For clarification: My remarks were intended to remind our colleague of the Catholic church hierarchy requirements that clerics and nuns spout the party line. Sr. Nirmala was responding as per the requirement of her oath of office to a question about abortion. As a nun she was not "free" to make a remark outside of the peremeters of Catholic churches official line. She may also be a Brahmin, or a Raiders fan for all I know, but I think she spoke not out of a culturally Indian perspective (which you who are more aware than I may feel free to attack) but out of her office as the spokesperson for the convent founded by the now dead Teresa. In either event I believe it is anyone's perrogative to point out the feminist question. And while it is true that the leading cause of death last year in India for women was burning, the leading cause of death in the workplace in California for the last two years was ALSO violence, perdominantly at the hands of a disgruntled former (male) lover/spouse, and only occasionally by a sexual harrasser that the company had failed to discipline. >Anthony P D'Costa wrote: > >>Now Doug, I thought you liked numbers, especially as they pertain to >>ratios (%):). How about getting the stats on widow burning? This is an >>old "internal" versus "external" debate. An understanding of social >>change in India informs us that local institutions have interacted with >>those introduced from the outside. There is a significant variation >>across regions: dowry deaths seem to be taking place in northern Hindi >>speaking belt (centered around Delhi and other urban centers). >>Paradoxically it is associated with the middle classes. As for widow >>burning you need to update your information. The last case I >>heard was in the 1980s, in a village in rajasthan, perhaps >>one of the most economically underdeveloped state. >> >>As for restrictions on property ownership it is still a >>problem. The institution of patriarchy will not be easy to >>eliminate. > >This, and an offlist communication, make me worry that I've been >misunderstood. I thought the original posting that I was reacting to >(appended below) overstated the case, treating sexism and callousness >towards the poor as purely western impositions. I'm not trying to excuse >anything, or divert attention from the crimes of imperialists. > >Doug > > >> >The way to say it without sounding like a chauvanist is to say it like a >> >feminist. There is no cultural basis for asserting that Sr. Nirmala is >> >acting out of an Indian cultural perspective. The beauty of culture is its >> >adaptability. The Indian pantheon of religions include many female deities, >> >and their is no Hindu sanction against abortion. The cultural imperialism >> >of Europe and the patriarchy of Roman Catholicism (objected to by most >> >Catholic women I might add) is what Sr. Nirmala is dutifully regergitating >> >as per the requirements of subservience in her Catholic church heirarchy. >> > >> >The rigidity of the backward patriarachal Euro-Centrated position you find >> >objectionable in Sr. Nirmala comes from Rome and hundreds of years of >> >Vatican mysogynist jibberish. It hails from no where else.
