Indian Guru holds victim responsible for gangrape

reply to post by seen2much


Bro nobody in India talks about what you are talking about

And everything that you say is incorrect but requires too much typing for me to respond to every line.

Have you ever been to India or are you just watching the news and reading articles?????????

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Ah he says clearly

He also went on to say, "Galti ek taraf se nahi hoti hai (mistake is not committed from one side)."

You may find common phrases like "An apple a day keeps the doctor away" as an admonition about going to the doctor; or "A penny saved is a penny earned." as a rallying cry for materialism.... but that is not how it was intended.

I am not talking about the rape... I'm talking about how this alleged guru went about expressing himself, and how easily that is "used" by those who want emotion to remain focused on something specific.

In this case the article is not about the tragedy of rape-gone-viral in countries like India... it's about one ignorant and poorly spoken guru - who seems to have inadvertently allowed his call for prayer in the face of violence to be twisted into casting the "blame" on the victim.

Fervent religious types can always be counted upon to make statements about their particular vision of Utopia (based on their faith) - and here we find the most willing to spew anger and hatred in any direction.... I save mine for the morons who feel their lust is adequate to justify personal violence and abuse.

Form the treatment of the Adivasi to women, traditional Hinduism has to be partly blamed for the atmosphere of injustice and racism in India. However, mainstream modern practice of Hinduism, thanks to the influence of western enlightenment and democracy, has given birth to a democratic India that is progressing. It is the world's largest democracy and I hope it becomes one of its best. This will be done not by appealing to Shiva but appealing to what matters very much to all: love of freedom.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Of course not, I made it all up.

Must one walk through every village before one comments? In that case, we would be unable to comment on more or less anything but our own names.

Originally posted by Maxmars

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Ah he says clearly

He also went on to say, "Galti ek taraf se nahi hoti hai (mistake is not committed from one side)."

You may find common phrases like "An apple a day keeps the doctor away" as an admonition about going to the doctor; or "A penny saved is a penny earned." as a rallying cry for materialism.... but that is not how it was intended.

I am not talking about the rape... I'm talking about how this alleged guru went about expressing himself, and how easily that is "used" by those who want emotion to remain focused on something specific.

In this case the article is not about the tragedy of rape-gone-viral in countries like India... it's about one ignorant and poorly spoken guru - who seems to have inadvertently allowed his call for prayer in the face of violence to be twisted into casting the "blame" on the victim.

Fervent religious types can always be counted upon to make statements about their particular vision of Utopia (based on their faith) - and here we find the most willing to spew anger and hatred in any direction.... I save mine for the morons who feel their lust is adequate to justify personal violence and abuse.

I was under the impression he WAS talking about the rape.

referring to the thread tittle,
the supposed "guru" mind tries to lighten the responsibilities of a whole society and the imprint of such incidents on that society itself by revoking the societies responsibility and turning the victim into the one being wrong in order to mitigate the negative picture the society has created for itself...

in other words having a guilty victim is less negative compared to having part of a society heavily sick....

i pity them

my heart is with that girl,
may she rest in peace in a better place

reply to post by WhereIsTheBatman

The older I get, the more I fail to understand "religion" or what pushes people to follow "religious" leaders. I'm not against any religion. I am not a religious person myself. However, I always understood that it was about peace, bringing people together and spiritual enlightenment.

Sounds you are against religion
You use a rare negative incident to generalize as religion and go on with biased assumptions and unnecessary recommendations.

reply to post by WhereIsTheBatman

Originally posted by WhereIsTheBatman
I always understood that it was about peace, bringing people together and spiritual enlightenment.

That's what you are SUPPOSED to believe about religion...

Like the quote in my sig says, the OPPOSITE is true.

The elite created religion as a tool with a stealth agenda.

"Every major religion in the world has been manufactured or infiltrated by the Illuminati to enslave and brainwash society. In essence, religion was the first form of mind control. The indoctrination of the masses by a "Trojan Horse" false religion has allowed the Illuminati to take control and work in secret for many, many years." Link

What if I were to tell you, that there is a vast Satanic conspiracy to deceive the masses of every society on earth? What if I were to tell you that the top leaders of the world’s religions were in league with the Devil? Would you think I’m crazy? I would! Yet, the truth is stranger than fiction! You have been lied to my friend. Few people in the world today are aware of just how much Satan has infiltrated organized religion. Link

"...religion keeps you from knowing God and keeps you blind as to what God is really like! All religious leaders are raised up by Jesus' arch enemy, satan! Link

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by Maxmars

 

What????

I dont quite get what your saying here. i see alot of fancy dancing.... but not alot of substance.

So forgetting to call out to jesus or vishnu when your being raped makes you complicit or not?

edit on 7-1-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)

Yeah, I'm not sure I follow this either. The article says:

"The girl should have taken God's name and could have held the hand of one of the men and said, 'I consider you my brother' and to the other two, she should have said, 'Brothers, I am helpless. You are my brothers, my religious brothers'. Then the misconduct wouldn't have happened."

I wonder if he would be willing to demonstrate this method, under the same circumstances as the girl was in. Lead by example, in other words, because I just am not buying it. Sicko!

Originally posted by new_here

Yeah, I'm not sure I follow this either. The article says:

"The girl should have taken God's name and could have held the hand of one of the men and said, 'I consider you my brother' and to the other two, she should have said, 'Brothers, I am helpless. You are my brothers, my religious brothers'. Then the misconduct wouldn't have happened."

I wonder if he would be willing to demonstrate this method, under the same circumstances as the girl was in. Lead by example, in other words, because I just am not buying it. Sicko!

As I stated before, this is a common trait in religious leaders; they speak of the world as if it played by the rules they have faith in. They believe that faith and a call to piety will somehow change a drunken rapists' mind.

I don't argue he is right; I just fail to see the value of assuming he actually 'blames' the victim... as opposed to fantasizing that 'had she called upon faith' this could have been averted.

Bottom line: This thread's source was about making people angry at someone other than the rapists. It obviously worked... since everyone eagerly attributes the ugliest potential outlook to the villain identified by the author of the article.

Unfortunately, the "guru's" position is among those shared by many people who feel their particular religion 'cures' these horrible tragedies of human abuse and disregard - or disrespect - for a certain segment of their population. Most religious leaders share this weakness in talking about "what ought to be" or "what should" happened.... In short, religious zealots are easy targets.

Its time to punish India government for these crimes against humanity,the country has chosen to not change the laws to fit the crimes and the entire world can see this,so lets start embargos and economic pressure to force change,its the only way to protect women and children.

What kind of people live there??What kind of men treat their women like that??What kind of men let OTHER men treat women and kids like this??


Kick their arses.Everyone refuse to participate in Bollywood,any industry that supports Indias econemy hence government hence outdated view on humanitarianism and womens and childrens rights .

Upper caste men rape lower caste women with impunity. Security forces and police rape women in their custody or in retaliation. Rape remains a prominent display of patriarchal power.

This isn't a religious problem, this is a cultural problem. It is a heavy patriarchy society.

Nor is the state, itself a bastion of male power, interested in protection, given that women in India are often unable to register their cases of rape with police and that the police seem uninterested in investigating or prosecuting most of the rapists.

huffington post

How do women become secure if patriarchal power exercised through violence is widespread? In this case, the young woman who was raped is constantly referred to in the news media as a "girl," even though she was 23 years old. She is not seen as an adult or as an equal.

"It actually freaks you out when people do such things to you ... eye-teasing, passing lewd comments and stalking you. They literally rape you with their eyes," she said.

I can speak about my own experience, as a student, in this city -- people are pinching you, touching you, someone is coming close to you. This is absolutely the mentality where you look at a woman as an object of sex and (which) you use and abuse," rights activist Ranjana Kumari said

Meantime, some observers say anti-women acts in India stem from the country's largely patriarchal social setup.

cnn.com

For every 1,000 boys up to 6 years old, the census counted 914 girls, a drop from 927 a decade ago.

It's illegal in India to abort a child because of its sex, but such abortions happen, often aided by illegal clinics.

"The reasons for the high number of female feticide in India include a deep-rooted traditional son preference, continued practice of dowry and concern for safety of the girl child and exploitation and abuse of women and girl children," Krishna Tirath, India's women and child development minister, acknowledged in parliament in March 2011.

reply to post by nixie_nox


I been trying to say that from the start.... its more of a cultural things than religion. Especially country like India.. which has over 20-30 cultures.

However, i do think its much easier for women to live in a city(where education holds a great deal) compared to village, Where old ideas still at large(stay home, cook, clean, serve husband)

reply to post by luciddream


I know, I just condensed it for you.

It doesn't matter what your religion is when culturual ideals over ride it.

And you are right, India has many different forms of religions.But I don't think urban vs. rural matters. My area is very populated and multicultural, and people come here still clinging to their beliefs.

Traditional Hinduism is an expression of patriarchal extremism. One fine example are the cult prostitutes. Apologists use the "culture not religion" argument ignoring that religion fuels the culture. This can be applied to the rape of Dalti women in India as well. It is misogony and racism sanctioned by the religion which innundates the culture. Many other cultures are misogonistic, right. Why? Religion has a great deal to do with it. Look at traditional muslim and christian societies. It is when people leave literal interpretation of scripture and traditional religion that society moves forward.

Christianity allows slavery. Yet, christians left literal interpretatiions and started abolitionism. Blacks were seen as the cursed seed of Canaan, doomed to slavery and the old and new testament allowed it; but many moved on to leaving the traditional, morally disgusting, literal meaning.

Hinduism was racist and pandered to Brahmin superiority. The Vedic texts and ritual were more or less originally a fire cult that became more spiritual in the time of the more metaphysical Upanishads. Buddhism was an example of an egalitarian backlash against Brahmin and Vedic Hinduism.

Denying that Hinduism plays a role in the subjugation of women is like saying the Islam plays no role in it as well in the Near East.

Stop denying the evil side of religion.

By the way, I think we should take a moment to thank western liberalism that allows us to say what we wish to say. This would never have been possible had we been ruled by Brahmins, mullahs, or catholic priests. Thanks to humanity, not scripture, we have progressed to viewing an egalitarian society as the norm, not a racist, misogynistic caste system.

If you want to argue that the Vedas and ensuing "sacred" literature have nothing to do with misogyny then you have to ask yourself:

1)Where the Vedas written in a patriarchal culture? That is to say, were they produced and are a product of one?
2)Do the Vedas promote gender equality?
3)If so, where? Are they simply two or thre verses or so many it is undeniable?
4)Assuming they are egalitarian, did they create a female priestly class, could women officiate ritual duties of a male high prist (Brahmin)?
5)Did they promote a meritocracy or a rigid hierarchy? For example, could a tanner of skins become a brahmin or kshatriya?


If they did not advocate equality or meritocracy, then one must ask:

1)Did they advocate inequality?
2)Did that influence traditional Hinduism throughout history?
3)Did that have an influence on how women and lower castes were viewed as seen in subsequent Hindu scripture?
4)Besides some mtaphysical and spiritual ideas, does traditional HInduism and the Vedas have anything to offer a progressive society?
5)Would India be better off in a Vedic orientated society or a modern democratic one?
6)Which one would allow women to live a freer life?