Are Christian/Hindu women exploited & sex objects

Originally posted by Aelfgifu   Ever heard of the Sexual revolution, in the 60ies? Women fought for their rights and got them. Tipu and the man he quotes apparently never bothered to see if relality was the same as theory. In this country, women are equal to man before the law.

Edited by Mosquito - 01-Nov-2006 at 03:51

Actually there is no such law. The requirement is to be modest (men and women). Personally I think wearing a burkha is terribly immodest.

Edited by RajputGirl - 01-Nov-2006 at 21:33

Originally posted by Mortaza Then why this burkha problem keeps ere have been cases where men propping up again & again ? This is not always true, Infact It is generaly women who effect men.  At least It is how I said in Turkey. Generaly It is girls who use headscarf protested for headscarf ban, not men. So men is not trying to enslave women. (sometimes it happen.) but women prefer to use these. Of course I am  talking about democratic countries.

Sorry friend, I am not anti muslim, but anti Indian traitors, whether Hindu or muslim.

An interesting point which has been raised is that while women in Muslim countries may suffer disadvatages in some areas of society, such as the judiciary and employment, that this may be a result of factors indigenous to the country itself and not to Islamic religion. It is no secret that many countries in the Islamic world, having only gained independence in the mid 20th century, have been slower in taking up many of the social, political and equality based rights adopted by other countries over the same time perio.

So while it may be to the benefit and empowerment of women in these countries that their governments be receptive to outside ideas concerning womens' rights, we must be careful in distinguishing which disadvantages in these countries stem from religion and which are simply the result of age old mysoginy (which all societies at one point or another have engaged in).

Originally posted by Vivek Sharma at best makes them look like vertical black boxes walking without an identitiy of their own.

@ Vivek

Your description of Indian women life in your first post is ... inaccurate to say the least.

Most of the women who in Asian and South American countries manage to access political power come from powerful families/clan for whom they represent little more than their father/brother/husband political reincarnation.

What does worshipping godess has to do with women's liberty. Athens was named after Athena and was an extremely sexist society. Portugal worships the virgin of Fatima and is not properly a female-power-friendly country.

Their is something in the Indian subcontinental culture which makes it so. Srimavo Bhandarnaike of Sri Lanka was the First elected Woman Head of State in the world, Indira Gandhi was the most powerfull Executive head of State India has ever had, In Bangladesh politics, you have to be with either of the two women to be in Politics, The battle is between which of the two women Hasina & Khalida are going to win, Men are entirely ruled out. Pakistan has unfortunately not got much chance to experiment with democracy, but in the days when the short lived paki democracy was at it's highest ever glory, even Pakistan had a women, Benazir Bhutto as the prime minister. India off course has Sonia Gandhi as the CEO. Nepal & Bhutan are the only countries that remain, but then they are monarchies, not democracies. 

Srimavo Bhandarnaike: was the wife of an assassinated Sri Lanka Prime Minister.
Sheikh Hasina : her father was an assassinated Bengladesh Prime Minister.
Khaleda Zia: widow of assassinated Bengladesh President.
Sonia Gandhi: widow of an assassinated Prime Minister (himself son of an assassinated PM).
Priyanka Gandhi-Vadra  is daughter, granddaughter, and great-granddaughter of PM. Daddy was PM and assassinated.

I do see a 'strong pattern' here as our statistician friends would say...
Not only the 8 women you mentionned were relative of a former head of state but all of these relatives died in office, 7 of them being killed.

I'd say Indian Peninsula is a clanic society where a woman can bebefit from her male relatives prestige and built up her own starting from there. Yet it is no a society where women as such have any weight in politics. All it proves is nepotism. It is a bite as saying: 1600 and 1850 England were heaven for women see there were these two mighty queens.

Also to be fair there are a few exception
  Mamata Banerjee in West Bengal
  Vasundhara Raje in Rajastan (father mother and husband powerful politician, though none was killed), her sister Yashodhara Raje is a proeminant politician as well (as well as her late brother and her nefew).
 
But
  Janaki Ramachandran succeeded her late husband Maruthur Gopala Ramachandran as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu
  Jayalalithaa Jayaram was also a protege/mistress of Maruthur Gopala Ramachandran and became Chief Minister in the 1990's. (I've just red on wikipedia how loved Maruthur Gopala Ramachandran was and it is not surprising that both his wife and he mistress became CM).
  Rabri Devi was elected several times Bihar CM while her husband Lalu Prasad Yadav was in jail, she is said to be illiterate.

The group of female heiress is called pallu and some argue they emotionally blackmail voters by constently reminding them of their late relative.

Ok to conclude, India doesn't give much room to women in politics, but as it gives more importance to caste and kinship than gender, women may find their way to top political position. The same is not true in Arab countries for example. I'm not sure that if Mr Mubarak or Mr Assad offsprings had been female they could have become the political heir of their fathers.


Edited by Maharbbal - 04-Nov-2006 at 08:03

And preciesly what is different in the culture between a muslim from Bangladesh and a Hindu from the Indian state of Bengal?

Jack all!