Young girls married to frogs for disease prevention

Discuss

36 Responses to “Young girls married to frogs for disease prevention”

  1. Shrdlu says:

    Well isn’t this a switch? Usually Frenchmen are known for spreading diseases rather than preventing disease–well at least social diseases, that is.

  2. nanuq says:

    The girls may go on to normal lives but the poor frogs have some ‘splaining to do to their sweeties in the pond…

  3. Xopher says:

    Fred 1: “As for the terrified frogs, they are thrown back into the temple ponds after the ceremony.”
    Maybe the little guys felt honored? I really enjoyed this. Well written article. Any footage of this?

    No, no! They were just commitment-phobic.

  4. airshowfan says:

    #2:Is there no formal education in the area?

    I know an area where formal education is pretty good, but where a majority of the population believes that there were talking snakes, that all animals currently on Earth (including us) are descendants of those put in a big boat during a planet-wide flood, and that 2000 years ago there was a god-man who could walk on water and bring himself back from the dead.

    (At least these beliefs seem to do more good than harm, overall, in most cases. And I’m not saying these beliefs are ridiculous, or even necessarily wrong; I’m just saying that good education will typically not undo them).

  5. Anonymous says:

    #10- I like your comment… LOL!

  6. Ugly Canuck says:

    Airshowfan: I would qualify your parenthetical, by the insertion of the word “presently” between the words “beliefs” and the word “seem”.

  7. AGF says:

    Cool. I hadn’t heard of Hinamatsuri. My parents have a small Japanese doll our exchange students brought. It’s really beautiful.
    I’m working on a show called Maggie Now. My friends adapted it from Betty Smith’s book.

  8. Darren Garrison says:

    Hello my baby, hello my honey, hello my ragtime gal.

  9. AGF says:

    @19 – ok weird that’d been running through my head all day. Where’s that from – related to frogs?

  10. Takuan says:

    you don’t know Michigan J. Frog?

    I hope I’m not typecasting you, but I immediately did think the twin frog/girl Indian wedding would make a marvelous, detailed diorama. Think of how many flower garlands alone!

  11. skrewgun says:

    Religion is AWESOME!

  12. Fred H says:

    “As for the terrified frogs, they are thrown back into the temple ponds after the ceremony.”
    Maybe the little guys felt honored? I really enjoyed this. Well written article. Any footage of this?

  13. felixjawesome says:

    Y’all are acting like this is weird. Way to be ethnocentric.

  14. Avarice says:

    Is there no formal education in the area?

  15. bluemadonna says:

    Well, as long as it’s harmless (which it appears to be, though I wonder what the girls thought about all this–might be embarrassing or might be an honor) I’m not going to complain.

  16. OM says:

    “…Although the marraiges did help stop the mysterious diseases, one known disease did show up not long after the nuptuals. Both girls now have cases of warts, as it turned out the frogs were actually toads.

    No word if the joinings will be annulled in light of this revelaion…”

  17. noen says:

    Good story, very ribbiting. Did seem to hop around a bit though.

  18. FoetusNail says:

    Ok, this may not be weird in that place, but it is weird to me. In fact, if this is taken seriously, then this is reason for involuntary institutionalization. Personally, I find beliefs in gods, goddesses, angels, devils, demons, fairies, crystal babies, talking snakes, voodoo dolls, ghosts, hobgoblins, elves, aliens, vampires, witches, mermaids, kraken, the loch ness monster, big foot, etc. to be weird, anytime, anywhere.

  19. rasz says:

    you forgot the bit about wedding crashers in drag terrorizing people for money, oh and they ate those little girls at the end

  20. nehpetsE says:

    were they these kind of frogs?
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13991-horror-frog-breaks-own-bones-to-produce-claws.html

    file under “universe not only stranger than we imagine but stranger than we can imagine etc…

  21. AGF says:

    I wonder if the girls are allowed to remarry later on. It seems pretty funny – but I wonder what the social implications for them are.
    From the link:
    “Villupuram district collector R Palaniswamy told TOI that he had deputed a team led by the district social welfare officer to visit the village and submit a detailed report. “The district administration proposes to evolve comprehensive schemes to motivate and enlighten the villagers against such evil and ignorant practises,” he said. But all these years the strange practice has been going on unchecked.”

    Why is this evil – because it’s superstitious? I want to know more . . .

  22. ill lich says:

    “Terrified frogs”– well DUH, it’s basically a shotgun wedding, how would YOU feel?

  23. Anonymous says:

    I told you this would happen if they legalised gay marriage.

  24. dculberson says:

    Ahh, Indian “journalism.” It almost makes American journalism look good.

  25. Mitch says:

    I can’t form an opinion of how harmless it is without knowing the fate of the girls afterward. If they are not allowed to marry human men later in life then it isn’t a harmless practice. I’m inclined to doubt that the people in a small village would want to make 2 girls ineligible for marriage every year, though.

  26. Anonymous says:

    If a person is “Manglik” it bodes ill for the future of the couple so a fake first wedding is done to transfer the bad luck to the faux partner and frees the real couple to wed without any cosmic obstacles. Even movie star Aishwariya Rai had to go through this purification. But in the case mentioned in this village, the reason is totally different.
    As a Hindu I can say that such marriages are performed and sometimes the other party could be something inanimate, even a tree or coconut. A more common partner is the idol of some God. The point is to rid the bad luck to the first partner as the horoscope predicts.
    Of course there are so many subSects and varying belief systems in the religion, so anything is possible.

  27. noen says:

    Seems harmless enough Mitch if you read the srticle it says: “the Villupuram village belles bid their amphibian grooms goodbye and lead a normal life thereafter.” Throughout most of human history girls are devalued. The practice of requiring a dowry guarantees it.

  28. mdh says:

    The diesease being… an underappreciation for Patriachy?

  29. The Rizz says:

    #10 – you beat me to the punch(line) on that one.

  30. mr.skeleton says:

    Clearly just viral marketing for Disney’s upcoming return to traditional animation, The Princess and the Frog.

  31. AGF says:

    Haha! I like the Takuan. Who doesn’t need more flower garlands? If only I wasn’t supposed to be sewing nun and priest outfits!
    Thanks for the froggie links – makes more sense now.

  32. Anonymous says:

    it will be ok if this palaniswamy does his normal duty at his office,instead of showing extraordinary interest in a non consequential event.this is not ignorance,it is more or less tradition.as long as it is not in a way negative to the future of the girls,which they have already afffirmed in the story,it should be left alone.Mr palaniswamy should use his office hours in a way to benefit the society.

    I wonder if the girls are allowed to remarry later on. It seems pretty funny – but I wonder what the social implications for them are.
    From the link:
    “Villupuram district collector R Palaniswamy told TOI that he had deputed a team led by the district social welfare officer to visit the village and submit a detailed report. “The district administration proposes to evolve comprehensive schemes to motivate and enlighten the villagers against such evil and ignorant practises,” he said. But all these years the strange practice has been going on unchecked.”

    Why is this evil – because it’s superstitious? I want to know more . . .

  33. Takuan says:

    oh? what you working on now?

Leave a Reply