New immigration option for battered Sikh women

It used to be the case that women who came to the US as dependents on their husbands’ immigration status were punjabi_woman.jpgsometimes caught between a rock and a hard place. In cases where one spouse was abusive, the other spouse wouldn’t leave the relationship for fear of losing their immigration status and being sent back to their original country. If they returned to their original country empty handed and without their spouses, they would be perceived as failures. And so, many women have just endured extremely abusive relationships.

One option that has been available if the abuser is a permanent resident or a US citizen is a self-petition under the Violence Against Women Act. But this wasn’t available if the abuser was in the US on a temporary visa, as many immigrants initially are, or to women outside the US.

Thus, a recent development in asylum law has the potential to open a door to safety for at least some women who are most seriously abused in domestic violence. To qualify for asylum (or refugee status), one must have been a victim of persecution, or have a well founded fear of persecution based on their race, nationality, religion, political opinion, or “membership in a particular social group.” Before this summer, women who were victims of horrendous domestic violence were not recognized as a particular social group, though the issue has been argued for 14 years in a battle to allow battered women to seek asylum in the US. [link]

The government’s prior position under the Bush administration was illustrated in the case of R-A-, a woman who suffered horrific violence at the hands of her husband, a former soldier of the Guatemalan army. She was kicked, whipped, and beaten unconscious, nearly had an eye pushed out, was repeatedly raped, sodomized, threatened with machetes and guns, dragged by her hair, and had windows and mirrors broken on her head. [source 1, 2]. The Guatemalan police refused to help each time she went to them, deciding that hers was a domestic matter. RA fled Guatemala and her husband, seeking asylum in the US.

RA was repeatedly granted then denied asylum before her case was finally stayed (put on hold) while the Department of Homeland Security attempted to articulate rules to govern cases like hers.

The immigration judge who heard Alvarado’s testimony found her story of abuse credible and granted her asylum. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (now known as Citizenship and Immigration Services) appealed the decision, In the Matter of R.A., to the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Board–though finding Alvarado’s testimony regarding her history of abuse credible — reversed the judge’s grant of asylum on the ground that she was not eligible for asylum. Rather than proceeding to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for judicial review, the Immigration and Naturalization Service re-examined the case and disagreed with the Board. In a 2000 response to this INS action, the Department of Justice published a proposed rule that set forth domestic violence survivors’ eligibility for asylum. One year later, Attorney General Janet Reno vacated the Board’s decision, instructing it to reconsider the case after the new rule was promulgated. But the rule never was finalized. In 2003, Attorney General John Ashcroft certified Matter of R.A. to himself and ordered supplemental briefing on Alvarado’s eligibility. Two years later, the litigation remained in administrative limbo, as Ashcroft remanded Alvarado’s case to the Board, again ordering decision upon publication of a final rule. [IntLawGrrls]

The rules have yet to be articulated but the stay was recently lifted and the Department articulated a new policy.

In a recent brief for a similar case, DHS stated that it is possible that domestic violence could be a basis for asylum…

[I]t is possible that … applicants who have experienced domestic violence could qualify for asylum … based on alternative particular social group foundations. [IntLawGrrls]

The Department hasn’t yet articulated just what the guidelines will be for whether a specific case of domestic violence creates a basis for asylum. The guidelines will likely be narrow, and only apply to extreme cases. But this is still progress.

Some readers are probably thinking, “what does this have to do with Sikh women in particular?” Domestic violence (sometimes in fatal form) exists in our community, even amongst educated, well-to-do, “modern” members. Many women do not know what their options are. Though we need to continue our long-term work to address the causes of domestic violence in our community, we also need immediate solutions for women in danger. Asylum is now one option.


bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark
tabs-top


39 Responses to “New immigration option for battered Sikh women”

  1. sham article says:

    There are no examples of in this article of Sikhs men abusing Sikh women.

    Gautamalen yes, but did they say christian gautamalen, or Christian men abuses woman, no.

    So, why is that female punjabi writers have such an easy time belittling Sikhism. Perhaps they really arent visible Sikhs as much as they are visible punjabi's.

    If people started indentifying abuse of women with punjabis these punjabi women writers could not stomach that, so they keep trying to victimize Sikhism.

  2. singh says:

    The author has got it wrong in the title. Nothing to do with sikhism here. Sikh teachings are of equality and respect for women.

    And someone who abuses his wife is definitely not following sikhism.

  3. sham article says:

    There are no examples of in this article of Sikhs men abusing Sikh women.

    Gautamalen yes, but did they say christian gautamalen, or Christian men abuses woman, no.

    So, why is that female punjabi writers have such an easy time belittling Sikhism. Perhaps they really arent visible Sikhs as much as they are visible punjabi’s.

    If people started indentifying abuse of women with punjabis these punjabi women writers could not stomach that, so they keep trying to victimize Sikhism.

  4. singh says:

    The author has got it wrong in the title. Nothing to do with sikhism here. Sikh teachings are of equality and respect for women.

    And someone who abuses his wife is definitely not following sikhism.

  5. P.Singh says:

    right…sort of like how, if a Christian priest molests a child, he's not a Christian and shouldn't be labelled as a Christian…

    …or if a Hindu decides to eat a Big Mac, he's not a Hindu…and shouldn't be labelled as a Hindu…

    …or if a Sikh considers caste to be important, he's not a Sikh…and shouldn't be labelled as a Sikh…

    I don't think anyone is saying it is Sikhi or Sikh thought that leads to the abuse of women. No doubt, the blame falls more squarely on a patriarchal Punjabi culture. However, it is silly to deny that many Punjabis are also Sikhs or profess to be Sikhs.

    Unless you are only going to count those purest of the pure Sikhs as Sikhs – the handful of saints amongst us who follow Sikhi to the letter in their thoughts and daily actions – you're going to

    find a whole lot of Sikhs who fall short of the ideal.

    I think its a little disingenuous to disassociate the Punjabi in us from the Sikh in us whenever its convenient.

    The abuse many women in our community suffer may well stem from our Punjabi culture, but that doesn't mean those women aren't Sikhs…or that men in the Sikh community aren't capable of committing such crimes.

    But it is a neat trick, I'll give you that – anytime a Sikh does something stupid, or commits a crime, we simply say he is not a Sikh, he is a Punjabi… meaning that no Sikh has ever done anything stupid or ever committed a crime. Yay!

  6. P.Singh says:

    right…sort of like how, if a Christian priest molests a child, he’s not a Christian and shouldn’t be labelled as a Christian…

    …or if a Hindu decides to eat a Big Mac, he’s not a Hindu…and shouldn’t be labelled as a Hindu…

    …or if a Sikh considers caste to be important, he’s not a Sikh…and shouldn’t be labelled as a Sikh…

    I don’t think anyone is saying it is Sikhi or Sikh thought that leads to the abuse of women. No doubt, the blame falls more squarely on a patriarchal Punjabi culture. However, it is silly to deny that many Punjabis are also Sikhs or profess to be Sikhs.

    Unless you are only going to count those purest of the pure Sikhs as Sikhs – the handful of saints amongst us who follow Sikhi to the letter in their thoughts and daily actions – you’re going to
    find a whole lot of Sikhs who fall short of the ideal.

    I think its a little disingenuous to disassociate the Punjabi in us from the Sikh in us whenever its convenient.

    The abuse many women in our community suffer may well stem from our Punjabi culture, but that doesn’t mean those women aren’t Sikhs…or that men in the Sikh community aren’t capable of committing such crimes.

    But it is a neat trick, I’ll give you that – anytime a Sikh does something stupid, or commits a crime, we simply say he is not a Sikh, he is a Punjabi… meaning that no Sikh has ever done anything stupid or ever committed a crime. Yay!

  7. Ranbir says:

    Very funny, P Singh, I was thinking the same thing. Now we can live happily together as perfect Sikhs– that's all five of us– wait, did I just have a drink– make that four. Yes, four perfect Sikhs in the world who do no wrong.

    But that's a lotta messed up Punjabis. Someone should start a blog about that.

  8. Ranbir says:

    Very funny, P Singh, I was thinking the same thing. Now we can live happily together as perfect Sikhs– that’s all five of us– wait, did I just have a drink– make that four. Yes, four perfect Sikhs in the world who do no wrong.

    But that’s a lotta messed up Punjabis. Someone should start a blog about that.

  9. sham article says:

    When you have a Christian priest who has a position in the Church to teach about Christ, and he molests a child then it can be understood why the headline would read Christian Priest John Kolaus molests child.

    If a public school teacher were to come to school drunk, you wouldn’t expect to read ‘School teacher Amy Duff comes to school drunk, Christians have no shame.’

    These articles do not have case information remotely related to Punjabi’s let alone Sikhs. One of the articles highlights casework about someone from Central America.

    These poorly written and irresponsible articles just have disturbing headlines to get noticed. Its like a big properly untied ugly purple pokadot ribbon on top of an empty box.

    That’s the trick. Nothing to read about. Its like the crime scene of journalism, you just got ripped off and libeled by the journalist, and the journalist friend want you to move along.

    People who write these types of headlines with nothing in the articles are making others look bad so people will believe they have something good to say, that’s how they wish to make themselves the authority on such issues.

    These type of journalist call themselves the backbone of activism, theirs is the maury povich/jerry springer approach to community.

    Today on Thelangarhall.com “Space alien impregnates Journalist” article below.

    Blah blah blah blah nasa blah blah girl he said he was an astronaut blah blah blah Blah blah saw him at the club blah blah blah home pregnancy test blah blah blah Blah negative blah blah but I’m eating lots of pickles blah blah test cant be right Blah blah he’s my baby’s daddy blah blah blah child support blah blah blah blah Why is my auntie around him blah blah blah blah my bla aunties pregnant too blah blah Blah blah going to be on jerry springer blah blah thanks thelangarhall.com blah blah blah blah

  10. Reema says:

    Sham article,

    I took the fact that abuse occurs within our community as a given. It occurs within every community.

    why is that female punjabi writers have such an easy time belittling Sikhism. Perhaps they really arent visible Sikhs as much as they are visible punjabi’s.

    If people started indentifying abuse of women with punjabis these punjabi women writers could not stomach that, so they keep trying to victimize Sikhism.

    Uh, wrong. Asking our community members to LIVE UP TO Sikh ideals is NOT "belittling Sikhi." It is recognizing REALITY, something you seem to have trouble doing.

    You're right in that many of our problems are rooted in Punjabi culture. But if you simply write off the inequities of our community to Punjabi culture, the next step to inaction is to say- well that's our culture, it's too hard to change, no point in trying.

    Sikhi mandates equality. Where we fail to treat each other as equals, we fail as Sikhs. Addressing the problems in a community does not bring shame to it! On the contrary, if we don't address our problems, we'll never move forward.

  11. sham article says:

    When you have a Christian priest who has a position in the Church to teach about Christ, and he molests a child then it can be understood why the headline would read Christian Priest John Kolaus molests child.

    If a public school teacher were to come to school drunk, you wouldnt expect to read School teacher Amy Duff comes to school drunk, Christians have no shame.

    These articles do not have case information remotely related to Punjabis let alone Sikhs. One of the articles highlights casework about someone from Central America.

    These poorly written and irresponsible articles just have disturbing headlines to get noticed. Its like a big properly untied ugly purple pokadot ribbon on top of an empty box.

    Thats the trick. Nothing to read about. Its like the crime scene of journalism, you just got ripped off and libeled by the journalist, and the journalist friend want you to move along.

    People who write these types of headlines with nothing in the articles are making others look bad so people will believe they have something good to say, thats how they wish to make themselves the authority on such issues.

    These type of journalist call themselves the backbone of activism, theirs is the maury povich/jerry springer approach to community.

    Today on Thelangarhall.com Space alien impregnates Journalist article below.

    Blah blah blah blah nasa blah blah girl he said he was an astronaut blah blah blah Blah blah saw him at the club blah blah blah home pregnancy test blah blah blah Blah negative blah blah but Im eating lots of pickles blah blah test cant be right Blah blah hes my babys daddy blah blah blah child support blah blah blah blah Why is my auntie around him blah blah blah blah my bla aunties pregnant too blah blah Blah blah going to be on jerry springer blah blah thanks thelangarhall.com blah blah blah blah

  12. Reema says:

    Sham article,

    I took the fact that abuse occurs within our community as a given. It occurs within every community.

    why is that female punjabi writers have such an easy time belittling Sikhism. Perhaps they really arent visible Sikhs as much as they are visible punjabis.

    If people started indentifying abuse of women with punjabis these punjabi women writers could not stomach that, so they keep trying to victimize Sikhism.

    Uh, wrong. Asking our community members to LIVE UP TO Sikh ideals is NOT “belittling Sikhi.” It is recognizing REALITY, something you seem to have trouble doing.

    You’re right in that many of our problems are rooted in Punjabi culture. But if you simply write off the inequities of our community to Punjabi culture, the next step to inaction is to say- well that’s our culture, it’s too hard to change, no point in trying.

    Sikhi mandates equality. Where we fail to treat each other as equals, we fail as Sikhs. Addressing the problems in a community does not bring shame to it! On the contrary, if we don’t address our problems, we’ll never move forward.

  13. sham article says:

    If a Sikh male wrote an article about prostitution and venereal diseases. And the title read,

    "Street walking and herpes the plight of punjabi women".

    But the article highlighted stories from Guatemala, Russia, and Iceland.

    How do you think that would affect Punjabi women?

    Especially when you know that majority of punjabi women are educated, fierce defenders of family life, and dont engage in promiscuous sex, let alone prostitution.

    And if the response by the writer was, 'I'm just trying to engage with punjabi women about the ills of society and to act responsibly, stop sugar coating life.

    The rest of society really doesnt know about much about punjabi women, can you imagine the added stigma they would have to face, especially if there were more and more articles along the same lines.

    Sikh men still have it worst, Sikh men are continuously mistaken for being the worst in society. Even muslims realize how horrible society views them by witnessing all that has been happening to Sikh men, especially since 9/11.

    How are Sikh men suppose to feel when even Sikh women are being instructed to villify them based on what other men do.

  14. Singh says:

    Especially when you know that majority of punjabi women are educated, fierce defenders of family life, and dont engage in promiscuous sex, let alone prostitution.

    Is this true?

  15. Reema says:

    Ok Sham article- I understand your concern.

    First of all, in no way, shape, or form was the intent of this post to 'vilify' Punjabi Sikh men as a group. Rest assured, I know many, many sensitive, reflective Punjabi Sikh men who are as feministic as Punjabi Sikh women. And engaging in a conversation about abuse in the community does NOT need to be a women vs. men issue. On the contrary, we need to respectfully have this discussion amongst both genders to see where each of us can improve in our communication and relationships.

    Secondly- the audience (both intended and actual) of this blog is Punjabi Sikhs. Why don't we focus on our own community instead of worrying how we look in others' eyes? The truth will come out. Whatever our problems are, people will see. What our strengths are, people will see.

    If you really think that the gurus' message of equality amongst genders is the norm in our communities, then you and I are coming from very different realities. That's lovely that you've grown up and lived in some utopian society, but that hasn't been my experience, nor the experience of any other Punjabi Sikh person I know, male or female.

    Why do you take this personally? This is a discussion about what takes place in the community. It's not directed at you. If you respect and listen to all the women in your life as equals, then more power to you. But you don't have the right to shut down and silence a conversation that others need to have.

  16. sham article says:

    If a Sikh male wrote an article about prostitution and venereal diseases. And the title read,

    “Street walking and herpes the plight of punjabi women”.

    But the article highlighted stories from Guatemala, Russia, and Iceland.

    How do you think that would affect Punjabi women?

    Especially when you know that majority of punjabi women are educated, fierce defenders of family life, and dont engage in promiscuous sex, let alone prostitution.

    And if the response by the writer was, ‘I’m just trying to engage with punjabi women about the ills of society and to act responsibly, stop sugar coating life.

    The rest of society really doesnt know about much about punjabi women, can you imagine the added stigma they would have to face, especially if there were more and more articles along the same lines.

    Sikh men still have it worst, Sikh men are continuously mistaken for being the worst in society. Even muslims realize how horrible society views them by witnessing all that has been happening to Sikh men, especially since 9/11.

    How are Sikh men suppose to feel when even Sikh women are being instructed to villify them based on what other men do.

  17. Singh says:

    Especially when you know that majority of punjabi women are educated, fierce defenders of family life, and dont engage in promiscuous sex, let alone prostitution.

    Is this true?

  18. Reema says:

    Ok Sham article- I understand your concern.

    First of all, in no way, shape, or form was the intent of this post to ‘vilify’ Punjabi Sikh men as a group. Rest assured, I know many, many sensitive, reflective Punjabi Sikh men who are as feministic as Punjabi Sikh women. And engaging in a conversation about abuse in the community does NOT need to be a women vs. men issue. On the contrary, we need to respectfully have this discussion amongst both genders to see where each of us can improve in our communication and relationships.

    Secondly- the audience (both intended and actual) of this blog is Punjabi Sikhs. Why don’t we focus on our own community instead of worrying how we look in others’ eyes? The truth will come out. Whatever our problems are, people will see. What our strengths are, people will see.

    If you really think that the gurus’ message of equality amongst genders is the norm in our communities, then you and I are coming from very different realities. That’s lovely that you’ve grown up and lived in some utopian society, but that hasn’t been my experience, nor the experience of any other Punjabi Sikh person I know, male or female.

    Why do you take this personally? This is a discussion about what takes place in the community. It’s not directed at you. If you respect and listen to all the women in your life as equals, then more power to you. But you don’t have the right to shut down and silence a conversation that others need to have.

  19. justasikh says:

    Hi Reema,

    It might not be directed at one person, but everyone's a part of a community and they will identify with different things than what anyone intended.

    Having worked at a newspaper for a few years and experiencing the "why do we do it this way" behind their editorial practices and policies, I think the attempt to link this to Sikhs can be done without doing it literally, and in this case would have been wiser to not try and make every article "sikh".

    I would like to try and share what I saw and what shaped what I read.

    There are many great articles that apply to all people, and having them on a sikh blog may not mean that it has to be tied in, literally. Such hand-holding in an intelligent environment (as hard as that might be to conceive sometimes) leads readers to not enjoy connecting the obvious dots themselves.

    Providing low hanging fruit that is satisfying, leads to people reaching for the higher hanging fruit which we desperately need so much attention paid to.

    In this case, this article simply saying "New immigration option for women" probably would have sufficed. Why? We can connect the dot to the word "immigrant", and some would be able to connect the dot to "women" as meaning, "Sikh/Punjabi women too, if it applies to them.

    This thread has proven that there is no shortage of misinterpretation and mis-perception, keeping a message clear, concise and open, maybe by an editor's foreward to the article helps shape and guide discussion and observation more as you intended.

    Being aware of how subtle, and powerful presentation is in perception and interpretation will likely lead us to become more aware as people.

    I highly recommend the excellent BBC Series called "The Century of the self". http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=895317227

    It pretty well shows how every facet of our so called open and free minds, may not be as open, flexible to entertaining opinions and viewpoints that we don't share with others, and how it came to be that way.

    Beginning with a generalization (Sikh – immigrant – battered – women), something long tied to a stereotype with no solution as the punchline… and then having no direct references to Sikh women in the content is what people in Public Relations and Propaganda call manufacturing consent / opinion.

    The gist is, the more you repeat something, even if it's a lie, the more it'll become believed truth. Look at Sikhs int he minds eyes. The voices that get heard say what they want and we all deal with it, good and bad.

    By partaking, even indirectly in linking the words sikh, women, and battered and not framing it, contextually with respect to scope, situation, brevity, etc, it does not allow the reader a fair outlook, and allows them to draw (as we can see) their own conclusions, some extreme, on all both of the spectrum.

    Google will see this site as being authoritative. It will see your titles as being authoritative. When someone searches they will say see, look at these articles, without looking into it deeper.

    There is a fine balance between journalism (presenting facts) and opinion pieces which share a perspective. When a site such as this tactfully dances on both sides of the fence, it's easy to slip up and not seperate facts from opinion and ensure they are framed as such.

    In this case, there are facts in this article. How much, or whether it exclusively impacts or applies to sikhs is open to debate, as we have here.

    It's the same thing that happens in the media when someone or something is vilified far beyond the scope of the true impact or nature. Is Britney Spear's life more important than other things?

    I hope my words are accepted by everyone as another perspective from an editorial/journalism side.

    This is a fantastic site and showing that it is coming to, and going through, and evolving through such clarifications leads to the suggestion that there will be higher and deeper and more critical thinking with our hearts, as much as our minds, something sorely missing from our community.

    By writing here I too am sharing my belief in this place as it continues to evolve to inspire people to aspire to greater levels of thinking, feeling, and being.

    Bhul chuk maaf,

    -justasikh

  20. justasikh says:

    Hi Reema,

    It might not be directed at one person, but everyone’s a part of a community and they will identify with different things than what anyone intended.

    Having worked at a newspaper for a few years and experiencing the “why do we do it this way” behind their editorial practices and policies, I think the attempt to link this to Sikhs can be done without doing it literally, and in this case would have been wiser to not try and make every article “sikh”.

    I would like to try and share what I saw and what shaped what I read.

    There are many great articles that apply to all people, and having them on a sikh blog may not mean that it has to be tied in, literally. Such hand-holding in an intelligent environment (as hard as that might be to conceive sometimes) leads readers to not enjoy connecting the obvious dots themselves.

    Providing low hanging fruit that is satisfying, leads to people reaching for the higher hanging fruit which we desperately need so much attention paid to.

    In this case, this article simply saying “New immigration option for women” probably would have sufficed. Why? We can connect the dot to the word “immigrant”, and some would be able to connect the dot to “women” as meaning, “Sikh/Punjabi women too, if it applies to them.

    This thread has proven that there is no shortage of misinterpretation and mis-perception, keeping a message clear, concise and open, maybe by an editor’s foreward to the article helps shape and guide discussion and observation more as you intended.

    Being aware of how subtle, and powerful presentation is in perception and interpretation will likely lead us to become more aware as people.

    I highly recommend the excellent BBC Series called “The Century of the self”. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8953172273825999151

    It pretty well shows how every facet of our so called open and free minds, may not be as open, flexible to entertaining opinions and viewpoints that we don’t share with others, and how it came to be that way.

    Beginning with a generalization (Sikh – immigrant – battered – women), something long tied to a stereotype with no solution as the punchline… and then having no direct references to Sikh women in the content is what people in Public Relations and Propaganda call manufacturing consent / opinion.

    The gist is, the more you repeat something, even if it’s a lie, the more it’ll become believed truth. Look at Sikhs int he minds eyes. The voices that get heard say what they want and we all deal with it, good and bad.

    By partaking, even indirectly in linking the words sikh, women, and battered and not framing it, contextually with respect to scope, situation, brevity, etc, it does not allow the reader a fair outlook, and allows them to draw (as we can see) their own conclusions, some extreme, on all both of the spectrum.

    Google will see this site as being authoritative. It will see your titles as being authoritative. When someone searches they will say see, look at these articles, without looking into it deeper.

    There is a fine balance between journalism (presenting facts) and opinion pieces which share a perspective. When a site such as this tactfully dances on both sides of the fence, it’s easy to slip up and not seperate facts from opinion and ensure they are framed as such.

    In this case, there are facts in this article. How much, or whether it exclusively impacts or applies to sikhs is open to debate, as we have here.

    It’s the same thing that happens in the media when someone or something is vilified far beyond the scope of the true impact or nature. Is Britney Spear’s life more important than other things?

    I hope my words are accepted by everyone as another perspective from an editorial/journalism side.

    This is a fantastic site and showing that it is coming to, and going through, and evolving through such clarifications leads to the suggestion that there will be higher and deeper and more critical thinking with our hearts, as much as our minds, something sorely missing from our community.

    By writing here I too am sharing my belief in this place as it continues to evolve to inspire people to aspire to greater levels of thinking, feeling, and being.

    Bhul chuk maaf,
    -justasikh

  21. sham article says:

    Reema you wrote: "If you really think that the gurus’ message of equality amongst genders is the norm in our communities, then you and I are coming from very different realities. That’s lovely that you’ve grown up and lived in some utopian society"

    Guru Nanak Sahib Ji existed so does that mean I come from a utopian background, no, it means I dont need mythlogical stories to draw upon, instead Sikhs have a Faith based in reality.

    Guru Nanak Sahib Ji spread the message of equality between all human beings. So, yes Sikhism does provide this message to everyone regardless of being male or female.

    The major religions of the world besides Sikhism portray women as lesser. How many men of Judeo-Christian-Islamic backgrounds will not allow women to forget that they took the apple from the serpent, and then had Adam to do the same. Because of this act all woman are bad. Christian women are damned if they do and damnet if they dont believe this.

    In Sikhism do we have any stories remotely related to why a woman should be seen this way? No, not one has ever been told.

    There is a difference between punjabi women and Sikh women, way too many punjabi women identify with being punjabi and especilly their caste more so than Sikhism.

    Why dont Punjabi women realize that they are essentially agreeing that they are low caste hindus.

    This will also be why a punjabi woman will want her daughter/daughter-in-law to abort a female baby. Because a female will always be worthless according to what the caste system is based in, hinduism. Hinduism is described as the worst in terms of treatment of women.

    http://www.geocities.com/~abdulwahid/hinduism/hin

    A Sikh woman does not need feminism, because western women have been berated by western religions. A Sikh woman needs Waheguru Period

    A Sikh woman can use Sikhism to make her point to anyone. Sikhism did not put a load on her back or shackles on her wrists, and ankles. Sikhism never teaches her to be less or for her to accept a lesser role.

    Dont mix the affects of community. Community based on Sikhism is different than a community based on the trends of being a punjabi.

    I dont know any Sikh man that thinks we can exist without Sikh women, I dont know any Sikh man thats hyping feminisim.

    I do know Sikh men and women that could agree on a similar explanation of Sikh family-ism.

  22. sham article says:

    Reema you wrote: “If you really think that the gurus message of equality amongst genders is the norm in our communities, then you and I are coming from very different realities. Thats lovely that youve grown up and lived in some utopian society”

    Guru Nanak Sahib Ji existed so does that mean I come from a utopian background, no, it means I dont need mythlogical stories to draw upon, instead Sikhs have a Faith based in reality.

    Guru Nanak Sahib Ji spread the message of equality between all human beings. So, yes Sikhism does provide this message to everyone regardless of being male or female.

    The major religions of the world besides Sikhism portray women as lesser. How many men of Judeo-Christian-Islamic backgrounds will not allow women to forget that they took the apple from the serpent, and then had Adam to do the same. Because of this act all woman are bad. Christian women are damned if they do and damnet if they dont believe this.

    In Sikhism do we have any stories remotely related to why a woman should be seen this way? No, not one has ever been told.

    There is a difference between punjabi women and Sikh women, way too many punjabi women identify with being punjabi and especilly their caste more so than Sikhism.

    Why dont Punjabi women realize that they are essentially agreeing that they are low caste hindus.

    This will also be why a punjabi woman will want her daughter/daughter-in-law to abort a female baby. Because a female will always be worthless according to what the caste system is based in, hinduism. Hinduism is described as the worst in terms of treatment of women.

    http://www.geocities.com/~abdulwahid/hinduism/hindu_women.html

    A Sikh woman does not need feminism, because western women have been berated by western religions. A Sikh woman needs Waheguru Period

    A Sikh woman can use Sikhism to make her point to anyone. Sikhism did not put a load on her back or shackles on her wrists, and ankles. Sikhism never teaches her to be less or for her to accept a lesser role.

    Dont mix the affects of community. Community based on Sikhism is different than a community based on the trends of being a punjabi.

    I dont know any Sikh man that thinks we can exist without Sikh women, I dont know any Sikh man thats hyping feminisim.

    I do know Sikh men and women that could agree on a similar explanation of Sikh family-ism.

  23. bhai says:

    I think there may be some talking past each other going on.

    On the one hand South Asian masculinity seems to have been problematized in many ways, from macho to overtly patriarchal and further down the spectrum from that. This particularly becomes a constraint to South Asian men in terms of who they feel they can grow up to be as they mature.

    On the other hand, South Asian cultural patriarchy has serious consequences as it exists. This harms women, and also everyone around it as well.

    A balancing point may be to not play a part in negative developments while being part of positive ones.

  24. bhai says:

    I think there may be some talking past each other going on.

    On the one hand South Asian masculinity seems to have been problematized in many ways, from macho to overtly patriarchal and further down the spectrum from that. This particularly becomes a constraint to South Asian men in terms of who they feel they can grow up to be as they mature.

    On the other hand, South Asian cultural patriarchy has serious consequences as it exists. This harms women, and also everyone around it as well.

    A balancing point may be to not play a part in negative developments while being part of positive ones.

  25. P.Singh says:

    sham article,

    Everything you've written is premised on some notion of there being this perfect seperation between the Punjabi and the Sikh; many, if not most, are both.

    Lets not get into what is ideal – lets look at the reality of the situation.

    It would be ideal if all those claiming to be Sikhs were perfect Sikhs, flawless in all aspects, adhering 100% to Sikh principles, and living in a vacuum, free from any cultural intrusions or impact.

    Sadly, that is not the case.

    You will find Sikh women, who are Punjabi by culture, struggling in families which demean and devalue them. Are they not Sikh women because they live in such families? Should we strip the "Sikh" from their identity because they do feel fear, and feel trapped, and have feelings of hopelessness? Are they not Sikhs because they have weaknesses, and are not pictures of perfection?

    The Sikh message of equality is awesome; however, the practice of this equality amongst Sikhs is hardly uniform.

  26. P.Singh says:

    sham article,

    Everything you’ve written is premised on some notion of there being this perfect seperation between the Punjabi and the Sikh; many, if not most, are both.

    Lets not get into what is ideal – lets look at the reality of the situation.

    It would be ideal if all those claiming to be Sikhs were perfect Sikhs, flawless in all aspects, adhering 100% to Sikh principles, and living in a vacuum, free from any cultural intrusions or impact.

    Sadly, that is not the case.

    You will find Sikh women, who are Punjabi by culture, struggling in families which demean and devalue them. Are they not Sikh women because they live in such families? Should we strip the “Sikh” from their identity because they do feel fear, and feel trapped, and have feelings of hopelessness? Are they not Sikhs because they have weaknesses, and are not pictures of perfection?

    The Sikh message of equality is awesome; however, the practice of this equality amongst Sikhs is hardly uniform.

  27. Tajinder says:

    Justasikh,

    Good catch "Google will see this site as being authoritative. It will see your titles as being authoritative. When someone searches they will say see, look at these articles, without looking into it deeper."

    I personally write SEO articles as a side gig. What the author is doing here is so dangerous for the image of the Sikh community they do not realize. Placing an article on the internet is not same as publishing it in a news paper, the audience is larger and google's spider will direct the audience to such material. Key words in the title and article once entered in google will automatically direct the search to this article and any related to it even with out the word "Sikh" in it. The author should take a serious look at what is being published here, and not create a negative image for the Sikh community because there is a personal agenda to down play men, driven by modern western feminist thinking. In fact if the author is serious enough about this issue there should be conference held to bring forth the concerns to the community rather then post base less articles on a blog with no solid proof for the "abuse" issue, which will bring a negative image to the community.

    Reema,

    "Why don’t we focus on our own community instead of worrying how we look in others’ eyes?"

    Believe it or not, the opinions of others matter in how successful your community will be. Especially if your community is a minority. Having a stereo type which down plays your minority community will only further depopulate your community as a whole not help it. Regardless of what we think our own young women and men will not be willing to associate with our own communities or marry with in the community just because we are the "abusers" a stereo type which is already in the works about the Sikh men in India, by non-Sikh sources. Yes we need to confront this issue if it truly exists to the extent the author wants to make it seem it exists, but we also need to be highly cautious of the strategy we use to find any solution.

    Publishing such a title is not such a small impact with today's technology this can damage a community image. The average person today does not watch TV news programs they watch sound bite material, they ready high lights not articles to place such a title on a article such as this is very unprofessional and a cheap shot by the author to get their name out there, to express their opinion about a subject by using someone else's work. This clearly shows that this author is opinionated and does not have solid facts to back up their claims.

    Also if one reads the articles on the links in the article there are some brief descriptions of women killed by their husbands. I don't know but the last I remember someone has to be pretty messed up in the head to set someone on fire! So is it really a Sikh, Hindu, Christian etc. or someone out of their fu.k.ng mind

    for some God known reason (molested as a child, abused as a child) which make these people do such a thing.

  28. Tajinder says:

    Justasikh,

    Good catch “Google will see this site as being authoritative. It will see your titles as being authoritative. When someone searches they will say see, look at these articles, without looking into it deeper.”

    I personally write SEO articles as a side gig. What the author is doing here is so dangerous for the image of the Sikh community they do not realize. Placing an article on the internet is not same as publishing it in a news paper, the audience is larger and google’s spider will direct the audience to such material. Key words in the title and article once entered in google will automatically direct the search to this article and any related to it even with out the word “Sikh” in it. The author should take a serious look at what is being published here, and not create a negative image for the Sikh community because there is a personal agenda to down play men, driven by modern western feminist thinking. In fact if the author is serious enough about this issue there should be conference held to bring forth the concerns to the community rather then post base less articles on a blog with no solid proof for the “abuse” issue, which will bring a negative image to the community.

    Reema,
    “Why dont we focus on our own community instead of worrying how we look in others eyes?”

    Believe it or not, the opinions of others matter in how successful your community will be. Especially if your community is a minority. Having a stereo type which down plays your minority community will only further depopulate your community as a whole not help it. Regardless of what we think our own young women and men will not be willing to associate with our own communities or marry with in the community just because we are the “abusers” a stereo type which is already in the works about the Sikh men in India, by non-Sikh sources. Yes we need to confront this issue if it truly exists to the extent the author wants to make it seem it exists, but we also need to be highly cautious of the strategy we use to find any solution.

    Publishing such a title is not such a small impact with today’s technology this can damage a community image. The average person today does not watch TV news programs they watch sound bite material, they ready high lights not articles to place such a title on a article such as this is very unprofessional and a cheap shot by the author to get their name out there, to express their opinion about a subject by using someone else’s work. This clearly shows that this author is opinionated and does not have solid facts to back up their claims.

    Also if one reads the articles on the links in the article there are some brief descriptions of women killed by their husbands. I don’t know but the last I remember someone has to be pretty messed up in the head to set someone on fire! So is it really a Sikh, Hindu, Christian etc. or someone out of their fu.k.ng mind
    for some God known reason (molested as a child, abused as a child) which make these people do such a thing.

  29. […] issue of forced marriages and domestic violence clearly struck a chord with many of the TLH readers. But somewhere deep in the comments over […]

  30. beera says:

    you know reema, if ever I make a lot of money in life i'll give a lot to you and this blog. You are doing a very important thing. Thanks you.

  31. beera says:

    you know reema, if ever I make a lot of money in life i’ll give a lot to you and this blog. You are doing a very important thing. Thanks you.

  32. […] this mans reaction does not stand alone; women whether in pornography or not face the burden of honour and the […]

  33. DSingh says:

    has anyone read Gurpreet kaur bhattis play behtzi? can i ask do you think it is a correct representation of the Sikh community. Do you think its relevant. just reading all these comments are very interesting and so id like to know what you think of this sikh writer who was shunned by the sikh community in birmingham because of her play.

  34. DSingh says:

    has anyone read Gurpreet kaur bhattis play behtzi? can i ask do you think it is a correct representation of the Sikh community. Do you think its relevant. just reading all these comments are very interesting and so id like to know what you think of this sikh writer who was shunned by the sikh community in birmingham because of her play.

  35. A single unbiased style for NBC in the Tv show. He still includes a truly tough immigration quote. They managed to graduate about the Harvard University. At this point he offers her 1 Radio Show. He could not such as that U . s citizens president.

  36. A single unbiased style for NBC in the Tv show. He still includes a truly tough immigration quote. They managed to graduate about the Harvard University. At this point he offers her 1 Radio Show. He could not such as that U . s citizens president.