Talk:Sexual abuse by yoga gurus

Why the modern yoga context

@Chiswick Chap: Fascinating, but saddening page. However, it struck me that the cumulative effect of this page is to compartmentalize the abuse as something modern and having to do with the psychological and power dynamics of commercialized yoga. Hence the use of Durkheim and Weber. But there is [not], nor can there be, any source that actually shows this. There are no reliable records of sexual abuse prior to the modern era. In fact, the very concept of sexual abuse may be only a modern idea. Further, the question of why sexual abuse occurs in any context is an open one. So, as a template, I propose Catholic sexual abuse which has the section==debate over causes==, which seems to me to be the proper NPOV to place both the philosophy of power dynamics, the implication of the modernization of yoga, and the Hindu defenses of these abuses. Sorry I don't have the time to do this now myself. But I'm happy to do it later. Cheers DolyaIskrina (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

DolyaIskrina - many thanks for looking over the page. I will see if I can action your comment to your satisfaction - I don't have any point of view in particular (other than I agree with your first sentence as a response to the evidence). As for cumulative effects, that really is just the evidence doing the talking. I've reorganised as I hope you intended. Do pop back in sometime and see if it's sorted. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

The website link to the 3HO/SSSC’s public access to the AOB report into the sexual allegations against Yogi Bhajan has been hacked twice and repaired once so far in 2 days. I included this PDF of the report while these hacks continue. Added this citation of the report in case users or other editors want to view the report themselves while the other link is being hacked.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h6W_UyinOeIThWJ3s0FS7o8egLKLWUYU/view?usp=drivesdk

Netal2001 (talk) 17:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Questionable source

Stripping the Gurus, by Mr. Falk, is a questionable source. The matter has arisen previously on Wikipedia, such as here and in this AfD. The book claims to be published by the "Million Monkeys Press". It turns out that the Million Monkeys Press has published just four books, all by Mr. Falk. – Epipelagic (talk) 06:54, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I've removed the Falk material. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Iyengar Yoga

The material on the Iyengar Yoga events involving the decertification of a yoga teacher does not concern a yoga guru (which would be Iyengar himself, or possibly Geeta). I've therefore moved it to the Iyengar Yoga article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:36, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Why the Specificity of the Article

I'm not sure why this article is so specific to Indian yogic culture. It makes more sense to consider abuse in general by those in positions of power: for example other cases that arose during the Me Too movement, or by cases involving priests. Perhaps this article could benefit from merging/ or include more links related to abuse by people in power? 2A02:3032:4:C4AA:1:2:5774:E673 (talk) 21:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

In general, I disagree with the IP, however I think the article could be broadened to include yoga instructors, as there have been numerous cases. @Chiswick Chap, what are your thoughts on renaming the article "Sexual abuse by yoga gurus and instructors? Netherzone (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Two reasons: firstly, the gurus are a clearly distinct group, an entity of their own, and certainly notable since books have been written about them, and their misbehaviour; and because the current title accurately matches the article's scope. Supposing that an article on Sexual Abuse by Princes of Wales existed, and you asked for it to be retitled and extended to Sexual Abuse by Crown Princes of the World, or Sexual Abuse by members of ruling dynasties (to encompass dictators as well as Monarchies), then we'd reply that however fine those topics might be, they were clearly distinct, and there was no reason to change the scope of the existing article. Well, so it is here. And, by the way, the presence of "and" in a proposed article title is a sign that two disparate entities are being joined.

One other thing: the IP imagines that yoga gurus are necessarily Indian, but modern yoga gurus come from more than one country. It happens that most of those cited here were from India, reflecting the rise of modern yoga, but the club is not exclusive. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Got it - what you say about the presence of "and" makes sense; and changing the scope could make it unwieldy. I did not mention India as I did not agree with the IP on that. Netherzone (talk) 15:28, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:52, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

About neutrality in this article

Phrases like «assisting a yoga pupil in his own style» in accusatory tone shouldn't be present in an enciclopedia. If no one opposes, I will change them. WikiDasher (talk) 09:51, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

For the record, and since you ask, I object. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)