This is a small yet great step for your country.The law must be enforced and not abused ( 120,000 husbands in India became victims of their wives harrassments) -http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3125931

Thanks for writing about this. I wish there were a collective feminist desi blog somewhere out there. Will settle for an assortment of posts from different places for now.

A serious post about a serious topic affecting millions of battered women. Strangely you choose to use a silly blog handle that undermines your message. It is a flippant, fliratious, irreverent but ultimately jejune "phillygrrl." Paradoxically you attack males using analogous handle as immature.

Women empowering women is what's needed.

@ sarada_ap: thanks for selecting such a serious blog name. I am certain that the mere selection of your name and use of big SAT level words will stop the majority of domestic abusers in their tracks - because yes, the world is that simple.

This law, and the recent government announcement restoring the 5% quota for religious minorities in government jobs, shows maybe that the PPP may actually stay a left-wing party while in government.

Strangely you choose to use a silly blog handle that undermines your message. It is a flippant, fliratious, irreverent but ultimately jejune "phillygrrl."

Sorry you feel that way. I've used it for a year now. No need to confuse my readers by changing now. And if readers choose to focus on that instead of the message, their loss.

Paradoxically you attack males using analogous handle as immature.

I didn't see her "attacking males" in this post, just telling a story and mentioning a recent news item in relation to the issue at hand.

This is a small yet great step for your country.

America?

This is very good news. it will take time maybe even a generation or two but is the right step.

When it comes to names in life or handles. America is the land of the free, be called whatever you want.

I wish there were a collective feminist desi blog somewhere out there.

There is!

And another one.

Those found guilty of beating women or children would face a minimum six months behind bars and a fine of at least 100,000 rupees (1,205 dollars).

I know embarrassingly little about punishment for domestic abuse, so I apologize if the answers to these questions are obvious. I realize they're applicable wherever perpetrators of domestic abuse are prosecuted. If the perpetrator is the only earner in the household, what happens to the family during the time spent in prison? Assuming the perpetrator can pay the fine, who gets it? After serving the sentence, is there forced reconciliation? Can the family get a permanent separation?

Here's the bill:

http://www.na.gov.pk/passed_bill/domestic_violence2009.pdf

So it seems that after the perpetrator is found guilty, the court can issue a restraining order.

It's the violation of this order that can land the perpetrator mandatory jail time and the fine, which goes to the aggrieved.

From what I can tell, the bill doesn't have anything to say about custody of children in the case of spousal abuse, and it's ambiguous who has to move out if the court issues a restraining order (at the court's discretion?).

Adil Najam in Pakistaniat

sarada_ap,
Jejune eh. Here's another ten dollar word, etymology. Google is your grrlfriend.

My mom looked at the aunty’s cast-covered arm and then at me. “Her husband broke it,”

Pakistan is (finally!) making a small step in the right direction when it comes to treating domestic violence as a punishable crime as opposed to a private family matter.

Indeed.
"Nor is it difficult to see what is the tie between man and man which replaces by degrees those forms of reciprocity in rights
and duties which have their origin in the Family. It is contract. Starting, as from one terminus of history, from a condition of society
in which all the relations of Persons are summed up in the relations of Family, we seem to have steadily moved towards a phase of social order in which all these relations arise from the free agreement of individuals. In [] Europe the progress achieved in this direction has been considerable. Thus the status of the Slave has disappeared — it has been superseded by the contractual relation of the servant to his master. The status of the Female under Tutelage, if the tutelage be understood of persons other than her husband, has also ceased to exist; from her coming of age to her marriage all the relations she may form are relations of contract. So too the status of the Son under Power has no true place in the law of modern societies. . . .
The movement of the progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from Status to Contract."

Henry Sumner Maine, Ancient Law (1861).

Just curious if there are conflicting laws in play. NWFP has Sharia law, so I'm guessing this does not apply there.

I'm curious about the rest of Pakistan. India, for instance has the Muslim personal law, which undermines social reform (most infamously for divorce). Does Pakistan have simlar religion based personal laws and, if so, does this ruling apply to them?

Strangely you choose to use a silly blog handle that undermines your message. It is a flippant, fliratious, irreverent but ultimately jejune "phillygrrl."

Sorry you feel that way. I've used it for a year now...

Paradoxically you attack males using analogous handle as immature.

I didn't see her "attacking males" in this post, just telling a story and mentioning a recent news item in relation to the issue at hand.

In the blog phillygrrl.com blog phillygrrl specifically writes "grrl/girl" is kosher but not boy because it's immature. Makes phillygrrl come across
like an aunty who secretly tells her son to keep the daughter-in-law in her place. Such practices in Desi culture are endemic and widespread.

I'm curious about the rest of Pakistan. India, for instance has the Muslim personal law, which undermines social reform (most infamously for divorce).

India has personal laws for Hindus, Christians, Muslims and Parisis. Wife beating, dowry etc are covered by the Indian criminal law and not religious personal law. Divorce is especially problematic under Muslim, Christian and Parsi personal laws in India. I think the Hindu personal law has mostly been reformed since 47. For example, it is almost impossible for Pari women to get divorced. Plus until a few years back, the divorce under Muslim personal had devolved into men divorcing on text messages. They are trying to reform it but the All India Muslim Personal Law board is too slow and conservative to bring change.

I meant Parsi.

In the blog phillygrrl.com blog phillygrrl specifically writes "grrl/girl" is kosher but not boy because it's immature.

That only applied if you're emailing about a potential date. But if you want to go with "Auntie PG," I'll answer to that as well.

So it seems that after the perpetrator is found guilty, the court can issue a restraining order.

It's the violation of this order that can land the perpetrator mandatory jail time and the fine, which goes to the aggrieved.

From what I can tell, the bill doesn't have anything to say about custody of children in the case of spousal abuse, and it's ambiguous who has to move out if the court issues a restraining order (at the court's discretion?).

Thanks for posting the link to the bill. Not an expert, the attempted far reach of the bill is prima facie evidence of being too disconnected from the society it's attempting to legislate upon to come up with effective solutions.

That said, there are three real strenghts I see regardless - 1) that it establishes a legal framework for assistance for DV victims, including houehold employees, etc. - even if this is never used, it is there; 2) it firmly states 'for educative purposes' that the government believes that domestic violence in the thankfully broad definition used here is unacceptable, so hopefully that provides some credibility for the argument; and 3) it creates protection committees, uses protection officers, and includes NGOs. The extent of this bill to deal with domestic violence will depend and vary, I think, on how effectively those people and bodies are willing and able to carry out their jobs.

i too am curious about the relationship between this law and the Federal Shariat Court, etc. Are criminal laws exempt from examination for being islamic/unislamic or do they receive the same treatment as divorce law has. i suppose i should know this :)

anyway, before i forget, thanks for the links phillygrrl and mr. x.

In the blog phillygrrl.com blog phillygrrl specifically writes "grrl/girl" is kosher but not boy because it's immature. Makes phillygrrl come across like an aunty who secretly tells her son to keep the daughter-in-law in her place. Such practices in Desi culture are endemic and widespread.

So the sister writes a blogpost about DV in Pakistan and in desi communities in the U.S. and is almost immediately accused of being juvenile (a classic), attacking men (too predictable), sekritly supporting the patriarchy (original! yet flawed!) At least the backlash proves the post had an impact - keep writing, Bhain PG! :)

So the sister writes a blogpost about DV in Pakistan and in desi communities in the U.S. and is almost immediately accused of being juvenile (a classic), attacking men (too predictable), sekritly supporting the patriarchy (original! yet flawed!) At least the backlash proves the post had an impact - keep writing, Bhain PG! :)

Palin supporters no doubt.

@sarada_ap : get a life

@phillygrrl: great article!

Dizzy, Religious Personal Law is a legacy of British colonial rule and can be found in Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. The differences lie in the frequency of reform. Muslim law in Bangladesh reflects the very progressive Ayub-era reforms. In Pakistan the law has moved forward (Ayub, Musharraf) and back (Zia). India has been stagnant on Muslim Law, its legislature leaving the issue virtually untouched since 47.

In contrast, Hindu Personal law is unreformed in Pakistan and Bangladesh -- for example, both allow polygamy for Hindus, as was the case in India before paritition. India has reformed its Hindu personal laws. No-one has touched the Parsi or Christian laws.

Religious personal law does not hinder reform in theory, but in practice, the minority communities in each country never get their laws updated.

It's all moot anyway. This is a all-Pakistan criminal law reform, applicable to all faiths, not a personal law issue.

(Oddly, Paagal admi is inaccurate on a legal issue here. The AIMPLB has no statutory authority on Muslim law in India, and has recently fractured into 4 different groups -- Deobandi, Barelvi, Shia, and Womens. Religious law is interpreted by secular judges of all faiths accordng to common-law principles).

what the heck does phillygrrl's username have to do with the substance of what she wrote, which by the way is 100% accurate?

i mean if her username was "slapabitch" or something awful like that you might have a point, sarada_ap, but in this case? Nope, you're wrong.

and i think the fact that you posted something so silly and tyhen disappeared says all i need to know about you.
Did one of the billy goats gruff knock you back under your bridge?

Religious personal law does not hinder reform in theory, but in practice, the minority communities in each country never get their laws updated.

Ikram - you cannot have this sort of debate without reading up. Just google "Shah Bano".

Ikram: You are correct. AIMPLB seems to be an advocacy group only. I guess I should stick to pontificating on US law only :(

Sulabh -- I am familiar with the case, and the utter confusion so many Indians have on the issue. We've discussed personal law issues on this site many times.

In contrast, Hindu Personal law is unreformed in Pakistan and Bangladesh -- for example, both allow polygamy for Hindus, as was the case in India before paritition. India has reformed its Hindu personal laws. No-one has touched the Parsi or Christian laws.

Are you claiming that Muslim personal laws are reformed in Pakistan and Bangladesh to ban polygamy and it is just the Hindu personal laws that are not?.

No -- it's that in Pakistan and BDesh, Hindu Personal Law predates partition and the progressive reforms made in India, such as banning Hindu polygamy, have never been put in place. In Bangladesh (to a lesser extent Pakistan), Muslim polygamy is governed by the 1961 ordinance. Not banned, but made less practical (requires permission of first wife) as well as changes to divorce rules, etc. More here.

I don't know enough about pre-partition Hindu-law, as implemented in Pak/Bdesh, to tell you how it compares to reformed Muslim law. I'm commenting more on the frequency of reform, not the extent of it.

Sulabh -- I am familiar with the case, and the utter confusion so many Indians have on the issue. We've discussed personal law issues on this site many times.

In Bangladesh (to a lesser extent Pakistan), Muslim polygamy is governed by the 1961 ordinance. Not banned, but made less practical (requires permission of first wife) as well as changes to divorce rules, etc. More here.

So technically in Pakistan and Bangladesh

prior to 1947
1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus
2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims

now
1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus
2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims

So it is not a complete statement that all over India, Pakistan and Bangladesh minorities did not have their personal laws reformed in a significant way.

A truer statement is that there were no reforms of significance in both Pakistan and Bandladesh (both for majorities and minorities) whereas Hindu personal laws are consideably reformed for the better in India.

So technically in Pakistan and Bangladesh

prior to 1947
1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus
2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims

now
1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus
2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims

nice elision of the facts to your convenient world view, when ikram has explicitly stated the details.

It's good that those countries that ignored domestic violence are taking actions to prevent or atleast subdue it but at the end, it is the women who still have to deal with the emotional and social backlash. There should be a program to help them with this aspect.

Thanks for shining a light on this development and the domestic violence problem through the blog. Even though U.S. laws on domestic violence are much more advanced, there are still too cases like the one you wrote about in our community. However, there are organizations that are trying to help AND change cultural attitudes about intimate partner abuse so that abuse victims feel comfortable and empowered to seek help.

Washington, DC: ASHA for Women (www.ashaforwomen.org)
New Jersey: Manavi (http://www.manavi.org/)
New York: Sakhi (http://sakhi.org/)
Bay area: Narika (http://narika.org/)

There are many, many more. Check them out. If you care enough, support them. At minimum, stand up and say that domestic violence is unacceptable.

I'll say!

Check them out. If you care enough, support them. At minimum, stand up and say that domestic violence is unacceptable.

Thanks for sharing that list, Bish.

India has been stagnant on Muslim Law, its legislature leaving the issue virtually untouched since 47....In contrast, Hindu Personal law is unreformed in Pakistan and Bangladesh -- for example, both allow polygamy for Hindus, as was the case in India before paritition. India has reformed its Hindu personal laws. No-one has touched the Parsi or Christian laws.

Religious personal law does not hinder reform in theory, but in practice, the minority communities in each country never get their laws updated.

This is not accurate, at least as far as my professor of personal laws (Werner Menski) in South Asia stated and provided evidence for with court cases. There have been court cases that have addressed, e.g. Christian divorce law (Mary Roy, Arundhati Roy's mother), and a gradual harmonisation of minority laws with Hindu law, which itself has changed. Furthermore, the way that Hindu law has been interpreted has taken on a more pluralistic understanding away from the Anglo-Indian conceptions of the law, which were focused on specific high caste traditions like the saptapadi - there is now more acceptance of any custom that exists 'for a long time' I think was the wording, which goes further in embracing the diversity of practices governed by Hindu law in law.

Most relevantly, the Muslim pesronal law has been LESS reformed than other personal laws, but there have been changes made, such as the Protection of Muslim Women Divorce Act and the subsequent verdict in Daniel Lathifi (I think it was) in 2001. My professor notes that the court (and Parliament too) used the opportunity in the weeks after the 11th September terrorist attacks to change several minority laws (the Muslim personal law on divorce noted above as well as others). And as you noted, there can be (and have been) changes to the criminal code that affect these types of laws.

The more relevant point in the context of this post, though, is that separate personal laws on communal grounds DOES make reform more difficult if one takes the wrong approach. Rather than the Hindutva approach - which is to demand a uniform civil code legislated from above (and presumably in accord with Hindu principles) what it calls for is what has been done - a gradual harmonisation. What has not been done adequately and needs to be done is for WOMEN and OTHER SEXUAL MINORITIES in those communities to organise and articulate their own standpoints on personal laws, rather than having competing patriarchies ('Hindu' 'modernist/state', 'Muslim' etc.) decide what laws should govern family structures. In this sense these laws and more broadly, women, children, and others are completely left out of the debate, and isntead we get an ideological struggele rather than enough consideration of what the most pertinent needs are. i.e. we need more democracy with an eye towards inclusion and empowerment of women and others disempowered within ALL communities rather than continued court-based, parliamentary, and ultimately political activity on these.

my two cents.

So technically in Pakistan and Bangladesh

prior to 1947
1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus
2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims

now
1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus
2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims

Another way to frame this is:

polygamy is still legal in Pakistan (not sure abotu Bangladesh but I assume it is) and in India under Muslim law, but it is not in Tunisia or Turkey under any law.

A second consideration is that the quranic verse which is used to legalise polygamy specifically intends for it to be a measure of relief for widows and orphans, to my understanding (I read it in translation over a year ago). So I would guess that if this were very narrowly rather than broadly applied, with tests ensuring that the circumstances reflects the spirit of the quranic injunction, it would significantly restrict polygamy.

A third consideration is whether the state can eventually assume the social welfare functions that justify polygamy even under Muslim personal law. I see no reason why not, over time, and with an increase in the wealth of the societies under consideration. Yes, it would be a protracted ideological battle and a reenvisioning of what it means to have a properly 'Muslim' law, but feminist struggles always are. But that's an outsider perspective - it's not my inheritance.

A fourth consideration is the undue focus given to polygamy. It is an issue, but not the only issue. divorce, marriage, annulment, succession (including property), and other matters are all, from an American progressive vantage point, extraordinarily retrograde in how they treat women in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.

A final consideration is that regardless of the laws, social practices continue unabated. Whatever the law says about polygamy or domestic violence or dowry killings or eve-teasting (sexual harrassment) or other problems, these practices continue in India and Pakistan at least, and possibly in Bangladesh (I say possibly only because I don't know)- so very practical steps that are feasible and go as far as possible and not further woudl help restore some sense of faith that the legal system can address these issues in conjunctionw itht he types of intereventions i noted above (protection officers, ngos, etc.). Without that, the laws, like the Indian constitutional guarantee of freedom from pollution, hunger, etc., are practically meaningless, though they still have some effects in articulating and framing the aspiratinos of the state. So the angel is in the details, and the devil is in the ideological capitalisation on these issues.

Oh, and two last things - In India (and I would assume Pakistan and Bangladesh), (I believe) Sikh and Jain personal laws don't exist - they are lumped into Hindu personal law. Which seems like it should be an issue - those groups should have their own personal laws which are integrated into the broader system.

Also, India has a separate system of civil marriages outside of the personal law system, which no one uses.

nice elision of the facts to your convenient world view, when ikram has explicitly stated the details.

Huh, if you read the comments it is Ikram who seemed to imply religious personal laws of the majorities are reformed all over South Asia whereas religious personal laws of minorities are not..

I just pointed out it is untrue. If you don't believe me read Dr. A's comments on how Christian personal laws have been reformed in India (though only recently, not like the Hindus in 1955). Banning polygamy is just one aspect, the key reform I think is in the inheritances of property, land etc.. and Hindu women have equal rights as Hindu men now.

First, one has to accept that it is not all the same all over South Asia. If you do not accept that it is part of the problem.

Also, India has a separate system of civil marriages outside of the personal law system, which no one uses.

If you are writing about registering marriages using the special marriages act, yes people do use it. It is used for registering marriages between inter religious couples and I have even signed a witness signature for one such wedding.

Sikh and Jain personal laws don't exist - they are lumped into Hindu personal law. Which seems like it should be an issue - those groups should have their own personal laws which are integrated into the broader system.

It's not an issue and Sikh and Jain people have obviously gone the past 60 years or so without caring. Why "should" it be an issue if nobody is worried about it?

Such unflinching rationality on Hindu rituals.

Such sympathetic multiculturality on other religious practices.

And so much vigilant censorship. ;-)

Dr.Amonymous -- Yes, courts in India have been Sotomayor-esque on Muslim Personal Law. Judges continually reinterpreting, with recent changes including the transformation of the iddat payment as applying after the iddat period (the Latifi case).

I don't think judicial interpretations are an adequate substitute for statutory amendments (as the Shah Bano case showed!), but the lack of statutory legal reform reflects the lack of legitimacy South Asian legislatures have in this area. For example, to answer Sulabh -- what right do a bunch of Muslim Pakistani Parliamentarians have to legislate on Hindu law?

And (to repeat myself), I see no reason to harmonize personal law in India. If Muslims want to permit cousin marriage and prenuptial agreements, and Hindus do not, why should one community follow the rules of the other?

Ponniyin -- Really? Why pretend to be stupid when you aren't. Anyway, details on family law in South Asia, including the various civil and criminal reforms (good -- MFLO, and bad -- Zina ordinance) can be found at the Emory University Family Law Project site. There is also an article on domestic violence on that site, to bring this back on topic.

Ikram: At some level, you do need to harmonize the personal laws with a minimum floor of basic rights. You do not need to legislate on cousin marriage but the rights of women, children have to be protected. For example, pre-nupital agreements (maher) are woefully inadequate in protecting the rights of women. Some form of American style alimony laws are necessary for Muslim women.

I know of at least 3-4 cases in the US, where people have gone to US Courts to have their rights originating from the Nikah agreement (specifically the maher provision) enforced. Unfortunately, most nikah agreements do not satisfy the requirements of a pre-nup and the Courts have mostly decided on the matter on a case to case basis.

Nikah: Islamic marriage contract
Maher: Pre-nup amount to be paid by husband to wife on divorce.

If Muslims want to permit cousin marriage and prenuptial agreements, and Hindus do not, why should one community follow the rules of the other?

FYI, It is common and usual for Hindus to have cousin marriages in the south and even within my family. It is a regional difference. In the north it is a taboo and it is not so in the south and they qualify as Hindu marriages too. Well, if telling the truth makes me stupid I'll be glad to be called so. :-)

Reforms have to do much with the specific religion involved and its adherents than the majority - minority dynamics as I pointed out .

[quote from "Dr Amm..."]
Oh, and two last things - In India (and I would assume Pakistan and Bangladesh), (I believe) Sikh and Jain personal laws don't exist - they are lumped into Hindu personal law. Which seems like it should be an issue - those groups should have their own personal laws which are integrated into the broader system.
[\quote]

You are right, we should definitely raise the issue of legal oppression in india against sikhs and jains. And, also, india-pakistan-bangladesh are exactly the same when it comes to legal treatment of different religous groups. Also, bangladesh is part of the greater middle-east and we need to send more arabic speaking americans there. Thanks for your inspiring and informed outputs.

Ikram: At some level, you do need to harmonize the personal laws with a minimum floor of basic rights. You do not need to legislate on cousin marriage but the rights of women, children have to be protected. For example, pre-nupital agreements (maher) are woefully inadequate in protecting the rights of women. Some form of American style alimony laws are necessary for Muslim women.

Rather than the Hindutva approach - which is to demand a uniform civil code legislated from above (and presumably in accord with Hindu principles)...

Interesting you should say that. You are the first person to have equated the Directive Principles of the Indian constitution, the opinions of such radicals as BR Ambedkar and Ramachandra Guha with Hindu/Hindutva principles! Shabbash!

The Special Marriages Act of 1954 applies equally to every Indian regardless of religion. I should know because my marriage (not inter-religious) as well as a friend's (Muslim man Hindu woman) are registered under that act. The Adoption of Children Bill 1974 was shelved following a strident mullah-led campaign. That is why Muslims in India cannot still legally adopt.

There is only so much laws can do, despite the incentives and deterrants they hold out. In India family and womens' protection laws have been made to work by combination of means including increasing the number of women in the police force (Tamil Nadu's all women police stations are an example) identifying exemplars among politicians and police officers and encouraging them, instant escalation of domestic violence incidents, a vigorously free press, etc., A few years ago in Tamil Nadu, a nightie clad newly wed walked out of her husband's home to the nearest all-women police station and filed an FIR complaining against dowry harassment, bringing down the law upon the husband's family like a ton of bricks. Politicians have also found that it pays to be mindful of women's complaints since they have become politically active. There is still a v.long way to go. But there definitely is a great deal of momentum. Dowry harrasment and murder cases are now prosecuted aggressively and several precedents have been created that have made it harder for crooks to get away - no more questioning of complainant's character, in-camera trials where required, etc.

Interesting you should say that. You are the first person to have equated the Directive Principles of the Indian constitution, the opinions of such radicals as BR Ambedkar and Ramachandra Guha with Hindu/Hindutva principles! Shabbash!

he..he.. Well Dr. A thinks everyone who have different viewpoints are Hindutvadis. :-)

Moreover it is amusing to see how "secular progressives" who think all of South Asia is same somehow differ in the respect they accord to different so called "holy books" of .

Look what Dr. A says here

http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/005855.html

Well, one, I wasn't disrespectful to krishna - I was sarcastic about the gita. But why do I prefer Buddha - because he was moved by poverty. And I believe he existed.

and here

A second consideration is that the quranic verse which is used to legalise polygamy specifically intends for it to be a measure of relief for widows and orphans, to my understanding (I read it in translation over a year ago). So I would guess that if this were very narrowly rather than broadly applied, with tests ensuring that the circumstances reflects the spirit of the quranic injunction, it would significantly restrict polygamy.

Imagine if the same BS (that justifies polygamy) you find in Quran is found in Gita/ etc..etc.., and some Hindus claim that as basis for demanding polygamy rights "secular progressives" would be the first ones to pounce on it and ridicule (which is very much valid in my opinion).

I just want them to apply the same standards everywhere. :-)

For example, to answer Sulabh -- what right do a bunch of Muslim Pakistani Parliamentarians have to legislate on Hindu law?

There are Muslims in Indian Parliament and they have participated in legislation processes that affected non-Muslims. Bete that is how a secular democracy works. I think slowly you will get the idea.

And (to repeat myself), I see no reason to harmonize personal law in India.

But do you see a reason to "reform" Muslim Personal Law in India ? You were trying to invent equivalance between sad state of Muslim Personal Law in India and Hindu Personal Law in Pakistan - remember???

Ikram - Sometimes I think are you just messing around wih us. Are you ?

Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery on August 7, 2009 11:32 AM · Direct link
Ikram: At some level, you do need to harmonize the personal laws with a minimum floor of basic rights. You do not need to legislate on cousin marriage but the rights of women, children have to be protected. For example, pre-nupital agreements (maher) are woefully inadequate in protecting the rights of women. Some form of American style alimony laws are necessary for Muslim women.

To the best of my knowledge, Islam requires the ex-husband to support the ex-wife for a period of time after the divorce called iddat. This is separate from the mehr, which is a gift the groom presents to the bride before the wedding. It's often money, but it's whatever the bride asks for. Which rights of women are not protected by mehr...?

To Ponniyin Selvan: "BS (that justifies polygamy) you find in Quran" that wadnt cool, boo. that wadnt cool at all. If you make people defensive about their religion, your point gets lost in hurt feelings and stuff. And then you get labeled Beatrice the Bold. which is an awful, awful name. tax evasion sort of name.

And, finally, about the domestic violence post :p!

When the law has to step into your home to sort out your own spouse's behavior, you've already lost. This is not to say that the extreme cowardice and nalaaiqness of wife beating should not be treated by the law as just that, an extremely cowardly crime. But you as a woman have to understand that though you'll never be as strong as a man, you can be ten times crazier. Don't let the police be the authority figures in your home. Break a milk bottle on the side of the kitchen sink and have it handy next time your man's under the mistaken impression that you're afraid of him (or anyone else), and not prepared to defend yourself. I guarantee you, you will be the last person on his list of People I Can **** With.

The question of whether or not you want to stay with someone you have to get all barroom brawl with just to keep your bones intact is for you to answer. But don't let him think you're not prepared, and you need a government employee to sort him out.

There are quite a few philandering men who "convert to Islam" solely to maintain multiple wives.

Bogus Trend Alert! Statistics please!

Sulabh -- I am always messing around with you Others, not so much.

Yes, there is a need to update and reform MPL in India, and HPL in Pakistan. I do not think the current status is adequate, progressive, or sufficiently feminist. Given the distrust the minority communtiy in each country has for its government (to varying degrees), I don't think the type of government-led commissions and reform that resulted in the 1955 updates to HPL in India and the 1961 updates to MPL in Pakistan are possible.

The only alternative to a government-led process is a community-led process, simialr to that which resulted in the 2001 reforms to the Christian Marriage Act in India (reforms that came about more than 100 years after the parallel reforms in the UK). There are strong signs of this in India, where the religious authority is fracturing and initiatives like the AIMWPLB's more feminist "model" nikah contracts is now underway.

Paagal is right that statutory minimums are necessary (I'm not sure about "american-style"?), but I don't see a way either legislature could pass a law on this that the minority community would see as legitimate, regardless of how "secular" the legislators proclaim themselves to be.

that wadnt cool, boo. that wadnt cool at all. If you make people defensive about their religion, your point gets lost in hurt feelings and stuff.

Sorry bro, I'm not a "secular progressive" to act so, I quoted Dr. A who can be sarcastic about Gita but all reverential about Quran. If you start talking religious stories why privilege / denigrate one over the other.

I think hurting "religous feelings" can be a good catalyst for forcing people to think about religious stories.

I concur, Ponniyin. Scripture denigration is for squares, anyway.

But I diasgree with the catalyst idea. Cuz I think if someone has a real n cogent point to make, he or she won't have to dis anyone's creed to do so. Or maybe it was all the "Share Your Lunch!" conditioning we underwent in first grade :|. At this point who knows?

Our religion and tradition have evolved to perfection after thousands of years. There is nothing wrong with taking a misbehaving wife to task. You upstarts need to understand the richness of the culture you came from. Perhaps a well deserved beating is in order to slap the naive amreecan out of you.

Interesting you should say that. You are the first person to have equated the Directive Principles of the Indian constitution, the opinions of such radicals as BR Ambedkar and Ramachandra Guha with Hindu/Hindutva principles! Shabbash!

Um, no I'm not. I'm the first person to acknowledge that what was a Direct ive Principle in 1947 has become an unsophisticated Hindutva talking point in 2009. If you want me to acknowledge that it's in mission statement of the Constitution of India - hurrah! here you go! Congratulations on getting a marginal radical to acknowledge that Amebdkar was overreliant on statist legal codes..

he Special Marriages Act of 1954 applies equally to every Indian regardless of religio

Aside from everyone who doesnt' marry under it, which is most people, to the best of my knowledge.

and on to substantive commentary:

And (to repeat myself), I see no reason to harmonize personal law in India. If Muslims want to permit cousin marriage and prenuptial agreements, and Hindus do not, why should one community follow the rules of the other?

I don't think the issue is the eccentrities of one patriarchy vs. another. I think the issue is that they're all f"£$king over women and children and using the personal law divide as a mechanism for distracting from that. I have no problem with maintaining separate personal laws as long as there's an organised feminist mov4ement in eqach 'community' demanding such a thing. It's in fact none of my business.

Bogus Trend Alert! Statistics please!

it may or may not be a trend, but it's enough to rise to the level of several court cases :) There was one in which a guy converted to Islam and then converted back to Hinduism in order to ditch his second wife, to the best of my recollection. Anyway, point being, as usual, many men are a$$holes.

/end presonal code debate

Dr. Am

I haven't posted or bothered to read the comments in a long time, and since there is another Rahul who posts quite often echoing very similar points I would've made - I've been rendered redundant. But I just wanted to chip-in and say that I'm disappointed at how hypocritical your talking points have gotten over time. You seem to call everyone who disagrees with you a Hindutvadi...Thats kinda sad.

But then again, just like Thomas pushed O'Connor to the center...maybe it was just a natural swing.

R

My husband was violent. I left him asap but already had a child and no money. So imp never ever to be in that position. Yes, children tie you down. Hence many women keep quiet, nowhere to go with children. Yes, and husband converted to Islam to avoid divorce and marry a rich UGLY lady. Sensible! I never bothered with the law, simply found a nice blue eyed blond man who adores me and is a good father. Why worry about suing, spent that effort looking after my child. I left my money, ran and have been happy in India. My blond loves India but then he is not ABCD.

Muslim laws in India can be changed only if Muslims want to. Ditto with Christians, etc. No one else is allowed to do that. Parsis adopt and get divorced regularly, may be in reverse order. Law in India seems to be cultural, hence we Jains (Buddhists and Sikhs) are quite happy as is. All communities in India can choose to get married in secular way and then the law of the land applies, not Nikah or whatever.

From NYT
Women are subjugated, harrassed, beaten, raped, and tortured. There is no respect for women, not in many countries, and not in the US. Every two minutes a person in the US is sexually assaulted. When survivors attempt to get the services they need they are met by disbelieving cops, callous hospital workers, and overworked social workers.

I was assaulted repeatedly by my husband in UK and the doctor, yes nice English DOCTOR called Falconer would not help me just stared at me.

While I weep for everyone attacked, the stats are no different in just about every western country. There is nothing per se re Ind culture but plenty in Victorian law and attitudes that took away colonized women's right to their own names, earnings and property. Until Brit times, streedhan, including land, was an accepted part of a woman's inheritance all over India. In traditional law, no one could take away her right to streedhan, married or not. The Brits did not want women to inherit as per their laws and hence today we have women with no money and the resulting violence/ dowry disasters. Ok for sons to claim family property, shameful for a woman to claim anything, even today. Money was required to pay Britrish tax and in an almost cashless society, the daughter in law was desired for her money to pay tax, just trying to keep the property in the family. Hence many sons and their marriages were seen as beneficial and dutiful and a daughter's marriage as a burden.

There is no mention of dowry deaths or disasters before colonial times as best as I know.

Marital rape is not recognized in Islam as best as I know.

Stats in the west re incest/dom violence are also similar, accounting possibly for a lot unreported.

But I just wanted to chip-in and say that I'm disappointed at how hypocritical your talking points have gotten over time. You seem to call everyone who disagrees with you a Hindutvadi...Thats kinda sad.

Can we go back to talking about DV and related issues now?

"Um, no I'm not. I'm the first person to acknowledge that what was a Directive Principle in 1947 has become an unsophisticated Hindutva talking point in 2009. "

Surely you must have meant no derailment....

Well I can rephrase the gist of your common concern thusly:
"If Hindutva the new Nazism? ...Then who is the new Mike Godwin."

Our religion and tradition have evolved to perfecton after thousands of years. There is nothing wrong with taking a misbehaving wife to task. You upstarts need to understand the richness of the culture you came from. Perhaps a well deserved beating is in order to slap the naive amreecan out of you.

he..he... you must be a "secular progressive". :-)

Reading all the hindutva discussions on SM, I beginning to view my Hindu friends with a lttle suspicion (God knows what they are cooking up behind closed doors!). Its very unfortunate, actually.

Reading all the hindutva discussions on SM, I beginning to view my Hindu friends with a lttle suspicion

So the efforts of all the liberal-secular-progressives were in vain, then. They must be crushed.
Anyway, welcome to the world of suspicion.
A good friend of mine had actually worked with one of the above gentlemen. Just thinking about it gives him goosebumps.

Reading all the hindutva discussions on SM, I beginning to view my Hindu friends with a lttle suspicion (God knows what they are cooking up behind closed doors!). Its very unfortunate, actually.

The thought of my culinary endeavors keeping you up at night makes me cry. Let me ease your mind, I did not soak my channa overnight and as result my poor dog has been emitting all kinds of vapors (OK...it's actually me, but it was over the top to involve the HOA board maybe?).

"Um, no I'm not. I'm the first person to acknowledge that what was a Directive Principle in 1947 has become an unsophisticated Hindutva talking point in 2009. "

Surely you must have meant no derailment....

You really want to get into this, huh. Derailment from what? The conversation shifted to a discussion of personal law systems in India and Pakistan starting with comment 18 and then the response at 20, which I did not enter until 41. This comment at 18 ran thusly:

India, for instance has the Muslim personal law, which undermines social reform (most infamously for divorce).

which a) implicitly criticises the existence of separate personal laws for Muslims and b) argues that it undermines 'social reform' though it doesn't quite spell out what is meant by that. The reason I use the words Hindutvavadi and Hindutva a lot is because there are a lot of Hindutva commenters and comments on this website. If you want to deny that, go ahead, but it's still going to be there even if you don't name it until someone does something about it or something changes structurally in the internet space that South Asian Americans inhabit.

Also I wasn't saying that you were trying to derail the converseation - I was saying that the conversation had gotten so far derailed that it's gotten to this point, which is how often or accurately I use a particular political label as a commenter on the site. That's some distance from domestic violence in Pakistan and South Asian American communities.

Not that the criticism was fair, to begin with. the idea that I label everyone i disagree with hindutvavadi when I have disagreed or criticised in this thread alone with quranic literalists for exegetical or legal purposes, the entire concept of a legal system based on the quran, all sides in the uniform civil code debate including most of India's politicians and judiciary except for feminists in all of the 'communities', the british involvement int he construction of Indian law, and a variety of people on matters of fact.

Well I can rephrase the gist of your common concern thusly: "If Hindutva the new Nazism? ...Then who is the new Mike Godwin."

The difference is that there aren't actual Nazis arguing on most blogs, whereas there are hard and soft supportesr of Hindu right politics very present on this one.

Okay, that's all I'm writing about this. I want to go back to talk about DV now.

When I was 3 years old, I was thrown several feet up against a wall by my father. Because i was so young, I wasn't sure whether it had really happened or it was a dream of some kind, which I wanted to think. It took me until two years ago to confirm that this had happened to me

And I consider myself lucky because of the minimal abuse I faced - at least physically. Every few weeks, I hear another story about someone or another who was sexually or physically or emotionally abused as a child or in a so-called partnership. And I think I have developed abusive tendencies too, which I have to do my best to deal wtih the best that I can and that doesn't come easy either. A friend of mine once said to me that every South Asian person she knew on a personal level had faced abuse of some kind or another as a child.

it's all shit. It is nice that there are organisations out there who are doing work to support this, but this is an issue in South Asian communities that needs MUCH more attention. This includes support for the people who are supporting DV victims - whether professionally at organisations like the ones listed above or on a personal level or thorugh social networks. this is something that actually does affect all the South Asian communities I can think of, no matter what the citizenship, nationality, class, diaspora or desh or anything else. It's there - constantly.

Here's a list at SAWNET to go with what was posted above. http://www.sawnet.org/orgns/violence.php. It doesn't have any resources in any South Asian countries except India and several diasporic countries, so perhaps if anyone has some of those they can post them, especially since those post was about a domestic violence bill in Pakistan.

Thanks for sharing, Dr. A.

Thanks for sharing, Dr. A.

Thanks for giving me the space to do it in :)

yes thanks for sharing.

Big fat hug from NY, Dr. A

Dear Dr. A and all interested bloggers who asked/inquired about a blog that focuses on domestic violence issues. Such a blog and organization does exist! (we've actually been written about on Sepia Mutiny before)

Out Against Abuse (www.outagainstabuse.org) is a non-profit organization focused on providing interactive online resources to bring together activists, volunteers, survivors and members of the South Asian community to encourage the discussion and understanding of gender abuse.

Our website also serves as an online hotline for survivors, allowing them to anonymously ask questions and to quickly connect to the most appropriate resources.

Please visit our recent news section to read more about recent domestic violence news and legislation:
http://www.outagainstabuse.org/category/recentnews/

If you have any questions or comments, please email us at contactus@outagainstabuse.org

Regards,
Out Against Abuse

Hi, very nice to hear people talk about this issue. if so many women see this growing up, maybe they'll turn away from their own south asian male population and look for mates elsewhere.

Dear Out Against Abuse folks,

Thanks very much for this link - it's enormously useful to look at. Will take a closer look when time allows.

Best,
Dr A.

Here's a South Asian shelter in IL but with a 1-800 # and many services:

http://www.apnaghar.org/indexnew.shtml

Dr Amonymous, not to take away from your personal experience or anything, but I have a bone to pick with you over one particular statement you made. I really sympathize with your situation, and wish that you didn't have to face even an iota of abuse when you were growing up. I think it's great that you're trying to raise awareness about DV in South Asian communities, and I agree that this problem needs addressing. However, this is the statement I am concerned about:
"A friend of mine once said to me that every South Asian person she knew on a personal level had faced abuse of some kind or another as a child".
This is your friend's experience, to be sure, but I have to take a diametrically opposite view on this. I do not know of even one South Asian person who faced abuse growing up as a child. I know that my views are neither the absolute truth, nor do they represent South Asians in entirety, but I cannot help but feel that such blanket statements only hinder frank discussion of DV related issues.

P.S. Yes, I'm South Asian as well. :)

From #59

There are quite a few philandering men who "convert to Islam" solely to maintain multiple wives.

Bogus Trend Alert! Statistics please!

There's Dharmendra (the hindi actor) who is now BJP--so much for conversion.

"A friend of mine once said to me that every South Asian person she knew on a personal level had faced abuse of some kind or another as a child".

Dr. A, thanks for sharing a painful part of your life and I hope that you never have to face such abuse again. But I also like Mr. Wise, had a problem with the above statement. It connotes that dv is more prevalent in South Asian culture than in other cultures. And as far as I know there aren't stats to show that, plus abuse is a difficult thing to statistically document.

However we do know there is plenty in South Asian interpretations of cultural and religious values that support strong women, equality in sharing power in intimate partnerships, respect for couples in marriage and then there is plenty in South Asian culture that support patriarchy and misogyny. I think the thing is not to stereotype our dynamic and diverse culture, but to recognize that there are different interpretations of that culture by individuals.

The reason why many of the organizations that support survivors of abuse in South Asian families exist, IS NOT, b/c there is proven to be a huge prevalence of abuse in our communities (as compared to other communities), but rather there are many unmet cultural, linguistic, and legal needs in mainstream American organizations; many times mainstream organizations do not have the staff and facilities that can support the specific problems that many immigrant women from South Asian cultures may face.

but rather there are many unmet cultural, linguistic, and legal needs in mainstream American organizations; many times mainstream organizations do not have the staff and facilities that can support the specific problems that many immigrant women from South Asian cultures may face.

The problem is that when it comes to abuses of women from south asian/middle eastern background in western countries, mainstream women groups really can't help. Alot of these mainstream women groups suffer from alot of white guilt and are afraid of speaking the truth, cause they will be called racist for speaking out against backward 3rd world treatment of the women that don't belong in the west.

who is now BJP--so much for conversion.

Why? Is there a reason Muslims be antagonistic to the BJP?

Seriously, though, yes, there are examples that make headlines, such as the minister in Haryana, or Dharmendra, but that does not a trend make. And there are non-Islamic polygamists such as Boney Kapoor or Karunanidhi, who are not prosecuted either. There are good reasons for uniform civil codes, but claiming prevention of polygamy as religious arbitrage is a 3 am phone call.

Alot of these mainstream women groups suffer from alot of white guilt and are afraid of speaking the truth, cause they will be called racist for speaking out against backward 3rd world treatment of the women that don't belong in the west.

It may be easier to "blame the system" since it lets you dissociate from the people in front of you, but the fact is the job of these shelters is to provide a source of support and safety for women in a bad way. We could benefit a great deal if we focused on helping them do their jobs better rather than embarking on grad social engineering projects that do little to fix the problem and just end up funneling resources away from the actual community outreach and into glossy brochures for lobbying politicians instead.

Seriously, though, yes, there are examples that make headlines, such as the minister in Haryana, or Dharmendra, but that does not a trend make. And there are non-Islamic polygamists such as Boney Kapoor or Karunanidhi, who are not prosecuted either. There are good reasons for uniform civil codes, but claiming prevention of polygamy as religious arbitrage is a 3 am phone call.

That does not, however, mean society is well served by having loopholes open and begging to be exploited. I said nothing about there being a huge trend, but it doesn't need to be for my point to be valid. I don't like the idea of having laws in the books that encourage flagrant disrespect for the idea of the law. The best way to do that is to not have legal systems that treat people differently based on difficult to verify categorizations.

Consider Madison's Federalist paper #10. He points out that the smaller a voting group you have the more likely it is that a single dominant faction will monopolize power and trample on the people's liberties. The solution was to create a large republic with lots of veto players which guarantee that the government will never be dominated by any single faction for long.
India did not take this lesson to heart. Its statesmen are bent on consistently subdividing the republic into smaller and smaller groupings. This does not guarantee freedom for its citizens. Rather it ensures that only the most powerful and retrograde forces within in each community rise to power. We have all the bad points of a large republic (deadlock, too many veto points to push an agenda) and none of the good (protection of the people's liberties.)

The reason why many of the organizations that support survivors of abuse in South Asian families exist, IS NOT, b/c there is proven to be a huge prevalence of abuse in our communities (as compared to other communities), but rather there are many unmet cultural, linguistic, and legal needs in mainstream American organizations

Please understand that the two points you're making don't necessarily move in tandem--i.e., it's perfectly logically consistent that (a) South-Asian-specific dv groups are necessitated by specific cultural/linguistic needs unmet by "mainstream" groups and yet (b) dv is in fact more prevalent in South-Asian American groups than in the broader culture at large.

You seem to want to deny (b) without offering any evidence to counter-act what I take to be widespread impressionistic conclusions to the contrary. I guess you may just not want the light shone on certain facts. For some evidence pointing in the direction of (b) being true, see, e.g., Narayan, "Male-Order Brides," 10 Hypatia (1995) ("women whose immigration status is dependent on their marriage face higher risk of domestic violence"); Dasgupta, "Charting the Course," 9 J. Social Distress 173 (2000). Or, on a more anecdotal basis, just ask anyone who's worked in an ER to guesstimate the relative frequency with which the wife of a Jewish male doctor versus an Indian male doctor appears seeking treatments after having "fallen down the stairs."

Generally polygamy is only practiced by people rich enough to support multiple wives anyway (and among non-Muslims, people powerful enough to disregard social convention.) In a country like India, that kind of money sadly, puts you above the law in many cases.

Having mistresses is a very common, and loosely socially sanctioned, practice in Tamilnadu among people of various economic strata. The examples cited are obviously of well known people, because the activities of well known people tend to be, well, well known.

Having mistresses is a very common, and loosely socially sanctioned, practice in Tamilnadu among people of various economic strata.

But I still don't like the idea of legitimizing these informal arrangements through the law.

Yeah.. well... you know, That's, just... like... your opinion, man.

I mean that seriously.

Having mistresses is a very common, and loosely socially sanctioned, practice in Tamilnadu among people of various economic strata.

Where did you get this data from?.

it's perfectly logically consistent that (a) South-Asian-specific dv groups are necessitated by specific cultural/linguistic needs unmet by "mainstream" groups and yet (b) dv is in fact more prevalent in South-Asian American groups than in the broader culture at large.

Did I say that it wasn't consistent? No. Please tell me where you see statistically it's shown that that Asian or South Asian American communities experience more dv than other communities. I'll pull up if I can find some stats on surveys done on asian Americans and the dv stats in their communities. There isn't anything concrete that shows that it's more prevalent in Asian communities than others...let me find it.

Please state the overwhelming dv in the South Asian Am community as opposed to other communities to my sister who during her residency often had to make the rounds in a hospital that had many hispanic families and lots of instances of dv. Please tell that to my dad, who while working in an inner city hospital in DC in the early '80s experienced his patients bruises or gunshot wounds from intimate partner violence or other types of violence. Please tell that to me, who having grown up, primarily among white people in the south, readily heard the in the gossip mill about the most horrible instances of disrespect and violence among white people that we'd meet or I'd over hear my parents discuss things from friends they knew - it didn't matter if it was the maid that worked for us, or a doctor's wife...and oh golly, they weren't Indian.

I don't like to deny problems in my community or in any community - by denying the problem it denies people that I love the chance to get out of a dv situation. But I don't like blatant stereotypes, which are useless and continue the violence that minority women may face. When I do have the opportunity to speak to about dv in Asian communities, I'm often faced with people, who are Asian, Af-Am, Latinos, or Whites, who has me "um, does dv occur in the asian community?" and I have to say to them why yes, it's a problem that many in the Asian community face. Nothing I've read from Shamita das Dasgupta, has supported that stats are more prevalent in the south Asian community than in others. the stats nationally and internationally show that 1/3 women will experience dv in some form in their lives. What I can't stand, is might I say, your stupid anecdote about the Jewish doctor's wife and the INdian doctor's wife. That's exactly the shit I can't stand. This is ur anecdote and anecdotes in such situations are useless if you are trying to state S.As Ams experience more dv than other communities. What is known is that it exists and there are barriers to the a women (generally most dv is experienced by women) receiving help that can include immigration status, linguistics, culture, etc and that is what needs to be focused on.

Oh and I'm South Asian American, who has experienced dv in her house and knows many Indians who are appalled by it and seem to having loving intimate partner relationships and many South Asians Am families who have experienced abuse.

This is your friend's experience, to be sure, but I have to take a diametrically opposite view on this. I do not know of even one South Asian person who faced abuse growing up as a child. I know that my views are neither the absolute truth, nor do they represent South Asians in entirety, but I cannot help but feel that such blanket statements only hinder frank discussion of DV related issues.

P.S. Yes, I'm South Asian as well. :)

Dr. A, thanks for sharing a painful part of your life and I hope that you never have to face such abuse again. But I also like Mr. Wise, had a problem with the above statement. It connotes that dv is more prevalent in South Asian culture than in other cultures. And as far as I know there aren't stats to show that, plus abuse is a difficult thing to statistically document.

Thanks for your comments and sympathy; they're appreciated. Just to clarify, I was not saying that every South Asian has faced abuse or that South Asians are more likely to face abuse than other communities. This issue is too important to f"£k around on and make claims like those. My point was just to convey another person's experience that it is widely prevalent because there are too many arguments that people offer to deny that it shoudl be confronted seriously, now, and forcefully (not violently, forcefully). I imagine that there are families - South Asian and not - in which these incidents don't happen, but right now we don't have enough open dialogue to even know exactly how widespread the problem is.

But my personal experence with people I know is enough. Let me recount to you what I have witnessed or heard firsthand from people who I am familiar with but are not me: a husband who hit his wife just once; a mother who broke her son's toys out of spite; a five year old grandson who was hit by his grandmother so hard that it left an imprint on his back; a son who was smacked down so hard by his father at a puja that he hit the floor - at a f"£king puja!; a niece who was sexually abused by her uncle which may or may not have been witnessed by his son and which was disbelieved by her mother; a child who was sexually or physically abused by a domestic servant; a woman who was stalked and harrassed by her ex; a woman who was raped by her partner; a son who was hit with a belt by his father on an ongoing basis.

I can't remember all of them. I have started hearing more stories lke this since I have started engaging in more conversations lke this, and I think the more we do, the better it is, because it allows us to frankly and honestly discuss what the causes are in our families and to say - there is a serious problem that we can't brush under the carpet any longer. Preferably in a way that doesn't just focus on the issue as one of right and wrong but also of one of needs being unmet and support not being given, on all sides. of the people who committed violence in the list above that I know, I know that many of them too were victimized in some way at some point in their lives.

I'm not calling for paranoia or condemnation of South Asian communities but for opennness about this issue so that it can end.

PS, what provoked me to respond to you is the aggressive repetition of the falsehood that dv isn't a particular (i.e., as opposed to other groups) in the South Asian community. This is some sort of clap-trap that someone has sold you on, and it appears you've never bothered to look into it. I have no taste for getting into some long statistical dispute with you, but in the interest of reproducability I typed "domestic violence statistics 'south asian'" into google, hit the first response, and found the following claim: Two out of five south asian women have experienced partner violence. A rate disproportionately higher than that of other minority groups.

Where did you get this data from?.

His girlfriend's boyfriend's wife.

Rob, I believe I have the print out of the study that you cited....I don't have my file with me, but I'll get it. I'm sure you noticed that the survey you cite (and unfortunately I think that dv resource that stated dv is more prevalent among south asian americans w/o the details of the research they site is misleading) is limited to a survey done I believe among south asians in boston. Ever wonder nationally what the stats show? DV is difficult to document, Afric Americans and Latinos have higher rates of dv nationally, but that's not to say it's more prevalent in their communities b/c we just don't know how and if people are responding to surveys. For ex Latinos it has been cited as high as 70 percent (based on a national research I believe but u can look at up, or I'll look it up later). There is strong correlation of dv and one parent households, low income households, low educations. Some of these factors are less prevalent among Indians, but more prevalent among other asians - cambodians, bangladeshis, vietnamese, hmong. There are numerous factors that can play on someone experiencing dv...those factors unfortunately are not just found in the s. asain population. There isn't anything particular about s. asian culture and dv and as much as you want to keep trying to say that, well you just ignore cultural factors in other communities, whether it's white americans, cambodians, japanese, african americans, latinos etc. To address dv and raise awareness in DV in a particular community, you want to try and be aware of particular dynamics, but unfortunately to you that means, well of course dv is more prevalent in s asian culture...b/c we're so umm...patriarchal ; anyways when I do have the energy I'll bring up the stats that you cite, the one in boston, and actually if I'm correct, the information that I'll provide will show community-wide surveys from not just boston but other cities for many asian groups.

is limited to a survey done I believe among south asians in boston

shutcho' mouth woman or i will shut it for you.

shutcho' mouth woman or i will shut it for you.

oh the dravidian race king is annoyed and apparently threatening...too bad :(

Dr Amonymous, thank you for your detailed post. PS said pretty much what I had in mind, actually. But after reading your post, I am rather taken aback. It seems almost as if we are in different worlds. How is it that you have come across so many incidents, while I am hard pressed to even think of one? There was one in which the wife had a drinking issue and sadly took her life, but whether that was due to work or family, I can't say. In any case, I definitely agree with you that DV is an issue which needs more awareness and frank discussion. I wouldn't hazard guesses as to whether South Asians are statistically more prone to DV, or why that would be the case, but I would be loathe to blame things like culture, religion, etc. It all boils down to one's own personality, and one's (lack of) self-control.

I know I'm going to be flamed for this, but I would wager that if one spoke to a person from any other culture, it's probably likely that that person can relate quite a few incidents of DV as well. Heck, if you read the Daily Mail, a British tabloid, you might end up thinking one half of the UK is beating up the other half! :) But i guess the issue is not which society has more DV, but what are we going to do to address it.

nat'l dv stats but of course this can mean many things including apis are underreporting

http://www.abanet.org/domviol/statistics.html

notice the lumping together of api comms, then the stats foe filipinas, koreans, south asians (lumps all south asians together", etc. Much of the studies, are like Rob's one analysis on stats on the south asian community in boston...it's highly misleading to take one statistic from a city and use it to represent the whole community...it's important to read the fine print and see the documentation of what those studies represent

sakhis take on statistics - http://www.sakhi.org/learn/natlstats.php

They cite the 40 percent boston study, clearly showing it is a limited study and they state "Women of all races are about equally vulnerable to violence by an intimate partner."

it would be pretty irresponsible of me to say dv occurs more in the south asian american experience than....white americans? korean americans, african americans? and if I did say something so silly, it would be based on some stereotype which I don't have about my community.

PS,
(1) Crime (for numerous) reasons does vary (both in terms of commission, conviction, and victimization) across a range of social groupings. These groupings do include immigrant status, ethnicity (as well as, e.g., sex, age, and SES). It would thus be highly anomalous (from a generic criminal-law perspective, almost laughable) if domestic violence were to be a strange outlier, where we really couldn't say anything more mealy-mouthed than "everyone is equally vulnerable." (Of course, pointing to such statistical differences doesn't mean that anyone is either guaranteed to be a victim or perpetrator, nor is anyone fully safe from either role.)
(2) Those American Bar Association statistics you cited (abanet.org. . . .) in comment #105 don't exactly agree with the statement that everyone is equally vulnerable, stating, for example, that "African Americans, especially African American Women, suffer deadly violence from family members at rates decidedly higher than for other racial groups in the United States."

His girlfriend's boyfriend's wife.

if that's the case, I guess this is a pretty strong statement to generalise 60+ million people.

Having mistresses is a very common, and loosely socially sanctioned, practice in Tamilnadu among people of various economic strata.

Personally I have not come across anyone under the age of 60 (now) who have mistresses (or second wives). There is a word in Tamil (I observed) has gone out of usage called "koothiyal" used to refer to mistresses by people of my grandfather's generation. I have observed him and a couple of other old ladies using the word quite frequently when talking about their friends / relatives. I guess the old ladies of my grandfather's generation were very accepting of their husbands having "koothiyals".. looks like men had a nice time 50 years back, not anymore.

That word has been replaced by "chinna veedu" (meaning small house) and even that is not widely used. I guess it has to do with the right to divorce offered to women decades ago. Now women have a choice to walk out of marriage.

That word has been replaced by "chinna veedu" (meaning small house) and even that is not widely used.

term is not widely used? are you joking? i know at least 5 people - 40 somethings - who have chinna veedus. there is even a movie with that title. others movies with that same concept. also hindu marriage act does not prohibit bigamy, only gives the first wife the right to divorce. so many women do not exercise that right due to so many social factors.

I would never want to condone domestic violence, but I would like to ask someone to actually define "abuse". Clearly different people have varying understandings of the term. One tendency that I've noticed is this very Western liberal PC discourse that "you should never hit your child, even in the interests of discipline, because it will scar them for life". Personally, I have been occasionally slapped by my parents growing up, but I have a good relationship with them and have not been traumatized by it. Of course, there is a huge difference between being slapped a couple of times and being thrown against the wall as Dr. A experienced. I absolutely feel that children and spouses/partners should never have to fear for their lives or their safety in a household. No question about that.

The only thing I am advocating is a more consistent definition of abuse and an understanding that South Asian norms differ from Western norms, which also have only recently changed. On some level, it is the parent's choice what approaches they want to use to discipline their child. I would of course prefer and advocate non-violent discipline, but I don't think we have total rights to decide what is ok and not ok in someone's home.

Dr Amonymous, thank you for your detailed post. PS said pretty much what I had in mind, actually. But after reading your post, I am rather taken aback. It seems almost as if we are in different worlds. How is it that you have come across so many incidents, while I am hard pressed to even think of one? There was one in which the wife had a drinking issue and sadly took her life, but whether that was due to work or family, I can't say. In any case, I definitely agree with you that DV is an issue which needs more awareness and frank discussion. I wouldn't hazard guesses as to whether South Asians are statistically more prone to DV, or why that would be the case, but I would be loathe to blame things like culture, religion, etc. It all boils down to one's own personality, and one's (lack of) self-control

You're very welcome! I can only say that there was a time in my life where I would have said something very similar. But the more you have one-one-one personal conversations with people - particularly girls, but boys as well, the more you realise whether it is or is not common. It also probably has to do with my family, the circles that I travel in and my own experiences that have made me more aware and itnerested in hearing about it and moreso doing something about it, and a willingness to get in other people's business in a productive way. The thing to always thing is - if that father is smacking his kid down to the floor at a puja, what's he doing elsewhere when no one's around?

I would rather not get into an overly abstract conversation about this because I think the first task - to ensure that people in South Asian communities (and again, I say that because this is a South Asian space and for no other reason) recognise that I think that oversimplified ideas about 'culture' 'religion' and other things are counterproductive in understanding something like violence (emotional or physical) in intimate relations (sexual or not) and the environments they operate in, you can't look at it in a completely individualistic framework. The whole point is that this violence happens in the context of a relationship and is therefore informed and structured by the power dynamics of that relationship as well as all others. Self-control, I think, is not as useful as open, positive, honest communication of needs - I think the latter would go a long way to preventing violence of any kind. I do agree that these kinds of relationships happen in different forms in different places and, for example, you're less likely (though not completely immune from) seeing an 'honor killing' among White people in the U.S. than you are in South Asia or diasporic South Asia, but that there will be other forms of discrimination perhaps rising to the level of abuse that are relevant in those contexts.

The only thing I am advocating is a more consistent definition of abuse and an understanding that South Asian norms differ from Western norms, which also have only recently changed. On some level, it is the parent's choice what approaches they want to use to discipline their child. I would of course prefer and advocate non-violent discipline, but I don't think we have total rights to decide what is ok and not ok in someone's home.

It is the parent's choice up to a certain point, mainly because of practical reasons, not because parents should have any ownership over their children. Aside from the abstract conversations that won't be resolved, there is a practical reason for this : at a certain point, because that parent and that child live in a neighborhood, a community, and a society that will have to bear the consequences of those choices - if a parent routinely demeans the confidence of, for example, a daughter and lowers their expectations for what they can do in life and that results in depression, that's something that everyone from the daughter's teachers to the daughter's boyfriends or girlfriends to the daughter's employers will eventually have to deal with. Which is ALSO why parents should expect to receive support in exchange for the work that they're doing (and it is work) and also why childrearing needs to be viewed as a social responsibility as well as one of the person or people raising the child in the home.

However, that's my view. As you poitned out the question of norms are important, and I think it's relevant to say that there's a difference between stating one's views and beliving that one's views should be legislated upon parents by the state or some other body. The key thing, I think is to not view this solely in terms of abuser/survivor, but as people, one of whom is being violent towards the other either on an occasional or consistent basis, whether physicalyl or emotionally.
This might be stating the obviousl, but I strongly believe that even parents and others who engage in domestic violence are not 'bad' people - but are engaging in specific actions or patterns of behavior that need to be addressed through support for them as well as for those that are being victimised. I loved my father (passed away) and my inability to believe that the specific event I described above had happened was partly due to the contrast between much of the rest of my upbringing. But that doesn't mean that incidents like that don't need to be addressed.

There is also a difference in the different approaches you take - for example, licensing for parents, offering optional communications, negotiations, and other workshops to people through their healthcare or schools, building stronger links and support between parents, schools, and community institutions, and other steps are important in reducing the propensity for violence in society before you even get to the point.

I think the question of "Western" vs. "South Asian" then recedes in importance, because what you want to do is develop contextually relevant solutions. For example, in some parts of South Asia, there have been efforts to curb alcohol consumption because it was a facilitator of domestic violence. You may agree or disagree with whether it's an appropriate long-term solution to the underlying problem, but the link was there in a way that may not be here. Similarly, I have read that military families in the U.S. experience higher rates of domestic violence than non military families - so that would be worth looking into, confirming, thinking about the causes of, and exploring what can be done about it.

I do agree that these kinds of relationships happen in different forms in different places and, for example, you're less likely (though not completely immune from) seeing an 'honor killing' among White people in the U.S. than you are in South Asia or diasporic South Asia, but that there will be other forms of discrimination perhaps rising to the level of abuse that are relevant in those contexts.

Go ahead on wit ya bad self, Dr Amonymous! Muy well-written. Communicating well often means that the level of cnflict will rarely reach the point where parties must exhibit massive amounts of self-control to kep from becoming violent. Although I must say, honor killings occur on the daily in just about every society where members are of European descent. Their way of using a Wite-Out pen to remove any elements they don't want in their lives is aborting unborn babies who will slow their hedonistic roll. At the very least, South Asian honor killings are carried out against people who have fully formed limbs, lungs and access to a weapon.

#108: also hindu marriage act does not prohibit bigamy, only gives the first wife the right to divorce

Not sure where you got this strange piece of info from. Check for yourself at:
http://punjabrevenue.nic.in/hmrgact(1).htm

The first clause under "Conditions for a Hindu marriage" (http://punjabrevenue.nic.in/hmrgact(1).htm#conditionsformarriage) state:

A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following condition are fulfilled, namely:-

(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage

...and then goes on to state more conditions.

if that's the case, I guess this is a pretty strong statement to generalise 60+ million people.

well, she gets around

term is not widely used? are you joking? i know at least 5 people - 40 somethings - who have chinna veedus.

How many times in the conversations with your friends / erlatives / acquaintances have you come across the term?. and 5 people out of how many?.

Does that justify this

Having mistresses is a very common, and loosely socially sanctioned, practice in Tamilnadu among people of various economic strata.

The difference is that there aren't actual Nazis arguing on most blogs, whereas there are hard and soft supportesr of Hindu right politics very present on this one.

Dr. A, I completely agree with you. The only thing I am cautioning against--and I'm not saying you are doing this-- is the tendency to be overly PC and define abuse so broadly that even if a parent slaps a misbehaving kid a couple of times, the child is considered to have been abused. I think a lot depends on the individual relationships within the home. If the child knows that his parents love him, and only slap him to discipline him (in his best interest), then I wouldn't consider that abuse, while someone who's afraid for their lives and safety--or who is beaten gratuitously, that's definately abuse.

I agree that we need to focus on finding conextually relevent solutions. Also, I agree that routinely lowering someone's confidence definitely qualifies as emotional abuse. I have many examples in my own extended family about how this lowered confidence goes on to mess up people's entire lives even in their adulthood.

#112
I agree with your point on communication averting violence, but then you lost me. I'm perplexed by your equating abortion with honor killing; seems like two completely different hot button issues to me.

"At least SA honor killings are carried out against people who have fully formed limbs, lungs, and access to a weapon." I seem to remember the last one I read about in Pakistan involved a teenage girl who had been raped being killed by her father and brothers-- limbs, lungs, and a weapon would have been little use. Sorry I don't have the notation. From my reading of the dailies, my anecdotal observation would be that women and girls are murdered by family/ community members in far greater numbers than men. Therefore it is a DV issue, not a when does life begin issue.

I won't speak beyond my own experience, which is of college educated, middle income, WASP, New England, US extraction. Of the three close friends that I have known to have abortions through the years (I am 41), all have decided to terminate the pregnancy after much thought for one reason. Because they couldn't financially afford to and the men that impregnated them could/ would not be fathers to the children, not as a part of an 'hedonistic' lifestyle. All have had children since, that are loved and wanted.

My personal experience (I'm not counting the various spankings, pinches, or smacks doled out) with DV within my extended family has been that the stressor that pushes people over the edge into violence, physical and verbal, is financial. Usually alcohol is involved as well. Neither I nor my mother or siblings was ever a target, but as a child I had been terrified of my father's rages several times. Knowing myself better, I know that that tension still effects my relationships today. Within the family, DV covers the spread of education backgrounds. The three friends I've known to have been sexually assaulted (2 women, 1man) were all attacked as children/teenagers. The women were raped by family members, the man by a priest.

Extrapolating from these experiences, and Dr A's, I think the more people would ask or talk about these things, the more they would find out that it happens in all families, across all cultures. If it is more predominant in one over the other, I couldn't say. One observation I will make: An interest in SA cinema has led me to view 250+ Hindi/Tamil/Telugu films in the last 15 months and portrayals of violence against women and children in all strata of society is commonplace within these films.

Kabir, I agree with you about being too broad and PC while defining parental abuse . My father, though very loving in his own way was (is) a strict disciplinarian.
As a teacher, he could be very demanding.
I remember once when I was 12 and a math-phobic rebellious pre-teen, he got frustrated at my persistent inability to grasp some algebraic concept (I just didn't practice enough) and slapped me quite hard. I ran away for half a day, then came back and started practicing harder. I thanked him years later when I got a perfect score on my GRE maths. His swimming lessons could be harsh, but again just drilled the concepts in my mind. I realise that he always had my best interest at heart. Now, as a grown up I rib him a lot about his former Hitler-panti and he takes it sportingly.
I know I encountered the kind of fear that not too many western kids of a similar background would have faced as children, but having weathered some really tough periods, I am aware that it has made me a stronger person overall. And what would Russell Peters have done if he hadn't been occasionally been hurt real bad?
My only doubt is that someone else with a different personality could have taken it not so well, and lost confidence.
To quote Chanakya:

Treat your kid like a darling for the first five years.
For the next five years, scold them.
By the time they turn sixteen, treat them like a friend.
Your grown up children are your best friends.

Kabir, I understand your point that a paranoid application of standards should not be the goal. However, I feel this is pretty obvious, no?

In any case, I looked up some resources of discipline and hitting and that led me to guidance provided by the American Academy of Pediatrics. It says that the type of behavior you're describing is very common but argues that it's not helpful and in many ways harmful. It's just one piece, so take it for what it is, but here is the part I found most effective in arguing that hitting is not a good idea:

Parents are more likely to use aversive techniques of discipline when they are angry or irritable, depressed, fatigued, and stressed. In 44% of those surveyed, corporal punishment was used >= 50% of the time because the parent had lost it. Approximately 85% expressed moderate to high anger, remorse, and agitation while punishing their children.21 These findings challenge most the notion that parents can spank in a calm, planned manner. It is best not to administer any punishments while in a state of anger.

Spanking of young children is highly correlated with continued spanking of school and adolescent children.20 More than half of 13- and 14-year-olds are still being hit an average eight times per year.17 Parents who have relied on spanking do not seem to shift strategies when the risks of detrimental effects increase with developmental age, as has been argued.

Spanking of preschool boys by fathers with whom the child identified only moderately or little resulted in increased aggressive behavior by those children.17

Corporal punishment in two-parent, middle class families occurred weekly in 25%, was associated with the use of an object occasionally in 35% and half of the time in 17%, caused considerable pain at times in 12%, and inflicted lasting marks at times in 5%.21 Thus, striking children in the abusive range is neither rare nor confined to families of lower socioeconomic class, as has been asserted.

Although children may view spanking as justified and symbolic of parental concern for them, they rate spanking as causing some or much pain in more than half of cases and generally experience anger at the adult as a result. Despite this, children come to accept spanking as a parent's right at an early age, making changes in adult acceptance of spanking more difficult.21

The more children are hit, the more anger they report as adults, the more they hit their own children when they are parents, the more likely they are to approve of hitting and to actually hit their spouses, and the greater their marital conflict.20

Although 93% of parents justify spanking, 85% say that they would rather not if they had an alternative in which they believed.21 One study found that 54% of mothers said that spanking was the wrong thing to have done in at least half of the times they used it.20 This ambivalence likely results in inconsistent use, which limits further its effectiveness as a teaching tool.

Although spanking has been shown to be effective as a back-up to enforce a time-out location, it was not more effective than use of a barrier as an alternative.32

Even controlling for baseline antisocial behavior, the more 3- to 6-year-old children were hit, the worse their behavior when assessed 2 years later.20

Actions causing pain such as spanking can acquire a positive value rather than the intended adversive value.31 Children who expect pain may actually seek it through escalating misbehaviors.

Parents who spank are more likely to use other forms of corporal punishment and a greater variety of verbal and other punitive methods.22 When punishment fails, parents who rely on it tend to increase the intensity of its use rather than to change strategies.

Dr. A, I agree with you that corporal punishment is not the optimum form of discipline, though I would hesitate to classify this as abuse. I guess it all depends on the family and the individual though. That said, of course domestic violence--physical, sexual, even emotional abuse-- is horrible and a real issue of concern.

One could argue in fact that emotional abuse is particularly horrible, because it's hard to figure out that it's even happening, as it leaves no marks on the body while having often life-long detrimental psychological effects.

Phillygirl, as a rule I don't comment here-- but I want to thank you for bringing attention to this

118 · katiekateQNS on August 11, 2009 04:04 PM #112 I agree with your point on communication averting violence,

but then you lost me. I'm perplexed by your equating abortion with honor killing; seems like two completely different hot button issues to me.

"At least SA honor killings are carried out against people who have fully formed limbs, lungs, and access to a weapon." I seem to remember the last one I read about in Pakistan involved a teenage girl who had been raped being killed by her father and brothers-- limbs, lungs, and a weapon would have been little use.

Sorry I don't have the notation. From my reading of the dailies, my anecdotal observation would be that women and girls are murdered by family/ community members in far greater numbers than men. Therefore it is a DV issue, not a when does life begin issue.

I won't speak beyond my own experience, which is of college educated, middle income, WASP, New England, US extraction. Of the three close friends that I have known to have abortions through the years (I am 41), all have decided to terminate the pregnancy after much thought for one reason. Because they couldn't financially afford to and the men that impregnated them could/ would not be fathers to the children, not as a part of an 'hedonistic' lifestyle. All have had children since, that are loved and wanted.

My personal experience (I'm not counting the various spankings, pinches, or smacks doled out) with DV within my extended family has been that the stressor that pushes people over the edge into violence, physical and verbal, is financial. Usually alcohol is involved as well.

Neither I nor my mother or siblings was ever a target, but as a child I had been terrified of my father's rages several times. Knowing myself better, I know that that tension still effects my relationships today.

Within the family, DV covers the spread of education backgrounds. The three friends I've known to have been sexually assaulted (2 women, 1man) were all attacked as children/teenagers. The women were raped by family members, the man by a priest.

Extrapolating from these experiences, and Dr A's, I think the more people would ask or talk about these things, the more they would find out that it happens in all families, across all cultures. If it is more predominant in one over the other, I couldn't say. One observation I will make: An interest in SA cinema has led me to view 250+ Hindi/Tamil/Telugu films in the last 15 months and portrayals of violence against women and children in all strata of society is commonplace within these films.