Purity Culture is a Vehicle for Sexual Violence

By: Priya Buddhavarapu

I was in New Delhi this August when a 31-year-old female trainee doctor in Kolkata, West Bengal, was found half-naked, brutally raped and murdered, on the fourth floor of the government-run RG KAR Medical College and Hospital.

Reading the news that day, pure disgust ran through me. As a woman, I was immersed in an acute fear that lashed at my core every time I roamed the streets of New Delhi in the days after. As an Indian-American, I felt overwhelming loathe towards the culture that I had always known as vibrant and joyous. Perhaps the most chilling aspect of my reaction, however, was my complete lack of surprise as I read the harrowing details of the victim’s experience. 

The majority of Indian women would be able to tell you firsthand about the catcalling, staring, and vulgar body language that they are accustomed to when walking down a local street. I couldn’t even escape this unwanted attention in broad daylight with my dad, a fully grown man. The majority of Indian women would be able to tell you of the rules imposed onto them by their families–don’t walk alone, don’t stay out past dusk, don’t make eye contact with strangers, don’t go out without a specific destination. 

Their daily experiences, I believe, are indicative of a much more threatening, parasitic force preying upon Indian society. From the 1992 Ajmer rape case, where over a hundred schoolgirls were sexually molested, to a more recent case in Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, where a 23-year-old woman was gang-raped by six men, it is clear that institutionalized injustice against women has plagued India for decades. 

What could be the root of the systemic sexual violence Indian women face? Why does the world seem to hate Indian women?

 I believe the source of the problem is this: India’s sickening commitment to purity culture. 

The term purity culture refers to an ideal, often in a religious and traditionalist context, where a person’s value is contingent upon their chastity and sexual abstinence. In societies where purity culture is prominent, the burden of keeping a community chaste typically falls to women. This also means that in cases of abuse or harassment, women are the ones who are left accountable for the actions of men–whether it be because of what they wore, what they did, or where they were. 

On the other hand, men are held relatively unaccountable, sheltered by the pillars of the patriarchal society in which they were brought up in. They are inadvertently excused from any consequences; hence the burdens of their actions defaults to the shoulders of women. In a world where women are stigmatized, and women shoulder accountability, what might possibly stop a man from catcalling, molesting, raping a woman? Certainly not the fear of facing the consequences of their actions. 

For this reason, I believe that purity culture is a vehicle of sexual violence. 

Historically, an Indian woman’s value as a functioning member of society is contingent upon her perceived adherence to the values of purity and modesty. Her decision-making power over her own bodies, in both a sexual and reproductive context, is traditionally granted to the man who has power over her–her father, and then her husband. Virginity is sacred; sexual activity outside the hallowed bond of marriage is sacrilegious. 

Purity culture, I believe, is also responsible for rape culture. In a world where Indian women increasingly dare to step outside the bubble they have been confined to, the coinciding spike in assault cases is proof of the following: sexual violence is a provoked response to women gaining ownership over their own lives. It is deep-seated, wrathful retribution to the fact that women have refused to exist solely within the roles their fathers and husbands have assigned them to. Sexual violence is an unmeasured, unequivocal response to a deviation from purity culture. 

African Governments Perpetuate Intimate Partner Violence

By: Priya Buddhavarapu

The global average of reported intimate partner violence (IPV) cases is 30%. In Sub-Saharan Africa it’s, 36% and in East Africa it’s 44%. 

IPV refers to abuse or aggression in a relationship, including physical violence, sexual violence, stalking, and psychological aggression. Women in rural areas, as well as marginalized groups, such as sexual minorities, are more likely to face IPV. 

There are three primary stigma components that prevent IPV help-seeking measures. “Cultural stigma” refers to societal norms that put into question the experiences of women facing abuse. “Stigma internalization” refers to the practice of women believing the negative stereotypes about themselves . “Anticipated stigma” accounts for the judgement women believe they will face (i.e. status loss and discrimination). 

However, still underlying these variants of stigma is the perpetuation of “victim blame and deservingness” attitudes. Many victims often hold themselves accountable for IPV if they feel they have violated gender role expectations; have provoked their partners; or feel that they are less deserving of empathy or humane treatment, particularly apparent in racial minority women. 

Even still, other victims lack awareness that what they are experiencing is non-consensual and wrong; it is within the scope of their marriage, they believe, to be treated in such a way. These narratives are only revolutionized by societal stereotypes that IPV is the result of provocation of the partner by the victim. 

Taken together, each of these factors justify the following: when a woman is facing IPV, it is incredibly difficult to seek help. I propose two reasons for why this conclusion is particularly relevant across the African continent. 

First, on average, African nations tend to rank lower on the democracy index than other European, North American, and Asian regions. In 2024, the Democracy Index (calculated by the criteria of the Economist Group) of Sub-Saharan Africa was 4.00,North Africa  was 3.12, while Western Europe was 8.28.  

There also tends to be a relationship between the quality of human rights and a country’s adherence to democratic principles, providing some insight on why women nations with lower Democracy Index scores might face more consequences in pursuing IPV help-seeking measures, particularly when the dominant culture is highly sensitive and conservative. 

Second, rural African women may face even less awareness on issues such as consent and sexual safety; compounded with the conservative tendencies of these rural communities to uphold societal customs and traditions, this may exacerbate IPV and other forms of domestic violence across isolated communities. Furthermore, the lack of infrastructure in rural regions of Sub-Saharan Africa also inhibits a woman’s access to proper reporting networks. 

Thus, due to a lower awareness, societal stigma, and the lack of reporting mechanisms, IPV is particularly grave for the 55%-85% of African women residing in rural areas.

If IPV is a prominent issue across the continent, what, then, stands in the way of government-led preventative measures? 

One argument worth considering regards privacy rights. How is the government supposed to interfere in the affairs of a consensual marriage without infringing on individual privacy rights? This question is particularly relevant for African nations such as South Africa, Nigeria, and Ghana, with comprehensive privacy protection legislation. 

However, in the case of other nations with few established freedoms and low Democracy Index scores, this question seems ironic– why would privacy rights even be of concern? 

The answer might lie not in privacy rights, but potentially in the continuous systemic marginalization of African women. Whether it be through inheritance rights or education policies, women remain at the bottom of the African social ladder, maintaining little access to education, land, credit, and education. If these governments fail to protect these rights, there is little hope that they will address IPV in the near future. 

Thus, in order to effectively combat IPV, legal reform towards the rights of African women must first occur. Until then, our efforts must go towards spreading awareness and changing our own deep-seated negative perceptions of IPV. 

The Wage Economy Contributes To Food Insecurity Among the Inuit

By: Priya Buddhavarapu

We live in a world where one jar of nutella costs $48 for some Inuit communities. 

The Inuit people, traditionally spread across the northern regions of North America, Greenland, and Russia, are a vast and diverse indigenous group that have, for centuries, thrived in the relentless Arctic environment. By engaging in cultural practices such as seasonal subsistence hunting, gathering, and preservation methods, as well as values such as sharing, respect for elders, and extended familial units, the Inuit people are able to call the Arctic tundra their home. The term Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) refers to the various types of Inuit traditional knowledge that encompass these values. 

In the recent past, many of these communities have been undergoing a transition from the traditional subsistence economy to a wage economy, perpetuated by the increasing costs of hunting and fishing, the effects of climate change in Arctic regions, changing interests, and loss of IQ. The average Inuit wage worker, however, faces an extreme disparity compared to the average urban citizen. From factors such as job shortages to a lack of affordable housing and healthcare, there exist several barriers to the economic wellbeing of several Inuit communities. 

One consequence of this economic transition stands out, an acute food security crisis. Food insecurity refers to when a household or community has limited or uncertain access to safe and healthy food. Due to environmental changes and the manpower of communities being diverted to the wage economy, many Inuit people are no longer able to rely on IQ and traditional practices to self-sustain. In one Inuit region, 70% of adults were found to be living in a food-insecure household.  In Nunavut, a large region in northern Canada populated by twenty-five Inuit communities, food insecurity is at crisis level. 

A solution to this, some offer, is to treat Inuit individuals like other citizens, expecting them to rely on the transport and purchase of market foods, or food shipped from southern areas. This is, in fact, what is currently being done in several communities across Canada and Alaska.

This, however, is unfeasible. 

Due to the longer distance and lack of adequate transportation across these northern regions, produce spoils quickly. If products do make it to their destination, costs are unattainably expensive. Additionally, the food that is readily available in these areas is usually highly processed and calorically dense, leading to high obesity rates among Inuit populations. This is juxtaposed with the starvation arising from inconsistent access. Furthermore, Inuit adolescents and children are at heightened risk for mental health issues such as depression and anxiety, compounding the adverse health effects of food insecurity.

Moreover, the shift to the wage economy has also driven a shift in traditional Inuit values. Most notably, this has been the destruction of the Inuit family structure and culture of sharing. Research has consistently shown that subsistence hunting is crucial to Inuit identities and economic wellbeing. Fully employed Inuit are significantly more likely to adapt to solely sharing within a nuclear family structure, whereas partially employed or sport-hunting guides are more likely to share subsistence food with extended family and distant kin. 

Values of sharing,cooperation, and the traditional Inuit familial structure are being disrupted by this economic shift. What was once collective now is becoming individualistic. 

The issues that the shift from a subsistence to a wage economy has caused  have severely contributed to the enormous food insecurity crisis present in these regions. Compounded with the effects of climate change, communities are seeing effects from health degradation to community collapse. 

In combating this issue, governments must listen to the voices of representative Inuit bodies, relying on IQ and their longstanding knowledge of their lands to address and ensure consistent access to safe and nutritious foods. While a solution to this complex issue will not come easy, it is imperative to rely on deeply relevant guidance that has survived centuries of obstacles. 

The U.S.-Mexico Border isn't Just a Political Issue, it's a Humanitarian Crisis

By: Priya Buddhavarapu

The US-Mexico migrant crisis isn’t just a political issue, but also a major humanitarian crisis. 

As Americans, we tend to boil down the complexity of the border crisis to three major dimensions: border security, illegal immigration, and drugs. However, there is a fourth dimension, a humanitarian dimension, that goes relatively unnoticed by the mass media and governments alike. Migrants are a highly vulnerable demographic, often exposed to extreme cases of danger, exploitation, and abuse. 

There are two aspects of the trans-American odyssey that especially contribute to the significant humanitarian risk that come with illegal immigration. The first is the dangers of the chosen form of passage, and the second is the exploitation of migrants by drug traffickers and powerful cartels.

Each mode of transportation along the migrants’ journey to the United States is accompanied by its unique risks and tribulations, whether it be by foot, boat, bus, or train. For example, a migrant traveling by foot from South America must survive the Darién Gap, a roadless crossing that is “more than sixty miles of dense rain forest, steep mountains, and vast swamps” situated on the border of Panama and Colombia. The Darién Gap is the only overland path connecting Central and South America, making it a key transit point that authorities have led crackdowns on. Through this route, migrants must often pay for a guide, called a “coyote,” to lead them through the jungle, where they are often faced with extreme hunger and thirst, intense anxiety, hopelessness, relentless rainfall, muddy terrain, and drastic temperatures. At the same time, they must evade–and often fall victim to– smugglers, drug cartels, and bands of criminals who often extort and assault migrants. In the first six months of 2023 alone, there were 60 reported deaths, leaving cause to believe that the actual figure was much larger. Not only do these migrants face the physical dangers of their environment, they are also victims of rape, robbery, and human trafficking. 

Assume the migrant has successfully crossed the Darién Gap, one of the most dangerous natural traps of their journey up north, as well as several other Central American countries. Now, they face the last, yet arguably the most treacherous leg: traversing Mexico. They opt for the infamous cargo train lines that run from the Guatemalan border to the north of the country. Colloquially called La Bestia – “The Beast.” —  migrants ride atop these rapidly moving freight trains, seeing that there are no passenger rail cars. Any space is valuable real estate; if they fall or are pushed off, they are subject to injury, amputation, or death. Furthermore, many of these freight lines are controlled by gangs and organized crime groups. Defenseless migrants are often subject to extortion, violence, rape, kidnapping, and robbery. According to one estimate, “eighty percent of passengers are subjected to violence while hundreds have died.” 

The humanitarian perils of their journey does not stop here. Throughout every step, organized crime groups exploit the fragile states of migrants, using blackmail, extortion, and violence to trap them in dangerous, self-serving situations. Many, especially women and children, fall victim to human trafficking and sexual violence, leading to grave circumstances such as unwanted pregnancies, HIVs, sexually transmitted diseases, and mental health issues. And, of course, no matter where migrants are, there is the omnipresent risk of being turned in or discovered by immigration officials threatening deportation or worse. 

The statuses of these migrants must not be diminished to a figure on an immigration report. In fact, this issue should not solely be looked at as a border issue, but as a real, imminent humanitarian crisis that governments across North America are insufficiently acting to prevent. In addressing a solution regarding the border, these governments must not only focus on security, but also on the lives and safety of migrants, who risk everything to seek a better life.