Letters to the Editor
smallfox
Published Letters: 94 Editor's Choice: 8
-
baby-goddess
[Read the article: Do you really want to be a goddess?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There's no red carpet under her feet in those photos of her at school. (Or in any of the photos, that I see.) This isn't an issue of "Those silly superstitious foreigners" nor is it an issue of "Those narrowminded xenocentric Westerners". The issue -- the ONLY issue -- is whether these girls suffer for their status psychologically or physically. There's nothing inherently wrong with losing a religious status after puberty, nor is there anything inherently wrong with attaching a religious or social signifigance to it. The girls are returned to their families, not made pariahs or sacrificed.
As Grungie said, some things are just wrong, and I think it's safe to say those are practices that violate basic human rights; if you want to play the complete moral relativism game, the Holocaust was justified. I haven't seen an article about the kumari that actually address the real issue, though - that is, whether it actually is exploitation (no, Price, I don't think it's an obvious, reactionary answer based on what very little we've been shown about their treatment), whether these girls are taken against their/their family's will, whether they are allowed to develop normal social and behavior skills uotside of their vocation (going to public school would suggest so), whether they are able to adapt back into society and lead normal lives, etc. That's what would make this a human-rights issue, and if these girls are leading undesirable lives it would not be hard to change the tradition enough to fall in line with basic human rights.
-
creepy? How is it "creepy"?
[Read the article: Periods, rabbis, panties and more]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Any other ladies out there think a pill that ends your period
is WAYYY CREEEEPY!!! Not that I look forward to it every month or anything...it just seems really weird not to have it."
If you're on hormonal birth control you don't have a period, anyway. I don't really see the point of forcing non-ovulatory bleeding just because we've been conditioned to expect it. There's nothing to gain from fake periods, why not eliminate them?
-
why the assumption of subjugation?
[Read the article: The other side of international adoption]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is the per-capita production of unwanted babies signifigantly higher among Korean women than poor American women? Presumably it would have to be to make the argument that these women are giving up babies they would otherwise keep due to lack of social services. And even if the percentage is higher, this isn't necessarily causation -- it may point to a lack of birth control or abortion options, or simply culture or religion that actively discourages both. Just because a baby is carried to term does not mean it's wanted by the birth parents (obviously.) I won't say there's not a sense of loss even with an unwanted infant, but it's a big leap to say the high number of children in orphanages directly correllates to an atmosphere in which women are pressured to give away wanted babies to line government coffers.
This idea that international adoption rips infants away from their culture is a little ludicrous, as well. Culture and language aren't scripted into one's DNA, and it's xenocentric to suggest a child does better / deserves to be raised in the culture from whence its DNA originates. While I think it's great for parents of internationally adopted kids to engage as a family in learning the language, customs, food, etc, of the "birth-culture", the child doesn't manifestly suffer from speaking English as a first language instead of Korean, Chinese, Spanish, or Russian.
-
on race -
[Read the article: The other side of international adoption]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Anon - yes and no. Obviously ethnicity is not a mutable trait like culture is, but it's a specious argument in terms of adoption -- analogous to saying the disabled shouldn't have kids, or that inter-racial couples ought not to reproduce. (On a tangent, China has recently instituted rules that bar disabled and obese foreigners from adopting.) The potential for prejudice is never a reason to avoid having a family. As for the psychological impact of not physically looking like your parents I've never seen any studies that suggest, let alone prove, that being ethnically different from one's parents is psychologically damaging. Every child goes through emotionally difficult periods; one can assume the issues are different for adopted children but they aren't necessarily more difficult than they are for any other kid, especially a kid who's "different". And moreover, I don't think the fact that a loving family of any gender or racial makeup is far better for a child than foster or government care is a particularly difficult arugment to make.
One may also assume that the potential for feeling alienated diminishes with urbanization and diversity. Being the only Asian child (with non-Asian parents) in a tiny town in Oklaholma may be lonelier or more confusing than being the Asian child of a white couple in, say, LA or Chicago, and it's likelier that those with the means and desire to adopt internationally would live in those larger, more diverse locations.
-
Is this actually threatening?
[Read the article: Hello Kitty, keeping cops honest]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"What does it mean for Thailand's female police officers that a cartoonish symbol of femininity is used to shame disobedient colleagues? Will this type of shaming -- which announces that femininity is antithetical to authority and power -- discourage women from joining the ranks of the police?"
Call me a complacent feminist, but I don't find this threatening. Were I female officer I'd be equally humiliated by being punished with a Sponge Bob armband. Hello Kitty is a "cartoonish symbol of feminity" I equate with five year old girls and shallow, infantilized adults, not strong women -- or men, for that matter. Hello Kitty may be antithetical to authority and power, but it's a huge leap from Hello Kitty to women. (I'd hazard to guess that many/most female Thai cops aren't big Hello Kitty collectors, too.) Is there just the slightest chance that you're reading way too far into this?