Causes Of Discrimination Against Females Amongst Sikhs

[kdsingh80]

To me this one is simple. True independent Sikh martial spirit was suppressed after the Anglo-Sikh war and only a controlled version which worked in an adjunct way to the British imperial agenda was allowed to be manifest. Outside of this, the martial culture was largely subverted into symbolism as opposed to real life practice which kept one militarily prepared in the modern context. Only small amounts of people tried to resist this (mostly unsuccessfully) like the Gaddarittes and those who joined the antiBritish movement during WW2.

Almost all Indian Martial races served under British Indian army but Sikhs lost much of their martial spirit.

Pathans of Pakistan are still some of fieriest people in the world .I think we should do lot of soul searching what went wrong from our side rather than blaming brits.Is it because we did lot of experimentation with Sikhism? Nihangs still blame that chatka was practiced upto the start of 20th century at Akal takhat but later on stopped by SGPC.Martial races used to raise their sons so they can retain martial spirit.I don't think Sikhs did that.There are lot of questions like Why sikhs stop prachar of sikhi? Why our martial spirit was lost? etc Whites can be partially blamed for this but lot of blame goes to Sikhs

[dalsingh101]

Almost all Indian Martial races served under British Indian army but Sikhs lost much of their martial spirit.

There is something quite important relating to this in the Omissi book. I'll try and post it later tonight.

[HSD1]

A long time ago I 'blogged' with some West London feminist apnee on the Pickled Politics forum (I know, I know...) about this very topic.

Dalsingh, I knew you were Sunny Hundal! Give me back my taxes lol.

I think it's more complicated than that. Like all men have the potential to be a complete kunjar, all women have the potential to be slappers given the right stimulus/environment. England is one of the worst places for this. Don't underplay the strong social needs of women and the abject terror they feel at being 'different' and the way this can dictate their behaviour when surrounded by the majority culture.

I've come across decent sikh girls who came from non-religous families, many of them not having had bfs and wanting to marry sikhs. The only way I can think they are like this is because the men they are around of their own generation acted the same way.

I remember when the instances of Sikh men behaving like this were minimal. In my parents generation infidelity was very rare. Even in my generation we didn't have hordes of he-slags. Apneean didn't have slutty role models either. That didn't stop them getting a terrible rep for these things.

Rather than parents I was thinking about the generation. From my own generation I know sikh guys who's bragging is jumped on by their female equivalents in order to justify their sluttiness. I was thinking that removing that oxygen is one step in stamping this fire out.

Personally, I think you are on some solid stuff here. If it has got that bad, instead of running around after girls that don't want to be with apnay, Sikh men should go with those that do. Actually having competition would probably make them (apneean) act differently too, what with way female psychology often makes them so competitive with each other over men.

Shhh! You've let the cat out of the bag lol. Also, better women regardless of their background provide stable platforms to build families rather than some of the pscychotic women we have. It also removes these women from other communities. Our slags for their nobler and decent women. A fair trade.

[HSD1]

You are free to interpret what you want but the fact is devi is hindu word.One can say Ram,das, lal are also respectful words but Sikhs always use them in humilating manner for other Sikhs.The main question is every sikh child is taught Guru gobind singh gave Singh to men and Kaur to women and now you suddenly found that there is little evidence that Kaur was actually given By Guru gobind singh is little bit depressing.

I doubt Guru Gobind Singh Ji would have given women a derogatory name. As for the Kaur thing, lets face it, as we Sikhs lost our country and had our nation broken we became more desperate and insular. Any nation around the world, when faced with defeat or a foe, tries to remove any connection to that enemy and to 'purify' itself in the hope of being able to fight back and prevent further losses. Anglo-Hindustan attacked and overran us. With their troops came their religion, customs and practices. Without an army we tried to find other means to resist. It really is that simple.

There are plenty of Sikh families like mine where women not only have lot of respect but also hold much of the household power despite not earning ,so women are treated with respect in plenty of Sikh families.

That's good to hear, but women will always want things like a sense of belonging too. This is a really complicated topic, with no one solution to get women and men in our nation on a level were we can iron out social problems.

About rationalism the less said the better it is.Many Sikh missionaries are rejecting each and everything in sikhism by calling it non rational.

Rationalism combined with ignorance is never a good thing. Guru Nanak Dev Ji was a very clever and wise man, he could pull it off. The majority of 'holy' sikhs today are a whole different (inferior) breed.

Not saying that Sikh women accept Polygamy but they should accept that Some Guru's as well as Puratan Singh's have more than one wife unlike creating fantasy stories that Guru gobind singh ji have only one wife

Did the Gurus and Purataan sikhs have children with more than one wife? I find this a bit hard to believe as I always believed adultery and sex with multiple partners was not permitted in Sikhi.

I have read what Gurukaameet wrote .Unfortunately that does not justify Sikh women marrying Muslims or Hindu's .What equality they get in those Religion?What I said in that thread I am repeating in this thread too there not one but plenty of Sikh families who treat their daughters with equality respect but still they end up with Hindu husbands.Manmohan singh's daughters are fine example of this.They all are very highly educated yet none of them is married to a Sikh.

Also let me tell you I have 6 cousin sisters ,none of them are married to Sikhs.The one which are married are married to non sikhs despite all the Equality dignity respect given to them.Even the younger one are quite hopeless case.At best I can that maximum of 1 or 2 end up marying Sikhs if that is possible

If you live in Hindustan then I feel sorry for you. A sea of political correctness is sweeping the world where women are encouraged not to marry their own kind, in order to create some commie society where everyone is mixed and no child has an idea of where they come from. These red dogs believe that will lead to 'world peace'. Sikh women growing up around with pan-hindustani propaganda about the greater glories of india are going to mix themselves in it as they believe that is what should happen. Look at the shaheeds who fought British rule in the early 20th century, many of them adopted muslim and hindu names out of some perverse notion that this represented sikhs standing shoulder to shoulder with those who couldnt protect themselves. Unfortunately those martyrs were too stupid to the see the long game, just as many of these sikh women will regret marrying outside their religion. Just give it time and the examples will be set.

But First our own brigade of western educated Liberal men and women have to accept this truth.They just take examples from families where Girls are not treated with equality and attack Sikh men and Sikh society while totally ignoring the other side of story

In the UK I have seen Sikh girls from middle class and upper middle class go to good schools and maintain a sense that they are sikh. They are not overtly religous but they sure as hell are not coconuts either. Some have travelled to Punjab willingly to see what it is like there and have developed a sovereign spirit. Sikh girls from working class backgrounds tend to fall for every trick in the book. They look at the whites/muslims/blacks and see some kind of better life through rose tinted spectacles. They then go and throw themselves into a double life or just go the whole mile. Now I'm not being elitist as what I've said isnt true for every girl from each background. But it's what I've seen. An education and a decent life let the girls be more confident. A bit of freedom lets them make friends with sikh boys and get a sense of belonging. As long as the people they are hanging around with arent nuts, they turn out good. Girls with no education, no freedom, no experience of the real world and no young Sikh networks fall prey a lot quicker. Now all this may not apply to Hindustan, but it's what I see.

Edited April 12, 2011 by HSD 2

[HSD1]

Almost all Indian Martial races served under British Indian army but Sikhs lost much of their martial spirit.

Pathans of Pakistan are still some of fieriest people in the world .I think we should do lot of soul searching what went wrong from our side rather than blaming brits.Is it because we did lot of experimentation with Sikhism? Nihangs still blame that chatka was practiced upto the start of 20th century at Akal takhat but later on stopped by SGPC.Martial races used to raise their sons so they can retain martial spirit.I don't think Sikhs did that.There are lot of questions like Why sikhs stop prachar of sikhi? Why our martial spirit was lost? etc Whites can be partially blamed for this but lot of blame goes to Sikhs

We lost. Simple as that. People think in weird ways. They associate the collapes of the Sikh Empire with the inferiority of Sikhi and the supposed superiority of whites/christianity and all other things that the angloindians had.

If violence doesnt work, people soon dont bother learning to fight as they know it wont achieve anything. There are numerous nations around the world that were once militaristic but had that bombed out of them, like the Germans, Japanese and god knows which other nations that dont even exist anymore.

Edited April 12, 2011 by HSD 2

[dalsingh101]

We lost. Simple as that. People think in weird ways. They associate the collapes of the Sikh Empire with the inferiority of Sikhi and the supposed superiority of whites/christianity and all other things that the angloindians had.

Is it really as simple as that?!

Many Sikhs kept on fighting. They just didn't do it for themselves as a nation.

Probably more appropriate to discuss this here?

http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=13952&pid=122252&st=0&#entry122252

[kdsingh80]

Did the Gurus and Purataan sikhs have children with more than one wife? I find this a bit hard to believe as I always believed adultery and sex with multiple partners was not permitted in Sikhi.

HSD

I will reply to your other points later but first read this discussion on this subject

http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=2472&hl=wives&st=0

The discussion ended with all the scholars of SA agreeing that some Guru's had more than One wife

[kdsingh80]

I doubt Guru Gobind Singh Ji would have given women a derogatory name. As for the Kaur thing, lets face it, as we Sikhs lost our country and had our nation broken we became more desperate and insular. Any nation around the world, when faced with defeat or a foe, tries to remove any connection to that enemy and to 'purify' itself in the hope of being able to fight back and prevent further losses. Anglo-Hindustan attacked and overran us. With their troops came their religion, customs and practices. Without an army we tried to find other means to resist. It really is that simple.

I don't understand ,are you saying Kaur is Derogatory?

That's good to hear, but women will always want things like a sense of belonging too. This is a really complicated topic, with no one solution to get women and men in our nation on a level were we can iron out social problems.

Men too want lot of things if we all start saying men want this, women want this then we end up destroying our own society.

If you live in Hindustan then I feel sorry for you. A sea of political correctness is sweeping the world where women are encouraged not to marry their own kind, in order to create some commie society where everyone is mixed and no child has an idea of where they come from.

Wait a minute are you saying that some propaganda machinery is responsible for Sikh women marrying out of religion in India? I am sorry to say but this is not true.Upto early 90s The problem of Sikh women marrying outside religion was mild but as the globalisation started and women Joined workforce the problem got severe and became like epidemic so the only one to blame here are women and their parents

In the UK I have seen Sikh girls from middle class and upper middle class go to good schools and maintain a sense that they are sikh. They are not overtly religous but they sure as hell are not coconuts either. Some have travelled to Punjab willingly to see what it is like there and have developed a sovereign spirit. Sikh girls from working class backgrounds tend to fall for every trick in the book. They look at the whites/muslims/blacks and see some kind of better life through rose tinted spectacles. They then go and throw themselves into a double life or just go the whole mile. Now I'm not being elitist as what I've said isnt true for every girl from each background. But it's what I've seen

Its good that you praising sikh girls ,though I have hardly seen UK sikh men praising their women on forum but real test of women come at the time of marriage .A Girl Who hardly has any knowledge of Sikhism but end up marrying a sardar is much bigger asset than a sikh girl who is a scholar but choose to marry non sikh man

Also HSD one thing you have to understand is Men and women have different psychology.A non practicing sikh men may feel offended if someone say bad about sikhism

but on the other hand sikh women who end in non sikh families may see their husbands or even sons making fun of sardars but they don't say anything

[kdsingh80]

We lost. Simple as that. People think in weird ways. They associate the collapes of the Sikh Empire with the inferiority of Sikhi and the supposed superiority of whites/christianity and all other things that the angloindians had.

If violence doesnt work, people soon dont bother learning to fight as they know it wont achieve anything. There are numerous nations around the world that were once militaristic but had that bombed out of them, like the Germans, Japanese and god knows which other nations that dont even exist anymore.

We were not the only people who lost the entire undivided India lost Maratha's ,muslims, Pathan,s Rajput and only then Sikhs lost.If people start thinking in weird ways then it shows that they were mentally weak.Also take the example of Hindu's they were constantly defeated by muslims for 700 years yet Maratha's bounced back and end up defeating several muslim kings and creating an empire.

[dalsingh101]

Anglo-Hindustan attacked and overran us. With their troops came their religion, customs and practices. Without an army we tried to find other means to resist. It really is that simple.

??

The leading section of the invaders (the Anglos) cleverly caused prominent Sikhs (whom they patronised in both senses of the word) to distance the faith from anything even remotely smacking of what is called Hinduism. These Sikhs seemed to identify with and aspire to the perceived world view of the new overlords. Which shouldn't surprise us as they were educated in their institutes.

Hence these Sikhs pushed for gender equality more vocally than at any other time previously (post 1708). Seeing as whitey (even now) uses the gender issue to beat men of colour with, it's no wonder Singh Sabhias reacted in this way. Their acts, were, in effect, attempts to identify with the invading culture, not distance themselves from it.

Edited April 13, 2011 by dalsingh101

[Mithar]

??

The leading section of the invaders (the Anglos) cleverly caused prominent Sikhs (whom they patronised in both senses of the word) to distance the faith from anything even remotely smacking of what is called Hinduism. These Sikhs seemed to identify with and aspire to the perceived world view of the new overlords. Which shouldn't surprise us as they were educated in their institutes.

Hence these Sikhs pushed for gender equality more vocally than at any other time previously (post 1708). Seeing as whitey (even now) uses the gender issue to beat men of colour with, it's no wonder Singh Sabhias reacted in this way. There acts in effect, where attempts to identify with the invading culture, not distance themselves from it.

This makes a lot of sense. I feel this movement amongst Sikhs of trying to encourage girls to behave and act like boys really as a reactionary movement to European/British culture. Although I think Singh Sabha movement had a lot of positive contribution towards the Sikhs, but this aspect about encouraging masculine behavior amongst Sikh women was unnecessary.

Dharmically, yes they are both equals, but socially they have different roles in society. I feel the later Singh Sabha movement attempted to make the Sikhs socially genderless, where by both men and women would play the exact same role in society and family.

Whenever you hear of feminist type Sikh girls give examples, they always give examples of a warrior type woman like Mata Bhaag Kaur, yet they never give examples of more feminine Sikh women like Bebe Nanki or Mata Gujri who were not only Dharmic but also devoted to their families and played a more traditional role of taking care of the family as devoted wives, sisters, mothers, daughters and grandmothers.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Mithar

[dalsingh101]

Look at the shaheeds who fought British rule in the early 20th century, many of them adopted muslim and hindu names out of some perverse notion that this represented sikhs standing shoulder to shoulder with those who couldnt protect themselves.

There may have been an element of alienation from Sikhi by politicised apnay at that time too, seeing as what was being pushed as mainline Sikhi had become, to all intents and purposes, subservient to British colonial interests.

Not everyone succumbed to this though, as the example of Bhai Randhir Singh (AKJ) illustrates.

Whenever you hear of feminist type Sikh girls give examples, they always give examples of a warrior type woman like Mata Bhaag Kaur, yet they never give examples of more feminine Sikh women like Bebe Nanki or Mata Gujri who were not only Dharmic but also devoted to their families and played a more traditional role of taking care of the family as devoted wives, sisters, mothers, daughters and grandmothers.

One of the major gripes of feminists seems to relate to all thing related to the kitchen and the very word is often used to suggest male oppression! "Expecting women to be tied to the kitchen all day" is a common accusation by feminists towards men they perceive as misogynistic.

So I'm not surprised they play down these other potential role models as they probably see them as examples of conservative women who have succumbed to male domination.

The other complaint is being seen as baby producing vessels.

Edited April 13, 2011 by dalsingh101

[kdsingh80]

One of the major gripes of feminists seems to relate to all thing related to the kitchen and the very word is often used to suggest male oppression! "Expecting women to be tied to the kitchen all day" is a common accusation by feminists towards men they perceive as misogynistic.

These western Feminists should look at 90% of Jobs done by men at ground level in India.The horrible working conditions will make almost every woman run away.That is why these jobs are done by men because they have to work they have no choice.Life was/never is piece of cake.The rest of 10% White collar jobs are jobs which all people dream of and women just look at them

The other complaint is being seen as baby producing vessels.

To be honest women are producing babies that's why society exists.If in any society 50% women decide not to have any child and 30% decide only to have 1 child

and rest of them 2 then that society will have severe shortage of young working population in 20 years and you have to import young population from other countries.So producing babies is not a choice but a necessity

[dalsingh101]

To be honest women are producing babies that's why society exists.

Well yeah, but the argument is that that men don't let women explore identities outside of that role. They don't want to be solely or even primarily defined in that capacity.

Plus there is whole thing about male dominated societies defining women in terms of their sexuality (like in the west), or suppressing the expression of this side of women from society (like most eastern societies do, including ours). Muslims probably do the latter with most success.

All things said and done. Sikh society could do with A LOT more to make more things fairer for women. Whilst Sikh women themselves need to take action to develop a positive contemporary female identity instead of trying to follow behaviour models of other communities women - usually gorian.

Truth is, if we don't help and support them to do this, they'll probably only become disgruntled and cause more problems.

Do we have a choice?

Edited April 13, 2011 by dalsingh101