|WikiProject Anthropology||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject India||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Sociology||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Duomin in China
slavery and base people and commoners in Ming and Qing China
Duomin (To Min) Zhejiang
The Morohashi dictionary notes that, according to Shaoxingfuzhi [Gazetteer of Shaoxing], duomin is a term used in the Shaoxing area of Zhejiang for beggars. According to Huangchao tongzhi: shihuolue and Huangchao wenxian tongkao: ...
9 Finally the abolition of the categories of duomin andgaibu in Shaoxing county, Zhejiang 3fftC was approved.10 Nian Xi initiated this policy during a period when both he and his father. Nian Gengyao ^HH ( ? -1726), enjoyed Yongzheng's ...
Yu Wanjun (2001b) 'Lanxi de yi zhi duomin qiyuan kao'[An investigation of the origin of the Lanxi Fallen People], Zhejiang dang'an, vol. 8, pp. 41-42. Chapter 15 ETHICAL DILEMMAS! BALANCING DISTANCE WITH INVOLVEMENT Marina ...
people of Zhejiang (duomin), and the boat people of Guangdong (danhu). Members of these and related social groups suffered various forms of discrimination, from simple prejudice to unfavorable legal treatment. For much of the Qing period, ...
The more prominent among these included the duomin, which literally meant ' lazy people', in Zhejiang province, the mianhu of Jiangsu, and the jiuxing yumin, or 'nine name fishermen', who lived on boats scattered along the Yangzi.
Other examples of subethnic groups in early modern and contemporary China that can perhaps most accurately be described as castes include the Tomin ( duomin, meaning "fallen" or "lazy" people) of Zhejiang and southern Anhui province, ...
... sanda miswriting of "sanda" f^ili- sia ga/sii kia meaning unknown (used also in Fujian) ISS duomin for highly sinicized Yao ... Zhejiang She people Terms common to Fujian Province iOfffQ sia ming sia people hsiamin Fuzhou dialect sia neng ...
According to Liu Yong's research, throughout the country, Chinese people look down on the folk musicians (chuigushou) and call them "cuckolds" (wangba) or " indolent pcopte" (duomin) (Liu Yong 1999.69). ... Hangzhou: Zhejiang Jiaoyu. Xue ...
... considérés comme sordides, ou encore les populations circonscrites de certaines régions, telles que les duomin132 du Zhejiang. ... Nous connaissons mal la véritable origine du statut des duomin (littéralement: «population dégénérée»).
National Geographic source
The National Geographic source here needs to be treated with considerable care. For example, it says Hindus believe a person is born into one of four castes based on karma and "purity" — how he or she lived their past lives. which is then expanded upon and is complete nonsense. The statistics may be valid but the explanations are pretty dodgy because the writer appears to have misunderstood the basic concepts. - Sitush (talk) 11:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- Yes that article doesn't seem to be neutral, it is like some activist petition, it is written by a author who has written nothing except some content of a "children book". I will support the removal of that link. Sitush what you think about this book? We just have to mention that there is still some prejudice, nothing else. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:41, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
What does "untouchable" mean?
In Western cultures, the word means someone who is "above the law". While here it appears to mean the lowest of society, as you literally don't want to touch them. Is that correct?Kneel behind Zod (talk) 05:08, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
"blacks in America and South Africa, and Hutu and Twa of Rwanda"
I removed this part of the sentence from the intro, since these groups are not listed in the untouchable groups section. I'd have no problem with this being restored if there are reliable sociological sources that say that these are untouchable. Smurrayinchester 11:35, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
As a class in the United States, blacks are not "Untouchable", since the U.S. is not divided formally into castes the way the social strata is arranged in India. There has been (and some would argue continues to be) segregation sanctioned both by law and custom including anti-miscegenation laws directed at blacks in the United States, but blacks are not as a class, "Untouchable". Using the looser definition given in this article of Untouchability, ALL societies have an untouchable class since ALL societies participate(d) in some form of discrimination. Untouchability as a caste is unique to India and since this article is about Untouchability and NOT discrimination or segregation generally, needs to be confined to a discussion about its existence in India, and not any other country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:19, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Why are "Romani" mentioned as untouchables in the end of the page?
It is bad if social phenomena like untouchability are captured by all kinds of special interest groups. Romani in Europe may be informally discriminated against and may have various social disadvantages (e.g., worse-than-average schooling etc.), yet they are not "untouchable". Nobody confines a Rom to certain jobs, there is no formal discrimination, and -- unless a Rom reveals this fact through clothes or otherwise -- people are not interested in whether somebody is a Rom, and they are not asked this question. Calling Romani "untouchable" by Roma advocates, making Roma helpless victims of a discriminatory environment, distracts from the real problems, many of which are rooted in Roma culture and lifestyle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Very confusing article
This article is ostensibly about a general type of social group, which may in principle be found anywhere in the world. The paradigmatic example of this type are the Indian/Hindu "Dalits," who are/were excluded from the regular caste system, from most occupations, and from (most?) Hindu religious worship. Finding exact parallels to this situation outside the Hindu-dominated areas is difficult, and it is therefore necessary, at the outset of this article, to clarify exactly what the term "untouchable" does and does not mean. Instead, the article gives only a very vague and general definition, followed by a couple of names of groups which are otherwise not described. At the end of the article a list of other "untouchable" groups is given. The rest of the article, however, is devoted to Indian/Hindu conditions. In practice, therefore, the article is just another version of the (already existing) article on Dalits.
I am not a specialist on either untouchables or Hinduism, however, it would seem to me that there are two ways out of this undesirable situation:
(1) Merge this article with the existing "Dalit" article (which could also easily be improved), adding a section on how the "untouchable" category has been transferred from India to other places in the world, preferably including a passage on the conceptual problems attendant on such a transfer.
(2) Expand this article into a genuine treatment of the "untouchable" category. This would primarily entail a clear definition of the term. As it stands, the article confuses more than it enlightens. The Hutu are included. Black Americans are not. The Roma (in Europe only!) are included. The Jews are not. Why? This question is briefly addressed in a section here in Talk, which asserts that US Blacks are not "untouchable" because "the U.S. is not divided formally into castes the way the social strata is [sic!] arranged in India." But if that is the criterion, what about the Roma, or the Hutu, or Native Americans, or Somalis in Norway? Moreover, it is not very long since US Blacks were "divided formally" from the rest of society. It would seem that they at least could have been included as historically "untouchable" - like the Cagots (mentioned in the concluding list). Or perhaps "slaves" and "untouchables" are two different things? If so, the article does not mention it. --- So, a revised article would need a definition (including a negative definition of what "untouchables" are not). It also needs a shorter and more precise treatment of the paradigmatic (Indian/Hindu) example, and discussions of some (at least 4-5, I would think) empirical examples from outside the "hindusphere." Finally, it needs at least a short section on authors that object to the use of Hindu caste categories outside the Hindu world (Louis Dumont comes to mind).
I am not qualified to rewrite the article along the lines suggested above, but a simple google search of <slavery untouchables roma jews> brings up some suggestive titles, which might at least provide a starting point. Filursiax (talk) 22:31, 2 March 2017 (UTC)