Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
41

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

That's really a spurious argument.

I don't think the average Muslim villager in UP or Kerala actively "chose" to remain in India because they believed in Congress any more than the average villager in Punjab or Sind "chose" Pakistan. You're implying that there was some sort of wholesale active rejection of the Pakistan movement...which no doubt did occur among the handful of Muslims who were active in the Congress Party, and likeminded individuals (Azad et al). On the same token, it's pretty well recognized that the majority of the Muslim middle class in what is now India did choose to leave and migrate to Pakistan. But to imply that it occurred on a national level, with the largely impoverished, apolitical Muslim masses "rejecting" the idea of Pakistan (or actively choosing the idea of Pakistan in Punjab, Sind, etc) is kinda silly.

In any case...even if we were to accept the concept, the fact remains that after Partition, more than 2/3 of the Muslims of the Subcontinent "chose" Pakistan.

~**~ Tussi Baray ----- Ho ~~~~ ~**~
42

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

I am grateful that you wrote this, it has clarified a number of things that many many other Pakistanis have been confused about. Hopefully after reading your post, they will stop accusing India and Hindus for muslim problems.

To extract here are the ones that I am talking about:

  • the only people you are willing to admit 'chose' Pakistan are then the middle-class that moved westward. Since the 'poor illiterate muslims' of whether Punjab, Sindh, Kerala or UP could not 'chose' because they can't afford to move, that would imply only a minority of people living in Pakistan actually chose to do so!

  • you have also made it clear that at least 'some' muslims have rejected Pakistan

  • since only the 'poor illiterate muslims' remained in India according to you, you have also clarified that it is not Indian or Hindu atrocity that has resulted in the average muslim in India being less well of than the average Hindu Jain Parsi or Christian but that they had a rotten deal handed to them by the Brits and the Moghul rulers preceding!

Of course we have learnt to overlook minor details such as Kerala which you cite, happens to be on the top of literacy rates in the sub-continent, not just India. Or that the 'impoverished apolitical massess' of muslims you refer to used to turn up in thousands to Mahathma Gandhi's meetings - it had to be the poor illiterate masses because according to you there were only a "handful of compliant muslims in Congress"!

JINNS IN MY ROOM PART-I and II
43

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

I don't think anyone would dispute the idea that the educated elites were primary force in the Pakistan Movement (or the Indian independence movement for that matter).

Nor do I think anyone would dispute the existence of the likes of Abdul Kalam Azad, Zakir Hussain, etc. It's pretty clear they were a minority among the Muslim political establishment though.

No doubt, the mass exodus of the Muslim upper and middle classes contributed to the backwardness of the average Indian Muslim.

That doesn't change the fact that Muslims have faced significant discrimination in post-independence India, of the fact that they have been victims of periodic atrocities at the hands of the majority communities...and these have also played their own role in maintaining the backwardness of the Indian Muslim community as a whole.

Also, where did I say anything about the Mughals?

At the time of Partition (which is what we're discussing, BTW), most Keralites were illiterate too.

Really? Do you have any exit polls to prove that Muslims were showing up en masse at Gandhi's rallies?

Even if that is the case, I don't consider that adequate evidence that they were active supporters of the Congress. Jinnah never failed to draw immense crowds of Muslims at his rallies across what is now India. I suspect many of the attendees never migrated to Pakistan either.

maybelline mousse blush
44

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

^ again thank you for admitting several things. For instance:

  • you say most Keralites were illiterate. Since then they Kerala has become the most literate place. India obviously has been pretty good to muslims then.

  • that only muslims attended Jinnah's rallies. OTOH people of all religions attended that of others. That aside, you are right to suspect 'many' of these attendees did not migrate to Pakistan. That's why we have some 150+M muslims living in peace in India

oh, btw would you call those muslims who attended Jinnah's rallies politically unaware illiterate or only the middle class attended his rallies?

45

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

Wow, you're shoving words into my mouth faster than I can get them out.

First of all, since when did "Kerala" become synonymous with "Indian Muslims?" And since when did literacy rates become the only marker of a population's wellbeing? Azad Kashmir's literacy rate (estimates range from 65-78%) is higher than India's...while the Hunza Valley (tucked away in the virtual colony that is the Northern Areas) is near universal literacy. Does that mean that people there have been "treated better" than the average Indian?

In any case, I think Kerala's communist state government deserves more credit for the literacy rates there than the Indian government.

Has anyone ever denied this? I mean, duh...it was a Muslim nationalist movement.

Actually, I said you have no proof that significant numbers of Muslims came out to Congress rallies. I honestly suspect that isn't the case...in the 1945-46 elections, the Muslim League swept the Muslim vote, even in the areas that eventually became India.

Except during the mass riots that break out every couple of years and claim a few hundred Muslim lives (if not more).

Depends on what time period we're talking about. In its early days, the League was an elitist organization with little support outside the Muslim elite of UP & Bihar. After Jinnah joined, and as the Pakistan Movement gained steam, it developed a lot more populist support...by the 40's, I'd say everyone was coming out to his rallies.

On the same token, what about the millions of Hindus, Sikhs, Parsees, and Christians who stayed in Pakistan? If Indian Muslims staying in India is an active rejection of Pakistan on their part, surely the non-Muslims of Pakistan have actively rejected India.

46

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

Jenab - just go back and read what you wrote. you quoted Kerala and I responded.

Now let's try some common sense here. If something acceptable to you happens (in this case Keralites achieving almost 100% literacy) then it is a state government achievement and somehow you won't give credit to India. But if something wrong occurs, you jump up and down about the Indians in general and Hindus in general.

Secondly since you admit that at least since 1940 that all sorts of people, not only elite or middle-class were attending Jinnah's rally, you can hardly characterize the muslim masses as apolitical. So picking back up from the original point, the fact that almost as many are in India as they are in Pakistan, goes to show that not all muslims believed that India would be rotten to them. And as history and current events have proved since then, except for a handful of events, over a 60+ year duration, the 150M+ muslims of India have enjoyed peace that almost no other muslim community has enjoyed elsewhere.

47

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

That's not necessarily true. I blame the Gujarat state government for the 2002 riots, not Indian society as a whole. I blame UP's state administration for letting Babri Masjid be torn down.

And I blame India as a whole for systematic discrimination against Muslims...in much the same way that you blame Pakistan as a whole for its treatment of Hindus.

The vast majority of those people were supporting the Muslim League though...even in what is now India.

As I already pointed out, at the time of Partition, more than 2/3 of the Subcontinent's Muslims "opted" for Pakistan...nor was there any significant Muslim migration from Pakistan to India.

Meh...the same could be said of Pakistan's non-Muslim population.

That's just absurd and you know it.

Sing a Song according 2 Ur Mood !!!!!
48

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

Jenab - now it's becoming a yankee "I can" "you can't" "can too" "uhn uhann" "do too" "na nananana".....break time.

49

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

When I read somebody talking something about Babri Masjid, my blood boils. How many morons know that all most all the temples in South India were either half destroyed or completely demolished by so called religious punk 'Nizam'. I have been to almost all the districts of Telangana in AP. I barely saw historical temples perfect in shape. I will not expect a comment here that they are not being taken care-of. If anybody wants, I can post all the pics.Local governemtns are taking care remains of historical structures. I hope, muslim brothers understand their intolerence towards other religions in yester years. My family it self is a victim of religious terrorists "razakars' in late 40's.

50

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

^
Spare us the crap from the '40's...my own family was victimized by Hindu fascists back then...I'm sure guppies can go back and forth on this.

In any case, Babri Masjid was exactly that...a Masjid, at the time of its destruction. If you need to go back hundreds of years to justify an act that was done a decade or so ago...that's really pathetic.

51

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

exactly...that's what I am saying ...cut the crap that happened twenty years ago...if you talk about this in 1980's..it was just 40 years by then...just move on in the life...take it easy...nobody is going to achieve anything by swallowing hatred one on another...

sTay ouT oV ma thrEad..
52

Re: Why Muslim women were mutilated in Gujarat

^
LOL...the difference between a hundred years and now is that the perpetrators are still alive, and so still subject to the law of the land...if it is indeed illegal to destroy a Muslim place of worship in India.

Otherwise, Muslims should continue to destroy temples, and simply cite the Hakuna matata logic you're employing here to avoid any persecution...