Jump to content

californiasardar1

Members
  • Posts

    701
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by californiasardar1

  1. Just embrace the natural beauty of the beard.
  2. That guy is very embarrassing and clearly has mental health issues. He should not be berating anyone’s appearance with his hair out like that and with such an embarrassing gut.
  3. There is more of a reaction when something affects Muslims because there are around 2 billion Muslims in the world.
  4. I am pretty sure that the border agents responsible for the mistreatment thought that they were mistreating Muslims.
  5. I am going to try one more time to help you understand: a man with $50 in his bank account is ten times richer than a man with $5 in his bank account. But the difference is essentially meaningless, because both of them are extremely poor.
  6. I don't understand what point you think you are making. Resorting to insults doesn't help your case. It is also really lame for you to make this some sort of US Sikhs vs UK Sikhs thing. Does it make you feel better about yourself to engage in this kind of petty one-upmanship? You don't appear to grasp very basic realities related to population density. From your posts, you sound very provincial. It might be illuminating for you to occasionally leave Wolverhampton or Southall or wherever you live. More troubling than your provincialism is your inability to understand basic quantitative reasoning. I don't say these things to try to insult you, and it gives me no happiness to note these things. You seem like a really nice guy (although you try to hide it). People like you are the future of the Sikh quam. So in making these observations, I feel disappointed and depressed.
  7. The sad truth about Shabeg Singh is that he was not motivated by Sikhi. He was an old man with health problems and nothing to lose, and he had a personal axe to grind with the Indian military. I’m sure his grievances were legitimate, but that is still a far distance away from how his motivations are typically portrayed. Anyway, he was happy to go down fighting with other people’s sons. But none of his four sons were involved. They are nonreligious monay who live comfortably to this day posting photos of their father’s exploits in the Indian army online (but never a peep about Operation Blue Star).
  8. I had never heard of the cousin thing. That is shocking and disgusting. I had heard about Punjabis sleeping around behind closed doors, but never about incest. I imagine it is because my relations who know about it find it so appalling and shameful that they don’t even want to mention it. It’s sad because I used to think that, despite our moral erosion, we would never stoop to certain levels (for example, cousin relationships that are apparently routine for Muslims).
  9. How old are you? Can you please learn to write properly? I applaud your passion, but if you care about advancing the Sikh community, it is important to develop competence in basic things.
  10. This happened in Brownsville. That means it is very unlikely Sikhs were involved. But who knows.
  11. Are you so <banned word filter activated> dense that you don't understand that, for example, 1% = 100*0.01%, meaning that there are 100 times as many Sikhs susceptible to getting attacked, but 1% and 0.01% are both very small percentages?
  12. In no way are a "majority of arrivals" in the Richmond Hill area Sikh. Did anybody in this thread suggest that? In your other post, you asked "Where's the fear of numbers?" What numbers are you even talking about?
  13. Who said it is a "stronghold?" Just because an area has relatively more Sikhs than other areas, that doesn't mean that Sikhs have large numbers there. Sikhs have tiny numbers everywhere in the US. They are just slightly less tiny in certain areas.
  14. Sikhs are targeted and attacked at relatively high rates everywhere in the US. You hear about it happening more in certain areas because those areas have more Sikhs to attack.
  15. The Richmond Hill area is the only area in NYC that has a substantial Punjabi population. It is not known to be a dangerous place. Punjabis move there for the same reasons they move to areas with relatively large populations in the UK (or Canada, or any other country).
  16. I bet their families were thankful that at least they were cohabiting with other "Sikhs." I have a Canadian cousin who lives with his widowed mother --- and his Vietnamese girlfriend. But hey, at least he didn't move out of the house!
  17. I am actually generally very skeptical of Sikhs who fit this description. I find that more often than not, it is just a phase that they are going through, and once the novelty wears off they will revert to form.
  18. I don't doubt you are right about the "pockets" in the UK. But I must say that, generally speaking, I was very surprised when I learned how lax most UK Punjabi families appeared to be with their children. Families tolerating their sons and daughters (!) being out late partying and coming home in the middle of the night. Girls drinking openly in front of their parents at parties. Girls wearing revealing clothing while still living at home. When I was growing up, no Punjabis who still lived with their family could get away with that. They could only do it by moving out of the house. Anyway, I am old and out of touch. It seems like Punjabi families EVERYWHERE are much less strict these days than when I was growing up.
  19. The "decent Punjabi culture" you speak of doesn't appear to exist in any substantial way today. Anyway, Punjabis (and Indians more generally) lack critical thinking skills, and that is probably partially due to the intolerance for out-of-the-box thinking that you point out (and lack of promotion of creativity more generally, I would argue).
  20. This is a good point. I have known many elderly Sikhs who partake in certain Hindu rituals and believe in certain Hindu superstitions. I am convinced that many Sikhs have Hindu roots that are much more recent than most people would imagine. There are lots of signs of this. For example, I have met some people whose ancestors from the early 1900s or late 1800s had "Hindu names" (i.e. a more "Hindu sounding" first name, and no "Singh" in any part of the name) and/or did not keep their kesh. There was an interesting thread on SikhSangat a few years ago regarding religious census figures in Punjab from the late 1800s and early 1900s. Surprisingly, Hindu jats outnumbered Sikh jats in many parts of modern day Indian Punjab in the late 1800s. Given all of the above facts, it's not surprising that Hindu practices have been strong in the Sikh community. I honestly think that the existence of Sikhs in substantial numbers today is accidental and due to the British: 1) The British made a clear distinction between Sikhs and Hindus, based on physical appearance (Sikh <=> turban and kesh, no turban and kesh => Hindu). Without the rulers making such a clear distinction, the line between Sikh and Hindu would have been blurred, and I think there is a good chance that Sikhs would have just been gradually absorbed back into the Hindu fold (most Sikhs partook in certain Hindu practices anyway, and Hindus to this day view Sikhs as just another one of their subgroups). 2) The British incentivized being Sikh by (among other things) preferentially recruiting Sikhs into the military. Within a generation or two of the British taking control of Punjab, virtually all Punjabi-speaking jats were "visible Sikhs" (kept turban and kesh). Within a generation or two of the British raj ending, a majority of Punjabi-speaking jats reverted back to being monay. This was not a coincidence. Aside from the jat community, notice similar practices in other communities. For example, the tradition of Hindu khatri families raising one son to be a Sikh. The frequency of this practice and the frequency of jats keeping their kesh follow essentially the same timeline.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use