Talk:Bride burning

Hindu Attitudes?
There are many stereotypes being perpetuated in this article - while the issue of bride burning is more or less unique to India, it is not as if it happens all the time there. Statistically speaking, it doesn't happen any more often than a mother murders her children in the United States. I am adding a comment regarding the reaction of the average Indian citizen to this practice in order to counteract what this article suggested. This is not a neutral article. 09 May 05 67.101.113.10

I agree. It is domestic violence and murder and is unrelated to Hinduism, except that it is usually triggered by dowry demands. Burning as a tool for violence and murder is unique to India, Pakistan and Bangladesh among Hindus, Muslims, and Christians probably because it is the easiest way of killing and hardest to prove seeing that it could be disguised as a kitchen accident. It is also the most common means of suicide among women in the Indian subcontinent.

Bride burning is a recent phenomenon (the past century or the past few decades) also and should be related more to the rise of western style consumerism than any religion. Also, this is in the category of 'Culture of India'. Will remove that.

The original content of this article was lifted from an article in CNN. It is not surprising though, seeing that western media has been consistently insensitive to/uncomprehending of the culture of India and Hinduism.

Stats - In 2000, 1,247 women were killed by an intimate partner in the US. Estimates range from 960,000 incidents of violence against a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend per year to three million women who are physically abused by their husband or boyfriend per year in the US.2 US has little more than a quarter of the population of India, where police receive 2,500 reports of bride burning every year.

Will rewrite article. --Pranathi 15:11, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't see how the link at the bottom is relevant. The article makes no claims about the relative violence level between India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and America. Kjkolb 11:54, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Rewritten to remove all the copyvio content, most of which was lifted from an old CNN article. I've also tried to remove any judgements related to hinduism or its practice as a religion or belief. It would be nice if we could get some additional factual and statistical information on the subject. The references I was able to find are mostly news articles that cite widely varying "facts", and often come across as overly harsh or judgemental towards the underlying culture. Darcrist 04:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

This culture allows people to hold their wives hostage for their dowry, burn them to death, and then remarry more young women from the same family so they can do it all over again. These people consider marriage a form of hostage-taking and have not the slightest shred of common morality, and yet this is somehow related to the rise of western culture? Because America causes all the world's problems? Fuck you. I hope you racist sons of bitches go to hell.

And BTW, also fuck Wikipedia for crying about neutrality when you're writing about husbands setting their wives on fire. Twisted sacks of subhuman shit. Jboyler 01:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I removedany referencs to Virendra Kumar and Sarita Kanth and Ashley K. Jutla MD, and Dr. David Heimbach MD as they nor notable in form as they are not knwon at all anywhere —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.30.9 (talk) 18:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

What the Hell is This
This is almost too bizarre. The_Irrelevant_One 18:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is a sad state of affairs that this tragedy did, and still does go on. etc. etc. etc.1812ahill (talk) 23:09, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Statistics
National Crime Bureau has not published any data mentioning the exact number of Bride Burning in India. So far as 7026 deaths classified as "reported" dowry deaths by National Crime Bureau, a large number of them are suicides. How? Because, According to another source in National Crime Bureau, the number of suicides by Indian women are about 43000 every year compared to 65000 by men. The number of murders of Indian women per year are 7952 compared to 27467 murders of men in year 2005. So, the overall fatalities of women by suicide and murder are 43,000 and 7952 respectively (with a ratio of about 8:1). When we apply the same ratio to "reported" (not convicted) dowry deaths of 7026, then about 6300 of them should be suicides and about 800 have to be murders. So, the maximum possible figure for Bride Burning (if any) in India is 800 deaths per year as Bride Buring is a kind of murder. How?? It is claimed in the beginning of the article that the husband or his relatives douse the woman with Kerosene and set her on fire. As murder can happen by various other means like murder by stabbing, hitting with objects or poisoning, it is highly unlikely that the actual bride burnings in India are even 100 as "Bride Burning" as defined in the beginning of article is too difficult for anyone to implement. When a person is set on fire in a small house, there is every possibility that the material and furniture in the house catches fire leading to a dangerous situation for even the murderers, as a person set on fire is inherently unstable rushing all around till death.Newageindian 11:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Redirection from Dowry_death article
It is a important to note that the wikipedia article Dowry death gets redirected to Bride burning. Bride burning (if any) are a subset of the category of murders called Dowry deaths. So, someone has to create dowry death article and she should merge Bride burning to it.Newageindian 11:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Is "bride burning" a Hoax
I have lived in India for 30 years. I have been to and stayed at about 35 odd places spread across 15 odd(out of 29)states of India. I(or more than 1000 people I have known thoroughly over 30 years) am yet to see a case of bride burning. On the contrary I see some feminists on net talking about it with much more frequency than perhaps these incidences actually occur spread over 1.1 billion of Indian population. Another practice of "Sati" has reported mere single digit cases( I think 5 to be precise) in last 20 years in India. In light of this, would it be relevant to have a topic devoted to this scarce phenomenon of "bride burning" which has a potential to mislead any reader about the actual state of affairs in modern India. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hparmar (talk • contribs).

No, I saw horrible cases in Bangladesh, first hand. My mother has pictures. More importantly it was something people tried to hide and no one talked about. There is no such thing as modern India. They still operate on a caste system. And CLEARLY this ritual is reflected in the laws, and well documented by noted periodicals (TIME MAGAZINE)!67.169.101.187 20:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yet, sati is an example of ritual suicide, and as such is not murder, nor related to dowry crime in any way. Think back to stories you've heard, though, especially if you spent any time in villages. While I agree that (at least in Orissa and West Bengal) I've never heard of, or met anyone who knew anything about, cases of dowry murders nearby us, you may recall gossip of the husband's family not treating the bride very well because of insufficient dowry. I've heard of mistreatments & miserable girls many times (though no violence to speak of). So, we see that this is problem is a very extreme and violent extension of the dowry custom (which in my opinion needs to GO). Also important to note is that while many cases of dowry murder possibly go unreported, or at least not reported as a murder (accident or somesuch) certainly the deaths themselves would be recorded. Even comparing numbers of suicide reports could give a useful upper bound. Further, horrible cases in Bangladesh to not correspond to the non-existence of modern India!! Certainly if you'll spend some months in a small Orissa village (mostly peaceful, good, simple, families) and see what is *not* modern, and then some months in Bangalore or Mumbai, you will come to know the difference. Your comment is obviously heated and motivated by personal bias. If it was hidden and no one talked about it, did your family report the murder and show the pictures to the police? Of course the killers will try to hide the crime. This, also has no significance to the over all statistics. I agree that they are likely under-represented numbers, but only better investigation and data gathering can solve that. 65.112.197.16 18:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Independent Dowry death article
I will remove the redirection from Dowry death article in 2 days time and write dowry death article in detail. Please let me know your views about this.Newageindian 15:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed the redirection of Dowry death article to [Bride burning]] and created independent article on Dowry death. Please contribute to that article.Newageindian 12:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

NPOV on the criticism section & sources for rest of article
Just had a look at the criticism section. The first paragraph needs a bit of editting for NPOV. However the 3 short paragraphs, in the middle are in essay style WP:SYNT and are argumentative. Becuase of this I've deleting them, if anyone can rewrite them and source them with verfiable info please do. The final 2 paragraphs of the criticism section needed to be adjusted for NPOV (I added just to show where refernces should be added when found). On a more general note, the whole article is in very poor shape. Both sides of it need references - may I recommend JSTOR as a source of reliable research articles (i found 5 substantial and balanced pieces there with only a quick search) unfortunately it's not a free service but anyone with access should use it or any other verifiable information to improve this page--Cailil 19:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Just another quick note I've put a tag above so that editors will read this talk page thoroughly before making unilateral editing decisions.  Also added the WP:GS tag since this a tag about gender violence--Cailil 20:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I have added the citation on the dowry death and bride burning hoax as well as newspaper reported article on how a man was wifully charged 219.64.74.2 18:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)bharati


 * Thank you 219.64.74.2 for your contribution, your citation is a good addition to this article. You have also added In this tune it is also important to look at the findings from the karnataka high court wherein it was cited that at the minumum 44% of the prosecution were throughly unprosecutable. [...] There are serious social and economic repurcussions." Furthur the story linked gives us how bride burning and dowry death are made up  These 3 paragraphs are in violation of WP:SYNT - using fact to make a point.  On Wikipedia articles must be verifiable and content must be objective.   To a passerby this addition looks more like an argument than an encylopedia entry.  Please discuss here.--Cailil 18:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Pursuant to my point above I've removed the following section. I am making no judgement on the truth of these claims, however this is WP:SYNT.  The criticisms in these paragraphs are already expressed in the existing piece.  Please beware of recentism
 * ''In this tune it is also important to look at the findings from the karnataka high court wherein it was cited that at the minumum 44% of the prosecution were throughly unprosecutable. This was reported in 2000(1) Karnataka Law Online starting on Page no 560 is illustrative of the severity of the abuse of the process of law happening in the dowry harassment and section 498a cases


 * ''IN the high Court of Karnataka M.F.Saldhana & M.S. rajendra Prasad JJ Crl.A. no. 589 of 2003 Decided on 4-9-2003 important excerpts starting from page 562


 * ''"we need to sound a note of caution that the police and investigating authorities should not improperly and technically jump to the conclusion that merely because death has occurred that ipso facto a criminal offense has been committed . In as many as 44% of these cases prosecution is thoroughly unjustified . Unless there is cogent and convincing evidence and unless there is material to sustain these charges, it would be totally impermissible and completely unjustified to embark upon legal action . The consequences of these charges are extremely grave because the accussed husband and invariably family members are placed under arrest . There are serious social and economic repurcussions."


 * I also removed the last line from the section as it is POV:Furthur the story linked gives us how bride burning and dowry death are made up Please discuss here before reposting.--Cailil 16:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Another POV statement
The paragraph added by 80.192.138.251 in this diff is another POv piece and has been deleted.--Cailil 18:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

PS: I've added about 5 Fact tags to this article because it is completely unreferenced. This situtaion needs to be addressed urgently.--Cailil 18:58, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

objection on referring the Save Family Foundation`s claims
i totally object to referring to Save Family Foundation`s claims on the number of dowry deaths and/or bride burning. their claims are unsubstantiated and at best rash estimation. if they have arrived at the number by a research or through authorities, which i doubt,why there no citation for that?

also, there has to be a mention of how hinduism treats its women, about the way women are told to be inferior, treatment of widows and women who don`t have sons or are childless. female baby killing, selective abortion, deep seated discrimination against women in family and also how the corrupt tradition of dowry affects women`s self-esteem. all these factors contribute to bride burning and have to be addressed.

Ghimirebhumika 20:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC) Ghimirebhumika

I have to agree with you Ghimirebhumika, there is no notable or reliable claim from Save Indian Family about bride burning - there's a lot of opinion and argument but no evidence. If you have or know of a WP:RS source for how dowry is effecting (affecting) women please add it.--Cailil 15:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Time Magazine reference
I'm not able to find a reference for Time magazine saying: "dowry deaths in India increased from around 400 a year in the early 1980s to around 5,800 a year by the middle of the 1990s" I was able to source this: "as many as 25,000 brides are brutally killed each year because of disputes over dowries" to Time Magazine, Feb 27th 2001 in 'Indian Society Needs To Change' by Maseeh Rahman. I've changed the section to reflect what I can source. If anybody can source the previous statement please re-add it.-- Cailil  talk 21:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I've made a number of changes here. All but one piece is now sourced.  Every link I found violating WP:EL was removed.  Everything violating WP:NPOV and WP:NOR was removed.  Everything I could source was sourced.  I've removed the POV and UNVERIFIED tags.  I'm going to send this page for peer review as soon as I can.  If anyone wants to add to this article please only use reliable sources and verified information.-- Cailil   talk 13:14, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a question here. How does wikipedia handle Media bias? Facts and statistics in media sources may not always be correct. One can find gross inconsistencies often as it is seen in this article. For example, a reader gets a picture of 2500 deaths to 25000 deaths due to Bride Burning. What is the policy of wikipedia regarding this? Newageindian 13:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The time magazine has published interview of a person, who claimed that 25,000 brides are brutally killed each year in India. It is his POV and it is not possible to trace this fact to any other source. Can a person's views in an interview by Time Magazine be considered as neutral? This particular statement violates WP:NPOV even though it got published in Time Magazine. So, this statement has to be removed. Newageindian 11:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually Newageindian you are misrepresenting WP:NPOV. In this case I'm not sure whether that interview should have been given the prominence that it had (being in the lead paragraph) but it should probably be in the article somewhere - Time magazine is highly notable.  NPOV states that all significant published points of view should be included in articles - not that sources should be neutral.  The media bias you assert is your opinion unless there are third party, reliable, non-trivial sources that state the Time article was biased.  Even then it may still be notable enough for inclusion somewhere since it was published by Time.  If you have a further query bring it to WP:RS/N-- Cailil   talk 00:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * After a lot of digging I finally found the first reference, saying "dowry deaths in India increased from around 400 a year in the early 1980s to around 5,800 a year by the middle of the 1990s." I've re-added this piece as it contextualizes the CNN report-- Cailil   talk 16:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Independent Article on Dowry Death
Bride burning is a subset of dowry deaths. Dowry deaths can happen due to suicides (by hanging, by fire etc) or murders(poisoning, stabbing, hitting etc). This article is extremely confusing and is still in disputed state, when we equates with dowry deaths with bride burning. Someone had redirected Dowry death article to Bride burning adding to all confusion.

I removed the redirection of Dowry death article to [Bride burning]] and created an independent article on Dowry death. Please contribute to that article. We can keep the Bride burning article as it is. Newageindian 12:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This article is definitely a subset of the dowry death article since there is no other reason for bride burning except dowry. In essence both these articles need to be a single section of the article on Dowry-Andy anno (talk) 06:28, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Groom burning
I've tagged the Groom burning section with cn. This section is based on a very short news item mentioned at 2 internet news outlets. This isn't good enough for encyclopedic writing. This is a serious issue, but the mention is trivial - not every court case deserves an entry at wikipedia. Unless a serious secondary source can be provided for this section it'll have to go (see WP:RS). When one is published then it could be re-inserted-- Cailil  talk 14:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I've removed the section. I did a little digging, and using one on-going case of immolation and the Kiranjit Ahluwalia case to argue that "Groom burning" exists is original research it was also given undue weight.  There are a number of books examining bride burning (i.e Bride Burning: Crime Against Women by A. S. Garg; Bride Burning in India: A Socio Legal Study by Mohammed Umar; South Asians and the Dowry Problem by Werner Menski; Behind Closed Doors: Domestic Violence in India by Rinki Bhattacharya); there have been at least 5 international conferences (the Fifth International Conference on Dowry, Bride-Burning and Son-Preference in India was in 2001) as well as numerous journal articles.
 * There are none about "groom burning." So far there are two separate incidents, one still under investigation, being linked together (ergo a synethsis) to advanced this idea or to make a point.  As stated above this is original research by synthesis and has been removed as such-- Cailil   talk 18:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

A.S.Gargi, Rinki bhattacharya and mohammed unmar have been throughly discredited by suicide statistics. Merely because a book is published means its is credible otherwise we will belive that there exists things like hogwarts express, avadakedavra

the credible sources like NCRB prove it to be lie of any kind of existence of bride burning in fac they are just a few media highlighted incidents —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.95.8.185 (talk) 17:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

What is bride burning, and why is it done?
The intro of this article spends a lot of time saying what bride burning is not, but not what it actually is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.153.190 (talk) 13:05, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for Comment

 * The following discussion is closed. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
 * The consensus here is that the occurrence of the practice in Pakistan is significant enough to be included in the lead, although not necessarily in the first sentence, as long as the greater prevalence in India is given appropriate weight. No decision here wrt using just "South Asia" in the lead; the proposal has attracted far too few comments to make a decision despite having been proposed almost three weeks ago. Jafeluv (talk) 11:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

And editor has recently removed Pakistan from the lede "saying no reason to put pakistan in this; the deaths in India are 30 times those in Pakistan." Should the fact that bride burning happens in Pakistan also be mentioned in the lede?

Discussion on RFC

 * Include, it is a massive problem in Pakistan and is getting worse every year. In 1988 a survey showed that 800 women were killed in this manner, in 1989 the number rose to 1100 and in 1999 it stood at 1800. An estimate by Human Development in South Asia, on average there are 16 cases of bride burnings a month. Women's eNews reported 4,000 women attacked in this manner in Islamabad over an eight year period and that the average age range of victims is between 18 and 35 with an estimated 30 percent being pregnant at the time death. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Include,, I have taken the liberty of changing your ref tags a bit, to make your references visible to other editors. I couldn't access the page 161 in your first reference (Jilani) using google books. On the page 160 it says "hundreds of women" have died annually. I trust that you have read the page 161 and have based your assertions on it. Your second reference looks incorrect. Dawn has no such article, if it does please provide the link. Your third reference is alright.


 * Based on the sources given here, it looks like anywhere between 500 - 1800 women are dying in Pakistan each year. This number is significant enough for Pakistan to be included in the lede (lead) with India, given its much smaller population. I also disagree with the logic gave here. Indian muslims also do not practice Karo kari, but it still occurs in Pakistan. So where is the equivalence? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 00:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * What else is new. Indian editors trying to include Pakistan in anything bad associated with India.  I've been watching it for six years.  It had stopped in the middle, but apparently it has started up again.  If you read the article on Caste, you wouldn't know it was associated with Hinduism or India.  Anyway, a few hundred (in one source 300) women are killed a year in Pakistan.  In India it is more like 9,000 every year.  That is a ratio of 1:30.  Sure you can include it in the lead, but not in the lead sentence.  It is similar to Pakistani editors wanting to include a mention of Mukti Bahini's atrocities in the lead sentence of the Rape in the Bangladesh War page.  My point of view three too was that it is a vastly different scale.  You can mention is later in the lead, but it can't be in the lead sentence.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  02:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * PS Based on the sources given in, we can't deduce anything on account of the prohibition on WP:Original Research; however, the author has: he or she has concluded that hundreds of stove deaths occur in Pakistan. Karo kari, or honor killings are very different; although they are equally repugnant forms of violence towards women, they are not bride burning.  Even stove deaths in Pakistan are usually not associated with dowry, since they don't have dowry on anything like the scale they do in India.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  02:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * PPS It is actually much more than 9,000. In  it is clearly stated that some 25,000 women in India are killed or maimed every year as a result of bride burning.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  02:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * PPPS (Added after Shrigley's post below.) The Encyclopedia of Women in Today's World mentions on "Bride burning in India."  No mention of Pakistan.  In other words, tertiary sources, or at least one tertiary source, which have to make balanced statements, do not mention Pakistan (in relation to bride burning).  I'd like to see mention of bride burning in Pakistan in some tertiary source.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  03:07, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Qualify. As Fowler says, mention it in the lead, but not in the lead sentence. If it absolutely must be in the lead sentence, then it should allude to the massive imbalance: "practiced mostly in India, and occasionally Pakistan". Or, "originated and predominates in India, although incidents are reported in Pakistan". Also, before any mention is made, the sources must be verified to say what DS claims they say, since CorrectKnowledge has found evidence of misattribution. The usual provisions about due weight apply. Shrigley (talk) 03:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Much less compared to India. Yes, it is much less compared to India; however, still should be mentioned in the lead (not necessarily in the lead sentence though). As Fowler asked for tertiary sources, I am supplying th efollowings:


 * The second source also calls it "stove-burning". Anyway, before this turns out into another ugly discussion, can everyone agree that the practice is much more prevalent in India, and so Pakistan should be mentioned but with significantly less emphasis? Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 04:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment, I am not bothered were in the lede it goes, just that it ought to be mentioned in the lede. Darkness Shines (talk) 06:55, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Conditional support: given that this practice is mainly associated with one country, the lede should focus on India and mention the geographical distribution of the practice somewhere in the end (eg., "The phenomena is also witnessed in ..."). — — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Proposal. Great. Seems everyone is in the same page now. I propose the following. The last sentence of the first paragraph of the lead goeslike this: Although prevalent in India, the practice of bride-burning is also seen in other South Asian countries such as Pakistan.


 * This sentence will leave the option of adding other South Asian countries such as Nepal, Bangladesh (if appropriate sources are found). We can add the tertiary sources as the reference for this sentence. We already have secondary sources referencing bride burning in Pakistan in the text of the article. what say? Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 11:55, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Dwaipayan, I did not see this proposal. However, my edit has now been improved by RegentsPark, and I'm delighted to defer to that version.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  11:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Include per and . It's not exclusively an "Indian" phenomenon.  Mrt  3366   (Talk page?)   17:07, 25 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: A lot of the material (reliable sources) on bride burning use the term "South Asia" to describe the areas (plural) that this occurs in. Pakistan should not be excluded if the individual countries are being listed in the lede - that would constitute POV by omission. However, a simpler solution is to use "South Asia", like many sources do, rather than list individual countries in lede line 1, and then expand on with due statistics about notable individual countries (and Pakistan's problem with Bride Burining is notabel enough for the lede paragraph just as India's is)-- Cailil  talk 19:15, 25 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I hadn't noticed this discussion here until now; I changed the lead sentence to "South Asia" a few minutes ago. It seems the best solution, especially since the article does contain extensive discussions of Pakistan. Andrew Gray (talk) 19:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Editing the bride burning article for a school assignment
As a part of my Poverty, Justice and Human Capabilities minor at Rice University, I'm required to find and edit a page that concerns class discussion material, which, as you can probably assume, often centers around human rights issues in underdeveloped countries. For this assignment, I chose bride burning, a topic that is both grotesque and fascinating and especially deserves more worldwide attention.

In order to combat such the global ignorance surrounding this topic (as many of you commenting are aware, considering your ongoing conversation), I chose this topic so that even one person can read, learn and attempt to eradicate bride burning all over the world. Unfortunately, currently the article is extremely limited, with only an introduction and one section on bride burning in South Asia and a subsection on India and Pakistan each. There is no history section (which should describe what exactly is bride burning and why it came to be prevalent in modern society), no mention of it existing in other parts of the world and no discussion on what is being done to combat the practice. Each of these sections are necessary to understand the full gravity of what bride burning does to women, their families and the cultures of affected nations. Over the course of the semester, I will take advantage of the many resources available on this tabooed subject in order to expand and ultimately reform readers' thoughts on bride burning.

There are many concerns already addressed and possibly resolved on this talk page, but for those that have not been fully discussed or edited within the page (for example: is the definition of what bride burning actually is adequately communicated?), I plan on including them in my revision. However, most of talk has been extremely passionately, thus resulting in almost immediate revision and expansion. I would be happy to work with more of you on the subject, especially in receiving advice or criticism, as I work on the article. One of my main concerns is remaining neutral on this type of subject, so I'd love help with that, as well as many source recommendations as I can get.

Thank you in advance for helping and being patient with me as I go through the dramatic revision of this article.

Ellyhutch (talk) 00:30, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Gendercide vs. genocide
Gendercide may be a useful term, the targeting of one sex but not the other, killing men and boys instead of women and girls, or wives and brides, female infanticide, etc.

however, to act as if it were a form of genocide is absurd, including, labeling it as form of extermination, as does Mary Anne Warren. genocide is the deliberate extermination of a entire group of people or the deliberate attempt to do so.

killing brides and wives in the attempt to get more money from the families and murdering babies just because they are girl are terrible thing, of course. but they are not parts of an attempt to exterminate women.

and using the word "exterminate" as a synonym for kill or murder is a travesty.

76.19.63.222 (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2014 (UTC) Michael Christian

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Rice University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2012 Q4 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 15:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)