watch the babies bounce

Holy shit.

Big whoop. Clapton did that years ago. Sorta.

How the FUCK are there 1 goddam billion people in a country that paints its floors with a cow dung and water solution and drops its babies from a five story fucking tower? I think we need to seriously re-evaluate the wisdom of allowing this nation nuclear capability.

Ah, yes. See you in Hell. Save me a seat.

Is this a new thing, or a thousands-of-years-old tradition that looks creepy on video, the better to distract effectively from the five-year anniversary of Bush declaring victory in Iraq?

Given the brute force repetition of the clip in the short period of time I was exposed to CNN today, I can only suspect the latter. This is anti-news.

Who are Americans to get indignant about how other cultures treat their kids, anyway? Did we suddenly kick creationism, Taco Bell and Mickey Ds out of all our schools? Glass houses, stones, etc.

Thanks for nothing buddy. Maybe we should rent a bus for the trip down?

Dude.... they are throwing babies off of a fucking building. I'm sure Bush had a cinematicaly evil phone call, asking someone in India to wag the dog with baby tossing. Oh, and I've never seen a McDonalds that the kids had to fucking go base-jumping to get into.

Don't worry. In hell everyone knows your name. Like Cheers.

I don't. That was hilarious.

Take that, babies!

I'll phone ahead to Sears to install our central air conditioning in hell.

What would make that filmclip even more fun would be a "BOIINNNGGG!!!" sound effect. Or "The Harlem Globetrotters" theme.

Is it any worse than circumcision?

There's at least arguably a health benefit from circumcision. What, pray tell, do they hope to accomplish by tosing their kids from a rooftop? And Lisa: Harlem Globtrotters theme? BAW-HAW-HAW!

well my foreskin accounts for roughly 50 percent of my pleasure down there. So, think about what you're missing.

I didn't need to know that for a couple different reasons. . . .

Besides, does telling a blind guy to think about what he's missing when he was blind since birth have any effect on him? Same here.

Dude, it's fricking Indonesia. A country made up of thousands of tiny islands with people that don't hardly even speak the same language and often don't have electricity or running water. There are probably hundreds of thousands of random little local superstitions/rituals that go on all over the country.

My girlfriend studies primates and where she is doing her research on Java they have a sacred waterfall that tons of people make pilgrimages to and wash themselves and children in.

Plus it's only a like a two story drop and there are obviously tons of people there catching the baby. It's not like you wouldn't have thought this was awesome as a kid.

The Eric Clapton joke cracked me up though. I think we still get wifi in hell though so we should be able to keep on posting on the message board (are we going to start seeing tons of 'Hell Chewer Meet-Up' threads?).

Eric Calpton reference kills me.

Laugh all you want, because there is no hell.

Could make a difference if you have a son and have to decide whether or not to hook a brother up.

I posted this vid in youtube thread, sorry if I missed this thread on the subject.

"Chewers We'd Like To Get High In Hell With."

Cuz what the fuck else are you going to do down there for fun?

Actually, the caption says it's in Solapur, which is in Maharastra, India, not Indonesia. According to Wikipedia, Maharastra is India's most industrialized and urbanized area and also includes Mumbai.

Needless to say, they've not only got running water and electricity, but a number of colleges.

Yeah, the outrage is stupid. We Westerners probably do just as many dumb things in celebration; we're just more acclimated to them.

And reggie-wanker's totally right. You do way more damage feeding your kid fast food on a regular basis than dropping him off a building into a seemingly well-supported blanket one time.

You would still think the first broken neck would have prompted at least a couple head-scratches.

The town reports that no babies have ever been killed or even injured.

My bad, I read to fast and yeah, the running water thing really wasn't really the crux of my argument but rather said to to highlight how these places have traditions that up until recently weren't easily accessible to the general public and weren't really subject to outside pressure/scrutiny.

Yeah, I guess my main point is that it's pretty harmless and that we've got traditions (like full immersion baptism, i.e. baby waterboarding) that would seem just as strange to someone who didn't grow up with them.

That's still kind of a tricky argument to make in regard to India. Most of my familiarity with English control of India comes courtesy of E.M. Forster, but I suspect that many Indians would disagree that the country hasn't been subject to outside pressure/scrutiny.

Absolutely.

What's particularly interesting is that this doesn't appear to be a religious ceremony, but a regional custom. The town is primarily Hindu and Muslim, and locals of all beliefs participate. This is probably more akin to Mardi Gras or St. Patrick's Day (religious origins for each, sure, but we've pretty much liberated them from their roots) than a baptism or sacred pilgrimage.

Some quick math says that those babies are probably reaching speeds above 30mph... and they are are completely stopping (and reversing direction) in less than half a second.

How does that compare to the force necessary for shaken baby syndrome? If nothing else, it seems similar to crashing your car at about 35mph into a wall while your baby rides along with you.

The spine is not very well protected in infants, and even if there are not neck breaks occurring, it seems like there could be spinal stretching and damage occurring... but, alas, I am no expert. You can also have damage to the retinas and the brain itself depending on the speed.

Even though I don't know if any real harm comes of this... it doesn't seem worth the risk. We have laws about baby car seats because it is very easy to cause damage to a baby in an impact... and dropping babies from a roof makes it hard to ensure that they don't end up in a dangerous body position during that rapid deceleration.

P.S. - I think stupid things are stupid things regardless of nationality, culture, religion, or musical taste... so I can be "outraged," right? I find it so odd that people feel affronted that anyone could possibly be worried about the health of these children... and your rebuttal? Westerners do things that are just as bad or worse. That isn't an argument. Something is good or bad on its own merits, not based on the actions of the opinion-holder. If a rapist thinks that murder is bad... that doesn't make murder ok all of a sudden, does it? Just like if a person who feeds McDonald's to their 3 year old thinks dropping children off a two story building is bad... that doesn't in any way factor into the legitimacy of their concern about baby dropping. Feel free to be upset at the hypocrit, I'll support you there, but don't act like the existence of the hypocrisy is some sort of proof against the hypocrit's argument.

You got it kungfumonkey.

I've been to India several times (including Mumbai in all the trips) and while there is running water, just don't drink it if you value your health.

There's a lot of fascinating things about Indian culture, but this surely is a crazy tradition, no doubt about it.

They are dropping infants two stories down. It's fucking stupid. There is no argument, just PC cultural-sensitivity bullshit.

I don't eat McDonalds, and won't feed it to my kids... can I say that dropping babies two stories is fucking dumb now?

This thread is full of kneejerk reactions from people who didn't bother to do any research on this besides watching a single video clip. All of the obnoxiously self-righteous "what about the children?!?" outrage in the world doesn't excuse being uninformed. I happened to look things up (novel, I know), and there have been no injuries reported in 500 years. Now some in this thread would probably say that this is some sort of cover-up designed solely for the purpose of protecting some irrational, primitive act. The problem with that theory is these people aren't nearly as "primitive" as some here seem to think they are (again - looking things up helps). If the risks were as great as you've said they are, presumably outrage would have caught up with this tradition looooong before 2008, and it would have been outlawed or at least noted by the Indian government.

Is it worth the risk? No idea. I wouldn't do it, personally. But from an entirely pragmatic view, this tradition doesn't appear to be causing any harm, regardless of what your "quick math" tells you.

And, yeah, I do think there's some merit in comparing our bad ideas to their bad ideas. Context is the only thing that allows us to even come up with how bad a given idea is. You say that "stupid things are stupid things regardless of nationality, culture, religion, or musical taste..." This is an absolutely nonsensical remark to make, because your idea of stupidity is entirely informed by your environment. Your environment is exactly what encourages you to believe that you are of some enlightened class bringing your heightened scientific awareness to these heathens, who can't possibly understand physics, health, and the potential dangers of dropping a baby from a building (which are, of course, not even scientific, but fucking common-sense - could it be that they account for these dangers in a way that's not made clear in the video?). It's arrogant, colonialist-style bullshit.

And, yeah, given the apparently small amount of actual (rather than potential) harm inherent in this activity, I do think it makes more sense to focus your white-hot outrage on things that have been proven to have ill effects on people. We've got a thread celebrating fast food in this forum. Go start some shit there. Go picket a tobacco field. Whatever.

You can say it's dumb all you want. A lot of things are dumb. But is it harmful? Not necessarily.

I don't see this as a PC cultural sensitivity bullshit. I just save my concern for things that actually harm people rather than things that seem like they might, but supposedly haven't in 500 years. I invite all of the parties concerned about the cultural activities of others here to feel free to start a thread on female circumcision at any point instead of harping on this fairly isolated "weird news of the world" thing.

Party pooper.

I can't speak for other people, but I looked things up as well. I pulled up some scientific journal articles on infant neck injuries for example.

As to the "no injuries reported in 500 years," you do realize that these types of injuries are usually not easily detectable? Sometimes it can be hard for a pediatrician to notice the injuries. It isn't like there are noticeable, external wounds. Brain injuries from something like this could result in minor to moderate impairments that wouldn't be noticeable unless you could see into the future and compare 15 year old dropped baby to its non-dropped self.

I assume this is boring you, though, as you probably knew all of this from your aforementioned research endeavors.

I suppose I also have an irrational fear of the baby missing the sheet for numerous accidental reasons.

I'd be ok if consenting adults were doing it... but a non-consenting infant? I'm not so sure about that.

For me, at least, this has nothing to do with how "primitive" these people are perceived to be. My response would be the same if this was a group of Hollywood movie stars, some midwestern farmers, the Pope, the CEO of Morgan Stanley, or just some random American families in some random neighborhood.

Actually, while doing some research just now I found out that apparently most of India didn't realize this was happening. It was a not very well known traditional in a small area of the country. Outrage and calls for the government to ban this practice are now arising in India as various groups are now being made aware of this.

I don't know what to say to that. I already admitted that I didn't know actual the risk. I just posted what I could figure out based on some simple physics in the hopes that maybe someone who knew more than me could chime in. I doubt either one of us is qualified enough to be the arbiter of safety here... but I've read numerous quotes from pediatricians that border from horror at the risks, to being uncertain by ultimately concerned. I haven't read anything from a single medical professional thinking that this is a good thing.

Yes, yes, we learn from the context of our environment, I understand that. There can also be no real understanding of truth, because evidence is proof of nothing, etc. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, we proceed in the only way we can. Inductive reasoning based on collected evidence. All our reasoning is thus probabilistic in nature, but the more evidence we collect, the (hopefully) closer we get to the truth in theory. We never make it there, but it is pretty much all we can do. We always need to be aware that we don't have a clear view of the entire puzzle, we are just seeing murky views from a few random angles.

Realizing all of that, my best guess (based on my experiences) is still that this is likely too risky, and unfair to the unconsenting infants.

Do you have a counter argument besides falling back on relativism and implying (as best as I can understand where you are going with this) that we can't prove anything so we should have no negative feelings about this because we could possibly be wrong?

See my points above about the possibility of not noticing the harm. We, as a culture, have subjected our children to numerous "harms" over the years. There have been periods of time when breastfeeding was looked down upon by various parts of our culture. Well, those infants (on average) likely lost some IQ points. Would anyone notice that their child was affected? No. Was it their fault? No, they had no idea. Once people find out, though, then we can talk about possible moral and ethical obligations.

I can agree that these people may not realize the possible unnoticeable harm being done to their children. I would also argue that most people from any country wouldn't fully understand it. I'm all for increasing awareness, though, and hopefully increasing quality of life.

You are above this, Dave. This isn't an argument. People can be upset by more than thing. People can even type on a message board about more than one thing... or even act for or against multiple things in "real life."

That fact that there are bigger problems out there doesn't automatically negate anyone's concerns for this issue.

Also, I don't come onto CHUD thinking, "What are the three most pressing issues in the world today, I must make my thoughts known!"

I actually read the main page. Then go to the forums and click on new posts. Click on a few that look interesting. Post if the spirit moves me. This one caught my eye for some reason... perhaps because I have a baby now and I tend to click on anything that says baby.

Posting here doesn't mean that I don't care about other issues. In fact, my "outrage" for this is so limited that I will likely do nothing more than post here in regards to it. I'll save most of my energy for problems in my hometown that I have more power over and that I can actually directly address.

If a female circumcision thread starts up, and I notice it, perhaps I'll toss in my thoughts. That is neither here nor there, though, as it doesn't pertain to this topic except as a deflection.

As for the fast food thread, it never really caught my eye. I didn't realize that I had to post my thoughts on every thread to make my thoughts on this thread worth something.

Also, I like to argue.

P.S. - No hard feelings, Dave, really. We've debated on numerous points before, and it has always been friendly. I'm not going to edit the snark out of this post, though, but I get the feeling that you have strong feelings about people's cultural prejudices (and rightfully, so), and you may be overreacting a little... at least to some people on this thread... I'm sure some of us deserve it, though.

That's fair, and you make some good points. I was probably overreacting a bit, but I still think the general reaction on this thread was initially "these stupid, stupid African... umm.... Asian... oh, whatever-the-fuck-they-are troglogytes in their mud-huts are hurting babies!"

The condescension and self-righteousness was shining through a lot more than the concern.

Plus, I resent being called PC or relativist for pointing that out. I'm more than happy to support cross-cultural interference when it comes to certain things, but I think it needs to be well-justified. Maybe it is in this case, maybe not - but the lack of reported (or noticeable) injuries should give us some pause.

In your defense, I can often be a little naive in terms of noticing other people's initial prejudicial reactions to other cultures unless it is pretty obvious. I have an even harder time when I at least somewhat agree with their basic position (even if for different reasons).

So, you may be completely right about some of the people on this thread.

I checked a few talkback style postings on other sites carrying this story, and 90% of those responses were overtly prejudicial and sickening (even if they had some valid concerns to go along with it).

In other words, after reading all of that... I'm now feeling overly sensitive about it, and I can understand your reactions here better.

The only question I have about this is, IF no one is getting hurt (and there are no news reports about that happening) what does it matter if it looks a little strange to us. It's just a local cultural tradition. In fact, I think it's more interesting because it makes you re-examine your own life and culture and consider what about your life would be considered strange by a person of an outside culture.

Of course, I'm friends with a bunch of cultural anthropology graduate students so I'm used to this kind of thing.

Can't we all agree that throwing babies off a building is funny?

IF some strange (to us) cultural practice exists (this one included) and no one is getting hurt by it (or shows a high likelihood of getting hurt), then I agree. No harm, no foul. In fact, I am even ok with potentially and actually harmful traditions if it involves adults who actually consent and are not being coerced in some way. Bungee jumping, perhaps? I'm sure lots of people think we are fools for doing that.