|
NB. The footnotes for this article are linked to
a separate footnote
page.
This paper is drawn from a presentation given at
the 'Vaishnavis in ISKCON' conference held in Marina Del Rey, California,
5-7 December, 1997.
Introduction
This paper examines the question of what constitute appropriate
roles for women in the International Society for Krishna Consciousness
(ISKCON). My purpose is to develop an analytical framework that
will be of use to ISKCON in further thinking about the role of women
in ISKCON. I use concepts developed in International Law in this
examination and I begin by explaining the benefits of a model that
incorporates International Law. The second section of this paper
addresses the relationship of Human Rights Law to our Vaishnava
philosophy and raises problems in our treatment of women up to this
point. In the next section I go on to discuss the kind of rights
that Human Rights Law embodies. Section four considers the application
of those human rights in ISKCON and examines the issue of protection
of women from an International Rights perspective. The concluding
section highlights actions that ISKCON should take in order to ensure
appropriate roles for women.
The benefits of International Law
The first, and most important benefit of an International Law
approach in defining roles for women in ISKCON, is that it gives
us a coherent framework for resolving many different tensions. The
question of the role of women includes a number of different considerations
and would have an impact on our society as a whole. It is, in some
sense, artificial to divide our analysis into 'men's issues' and
'women's issues', because the treatment of women affects every member
of ISKCON, regardless of gender -women are wives, mothers, sisters
and service colleagues to men. Moreover, the question of the role
of women in ISKCON raises other questions, such as the relationship
our leaders have with ISKCON's members and the obligations of the
individual to ISKCON as an institution. International Law provides
an existing model that allows us to integrate these various concerns
into a coherent analysis.
The second benefit of International Law is that it allows
us to create needed cultural variations in our practices. ISKCON
is an international organisation facing cultural variations in different
regions of the world. If we are going to be an effective organisation
for all people, and for women in particular, then we have to be
sensitive to cultural variations. Shrila Prabhupada expressed this
thought most easily and eloquently by saying we have to be attentive
to time, place and circumstance. International Law has already looked
at these cultural variations, and created a way of allowing people
some flexibility to tailor a policy to their particular region while
maintaining a structure that keeps any adjustment from sacrificing
underlying goals.
I do not advocate that we take principles of International
Law and replace our own philosophy with International Law. However,
I contend that we can effectively use International Law to develop
a model within which we can test our adherence to our own philosophy.
We have numerous written sources of religious principles, in addition
to the examples implicit in the actual behaviour of Shrila Prabhupada.
It is our task to integrate this wealth of instruction into a coherent
policy on women in ISKCON. One part of our problem, particularly
in our treatment of women, is that we have focused on one or two
instructions, which have been taken out of context. We have also
used certain words arbitrarily without actually understanding what
those words actually mean. Finally, we have made sweeping statements
as justification for our policies even though those statements do
not reflect our actual activity. Consequently, we need to revisit
this issue of women's participation in a thoughtful and rigorous
manner.
Law gives us the tools by which we can integrate numerous
instructions on individual issues. Law also teaches us to define
our terms and to test our rhetoric against our actions. The need
to accomplish these goals is particularly apparent when we examine
the role of women in ISKCON. Some of Shrila Prabhupada's statements
about women have been over-emphasised to the exclusion of other
contrary statements. As a result, our policies on women's issues
are imbalanced. The particular nature of these misconceptions about
women that we have developed in ISKCON is further developed later
in this paper.
Human Rights Law and Vaishnava Philosophy
International Law is a particularly useful tool for ISKCON because
there is a theoretical similarity between Human Rights Law and our
own scripture. That similarity is in the idea of equality. In a
sense, it is ironic for members of ISKCON to discuss equality between
men and women because so often equality does not occur in practice.
However, the principle of spiritual equality is undoubtedly described
in our scriptures. There is a similar concept in International Law.
International Human Rights Law rests on the principle that everyone
is entitled to certain fundamental things because all human beings
share the same essence, and that essence is somehow sacred.1
This fundamental principle is also described in our own scripture.
Krishna goes even a little further in the Bhagavad-gita when
he says that the enlightened sage sees a brahmin, a cow, an elephant,
a dog and a dog eater with equal vision.2
In the related purport, Shrila Prabhupada explains that this equal
vision arises from the fact that all living entities have the same
essence and we all have the same relationship to Krishna.3 There is, thus, an obvious philosophical basis
on which to compare our scripture and International Human Rights
Law.
Despite this fundamental teaching, we have not yet accepted
this principle of equality in our society. There is a feeling in
ISKCON that souls in women's bodies are not equal, but suffer instead
from serious mental and emotional deficits. We are seen as being
less intelligent, untrustworthy and over emotional. Jyotirmayi Devi
Dasi described thoroughly in her paper, 'Women in ISKCON in Shrila
Prabhupada's Times'4, all of these
misconceptions about women and explained through Shrila Prabhupada's
own writings exactly why they are misconceptions. A very brief examination
of Shrila Prabhupada's statements reveals that he did not view his
female disciples as being less intelligent or less able than his
male disciples. In the Caitanya Caritamrita, Shrila Prabhupada
described his disciples, saying, ' . . . both boys and girls are
being trained to become preachers . . . these girls are not ordinary
girls, but are as good as their brothers who are preaching Krishna
consciousness.'5 Shrila Prabhupada made a similar statement about
equality between Vaishnavas and Vaishnavis in a lecture in which
he described how women, vaishyas and sudras are transformed
through Krishna consciousness:
[It is] Not that even though they become interested they keep
behind. No . . . with equal force with men, they also promoted.
So Kunti, out of her humbleness, meekness, she is presenting herself
that 'We are women, striya'. But she's not ordinary woman.
She's devotee. Similarly, any devotee woman is as good as Kunti.6
Shrila Prabhupada never intended his female disciples
to be disparaged on the basis of their bodily forms. Rather, he
clearly instructed us that women engaged in the practice of Krishna
consciousness make equal advancement with male devotees. Indeed,
to believe otherwise would indicate a profound lack of faith in
the process of Krishna consciousness.
However, the belief that women are inferior is often
reflected in our policy and in our practice. Women are dehumanised
and devalued by our rhetoric and by accusations used to marginalise
them. At the 'Vaishnavis in ISKCON' conference, one woman described
how she was marginalised when she spoke out on the need for women
to give Bhagavatam class. She said it led to the end of her
career in ISKCON management. Having lived in the same community,
I can comment on her treatment from personal experience. Many women
who looked to her as a leader, including myself, were told that
she did not want to give Bhagavatam class because she was
more interested in making money than in working in ISKCON management.
Thus, she was presented as avaricious and the true facts of her
conflict with ISKCON management were concealed. Moreover, I have
heard the Women's Ministry dismissed as a 'group of women who never
cover their heads'. This statement, in addition to being inaccurate,
misses an important point. The real issue is the purpose and effectiveness
of the Women's Ministry; the extent to which the Women' Ministry
does or does not propose and implement sensible, useful policy for
ISKCON. The fact that some of the members of the Women's Ministry
may adjust small externalities in their dress according to time,
place and circumstance should not determine the value of the Women's
Ministry as a whole. The need to separate Krishna consciousness
from external rituals has been the subject of much discussion in
our sampradaya. Similarly, this external consideration is not the
proper measure by which to judge the Women's Ministry.
There are even more insidious, subtle, day-to-day minimisations
of women that may be harder to observe. The language we use marginalises
women. When we say 'devotees and matajis' (mataji,
means mother) we are saying that women are in a category separate
from devotees. Such distinctions create a psychological space in
which women can be ranked just a little bit lower than the rest
of the Vaishnavas, who are the men. Clearly, everyone does not use
the statement for such a negative purposes, and the distinction
may be genuinely made out of a mood to offer respect, or used blindly
simply because the terms used have become the norm in our communities.
However, the language creates the space in which the minimisation
of women is possible. Those who are immature in their faith naturally
find these spaces and take advantage of them.
Another example of the minimisation of women involves
the Mayapur samadhi of Shrila Prabhupada.7 At the 'Vaishnavis in ISKCON' conference, His
Holiness Bir Krishna Swami very accurately described the historical
photographs that have been reproduced as paintings decorating the
samadhi. Surprisingly the female disciples of Shrila Prabhupada
are not in the paintings although they were in the original photographs.
It is without doubt disrespectful and a devaluation of women when
they have been deleted from our institutional history. More importantly,
this deletion involves the Mayapur samadhi, a place of enormous
significance in our movement. Thus, the message that we as women
get is multifaceted and extremely negative. First, we are told,
'Don't speak.' If you do speak, you run the risk of being one of
those women who never covers her head. In other words, you become
someone who should not be listened to, someone who is not reliable.
We are also told, 'Don't act', 'don't dance in the temple', 'don't
stand in front of the Deities', 'don't give class', 'don't lead
kirtan'8 , and do not participate in many other activities.
And the murals in the Mayapur samadhi go even further and
say, 'Don't exist.' Women leave ISKCON and we are surprised. To
paraphrase Shrila Prabhupada, rather we should be surprised that
women have stayed.
Applying the principles of International Law to
our society
Having identified some of the main problems in the treatment
of women, we must first ask how the law can help us in solving these
problems. The law is relevant here because law involves relationships.
Law is a way of governing relationships by creating structure and
space in which those relationships can take place. When law works
well, it is because it has minimised conflict. We need such a structure
in ISKCON. We have many spaces where it is possible for the interests
of women and the need of women to be devalued or ignored.
One of the things which we have not yet examined and
which is critical for all of our social development policies is
the question of what constitutes the proper relationship between
ISKCON and its members. At one point, though it may not have been
articulated, the relationship was viewed as an autocratic tie with
ISKCON functionaries giving pronouncements that could not be questioned
by individual members. This relationship led to situations that
were destructive to both ISKCON as an institution and to individual
members of ISKCON. Shrila Prabhupada himself specifically rejected
this type of relationship between institutional leaders and those
in their care.9 A new relationship
between ISKCON and its members has yet to be articulated. However,
there is currently much discussion of the need for ISKCON to support
and nurture its members.10
In the law we call this type of relationship a social
contract. It is a mutual relationship. There is plenty of evidence
in the Vaishnava scriptures to support the position that the relationship
between institutional leaders and members is based on a social contract.
Krishna Himself and Shrila Prabhupada have both indicated that the
relationship between individual and spiritual leader is a mutual
reciprocation. In the verses that Shrila Prabhupada liked to quote
so frequently from the last chapter of the Bhagavad-gita,
Krishna says, 'Engage always in thinking of Me, become My devotee,
offer obeisances to Me, worship Me. In this way you will come to
Me. I promise you this because you are so dear to Me.'11
This verse describes a promise- Krishna tells his devotees,
worship Me and I will reciprocate. In the next verse, Krishna says
abandon all varieties of religion and I will deliver you.12
Again, Krishna is describing a reciprocal relationship. The devotee
has an important duty to be obedient to the Lord and to surrender
to him, but they also have an equally important promise of support
and deliverance on the part of the Lord.
This principle of mutuality is highlighted in the pastimes
of Lord Ramachandra. When, Ravana's brother, Dvisana, attempts to
surrender to Rama is an example to point. Rama's followers advise
Rama to reject Dvisana saying that he may be an enemy. Lord Rama
replied 'I cannot reject anyone who surrenders to me. I have
no choice.' (Emphasis mine.) So the Lord is bound, as Shrila Prabhupada
says, by His devotee's love.13
That principle can apply to ISKCON as well. If we, the members,
surrender and serve Shrila Prabhupada's movement, then we fulfil
our duty to participate and to obey the laws of the society. At
that point, ISKCON has an obligation to reciprocate and to see that
the devotees are cared for.14
In Human Rights terminology one would say that there is a mutual
relationship of rights and duties. In order to articulate what ISKCON's
duties would be we could talk about rights that we would have.
In Human Rights Law, at the international level, there
are two types of rights. There is an International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights which covers rights such as citizenship, voting
and ability to hold office. 15
There is a second International Covenant on economic, social, and
cultural rights which includes rights such as housing, food and
education.16 For the purposes
of our discussion in this paper, I will refer to these two categories
as participation rights and substantive rights. My theory is that
devotees in general, and women in particular, are entitled to both
kinds of rights in ISKCON. I further contend that there is an important
link between these two categories of rights.
Women are clearly entitled to participation rights in
ISKCON at some level. We are allowed to become members of ISKCON.
We are allowed to take initiation. We are allowed to chant the holy
names. The maha-mantra is not a secret mantra given
only to men. So we participate at some level. There has been some
controversy about what that level of participation should be. This
topic is thoroughly covered in the paper presented by Jyotirmayi
Devi Dasi that is available through the Women's Ministry. In her
paper, Jyotirmayi Devi Dasi makes a compelling case for equal levels
of participation for men and women based on Shrila Prabhupada's
own writing and practices.
In Caitanya Caritamrta, Adi Lila, chapter seven,
Shrila Prabhupada describes how Lord Caitanya adapted many of the
rules of Vaishnava etiquette to increase the effect of His preaching
and the spread of Krishna consciousness. In the purport to verse
thirty-two, Shrila Prabhupada writes:
Not knowing that boys and girls in countries like Europe and
America mix very freely, these fools and rascals criticise the
boys and girls in Krishna consciousness for intermingling. But
these rascals should consider that one cannot suddenly change
a community's social customs. However, since both boys and girls
are being trained to become preachers, these girls are not ordinary
girls, but are as good as their brothers who are preaching Krishna
consciousness. Therefore, to engage both boys and girls in fully
transcendental activities is a policy intended to spread the Krishna
consciousness movement.
There are two points raised by this purport which we
ought to carry into further discussions on this issue.
First, Shrila Prabhupada indicates that the test of whether a woman's
participation role is appropriate is not whether it is Vedic.17
Shrila Prabhupada says here that the test of whether a woman's role
is appropriate is whether it helps to spread Krishna consciousness.
If we truly thought in terms of what is effective for spreading
Krishna consciousness, many of the controversies between men and
women would disappear.
The second point is one I previously discussed in section
two of this paper, that Shrila Prabhupada has created an analytical
exception to the statements that women are less intelligent or untrustworthy.18
Women engaged in transcendental activities, that is women who are
devotees, are, according to Shrila Prabhupada, just as intelligent
as men engaged in devotional activities.
We can now examine the presumptions that are prevalent
in ISKCON against the standard Shrila Prabhupada has articulated.
My perception, and others may disagree, is that we have a presumption
against women's participation in ISKCON. That presumption does not
mean that women do not participate in our movement. However, we
begin by presuming that women should not participate, and
then place the burden on women or their supporters to show why women
should be included. This presumption needs to be reversed if we
are to give women equal encouragement to develop in their spiritual
lives and serve Shrila Prabhupada's mission to the best of their
abilities. We should have a presumption of equal participation for
both genders. The burden then should be on those who argue that
the role of women should be circumscribed, for reasons of etiquette
or social custom, to articulate why and how such restriction relates
to our goal of spreading Krishna consciousness.
When we examine our treatment of women in a logically
rigorous manner, many of our practices appear unreasonable. For
instance, we often speak of 'protecting' women whenever we are accused
of gender discrimination. Disparate practices are held to be necessary
and even beneficial to women on the grounds that women need special
forms of protection.19 However,
this justification for discriminatory practices is incomplete. Those
who would use it must define what it is that women are being protected
from. Current ISKCON practice supports best the argument that women
are being protected from participating. Moreover, we must also decide
what the form of that protection should be. For instance, American
law requires that restrictions that limit rights must relate to
an important governmental purpose and be as narrowly defined as
possible. ISKCON could use similar principles in its treatment of
women, requiring that restrictions on their participation be related
to the goal of spreading Krishna consciousness and that these limits
be as narrow as possible.
We must first ask what Shrila Prabhupada intended ISKCON
to protect women from. For this, we can consult his writings on
the subject. The most obvious context in which Shrila Prabhupada
discussed protection occurs in the first chapter of the Bhagavad-gita.
Arjuna tells Krishna that when irreligion is prominent, women are
prone to degradation. Arjuna informs Krishna that such women may
bear unwanted children to the detriment of society. In his purport
to this verse, Shrila Prabhupada says that women are prone to being
misled by irresponsible men and that the cause of their fall down
is mixing too freely with men.20
If that is the kind of protection we are discussing, then I do not
understand how the dearth of women on the Governing Body Commission
(GBC)21 or discouraging women
from accepting management positions in our movement protects us
from sexual exploitation. Such an argument requires a belief that
the men we would be working with under such circumstances are irresponsible
men. The rules ISKCON uses in this context do not appear rationally
related to the purposes Shrila Prabhupada has described for us.
The next question is what form should this protection
take? In ISKCON, we have an unspoken assumption that protection
means restriction. We protect women by telling them 'you can't'
and taken to its extreme form this instruction becomes, 'you can't
leave the house.'22 Even in slightly
less restrictive contexts which permit women to attend worship at
ISKCON temples, making flower garlands for the deities is sometimes
seen as the most suitable service for a woman. There is some similarity
between the protection model currently applied to women in ISKCON
and the techniques I use in raising my children. I give my children
crayons and colouring books and protect them by instructing them
to sit quietly and colour. Women in ISKCON get colourful bundles
of carnation blossoms along with tapestry needles and string. We
are instructed to sit quietly and make flower garlands. In ISKCON,
the current perception seems to be that women are comparable not
only to children, but to very young children.
I do not believe that this 'woman as small child' model
is the one Shrila Prabhupada intended. In fact, examination of the
histories told by many of his early female disciples reveals that
Shrila Prabhupada himself did not treat women in this way. Their
stories reveal that Shrila Prabhupada protected them in three ways.
First, he educated his female disciples about their true identities
as spirit souls. Second, Shrila Prabhupada engaged women in devotional
service, a process by which they could attain liberation from death
and rebirth, the ultimate protection from worldly suffering and
evil. Finally, as Kausalya Devi Dasi detailed in her presentation
at the 'Vaishnavis in ISKCON' conference, when limited facilities
were available for the devotees' use, Shrila Prabhupada protected
his female disciples by giving them the lion's share of those physical
resources.23
In examining Shrila Prabhupada's actual behaviour toward
his female disciples, it seems fair to conclude that far from comparing
women to children who need protection, Shrila Prabhupada desired
a model in which women would be nurtured and supported and above
all encouraged to contribute as much as they could to the Krishna
Conscious Movement, rather than being reviled and restricted. Perhaps
we should redirect our efforts toward a model designed to ensure
that women are educated, engaged and provided with sufficient physical
resources in order to perform their various services effectively
within our organisation.
This question of protection through the provision of
resources raises the second category of Human Rights, that is, substantive
rights. If protection really were our goal, then as an external
academic observer of the institution I would expect to see policies
directed towards that goal. The Women's Ministry and other members
of ISKCON have engaged in significant discussion concerning policies
that would be necessary to protect women members of ISKCON. That
list is legion, but if we examine protection from sexual exploitation
specifically, I would expect to see, among many other things, education
about the proper roles of men and women, ashram24
facilities for women, and a policy prohibiting sexual harassment.
In fact, we have some of these things. We have training manuals
for our new members, but they do not often include material on how
to respect and protect women. We have ashram facilities.
However, we spend more resources on men's training and men's ashrams
than we do on comparable programmes for women. The Women's Ministry
is drafting a policy on sexual harassment, but without effective
support from ISKCON's management, that policy is unlikely to result
in meaningful social change. Thus, in spite of our rhetoric about
protecting women, an outside observer will find that we give more
substantive rights to men than to women.
In ISKCON we find ourselves in the position of telling
our women members that they do not need participation rights because
we will protect them. But we then fail to provide the resources
by which that protection might come about. Human rights analysts
will tell you that when you decrease somebody's participation rights
without a corresponding increase in their substantive rights, that
person will be worse off than they were at the beginning.25
This type of situation is the very definition of oppression and
dictatorship, which is surely not what Shrila Prabhupada intended.
There is another aspect of the protection issue that
raises a slightly different philosophical basis for a duty on ISKCON's
part. That issue is domestic violence. In his presentation at the
'Vaishnavis in ISKCON' conference, His Holiness Bir Krishna Swami
mentioned a letter he had seen in which a male member of ISKCON
expressed his understanding that our Vaishnava etiquette permitted
him to beat his wife as long as he used only a leather belt on her
back or a sapling on her legs. Some male members in Southern California
have expressed the belief that Shrila Prabhupada stated that both
a wife and a mridanga required beating. I have personally
not seen any proof that Shrila Prabhupada endorsed wife beating.
Moreover, ISKCON's Governing Body Commission has specifically rejected
the claim that our philosophy justifies spousal abuse in any way.
Given this institutional force which misguided members
are using to promote domestic violence, ISKCON has a duty to create
policies which will counter domestic violence. While the ISKCON
Women's Ministry has undertaken to create some policies and substantive
programmes to meet this need, we often hear excuses for institutional
inaction on this issue. The excuses we hear, lack of resources and
an inability to interfere between husband and wife, are clearly
insufficient. Given our somewhat chequered history which includes
(at the very least) the public perception that we have a poor record
on domestic violence, we have a duty to find the resources to counter
this destructive influence. Moreover, having given numerous, repeated
public instructions on the duty of the wife to tolerate any of her
husband's abuses and having given men some (false, but well promoted)
basis on which to justify their abuses, it seems a little late to
make the claim that we cannot become involved in the marital relationship.
If we make the claim that we protect women, then we must become
responsible and actually protect them.
I want to return now to the issue of participation rights
because there is a clear link between participation rights and substantive
rights. The best way to ensure that people have substantive rights
is to give them participation rights.26
So, the claim that we can safely relinquish our participation rights
in exchange for protection is simply untrue. Even with the best
of intentions, our leaders will be unable to safeguard our substantive
rights if we have too few participation rights. I am deeply suspicious
of anyone who tells us that we do not need participation rights.
Experience shows that we do need such rights.27
There are two reasons why ISKCON needs to pay particular
attention to this link between participation rights and substantive
rights. The first is that we have a limited ability to enforce any
substantive rights we create. We have no functioning justice system
in our movement. Although we have a Justice Minister and have developed
some grievance policies, our Justice Ministry has no staff and no
financial resources. Hence, our grievance policies are routinely
ignored. It would be unreasonable to assume that substantive policies
protecting women can be enforced effectively in this environment.
Furthermore, there are important transaction costs which
function as barriers preventing our leaders from developing and
enforcing policies which would truly meet the needs of ISKCON's
women in an environment which excludes women from upper management.
Basic economic theory informs us that the development of any policy
to protect women will bring with it transaction costs including
the costs of gathering the information necessary to develop that
policy. Those transaction costs will include both monetary costs
and opportunity costs. If our leaders wish to develop substantive
policies to protect ISKCON's women, rather than allowing the women
to participate in management and work out for themselves what they
need, then our leaders must be willing to invest both time and money
in this project.
These costs will operate as a significant barrier to
the development of substantive rights for women in ISKCON. ISKCON
leaders already plead lack of financial resources to explain lack
of substantive social development policies in our movement. Furthermore,
our leaders are consistently over engaged, that is, they have less
time available than they need to accomplish the tasks already assigned
to them. So there is little realistic likelihood of them as a group,
or even more than one or two individuals, making it their business
to find out what the women of ISKCON really need and to develop
the structures to meet those needs. Again, we return to the idea
that women need participation rights if they are going to have a
meaningful role in ISKCON and if ISKCON can truly claim to protect
them.
There is another kind of transaction cost that is raised
by the exclusion of women from positions of authority in ISKCON.
That cost is the difficulty for women in identifying other women
who are spiritual role models. There are many visible male role
models, advanced spiritual leaders, whom we can easily identify
because they have visible symbols of advancement. They have dandas28;
they have titles such as GBC representative or temple president.
At the very least, they sit on the vyasasana29
during the morning programme and give Bhagavatam class. The
women in our movement, many of whom have been practising Krishna
consciousness longer than some of the male role models, are very
hard to find. They lack the visible symbols of advancement. Thus,
it has taken me more than ten years just to begin to identify the
women who can act as my spiritual mentors. Giving women participation
rights that permit them to give Bhagavatam class, to run
projects and temples, to sit on the GBC, allows the women of ISKCON
to find the role models we need to advance in Krishna consciousness.
Conclusion
There are three points that are essential to any policy that
would permit ISKCON to ensure appropriate roles for women.30
First, as I mentioned before, there should be a presumption against
limiting women's access to spiritual resources. Where women's access
is limited, policy makers must provide a written justification for
their decision, articulating how their policy is necessary to increase
the spread of Krishna consciousness.
Second, we need women in leadership roles from the highest
levels down to the local temple communities. We need women in leadership
roles in significant numbers to prevent these leaders from being
isolated or marginalised by male administrators. One aspect of this
issue of female leadership that we have not yet addressed is the
extent to which men get a significant amount of informal support
in rising up through the ranks in ISKCON. This phenomenon is not
necessarily a sign of malice on the part of our leaders. Rather,
men develop intimate relationships with men in our society, as they
should. However, anyone in an intimate relationship with a leader
has access to a great deal of support and resources. Women do not
have that opportunity and will not have that opportunity until we
have significant numbers of women at high levels. Thus, ISKCON has
a duty to foster the development of women leaders. It is not sufficient
for ISKCON's management to say, find some qualified women and bring
them to us. ISKCON has the duty to find women who can lead and also
to find women who have the potential to be leaders and to give these
women the same opportunity to develop that is given to similarly
qualified men.
When we have done these two things, we can progress
to the final prong, developing substantive policies, more effectively.
We must identify the needs of the women so that we can do two further
things. We must empower the women to meet some of their own needs
and we must develop structures that will provide women with the
resources and facilities they need. The focus of the Women's Ministry
has been, in large part, on providing women with a forum for working
together to meet their own needs. The recent 'Vaishnavis in ISKCON'
conference embodied that philosophy, involving women from across
North America who worked together under the direction of Sudharma
Devi Dasi to organise what His Holiness Hridayananda Swami described
as an historic event which could vastly improve our movement.
Finally, we must all work together as a movement to
develop the structures and policies which will provide women with
the substantive rights they need for their protection and in order
to meet our goals of advancing Krishna consciousness. However, we
will work most effectively together if we increase participation
roles for women in ISKCON.
|
Print
this page |
