Talk:Sexuality in India/Archive 1

First stupid discussion by Andy and his friends
Whoa, this page consists of a pile of words. Some sense has to be made out of this... Could the author of this page change everything into meaningful sentences? Thanks, AndyZ 23:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Andy, that is because it is a stub ;-) Vastu
 * And, I am sure that it shall become a great page. I would love to actively work on this page. --Bhadani 13:12, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for your kind comments Bhadani, while I helped create the History of India page, and added to a few others, this is the first full article that I have written from stub to finish. It is my hope that it will go some way towards eleiviating some of the ignorance surrounding such an important matter in Indian society, and help to explain the treatment of sex in India to non-Indians. Vastu 14:00, 22 Jan 2006 (GMT)
 * Sure. Some of the pictures may be removed and bundled up in Wikemedia commons, for example as has been done in the page Indian painting. This will perhaps give the reader more time to concentrated on the words than the see the "attractive pictures". --Bhadani 14:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I find that pictures break up text in a nice way though - most people huff and puff when they see a long article, but when there is some pictures, they seem more drawn to the text too, so I hope they arnt removed by anyone. Vastu

No reference
This article needs a major revision. Amir85 14:14, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It only really needs references dosent it? Vastu 11:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Also a decent clean-up, information provided doesn't seem to verifiable at all. Amir85 14:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Reinsertion, references
I'm reinserting some details deleted by an anon. I'd like to see a lot more references, especially in the modern section. Hornplease 08:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Devdas.jpg
Image:Devdas.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:44, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't maintain this article and I added the fair use rationale for the 2002 film... but, I seriously doubt it exists for this article. gren グレン 23:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kama Sutra 2.jpg
Image:Kama Sutra 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kamasutra.jpg
Image:Kamasutra.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

holiness of semen
Shouldn't there be some mention of male and female semen being holy and life-giving in this article? Modern Tantra practitioners are still concerned with conservation of their semen to keep their longevity. See preservation of semen Alatari (talk) 06:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Sexuality in extended families in South Asia
Traditional extended families apparently managed sexual attractions and energies differently from modern nuclear families. This has been explored by academics such as Charu Gupta, addressed in literature such as Tagore's Nastanirh and in film such as Satyajit Ray's Charulata, and in the pornographic comic Savita Bhabhi. So why would a "sister-in-law" be such a conspicuous object of desire? It also becomes apparent if you Google Bhabhi or venture into pornography forums such as http://desi-fantasy.blogspot.com/2006/09/stories-collection.html

This topic is controversial if not taboo. I am trying to launch a discussion at Talk:Bhabhi and invite readers of this talk page to participate. LADave (talk) 12:16, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

NPOV!
"Delhi Sultanate and Muslim Rule Era

After the foundation of the Delhi Sultanates and the set up of several muslim states in the 14th-15th centuries in India, Islamic customs of the complete/partial covering up of women tarnished the freedom of sexuality that once existed in India. It is not to say that the "Purdah" system became prevalent or was enforced in this period, because there were several Hindu customs which had the same principals - such as the 'ghunghat' of the marwaris of Rajputana. However, it came to be followed more like a staunch rule than a tradition, and ofcourse it must be remembered that this was not an indigenous custom, being in fact imported from the desert lands of Arabia (which required covering of women for totally different and non-religious reasons). There has been strong evidence that Islamic customs of 'burkha' and the likes were not forced among the majority of the then liberal Hindu population.

The Mughal rule saw an interlude of liberalism and forward thinking which was brought to an end in the reign of Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir, who single-handedly usurped the power of the Ulema and imposed his own tyrannical and puritan version of Islam on a scientific, forward looking people. Non-muslims in the empire were encouraged to follow the muslim customs by way of new laws and other tactics, for instance, the reintroduction of the hated "jiziya" tax (which non Muslims had to pay). The Non-fundamentalist Muslim way of 'blasphemous' liberalism including Sufiism and communities like the Shias, were ridiculed and even punished. These tactics led to mass conversions of Non-Muslims during the rule of the tyrant, and Islamic Sharia Law was almost introduced for all Mughal subjects (rather than just Muslims) before Aurangzeb's death, thus resulting in nearly total loss of the liberal way of life that once existed."

The entire paragraph suffers from mad NPOV - words like blasphemous need to be checked.... dude.--64.230.15.117 (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC) --64.230.15.117 (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Even if the section on Muslim rule suffers from NPOV issues, moderate editing seems a much better solution than deletion. In fact the deleted section addressed an important historical theme. Following (supposedly) liberated classical times, there were some 400 years of Muslim invasions and rule before the British turn came. If those Muslims were anything like their modern counterparts in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan, they must have brought big changes to Hindu society.

After the British arrived on scene, supposedly many officers of the East India Company adapted comfortably enough to tattered remnants of ancient liberalism. There are accounts of upcountry officers acquiring and maintaining de-facto wives. Then the transition from Company rule to Empire in 1858 brought things more directly into the purview of the British middle classes and their moral guardians, and the Empire set out to rid India of "uncivilized" ways. If efforts to stamp out "suttee" and child marriage were constructive, what about the replacement of certain liberties within extended families and temple prostitution -- whatever that actually meant -- with the more oppressive and deadly sex industries that always seemed to accompany colonialism? LADave (talk) 05:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I have reverted this section. I agree that it needs references and is subject to NPOV objections. I hope the WikiCommunity will step in and deal with those problems through constructive editing. LADave (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Small Comment
"India played a significant role in the history of sex" - Certainly there seems to be some interesting information about ancient Indian attitudes to sex that have survived, but "India played a significant role in the history of sex" is just a completely meaningless sentence.

Every person that is alive today comes from a culture that played a significant role in the history of sex (their ancestors procreated) otherwise de facto they could not exist. If this sentence is meant to imply that ancient Indian attitudes to sex are arguably advanced and enlightened when compared to what is known about the sexual attitudes of other ancient cultures, then that is what it should say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Btnw (talk • contribs) 03:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Vijay Mane zindabad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.58.102.197 (talk) 11:39, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

M. Gandhi's influence
Wasn't Mohandas Gandhi the ultimate prude? The dude didn't even think it was OK to have sex with his own wife!

I realize Gandhi made a huge contribution to the anti-colonial struggle, but there were some things he didn't liberate at all. If the Establishment is still stuck in the Victorian Age in certain ways, isn't some of it Gandhi's fault? LADave (talk) 05:52, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

He has written in his book "my experiments with truth" that he always felt pangs of guilty feeling to recall the fact when he was humping his wife when someone knocked his door to tell him that his mother has died. No one really liked him when he was alive..but everyone uses him and his name even now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.238.71.150 (talk) 20:35, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The paragraph describes how Gandhi talked about sexuality, but not about the "impact" or influence. I think it should be removed completely from the article. requestion your opinions —usernamekiran  (talk ) 23:33, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm unfamiliar with this subject so I do not have any strong opinions. Mz7 (talk) 23:45, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely doesn't seem to describe the impact it had. May not be appropriate to the article. RoCo (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Okay. Anyways it is tagged with this:

This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (June 2010) This article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2010) This article possibly contains original research. (October 2007) This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. (June 2010)

So I guess I will exclude this para while I rewrite the entire article. —usernamekiran (talk ) 03:54, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Revision of April 5, 2017
Hi, As per the request made on June 2010 for rewriting the entire article, I have done it so. During the re-write of the article, there were many issues which couldnt be mentioned in the edit summary, so i will address them here:
 * In all, I didnt add any content or source, all I did was cleanup.
 * Further work needs to be done, including adding sources, and new content.
 * Removed the first para from lede. It was unecnyclopaedic (also seemed to be original work), and didnt have much to do with the article. Reworded the second para.
 * Removed he history of colonialism which had nothing to do with sexuality, or the article.
 * Removed the entire section related to Mohandas Gandhi. It describes how Gandhi talked about sexuality, but not about the "impact" or influence.
 * From the section "colonial era", deleted history of british raj, which had nothing to do with sexuality/article.
 * Moved some content from "colonial era" to "current issues". This content discusses the issues after 1947, not colonial era.

— usernamekiran [talk]   20:13, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

It will be slow though, as I have some other work on my hands too. — usernamekiran [talk]   22:11, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * what do you think of the latest version? — usernamekiran [talk]   20:26, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the cleanup! It is more precise now, but there's more work to do. The lede and some sections still need to be improved and made less clumsy. Good luck! RoCo (talk) 21:51, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * yup. There is a lot of stuff that needs to be deleted, some needs to be added, and citations are required too. I would say work is progress.What do you mean by "good luck"? Arent you going to work on that? — usernamekiran  [talk]   21:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps not, I have other articles and things planned on Wikipedia. Looks like you're stuck with this one! RoCo (talk) 22:06, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ouch.