--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "lurkernomore20002000"
steve.sundur@ wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I believe he (Ravi) is of Indian descent. He claims that
> > although he embraces, or at least is comfortable with "liberal"
> > western values, that his wife is traditional in her values,
> > and that she wants her husband to be her guru as well. Maybe
> > it is all good. But it doesn't sound quite right to me.
>
> Me neither. I mean, if they have some kind of mutual
> agreement, that's one thing, but it's a private matter.
> Forcing her to repudiate Amma in public borders on
> abusive, it seems to me (again, on the basis of what
> you describe). Well, just to be clear. I don't believe the
repudiation was a public event. I believe he made her do it privately to
him. But he did not seem to mind talking about it.
>
> > My connection between this situation, and off
> > shore drilling, was that there seemed to be a big pile on,
> > in the sense that members of the group were echoing one
> > another that the BP disaster should make it clear that all
> > off shore drilling should be banned, and then while we're
> > at it, lets ban any more nuclear plants.
> >
> > Now, rightly or wrongly, I figure that people who espouse
> > those sentiments are also likely to be vocal about women's
> > rights, and it seemed that no one cared to challenge Ravi
> > about his decision to ban his wife from participating in
> > anything to do with Amma, and that going forward he was to
> > occupy that role.
>
> I see the connection you were making. I think people are
> a lot more reluctant to challenge personal stuff publicly
> than huge impersonal entities like BP or the nuclear power
> industry. So that doesn't really surprise me.
>
> I hope she has some friends she can go to if he begins to
> get out of hand. Just sounds potentially ungood.
>
