Now we are moving on to one of the main presentations, which is given by Sudharma dd. Her presentation is quite long, so please bear with our refutation.
Quote:
These histories are important because they exemplify the severity of disregard for women in our society during the middle to late 1970s.
This is a biased statement. Where did this "severe disregard for women" come from? As far as I know, most ISKCON members (other than the feminists) follow Srila Prabhupada's teachings solely and wholely. Could it be a possibility that what Sudharma dd is referring to was coming from Srila Prabhupada's teachings? Also, what are her definitions of "abuse" and "disregard"? Did someone actually request you to cover your head with a sari? Oh, what horrible abuse!
Quote:
Many of you have probably wondered why we felt it was so important to establish the Women's Ministry.
Yes, so that you can further your feminist and liberal humanist agenda. And to undermine Srila Prabhupada's direct instructions on this matter.
Quote:
Perhaps also, through my testimony and what you have heard from my Godsisters, you will understand that this is not feminism
The thief that cries "I'm not stealing!". Actually, it is all about promoting feminism, but the promoters are so self-deluded that they do not even realize that that is exactly what they are doing.
Quote:
I hope that you will also recognise that the seeds of injustice towards, and prejudice against, women still bear fruit today.
Where does this "prejudice" that Sudharma dd speaks of come from? I see no other source but Srila Prabhupada's teachings. Her problem is actually that she is unwilling to accept Srila Prabhupada's teachings in full, and she rejects teachings which she does not like, such as "women should never be independent", "women are less intelligent", or "Don't follow equal rights". She actually has a problem with Srila Prabhupada, but is not honest enough to admit it.
Quote:
Looking back, the significance of many experiences have become apparent and are shocking, but worse was bearing witness to the suffering of my devoted Godsisters. Even though unaware of the details, the pain was evident, immeasurable and unbearable to watch. Clearly, these experiences reflected a perversion of the edicts of protection for women.
And now she wants to simply throw out the baby with the bathwater. Since the Vedic system was misapplied, she wants to get rid of it and instead institute gender equality and equal rights. This is not a very intelligent choice. If your house is broken, one solution is to simply burn it down. A better solution is to fix the problems the right way.
Quote:
Next, through our own efforts, we were able to open a beautiful restaurant in Manila. When the restaurant became successful, I was told it was now time to put someone serious in charge; that a woman's nature did not allow her to bear the managerial responsibility of such a project.
Yes, sastra says that a woman's role is to stay at home and take care of the children, not to go out and become independent or a businesswoman. The person that told Sudharma dd that was merely following sastra. That Sudharma dd holds such a person's opinion in contempt is showing that actually she holds sastra in contempt. She is rejecting sastra by making this statement.
Quote:
I do not know if the opposition to my efforts was due to a fear of losing collectors - who may prefer to preach - or to being a successful woman preacher, or both.
This is one of the arguements that feminists sometimes give. "The problem is that you men are just too insecure to accept a dominant woman". What utter nonsense! Sastra does not prescribe for women to become dominant, masculine, but rather to become a chaste mother. The underlying attitude behind Sudharma dd's statement is one of arrogance.
Quote:
More detrimental to me than the ill fate of being on a women's party was my arranged marriage.
Westerners generally tend to have a hard time accepting arranged marriages, because they are generally prejudiced and think that it is just some "old-fashioned custom coming from the nasty Indian culture". This is a huge misconception. Arranged marriages are found in sastra, and are generally far superior to the so called "love marriages" of the West, where a woman goes out hunting for a man to find as a husband, like a prostitute. Inherit in her attitude is a rejection of Vedic culture, and therefore a rejection of Krishna Himself.
Quote:
It was determined that the solution to the numerous fall-downs of New Vrindaban's residing spiritual leader would be to give many of the men sannyasa and to marry off all of the women.
Actually that was Srila Prabhupada's mood during the later part of his pastimes. He saw how difficult it was for the mlecchas to maintain a marriage, and he finally grew disgusted and refused to condone any more marriages, and he began giving sannyasa more and more to young men (notably he never gave sannyasa to even one woman). Sudharma dd is actually criticizing Srila Prabhupada by making such a statement, because that was indeed Prabhupada's later policy, that he refused to condone any more marriages because the westerners simply couldn't maintain them. Is it Srila Prabhupada's fault that women could not stick to one husband? That men could not refrain from mixing with other men's wives? And how will instituting gender equality or equal rights help that? Rather, it will simply encourage further free mingling between the sexes, increasing the rates of falldowns and divorces.
Quote:
But we came out of a sense of duty and concern; concern that extends, in truth, beyond our compassion for other female devotees.
In the name of duty, concern, and compassion these women are destroying Srila Prabhupada's movement and rejecting his teachings. Of course they will claim to be acting for "the good of mankind", as all humanists do, but in reality they are blind to the fact that they are doing the exact opposite of what they intend to do. By allowing equal rights and feminism, free mingling between men and women will increase, which will simply result in more and more cases of abuse. They are the kettle calling itself black.
Quote:
Perhaps the desire to renounce the object of sense gratification has led to a denouncement of women devotees,
But that is exactly what sastra and Srila Prabhupada has instructed us to do! Renounce! Take vanaprastha at the latest by the age of 50. Who is actually following these instructions? And because we are too weak to follow these instructions, we become envious and begin to indirectly criticize Srila Prabhupada and sastra for giving such instructions, saying that sastra is "misoginistic" and that Srila Prabhupada is "just a woman hater". These kinds of covert atheists should be rejected from our movement before they destroy the whole thing.
Quote:
which in turn results in a denial of the more feminine Vaisnava qualities that each one of us holds within the core of our hearts - qualities that may now be needed to re-instil the trust and faith of our Society's members.
This is a sentimental appeal that is coming from the emotional platform. Notice yet how these women tend to generally appeal more from the emotional platform than from the sastric platform? That is exactly why sastra forbids women becoming leaders. They are simply too emotional to handle such roles. Instead, their proper role and utilization of their emotional nature is to stay at home and take care of the children. But these modern women are not satisfied with such a simple role. They want power, equality, you name it. They are making such big demands, at the expense of rejecting sastra and minimizing Srila Prabhupada's teachings. What a traversity!
Now we are moving on to the last presentation, given by Rukmini dd.
Quote:
We have been enriched in ISKCON by the sannyasa culture many of the GBC represent. Perhaps no other spiritual organisation has this strength of austerity. But in our efforts to follow Srila Prabhupada in his austerity and carefulness in dealings between men and women, the women of ISKCON have been denigrated.
Yes, the problems of the women is all because of those mean and evil nasty sannyasis and brahmacaris. What an arrogant statement for Rukmini dd to make in front of a room of sannyasis! As I already pointed out, independent women, self-proclaimed "strong and confident" women, naturally feel envy towards renunciates, because renunciates are not under the control of a woman, and this hits their false ego on a very subconscious platform. By "denigrated", what does Rukmini dd mean? That you poor women were forced to stand in the back during kirtan? God, what abuse! Nevermind that if you were not in this movement and were just some karmi, you would be taken advantage of by 20 men a year (many divorced women frequently "date" other men, which usually ends up in sex). All in all, this is a very arrogant statement for her to make.
Quote:
In our Society, unscrupulous men, often in managerial positions, have abused and neglected women.
What an arrogant thing to say in front of a room of leaders. Oh, poor little thing. You were neglected? What was neglected from you? Your demanding of the right to become a guru, or a GBC, or a temple president? In that case, you are rejecting sastra, and are fit to be rejected.
Quote:
The abuses and neglect of women and children must be corrected immediately, as our sexist and inhumane behaviour reflects badly on Srila Prabhupada and taints his movement in the eyes of the world.
What does Rukmini dd consider "sexist and inhumane" behavior? That women should stay at home and take care of their children, rather than go out and get a job and thus become a prostitute? A woman who goes out and gets a job mixes with her fellow male co-workers more than her own husband, and therefore yes, the term "prostitute" is a right adjective to apply.
Quote:
About two years ago my husband (Anuttama Dasa), Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu and I met with the leaders of the anti-cult movement in North America. In a private meeting, we requested that they no longer refer to us as a cult. They said that for them to refrain from calling us a cult they would have to see evidence of accountability.
Are the anti-cultists our authority, or is Srila Prabhupada our authority? If the mainstream world accepts our movement, then that is a sure sign that we have deviated from our pure principles. The karmis are supposed to accept us on our terms, not that we have to accept them on their demoniac terms. Srila Prabhupada did not want us to change the movement or water down his teachings simply to appeal to the masses. To do so would be a serious and gross deviation from Srila Prabhupada's mood and a minimization of his teachings.
Quote:
How can we expect our devotees to offer love and surrender if their human needs are not met and if our leaders do not love them?
Again, quite an arrogant thing to say in front of a room full of leaders, as if you are accusing them of these things. Women want to be respected, but are they willing to respect others? If women are not willing to offer respect to others, why should they deserve to be respected? Rather, if a woman is independent and disrespectful, she shouldn't be surprised if she is disrespected, because the quality of independence in a woman is not a respectable quality.
Quote:
If devotees felt supported spiritually, emotionally and practically, there would be little danger of being vulnerable to rtvik or other aberrant philosophies.
Or the aberrant feminist philosophy? The solution to this is not to establish western social norms like equal rights and feminism, but to establish truly independent varnasrama living so that devotees can live happily without depending on the modern demoniac society.
Quote:
As leaders, you meet women in the course of your preaching. Often you give more deference to these women than to your Godsisters, whom Srila Prabhupada considered Vaisnavis and more intelligent than ordinary women.
Again, quite an arrogant accusation to be making against a room full of exalted sannyasis. Perhaps a reason why many men don't feel respect towards these women is that they themselves, the women, are very disrespectful.
Quote:
Jayadvaita Svami says that what ISKCON needs is grandmothers.
Yes, because grandmothers generally have very motherly qualities. Perhaps what Jayavaita Swami meant was that we need less "masculine and independent women (feminists)" and more "feminine women who naturally command the respect that a mother deserves".
Quote:
When I see the beautiful puspa-samadhi of Srila Prabhupada with all the male figures in kirtana, I feel excluded.
Yes, why not put up a few figures of western women dancing in kirtan? Or better yet, why not put up some figures of some women who are staying at home, taking care of their children, cooking, etc?
Quote:
Whose movement is this? Is it your movement, or does it belong to all of us?
Another very arrogant statement of accusation towards a room full of exalted devotees and sannyasis. Yes, it belongs to everybody, but it is meant for men to manage, not women. Women are supposed to stay at home and take care of their children. A woman's voice can be represented through her husband. A woman that will directly try to represent herself is independent, and Srila Prabhupada called such women "prostitutes".
Quote:
If ISKCON is to be considered relevant, the voices of our women need to be heard.
Considered relevant by whom? The anti-cultists, the mundane academic scholars, the karmi feminist movement, or the demoniac western nondevotee society? Srila Prabhupada said that who cares what you think. You have to accept us on our terms, not that we should accept you (the nondevotees). Rukmini dd's statement is in contradiction to Srila Prabhupada's mood, and could therefore be considered a rejection of Srila Prabhupada's mood.
Quote:
Yamuna, Visakha, Sitala, and other women are highly intelligent, glued to Srila Prabhupada's lotus feet, and their sadhana is impeccable. How enriched this GBC body would be to regularly receive their wise perspectives.
If Srila Prabhupada wanted our leaders to be influenced by women, why did he himself not establish a "Woman's Ministry" to represent women for the GBC body? Why not just be honest enough to admit that what she is proposing is something different than what Srila Prabhupada wanted. If Srila Prabhupada wanted women to become leaders, why didn't he make them leaders? At the time of Srila Prabhupada's passing away, there was not one female GBC, temple president, or guru in the whole movement. Why try to change Srila Prabhupada's philosophy and movement? That is an offense to him, and a rejection of his authority. It is also a rejection of sastra, because sastra does not prescribe that women should become advisors to leaders. Rather, that is the duty of the brahmanas. Because we do not follow sastra, we have so many problems, and then we try to blame sastra as the source of our problems. What blind ignorance!
Quote:
Before I conclude I'd like to quote Radha Devi Dasi, a Harvard law graduate:
The qualification of a woman is not to go out and become a professional prostitute, but to stay at home and become a chaste mother. A woman who is a graduate of Harvard Law may be very qualified from the material platform, but from the spiritual platform, such a person is in the grossest ignorance. Because we base our opinions on such people, we fall into maya and misconceptions.
Quote:
First, we misunderstand our own philosophy and misrepresent our founder-acarya, Srila Prabhupada, if we develop institutional structures that operate as barriers to the integration of women into our ISKCON society.
What does Radha dd consider an "institional barrier"? That women should be encouraged to become gurus and leaders, instead of following the sastric prescription of staying at home and taking care of their children? There are many misconceptions inherit in the very attitude in which Radha dd makes this statement.
Quote:
It is a mistake to contend that Vaisnava philosophy requires that women fill one, and only one, social role.
Whether Radha dd likes it or not, sastra does indeed prescribe one role- that women should be mothers, staying at home and taking care of their children, not going out and getting law degrees. She is rejecting sastra by making this statement. Why not be honest enough to admit that you cannot surrender to sastra rather than trying to change sastra to suit your own speculations and sense gratification? If you cannot accept sastra, why not leave this movement and stop contaminating everyone else with your faithlessness?
Quote:
In the first place, Srila Prabhupada made clear that our Vaisnava heritage is one of flexibility and adaptation with the goal of bringing as many people as possible to the practice of Krsna consciousness.
What a nonsense statement! To what degree was Srila Prabhupada willing to be flexible? Surely not "infinitely flexiable and infinitely accommodating". How flexible does Radha dd want to make our philosophy? So "flexible" that women are free to reject sastra's prescription that women should stay at home and be mothers? So "flexible" that women can go out and become prostitutes?
Quote:
Our Vaisnava history is not intended as a set of chains which will bind modern persons to an historic lifestyle which has not existed anywhere on this earth in a pure form for thousands of years.
Why then did Srila Prabhupada reccomend women to follow traditional women's roles? Her statement is a rejection of Srila Prabhupada, most likely due to a lack of proper understanding of his teachings. Are we actually reading Srila Prabhupada's books? Are we actually accepting everything he says, as it is, without rejecting or adding/subtracting parts that go against our modern western social conditioning?
Quote:
Used in such a way, our Vaisnava history becomes a bar - prohibiting others from approaching Krsna - and we fail to fulfill the injunction laid upon us by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to become spiritual masters and free the entire world.
And what is Radha dd's solution? That we should allow all kinds of nonsense? That women should have the freedom to go out and get law degrees? That we should reject Srila Prabhupada's teachings which state hundreds of times "Women are never to be given freedom"? Rather than admitting her own lack of faith, she is trying to change Srila Prabhupada's philosophy to cater to her own lack of surrender. Is this not insanity?
Quote:
This discussion of the uses and place of our history and tradition has a profound impact on the actual operations and effectiveness of our institution.
And what is Radha dd's solution? That we should reject the Vedic tradition which Srila Prabhupada gave us? Why not just outright reject Srila Prabhupada's authority, and go join some other movement that you can feel more a part of, like the karmi feminist movement. If Srila Prabhupada didn't want us to follow Vedic culture, why then did he glorify it so many thousands of times in his lectures, conversations, and books?
Quote:
By arguing that women must keep to traditional roles for which they may not be suited, by preventing them from participating in services where they could excel,
Regardless of whether or not Radha dd wants to surrender to the traditional roles which sastra prescribes for women, sastra does not change. Radha dd is outrightly rejecting sastra by making such arrogant statements. What kinds of services is she referring to? To become a guru, leader, GBC, etc? If Srila Prabhupada wanted women to become those things, why did he himself not prescribe it or establish it? Radha dd has no faith in Srila Prabhupada's absolute authority and she is outright rejecting Srila Prabhupada by making such statements.
Quote:
It is no secret that ISKCON's treatment of women and children has drawn criticism from anti-cult groups, rights organisations and even governmental bodies.
So we should adopt the demoniac standards that the above mentioned groups prescribe? That would be a rejection of sastric standards and the standards that Srila Prabhupada taught. Who cares what these demons think! If she want to follow their authority more than Srila Prabhupada's, perhaps Radha dd should go join the anti-cult movement, or the human rights organizations, or even go join the corrupt government.
Quote:
It is easy, but foolish, to dismiss such criticism as envy or the uninformed opinion of materialists.
It's even easier to dismiss Srila Prabhupada's direct instructions about culture and social roles, as Radha dd is clearly doing in her statements.
Quote:
Srila Prabhupada himself engaged women in management, public preaching, his personal service, in fact, in virtually every aspect of his newly formed ISKCON organisation.
This is a blatantly incorrect statement. In saying "virtually every aspect", she is totally wrong. Does "virtually every aspect" include guru, GBC, or temple president? But history shows that Srila Prabhupada never engaged any women in these roles. Therefore, why not be honest enough to admit that you are simply rejecting Srila Prabhupada's example as well as teachings, Radha dd?
Quote:
Why should we offend half the world's population in order to uphold a 'tradition' with which even Srila Prabhupada was willing to dispense?
Another blatantly incorrect statement. If this is true, why then did Srila Prabhupada criticize modern western society so strongly and so frequently? And why did he glorify India's traditional Vedic culture so strongly and so frequently? Radha dd's problem is that she has her facts wrong.
Quote:
Most women in ISKCON are engaged in traditional roles. We are mothers, wives, cooks, housekeepers and caretakers. We cook, we clean, we care for the children and the men in our Society, as well as caring for each other. But these tasks are not the whole of our abilities or of the contribution we have to make to Srila Prabhupada's movement.
But they are the roles that sastra prescribes for women. To want to add to that is sastra-ninda, thinking that you are more intelligent than sastra. What an offensive position to take.
Quote:
There are important gender differences that cannot be ignored. This fact, often used as an argument for silencing women, is actually a reason why they should be involved in ISKCON's public discourse.
Even the feminists cannot deny that there are indeed differences between men and women, as her first sentence shows. But her second sentence is a misconception. If Srila Prabhupada wanted women to have a "public voice" and influence on the leaders, why did he himself not establish a "Woman's Ministry"? The fact is that the current ISKCON Women's Ministry, recently renamed Vaisnavi Ministry, is just a vehicle for instituting feminist policies within ISKCON. This will simply spoil everything and destroy Srila Prabhupada's movement. It is an outright rejection of Srila Prabhupada's teachings.
Quote:
Psychologists and others who have studied gender differences have concluded that women are, either through biology or socialisation, more invested in personal relationships than men are.
Yes, and this is why women are supposed to remain at home and raise their children, because they are better at nurturing and giving love to the children. To promote feminism, that women should have some role other than that of a woman, is the greatest social injustice, because it destroys the family and the home, and destroys the lives of the children. Even modern sociologists are beginning to realize this.
Quote:
Our Vaisnava society suffers when women are excluded from its public life, from decision-making, management and formation of policy.
This statement is actually very true. A woman's role is to be the decision maker of the family, specifically in relation to dicisions related to children. A woman's role is to be the manager of the children of her family. A woman's role is to be the formator of policies within her own home, especially in relation to her children. It is NOT the duty of women to become ISKCON's decision makers, managers, and policy formers. Otherwise, why did Srila Prabhupada himself not establish women into these positions, if that is what he wanted? Her statement is a rejection of Srila Prabhupada's mood and authority.
Quote:
In conclusion I have three requests for you to consider:
1. Lend credibility to the Women's Ministry by increasing the representation of women on the GBC on some level and inviting senior women to your zones and temples to associate with your women devotees.
This is again a rejection of Srila Prabhupada's authority and teachings. If Srila Prabhupada wanted women on the GBC, why did he himself not establish it? In 1977, when Srila Prabhupada passed away, there was not one single woman on the GBC body. If Srila Prabhupada wanted women to be on the GBC, why did he not put them there?
Quote:
2. Issue an apology to women for lack of protection and exploitation under your management and the management of those who came before you.
This is a very arrogant accusational statement to make in front of a room of exalted sannyasis and leaders. It's all the bad and mean sannyasis and leaders fault! Nevermind that part of the blame might rest on the women's shoulders also, for being too independent and too inclined to feminism.
Quote:
3. Return to your respective zones and hold ista-gosthis in each temple. As you travel, establish the priority of providing equal facilities, full encouragement and genuine care and protection to the women members of our society. Hold meetings with leaders and women to openly address their needs and problems.
The term "equal facilities" is used here, a thinly viewed reference to equal rights, or feminism. Has this woman never read the many statements Srila Prabhupada made against equal rights? By encouraging this, she is rejecting Srila Prabhupada's teachings. Why not just admit that we have a problem with Srila Prabhupada, rather than masking ourselves as his followers and contaminating others under the guise of being "socially progressive"?
Quote:
As I mentioned earlier, the 1996 GBC-authorised survey of devotees told you that the devotional community has very little faith and trust in you as leaders. These steps would be very significant in re-establishing the community's faith in your leadership.
Actually it would be quite instrumental in many devotees LOSING faith in the GBC, not in re-establishing their faith. Why? Because by following these nonsense steps, the GBC will be in clear deviation of Srila Prabhupada's explicit teachings, and thus strict followers of Srila Prabhupada will reject the GBC promoting apasiddhanta.
