Lobsang Wangyal
ON THE WEB, 2 July 2019
Who doesn’t want to look attractive? Don’t we all? Are the trolls saying that they don’t care if they don’t look ‘attractive’?
The Dalai Lama in an interview with a BBC journalist said, “If a female Dalai Lama comes, she should be more attractive.” When the interviewer told him that he could be seen as objectifying women and that beauty is who you are inside, the Dalai Lama said, “Yes, I think both. Real beauty is inner beauty. That is true. But we, human beings, appearance is also important.”
The journalist reminded him that he had made a similar statement in 2015, and to her that seemed at odds for a man who preaches a message of tolerance and inner confidence, she later wrote. The journalist said that the Dalai Lama reaffirmed his belief that beauty matters as much as brains. He told her that in Buddhism both inner and outer beauty matters. He also said that equality was important and was keen to stress that he supported women’s rights and equal pay in the workplace.
The “attractive woman” reference by the Dalai Lama has gone viral and he has been facing a lot of criticism, with people calling him out for his sexist comments. Some even changed the word from ‘attractive’ to ‘hot’, implying that the Dalai Lama is saying he wants a woman to succeed him only if she is ‘hot’.
Sexist Dalai Lama
One website said , “With thousands around the world looking up to him for inspiration, it could be hoped that he would refrain from making statements that demeans half of the world’s population. But, alas.” Right below that writing was a link promoting “Top 30 Most Beautiful Women In The World”. Alas! Not all the half of the world’s population are equally beautiful after all. And, that kind of attention does not promote sexism, and it’s ok to accept. What an irony!
It would be good to understand the complex issue of reincarnation, which is a system of believing in the continuity of the consciousness from the previous to the next life. As such, the next Dalai Lama will be the descendant of the previous Dalai Lama. He or she will not be elected. When the Dalai Lama says the next one comes, what he means is that a new baby will be born, and that will be the continuation of his current self. He (or she, if the current Dalai Lama chooses to be woman in the next incarnation), will then be trained according to the traditions, as well as with modern education, to take the role of the the Dalai Lama to spread the message of love and compassion.
Whether someone is attractive or not, or however their form is, is related to ones karma, a concept that’s not easy to comprehend unless one has a certain level of understanding and faith. An attractive Dalai Lama will have more attention, which he could use to promote those values to a wider audience. That is exactly where the Dalai Lama is coming from. Does that imply sexism? It just doesn’t make sense why the Dalai Lama, a person who has all his life promoted equality, human values, and compassion, would have sexism as his intention.
Then, the same BBC journalist has written “In an age where celebrity is worshiped, the Dalai Lama is a faith leader who has become a spiritual superstar.” She has acknowledged that celebrities are worshiped, but nobody criticises that when it’s generally about attractive people (mostly physically good-looking). Or are those star-struck people worshiping the celebrities’ great intellects?
Hollywood, the cultural altar of the western world, looks only for physically-appealing people for their million-dollar salaries. Nobody’s pointing fingers at that. Is there no sexism there? Could the hypocrisy get any more obvious?
The Shanghaiist website has a collection of what some self-styled critics say to the Dalai Lama’s statements. Their reactions perfectly reflect their lack of class and low mentality, let alone their lack of understanding of the issues. One has shared a morphed image of the Dalai Lama in long blond hair. These trolls don’t have even the basic knowledge that if the Dalai Lama comes as a female, she will be a nun — that is to say that she will have a shaved head all the time. And to imagine that “attractive” must be blonde, in itself shows an adherence to racial superiority.
Racist Dalai Lama
Another question the BBC journalist asked was about a speech the Dalai Lama made last year when he said that refugees to the European Union should ultimately return home, adding that “Europe is for Europeans”. The Dalai Lama stood by the statement when she challenged him on it.
The Dalai Lama has said that the European countries should take these refugees and give them education and training, and the aim is for the refugees to return to their own land with the skills they have learned to rebuild their countries once the problems in their countries are solved, if they so love their country and their “rich” culture.
What is not sensible here? He himself is one of those refugees, who has been fighting for the last 60 years to be able to go back to his home, which was annexed by Communist China.
What if people want to stay? Stay if they want. But one cannot just misconstrue the Dalai Lama’s views, and his well-intended suggestions.
In fact, there’s nothing new in the BBC interview. He has been asked these questions over and over again, and he has said the same things every time. It’s more confusing why the journalist repeated the same questions, when a lot of important questions could have been asked, such as about global warming.
Now, the self-righteous nonsense with shallow understanding have raised more questions, that need answers. Trolls need not show such tantrums towards someone who has given his life for the good of the whole world.
About the author
Lobsang Wangyal lives in McLeod Ganj, India, and edits the Tibet Sun website.
More articles by Lobsang Wangyal on Tibet Sun.
About 200 Tibetans arrive every month to Paris to seek asylum from India. Tibetans born in India can be said to belong to India under CTA. But they want to settle here.
Paris has become a new Dharamshala. There’s a park which serves as a sort of newcomer reception centre where they sell momoes. All Sarjors and Shichaks have become sanjor again in a new country.
In this, one thing is for sure – Tibetans belong to France. And they aren’t going to India or Tibet back. There will soon be only 30,000 tibetans left in India.
Most good looking girls ha e left abroad to marry uncles. Only ugly girls remain in India. Tibetans in India is suffering a beauty drain of its female population. That’s a real concern.
Watch youtube video
“If the Dalai Lama is a sexist, the # MeToo mafia has gone too far”
Yonden Lhatoo South China Morning Post
Also watch the youtube video: “This pretty much explains todays world” by Kia Zolgharnian and get an insight in the world we live in.
Actually Europe want some men to fill in job vacancies in the hard labour sector. They don’t admit it, but europe do require immigrant labour to dig ditches, wash dishes and cars, and drive their buses, etc.
We think ‘Oh Europe is so kind giving papers to these refugees.’ But these countries are stealing more in oil from middle-east and creating the refugee themselves.
Eg. Syria refugee crisis – it is the UK and USA and NATO people who first created the chaos there. Of course, refugees happen.
We need attractive president for us in 2021. We will vote for a president who’s above 6 feet tall ( 5″ 7′ for ladies) , at least 7/10 in looks, and must have certain swagger. Otherwise, no much use. Lobsang Sangay won against Penpa Tsering because he is taller and more good-looking.
Next sikyong should be Kaydor Aukutsang. Ladies say he’s sexy and charismatic; his brains or inner qualities is another story.
Conversely – Tibetan Buddhist iconography portray dharma and worldly protecters in their OTHER (non- beautuful?) manifestations – wrathful and hideous beings to R-E-P-E-L the enemy : Ignorance, Confusion, Jealousy….
There is no reason why anybody should be angry and surprised by the recent comments of His Holiness the Dalai lama with regards to his incarnation. Those who are unhappy with the comments are either due to lack of proper understanding of Buddhism or sense of Tibetan humor. I think it is not good to make unnecessary issues out of nothing and spread more misunderstanding and hatred in society.
His Holiness doesn’t mean anything bad to anyone or he has any intention to hurt the sentiments of people. He has spent his entire lifetime talking peace and wanting to promote brotherhood and friendship throughout the world. Needless to mention, His Holiness remarks are being given wrong interpretation and blown out of the context for various reasons. It is morally very wrong to drag someone like His Holiness the Dalai lama into useless controversies and criticize him due to the ignorance of some readers.
Food for thoughts…
Most of the 85,000 Tibetan refugees in India don’t want to return to Tibet, neither do they wish to stay in India – they want to resettle in Europe or North America as refugees in search of financial security.
So, my question is – how many of us Tibetans are listening to HH Dalai Lama? I am afraid 95% of us are openly disobeying HH’s wisdom by not wanting to return home. The articles and songs about return home are just words, not real.
All the cafes in Majnukatilla in Delhi are filled with excited Tibetans discussing visas and asylum application process to get to Europe or America, work hard, and help their families financially. This is the ground reality, and i think this applies to most poor peoples who migrate.
But HH is right that these refugees are quite a burden on host countries.
This is absurd! You can’t judge people not making choice of what is not available at all. Well, the choice of going back to Tibet isn’t available, duh! No visa! Fear of being arrested and persecuted isn’t there in going to the west.
If there is ever an option of returning to Tibet in absence of fear of persecution and freedom, it would be top of the list, no doubt about it. I want to go back. So does, all of my family!
First of all, journalists ask question which are highly improbable, if not impossible. We never have historical proof pointing to a male lama getting reincarnated as a female lama. But if he says NO to the question that was asked, he would be surely get trolled and blamed for being a male chauvinist. So he takes such questions in lighter vein. But in a world where humour is getting confined to extinction, finding reasons to blame is a common thing.
As far as migrants returning to their land of origin is concerned, this is how it really should be. Most of the people who migrate to the West orginate from countries which are developing or under developing countries. So when these migrants become financially well off, they should surely return to the country of their origin and help their native countries develop.
But in the world where money is the only concern, who would appreciate the words spoken by His Holiness? Not even money mongering Tibetans.
Great article! Hypocrisy rules, alas…
I think the question was first put to His Holiness in 1992 in Paris, by the editor of Vogue, who was preparing an issue dedicated to him.
“Success has many fathers and failure is an orphan.” With this quote I can relate the whole incident. With a successful person everyone yarn to be associated with or get piece of them for their stardom, for that matter they don’t care about their mode of approach be positive or negative one, they just care about their own or the brand they endorses into limelight. This incident was one amongst many other an classic example of incidents that has happened with His Holiness, and nothing else.
In 21st century, everyone are in wild rush in making their stand, trying to prove the world about their existence, Ms. XYZ from BBC News has done nothing in contradictory. She questioned His Holiness as per her plans and then twisted and molded the whole interview making it more controversial.
The next time, the private office should in advance check the credentials of the news reporter and if possible scan all the possible questions that thy’ll put forward before His Holiness. It’s their responsibility. Unlike any other politicians and public figure, I am sure HH doesn’t ask for editing such comments later.
I agree that I will prefer a sexy and beautiful next Dalai Lama. If there are five girls sitting next to me in a pub, my first instinct will be to talk with the ‘prettiest’ face.
If Gaden Phodrang selects a female Dalai Lama who isn’t in the top 1% in physical beauty, I will never accept her as a Dalai Lama.
In lot of professions such as media, TV presentations, and even in lowly paid jobs like KFC customer service assistants, they look at your physical appearance.
In the West, we hide the ‘beauty’ factor in contributing to the success of an individual in the age of political correctness. But the Lama was born in 1935 in an age and a place where people never talked about concepts like ‘female objectification’, ‘LGBT rights’, ‘self-conscious’, etc.
I just don’t agree with the view that refugees should be returned to their country of origin. The world is in a constant flux of migration, starting from Sub-Saharan african, since the age of dinosaurs. DNA analysis reveals the trend. A Muslim refugee born in London is unlikely to return to Yemen from where his father escaped 70 years ago.
In UK, it is a taboo to say refugees should be sent back to war-torn states. It is called deportation. It is the economic migrants who should be sent back.
In Tibet exile society in India, Tibetans born in India post 1960s have no intention to return to Tibet. In fact, one Tibetan from USA said, ‘Why are people telling me to return to Tibet. I was born in India, grew up there, and I don’t have a place to stay in Tibet.’ So, once a generation of refugees flee a country into another, the second generation doesn’t return back. Forcing them to return might be tad harsh.
You got it wrong again like many of those who haven’t listened the interview but are forming their opinions after reading either of criticism or the trolls.
HH never said or suggested the refugees should be ‘returned’ to their original country. He is completely misunderstood here. HH have always called for support to the refugees and requested support for all.
I am also a Tibetan born in India to grandparents who escaped from Tibet in 1959. I want to go back. The problem is there is no avenue of going back to. There is no scope and there is always a fear of persecution and loss of freedom. That’s why I can’t go back. It is not a choice, it is lack of option and opportunity and it is theft of my right to be in country of my forefathers.
So, when HH said, we refugees ultimately should go back to our own country to work rebuild it. He doesn’t mean NOW! We should go back when it is peaceful, when there is no fear of persecution, when there are opportunities (being practical) and when it is a right time. HH didn’t mean or asked Europe to send back refugees NOW! but they should go back when their countries are not in war and have opportunities to rebuild. However, the key word here is about the choice. It is their choice. They should go back if they choose to.