From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Subject: Re: To Marry (Indian) or Not?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 19:31:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.173443.1763@ctp.com>, pghol@ctp.com (Preeti Anissa Gholap) writes:
> for the exceptions to the rule among Indian men", its probably
> because they don't meet that many to begin with, and of the ones
> they meet, they are too buzy with their careers and educations

You just have to look harder. Finding a suitable marriage partner isn't
an easy thing to do. One has to put significant amount of time in this
effort along with other things in life like work and career.

What comes easy goes easy. What comes with hard work gives delight for
a long time.

> 
> >The answer to sexism in the Indian community cannot be the practice 
> >of a reverse sexism mixed with racism, which is what the preference 
> >of Indian women for non-Indian spouses amounts to, in the final 
> >analysis. My sense is that women are deluding themselves if they 
> >believe that American men are not sexist or that American society
> >is yet free of institutionalized discrimination against women.
> >If they wish to leverage their 'exotic' status to their advantage, 
> >or use the idea that American men are less sexist as a mask for 
> >self-hatred, well ... I suppose that is their right.
> 
> Whoa! If individual Indian women elect non-Indian partners,
> its called "their business", NOT "reverse sexism" !

However if they harbored or expressed notions like all Indian
men are sexist or not good then they are engaging in racism and
reverse sexism. 

> I do not see why ANYONE should feel a sense of obligation to
> choose a marriage or dating partner solely from one's
> own community. 

In a normal circumstance, you are right. However when a whole
community is being discriminated in an environment, those who stand
up to such discrimination and make choices which support that 
community even in personal life, are appreciated in that
community. They become the leaders of the community as opposed to
just somebody in the majority which is discriminatory towards
that community.

Look at the Jewish for example. They always try to marry
a Jewish person. Jews as a community faced tremendous discrimination
in the western world and such discrimination brought them together.
They have a sense of community. They want to grow together or die
together. 

Look at the Chinese. Chinese stick together with chinese and 
promote each other. Chinese women and men would often marry 
among themselves too. Why ? They too feel persecuted as a 
community in the western world.

Indians are also discriminated all over the world as a community.
Indians in MIddle East, Far East, Europe feel quite discriminated
as a community. Indians are not as much discriminated in Canada
or USA as yet. This however is due to the fact their number is 
significantly small in Canada or USA at present. As the numbers
grow, one would see increasing discrimination upto a certain point.
It may then decline because the community may become a powerful 
'voting block'.  In current stage of discrimnation, it is an obligation
to certain extent to stick by the community you are considered a part of 
by the majority. If not, you feel find yourself caught up in the 
middle and you will get brickbats from both sides.
So unless you are an 'ace' or a 'queen', sticking to your community
is likely to be a safer bet ...

In difficult times, it is your own community that you can trust more.
In my own experience, I have found Indians being helpful in difficult
times, not the Americans - partly because Indians understand the 
difficulty easily compared to an American who is relatively ignorant 
about Indians, and partly because there is a sense of being 
co-miserables ...

Alok