______________________________________________

8.1 Mother Madhusudani Radha dd and gay advocacy?

Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 11:15:47 -0700

Sdd>SOS! Can someone provide one reason why the HOT sex-ed program >(which advocates safe sex- including anal sex- and condom usage!) should >be considered for our gurukulas?!

MR: OK, I'm only going to repeat this once here:

No one said anyone should use any particular curriculum in gurukulas.
Following requests on this conference, I offered to make available a curriculum that:

1) had been developed for public school
2) is based on federal and state guidelines for sex and AIDS education, and
3) which is one of the very few programs in the world that has been
rigorously evaluated and found to *decrease* sexual activity among junior
high school virgins in a controlled comparison test. (please note that it
increased abstinence in spite of/or because of its peer-led, comprehensive
nature)

If anyone can find *any* useful component in this 15 session program, they
are welcome to use it. It has been successfully adapted in places as diverse as Bhutan, New Zealand, Egypt, Bali, the Philippines, Eastern Europe, Kenya, Georgia, and the Bronx. I have no doubt that pieces of it could be useful to AIDS/sex educators in other settings too.

This program is certainly not being pushed for gurukulas in any form or
fashion.
[...]
MR: This was designed for a public school. You can't make moral judgments
there. However, the peer educators emphasized at every point in the
curriculum that abstinence was preferable to sexual activity from a public
health point of view. Also, they emphasized quite successfully that it's
unwise to have sex just because you think your partner may want it (or he
may dump you etc). The peers never advocated sex and the section on condom use targeted those 20-25% of the students who were already sexually active.

You can absolutely add your own values to the informational piece and
remove any references to condom use. However, programs that don't treat
the kids as if they can make their own decisions end up with higher
percentages of sexual activity than did ours.

If you have specific questions about this curriculum, I'd be glad to answer
them. However, I simply don't have the time to argue the pros and cons of
sex education for devotee kids. Everyone must make up his/her mind. I just provided this info *in case* anyone is interested. If not, I really don't mind.
--------------

Here are some excerpts from course outline (the details can be downloaded
from the site but were too gross and lengthy to post here):

> Healthy Oakland Teens Project
> 1995-1996 Curriculum
>
> Peer-Led AIDS Prevention Curriculum
> Teen-led Sessions
>
> 7. Condoms
>
> Review of Session 6
>
>Here's a quick review of what we did last week. In Session 6, we worked on
>improving communication.We talked about using "I" messages to state how >you feel about something and what you would like to change. We also >worked on >different ways of saying "no" to someone who is putting >pressure on you.
>
> Objectives
>
> 1.Get comfortable talking about condoms.
>
> [Activity A: Issues - 10 min.]
>
> 2.Learn the steps for using condoms correctly.
>
> [Activity B: Condom Line-Up - 10 min.]
>
> 3.Explain and demonstrate the steps for using condoms.
> 4.Find out where you can go for counseling, health care, and condoms.
>
> [Activity C: Condom Demo & Resources - 20 min.]
>
> Materials:
> Activity A: Issues
> "Discussing Condoms" sheets
> Activity B: Condom Line-up
> "Condom Line-up" cards
> Activity C: Condom Demo
> Condom Display Board
> Condoms
> Plastic models
> Small tubes of Vaseline
> Tissues
> Small garbage bags
> "Resources" sheets
>
> A. Issues
> Objectives
>
> 1.Get comfortable talking about condoms.

etc.....
(Text COM:1747294) -----------------------------------------

Text COM:1768809 (136 lines)
From: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)
Date: 14-Oct-98 19:41
To: Umapati Swami [5399] (received: 15-Oct-98 09:49)
To: Vipramukhya Swami (TP Bhaktivedanta Manor - UK) [31290]
Bcc: GHQ [333]
Subject: Homo sex marriages & Chakra (?)
------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: 14-Oct-98 03:54
Subject: WHO: MR and Homo sex marriages
------------------------------------------------------------
>Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 17:11 -0700
>From: <Devarsi.Muni.VMS@com.bbt.se>
>Reply-To: Devarsi.Muni.VMS@com.bbt.se, Granddisciples@com.bbt.se
>To: "COM: Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada)" <Granddisciples@com.bbt.se>
>[Text 1766134 from COM]
>
>Dear Granddisciples,
>
>Please accept my humble obeisances,
>All Glories to Srila Prabhupada!
>
>In regards to Mother Madhusudani Radha dd's comment about sexual orientation I would like to make the following comments, after which I will not bring up the subject again.
>
>I sense that no one hear believes that Mother Madhusudani's comments are >worth commenting upon.
>
>I can hardly believe that this is the case.
>
>Mother Madhusudani has written on CHAKRA that she thinks that ISKCON >should someday open itself up to homosexual marriages. Then she says here >that she thinks that there should be no discrimination against someone
>based on their sexual orientation.
>
>It is not "sexual orientation," it is homosexuality!
>
>Is this acceptable? Do you really all agree with this?
>
>You may think that this does not concern the granddisciples confernce, but >when one of the co-organizers of this conference has made such statements,
>it becomes our business.
>
>Many of you here do not want a debate of women's rights issues to over
>take this conference.
>
>I fully agree.
>
>But I am not discussing women's rights here, unless someone thinks that "sexual orientation" is an aspect of women's rights.
>
>I am talking about the subtle acceptance of homosexuality in this spiritual movement. Stop for a moment and think about that.
>
>Mother Madhusudani is a respected devotee. She writes on Chakra,
>organizes conferences on COM and is a role model for many devotees. When >she says something, many people listen.
>
>I will stick my neck out here and say that I do not think that she has any
>sastric support for her comments and should be much more careful about
>what she says.
>
>She is a senior devotee to me, and I offer her all respects, but how can she
>go around making such remarks?
>
>Yes, I am subject to the fault of fault finding. Perhaps I debate too much
>with the ritviks, and have caught this mood from them. Perhaps I am just
>guilty of my own accord, and can blame no one but myself.
>
>I apologize for this great fault of mine, and take this opportunity to offer
>my very humble obeisances to all of the assembled devotees here, and
>everywhere. You are the shining lights of mercy in an otherwise dark world.
>
>That being honestly said, I must still speak out against what I see as a
>problem. A problem that needs to be reformed.
>
>Once again, I sincerely apologize for my fault finding, and I hope that you
>all are willing to forgive me while I try to raise my consciousness.
>
>But I do not apologize for saying that this support for the homosexual
>lifestyle, whether subtle or overt, is a nonsense idea, and that Mother
>Madhusudani should not be promoting such a concept.
>
>your servant
>Devarsi Muni dasa


Dear Maharajas,

Namonamaha. Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

If Bhishma Pitamaha & Dronacharya were guilty by association with
Duryodhana, I beg to inquire as the possible result of your "association" (via the Chakra management team) with a Mataji who is propagating the above mentioned "siddhanta"?

No, none of us are perfect: I am a most fallen, bhogi, householder. Admitted. Despite all my disqualifications...

As your disciple, (old buddy, old pal) Vipramukya Maharaj, wrote above:

>Mother Madhusudani is a respected devotee. She writes on Chakra,
>organizes conferences on COM and is a role model for many devotees. When >she says something, many people listen.

As one sannyasi recently wrote me:

>Weird. Our society gets weirder by the day.

I hope chakra doesn't become "wierd" too.

Sorry for disturbing you Maharajas, but this IS disturbing news.

dasabhas,
Basu Ghosh Das
(Text COM:1768809) -----------------------------------------

Letter COM:1771008 (180 lines)
From: Madhusudani Radha (dd) JPS (Mill Valley - USA)
Date: 15-Oct-98 14:43
To: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) [6674] (received: 15-Oct-98
Cc: Devarsi Muni (das) VMS (Crescent City, CA - USA) [765] (received:
Cc: btb@georgian.net
Bcc: GHQ [339] (sender: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN))
Subject: Homo sex marriages & Chakra (?)
------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Bhasu Ghosh Prabhu,

If you ever want to know what I do and do not advocate for, please ask me
instead of perpetuating rumors. Your behavior is most disappointing.

Dear Devarsi Muni and Sita,

Just to clarify, you are not allowed to leak texts from the grandisciples'
conferences with other non-members. This is one such reason. People who
see only isolated texts easily misunderstand. I had already explained in a
follow up text on the conference that I don not advocate for homosexual
marriages and that I don't believe in any illicit sex. I had also clarified that no article advocating for such practices was ever published on Chakra, but since Bhasu Ghosh is not a member, how was he supposed to know?

In the case you were not involved in the leak, please just take this letter
as a re-statement of the conference rules and as a reminder to check directly before perpetuating rumors.

This is like the operator game we all played in 3rd grade - I would have
hoped all of us would have moved on since then - unfortunately that does
not seem to be the case.

Ys,
Madhusudani

Text COM:1787396 (74 lines)
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 20-Oct-98 20:33
To: GHQ
Subject: FYI reform ideas
------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded Message ----------

not sure if I sent you this. (btw, I never attacked her character)

Ys, Sdd

>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 98 17:23 +0200
>From: <Madhusudani.Radha.JPS@com.bbt.se>
>Reply-To: Madhusudani.Radha.JPS@com.bbt.se, Granddisciples@com.bbt.se
>To: "COM: Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada)" <Granddisciples@com.bbt.se>
>Subject: Re: reform ideas
>Lines: 35
>[Text 1768057 from COM]
>
>Bhadra Balaram wrote:
>>First of all if she thinks like this then it's a plain nonsense. Period.
>
>No first of all, if someone on this conference says "what another person
>thinks" I think we need to stop the discussion and ask that person what
>s/he *really* thinks - or if they care to clarify.
>
>We can not take 2nd or 3rd hand descriptions of other people's thoughts >and beliefs as absolute truths.
>
>Secondly, as I have stated many, many times before, my persaonal beliefs
>are my personal beliefs. They are no one's business. What we are >discussing here is advocacy and I've already clarified that I am not >advocating for homosexual marriages. Anyone who says I am is lying plain >and simple.

>>Although I don't think you said something wrong (since you quoted >>CHAKRA)>
>
>Again, as Ananta Prabhu so correctly pointed out, we can not take >someone's words that a reference is correct. So please don't perpetuate this >notion that I wrote an article for Chakra in which I called for ISKCON to
>institutionalize gay marriages. I did not. You should all know that it would
>not have been published on Chakra if I had. As Jahnu correctly pointed out, >scriptures would not allow us to do so and thus it would be against Chakra's >editorial policy.
>
>I know this subject matter is closed, but I had to clarify the above
>misunderstandings. Sita and Devarsi Muni's texts attacked me character and >could not stand unopposed.
>
>I will not write anything further on this topic on this conference unless
>again attacked.
>
>Ys,
>Madhusudani

>Date: Thu, 10 Dec 98 23:45 -0800
>From: <Madhusudani.Radha.JPS@com.bbt.se>
>To:<Mataji.Council@com.bbt.se>, <Social.and.Economic.Development@com.bbt.se>, <Varnasrama.development@com.bbt.se>
>Subject: an early x-mas present for Sita
>
>At 6:55 -0800 12/10/98, Sita prabhu wrote:
>
>>I'm sorry, Madhusudani, but my husband didn't say anything about >>initiated homosexuals having illicit sex. Maybe you can clarify whether or >>not you said or didn't say you felt homosexuals should be allowed to live as
>>married couples within ISKCON and whether or not you still hold this view?
>
>I'm starting to feel flattered that you care sooooo much about my opinion
>on this matter, dear Sita. So after over a year of ignoring your question,
>I've decided to finally break my long silence and let you know how I feel
>about this topic (hope the suspense isn't killing you).
>
>The first part of my answer is that I really don't care how other devotees
>conduct their private lives as long as they are not abusing another living
>being. I have a hard enough time worrying about my own spiritual life to
>even spend a second on what two consenting adults do in private.
>
>If two devotees (of any gender) care about each other and want to live
>together to support each other emotionally and spiritually (please note
>there is not one single word about sex here), I have no problem with that.
>If they want to refer to themselves as partners, roommates, husbands, >wives or whatever, that is their business. Why should I let it bother me?
>
>It's very difficult to remain strong in spiritual life by yourself. If someone is >fortunate enough to find another human being, whom they care about and who wants to help them in that endeavor, I don't feel like I have the right to protest simply because of what *might* be going on in the privacy of their home. It's none of my business and if I start meditating on all the possible illicit activities in which other people may be engaging, it's only going to hurt my own spiritual life. So I don't.
>
>That's it. Now you know. This is how I felt 5 years ago and how I feel
>today.
>
>Ys,
>Madhusudani dasi
>ps. I don't know what you mean by "in ISKCON". If you're referring to
>within temples then the above obviously does not apply. Temples have very
>strict rules for its members, which need to be followed.

Letter COM:1674089 (223 lines)
From: Internet: btb@georgian.net
Date: 09-Sep-98 20:15
To: Shyamasundara (das) ACBSP [4326]
Subject: something of interest
------------------------------------------------------------
Some recent texts from IWC by Madhusudani and Advaita concerning the Boston
temple and president, also a note from and to M. XYZ to and from the
Boston TP....

MRdd writes:

Dear IWC members,

I had the fortune of spending Radhastami at the beautiful ISKCON temple in
Boston, MA. The Deities were all wearing gorgeous new flower outfits and
the feast was great. However, one thing detracted from the experience; Boston
is one of the few US temples in which the women still stand in the back.
Following the feast I spoke with Sadhusangananda, the Boston TP about this.
I also spoke about it with Advaita Prabhu who has had similar experiences
when bringing Harvard students to the temple. Advaita Prabhu felt strongly
enough to send Sadhusangananda Prabhu a letter about this issue, which I am
posting below. This is a very important time in ISKCON. Reform proposals are
being widely circulated. Let's take advantage of this golden opportunity and
make this a true reform that also includes profound changes in the way women are treated in our society.

Thoughts?

Advaita Prabhu Dasa writes:
Subject:
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 12:59:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Edwin Bryant <ebryant@fas.harvard.edu
To: Maria Ekstrand <ekstrand@slip.net
CC: sadhusangananda.hks@com.bbt.se


Dear Sadhuji,

All glories to Guru and Gauranger. I understand that Madhusudani,
who is receiving a copy of this message, spoke to you about allowing women
to share the front of the temple room instead of at the back. I thought
perhaps this would be an appropriate time for me to share some feedback
with you from my students from Harvard whom I have brought (and will be
bringing) to the temple. I think such feedback is essential because Srila
Prabhupada was most keen to target the student community and spread KC
amongst the educated class of people. He was especially proud of, and
committed to, attracting scholars and students and I think it is very
questionable whether the devotees have fulfilled that desire on any
significant scale.

First let me note that the students loved the deities, the kirtan
and the prasadam. If you want their feedback on the classes then I will
share that with you separately. But the one comment that everybody seemed
to make was the sexist culture of the temple and this is what I wanted to
share with you on this occasion. This feature was not at all appealing to
the students. I should hastily add that this did not just negatively
impact the female students, but the male ones as well. Students nowadays
are thoroughly schooled in the principals of male/female equality and any
kind of a sexist culture where women are relegated to positions of
inferiority or secondary status is completely unacceptable to both men and
women. In my opinion, KC will never make a serious impact in the lives of
the intelligent class as long as such attitudes remain in operation.

Devotees sometimes try to substantiate such a culture by selective
quotes from Prabhupada. In so doing they often by pass other quotes from
Prabhupada wherein he empowered his women disciples to do everything they
were inspired to do and accepted them as good as the men on all accounts.
They also ignore the fact that men and women used to share half the temple
room in a left/right (as opposed to back/front) fashion in the early days
before the sannyasi culture became prominent and relegated them to the
back. They also used to give classes and lead kirtans until some of the
the 'renounced' sannyasis objected. We know what has happened to most of
those sannyasis.

It is my belief that Prabhhupada himself would have modified his
statements on women (as he modified other statements that he made
according to time and place) if he was made aware of the devastating
effect ISKCON's sexist culture has had on the ability to spread KC. But
that is just my personal belief and perhaps not of interest to most
people. What should be of more interest to ISKCON devotees, is that the
North American GBC have perceived the negative effect of sexist practices
and resolved that men and women should split the temple room in a
vertical, as opposed to horizontal fashion. I urge you to accept this
resolution. I also urge you to strongly encourage the women devotees to
give class. Regularly. If they initially are hesitant to do so it is
because they have been disempowered for so long.

A final point is that on occasion temple presidents have asked the
women resident in the temples what they would prefer in this regard.
Sometimes these women, either out of extreme purity of devotion or extreme
social conditioning, opt to maintain the status quo. Such superficial
surveys do not take into account the numerous other women who perhaps have
already previously left the temple because they could not tolerate such an
atmosphere. It does not take into account the numerous women who were not
attracted to move in in the first place. And it does not take into
account the number of women who might never have moved in but might
nonetheless have been interested in KC in a more general way, but were
disturbed by such features. I can assure you that these must be legion
just from the feedback I get from my own students. It is impossible to
calculate the negative effect on the ability of KC to become a more
mainstream form of religious life.

I read your proposal on ISKCON reform which you sent to CHAKRA and
was impressed by the very valuable insights you articulated therein, so I
know you are very concerned about the future of the ISKCON mission. Since
you are in a position of power, it is to you that we must address
ourselves on issues that some of us consider to be of paramount importance
in the spreading of KC in the West. Let the women take up half the temple
room and strongly encourage them to give *regular* class (ie not the odd
token women every once in a while). If the temple room is too small to be
split in the middle, let the women go in the front. This is the system in
all the temples in India: the women are allowed to swarm into the front
before the deities. It is also in keeping with notions of chivalry in our
own western cultures.

I am inviting Madhusudani to post this message onto the
International Women's Conference, along with your response, so that this
is not just limited to the sharing of opinions between two individuals,
but can be discussed by a larger concerned audience. I would like to post
it to Niranjana Swami as well as Premananda if you would kindly give me
their e-mail addresses. Such discussions are of vital importance at this
vulnerable time in ISKCON.

Hare Krsna. YS APD

XYZ writes:

In this letter, Sadhusangananda prabhu is replying to my letter to him.

<<<<I beleive that our own lack of apreciation of the eternal sva dharma of
both women and men is an actual impediment to the spreading of Krsna
Conciousness to the women of the West, not the application of modern
so-called standards of equality between men and women.

I fully agree: A properly situated and normal, happy householder couple is
A very impressive and convicing representative of KC to many people. So is a
happy brahmacari or a renounced sannyasi.

<< On the absolute plane, we are all spirit souls but while in this body,
we should follow the intruction manual that came along with it.

Srila Prabhupada confirms this over and over in his books, conversations,
etc. but some men and ladies can simply not accept it. Interestingly, they
are the same ones who generally have no taste in harinam, the Bhagavatam,
japa, etc.

<<There are several discussions on this particular topic on another
conference, Dharma of Women, I would like to invite you to take part in
this conference. Let me know if you would like to be added as a member.
ys XYZ dd

Answer below:

Dear XYZ dd,

Please accept my humble obeisances.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Thank you very much for your letter. I have heard about the "Dharma of
Women" conference recently and was very happy to hear that such a
Conference exists. As far as I can see, there is a growing body of women who are tired of militant feminists telling them how they have to cause revolutions in
The temples. The Boston temple is one of the most dynamic and happy temples in
the world, and the militant attack (the letters on the conference you
mentioned were 'nothing' compared to the latest hate letter from the German
mataji council.

The ironic thing is that I am fighting for matajis getting proper respect,
being fully accepted as authorities in case they are department heads etc.
for as long as I can think of. Although I am a brahmacari, I have helped
many matajis over the years to find a suitable husband, get trained in KC
etc. Nevertheless, feminists love to attack me in any way they can - must
be my karma.

I humbly requested Advaita and Madhusudhani to stop their inappropriate and
non-sensical attack in public because I have to presently take care of a
legal aspects + spiritual counseling of a mataji who has terminal cancer.
On top of that I have my hands full with counseling disciples of Harikesa
prabhu + tons of other managerial and preaching duties. Despite my pleas,
they simply continued to mercilessly harrass me and the Boston temple.

The situation here in Boston is very simple: the temple room is so narrow
that a side by side solution doesn't work. No one ever complained about it.
No GBC, no senior mataji, not even the few matajis with feminist tendencies
that came through here in the past few years. Even though our ladies are
requested to stand side by side during Deity greetings (because there is no
dancing during that time, and therefore no problem) they tend to stand a
little further in the back. The men here don't really mind if there are
aggressive ladies who ostentatively try to come up front - they simply
tolerate without thinking much about it.

Re. matajis giving class: As soon as there are qualified matajis present,
We generally invite them immediately to give class. Our own matajis here are
not only mostly young devotees but not inclined at all to give class.

Re. my membership in the conference: Personally, I do not think that I
Could contribute very much philosophically in the Dharma conference - but I'd
like to be added as a receiver for the sake of learning. Since I am planning to
close down my COM account, I am not certain though whether I can receive
texts on my AOL account (Sadhu1008@aol.com). Although I am usually
overburdened with work, I would still try my best to read the texts posted
there simply because I am attracted by dharma.

Thank you for your kind letter.

I hope this meets you well.

Y.s.

(Text COM:1674089) -----------------------------------------