One of the things that stands out is the analogy you can draw between some of the commenter’s attitudes towards women, and some people I knew in Mississippi, and their attitudes towards…um, people who had more melanin than they did, and the government policies that were shaped to address the inequities they faced.

They’d always flip the argument around to make it about them. It was infuriating. “Do you know how many poor white kids can’t get into a good college? Do you know how many whitefolk can’t live the American dream?”

The point I’d make to them (and you) is that in each of these discussions, there is a group that is singularly empowered, and another that is most assuredly not. Is there such a thing as DV towards men? Yes, of course! Is it as prevalent as DV towards women? No. And is it as serious? Sorry, but again…no. Speaking very broadly, it’s not.

And to the goofy loon who posted these pseudo figures about genders and the relative rates of DV by INSTIGATION, I’m going to call bullshit! Seriously, who are you trying to fool? Since when does the initiation rate for DV mean anything? If you want meaningful figures, how about you look at the INJURY RATE for men and women in DV? Or the rate of short-term or long-term disability resulting from DV? Or do you really think the whole “she started it!” argument is a valid defense for beating your spouse?

Runa, you’re right. I missed the implications of that part of her comment. I was reacting more to people freaking out about the cousin thing.

thanks for the compliment, btw.

I just could not resist one more post.I always admire your common sense postings. However:

If MoS had qualified her statement to say that she meant marriage between cousins in some parts of India, then her statement is defensible. If she had qualified her statement with anything at all , it would have been ok.

Her statement reads that all over India, repressed desis are playing much more than “house” with their cousins and all because “boyfriend/girlfriend” is “not allowed”. This is what offends- the sweeping generalization without any qualifiers.Perpetuating stereotypes about ‘conservative Indian society’.What does she mean by “not allowed”? Does she claim to speak for all Indians based on the few that she has met?

I am sure that across America there may be some folks who sexually experimented with their cousins.I am sure there are several Americans who are married to their cousins too.You don’t see any sweeping generalizations about Americans based on that fact!

I think what hit a nerve was that I have observed such of pre-conceived notions from non-Indians a few times earlier and its very patronizing.Back in the 80s, I remember , along with a bunch of friends,meeting a couple of American exchange students in my hometown in India,. They were totally amazed that our group of teenagers included boys and girls and that we actually had interaction with members of the opposite sex.A few us us were even – gasp! – dating. Actually their open-jawed reaction was quite hilarious in retrospect but back then it was a rude awakening that folks from outside India had a lot of incorrect ideas about India and Indian society.

Some twenty -odd years later , reading something that I found as patronizing on this board ,reminded me that the more things change, the more they remain the same.

You are right too, but MoS didn’t say what part of India she was talking about, she just said it was “not uncommon”. And I did say it was taboo among some areas in India. I just don’t think she was wrong in saying it was “not uncommon”–even if you only include Indian Muslims, and some South Indians, it’s still a sizeable chunk of the population. (Razib, help me out here–I know there are studies done on this). Either way, there’s not as much of the gross-out factor in India–even groups that don’t do it are generally okay with people who do, in my experience, as long as it’s not their family. It’s not so much that I care to defend her but that I think people need to realize how relative all these cultural taboos are.

I grew up in Hyderabad where there are plenty of both North and South Indians and no one was particularly shocked about the cousin make-out stories. While I’m personally not into that, having grown up with my cousins as basically siblings, whatever floats your boat.

Depending on region, religion, and community. In northern India, marrying cousins is strictly taboo among non-Muslims. And that extends to cousins several generations removed.

Pardesi Gori, I am sure some cousins do what you describe, but the cultural paradigm for cousins in northern India is that they are just like your brothers and sisters. We don’t even have a word for ‘cousin’, we refer to them as brother/sister. This is an important cultural value that I’m surprised you didn’t pick up on when you were in India.

I’m surprised to find myself in the position of validating someone I so often disagree with, but she’s actually right about this. It is not uncommon. I say this based on the experiences of about a third of my close friends growing up. Also, MoS, it’s not just in the Arab world that cousins marry cousins. It’s even expected in some parts of India, for first cousins too, and taboo in other parts. For example, the Telugu word for father’s sister, attha, can also be used to refer to one’s mother-in-law, because in some Telugu-speaking communities, a girl is expected to marry her father’s sister’s son. I know those of us who have bought into western moral values about who it’s okay to have sex with will find this disturbing, but in India it’s hardly even worth remarking on when someone is married to their cousin.