Amardeep, I am surprised she didn't interview some prominent Sikhs in the City, such as Waris Ahluwalia (an actor/fashion designer) or others in NYC, who sport it proudly on screen and off. Or how about an everyday cabbie. Surely, they too, must endure the vanities of tying one. I'd think living here, the sikhs would be inclined to employ the laze factor. And, how many women swooned over Naveen Andrews unraveling his lustrous locks in The English Patient.

Very interesting article, and Mr. Jaswinder Singh sounds like a classic old-school uncle type, harumphing away about Busy Working Mothers and kids these days who can only think of a bigger car ("working mothers" seem to be responsible for most of the world's problems, per conservatives, at a recent conference in Qatar there was concern about how kids weren't learning "good" Arabic because Working Mothers left them with the Foreign Help, never mind that the employment rate for women is relatively low). I'm surprised that Punjabi ingenuity hasn't come up with a ready-to-wear turban that you just plop on over your patka, maybe with a lycra-cap base or something.

I think the problem is that many youngsters see a pagdi-wearing man and one with a beard as fairly removed from the ideal for attractiveness, the cinema-ka-hero, and you do hear women joke about the "smelly hair," which would wound the vanity of your average teenager, I imagine. Facial hair in general is going out of fashion.

Verrrrrry different culture/religion/situation, but I'm wondering if one can draw an analogy with Orthodox/Conservative/Reformed Jews. There are the Orthodox/Hasidim who cling to certain rules of dress (not mixing fibers), men "not cutting the corners of their hair" (or something like that), married women covering their hair, etc.... which obviously Reformed Jews do not cling to. There have been great schisms in the Jewish community about this, and I'm sure a lot of the Orthodox are not happy about these traditions falling away, and perhaps they don't even consider their Reformed brethren to be true Jews (this is conjecture, I am not writing this as fact...). However, I'm sure if one talks to Reformed Jews (which I'm sure comprise the majority in the world), they would bristle if the question of their "Jewishness" was brought up based on their adherence to "Talmudic law" regarding dress, hair, etc. Food for thought. This NYT article was definitely interesting.

If a Sikh can only be defined by whether or not he wears a turban then the Sikh population of the UK is only half the official number. It comes down to how Sikhs define what a Sikh is themselves. My non keshdari Sikh friends identify strongly as Sikhs, with Sikh history and culture, go to Gurdwara, revere the Gurus and so on. I guess they don't feel ready to make the commiment to the outward symbol yet but when they do they will.

I completely agree with the laziness/comfort argument given in the article from my first hand experience in Punjab. In my High school class of 60+ students in rural Punjab there was a 50% split of turbaned and non-turbaned sikh students in early 1990's. The major reason for students to get their hair cut was either "girls don't like turbans" or too much hassle.

I was one of the very few students in college who tied a turban and had long beard. Majority were either without turban and beard or tied a turban but trimmed their beards. Major reason for trimming beard or both "hair and beard" in college was again girls and convenience. Among the turbaned majority were doing it for family pressure and given their own free will they would happily do without the turban.

As an aside even though was less religious than some of my shaven-Sikh friends I was always considered more religious and I was expected to act/behave differently than those with their hair cut.

In my village majority of youth in the age group 14-25 have their hair cut. At a wedding my grand mother (who is very religious) commented "Hun ta aa ghonne monney juaak vi sohne lagg de aa" (Nowadays even kids with short hair look cute), that because there are so many of them.

Incidentally as a Sikh I don't see a problem this. I see turban as a political symbol for freedom/right of self expression rather than a spiritual thing. In present day India turban as a political symbol doesn't seem to be that important for youth, whereas career and material success are, and having or not having a turban is probably insignificant in that pursuit.

i thought of a jewish analogy as well, but

However, I'm sure if one talks to Reformed Jews (which I'm sure comprise the majority in the world)

no. reform is a plural majority in the USA (just surpassed conservative), the numbers i see are usually in the 35-45% range depending on how you define it (a higher % of reform jews are not members of temples, etc.). but in the rest of the world (including israel) it has minimal presence (i think in england and oz it is called 'liberal'). in much of the diaspora 'orthodox' judaism is normative judaism qua judaism. if you don't want to practice halakah in all its details then you are simply a secular or cultural jew. but during high holidays secular jews in places like montreal will still tend to attend what we in the USA would call orthodox synagogues since that is the only game in town. in israel i think the english speakers will use terms like 'religious' and 'non-religious,' where 'religious' is synonymous with orthodox.

When I went to Amritsar last year, they had a Mr. Sikh pageant. I remember asking my cousin about it who said that Sikh groups in the city were trying to promote the preservation of the turban and sikh values through the contest. I thought it was an interesting way to help people relate to their turbans as the mainstream and as handsome. There were some serious hotties on the billboard they showed.

The Sikh community has survived wars with the Mughals and then the British, the terrible bloodbath of the Partition, and then 1984 and its aftermath.

interesting point. irving kristol i believe has stated that a 'little anti-semitism' is good for the jews. so it doesn't surprise me that sikhs held to their traditions which marked them out during some periods of duress. rather, i think that there a median level of social tension which maintains the perpetuation of cultural traditions which 'mark' a group out. when jews were no longer under moderate and persistant discrimination, like their slow but eventual emancipation in europe in the 19th century, they quickly started defecting from judaism. the reform movement began in germany as a way for jews to cling to their religion while at the same time participating in the gentile culture. in the 1950s jewish intermarriage rates were around 10%, but today they are nearing 50%, and are particularly high in reform congregations.

There are lots of Sikh hotties, definitely. I wonder at what point the idea that turbans and a beard aren't attractive to women took hold. Certainly a generation or so ago Sikh girls would have grown up with men around them who did have the kesh and beard, and would have expected to marry someone who did. I'm sure urbanisation, films and TV and a greater choice in marriage partners have contributed to this anxiety among Sikh men about their attractiveness with turban.

Amardeep

Can you envisage a revivalist movement that pits keshdari Sikhs against mona Sikhs in Punjab and the diaspora? Something that feeds into Sikh nationalism at the same time?

if you don't want to practice halakah in all its details then you are simply a secular or cultural jew. but during high holidays secular jews in places like montreal will still tend to attend what we in the USA would call orthodox synagogues since that is the only game in town.

That's a common misconception, that Reform jews must be "less religious". It's not really true at all. Perhaps they are considered less jewish by strict Orthodox jews, but they consider themselves very religious, and are often more so than some Conservative jews. Reform does not equate to secular. Things are different in Israel, where many Jews are not religious. As one comedian said, "I moved to Israel so I wouldn't have to be Jewish".
In Judaism, like many religions, there is a lot of room for self-definition since there is a tradition of theological discussion. The rules of keeping kosher, for example, are not hard and fast. Everyone does it a little differently.

And what about Naveen Andrews' hair back in the day?

Anyone else notice this gem in the article:

To promote the turban as a fashion item, Sikh leaders have also started holding Mr. Singh International pageants. Contestants are judged by looks, moral character, personality, knowledge of Sikh history and principles, and turban tying skills.

I mean, I draw the line at cutting the keshdari right off.

Don't mean to be disrespectful, I just thought that was too funny.

There are well-tied turbans, and poorly-tied ones, and there is a difference. It's a learned skill, and you have to promote the learning of it. Turbans in the Sikh context are not, of course, a mere sartorial affectation, but good grooming and a well-tied turban are both spiritually and secularly valued in the socio-cultural milieu.

The decline in turban tying is also related to a general decline in male headgear, across cultures.

What % of sikhs in the west[Canada/USA/UK] wear turbans. Is it around 15-20% or is that number too low.

In my hometown where I grow up in western canada, of the 10 sikh families, only 1 of the 10 men had a turban.

My family in California on my mom side, 3 of my 5 uncles have turbans, but they are all over 65. My 10 male cousins and my 2 female cousins husbands are all between the age of 27-42. Not one of them wear's a turban, and 9 of the 12 were born in India.

Is this same in other sikh families in the west.

Naina, in the Sikh context, this isn't that surprising. Male vanity in punjab has a lot to do with appearence. Upturning your mustache and having a nicely tied turban, looking "smart" has been seen as a source of pride for, probably generations. Its one of those interesting moments when "what is old is new again"

I think the trend is definately multi-factorial, and has do to with many issues, including urbanization, repression, modernity, immigration, religion, what is going on with social-networks, ect

I would also not discount such simple factors as that most of the kids doing it appear to be in their teens, and at that age, popular culture is (probably too) high a factor in life-decisions. Cutting your hair is probably the type of thing, once you do it, its hard to reverse the decision, and maybe at the age of 16-18, someone does it for different reasons than they might at 30-40. Who knows?

This whole discussion can go quite deep and wide in terms of the various factors at play. "Working mothers" is probably by itself quite far down the list and not a very insightful answer

It's a learned skill, and you have to promote the learning of it.

Most young Sikh guys (in Canada) usually sport low fades these days...

In punjabi culture, for boys considered "gabaroo" (hale and hearty I guess) its both a personal source of pride and a community source of pride to show off one's "smart" looks, so I would say that a "pageant" like this is just a slight variation on past cultural practices and not really anamalous or out-of-place

I would say that a "pageant" like this is just a slight variation on past cultural practices and not really anamalous or out-of-place

yeah, those two phenonena are probably miles apart in terms of source, ramification, and the dynamics at play

It makes complete sense that they'd try a pageant to compete with the very TV-centric dominant definition of good looks, given that one of the reasons young Sikhs are cutting their hair is that it's considered less attractive or "modern." Of course, pageants probably won't cancel out the effects of other cultural and media messages about male attractiveness.

Totally superfical, but still feel the need to say this -

I've never dated a Sikh with a turban, but I personally find it hot. I grew up in the United States and am from the South in India, so it's not like I was used to seeing men in turbans.

I think I find it hot b/c 1) it's symbolic to me of someone being able to be brave enough not to fit the norm b/c he wants to stay true to his convictions (that is, those Sikhs who I see wear turbans in the U.S. and 2) Maybe many of the Sikh-American men I've seen have just been what I would consider handsome.

All this lament of "saving" day-to-day aspects of a culture is eerily similiar to Shashi Tharoor's views on Saris.

It's ok if cultures evolve with time, as long as the underlying philosophy is retained through generations. I hasten to add that there also seems to be a certain degree of correlation between giving up one's culture (dress/language/food etc) and losing underlying values (reverence to elders, work ethic etc). As in everything else, balance is of paramount importance.

M. Nam

I think I find it hot b/c 1) it's symbolic to me of someone being able to be brave enough not to fit the norm b/c he wants to stay true to his convictions

I'll echo that! I was definitely more attracted to sardars for this reason. They just exude a certain confidence and degree of bravery that I don't see in other men. Of course, I'm referring to those men who actually want to be sardars and are not just keeping their hair for their mommies.

I heart my turban wearing husband =)

But one thing about my original comment is that:

I do realize that just b/c someone wears a turban it doesn't necessarily mean he's strong in his convictions. But when you are just going by first impressions, that's what a turban-wearing Sikh-American seems to me - hence to initial reaction of hotness.

I want to clarify what I said previously, b/c I'm well aware of hypocrisy in ritual w/o meaning. By the way, your a lucky women Sonia!

That Shashi Tharoor is more of an old fart than I had realised. Why should Indian women be expected to maintain sartorial tradition, and what about Indian men? They were the first to switch to Western clothes, weren't they? I think Indian male clothes look wonderful, and they aren't as impractical as saris. And saris have actually made a comeback for evening wear in the last several years, and desis are far from giving up their distinctive clothes, witness the rise of the kurti as the equalizing uniform for Westernized and more conservative young women. Let every man who whines about the tragic decline of the sari wear one for a month and deal with the cleaning and ironing and starching with a full-time job and probably a second shift doing every damn thing in the home too, in addition to the comfort factor. Bah.

I guess I can understand a bit of Tharoor's nostalgia -- there is something about the homogeneity of "modern culture" that is sort of bland in its universality -- but he definitely comes across as old fart in that piece.

I am not a worshipper of Ataturk, but funny that Tharoor talks of how Kemal "banned his menfolk's traditional fez as a symbol of backwardness" without mentioning that he also banned the covering of women (a ban which more or less exists to this day), and women in Turkey (on the whole... I feel the flames coming on...) are in many ways more liberated than in a lot of Muslim countries. I wonder if Tharoor would be the type who would lament the demise of purdah garments...

Let us be not so alarmed about this current trend.

Everything is taking its natural course. What's so shocking?

Most of the lives in Punjab are divided by casteism. Honor killings

(or at least the threat thereof) and female infanticide are commonplace.

Are the youth really to blame? How are the youth to believe that Sikhi

believes in equality when the parents do not see God in everyone?

Faith cannot endure with hypocrisy.

Endeavors like the "Mr. Singh contest" and the emphasis of tying a turban properly

and looking fine in one has its limited use, but the overwhelming need is, in fact,

to teach and live truthfully.

The destiny of Sikhi lies in Sikh character.

Aha! The working mother! She's the one to blame! First she won't wear saris and now she won't help her kids wear turbans.

I sympathize with some of the sentiment of "losing" tradition, but why is it always the working mother who is to blame?

the problem with turkey and iran under the shah was that they displayed the type of behavior they were trying to correct - intolerance- and their secularism became extreme as well in their persecution and discrimination against women who chose to wear conservative islamic wear. this only breeds more resentment and intolerance.

Kusala, Ataturk didn't quite manage to ban the hijab, and there's a huge "covered fashions" business in Turkey these days (not to mention an Islamist movement that's extremely similar to the BJP in its mainstreaming). Only government employees are barred from covering their heads.

Totally superfical, but still feel the need to say this -

I've never dated a Sikh with a turban, but I personally find it hot. I grew up in the United States and am from the South in India, so it's not like I was used to seeing men in turbans.

Actually, it used to be quite common for South Indian men to wear turbans, and for that matter also elsewhere in Northern, Eastern or Western India - it has declined in the cities, but is still fairly common in rural areas. Most early Indian male immigrants to North America - Sikhs and Hindus especially, also wore turbans. In fact, Sabu, the Kal Penn of the 1930s, also wore it often, on and off-screen!

Here are 3 'South Indian' men - a philosopher-statesman, Vice-President and President (1952-67), a Nobel Laureate and a celebrated centenarian technocrat. The pictures are from the 1960s, but this is what contemporary American Presidents looked like back then, so men don't wear hats any more over here, and Indian men don't wear turbans so much any more. Turban-wearing has faded less-slowly among Sikhs because of the religio-cultural injunctions, but it still needs all the encouragement it can get.

BTW, I'm totally with you on the 'wearing turbans shows strength of conviction' bit!

Honor killings(or at least the threat thereof) and female infanticide are commonplace

Hainh..??

When we were school and college, we had quite a few sardar kids, and the general consensus was that if most of them cut their hair and beard, it will be a very very tough for others to keep their girls away from them :).

When we were in school and then college..

If Sanjaya wears a turban next week, problem solved.

In response to Amardeep's original question: I'm a Singaporean Sikh currently in the US for grad school. On my mum's side, we've been in Malaysia/Singapore for 4 generations, and my uncles on both sides and my dad all had turbans. We grew up with long hair, and began tying a turban once we were entered secondary school at 13 (which is grade 7 in the US, I think). Since my dad held two jobs, my mum was the one who taught us how to tie the turban. However, my dad did use to show us and practice with us on some Sundays. Since then, I have learnt various styles from friends and cousins, and have figured out how to tie a few different styles. However, I am the only one from both sides of the family who still wears a turban. All of my other male cousins in India and Malaysia, as well as my brother, have cut off their long hair. In South-East Asia, I think that about 20% of male Sikhs wear turbans. One interesting thing you might see is for some adults who have cut off their hair to still keep a trimmed beard and tie a turban. This has to do with the perceived positive image that a turban brings- a perception which, from the comments above, is widely shared.

I guess this trend is spreading everywhere. The other day in NYC I saw a man toting a turban and suddenly realized I actually hadnt seen one in Manhattan for at least 2 years now!
Was that pure chance?
Or pure choice on Sikh men's part?

I think the trend to cut ones hair among Sikhs differs greatly whether you are on the West Coast or the East Coast of the US. My experience with both coasts has led me to believe that Sikhs on the West Coast are more "Punjabi" and Sikhs on the East Coast are more "Sikh". I met many more young Keshdhari Sikhs on the East Coast than I have on the West.

irving kristol i believe has stated that a 'little anti-semitism' is good for the jews.

'HaiR' aS plitical sssteatment. GroW te HHaiiiiR and pROotest the drAFt.

"That Shashi Tharoor is more of an old fart than I had realised. Why should Indian women be expected to maintain sartorial tradition, and what about Indian men? They were the first to switch to Western clothes, weren't they? I think Indian male clothes look wonderful, and they aren't as impractical as saris. And saris have actually made a comeback for evening wear in the last several years, and desis are far from giving up their distinctive clothes, witness the rise of the kurti as the equalizing uniform for Westernized and more conservative young women. Let every man who whines about the tragic decline of the sari wear one for a month and deal with the cleaning and ironing and starching with a full-time job and probably a second shift doing every damn thing in the home too, in addition to the comfort factor. Bah."

I agree, the sari is definitely not going the way of the kimono. Perhaps its becoming somewhat of an ethnic costume, but its still the preferred dress of choice for formal desi events or religious festivals(for those that come from traditional sari wearing regions of the subcontinent). When madrasi brides and grooms start wearing white wedding gowns and tuxes during their muhurthams, I'll concede that maybe there is a problem.

another question: What makes you think the article had a cheery tone to it? I didn't come away with that at all.

another question: What makes you think the article had a cheery tone to it? I didn't come away with that at all.

Amardeep, the author of the post, a keshadhari sikh is being sarcastic.

"Though she does have quotes from people who are unhappy about the phenomenon, I must confess that on an emotional level I do find Amelia Gentleman’s article a shade too cheery considering how much anxiety this trend causes amongst traditional Sikhs. Indeed, as the defining symbol of the Sikh tradition declines, it’s hard not to think of the core of the religion as declining as well."

He's being sarcastic here? I was alluding to this statement, not the title of the post.

Sorry I've been out of the discussion most of the day -- teaching classes, meeting students... etc.

But actually I wasn't being sarcastic with the word "cheery." It might not be quite the right word, but I guess I felt the article had a bit of a neutral, "hey, check out this interesting trend" angle to it that runs up against the strong emotional response many people within the community have about this. To be fair, she does give a fair amount of air time to some folks in Punjab who are troubled by it.

The other thing I wanted to say is this -- strangely, I kind of agree with MoorNam, when he said this:

It's ok if cultures evolve with time, as long as the underlying philosophy is retained through generations. I hasten to add that there also seems to be a certain degree of correlation between giving up one's culture (dress/language/food etc) and losing underlying values (reverence to elders, work ethic etc). As in everything else, balance is of paramount importance.

I don't know about cheery, but the author definitely does make light of the situation. Just the title of the article gets to me: "Young Sikh Men Get Haircuts, Annoying Their Elders"

Annoying their elders? Seriously? This issue has much larger ramifications than making some old people uncomfortable.

It could be that some Sikh men are opting not to wear turbans because of the profiliing they receive at airports and fear of racial attacks after 9/11.

In the years since 9/11, granted I don't travel too much, in three separate instances I have seen Sikh men "randomly" stopped at the security checkpoint and all of their belongings rifled through.

BadIndianGirl, yes, but this is actually in India, where there isn't that confusion.

And actually, even in the U.S. most Sikhs I know don't mind the whole airport thing that much, especially since they've done away with the last minute "random" gate searches for the most part. The guys who have it much harder are the ones in the service industries -- running convenience stores, gas stations, driving taxis. It's very difficult to deal with the kind of hostility those guys encounter on a daily basis.

Amardeep. Right, this was in India.
Guess I should pay more attention and focus on work or reading SM, not both ;-)

Naina wrote:

Anyone else notice this gem in the article:

To promote the turban as a fashion item, Sikh leaders have also started holding Mr. Singh International pageants. Contestants are judged by looks, moral character, personality, knowledge of Sikh history and principles, and turban tying skills.

I've never heard of anyone using male beauty pageants to help boys feel better about themselves. Don't mean to be disrespectful, I just thought that was too funny.

Actually, there's a lot of fascinating academic literature out there about the varying types of 'beauty pageants', all centering on the idea that pageants are about selecting a person who is the best embodiment of the values of the community/group who holds it; it seems that this is true regardless of the type of pageant (from Texan "rattlesnake queens" to trans/gay (bantut) competitons in the Philippines). I agree that it is interesting to see men in pageants as a gender role reversal, but the trends and idiosyncracies are really cool to read about.

If you're interested, there's a great edited volume from just a couple of years ago called Beauty Queens on the Global Stage (citation below), and, of course there has been a TON written from a desi angle re: miss worlds and miss universes. If you're interested, I can send you some articles.

Here's the book:

Cohen, Colleen Ballerino, Richard Wilk, and Beverly Stoeltje. Eds. 1996. Beauty Queens On the Global Stage: Gender, Contests and Power. New York: Routledge. ISBN: 0415911532

so sorry, i did the block quote wrong (nested tags).

It's very difficult to deal with the kind of hostility those guys encounter on a daily basis.

Yes, but the hostility is based on perception of difference - whether they fixate on the beard and turban or the skin color, it's still there. At least by adopting a visible marker of difference voluntarily, one provides oneself a spiritual-psychological boost that is reinforced daily, everytime one ties one's dastar. Any personal experiences on this you would care to share, Amardeep?

That's a common misconception, that Reform jews must be "less religious".

are you capable of reading what other people write? yes, reform judaism is a vibrant, and even dominant, branch of religious judaism in the USA. but in most of the rest of the world it is a non-presence. the 'secular' jews in israel are not reform, they don't consider reform judaism a religious option for them (in part because the orthodox rabbinate has blocked legitimization of reform and conservative religiosity). reform judaism started in germany, and spread to the USA. for obvious reasons it isn't a strong presence in germany, so it is in the US that it is a viable option. in most of the rest of the diaspora religious expression took the expression we would term 'orthodox' (though the mitnagdim, hasidim, sephardic and mizrachi jewish traditions would all emphasize their differences) in the USA. non-orthodox jews were avowedly secular, though they might have a strong jewish cultural identity. the reform movement in the USA rejected the idea of jewish nationhood in the 19th century (though they went back to it in the 20th) explicitly because they wanted to turn judaism into just a religion (confession or denomination). many atheist or non-religious jews reject reformism explicitly because it does not resonate with their sense of what religious judaism is about (more so outside the USA where reform is thin on the ground).

It's ok if cultures evolve with time, as long as the underlying philosophy is retained through generations. I hasten to add that there also seems to be a certain degree of correlation between giving up one's culture (dress/language/food etc) and losing underlying values (reverence to elders, work ethic etc).

sure, about values, but those values are not the necessary ones either. that is, it seems pretty obvious that if you "look like" the mainstream society you'll assimilate their values to a greater extent. in a place like india i doubt it would be as much of an issue re: reverence to elders, work ethic, etc., cuz i doubt that hindu punjabis have different values....

are you capable of reading what other people write?

Don't worry Razib. I will never again respond to anything you post because you get so snarky any time I post anything that disagrees with you. There are plenty of people on this site I have disagreed with but we've managed to argue without being rude. I can thing of plenty of snarky comebacks myself, but I will refrain. You can continue to be an authority on Judaism, or anything else, with no one to contest you.

There are definitely women who identify as being Sikhs who don't find the turban and beard attractive, but there are also plenty who do. It did bother me when I heard a couple of single girls in my family asked if they wanted a guy with or without a turban and beard, and one of my cousins replied, "No no - girls these days don't want that..."

As far as Non-Sikh women, a lot of my sardar friends get lots of love from plenty of non-Sikh women. Some of these men may just not realize that it's not the turban that's keeping the ladies away - it's them. But then, in India, when the kids are going through this spouse-finding process, they're also taught that the main focus is on their appearance and their resume. Moms don't tell their sons, "Beta, you need to work on your swagger to find a quality mate." So it may just be that their not taught to have any game, or don't learn any from anywhere else, and when they don't get what they consider to be a favorable response from women, they figure it's the turban. That sucks.

And sidenote: Poorly tied turbans are definitely a turn off (at least for me). A man's turban says a lot about him. (I have my theories.)

I know I rambled a bit. Sorry.

While sheer laziness is probably a partial contributing factor to this trend, I'm pretty sure its not the main reason most keshdari youth cut their locks. The lazy ones tend to keep the pugh, but drop the beard. As has been said above, I think much of this has to do with the perception of what the women-folk find attractive, and to an extent, I think they have a point.

Here in the west tho, I really think the increasing influence of militant-secularism also has had an impact. Religion just isn't cool right now, and outward symbols of faith are generally viewed (at least initially) with suspicion/apprehension. We saw this explicitly with the school ban in France, and recently here in the UK with the Muslim veil/head scarf furore.

For the poll: While my mum took care of our hair when young, it was always my dad who firstly taught us how to tie a patka properly, and then a full turban. I still regularly get chided by my dad when my pugh is anything less than perfect in his eyes, while my mum always thinks it is perfect - even when it clearly isn't... For the record, both have busy career schedules.

if you don't want to practice halakah in all its details then you are simply a secular or cultural jew.

That's a common misconception, that Reform jews must be "less religious".

The common understanding of "secular" is "less religious", dictionaries notwithstanding.

He puts the start of rapid decline at the mid-1990s...as satellite television arrived in the villages of Punjab

Apart from the turban issue (which I would say boils down to men responding to female preference), the satellite television arrival in villages will be the end of the Punjabi language. The villages are the last stronghold of well-spoken Punjabi. Unfortunately Punjabi is a language which is not adequately taught in schools. The English-medium schools give it very short shrift, and the Punjabi-medium goverment schools suck. Due to the language politics of Punjab, most Hindus do not go to Punjabi-medium schools anyway, opting for Hindi-medium if they can't afford English. Compounding this is the fact that Hindi and Punjabi are fairly similar in many respects, and therefore people (the younger generation raised on cable tv) will gradually use more and more Hindi words in their Punjabi without even fully realising it. You can see this in Pakistan already, where 60 years of Urdu and English have already devastated Punjabi.

Apart from the turban issue (which I would say boils down to men responding to female preference), the satellite television arrival in villages will be the end of the Punjabi language. The villages are the last stronghold of well-spoken Punjabi. Unfortunately Punjabi is a language which is not adequately taught in schools. The English-medium schools give it very short shrift, and the Punjabi-medium goverment schools suck. Due to the language politics of Punjab, most Hindus do not go to Punjabi-medium schools anyway, opting for Hindi-medium if they can't afford English. Compounding this is the fact that Hindi and Punjabi are fairly similar in many respects, and therefore people (the younger generation raised on cable tv) will gradually use more and more Hindi words in their Punjabi without even fully realising it. You can see this in Pakistan already, where 60 years of Urdu and English have already devastated Punjabi

I believe you're right Amitabh. Punjabi, among many other languages through out the world, is dying out. I noticed this with my cousins' children as well. They go to private schools (english-medium, I believe) although they speak Punjabi, they aren't very good at writing/reading it. They know how to write/read (and speak) English and Hindi, but not so much Punjabi. And don't get me started on those families who are living outside of Punjab in cities like Bombay/Nagpur/Surat, their kids' Punjabi skills are worse than any ABCD's (which is probally because it would be too hard for them to balance punjabi/english/other indian language).

When I visited India, I could hardly understand what my cousins were saying. When we tried to converse in Punjabi, they mixed some Hindi into it. And since I don't understadn Hindi, I was very lost most of the time.

If wanting to be attractive to girls is a motivator in Sikh men forgoing the pagh, then the situation is only going to get worse. Punjab has the lowest ratio of girls to boys in all of India, especially in the lower age groups. That means that men are going to have a hard time finding brides, something which has already begun, as men are starting to "buy" brides from other parts of India. It certainly doesn't help that so many Punjabi men from the West keep flocking to India to marry the fewer and fewer girls that are there because these men are insecure about their masculinity and want a "homely" bride who they can control and only give as much freedom as they're comfortable with. Anyway, I digress. But yea, men are having to take extra steps now to live up to the Bollywood beauty standards if they want to nab a gal.

Sonia you made a very good point in your last post about the low birth rate in Punjab for females. Also you were dead on about insecure punjabi men in the west who go back to finding a bride they can control and limit there a freedom. Sonia I don't know if you aware of this, but the practice of female fetus being aborted is now problem in some western punjabi communities.

The funny thing is that in the past I have been criticized for making these same points in other posts.

All of this wont matter in 5 thousand years, when everyone start's to worship GLANG, peace be upon it.

Sikhism is a religion with few answer's. Ask 10 Sikh's about what happen's to your soul when you die and you will get 10 different answer's. Ask about eating meat, you get 10 different answer's. Ask about how you are supposed to eat in a Gurdwara and you will get 10 different answer's. Ask about wedding ritual's and ....you get the picture.

So it is not a simple religion. So, if you find yourself belonging to a religion with no clear answer's on basically anything then you will make up your own rules and hence the whole "Hair is not important, it is what's in your heart", philosophy and that is a hell of alot easier then the alternative way to express your faith.

So it is not a simple religion. So, if you find yourself belonging to a religion with no clear answer's on basically anything then you will make up your own rules and hence the whole "Hair is not important, it is what's in your heart", philosophy and that is a hell of alot easier then the alternative way to express your faith.

Why is that a bad thing? Better a religion that contains room for personal interpretation than one that claims to know everything, is the only one true faith, and imagines it is superior to all other faiths.

I didnt mean that it was a bad thing. I am just saying that a religion with no clear cut answers is going to have a hell of alot more people taking the easy way of interpreting it then the other way around.

It's why you have 20 thousand people watching 500 people run a marathon and not the other way around.

I'm not too happy with the characterisation of Sikhs with cut hair as lazy (or cursed with lazy mothers, God forbid). It's just as easy to read cut hair as indicating that individuals simply have other priorities as it is to assume those same people are lazy. Not everyone wants to make declaring their religious identity to the world their top priority. I'm pretty horrified by the anti-working-mother tone of the article too, and the idiot whose quote seems to make out that women work so their families can have bigger cars. WTF? If I have kids, there's no way I'm going to comb their hair for 15 years because I a) have other priorities, b) don't want to be identified by my religion every time I leave the house (and neither does my short-haired dad, for whom it would be more of an issue, nor do I want my kids to elevate their religious identity over all others), and c) work, without guilt, because I want to and have socially meaningful work to do, not for a bigger car. FFS, I have never felt apologetic for cutting my hair, and Jaswinder Singh's shitty, finger-pointing moralism isn't going to make me.

Amardeep's linked article mentions the singer Pammi Bai, who released a song recently to promote the turban. Here is the song for anyone interested in hearing it...it starts about 35 seconds into the clip. Unfortunately the video is unwatchable...it's in avi format, whatever that means. The song apparently is a big hit; I can vouch that it was on TV a lot when I was in India last month.

Clueless, yes I'm well aware of the problem in the West as well, and my friend who is writing her master's thesis on fetal sex selection among South Asians in the West says she thinks the situation is worse here because no one talks about it since the community is rather small in proportion to the whole population. I can't tell you how many families I've seen here (in California) with like four girls and then their youngest child is a boy. The sex ratio issue may not be a direct cause of men in Punjab abandoning the turban, but it is causing men to have to be more competitive in all areas including looks. I personally think turbans are fucking sexy!

I can't tell you how many families I've seen here (in California) with like four girls and then their youngest child is a boy.

Those families should be lauded...because if they had four girls that means they DIDN'T terminate the female pregnancies, and opted to have the girls. That's not sex selection. And I don't think you can blame them for continuing to try until they had a boy. Most desis want at least one son. I often see desi families with three daughters and no sons. What that means is they tried three times and finally gave up. And again, I laud them for NOT doing sex selection too.

There are families that had 3 daughters, but may had another couple of pregnancies with female fetus which they aborted until they had there "precious jatt" son.

Here in Vancouver that female abortion problem in the punjabi community is a thing every one know abouts, but no one wants to talk about. I have friends in the medical field who were shocked at that number of married punjabi women getting abortions cause they were pregant with a girl.

Turban, keeping long uncut hair are issues that need to be indentified very seriously among Sikhs. Wearing a turban is a burden as long as one cannot be connected to the core as to "why" wear a turban. If one creates a bond with the Guru,then wearing a turban is a joy!!. I know a Sikh guy told me that he feels confident as he had cut his hair and trimmed his beard and feel more accpeted by his peers(other races). But it's funny that he never asked his peers whether did they ever not accepted him when he had a turban. So it is perceived that turban and uncut hair is "cool" and "good looking", "more pretty", "guys want such gals". So Sikh leaders around the world must be "very Loud" about turban and uncut hair, not just whisper and let it off so easily.pritam,singapore.

From a religious point of view, I think its quite hard to get a large percentage of people who can wear dastaar in the spirit it was intended. if you look at the time of the ghulugharas, that was a time when the sikh community was exceedingly small, but the people who wore dastaar, they knew why they wore it

That Pummy Bai youtube video didn't work, but here is a similiar one,

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kY-zPe1Ood4&mode=related&search=

Honestly, there should be no reason why a daughter is not as celebrated as a son. I am sure it does not feel to punjabi women who look at how happy everyone is when a boy is born versus a girl. Its actually silly and not logical

Amitabh, yes they should be lauded for not opting for sex selection, but at the same time it disheartens me that their daughters weren't good enough for them and that they took the financial leap of trying and trying until they had a boy. Why is having a boy THAT important to them? They may have valued their daughters enough not to abort them, but they obviously don't value them as much as they would a son, because if they did they would have been happy that they were blessed with a wonderful daughter.

Yep, girls are almost always the number one reason. It is a fair concern though.

But if you compare the loss of tradition and cultural values among communities in India as a whole, I don't think the Punjabi, or even specifically the Sikh community, is doing that bad. Part of the reason is that Punjabi is very dominant in the popular culture of modern India. It is fairly represented in Bollywood and Indipop. You don't have to be embarassed to adhere to your Sikh and/or Punjabi identity (as for example, I as an Oriya growing up in Delhi as a teenager somewhat had to). In fact, most Sikhs and Punjabis tend to be very assertive of it. Wearing a turban is not nearly as embarassing as being from a poor state, or having a long South Indian name in North India.

This issue is much more prominant among other cultures in India - like the decline of Urdu among the remnant (though sizeable) Muslim community in India.

Sonia a boy is a must in the punjabi culture. I have learned the hard way. I have one child who is a girl. Yet all the time I hear from punjabi people telling me that I need to have a son. One time a person I did not know that well to me that he was gonna pray at the local sikh temple for me to have a son.

When I tell people that I don't need to have a son, they are very surprised when I say that.

One reason that even in the west punjabi want to have sons, is cause most who come to the west keep there culture and values from the homeland. Sexism is a major problem, yet very few men in our community speak out about it. I have spoken out about it, and when I do people tell me I'm too western.

It certainly doesn't help that so many Punjabi men from the West keep flocking to India to marry the fewer and fewer girls that are there because these men are insecure about their masculinity and want a "homely" bride who they can control and only give as much freedom as they're comfortable with.

Sonia, it's not that different for Punjabi men within India either, IME, comparing my family and particularly relatives who live in the north even with other desi men, I'm always struck by the sense of entitlement, the way they are brought up to be helpless little princes, and yet respected for throwing their weight around, and no matter how well-educated or elite they are, still want a wife they can keep "in her place"...sad but true, particularly in cities in Punjab. I really hope things are changing.

The Punjabi language is probably getting more mixed with Hindi but certainly not dying out in cities like Chandigarh or even Delhi. It's never been terribly "pure" anyway, has tons of Arabic and Persian words, and will keep evolving. There are lots of Punjabi channels on satellite TV these days, whether music,films or news, and you could even argue there's more Punjabi media options now than in the days of DD with its two channels.

My friend cut his hair when he was 19, mainly to appear more attractive. Now, 10 years on, he has decided to grow it back. He started feeling alienated from his own religion in the absence of these outward symbols of sikhism.

He looks rather funny now, with a scratchy beard and a "hollow" pagri.

Those families should be lauded...because if they had four girls that means they DIDN'T terminate the female pregnancies, and opted to have the girls.

Whats wrong with terminating female pregnancies in California? They dont have the Punjab problem.

ShallowThinker on March 29, 2007 09:57 PM · Direct link

Sikhism is a religion with few answer's. Ask 10 Sikh's about what happen's to your soul when you die and you will get 10 different answer's. Ask about eating meat, you get 10 different answer's. Ask about how you are supposed to eat in a Gurdwara and you will get 10 different answer's. Ask about wedding ritual's and ....you get the picture.

Hmm, as opposed to what - Hinduism? Catholicism? Where there is only one answer? Come on now - you can do better than that reasoning.

Clueless on March 29, 2007 09:43 PM · Direct link

The funny thing is that in the past I have been criticized for making these same points in other posts.

You were criticized not for what you said, but for the fact that it was the only thing you talked about and repeatedly posted (which you continue to do) - there are no turbaned men in canada or california, all the sikh people in canada abort their female children, etc etc. By now I hope you realize that there is a whole Sikh community in Canada and in California outside of yours where men DO keep their hair, and Sikh women marry them, and they go on to have beautiful Sikh girls that they love. I can introduce you to many if you would please just accept that you do NOT know all Sikhs in Canada and California.

Sonia on March 30, 2007 01:48 AM · Direct link

Amitabh, yes they should be lauded for not opting for sex selection, but at the same time it disheartens me that their daughters weren't good enough for them and that they took the financial leap of trying and trying until they had a boy. Why is having a boy THAT important to them?

I agree for the most part - it's pretty pathetic when you see four daughters and a son - especially ironic when the children are all grown up and it's the daughters who are caring for the parents instead of the one precious son they tried so hard for.

But the idea of wanting a boy can not just be chalked up to old-fashioned thinking. I want a daughter and my husband wants a son (for purely selfish purposes - he wants a football player and I want to buy a lot of cute dresses and hair clips). I don't think that means we would value either one less than the other. But I don't think me wanting to try for (or adopt) a boy if I have two girls, or vice versa, is a bad thing.

Clueless on March 30, 2007 02:38 AM · Direct link

When I tell people that I don't need to have a son, they are very surprised when I say that.

The last time I was in Delhi, a group of women surrounded our van and proceeded to "bless" my sister-in-law by telling her she would have a son (in exchange for giving them money, of course). The look on their faces when my sister-in-law said she wanted a daughter was SO priceless. I wish I had taken a picture.

The look on their faces when my sister-in-law said she wanted a daughter was SO priceless. I wish I had taken a picture.

Yes...it's not easy to faze those people...impressive.

That Pummy Bai youtube video didn't work, but here is a similiar one,

The video doesn't work (#68) but you should be able to listen to the song.

OK, sorry for commenting so much...Sahej, in the video you mentioned, that is one GORGEOUS woman (the one who is praying and then gives the little boy parsaad).

Honestly, there should be no reason why a daughter is not as celebrated as a son. I am sure it does not feel to punjabi women who look at how happy everyone is when a boy is born versus a girl. Its actually silly and not logical

The mindset is there - it exists, and we can't deny it or just criticize it. We have to work, instead, to change the mindset and the trend. I'm the oldest grandchild on my father's side, and I was told that when I was born, my dadi (grandmother) had tears in her eyes - she had hoped for and been expecting my mother to have a boy. It was hard for me to hear, especially because my entire life, having the relationship I've had and still have with my dadi, I couldn't possibly imagine it. I do realize that things were different then - but whether I knew it or not, I was the one who made her happy to have a granddaughter. Gotta teach them.

I was at my uncle's brother's wedding in Ludhiana, Punjab. My uncle and aunt have 3 intelligent, athletic, beautiful girls. The hijray came around the wedding house and were asking him how many kids he had (so they could offer him blessings for sons) - he said he was happy with his 3 girls and couldn't ask for anything more. Everyone was like "Eh?? But of course you still want a son, though, right??" They just didn't understand why. It made me feel good to see him be proud of his girls and not succumb to peer pressure and let them make him feel like something was lacking because out of his 3 children he didn't have a boy.

Don't get me wrong - boys are great. I love them. But when I have children, I'll have what I'm meant to have, and I'll be happy with that.

Sonia I never said that there are no sikh men that don't wear turbans. My father-in-law and 3 of my 5 uncles in California have turbans. What I was trying to say was that % of sikh men who are under 50 that wear turbans is around 15-20%. Vancouver has the biggest sikh population in Canada is where I live. And the bay area and central California which has the biggest sikh population in the United States, is where I have alot of family, and a place where I have spent alot of time.

Also other then right wing sikh's, I have not criticized sikhism at all. My criticism has been about certain parts of punjabi culture that I find very sexist.

Also before my daughter was born, I told everyone that I wanted to have girl. Yet I lost time how many people in punjabi community said that they hope I have a son.

Clueless wrote:
>>My criticism has been about certain parts of punjabi culture that I find very sexist.

My criticism has always been about the culture of individuals who judge and hand out opinions on others' private behaviour which does not violate anyone's rights, and their tendency to give out unsolicited advice to change the subject's private behaviour.

Whether Sikh boys want to cut their hair or Indian women choose other attire over sarees or whether they choose to marry trees or abort female fetuses or give/take dowry: The underlying issue is the same. It's their private behaviour and neither the Sikh elders nor Tharoor nor anyone else should be judging or commenting on their actions. It's the culture of not minding one's own business that I find disconcerting, because sooner or later, if these busybodies get political power they will try to meddle in private affairs of individuals and history has shown that they will use State power to enforce their worldview.

Under no circumstances should the individual be trampled.

M. Nam

M. Nam - is your statement at the end that the individual should not be trampled meant ironically? Does it not occur to you that female foeticide/infanticide and the practice of dowry violates the rights of hundreds and millions of individuals? Do women run off and abort their female foetuses of their own volition, do husbands and "elders" have nothing to do with it? Embededdness in structural bigotry and discrimination make it rather difficult to treat some of the practices you've described above as voluntaristic individual decisions. I can agree with you on some other points, but not these.

SP writes: >>Does it not occur to you that female foeticide/infanticide and the practice of dowry violates the rights of hundreds and millions of individuals?

I'm afraid you have the wrong notion of "rights".

Rights can be conferred only on those who have responsibilities. They are opposite sides of the same coin and go hand in hand.

A fetus does not have rights. Cannot and should not. Since it does not have any responsibilities.

But what about the woman who is coerced to abort the fetus, you ask. And I say, "coerced" is a loaded word. If this means physical force, then there are laws against it. If this means societal pressure, then I would say that a person who is not responsible enough to face societal pressure to carry out one's desires as an individual, then the said person should have to abrogate those related rights.

But what about men who have scrape their lives savings to give dowry, you ask? Same situation. If these men cannot stand up to society and their daughters cannot stand being single, then they have to give up their right to a dowry-free marriage.

There's no free lunch. You cannot get something for nothing.

M. Nam

Now if only all the punjabi hotties also started showing their legs....I was at a desi do at SF and man...sikh kudis have the most amazing legz....endless chocolate..mmmm :-)

If this means societal pressure, then I would say that a person who is not responsible enough to face societal pressure to carry out one's desires as an individual, then the said person should have to abrogate those related rights.

Whoa, that is a loaded statement. So are you saying that you have never done anything you don't want to do because of pressure from family/others around you?

Secondly, say this woman doesn't get the abortion as her husband's family wishes and then they throw her out of the house. And then her parents won't take her back into their house because she has "shamed" the family. When faced with those options, what is left for her to do, but get the abortion? Not that I am condoning these forced abortions, but for some women, it is there only option.

>>So are you saying that you have never done anything you don't want to do because of pressure from family/others around you?

I've done plenty of things that I did not want to do for pressure from family etc. And I will continue to do so. But I don't blame them, because at the end of the day, I make the choice. And yes, there are plenty of times that I've weighed pros and cons and gone against them to do what I wanted to do as well. It's a balancing act.

>>this woman doesn't get the abortion as her husband's family wishes and then they throw her out of the house. And then her parents won't take her back into their house because she has "shamed" the family.

It's time for her to make some hard choices. You're saying the glass is half-empty, and here I am thinking the glass is half-full. She's free to do what she wants. It's a big world and with a bit of courage, determination and sheer hard work, most people can fend for themselves.

What do you suggest she do?

M. Nam

Clueless on March 30, 2007 02:38 AM · Direct link

Sonia a boy is a must in the punjabi culture. I have learned the hard way. I have one child who is a girl. Yet all the time I hear from punjabi people telling me that I need to have a son. One time a person I did not know that well to me that he was gonna pray at the local sikh temple for me to have a son.

When I tell people that I don't need to have a son, they are very surprised when I say that.

One reason that even in the west punjabi want to have sons, is cause most who come to the west keep there culture and values from the homeland. Sexism is a major problem, yet very few men in our community speak out about it. I have spoken out about it, and when I do people tell me I'm too western.

I don't see how the solution to son-preference is to have a son so that other Punjabis will leave you alone. I'm glad you have the confidence to tell them that you don't need to have a son, but too many people are afraid to. The solution isn't to succumb to the pressure, but to change the mentality. We can't change the world overnight, but we can change the way WE think. I personally think a fitting response to the Punjabis who pester you about having a son is to tell them to fuck off. I've had fights with my own mother about this when I ask why she is extra congratulatory to a Punjabi couple if they had a son. And incidentally, her own son is pretty much a failure in life and me, her daughter, is the one all her hopes are pinned on.

Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery on March 30, 2007 07:10 AM · Direct link

Whats wrong with terminating female pregnancies in California? They dont have the Punjab problem.

What's wrong with it is that it represents the devaluing of girls, that's what. That's like asking what's wrong with lynching a Sikh man in 1984 because there were plenty of Sikhs in Punjab already.

Props to Sonia for the stinging comeback ^^

Rights can be conferred only on those who have responsibilities.

MoorNam, I have heard this statement before, and it does seem to make sense in most cases. However, the statement cannot be applied universally. For instance, babies -- say between the ages of 0-2 -- have no responsibilities. They don't take the trash out, squeal all night and keep the neighbours up, create messes and in general act like hobos. Cute hobos, nonetheless. Getting back to my point, so since babies have no rights according to that doctrine, we should be able to kill them without remorse.

What's wrong with it is that it represents the devaluing of girls, that's what. That's like asking what's wrong with lynching a Sikh man in 1984 because there were plenty of Sikhs in Punjab already.

Thats a rather silly analogy. My point was that in Punjab sex selection of children is a problem as it has lead to female infanticide, large scale abortion of girls (leading to gender imbalance)etc.

However California does not have the above problem and I dont see any problems with some lone Sardar having a preference for a boy or a girl. I dont have a problem with abortion anyway so we might not agree on this.

However California does not have the above problem and I dont see any problems with some lone Sardar having a preference for a boy or a girl. I dont have a problem with abortion anyway so we might not agree on this.

DEAR GOD! If I wasn't waiting to sober up I'd have a better response, but really dude, WTF?

However California does not have the above problem and I dont see any problems with some lone Sardar having a preference for a boy or a girl. I dont have a problem with abortion anyway so we might not agree on this.

Are you saying that California (or other places in the West, for that matter) do NOT have a problem with Punjabis aborting female fetuses? Because indeed they do.

DDiA #96: >>since babies have no rights according to that doctrine(of not having responsibilities), we should be able to kill them without remorse.

But babies do have responsibilities, and most(99.99%) of them carry their responsibilities effortlessly. Their responsibility is to do something that even the best movie actors cannot do: Giggle, smile guiltlessly, squeal with pleasure at parents' sight, gaze with deep wonder at the TV remote, etc etc. It's their responsibility to bring out the child in you.

Since the begining of time, man has had the legal right to kill off their baby (until about a century ago). Yet, only a miniscule portion of parents choose to do so (even when there is religious sanction for it).

>>the statement cannot be applied universally.

It can too.

M. Nam

DEAR GOD! If I wasn't waiting to sober up I'd have a better response, but really dude, WTF?

Why is it so hard to understand that some of us dont really care as much as apparently you do about fetuses and are not that bothered by abortion.

Are you saying that California (or other places in the West, for that matter) do NOT have a problem with Punjabis aborting female fetuses? Because indeed they do.

Yes though I am willing to change my opinion if presented with credible evidence which contradicts my opinion.

Sonia is right about California having a gender problem with Punjabi's aborting female fetus. But it is even worse in Canada, especially in the punjabi community in Vancouver.

MoorNam some of these punjabi women have been threatened if they don't abort there female fetus.

Another problem is that alot of women and feminist groups in the west are useless when it comes to issues like this. Due to Polictical Correctness, stupid white guilt and the fear of being called racist they are afraid to speak out about issue like this.

But babies do have responsibilities, and most(99.99%) of them carry their responsibilities effortlessly. Their responsibility is to do something that even the best movie actors cannot do: Giggle, smile guiltlessly, squeal with pleasure at parents' sight, gaze with deep wonder at the TV remote, etc etc. It's their responsibility to bring out the child in you.

You completely destroy your own argument with stuff like this.

It's not the foetus's rights I was talking about, but the mother's - you people are seriously OK with her husband and in-laws forcing her to abort a child she would like to carry to term? Does she not matter as a person, the foetus has to be discussed as having rights before she does? In endless reports about female foeticide the mother is described as being very reluctant and pressured by her husband. Do you have any idea what it must be like to be a young woman with intense social pressure to stay with and please your husband and his family by producing a son, very little financial independence, the knowledge that your family and social milieu may well reject you for not being the Good Wife, and taken by your husband and in-laws to have an abortion? "There are laws against it" - of all the naive things to say.

Well played, MoorNam :)

But if we extend that argument, aren't we forced to include the promise of future, the promise of the giggles and squeals that these unborn children hold within them? Fetuses kick and make their presence felt to the mother. They have the same responsibilities as giggling children, in that case. They provide unalloyed joy and hope for the parents, and their grandparents. In that case, surely, they should too be endowed with rights.

Note that I am not rabidly pro-life like the Christian-right. But in this case, the parents want the child were it not for social bullies, the fetus wants to be born (naturally) and the only people who don't want the female child are random village idiots. Killing a baby to "fit-in" better with the Joneses cannot be ethically condoned at all.

As to your second point,

Since the begining of time, man has had the legal right to kill off their baby (until about a century ago). Yet, only a miniscule portion of parents choose to do so (even when there is religious sanction for it).

It's not the foetus's rights I was talking about, but the mother's - you people are seriously OK with her husband and in-laws forcing her to abort a child she would like to carry to term?

No, I am not and no one is saying that (I am not anyway) so please dont give birth to strawman just so you can then abort them mercilessly :)

>>you people are seriously OK with her husband and in-laws forcing her to abort a child she would like to carry to term?

"Forcing", "Coerced" etc are all loaded words. Please see earlier responses.

She can do whatever she wants on her own terms. She can run away to another town. Live hand to mouth and feed her child. Pay the right price for the right to give birth.

What you seem to be saying is: The husband and in-laws should accept her desire to have the girl-child, pay for child birth, education, wedding etc etc.

I say, nonsense. Nobody has to accept anything on others' terms. Husband/In-laws have the right to reject her for carrying a female fetus. You cannot legislate away desire to have male offspring.

I am only concerned with everyone's individual rights. Much as I disagree with husbands/in-laws who don't want to have the girl-child, I will fight to defend their right to do so. Just as I will fight to defend the pregnant woman to leave the house and care for the child on her own.

M. Nam

Read my post numer 88 - I explicitly referred to women's rights with regard to both forced foeticide and dowry but somehow the rest of you saw the matter of rights as only relevant to the foetus. The lack of attention to the point of women's rights is telling. It's not a bloody straw man, it's important.

MoorNam, you seem to live in your own idealised little conservative universe, rather far removed from reality, and with the burden of responsibility 100% on those who are weaker and complete protection for everyone else. I don't know what to say to someone who thinks like that, only perhaps that it might do you good to live a few years in a context where these issues are real and not theoretical.

SP: #109

Once a person starts pulling at emotional strings instead of logical debate, there's nothing much to be said.

M. Nam

101 · Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery on March 30, 2007 03:20 PM · Direct link

Are you saying that California (or other places in the West, for that matter) do NOT have a problem with Punjabis aborting female fetuses? Because indeed they do.

Yes though I am willing to change my opinion if presented with credible evidence which contradicts my opinion.

Sex Selection Alive and Well in South Asian Immigrant Communities in the U.S.

News Feature, Sunita Puri,
India Currents, Mar 17, 2006

The woman lying on the examination table is clearly nervous. She has a look of troubled anticipation, brows deeply furrowed, lips pursed and pale, and forehead glistening with tiny beads of sweat. She takes a deep breath, and grasps her dupatta with moist hands, while mouthing prayers into the off-white wall.

“It’s a girl.�

I watch the woman’s blank expression, and catch the look of frustration on her husband’s face in the corner of my eye. Seconds later, she begins to cry.

As a medical student I first became interested in the issue of sex selection upon talking with South Asian women who told me they were abused or neglected by their husbands and extended family because they had given birth to girls. I was surprised to learn that such pressure to have boys exist even within immigrant South Asian communities in the United States. A number of factors have converged to actually enable this practice: easy access to routine ultrasounds (forbidden in India), the availability of abortion services, and the American fertility industry, which offers everything from preconception sex selection to at-home gender determination kits. Ads for sex-selection clinics have appeared in South Asian community papers and even The New York Times.

I thus decided to do a research project on sex selection and the reasons for its prevalence among both South Asian immigrants and non-South Asians in the United States. This research is formally intended for the master’s thesis required for my medical degree, but I also wanted to do this project to promote dialogue about a preference for sons and its impact on the lives of women and children. Any quotes and locations have been changed to protect the identities of my research subjects.

When I first began my project, I was extremely wary. I had seen that newspaper articles about the skewed gender ratio in India often make the front page, yet offer little insight into the reasons for sex selection, or the pressures and emotions involved in such decisions. I did not want to further stereotypes about the preference for sons among South Asians. I wanted to understand what drives women to seek three or more abortions in their quest for a male child. I wanted to know how the desire for a son, and not wanting any more daughters, affected a couple’s existing children. I wanted to understand how medical providers felt about offering sex selection services or simply early sex determination via ultrasound. And, I wanted to understand why this practice was occurring in the United States among South Asian immigrants.

“In this country?� is the incredulous response I most often hear when I discuss some of the trends I’ve observed. Yet my own surprise has lessened as I’ve researched the reasons behind son preference. Religious and cultural festivals are not the only practices that survive the processes of immigration: the ultrasound machine has retained its iconic status among some South Asian immigrants in this country. When I ask women why they want a son, they often expect that I should know and understand that this is “an expectation of women,� as one woman put it.

Yet, what draws couples to travel across the state and sometimes to other states to get an ultrasound scan? What motivates them to spend thousands of dollars to select fetal sex before conception? Surprisingly, it is often women themselves who firmly believe that they need to have a son. The couples visiting these clinics usually already have at least one daughter—I have never seen a couple try and select the sex of their first child. When I ask why, they often tell me, simply, that every mother has a right to a son. Sometimes, their stories are heartbreaking: their female in-laws taunt them, call them infertile, drive them to it. It is sometimes their own mothers or mothers-in-law who pressure them to have a boy. In other instances, the tension between the couple in clinic is palpable, and I wonder about the pressures women face from their husbands at home.

It is undoubtedly difficult for couples to speak with me about their most personal and intimate matters. Yet they patiently answered my questions, allowed me to sit in on their clinic visits, and afforded me glimpses into their emotional experiences. Many are deeply conflicted, and openly acknowledge the tension in being a woman and not wanting a daughter. Some do not want to have a girl because they want to prevent another woman from suffering as they have. Some hope that the newer technologies of sperm sorting will actually decrease their emotional suffering by avoiding an abortion.

A crucial question arising from this work is, what does this practice do to our daughters? Children are usually overlooked in the debate about sex selection, yet they are among the most immediately affected. Children who witness parents’ ongoing attempts to have a son are impacted emotionally and materially. A South Asian American student told me in an interview, “Do these parents think we don’t know what they’re up to? Of course we do. It’s no mistake that all the families I know have, like, four girls and the youngest is a boy. It’s obvious to us even if we don’t say anything. Because what can we really say?�

One could argue, as many physicians have, that patient autonomy and the concept of choice makes sex selection permissible if patients believe it is the best option for their family. However, it is not entirely clear whose choice it is. If a woman faces intense pressure, psychological or otherwise, to have a son, is she really exercising her choice? If she is harassed, threatened, or emotionally abused, is she free to seek or not seek sex determination or sex-selection services?

The real issue is not necessarily sex selection per se, but what sex selection signifies—the unequal status of women. While many couples say they need to have a son since they already have daughters, many do not know how to answer me when I ask if they would seek a daughter if they had only sons. Technology or physicians alone are not at the root of the problem. The use of technology and marketing of sex selection exist because of the preference for a male child. Technological advancement undoubtedly increases the pressure to use technology in order to have a boy. One woman told me, “Now that all these methods exist, if I don’t use them, my in-laws will harass me.� While I understand the role that technology plays in making this issue worse, ultimately it is the deep-seated preference for boys that we must question and challenge. For instance, why is it that some couples believe they have “too many daughters,� but we rarely hear complaints about “too many sons�?

We must acknowledge the societal pressures to have a son rather than condemn couples who succumb to them. Judgment and blame will only thicken the shroud of secrecy surrounding these practices, making it even harder to talk about it. Family planning decisions are naturally complex and emotional, but in this instance they can be influenced by expectations from family and community that result in unusual pressure and harm to both women and children.

How can the family and community provide a more positive influence? We can take steps towards change in small ways. For example, we can congratulate couples equally when sons and daughters are born. We can organize small meetings about creating more opportunities for women’s advancement, and more days to celebrate women’s many accomplishments. We can hold debates about the role and status of women, making space for women to talk about the ways they have experienced gender inequality. We can remind our daughters every day that they are equal to their brothers in every way.

When I look around me, I see strong, brilliant, beautiful South Asian daughters committed to improving the world around them. Our women are teachers, world-class athletes, artists, musicians, writers, activists, doctors, lawyers, models, actresses, mothers, daughters, and sisters. Let us celebrate our daughters, and all the women of our community, and take active steps towards achieving equality of women and men, daughters and sons.

Sunita Puri is a second-year medical student at the UC San Francisco-UC Berkeley joint medical program. She is currently conducting an ethnographic study of son preference and sex selection among South Asian immigrants in the United States.

see the article at http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=77ccb8095412ea46e40184e503787025

more info to come...

Also check out these dispatches from the same writer of that article about her research in the Bay Area on sex selection among desis there...

Thank God Moornam doesn't have any actual influence on things. Actually, some of you guys should also probably be thankful (for different reasons of course) that I don't have much influence on things either...if I did, you wouldn't recognize India by the time I was done. Of course, I think it would be a much better place.

Amitabh,

Did not expect a personal attack from you.

Sonia,

You seem to think that female sex selection is wrong because it violates the rights of women. Fine.

As you may know, the sex of the foetus is determined by the male(sperm). What if in the future, medicine companies produce a $2/- pill which a man can take to kill off all his female sperm? Would you ban that too the way you seem to think that sex-selection tests should be banned? What would it do to the rights of the man? Does his sperm have more rights than him?

Where do you stop with intrusion into personal lives?

M. Nam

Did not expect a personal attack from you.

Sorry...you're right. I disagreed with your statements about rights/responsibilities but I could have expressed it much better. I do always try to avoid any personal comments but I slipped up this time. My apologies again. I do however think you are being too rigid and your views appear heartless to me. Peace.

Although, Moornam, and I don't think this is a personal attack, I am happy that your views are not widespread and are not in legislative effect.

ShallowThinker on March 29, 2007 09:57 PM · Direct link
Sikhism is a religion with few answer's. Ask 10 Sikh's about what happen's to your soul when you die and you will get 10 different answer's. Ask about eating meat, you get 10 different answer's. Ask about how you are supposed to eat in a Gurdwara and you will get 10 different answer's. Ask about wedding ritual's and ....you get the picture.

Sonia said:
Hmm, as opposed to what - Hinduism? Catholicism? Where there is only one answer? Come on now - you can do better than that reasoning.

Ask a Catholic what happen's when you die? The answer is simple. Hell, they even have a guy who make's all the rule's for them,I think he is called the Pope or something

Hinduism is more complex and from my interaction's with most hindu's, they are confused as well.

Both Sikhism and Hinduism are to complex for the everyday person to really understand. Last time I checked Hinduism and Sikhism arent exactly stealing away Catholic's and Muslim's on a everyday bases. Unless you count Yoga, which is very popular, but more for exercise and I am sure that most people who do it think some fitness model came up with it.

The simplest answer is usually the correst one. No need to bring in a mathmaticican and use his expertise in game theory and algorithms to crack this case. Getting up at 4 in the morning to get ready for the rode by 6 in the morning isnt a life style that most people desire.

People have to study, work, deal with their hormone's, socialize, play sports, do taxes, and whatever else. Most people cant handle anything else.

To quote that line from The Shashank Redemption, "The world got itself in a big damn hurry", and sadly the turban slow's alot of people down.

Those that can handle it are incredible, but from our interaction's with people everyday we know that most people are not incredible.

I have also noticed that as people get older and their life has slowed down and in many cases when they have gone bald, they all of the sudden start wearing a turban. So maybe less young people are wearing it, but as they get older and all the kid's are married off, they to will start wearing one.

Guys, we're getting quite negative on a lot of these comments. There also seems to be a bit of a deadlock over the whole female foeticide issue, which is starting to go around in circles.

In a few hours we'll probably shut this thread down.

Last time I checked Hinduism and Sikhism arent exactly stealing away Catholic's and Muslim's on a everyday bases

But that is not in Hinduism or Sikhisms nature to prosletyse or 'steal' Catholics and Muslims. Whatever their faults, that is not what they are geared towards, or believe in.

114 · MoorNam on March 30, 2007 06:14 PM · Direct link

Sonia,

You seem to think that female sex selection is wrong because it violates the rights of women. Fine.

As you may know, the sex of the foetus is determined by the male(sperm). What if in the future, medicine companies produce a $2/- pill which a man can take to kill off all his female sperm? Would you ban that too the way you seem to think that sex-selection tests should be banned? What would it do to the rights of the man? Does his sperm have more rights than him?

Where do you stop with intrusion into personal lives?

M. Nam

M. Nam,

Go back through my comments and find the one where I wrote that I think sex-selection tests should be banned. Can't find it, huh? Stop assuming things. Legislating things is an iffy issue because sometimes it just makes the problem worse.

People can do whatever the hell they want. We can't stop a woman from aborting her female fetus or a man from beating his wife for giving birth to a girl. BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE IT OKAY. Furthermore, this has implications for the rest of us, not just them. It does nothing more but perpetuate the sexism and misogyny that permeates the Punjabi culture.

If someone wanted to go around committing hate crimes against South Asians because in his/her "personal life" he/she believed it was okay and truly hated desis, what should be the course of action? Let him/her go around killing people or do something about the attitudes that are prompting it?

119 · SM Intern #5 on March 30, 2007 07:00 PM · Direct link

Guys, we're getting quite negative on a lot of these comments. There also seems to be a bit of a deadlock over the whole female foeticide issue, which is starting to go around in circles.

In a few hours we'll probably shut this thread down.

SM Intern #5, not all of us are "guys." I sure am not.

Let's talk about turbans, shall we, before the thread gets shut down.

Shallow Thinker - I agree it takes time to tie a good turban - on the other hand, that's exactly what practice does for you - reduces the time you need. Another solution is to find a simpler style to wear. Also agree about people tying turbans when they start to go bald - that also increases the chances for men to start wearing caps regularly - across cultures. Turbans are also suggested for hair loss arising from chemotherapy. And SP - ready-to-wear turbans already exist, but I can't see myself wearing one!

This Baisakhi Day, April 13, is International Sikh Turban Day. Two interesting ways of popularizing turbans: Link and Link. Read about it here and here.

Yes, I know Sonia -- I meant it in the gender neutral sense.

And incidentally, her own son is pretty much a failure in life and me, her daughter, is the one all her hopes are pinned on.

I know you are trying to make a point on how unfair it is, but this seems a little callous

^^^
Just trying to give an example that I can speak about to show that the son preference is not only sexist and misogynistic, but pointless as well. I see more Punjabi families where the daughters are the ones taking care of their parents in their old age, not the sons.

Cool, I was actually going to write to take back my comment anyway, as I think it makes sense in the context of what you said

The mindset is there - it exists, and we can't deny it or just criticize it. We have to work, instead, to change the mindset and the trend. I'm the oldest grandchild on my father's side, and I was told that when I was born, my dadi (grandmother) had tears in her eyes - she had hoped for and been expecting my mother to have a boy. It was hard for me to hear, especially because my entire life, having the relationship I've had and still have with my dadi, I couldn't possibly imagine it. I do realize that things were different then - but whether I knew it or not, I was the one who made her happy to have a granddaughter. Gotta teach them.

I was at my uncle's brother's wedding in Ludhiana, Punjab. My uncle and aunt have 3 intelligent, athletic, beautiful girls. The hijray came around the wedding house and were asking him how many kids he had (so they could offer him blessings for sons) - he said he was happy with his 3 girls and couldn't ask for anything more. Everyone was like "Eh?? But of course you still want a son, though, right??" They just didn't understand why. It made me feel good to see him be proud of his girls and not succumb to peer pressure and let them make him feel like something was lacking because out of his 3 children he didn't have a boy.

Don't get me wrong - boys are great. I love them. But when I have children, I'll have what I'm meant to have, and I'll be happy with that.

To be honest, as a younger guy, you are pretty unaware of most of this stuff, and I think its only at a later time that you become aware of some of it. At a certain point, it just seems like its all fun, music, and ladoo, and these other issues only seem to be hinted

Fine, Moornam, I'll just leave you to your sappy smiles at gurgling boy babies bullied out of some non-superwoman. You really are too funny and self-contradictory to be taken very seriously.

Sonia, I often wonder what it will take for the mentality to change. You see so many women who are taking care of their parents while the sons basically get the property out of them and run off, and young women who come to work in the city and send money back home to their parents.

Turbans, turbans - can anyone think of a TV or film hero in this generation who was Sikh and had a turban? Do Sikh sex symbols just not sell? Because if they did, I don't think we'd be hearing so much about how hard it is to tie a turban. Thoughts?

Yes I wonder what it will take too, but I hate how people just say "Well that's the culture, we can't change things." We can change how WE think, and that's a start. I honestly just wish Punjabis would stop caring so damn much what other people think of them. I know it's a collectivist culture and all but damn.

A propos of changing gender roles, the National Sample Survey's figures on male and female employment outside the home suggest that the last 10 years have seen a huge surge in women going out to work.

It occurred to me re: Sikh hotties that the only Sikh media stars I can think of are Daler Mehndi and Rabbi Shergill and a couple of other characters on music channels. Not exactly uber sex symbols but they do exist.

101 · Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery on March 30, 2007 03:20 PM · Direct link

Are you saying that California (or other places in the West, for that matter) do NOT have a problem with Punjabis aborting female fetuses? Because indeed they do.

Yes though I am willing to change my opinion if presented with credible evidence which contradicts my opinion.

Also check out these ads that have appeared in newspapers here

Ajit Weekly: http://www.jakara.org/images/ajit_1.jpg

Hamdard: http://www.jakara.org/images/hamdard_1.jpg

hmm...wonder why a doctor named John Stephens (obviously a gora) would bother making the effort to specifically advertise to the Punjabi population and get it written in Gurmukhi for all the fobs to read

Wow, what a thread. I'm glad it's calmed down, for now.

Here's a less "cheery" and more pointed article about the phenomena. It's author states that the "no turban" trend in India is divided among caste lines, an argument I had not heard before:

Clearly, the situation has gone beyond hair-splitting as rural Punjab's tryst with the barber keeps growing. The land-owning Jat Sikhs have all but shed the turban, whereas the more conservative trading 'Khatri Sikhs' in urban areas are less inclined towards the new trend. One reason is that most of the Sikh gurus were 'Khatris' or from the trading community which is why this section of Sikhs are more staunch believers.

But go to rural Punjab and there are some tell-tale indicators of change. Where earlier, the sole barber in a village had to supplement his income by selling sweetmeats, now, most villages have three to four barbers. The feisty land-owning Punjabi Jat farmer has always been known for his enterprise and desire to try new things. True to form, it is he who is leading the 'no turban' trend even though it makes him an apostate in the eyes of his religion.

Anyone care to comment about this? I know very little about this issue to give any useful commentary, but find it interesting nonetheless.

When I went to Amritsar last year, they had a Mr. Sikh pageant. I remember asking my cousin about it who said that Sikh groups in the city were trying to promote the preservation of the turban and sikh values through the contest. I thought it was an interesting way to help people relate to their turbans as the mainstream and as handsome. There were some serious hotties on the billboard they showed.

Here's an article about the Mr. Sikh India Pageant, with epic pic.

It occurred to me re: Sikh hotties that the only Sikh media stars I can think of are Daler Mehndi and Rabbi Shergill and a couple of other characters on music channels. Not exactly uber sex symbols but they do exist.

SP, check out post #1 by Saira. Ahluwalia may be not be a household name, but he's been in some big movies, (Inside Man, The Life Aquatic) magazine shoots, and has a jewelry line out.

Guys, we're getting quite negative on a lot of these comments. There also seems to be a bit of a deadlock over the whole female foeticide issue, which is starting to go around in circles.

In a few hours we'll probably shut this thread down.

Please, not before Shri Spoorlam makes an appearance! I need to hear about how Vedic babies gurgle and coo at a 3.5% cuter level than those infidel Abrahamic uterine dumplings! I want to know how many more babies Hindu women should be making so we won't be swamped by Muslims procreating like halal rabbits!

Hm, Ahluwalia is OK but not as hot as Rabbi. The Mr Singh pagaent photo is PRICELESS.

The theory about barbers looking for work => more mona sikhs is not convincing IMO.

The theory about barbers looking for work => more mona sikhs is not convincing IMO.

The theory in that article is that it's disproportionately Jat Sikhs abandoning the turban.

Whoops - I read that wrong. Sorry. Are Jat sikhs more likely to be urban or live among non-sikhs too?

Are Jat sikhs more likely to be urban or live among non-sikhs too?

Not in India. The article makes clear they are more likely to be rural. In the rural areas, losing the kesh does not mean one is taken to be non-Sikh automatically, since there are both Keshdharis and monas in the rural areas. In the urban areas however, it is more likely that losing the kesh means one could be automatically thought of as non-Sikh. This may explain the urban-rural divergence in turban-tying. Of course, even in the rural areas, there are some non-Sikhs and non-Jat Sikhs, still, I think my point holds.

The kesh-turban issue has been there for a long time, as the perception of the balance between the benefits of looking different versus retaining the identity has see-sawed over time. Interestingly, even as far back as the late 19th and early 20th century, British Army recruiters (of all people) used to worry about it, since they wanted a distinct visual appearance among Sikhs for their colonial armies. They would therefore go to great lengths to instill the Sikh identity among their recruits, including standardizing turban-tying.

In the immigrant context on the other hand - the very earliest generation of Sikh immigrants (1890s-1900s) retained their kesh and turban, but the generation that immediately followed them, in North America, would often shave beards and cut their hair, usually in Hong Kong, on their way to Vancouver (1910s-1920s). Similarly, ladies would get skirts and dresses instead of shalwar-kameez. As time went on, and the population of immigrants increased, people realized that discrimination was occuring regardless of whether you shaved your hair or not, and the benefits of a distinct identity, including an external appearance, became clearer. Today, the debate continues in the diaspora, but new issues, such as 9/11 and 'globalization' have come up. The latter is especially spurious to my mind. Sikhs are already a globalized community, and both the identity and the external appearance issue have held up well through the earlier phase of 'globalization' - pre-WW-I. The same largely holds today, in my view, and I hope more people would realize that.

SP It occurred to me re: Sikh hotties that the only Sikh media stars I can think of are Daler Mehndi and Rabbi Shergill and a couple of other characters on music channels. Not exactly uber sex symbols but they do exist.

Hmm... where do you come down on Kabir Bedi, an uber sex symbol if there ever was one?

Anyone care to comment about this? I know very little about this issue to give any useful commentary, but find it interesting nonetheless.

It has been true for a while, actually. The big shifts have been amongst rural Jats, with urban Bhapa Sikhs showing less abrupt change over time, although they too have a less steep decline in turban wearing.

You can see this in the USA when you go to Gurudwaras - "Jat Sikh" Gurdwaras tend to have more monas, "Bhapa Sikh" Gurdwaras have fewer. It also shows up when you speak Punjabi since the dialects are different, so you can class somebody once they open up their mouths.

I really resist talking in terms of tribes within Sikhi, because I think it's very pernicious. But in this case the patterns are pretty clear, and one can rephrase in terms of urban and rural instead.

Actually, it used to be quite common for South Indian men to wear turbans, and for that matter also elsewhere in Northern, Eastern or Western India - it has declined in the cities, but is still fairly common in rural areas. Most early Indian male immigrants to North America - Sikhs and Hindus especially, also wore turbans. In fact, Sabu, the Kal Penn of the 1930s, also wore it often, on and off-screen!

Here are 3 'South Indian' men - a philosopher-statesman, Vice-President and President (1952-67), a Nobel Laureate and a celebrated centenarian technocrat. The pictures are from the 1960s, but this is what contemporary American Presidents looked like back then, so men don't wear hats any more over here, and Indian men don't wear turbans so much any more. Turban-wearing has faded less-slowly among Sikhs because of the religio-cultural injunctions, but it still needs all the encouragement it can get.

BTW, I'm totally with you on the 'wearing turbans shows strength of conviction' bit!

Thanks chachaji for the links above (your comment in #34). I had no idea in the South Indians people wore turbans. But from the links above that you showed me, I guess the men wore their turbans different, b/c I don't think they grow out their hair, like the Sikhs do. Somehow the hair makes it so much more attractive.

I've never really thought about this but I guess many types of INdians wear turbans - not just Sikhs with long hair - I remember seeing old pics of maharajas wearing their jeweled turbans.

The Frank H. McClung Museum at the University of Tenn had a special exhibition a few years back. Devoted to all things fab & Cartier, they had on display many rare objets that displayed the innovative genius of Louis Francois Cartier - such as his being a pioneer in using platinum starting in 1896: "The thick settings of gold, silver and heavy woven strands that had been known since time immemorial were like the armor of jewelry. The use of platininum, which became its embroidery, an innovation introduced by us, produced the reformation..."

The "Garland Style" upped the wow factor of his diamond/platinum settings; the Maharaja of Patiala - commissioned him to create special turban bling.

But from the links above that you showed me, I guess the men wore their turbans different, b/c I don't think they grow out their hair, like the Sikhs do. Somehow the hair makes it so much more attractive.

Although the turban and the kesh have a unique significance within Sikhism, related traditions of long hair and the turban, (separately and together) are also found elsewhere within India, though more likely in an ascetic context, especially today. Here are two South Indian Shaivite sadhus, for example. Guru Gobind Singh drew on this tradition in creating the kesh as a symbol of Sikh practice and faith. Of course, even outside this ascetic tradition, lots of men in India wear turbans, but as you note, they don't necessarily grow out their hair.

Actually, it used to be quite common for South Indian men to wear turbans, and for that matter also elsewhere in Northern, Eastern or Western India - it has declined in the cities, but is still fairly common in rural areas.

Rajasthani culture was famed for its tradition of turbans...also sadly a dying phenomenon.

All said and done, turbans in their various forms are symbolic of India. For example, I think it's great that the male members of the Indian olympic team all wear turbans during the opening ceremonies.

Yes I was about to say that about Rajasthan too, and also that turbans were traditional in other parts of Asia and the Middle East too.

Chachaji - Kabir Bedi was super hot, but he didn't wear a turban ever, did he?

Very interesting that the kesh/identity issue became more relevant in mixed or urban settings, it makes sense that differentiation and staking out one's identity becomes more important when it can't be taken for granted. But you'd also think that young Sikh women who had grown up around predominantly Sikh men would be more likely to have a keshdari man as a norm or ideal.

In Delhi amongst the Hindu Punjabis, it used to be asked, "Who goes for the Surd (Sardar) guys?" and the answer would invariably be "sadarnis of course, they like their own." If Sadarnis find the look less appealing now, you cannot blame the Sadars for cutting their hair and shaving.

Chachaji - Kabir Bedi was super hot, but he didn't wear a turban ever, did he?

SP, he may not have routinely worn turbans off-screen, but he has certainly worn turbans on-screen, including in his more famous roles, such as Gobinda in Octopussy, and also as Sandokan. He has an extensive Bollywood filmography, and I would guess he wore turbans in many other roles. Interestingly, he is cast in Deepa Mehta's forthcoming Kamagata Maru. I would be very surprized if he didn't have a turbanned role in that movie.

In Delhi amongst the Hindu Punjabis, it used to be asked, "Who goes for the Surd (Sardar) guys?" and the answer would invariably be "sadarnis of course, they like their own." If Sadarnis find the look less appealing now, you cannot blame the Sadars for cutting their hair and shaving.

Maybe "sardarnis" find the look less appealing because of the pernicious influence of people around them who asked questions like that. And who probably didn't stop at the questions but went on to make a bunch of bigoted and tasteless jokes at the expense of the "Surd" community. Another fact is that Indian media, whether Bollywood or the television channels, has waged subtle, low-intensity, psychological warfare against Sikhs and Sikhism for a long time now...the goal of this war is assimilation...and most often the people behind the scenes have been Punjabi Hindus.

Amitabh,

In Delhi, Sikhs refer to themselves as "Surds" very often. And I think you've been reading too many Khalistani websites if you think there is some war in the media waged by Hindu Punjabis against Sikhs. Get real, man.

Wow, this thread got long! Firstly, right on Sonia, and way to hold it down. I've agreed vehemently with everything you've written - perhaps we have the same friend in common working on her MPH/MD? :)

Re: turbans and are they attractive
Having grown up in CA, I still find men with dastars/paghs attractive, and the image of a turbanned Sikh is clearly not exhalted or the "norm" out here! That said, what I find super unattractive is the personalities of these same guys. I don't think the % of jerks is higher among Keshdari Sikhs, I'm just saying, I think working on one's asinine personality is probably going to help more than cutting one's hair in Punjab.

Also, based on personal experience, my cousin's father-in-law also felt that Sikhs in Punjab were too quick to cast off the turban. His complaint was, "Punjab, home of apostasy." Kind of accurate, to be honest. I don't meet many Sikhs in Punjab who have cut their hair but also identify strongly with Sikh religious teachings, etc. (I've found it to be more of a mixed bag - whether or not you cut your hair - in the West).

Ok, back to side topics:
Sikhi is "too complex"
ShallowThinker, Sikhi is not that "complex" in explaining what happens after you die, etc., etc. What is complex is that people have different religious understandings and interpretations, and that the religion is dynamic enough to encourage dialogue and disagreement. Indeed, conversation and learning is one of the key underpinnings of having a sangat to begin with. That said, I honestly think the lack of consensus does not show that Sikhi is a confused faith, and I do think some questions are pretty straightforward.

Son preference
MoorNam, I was going to write something scathing, then decided against. Honestly, I find your argument ridiculous, but there isn't much more to say.

Thats a rather silly analogy. My point was that in Punjab sex selection of children is a problem as it has lead to female infanticide, large scale abortion of girls (leading to gender imbalance)etc.

However California does not have the above problem and I dont see any problems with some lone Sardar having a preference for a boy or a girl. I dont have a problem with abortion anyway so we might not agree on this.

In Delhi amongst the Hindu Punjabis, it used to be asked, "Who goes for the Surd (Sardar) guys?" and the answer would invariably be "sadarnis of course, they like their own." If Sadarnis find the look less appealing now, you cannot blame the Sadars for cutting their hair and shaving.

Maybe "sardarnis" find the look less appealing because of the pernicious influence of people around them who asked questions like that. And who probably didn't stop at the questions but went on to make a bunch of bigoted and tasteless jokes at the expense of the "Surd" community. Another fact is that Indian media, whether Bollywood or the television channels, has waged subtle, low-intensity, psychological warfare against Sikhs and Sikhism for a long time now...the goal of this war is assimilation...and most often the people behind the scenes have been Punjabi Hindus.

And Amitabh is right. Sikhi has been often maligned and misrepresented in mainstream desi media, Bollywood and otherwise. I know some folks would argue that there have been "positive representations" in the past 5 years, but I would argue that Sikhi is often portrayed as something bizarre or "confused." Prior to that, Sikhs were almost always portrayed as either the fool or the villain. I would argue that the way we have been treated in the media is similar to the historic treatment of African Americans in U.S. entertainment/media.

Apologies for being so blunt, but re: comment #1 - this is stupid. I am tired of people blaming the decisions of Sikh men on the fickle preferences of Sikh women. There are tons of complicated (and accurate) reasons for why there is an increase in people cutting their hair in Punjab, imo. I am sure that sex appeal is not the only one, and if it is, I really feel bad that people are so insecure in their own self worth that they think that cutting their hair is going to magically get women to fall at their feet.

Camille, you're pretty quick to put guys down. Go online and take a look at the number of Sikh women who want men with cut or uncut hair. Most of the ads are for monas. Even women who like turbans and beards often want a "trimmer" and are pretty blunt about it. Like all sorts of discrimination, just becuz you don't do it, or you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it isn't there.

That said, what I find super unattractive is the personalities of these same guys. I don't think the % of jerks is higher among Keshdari Sikhs

Woah - that's a sweeping statement. What - once they cut their hair, they stop being assholes? Why do you think that monas are less likely to be a*holes, esp. given that they are still Sikh and Punjabi? Assimilation makes them nicer?

You're pretty quick to make sweeping statements both ways. Oh no, Sikh women couldn't possibly be part of the problem. It's all the guys fault. They're a*holes, and they're weak willed! But nobody discriminates against them. Uh huh.

Camille: >>MoorNam, I was going to write something scathing

As long as it's a logical debate and not a personal attack, bring it on.

M. Nam

I don't think the % of jerks is higher among Keshdari Sikhs

Woah - that's a sweeping statement. What - once they cut their hair, they stop being assholes?

Dhari, Camille said she doesn't think the % of jerks is higher among Keshdhari Sikhs. Not to be hard on you, it seemed like she said what you thought on a casual reading, even to me. Thought I'd clarify that before the thread goes off kilter again.

Chachaji - they're not jerks but they have unattractive personalities. Same diff. She's making sweeping statements.

If not jerks then dorks then. The same tired stereotypes about Indian men recycled. Except now, mona guys are the new white guys.

Camille, thank you for the support. Yes it looks like we have a friend in common =)

Female foeticide probably seems off-topic here, but for the sake of defending this thread: it came up because of the fact that there are fewer girls for every so many boys in Punjab now, and this is making competition stiff. If girls can be more selective now, they will be, and if they prefer cut-hair Sikhs, then more men are going to succumb to it. I don't think this is entirely the reason for the rise in Sikh men cutting their hair, but one can't rule it out as factor. And yes, Punjabi men in the West do NOT make the situation better by going to India and marrying the fewer and fewer girls that are left there. I don't want to open a new can of worms, but it would be interesting to know WHY so many Punjabi men don't want to marry Punjabi women raised here. I have my own speculations...

And yes, Punjabi men in the West do NOT make the situation better by going to India and marrying the fewer and fewer girls that are left there.

Maybe becuz women in the west think they have "unattractive personalities". Not all women are like you Sonia.

Sonia there a few reasons that alot of punjabi men don't want to marry women raised in the west. These men are looking for a women that they and there mother can control. Plus alot of these women from Punjab don't have much family in the west, so it will be harder for them to leave a bad marriage. I have heard so many stories about how these poor women from punjab who marry western husbands have no life of there own.

In last couple of months there were 2 punjabi women in Vancouver who were killed by there husbands family. After they died both had the same story. The dead women family from India talked about how they were treated by there husband and his family. They had to work all day, they could never go any where by them selves, they were scared to leave cause they were afraid to lose there kids and shame there family. So instead they stayed in there unhappy marriage and it only cost them there life.

Apologies for being so blunt, but re: comment #1 - this is stupid. I am tired of people blaming the decisions of Sikh men on the fickle preferences of Sikh women

If Sikh women don't find the turban attractive, what in the world are you going to do about it? "Reform" them? Why can't we just accept that women have preferences, and that those preference impact men, instead of blaming Hindus or "the media" for what's happening.

roddick writes: >>Why can't we just accept that women have preferences, and that those preference impact men

And men have preferences that impact women. And parent-in-laws have preferences that impact children-in-laws. And society swings in various directions due to these preferences. And that there's no right and wrong about it.

So saying that Sikh boys cutting their hair is wrong or having preferences for sons is wrong or opining that someone spent $200K on their daughter's sweet sixteen is wrong are all, well, wrong. And if carried to their logical conclusion, these attitudes of judging other's personal preferences will end up negatively impacting individual rights for all of us.

M. Nam

opining that someone spent $200K on their daughter's sweet sixteen is wrong are all, well, wrong.

Fine, spending $200K for person A may be equivalent to spending $10K for person B, and both may be 'wrong' (or 'right') in their own way; but come on MoorNam, you can't tell me that nothing shocks, offends, or bothers you? In your world, what qualifies as being 'wrong'? I get the feeling you're quite pleased with this philosophy you've developed, and you seem to think it applies to any and every situation imaginable. In my view that leads to rigidity and inflexibility; your views lack nuance and there are no shades of gray with you. Your attitude lacks humanity and empathy. And you're very fortunate that you don't have to actually live with the rules you'd like to see imposed on the rest of the world.

Amitabh asks: >>In your world, what qualifies as being 'wrong'?

Any action that prevents or leads to prevention of others exercising their rights at their own expense.

>> I get the feeling you're quite pleased with this philosophy you've developed,

I ride on the shoulders of intellectual giants who developed this philosophy millennia before my time.

>>you don't have to actually live with the rules you'd like to see imposed on the rest of the world.

Actually, I've been doing exactly the opposite! I am asking others to not impose their rules on rest of us.

>>Your attitude lacks humanity and empathy...your views lack nuance... .

Debate only, please. Why are so many people resorting to personal attacks instead of talking about the issue? Is this because there is is no counter argument to offer? Come on folks - I've never attacked anyone personally, not even SpoorLam, whose entire energy is spent on personally attacking me.

M. Nam

Dhari, I said no such thing. You are free to re-read my comment. I think the % of jerks who happen to be Keshdari Sikh is about the same as the % of jerks of every color and creed. I discriminate equally in that regard :)

What I will NOT do is write some long clarifying apology. As someone who has been super active in the Sikh community and who has worked on issues of Sikh representation, discrimination, etc., for over 7 years, I can assure you that my opinion on the maturity of men (in general) is not the primary reason that Sikh guys in Punjab are cutting their hair.

Furthermore, I ask you how many SARDARNIS are asking for mona men to marry. I am referring directly to the statement that was posed (that I responded to above). I understand that Sikh men face real, painful, and oftentimes violent discrimination, mostly outside of India, but also within. However, within Punjab, I am unimpressed and do not believe the argument that guys are cutting their hair SOLELY because they think it makes them more physically attractive to Sikh women. My point is, I wish people would try harder to develop a nuanced understanding of the MANY factors that could contribute to this instead of blaming Sikh women, yet again.

And, I reiterate, I am sick of people blaming Sikh women for the problems in our community. We [Sikh women] have enough drama to deal with without being blamed for every dilemma within the faith community. I am sure that we are not without some role in all of this; indeed, EVERYONE, Sikh and non-Sikh, probably has an influencing role in this issue. That said, instead of hating on Sikh women, maybe we could actually discuss the other relevant factors in this?

I don't want to open a new can of worms, but it would be interesting to know WHY so many Punjabi men don't want to marry Punjabi women raised here. I have my own speculations...

Debate only, please. Why are so many people resorting to personal attacks instead of talking about the issue?

MoorNam, it's NOT a personal attack. I'm merely expressing my opinion and reaction to your posts. I haven't insulted you in any way.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but I can recall going through the matrimonal section of Punjabi newspapers like Ajit Weekly as a teen and finding it impossible not to notice that the number of women with a preference for "clean shaven" Sikh men far outnumbered those who preferred one with a fully grown beard. It's been a while since I've looked through such papers so perhaps someone who has a current copy lying around (or a shaadi.com account) can fill us in on whether this trend persists. I'd be surprised if it hasn't. So although I agree with Camille that it would be a mistake to think that the sole reason Sikh men are shedding their kesh is to conform to the sexual preferences of Sikh and/or desi women, I don't think this factor is an insignificant one.

Furthermore, I ask you how many SARDARNIS are asking for mona men to marry. I am referring directly to the statement that was posed (that I responded to above). I understand that Sikh men face real, painful, and oftentimes violent discrimination, mostly outside of India, but also within. However, within Punjab, I am unimpressed and do not believe the argument that guys are cutting their hair SOLELY because they think it makes them more physically attractive to Sikh women. My point is, I wish people would try harder to develop a nuanced understanding of the MANY factors that could contribute to this instead of blaming Sikh women, yet again.

Camille - ur right, it's not the only reason. But, it is part of it. Think of peer pressure - what do young guys want? They want girls to think they're hot. You don't think bollywood affects girls too?

Yes, more sardarnis want monas than the other way around, go online and see. In my family in India, I have female cousins who married monas, but no male cousins who married sikh girls with cut hair. Again, just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it's not there.

Nobody is saying blame, but it is part of the picture.

Umm, as a Hindu chick raised in the West can I just say...I find second gen Punjabi guys who choose to wear turbans ULTRA HOT. Nothing says character like that.

I don't want to open a new can of worms, but it would be interesting to know WHY so many Punjabi men don't want to marry Punjabi women raised here. I have my own speculations...

Ennis, maybe it is a CA thing. I would say that a good number of Sikh guys I know who are 1-2 generations older than me (so the 28-40 year old crew) have definitely gone to India to find a wife.

Dhari, point taken :) I guess among my friends and family, it's generally been mona-seeking-mona and sardarni-seeking-sardar. I found sardarnis to be much more discriminating, but again, it's probably just my anecdotal experience.

165 · Camille on April 1, 2007 08:15 PM · Direct link

I don't want to open a new can of worms, but it would be interesting to know WHY so many Punjabi men don't want to marry Punjabi women raised here. I have my own speculations...

Sonia, didn't we recently discuss this on another thread?

That Sonia on there isn't me...there are too damn many people with that name...

159 · Clueless on April 1, 2007 04:32 PM · Direct link

Sonia there a few reasons that alot of punjabi men don't want to marry women raised in the west. These men are looking for a women that they and there mother can control. Plus alot of these women from Punjab don't have much family in the west, so it will be harder for them to leave a bad marriage. I have heard so many stories about how these poor women from punjab who marry western husbands have no life of there own.

In last couple of months there were 2 punjabi women in Vancouver who were killed by there husbands family. After they died both had the same story. The dead women family from India talked about how they were treated by there husband and his family. They had to work all day, they could never go any where by them selves, they were scared to leave cause they were afraid to lose there kids and shame there family. So instead they stayed in there unhappy marriage and it only cost them there life.

Yep exactly what my speculations were...thanks for the reaffirmation =)

158 · Dhari on April 1, 2007 04:09 PM · Direct link

And yes, Punjabi men in the West do NOT make the situation better by going to India and marrying the fewer and fewer girls that are left there.

Maybe becuz women in the west think they have "unattractive personalities". Not all women are like you Sonia.

I'd respond to this if I knew what exactly you were saying...

Regarding importing girls from India - having lived on both coasts, I feel there is definitely a difference in the reasons for it. On both coasts, I've seen guys from my generation import because they've ruined their reputations here and can't find a girl who wants to marry them - no joke. Let's just say these guys tend to be in the entertainment industry. However, in terms of importing girls who they can control and expect to be obediant, I've definitely seen more examples of this on the west coast.

That Sonia on there isn't me...there are too damn many people with that name...

Tell me about it! Anna had to nickname me Original Sonia because of all of you =)

My view is that the article is indicating a positive development in Indias(Ok potentially khalistans(a very potent declaration may be required for that)).
Just how does sporting a PaGindicate anything about the persons character.

Amardeep (or anyone else) -- to what extent do you think that being part of a post-1984 generation of Sikhs plays into this trend? Gentleman mentions the post-9/11 context creating a sense of insecurity, but (and this is unadulterated conjecture) I should think that within India itself, that is less of a factor than the insecurity arising from memories of 1984, especially for people who came of age in its wake.

I'm actually surprised that the events of 1984 hasn't led to more Sikh men wearing the turban out of pride and identity. I can understand men cutting their hair during the pogroms to avoid being targeted, but what has often happened after the fact is that a new sense of pride and community is created because of such a horrific experience. Maybe this isn't a fair comparison, but I remember reading about how after 9/11, more Muslim women began wearing hijab out of a newfound appreciation for their religion which they took for granted before it was targeted as it is today.

You where your hair long because that is what the sikh religion teaches u to do. it teaches u that u r fine the way u r, and u r how u r cuz God wanted u to be that way. If someone cuts their hair, i dont think that they are following their religion, so i wouldnt say that they are still sikh. They arent because they have just taken away their identity and gone against their religion. How can someone say that they are still sikh after they've cut off their hair? They can't. And they can't say that they will still go to gurudwara and pray and do paat, and hope that that will make up for not having long hair. Its just not the same.

Men don't blame your mother, Living in the Uk I notice we sikhs here seem to be more proud of our heritage than the ones in the US and Canada, I dont know why perhaps its because we will never be ''english'' where as you canadians and Americans think thats your true identity. Mental strength is needed, someone wrote earlier that if ask 10 sikhs what happens after you die you get different answers, thats the way of the tiger. If you want to fit in and become a sheep like Socretes says then go ahead and assume the opinion of the majority in this case turbans and beards are not attractive, fashionable or wateva!, Im damn proud of my long hair! Im a throwback to the 17,18 or 19 century, no wonder the tiger is becoming extinct!

Guys if you want to look better go on the hard and long path of getting real-health and go to the gym, spartans had long hair and beards and held off the persian assult and on the last day of battle ''combed thier long hair, rubbed oil in their bodies as this was sign of spartans getting ready to fight and to die'', wake up in the morning and groom yourselves without cutting your hair and get ready to fight the ignorance of this world,its a discipline for a select few.

www.spartanhealth.com

Men don't blame your mother, Living in the Uk I notice we sikhs here seem to be more proud of our heritage than the ones in the US and Canada, I dont know why perhaps its because we will never be ''english'' where as you canadians and Americans think thats your true identity

not true,.....sikhs in usa & canada are much better than those in uk.....they are more attached towards their culture & religion.....sikhs in UK dnt even speak punjabi spclly grls.....they are not even interested.....they make fun of their own ppl.....if someone speaks punjabi they make fun of them....

join a website called facebook.....& see wats the difference between uk sikhs & us,canadian sikhs....all those grls & few guys too knw is abuses......abuses & abuses.....i have so many frnds 4m canada & us.....they are too good.....i talked with sikhs 4m UK too.....& believe me they are too bad,rude,egoist...

'girls don't like turban and beard'. It's the biggest reason for those who cut their hair and shave their beards. Even in my college half of those who support turban trim their beards, but i feel superiors with my nicely tied beard and well wrapped turban....it gives me a feeling of completeness. Whenever i stand infront of the mirror and look at my turban and beard i feel confident and feels authoritarian, born leader more influencing and i suppose girls like leaders.....isn't it?

5 · Pugg pin said

I completely agree with the laziness/comfort argument given in the article from my first hand experience in Punjab. In my High school class of 60+ students in rural Punjab there was a 50% split of turbaned and non-turbaned sikh students in early 1990's. The major reason for students to get their hair cut was either "girls don't like turbans" or too much hassle.

I was one of the very few students in college who tied a turban and had long beard. Majority were either without turban and beard or tied a turban but trimmed their beards. Major reason for trimming beard or both "hair and beard" in college was again girls and convenience. Among the turbaned majority were doing it for family pressure and given their own free will they would happily do without the turban.As an aside even though was less religious than some of my shaven-Sikh friends I was always considered more religious and I was expected to act/behave differently than those with their hair cut.

In my village majority of youth in the age group 14-25 have their hair cut. At a wedding my grand mother (who is very religious) commented "Hun ta aa ghonne monney juaak vi sohne lagg de aa" (Nowadays even kids with short hair look cute), that because there are so many of them.

Incidentally as a Sikh I don't see a problem this. I see turban as a political symbol for freedom/right of self expression rather than a spiritual thing. In present day India turban as a political symbol doesn't seem to be that important for youth, whereas career and material success are, and having or not having a turban is probably insignificant in that pursuit.

I fully agree with this.
The family environs is usually actingas a pressure to keep on th eturbans. But having cut hair does not make you a lesser Sikh. And with the rising trend the grandmothers will give sanction. Mothers are therfore more progressive and actually helpful in assisting their children(boys and girls) to cut their hair. It is so cnvenient and also makes one mix with the mainstream. It is afterall a ver ypersonal choice and should not be made into much of an issue. In India and that to in Punjab more than 80% boys have cut their hair. Girls are not far behind and the young generation is looking out for an excuse to go for teh unturbaned look. No special guesses for this! It is sooo Convenient and yes. ladies save so much of time and it definitely is less of a bother.

I look to hearing from more persons on this. It is the issue for today and surely someone mentioned that there is more confusion in Sikhs than in any other religion. More progress means more questions and then more ambiguity!!

How about the reverse? Hasn't the number of girls who keep their hair long gone down amongst Sikh women as well? I mean from a religious perspective, girls should keep their hair shouldn't they? And does the number of girls cutting their hair have to do with male preferences? Would like to hear others thoughts on this.