Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
If Shefali Anand did live in India, especially through the 90's and the current decade, she would know that Indian women are not exactly demure as most misconceptions go. The author would have been enlightened if she had taken the trouble to actually live and meet some (so-called repressed rural and urban) Indian women[0]. [0] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1381303.cms On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 5:53 AM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: In a Dawkinsian sense the highest payoff for a human female in such a society would come from a faithful partner who would support her in times of vulnerability, while http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Ahmedabad/Most-sex-workers-in-city-are-homemakers/articleshow/4363241.cms In the 1990's (before the online versions of TOI), a Masters/PhD student at Mumbai University had researched a similar topic as part of her thesis which claimed (among other things) that educated men with good jobs wanted to marry PYT's as the *pretty wife* would be the ladder for his career advancement. The phenomenon called One Kapoot obviously didnt find this story Indian enough. A public loss. Unfortunately the University researcher was embroiled in a quarrel over the research credits with her thesis advisor and TOI did'nt bother to publish the final storyline... whether her thesis was accepted or not. Marriage is a human social construct in which monogamy is forced. As I have stated earlier I believe it has social benefits that are unrecognised by randy men and women who have access to birth control. In the absence of birth control, the human female gets to pay a higher price for polygamy than the male. How so? The women can still abandon the kid at an orphanage or abort them at a local illegal quack, risking her life in the process. Such 5x5cm articles were an everyday occurrence in local papers. -- .
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Thursday 09 Apr 2009 1:04:49 pm . wrote: If Shefali Anand did live in India, especially through the 90's and the current decade, she would know that Indian women are not exactly demure as most misconceptions go. The author would have been enlightened if she had taken the trouble to actually live and meet some (so-called repressed rural and urban) Indian women[0]. snip Marriage is a human social construct in which monogamy is forced. As I have stated earlier I believe it has social benefits that are unrecognised by randy men and women who have access to birth control. In the absence of birth control, the human female gets to pay a higher price for polygamy than the male. How so? The women can still abandon the kid at an orphanage or abort them at a local illegal quack, risking her life in the process. Such 5x5cm articles were an everyday occurrence in local papers. Unfortunately being demure or not is not the problem IMO. Women end up having sex as often as men on average - given that it takes two to do it. In the absence of social support a pregnant girl is in serious trouble. If she is married - support from a husband helps. Abortion and pregnancy all carry some risk to life and health. Pregnancy is a burden. A live baby is a burden, as is a dead baby. Its fun all the way for the man. The more he scores - the better. In the absence of contraception the cost is invariably higher for the woman unless the cost is raised for men by forcing a man to stay and support the woman he has impregnated on pain of some punishment (in other words - marriage :D LOL shiv
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:00 PM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: In the absence of social support a pregnant girl is in serious trouble. If she is married - support from a husband helps. Abortion and pregnancy all carry Marriage is not necessarily the solution. There are men who abandon their wives just as they abandon their lovers or remarry after converting[0] and still abandon them. [0] http://www.indianexpress.com/news/chand-married-me-only-for-sex-fiza/439250/ The reality is Indian women lack social support, unlike developed nations which have appointed counseling agencies and have developed a social security and health care system, even if its not perfect. This root problem (of lack a proper support system, whether its pregnancy, sexual assault, marriage or any other aspect of a womans existence in India) has no co-relation with marriage and should not be inter-dependent or a pre-condition. -- .
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian sur...@hserus.netwrote: This is Krish Ashok blog material and I hope he will write about it and I can have a wonderful time reading it! :) Deepa.
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Divya Manian divya.man...@gmail.com wrote: Came across this, and found it too funny! http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123896998996190775.html [...] I suspect this is satire, even the names of the marriage bureaus seem too fantastic! Really? In my observation this sort of thing is pretty common. If you find this unbelievable check out how the Chinese get married. With a male:female ratio that's even more skewed than in India, and with no social stigma against marrying non-Chinese, the Chinese men have it much tougher. Cheeni
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123896998996190775.html For instance, he says some overseas Indians want a bride who is smart, fluent in English, and simultaneously, docile in the house. He says such women are now harder to find, so he bumps up his fees for some searches. To be fair, there are some red-blooded, white-breaded American males looking for such demure companions as well. Unsurprisingly, usually these guys are conservative, christian, and Republican. The cartoon Morel Orel on Adult Swim does a good job of satiring, in general, that group. But I do agree (in my case happily) that they are a vanishing breed in the US. Unless they want to be that way of their own free will and choice, understanding they have options, in which case, by all means. It's the forcing part that rubs my Free-Society fur the wrong way.
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 17:38, Srini RamaKrishnan che...@gmail.com wrote: If you find this unbelievable check out how the Chinese get married. With a male:female ratio that's even more skewed than in India, and with no social stigma against marrying non-Chinese, the Chinese men have it much tougher. On the other side side of the Himalayas: Matrimonials – Chinese style by Pallavi Aiyar Held every Sunday afternoon, the market is a forum for parents who have come to despair of their educated, career-driven offsprings ever finding appropriate life-partners on their own and have thus decided to take matters into their own hands. “Boy, 28 yrs, has own apartment in Fuxing district, no mortgage, Communist Party member,” advertises the piece of paper offered up by one bespectacled father. And the non-stigma about marrying non-Chinese: I (Pallavi) am quickly approached by several people anxiously asking if I am “available”. When I shake my head in regret they quickly change tack and inquire about prospective single friends I might have. ~ash
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 18:11, Ashwin Nanjappa ashwi...@gmail.com wrote: Matrimonials – Chinese style by Pallavi Aiyar Sorry, forgot the link: http://www.hindu.com/mag/2008/05/18/stories/2008051850020200.htm ~ash
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
Its what feminists sarcastically call most men's perception of an 'ideal wife' - an angel all day long but suddenly turns into a pornstar in the bedroom. On Mon, April 6, 2009 4:46 pm, Ravi Bellur wrote: To be fair, there are some red-blooded, white-breaded American males looking for such demure companions as well. Unsurprisingly, usually these guys are conservative, christian, and Republican. The cartoon Morel Orel on Adult Swim does a good job of satiring, in general, that group. But I do agree (in my case happily) that they are a vanishing breed in the US. Unless they want to be that way of their own free will and choice, understanding they have options, in which case, by all means. It's the forcing part that rubs my Free-Society fur the wrong way.
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
Its what feminists sarcastically call most men's perception of an 'ideal wife' - an angel all day long but suddenly turns into a pornstar in the bedroom. I thought feminists were those who believed that's what most men want, devoid of any sarcasm :) Kiran
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
I didn't realize a flat screen TV could be a determining factor in marrying someone-guess i would never have made it to any matrimonial list in any case especially since i clean my own bathroom! my husband had only an air-mattress in his name thanks to his free wheeling, globetrotting lifestyle prior to our marriage. the only concession he made to lifestyle were his golfclubs and icehockey equipment. On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:03 AM, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: Its what feminists sarcastically call most men's perception of an 'ideal wife' - an angel all day long but suddenly turns into a pornstar in the bedroom. I thought feminists were those who believed that's what most men want, devoid of any sarcasm :) Kiran
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Monday 06 Apr 2009 7:48:26 pm Radhika, Y. wrote: his golfclubs Aha! This man knows life. shiv
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Radhika, Y. radhik...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't realize a flat screen TV could be a determining factor in marrying someone-guess i would never have made it to any matrimonial list in any case especially since i clean my own bathroom! my husband had only an air-mattress in his name thanks to his free wheeling, globetrotting lifestyle prior to our marriage. the only concession he made to lifestyle were his golfclubs and icehockey equipment. Marriage has historically been an economic arrangement first and foremost, a partnership to weather the rough waters of life. Ancient Rome at the peak of its affluence saw a decline in marriages because people saw no reason to marry. This led to the introduction of the tax sop for married couples that most modern states continue to this day. It is no surprise then that arranged marriages even today resemble the harsh haggling and negotiation of a bazaar. Ancient love stories notwithstanding, marrying for love is a relatively recent phenomenon worldwide, less than 100 years old. It remains to be seen if marrying for love is a sustainable idea, afaik there is very little evidence either way at the moment. On a related note, the human gene is inherently polygamous - obviously therefore modern social conditioning of monogamy runs contrary to genetic traits, and is in a somewhat risk prone position. Marriages in ancient Rome or India carried no such rider of monogamy for example. OTOH, modern society seems to have aids to counter the genetic urges, such as pornography. Porn is a socially acceptable (in most cultures) outlet for genetic urges. Ironically therefore pornography saves marriages more often than not! Some reading: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7982132.stm http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime_20020321.shtml Cheeni P.S. Couldn't resist stirring the pot a bit, the thread was getting boring :-)
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan che...@gmail.com wrote: Ancient Rome at the peak of its affluence saw a decline in marriages because people saw no reason to marry. This led to the introduction of the tax sop for married couples that most modern states continue to this day. Someone should tell the USian government: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_penalty Ancient love stories notwithstanding, marrying for love is a relatively recent phenomenon worldwide, less than 100 years old. It remains to be seen if marrying for love is a sustainable idea, afaik there is very little evidence either way at the moment. I find the entire social construct of marriage (arranged or find your own) quaint. Of course, there are important financial implications (inheritance, benefits, taxation, etc.) of formalized cohabitation. On a related note, the human gene is inherently polygamous - obviously therefore modern social conditioning of monogamy runs contrary to genetic traits, and is in a somewhat risk prone position. Are these traits *in homo sapiens* uniformly distributed between the males and the females of the species? Marriages in ancient Rome or India carried no such rider of monogamy for example. But didn't the riders apply to the female population (rare instances like Draupati notwithstanding)? Thaths -- You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel. -- Homer J. Simpson
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
ah. an excuse for when the wife catches you with a copy of playboy .. Srini RamaKrishnan [06/04/09 17:43 +0200]: OTOH, modern society seems to have aids to counter the genetic urges, such as pornography. Porn is a socially acceptable (in most cultures) outlet for genetic urges. Ironically therefore pornography saves marriages more often than not!
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Thaths tha...@gmail.com wrote: snipped I find the entire social construct of marriage (arranged or find your own) quaint. Of course, there are important financial implications (inheritance, benefits, taxation, etc.) of formalized cohabitation. or implications based on nationality and citizenship in case one of the partners happens to be a foreign national -someone-trying-to-foresee-hassles-around-procurement-of-an-x-visa (aka indra) Thaths
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
Cheeni, please do stir up the pot! going by the logic of your argument though since the lady Anisha _ quoted in the article doesn't need a man's money as she is quite well off and therefore doesn't need to marry, why does she still care if the man makes more money or less? something inconsistent... On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan che...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Radhika, Y. radhik...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't realize a flat screen TV could be a determining factor in marrying someone-guess i would never have made it to any matrimonial list in any case especially since i clean my own bathroom! my husband had only an air-mattress in his name thanks to his free wheeling, globetrotting lifestyle prior to our marriage. the only concession he made to lifestyle were his golfclubs and icehockey equipment. Marriage has historically been an economic arrangement first and foremost, a partnership to weather the rough waters of life. Ancient Rome at the peak of its affluence saw a decline in marriages because people saw no reason to marry. This led to the introduction of the tax sop for married couples that most modern states continue to this day. It is no surprise then that arranged marriages even today resemble the harsh haggling and negotiation of a bazaar. Ancient love stories notwithstanding, marrying for love is a relatively recent phenomenon worldwide, less than 100 years old. It remains to be seen if marrying for love is a sustainable idea, afaik there is very little evidence either way at the moment. On a related note, the human gene is inherently polygamous - obviously therefore modern social conditioning of monogamy runs contrary to genetic traits, and is in a somewhat risk prone position. Marriages in ancient Rome or India carried no such rider of monogamy for example. OTOH, modern society seems to have aids to counter the genetic urges, such as pornography. Porn is a socially acceptable (in most cultures) outlet for genetic urges. Ironically therefore pornography saves marriages more often than not! Some reading: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7982132.stm http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/inourtime_20020321.shtml Cheeni P.S. Couldn't resist stirring the pot a bit, the thread was getting boring :-)
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Radhika, Y. radhik...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't realize a flat screen TV could be a determining factor in marrying someone-guess i would never have made it to any matrimonial list in any case especially since i clean my own bathroom! my husband had only an air-mattress in his name thanks to his free wheeling, globetrotting lifestyle prior to our marriage. the only concession he made to lifestyle were his golfclubs and icehockey equipment. Marriage has historically been an economic arrangement first and foremost, a partnership to weather the rough waters of life. Ancient Rome at the peak of its affluence saw a decline in marriages because people saw no reason to marry. This led to the introduction of the tax sop for married couples that most modern states continue to this day. Shot in the dark - skewed sex ratio apart, what about female life expectancy, infant mortality rates? If females had lower life expectancy and infant mortality was high, society as such would move to polygamy. Once female and male life expectancy got closer, and infant mortality rate was lower, given the need for a proper home for the child, society as a whole would have encouraged monogamy. And when life expectancy and quality of life reach their peak, and there are no perceived threats, society as such loses the will to reproduce Simplistic perhaps, but somehow I feel there is more to all this than just economics. I tried to find some study which captured life expectancy trends for males and females. Kiran
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
On Tuesday 07 Apr 2009 12:17:36 am Kiran K Karthikeyan wrote: If females had lower life expectancy and infant mortality was high, society as such would move to polygamy. Once female and male life expectancy got closer, and infant mortality rate was lower, given the need for a proper home for the child, society as a whole would have encouraged monogamy. I am guessing that it is exactly the opposite. Societies with high maternal and infant mortalities would be normal human societies until about 100 years ago, and about 50% of the human population today. Apart from disease, which affected every segment of society, malnutrition as a cause of maternal and infant mortality affected the poor more than the wealthy, and obviously women far more than men. In a Dawkinsian sense the highest payoff for a human female in such a society would come from a faithful partner who would support her in times of vulnerability, while simultaneously supporting older but vulnerable children that she has. I suspect this has skewed things towards monogamy. Marriage is a human social construct in which monogamy is forced. As I have stated earlier I believe it has social benefits that are unrecognised by randy men and women who have access to birth control. In the absence of birth control, the human female gets to pay a higher price for polygamy than the male. shiv
[silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
Came across this, and found it too funny! http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123896998996190775.html Here is an extract: Given the difficulty in finding matches for Indians abroad, some matchmakers are now charging them more. Mr. Dave of Klassic Match charges a minimum fee of $100, versus $50 for candidates living in India. He charges more for specific requirements. For instance, he says some overseas Indians want a bride who is smart, fluent in English, and simultaneously, docile in the house. He says such women are now harder to find, so he bumps up his fees for some searches. I suspect this is satire, even the names of the marriage bureaus seem too fantastic! - divya http://nimbupani.com/blog
Re: [silk] Indian Men Living in U.S. Strike Out
This is Krish Ashok blog material On Mon, April 6, 2009 10:45 am, Divya Manian wrote: Came across this, and found it too funny! http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123896998996190775.html Here is an extract: Given the difficulty in finding matches for Indians abroad, some matchmakers are now charging them more. Mr. Dave of Klassic Match charges a minimum fee of $100, versus $50 for candidates living in India. He charges more for specific requirements. For instance, he says some overseas Indians want a bride who is smart, fluent in English, and simultaneously, docile in the house. He says such women are now harder to find, so he bumps up his fees for some searches. I suspect this is satire, even the names of the marriage bureaus seem too fantastic! - divya http://nimbupani.com/blog
