Intra human Marriages

[goundamani]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

I was about to respond in the thread "inter caste marriages".Nowever the original initiator of the thread wanted that thread to be closed and a new thread started.So I start this.

For people who dont believe in castes, the word 'inter caste' itself is offensive.When two consenting adults want to enter into a relationship, that is the end of matter.Nobody has anything else to say here.Caste, religion etc, etc all become superficial here.

But castes do exist in mind of casteists and they do make a hue and cry about intra human marriages.While ascertaining that "it is the individual right of two people to get married,they still somehow dont agree that female members of their group should not marry people whom they disapprove eg:maran, chidambaram"

Karthik chidambaram was one of the most eligible bachelors in TN during his time and he married a woman of his choice.Period.

Same was the case with maran. Period.

same was the case with sadhasivam iyer who married MS subbulakshmi. Period.

What is there to argue in this? I certainly do not understand.Maran and chidambaram are called as 'thieves'.That certainly is your perception and you are welcome to have it. These girls did not share the perception.Law doesn not share your perception. Simple,end of matter.

Arranged marriages themselves are a type of violence perpetuated on women. This system is the mother of all evils like dowry and female foeticide.
Like a gang of robbers groom's family will visit the bride's house, will behave like terrorists and torture the poor girl's father and mother.Usually for many girls, this will be a horrific and shameful experience.Many girls will be terribly afraid and shiver to death when they are ragged by this gang."Do you know to sing?, sing a song, turn and walk,show me your teeth"...are some of the questions asked by this gang when they 'inspect' the female to be 'bought'.In pollachi market buyers will inspect cattle in this method only.

Then this gang of robbers will extract a handsome dowry and will often force the girl's father to beg,borrow or steal.

Nothing of this sort exists in love marriages.Two people love and get married. It is good if their parents and relatives ostracize them.The girl will live happily without the torture of inlaws. A life freed from casteism, dowry, female foeticide, inlaws,.wow...

I cannot understand why some people want to retain a system which is full of evils like dowry, male chavunism, casteism, female foeticide , torture of inlaws and forced marriages.

 

[born_again_aiyer_maami]

Another perspective ...

Goundamani,
I beg to differ - despite the fact that there was a time when I subscribed to your point of view.
Unfortunately, marriage is not as trivial as 'two people coming together in love, and living happily ever after' ! Life you see - is not a fairy-tale.
I have seen many of these 'intra-human' marriages fall apart.
I do not deny that many of the evils you describe exist in our society - but the solutions you prescribe are very simplistic, and they simply do not work.
At best, these marriages are as good/as bad as the arranged marriages that you so vehemently trash.
Last week-end I was with an old friend - who had in 'intra-human' marriage of 12 years, is estranged from family, divorced, and a little lost. My friend just could not deal with an idle, uneducated spouse! - it was that simple. Unfortunately, in life it is not possible to live on "love and air".
Nor is this friend's experience singular.
Marriage is a social institution - and a society is composed of invisible walls.
Laws, mores, customs, values, meanings and symbols are the bricks and mortar of society. The fact that these are 'invisible' - does not mean that they do not exist. They are even more 'invisible' since we have migrated from the land of our origin. We are a community in flux - many of our mores and customs are changing (some for the better!) - but it is impossible for a human being to shed his/her origins completely.
Our values and expectations are set very early in life. Let me give you a game-theoretic perspective: Norms give a person a rule of thumb for how they should behave. A rational person acts according to the rule if it is optimal for them. The situation can be described as follows. A norm gives an expectation of how other people act in a given situation (macro). A person acts optimally based on this expectation (micro). In order for a norm to be stable, people's actions must reconstitute the expectation without change (micro-macro feedback loop). A set of such correct stable expectations is necessary for two/more people to function together. The stability of the norm is disrupted when people arrive at marriage with vastly different life-styles/backgrounds/expectations. Every player, plays by and reinvents his/her own set of rules and it becomes impossible to attain 'Nash equilibrium'.

 

[mrifan]

Psychohistory, Part I

I think the following sequence holds for many people:

1. teenage: I hate my parents, they just do not understand. They keep saying, "When I was your age, I was also rebellious, and I wish I hadn't made some choices then." I don't believe them, I bet they were always conforming kids. Why won't they let me do this?

2. single: finally I am free to explore on my own and do my own things. My parents will understand someday.

3. married, no kids: I think a sense of balance is needed in life. Maybe a conservative approach would be ok to try just to be safe.

4. married, about to be teenage kids: I am getting worried, maybe my parents were right, after all they have experience and went through this. I should call them and see what they have to say about some of these situations.

5. married, teenage kids: I keep telling my kids I was rebellious like them once, and that they should think carefully before doing some things. Why don't they believe me? It is for their good after all, life is not idealistic, reality can be more complicated.


Repeat steps 1-5 in every generation.

 

[mrifan]

Psychohistory, Part II

A game-theoretic approach implicitly contains the assumption about a fairly consistent, and repeatable pattern of behavior for the "units" involved in the interaction model. It is in a way a trying to guess the macro behavior of a gas, based on modeling the individual molecules, which interact in a certain predictable way. Hence, the outcome is represented in terms of probabilities, a 30% chance of this outcome, a 40% chance of that outcome etc.

What is missing is to represent the molecules, in this case, human beings, with a truly quantum randomness in the details of the individual molecule. This changes the picture of the entire macrocosm when taken in the aggregate. For example, quantum theory tells us why the same material, alkaline-silica glass containing colloidal copper nanoparticles abruptly changes color from green to yellow, when the copper particles are above a certain diameter.

Isaac Asimov made a promising beginning towards this end, by introducing the concept of "psychohistory". Instead of modeling an individual human being in order to deduce the patterns of societal interactions, a "clump" of humans is statistically averaged using historical data to fine-tune the model. This keeps the number of units in the model to a manageable number, and averages out the inevitable outliers, who have a negligible impact on the group behavior. This provides the protagonist in Asimov's fiction (The Foundation trilogy - Hari Seldon), with a startlingly clear grasp of the evolution of human interactions, and a predictability in the evolution of each group in response to specific stimuli.

The point of the entire discourse above is to say, "Listen to your parents!". They may not call it psychohistory, but they crunch the same equations nonetheless by calling it experience, tradition, intuition, whatever. Ignoring the outliers, the mainstream thus survives for thousands of years by leveraging this experience. Let us not throw it away based on propaganda.

 

[mrifan]

Seniority

I still feel a bit weird when I see Senior member beside my username. After all in real life, I am very much a junior! Maybe this Senior/Junior member qualification scheme should be dropped, lest one automatically associate that honorific with age!

 

[Vaylan]

Sriman Goundamani,

You have presented an excellent, ground-breaking idea. Please accept my congratulations !

I would like to illustrate how well this works in real life, with your kind permission.Since you are the originator, I would like to use your life as example so that you may get full credit.

Say Sri Goundamani has a unmarried daughter, Sow. Gundu Manikyam.
By virtue of being OBC/SC/ST/Martians ( kindly choose, I am unaware of your background ), Gundu is studying in a BE course, sixth semester. Gundu falls in love with the local sanitation worker Lenin who she meets when he comes to clean the facilities in her college.
After taking her to movies ( tent - not Sathya a/c etc for one month, Lenin approaches Gundu's parents for her hand in marriage. True to his principles, Sri Goundamani says "go ahead!" Sri Goundamani's wife has some misgivings but Sri Goundamani reminds her of how he married her and she is silenced.

Wedding is done is very modern style - no silly Brahmin priests, some revolutionary anti-casteist songs are played, some great Dravidian "leaders" are invited to bless the couple, toddy and arrack are served etc.

Couple are married, Gundu moves to Lenin's hut, though they are poor, she is very happy, washing clothes in the Kuvam, drinking water from same, watching neighbour's TV, riding in Lenin's corporation lorry to college etc.

Because of Lenin's drinking habit, though, Gundu finds it necessary to work part-time as a sales girl so that the couple can eat food. Because of this, her studies begin to suffer and she fails in many subjects. Soon she is forced to quit college in her seventh semester and work full-time. Of later Lenin has started hitting her to get more money for his drink.


One day she simply runs away from his hut and comes back to Sri Goundamani's house. For some time life continues as before, but suddenly Sri Goundamani's health takes a turn for the worse. Gundu is now the sole breadwinner , barely eking out a hand-to-mouth existence with her limited education. One day she loses even that job and is forced to start begging to keep herself and her family alive.

The future looks grim - she is afraid she may have to go even worse than begging.

Normally human fathers would be greatly concerned at this plight of their children. However this "superhuman" father Sri Goundamani is not fazed by these events. From his sick bed, Sri Goundamani says "Arranged marriages themselves are a type of violence perpetuated on women. Good thing I let my daughter have a love marriage. Now she is walking on the street, so what. As my idol Periyar said, women get trapped in the name of morals. Now my little girl is free to do whatever she wants with whoever she wants. She is liberated!"

Goundamani Sir, if everyone was this clever, the streets would be filled with "liberated" women. Hats off to you!

PS - This "superhuman" thinking is also seen in animals which do not care for their young after the initial basics of food and protection in their young age.
So, Intra-human may not be a good name for this kind of arrangement. Instead of "Inter-caste" -Maybe we should say "Inter-Species".

 

[mrifan]

Diversity is good!

Goundamani,
I beg to differ - despite the fact that there was a time when I subscribed to your point of view.
Unfortunately, marriage is not as trivial as 'two people coming together in love, and living happily ever after' ! Life you see - is not a fairy-tale.
I have seen many of these 'intra-human' marriages fall apart.
I do not deny that many of the evils you describe exist in our society - but the solutions you prescribe are very simplistic, and they simply do not work.
At best, these marriages are as good/as bad as the arranged marriages that you so vehemently trash.
Last week-end I was with an old friend - who had in 'intra-human' marriage of 12 years, is estranged from family, divorced, and a little lost. My friend just could not deal with an idle, uneducated spouse! - it was that simple. Unfortunately, in life it is not possible to live on "love and air".
Nor is this friend's experience singular.
Marriage is a social institution - and a society is composed of invisible walls.
Laws, mores, customs, values, meanings and symbols are the bricks and mortar of society. The fact that these are 'invisible' - does not mean that they do not exist. They are even more 'invisible' since we have migrated from the land of our origin. We are a community in flux - many of our mores and customs are changing (some for the better!) - but it is impossible for a human being to shed his/her origins completely.

I think diversity is good! I consider myself fortunate to have lived in diverse societies like India and USA, where there are different languages, races, faiths, groups etc living in harmony with the freedom to practice whatever they want in private, and get along with each other in public. Why do we have to enforce uniformity on everyone? If everyone looked the same, believed the same things, married at random, the world would be such a boring place! Why is the lack of uniformity considered such a horrible thing?

Cosmologically, the universe was at first composed of hydrogen only, but then more complicated stable molecules like helium, carbon, oxygen, iron etc formed, by combining selectively with other elements. It made life possible. Instead if all combinations had been considered unstable, and each molecule was forced to be ripped apart so that it would merge at random, the universe would still be composed of only hydrogen, and nothing else, a dull, dark, empty and purposeless place.

Humans arose from monkeys, and split into multiple races and then into different subgroups etc. While wars did take place due to competition for resources, the concomitant development of human technology due to specialization among different societies and groups, has also made it possible to expand resources so that humans live far more comfortably than ever at the top of the food chain. I think that is great! Let us not all go back into homo erectus stage. It is important to learn to get along with each other, and maintain our diversity. I feel that is the stable solution to the human social model.

I have tried to explain this as best as I can. If people still are not able to expand their minds to absorb this concept and remain concerned with the minutiae, I give up. It is like trying to explain the color red to a blind person. Even Einstein could not have succeeded in that!

 

[mrifan]

Carbon atoms are racist and casteist!

I am a hydrogen atom. Everyone knows amorphous carbon atoms prefer to bond with other amorphous carbon atoms. What about the poor crystalline carbon atom? What about us poor hydrogen atoms, who are expected to usually bond only with another hydrogen atom. I think carbon, silicon and other atoms, are racist and casteist. After all, don't we all have the same protons and electrons in our body? Is it not a sin to segregate us elements by type, like the upper periodic table and the lower periodic table. In fact, I think this is a conspiracy by God to abuse us poor hydrogen atoms.

I would like to request God to make a change to the constitution...er..the laws of physics, to prevent this selective bonding preference. All atoms should bond at random with all other atoms, and only call it intra-atom bonding. Anything else is an insult to all of us atoms. Each atom checks the valence of the other atom, and then decides to only bond with a certain group of atoms. This is absolutely un-atomic behavior, and violates the intra-atom equality. Why can a hydrogen atom not enter the iron atoms house...er...I mean the iron atom's quantum neighborhood, just because it is higher up in the periodic table? Why this discrimination against its atomic brother?

So please God, ensure all bonds are equally preferred, for true intra-atomic bonding equality... Thanks a lot.. oops, looks like we just lost the universe...uh oh..

 

[mrifan]

Please, let us not get personal

While I do understand the overall import of the following post, I feel one of the virtues of this forum is that personal attacks are very uncommon and not encouraged. In my opinion, it might be best to try to convey one's thoughts, by wording it in a neutral manner, just as one would if one were face-to-face with that person in a group in public.

Sriman Goundamani,

You have presented an excellent, ground-breaking idea. Please accept my congratulations !

I would like to illustrate how well this works in real life, with your kind permission.Since you are the originator, I would like to use your life as example so that you may get full credit.

Say Sri Goundamani has a unmarried daughter, Sow. Gundu Manikyam.
By virtue of being OBC/SC/ST/Martians ( kindly choose, I am unaware of your background ), Gundu is studying in a BE course, sixth semester. Gundu falls in love with the local sanitation worker Lenin who she meets when he comes to clean the facilities in her college.
After taking her to movies ( tent - not Sathya a/c etc for one month, Lenin approaches Gundu's parents for her hand in marriage. True to his principles, Sri Goundamani says "go ahead!" Sri Goundamani's wife has some misgivings but Sri Goundamani reminds her of how he married her and she is silenced.

Wedding is done is very modern style - no silly Brahmin priests, some revolutionary anti-casteist songs are played, some great Dravidian "leaders" are invited to bless the couple, toddy and arrack are served etc.

Couple are married, Gundu moves to Lenin's hut, though they are poor, she is very happy, washing clothes in the Kuvam, drinking water from same, watching neighbour's TV, riding in Lenin's corporation lorry to college etc.

Because of Lenin's drinking habit, though, Gundu finds it necessary to work part-time as a sales girl so that the couple can eat food. Because of this, her studies begin to suffer and she fails in many subjects. Soon she is forced to quit college in her seventh semester and work full-time. Of later Lenin has started hitting her to get more money for his drink.


One day she simply runs away from his hut and comes back to Sri Goundamani's house. For some time life continues as before, but suddenly Sri Goundamani's health takes a turn for the worse. Gundu is now the sole breadwinner , barely eking out a hand-to-mouth existence with her limited education. One day she loses even that job and is forced to start begging to keep herself and her family alive.

The future looks grim - she is afraid she may have to go even worse than begging.

Normally human fathers would be greatly concerned at this plight of their children. However this "superhuman" father Sri Goundamani is not fazed by these events. From his sick bed, Sri Goundamani says "Arranged marriages themselves are a type of violence perpetuated on women. Good thing I let my daughter have a love marriage. Now she is walking on the street, so what. As my idol Periyar said, women get trapped in the name of morals. Now my little girl is free to do whatever she wants with whoever she wants. She is liberated!"

Goundamani Sir, if everyone was this clever, the streets would be filled with "liberated" women. Hats off to you!

PS - This "superhuman" thinking is also seen in animals which do not care for their young after the initial basics of food and protection in their young age.
So, Intra-human may not be a good name for this kind of arrangement. Instead of "Inter-caste" -Maybe we should say "Inter-Species".

 

[Vaylan]

Sriman Mrifan Sahib,

What makes you think this is an attack, let alone a personal one ? Sri Goundamani obviously believes in eliminating the horrors of arranged marriages through love marriages. Being a man of integrity he would definitely stand for his principle and lead the way in this great task.

Now if he was to say " I don't want to do it in my case - I just meant for others to follow it - please do not include me in your example" then I will gladly edit the post.

But I would like Sri Goundamani to say what he thinks - and prefer that you talk only for yourself.
Many pranams

 

[born_again_aiyer_maami]

Hilarious!

Vaylan & Mrifan - Sirs,
Your narratives are simply hilarious! I had tears streaming from my eyes!
Vaylan Sir - particularly enjoyed your choice of names Gundu Manickyam & Lenin !!!
Mrifan Sir - your analogy with atomic valency is very powerful and apt!

 

[NARAS]

sir - experience has shown that arranged marriages are successful, whereas love marriages are flops mostly. there could be a sentimental reason for this.a man or woman, who 'falls' in love and marries his or her lover, against the wishes of parents, incurs the wrath of parents, whose stomach burns like anything. ofcourse, no parent would like his child to suffer, even if the child has committed a mistake. but when the stomach of the parent burns, even god cannot prevent the couple from suffering. love marriages can succeed, if the parents consent to it. otherwise they will lead to divorces. love marriage & divorce are siames twins , which can never be separated!

 

[hariharan1972]

I still feel a bit weird when I see Senior member beside my username. After all in real life, I am very much a junior!

Mrifan,

You want us to believe this after you quote "Quantum theory" & 'what-was-that-?" psychohistory !!!!!

 

[hariharan1972]

How 'bout this ?

Is it not a sin to segregate us elements by type, like the upper periodic table and the lower periodic table.

I am a 'half-tiger' in Science. Given my 'handicap' my contribution to this 'noble cause' would be :

a) The new classification should be named 'Perioric' table.

b) Atoms which refuse/reject the new classification should be coined as "paarpana atoms" & should be placed at the lowest rung of the 'perioric' table

c) Needless to say "OBC Atoms" should get the pride of place in the 'perioric' table

 

[lotus_quartz]

b) Atoms which refuse/reject the new classification should be coined as "paarpana atoms" & should be placed at the lowest rung of the 'perioric' table

Paarpana elements would naturally get placed in 'Rare Earth Material Group of Elements' group of the periodic table due to their rareness and exclusiveness.

Soon thereafter, the group will have two sub groups - iyer paarpan elements and iyengaar paarpan elements !

 

[goundamani]

Was surprised to read the responses.

One member quotes atomic theory, quantum theory to justify arranged marraiges.

Another narrates an interesting scenario, with all sorts of wild guessing..but boring story.I will give it 5 out of 10.

As usual the rest of the postings are full of advice, (you will understand your parents when you become old, etc..etc..etc..)

Let me start my reply to B.A.I.Mami...

Mami mostly argues from her friends' experiences.I am sorry that her friend's experiences were bad.But almost all of my friends live happily ever after love marriage.So what conclusion do we arrvie from these two contrary experiences?

The underlying rule is simple. One cannot generalize one's experience to the whole world.

Mami next argues about laws, morals, norms etc which are the brick and mortor of the society.This is a logical fallacy called as argument by tradition.


Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done." This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. X is old or traditional
2. Therefore X is correct or better.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer. This is made quite obvious by the following example: The theory that witches and demons cause disease is far older than the theory that microrganisms cause diseases. Therefore, the theory about witches and demons must be true.

 

[mrifan]

Marriages in "liberal" America, Europe

All marriages in America and Europe are "love" marriages. Most People have relations with multiple partners before getting married, some get married and still have multiple partners, and the divorce rate is close to 50%. I certainly wouldn't say this is the ideal one should be striving for. A marriage is a social institution, and as such requires family support at many crucial junctures in life. It is completely erroneous to say that "love" marriages in India are the most successful ones of all. The modern arranged marriage, is not like the practices of ancient times, where the bride and groom were not really involved in the decision. While rural parts of India may still follow this custom to a certain extent, an arranged marriage of today usually involves some pre-screening of the parties on the part of the parents, and the bride and groom are fully involved in the decision. While the selection may be limited because of the pre-screening due to socio-economic considerations, there are many positive aspects. Many Americans have actually told me they see certain good points about such a process. There are always going to be some rebellious types who would want to marry across racial/religious/caste/... lines, and some of those unions may indeed be successful, no doubt.

Rural India will also change as urbanization makes inroads there, and some of the practices like dowry and domestic violence will decline with greater awareness and increasing education for both men and women.

sir - experience has shown that arranged marriages are successful, whereas love marriages are flops mostly. there could be a sentimental reason for this.a man or woman, who 'falls' in love and marries his or her lover, against the wishes of parents, incurs the wrath of parents, whose stomach burns like anything. ofcourse, no parent would like his child to suffer, even if the child has committed a mistake. but when the stomach of the parent burns, even god cannot prevent the couple from suffering. love marriages can succeed, if the parents consent to it. otherwise they will lead to divorces. love marriage & divorce are siames twins , which can never be separated!

 

[mrifan]

Why am I not surprised?

Actually, I was not surprised when I read the following, in fact I had been expecting it. I was hoping against hope that one would have been able to expand one's mind to realize the underlying metaphors about the singular contributions of diversity, and pluralism, fundamental to the existence of life in the universe and of human progress, but instead I should have realized I was dashing my head against the iron curtain of communism . My head hurts...

Anyway, as I mentioned, if the focus remains on the minutiae, it is best to give up and politely go on one's own way. As mentioned in the Vedanta, "Satyameva Jayate", the truth will win in the end.

Was surprised to read the responses.

One member quotes atomic theory, quantum theory to justify arranged marraiges.

 

[goundamani]

Mr.Vayalan seems to be very angry against me for some reasons.He comes out with a wild story, involving my unborn daughter and son-in-law, puts my unborn daughter in a fix (because he is the script writer) and tells me this happened only because of my belief.

First of all this story isnt powerful enough to make me to refuse the freedom of choice which were given by God and law to my unborn daughter/son.And next I dont want to raise them as chikin. Teach kids to swim and throw them in water.Fittest will survive, useless will sink.If you dont want to face the consequences of your actions, why do you even want the power to make decisions?In that case you are unfit to be a ruler.You can only be ruled.

Such kids who are parent dependent, after marriage will become spouse dependent and after becoming old will become child dependent. But they never become independent.

What is the point in raising dependent children?If anybody does that he has failed as a father.If any animal raises its offspring in the wild in this fashion, then it's offspring will become lunch very soon.

This is another observation which I have made in arranged marriages.usually boys who do arranged marriages will be amma gondu (mother dependent). After marriage that will reverse and he will become uxorious.The more you are 'amma gondu' before marriage, the more uxorious you become after arranged marriage.Such kids need a mundanai forever to hang around. That's all.

Another ill effect of arranged marriages..

 

[hariharan1972]

Y Theory !

Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done." This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. X is old or traditional
2. Therefore X is correct or better.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer.

Goundamani,

How 'bout Y Theory

1. Y is contemporary or modern
2. Therefore Y is correct or better than X

Somehow i get the feeling that you are brainwashed into believing that Brahmins have to bend over backwards to atone for their sins.

Why i bring the brahmin issue is that you have cleverly indulged in 'surrogate brahmin bashing' when you started your thread.

True, Mrs Maran, Mrs Karthik Chidambaram exercised their choices & we have no right to question. I completely agree with you this doesn't make Maran & Chidambaram cheats.

However, if one looks at it dispassionately, it is not too difficult to see that Maran & Chidambaram are only 'vai sollil veerars'. One could argue that why Maran & Chidambaram couldn't have taken their brides from under-privileged societies and actually 'act upon' what they go about preaching the world.
Before you jump in with the 'personal choice' argument, let me hastely admit it myself.

However, How fair is it to criticise brahmins for their choices while retaining their own personal choices ?

And who gave you the idea about 'Traditional marriages' being disasters while 'Love marriages' are roaring successes ? If it's your view, well, i raise a toast !!!!

It seems like you are keen on 'demonising' arranged marriages while conveniently ignoring the fact that this is the system that has been in vogue for centuries & has produced you & me. Surely it cannot be a complete disaster.

While on 'Love marriages' what is your take on people who cannot differentiate between 'infactuation, puppy love' and loose their careers. It is only in movies that a college dropout makes it big (most often than not within the duration of a song). Reality is far different.

If you say 'Love marriage' is an important tool to create a casteless society, i wouldn't argue, but to broadbrush 'Arranged marriages' as a system vicitimising the women is not something i will buy into.

I honestly feel that the time has come when we should define what is 'non-casteist' -

1. I feel it is respecting an individual for his abilities, traits and thoughts & not discriminate him for his practices in his private domain

2. I feel non-casteist doesn't mean 'abolition of castes' but 'irrelevance of caste' in the public domain.

3. I feel casteist is one who carries his 'personal baggage' into a public domain & fiercely protects it.

Mr Goundamani, i know you will quote me multiple times & produce counter posts, but the fact remains that caste will not be eliminated merely by brahmins abrogating their practices for the simple reason that the baton of caste is not held by them.

You are perhaps over exposed to DK & your 'hero' EVR's thoughts which IMHO overrides your natural thought process.

In a lighter vein, have you considered changing your screen name to Veeramani ?

 

[goundamani]

Mrifan talks about 50% divorce rate in west and multiple partners before marriage. Both are very healthy signs of a matured civilization.

It is a pity that many Indian women are unable to divorce their chavunistic, wife beating and drunkard husbands.Due to social norms they had to live with such creatures.Not only in villages, but also in towns many educated, well employed women live under a marriage lock which they can never get out from. A divorced woman is still socially looked down, her sisters would get married if she divorces, nobody will rent her a house, rowdies will wander after her if she lives alone....OMG..how many social stigmas force indian women to live with such creatures?

In the west no such social stigmas exist.A marriage lasts only as long as both parties love each other.How healthy such a system appears?What do we get by forcing women into life long hells and being proud of that fact?

Only if threat of divorce exists, men will become responsible about their wives.

And next multiple sex partners before marriage.

India refuses sex before marriage to its youth.What happens as a result?Our youth stand in busstops, gazing and teasing women, running after them for years, eveteasing them, misbehaving with them on bus and workplaces, passing sexual rude comments and so on.Many youth go to brothel houses..why does all this happen?

Boys reach puberty around age 11 or 12.They get married only at 27 or 30.In many cases even late.They are forced to remain virgins in the prime of their youth,which is a herculean task.No wonder they fall prey to all such dirty habits and waste their youth in porn magazines and busstands instead of studying well in colleges and schools.

On the other hand in west by age of 15 or 16 people really become experienced in sex. After it, they dont give much importance to it. They really can concentrate on their studies and those boys dont gaze and stare at women as if they have seen an alien. There is no eve teasing, no brothels, no misbehavior in bus, no need to give false promises and cheat women, simple.

 

[goundamani]

Dear hariharan,

I did not say love marriages are bad because they are modern.In fact they are as old as mammal civilization is.Only when apes evolved into humans did at some point of time, arranged marriages originate.So love marriages are not something modern.They are as old as hills are.

And the debate on personal versus private casteism-I can agree in it on certain points.But in real life it is very difficult to maintain this difference.Life is not black and white Hariharan sir,there are bound to be grey areas.For example if a person prevents his daughter from doing intercaste marriages, is it his private domain or public domain? Couple of days back I read that a muslim employee of Target refused to scan pork.Was it her public domain or private domain?

But I certainly agree with you that people should have the freedom to be on their own at their houses, as long as they dont break any law.But if this inhome behavior turns unethical then society cannot be blamed if it criticizes at that person.

Coming to Intra human marriages, yes..people who want to do arranged marriages, they should be free to do them.Only a stalinist regime will force love marriages on all..and love isnt something which is forced.I am not advocating such a system.

We are debating about the merits of two systems - love and arranged marriages and trying to find out which is better.Only such a debate will bring out the merits and demerits of both these types of marriages.

 

[goundamani]

Hariharan sir,

I did not change my name to veermanai because he is a bad comedian. Goundamani is a good comedian:becky:

Some other member accused me of being a 'periyarist'. I believe it was vayalan. Anyway, I have my own misgivings about periyarism and veeramaniyism. I know that some members hate them like poison, I dont do that. I try to see what good we can get from their philosophies. That doesnt mean i swallow line, hooker and stink of everything they said.

In my opinion, periyar said the right thing in the wrong way and took the wrong approach. Had he opposed casteism instead of opposing brahmins, dalit oppression by OBC's would have stopped. He did not do that. Had he opposed superstitions, instead of opposing hinduism, he would have got the support of mainstream hindu society and all the evils of hindu society would have been removed. It did not happen. At one stage his spite for brahmins overshadowed his thought process and he failed as a leader from that point onwards.

 

[NARAS]

sir - even if 2 persons of different castes, marry, their children would inherit the caste of the father as per law. so it is back to square one, as it leads the way & path to same old caste instead of creating a casteless society. even in t.nadu, which has been ruled by 'rationalists' for so many years, the law that a person inherits his or her father's caste prevails!!! so there is no point in eulogising inter caste or inter human marriages!!

 

[lotus_quartz]

AM vs LM

The issue of arranged marriages vs love marriages has stood before every indian irrespective of caste.

In olden days, arranged marriages were purposefully used to perpetuate the endogamous nature of the caste. No wonder, some of genetic strains, skin complexion and other traits could be preserved for so long.

Now due to enlightenment of the young generation due to availability of scientific and secular education, it is becoming increasingly difficult to perpetuate endogamous nature of any caste group for historical / ideological reasons.

The best would be to leave it to the discretion of the young generation. If they are convinced of the need and merit of perpetuating their endogamous caste group, let them do so. There is no point in forcing anyone to marry within a select choice set against their wishes.

Dear hariharan,

I did not say love marriages are bad because they are modern.In fact they are as old as mammal civilization is.Only when apes evolved into humans did at some point of time, arranged marriages originate.So love marriages are not something modern.They are as old as hills are.

And the debate on personal versus private casteism-I can agree in it on certain points.But in real life it is very difficult to maintain this difference.Life is not black and white Hariharan sir,there are bound to be grey areas.For example if a person prevents his daughter from doing intercaste marriages, is it his private domain or public domain? Couple of days back I read that a muslim employee of Target refused to scan pork.Was it her public domain or private domain?

But I certainly agree with you that people should have the freedom to be on their own at their houses, as long as they dont break any law.But if this inhome behavior turns unethical then society cannot be blamed if it criticizes at that person.

Coming to Intra human marriages, yes..people who want to do arranged marriages, they should be free to do them.Only a stalinist regime will force love marriages on all..and love isnt something which is forced.I am not advocating such a system.

We are debating about the merits of two systems - love and arranged marriages and trying to find out which is better.Only such a debate will bring out the merits and demerits of both these types of marriages.