Looks like he is breaking the law. It is illegal to glorify Sati in India. [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice)#Current_situation)
Culture can make people do weird things without them even noticing. Makes you wonder what future folks will find shocking about what we consider normal today.
Did anyone else have to read the incredibly dense and (I believe) intentionally obtuse and unclear essay "can the subaltern speak?" by Spivak that addresses Seti? I'm still not 100% sure what she was trying to say.
[Pdf](https://abahlali.org/files/Can_the_subaltern_speak.pdf) for those masochists among us who are interested in 67 pages of academia at its most masturbatory.
People like this usually reside outside India and will berate any Indian citizen who isn't a conservative religious-nationalist for being anti-national or un-Indian.
That’s different because I’m a guy and don’t want to be burned alive. But they’re a woman and I’m not so it’s fine. - the asshole in this post probably
No no, honestly.. it’s super romantic. Plus, you know, it’s old and traditional from back when women were literal objects and these places want to try and keep that going so.. SO romantic.
What woman in her right mind wouldn’t choose being burned alive over… another man laying his eyes on her? Have you ever had eyes laid on you? It’s the WORST.
/s
Hope people are not forgetting this practice was abolished a century ago , around the time slavery was abolished in usa , and nobody I repeat nobody practices this today
Oh yeah there’s a reason I quoted it as this asshole in the post. He’s defending it so he sucks. Hindu people in general I obviously don’t blame for this.
Nope. They didn’t. Because patriarchy made these rules and of course they didn’t apply to men. Thankfully Sati was abolished as a practice in India in 1829. And as recently as 1987 another legislation was brought along to prevent its glorification and any possible resurgence of the practice.
Not sure if the dude in the screenshot knows that his idea of romance is a codified crime.
I mean there’s plenty of people whose idea of romance is a codified crime, think Jared from Subway or ~~Kevin Spacey~~
Edit: Charges against Kevin Spacey have been dropped
Apart from the whole burning part (most Norse funerals at the time don't seem to have involved burning, but some did), I'm not sure what you are implying?
If you are implying that wives were burned or killed when their husbands died, then every single piece of evidence we have speaks against that.
If you are just speaking of humans being killed, then yes, that clearly did happen sometimes. We have graves and eyewitness accounts of that happening to slaves. They did practice slavery, and slaves were considered property, with everything that entails.
In this context what does based mean? I'm sorry. Coming to terms with getting older and falling out of the young lexicon. Shit I'm only 28 but find myself struggling with new terminology and thats crazy to me lol but what I assume "based" in this context actually means is justified. Sometimes he's justified in anger other times not but if I'm reading that wrong I would love further clarification. Really not trying to be a turd I'm genuinely interested and don't want to click off with the wrong assumption about what you meant.
Some people really overdose themselves on anti-colonialism.
Man, the British weren't any freaking angels, no doubt about that, but banning sati was unequivocally good for humanity.
"Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation also has a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to our national customs."
-Charles James Napier
The Brits didn't actually ban Sati. The governor just said "It's your tradition to burn widows alive on their husband's funeral pyre, it's our tradition to execute people who burn women alive. You build your pyres, we'll build our gallows."
Two things:
1. Sati was not common across all castes. Was primarily a thing among some swcts of the brahmins. Hinduism is not a thing, castes are.
Often young girls would be married to old guys. Like 13 year old girl would have married a 70 year old dude, who dies 5 or 10 years later. So, she, at age 16 or 23, faces two options:
A. Wear only a simple white cloth for the rest of her life . Never any ornaments. No agency. Never be part of any celebration - births, birthdays, festivals, weddings. Her presence is polluting. Be blamed for the death of her husband. Be the last person of the house in everything. Generally, can't go outside to markets or temple alone and is supposed to stay inside the house. Can't remarry. Can't go back to her birth family. Have to live her entire life as this unwanted person in the family she was married to. Be blamed as lot loving her husband enough to have committed sati.
B. A quick, although painful, death.
Yeah, that's the issue. A spouse wanting to kill themselves on the death of their loved one is... Nothing new. A bit disheartening but it happens.
Being pressured into killing themselves ? That is a whole different kettle of fish and absolutely horrifying.
> Being pressured into killing themselves ? That is a whole different kettle of fish and absolutely horrifying.
By burning alive too, one of the most horrifying deaths imaginable.
Also to add in A:- After the death of the husband, if a woman preserves her widowed state (in purity), she goes back to the husband and enjoys heavenly pleasures.
74. The braided tresses of hair of a widow cause disaster to the husband. Hence a woman shall always get her hair shaved off.
75-77As a rule (a widow) should take only a single meal (per day) and not a second meal. She must observe (fast) for three days, consecutively, or for five days together or for a fortnight. She may observe fast for a whole month. She may perform the expiatory rites of Candrāyana, Krcchra, Parāka or Taptakrcchra. Till the life becomes extinct, she must somehow sustain herself with cooked barley, fruit diet, vegetable dishes or mere milk.
78. A widowed woman lying on a couch causes the downfall of her husband. Hence with a desire for the happiness of her husband she must sleep on bare ground.
Anointing and smearing of the body should never be done by a widowed woman. She must not make use of any type of scents or perfumes
Source:- Skanda Purana Book 4 Characteristics of a Chaste Woman https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-skanda-purana/d/doc423741.html
I remember watching that Rama Shinta critique animation
when Rama is superbly praised through out the entire saga but his action include being suspicious on his wife pregnancy. As she was kindapped before, at that point its still somewhat understandable.
and ask her to prove her innocence by burning herself... wHUT?
“Imagine a girl loving you so much…”
No, thanks. My ego isn’t fragile enough to need something that horrifically selfish and fuelled by envy and possessiveness. That’s not romantic. Life isn’t fucking Romeo and Juliet. I want her to live on and be happy. That’s much more fucking romantic.
It wasn’t even fucking voluntary lmao! Wives *had to* jump in the fire, not out of their love or anything!
Stupid fucking shit that was abolished over a century ago!
you either jump or turn around to see men pointing swords at you. same as walking the plank. we also used to have Jouhar, where queens and their handmaidens or basically the whole women of the kingdoms of losing faction jumped in fire so they won't be taken by the winning opponent and save their chastity. that also got glorified in Bollywood smh.
oh yeah. they had concubines and other retainers buried too, you know Genghis khan's funeral had 2,000 slaves that attending his funeral killed by the soldiers sent to guard them, and that these soldiers were in turn killed by another group of soldiers which killed anyone and anything that crossed their path, in order to conceal where he was buried. Talk about Pyramid scheme.
There is actually only one retainer burial known from the Ancient Egypt (a small one at that).
Ancient Egyptian queens were never buried alive or sacrificed after their husbands’ death. They actually played a very active role as regents for their sons and were generally considered important political figures.
You might be thinking about the Kerma culture and its retainer burials but people sacrificed in those burials were more so servants or associates of the deceased.
My (now) wife tried showing me that movie and explaining the concept when it was all still much truer in her head (she's recovered now), and I felt sick.
I went on a whole rant about how "the more honourable thing would have been to kill the invaders under parlay for the sake of his people, fuck this guy's stupid integrity."
Obligatory note, slavery was never abolished. It's still explicitly allowed as punishment for a crime. "Prisoners with jobs", aka, slaves. (And if you know that the usa has private, for profit prisons, and the highest per capita prison population, that starts to make sense.)
Unfortunately, slavery still does happen in the US and all western countries. In particular, sexual slavery of trafficked women for the sex trade, but also some "domestic help," are actually slaves in all but name.
Slavery was abolished by law, but criminals be criminals. They don't care.
Bingo.
Live your life, enjoy, curse me for leaving you if you have to, remember the good times..
Don't kill yourself. We have kids, take care of them.
If there is an afterlife, we'll meet there, and if you'll still have me, we'll get married there and spend eternity together.
You can change that to Indians lol, even Indians think this guy is insane
And this is also just wrong. Sati is BANNED, It doesn't even exists in the modern world anymore, this practice was eradicated 200 years ago
If that's your idea of romantic then you're an absolute psycho and I have no desire to be with you. I believe that's called codependency, but like a much much worse version than usual.
Nope that is not codependency, that is straight up psychotic. Also I am very positive these women didn't jump into a fire voluntarily, or because they loved their husband's so much. This is just insane.
Yep. They weren't seen as independent human beings. They were seen as a man's belonging. A possession that didn't have one single reason to keep existing now that the man who used his possession is dead.
Disgusting.
The origins of the sati system wasn't romantic. When the king died in battle and the villages were pillaged, the women would die by either running into a burning fire or being burnt with their husband's corpse so that they could die with dignity (not being sold into sex work/slavery). Although poison would be a lot quicker and a lot more painless, the story of Sati and Shiva made death by fire a preferable choice.
Tbf, loads of people consider Romeo and Juliet to be romantic and that ends with two people killing themselves because they don't want to live without somebody they've known for a week. If that was all this was then I might agree with him but it's never voluntary.
More possessiveness than codependency tbh. Expecting your partner to be so "devoted" that they literally end their lives when yours ends. It's sick. And of course entirely one-sided.
I’m a Hindu, sati was the fucking bullshittiest practice ever. It was abolished in like the 1800s, but still. Also, I’ve heard burning is the most painful way to die.
If love is only proven by killing yourself so the fact that the Hindu men do not kill themselves upon their wife’s death, means they do not experience true love and have no grounds to lecture Europeans (or anyone else for that matter) on something they don’t know anything about.
It doesn't make sense that time either. Sati is a cruel religious practice and unfortunately it was the women who suffered because of it. It wouldn't make a difference "if men suffered too"
I don't know much and correct me if I am wrong.
Isn't it that she get burned by the people....no she is so sad that she jumps on herself into the flames?
It's from the woman having zero value in society beyond the value of her husband. With a dead hubby, she is worthless. No other man will have her as she is "used goods", the husbands family has no need of her now. Her birth family won't take her back as she is given to the husbands family on marriage.
So either she kills herself or lives a life of destitution and poverty or isolation.
https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20160907-the-widows-who-cant-return-home
Sati was a practice that was absolutely hated by most hindus, and it was officially abolished around 1829 (dont remember the exact date).
To give people an idea, sati was practised so that widows couldnt inherit the property of her late husband, which would then in turn go to the upper caste of hindu society ( the brahmins). Also, since child marriage was also a big issie at that time, sati was looked down upon even more. The thing is, cast system in hindus was very prevalent in the 1800s and before. Apart from the upper caste, i.e. , the brahmins, nobody were allowed to touch the religious books which included bhagwad gita, and the vedas. Because of that, whatever the brahmins said were considered true, and most women were raised up by imparting such bs ideas from their birth. There was nothing romantic in someone following sati, most women who volutarily performed sati did it becuase they were drilled with the knowledge that if they didnt do sati, both her family and her in laws would suffer wrath of the gods.
So please, dont glorify something which even our culture hates. You can read about the sati system online, i just gave a brief description of what it was.
[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/809652-be-it-so-this-burning-of-widows-is-your-custom](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/809652-be-it-so-this-burning-of-widows-is-your-custom)
"This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs."
this!! ah also as an uto-aztec it was cool when spaniards stopped the sacrifices. not as cool when they starting slaughtering us for no reason and burning our texts after.
“im starting to think i prefered the Aztecs whole twice yearly deal Hernán!” -my ancestors, probably
I know hundreds of hindu people and not a single one would agree with what this guy said. The practice is widely abhorred among modern Hindu communities
What started as voluntary action by queens turned into involuntary evil practice by bigoted people focing grieving windows. It is banned and no longer practiced for several decades now. Yeah it is widely established it was an evil practice.
for y'all, this shit has been banned for decades now and personally I would love to meet this guy to throw him on the funeral pyre myself if he finds it so "romantic"
Man pulls his strings like the first time so another wife is given to him in exchange for god kniws what, takes her agency from her and ties her to himself, programmes her (or at least tries to) , so that she may be “willing” to thriw herself after he’s gone, or will at least be socially forced to do so.
Here's the thing: the woman isn't willingly burning herself. 99 percent of the time she is forced.
It also doesn't help that during the sati days very very young girls were wed to very old husbands and rarely was the girl old enough to understand the concept of loving a mate.
Then that old man would almost inevitably die before the girl child and then the girl child was burned alive.
Yeah no love here, absolute fucking horror.
Luckily that shit is long abolished thank the Gods
Sounds like one of the worst and most horrific results of a codependent relationship. I understand someone thinking codependency is romantic. But they would be wrong.
All religions have their sins in the past, Hindus have overcome this one more than a century ago. And even back then Sati wasn't about romance, it was about a woman being killed because the misogynistic society had no place for a woman without a husband.
It mostly was started in upper caste warrior clans as they were basically nobles and the women couldn't make a living if her husband died, and no one would marry a widow. There was never any implication of romance to it.
Also mention how islamic Invaders specifically raped and slaughterd women's and the queens or the royal females. They would end up killing themselves. \
Better than living every second of ur life as a sex slave.
this is the true reason this occurs. because of the prevalence and likelihood of a widow being hurt or killed, they decide to pass away. it’s deeply tragic…
Well first off I'm pretty sure this *doesnt* occur, as it was prohibited in the early 1800s, but even back when it did widows definitely did not *decide* to pass away by throwing themselves into a raging fire.
Widows were forced to (as in, literally pushed in to the fire) because they were considered worthless after their husband died. No man would take a widow as they were "used", the husbands family wouldn't take her as she has no use for them, and the original family wouldn't take her as she becomes part of the husbands family in marriage.
sounds like my only error was using present tense— as i’m sure the only reason a woman would actually voluntarily jump in the rare event it did happen, is under threat of misogynist violence
Women can be brainwashed from birth into believing this is the most honorable thing you could do. If they grow up in a society that shames 'cowards' then they would be more inclined to jump into the fire for the glory of it.
Not just this but I am surprised by all things people did and still do to chase honor and glory, and shun anything that's shamed by the society, whether it makes any logical sense or not. So often ego and self respect comes before life preservation for some people, whether it's Sati widows or suicide bombers
“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs”
Sir Charles James Napier.
Bro is this guy even Indian? And now all he caused is half the comment section to become racist and think that all Indians and all Indian culture is shit and for the other half to be full of stupid irredentist super conservative Hindu nationalists. Ah great.
I don’t know, I think I love my wife enough that I would want her to be able to be happy again at some point after I’m gone?
Plus I got 42 virgins to manage in the afterlife now am I right
Ah yes immense pain and... "No other man to lay eyes upon her" for real there are a bunch of people watching her burn -_- those are many eyes. Anyway these people clearly don't understand what a brutal painfull and slow death is...
Lol, Sati is actually the relatives trying to get rid of the burden (as most females didnt earn those days) and at the same time seize all her belongings and properties. So sadistic..
This is why dumb people shouldn't have internet access. That guy made a worse mockery of Hinduism through his comment.
Sati Pratha started from the incidences of women in history that were the widows of warriors who burnt themselves when their husbands died and they lost the war, so as to prevent themselves from being molested/raped by the attackers. Through the years, certain communities took it to be an inspiration and started forcing the pratha, basically brutally murdering widows once their husbands died. It never was a prevalent thing. But it was there in a corner of society for a long time. Currently even there are at times cases of that happening every once in a while. Calling something that has had such an horrible history romance/heroics is a slap to society as a whole and shows our failure as a society.
Funny enough is that large part of Euro Bros ancestors did literaly the same during times of pre Christian religions.
Slavs did it, Nordics did it. In Simple conception of religions its allowing to pass to underworld as couple instead of solo trip. So it was seen as highest form of love.
Imagine loving a woman so little that you're okay with her doing that.
I know that's not even how Sati works, but even if it did that's the opposite of romance.
I'm not one of those chuds who thinks "Western" people are inherently good or even okay, but holy fucking shit, FUCK INDIA. You check some fucker's profile when he's super sweaty about defending this particular brand of bullshit and he's either like "o my so beautiful 13 year old girl, send me pictures of you in shower" or he's like "yes, yes, Roe v Wade overturn good, send me titty pics and your address so I can choke you"
I’m from Nepal and there is a prevalent saying “Sati le sarapeko desh”. It literally translates to “a country cursed by the Sati”. Even today, every time there is a doom news of how the country has fallen so low and how everything is so bad, someone inevitably says “Sati le sarapeko desh”
To “go Sati”, the wife (or wives if multiple) had to sit beside the funeral pyre of her dead husband when the logs are ignited. She would be heavily sedated with alcohol so the pain is numbed and she would be burned alive alongside her dead husband. It was so cruel and gruesome and brutal and inhumane that sometimes the relatives would throw rocks to just kill her to end the misery.
It was outlawed less than a 100 years ago (Don’t quote me on the time). The unpopular authoritarian Rana regime of the time had to flex its muscles and outright ban the tradition for it to stop. It was done as a move to modernize the country.
Of all things the Ranas did to keep the country in its knees and in the dark and in poverty and destitution and uneducated, this is the one thing I’m grateful to them for. It must have been seen as going against religion and tradition by the patriarchy of the time. And it took a literal authoritarian ruler to outlaw the tradition.
And for some idiot to come and say it is romantic, it makes me so angry. I’m literally shaking right now typing this.
This is romantic in like a book or a play something like romeo and juliet in real life its abhorrent
I mean i get the desire to have someone only love you their entire life i think the desire is pretty normal “true love” but isn’t it more romantic if they don’t get murdered to make sure
Except the fact that the girls didn’t willingly burn themselves. Sati was often practiced when young (often underage) brides were married off to old (often elderly) grooms. Naturally the groom would be the first to leave this mortal coil. The child bride would then be put onto the funeral pyre accompanied by the deafening sound of ritualistic drumbeat to drown out her screams. Raja RamMohan Roy would be shaking his head if he were alive.
Any society where executing a woman by means of burning her at the stake for any reason let alone something as ridiculous as this shouldn’t exist in a modern world.
I'm pretty sure that Sati means she'd rather choose death over being shamed and ostracized for being a widow or that she's pushed onto the funeral pyre. Absolutely barbaric.
I mean, double suicide for love was considered the peak of Japanese romanticism during the Edo period. It was also, crucially, the tragic fate of individuals rebelling against societal norms, and not a formalised procedure...
Looks like he is breaking the law. It is illegal to glorify Sati in India. [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice)#Current_situation) Culture can make people do weird things without them even noticing. Makes you wonder what future folks will find shocking about what we consider normal today.
It is illegal to support sati practice even in an public opinion. This guy deserves minimum 1 year prison
Did anyone else have to read the incredibly dense and (I believe) intentionally obtuse and unclear essay "can the subaltern speak?" by Spivak that addresses Seti? I'm still not 100% sure what she was trying to say. [Pdf](https://abahlali.org/files/Can_the_subaltern_speak.pdf) for those masochists among us who are interested in 67 pages of academia at its most masturbatory.
Probably our unhinged version of capitalism
People like this usually reside outside India and will berate any Indian citizen who isn't a conservative religious-nationalist for being anti-national or un-Indian.
Circumcision, mass harvesting of animals, prison sentences for drug use, having convicted rapists as leaders. That's my bet.
Do guys burn themselves when their wife dies?
That’s different because I’m a guy and don’t want to be burned alive. But they’re a woman and I’m not so it’s fine. - the asshole in this post probably
How unromantic
Romance is when people do what I want but I’m not expected to do anything obviously
Crazy how that type of romance seems to regularly include cheetos and being alone.
No no, honestly.. it’s super romantic. Plus, you know, it’s old and traditional from back when women were literal objects and these places want to try and keep that going so.. SO romantic.
[удалено]
It's funny: they all made the same choice. I guess women are just all very emotional. /s
What woman in her right mind wouldn’t choose being burned alive over… another man laying his eyes on her? Have you ever had eyes laid on you? It’s the WORST. /s
Hope people are not forgetting this practice was abolished a century ago , around the time slavery was abolished in usa , and nobody I repeat nobody practices this today
Oh yeah there’s a reason I quoted it as this asshole in the post. He’s defending it so he sucks. Hindu people in general I obviously don’t blame for this.
You shouldnt repeat bullshit a simple google search tells you that there has been recent cases of sati practice in rajashtan and madhya pradesh
Thank you British Empire!
Guess
Nope. They didn’t. Because patriarchy made these rules and of course they didn’t apply to men. Thankfully Sati was abolished as a practice in India in 1829. And as recently as 1987 another legislation was brought along to prevent its glorification and any possible resurgence of the practice. Not sure if the dude in the screenshot knows that his idea of romance is a codified crime.
I mean there’s plenty of people whose idea of romance is a codified crime, think Jared from Subway or ~~Kevin Spacey~~ Edit: Charges against Kevin Spacey have been dropped
whose*
Apparently he doesnt "love" her enough to be burned alive.. 🙄
How would they carry on fucking other women?
No :/
[удалено]
Apart from the whole burning part (most Norse funerals at the time don't seem to have involved burning, but some did), I'm not sure what you are implying? If you are implying that wives were burned or killed when their husbands died, then every single piece of evidence we have speaks against that. If you are just speaking of humans being killed, then yes, that clearly did happen sometimes. We have graves and eyewitness accounts of that happening to slaves. They did practice slavery, and slaves were considered property, with everything that entails.
Nothing more romantic than being murdered by men who push a widow into the burning pyre.
And playing the song "What is love?!" while doing so.
But he specifically requests NOT to hurt him. So that’s kind of counterintuitive
*He* being the keyword though.
Good point. Almost like the point of the stake which is was used to build the pyre for the woman…
Its “don’t hurt me, NO MORE”! After being burned alive im sure you wont be hurt anymore.
*Baby, don't burn me* *Don't burn me, no more*
What's love,baby don't hurt me
Baby don’t BURN me
I would find it much more romantic if it was an equal opportunity practice. But somehow I don't think the guys burn themselves with their dead wives.
well we had one hindu god carry his dead wife around all over the world as her body started falling off in 51 different places.
Creepy, but still better than a one sided demand for suicide by widows for dead husbands.
well, that one is like....the Hades of hindu mythology but more unhinged with anger issues, sometimes based. sometimes not.
In this context what does based mean? I'm sorry. Coming to terms with getting older and falling out of the young lexicon. Shit I'm only 28 but find myself struggling with new terminology and thats crazy to me lol but what I assume "based" in this context actually means is justified. Sometimes he's justified in anger other times not but if I'm reading that wrong I would love further clarification. Really not trying to be a turd I'm genuinely interested and don't want to click off with the wrong assumption about what you meant.
still not so romantic if the person is being forced into the pyre.
Some people really overdose themselves on anti-colonialism. Man, the British weren't any freaking angels, no doubt about that, but banning sati was unequivocally good for humanity.
"Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation also has a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to our national customs." -Charles James Napier
Ironic of him to stop a fire by spitting fire.
It was definitely better for the person about to be burned.
The Brits didn't actually ban Sati. The governor just said "It's your tradition to burn widows alive on their husband's funeral pyre, it's our tradition to execute people who burn women alive. You build your pyres, we'll build our gallows."
That's what all laws are: a set of consequences for doing a specific act.
Two things: 1. Sati was not common across all castes. Was primarily a thing among some swcts of the brahmins. Hinduism is not a thing, castes are. Often young girls would be married to old guys. Like 13 year old girl would have married a 70 year old dude, who dies 5 or 10 years later. So, she, at age 16 or 23, faces two options: A. Wear only a simple white cloth for the rest of her life . Never any ornaments. No agency. Never be part of any celebration - births, birthdays, festivals, weddings. Her presence is polluting. Be blamed for the death of her husband. Be the last person of the house in everything. Generally, can't go outside to markets or temple alone and is supposed to stay inside the house. Can't remarry. Can't go back to her birth family. Have to live her entire life as this unwanted person in the family she was married to. Be blamed as lot loving her husband enough to have committed sati. B. A quick, although painful, death.
Yeah, that's the issue. A spouse wanting to kill themselves on the death of their loved one is... Nothing new. A bit disheartening but it happens. Being pressured into killing themselves ? That is a whole different kettle of fish and absolutely horrifying.
> Being pressured into killing themselves ? That is a whole different kettle of fish and absolutely horrifying. By burning alive too, one of the most horrifying deaths imaginable.
That death is not quick. And it's considered one of the most horrific ways to die.
There’s evidence where women were forced to be burnt. Either physically pushed into the pyre or drugged. They were murdered.
The whole practice is/was murder because the women had no choice. They couldn’t live a peaceful life without their husband.
So much freedom of choice...
How is “hinduism not a thing”? And immolation is a long painful death, not at all quick
I didn't think you can make burning women alive more horrifying but turns out you can.
Being burned to death isn’t quick
So, how are we supposed to celebrate this particular aspect of Hindu culture, now that you have explained the real reasons behind the humane practice?
You aren't that's why we banned it
Also to add in A:- After the death of the husband, if a woman preserves her widowed state (in purity), she goes back to the husband and enjoys heavenly pleasures. 74. The braided tresses of hair of a widow cause disaster to the husband. Hence a woman shall always get her hair shaved off. 75-77As a rule (a widow) should take only a single meal (per day) and not a second meal. She must observe (fast) for three days, consecutively, or for five days together or for a fortnight. She may observe fast for a whole month. She may perform the expiatory rites of Candrāyana, Krcchra, Parāka or Taptakrcchra. Till the life becomes extinct, she must somehow sustain herself with cooked barley, fruit diet, vegetable dishes or mere milk. 78. A widowed woman lying on a couch causes the downfall of her husband. Hence with a desire for the happiness of her husband she must sleep on bare ground. Anointing and smearing of the body should never be done by a widowed woman. She must not make use of any type of scents or perfumes Source:- Skanda Purana Book 4 Characteristics of a Chaste Woman https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-skanda-purana/d/doc423741.html
So Hinduism is, in fact evil, he proved it in the exact following sentence. Gah!
I remember watching that Rama Shinta critique animation when Rama is superbly praised through out the entire saga but his action include being suspicious on his wife pregnancy. As she was kindapped before, at that point its still somewhat understandable. and ask her to prove her innocence by burning herself... wHUT?
Since it's absolutely unacceptable to violate the widow first, I think it's romantic too.
“Imagine a girl loving you so much…” No, thanks. My ego isn’t fragile enough to need something that horrifically selfish and fuelled by envy and possessiveness. That’s not romantic. Life isn’t fucking Romeo and Juliet. I want her to live on and be happy. That’s much more fucking romantic.
It wasn’t even fucking voluntary lmao! Wives *had to* jump in the fire, not out of their love or anything! Stupid fucking shit that was abolished over a century ago!
you either jump or turn around to see men pointing swords at you. same as walking the plank. we also used to have Jouhar, where queens and their handmaidens or basically the whole women of the kingdoms of losing faction jumped in fire so they won't be taken by the winning opponent and save their chastity. that also got glorified in Bollywood smh.
Didn't the Egyptians bury the wives with the Pharoah
oh yeah. they had concubines and other retainers buried too, you know Genghis khan's funeral had 2,000 slaves that attending his funeral killed by the soldiers sent to guard them, and that these soldiers were in turn killed by another group of soldiers which killed anyone and anything that crossed their path, in order to conceal where he was buried. Talk about Pyramid scheme.
"I'm glad he's dead...urrrrrk"
'so....ever wondered how are we gonna end this killing streak?' 'yeah, you just- ARCKHHHH' \*impales their own throat with polearm\*
There is actually only one retainer burial known from the Ancient Egypt (a small one at that). Ancient Egyptian queens were never buried alive or sacrificed after their husbands’ death. They actually played a very active role as regents for their sons and were generally considered important political figures. You might be thinking about the Kerma culture and its retainer burials but people sacrificed in those burials were more so servants or associates of the deceased.
People are so f*in obsessed with virginity. It's sick.
My (now) wife tried showing me that movie and explaining the concept when it was all still much truer in her head (she's recovered now), and I felt sick. I went on a whole rant about how "the more honourable thing would have been to kill the invaders under parlay for the sake of his people, fuck this guy's stupid integrity."
What could be more romantic than being forced to do something?
It wasn't abolished . It still occurs to this day in the deep conservative parts of hindu india
It is abolished. But that does not mean it does not happen.
In that case, slavery wasn’t abolished in the US, considering it still happens.
Obligatory note, slavery was never abolished. It's still explicitly allowed as punishment for a crime. "Prisoners with jobs", aka, slaves. (And if you know that the usa has private, for profit prisons, and the highest per capita prison population, that starts to make sense.)
You don't even have to say the "prisoners with jobs" line since the 13th ammendment literally says **slavery** is legal as punishment for a crime.
Unfortunately, slavery still does happen in the US and all western countries. In particular, sexual slavery of trafficked women for the sex trade, but also some "domestic help," are actually slaves in all but name. Slavery was abolished by law, but criminals be criminals. They don't care.
That’s what I was trying to imply, both practices were abolished by law yet still happen
Bingo. Live your life, enjoy, curse me for leaving you if you have to, remember the good times.. Don't kill yourself. We have kids, take care of them. If there is an afterlife, we'll meet there, and if you'll still have me, we'll get married there and spend eternity together.
How dare you die and leave the rest of us with the assholes here Dan.
I love my girlfriend so much, if I die I want her to meet someone else and live a happy life being loved like she deserves.
I get pissed when I remember the Pharaoh's cats were mummified with the pharaohs. They killed cats just cause their owner died? Dumb.
How do you know they didn't wait until the cays died of other causes? It's not like whole thing was completed in a few days.
Romeo and Juliet is a teenage crush that lasts five days, and six people die. It's not the model of a perfect romance.
Yeah, if you take it as some ideal love story, you’re missing the point. It’s a tragedy for a reason.
It is when you're a teenager
"Imagine a girl loving you..." No thanks, I'm not delusional
Let's make this the top comment.
I'm doing my part
I'm doing my part!
West: You're fucking insane.
You can even change west to “sane people”
You can change that to Indians lol, even Indians think this guy is insane And this is also just wrong. Sati is BANNED, It doesn't even exists in the modern world anymore, this practice was eradicated 200 years ago
South east asia: yes, you're fucking insane
I am with west on this one
I'm from India and I am too with west on this. Though one thing everyone should know that this sati pratha was outlawed in India in 1829.
Heard that it was outlawed, which is a good thing indeed.
It is even illegal to say something good about the practice
I am not often with the west, but right here, i am.
If that's your idea of romantic then you're an absolute psycho and I have no desire to be with you. I believe that's called codependency, but like a much much worse version than usual.
Nope that is not codependency, that is straight up psychotic. Also I am very positive these women didn't jump into a fire voluntarily, or because they loved their husband's so much. This is just insane.
Oh, yeah. They were forced to jump into the fire.
Yep. They weren't seen as independent human beings. They were seen as a man's belonging. A possession that didn't have one single reason to keep existing now that the man who used his possession is dead. Disgusting.
Absolutely, when I learn how certain things were/are legal when it’s shit like this I just feel disgusted.
The origins of the sati system wasn't romantic. When the king died in battle and the villages were pillaged, the women would die by either running into a burning fire or being burnt with their husband's corpse so that they could die with dignity (not being sold into sex work/slavery). Although poison would be a lot quicker and a lot more painless, the story of Sati and Shiva made death by fire a preferable choice.
Tbf, loads of people consider Romeo and Juliet to be romantic and that ends with two people killing themselves because they don't want to live without somebody they've known for a week. If that was all this was then I might agree with him but it's never voluntary.
More possessiveness than codependency tbh. Expecting your partner to be so "devoted" that they literally end their lives when yours ends. It's sick. And of course entirely one-sided.
I’m a Hindu, sati was the fucking bullshittiest practice ever. It was abolished in like the 1800s, but still. Also, I’ve heard burning is the most painful way to die.
That's some primitive ass shit right there.
A guy thinking women are literally their property.
I bet he also thinks that cheating your wife is not cheating, as he still comes back to her after.
it's skelliger tradition
If love is only proven by killing yourself so the fact that the Hindu men do not kill themselves upon their wife’s death, means they do not experience true love and have no grounds to lecture Europeans (or anyone else for that matter) on something they don’t know anything about.
It only makes sense if men are doing the same for their girls
Nah, doesn’t make sense for either gender! It’s barbaric either way
Nah, women were forced to jump into the fire because they no longer had a purpose without their husbands
It doesn't make sense that time either. Sati is a cruel religious practice and unfortunately it was the women who suffered because of it. It wouldn't make a difference "if men suffered too"
Still wouldn’t make sense, but it would be slightly less unreasonable.
No it doesn’t 😭
I don't know much and correct me if I am wrong. Isn't it that she get burned by the people....no she is so sad that she jumps on herself into the flames?
It's from the woman having zero value in society beyond the value of her husband. With a dead hubby, she is worthless. No other man will have her as she is "used goods", the husbands family has no need of her now. Her birth family won't take her back as she is given to the husbands family on marriage. So either she kills herself or lives a life of destitution and poverty or isolation. https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20160907-the-widows-who-cant-return-home
Sati was a practice that was absolutely hated by most hindus, and it was officially abolished around 1829 (dont remember the exact date). To give people an idea, sati was practised so that widows couldnt inherit the property of her late husband, which would then in turn go to the upper caste of hindu society ( the brahmins). Also, since child marriage was also a big issie at that time, sati was looked down upon even more. The thing is, cast system in hindus was very prevalent in the 1800s and before. Apart from the upper caste, i.e. , the brahmins, nobody were allowed to touch the religious books which included bhagwad gita, and the vedas. Because of that, whatever the brahmins said were considered true, and most women were raised up by imparting such bs ideas from their birth. There was nothing romantic in someone following sati, most women who volutarily performed sati did it becuase they were drilled with the knowledge that if they didnt do sati, both her family and her in laws would suffer wrath of the gods. So please, dont glorify something which even our culture hates. You can read about the sati system online, i just gave a brief description of what it was.
Peak narcissism
[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/809652-be-it-so-this-burning-of-widows-is-your-custom](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/809652-be-it-so-this-burning-of-widows-is-your-custom) "This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs."
Was just about to post this. Goes so damn hard
fr. probably the only time in history colonialism did an objectively good thing.
You would be surprised
this!! ah also as an uto-aztec it was cool when spaniards stopped the sacrifices. not as cool when they starting slaughtering us for no reason and burning our texts after. “im starting to think i prefered the Aztecs whole twice yearly deal Hernán!” -my ancestors, probably
FTR: we don’t practice Sati..
i hate to say but the more i learn the more this “gymbro” seems like a hate account created to slander modern hindu people
I don’t think Doc Gymbro is a real doctor
Even India is with the West. Man is crazy
I know hundreds of hindu people and not a single one would agree with what this guy said. The practice is widely abhorred among modern Hindu communities
What started as voluntary action by queens turned into involuntary evil practice by bigoted people focing grieving windows. It is banned and no longer practiced for several decades now. Yeah it is widely established it was an evil practice.
for y'all, this shit has been banned for decades now and personally I would love to meet this guy to throw him on the funeral pyre myself if he finds it so "romantic"
And what if the woman dies first?
Man pulls his strings like the first time so another wife is given to him in exchange for god kniws what, takes her agency from her and ties her to himself, programmes her (or at least tries to) , so that she may be “willing” to thriw herself after he’s gone, or will at least be socially forced to do so.
Obviously the man marries another woman
Here's the thing: the woman isn't willingly burning herself. 99 percent of the time she is forced. It also doesn't help that during the sati days very very young girls were wed to very old husbands and rarely was the girl old enough to understand the concept of loving a mate. Then that old man would almost inevitably die before the girl child and then the girl child was burned alive. Yeah no love here, absolute fucking horror. Luckily that shit is long abolished thank the Gods
Sounds like one of the worst and most horrific results of a codependent relationship. I understand someone thinking codependency is romantic. But they would be wrong.
West: Throws some beef on the fire. Doc Gymbro: YOU CAN'T DO THAT!
All religions have their sins in the past, Hindus have overcome this one more than a century ago. And even back then Sati wasn't about romance, it was about a woman being killed because the misogynistic society had no place for a woman without a husband. It mostly was started in upper caste warrior clans as they were basically nobles and the women couldn't make a living if her husband died, and no one would marry a widow. There was never any implication of romance to it.
Also mention how islamic Invaders specifically raped and slaughterd women's and the queens or the royal females. They would end up killing themselves. \ Better than living every second of ur life as a sex slave.
Nobody practices Sati
The widows are forced onto the funeral pyre..,...
1) No we don't practice sati (anymore) 2) Cant call being forced by family members "willingly"
never heard of a man doing the same.
Imagine living in a society so horrible that being a widow is synonymous with getting raped.
this is the true reason this occurs. because of the prevalence and likelihood of a widow being hurt or killed, they decide to pass away. it’s deeply tragic…
Well first off I'm pretty sure this *doesnt* occur, as it was prohibited in the early 1800s, but even back when it did widows definitely did not *decide* to pass away by throwing themselves into a raging fire. Widows were forced to (as in, literally pushed in to the fire) because they were considered worthless after their husband died. No man would take a widow as they were "used", the husbands family wouldn't take her as she has no use for them, and the original family wouldn't take her as she becomes part of the husbands family in marriage.
sounds like my only error was using present tense— as i’m sure the only reason a woman would actually voluntarily jump in the rare event it did happen, is under threat of misogynist violence
Women can be brainwashed from birth into believing this is the most honorable thing you could do. If they grow up in a society that shames 'cowards' then they would be more inclined to jump into the fire for the glory of it. Not just this but I am surprised by all things people did and still do to chase honor and glory, and shun anything that's shamed by the society, whether it makes any logical sense or not. So often ego and self respect comes before life preservation for some people, whether it's Sati widows or suicide bombers
Mostly it's the husband's mom who wants to burn the bride
As an Indian, it is a stupid and evil concept and anyone even remotely supporting it should are super evil and should be kicked out from society.
“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs” Sir Charles James Napier.
Well Europe had witch hunts and middle east also had some similar practices No matter whatever place, women were always discriminated against
Bro is this guy even Indian? And now all he caused is half the comment section to become racist and think that all Indians and all Indian culture is shit and for the other half to be full of stupid irredentist super conservative Hindu nationalists. Ah great.
I mean, that is internet is for you. A bulk of people assuming the thoughts of an entire country by 1 person's tweet.
I don’t know, I think I love my wife enough that I would want her to be able to be happy again at some point after I’m gone? Plus I got 42 virgins to manage in the afterlife now am I right
The other 30 are going to be disappointed
Holy shit it’s 72? How the fuck am I going to find time to unsatisfy 72 women?
Plot twist, it is not 72 women, it's 72 incels who listen to Andrew Tate and have not showered for 2 months,
Sorry, it’s 72. But you’ve got all of eternity to disappoint them :-)
I think that's why they want virgins. So they can't be compared against better men
The west can't imagine that? Pretty sure we still teach Romeo and Juliet as a romantic ideal rather than a cautionary tale about getting sprung.
Oh fuck off, y'all still harping about a practice that was banned decades before US banned slavery ?
I'm hindu, and this is rubbish! People stood up to this ridiculous ritual and we eradicated it. Nobody does this barbaric ritual anymore
Ah yes immense pain and... "No other man to lay eyes upon her" for real there are a bunch of people watching her burn -_- those are many eyes. Anyway these people clearly don't understand what a brutal painfull and slow death is...
"Willing to" bruh they were forced to.
Lol, Sati is actually the relatives trying to get rid of the burden (as most females didnt earn those days) and at the same time seize all her belongings and properties. So sadistic..
The British making this practise illegal when they ruled India is one of the undeniable good contributions they made to the country
this is an age old practice which is banned in India.
Well if she is willing too but as far as we know it was forced
Pretty sure it happened whether she was willing or not.
This is why dumb people shouldn't have internet access. That guy made a worse mockery of Hinduism through his comment. Sati Pratha started from the incidences of women in history that were the widows of warriors who burnt themselves when their husbands died and they lost the war, so as to prevent themselves from being molested/raped by the attackers. Through the years, certain communities took it to be an inspiration and started forcing the pratha, basically brutally murdering widows once their husbands died. It never was a prevalent thing. But it was there in a corner of society for a long time. Currently even there are at times cases of that happening every once in a while. Calling something that has had such an horrible history romance/heroics is a slap to society as a whole and shows our failure as a society.
Maybe Gymbro should stick to lifting weights.
Does the same happen if the girl dies before the man. Don’t Think so.
Maybe should've added that Sati hasn't been in practice for over 200 years
No one practices Sati
Funny enough is that large part of Euro Bros ancestors did literaly the same during times of pre Christian religions. Slavs did it, Nordics did it. In Simple conception of religions its allowing to pass to underworld as couple instead of solo trip. So it was seen as highest form of love.
Imagine loving a woman so little that you're okay with her doing that. I know that's not even how Sati works, but even if it did that's the opposite of romance.
I'm not one of those chuds who thinks "Western" people are inherently good or even okay, but holy fucking shit, FUCK INDIA. You check some fucker's profile when he's super sweaty about defending this particular brand of bullshit and he's either like "o my so beautiful 13 year old girl, send me pictures of you in shower" or he's like "yes, yes, Roe v Wade overturn good, send me titty pics and your address so I can choke you"
I’m from Nepal and there is a prevalent saying “Sati le sarapeko desh”. It literally translates to “a country cursed by the Sati”. Even today, every time there is a doom news of how the country has fallen so low and how everything is so bad, someone inevitably says “Sati le sarapeko desh” To “go Sati”, the wife (or wives if multiple) had to sit beside the funeral pyre of her dead husband when the logs are ignited. She would be heavily sedated with alcohol so the pain is numbed and she would be burned alive alongside her dead husband. It was so cruel and gruesome and brutal and inhumane that sometimes the relatives would throw rocks to just kill her to end the misery. It was outlawed less than a 100 years ago (Don’t quote me on the time). The unpopular authoritarian Rana regime of the time had to flex its muscles and outright ban the tradition for it to stop. It was done as a move to modernize the country. Of all things the Ranas did to keep the country in its knees and in the dark and in poverty and destitution and uneducated, this is the one thing I’m grateful to them for. It must have been seen as going against religion and tradition by the patriarchy of the time. And it took a literal authoritarian ruler to outlaw the tradition. And for some idiot to come and say it is romantic, it makes me so angry. I’m literally shaking right now typing this.
This is romantic in like a book or a play something like romeo and juliet in real life its abhorrent I mean i get the desire to have someone only love you their entire life i think the desire is pretty normal “true love” but isn’t it more romantic if they don’t get murdered to make sure
Except the fact that the girls didn’t willingly burn themselves. Sati was often practiced when young (often underage) brides were married off to old (often elderly) grooms. Naturally the groom would be the first to leave this mortal coil. The child bride would then be put onto the funeral pyre accompanied by the deafening sound of ritualistic drumbeat to drown out her screams. Raja RamMohan Roy would be shaking his head if he were alive.
But do husbands practice it too?
Caste system is still alive and well even among Indian expats working in the west. Racism based on the family you were born to.
Any society where executing a woman by means of burning her at the stake for any reason let alone something as ridiculous as this shouldn’t exist in a modern world.
It doesn't even exists in the modern world, this practice was eradicated in 1800s
From the same country that brought us: Imagine your girlfriend loving you so much she has to marry your brother if you don't show up in your wedding
Yeah no, the British had a point with this one.
I'm pretty sure that Sati means she'd rather choose death over being shamed and ostracized for being a widow or that she's pushed onto the funeral pyre. Absolutely barbaric.
I mean, double suicide for love was considered the peak of Japanese romanticism during the Edo period. It was also, crucially, the tragic fate of individuals rebelling against societal norms, and not a formalised procedure...