that Islamism has led to today.”? I take it as an axiom that Islamic fanaticism is a poison, on a blog where we largely discuss the trends of a Hindu majority country, I feel the need to speak about the poison that I think Hindutva is.
Will you be happier if every comment has “And Islamism is bad, bad, bad.” suffixed to it?
I have hardly said or implied anything to that effect.
129 · rob said
I do not think Hindutva is a useful defense against Islamic fanaticism. To that end, and given what I see as the inevitable end game of escalating Hindutva and competitive intolerance between faiths, and given that I identify strongly with India, I feel strongly enough about Hindutva to be compelled to waste my time on threads related to it.
Yes, frankly, b/c otherwise you sound unhinged. Esp. to my non-desi club-members, who are like, “WTF??@!!” But, importantly, to me too–so, thanks!
132 · rob said
I am unhinged because I don’t rail about Islamic fanatics on a thread about Muthalik? Really?
Oh, Islamism is bad, bad, bad.
You should educate them about Godhra, Kandhamal, Bhagalpur, Mangalore, and many many others, as well as Abhinav Bharat, Shiv Sena, Bajrang Dal and so on. Maybe they will feel better if educated about it.
iibbb.
Look, I’ll be the first to admit that in the (higher-level) US spheres, Hindu = pretty good, Muslim = uhh–ohh (though not universally bad, think of the Sons of Iraq, or the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan).t. Myself, I will continue to use the (passive) pro-Hinduism of the US and the (active) anti-Islamism for my benefit. Sorry. I’m >:-p like that.
I second that. Islamic fundamentalism is not a threat to India the way hindu fundamentalism is, simply by reasons of demography. Way too tipsy to comment further (sorry NV), but ‘since you mentioned it’, thanks a lot for your passionate defense of liberal principles.
A bunch of gundas beat defenseless girls on live TV, or a couple of girls drink or dance by their own choice on their own money, which is a greater degradation of Indian culture.
I am not endorsing some crazy theory, like there is going to be a fascist takeover the next time BJP comes to power. I don’t think this is a BJP vs Congress debate, its much bigger.
Also,it is not a question of whether the next generation of women will wear skirts or go to pubs, or whether such habits are useful. Its a question of whether they will be allowed to make decisions for themselves. Respect for individual freedoms is not a long tradition in India (wrt to women it is particularly miserable), and as Indian society opens further, there is going to be a backlash. Many people have been disoriented by the changes of the last decade: I’ve seen it in my own family. Many have accepted it for now, but the winds might change, might already be changing. That is what scares me.
136 · sakshi said
Yes. The Hindutva movement has worked hard to sow the wind especially over the last couple of decades, now India is reaping the whirlwind. The BJP will increasingly dissociate itself from the Hindutva movement as it is already seeing the ramifications of the monster it has unleashed – it already is trying to unwind itself now, but the ramifications of the Hindutva uproar will persist in ever-violent forms (not just anti-Islamist or anti-western, but anti-whatever constraining aspect of culture is deemed inviolable).
This issue has a significant class aspect to it too. Even as recently as two weeks ago, a Delhi college girl was raped by villagers in Noida because she was making out with her boyfriend in a car. The villagers made the same noises about tradition, and also talked about how they felt these big malls had come up where they lived and that these rich kids just took from them and didn’t deign to give them the time of day otherwise. Absent economic development, and fed drivel about morality and culture in a society replete with repression, the effect can be very potent indeed.
Yes, it’s truly tragic that we didn’t all have the opportunity to go to JNU and imbibe their world-view.
138 · rob said
Ummm.. Zing? My delicate feelings would be devastated by this barb, if I wasn’t completely flummoxed by its irrelevance.
Since you mentioned it, you’d sound a lot less like a troll if you didn’t repeatedly mention “Godhra” under your listing of “hindu atrocities” as anyone who’s actually paid attention to the issue knows that 58 hindus (primarily women and children) were burnt to death by a muslim mob at godhra’s station. That is what triggered the riots in gujarat ( in spite of lalu prasad yadav’s kangaroo court banerji committee, and as trenchantly established by Justice Nanavati) in which 700 muslims and 250 hindus died (Indian government statistics).
Also, the Kandhamal riots were triggered by the murders of Swami Laxmananda and hindu nuns…hmm, where are all the feminists now? How convenient that the Swami just happened to be reconverting the people that the Evangelical churches were targetting, but wait oops, there’s no way the Maoist insurgents could do the church’s dirty work like they did in the north east, right? Also, the main issue in the kandhamal riots wasn’t religion, but govt caste privileges. Tribal groups were vying with each other for control of lands and for ST status. The church, which surprise , owns the most land in India after the government, was munificently bestowing wealth upon the tribe that had recently converted but insisted on their retaining the ST status under Indian law. This hurt the other caste which, remained poor, hindu, did not have the power of the church to back it up, and had to compete for its ST privileges. That was the main basis for the riots. There were similar ST riots in Rajasthan by the gujjars and that had a nonreligious dimension, and sunk the bjp govt in Rajasthan.
Second, you guys are so impassioned about misogny, what about when it happens to religious women, like oh, i don’t know, the sadhvi who was tortured by the Mumbai ATS? http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Sadhvi-Pragya-tortured-by-ATS-claim-lawyers/386806/ . Deafening silence… So dedicated to ensuring that women can drink whenever and wherever, but if some religious hindu woman is outraged, (or in the case of godhra) burnt to death, then oh well they prob deserved it…And of course, God forbid be we investigate the repeat cases of women being abducted and forcible converted http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3039486.stm. but hey, who cares, this type of thing could never happen in say…London: http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=38548&in_page_id=34
The core of the problem is that the vast majority of hindus don’t support people like muthalik. India is secular, because they are secular and want a country where every boy or girl can grow up with equal rights and a chance to prosper. What upsets them are these ridiculous double standards that people like you have. You don’t comment or condemn outrageous actions such as Godhra and the murder of Swami Laxmananda and his nuns, but are quick to point out the myriad of wrongs that hindus are committing that are destroying India. Why don’t you read that Francois Gautier article and then comment again.
The whirlwind india is reaping wasn’t because of the bjp, it was because of the congress and people like you that created bogeymen to distract the populace from the real menace to the west. The congress is the most communal party and engages in the worst kind of communal patronage politics wherein it divides the hindu vote with issues like muthalik and then unifies its preferred minority votebanks to secure power by casting doubt upon men like M.C. Sharma who died at Batla house. The congress is the real danger to india since it has foisted an uneducated italian au pair upon india, who is advised by the worst sycophants in the world, whose only goal is to secure power for her undeserving son, consequences to the country be damned. That’s why after a string of bomb blasts last year, the incidents were quickly forgotten and bogeymen like muthalik and raj thackeray supported so that people like you can distract the indian voter from real dangers…like, i don’t know, the LeT that slaughtered 200 people in Mumbai, but no, the real danger to India has to be the bjp.
Lastly, let me reiterate that i have nothing but respect for the millions of indian muslims who are by and large moderate and respectable. The issue here is not about them, but about the chatterati class that doesn’t take the time to educate itself about the issues and simply mouths the same old tired tripe about the BJP and the hindu fundamentalists in order to do the bidding of the Nehru Gandhi dynasty. This way they can busily return to their pubs and cocktail parties instead of actually engaging in service to uplift their impoverished brethren, whether hindu or muslim…
140 · SecularPlease said
I said Godhra when I meant Gujarat. If you want me to be any clearer, I will spell it out for you – the Narendra Modi supported pogrom of over 1000 muslims.
You can consider me a troll if it makes you sleep better.
I am not engaging you because I am not interested in your tripe about Italian au-pairs and bogeymen to distract from the menace of the west and congress water carrying. You can impute these motives to me. You are also free to call me sickular or pseudo-secular or islamist or communist or terrorist or pinko or appeaser or licentious pub-goer or whatever the pejorative du jour is.
It’s not irrelevant at all–it’s why India-trained historians are treated with such (deserved) disdain in the US–they’ve just been taught a bunch of left-tard nonsense.
143 · rob said
How was it relevant to my comment? It seems like JNU comes up often on your VHP-issued insult-a-day card. It would have more effect if you used it where it might have more impact.
143 · rob said
I don’t really care how they are treated, but I don’t think your statement has much basis in truth (in so far as circles in which academic historians and their pedigree are given any degree of thought).
No, you ignore everything i said because you know there is no defense. You are dedicated more towards the ideology of so-called “liberal principles” while ignoring the fundamental basis of liberalism itself. That’s why you are not interested in discussion (aka a civil exchange of ideas), but a shouting match were you can engage in dialectical acrobatics.
Lastly, I like pubs and clubs, so I’m afraid your “saffron” paint roller won’t work. I believe that women should have equal rights and freedoms and think that what happened at Mangalore was outrageous. But I also know that people like you don’t care about the country and would rather see it destroyed than have true mainstays of secularism in place, such as, oh i don’t know, a Uniform Civil Code, which btw, is the foundational principle of secularims (equal under the law)…
146 · SecularPlease said
You are correct. You have a winning argument.
There is nothing I would want more. After all, I am the troll here.
Shhhh—you can’t say that–it’s anti-secular, didn’t you learn that? Also, black is white. 😉
Since you mentioned it, why do you always ignore the Hindu statistics. Are not each of the 250 hindus who died as valuable and as cherished as each of the 700 muslims? Or does hindu life have no value for you? BTW, you really should read that article by Gauthier. Get a better understanding of just how much british chicanery messed up india’s (lack of) intelligentsia. Macauley’s children indeed…
149 · SecularPlease said
Yes, my positions and comments must have made it amply clear to you that I do not value Hindu lives.
I did read it, and thought it was a bunch of garbled non-sequiturs. Yes, I am a Macaulayite too. You can add that to the list.
LOL, b/c you’re not a Macualayite? I admit that I am,but I think you are too.
Since you mentioned it, why did you think it was a bunch of garbled non-sequiturs?
152 · SecularPlease said
Because I don’t value Hindu lives as you so presciently observed.
Yes, I know you think I’m a Macaulayite.
153 · since you mentioned it on February 14, 2009 03:47 AM · Direct link · “Quoteâ€(?) 152 · SecularPlease said
Since you mentioned it, why did you think it was a bunch of garbled non-sequiturs?
Because I don’t value Hindu lives as you so presciently observed.
Thank you for proving my point…excellent discussion, your willingness to politely exchange ideas in good faith is emblematic of secularism at its finest…
154 · SecularPlease said
Yes, your first shot across the bow, and future comments showed what you thought of my opinions. Glad we could both be secular to each other.
OK, well, this should help to confirm Ennis’ well-cultivated fear that we Desis are in fact rebelling against the turbanned, bearded types–LOL!
Just consider me the foremost defender of “liberal” principles…
I second that. Islamic fundamentalism is not a threat to India the way hindu fundamentalism is, simply by reasons of demography.
Well, if you take demography into account, Islamic fundamentalism is a threat in Kashmir/Assam/Bengal/Kerala(?). I think generally people are averse to seeing violence inflicted on people in the name of culture/religion, but they clearly see the double standards in the so called “secular” press and “secular” intellectuals selective anger against fundamentalism of the Hindutva variety.
I was hoping to see atleast one editorial in a major newspaper or some statements from leading “secular” intellectuals about the arrest of an editor for offending Muslims, unfortunately looks like as far as they are concerned, nothing happened. Imagine, if Gujarat government under Modi arrested editor for publishing what Karunanidhi said about Rama. All hell would have broken loose. 🙂
Just after I commented, I read the latest Outlook, it is atleast better that they took notice.
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20090213&fname=puri&sid=1 The Lost Battle Why was the arrest and release on bail of The Statesman editor and publisher largely ignored by media? The governments may have electoral compulsions, but has the media totally given up the battle for free speech?
a non-“saffron” take on the Congress, aka what mangalore has actually been distracting india from for the past 2 weeks: http://www.rediff.com/news/2009/feb/13guest-how-upa-devalues-democracy.htm
No I consider you a troll for tying unrelated events to the PCC top. And for tying the Ram Sena to every Indian political body whose ideology is to the right of Che Guevara.
And no, don’t quote from the Indian Newspapers to justify what you are doing. The Indian media does more than its share of trolling, like when they run interviews that make it appear that hoolganism by 40 odd members of a fringe party is the greatest threat to a nation of a billion people which is facing multiple problems. When it run stories from the CPIM that call for the banning of the Ram Sena. But everyone knows that the Indian media, especially the English language media is run by hacks who are unprofessional, unethical, and corrupt to the core. The media does it because making a hulabula about what should be a non-story it creates attention and generates revenue. What’s your excuse
This Mangalore pub incident makes me very uncomfortable. The questions it raises are very complex, and the arguments on both sides have merits. What is culture, and what are moral values? Whose prerogative is it to enforce them, and what are the ethically acceptable means to do so? One thing is for certain.Any physical or mental violence is unconstitutional, and needs to be dealt with swiftly.If not for the politics involved,this was a local law and order problem, which could have been ideally dealt with firmly by a sufficiently empowered police, and nipped in the bud without giving any publicity to (and making celebrities out of) local thugs. Secondly,society chooses it’s morals. If a group of people out of conviction decide to become vegetarian celibate teetotalers, they are not any more backward or forward than a pub going,loose and carnivorous subset. Societies change, and lose the morals they find unacceptable. The Victorians have turned into the English of today, (which is not necessarily an improvement).If Hindu society finds pop western consumerist/libertine lifestyle unacceptable, they would have to resist it at the level of the family, and bring up their children with the right sanskaras to have pride in their roots, and be capable of making educated moral choices. That should be the aim of the Hinduva movement. And I think we are already seeing signs of this cultural resurgence.
Bringing in Godhara/Malegaon/Bhagalpur into this argument is just muddying the waters. These are completely different issues, to be debated at a different time and place. At the heart of the matter is a failure to enforce law and order fairly and equitably to protect our fundamental rights. Every time we ignore incidents like these, we are strengthening the hands of people like Muthalik. Whatever happened to the minister who’d placed a bounty on the heads of the Danish cartoonists? Why can’t I buy the ‘Satanic Verses’in New Delhi? In our misplaced political correctness (vote bank politics?), we are creating an inverse secularism that accommodates and promotes lunatics from every religion.
I can see some of your point of view, SecularPlease. What amazes me is that you can’t see why th ekilling of over a thousand innocent Muslims supercedes the original horror of the event of Godhra.
Collective punishment, collective killing. If a thousand Muslims had been murdered on the streets of London after the July 7th terrorist suicide-bombing in which 55 people were killed, and in response 1000 innocent Muslims who pulled from their homes and cars and lynched, you can be sure that the initial assault would be obscured.
Why is that so hard for you to see? And I say that as someone who does admit that there are double standards at play on some of these issues.