3 ms·

Settle down, no need to sensationalize. That's not what even the OPs comment meant. Also, no, not everyone in India treats women like "chattel" (heck most of th

Settle down, no need to sensationalize. That's not what even the OPs comment meant. Also, no, not everyone in India treats women like "chattel" (heck most of them worship them) and I'm pretty sure, neither does Satya.

neilellis 12y ago
I am not commenting on Satya in this reply, just the idea that either a) all women are treated like chattel in India or b) no women are treated like chattel in India. Neither of which of course is true. Women's lack of equality in India, compared to the UK, are in general I'm afraid pretty appalling, when I was younger I nearly moved to India for a while. But my wife who is of Indian descent was extremely reluctant because of they way they are treated in India compared to the UK. The rights of women are minimal compared to men. That's just the reality. On the other hand they are allowed out of the house unescorted, so as always it's a sliding scale. Don't get me wrong India is home to some of the loveliest, kindest and gentlest people I have ever met. On average I'm pretty certain I'm a much less decent human being than the average Indian. It is a country which has many great qualities we can learn from over here, just not respect and equality for women. And that omission, like the caste system, is very saddening. But hey I have a huge log in my eye :-) People worship their cars, personally I wouldn't equate desire with respect.
- benjaminButton 12y ago
  Again, it's hard to generalize but for the modern woman, I think it's no worse than what you'd find in the western world. Until last year, the most powerful politician in India was an Italian-Indian woman (again this might not mean anything but it shows that it's not ingrained into people). Also, given the population, you might hear more cases of inequality. But please don't let that affect your general view of India. The caste system, I'm very sorry to say this, your ancestors are partly to blame for as well. Like we all know divide and conquer goes a long way in sorting out issues :-). But it used to be societal classification based on one's occupation (and people were free to move across strata as well) which allowed for easy governance. Anyway, today it's pretty much non-existent and is more a class system than anything else (it's a corollary that the highest castes are the richest class today). However, have enough money? Even the highest caste member will not mind handing his daughter over.
  - neilellis 12y ago
    Have you been to India? The caste system predates the Buddha (500BC) btw. and is routed in Hindu culture. The British actually also exploited the difference between Muslims and Hindus, but again didn't create the difference. Yes the Raj used divide and conquer, but they used differences that had existed for thousands of years and still do.
    - known 12y ago
      And https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India
- jessedhillon 12y ago
  Dude, the distance from the east to the west of India is some 1200 miles, and north to south is around 2000 miles. The idea that you could describe the entire country in such simple cultural generalizations is as wrong as generalizing about people from LA and Kansas. Just the way you're talking about India is, while flattering, very uninformed. The US is also home to lovely and kind people, as well as people capable of monstrosity. The caste system is irrelevant in many parts of India -- it's not even a consideration! It's like not wanting to visit 1960s New York because, you know, all the lynching and the Jim Crow laws.
  - neilellis 12y ago
    I have visited India multiple times, my in-laws are Indian, it's not a country I'm completely ignorant of and I'm saying nothing out of ignorance, but direct experience of the unequal status of women in Indian society compared to Western society. You can make generalisations when doing a comparison with cultures, but not when prejudging individuals. For example the US is wealthier than Algeria. That is a generalisation based on an aggregate (the total GDP), but doesn't reflect the individual status of people within each country. I.e. some Algerians will be wealthier than some Americans.
    - jessedhillon 12y ago
      > For example the US is wealthier than Algeria. That is a generalisation ... No, that's a statement of fact for some definition of wealth. > ... but doesn't reflect the individual status of people within each country. I.e. some Algerians will be wealthier than some Americans. This is simply a recognition that your fact applies to the whole and does not hold for every possible pairwise comparison. My issue is that you cannot generalize about any cultural phenomenon in India. You can state some facts you've seen, but India is, * a country dominated by three distinct religions, * in some places resembles New York or Paris * while in others it the remotest parts of Afghanistan * and still in other parts more closely resembles Tibet So to say that you could make one statement about the status of Indian women is misguided. I'm glad you enjoy (presumably?) your Indian family and your trips there, but your experience is limited, and still that of a foreigner. A person having lived their whole life in India could hardly be expected to give a coherent assessment of the situation, much less so with you. The question itself is rooted in a level of imprecision which makes it useless when applied to a country as diverse as India.

neilellis 12y ago

I am not commenting on Satya in this reply, just the idea that either a) all women are treated like chattel in India or b) no women are treated like chattel in India. Neither of which of course is true. Women's lack of equality in India, compared to the UK, are in general I'm afraid pretty appalling, when I was younger I nearly moved to India for a while. But my wife who is of Indian descent was extremely reluctant because of they way they are treated in India compared to the UK. The rights of women are minimal compared to men. That's just the reality. On the other hand they are allowed out of the house unescorted, so as always it's a sliding scale. Don't get me wrong India is home to some of the loveliest, kindest and gentlest people I have ever met. On average I'm pretty certain I'm a much less decent human being than the average Indian. It is a country which has many great qualities we can learn from over here, just not respect and equality for women. And that omission, like the caste system, is very saddening. But hey I have a huge log in my eye :-) People worship their cars, personally I wouldn't equate desire with respect.

benjaminButton 12y ago
Again, it's hard to generalize but for the modern woman, I think it's no worse than what you'd find in the western world. Until last year, the most powerful politician in India was an Italian-Indian woman (again this might not mean anything but it shows that it's not ingrained into people). Also, given the population, you might hear more cases of inequality. But please don't let that affect your general view of India. The caste system, I'm very sorry to say this, your ancestors are partly to blame for as well. Like we all know divide and conquer goes a long way in sorting out issues :-). But it used to be societal classification based on one's occupation (and people were free to move across strata as well) which allowed for easy governance. Anyway, today it's pretty much non-existent and is more a class system than anything else (it's a corollary that the highest castes are the richest class today). However, have enough money? Even the highest caste member will not mind handing his daughter over.
- neilellis 12y ago
  Have you been to India? The caste system predates the Buddha (500BC) btw. and is routed in Hindu culture. The British actually also exploited the difference between Muslims and Hindus, but again didn't create the difference. Yes the Raj used divide and conquer, but they used differences that had existed for thousands of years and still do.
  - known 12y ago
    And https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India
jessedhillon 12y ago
Dude, the distance from the east to the west of India is some 1200 miles, and north to south is around 2000 miles. The idea that you could describe the entire country in such simple cultural generalizations is as wrong as generalizing about people from LA and Kansas. Just the way you're talking about India is, while flattering, very uninformed. The US is also home to lovely and kind people, as well as people capable of monstrosity. The caste system is irrelevant in many parts of India -- it's not even a consideration! It's like not wanting to visit 1960s New York because, you know, all the lynching and the Jim Crow laws.
- neilellis 12y ago
  I have visited India multiple times, my in-laws are Indian, it's not a country I'm completely ignorant of and I'm saying nothing out of ignorance, but direct experience of the unequal status of women in Indian society compared to Western society. You can make generalisations when doing a comparison with cultures, but not when prejudging individuals. For example the US is wealthier than Algeria. That is a generalisation based on an aggregate (the total GDP), but doesn't reflect the individual status of people within each country. I.e. some Algerians will be wealthier than some Americans.
  - jessedhillon 12y ago
    > For example the US is wealthier than Algeria. That is a generalisation ... No, that's a statement of fact for some definition of wealth. > ... but doesn't reflect the individual status of people within each country. I.e. some Algerians will be wealthier than some Americans. This is simply a recognition that your fact applies to the whole and does not hold for every possible pairwise comparison. My issue is that you cannot generalize about any cultural phenomenon in India. You can state some facts you've seen, but India is, * a country dominated by three distinct religions, * in some places resembles New York or Paris * while in others it the remotest parts of Afghanistan * and still in other parts more closely resembles Tibet So to say that you could make one statement about the status of Indian women is misguided. I'm glad you enjoy (presumably?) your Indian family and your trips there, but your experience is limited, and still that of a foreigner. A person having lived their whole life in India could hardly be expected to give a coherent assessment of the situation, much less so with you. The question itself is rooted in a level of imprecision which makes it useless when applied to a country as diverse as India.