Aditya loves, loves, loves it when I wear sindoor. For him it is the epitome of beauty. (There’s also probably an element of husbandly pride and maybe something oedipal going on, but, hey, you can’t win them all.) When I reach over to open to the medicine cabinet while brushing my teeth in the mornings, his face lights up in the hope that I’m grabbing out my container of vermilion powder:
“Are you going to wear sindoor today?” You should! – you look so beautiful when you wear it!”
And, almost always, I mumble something that amounts to “no, not today.”
It’s not that I don’t like sindoor in and of itself. The fine, red powder – which is traditionally worn daily by married Hindu women at the front of the center part in their hair – is fine in my books. It’s not a custom I grew up with, but I don’t think it looks bad – just different. And, yeah, sure, I have a tendency to smear it all over my forehead within an hour of application. Whatever – I do that with my eyeliner & mascara most days too, making raccoon eyes a signature Gori look.
No, my problem with wearing sindoor is that most days I’m headed into work. Where there are a fair number of Indian people. And none of them wear traditional Indian clothing, except for the occasional short kurta – certainly there isn’t any sindoor-wearing going on amoung the married ladies! One older Bengali coworker even expressed amazement that I followed the “old-fashioned” tradition of wearing a loha – a gold-plated iron bangle that serves as a wedding ring among Bengali women – on my left wrist daily.
On the other hand, though, when we have people from the Delhi office visiting headquarters, they love that I wear bangles, that I have kurtas in my regular office clothes rotation, and that I occasionally wear sindoor. (Sidenote: when one of said Delhi office coworkers messaged me with a software question that started with a “yaar, how does one…”, I was pretty thrilled at the implied familiarity. Of course, I couldn’t answer his question, since our computer software is acutally composed of ancient cryptic riddles in text files, not understandable data.)
On the third hand (yes, yes, I know), the last time I wore sindoor to the office, my boss wanted to know if I needed a band-aid for the cut on my head. Yeah. Yeah, I know. Does anyone else have problems with this?
I think I’ll be sticking to wearing sindoor strictly outside of the office from here on out. Or put in for a transfer to Delhi.
Related posts:
May 13th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
GG: Considering none of my married Indian friends even consider sindoor, I find the dilemma quite interesting to read about.
But here is a weird thing that I have heard from elders about sindoor. Sindoor used to be a cheap red lead oxide (stay with me) and is now usually a mercuric compound. Its relevance is linked to the times when a woman was financially reliant and socially dependent (for her status) on her husband. The use of lead oxide, which as you know is a poisonous compound, helped ensure that she was doing nothing to prolong her own life so as to outlive the man on whom her life and welfare depended*. Now that women are not dependent so much on men, I don't see why they need to poison themselves to a slow death.
Nearly all “traditions” eventually have an economic or social or socio-economic explanation. But whenever I have offered this 'explanation' even as a hypothesis, people get very cross and start jumping up and down. So I won't be surprised if that happens this time too.
But if someone has an alternative 'explanation' (all explanations filed under 'hypothesis' till proof is obtained) for why a woman must fill her parting with lead oxide, I would love to hear it.
* I am sure you are familiar with the continuing maltreatment of widows in some communities in India; I am still scarred from having seen widows in Vrindavan when I was 10 years old and when my aunt told me that if seeing those women has upset me, I should remember never to keep my mouth shut when I see women being ill-treated etc.
January 7th, 2010 at 3:08 am
Going by your hypothesis…
“The use of lead oxide, which as you know is a poisonous compound, helped ensure that she was doing nothing to prolong her own life so as to outlive the man on whom her life and welfare depended”
After being widowed why weren’t these females given the same sindoor(to consume or put a bucket load on their head) to end their lives instead of wasting money to kill them under the garb of sati tradition.
Kindly explain. I would love to hear it.
–
I never knew lead was used in sindoor in ancient times, I was under the impression that usage of lead was introduced recently for its cheap synthetic imitation.
Regarding a possible explanation.. there are many analogies in nature for corresponding concepts in sanatan conceptualization of the creation/god
Shiva tattva = mercury, Shakti tattva = sphatic(quartz)
Don’t by so cynical.
May 13th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Great post.
But @Shefaly is right – evil lurks behind a lot of customs that we now think of as quaint. People have their sense of identity tied up so much in these customs that they can't bear to face up to the truth. That is probably why @Shefaly expects (and will get) negative responses.
PS: I was trying to remember when it was that I last saw a woman in India wearing sindoor – it was on TV last week when I accidentally switched to a soap opera channel instead of sports. And almost no one wears it to work in India – so I doubt that a transfer to Delhi or Mumbai will help.
May 13th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
I wear sindoor if I'm wearing a kurta or other Indian clothes, and have worn it to work before. Otherwise, with western garb, I have also gotten comments from people thinking I hurt myself. My husband doesn't like me to wear too much though, or risk looking like a “villager,” as he says.
We went to visit my husband's taoji and taiji (father's elder brother and his wife) on our last trip to India and taiji loved the way I wore a sari, etc. but on that day I forgot sindoor and she commented about it later, wondering why I did not wear it.
May 13th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Shefaly, vermilion powder has been used throughout Asia in decoration since prehistoric times, and it's actually a mercury compound, not lead. Given that knowledge about the effects of mercury poisoning is relatively recent discovery (you can find really old photos of workmen playing around with mercury before people knew it was dangerous), I don't think that you can chalk up the use of sindoor as an attempt to keep a woman from outliving her husband. The facts just don't fit your hypothesis.
I think it's far more likely that it's just used as decoration, just like the million and one way that people have been using color and sparkly things to adorn themselves throughout the ages.
Today the vast majority of sindoor available commercially is a cadmium compound, which is nontoxic. Of course, it's possible to purchase cheap stuff with mercury or lead compounds mixed in if you aren't careful about the quality of the stuff you're buying – but that's true about a lot of things in India, frankly.
Most of the woman in Adiya's family wear sindoor. His mother wears it every day (she's quite traditional), and others wear it occasionally as they feel like it. I think they all see it as decoration, much like wearing earrings or bangles or whathaveyou – not as “filling her parting with lead oxide” (which, as stated above, isn't what decent-quality vermilion powder is actually made of.
May 13th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
As I stated above to Shefaly, I don't think the facts of wearing sindoor fit her “evil” explanation. I suppose you could make a case that marking out married women in such a visible manner is a way to reinforce the Vedic requirement to get married and be a householder and all that jazz…. but most societies do that in one or another – like wedding rings. Society can only continue if people get married and have kidlets, after all, so it's no surprise that there are incentives to do so, and to mark out those who are doing their duty.
Many (I want to say most, but my memory isn't great enough to say it with any certainty) of the women I saw in Maharashtra, Bombay, and Calcutta on my last trip to India were wearing sindoor – perhaps you just aren't looking in the right places?
P.S. this isn't twitter, no need for the @
September 29th, 2009 at 1:45 am
Hi there,
I, too, am married to an Indian man. Well, he’s Nepali and Tibetan by heritage, Indian by citizenship and upbringing, so there’s a whole mix of the cultures. We live in Darjeeling, India where it’s mostly Nepali culture. I wear sindoor daily, not because he demands it, not because I need to announce my subservience to my husband or any such thing. I do it mostly because he recognizes it as a very normal and expected; if I didn’t do it he wouldn’t try to force me, but I think it would hurt him as much as me refusing to wear a wedding band. I wear it because I am proud to be married to him, because he knows it’s noticeable and unusual on me so the fact that I wear it regularly and of my own volition, I think, makes him feel good and aware that I don’t mind people immediately making the connection that I am married to him as he walks beside me on the streets, especially considering that I’m blonde. But I wear it sparingly, just a half-inch thin line at the start of my hairline… enough to see, but not a beacon to be noticed from yards away. I know I’ll probably get a lot of “oh, did you cut yourself?” comments when we move to the states (my home country), but I still plan to wear it. It’s as important to me now as the ring on my left ring finger.
I’d heard rumors that it indicated sexual possession and other things, some of which were not so flattering to an independent, modern woman. I did some research and the reasons for sindoor’s use that I seem to find are twofold: (1) to clearly identify that the woman is taken/married/off the market (marriage here does seem to be more religiously and morally heavy than in the US, so they do seem to like a clear awareness of who’s married and who’s not), and (2) to indicate that the bride is now married and under the protection of the husband, and the crimson sindoor signifies that if you harm this woman, your blood will be spilled.
Granted, these are somewhat archaic meanings. It’s not the most modern way to express love, true. But we have to understand such things in the context of the times of their origin… in the past sindoor would have been an intense mark of pride that a woman was married (read: healthy, a good home-maker and mother candidate, and desirable), cared for, protected. We may not need so much protection and such these days but we also don’t have to read so far into the past and apply it exactly to today’s world. To me, my sindoor does not mean I belong to my husband or that I am stating that there’s muscle in my life to fight my fights. Rather, my sindoor means, to me, that I am happily married, that I am proud to have found a man with whom I am sharing my life, and that I care enough about my husband to follow this tradition because it clearly shows him that I’m proud to be tied to him and that I respect his wishes, norms, and cultural expectations just as he does mine when the opportunities arise.
I have to agree that the whole “killing yourself slowly” theory doesn’t seem to fit the facts. Especially considering that the tradition developed initially with the use of harmless turmeric powder with a dash of lime juice, which caused the turmeric to turn bright red. It was only later that the sometimes-dangerous synthetics with mercury came into use, after the tradition was established. And yeah, that was/is just due to over-arching faulty health standards in India, not to a conspiracy to kill women off before men.
Also, all the women I know here who are married Hindus wear sindoor and support my wearing of sindoor, even the young, modern women. It seems to be a tradition that is alive and well in this part of India, anyway.
Anyway, I think it’s a very personal choice. We women, white and otherwise, ought to be free to love and display love as we see fit. For some that may involve sindoor, for others perhaps not. It’s very individual!
Regards,
Catrina
October 2nd, 2009 at 12:05 pm
We learn something every day. So that’s how Sindoor was traditionally made at home: by mixing turmeric with lime. That explains how Indian men tried to murder their women – with turmeric and lime *sarcasm*. Good heavens, that sounds like a healthy snack to me
January 8th, 2010 at 11:19 am
“I suppose you could make a case that marking out married women in such a visible manner is a way to reinforce the Vedic requirement to get married and be a householder and all that jazz…. but most societies do that in one or another – like wedding rings. Society can only continue if people get married and have kidlets, after all, so it’s no surprise that there are incentives to do so, and to mark out those who are doing their duty.”
Another reason is to provide a visible indicator to single men in the society that this woman wearing sindoor or a ring is off-limits (at least for those men who are ethically inclined) and deserves to be treated accordingly, and not as a target of their amorous desires.
May 13th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
GG: Actually you will find that red lead oxide was the more common source of sindoor in India. This was true until even the 1980s and probably is true in some parts even today.
The use of lead (Hindi: seesa, not to be confused with sheesha, which may mean glass or mirror) as a poison is well-documented going back at least to the Maurya dynasty (see, for instance, how a Vishkanya was created and deployed as a potent weapon against enemy soldiers). In Vedic times, molten lead was poured into the ears of lower-caste people who may have accidentally heard Vedic recitals (mantra or shruti) which they were not supposed to hear, a brutal practice documented in Manusmriti which dates even further back in time.
So while mercury's poisonous qualities may have been discovered later (mercury was and is still used in Ayurveda so it has definitely been known for a long time), lead and lead oxide and their poisonous nature have been widely known in India for several centuries.
I'd say the “facts” are themselves disputable. I am willing to hold the explanation as a 'hypothesis' but a better way to verify or disprove it would be to find data, if possible, that can help explain a correlation between the use of sindoor and average longevity of women. Correlation is not causation, of course, but a positive correlation would indicate a factor that is worth paying more attention to.
May 13th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Traditional kumkum is made with turmeric, lime, iodine, camphor… The commercial version typically uses synthetic materials and various oxides (that could include lead/mercury). So, depending on which one you use, you could be controlling your blood pressure (and I believe increasing your sex drive) or racing to meet with the maker!
May 13th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Found this: http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2004/10-1...
May 13th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I'll go ahead and state that this is amongst the dumbest things I've heard in a while…
First of all, traditionally, sindoor was not made out of lead or mercury… it was made out of turmeric and lime. So let's stop with the conspiracy theory already…
mercury and lead were not used to make sindoor until sindoor started being manufactured in factories (very recent phenomenon).
Secondly, from a analytical perspective, the color Red is commonly used to indicate fertility… the context and significance of marking of the bride, therefore, is pretty straightforward.
May 13th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Shefaly, lead-based colors are also used in mass produced holi “rang”… your hypothesis would imply that holi was designed to kill off the young…
May 13th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
“The use of lead (Hindi: seesa, not to be confused with sheesha, which may mean glass or mirror) as a poison is well-documented going back at least to the Maurya dynasty (see, for instance, how a Vishkanya was created and deployed as a potent weapon against enemy soldiers).”
Ok, you need to get your Hindu mythology straight…
A. There is no evidence of Vishkanyas ever existing
B. Even in mythology, they were never used against “soldiers” they were supposed to be spies who assassinated senior leaders after seducing them.
C. “Vish” does not come from lead, it comes from serpent venom.
“In Vedic times, molten lead was poured into the ears of lower-caste people who may have accidentally heard Vedic recitals (mantra or shruti) which they were not supposed to hear, a brutal practice documented in Manusmriti which dates even further back in time.”
–> uuh, no. The original Manusmriti was composed between 200BC and 200AD – so most of the Vedas predate it by… one thousand years (at least).
there is no evidence whatsoever of lead being poured into lower caste folk “in vedic times” – if there is, please point it to me.
Manusmriti does not document anything from a historical perspective. It is a composite document of principles from the Dharmashastra, and later extrapolations (600-800AD). It is not even in the Vedic tradition.
May 13th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
“People have their sense of identity tied up so much in these customs that they can't bear to face up to the truth. That is probably why @Shefaly expects (and will get) negative responses.”
-She got negative responses because she put forward conspiracy theories that have no grounding in fact.
May 13th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Yes, I think it's important to point out that there are four different substances being discussed – since I think we're talking past each other a bit. And then there are also impure versions of some of them.
As both you & Bala below point out, traditionally sindoor is made out of very natural ingredients that wouldn't poison you even if you consumed it in large quantities (not recommended).
Then there are the two things that “vermilion powder” refers to, both of which are non-homemade sindoors. There's the mercury-sulfide version (occurring naturally, but can also be created by combining mercury & sulfur) that has been known since ancient times, and is toxic. AND there's the new version of the same compound that uses cadmium rather than mercury to keep it from being toxic.
Finally, there's the lead oxide, which has only become available since sindoor started being mass-produced, is toxic just like all lead things, and is hopefully becoming less and less common since it's, yah know, toxic.
And with all of the mass-produced versions of sindoor, there are versions that are contaminated with toxic chemicals, like, uh, lead and mercury!
I'm pretty certain that the stuff I use, while not the perfectly-safe homemade stuff, is of high-enough quality that it's non-toxic.
May 13th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
I enjoyed this post! Worrying about doing “Indian” things that other Indians aren't doing definitely makes sense to me.
Sindoor is pretty common where my husband is from, and I enjoyed wearing it there (in fact, I enjoyed almost anything that made it clear to those who say us out and about that we were married – I think I just find double-takes kind of fun, plus, of course, things were easier for us once it was clear we were married).
I don't wear it here, but I probably would if I were wearing Indian cloths for some reason.
Of course, having red-ish hair to begin with, it's less obvious on me!
May 13th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
I'm an Indian-American woman (born and raised in the US) and I have never been comfortable with a bindi or kumkum (and have never tried/been asked to wear sindoor). I wore a tiny bindi with my sari for the wedding reception my parents had for us, but that was about it. It just seems “foreign” to me and non-Indian people are always like “hey, what's that on your head” and it just bugs me to call attention to myself.
Now of course, that could be construed as a lack of appreciation for the culture in which I was raised, but that's a whole 'nother discussion
May 13th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
I'm not disputing whether or not poisoning might have occurred by long-term
exposure to vermilion (whether it was knock-off lead oxide or the actual
mercury compound), but whether it was *intentionally* used to shorten the
lives of the women applying it. I don't think there's a case at all for that
- the scientific knowledge regarding poisons and the effects of long-term
exposure to lead & mercury just wasn't there when the practice started. The
fact that people knew that you could hurt someone with molten lead or that
massive amounts of lead could lead to poisoning != people knew using a
little lead compound as decoration was dangerous over time. Scientific
understanding of the world around us is an incredibly new phenomena in human
history.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
But most societies do that in one or another – like wedding rings.
>Yes but don't both parties in the marriage wear these rings.
I am Indian, raised in India and live in the East Coast too. Growing up, I've felt that these symbols -
the mangal sutra, the sindhur etc were one-sided and oppressive. There is a tendency to
mark out the marital status of the woman whereas it does not matter for a man. Even today,
there are rituals performed (even amongst my own relatives) called Sumangali prarthana where only married women and women whose husbands are alive are allowed. So I stopped wearing these symbols sometime in my teens when I started to think for myself and never wear them.
Many explanations and retro-fitting analyses of why the kumkum ranging from retro-fitted leadoxide theories(that one is surely bogus from whatever texts I have read) to freudian symbolisms of blood and
feritility, have been put forth by many. Social traditions and indicators do not always need an economic explanation. As I see it, these are merely marks of a 'supposedly special' status just like the sacred thread – a symbol that marked out a 'special status' for a caste.Here it is an ideal state every woman ought to aspire to. It is this rationale that I find extremely objectionable and would rather not wear such marks. Of course one can always reclaim these symbols and keep it for external beauty and treat it as a cosmetic , that then again is a choice.
May 13th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Regarding Shefaly's theory, it sounded believable to me. However, traditionally girls were married to boys much older than them and I believe the purpose was so the husband had a servant/caretaker/nurse in his old age. So I don't think they'd want the wife to die off sooner than the man. But then on the otherhand there is that big taboo over widowhood……
Probably the ideal was a wife who would be taking care of her husband right up until his death. Then shortly after that she would die so as not to become a “burden” on anyone (have to have someone serve her like she served her husband in his old age). I guess sati was one of the ways to take care of that.
Sindoor looks really good when it is worn the proper way on really black hair. The traditional way is to cover the entire part, not just the small part in the front. The contrast of jet black and deep red looks awesome.
May 13th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Disclaimer: I totally get the sindoor thing from your perspective – the following is more of an academic discussion.
1. Sindoor is not an incentive or reward for people to get married – its exactly the opposite. Indian married women are supposed to live (and die) to an almost impossibly unhumanly high standard – whether it comes to husband worship, self-sacrifice, child raring, elder caring etc. The Sindoor visually reinforces her own obligations through gender stereotypes and subliminal messaging, and encourages society to judge her by those standards.
2. Unsurprisingly, since men made most of these rules (see next point), there is no correspondingly visible sign that indicates that a man is married – after all, society continues just fine (and in fact even better) if the men are promiscuous (a certain polygamous religion that's making the news recently comes to mind).
3. Off-topic (but not really). There are very good reasons why no Indian children are taught the Vedas (or only selectively, and never in a language they understand well) – you only have to read them to figure out why. There's some sexist gems in there, e.g. “Mantra to make sure you get a son instead of a daughter” (Atharva Veda [1]) . Wisely, most people pick (selectively) from the Mahabharata/Ramayana etc. – our innate sense of humanity morality in 2009 already far exceeds that of the Vedas (and the Bible and all the other texts).
Now, having said all that, let me just say this (and duck for cover) – sindoor does look hot – its a pity Mrs. Neo never wears it.
[1] http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/athar... – Search for “pumsavanam”
May 14th, 2009 at 3:50 am
“But most societies do that in one or another – like wedding rings.
>Yes but don't both parties in the marriage wear these rings. “
In America, both parties wearing wedding rings is rather new. If you look at older wedding books you'll see how to have a “double ring ceremony,” which means both partners are going to get rings. Before the Great Depression, only 15% of men wore wedding rings. After WWII, it was up to 80%. Never underestimate the power of marketing.
There are still many religions and cultures where only the woman is wearing a wedding band.
And even if the man does wear a wedding band, the vast majority of women in America get engagement rings, which shows she's “taken,” whereas the vast majority of men don't wear any sort of engagement ring. (I know this intimately because my husband and I both wore engagement bands and people who didn't understand his Claddagh assumed we were already married.)
May 14th, 2009 at 6:37 am
The only time I've ever worn sindoor was at my wedding and for some reason it was an orange color rather than red. I've never seen any of the women in my husband's family wear it even at very traditional events – it seems to be reserved the bride on her wedding day. I'll have to ask my MIL about this. Maybe it's just a regional variance among M's family.
May 14th, 2009 at 7:13 am
in response to #3: I think there are other reasons why vedas are not taught to children in the vernacular:
1. Part of the point of the vedas is that its supposed to be passed down as is – thus the oral tradition part… it's like the torah is never in English.
2. Modern Hinduism is not very Vedic in nature… You only have to browse the Rg Veda to see the massive distinctions (including serving veal to guests)…
May 14th, 2009 at 7:32 am
Thank you for stating it. Are these comments based in some sort of feminism that I don't understand?
Sindoor is more common in certain Indian cultures (such as Bengali) than in others. In cities like Calcutta one will see plenty of women wearing it.
May 14th, 2009 at 8:20 am
I've never worn sindoor, not even at my wedding (I didn't want to have to wash/re-do my hair between ceremonies). G's grandmother did, but no one else in the family does. We all do kumkum on the forehead during poojas and that's about it.
I always wear a bindi when wearing traditional Indian clothes. Mine are all decorative colored/sparkly ones. I've only really seen older ladies wearing the red ones.
I wear short kurtas and bangles and my manglasutra fairly often. I'm actually wearing some of my wedding bangles with Western clothes today.
May 14th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Regarding 1 – I think you're looking at this from a very simplistic feminist perspective, which isn't the way that everyone views sindoor. For many women – and I'd probably include my highly-educated MIL in this group – wearing sindoor is enjoyable because they enjoy being married, and enjoy showing the world that they are married, and they enjoy “dressing nicely” which, in their minds, includes wearing sindoor daily. If you feel shackled by marriage – or feel obligated to meet “impossibly unhumanly high standards” then you might feel that sindoor is undesirable. But to assume that all Indian women feel this way is incredibly patronizing.
From a behavioral economic perspective – or a more complex feminist perspective, I think – you have to assume that all women who wear sindoor wear it because they receive some sort of utility from it. Being able to be recognized as a married woman is an incentive to wear sindoor – and many women gain utility from being recognized as such. Whether it's a good or bad thing that women wish to be recognized as married really depends on more underlying features that I skimmed over above – but I don't think it's reasonable to immediately write off such desires as negative or something that a modern woman shouldn't have. Personally, I like being seen as a married woman 'cause I think I did a damn fine job picking out a person to share my life with. I also think it's clear from the gay rights movement that many people wish – quite reasonably so – to be able to be recognized as married by the community at large.
Re 2: It's simply not true that society continues just fine – or better – if men are promiscuous. Some societies, maybe. Certainly not all. Remember society != human species reproducing itself (If you follow evolutionary psychology etc then you probably know that promiscuous behavior is (to put it in very simplistic terms) hardwired into th male half of the human race. But what's in our genes doesn't necessarily make the best society, since genes aren't much interested in crafting good societies.)
Re 3: If it's an “innate sense of humanity morality” then it can't be era dependent, which your qualifier of “2009″ seems to suggest. Rather, I'd say that our understanding of what is ethical behavior has become more informed throughout human history, and that ancient ethical codes prescribed by equally ancient religious systems do not always correspond well to what we now recognize as ethical behavior.
May 14th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Yeah, I think there's a very simplistic version of feminism being tossed around here – one where if a symbol has been associated in the minds of some feminists as demeaning, then it is demeaning to all women, regardless of how others choose to see it. To say that an individual can't determine how he or she chooses to view a symbol is not very empowering.
May 14th, 2009 at 9:35 am
I think it's perfectly okay to not be comfortable with it. I'm agnostic on sindoor, but my husband thinks it looks nice so, *shrug*, no harm to me in putting it on. Well, except that my boss thinks that I regularly bleed from my hair parting…
May 14th, 2009 at 9:38 am
I think the most important thing is that it should be a choice for all women – not required to wear it by society, but also not required to not wear it because some think it's demeaning or oppressive. If you (general you) don't get utility from wearing it – then you shouldn't. If you do, then I think you should be free to make that choice without being judged by others as buying into the “oppressors' side”.
NOTE: I'm not saying you judge or anything like that. Just talkin' generally.
May 14th, 2009 at 9:52 am
Sindoor is common in West Bengal. It's also worn in other regions but not as much as in West Bengal.
In West Bengal they got the red goin' on pretty heavy; sindoor, big red bindi, foot lac (looks really bad on cracked feet), and the white and red bangles.
Oh, and the white sarees with those big red borders……….. typical old school bengali look.
It all fits together quite well actually.
And then the school girls with their blue saree ensambles. Perfectly starched, ironed and pleated, with their long black braids hanging down their backs. Looks nice.
All of the above pitted against a tropical backdrop of chartreuse green rice fields and tall, swaying coconut trees. The Ganga meandering throughout…….
West Bengal has some nice aesthetics going on.
May 14th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Interesting discussion.
When we've discussed going to India, Satya has mentioned that he'd like me to wear the bindi. His mom is designing a mangalsutra for me to wear. I'll be wearing that too in India. In the U.S. I don't think I'd wear the bindi on a regular day-for the temple or a festival maybe. I might wear the mangal sutra everyday, I'm not sure. Here, mangal sutra seems more common-we see Indian women wearing them often.There are also toe rings too for married women, but those he says fall off a lot and those I'm not so sure about wearing-bindi and the mangal sutra seem easier to wear.
Here in the U.S. I want Satya to wear his wedding ring and he does so when we're in India I'll wear what he wants. I hope he'll wear his ring in India! (We better discuss that one : )
May 14th, 2009 at 10:53 am
You only have to see any Hindi movie (or soap) to know what's supposed to happen _after_ a groom puts sindoor on his bride for the first time – she falls to her husband's feet (symbolizing husband worship).
So clearly the sindoor has some correlation to husband worship.
Many Indians accept (and some even expect!) this gruesome spectacle of one adult (however symbolically and briefly) having to worship another adult only because of her gender. (Why not a more equal gesture, like a kiss, or a handshake, or a hug, or both spouses touch one another's feet ?)
Now, if today's women choose to reinterpret sindoor as a sign of being proudly married, or even just a sort of retro-ethnic fashion statement – that's awesome! No better way to destroy an old symbol than to make it mean something totally different!
September 29th, 2009 at 2:15 am
Hi Neo,
I do apologize, but you seem to have a habit of attaining some knowledge about Indian culture from somewhere (Hindi soaps, maybe?) and then erroneously plastering it across all of Indian culture. Your comment that after seeing even one Hindi movie or soap leads you to “clearly” conclude something only goes to show that you are not doing adequate homework, but are extrapolating probably inaccurate, dramatized information from less than academic sources.
I was recently married in a Hindu ceremony and there was no “falling to my husband’s feet,” not even touching or gracefully lowering myself to his feet. No husband worship occurred at all. In fact, I led the majority of the loops (as directed by the pandit) around the sacred fire, which are supposed to symbolize the ways a husband and wife have to follow and lead each other through various trials of life. There was also a part where we switched our seats and then I sat down first, then physically pulled him by the hand from a standing position to sit down– as explained to me, this indicated that I would now control much of the relationship.
Basically, my point is that our Hindu wedding was a very egalitarian affair. There was no worship of one person over the other. If there had been, the independent, Western woman in me would have had no part of it!
You have a right to view sindoor as you wish, and you don’t have to like it. Just, check your facts before you start making assumptions and declarations that are not only insulting to those of us who do find value in sindoor, but which also make you appear rather ignorant. Bollywood is not an accurate gauge of Hindu culture, I’m afraid, and even if it were, there is such variety of subcultures in India that any one movie could never capture all the different ways of being Hindu.
May 14th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
“You only have to see any Hindi movie (or soap) to know what's supposed to happen _after_ a groom puts sindoor on his bride for the first time – she falls to her husband's feet (symbolizing husband worship).
So clearly the sindoor has some correlation to husband worship.”
–> By the same logic, you only have to see any Hindi movie to know what's supposed to happen _after_ parents take twin brothers to a “Mela” for the first time – they get separated for the next twenty years or so and then finally meet in a climax of dramatic turns in their lives (often including pretty girls with rich, villainous fathers).
That being said – i do agree with your last point about reinterpreting sindoor…
May 14th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Is it custom for the bride to touch the groom's feet at any time during a traditional Bengali wedding ceremony – sindhoor time or not?
There is also a custom of the groom getting bathed by the women of his family, or is it the bride's family, and then that bath water being sent to the bride. But not vicer versa.
I thought that was a Bengali custom as my Bengali friend had that. But many it reaches beyond Bengal or maybe not all Bengalis do it. I know that wedding rituals have been considerably shortened over the years. But the village folk seem to still do the whole shabang.
May 14th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
I think it's almost always going to be at best a half-truth to make a claim that something as common as Sindoor exists “because of X” or “means X”. Almost nothing so common and simple as this kind of a custom has one cause for its perpetuation – different people participate for their own mix of reasons, and if enough people find enough reason to follow it, it is kept alive.
In this case, the causes clearly vary greatly. Just like engagement rings are clearly warn in part because women think they look nice, in part because they show off that you've found someone who can afford a ring (and thus you've got someone at your back and shouldn't be messed with), and yet at the same time have some element of labeling a woman as “taken”… Sindoor clearly is worn for at least all these same reasons. But, I'm not sure it's fair to link it with husband-worship or certainly polygamy – my MIL's family wears it, and their heritage is traditionally matrilinar, and was not that long ago known for being one of the few examples of practicing polyandry in the world.
May 15th, 2009 at 2:02 am
I find it really charming that you'd go that extra mile because he likes you in Sindhoor – especially since you don't care one way or the other! The only time I'd wear a tiny speck at the hairline (I don't really part my hair) was a few weeks after we were just married. No mangalsutra, just that speck. Partly because of that “just married” feeling, & “the nut I dated has turned into a husband” amusement; partly because we were in different places for 6 months right after we got married – so I quite wanted to wear it. But mainly because it was so unlike me, I just got a kick out of it
I was reading the comments – that's quite a discussion! (And pretty much the reason I decided to delurk
) I won't comment on whether I subscribe to Shefaly's hypothesis, since I had neither heard of it before, nor could I find anything supporting it in the brief search that I did. What I must grant, however – other than the imagination & line of thought – is that she does indeed call it a hypothesis rather than claiming it as an absolute fact – and is clearly open to alternative explanations. The reason I'm more inclined to go with Aditya's explanation that it was simply turmeric + a natural acid is that I'm a strong proponent of Occam's Razor. But seriously, conspiracy theory? Isn't that giving it too much credit? 
g
PS: Loved that picture – and the others on your blog – you guys make a great couple!
PPS: Was I supposed to refer to Shefaly/Aditya as @shefaly & @aditya?
May 15th, 2009 at 6:39 am
It always saddens me to see broadsweeping statements about history that indicate that ALL men hated women and were simply out to treat them as horribly as possible. While I do not doubt that women's rights have been violated for all time, I think these comments have gone overboard. Good grief, folks! All the Bitter Bettys took a sweet post from a woman who appreciates her husbands culture and then twisted it into dark tales laden with mercury and lead. Get a grip.
That said, when I was in college, I dated a Pakistani for over 4 years and as such, wore the clothes with jewelry quite frequently. However, it was college and I had the freedom to do so. We were also attending all sorts of social events and parties where the dress fit in.
Now, I am married to a Catholic from Kerala, which does not leave much opportunity for exotic attire. I do love my bangles, though. I had to have one repaired and it felt odd to not wear them since I never, ever take them off.
May 15th, 2009 at 6:53 am
How do you sleep with bangles on? I know plenty of people – including my MIL – do, but I always end up killing the feeling in my hand, or waking up with a dent on my head.
May 15th, 2009 at 7:43 am
While on the subject of goris donning desi attire. Anybody here get their eyebrows threaded?
May 15th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Hi gorigirl, I'm a sindoor fan. I also consider myself a feminist. I just fell in love with it after I saw a pretty lady walk out of an Indian restaurant in a white lehnga and red sindoor. I went home and put it on and thought 'wow, I look good'! Too bad my husband doesn't care for it since it got on his white shirt. Is there a variety that doesn't stain? And I never wear it to work, only temples and Indian functions. Anyways, I think you should put up a picture of you with sindoor. This photo is beautiful but doesn't show the sindoor well.
If you are wondering why a random stranger is commenting on your blog, blame Ultrabrown, LOL!
September 30th, 2009 at 7:12 am
Yes, You van get sindoor in liquid form. Best quality is Lakme, you get cheapre versions too but not safe I suppose
Lakme Jewel sindoor in liquid form is easy to apply and dries up pretty quickly in few seconds
May 15th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Rasudha, the last time I was in India the makeup brand Lakme had this makeup called “jewel sindoor” that was not powdery, but more like a slightly shimmery paste you could use as sindoor. There were different colors to match the different makeup color combinations. I would imagine that that kind wouldn't stain like the typical red powdery kind.
May 15th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Vidya – I agree with you that some of the rituals are very sexist. I incorporated a few Hindu rituals into our wedding ceremony, but definitely excluded the ones that I didn't care for like the kanyadaan (giving away the bride). I had both of my parents walk me down the aisle (we had a very nontraditional wedding for which we completely designed the ceremony ourselves). I didn't care too much about the mangal sutra – my mom was really in favor of it, but doesn't care if I wear it or not now.
In case you're interested, here's what we did:
http://houseofpeanut.blogspot.com/2005/05/if-sk...
May 16th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
It's the same here!
Until about 40 years or so ago, a woman was Miss or Mrs. depending on marital status. A man was always Mr., regardless. Most other Western languages are the same: Monsieur vs. Mademoiselle/Madame, Senor vs. Senorita/Senora, etc.
May 16th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
I MISS eyebrow threading, mine are gigantic now. But there's no place to get it done in this tiny little excuse for a city.
May 18th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
I didn't have a Bengali wedding, but Aditya informs me that, as far as he knows, there isn't any custom of touching the groom's feet.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:37 am
The whole concept of touching the husband's feet – the symbol of worship still exists in most parts of India.
It is also a part of the Wedding Ritual. (If I'm not wrong)
Having said that – enjoyed reading your blog… Will comment more as I go on reading
May 20th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Welcome to the blog, Pixie. My comment above was in regards to traditional Bengali weddings, not other sorts of rituals.
May 21st, 2009 at 2:37 am
Yea… I know
I just mentioned that it's still present, that's all!
Loved your place… was going thru the archives and found it a very interesting read…
May 21st, 2009 at 5:01 am
There is a custom of touching the groom's feet. And you by now definitely can interpret the meaning of such a gesture in Indian customs and traditions!
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:41 pm
Ignoring all the useless rants about the origin of sindur, I have to say sindur is really beautiful. My “obsession” for females wit Sindurs probably has to do with seeing my mother wearing it all the time.
She used to be a president of a feminist NGO and probably more feminist than a lot of the commentators here. She doesn't worship my dad but rather respects him. There is a difference. One of the reasons why she loved sindur so much was because she grew up in a Muslim majority country, where you couldn't wear sindur outside of your house for safety reasons. So, she had to wear it at home or put very lightly so no one could see.
My ex-gf, who was a Muslim, used to wear sindur while attending traditional formal, parties etc. To her it was more of a cosmetic thing rather than any values attached to it. When you try to over analyze something then it becomes weird and disguising. Just go with the flow and if you like wear it if not then don't.
Probably even wearing Sari could be considered husband worshipping symbol because thousands of years of ago women used to wear “sari” to worship their husbands. (sarcasm)
May 28th, 2009 at 3:05 am
I also like sindoor. Here in India, I wear it to family functions and pujas. I would like to wear it from day to day, but don't want to attract extra attention and curiosity from the Indians as to why the white girl is wearing sindoor! I do however often wear bindis and bangles.
My husband isn't really fussed as to whether or not I wear sindoor. He's quite happy for me to look western, and dress in jeans and t-shirt. However, when I go out I like to at least wear one item of marriage, apart from my wedding ring – whether it be mangal sutra, bangles, bindi, or sindoor. If I was home in Australia though, I probably would just stick to bangles occasionally!
May 28th, 2009 at 5:58 am
I think in the past these symbols – sindoor, loha, mangal sutra, touching your husband's feet -may have had oppressive meanings for some people – depending on how they were interpreted at the time. But as times change and we gain new experiences and new perspectives, the way we see these symbols come to change. They can have new meaning for us. In my family only one of those four was ever used and even then only during religious ceremonies.
For me, i've grown attached to perhaps the most oppressive symbol of them – touching your husband's feet. i didn't like it at all growing up but over time i think my subconscious began to associate it with the love and respect my grandpartents had for each other. When my grandmother touched my grandfather's feet and he just barely touched her head it was so beautiful! The affection in the both of them when they did it touched anyone who looked on – it only happened during religious ceremonies. When i'd sit at their feet while we talked they'd always touch my head too and i suppose that memory, the love there, made the practice mean something very different for me over time.
May 30th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Sharell, I've seen quite a few white and black women wearing sindoor in India and around the world (they all belonged to various Hindu cults). My opinion is that it looks best contrasted with black or dark brown hair. Scottish blue eyes, strawberry hair, red freckles and red sindoor is just not a good look. But I've seen more than my fair share of that!
Regarding touching husbands feet – if it is reciprocated, no problem. I had a an anglo Brit friend who had a Desi Brit beau and she told me once they were tickling each other and she kicked him off and he became very offended and said, “women should never touch men with their feet”.
I'd like to ask Manveri if she ever saw her grandfather massaging her grandmother's feet?
Foot massages are something that most western women expect from their lovers and its usually something their lovers love to do.
I know that massage is huge in Indian culture too, so just wondering if desi kids ever witness their fathers lovingly massaging their moms feet.
July 4th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
White Woman's Burden
There are a small number of blogs now, by women from the West in the process of getting married to, or already with, an Indian husband. Interestingly many of these blogs call out to themselves in “skin color” terms: “WHITE Indian housewife” or “GORI girl”. Perhaps I am overly sensitive, but there seems to be a mild air of prejudiced condecension in the subtext of these blog titles.
'Look at me, I am white but I am trying to make it with a “colored” man in very difficult circumstances. I am liberated and don't care about race (what about those color references as the defining characteristic of the blog titles?) but look at my husband's family and country — caste system, higher fees at parks for foreigners, they shit and spit in the street, mom-in-law looks at my “blonde” hair and “fair” skin in envy — so much of a white woman's burden (sigh!).'
Methinks there is an externalization of collective prejudice perhaps? When 9/11 happened, Sikhs got murdered in Phoenix, AZ, coz some European-Americans couldn't be bothered with the difference between them and Al-Qaeda! Sikhs and Muslims thrown into the same category because they have turbans and beards is the ultimate irony! And speakin' of Australia — well, lets examine the immigration policies from a few years ago or how “aborigines” have been treated…..the less said the better! Australia, South Africa, and the US are examples of institutionalized prejudice in European-dominant societies, in the same way as one might think of the caste system in India. There is unfortunately no racial monopoly when it comes to prejudice, although the evidence points to greater violence related to institutional prejudice in “white” societies.
Another important point about these (mis)conceptions is the equating of race with skin or eye color. Any decent anthropologist or evolutionary biologist will tell you that human beings are essentially all racial hybrids and are genetically indistinguishable from each other racially compared to other species, say, apes or mice. Indians and Europeans are actually all caucasians who even share a common original language called proto-Indo-European — read Max Mueller!! This is what really gets me: that these women/men think they actually have married into a different race because of differences in skin color. It never occurs to them in their ignorance that they should question the prejudices they grew up with in their own societies/families. The externalization of ignorance is the the very essence of prejudice.So skin color is just a political manifestation of “racial” self-identity in institutionally prejuduced societies: us vs. the aborigines, us vs. the “blacks”, us vs. the injuns, us vs. the japs we put in the internment camps, us vs. the wetbacks, us vs. the curry-smelling brown guys, us vs. the shudras, etc., etc. I have never actually seen a WHITE-skinned person, they are mottled pink or cream, or yellow, or brown, or whatever. White is the color of the printer paper next to your PC — its an invention of convenience to define separateness in very superficial terms.
So, I might ask, are Westerners like that only, but I may be accused of generalizing to an entire group or race or set of countries, and that wouldn't be right, now, would it?
July 4th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Interesting, Svaha, that you chose to both write about this on your blog and comment here. I think you're off the mark here, at least in regards to my beliefs & reasoning for this blog's name – and I don't particularly like how you assumed before asking questions, but I do appreciate that you were reasonable in your tone in this comment.
I've addressed why I named this blog what I did in this post here, which is linked to in my about page. I recommend reading the about page when you come across a new blog, particularly one that you dislike for whatever reason.
Now, to address your points:
1) I would love to see you point out where I discuss in any detail at all on this blog: (a)Indian caste systems, (b)higher fees at a national park, (c) bodily fluids on Indian streets, (d) my MIL looking at my non-existent blond hair, or how my fair skin is a burden. Because I don't, anywhere. Try again to find something objectionable here, or go bitch at another blog that does that.
2) I have no idea what prejudice against Sikhs or Muslims or what happens in Australia has to do with me, as I have no prejudice against Sikhs or Muslims, nor am I Australian. And for the record, if I desired to murder Muslims (and currently I believe I only have it in for my Bangladeshi co-worker who failed to get me the modeling results I needed last week, the bum), I wouldn't do something so silly as kill a Sikh. This sort of silliness is why Californians (like me) like to say “I'd rather be dead in California than alive in Arizona” (Actually, we don't say that, but it's from Arrested Development, and needed repeating.).
3) Race is a social construct, not a genetic one. So when I write that I am in an interracial relationship, I am writing about the social aspects of being married to someone who is perceived as a different race than I am – whether that is an accurate perception or not, it's one that my husband and I do run into fairly often. When I am not discussing this sort of social context of race, I prefer to use the term intercultural, since it's a better descriptor of the issues that arise in such a coupling. Oh, and I think your phrase “The externalization of ignorance is the the very essence of prejudice” sounds nice, but means very little when you think about it. Try again, maybe after reading my post on prejudice to better educate yourself.
4) I have no idea what you mean by your question, “Are Westerns like that only?” Like what only? Try coming up with a decent thesis sentence, rather than some ramblings that don't actually apply to the situation at hand, and we can discuss.
July 5th, 2009 at 6:23 am
I'd vote for PG spotting being a sport. Or may be this one is a look alike.
July 5th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Svaha is spamming quite a few sites with this comment, including Sepia Mutiny.
July 5th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
My bet is on Max Mueller's Dharam Patni as PG.
July 5th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
You might win that bet but Svaha is not PG, as alluded to by someone else.
Who likes to smoke bidis here and has a penchant for older women? Hit me up.
Current research shows nothing improves a relationship more than infidelity.
July 12th, 2009 at 8:44 am
I guess here's the admission that MMDP is “Pardesi Gori”?
July 18th, 2009 at 3:34 am
I don't judge whether it's a good or bad thing that women wish to be recognized as married really depends on more underlying features that I skimmed over above.. lets examine the immigration policies..
celtic engagement rings
September 16th, 2009 at 1:19 am
As per the Hindu medicine system (Ayurveda) as well as Hindu spiritual studies (yoga et al) there are 7 major energy centres in the body, starting from the base of the spine, called Chakras (Perhaps very well known in the west today, and most of you have most likely heard of them).
The sindoor (made of lime and turmeric etc. as some have very rightly pointed out) worn till the (almost) centre of the head (place of the Sahasrara or Crown Chakra, the seat of spiritual enlightenment and connection with cosmic energy) is supposed to stimulate intellectual, intuitional and emotional calm, free flow of thoughts and enegry and aid in being able to handle the strenuous responsibility of marriage. Men of course wear sandalwood paste and sacred ash from sacrifices ( http://www.scribd.com/doc/7602320/Integrated-Science-Yagna ) for similar benefits. Apart from the sindoor on the head, women (and men) also wear the bindi between the eye brows (the Ajna chakra) for similar benefits.
South Indian marriages involve the bride and groom placing jaggery mixed with cumin seeds on each other’s crowns from across a curtain, and then the curtain gets lowered so they look into each other’s eyes (for the very first time) to (I think symbolically) create a super conductivity (jaggery + cumin seeds mixture) based connection between their crown chakras, thus merging their energies and auras together , thus establishing a spiritual connection first, then looking into each other’s eyes (and in between their eye brows) establishing an intellectual, emotional and physical connection with each other.
Hope this helps.
September 28th, 2009 at 2:50 am
This post and the comments have been really educational for me. I am a white woman who wears hijab, and although it is not the same thing at all in many ways, I can see a few parallels in that some non-Indian people at work might find a white woman wearing sindoor as being weird, pretentious, and a wannabe…and I know a white woman in hijab can be viewed in the same way. So it is a lot of ignorance to deal with for someone who just wants to be herself and honor a practice that is important to her.
Modern Indian feminist anti-mangal sutra or anti-sindoor rhetoric is new to me as well. Very interesting.
September 28th, 2009 at 3:04 am
Geeze, somehow my comments was eaten, but I wanted to contribute. Let me try again…
First, I found the post and subsequent comment thread really interesting and educational. I hadn’t heard of feminist anti-mangal sutra or anti-sindoor discourse before. Sindoor is a common sight for me in Dubai (over 65% of the population is South Asian), but I won’t take it for granted now.
Secondly, I am a white woman who wear hijab…it is not the same thing as a white woman applying sindoor at all in many ways. But at the same time, a parallel that jumps out at me is that at work, non-Indians (and even some Indians) may view a white woman with sindoor as weird, pretentious, a wannabe, or what have you. People can definately see a white woman in hijab in the same light. It is a lot of ignorance to deal with for a woman who simply wants to honor a practice and be herself.
October 14th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Looks like there might have been a lag between your first comment being written & showing up. Sorry about that! Thanks for taking the time to retype everything, tho.
I think the parallel of sindoor with hijab is quite interesting, since both are connected to religion (and religions that seen as being tied to specific regions of the world and types of people), but are also tied to cultural practices.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:07 am
i am sp amazed how a simple traditional matter has been twisted i nto such an obnoxious hypothesis. subject of sprituality and traditions always end up in holier than thou attitudes among proponents of various religions which ultimately leave us with animosity against each other. ok i am a hindu and i am proud of it. but that doesn’t mean the religion hinduism or rather the social fabric spun around the vedic dharma is entirely flawless. so it is better that we all accept after all we human race have come past various degrees of civilisation and have evolved into modern society. but still there are pockets of yester years in every country that follow every religion. it is foolish to judge a religion on the basis of social behaviour or rules of a particular society. religion is about what is beyond this life time and that is more relevant than taking the social evils and religious truths in one bundle.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Very nice post. I tend to agree with GG and Aditya in their views on Sindoor. I think Shefaly is incorrect about a male Indian conspiracy to “bump off” women using Sindoor.
The red powder (Sindoor), also called Vermillion, is a naturally occurring red pigment, used since antiquity, originally derived from the powdered mineral cinnabar. Chemically, the pigment is mercuric sulfide.
Traditionally and historically, Indian men too sported vermillion every day – in the form of prominent tilaks on their foreheads. So, if the “male chauvinist Indian pigs” were trying to kill their womenfolk using Sindoor, why then were the same Indian men trying to commit suicide by daubing the same poisonous pigment on their own masculine foreheads? Go figure !
It is unlikely that historically Indians, both men and women, were aware or worried about mercuric poisoning and its effects… Or perhaps the traditional Sindoor pigment may have been benign when applied as a dry powder (as opposed to applying it as a wet-paint).
I know for a fact that my awesome grandmother and great-grandmother (who lived with us) lived very healthy lives and lived well into their nineties – their copious use of “poisonous” Sindoor notwithstanding.
In the past decade, Sindoor had begun to be manufactured in unscrupulous, hole-in-the-wall, shady factories with unsafe chemicals which lead to skin rashes and local skin discoloration (both in women and men) – forcing a public outcry and forcing Indian manufacturers to explore using safer, non-toxic ingredients to manufacture Sindoor.
A similar outcry over the “unsafe” glue used in bindis (which too lead to skin rashes) prompted the use of safer, non-toxic glue by local manufacturers.
Generally, the well-known/top brands of Sindoor and Bindis are considered safe to use, unless proven otherwise.
October 14th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
Thanks for the quick historic recap – I wasn’t aware of the glue issue in bindis.
September 30th, 2009 at 6:36 am
Hi All,
I agree with Bella and actually traditional sindoor is made with turmeric, lime, iodine, camphor
And I live in London, UK wear sindoor daily
Most of my Indian friends don’t wear it because of FASHION!! but they all wear it on Diwali or pooja day How funny? One friend confided that he feels ashamed? Why one has to be ashamed of their oown customs. Every little thing we do in hinduism has a meaning to it?
Touching feet is to do with respect and love to all your elders, traditionally groom was many years older to the bride.
And even from scrptures u can see Lord Rama and Lord krishna taking care of their wives.
There is lot of misunderstanding even in India about place of woman as per hinduism. If we go back and get the facts it is clear that woman was given highest place even over man. She was the one responsible for house hold, all the decisions in family were by women and they still do it.
You can see the respect woman have from navratris when little girls are treated form of goddessed. But with time and diffrent invasion in India along with some political male interference things changed and gave bad look to India.
I will be starting a blog soon on facts about hinduism.
October 14th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Drop me a line when you start your blog, Torquee. I’d be interested in reading it.
October 8th, 2009 at 9:47 am
There seems to be some confusion here regarding the traditional use of mercury sulfide sindoor. As a practitioner in the Nath Aghori tradition who has lived long time in India, I would like to add to the discussion that yes, mercury sulfide has been used traditionally as sindoor, and is considered the best quality in tantric rituals. Ayurvedic physicians use mercury sulfide as medicine, in proper dosage and proper admixture with other compounds to reduce its toxicity. Yes, Ayurvedic physicians are aware of mercury’s toxic qualities in high dosage. As well as using it on the forehead (usually mixed with an oil – these days we use peppermint oil for its cooling qualities), it is also used internally, mixed with honey and cream as well as various medicinal spices (such as cardamon) depending on the prescription. This helps to thin the blood and cool down overactivity of the brain. Mercury sulfide is not a cheap alternative. The real stuff is still quite expensive compared to the synthetics available, and traditionally the price of mercury was higher even than gold.
October 20th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
There is just so much to say!!
I am an American married to an Indian, living in America. I wear sindoor- but not the powder- the kumkum paste because it’s not as messy- occasionally. I used to wear it more frequently and yes, people thought I hurt myself. Others were a bit afraid to ask.
If one says that putting this makes a woman subservient or property of a man- I wonder why this is said about an Indian custom, but wearing wedding rings as many Westerners do, is not said to be the same thing. These are both symbols of marriage. In the West often because women shake hands when they meet others, and can shake hands of unmarried men (not that Indian women don’t but traditionally, did not) men will see the ring, and know she’s married. Like Catrina said it’s a symbol of marriage, but in a culture where a man is less likely to see the hand and can easily see the head- and hair part- this symbol makes a lot of sense.
Some also believe this part of the body is sensitive being on the scalp, and this protects it rather than harms. Others believe that based on the chakra system, it’s a spiritual thing. Regarding the chakra thing- if this is true, then the only bone to pick is that why only married women have the right to attune their chakras with sindoor.
Coming back to the mercury ‘problem’- when we classify sindoor as a cosmetic because it’s made by cosmetics industry there is another view point on this. When I lived in Chennai I was suprized to notice this- women gave importance to only a few adornments to the face cosmetically- bindi (sticker or drawn on), kajol (eyeliner), and sindoor if married and lip balm for the more ’sophisticated’ ones. That being said- this is ALOT less make up than society requires for a typical American woman and if a typical American woman puts on all these store bought cosmetics daily for their entire adult life this is not only more chemicals over a life time than sindoor, but also you could say this is also a subservient thing. I mean why do girls have to wear that much make up anyhow? We are beautiful without it!
It’s nice to take things out of context and make a monster out of them, but we have to see how does such things come up in our own culture- see different sides to the issue then make a decision.
It definitely can be ‘chalked’ up to a different standard of beauty.
@ Bala Great one!
@ Aditya good insight… the craziness of it makes me laugh!
@ Auntie- good point the girls were much younger… so the dying off theory again has been disproved!
Also you’re right- I also think the red and black combo is stunning. Nothing beats it. In fact this beauty is discussed in my favorite Tamil song Kannaku mai Azaghu (meaning the eyeliner on the eyes is beautiful) see it here http://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=255924&TPN=4 (it’s near the bottom) this song was sung at our wedding! 
@ Amanda.. Wow that is a great social history lesson.
@neo- I disagree with husband worship as such. But then shouldn’t husband and wife worship each other- with divine love and respect? Anyhow I am an American never grew up in the traditions, and when my Indian hubby put the sindoor on me in the wedding ceremony I cried as if he were putting the ring on me or ‘kissing the bride’. I akin it to those things in the Christian wedding. It’s symbolic like that. I also believed him putting that on me knew we were finally together, married and we would love each other forever. Alot gets tied up in symbols!!
@cagey.. Curious if you’ve been to Kerala. Christians in Kerala have some exotic dresses. Not sure about Catholics. Syrians traditionally have huge gold rings that get put in the top part of their ear- and how they tie mundu (two piece kerala sari) is unique. I am wondering about how Catholics in Kerala tie sari- I am wondering if they tie the mundu int he back in a fan shape? But Kerala is a bit more simple when coming to all these traditions, i think.
@gori girl … I wanted to read all the comments but just can’t! How do you do it! I am impressed. Thanks for posting this and making us think!
@Catrina… Wow…
October 20th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Heh – I love your point:
Also great point on the cosmetics in the West issue.
And yeah, the comments section went a little crazy on this one! Way touchier subject than I had initially thought. I think part of the “subservient” belief regarding sindoor comes from the fact that men do not have a similar outward marking in India, while wedding rings are (now) worn by both sexes in most of the West.
October 27th, 2009 at 12:06 am
Hello Gorigirl,
Just came inn your blog and found very interesting posts and comments.Now that you are a part of India I am sure you would like to know more and more about Indian traditions,Hinduism.So I invite you to my blog.
Also there is a post on Sindor,which I guess you would like to read.Giving you the direct link to that post.Would wait to meet you on my blog.
http://meghanaunleashed.blogspot.com/2009/06/sindoor.html
November 14th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Gori Girl I find sindoor goes well with bright coloured saris. You may find many women have taken to wearing sindoor only occasionally (or not at all) because,
1. They find it inconvenient.
2. It is difficult to tell if the sindoor they have bought is really non toxic.
3. It doesn’t go well with Western clothes.
4. Sometimes it’s rebellion.
There is this belief that application of sindoor (or wearing the tali, bichia or mangal sutra) makes the husband live longer. Whether the wife believes that or not, she must wear it everyday, and remove it along with all jewellery and bright coloured clothes, only when the husband dies.
Amongst the compulsory symbols of ’suhaag’ are also toe rings (bichia) that hurt if worn with shoes; or many women find bangles cumbersome while bathing or kneading the dough for making chapaties; mangal sutra is found inconvenient with small babies. But they are not allowed to take these off.
A male commenter on my blog frankly admitted that he won’t accept his wife taking off her mangal sutra. This compulsion makes many women hate these symbols and also makes them question the right their husbands have of not requiring to display their marital status.
Widows are also considered ‘abhagan’ or ‘upshakun’(one who brings bad luck). So are women who can’t conceive (‘baanjh’). Even today they are not permitted to take part in any auspicious ceremonies. Again there are no rules for men here.
There is also the custom of dressing a new widow in bridal finery, and then breaking their bangles and wiping off their sindoor. Their coloured and festive clothes are taken away and they are required to wear plain white saris. These days dull coloured clothes are permitted to widows. Non vegetarian food, celebrations and make up is forbidden to widows. Widowers have no such restrictions. This built resentment and made women question the tradition of indicating their marital status.
Today if you see a woman free to choose when to wear these symbols and when not to, then she is sort of considered a woman whose opinion and choices are valued by her family. Only a well loved and respected woman would be ‘allowed’ to get away with giving up symbols of ’suhaag’.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Shefaly, I am writing to follow up on your arguement about sindoor as a slow poison and GG’s response. It is very painful to see you make an argument (or as you say ‘present a hypothesis’) without supporting evidence. I think what makes it even more dangerous is that a young vulnerable man or woman who hears you make this point or reads your comment may be influenced by it, and start believing, like you do, in the ‘Indian conspiracy to slowly poison the women’.
In the Indian culture, the sindoor, like the bindi, was made from ingredients derived from natural sources such as the rose flower. Of course, today it has been substituted by synthetic man-made compounds. Just as today most people drink milk from plastic cans instead of milking it themselves from cows (and don’t even get me started on the drawbacks of plastic for you and I as individuals and for the world as a whole), most Indian women use sindoor or bindi made from synthetic material. Poor women in India, like poor people elsewhere, of course usually buy sindoor or bindi made from cheap material, and the rich usually have the luxury to buy more expensive stuff made from better quality material.
I find it sad that traditional symbols of love and affection are today seen by many like Shefaly through a simplistic and ignorant lens. In their quixotic protest against some imagined masculine oppression, they wave their sword-like pens against windmills! In their view, marriage is a bondage for women (who by nature or nurture become primary care-givers of the family) and all men are oppressors who spend their day and night imagining ways to enslave and subjugate women. Of course, in this view, there is also no place for a women who doesn’t join the quixotic wind-mill fighting. Women who wear the sindoor, put on the magalsutra, like the wedding ring etc. are seen as willing collaborators in men’s oppression of women.
I hope that those like Shefali begin to appreciate good things about our cultural traditions (whether Indian or Chinese or western) and start realizing that not all things that happen are done to oppress women. Putting the sindoor, like wearing a wedding ring, is a constant and visible reminder of marital commitment, which we seem to need more today than we needed in the last!
December 28th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Chanakya, thank you for your insightful and well-worded comment. I hope that Shefaly or others can learn from it.
January 8th, 2010 at 11:48 am
Excellent comment, Chanakya.
January 14th, 2010 at 11:08 am
I managed to convince my (Chinese) gf to wear bindi (the stick-on variety) and salwar and accompany me to the temple tomorrow for Sankranti celebrations. You know, just so we do it like the desi couples do back in the desh, who hang out in temples and such…
Here’s what I told my gf: nothing Oedipus about it, it’s that strange kick of experiencing two cultures simultaneously.