<p>antarius, i wasn't suggesting that everything in the u.s. is perfect. and i didn't even say anything about what parts of india bride-burning happened in. i was simply remarking, after watching a pretty horrific documentary about it, that i was glad i was in no danger of it, and that it was a terrible thing which does, on whatever scale, exist in india.</p>
<p>and i'm afraid the british don't have much to do with it either. they actually banned suttee (i'm assuming that's what you meant by "suti"?) during their occupation. </p>
<p>honestly, i don't see what the big deal is. and coreur is right: we have had no official witch hunts since salem. of course, that doesn't count the red scares and the mccarthy lists, and maybe the kkk. and these were things of a very different kind (though, yes, very barbaric) because they were carried out by groups or the government. i don't see how bride-burning is very comparable. in fact, sometimes it seems even worse than many of the atrocities in america because many of the women actually live, disfigured, outcast, and in pain for the rest of their lives. the amount of time that india has been independent, or any kind of segregation, is no excuse for husbands burning their own wives for more money, just as social factors in early america were no excuse for the salem witch hunts, or poverty in germany was no excuse for the holocaust.</p>