Rape and India

[Preety_India]

@fi1ghtclub thanks for the support 

 

 

 

[Dumuzzi]

@Preety_India  You know, reading your posts, I'm starting to think that this must be a very old problem, possibly going back thousands of years. It seems unlikely that things will change any time soon, but hopefully, with better education and awareness, they will. 

I have referenced the last chapter of the Ramayana before, which has traditionally been used to justify Suttee (or Sati). In it, Sita is accused by his Husband, Rama, the he was defiled by Ravana, the ten-headed Rakshasa, ruler of Lanka. The interesting thing is that Ravana, a serial rapist, is unable to rape her, because of a curse placed on him by a previous victim which means he can only have consensual sex (shocking I know. Must have been quite a curse at the time). Sita of course refuses his advances, but the very act of her being in the presence of another man, makes her sullied in her husband's eyes. To prove her honour and valour she throws herself on a funeral pyre, etc, etc... which is how the Suttee myth was born. 

It is an interesting glimpse into social relationships in ancient India and I think it explains a lot. 

I am also reminded of a chapter in the Ananga Ranga, which is a medieval "dating" and sex manual so to speak, meant for young princes and other aristocrats. In it, men are instructed on how to approach a woman if they desire her. It starts relatively innocently, with reciting poetry, buying her gifts, etc... If those steps fail, the young prince is instructed to furnish as big a stick as he can find, beat the shit out of the woman, after which he can proceed to rape her. Again, quite an enlightening peek into social relations in old India.

There are many other examples of such behaviour being justified even by religious scripture, but I don't want to single India out, every single region of the world has had a similar problem in the past. The point is, that many places in the world managed to overcome the shackles of the past and move beyond such archaic mores, but India, probably due to extreme religiosity, is yet to do so.  

[Forestluv]

One thing I like about being male is that I don't have to worry about being sexually harassed or raped. It doesn't even cross my mind. Last night I walked through nature at night by myself. I was not stressed or worried that I could be raped. It never even crossed my mind. When I travel on buses, go to public events and go to work, I don't have to worry about creepy women sexually harassing me or raping me. I don't need to take precautions to protect myself from being raped. I don't need to worry about the clothing I wear. I don't need to carry mace. I don't need to have elevated stress hormones in my body as preparation for fight or flight. . . I literally never even think about it. That is a privilege I have as a male and I wish that women also had that peace of mind and body.

[Dumuzzi]

@Serotoninluv  It's not the creepy women you have to worry about, but the creepy men. A lot of men are raped too, not just women and the perpetrators are almost always men. A serial rapist in London, who targeted almost exclusively men (hundreds overall) has just been jailed.

Like I mentioned in a previous post, I also had problems with sexual harassment (unwanted touching and groping) and the perpetrators were always South Asian men. Maybe I was just unlucky, but it is a persistent problem in that part of the world and it affects everyone, though, of course, women are generally the victims.

[Forestluv]

@Dumuzzi I don't need to worry about creepy men either. The chance of me being rapped by a man is super low. The chance of a woman being raped by a man is MUCH higher. The risk is on two completely different levels and, imo, it's not fair to equalize them. It would be like me saying to a woman "yea, men can get breast cancer as well. Breast cancer is something both men and women need to worry about". And then telling a story about how some men got breast cancer. The frequency of women getting breast cancer is MUCH higher than it is for men. The risk is so low for men the vast majority of men do not need to worry about getting breast cancer. Are there isolated incidents of men with breast cancer? Yes. It is fair to equalize this at an individual level. A man with breast cancer should get equal compassion and care as a woman with breast cancer. However, it is not fair to equalize it at the population level and say "breast cancer is an issue both men and women face". At the population level, more resources should be invested in researching and treating breast cancer in women. . . Similarly, are there isolated incidents of men being raped by other men? Of course. At the individual level, a man being raped is just as concerning as a woman being raped. However, at a population level rape is a widespread risk for women and only an isolated risk for men. Imo, it would be unfair to say "Rape is an issue both men and women face" because this equalizes the risk at a population level. At the population level, more resources should be invested in helping women in regards to rape. 

[Dumuzzi]

@Serotoninluv  Yes, obviously. I'm not sure why you'd think that I'd disagree with that. If you have seen my first post on this thread, my entire point is that even men have to watch out for creeps, therefore it must be infinitely worse for women.

[Forestluv]

@Dumuzzi Looks like I misinterpreted your frame. Thank you for clarifying that. 

[student]

Very good insights. But the solutions he proposes are rather for an unrealistic, not yet mature enough world.

Edited March 10, 2020 by student

[Derek White]

2 hours ago, Dumuzzi said:

I have referenced the last chapter of the Ramayana before, which has traditionally been used to justify Suttee (or Sati). In it, Sita is accused by his Husband, Rama, the he was defiled by Ravana, the ten-headed Rakshasa, ruler of Lanka. The interesting thing is that Ravana, a serial rapist, is unable to rape her, because of a curse placed on him by a previous victim which means he can only have consensual sex (shocking I know. Must have been quite a curse at the time). Sita of course refuses his advances, but the very act of her being in the presence of another man, makes her sullied in her husband's eyes. To prove her honour and valour she throws herself on a funeral pyre, etc, etc... which is how the Suttee myth was born. 

Most Hindus don't perform Sati and it's very rare, it's not a problem in modern India, they are clearly not reading it the way you have described. The message is a lot more abstract, you're not suppose to take them literally. Rama was a king, that doesn't mean Hindus support a monarchy just because it was in their scripture. The message is not to put your wife on a test to prove her loyalty.

And Ravana was a serial rapist? What? He didn't rape SIta because he was a good person and not because he was cursed. Again, not the version I'm familiar with. 

Furthermore, Rama, a king, put his wife on a test because she was pregnant and it's very important for the people of a kingdom to know whether the child, their potential heir, is from their king or conceived from someone else. He did what he did because of his duty to his people. The story was written before the 5th century BC so it has some traditions which are outdated.

I think Sadhguru answers your questions in these videos:

2 hours ago, Dumuzzi said:

I am also reminded of a chapter in the Ananga Ranga, which is a medieval "dating" and sex manual so to speak, meant for young princes and other aristocrats. In it, men are instructed on how to approach a woman if they desire her. It starts relatively innocently, with reciting poetry, buying her gifts, etc... If those steps fail, the young prince is instructed to furnish as big a stick as he can find, beat the shit out of the woman, after which he can proceed to rape her. Again, quite an enlightening peek into social relations in old India.

This is the first time I'm hearing of Ananga Ranga, it's not a religious text. A dating manual? India doesn't have a dating culture, we have arranged marriages. Anyway, a quick Wikipedia search tells it was written in 15th or 16th century in honor of Lad Khan, son of Ahmed Khan Lodi, so it is during the Muslim rule of India written for the Muslim rulers' pleasure. It says more about Islam than Hinduism. 

3 hours ago, Dumuzzi said:

I don't want to single India out, every single region of the world has had a similar problem in the past.

YOU are the one who brought religion into this and said Hinduism is worst than Islam.

There is enough there in the culture to guarantee human rights. India doesn't need to look at, say the US which legalized interracial marriages just 50 so years a ago, for moral guidance. The examples of sexism you mentioned are not even give that much emphasis and don't clearly say "men are superior to women". There are many good examples and symbolism of women as equals in the culture which are very very overt, but you clearly ignored those. That is one thing India is good at, acceptance, tolerance, and spirituality. Indian culture is bad at organizing society, defending itself, and science but we are catching on.

Let's stop discussing religion and pointing fingers and focus on the real issue. 

[Parththakkar12]

While analyzing this systemically, we need to also remember that the reasoning of most people doesn't really go much deeper and nuanced than 'Rapists should be in jail' and 'Men should be taught to respect women'. It didn't previously occur to me that your reasoning was that simplistic @Preety_India . It's not the 'one right way of looking at this issue' like you've been portraying it.

I've been talking about it in much more complex systemic terms. The root causes of these issues go a lot deeper than this. Feel free to re-read my comments.

[Forestluv]

The original intent of the thread was to stimulate a discussion about rape in India, yet the focus has been derailed and the thread is locked by request.