After Tsunami, Indian Women Are Cast Onto One of Lowest Rungs

[Tsiyu]

After Losing Husbands to the Tsunami, Indian Women Are Cast Onto One of Society's Lowest Rungs: Widowhood.

By Deborah Hastings Associated Press Writer
Published: Jan 30, 2005



CUDDALORE, India (AP) - Even before the tsunami ripped away her husband, Vallatha was the subject of gossip and derision, through no fault of her own.
Because her eyes are a stunning shade of green, an unusual twist of genetics in a country of brown-eyed people, she was considered evil. Behind her back, villagers call her the "cat-eyed woman."

Adding to her reputation was the fact she married her husband because she loved him. That is not a valued reason to wed in this seaside village. Here, marriages are arranged by parents based on similarities of social status and the size of the bride's dowry. Worse, after 15 years of marriage, her husband recently took up with the woman next door. To save face among disapproving neighbors, he took that woman as his second wife, which violates Hindu custom. Vallatha was shamed.

Now she sits on the floor of her mother-in-law's stone house. The tsunami, which killed five men in this poor village of 200 families, has left her penniless, homeless and a new member of one of the lowest rungs of Indian society: widowhood.

For the rest of her life, she must depend on the continued good graces of her in-laws. Without them, she could lose her children and her place in this tight-knit community. She can never remarry.


more:

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB9KN1IL4E.html

[aquart]

1. NEVER remarry?

Big fat UGH.

[Tsiyu]

2. Amazing the conditions some humans place on other humans

No more than beasts, really.

[aquart]

5. Animals can mate again.

They also get to choose for themselves.

[lovuian]

3. In a patriarchal system this is the system for women

control the finances and you can control them!!!

[barb162]

4. I can't figure this story out

"To save face among disapproving neighbors, he took that woman as his second wife, which violates Hindu custom. Vallatha was shamed."

Ironic in any case that he violates custom and she gets the big fuck. I wonder how she will keep in the good graces of the in-laws if the in-laws don't want to feed her daughter til age 20.

[aquart]

6. As near as I can tell

If the man does something gross and stupid, the woman is shamed and has to take it. If the woman does something gross and stupid, the man is shamed and has to kill her.

That's the basis of honor killings, right?

So far as I'm concerned, if a man isn't responsible for his own actions, he shouldn't be allowed to vote or own property. And I'd think seriously about leash laws.

[SoCalDem]

7. Too bad they have never read Lysistrata

This is why education of girls and women is MORE important than anything else.

When 1/2 of the population is subjugated by the other 1/2 nothing good can come from it.:(



http://www.lysistrataproject.org/
Lysistrata Project: A call to peace, social justice, spiritual ...The Lysistrata Project. Peace in the world is attainable. What it takes is people who desire genuine Peace rooted in spiritual values ...
www.lysistrataproject.org/ - 14k - Jan 29, 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

[barb162]

11. you'd think his own family would shun him, not the first wife. Leash

laws sound very good! You'd also think the second wife's family would have put the nix on her seeing the married man since they are so controlling about women there.

[Charon]

8. Indian Women Are Cast Onto One of Lowest Rungs

This story should not be surprising. One of the old customs of Hindu India, was for the widow to throw herself on her husbands funeral pyre. I believe the custom was outlawed by the Indian Government.

[noonwitch]

9. My dad went on a Rotary-sponsored trip to India in 1979

He stayed with several wealthy families, while touring the country. The family he liked the best had been very influenced by british customs, and the father treated his wife as an equal and his daughters were educated and the family ate dinner together every night. Dad said the rest of the families segregated the women at meal times and didn't bother to educated their daughters, as they were just going to marry them off once they were old enough. The daughters attended an elite private school and we wrote letters back and forth until they (and my sister and I) were college aged.

We had an Indian businessman stay at out house for a week as part of the exchange. He was a really nice guy who adored his wife. He had a semi-arranged marriage, in that the parents arranged for them to meet and encouraged them to marry, but gave both parties the ability to walk away from it. He and his wife decided that their parents did a good job arranging a marriage and fell in love. Both he and his wife are college graduates.

It seems that there is a difference between the educated class and the other castes, in the status of women. Even within the wealthy class, there are differences. It isn't a religious thing, all the families my dad met and the guy who stayed with us were all hindus.

[FizzFuzz]

10. CEDAW--Global "Bill of Rights" for women--ratified by 176 countries

USA not one of them. I guess they're FOR violence, denial of education, economic servitude and denial of healthcare to women.

In searching for CEDAW + Bush, I came across a deceptively titled article posted at the site MensNewsDaily.com "Women's Groups Speak Out on Bush Policies" This article, written in August 2003, by Jeff Gannon, brought to us by Talon "news group" (see Top Ten Idiots, Jeff Gannon) actually follows conservative women protesting against the Convention covers a press conference where "The Feminist Majority, Women's Environment and Development Organization (WEDO), and the Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE) issued a Global Women's Issues Scorecard on the Bush administration in a sparsely attended press conference at the National Press Club." (emphasis by Fizz).

............
The article is full of weasel words like the above, included to cast a miasma of editorial derision on any "liberal" activities. It ends by quoting Janice Crouse: "Other women's groups also spoke out on Equality Day. Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Senior Fellow of Concerned Women for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute: A Center for Studies in Women's Issues, said, "As the nation's largest public policy women's organization, CWA gives this administration highest marks for holding firm to pro-women, pro-family, pro-life, and pro-marriage policies. Instead of exhibiting cultural arrogance by funding forced abortions, condom distribution programs, and exporting the radical feminist agenda, the Bush administration is concentrating on providing helpful services abroad."

Without added editorial slanting, I might add. :eyes:

The address for the above site is http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/newswire/nw03/talonnews/0803/082703-tn-women.htm , if anyone has time to check it out further. I'm sure it's ...*ahem* intriguing. They DO have a banner up top, linking to 1) Poker Babes
2) Are You Terrorsafe?

.............
Now, after the above diversion, (sorry to make this post so long) here is the CEDAW's text:
<snip>(Sorry mods, this seemed too important to not print in entirety)www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw

the Conference to End Discrimination Against Women Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly, is often described as an international bill of rights for women. Consisting of a preamble and 30 articles, it defines what constitutes discrimination against women and sets up an agenda for national action to end such discrimination.

The Convention defines discrimination against women as "...any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field."

By accepting the Convention, States commit themselves to undertake a series of measures to end discrimination against women in all forms, including:

to incorporate the principle of equality of men and women in their legal system, abolish all discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones prohibiting discrimination against women;
to establish tribunals and other public institutions to ensure the effective protection of women against discrimination; and
to ensure elimination of all acts of discrimination against women by persons, organizations or enterprises.
The Convention provides the basis for realizing equality between women and men through ensuring women's equal access to, and equal opportunities in, political and public life -- including the right to vote and to stand for election -- as well as education, health and employment. States parties agree to take all appropriate measures, including legislation and temporary special measures, so that women can enjoy all their human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The Convention is the only human rights treaty which affirms the reproductive rights of women and targets culture and tradition as influential forces shaping gender roles and family relations. It affirms women's rights to acquire, change or retain their nationality and the nationality of their children. States parties also agree to take appropriate measures against all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of women.

Countries that have ratified or acceded to the Convention are legally bound to put its provisions into practice. They are also committed to submit national reports, at least every four years, on measures they have taken to comply with their treaty obligations.