Sepia Mutiny the power house Indian group blog points out to a response by a blogger to the NYTimes article.
Amardeep at Sepia Mutiny writes
Perhaps the reluctance by more conservative Parsis to accept intermarriage has to do with exactly the kind of internalized racial thinking the blogger (who is not a Parsi him/herself) is talking about. Personally, I’m rooting for the Parsis; I hope the faction that favors allowing people who’ve intermarried to remain in the community prevails.
This is in response to Strangeloops who opined
The British sought to cultivate an indigenous elite with a vested interest in the preservation of Empire, and further saw Parsis as more ‘white’ (and ‘Aryan’), and thus culturally closer to Europeans. Indeed, the British often referred to Parsis as the ‘Jews of India’ (a somewhat ironic statement given the rich history of several Indian Jewish communities). All this made the transition to an Independent India an awkward and stilted affair for many (but by no means all) Parsis in Bombay and elsewhere. After all, being friendly with the colonial occupiers isn’t necessarily appreciated by a new nationalist elite.
Follow the discussion at Sepia Mutiny.
Original NY Times article here