Sex and depravity as tools of Colonial rule

jonniebgood1

There are many ways and methods that were used to control colonies by European powers. The organised control behind this can be surprising. It seems to me to be expected that some form of prostitution will be involved with occupying forces but I am talking here about widescale organised depravity. I read about it in Laurence James book 'Raj' regarding the fall of the British empire in India. I will return to that book perhaps in a later post. The first example I give of this is from India also where it seems to be used as a tool of 'putting them in their place', i.e. suppressing natives as unequal people. To me its a shocking example of this.

The British administration never viewed prostitution from a moral angle, or if they did, their concern was about preserving the dignity of the Christian and European women than the Indian. They viewed the Indian harlot as a medical or hygiene problem, and they were concerned only to the extent that the native women could be precluded from spreading venereal diseases to their soldiers and officers. Thus, the Imperial Government did not look into the supply-side forces which forced ill-circumstanced women into a profession from which the victim or practitioner had no escape, and which branded her progenies to come with a taint as demeaning, and social ostracism as severe as a leper. The British could only apply legislations borrowed from their home country which reflected the gender-bias and double-standards of the Victorian Age. Instead of applying the retributive action of the state on punishing those who pushed the hapless women to this trade, they made the life of the Indian prostitute more miserable by initiating the system of ‘Lock Hospitals’ and ‘Registered Prostitutes’, the intention of which was to fully meet the lascivious needs of the English Tommy without impairing his bodily vigour and, thus, maintain the British Army, an important pillar of British hegemony around the globe, as an active fighting force capable of warding off challenges to this ‘Jewel in the Crown’ both internally and externally. http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article2142.html

Earlier in the same article more detail is given on the workings of this system of keeping the whites 'in sex' at the expense of the natives. It was important that they eliminated the diseases that they blamed on the inferior natives.

The system devised for furnishing sensual indulgence to the British soldier, and for protecting him from diseases consequent on such indulgence was commonly called the Contagious Diseases Act, but was carried out under Cantonment Regulations, and was as follows in its main features: There were placed with each regiment (of about a thousand soldiers) from twelve to fifteen native women, who dwelt in appointed houses called chaklas. These women were allowed to consort with British soldiers only, and were registered by the Cantonment Magistrate, and tickets of licence were given them. Besides the chakla, that is, brothel, there was in each Cantonment a prison hospital, in which the patients were confined against their will. To these Lock Hospitals, the women were obliged to go periodically (generally once a week) for an indecent examination, to see whether every part of the body was free from any trace of diseases likely to spread from them to the soldiers, as the result of immoral relations. When a regiment came into a large Cantonment, there would be a government brothel to which all such women were sent for residence, and a guard in uniform looked after them. When the soldiers were camped out in the open field, tents were set up for the women at the back part of the encampment. When the soldiers marched, the women were carried in carts, with the British soldiers to guard them, or sent by train to the destination of the regiment. These women was placed under a superintendent or brothel-keeper, called the Mahaldarni, one of whose duty comprised of procuring more such women as and when desired. On June 17, 1886, a military order, known among the public as the “Infamous Circular Memorandum, 21A”, was sent to all the Cantonments of India by Quartermaster-General Chapman, in the name of the Commander-in-Chief of the Army in India (Lord Roberts). As a result, under it there was an officially sanctioned and blatant exploitation of Indian women sanctioned by none other than the regimental commanding-officers of the various British regiments.

Reference is made to a report made by American missionaries in this article also. I have come across this report and its full contents are online here
The report by these missionaries captures several elements that are equally deprived but interesting:

The officer in command of the 2nd Battalion Cheshire Regiment sent the followingapplication to the magistrate of Umballa Cantonment: “Requisition for extra attractive women for regimental bazaar, in accordance with Circular Memorandum 21a.” “These women’s fares,”
it continues, “by one-horse conveyances, from Umballa to Solon, will be paid by the Cheshire Regiment on arrival. Please send young and attractive women, as laid down in Quartermaster- General’s Circular, No 21a.” http://godswordtowomen.org/queensdaughters.pdf *pg.10

So young women were prefered by the British soldiers, I wonder how young? 14 upwards it seems. I have read that the age of consent was lower in this era but need to clarify this.

"The commanding officer gave orders to his quartermaster to
arrange with the regimental Kutwal [an under-official, native] to take two policemen (without
uniform), and go into the villages and take from the homes of these poor people their daughters
from fourteen years and upwards, about twelve or fifteen girls at a time. They were to select the
best-looking. Next morning, these were all put in front of the Colonel and Quartermaster. The
former made his selection of the number required. They were then presented with a pass or
license, and then made over to the old woman in charge of this house of vice under the
Government. The women already there, who were examined by the doctor, and found diseased,
had their passes taken away from them, and were then removed by the police out of the
Cantonment, and these fresh, innocent girls put in their places.” http://godswordtowomen.org/queensdaughters.pdf pg.11

So these girls were taken from their homes and used in this way until a doctor decided that they were no use any more. What did they do then, presumably they did not know where they had been contained?

Her caste is broken, because she has lived with foreigners, and her friends
will seldom receive her back; she has been compelled to follow the soldiers on the march; and
when dismissed may be hundreds of miles away from any human being who ever saw her face before. http://godswordtowomen.org/queensdaughters.pdf pg. 12

These associations obviously led to offspring who in turn were social outcasts. The women were controlled in terms of finance apparantley owed, presumably for the Lock hospitals 'care' they received.

From the Lock Hospital we drove to a large chakla, and talked with a group of about
twenty girls, among them a little girl of twelve, and another of four. Everywhere we went among
the degraded women of India, we found children in the chaklas, these Government-regulated
brothels, with their ever-present guards, so that Englishmen knew perfectly that children were
being trained under Government regulation for prostitution. The advocates of licensed
prostitution for India are fond of insisting as an excuse for licensing the evil, that it does no great
harm because the recruits come from “the prostitute caste.” Repeatedly we made enquiries of
Englishmen, native physicians, and in one case applied to the census office for some information
concerning this special class. Its existence was practically denied, excepting those cases which
can be found in every land, in which women of all classes may fall into shame and train their
daughters after their own evil ways. It is scarcely necessary in this connection to mention the
temple and nautch girls of India, who are found in civil lines. http://godswordtowomen.org/queensdaughters.pdf pg. 28

So this was the organised response of the Raj (its after 1857) to prevent diseases. Was this just an excuse?

How did they get here, it is far more horrific and widespread than the temple and nautch girl system referred above (at least it seemed voluntary). What caused the jump?

Was this level of organisation/ exploitation of women the same in other colonies? America? South Africa? etc and was it limited to the British or did other European rulers have the same level of organisation as this?

Was this all about sex for the soldiers or was there a deliberate psychological suppression of the native population involved?

secondopinion

Colonial soldiers in prostitution shocker...

Park Royal

Did we acquit ourselves well in Chad recently ?.....don't think so....!.



Correction not Chad but .... Eritrea

jonniebgood1

secondopinion wrote: »

Colonial soldiers in prostitution shocker...

Prostitution or child rape?

Is that defence of it by the way- I don't really get your point?

Park Royal wrote: »

Did we acquit ourselves well in Chad recently ?.....don't think so....!.

Feel free to expand on your point.

secondopinion

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Prostitution or child rape?

Is that defence of it by the way- I don't really get your point?



Feel free to expand on your point.

My point is, that wherever colonial or imperialistic, or any other sort of army goes for any extended time period, local women end up servicing the troops. That's the reality of it. Always has been and I suspect always will be. Men want sex and women can exploit this need to make money.

Perhaps you can expand on where 'child rape' was involved?

Park Royal

Feel free to expand on your point.[/QUOTE]

The report of a female Irish soldier on what she saw and experienced ,

shows some of our troops appear to follow other nations troops as

regards using local females for sex....

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books/review-in-the-shadow-of-men-by-valerie-obrien-2051185.html

I recall reading "somewhere " that prior to 1916, British soldiers loitered around Henry Street and the GPO oogling the Irish girls.....this apparently got up the noises of the Irish lads and did not assist in reducing the angist the Irish lads had for English rule.....

R.Dub.Fusilier

it was said that where ever the British went the first thing they built was a prison and a brothel and the first things the irish built was a hospital and a school , a bit of a sweeping statement i know.

but the cases of what we now call STDs in the early 1900s in Dublin was blamed in part on the british army but in the years after they left the numbers of people recorded with STDs rose higher and higher and only slowed down towards WW2.

i dont think soldiers having sex with brassers is particular to the brits, Benburb St. is just beside Collins barracks.

jonniebgood1

secondopinion wrote: »

My point is, that wherever colonial or imperialistic, or any other sort of army goes for any extended time period, local women end up servicing the troops. That's the reality of it. Always has been and I suspect always will be. Men want sex and women can exploit this need to make money.

Perhaps you can expand on where 'child rape' was involved?

That is my extrapulation from the report that I quoted and I think it is quite clear. The soldiers have recorded their wishes for taking girls who were younger, the report quotes "Please send young and attractive women, as laid down in Quartermaster- General’s Circular, No 21a.”.
With regard to child rape feel free to disagree but again I am taking from this report and some of the evidence contained within.

A hill girl of respectable family lost her parents and her husband (perhaps only
betrothed, yet possibly already married), before ten years of age. A deceitful woman
came to comfort her in her grief and unprotected condition, and enticed her to travel
with her a month to assuage her grief; sold her to a British official, with whom she
lived one year, when he died. She then became a chakla woman. She was only
sixteen. She said, “It is a bitter life.”
.....
Taken in famine time by the daughter of a sepoy (native soldier). The soldier sold her
at eleven years of age “to sit in the chakla.” “In all the years of my life, I have not
known one day of happiness; my heart is full of wounds,” was her pathetic ending of the story.
....
Deserted at the age of eleven by her husband; a British man took her by force to his
bungalow. When he discarded her, her family would not receive her again. She was
then “taken by the Government and put in the chakla.”
Pg 24 of report.

A chakla being explained earlier in the report as where these women were held in groups for the soldiers to use.

The accounts we have given in previous pages reveal the extremely tender age at which
some of these girls were thrust into a life of shame by court proceedings under the Contagious
Diseases Acts, when they were openly enforced. Two Benares girls declared they were taken up
by the police at fourteen, and one Sitapur girl said she was sold to a mahaldarni at eleven. Much
has been said of the horrors of child-marriage in India, and these atrocities should not be
minimized, even though we bear in mind the usually slender type of Eastern manhood; but what
shall we say when the robust British soldier has had placed at his mercy a little girl of fourteen
years old, of the delicate Oriental type; and this done by regular process of law “to preserve his
health”? Pg 30

This is all from the report which I quoted in OP. I understand that you say soldiers making use of prostitutes is normal and I don't dispute that. I don't think the quoted above information is normal. So for you to say "Colonial soldiers in prostitution shocker" either misses the content of the OP or tries to avoid it. If it needs clarification this thread is to look at the issue and not an attempt to criticise the British- I am unsure as to the extent other colonial powers used natives in this way.

What I asked in OP was how did the use of prostitution jump to what is contained in the report?
I also asked was the same level of depravity used in other colonies?

http://godswordtowomen.org/queensdaughters.pdf

secondopinion

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

That is my extrapulation from the report that I quoted and I think it is quite clear. The soldiers have recorded their wishes for taking girls who were younger, the report quotes "Please send young and attractive women, as laid down in Quartermaster- General’s Circular, No 21a.”.
With regard to child rape feel free to disagree but again I am taking from this report and some of the evidence contained within.


A chakla being explained earlier in the report as where these women were held in groups for the soldiers to use.

This is all from the report which I quoted in OP. I understand that you say soldiers making use of prostitutes is normal and I don't dispute that. I don't think the quoted above information is normal. So for you to say "Colonial soldiers in prostitution shocker" either misses the content of the OP or tries to avoid it. If it needs clarification this thread is to look at the issue and not an attempt to criticise the British- I am unsure as to the extent other colonial powers used natives in this way.

What I asked in OP was how did the use of prostitution jump to what is contained in the report?
I also asked was the same level of depravity used in other colonies?

http://godswordtowomen.org/queensdaughters.pdf

Most of what you quote seems to suggest that it is the natives who are most culpable by actually marrying children (or else selling them).

This is downright bizarre:

Much has been said of the horrors of child-marriage in India, and these atrocities should not be minimized, even though we bear in mind the usually slender type of Eastern manhood; but what shall we say when the robust British soldier has had placed at his mercy a little girl of fourteen
years old,

Far out. :rolleyes: