Based on Rambachan chapter in Raines and Maguire

Larger theme/question for us with all the religions – Is there a causal relationship between/among development, culture, religion?

Here, for example, they argue that Brahman (sexist) culture predates/colors Hinduism

18 – interesting parallel with Marxist analysis of working class mimicking the tastes/customs of the bourgeoisie as “evidence that they’ve made it”

here called “Brahmanization” or “Sanskritization”

Is Hinduism “positive” or “negative” for women?

Positive side:
Feminine deities or really manifestations of the divine “equally” divine (sort of, see Shakti link below)
Shakti

               
Shakti and Shiva                                          Kali

Precept of “nonviolence” (Ahimsa) should be used to create norms against violence against women
Commands from Manusmrti to honor women

Negative side:
Karma (caste too) used to justify mistreating women;
Interpretation of womanhood as a “curse” payback for misdeeds in former life
 Also used to condone suffering, physical abuse of women as “karma”
Manusmrti – list of rules, prohibitions
Women can’t be independent; must be subject to father, then husband, then sons

Cultural:
 Women have no value outside their relations to men
Once man dies (which is seen as his wife’s failing) the widow is seen as a drain on society – honorable thing to do is to commit suicide (sati) by jumping onto his funeral pyre
Dowries and the fact that women “go to their husbands” leads to devaluing daughters, daughters seen as drain on family

On the development issue, rather than development changing these norms, they have reinforced many of them

e.g. college educated men are more valuable now so they can demand higher dowries; more gadgets to be had so they demand scooters, TVs, etc.;

also technologies like ultrasound used to screen for female fetuses – only they are aborted; leads to imbalance of men to women (about 92.7 to 100)