Sex, Celibacy and Abuse - What Can Repression Accomplish?

Several years ago I came across a series of books in a college library on ethical issues. The series included pro and con arguments on topics such as euthanasia, contraception, and divorce but one of the books even had people arguing in defense of the engaging in sex with children. It was the only book in the series that didn’t have a strong balance of arguments—there were obviously few who were willing to defend such practices. My recollection of the arguments is that they centered around the idea that there is no stigma unless you create a stigma.

One of the key points I picked up from the anti-abuse essays was that there was no link between heterosexual desire and pedophilia. Perhaps I misunderstood what the authors were saying or their opinions were not representative of serious research but at the time I was surprised to read this as the rate of sexual abuse of children I had come to know about in ISKCON seemed to indicate otherwise. Celibacy, the restriction of heterosexual desire, seemed to play a part in many instances of sexual abuse of children.

At the time I took a mental note that sometime in the future I wanted to look into this topic more but to date have never done so. A few days ago I saw an announcement that Google were testing a search engine for academics. I visited the the site and typed in the word “vaishnava.” Four pages or results were shown and I started browsing through the various links. On the fourth page I came across a link to a pdf file from the Naz Foundation. [The results have since changed but the pdf is available here. I haven’t found the word “vaishnava” in the report but Google’s service was clearly beta.] The report was entitled “Risk and needs assessment amongst males who have sex with males in Lucknow, India.”

The report was very graphic but as soon as I started reading I realized that I had found something that seemed relevant to my question from years ago: can celibacy lead to greater incidence of “unnatural” sexual practices? Although the Naz Foundation is an HIV/AIDS NGO with a focus on male-to-male sexual relationships, the report made it clear that much sexual activity in India does not follow the simple stratification we might see in the West—hetero, gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, etc.—but rather that there are a great deal of “convenient” sexual encounters, in which children and other males are the prominent “outlets.”



Similarly in another report from Naz "On Males Who Have Sex With Males In India And Bangladesh":



In adopting the sexual tenets of “Vedic culture,” Brahmanism, Hinduism or whatever, did ISKCON create a culture much closer to that of the amorphous type described in these reports?

When reading these reports, the alleged references by infamous Western sannyasis and gurus to “any old hole” and allegations of sexual activity with males of any age similarly blur the line between heterosexuality, homosexuality, and pedophilia. However I also have in mind while reading these reports particular individuals who, as far as I know, are clearly heterosexual but who engaged in some kind of sexual encounter with minors while ostensibly trying to practice celibacy.

“Making Visible the Invisible,” another paper from the Naz Foundation, presents a summary of South Asian culture, where marriage rather than celibacy is the goal:


The most sexually available object. It is terrible to use the word “object” here but this is a recurring theme in the Naz reports that I have read. The sexual partner is often not a partner but an object, something to be penetrated, a vessel for discharge, a hole.

The Lucknow Report supplies some astonishing results. It should be noted however that their 400 survey participants are not representative of the entire population as their participation was not solicited blindly but “self-selected by members of the survey team, and [this] usually represented friends, sexual partners, and members of sex networks.” The statistics are therefore representative of little more than the participants themselves but even so, are worth noting.

Age of first sexual encounter:
Aged 5-10 - 16.75%
Aged 11-15 - 53.25%
70% had sexual encounters before the age of 15.

Who with?
With a male - 89.25% With a female – 10.75%

In most of those encounters with a male, the first sex act involved something being done to them, i.e. mutuality was not present. More than 80% of those dominating males were over the age of 17, a full 56% being over the age of 22. Almost 56% of those males were relatives.

Of the 400 participants, only 6 are unmarried and planning to remain so. The rest are either married or planning to get married*.

Many of the anecdotes do not support a strong homosexual or pedophilial desire. Sexually active males, within the confines of a culture where women are unreachable and/or uninterested, seek engagement wherever they can find it. Darkness, accessibility, lack of suspicion, etc., all provide a situation where young males can easily become sexual objects.

[Going to have to cut this here as I’m getting carpal tunnel from typing…and hopefully what I’m trying to investigate isn’t of the same nature. If any readers know of any relevant research or recommended titles and don’t want to post it publicly, please PM me. I do know of a book on child abuse in India called “Bitter Chocolate” but I don’t have a copy yet.]


*In regard to marriage, it is worth noting that just last week the UNAIDS reported (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4032699.stm) that HIV infection in women worldwide was reaching the 50% mark and it is not difficult to imagine that in India most of the female sufferers were infected by their husbands. Their report for 2004 states:



http://www.unaids.org/wad2004/EPIupdate200....htm#P145_38679

An impressive report, Braja. I'd like to see more articles of this sort. Clearly this goes heavily counter to the idealized image of Vedic culture that is represented by Krishna Kirti's blog.

In particular, I agree with your top of article assessment that enforced celibacy leads to an "any hole in a storm" kind of philosophy.

But this is also one of the reasons that demonization of the pedophile also seems to be a bit over the top. Even Srila Prabhupada seemed to have this kind of "physics" attitude to sexuality. If it is ready to blow, it blows. And it very much is a type of "object" relationship.

Very interesting data and good analysis, Braja.

I was going to quote Krishna Kirti as means to expand upon the "not a stigma unless you make it a stigma" type of outlook. He posted a piece on child marriage that essentially took the high incidence of premarital sex in America and "solved" it by instituting child marriage. If losing your virginity before marriage is on the scale of normal-to-unfortunate rather than death-to-damnation, such an argument necessarily looks quite ridiculous and, indeed, dangerous. (I'd sure like to see some statistics on how such marriages have worked in ISKCON so far. "No post-dated checks, please.")

I do remember also being shocked when one of ISKCON's abuse counselors was showing abused gurukulis a Hollywood movie in which the abusers get their violent comeuppance at the hands of those they abused. Letting Hollywood decide what an appropriate emotional and/or practical response is to having been abused is frightening. Then again, if it is cathartic or the only means a person has for identifying what they feel, perhaps it does make sense.


I can never escape the posters my mother used to hang on the back of our toilet door: "Learning to love is learning to listen" "It's better to understand than to be understood." The issue for me is one of exploitation. Did a person engage their age, size, gender, position or other superiority to use another person for their own pleasure? That's my own moral line.


One of KK's respondents had this to say:


Dehumanized. I take humanity from the perspective of each individual. You make someone an object if you do not identify from their perspective.

The BBC has a review of Bitter Chocolate. It begins:

A related topic I just started...

'What Should/n't Happen Before Marriage'

I have heard about similar same sex stuff going on a lot in Turkey where marriages are also arranged and the virginity of the girls is a must. The future mother-in-law even personally checks if the selected bride is a virgin before the engagement can take place. I agree that we have a romanticized and unrealistic picture of Indian/ Hindu/ Vedic society and we don't have the full picture of what life in such a society is really like and of the extent of hypocrisy and abuse just beneath the surface.



It is a horrible notion and I agree fully that it is dehumanizing and deeply traumatic for the person who has been made into an object. A couple of years ago my sister lived in India for while and came to know an Indian boy from a poor Vaishnava family. He went to a school that sounded very much like an ISKCON gurukula but had nothing to do with ISKCON. He was sexually abused by his teacher as a young boy and said that everybody knew that this man is into boys but nobody did or said anything. He said that such abuses are common, but it is taboo to talk about it. This boy was very angry at his teacher and his main motivation to get ahead in life (he became a world champion of hatha-yoga) was to become physically strong and be able to confront his abuser.

IIRC, there was some discussion on the Pashtun also and how male-boy sex was quite prominent in that culture but was against the Talebanic ideal.

The breach of trust that occurs when a teacher or parent abuses a child is diametrically opposite to what I believe the purpose of varnasramic culture is--ever widening circles of trust and acceptance that ultimately sustain faith in God. We have that saying that "water finds its level," and, sadly, we can see that abuse and exploitation are part of the level with which we live. So which system or ideal best supports the restriction of those tendencies? A modern humanist outlook which tries to create equal rights for all or an ancient system, transplanted, and missing key components (no religious people or powerful, charismatic, Godly leaders)?


I totally forgot when I was writing this that on my first visit to India an airport guard tried to molest me. I was a naive 19 at the time and was flying from Delhi to Bhubanesvara. As the flight left at 5 or 6 am, I decided to spend the night in the airport. I chose a quiet corner to sleep in (or rather, in which to offer myself as mosquito fodder--the mosquitos thought the citronella was a tangy sauce rather than a deterrent). After some time a guy in uniform, carrying a gun, told me that I couldn't sleep there but had to move. I picked up my stuff and started walking away when he told me that there was a designated room for sleeping, directing me to a room a few feet away that had half a dozen beds. Foolishly I believed him and put my stuff down next to a bed but did not lie down. He then switched out the lights, approached me saying "massage is good" and tried to rub my thighs. When I let him know that he couldn't do that he became angry and told me to get out. By that time I was thinking the same thing.

In a small way it demonstrated the breach of trust that is necessarily a part of much abuse--the guy in uniform becomes an exploiter rather than a protector. Years later my wife was groped when we boarded a train in Kolkatta by an armed, and drunk, soldier. I ended up pushing him out the door of the train, which was only just starting to move, unfortunately.


==================================================

While speaking of a possible difference in Indian and Western sexuality, I'm also reminded of when I first began studying jyotish. I was deeply interested in the psychological aspects of astrology, especially the interplay of the planets and the three modes, but most of the texts I could find would state things like, "will have mean eyes, will be a killer of birds." My impression was that they lacked reference to things like introversion, insecurity, confidence, etc., instead making definite and physical prognoses--"Will have five children." Sheer physicality and certainty seemed to be the prominent concern.

The point about social systems is interesting. We have the Platonic/Aristotelian divide again. This is always the danger when one public acknowledges that there is a problem. Islamic and Communist societies routinely hid their own problems while pointing their finger at the very public scandals in the democratic countries.

There is a genuine balance that needs to be struck, but clearly the democratic approach is better. Better to expose, reform and eventually forgive, than to ignore and allow abuse to persist in the name of respecting authority.

Just a small point: My impression from Prabhupada was that

(1) It was wrong because sexuality in general was wrong. E.g., homosexuality was not considered radically different from heterosexuality. Both were symptoms of the material disease. By that token, pedophilia or bestiality, etc., are just extensions of the same maladie.

(2) As such, it was in the "normal" of material life. In other words, no lasting psychological damage was really taken into consideration. Or if it was, it was taken stoically, as a karmic cross to bear.

But one of the general criticisms of ALL traditional societies, including the Hindu, is a general passivity about reform, the so-called "fatalism." (Why just traditional societies, where are individuals ready to sacrifice personal comfort and security for the greater good in any society?)

The question we are faced with is how to negotiate the "conversion" of Vaishnava religious symbols, rituals, etc., into a more rational social environment.

Just one more rather important point: To what extent does a milieu which we can now look at critically, in other words a diseased cultural environment, produce a phenomenon like the bhakti movement? Generally, social or economic conditions are often seen as valid causes of a religious or other upheavals in society. But sexual frustrations, etc., also play a role in a society's general sense of satisfaction with life.

It has become well known that societies with high percentages of indolent youth with reduced prospects are the most revolutionary or unstable. This is one of the reasons why the Middle East is so volatile. In Iraq, for instance, after the invasion, a great number of youth in this age group were fired or simply not hired. These fellows are now shooting at the imperial aggressors. Or strapping bombs to their chests. The promise of Houris in Paradise is more certain than heterosexual intercourse in this world.

In other circumstances, this might produce a religious movement.

(Of course, I am only talking about a single factor among many, but one that needs to be taken into account.)

I have been asking myself the same question and my conclusion is that a modern humanist outlook is a better, and yes, more progressive approach. And let's not forget that if we had not imbibed this outlook from our host culture, and if our societies did not give us the freedom (and the right) to choose our own path in life, we would not be having this discussion, nor would have Krishna Kirti ever found out about the virtues of Indian conservatism.

It is true that traditional societies have strong and stable families, and I also think that where divorce is not an option people will have a more solid psychological ancor and a sense of belonging, will know their roots and will not experience the confusion and identity crisis of persons from broken families in the West. For a child, the father and mother are one whole and his entire world, and if that world remains intact and a constant, unchangeable fact, it gives one a firm ground under one's feet that otherwise wouldn't be there, even when that world is very troubled and damaging in other respects.

But I will choose modern life with all its stress, confusion and alienation over Indian village idyll any day, because Western society gives me the possibility to change my circumstances and develop my potential. I don't believe that either system is perfect, but I am convinced that modern Western life is the lesser evil than the two.

Last year I was a witness of a family drama which was a real eye-opener for me. There was a nice Armenian family in our neighborhood with two wonderful little girls who quickly became playmates to our children, so I came to know their mother quite well. Armenian culture is a mixture of East and West. The extended family is very important, most women marry young, right after high school, and don't work, but have no more than 2-3 children. They are not covered like in the Islamic countries but are invariably dressed in feminine clothes and high heels and always have make-up and manicure.

This particular family stayed here for a year; they were kind and decent people liked by everybody. Then one day they received the news that the brother of the husband had died in a car accident in Armenia and he decided that they are going back to be with his parents. When the woman told me about it, she was crying. She was devastated because they would be going back to a life of uncertainty and misery and even danger while in Belgium they had a chance of normal life and a future for the children.

As we were talking, she heard that her husband was coming. Immediately she dried her tears and put on the most cheerful and composed mask on her face you can imagine and served him his dinner as usual. I was dumbfounded. It was a performance worthy of an Oscar. If I had not seen her despair just seconds before, I would have thought that this was a perfectly happy and united family. I still shudder when I remember it, not so much because the woman had to leave with her husband while she obviously wanted to stay -- there can be always reverses and circumstances beyond your control -- but because she had to pretend for the sake of appearance, because she was not allowed to have an opninion, to be herself ultimately.

So, yes, traditional societies give the appearance of stability and strong family ties, but it is another question how much substance is there below the surface and at what price is this appearance maintained.

A short word: I don't know why we think exclusively in terms of either/or. Of course, that is the way Prabhupada presented it, or KK presents it now. But in fact, we are in a position to choose the best of both. I agree that we are beneficiaries of the humanistic outlook beginning from the enlightenment, which really viewed religion as a repressive force for obscurantism and evil.

We don't have to think that religion is NECESSARILYa force for repression and evil, but rather that it too can be reformed, and serve its essential purpose--to provide meaning and transcendence to a life, that even with the best opportunities, is always circumspect--bound by old age, disease and death, and therefore an aura of existential emptiness.

I sometimes think that the Western interest in KC is, like the Indians sometimes think, a kind of fifth column for Western values to enter India. Just think, for example, of the devotees' desire to promote ecological ideas in the Braja area. It's not as simple as "the blind and the lame."

One of the great ironies of Mahar conversion to Buddhism in the 1950's is that today there are a great number of Western Buddhists working in the Mahar community much in the way that Christian missionaries would have in the past--as teachers, etc.

Maybe in this particular case the woman acted as she did because she wasn’t ‘allowed’ to have an opinion, as per your witness. However, I believe the norm in modern western culture, especially in American culture, is that if ever a woman sacrifices her own ‘self’ for the sake of others, it is done by choice. Western women in general are finding more and more facilities to be on their own, and all the support to be all they desire to be, but naturally the choice is ultimately theirs, and many choose to hide their tears and so forth for the comfort of family and then the community and society.

I don’t think any of us can really escape the circle, that circle of cosmic independence and exploits which keeps leading us back to the village, where sacrifice becomes actual liberation and ultimate fulfillment.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I have read through this section several times and struggle for some perspective. I cannot speak well on the cultural contexts and how that may play into the issue of sexuality. However I do have strong feelings surrounding the idea of sexual repression equating or leading to pedophilia.

As a victim of sexual abuse I will say that it is something that forever haunts those who suffered through it. There isn’t a day where a glimpse isn’t there and it wreaks havoc on every aspect of ones life, or in the least, it has to me. In some respects I have come to terms with it over the last few years as I have tried to see it as more than tragic occurrences but also as a part of who and what I am. In a psychological/emotional context it is, quite honestly, a part of my very being.

Just some scattered thoughts:

In regards to repression of sexual outlet being a gateway to pedophilia I simply cannot agree. Pedophilia, like rape, is not a sexual release. I don’t want to discount the social studies that Braja has presented but I believe they blur some lines as well as remain aloof from the insight of both the perpetrator and the victim, which in this case, is critical in understanding it.

Pedophilia is an outlet for a need to control and power over others which is played out in a sexual context. In general it is something that is passed down (i.e. those that perpetrate such acts were almost always victims of them). For those victims that become perpetrators it is about ddressing the devastation fo being the powerless victim and now being the one with the pwer. It is about dehumanizing what one experienced and in moving "up" from vistim o controller.

As a victim I have been conditioned to feel powerless in any situation where I am not in control. I will give you some insight into just how deeply it runs for me:

I sit down in the barber’s chair. They put the apron on and I am overcome with a feeling of being powerless. I am not exaggerating when I say that if I were to tell the barber that I want a slight trim and he decides to shave my head I simply can barely, if at all, voice disapproval. I fall apart inside. I feel angry, sad but most of all powerless. Like I am watching a movie which I didn;t write and can;t change. This may sound silly and unrelated but it is a direct result of the abuse I suffered. You feel powerless and are easily taken advantage of.

As a child between the ages of 7 and 9 years of age I was sexually molested on several occasions by my Dentist. The result was that I could never take care of my teeth, look at my teeth or talk about my teeth. Just the site of a toothbrush brought everything to life and for almost two decades I could not see a dentist or any doctor for that manner except for a few rare occasions where I had no choice. Why? Because like I experienced as a child I am at someone elses mercy. They can chose to care fo me or take advantage of me and I can only react. For vistoms being reactive is more painful than I can describe.

Other aspects of my experiences led to terrible migraines, manic depression and an inability to become close to anyone. From the time that I experienced the abuse until the age of 25 I basically erased the particular events from my mind. I didn’t think about them and I never talked to anyone about what had happened to me.

At one point, almost 10 years ago I felt I had enough of it. At the time I was living in NYC. My wife and I were running the temple on 26 Second Avenue and I was touring heavily with a preaching project called 108. Anyhow, I had gone weeks with terrible migraines, while on tour, which led to various emergency room trips around the country. When I returned home I couldn’t even sleep. I would lay in a dark room for days at a time. Finally I decided I just couldn’t do this anymore. I got dressed, went outside and took a walk over to Washington Square Park. Just the personal resolution that I wasn’t going to do “this” anymore made my headache go away.

The walk to the park was peaceful. My senses were alive and it felt like the most beautiful day in the world. When I got to the park I sat down at a bench and within minutes was approached by one of the many resident drug dealers. He hit me up and I told him I wasn’t interested in drugs but that I would be interested in getting a gun. He told me $400 upfront and to be back in an hour. I walked right to the ATM across the street, took out the money and handed it over. Over the next hour I walked around and was struck by how alive I felt. When I returned to the bench I was approached and given my gun.

I walked back to my apartment and went into my room. I sat down, took the gun out of the bag and promptly placed it into my mouth. It was like the world was standing still. I finally felt in total control; my life was mine. I saw, in my head, my father and my wife. I thought of how my death would play into their lives and I fell apart. After I gathered myself I walked downstairs and down to avenue D. I saw a dumpster and deposited the gun.

Years later I wrote about the experience in a song:

One Fine Day

One fine day, gun in hand
Purpose; clear intentions
Passion in my heart; fire in my veins
No more insecurity; no more self loathing
This I control
All I wanted was control; a sense of control
Now it’s in my hand; the ultimate control
Never meant to be; it never should be
But for one sad second I felt control

That morning, that three hour space of time, started the healing for me. What lied ahead for me over the last 6 years was extremely painful. As my wife, father and few friends discovered what had happened they all said one thing… that it all made sense now.

A few years later, after I had given up music I started to write again. I got together with a few friends and everything poured out. Within minutes of hearing a part of a song I wrote something which captured that experience and how it shaped my life:

Beauty Mark

I can see myself, vulnerable, innocent. Just what you were looking for. You set the stage for what is my life and I played it back a million times. And how I tried to purge this from my mind but it’s always tearing at me. I can’t help but wonder if you ever think about me because I can’t get you out of my mind.

You’re faceless, heartless, to me. Was I the only one? You are the rotting teeth in my mouth and everyday you’re there to remind me. You symbolize my pain, you’re that gun in my mouth, but no bullet can make this go away. I only wish I could share this with you.

Do you have a son? Is he beautiful and innocent? Did you share with him what you shared with me? You’re my beauty mark.

Months later I wrote and recorded an album that was about what I was experiencing. It was the most lucid and cathartic months of my life.

A year before this my wife and I had our first son. It was the first time I ever felt someone was a part of me. It wasn’t that I didn’t love my wife, my parents or friends but there was this wall that will always exist. With my son the wall didn’t exist. The most peaceful moments in my life were when he was laying in my arms.

I booked two weeks at a recording studio on the beach in Massachusetts. The plan was to finish writing and recording a record. At the time I had released over a 9 records but this would be my first record. It wasn’t about what I believed in; rather it was about what I was. My wife was in school at the time so I brought my son with me. Everyday I would take him to the beach and watch him run around. When he would sleep at night I would write and record the vocals. It was through my son that I now had access to myself. I experienced my first sense of control the day I put a gun in my mouth and I experienced my first true sense of belonging with my son.

What I am trying to get at is that for the victims pedophilia has nothing to do with sexuality except that it is the medium. The cycle itself and all it entails is not about the act of sex rather one of violence.

Personally it ruined any enjoyment that sex could or would ever be able to bring to my life. It made sexuality itself a devastating subject and aspect of my life. It is also why I feel strongly that for the perpetrator it isn’t about sexual release. It is about having control, exerting your control and making sense of something that can’t ever make sense.

An additional note is that I find the attempted link between homosexuality and pedophilia to be offensive, thoughtless and damaging. It is a fact that the overwhelming majority of perpetrators are heterosexual in their “normal” life. Their actions aren’t about trying to “escape the closet” as it is an all together separate experience and action than that of sex.

In the context of how this plays out in the various examples of ISKCON I think it is important to differentiate between fall down and pedophilia. No one decides to molest a child because he is afraid to put on white or can’t find a wife. I don’t think anyone here would or could equate the sexual reasons to choosing marriage over being single to the choice between having union with a consenting adult in marriage or experiencing the same things with a young child. It just doesn’t equate.

I do think that when it comes to adults and how they experience sexuality and with whom that culture and ones situation may play a part but in the case of pedophilia I do not.

I think that is all I can write. This probably doesn’t make a lot of sense so I apologize if it all seems jumbled. However it is something I still try to understand to this day.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Rasaraja, thank you for the collection of the scattered thoughts. I could feel a warmth and a courage in your words of one who made great steps in the healing process. And yes, it did make a lot of sense. Blessings on your journey.

Dear Ras,

I really appreciate you sharing this with all of us. It means a lot to me.
Best wishes and have a nice time in India, you and your nice family....

It doesn't have to be either/or, definitely, and the ideal is a harmonious synthesis of both. But the foundation of your outlook will always be either one or the other, unless you were born in a mixed family and somehow managed to grow up in two places (India and the West) at the same time. As the saying goes, samskaras run very deep, and I also think that they are intrinsic and unalienable. E.g., I had an atheist education and upbringing, and although ACBSP and ISKCON opened the world of religion and spirituality for me, and while my faith is very important to me, if I examine it honestly I will admit that I want God (Lord Krishna) on my terms, because I chose to believe in Him. I can refine my approach and adjust it but I cannot change it.

In the same way, both KK and Suhotra Swami sound pretty Western to me. No matter how long essays they write and who they quote they are not convincing because what they are defending is not "in their blood". It just doesn't flow naturally for them. The Vedic ideal is an acquired ideal for them, if one could call it like that, it is not part of the foundation of their worldview. And on top of that, there is no clear consensus on what the Vedic ideal is supposed to be, so their identity is kind of blurred and unclear. From the way they present themselves, I'd rather picture S. S. as a professor of philosophy and KK as a headmaster in some Catholic atheneum for girls, than these caricature-like Vedic/ ISKCON brahmanas they try so hard to be.

Just some scattered thoughts from me too. I meant to respond earlier but was sick.

O my dear Rasaraja Prabhu, I am so glad you are here to be with us. Thank you for sharing your story with us and trusting us with it. I know it takes courage to reveal such raw pain and the damage it has caused.

I agree also with your assessment of the reasons behind sexual abuse and very much appreciate your separating out the sexual orientation from the abuse, and violence versus sexual gratification as the motive. This has been true for every account of sexual abuse I have heard on the suicide crisis line I work on. (I have to say also that a majority of callers have experienced sexual abuse.)

Wishing you healing and, ultimately, joy--

Tapati dasi

As for the choice between western style humanism or Vedic cultural standards, I think that ultimately we must incorporate these Vedic ideals according to the terms of the culture we are in. It is the culture we understand, live in, and are oriented to. I am not going to marry off a 12 year old. That's just not going to happen. If the valuable parts of Vedic traditions are ever going to appeal to a Western audience in the long term, they can't violate such basic standards as not marrying off children (as we see it in the West). Polygamy is another one that just gets us looked at like weirdos.

Also, what we know about Vedic culture is not from personal observation, but from books that idealized that culture--including fantastical elements not supported by science. Who knows what it was really like living in those times? However, even if it was exactly as portrayed in scriptures, I wouldn't be happy living like that. It's not my culture and years of trying to adopt it didn't "take."

I also agree that we were taught to idealize present day Indian society. In Anthropology we talk a lot about the differences between real and ideal culture. There is what you like to believe about your culture on the surface, and then there is what really happens whether behind closed doors or even openly. An example of this is that we like to believe in America that we have this great concern about human rights, we go around the world preaching about it, yet our prisons are often very abusive and we have the death penalty in several states. ( I won't even get into Abhu Graib...)

The 20% figure for sexual abuse in India is very close to our own figures and I find myself wondering if studies have been done comparing rates cross-culturally--is this a figure that is constant in many cultures? Of course, it is hard to quantify in any culture given that many victims have taken on feelings of shame and do not ever report it.

In that regard here is an interesting site:

http://www.jimhopper.com/abstats/

A friend of mine who worked with women who were seriously mentally ill did a study to complete her LCSW coursework that looked at whether they had experienced childhood sexual abuse. It turned out that almost all of them had!

I've been reading with interest the stories and controversy regarding celibate priests and sexual abuse and many people think it isn't just the celibacy, but that men who already have damaged psyches with regard to sex gravitate to the priesthood where they think they can escape the issue. I found myself wondering if that same type gravitates to the bramachari ashram or sannyasa.

I'll stop rambling now between tasks at work.

Dear Braja,

Wow. The research you have posted is insightful and indeed food for thought.


At least it created conditions, I think, where individuals were similarly sexually frustrated, and where the kind of sex that is normal for most of us -- between two consenting adults of opposite sex -- was made unavailable. And not just physically unavailable but also an activity that had a high cost: it required that one be married (a big risk to take, considering the ISKCON matchmaking traditions and the stigma attached to grhastha life), it required that one was prepared to have children, and it produced shame and guilt.

The key ingredients seem to be:

-- polarizing the two genders: making women inferior and objectified, with only males having the subject status (this makes sure that no satisfying, mutual bonds can develop between the sexes, even in marriage)
--- polarizing the value judgments of the regular sexual act (proper, religious sex for begetting KC ofspring is divine, while sex for pleasure is sinful)



This has parallels in the Hindu religious canon. The belief that the soul is in the semen and that the woman's role is that of a vessel, patra. It's there in the Bhagavatam as well. I have no book at hand to look up the reference, but I believe one example is in 9th Skandha, the story of the pregnant Mamata being raped, with ACBS' purport.

Think of all those stories of sages who discharged semen upon seeing an Apsara, and from that semen children were born. One sage collects the semen into a pot, a vessel.



The ancient Greek culture had something similar. The word paedophilia is Greek. I believe such love between males was even less shameful and secret than it is in the Indian society of today. The so-called Platonic love was not really a non-erotic love but a courtly love between a boy and an older male. It did not always involve sexual acts of penetration but it was definitely erotic. These were males who would later marry and perform sexually with women. (Elpis or someone else well-read in ancient Greece, please correct me if needed.)




WHAT? 50% of all women worldwide?
Yes, in India most female sufferers were infected by their husbands. Then they cannot afford the antiretroviral drugs for both husband and wife, so the surrendered wife forsakes hers, so that her husband can get treated.

If you want info about more research relevant to this question, Madhusudani Radha could surely help you (I can give you her e-mail address if you don't have it). She works as a researcher in the field of AIDS prevention and treatment in India, which includes research on sexuality in that society.

Fast thought: And how do we reconcile the symbolism of Radha and Krishna with the above "key ingredients"?

It seems that the creation of this kind of repressive and dualistic culture only heightens the contrast with the "romantic" picture of love in the Divine Couple.