• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
'Evil' Hindu Practices
All the calumny on Sati is heaped by the city dwelling westernised retards who on the other hand think pub culture is a freedom of choice (which it is) but not the decision to take your own life. They are against liberty for things they don't agree but which never violate the rights of anyone else.

And sati is not something unique only to women, Thevar warriors practiced martial suicide for thousands of years, there are numerous sculptures in kovils depicting self decapitation. The influence can also be seen in the phrase "senchorru kadan (the debt of red/blood rice)" in Tamizh concerning loyalty, it is referred to in the movie Karnan in the song preceding his death.

In Kerala there were chaver suicide squads under the Zamorin (anglicization of Samoothiri i think) in Kozhikode. The modern variant of this were the Kamikaze who unlike Islamic suicide bombers only targeted US navy instead of civilians.

Japanese culture has a close parallel in hara kiri which afaik is also banned due to internalisation of christian morality. The education system in India engages in demonization of sati as "evil" which I used to believe when I didn't know any better, shows how much christian morality is imposed on unknowing school kids who will never learn the truth.

By the way Husky, thanks very much for your translation.
Hindu festival officially blessed, but there's politics in the picture ( Sydney Morning Herald )

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The spectacle is part of <b>Thaipusam, a Hindu festival now banned in India </b>but celebrated in Malaysia, Singapore and Mauritius.

when did this happen?
....what the hell?

Sounds ludicrous. Thaipusam is still celebrated in TN.
<!--QuoteBegin-Pandyan+Mar 15 2009, 09:58 AM-->QUOTE(Pandyan @ Mar 15 2009, 09:58 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->....what the hell?

Sounds ludicrous. Thaipusam is still celebrated in TN.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A Hindu devotee gets pierced on Sunday, Feb. 8, 2009 in Singapore where Hindu devotees gather to celebrate Thaipusam. <b>The rituals held during Thaipusam banned in India</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The thread topic:
<b>Thaipusam Festival, Banned in India, flourishing in Malaysia</b>

http://www.2camels.com/thaipusam.php (Malaysian touristy-looking website)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->the annual Thaipusam festival. <b>Now banned in India, Thaipusam</b> is celebrated by Hindus in several locations in Southeast Asia, including Penang and Singapore, but the largest gathering is at the Batu Caves, just 15km north of KL.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hindu devotees with hooks embedded into their backs take part in a procession toward the Subramaniawary Temple in Batu Caves during the Thaipusam festival in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Sunday, Feb. 8, 2009. The festival is rooted in Hindu legend and was brought from southern India by 19th century immigrants who came to the Malaysian peninsula to work in rubber estates and government offices. <b>The ritual, banned in India,</b> is celebrated in cities throughout Malaysia, as well as in Singapore and Sri Lanka. (AP Photo by Vincent Thian)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Communistic/christopsecular sepiamutiny disagrees:
Note also the typical christospeak of the sepiamutineers. Having stolen the intrinsically Hindu meaning of 'Tamil', now they want to psecularise the festival too: calling it 'Indian festival', 'Tamil festival'. It's a <i>Hindu</i> festival:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Its a tamil festival (i.e. not just indians in malaysia), but it is officially banned in India.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Thaipoosam is not banned in India. It is celebrated grandly in Palani (in Tamilnadu). <b>The Indian government has banned all acts of piercing and hence people can only take kavadis and paal kudams (milk pots).</b> The same water tents exists in India too.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Piercing is an important aspect of Thaipusam which has to do with Subramaniam. Hence, to all intents and purposes such a ban is actually a ban on Thaipusam itself: christoconditioned govt won't allow Hindus to celebrate it the way it ought to be celebrated.

Christolaws of government are no doubt the cause. Like they banned Hindu suicide because suicide is forbidden in christianism, they can't bear Hindus doing Hindu things during Hindu festivals either.
Can you see the christoterrorist government banning islamic and christian self-flagellation? Oh no. That's all pious gawd-approved behaviour, as is the christian mass-murder of heathens.

Here's a plan: since all acts of piercing are banned by the 'Indian' government, if any psecular Indian entity is caught doing body piercing, Hindus should call in the police on them. Haha. Let the christo-conditioned pseculars feel the heat of having their freedom infringed upon. Maybe their whining to be allowed to get body piercings done will allow proper celebration of Thaipusam again.
I bet telling on someone would never be quite so rewarding or so morally (and lawfully!) right.
Re above 2-3 posts

..and see how the kkkaangress gets tears of vote-bank-psec devotion in its eyes as it magnanimously allows self-flagellation by shias in muharram. That is devotion onlee, no, since it is not Hindoo. Common sense onlee. <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Great, so the gov't knows better than people themselves what they can or cannot do with themselves.

What next, a ban on nose piercing or ear piercing?

But "pub culture" is a choice, talk about hypocrisy.

This is besides a ban every year on Jallikattu by the asshole judges who don't have any guts to ban halal slaughter.

Everyone please vote NO.
Crossposting <b>stuff Bharatavarsha, Ramana and Bodhi posted/wrote</b>:

1. Bharatavarsha posted the following, writing "Sati is well attested in the South as far back as Sangam times":

IndiaStar Review of Books
Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300 by Romila Thapar, Berkeley: Univ of California Press, 2003

Reviewed by <b>Kalavai Venkat</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Yet, the most vivid recordings of this practice come from the Sangam Tamil literature. Evidently, a woman either joined her husband in his funeral pyre or burial urn, or led the austere life of a widow comparable to that of an ascetic. Most cases of Sati are spoken of in the martial context. It can be argued that when the king died not only his queen[s], but also his attendants committed sati. A queen chastises the courtiers for not [apparently] performing sati and tells them that she would rather join her beloved husband in the pyre than lead the spartan life of a widow. Not for her, says she, is the life of a widow who eats one meal of rice mixed with gingili oil and neem leaves, and who sleeps on the bare floor. May you not commit sati, the queen tells the courtiers, rather sarcastically, but for me the cold water of the lake is not different from the fire of the pyre.[129] And the very next song confirms that she did commit sati.

Another Tamil woman implores the potter to make her husband's burial urn large enough to hold the widow as well.[130] Tolkappiyam[131] says that the highest glory that a woman can aspire for is to join her husband's funeral pyre. Those ethos were emulated not only by the common women, but even Kambar, who appeared towards the end of the first millennium AD seems to have regarded sati quite highly, for he lets Mandodhari die at the battlefield once Ravana had fallen. N. Subramaniam has suggested[132] that even the great sage Tiruvalluvar alludes to the glory of a woman who performs sati. Manimekhalai has an interesting narrative[133] where the chaste Adhirai wrongly concludes that her trader husband had died and attempts to commit sati, but the fire refuses to engulf her. Then her husband returns and they live happily ever after! It is reflective of the belief of the social milieu that a chaste wife is the one who protects her husband.

A woman wasn't always allowed to commit sati. A Sangam song says[134] that after her son's father departed, the widow's head was tonsured and her bangles were removed. Then onwards, lily with rice became her staple food. So, scholars have argued[135] that those women, who had children, were rather expected to observe widowhood than commit sati. Interestingly, Manusmriti[136] doesn't prescribe sati even for those widows who have no offspring. It expects them to lead an ascetic life of honor. Its prescriptions, barring the tonsuring of a widow, are very similar to the descriptions of a widow's life that one finds in the Sangam poetry. It is evident that the wives of the deceased themselves looked down upon the plight of a widow, who had to tonsure her head, and rather thought of sati as a glorious option.[137] G. L. Hart draws[138] our attention to the prescriptions of Skanda Purana, which includes even the tonsuring of the widow; he points out that Skanda Purana's injunctions regards the vows of a widow exactly match the social mores of ancient Tamilnadu.

Why then, does Thapar falsely claim that sati is evidenced only in AD 510? Ignorance? None would doubt that. Is it also because this augments the usual Marxist rhetoric that the Gupta era supposedly led to the ascendancy of the Hindu orthodoxy, and hence the marginalizing of the woman, an ideal recipe that "could have" resulted in sati? In the same page, Thapar claims that with sati in place, the emerging debate over widow remarriage "could've been" nipped! Elsewhere,[139] she claims that cattle raids were very common in Peninsular India, and alleges that the commemorative stones depicting sati were meant to cultivate a heroic ethos in defense of the settlements not protected by the royal army! She provides no evidence. In the Marxist scheme of things, any Indian war has to be a "cattle raid" and practices like sati have to be reduced to utter banality. If she were right, then what does one do with all those instances of the women of royal households committing sati? Tonsuring of the widows continued even till a few decades ago among the Brahmins of Tamilnadu. The Brahmins are not known to have participated in the battlefield, until mid medieval times. Was this tonsuring of the Brahmin widows too a practice aimed at cultivating heroic ethos for defense against "cattle raids"?

Even during the Sangam times, sati was more an ideal than common practice. In every instance where it occurred, the widow performed sati willingly. The internal references in the poems regards the spartan living of the widows is abundant proof that most widows took to ascetic living. For all practical purposes, it was only the royalty that took to sati. This was practiced on a large scale only during the times of Islamic invasions. The Rajput women embraced the funeral pyre of their husbands, to avoid being raped and ending up in the harem of the Islamic aggressors. The Leftist historians, to whitewash the Islamic culpability, have often tried to project sati as a retrograde Hindu religious practice, which it wasn't. In fact, Manusmrti,[140] even prescribes the duties of a widow, but has no word on sati. No other Hindu law book either. Barring inevitable exceptions, it is evident that the women, who performed sati, did so joyfully. Friar Jordanus,[141] the Christian missionary, observes succinctly sometime in the early 1300s AD: "In this India, on the death of a noble, or of any people of substance, their bodies are burned; and eke their wives follow them alive to the fire, and, for the sake of worldly glory, and for the love of their husbands, and for eternal life, burn along with them, with as much joy as if they were going to be wedded; and those who do this have the higher repute for virtue and perfection among the rest. Wonderful! I have sometimes seen, for one dead man who was burnt, five living women take their places on the fire with him, and die with their dead." Despite his contempt for the Hindus and his missionary zeal, he was honest in his observation that sati wasn't forced.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

2. And Ramana wrote:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Also after Lord Krishna's death the Yadava women folks commit sati. The remaining women are escorted to Hastinapur by a weakened Arjuna and are waylaid and abducted by the Abhiras. So Ms Thapar is wrong. But then she doesn't think Mahabharat is a history despite it being an itihaas.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

3. Bodhi wrote about the existence of Sati in S India:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Marco Polo in his travelogue mentions overhearing about satI (by certain pANDyan women?) in tamil country. chAlukya-s also had the tradition.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Christo MSN "India" wants to associate Deepavali with death, so it puts these two headings side by side:
<b>Diwali celebrations: Pics | 32 killed in cracker shop blaze</b>

2. More psyops (i.e. christianism) timed for Lakshmi puja:

How christo/communitwits don't know what they're talking about and display their ignorance for all the world to laugh at.
Example of another one lying its head off:

<b>A gender bender in the worship of Goddess Lakshmi</b>

New Delhi: The rites of invoking Goddess Lakshmi, the consort of Vishnu whom millions worship on Diwali, is also mired in several "gender loopholes", says writer-researcher R. Mahalakshmi, a professor of ancient history at Jawaharlal Nehru University here.

"Who was this goddess, the female counterpart of male deities, who did not allow mortal women to worship her freely without the mediation of men?
(Never mind such obviously minor and inconvenient facts like how for instance Varalakshmi pooja is done entirely by women. But JNU is not going for facts here, after all. It's going for christianisation.)
It was only as I became a serious student of social sciences that I began to see the linkages between social perceptions of gender and the gods and goddesses that were part of the Brahminical religious traditions. Caste and community were major factors in her worship," she says in her religious non-fiction volume, "The Book of Lakshmi", published by Penguin-Books India this week.
(Social sciences: How to 'scientifically' yell "Idolator!", "Polytheist!", "Worshipper of Godd<i>esses</i>!" at the heathens, before calling for the communist revolution to save said heathens for christ. Not to forget stabbing the heathen Hindoos with "castes, brahminicalism and gender" to make sure they're completely good and dead. Opus Dei's Deus Volt. And in jesuitry, The End Justifies The Means, after all.)

The slim non-fiction book retells the myths surrounding the goddess through a series of illustrations and short stories and poses questions "on the gender bias in the worship rituals of the most feminine of all deities".

"My interest in studying and understanding the goddesses can be traced back to the time, when as a young child I noticed numerous festivals that centred on the family's 'kula devi'. <b>Kanchi Kamakshi, a variation of Lakshmi,</b> generated much excitement among all members of the household," the writer said, explaining what made her explore the deity.
( <!--emo&:roll--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /><!--endemo-->  <!--emo&:roll--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /><!--endemo-->  <!--emo&:roll--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Can someone else smell an arch-liar? It's like some really cheap perfume.
Any <i>Hindu</i> would know - but not christos and communitwits of course: Kanchi Kamakshi is <i>Parvati</i>, not Lakshmi. And her husband is Shiva, here as Ekambranatha. The Sthala Purana concerning Kanchi Kamakshi is known well to Hindus of the region, so the scribbler is obviously lying.
And the above also shows how there is no "research" - and in fact no brain either - in the crypto writing for Penguin-Books. But does one even need to read the rest of her nonsense.
Penguin is a famous anti-Hindu publishing house - also famous for its ignorance and for hiring subversives - so no surprises there. Nor any surprises concerning the very <i>christian</i> timing of the release/coverage of the book.)

"Why was my mother not allowed to be a part of the festivities on certain occasions and not allowed in the sacred areas? Why was it that all the 'paattis' (grandmothers) with shaven heads and crisp ochre-coloured 'saris' were not allowed to enter the kitchen on these days? I was also affronted to see my favourite household help severely admonished for entering the house on such occasions," she said, listing that subtle gender and class faultlines.

"Interestingly, in a number of folk rituals that I have seen, women have no male mediation at all in invoking Lakshmi. So much of female bonding happens on these occasions that the women forget about men," she said.

<b>According to the writer, "the Brahminical patriarchy creates problems for the goddess".</b>
(Cryptochristos aka communitwits create problems for Hindus and the world at large with their compulsive lying. They should move to TSP where christos are happiest and BD where communitwits were happiest - or so I heard.)

In several Tamil Brahmin families, "a ritual called Pendukal is practised. Women in the family, who have died as 'sumangaliks', that is before being widowed, all called from their heavenly abodes to bless the women of the family so that they may also also die before their husbands as 'sumangaliks'," she said.
(And that's thoroughly understandable.
Death rites in Hindu Dharma are crucial and are performed by male family members. IIRC, the wives would like to die first since their husbands could organise the death rites for them if there are no sons; and they won't lead a harsh life on their own without a husband to look after them. In any case, the matter of death rites was/is a very important consideration for Hindu women, see for instance how worried Adi Shankaracharya's mother was about who would perform her death rites if he became a sannyasin.
Also - as anyone with older Hindu family members will testify - old people still in love with their spouse find it very hard to not keep thinking about their spouse after the latter's passing. This pain too, the Hindu husbands don't mind taking upon themselves and would spare their wives from the pain of separation at the expense of themselves having to live through it. Of course, no Hindu wants their spouse to die before them, but someone has to swallow it and the old Hindu men would rather take the sour end of the deal for themselves as long as their wives got the better end.
Hard, isn't it, for christoterrorists/communitwits to understand the heathen infidels? But no need for all the christolying though. The truth is rather simple and any heathen of any kind would understand instantly.
Christomen would rather burn christowomen, as history has shown. It's known as christian love. Where's JNU's book on that?)

Anthropological studies reveal that in several parts of the Indian subcontinent, "women like to be identified more as Parvathi, Shiva's consort", she said.
(What? Must be more of christocommunimoronic insinuation, aka "speculative research".
Obviously they're all wrong again. Here's a very nice and rather apt example that I learnt of this Deepavali:
Lingayat friend's sister-in-law's Ishtadevam is Lakshmi - her other ishtadevam is Hanuman, btw. She does daily puja to her Lakshmi mukham which she inherited from her mother. Oh and she is a Lingayat too - well, <i>of course</i>. OMGs, Shiva was not listed in her personal shortlist! Gasp! Not another Hindooooooo!!!!!! The Hindoos are all so tragically unpredictable, so how can the christoanthrax, I mean the anthropologists, box and label them all properly if they will not conform to desired 'expected' behaviour? Oh what to do about the dratted inconvertible heathens who are clearly ignoring all them anthropological studies and just continue to be themselves?
Anyway, the example merely illustrates how Hindus love Mother Lakshmi - she is incredibly beloved among Hindu men and women. She is everything to Hindus. Parabrahmam herself.
But I don't expect christoislamicommunits to understand. They should continue worshipping the non-existent jeebus' non-virgin mary.)

"In the most popular of myths, Lakshmi is presented seated on a full blown lotus. She is the daughter of the ocean. She holds unfading lotus flowers in her hands," Mahalakshmi said.

The mascot of the goddess is the owl. 
(<!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> What is a mascot????
I have seen Lakshmi with one or more Elephants surrounding her, I've seen her with her husband's Garuda as Vahanam. But I have not seen any owl in any of my Kovils. Did I miss something? Or is this more a North Indian thing?
In any case, I've never seen Lakshmi - or any Hindu God - with a "mascot". "Mascots" must just be more of the JNU writer's delirium.)

The book, which is almost childlike in the lucidity of its "arguments and style",
(That's not what's childlike about the book. It's the "research" - i.e. the non-existence of the same.)
is divided into seven chapters -- "Lakshmi as the embodiment of wealth and beauty", "Lakshmi as the daughter of the ocean", "Sri Lakshmi and other deities", "Symbols of Lakshmi", "The Iconography of Lakshmi", "Lakshmi Festival and Worship" and the "Ashta Lakshmi Stotram and the Kanakdhara Stotram sacred mantra".
(Now, now. After distorting Hindu Dharma into non-recognition, after getting it all hysterically <i>christomoronically</i> wrong - after telling a Big Lie a la that catholic hitler - there's no need for the scribbler to mention Varadacharya's AshtaLakshmi Stotram and Adi Shankaracharya's Kanakadhara Stotram as if it would know anything about either. It was never speaking before about any Lakshmi known to any Hindu, so it need not try to start now and embarrass itself further.)
Source: Indo-Asian News Service
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->There's a lot more nonsense in there, but my Purple was getting out of hand already.

Well, at least I'm not the only one going <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> over the mention of the owl with ref to Lakshmi:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->3. What is Goddess Lakshmi's Vahanam, people in North India say
>  Aandhai (Owl) is Her Vahanam.  Is it true or a rumour ??

It is a rumour. Whatever vAhanma He takes, She also takes the same thing. So Her primary vAhanam is garudan. ref. "vAhanam vEdAtmA vihagESwarO" of Alawandar in kAntA chatuSSlOkI.

Lakshmi Sahasranamam from Skanda purAnam also describes Her as "garudOpari samsthitA". It also says  "simhagA vyAghragA dEvI vAyugA cha mahAdrigA" wherein lion, tiger, air and mountain are mentioned as Her vAhanams. I have also heard priests saying "rAjahamsAdhirUdhAyai rAjyalakshmaicha mangaLam" which makes Her hamsa vAhinI. Interestingly perumAL also has hamsa vAhanam during brahmOtsavam.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Of course, the more important question remains: what do "mascots" have to do with Lakshmi? (I obviously never really got beyond that statement <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> , christocommunist verbiage being too ... uhhh ... intense for me.)
Wrong thread, Husky. These are NOT "Evil Hindu Practices". These are "Evil Christo/Commie Practices" a.k.a. psy-ops.
Belongs in christianism (=terrorism) thread too.


Quote:India elephant blessings 'to stop' due to health risk

By Jill McGivering

BBC News

[image caption:] Elephants are social animals

Forest officials in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu have asked temple custodians to stop their elephants from blessing Hindu pilgrims.

Their concern is that the practice could be damaging the more than 50 elephants kept in Hindu temples.

(These "forest officials" are crypto christians. The proof is in their pronouncement.)

The elephants are routinely forced to touch the heads of pilgrims with their trunks as a form of blessing.

But officials say the practice could be putting the animals at risk of tuberculosis.

They say the constant exposure to as many as 500pilgrims a day may be putting the elephants at risk of contracting diseases, including tuberculosis.

In recent years, four temple elephants have died after contracting tuberculosis.

A spokesman for the department in charge of temples says it will comply with the request.

(Must be cryptochristist in christo HRCE dept that's put in charge of temple affairs in TN.)

But one right-wing Hindu group responded by saying there should be more discussion before a decision was made.

(Look how the Hindu group is "right wing" merely for asking for more discussion on the topic. If it's Hindu and opposes christianist incursions, it MUST be right wing.

Meanwhile, the virulently anti-Hindu - obviously christo - cryptos are just 'neutral' "animal rights groups" and "forest officials"<img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />

Some animal rights groups have been lobbying for a long time for a total ban on temple elephants.

They say elephants are very social and intelligent animals and should not be forcibly isolated.

Christism in Tamizh Nadu and Kerala has been stealing elephants and using them in their churches and processions - can be seen in quoteblocks below.

I don't see that these "animal rights groups" who have been "lobbying for a long time for a total ban on temple elephants" go after christianism in India. Note that they're going after *temple* elephants. I.e. Hindu elephants doing Hindu things, versus the elephants kidnapped to wait on christist sheep.

But the forest officials are more specific: they have stated their intentions in such a way that they could never be after the elephants in church, since their dear friend/boss the Church is using the elephants to inculturate (to keep the flock the church has recently acquired/duped into christianism - the flock which is obviously still attached to Hindu religion and reads this core Hinduness as some universal "Indian culture" instead, because culture is what christoislamism *obviously* lacks). But note how these "forest officials" particularly want the most HINDU of rituals to do with elephants abolished: the elephant blessing the Hindu temple visitors. Because that is an even more overtly heathen practice: elephants in Kovils are decorated, worshipped and give their blessings, because they - like cows and other sacred animals - are considered, well, Sacred in the Hindu Dharmic religion. (Horses, Cows, Elephants, Snakes, Eagles, Monkeys, Dogs, etc. etc. are all considered sacred and even divine by Hindus. Just like a great many Indian plants are.)

So the Elephant blessing people is a practice that is a Big No-no in christoterrorism: they clearly can't copy the Hindu temple elephants blessings, since they absolutely can't have elephants blessing the christoterrorist sheep visiting churches. <- That would be polytheistic idolatry and hence against commandment #1. No one but the non-existent gawd may bless the sheep.

So the church does what it did with the snakes (all snake-related heathenism CAN NOT be assimilated into christianism and hence must be thwarted): BAN all heathenism that cannot be inculturated. Not merely avoid inculturating on it - No - but *Ban* it from heathen religions themselves, through pretended secularism: through the "secular" arm (i.e. cryptochristo authorities/govt) and their secular excuses ("it may hurt the elephants"). After all, the non-existent biblical gawd can't stand that somewhere on the planet there is a heathen worshipping anything other than His Non-Existence.

And the following from HK mentions how many a sacred Hindu Elephant (all Indian elephants are sacred) are now regularly kidnapped by christoterrorism and used as slaves in christianism and its inculturation routines:


Quote:Christianity -A bundle of fabrications and imitations

26/02/2010 22:32:15

GSK Menon's Response to the usage of 'Pagan'as a derogatory term for non-Christians in Christian writings.

Christianity is not a religion, it is a bundle of fabrications and imitations. Take the case of Christianity in India, no Christian including the Bishops and nuns prefer a Christian name, everybody wants only a Hindu name, for eg look at the names of these convert bishops - Bishop Vijay Anand, Bishop Sunil Kumar, Bishop Pradhan, Brother Dhinakaran etc etc.

The Christians refuse to call these alien gods by their correct names, instead they have borrowed names of Hindu Gods & Goddesses, for eg; Amala, Vimala, Nirmala, Parameshwar, Mahesh, etc.

(NOT borrowed. Stolen. The way some christists kept names like Dion, Diana, even though this was strictly forbidden by the early church fathers and the church.)

Nowadays they are into full scale imitation of Hindu temple rituals, rites and customs. Thus you will find christian idols being fed Hindu dishes like kheer, laddoo and these being distributed as prasad. Is there any concept of prasad in their religion ? Nowhere else in any church in the world are these being done. Remember our Hindu brothers and sisters were converted by lure and guile by ridiculing as to how our Hindu idols ate ? Should we now not ask these converts as to how their alien idols are eating Hindu dishes ?

Temple rituals like procession on elephants, use of colour umbrellas, Hindu temple musical instruments, are all being shamelessly imitated. Even Dhwajastambhams are being erected which has no connection whatsoever with this desert religion. The Dhwajastambhams that are being erected in churches are exact replicas of those found in Hindu temples.

In Tamilnadu and Andhra converts are made to carry christian idols in palanquins like in Hindu temples !

(Already said: Rome Part II.)

Hindu lamps are currently the rage in churches. The Hindu traditional lamp is a representation of the Hindu trinity of Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva, how is this being used in churches ? Most of the christian converts are embarrassed to answer this.

Caste system is immensely popular among the converts, the bishops and nuns pretending to be Brahmins. They are getting themselves be called as Swamy, Purohit, Acharya etc.

In Kerala it is a big joke, every christian convert in the Travancore area pretends to be a descendant of a Namboodiri family. Imaginary lineage claims which are unverifiable are bandied about. I once challenged a Namboodiri pretender to undergo a DNA test. He fled from the place in no time lest his actual caste and genes are deciphered !

What is the meaning in such type of characterless people calling others as Pagans/Heathens ? Do they have any locus standi to call others as Pagans/Heathens ?

(The meaning? It's core christianism. That's all there is to it. In christian terminology, "polytheistic idolaters"=thorn in the sight of the non-existent jeebusjehovallah, see Bible=the working definition what has become known as pagani/heidenen since the conversion of Europe. The "locus standi" is their bible from where the differentiation originated. This differentiation is integral to christianism.)

And a couple of comments from different parts of the HK site:


I have seen a palli perunnal in tsr last month in TV in which they lined up 60 elephants with Yesu thidamb.. think about that folks.
60 elephants. That's 10 more than in Hindu Kovils as per the Beeb "news" piece above.


Whatever we see today whether it is using elephants in festivals or singing Bhajans are all signs of desperation to hold on to their 21% population in Kerala.

According to the surveys 50% of Kerala Christians live like Hindus and wanted to come back to Hindu.

BTW, that last ("50% of Kerala christos want to revert to Hindu religion") is a quaint factoid, but of little other use: many a christoterrorist in the Roman empire eventually wanted to and did return to Hellenismos too (some even centuries after the Hellenes had decisively lost). But there's no point revisiting the story of GR's end, it is well known.

The fact is: it does not matter how many heathens there are and how small in number christianism's presence initially is. Or how many want to revert to heathenism. All that matters is christianism achieving political power (christianism always keeps trying for this, until it succeeds - century after century, if that's what it takes). Once it has attained political power, heathenism has definitively lost and one can just count down: the matter reduces to establishment of christianism through accelerated destruction of heathenism.
^ India=Rome Part II. More of the Theodosian/Justinian Codes (sets of increasingly discriminatory christian imperial laws to stifle Hellenismos and other heathenism in the Roman empire).

[quote name='Husky' date='05 August 2010 - 07:09 PM' timestamp='1281015089' post='107762']Once (christianism) has attained political power, heathenism has definitively lost and one can just count down: the matter reduces to establishment of christianism through accelerated destruction of heathenism.[/quote]At which point christianism grows by subversion and theodosian/justinian codes like in the post above. Gradually suppressing all heathenism. It all begins like the Let's Ban Temple Elephants(' Blessings) above. And like how the govt's christoboard hiked up the charges for various poojas to Ayappa at Shabari to exorbitant prices no Hindu can afford. Like how the govt is "secularly" encroaching on and threatening - via christo "secular" temple boards like HRCE - many a major Hindu temple/sacred site (Ramarsethu, Chidambaram), as well as many a minor one. It's just how it all begins. Textbook christianism.

And more political power means more multiplying sheep. Multiplying at greater speeds. Through:

- Lying: about themselves (PR, e.g. "Thomas in India") and about the heathens (e.g. psyops, and fictions like "Hindu Terror", rewriting history). Using christomedia and christoarchive and cryptochristianism.

- Murder/torture/intimidation and other removal of key and resisting Hindus such as through character assassination. (E.g. Dara Singh, and Swami Lakshmananda - part of a long list of murdered Hindus).

- Subversion: gradually undoing all the remaining heathenness in the heathens.

- Inculturation

- Crypto-christianism

- And of course conversions through stolen advantages (Hindu tax money used to privilege christists in govt christist schools like santa stephen's college or something, stolen Hindu temple lands, privileges stolen from Hindu underprivileged: re-directed to "dalit christians/islamaniacs", stolen Hindu temple money which were used by Hindu temples to maintain themselves and to help poor Hindus such as by daily feeding masses of Hindus for free and performing mass Hindu marriages. This temple money is now used to fund "mass christian marriages" and christian churches, more Hindu land 'purchases' for encroaching christism, and subsidies for haj and ME churches).

Repeat - Smith in Julian's Gods:

Quote:what Constantine had done for the Church. Behind the success of his reforms had stood the brute force of money.135 Vast sums were spent on the building of basilicas, and there were grand endowments of land to the Church. That land, moreover, was to be exempt from tax. Clerics were excused the burden of costly public offices, even personally subsidized. There were food allowances for Christian widows and nuns. To pay for it all, Constantine looked to a source of funds accumulated over centuries: the huge treasure house of precious metals lying to hand in the ancestral temples. Pagans, it has been nicely said, had financed their own destruction. 136 Julian's most pressing task in this connection was to do the same in reverse, to restore the temples as the perceived focus of public beneficia at the expense of the Church.137
Then as now (but minus the Julian). Because christianism learns from history - to perfect its assassinations.
(I will hopefully get to the point by and by. Bear with.)

Remember the Hindu family where the dad got a job as geologist in Norway, then the Norwegian authorities stole their kids for "evil Hindoo practices" such as:

1. the parents [color="#0000FF"]co-sleeping[/color] with their little bubs (something all Hindu parents/grandparents/aunts/uncles do, not to mention many a mammal. Should all such mammals' young be sent off to foster homes too? No? Actually, whenever I visit home in India, my sleeping arrangements usually comprise of the most of/the entire family all napping in the same room: in a line of beds spread on the ground);

2. the parents fed babies by hand (same as many a Hindoo parents and elders still do for little ones. Actually, I continue to eat with my hand - definitely when I'm back Home. Should I be locked up? Indeed, I've seen how birds feed their bairn with their beaks - which surely must be even more "morally" wrong - methinks we should put their babies in cages to protect them from their own parents????)

3. the mother breastfed in a manner the Norwegians decided was "wrong". Not sure what she was supposed to have done wrong here.

Before I get to my point on "co-sleeping", need a recap - from :


Yes, the page at the link is indeed called "Kidnapping of children, is a big industry in Norway". And as the domain ends on .is, it's an Icelandic site.

They seem to know their neighbours well.

Anyway, as the page explains:


Quote:Kidnapping of children, a big industry in Norway

[color="#0000FF"]Kidnapping of children, is a big industry in Norway. A grotesque instrument for criminals in and around the public administration.[/color]

Norwegian so-called “child protection service” is a grotesque criminal activity, as a tool for criminals in and around the public administration. There are very many children, parents and families who have had their lives destroyed by this grotesque business that threatens everybodys dearest and nearest values. While there are many who also benefits from and who earns on the kidnapping, catch hold, harassment, false documentation, torture, exploitation and out-plundering of children, parents and families. A very very big and central problem in Norway. In Sweden, Denmark, England and some other countries too.

Read more about this, for example, on the following links:

– africanpress.me/2007/02/20/[color="#0000FF"]barnevernet-child-protection-services-in-norway-destroy-families-says-professor-skaanland/[/color]

– www.fampo.no/cps.html

– hunwww.is/2012/02/11/[color="#0000FF"]norway-offers-residence-permits-in-exchange-for-children/[/color]

– hunwww.is/2012/02/11/more-from-russia-about-the-norwegian-terror-regime/

– forum.r-b-v.net/viewtopic.php?p=31595#p31595


This is a major known issue: organised and deliberate theft of children. One that others - e.g. the IJslanders above - apparently not only know about but have been monitoring.

Child trafficking in broad daylight: completely "legit".

Now for the relevant recap comment at last, as support for what the "crimes" of the parents were that the Norwegian authorities listed as reasons for taking their cubs away:

Quote:It is customary in these cases to accuse the parents of emotional abuse of their

children. This is characterised by a lack of consideration for the children, lack of

love and affection. However, what are the proofs for this accusation? [color="#0000FF"]The Norwegian

Children Welfare Services have only come up with hand-feeding, co-sleeping and

“wrong” breast-feeding.
[/color] Contrary to what the Norwegian ambassador is implying,

there are no deep, dark secrets in this case. The parents have not been accused of

physically molesting their children nor have they been accused of sexual abusing

the children. So what are the reasons the CWS have confiscated the children?

Obviously, this is a difficult question for the CWS to answer because there is none.

from: Cecilie Bedsvaag – Posted on: Mar 1, 2012 at 16:54 IST

("Lack of love and affection", indeed. Quite the opposite clearly as co-sleeping and hand-feeding etc are typical examples of human mammals that care about their young. Heathens - like other mammals - intrinsically know the importance of the physical proximity of the parents in rearing the young. Many a baby monkey still clings to its parents as if for dear life and the parent monkeys by nature allow this since that increased bonding between babe and parent monkeys and keeps it safe/makes it feel safe.)

It seems the mum's villainy in breast feeding was that she fed the cub when it asked for the milk, rather than according to some timetable determined by the Norwegian authorities as optimum feeding times for a baby:

Quote:“As a reader, I am unable to evaluate if there was any risk at all to the children’s development, but surely I can see the risks created by the actions of the authorities. Isn’t that a bigger crime committed by the state, of denying a baby her breastfeed, and denying the mother the right to breastfeed her child ? Aren’t there Human Rights organisations in Norway? [color="#0000FF"]“On demand” feeding has been blamed. “On demand” breastfeeding will never become “overfeeding”. It is those strictly time-based feeding regimens that are suspect and constitute pseudo-science. The human body has its own intelligence and the baby will cry for food when he/she is hungry. All that is natural.[/color] Real science understands it perfectly too ! The family should take these authorities to court.

from: Kumar – Posted on: Jan 26, 2012 at 08:48 IST”

Anyway, having invented absurd reasons to steal the children, the Norwegians (BTW, any christos involved again, by any chance? One can usually smell them about when stolen kids are involved) -

again: so then the Norwegian authorities stole the parents' little babies and put them in separate alien Norwegian "foster" care until the kids would turn 18. Probably to ensure that the Bhattacharyas' babies wouldn't turn into adult heathens: thereby decreasing the number of the world heathen population again. Possibly to be raised as christoterrorists too (or fodder for christopaedophilia for all I know) thus increasing the number of christoterrorists in the world by 2 again. (Yes, they *are* doing nazi math, it's what christoislamics do.)

Recap from The Chindu, for support:

Quote:In a memorandum submitted to the President, the grandparents have said that Abhigyan had already lost his mother tongue. Both the children are traumatized as Barvevarne has arranged to keep them with foster families till 18 years. They have already broken the relation between the natural parents and the children, now they are going to snap the relation between the kids, they said.

Getting to the point at last: remember how "co-sleeping" is listed as a crime? A team of NRIs was trying to raise visibility on the issue to help these poor Hindu parents get reunited with their pups. For some reason, the NRI defence team tried to argue that "co-sleeping" is accepted in (presumably other) western countries.

But let's get this straight: co-sleeping is considered *controversial* in western countries, as was obvious again from a recent Time issue where "co-sleeping" was listed as one of the "controversial" techniques for better parenting as "devised"/advised by some all-knowing western paediatrician.

Quote:Time cover shows mum breastfeeding son, 3

Fri May 11 2012


The Time article explores the rise of attachment parenting, a set of [color="#FF0000"]controversial[/color] [color="#0000FF"]techniques made popular by US pediatrician[/color] Dr William Sears [color="#0000FF"]which includes[/color] baby-wearing, extended breastfeeding and [color="#0000FF"]co-sleeping[/color].

Perhaps the American paediatrician association will soon patent this co-sleeping "technique" under this "attachment parenting" method?

But then, until christo nations start doing something as a fad, it is all "Evil heathen practice" onlee. And once the christonations adopt it, it becomes the new rage and is explained as "beneficial" to baby and helping it to bond well, learn well, socialise well and become well-balanced in life etc etc (summarised in that positive-sounding "attachment parenting" catch-phrase above).

Indeed, it's quite possible that tomorrow parents all over Norway will be doing the same, having learnt it in a manual. Anyone betting Norwegian kids won't be ripped from their parents then and thrown into Norwegian foster care?

Meanwhile, many a heathen culture - being basically mammals when you get down to it (and basic parenting is quite instinctive and innate in mammals) - has since aeons known all about how co-sleeping helps to comfort the cub, as well as other methods of bonding with the baby like kissing it*, singing gently to children and hand-feeding them, etc. (All such "attachment parenting" will soon become popular in the west. But raising their young well is what heathen societies and other mammals do. Even the hand-feeding that Hindoo elders regularly do with Hindoo youngsters may one day become popular in the west, where it will be advertised as some "genius innovation for social bonding in human familial settings" no doubt.)

* As we know from docos, a mum kissing its baby gets a specimen of the bacteria and allergens etc that are currently present on the babies' skin - which possibly oozed out from the skin. This specimen is imbibed by the mother during the kissing process, whose body then manufactures anti-bodies and other stuff helpful in babies' immunity. These then end up in the mother's milk which the cub drinks to raise its immunity against such things.

Human mothers are quite oblivious to how their affectionate kissing of their whelps - or licking in the case of other mammals - is thus helping to biologically strengthen their babies against disease, but they do it all Correctly instinctively anyway.

As regards the article in the Time magazine: the first noticeable controversy was about Time's cheap cover photo of an American mum breastfeeding her 3-year old (an age frowned upon as past breastfeeding in western society. Don't know much about non-western societies as regards the age for weaning. At the very least there's more chance of females becoming pregnant again *after* they have weaned their first litter. Among Indians what I've noticed is that this tends to often be after the baby's turned 2 or 2 something, but not quite sure. Recent western studies have concluded that not only are babies who are fed on their own species' mother's milk more intelligent than babies on other milk or formula, but that a minimum of two years of mother's milk is also an important contributor to the human baby's intelligence. While I don't know the upper limit, I hazard to guess that young can't subsist on mere milk forever...)

No one seemed to notice how - predictably - the same "American mum" in the Time ragazine cover has also abducted I mean adopted an African baby. "Saving the poor abandoned babies of the world" - you know, the way the Norwegian authorities "saved" the Hindu babies from their heathen parents - is something western women** like to see themselves doing. Playing saviour/hero by encouraging abductions of other nations' and other communities' children to make themselves feel superior. Sick.

** Western men like to see themselves "saving" - aka marrying etc - "ethnic" women (what I tend to think of as the "Phileas Fog" syndrome, unless someone has already coined this phrase?), whereas western women like to see themselves "saving" ethnic children. I predict that western children will try to save ethnic hamsters/pets next, No?

The last would be in line with that famous statement by a western feminist (would be Gloria Steinem I suppose, since it's the only feminist whose name I know): "Men love women. Women love children. Children love hamsters. There is no reciprocity."

Gawd forbid that women could love men or that men could love children or that children could love their parents back or that all adults could care about animals (hey, who wouldn't want to walk around with some cuddly moonjur or mooshika in their shirt pocket - admit it, it's so cute. I mean, you can pet its head with your thumb while you wrap your other fingers around it <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' /> The very idea is cute). Oh and gawd forbid that hamsters/etc maybe just want to be left alone and would perhaps have liked to have been left there in the wild, to raise their own families... I recall a Kungfu Hamster video that went viral on Utoob. (Well it's possible that hamsters and the like will be willing to forego all the free food and secure lifestyle that a human can give them for a chance to pursue their own biological purpose to procreate - by natural selection, rather than have humans planning to "breed" them with pre-selected mates. Such denial of self-determination for other animal species is actually not fair, especially as it flies in the face of nature...)

Hmmm, I suppose one can view Steinem's statement from a biological perspective to *force* it to make sense - though I don't know that Steinem meant it that way:

that males have a much stronger drive to mate (i.e. with females) in order to spread their genes about, while female mammals are more into producing progeny and thus spend their efforts in raising the offspring (mammals as we know take longer to raise than some other animal species). Both make evolutionary sense in that genetic data is programmed to try to propagate itself and survive, and gets its carriers to do the hard work for this. Meanwhile babies... must get tired of all the never-ending coddling and be looking to find some other helpless creature - e.g. hamsters - to coddle in return/revenge??? The last is clearly a supposition...

But if Steinem did mean it in a biological sense, why should she speak of "men" and "women" etc - i.e. about humans - and not more generally about animals?

Uh-oh I've digressed more than usual. The point(s) of this post ended a long time ago. Never mind. I can't play at being serious forever. (Well, at least I never pretend to be deep and intellectual and profound and thereby make an even greater fool of myself. My acting talents don't stretch that far.)
[color="#0000FF"]Directly related to the previous post.[/color] Some relevant news has turned up that has to do precisely with these bits of that earlier post:


It seems the mum's villainy in breast feeding was that she fed the cub when it asked for the milk, rather than according to some timetable determined by the Norwegian authorities as optimum feeding times for a baby:

Quote:“As a reader, I am unable to evaluate if there was any risk at all to the children’s development, but surely I can see the risks created by the actions of the authorities. Isn’t that a bigger crime committed by the state, of denying a baby her breastfeed, and denying the mother the right to breastfeed her child ? Aren’t there Human Rights organisations in Norway? “On demand” feeding has been blamed. “On demand” breastfeeding will never become “overfeeding”. It is those strictly time-based feeding regimens that are suspect and constitute pseudo-science. The human body has its own intelligence and the baby will cry for food when he/she is hungry. All that is natural. Real science understands it perfectly too ! The family should take these authorities to court.

from: Kumar – Posted on: Jan 26, 2012 at 08:48 IST”


Perhaps the American paediatrician association will soon patent this co-sleeping "technique" under this "attachment parenting" method?

But then, until christo nations start doing something as a fad, it is all "Evil heathen practice" onlee. And once the christonations adopt it, it becomes the new rage and is explained as "beneficial" to baby and helping it to bond well, learn well, socialise well and become well-balanced in life etc etc (summarised in that positive-sounding "attachment parenting" catch-phrase above).

Indeed, it's quite possible that tomorrow parents all over Norway will be doing the same, having learnt it in a manual. Anyone betting Norwegian kids won't be ripped from their parents then and thrown into Norwegian foster care?

So yes, turns out the next fad will be nothing less than on-demand feeding. Which was the third and last remaining "crime" listed against the Hindu parents for which they were separated by the Norwegian authorities from their children (see previous post for details):


Quote:When you feed affects your baby's IQ

By Pamela Allardice

Friday, July 13, 2012

Babies who are fed whenever they are hungry have higher IQs than those who are fed on a schedule, a new study has found.

The research — published in the European Journal of Public Health — suggests a significant difference in the mental abilities of "demand-fed" and "schedule-fed" babies.

<Snip related news link>

Researchers studied data from a child development study of more than 10,000 children between the ages of five and 14.

On average, children who were demand-fed as babies had IQ scores four or five points higher than those who were schedule-fed.

"This difference between schedule and demand-fed children is found both in breastfed and in bottle-fed babies," explains Dr Maria Iacovou, who led the research from ISER.

"The difference in IQ levels of around four to five points is statistically highly significant. However, at this stage, we must be very cautious about claiming a causal link between feeding patterns and IQ.

"We cannot definitively say why these differences occur, and more research is needed to understand the processes involved."

<Snip related news link>

The research is the first large-scale study to investigate the long-term outcomes of schedule-fed versus demand-fed babies.

It was carried out by researchers at the Institute for Social and Economic Research at the University of Essex and at the University of Oxford.

<Snip video link>

Oh and by the way, on this bit that was taken from the Chindu and pasted in the previous post:

Quote:In a memorandum submitted to the President, the grandparents have said that Abhigyan had already lost his mother tongue. Both the children are traumatized as Barvevarne has arranged to keep them with foster families till 18 years. They have already broken the relation between the natural parents and the children, now they are going to snap the relation between the kids, they said.

Forgot to mention that the full Chindu report revealed that Norway moreover stipulated the heathen Hindoo parents should separate if they wanted the Hindoo dad to get to keep the kids ("we'll put the kids go into fostercare, if you two don't split up!"). All because of the mother's "crimes of negligence and ineptitude" (which is a reference to her breast-feeding on-demand, hand-feeding the other one and both the heathen parents co-sleeping with their babies):

Quote:Three-year-old Abhigyan and his one-year-old sister Aishwarya are in foster care in Norway after the country's Child Protection Service charged their mother, Sagarika, with “negligence and unable to bring up” the children. Barnevarne, a child care service of Norway, took custody of the children in May last year when Aishwarya was just five months old and on breast feed.

A Norwegian court has now ruled that the two children would stay in different foster homes in until the age of 18, with the parents allowed to meet them only once a year for one hour. The court has, however, said that if the couple separated, it could give the custody of the children to the father Anurup Bhattacharya who is employed as a senior geoscientist in a multinational firm since 2006.

The couple fear the worst when their visa expires next month and they would have to return to India without their children.
(Hey, that's what the christo-nazis did to the Jews too, isn't it: Split up the target victim families, besides manufacturing "crimes" that the Jews are to have committed.)

Anyway. So now that the Hindoo parents are exonerated on two of the 3 counts - in that both co-sleeping and on-demand feeding are shown to be beneficial - the only thing that's still held as a "crime" against them is.... hand-feeding. <- Which is so clearly the worst thing parents can do to their children... [Confusedatire:] "That's it. Burn them, burn the heathens!"

The Hindu defence team of these parents should sue the Norwegian authorities and get the children back. Stealing children from an ethnic group is classed as genocide by the genocide convention, as per the famous though defunct christianheritage site. A copy of the specific crimes outlined is still available under "Excerpt from the genocide convention".

So slap the Norwegian childnapping authorities with Genocide.

The genocide convention should also be used against all the christian so-called "orphanages" in India, which are famous for stealing Hindoo kids (even from their yet living parents!) and were in the news yet again for just this: Church sponsored Child Trafficking continues unabated in Tamilnadu, June 2012.
Was this not the psyops thread?

ModelMinority regularly discusses the ongoing, institutionalised discrimination and psyops against East and Southeast Asians by the west, particularly against Asian Americans by WASPy America.

Lots of articles that I hadn't yet read on MM, may post relevant bits from some of them. But for now the following 2 excerpts.

1. modelminority.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=153:why-do-asian-women-date-white-men-&catid=37:dating&Itemid=56

Quote:Asian Women, Caucasian Men

It's a growing trend in the Bay Area's new multicultural world. But these relationships can bring with them social and psychological complications.

By Joan Walsh

San Francisco Examiner

December 2, 1990

[...] Doug Nishida, president of the predominantly Asian fraternity Lambda Phi Epsilon, pulled together a group of his friends to talk about the Asian women-white men phenomenon. Our conversation flashed back and forth between sociological theories and personal angst. Of the four, only Doug has a girlfriend right now, a trend they attribute at least partly to the preference of Asian women for white men.

All four have discussed the trend with friends, with family, in Asian-American Studies classes. They believe American culture - white culture - has sought to emasculate men of color, and see the same impulse that insulted black men with the term "boy" neutering Asian men. "Look at the Rambo movies, or The Karate Kid," says Bryan Nobida, whose heritage is half-Chinese, half-Filipino. "Look at all movies and TV. Asian men are either celibate, sexless or else we're rapists, [color="#FF0000"]someone that a white man should save a woman from.[/color] The Asian never winds up with the woman."

Like many Asian men (and some women), all four believe an urge to assimilate is behind the attraction to white men among Asian women. For Japanese-Americans in particular, the bitter experience of internment during World War II led to "shame about their culture and a strong desire to assimilate," Doug says. His parents were interned, as were Dave's. Both believe that traumatic experience helps explain an outmarriage rate of over 70 percent among Japanese-American women, and it disturbs them.

"If a Japanese-American man wants to preserve his culture, his choices are becoming increasingly limited," observes Dave, who has two uncles who are bachelors. "As an Asian-American, I can't complain," he says, because he thinks all races should be free to date whomever they want. "But as a man, I get very upset. It wouldn't be as bad if white women were dating Asian men, but they aren't." Of the four - all good-looking, funny, articulate - only Doug has ever dated a white woman, which shocked me, even though I know the statistics.

"So it's pretty upsetting," Dave continues. "It's a sexual thing, it's very primal - it's like your turf is being invaded, and it makes you angry."

The others laugh at his bluntness, but they mostly agree. "It wouldn't bother me as much if Asian women were also dating black men or Latino men," Bryan says. "But it's white guys. I've heard Asian women say they only date white guys. And it's because we live in a white culture. They do it for status. It's self-contempt."

Bryan's friends agree that the preference for white men among large numbers of Asian women reflects a self-loathing born of racism. Their consensus is a little too glib - it reminded me of gripe sessions with my girlfriends, in which we trash wayward boyfriends and other feckless men for "being threatened by strong women," "not being ready for a real relationship" and other mantras of self-protection, to mute the pain of personal rejection. But I felt for these guys nonetheless.

Ana Reyes and I are sitting over soft drinks at the Blue Danube, that Caucasian island on Chinese Clement Street, trying to analyze her preference for white men over Asians. At times, she's almost as pained by it as Doug Nishida and his friends. "I'd like to at least have a balance, date some Asians, date some whites," she says. "I mean, how thoughtless can I be, just seeing whites? I know it has a lot to do with socialization - the images of masculinity in our culture are definitely not Asian."

But, reluctantly, she blames some of it on Asian men. There's the sexism problem, but most important, for Ana, is what she calls Asian "conformity." Most Asians, she believes, are striving "for a mainstream life. They're heading towards yuppiedom. They're materialistic." Just then a horn starts blaring outside the cafe. A cherry-red Mazda RX7, just off the lot, has a short-circuit and the fade-coiffed Chinese-American youth at the wheel seems embarrassed but a tiny bit proud at the attention his new car is getting. We have to laugh. "See what I mean?" she jokes.

Yet the stereotyping Ana and I indulged in can feed on itself. It also gives white men more credit than they deserve: There are plenty of white guys driving around pricey phallic objects, but nobody ever thinks it's particularly white of them. "People tend to compare all Asian men to the top one percent of white men - the most elite, the most sophisticated, the most liberal, the most educated," observes Sonoma State's Larry Shinagawa. "They aren't less sexist or whatever because they're white, but because they've had more social opportunities than Asian men, and they're not limited by stereotypes."

Shinagawa and colleague Gin Yong Pang, a doctoral candidate in Ethnic Studies at UC-Berkeley, have coined their own term, "hiergamy," to explain intermarriage patterns, including the tendency of Asian-American women to marry white men. Hiergamy, says Shinagawa, holds that in marriage, people "try to maximize their status opportunities, and their sense of wholeness, in the context of a society that's stratified by race, class and gender."

That's a mouthful, but it works like this: Given a choice between Asian men - who have some economic clout but less social status - and educated white men - who have economic clout and social status, as well as the more liberal attitudes social acceptance can bring - many Asian women would choose the latter. The concept also explains why many white men marry Asian women, Shinagawa says: "They are bright, educated and articulate women, but in the racial fantasies of white men they have always been portrayed as submissive, domestic and sexy - qualities they think white women have abandoned for feminism." White men, in other words, are trading a little public status for some private happiness, a reasonable compromise under hiergamy.


2. modelminority.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=336:asiaphiles-frequently-asked-questions-&catid=37:dating&Itemid=56

Quote:Asiaphiles: Frequently Asked Questions

From an AsianAvenue Member Site


What is Asiaphilia?

Asiaphilia is the objectification and exotification of Asian culture, including Asian women and Asian men. Often this is done without the perpetrator being conscious of it. On the contrary, he may think that his "preference" for Asian women is a form of flattery and tribute to the Asian culture. But what he has done is created an "other." This "other" is something that he can admire from a distance, that he does not have to engage in full. Essentially he is taking a culture and stripping it of its inherent worth, creating a perception of that culture that serves only him, and is beneficial to only him. He takes what is trendy or convenient and leaves the rest as carnage. This is a false and damaging appreciation of another culture. Most Asiaphiles will defend themselves on that assertion by saying that they have developed interpersonal relatinships with the Asian women they are with, making that women more than a "perception," into a "reality." While this is not a complete fallacy, these relationships more often than not are built on foundations of fetishization. It is very evident from the statement of alleged Asiaphiles on AsianAvenue that they approach women based strictly on a racialized perceptions. Clear examples of this come from members like Asian_Lover who say that "Asian girls are more educated and always dress nice," or Ilikecuteasians who asserts that Asain women have that "cute little Asian accent, and that `exotic` factor." These stereotypes are hamful to our community because it paints us as objects first and humans second, not to mention that these perceptions are complete fabrications of white male fantasy.

Where does Asiaphilia come from?

Contrary to popular belief, Asiaphilia, known in academic circles as "Orientalism," is not simply about innocent preference, like a man preferring blondes to redheads. Asiaphilia is insidiously rooted in colonialism and white supremacy. White men are distinctly responsible for colonialism and white supremacy. This separates white male Asiaphilia from that of all other non-Asians who "prefer" Asians as mates. When white men manifest their desire for Asian women or culture, they are revisiting hundreds of years of oppressive behavior. This prolonged position of dominance in society has created a mentality of entitlement for white men. White men feel that they are not only entitled to the percieved loots of Asian culture, but they feel they are entitled to pick and choose from that culture, as if they were shopping for heritage. The exotification of Asia comes from Western dominance and white supremacy. Thus when white men engage in Asiaphilia, the ramifications and power dynamics are completely different (though no less harmful) than if a black man or white women engages in it. The images of the docile, exotic, mysterious, dangerous, yet strangely alluring Asia is a white male concoction. This image was created to subordinate Asia and create a separatist mentaility to Asian people. Asia was the exotic "other." This mentality justified imperialism and most other injustices against the East at the hands of the West. It is ironic that white men think in order to break that separatist mentality they should engage in the very stereotypes that created the "otherness."


That anti-Hindu indologist - discussed somewhere on IF - who badmouthed Hindus on some indology list and then sought to exhonerate himself from possible charges of racism by playing the "my girl is Chinese card, so how can I be racist" - note the condescending "girl" drop, BTW - he is a textbook case of an Asiaphile. I.e. a racist by definition (which was merely underscored by his attack on India's native heathens by the way). As all at ModelMinority would instantly recognise. Hindu vocalists should have called him on his blatant racism.

Lots of Asiaphiles/orientalists - which includes indologists - tend to hate Asian men, particularly the heathen kind, including when the Asianphile then marries Asian women (including the allegedly-heathen kind) and/or adopt Asian kids, and even when they settle in the Asian country whose religion/culture they badmouth/dabble in. ALL are textbook cases of racism. See also Dhu's earlier link to Lee Sam-Dol's article at transracialabductees.org on the subject of Asiaphiles' hobby of acquiring Asian women and kids and Asian cultural treasures.
Comments in purple again.


Quote:U.S. Military Prostitution in Asia

By Katharine H.S. Moon

Excerpted from Sex Among Allies: Military Prostitution in U.S./Korea Relations

Columbia University Press, 1997

The U.S.-Korean history of military prostitution shares many of the characteristics and tensions present in other sites of overseas U.S. bases, especially in Asia. The economic dependence of local camptown residents on the presence of U.S. troops is not unique to South Korea. For example, Takazato Suzuyo, a political activist on Okinawa, reported that Okinawa, which served as a R&R area to U.S. troops in Vietnam, lived off U.S. dollars:

Quote:In its heyday, there were more than 1,200 "approved" bars, night clubs, and restaurants on Okinawa, and soldiers spent money freely. B-52 bombers were taking off from Kadena [US Air Force] base almost every day to bomb North Vietnam, while returning soldiers from Vietnam, with their chest pockets filled with dollar bills, sometimes spent all their money in one night.

In Olongapo and Angeles in the Philippines, where the U.S. Subic Naval Base and Clark Air Force Base were respectively located (until the withdrawal of U.S. forces in 1992), "[t]here was virtually no industry except the 'entertainment' business, with approximately 55,000 registered and unregistered prostitutes and a total of registered 2,182 R&R establishments. By 1985 the U.S. military had become the second largest employer in the Philippines, hiring over 40,000 Filipinos. . . . The sum of their salaries amounted to almost $83 million a year."

Ideologies around race and nationality have also contributed to the social inequalities and conflicts, especially affecting prostitutes, in the U.S. camptown communities in Asia. Enloe writes that "[c]lass and race distinctions inform all social relations between the U.S. military and the host community." The racism demonstrated by American soldiers toward Asians in Vietnam and Korea are well-documented. Lloyd Lewis notes that "soldiers in all branches of the armed services [in Vietnam] recount receiving the same indoctrination" that the "enemy is Oriental and inferior." The racist terms for Vietnamese -- "gook, slant, slope, dink . . . or a half a dozen local variations" -- had all been employed previously by Americans [toward Japanese in World War II and Koreans and Chinese in the Korean War] to designate yellow-skinned peoples." Max Hastings has noted in his history of the Korean War that the"Eighth Army was forced to issue a forceful order" in the summer of 1951 that soldiers cease "to take a perverse delight in frightening civilians" and attempting to "drive the Koreans off roads and into ditches." The order concluded with"We are not in this country as conquerors. We are here as friends." Hastings also includes a comment by a Marine, Selwyn Handler: "Koreans were just a bunch of gooks. Who cared about the feelings of people like that? We were very smug Americans at that time." Bruce Cumings recounts the racism among Americans, soldiers and diplomats alike, in the late 1960s:"Their racism led them to ask me, because I was living with Koreans and they rarely ventured out to 'the economy,' things like whether it was true that the Korean national dish, kimch'i, was fermented in urine."

Racist stereotypes of Asians within the American society have mixed with sexist stereotypes of Asian women to foster American participation in camptown prostitution in Asia. The main military newspaper, Stars and Stripes, encouraged soldiers to explore Korea's "nighttime action," especially the kisaeng party, the "ultimate experience":

Quote:Picture having three or four of the loveliest creatures God ever created hovering around you, singing, dancing, feeding you, washing what they feed you down with rice wine or beer, all saying at once, "You are the greatest." This is the Orient you heard about and came to find.

A U.S. Army chaplain I interviewed in April 1991 noted the following:

Quote:What the soldiers have read and heard before ever arriving in a foreign country influence prostitution a lot. For example, stories about Korean or Thai women being beautiful, subservient--they're tall tales, glamorized. . . . U.S. men would fall in lust with Korean women. They were property, things, slaves. . . . Racism, sexism -- it's all there. The men don't see the women as human beings--they're disgusting, things to be thrown away. . . . They speak of the women in the diminutive.

[color="#800080"](See, even a US Army chaplain had to admit what the christian tour of duty in Asia does.

But why does CNN's selected tourist to India leave such things out, all in order to propagate their one-sided - and quite untenable - case for "all Indians are rapists and racist rapists too boot"? The media eagerly provides the unfortunate experiences of x many tourists in India, misusing these narratives as sobstories of persecution instead, and they combine their news reports/opinion pieces with the suddenly-popular interest in rape cases in India - though no one seemed to have really cared about the many victims before - all in order to use these to stab Hindu society with as the culprit: "Hindus are rapists, because Hindus are the majority in India, and Hindu men/society is therefore patriarchal". Minus the fact that it's really christoislamics and de-heathenised seculars that are the perpetrators, while Hindu and other Dharmic men of the country are the ones that continue to try to protect the womenfolk.

Such disingenuity in local and western media and commentators emerging from the woodwork to deliver their condemnation is deliberate, of course, and proves it all to be no more than orchestrated psy-ops. It is absurd how many Indian-origin anti-Hindu wom/men want appear from absolutely nowhere to chime in about the topic everywhere and are busy pointedly blaming Hindu religion about this - which shows they have an agenda and don't really care about the victims, just like they never cared about them before - when the same people were nowhere to be seen in all the many cases of islamic gangrape of Hindu Harijan women. Those were not committed by secular Indians bearing Hindu names, but faithful, clearly identifiable jihadis doing what islamics have always done: rape infidel women. And of course none of the Hindu-baiting critics will *ever* mention the systematic rape of Hindu Vanavasi women in the northeast by christian terrorist outfits like the NLFT. The silence of the Hindu-baiters shows that they are christian.

The real case of largescale sexual exploitation and rape of women - and which is entirely racist and christian in foundation - goes on in the instances exported by the christowest into Asian and African and other "3rd world" nations. And this is never covered in depth and over a prolonged period and in the international arena. At best it may get a once-off local coverage somewhere. And no one ever blames christianism of course. Yet the line from christianism to exploitation of "Hamitic" women is as clear and straight as the line connecting islamic jihad=islam and its equally-systematic rape and kidnap of kafiri women. But the monotheisms don't want all that in the news, let alone for the data to be analysed correctly with the blame apportioned to where it deserves to be.)[/color]

[color="#0000FF"]On Okinawa, U.S. servicemen from the Kadena Air Base "can be seen in town (Naha) wearing offensive T-shirts" depicting "a woman with the letters LBSM," which means "little brown sex machine." The "brown" refers to the Filipino and Thai women who constitute the majority of military prostitutes on Okinawa. Aida Santos reveals that Olongapo sells a variation on the theme--a popular T-shirt"bearing the message 'Little Brown Fucking Machines Powered with Rice.'" She emphasizes that in the Philippines, "[r]acism and sexism are now seen as a fulcrum in the issue of national sovereignty."[/color]

[color="#800080"](The last line: Philippines as a christian nation low-down in the christian hierarchy was specifically groomed for this. Like it or not, to christianism, that's what Hamitic christians are for. It is christianism that has reduced them to people who can't even say no to the aggressor, and every demur and objection from them is weak, half-hearted and becomes merely an excuse for the aggressor to continue terrorising them. Poor Filipinos, they should dump christianism. But they're stuck on the drug. Being heathen won't stop the aggressos - who'll be all the more criminal - but your No at least will be absolute, and a heathen govt won't be betraying its own population to side with alien christoterrorists just because they are higher up in the christion hierarchy.)[/color]

The presence of U.S. military servicemen in Asia generates significant social transformations that affect both the host Asian society and the American society across the Pacific. Thanh-dam Truong has asserted that the U.S. military's use of Thailand as the major R&R base for U.S. soldiers fighting in Vietnam has spawned the now booming sex tourism industry all across the country, winning Thailand the ignoble title, "Asia's brothel." Filipinos have charged that U.S. servicemen have brought AIDS and HIV into their country. Prostitutes in Olongapo, along with the umbrella feminist organization, GABRIELA, and health organizations, pushed the Philippine government to"obtain a guarantee that all U.S. service personnel coming into the Philippines be tested for HIV." In 1988, the Philippines Immigration Commissioner required all U.S. servicemen entering the Philippines to present certificates verifying that they are AIDS-free.

[color="#0000FF"]In addition, sexual relations between American men and Asian prostitutes have created a living legacy of mixed-raced children who are rejected by both their mother's and father's societies. Maria Socorro "Cookie" Diokno, an active leader in the Philippines' anti-base movement, has referred to the children born of American servicemen and Asian women as "Amerasian 'souvenir' bab[ies]." ABC's Prime Time (May 13, 1993) depicted Amerasian children in the Philippines who had been abandoned by their soldier-fathers and were living with their impoverished mothers, scavenging for food among heaps of rubble and waste. Enloe reports that "[o]f the approximately 30,000 children born each year of Filipino mothers and American fathers, some 10,000 [were] thought to become street children, many of them working as prostitutes servicing American pedophiles." Enloe adds that a Filipino "insider" has noted that many others have been sold, with "Caucasian-looking children . . . allegedly sold for $50-200 (around P1,000-4,000), whereas the Negro-fathered ones fetch only $25-30 (around P500-600)."[/color] Johnston's Mom in Songt'an, Korea, also tried to give up her sons to adoption, after earlier having given up a daughter. But in the end, she could not bear to do it and went back to prostitution in order to keep her boys. In the film, Camp Arirang, one barwoman in Songt'an laments the need to give up her half African-American son one day; black Amerasian children are most shunned in Korean society, so most mothers try to send them to the United States for a chance at education and a future. She has already torn up all photographs of herself with her son because she knows she must let him go. In a voice cracking with emotion, she calmly says, "All I want him to know is that he was born in Korea, that his mother is Korean, and that she is dead. It will be easier for him that way."

[color="#800080"](And that's another thing no one discusses: how christianism spreads its christian hobby of paedophilia all over Asia/Africa. Yet its truly epidemic. So christian is extra silent.

What makes the blue bit 'interesting' for another reason is the AmeriKKKan/general western sudden hobby of "adopting" [abducting] Asian/African/"ethnic" kids - even those stolen by christian orphanages from heathen parents and put into christian "orphanages" for the christowest to adopt. Yet the AmeriKKKans never seem to want to adopt the kids they had sired and then dumped and left behind to rot in Asian countries. <- Which is another way to tell that western adoptions of 'coloured' babies is no more than a passing fad for them. They don't really care. They never did. But if called on it, their retort is to play the Great Benevolent Intervention: "You people are so poor you can't even look after your own kids, you should be grateful we step in to 'save' them in our magnanimity/charity. Our adopt-a-3rd-world-baby fad is NOT racist because, look, we're adopting 'coloured' babies! Which proves we've overcome our past racism." <=circular reasoning> It's actually the old racism that's continuing, but morphed into its latest form.)[/color]

[color="#0000FF"]The withdrawal of U.S. naval bases from the Philippines in 1992 also left behind a legacy of approximately 50,000 Amerasian children in the Philippines, with an estimated 10,000 of them living in Olongapo, which had housed the U.S. Subic Naval Base.[/color] The law firm of Cotchett, Illston, and Pitre of Burlingame, California, filed a class action suit against the U.S. government on behalf of Amerasian children left behind in the Philippines in March 1993. The plaintiffs would"ask the federal court to order the Navy to provide funds for the education and medical care of these children until they reach 18 years of age." The prostitute-mothers of these children and several leading Philippine civic organizations, such as GABRIELA, as well as the Council of Churches, mobilized such legal action.

Asian societies have borne the burden of the painful repercussions of militarized prostitution, but the American society has not gone untouched. Many of the prostitutes who end up divorced from their GI husbands (an estimated 80% of Korean-GI marriages end up in divorce) go back into prostitution around military camp areas in the United States. In the film The Women Outside, officials from the Mayor's Office of Midtown Enforcement in Manhattan state that some U.S. servicemen have been paid by flesh traffickers to marry women in Korea and bring them to the United States for work in massage parlors and brothels.
Cross-posting from the UPA's christianisation of India thread.


[color="#FF0000"]Tantriks thrive in Mumbai despite anti-superstition law[/color]

After reading the first line at the link (didn't read the rest, don't need to): Curious, how "quack" and "tantrik" are hereby becoming permanently associated in christolaws/media. Of course the christomedia will no doubt present pictures of quacks whenever speaking of the matter (but that's not whom they're after, and anyone with an iota of sense would know that).

I had earlier this month or so read news that the stOOpid-times-infinity BJP declared that "black magic should indeed be prohibited" ('but not other kinds', by implication or perhaps even vocalisation/explication on their part), but the silly nationalists don't seem to recognise that in christianism's view, all Tantra/all Hindoo heathenism IS black magic. (BJP missed the logical conclusion in that. How they managed to miss it, I don't know, when it was in print in the 4th century CE and onwards already.)

The BJP further missed that: Vedam is Tantra. And even if no one said it, what christianism sees is still this: Vedabrahmanas recite "incantations". They make ritual hand gestures when reciting. And every other kind of Hindu at least draws kollams/yantras and recites incantations over them (and does ritual hand gestures with this too). From the christian POV it is Magic. And all Magic is the devil. And ... the rest doesn't even need to be spelled out.

It is a Bad Idea to lawfully "ban" ANY "magic" during the christianisation process. (And it is an utterly terrible move to allow association of the Hindu religious term "Tantra" with the word magic and "Tantriks" with "magicians". Many a Veda brahmaNa is a Tantri.)

Note: Heathen Romans never had a problem banning "black magic" (stregaria, I think it was called) before christianism, because they knew they were banning only harmful social practices, not their heathen religious i.e. sacred practices.

But christianism always uses this as a foot in the door/an opportunity to get ignorants' easy acquiescence for banning a whole lot more.

Remember to compare with the ANTI-"PAGAN" LAWS OF SUCCESSIVE EMPERORS OF ROME. But this is how it begins, right?


Quote:It should be borne in mind that these laws were enacted at a time when Rome's Christian population was still, according to the most favourable calculation, no more than 5%.

A number of laws follow in favor of the Pagans, and while prohibiting "private divination and soothsaying," and "Malevolent Magic Prohibited, but Beneficial Magic Encouraged"; also exempting Pagan Flamens, priests and magistrates from sundry restrictions and disabilities.

Note above how in Rome only "Malevolent Magic" was prohibited. At first.

And then (the Romans didn't see it coming, because they didn't read the history books that the BJP could have):

Quote:"Edict to the People of the Provinces Concerning the Error of Polytheism." (Ib. [Eusebius, Vita Constantine, N&PNF. Bk. II] chs. xlviii-xlix.)

And then:

Quote:Laws of Constantius [II] and Constans

"Sacrifice Prohibited.": "Let superstition cease and the folly of sacrifices be abolished. Whoever has dared in the face of the law of the divine prince, our father [Constantine] ... to make sacrifices, shall have appropriate penalty, and immediate sentence dealt to him." (Cod. Theod. xvi, 10, 2; 341.) "All Temples Closed and Sacrifices Forbidden." "but if any one commit any offense of this sort, let him fall by the avenging sword," and his property forfeited; judges neglecting to "mete out penalties for these offenses, they shall be similarly punished." (Cod. Theod. xvi, 10, 4; 846.)

"Sacrificing and Idolatry Punishable by Death." "We order that all found guilty of attending sacrifices or of worshipping idols shall suffer capital punishment." (Id. xvi, 10, 6; 356.)

Laws of Gratian and Theodosius

(Quoted from Forgery in Christianity, by Joseph Wheless. Crimes of Christianity, by G W Foote and J M Wheeler.)

Rest at link.

"Oh", says Le Fou, "we're only at Constantine/Prince Raoul's stage."

Und morgen ist alles besser, nichtwahr?

But "tomorrow" comes Constantius II and Constans II. And then (no Julian for Hindus, obviously, need to be a deserving heathen population for that), well then we have Jovian, etc. (Sorry, my imperial christian chronology is non-existent after Julian, except I vaguely recollect that Jovian got the empire on FCJ's death.)

Anyway, the self-declared great "defender" (traitor) and intellectual "warrior" (midget) NS Rajarant will no doubt be thrilled at the side effect that the current laws and events are going to have in getting the Vedam banned. It's what he always wanted for Hindus. It's also what his buddy-his-pal Clooney (and the whole Vatican) wanted for Hindus.

And repeating the actual headline:


[color="#FF0000"]Tantriks thrive in Mumbai despite anti-superstition law[/color]
Returning to this bit from from the previous post:


Tantriks thrive in Mumbai despite anti-superstition law[/color]

After reading the first line at the link (didn't read the rest, don't need to): Curious, how "quack" and "tantrik" are hereby becoming permanently associated in christolaws/media. Of course the christomedia will no doubt present pictures of quacks whenever speaking of the matter (but that's not whom they're after, and anyone with an iota of sense would know that).

I had earlier this month or so read news that the stOOpid-times-infinity [color="#0000FF"]BJP declared that "black magic should indeed be prohibited" ('but not other kinds', by implication or perhaps even vocalisation/explication on their part), [color="#0000FF"]but the silly nationalists don't seem to recognise that in christianism's view, all Tantra/all Hindoo heathenism IS black magic.[/color] (BJP missed the logical conclusion in that. How they managed to miss it, I don't know, when it was in print in the 4th century CE and onwards already.)[/color]

When looking up something else, found the following among others. It explains - in words I could not find - the exact reasons for why the above is truly scary in very real, practical terms. And why - as christianism deliberately intends - Hindus will misinterpret what these laws mean, whereas christianism intends something else and something very sinister by them altogether. It was so imperative for those claiming to bat for the Hindu side - BJP, nationalists, vocalists - to know what "superstition" means in christian parlance vs how christianism means heathens to misinterpret this, especially before "nationalist" politicians blindly chimed in with anti-superstition laws. People walked right into that one. And wow, will they make everyone else sorry in time.


(Don't know the site, not endorsing it therefore. Just linking to it for the following stuff)

Quote:[color="#0000FF"]The Latin word superstitio, from which the common word superstition derives, actually had different meanings across centuries and has been used to define (also) Christianity and later Paganism. But what we are here to underline is that the possibility of misunderstanding has been used to deceive the Pagan under the juridical aspect in late antiquity; from what you can read below, even modern Pagans have a lesson to learn from that about how much important is to understand the meaning that a word has according to the person we are talking to.[/color]

The first meaning, in order of time, of the word superstitio is "divinatory practice": with this meaning we can find the word used in Plautus, Ennius and later Pliny. From the 1st century b.c.e. there is another meaning, a very important one for this piece of writing, that is "practice outside official religion": that meant not only a religious practice that didn't belong to official religion because of its different origin (a private practice of a particular family, or one coming from abroad), but also an excessive and unreasonable religious belief, or a practice implying an excessive and unreasonable fear of the gods. This is why Livy uses this word to define the Bacchanalia forbidden by the Senate and Pliny defines Christianity through it; Varro, Cicero, Seneca and Servius used it to call Roman practices outside official religion.

The word enters the juridical language with this meaning. When a word enters the legal language and is used to write laws, it becomes a technical term to define what is legal and what it's not; while a word used in a philosophical or literary context can be explained by the writer or by the context itself, a word used in writing a law should be clear and with one meaning only. We'll see that this wasn't true for late antiquity laws.

At first, we find the word superstitio in laws against those who lead weak-minded people to excessively fear the deity (a law by Marcus Aurelius) or who practice a religion that terrifies people. This excessive fear is what is called superstitio. So now it's clear why some authors call Christianity a superstitio.

Christian polemicists and apologists of the first centuries found themselves labeled as superstitiosi and so assimilated the meaning of superstitio as "unreasonable belief" and started to apply it on Pagans. In their writings, superstitio becomes a synonym of Paganism. Lactantius writes that religio veri dei cultus est, superstitio falsi, religion is the worship of the true god, superstition of a false one (Divinae institutions, 4.28.11). The same idea can be found in Tertullian, writing of gentilicia or romana superstitio, gentiles' or Roman superstition, and in Orosius.

During the 4th century, when Christianity took more and more importance until it became the state religion, both the meanings of superstitio coexisted: according to Pagans, it meant all excessive religious practices, while according to Christians it meant the whole paganism. In a law dated 319, the word superstitio still means divination.

[color="#0000FF"]This ambiguity at the end turned against pagans since it has been used against them. This didn't happen only under the legal aspect:[/color] even the panegyrist writing the praise of Constantine who defeated Maxentius (in the famous battle at Ponte Milvio, when the vision of the cross should have occurred, from what Eusebius wrote) uses ambiguity not to displease anyone, saying that Constantine won thanks to divina praecepta, divine teachings, and Maxentius lose because of its superstitiosa maleficia. A Pagan reader could then understand that Maxentius had lost because he had practiced superstitious or illegal magic, trusting on it for victory, while a Christian reader could understand that Maxentius had lost because he was a Pagan and so god had helped the emperor instead. Constantine could act against Pagans only in the Eastern part of the Empire, but not in the Western one, where Pagans were much more and more powerful. In an inscription from Hispellum, Umbria, Constantine forbids the temple to be used in a superstitious way: once again, a Pagan could understand that only unreasonable practices were forbidden, a Christian that all the Pagan rites were. Maybe this is the reason why Eusebius affirms that Constantine forbade sacrifices and temple worship, while we there is no law about that yet.

[color="#800080"](^ Important example to study the christian meaning. It's a code christians understand.)[/color]

[color="blue"]Obviously, an ambiguity in a legal text is far more dangerous than an ambiguity in a literary text as the praise to Constantine was, because it can be used for advantage of one party. Constans, who was a Christian, used the misunderstanding of the word in the famous law issued in 341: cesset superstitio, sacrificiorum aboleatur insania, superstition shall cease; the madness of sacrifices shall be abolished. Today it seems clear to us that the law was going to abolish sacrifices, but when it was issued, the law could be applied in two different ways: a Pagan administrator would have prevented people from doing too many, useless, sacrifices for superstitious (in modern sense of the word) reasons, a Christian one would have abolished pagan sacrifices at all. In this way, Constans could satisfy the Christian will to abolish Paganism without provoking a strong Pagan reaction he couldn't have been able to face yet, because Pagans understood the law differently from Christians even approving it because it recalled preceding laws against superstitious (unreasonable, outside the official religion, strange and made with boast) practices. In facts, regular sacrifices took place in Rome even before this law; there's another Constans law against the superstitiones, directed to Catullinus, prefect of Rome, who was pagan, and this law too could be interpreted in two manners.

After Constantius enforced his rule by defeating Magnentius, he didn't need to keep good relationship with Pagans anymore: the laws issued from 356 to 360 forbade image worship, closed temples and forbade divination. None of this law uses the word superstitio.

The word appears back again in 5th century laws, but this time it's clearly defined as sacrifice and worship of temples: Christianity has already taken over the empire and affirmed the equivalence between superstitio and everything different from Christianity. From the 5th century, the word is used also to define Judaism and heresies.[/color]

Next to the Codex Theodosianus, the Italian(?) lady who authored the above also mentions as references:

Quote:Michele R. Salzman, Superstitio in the Codex Theodosianus and the persecution of pagans, in

"Vigiliae christianae", 41(1987)

L. F. Jannsen, 'Superstitio' and the persecution of christians, in "Vigiliae christianae", 33


But this is why English is so dangerous to Hindus: English - when it comes to matters pertaining to ideology and religion - is a *loaded* language. People don't really know the real (i.e. christian) meaning of seemingly-general/"secular"-sounding words. But christianism will get you to acquiesce to the secular meaning that crucial words have at their superficial level and will thereafter nail you with the true, christian meaning.

By letting the anti-superstition law pass, Hindus essentially did the equivalent of a victim signing their name to a paper they didn't understand. And hereafter, the "Anything you say can and *will* be used against you" rule applies. It is with such thoughtless actions as these - which recur regularly in India today - that Hindus have narrowed down their future and thus got themselves cornered.

Oh, and the following alludes to another tactic of christianism well-recognised for what it is by other heathens (but not by all Hindus):



While in other cities pagan festivals had already been deleted and some temples destroyed, in Rome still during the 5th century c.e., the festival of Lupercalia was still celebrated, even though its religious meaning wasn't known anymore: the survival of the festival still one century later than the Theodosian edict which made Christianity become the state religion, is witnessed by Gelasius and his letters against the Lupercalia. In facts, in January 495 c.e., Gelasius forbade Christians to take part to the festival that was near to begin because in that festival demons were worshipped.

This is the period in which pagan gods are identified with demons, due to Augustin and Gelasius himself, who followed Augustin's track: in facts, most of early Christian writers used to identify the worship of the Pagan gods with the worship of statues or of men who had lived many centuries before and had been deificated because of superstition. In his letters and masses, Gelasius underlines a lot the bound between the festival of Lupercalia and feminine fertility, but the celebration of the festival during the month of February, the blood on the boys' foreheads, the laugh make us think more to a purification festival, maybe intended as a purification from every obstacle to fertility. Under the emperor August, the festival had been reinstituted, and only then the features related to feminine fertility had been emphasized; moreover, the festival became one of the many festival underlining the emperor's sovereignty. So it became part of the state religion: in this case when we say 'state religion' we don't mean the only religion in the state, but a series of practices that the citizens were expected to follow to enforce their belonging to the state. For sure, this affected both the survival of the festival and the hate Gelasius showed against it.

So Gelasius was really bothered about the Lupercalia, because they were a very ancient and long -lived festival, related both to the feminine fertility (that means sex, too) and to the awareness of being Roman citizens. Of course Gelasius rationalized, saying that the festival was a non-sense, because if its aim had been to promote fertility, then there would have been no fertility in Africa or Gaul where people didn't celebrate it. Rationalization is a common instrument in the hands of those who wrote against pagans until Middle Ages and this is true also for what concerns witchcraft: in facts, opposite to what is commonly believed, during the Dark Ages the church didn't accept the idea of a witch as a woman with magic powers used to harm people, because according to Christian theology, only god can have or give those powers, which can't be gained even through a pact with the devil. So the church put itself in a rational position towards pagan cults, which were charged of being just superstition.

(Note: the bit on witchcraft is not true. Joseph McCabe demonstrates from his survey of medieval church records concerning the inquisition and torture of witches over several centuries, that the church - or at the very least the lower rung/implementing side of the church - most definitely believed that the so-called "witches" were in league with devils/demons/non-existent christian spooks and had gained "demonic" powers as a result. It is the defunct christianheritage site that showed that the practical "achievement" of the church's genocide of about 9 million women + men - a great many of whom professed to be christian until the end - was to wipe out all those women and their families who knew how to prevent or terminate pregnancies. I.e. that the church wanted knowledge of contraception exterminated in order to explode the numbers of christians by force. <- A policy which came in handy to christianism when it was time for the church to take over the "new world" etc and populate it with christianism by genociding the natives. I.o.w. the church was building a christian army of conquest and settler populations.)

This way of thinking remained until these days in the minds of many who dealt with paganism. The main difficulty lies in look at paganism as a religion, but with a completely different meaning of 'religion'. It's true also that, as the pagan state religion spread, as we said before, the personal attention in religious practices began to diminish and this made way for a superstitious behavior. From a Pagan point of view, the statalization of Roman religion can be considered some kind of decadence, because the religio, that is the attention needed during religious practices that allows us to feel the gods around us, was no more needed in celebration. All it was needed was a formal adhesion, to prove the good will of citizens to be good citizens.

Note that christianism only tries to pseudo-rationalise heathenism. Christianism will not rationalise itself, especially since christianism can't stand up to scrutiny. Its jesus is not even a deified historical character, but a deified fiction, which - reducing it further to its bare essentials - remains a mere and pure fiction and nothing more.

But repeating the first highlighted statement to re-emphasise this next statement:

Quote:This is the period (Pope Gelasius' et al's time when Lupercalia got banned) in which pagan gods are identified with demons, due to Augustin and Gelasius himself, who followed Augustin's track: in facts, most of early Christian writers used to identify the worship of the Pagan gods with the worship of statues or of men who had lived many centuries before and had been deificated because of superstition.
That is to say, Christianism's initial tack was to impute that the Hellenes had committed apotheosis to "generate" their Gods by deifying men. And from there derived the christian statement that Hellenes did not have actual Gods* (which still fits the christian allegation of "false Gods" that was used against heathens, but the "false Gods" incrimination got changed to mean demonic - i.e. finding a place in *christian* cosmology - and/or else not real or historical in any sense).

* This is a form of that "rationalisation" mentioned above which the church used to demote Hellenismos. It is still a christian tactic in great use - seen in how christianism alleges that all Daoist Gods were apotheosised heroes, by twisting Daoist literature about historical Chinese heroes into becoming a universal statement on all of Daoism: that all Daoism's Gods are allegedly no more than deified heroes. Of course the Daoists don't stand for the christian rewriting of their Gods/religion/cosmology/history in this manner, and have always taken pains to distinguish between their human heroes and the "avataras" of their Gods/Gods.

[It's true the Romans had deified emperors - but this was a Roman state policy at one point in time, and the laity did know to distinguish between their ancestral Gods and their suddenly deified emperors. However, the christian imputation was that *all* GrecoRoman Gods were merely deified by the GrecoRomans. But Herakles etc was not "deified". Herakles was always the son of Zeus, even when reading the traditional narratives concerning him as "myth". He was not a person of whom people *later* decided that he'd be Zeus' son and that he therefore must have ended up in Olympus upon his death. Instead, the very narratives that originally spoke of him already contained all these features about him. As a consequence, the Hellenes worshipping him as both earthly divine-origin hero and as the divine God residing in Olympus thereafter is correct. And where the Hellenes meant for their Herakles to be historical, they don't mean that only one part of his life-story was historical and the other mythological: both his earthly life and his taking his place in Olympus are both to be considered equally historical or else equally mythical. He was always *meant* to join the Olympic Gods, if he was the one meant to vanquish the Titans by standing alongside the known Olympians. Which he did, of course.]
Post 1/2

About the urinating/defecating in public topic again.

[color="#0000FF"]The second post is the important one. But the following (especially the attitudes) are relevant to the post to follow.[/color]

1. rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2014/05/unicefs-slumdog-campaign.html

Quote:Friday, May 02, 2014

UNICEF's Slumdog Campaign

With the seeming objective to improve sanitation in India, UNICEF has come out with this disgraceful Slumdog style campaign.

Making of Poo to the Loo song. Brilliant smorgasbord of toilet noises decided on by UNICEF representatives and the avant garde musicians enlisted for the project:


The music video:




The team of orifices involved:

Maria Fernandez, Communication Specialist, UNICEF India

Shri, Music Composer

Chester Misquitta, Sound Engineer

KC Loy, Singer

Sofia Ashraf, Singer

Nilima Eriyat, Producer, Studio Eeksaurus

Nitu Chaudhry, Singer

Pradip Kashikar, Singer

Suresh Eriyat, Director

Shikha Sud, Creative Director

Sonia Bhatnagar, Executive Creative Director

Posted by non-carborundum at 5/02/2014 10:46:00 AM

2. rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2014/05/in-case-you-feel-like-pissing-in-public.html

Quote:Tuesday, May 13, 2014

in case you feel like pissing in public...


Haven't watched the video, but going by the comments to follow, it seems some disturbed holier-than-thou entity is going around harrassing Indians who are relieving themselves in public by spraying water on them or something:

Quote:4 comments:

non-carborundum said...

I hope you don't endorse this Rajeev. I know there's a thing or two to be said about holding it in for a while, but where will most of these people go in the middle of the day? Where are the public toilets? Most of these seem to be people from the lower middle class.

If this hipster continues his Batman syndrome then he is going to get stabbed by some joker, and rightly so.

5/14/2014 12:24 AM

VidrohiArya said...

Agree with non-carborundum... this is highly insulting to poor people..and is a cover up for inefficiency of govt... i hope this guy does get stabbed...

5/14/2014 4:06 AM

Brownian Motion said...

I am absolutely speechless with anger. If it's official, it's a complete abuse of power. Whoever it is needs to be brought to heel.

There's absolutely no place to pee in Mumbai. The few Sulabh sauchalayas stink in my experience. One of the few places to pee is at the malls of which there simply aren't enough. Stores and restaurants almost never have clean public restrooms and they only allow their customers to use the facilities anyway. What's a man (or a poor woman) to do? There's only so much planning ahead you can do. To douse public pissers with water is absolutely criminal. The only path to take is to make clean public restrooms available everywhere and then educate the public to change their habits and use them. And after that abusers can be arrested etc. not doused with water.

5/14/2014 1:37 PM

nizhal yoddha said...

this is one of my pet peeves: peeing in public, and worse, defecating in public. yes, it is a failure of the government to provide facilities, but do we have no shame as individuals? at the very least couldn't we go behind a bush or something.

while the firehosing technique is cruel and inappropriate, it is time we became less blase about public excretion. just as we should about public noise we create, talking loudly and bothering everybody else around. we need to learn some civics, act a little civilized. this is not behavior appropriate to an ancient civilization. even in dirt-poor countries elsewhere, i have never seen public defecation. why in india?

and anyway, why aren't we agitating and throwing out the useless bums who didn't give us the services, instead of happily peeing all over the place?

5/14/2014 9:41 PM

Post a Comment


sent from samsung galaxy note, so please excuse brevity Posted by nizhal yoddha at 5/13/2014 11:44:00 PM

What troubles me are lines such as these, courtesy Rajeev Srinivasan himself:

1. "this is one of my pet peeves: peeing in public, and worse, defecating in public. yes, it is a failure of the government to provide facilities, but do we have no shame as individuals?"

=> Uh, why do 1st worlders have no shame in publicly urinating and defecating in places like hi-tech Hong Kong? People didn't know? See further below/next post.

Really, why do better-off (stuck up?) Indians go all "1st-world" on their own people when - let's face it - India is still quite a poor country and living below the poverty line with many basic amenities missing (like universal access to clean drinking water etc), yet less fortunate Indians have to PRETEND to be rich and well-off just to keep the kinds of people who become easily ashamed from feeling embarrassed? The reality remains that at present, India is still a 3rd world country (nowadays called "developing world" but it's a new label for the old insult). And it is NOT public defecation that makes or keeps it 3rd world (HK/China still has public defecation/urination). But what keeps India a 3rd world country is the idiot mentality that Indians must live the lie of a 1st world life despite much of India not being well-off at present to actually live a 1st world life.

2. "why aren't we agitating and throwing out the useless bums who didn't give us the services, instead of happily peeing all over the place?"

=> Why does Rajeev say "we ... are peeing all over the place" when he doesn't mean "we" but other Indians, the supposedly "less civilised" and certainly often more destitute Indians than himself. See the tie-in Rajeev makes to civilised behaviour in:

3. "it is time we became less blase about public excretion. ... we need to learn some civics, act a little civilized."

=> Oh, and it's civilised to dump plastic everywhere in public and to let it collect everywhere? At least human waste (like all living waste products) are biodegradable.

Back in the early 90s, in NL (1st world country!), dogs used to do their thing all over the grass everywhere. And NO ONE removed the dog waste back then. There were no laws about it.

Of course I really disliked accidentally stepping on any, as did everyone, but I figured, Hey, it's an animal, it's what animals do (IIRC, producing waste/by products is one of the signs of a living organism). It's biodegradable: their stuff is returned back to the environment where it belongs and other creatures break it down, in a natural cycle. It's perhaps considered inconvenient but it is ultimately inoffensive (and is what should be happening to human waste products too, btw).

Then suddenly people started carrying about plastic dog-waste bags, to clean up after their dogs. And this became mandatory by law. <- PLASTIC BAGS to contain BIODEGRADABLE WASTE that really ought to be returned to the environment, and which used to be returned in the less "civilised" era up to the early 1990s.

Are these people mad? But this is the 1st world. Surely the epitome of civilisation? Yet now most of the 1st world is isolating biodegradable dog waste in plastic bags, and I doubt that there's any machinery separating the dog waste inside the plastic bags - for composting say - from their plastic coverings (for road/landfill garbage).

There are period pads containing plastic - back in my mother's era in Hindoo India they still used simple cotton cloths, which were reusable (now also available in a few environmentally conscious 1st world online stores, where you can pay for cotton rags :hystericalSmile - and tampons and condoms and mountains of diapers containing plastic etc etc.

Humans create this plastic non-biodegradable waste to capture and contain biodegradable human waste. That biodegradable waste should have been returned in some natural manner to our environment, but the 1st world can't be bothered coming up with workable solutions since it's too bothered with being civilised and since civil mentalities are not offended by plastic covering and isolating biodegradable waste - and indeed sees it as the civilised thing to do - there is no budging to improve the situation. This is not civilisation. It is a mockery of all commonsense, while parading about as superior.

Anyway, none of the 'civilised' Indian pretenders to 1st world sensibilities ([once-were-]NRIs by any chance?) have a word to say about how utterly disturbing this trend is. I have seen goats eat plastic garbage waste lining Indian roads. Non-biodegradable plastic. Far more offensive to me than Hindoos relieving themselves in public: I can look away from their private business safe in the knowledge that they are returning waste products to the soil where bacteria etc break it down. But I worry about the huge masses of accumulating plastic that take millions of years to degrade (and which we haven't taken 100 years to accumulate, more like a few decades) and which, IIRC - though I could be misremembering the environmental documentaries from primary school - temperatures the kind of which rages in the sun may be necessary to dispose of.

4. And this is an utter lie/ignorance (the latter is worse in this case, btw, convenient ignorance=uncivilised and in fact, should be a crime). Said Rajeev:

Quote:"even in dirt-poor countries elsewhere, i have never seen public defecation. why in india?"

He missed that in rich and civilised Hong Kong, people pee and defecate in public - on a large scale (see next post) and let their kids do so too.

In fact, the football-player David Beckham apparently let his kid(s) urinate in public space in Hong Kong and apparently requested "understanding". Yet I doubt he'd have tried this in the UK or mainland Europe or AmriKKKa or anywhere christowestern. You see, civilised people do that only to non-western countries like India and China etc, even as they then go about producing UN "poo to the loo" type programs to lecture "3rd worlders" (or 1st/2nd world HK) on how to behave in a "civilised" fashion that won't offend 1st world western visitors to the UnWest.

[color="#FF0000"]For those interested in building toilets for humans that may be better suited to the Indian situation, perhaps this is relevant[/color] (it may be less water-intensive, and in any case it creates compost out of human waste):



IIRC, it's Do It Yourself (DIY). Why wait for the govt? Every Hindu village handyman - talented DIY-ers as they are - can get to work and fit their neighbourhood with such useful 'humanure' toilets.

There should be a nationwide ban on all wasteful plastic bag etc manufacturing and use. Such laws are imperative, a.o.t. laws against public defecation/urination. Certainly far more imperative than laws against public defecation.

And instead of spraying people who relieve themselves in public with water as a method of shaming/punishing them, should levy a super-tax on all the rich Indians (esp. Angelsk-speaking kind) who make use of and throw away any plastic bags etc. <- That will be all rich Indian ueber-losers who play at being superior 1st world vis-a-vis other Indians. Make it a tax that increases polynomially for each waste plastic item illegally disposed by the filthy rich (filthy is here such a contextually appropriate adjective to rich).

And when caught, they can be publicly shamed.

Ugh, only the oh-so-"intelligent" humans would invent non-biodegradable plastic as a "solution" to containing biodegradable waste and elevate such insanity to "civilisation". I'm beginning to rue the day some ancient monkeys left the trees for the grasses and started walking upright. Nothing worthwhile ever came from humans I think, when seen objectively; only things that humans imagine is worthwhile - which of course is a subjective POV and hence dismissable as mere human opinion (and the universe, as it grows older, will show up just how irrelevant, by wiping away everything humans ever "created" and pretended was so very "valuable" and "immortal". Humans. Sound and Fury. Nothing more.)
Post 2/2

Public urination (and even defecation) happens on a large scale not just in poorer India, but also richer Hong Kong (sky-scraper buildings! and some HK people have better English than the British aristocracy <- it's true, e.g. listen to Maggie Cheung) and the rest of China. So snobbish Indians can stop pretending that India is the only country where this occurs and that it is exclusively behaviour seen in the "3rd world" or related to poverty. Oh, and clearly, it isn't Hindoo-ism, since China etc isn't Hindu.

Note that this is not news from a Hong Kong of the last century or last decade or last year even. But [color="#0000FF"]news from this and last month.[/color]

Indian snobs can stop pretending that it's "just India".

1. scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1498657/all-sorts-not-just-chinese-mainlanders-answer-call-nature

Quote:PUBLISHED : Monday, 28 April, 2014, 4:03am

UPDATED : Monday, 28 April, 2014, 2:19pm

Mainland Chinese aren't the only ones peeing on streets of Hong Kong


Alex Lo is a senior writer at the South China Morning Post. He writes editorials and the daily “My Take” column on page 2. He also edits the weekly science and technology page in Sunday Morning Post

All sorts, not just Chinese mainlanders, answer call of nature in public

If you only get your news stories from local social media, you may think Hong Kong is about to be flooded in mainland urine.

These sites are filled with accounts of mainland visitors' misbehaviour, the most provocative of which must be their supposedly carefree way of answering the call of nature in public. The latest spark to an escalating toilet war stemmed from a fight in Mong Kok between a mainland couple and several locals who filmed their child relieving himself. The clips went viral on the internet, being viewed more than a million times. Even the state-owned People's Daily weighed in.

A campaign has been launched on the mainland urging parents to let their children urinate on our streets. A Hong Kong counter-campaign asks people to film and document such misbehaviour. It would be comical if it was not so tragic.

[color="#FF0000"]Are mainlanders the only ones incapable of finding or using public toilets?

In Hong Kong, I have seen that type of behaviour from any number of visually identifiable groups - local Chinese, expatriates, foreign (non-mainland) visitors, taxi drivers, teenage schoolboys, fathers and sons, and yes, fellow journalists. I have seen it at the Sevens and in the Wan Chai bar district.[/color]

Just last year, I witnessed a young man unzipping himself on Leighton Road, near my office, during the evening rush hour and releasing a long stream in front of dozens of horrified and disgusted people. I was sure his first language was neither Cantonese nor Putonghua.

[color="#0000FF"]Such behaviour can get you arrested in Hong Kong and you would not just face a fixed penalty.[/color] If someone breaks the law, he or she should pay for it. The police should make an example of those guilty of such misbehaviour, regardless of their race, ethnicity or any other identifiable physical attributes.

Yes, there is a lot of anger and frustration over the way mainland tourists have flooded into Hong Kong, overwhelmed our facilities and distorted our economy. A strong case can be, and has been, made to control the number of visitors. That is a valid concern. But try not to demonise some people with behaviour that everyone else is guilty of at one time or another.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as All sorts answer call of nature in public

Although the furore is against mainland Chinese in HK feeling singled out for this by local HK people (HK was colonised by Britain for longer) and some clear resentment festering underneath, the purpose of my posting it is two-fold. The fact that it happens in another nation PLUS that western people are obviously into it (and not just kids)

2. scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1496617/bring-your-children-pee-hong-kong-mainlander-starts-campaign-after

Quote:Chinese tourists

China's Vice-Premier Wang Yang in May 2013 acknowledged that "uncivilised behaviour" by its citizens abroad was harming the country's image. He cited "talking loudly in public places, jaywalking, spitting and wilfully carving characters on items in scenic zones". Destination countries have been easing visa restrictions to attract more tourists from China, but reports have emerged of complaints about etiquette.

[color="#0000FF"]'Bring children to pee in Hong Kong': Mainlander starts campaign after public urination clash[/color]

Call for action may break mainland law; call of nature may cost HK$2,000

PUBLISHED : Friday, 25 April, 2014, 1:39pm

UPDATED : Saturday, 26 April, 2014, 7:45am

Stuart Lau stuart.lau@scmp.com

Img caption: The couple let their child relieve himself on a Mong Kok street.

[color="#0000FF"]Internet users calling on mainlanders to let their children relieve themselves in Hong Kong streets - in protest at this week's photographing of a toddler doing just that - have been warned they could end up in trouble, along with anyone who takes part in the protest.[/color]

Mainland law prohibits encouragement of such disruptions of public order even if it takes place elsewhere, a veteran lawyer with experience in both jurisdictions said yesterday.

The warning came as controversy continued to snowball over the incident in which a video of a mainland couple allowing their toddler to urinate and defecate on a busy Mong Kok street was posted online.

Solicitor Thomas So Shiu-tsung said Articles 290 and 291 of the mainland criminal code outlawed "assembling a crowd to disrupt social order" and "assembling a crowd to disrupt order of public places".

Article 7, meanwhile, allowed the state to punish citizens who commit such offences outside the mainland.

"It depends on the size of the activity," So said. "If there are only a couple of people turning up, it is unlikely that amounts to an offence."

Hong Kong's Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation prohibits those in charge of a child under 12 from permitting the child, without reasonable excuse, "to obey the call of nature in any public street". Violators face a HK$2,000 fine.

Meanwhile, the controversy spread to Taiwan - possibly reflecting concerns there about an influx of mainlanders similar to those experienced in Hong Kong.

News about the suggestion of the "pee and poo" protest went viral on Taiwan media outlets.

Back across the strait, the top post on popular mainland forum Tianya.cn featured a mainlander who claimed to be working in Hong Kong.

"Are [the Hong Kong people] psycho?" one user, who went by the name Round Face Tomato Ghost Devil, quoted her Spanish friend as asking.

The comment was widely echoed by other mainlanders. "People should help people in need, not take photos and post them online," wrote one.

In the video, the mother was seen telling the crowd of onlookers: "The child was going to pee in his pants, what do you want me do?"

A scuffle then broke out and the parents tried to take the memory card from the camera of the young man filming the incident. State media had earlier criticised those who took the pictures as being as uncivilised as the toddler's parents.

[color="#800080"](The parents should sue the terrorist who took the video as this being an act of paedophilia. That will shut such people up.)[/color]

A commentary in the People's Daily overseas edition questioned whether the bystanders had acted properly, while saying there was a need for "mutual civilisation and understanding" between tourists and Hongkongers.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as Pee protest could land proponents in poop

3. scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1497816/let-reason-prevail-when-nature-calls

And some comments from all 3 links

- scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1498657/all-sorts-not-just-chinese-mainlanders-answer-call-nature

- scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1496617/bring-your-children-pee-hong-kong-mainlander-starts-campaign-after

- scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1497816/let-reason-prevail-when-nature-calls

Quote:****** May 5th 2014


Wow, as if it was fine to evacuate on streets. Despite it being common, civilised people are still not supposed to pee in the public. Before you accuse Hongkongers of being hypocrites, try to get your values right.


[color="#800080"](See, some Indians sound just like some Chinese. But we're all civilised here: we've all been 'civilised' by the colonial hand. Speaking of whichSmile[/color]

Brit_in_China May 4th 2014


Saw a Hong Kong couple allow their toddler to pee on the streets in Zhongshan just yesterday. Why? Simple. Kid suddenly needed to pee and caused a hissy fit when they tried to move her. I offered them the use of the cafe toilets, but when thy tried to move the kid she was already doing the business. Too late. They were very embarrassed; but no one really cared. You know, dogs, cats, and kids run only on their DNA. When they want to go, they want to go. Try stopping your dog marking every drain pipe and tree in the city. Good luck with that.

Kids drop 'em and pee. Get over it. Nought you can do most of the time. [color="#0000FF"](British with 3 kids.)[/color]


[color="#800080"](Well, a Brit has declared it's all okay. Therefore it's civilised now. But only if you're in China. Not if it's India. Etc.)[/color]

ldAsia May 2nd 2014


These low people have never been out of Hong Kong. They have a teeny tiny narrow vision of the world. If they have the money to afford to travel, then they will find out it is not uncommon to see situation like that all over the world. They have nothing better to do than picking on a little kid. You know what, these hypo probably themselves had done the same thing that they would not dare to say.

[color="#0000FF"]These lackeys only dare to insult their own people. Once they encountered the white people, they would be hiding like a rat and would not dare to say a single word.[/color]

Go find yourself a life instead of “MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING”.

(Oh some sense of perspective. At last. Barely see that in Indians.)

****** May 3rd 2014


These things don't happen very often, he is just a 3-year-old child and there are a lot of people waiting for the toilet, what do you expect? Curiously, a few years ago David Beckham with his kids do the same thing in Hong Kong, but at that time the Hong Kong people for their understanding. For now ,these people use mobile phones to take the process of the child to pee and sent to the Internet, they judgment the people who come from the mainland are immoral, their do this behavior is moral? Seriously, just because a 3-year-old child can not wait for the toilet to pee on the street, they say the people who come from the mainland are immoral, that makes me laugh. They forgot the most basic of human love and tolerance. If civilization without love, just morbid vanity.


[color="#800080"](Nah nah nah man. It's Beckham. If he or his kids urinate in public in your country, they expect you to consider it an honour.)[/color]

****** Apr 29th 2014


Los Angeles Times, March 11, 2014, by Stacey Leasca: Peeing in the pool

"One in five Americans has admitted to peeing in a public swimming pool, according to a new survey.

That’s 20% of Americans urinating where others swim. Besides being disgusting, peeing in the pool may be seriously harmful to your health.
In a new study, researchers from China Agricultural University and Purdue University looked at what happened when uric acid, a byproduct of urine, and chlorine combined. The group found dangerous chemical reactions were a result of this unholy union.

The combo kicks up cyanogen chloride, a gas that can harm the central nervous system, heart and lungs if inhaled. Uric acid is linked to 24% to 68% of this byproduct in pool water, the scientists said."


****** Apr 29th 2014


Then what about barring drunk Westerners fresh out of bars and night clubs from yelling, cursing, urinating, vomiting, and damaging public property?



paulch12 Apr 28th 2014


I think the incident is blown out of proportion because of racism of a few. It happens in LAN Kwai Fong during weekends, I don't hear any complaints. We, Hongkong people, travelled abroad, sometimes are loud and uncivil, I don't hear our own uproar at their behavior.

At the moment, the whole world is seeking tourist dollars from mainlanders, Hong Kong is the only place that complains. Time to stop racism, and start looking at our own inhospitable behavior. We need to resolve these situations by providing better education and facilities for tourists of all races.


****** Apr 30th 2014


True, I have seen white people and foreigners doing the same shameful acts at times, but they aren't the ones who go right onto Weibo and then launch into some grand speech about how because they got told off for something which is potentially against the law not just in HK, but around 99% of the world, that people are "discriminating" against them.


****** Apr 30th 2014


Happens all the time everywhere in the world, yet I don't see them going onto Facebook, or Weibo, or the general internet, and then going on into this grand rousing speech about how because I am of a certain background, that because this happened they are apparently discriminating against me.

Cry me a river, seriously.


ldAsia Apr 30th 2014


It is amazingly low that a little boy peed in public can create such a big fuzz. These people probably got nothing better to do, then picking on a little kid. They are really fuzz about nothing. Go visit the world and see more - [color="#0000FF"]go visit the bars in Paris (the area near the bar entrance is stink with human pees), go visit downtown New York (Browery bumps used to be stinky with pees, even though it has been cleaned up a lot), go visit Key west in Florida (the drunk pees on the street, even though it is not broad day light), go visit London and Munich (adults pee on the street is often).[/color] It is a nature call after you have a few bottle of beer.

Keep your mind open and do REAL thing, instead of picking on a little kid.

(The blue bit is actually so true. But remember: it's civilised if western people do it. And moreover, it becomes manly if beer-swilling western men do it. No?)

johnyuan Apr 27th 2014


Pairs being a tourist city, it solved 'the need to go' most amicably with public toilets installed at easy to spot sidewalks. It is both civilize and practical. The Tourist Board in Hong Kong has been delinquent while pushing for ever more tourism but without consideration for both visitors and locals. Easy locatable public toilets are part of infrastructure for a sustainable tourism industry which current situation has atrociously overlooked.


Public should learn more about these self-flushing and cleaning design for sidewalk toilets before raising objection.


I wish there is less arguments but more practical solution in the work. Afterall, 'need to go' is a need. Just make sure it is accomodated civicly without delay when children are considered.


BTW, My brother and I often used the men's room at Mandarin Hotel in the 60s. We were kids playing at its shopping lobby. Yes, the locals know around.


Apparently there are pages and pages of more comments - many hundreds of comments at the links.

Oh and "civilised" Indian snobs must be reminded that there is more to get all worked up and offended over: in many restaurants and cafes in some western countries (e.g. Australia IIRC), public breastfeeding is banned. It is being considered increasingly uncivilised and "disgusting" to publicly breastfeed a baby: if mums can't find a place to privately suckle the infant, mums are preferred to let the baby cry on (or starve it to death, presumably) rather than subjecting the shocked and annoyed unreasonable adult public to the mostly-obscured vision of human cubs being suckled. It's all fine and well for human adults to eat at restaurants/cafes when hungry and put their forks in their mouths and chew and guzzle in public, and talk while they're eating and spew at each other, but if a baby thinks it's feeding time and wants to harmlessly suckle, well too bad Baby, that's just eeeeewww offensive.

Publicly suckling desperate babies is growingly regarded as SO uncivilised and disgusting, in fact, that I can't wait for NRI and other angelsk-speaking superior Indian types to start parroting this new trend as the latest in civilised behaviour in India as well. Let's not be all hypocritical and allow breastfeeding in public while booing at other ultimately-inoffensive stuff after all, since some 1st worlders at least think it's all an uncivilised horror.

Note, if you're another species of mammal, you are free to suckle your cubs: the ueber-civilised humans will not just remain un-offended but will in fact be happy to watch documentaries showing such mammal behaviour and go all Oooooh and Aaaawwww over it. Other animals relieving themselves in public is not considered offensive either, with easily-offended humans moreover finding they can rather easily turn away at such times and not be bothered into a deep and great "shame" over it. But if you're a human animal, by gawd and deus vult, harmless everyday behaviours become a great offence to others' sensibilities.

The news was:


Quote:PUBLISHED : Monday, 28 April, 2014, 4:03am

UPDATED : Monday, 28 April, 2014, 2:19pm

Mainland Chinese aren't the only ones peeing on streets of Hong Kong

Alex Lo

[color="#800080"](Little kid had to defecate and urinate in public in HK and this being the latest such incident caused a major uproar btw HK locals and mainland Chinese in HK.

Turns out it's not just mainland Chinese kids that are doing this in public in HKSmile[/color]


[color="#0000FF"]In Hong Kong, I have seen that type of behaviour from any number of visually identifiable groups - local Chinese, expatriates, foreign (non-mainland) visitors, taxi drivers, teenage schoolboys, fathers and sons, and yes, fellow journalists. I have seen it at the Sevens and in the Wan Chai bar district.[/color]

So it's not just in India.




Quote:One in five Americans has admitted to peeing in a public swimming pool, according to a new survey.

Eeeww. Sick.

And 1 in 5!

NRIs living in the US should think deeply about that one: that's one in five of all such 1st world people that they've ever met. And that's just the number of people who confessed/admitted to it. The real figure may well be higher. Now that is seriously disgusting.

When's the UN going to step in with toilet adverts and health warnings about this large-scale crisis in the US? I mean, America has over 250 million people. So some 50 million are messing up public swimming pools and threatening the health of others.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)