GHQ: all misogynists?

[Guest guest]

> So what is the good reason (professional or sastric) for this

> claim that GHQ members were/are misogynists?

 

Study of their texts. It certainly will be a waste of energy to try explain

it

to you, so I won't try. It is more for the purpose of communicating to others

who are capable of independent intellectual activity to understand what it

actually going on.

 

You use a series of arguments to try explain why misogyny isn't important

because Srila Prabhupada never discussed it directly. He also never discussed

knee capping directly either, never said there was anything wrong with it,

but

I imagine if you were an impending victim of such an act, it's lack mention

by

Srila Prabhupada would be irrelavant to your attempts to avoid it.

[Guest guest]

On 26 Dec 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

> > So what is the good reason (professional or sastric) for this

> > claim that GHQ members were/are misogynists?

>

> Study of their texts. It certainly will be a waste of energy to try

explain

> it

> to you, so I won't try. It is more for the purpose of communicating to

others

> who are capable of independent intellectual activity to understand what it

> actually going on.

 

Well, I may be a hopeless case, prabhu, but for the benefit of the innocent

perhaps you should present the results of your study. Otherwise, anyone can

claim anything about anybody--isn't it? And I again say that to call another a

"hater of women" is a claim that ought be made only by one who is *absolutely*

sure of that, lest he be reaping the results of his misjudgement in the

future. What do you think, prabhu?

 

> You use a series of arguments to try explain why misogyny isn't >important

because Srila Prabhupada never discussed it directly.

 

I've asked (challenged) you to back your statement, either sastrically or with

material facts. I doubt you can do so sastrically, since that particular

pathology isn't discussed in Srila Prabhupada's books. As for knee-capping,

etc., that is obviously causing unnecessary pain to another, or violence,

which topic *is* discussed by Srila Prabhupada. Also, if we know that someone

has committed violence, then we can factually accuse him of being violent.

 

So in the absence of sastic evidence, what is your material evidence that GHQ

members were following the *misogynist* vani of Kirtanananda? I'm specifically

asking you to back your claim that these members are *haters of women," if you

would be so kind as to explain.

 

Thank you, prabhu.

 

--gkd