கால பைரவன்;199132 said:
My opinion is that, if people can be arranged in a line from orthodox to "reformed", it is the "reformed" who attack the orthodox and it is seldom the other way around.
I do not know that I am "reformed" I do know that I am not "orthodox". I do not attack the "orthodox" as long as they do not attack, or criticize, me or my ways.
I have relatives who are "orthodox in my view", I respect their ways. I tolerate (more like accommodate) their views. But when they try to impose their views, I put my foot down.
sorry KB,
i am more with prasad in this one.
as you know with views, which are often contrary to maintaining values, just because they are the tradition. many a times, i think, our religion, with its built in caste hierarchy, does not care enough about the society, the poor, the unwanted, the abandoned and above all, deliberately created a class called panchamas.
along the way, our society also created subgroups of exploited... the devadasis come to my mind now. under the guise of religion, and 'wedded' to god, these girls were exploited sexually and monetarily. it took some courageous women like muthulakshmi reddi and others, to end this system. but there is a tendency, even now to paint a rosy picture of this, as is evidenced by sornamalaya's lectures, the most recent one at mgr university.
it is much like the white folks in the usa, who now present slavery as a kind paternalistic all caring cradle to grave arrangement for the blacks. well we all know, the truth is far from it, as is evidenced by the civil war in the usa.
i too have relatives, as they age, have been moving towards religion, poojas and yagams. along with it, what i find most uncomfortable, is their calcification of social attitudes. somehow, when the meat alcohol women left their lives, so too went the tolerance compassion and above all willingness to accommodate other pov.
i dont intend to provoke you or anyone else. these are my personal experiences. ofcourse others may be different.
one little example. raji here, i would consider fairly traditonal lady by my standards. but even she was wont to protest at the edict of the OP here regarding women. i think that itself says a lot about our traditionalist conservatives. because once we start on the way to 'purity', we cannot put a brake at a point, but have to keep on moving towards the 'absolute purity' point, as each and every perceived transgression becomes a black mark which needs to be wiped away. only to be replaced by another one, which needs further wiping. and so on. and on. and on....
peace.