Spousal violence against men

A survey of women in Ahmedabad, mentioned 58 percent of women in Ahmedabad suffered significant mental distress, with marital disharmony being the leading cause. The causes found in the survey are covered in
http://isai-os.blogspot.com/2007/10/marriage-makes-wrecks-of-58-percent-of.html

Interesting, if you look at the survey, a number of items in the list apply to women's abuse of men too. If men doing it to women is considered violence, then certainly women doing it to men should also be considered violence. (Magenta colored text is from the original post - some of the items that were listed under violence by men against women)

Sexual violence

56% were deprived of sex [if deprivation of sex is considered violence by women, then I would like to see who is the perpetrator of more violence - women, or men]


Emotional violence

70% report verbal abuse, threats [women may not resort to verbal abuse, but it would be interesting to contrast threats from the two genders against each other, in marriage]
62% report lack of support and appreciation [both genders probably complain about the same thing - is this really violence?]

Intellectual violence

69% excluded from decision-making [what do you do, when someone absolutely refuses from participating in decision-making. That may not be violence, but it certainly is not in the spirit of a marriage.]

Marriage makes wrecks of 58 percent of women in Ahmedabad

A previous post talked about a survey of women in India, where over half said that it was OK for husbands to beat wives.
http://isai-os.blogspot.com/2007/10/womens-survey-in-india.html

Here is another survey released at about the same time. I don't remember the date, but the colored portions are direct quotes from Time of India, Ahemdabad edition - around October 20, 2007.

Marital blows

One in every two married women in Ahmedabad is subjected to torture everyday by her husband, the man with whom she took the seven vows till death parted them. But men seem to have broken these vows. A survey of 1,500 women in Ahmedabad revealed the following.

Acts of physical violence

33% admitted to being victims of domestic violence. [I assume that the statistics in this section are from this 33%, but the TOI article does not make it clear.]

Slapping 68%
Kicking 62%
Punching - 53%
Hitting with hard objects - 49 %
Biting - 37%
Choking - 29%
Bramdomg wotj cogarettes butts - 22%

Sexual violence

50% were subject to forcible sex (rape)
56% were deprived of sex

Social violence

76% abused before family
69% before neighbors
60% before friends
67% in public places

Emotional violence

70% report verbal abuse, threats
62% report lack of support and appreciation

Intellectual violence

69% excluded from decision-making


Horrifying statistics. Amazing that a society known for its external tolerance can be so violent at home. Is there anything being done in the society to address this?

The Women's survey in India

A recent survey in India collected opinions from a lot of women. One of the surprising findings was that 54% of the women thought it was OK for husbands to beat wives. A revealing fact about the society! Obviously, some attitude-setting is in order.

Another side issue that came up, was the kind of question that were asked. There were fairly frank about sex, sexual partners, extra/pre-marital affairs, and vices. The media made a big deal about how these questions were shaming women. However, unless such surveys are conducted, dark deeds of society lay hidden - these needs to be exposed.

Clearly, the 54% number proves the point.

Where do temple donations go?

When you donate to a temple in India, do you know where the money goes? You think you are donating money to a religious cause, when in reality, you may be giving money to support the temple owner's lavish lifestyle. And, this lifestyle may not have anything to do with religion. We are familiar with one aspect of it, where money raised in religious places has supported terrorists.

Yes, there are temples run by trusts, which put the money to good use. And, there are temples administered by the Government - which ensure that much of the money is put to good use. But there are also temples that are either entirely privately owned, or are joint ventures with the Government, and operate on a revenue-sharing arrangement.

Would you donate to a temple, if you knew that money was going to someone's pocket? If yes, do you try to find out before you donate?

Child Labor

Nike recently restarted procuring soccer balls from Pakistan. They had stopped this practice six months ago, because of concerns about child labor. Nike now has a new supplier, who has commited to not use child labor.

It is easy to criticize child labor as a reprehensible practice. And, that criticism is abundant in the US. In fact, there are frequent initiatives to ban things that are found to have child labor. But which country has a bigger child labor problem, and what are people accomplishing by boycotting goods that have child labor?

In US there are plenty of children who work to make money. Why is that not child labor? Is that because these people are earning money that will be spent on stuff that large corporations provide (Nike shoes, for example). In third-world countries, children work to feed themselves and their families.

By criticizing only the third-world child labor, we are in effect saying that it is OK to have child labor if the money is spent on luxuries. But, if the child is working to earn food - that is a horrible thing to do, and must be stopped. What is a hungry child to do?

Difference between a temple and a church

Most religious orders have places of worship. Temples and churches are probably the two most common terms. Christians have churches, Hindus and some others have temples.

Mormons (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) have both - Temples and Churches. They both serve different purposes. Mormon Churches are for public worship, and anyone can go in. Mormon Temples are for private worship, and have restricted attendance.

Does this definition apply to Hindu Temples and other Christian Churches too? While people use Churches for private worship too, their main purpose is public worship - usually the once-a-week Sunday service. And, while people use Hindu Temples for public worship too, their main purpose is private worship.

Does this also underscore a difference between religions? Hinduism is primarily focused on private worship, and Christianity on public or group worship?

And, what about Mosques and Synagogues? I don't know enough to say whether they are for public or private worship. The dictionary states them both as houses of worship.

Indian Muslims in the US

Why are there so few Muslims from India in the US?

According to a recent news report, there are more Muslims from Pakistan - which itself has fewer Muslims than India*. This is a bit surprising, when we believe that the Indian educational system trains well, and that there are equal opportunities for everyone.

Is it that Muslims are not using their opportunities in India? Or, that they are not choosing to come to the US?

Or, is the number misleading; in other words, is the percent of Muslims in the Indian immigrant population in the US roughly the same as the percent of Muslims in India (16.4)? If this is the case, then immigration from Pakistan must be higher than that from India - as a percent of its own population.

Any other explanations?

* Total population of Pakistan in 2007 - 169M (of this, 96% are muslims)
Number of Muslims in India in 2001 - 174M