And Deepa, NOBODY criticises Shiv. Once he posts, everyone knows whom to applaud, whom to jeer. Until then, there is uncertainty, fear and doubt.
bonobashi >________________________________ > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <sur...@hserus.net> >To: silklist@lists.hserus.net; Saritha Rai <sarirai...@yahoo.com> >Sent: Wednesday, 28 March 2012 6:38 AM >Subject: Re: [silk] Fwd: Life and Love in Bangalore > > >Articulateness versus rhetoric with loaded terminology is always an >interesting distinction > >People in a comfort zone (stay at home spouse, extended family etc available >to take care of the kid) aren't the best qualified to comment on this issue > >Deliberate neglect or abuse, which can happen in either situation, usually >gets countered one of two ways - community, which kind of gets lost in a much >more anonymous society, or government mandated childcare - which isn't >sufficiently developed in India > >-- >srs (blackberry) >________________________________ > >From: Deepa Mohan <mohande...@gmail.com> >Sender: silklist-bounces+suresh=hserus....@lists.hserus.net >Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 05:55:40 +0530 >To: <silklist@lists.hserus.net>; Saritha Rai<sarirai...@yahoo.com> >ReplyTo: silklist@lists.hserus.net >Subject: Re: [silk] Fwd: Life and Love in Bangalore > > > > >On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Srini RamaKrishnan <che...@gmail.com> wrote: > >On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 6:50 PM, ss <cybers...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> The former conforms to dharma, the latter is adharma. >> >> India went through an even greater transition in the last 70 some >>independent years, second only to the Chinese cultural revolution, and >>yet it's gone unnoticed. Like the silent killer of the night, >>inconspicuous yet deadly. >> >> >Cheeni...that was so impressive. I had not thought of it as a cultural >revolution, and that is, of course, what it has been. > > >But, Cheeni, you criticise Shiv for terming it "dharma vs adharma"....but >when you call it a "silent killer of the night" (I remembered Bhopal when I >read that)...you too, take a judgemental stance. > > >I cannot believe that the old system was always good; the concept of family >before self, of duty before self, did, in my opinion, lead to a lot of bad >practices, and deep unhappiness. This was especially so when a person did not >believe implicitly in this concept. > > >For better or worse (obviously, you two feel it was for worse), the change has >come to stay. We are now cocooned in individuality; but yet, I feel that we >are quite connected to our families and to our friends. > > >The question of "who will care for the children" has always been a complex >one, and continues to be so. I, for one, would rather have parents drop off >their children at a night care, even if they are partying, than either drag >them to unsuitable places, or stay at home with them and vent their >frustration on them. I have seen this happen so often in the old family >system. A constant refrain of "I gave up a, b, c, for you, be grateful to me" >is like the Chinese water torture....a constant drip, drip, drip of mental >tyranny. > > >What is old is familiar, but for that reason, it cannot be held to be >universally good. We just have to accept that many parents today cannot quit >their jobs and be with *their* parents; they have to lead a lifestyle >different from their parents' and they have to accept solutions about child >care, that are different. > > >Hmm...I wish I was as articulate as Cheeni or Shiv is...I'm just trying to >say, we have to accept the new realities and not hanker after the old, seeing >them through the rose-tinted glasses of selective memory and hallowed >traditions. > > >Deepa. > >
