10 million girls killed by their parents in India

surferdude

VictoryGin wrote:

so you're personally against killing girls but you won't do anything about it?

speak slowly, i'm really hungover.

Not at all. On the aborting of female girls there's nothing I can do and probably nothing I should do without getting into the whole abortion debate and trying to then justify when abortion is okay and when it's not.

I just don't know enough about Indian culture to know if this killing of girls after birth is sociably acceptable or not. I'm fully prepared to condemn the individual though.

I'm with you on the hang over thing.

surferdude

hippiemom wrote:

I look forward to arguing alongside you next time someone is claiming that some proposed occupational safety standard is an unfair infringement on the rights of the employer because all those men CHOSE to take those jobs.

Look if you want someone who makes sense across a wide range of issues you got the wrong man. I fully hold onto my right to contradict myself at all times.

VictoryGin

angelica wrote:

I personally find it obscene and reprehensible, just like I find abortion reprehensible, based on my personal morals. And like I find the Iraq war and that killing reprehensible.

Should we "allow" it? This is where I get nervous. I'm 100% with surferdude on this one: I know so very little about their culture and their views so the idea that I have any right to impose my views and beliefs on a different culture is also reprehensible to me. To do so is the opposite of problem solving in my view. And with above board problem solving on such an issue, we may not be able to make much of a difference to a whole culture in their cultural evolution. I can recognize what is within my ethical power to change and I can accept what is not. And I personally trust my own ability to tell the difference. I am not the guardian of life to mete out judgment and punishment. I am one person, thoroughly immersed in my own culture including it's own blindspots.

maybe then you can help clarify. were you against the stopping of the holocaust? that was the systematic killing of jews, slavs, people who were born a certain way, like what happens with gender.

surferdude

soulsinging wrote:

i feel as a country we ought not support such things. im not talking about military intervention. im talking more economic. im quite positive we give money to them. cut that off. tell them until they do something about this trend, americans will take their business elsewhere.

So your solution to people killing girls because they can't afford them is to give them less trade and make them poorer. Funny approach to the problem but who knows it may work.

soulsinging

surferdude wrote:

Look if you want someone who makes sense across a wide range of issues you got the wrong man. I fully hold onto my right to contradict myself at all times.

i think i need a disclaimer like this in my sig

soulsinging

surferdude wrote:

So your solution to people killing girls because they can't afford them is to give them less trade and make them poorer. Funny approach to the problem but who knows it may work.

i thought i read this problem is most prevalent in the wealthier and better educated famlies, not the poor ones. so maybe if we knock those people off their high horses, they'll realize how messed up it is to put securing their future income against human life.

this is proof positive that rich people are more evil than poor people

Ahnimus

I think trying to force a culture to evolve is a lot like strapping legs to fish and throwing it on land. I mean, just look at the Middle East.

angelica

VictoryGin wrote:

maybe then you can help clarify. were you against the stopping of the holocaust? that was the systematic killing of jews, slavs, people who were born a certain way, like what happens with gender.

I'm not willing to make any highly important decision with far-reaching ramifications if I do not have the vision of insight with which to make it. That includes any retroactive decisions about the holocaust. I am not there, in that time period, assessing my variables, informed by the inner truth of my insight. For me to attempt to recreate that situation in the now is beyond my ability to do, with any sense of certainty and accuracy. Therefore, to me it would be an exercise in imagination, rather than depicting how I would actually deal were the situation happening in my life. Due to the inherent inaccuracy of doing so, I find there to be little to no reason to do it.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

I think trying to force a culture to evolve is a lot like strapping legs to fish and throwing it on land. I mean, just look at the Middle East.

Yikes, Ahnimus. You brought me to actually laugh out loud! Good point, too!

VictoryGin

surferdude wrote:

Not at all. On the aborting of female girls there's nothing I can do and probably nothing I should do without getting into the whole abortion debate and trying to then justify when abortion is okay and when it's not.

I just don't know enough about Indian culture to know if this killing of girls after birth is sociably acceptable or not. I'm fully prepared to condemn the individual though.

I'm with you on the hang over thing.

i'm not really talking about the abortion part so much--and i thought it was against the law there to abort based on sex. i'm more focused on the girls when they're born and being buried alive and such. say even if that was socially acceptable, you wouldn't want anything done about it? i mean 10 million girls . . .

VictoryGin

angelica wrote:

I'm not willing to make any highly important decision with far-reaching ramifications if I do not have the vision of insight with which to make it. That includes any retroactive decisions about the holocaust. I am not there, in that time period, assessing my variables, informed by the inner truth of my insight. For me to attempt to recreate that situation in the now is beyond my ability to do, with any sense of certainty and accuracy. Therefore, to me it would be an exercise in imagination, rather than depicting how I would actually deal were the situation happening in my life. Due to the inherent inaccuracy of doing so, I find there to be little to no reason to do it.

so is this a long-winded way of saying you can't comment on anything that isn't currently happening? but yet, you can't comment on an issue that is currently happening, like female infanticide?

hippiemom

angelica wrote:

I'm not willing to make any highly important decision with far-reaching ramifications if I do not have the vision of insight with which to make it. That includes any retroactive decisions about the holocaust. I am not there, in that time period, assessing my variables, informed by the inner truth of my insight. For me to attempt to recreate that situation in the now is beyond my ability to do, with any sense of certainty and accuracy. Therefore, to me it would be an exercise in imagination, rather than depicting how I would actually deal were the situation happening in my life. Due to the inherent inaccuracy of doing so, I find there to be little to no reason to do it.

We don't make any highly important decisions here, it's a rock band message board, so feel free to speak your mind. How many variables do we need to assess before we can confidently say that attempting to exterminate an entire race of people was a bad thing?

angelica

VictoryGin wrote:

so is this a long-winded way of saying you can't comment on anything that isn't currently happening? but yet, you can't comment on an issue that is currently happening, like female infanticide?

Is this your way of saying you missed it when I did say this: "I know so very little about their culture and their views so the idea that I have any right to impose my views and beliefs on a different culture is also reprehensible to me. To do so is the opposite of problem solving in my view." Or that you missed where I said that what they are doing is reprehensible?

I clearly commented on the issue currently happening. If I was not clear enough: I am 100% opposed to acting on this information in terms of attempting to take measures designed to change people because that does not work for the intended purpose. Further, I said it was reprehensible to try to do so, in that we would complicate the problem rather than be part of a solution. It would be a way of undermining our own selves by our self-centered blindness, in my opinion.

angelica

hippiemom wrote:

We don't make any highly important decisions here, it's a rock band message board, so feel free to speak your mind. How many variables do we need to assess before we can confidently say that attempting to exterminate an entire race of people was a bad thing?

As I said, a pretend idea of what I would do, to me, is irrelevent and inaccurate. I invest my energy in what makes sense for me. Whether a band message board or in "real" life, it is important to me to be authentic. There is no point for me to state and back something I can't support or stand behind--an illusion, in other words.

The key in retro decisions is not the variables involved. It is that if I lack the context within which decisions are made, I'm unable to feel confident even supposing a decision. Or even in taking a stab in the dark.

VictoryGin

angelica wrote:

Is this your way of saying you missed it when I did say this: "I know so very little about their culture and their views so the idea that I have any right to impose my views and beliefs on a different culture is also reprehensible to me. To do so is the opposite of problem solving in my view." Or that you missed where I said that what they are doing is reprehensible?

I clearly commented on the issue currently happening. If I was not clear enough: I am 100% opposed to acting on this information in terms of attempting to take measures designed to change people because that does not work for the intended purpose. Further, I said it was reprehensible to try to do so, in that we would complicate the problem rather than be part of a solution. It would be a way of undermining our own selves by our self-centered blindness, in my opinion.

sorry. i guess i just don't understand how one can say that the practice of mass killing is reprehensible yet it would be self-centered to do something about it.

i don't see female infanticide or mass killings due to race, ethnicity, etc. as a cultural practice we should respect. i see it as a human rights issue.

angelica

VictoryGin wrote:

sorry. i guess i just don't understand how one can say that the practice of mass killing is reprehensible yet it would be self-centered to do something about it.

i don't see female infanticide or mass killings due to race, ethnicity, etc. as a cultural practice we should respect. i see it as a human rights issue.

Maybe with differing views discourse and conflict can give rise to solutions.

angelica

VictoryGin wrote:

sorry. i guess i just don't understand how one can say that the practice of mass killing is reprehensible yet it would be self-centered to do something about it.

It's a psychological principle that to take the "I'm right/you're wrong" approach, you guarantee yourself imbalanced repercussions because you are coming from an imbalanced perspective. Whereas the idea is if one is be realistic and on a equal playing field, one accepts that one's own views are there for a reason, and also that the Indian family's views are also there for a reason. By this willingness to look into the situation, we can find the actual issues/causes, and even possibly make movement towards solutions. It's about suspending judgment so that we can learn and use our logic without distorting it. When we distort logic with emotion, we therefore act in distorted ways, which begets distorted payback. The way of imposing views on others ends up more like the Iraq war: "we're going to give you freedom, whether you like it or not". (it doesn't work, and shows how dysfunctional the original approach is, AND has a huge payback for the perpetrators.)

i don't see female infanticide or mass killings due to race, ethnicity, etc. as a cultural practice we should respect. i see it as a human rights issue.

I don't respect it, I don't support it. I don't condone it. I seek to understand it because that is the only way actual solutions will unfold. The solution exists within the situation.

soulsinging

angelica wrote:

It's a psychological principle that to take the "I'm right/you're wrong" approach, you guarantee yourself imbalanced repercussions because you are coming from an imbalanced perspective. Whereas the idea is if one is be realistic and on a equal playing field, one accepts that one's own views are there for a reason, and also that the Indian family's views are also there for a reason. By this willingness to look into the situation, we can find the actual issues/causes, and even possibly make movement towards solutions. It's about suspending judgment so that we can learn and use our logic without distorting it. When we distort logic with emotion, we therefore act in distorted ways, which begets distorted payback. The way of imposing views on others ends up more like the Iraq war: "we're going to give you freedom, whether you like it or not". (it doesn't work, and shows how dysfunctional the original approach is, AND has a huge payback for the perpetrators.)

I don't respect it, I don't support it. I don't condone it. I seek to understand it because that is the only way actual solutions will unfold. The solution exists within the situation.

this all sounds like the exact same reasoning ahnimus was using in the rape thread that got you all bent out of shape.

angelica

soulsinging wrote:

this all sounds like the exact same reasoning ahnimus was using in the rape thread that got you all bent out of shape.

I didn't see the rape thread until yesterday when the link was posted to it in the criminal thread. So I definitely did not get bent out of shape about it. For the record, I mostly agreed with what Ahnimus was saying, from what I read (and I only read a page or so). I also mentioned a few times in the criminal thread that I agreed with his view throughout regarding understanding criminals. That is where he and I see eye to eye.

I stand strong behind that because like Ahnimus, I know what it is like being an intelligent person who has dramatically felt the consequences of the way society treated me. As a teenager I used to fantasize about committing suicide and taking people with me. There are reasons that happens. I have the utmost compassion for the throwaway people of our society. As a matter of fact, I believe that I am very blessed that I have made it out of "that world" by the grace of God and a few good people. The majority of people reinforced the horrible fallout I experienced. And they do not realize what accountability they hold. When we blame one to absolve many, we miss out on understanding. I have many friends who are no longer with us--they paid the price for our evolution. Victims are victims. Rapists and the raped are two sides of the abuse coin, for example. I am for renewed systems that are beyond concepts of sacrificing for the whole.

However, I understand there are practical considerations that you raise. For example with rape or criminals in our own backyard--in our own countries, I am all for having practical consequences. And I know they are accountable for their actions. We all are.

josevolution

this is just fucking sick i don't care for what reasons the indians are doing this it's just plain wrong i believe this has to affect the karma of the whole human race for the worst i'm afraid, poor souls and yet they worship rats & cows but not women who by the way are the one's god chose to cary the burden of childbirth...........