My Journey from Conservatism to Liberalism

I proudly call myself a feminist and a socially liberal person today, but this identity did not come to me naturally. I did not grow up in a liberal household or society. Liberal ideas were not a part of the culture, community, or environment in which I was raised. In fact, they were foreign to me, sometimes even threatening, because they challenged almost everything I had been taught to believe.

And yet, once I began examining those beliefs with honesty, there was no going back. It took me quite some time to gather the courage and intellect to examine my cultural and social conditioning, but I am glad that I was able to do this. I know that for many, this is not even possible; they spend their entire life living in a bubble and fighting to protect that bubble with all their intellect and power. I could not imagine a world where discrimination and oppression were excused as “culture,” “tradition,” or “religion.” My journey to this realization was slow, difficult, uncomfortable, and ultimately liberating.

---

Growing Up in a Conservative World

I was born and raised in Pune, in a family that had migrated from Uttar Pradesh to Maharashtra. My childhood environment was deeply conservative. Religion and culture shaped every aspect of our lives, so intensely that people were willing to harm each other in the name of protecting “honor,” “faith,” or “tradition.”

Patriarchy was not subtle where I grew up.
Misogyny was not hidden.
Casteism was not questioned.

Religious bigotry and hatred were not just taught but were expected as a part of your affiliation with your religion. These weren’t just social norms; they were considered virtues. And like most children, I absorbed all of it. I had no alternative worldview, no exposure to anything different, and no one around me who would challenge the system.

---

The First Cracks: Movies, Books, and Questions

Things began to shift only when I started watching movies of my choosing and reading books outside the school curriculum. Those stories introduced ideas that were almost revolutionary for my conservative mind:

• Caste discrimination was real

• Gender inequality was everywhere

• Religion was used as a tool for dominance and polarization for political gains

• “Honor” was often a mask for oppression

These books and films planted doubts, small at first, then louder. 

Questions began forming:
Why are women treated as second-class citizens?
Why do we claim to worship goddesses but deny respect to real women?
Why are some people considered inferior just because of their last names?
Why was I told to dislike Muslims without knowing anything about them?

Growing up during the Ram Mandir movement added fuel to the confusion. Like many teenagers around me, I fell for the rhetoric. I sympathized with the movement simply because I believed it was my duty as a Hindu. I was so immersed and impressed by conservative rhetoric and propaganda around me that I even wrote a letter to Mr. P. N. Oak, author of the controversial book, Taj Mahal-The True Story (I read the Marathi version of the book). I completely believed his conspiracy theory about the Taj Mahal being a Hindu temple, and proudly treasured his postcard reply where he praised my commitment to the Hindu cause.

At that time, I thought I was doing something noble and great. I was really proud of my anger and hatred against people whom I didn't know, just based on unverified statements by someone whom I believed to be intelligent. 
Looking back, I realize how easily young minds can be influenced when they grow up in environments that encourage obedience and subjugation, not questioning.

---

Understanding Gender: The Most Painful Realization

Of all the discriminatory practices around me, gender inequality was the most visible and the most disturbing once I learned to see it. It was everywhere, in my home, in my neighborhood, the rest of society, in most movies that I watched, and in the country. I watched women’s lives shrink after marriage. Young girls who had a little freedom as teenagers were suddenly expected to:

• cover their faces

• speak softly or not at all

• avoid going out alone

• defer to any male relative, including boys younger than them

Even in my own home, when important family matters were discussed, men sat in the main room while women listened from the other room. Their opinions, even when the issue affected them directly, were neither asked for nor welcomed.

This wasn’t considered oppression.
It was “culture.”
It was “tradition.”
It was “how things are supposed to be.”

I was told to be proud of these things and protect them at any cost. And yet, something in me was deeply uncomfortable.

---

Breaking the Mold: Marriage, Books, and Self-Reflection

When the time came for my own marriage, a simple request, to speak to the girl before saying yes, was considered a bold act. Reena’s extremely modest expectations from her future husband startled me. They exposed how deeply unfair the system was to women.

This moment acted like a mirror. I realized how much I needed to change, both around me and within me, if I wanted to break the conservative mold I had inherited.

As there was no one around me to whom I could talk or ask any questions, books became my biggest teachers.
They validated my doubts.
They challenged my assumptions.
They held up a mirror to parts of my belief system that I had never examined.

Every new concept: feminism, equality, social justice, representation, challenging traditions and superstitions, human rights, was like learning a new language. Slowly, liberal values entered my life, one step at a time.

---

Becoming a Parent: The Final Transformation

If books opened the door, my children pushed me firmly through it.
Becoming a father, especially wanting a daughter so desperately, forced me to confront the biggest taunt I used to receive:

“You will understand the importance of these rules/traditions when you have a daughter.”

I wanted to prove, to others and to myself, that I truly believed in equality. My children made me revisit every belief I had inherited. They made me examine my unconscious biases. They pushed me to imagine a world where they could grow without fear, limitations, or discrimination.

Parenthood turned questioning into responsibility.

---

Letting Go of Hate and Rediscovering Myself

My shift from conservatism to liberalism had nothing to do with political ideology, left or right.
It had everything to do with empathy, justice, and self-awareness.

It is not easy to admit that everything you once believed in, things your family, religion, and community glorified, can be wrong. It is not easy to stand against practices that people around you consider sacred. Most of them were good people; they simply followed what tradition told them. When culture and religion justify discrimination, people no longer see it as wrong.  

But the moment you start questioning, the entire structure begins to unravel.

You realize how ideologies manipulate you into becoming a loyal follower instead of a critical thinker. As Dr. Ambedkar wrote, a Hindu is a casteist not because he is a bad person but because he wants to be a good Hindu. You realize how prejudice is taught, not inherited. You realize how privilege can blind you to the pain of others.

This realization was painful, but liberating.
And once I embraced it, I could never go back.

---

Where I Stand Today

Today, I still care deeply about politics and society. I vote in every election. But I am not a blind supporter of any political party. I am a deliberate supporter of equality, dignity, representation, and justice.

I take pride in calling myself a feminist.
I actively work on recognizing and correcting my biases, both conscious and unconscious.

Living in the U.S. exposed me to topics like LGBTQ+ rights and mental health, which were not part of my upbringing. These were shocking at first, but slowly, through listening and learning, I understood their importance. I am still learning.

And that, perhaps, is the biggest lesson of my journey:
Liberalism is not a destination. It is a continuous process of self-reflection.

Thank you for reading, and please share your views on this topic. 

© Vinay Thakur, All rights reserved. Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com 

Privileged and Unisex Historical Perspectives

Human history is rich with literature from diverse cultures and societies. Across eras, literature has served as both a mirror to the world and a means of shaping it. However, one cannot ignore an unsettling reality: much of this literary legacy is inherently biased, shaped by the perspectives of the privileged, and overwhelmingly male authors who controlled the narrative. This skewed lens has influenced how we understand history, culture, religion, and society, resulting in a perspective that is, at best, incomplete and, at worst, deeply exclusionary and unisex.

Literature Through the Prism of Privilege

A significant portion of historical literature comes from the pens of privileged individuals. These were often the educated elites with the leisure and resources to engage in literary pursuits. Consequently, the narratives and themes they explored tended to reflect their own experiences, concerns, and biases. The lives of underprivileged or marginalized communities, when depicted, were filtered through the lens of these privileged storytellers. There is no way to verify the authenticity of these depictions, as there is no representation of underprivileged authors in the literature that survives various transitions of human history.

For instance, in many ancient civilizations, the voices of the working class, enslaved individuals, or women were seldom recorded firsthand. Their experiences were either ignored or romanticized, often reduced to stereotypes or supporting roles in stories centered on the lives of kings, warriors, and noblemen. This dynamic perpetuated a cycle in which the struggles, joys, and perspectives of the underprivileged were either misrepresented or erased from the broader narrative. Take any book or even epics like Ramayan, Mahabharat, or Eliad, they are all written by the elites and for the elites. Of course, over time, the entire society adopted these epics as its own story, as there was no other alternative. When the discourse is heavily dominated by voices from certain sections, one tends to believe that only those voices are relevant. 

Even in more recent times, this pattern persists. Consider colonial literature, where indigenous cultures were often depicted through the lens of the colonizers. The historical accounts of the freedom struggle of India are also depicted through the lens of colonizers or the privileged class that either colluded or occasionally resisted colonizers to protect their own interests. These portrayals were laden with biases, reinforcing notions of cultural superiority, justifying the exploitation of the colonized, and dehumanizing or marginalizing underprivileged voices. The accounts of contributions from non-elite classes were either absent or consistently downplayed. Such literature, while historically significant, reflects a deeply skewed understanding of the societies it sought to describe.

The Male-Dominated Narrative

Adding another layer of bias is the predominance of male perspectives in literature. For much of history, social structures have relegated women to secondary roles, both in life and in literature, especially for underprivileged women. The narratives that emerged from this male-dominated world naturally reflected their worldview, concerns, and values. As a result, literature, whether religious, cultural, or historical, became overwhelmingly unisex in its outlook, focusing solely on male experiences and aspirations.

Even portrayals of women in historical literature were often shaped by male authors. Women were depicted as muses, temptresses, or paragons of virtue, their identities crafted to serve the narrative needs of male protagonists. Many books, mythological stories, and even movies include various complex male characters with various shades; however, any of these mediums have rarely presented females as fully realized individuals with agency and depth comparable to their male characters.

Religious texts, which have profoundly shaped cultures and societies, are no exception. Most were authored by men and reflected patriarchal structures, often relegating women to submissive or supportive roles. These texts have been instrumental in perpetuating gender norms and have influenced the way societies view women and their contributions. These texts have a profound influence on various societies that even women view themselves through the lens inculcated in their minds by these stories. 

Social Media and the Emergence of Diverse Voices

It is only in recent history that this dominant narrative has been meaningfully challenged. The rise of social media has offered a unique platform for diverse voices, particularly from women and other marginalized groups. This has begun to shift the literary landscape significantly. Various female content creators have brought new perspectives to literature, exploring themes of identity, empowerment, and the lived experiences of women. Social media, with all its drawbacks, has democratized the narrative and helped reduce the gender gap; no one can deny this effect of social media.  

Moreover, the growing focus on intersectionality has highlighted the importance of including voices that reflect the complexities of race, class, gender, and sexuality. Writers from underprivileged backgrounds are now sharing their stories, offering unfiltered perspectives that challenge the narratives crafted by the privileged few.  This shift is not just a matter of representation; it is a rebalancing of the literary canon. For most of human history, only one section and one gender of society occupied the stage, and now, by including diverse voices, we gain a fuller understanding of the human experience, one that acknowledges the richness and complexity of different perspectives. Today's literature is the most diverse and richer than at any point in human history. I know many elites won't agree with me on this, but this is a verifiable fact, and social media is one of the major factors that made it possible.

Moving Toward a More Inclusive Literary Tradition

While progress has been made, much work remains to be done. The literary world still grapples with systemic inequalities, and many voices continue to be marginalized. Publishers, educators, and readers must actively seek out and support diverse perspectives, ensuring that literature reflects the breadth of human experience. To move beyond the unisex perspective, we must embrace stories that challenge our assumptions and expand our understanding. By doing so, we honor the richness of humanity and create a literary tradition that is truly inclusive and representative of all voices.

In the end, literature is not just a reflection of society; it is a tool for shaping it. By addressing the biases inherent in our literary heritage, we can pave the way for a future where every story has the chance to be told, heard, and valued. I am lucky that I started writing the blog and could share my views and ideas on various platforms. I encourage my readers to share their stories also. You will be amazed to see how many people are like you and are interested in knowing your story. It is up to us to develop and be a part of a more inclusive and gender-balanced literary tradition. I am excited to be part of such a tradition, are you? 

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

*Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com 

Subtle sexism and patriarchy

Sexism and patriarchy are widely debated issues, they are insidious forces that permeate our society, often operating under the radar and manifesting in seemingly innocuous ways. I have written a few posts related to these issues. We may want to believe that our generation has really started questioning these practices, but debates about these things have been going on for decades in some form. Also, one cannot deny the significant progress that has been made toward gender equality in the last few decades years. In many societies, the situation is much better than it was just a few years ago.  

Even after all this progress, there is a long way to go. Sexism and patriarchy now exist in a very subtle and nuanced way in many societies, including developed nations like the United States. Unlike overt forms of discrimination, which are easily identifiable and condemned, every form of discrimination now exists in its subtle form. Subtle forms of sexism and patriarchy are more difficult to recognize and address, yet their impact can be equally damaging. It is possible to be sexiest without being hostile towards women, it is possible to be sexist even if you have a mother, wife, and daughters, just having female relatives doesn't give anyone the right to downplay their sexist and misogynist behaviors. Subtle sexism refers to the subtle, often unconscious biases, stereotypes, and microaggressions that perpetuate gender inequality. It can manifest in various forms, such as the gender pay gap, double standards in behavior and appearance, or the underrepresentation of women and other genders in leadership positions. Subtle sexism praises women, but only in certain contexts or for certain qualities such as kindness, patience, or motherhood. It predefines and confines a gender only to traditional gender roles. Some examples are, men not washing their own dishes, the stereotype that women are bad drivers, the tag of gold digger only used for women, and assuming that a successful woman must have used some other means to reach there whereas a man in a similar position reached there just on merit. These are just a few examples to show how gender discrimination still exists but only has shifted its means and manners. It is now more subtle and nuanced. These subtle biases reinforce gender roles and norms, perpetuating inequality and limiting opportunities for women to fully participate and thrive in society. On one side women are encouraged to take on new challenges but on the other side, they are forced to continue with their traditional gender roles making them shoulder additional burdens. And when they struggle or fail questioning the ability of the entire class. Note that when a man fails, just that man fails, no one stands up and questions whether men are qualified to do that task. But when a woman fails, she carries a burden of their gender, as many stand up and question the ability of every woman to do that task. 

Gender discrimination, misogyny, and sexism are legacies of patriarchy. Patriarchy refers to a social system in which men hold primary power and dominate in roles of political leadership, moral authority, social privilege, and control of property. While one may think that patriarchy is an outdated concept in today's progressive societies, its influence persists in subtle ways, shaping social structures, institutions, and cultural norms. On common example of the manifestation of patriarchy is the expectation that men should be assertive and dominant, while women should be nurturing and accommodating. Any man showing accomodating behaviors, especially towards women becomes a target of gossip and criticism even today. Patriarchy can also be seen in the disproportionate representation of men in positions of power and influence, such as corporate boardrooms, government offices, and media outlets. These subtle manifestations reinforce gender hierarchies and perpetuate inequality.

Addressing subtle sexism and patriarchy requires a collective effort to challenge ingrained biases, and sexist and misogynist cultural and religious practices, dismantle oppressive systems, and promote gender equality. This involves raising awareness of unconscious biases, advocating for policies that promote diversity and inclusion, and creating spaces where individuals of all genders, races, nationalities, or any other diversities can thrive and succeed on equal footing. We must recognize and confront subtle sexism and patriarchy, or for that matter any form of discrimination in all its forms. We must work towards building a more equitable and just society where everyone, regardless of gender or any other identity, has the opportunity to reach their full potential. It's a journey that requires ongoing reflection, education, and action to create meaningful chances. I am ready for this journey, are you ready?

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

© Vinay Thakur, All rights reserved, Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com 

My Nani and feminism

Patriarchy is a default setting for all of us. We all are born in patriarchy, it is the system that has been prevalent in all cultures, societies, and countries for centuries. Generations have lived and are still living in social constructs dictated by patriarchy and there is a strong social, cultural, and religious culture that propagates it in various ways. We don't have to do anything special to propagate patriarchy, it exists around us, and we all become part of it as that's the culture we inherit in all societies. Individual families sometimes may differ somewhat and try to get rid of some regressive patriarchal traditions, but even those families live in societies that are patriarchal. The patriarchal mindset has been challenged by the gender equality movement, also called feminism, but this battle is still in its initial stages and there is a long way to go. Feminism has challenged gender discrimination at every level and in this process, it has also affected the dynamics of male-female relationships.  

I am a proud feminist. There are many instances that guided my path to becoming a feminist, the life of my Nani (maternal grandmother) is one of the major forces that made me a feminist. I have written a blog about her, it was written as a response to the comments I received for another blog about some objectionable phrases from a famous Gita translation. My nani lived her entire life in a small village named Rajapur in Uttar Pradesh, the most populated state in India. As it was a common practice back then she got married at a very early age, child marriage was a norm and it still exists in India no matter what are the laws against it. She became a widow within a few years of her marriage. Her husband (my Nana) died in a tragic boat accident in the river Ganga, this happened immediately after the birth of my mom, hence my mom is the only child of my Nani. This one unfortunate incident changed her entire life, it made her life colorless and companionless. She was not allowed to wear a colorful saree or have any makeup or any jewelry that a married woman was allowed to wear. No one even bothered to think that she should be given a second chance to restart her life with someone else and enjoy the simple pleasures of life that any married woman around her was enjoying. Rather, the entire society was okay with depriving her of all the simple pleasures of human life at such a young age. Nani was a brave lady, she survived, lived her life with grit and dignity, she created her own identity and raised my mom with the help of the joint family. People respected her and took care of her needs like food, clothes, and shelter, but no one went beyond that. As a grandson, I received tremendous love and pampering from her, she used to treat me and my two younger brothers like kings. Whenever we visited her, she was happy and ran after us making sure that we didn't face any troubles, as long as we stayed with her her entire life revolved around us. I have a retreat in my life that I could not reciprocate her love, she passed away in 1991 when I was just a teenager. I wish she could have survived to see me graduate from college and especially get my PhD, whenever I think about this I feel sad that she didn't live to see any of this. However, her life did make me realize unfair and brutal religious, social, and cultural practices that only targeted women. It made me realize how women are purposely suppressed so that society can exploit them. It is true that in Hinduism there are many female deities like Durga, Lakshmi, and Sarasvati, but just because society worships female gods does not mean it also respects females and treats them as equals. Just because her husband died my Nani couldn't live the life of her choice, she was not offered any choice, her choices went away with my Nana's death, but her presence in my life made me a feminist to make sure at least no one in my family will face a similar fate. As long as there are traces of patriarchy in our society, we need feminism, as long as there is a single woman whose choices are taken away due to misogynist religious and cultural practices, we need feminism. My Nani unknowingly made me a feminist. I am a proud feminist, are you?  

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

© Vinay Thakur, All rights reserved, Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com 

Patriarchy and motherhood

"This feminism has really messed up our traditions and culture, many women are avoiding being mothers," one of my friends said with a tinge of remorse in his voice. He knew that I am a proud feminist and was trying to score a point. 

"Women are not avoiding anything, they are choosing whether they want to become a mother and if they want when to become mothers, motherhood is neither an obligation nor an imposed burden for many feminist women, and I think that's good for both, men and women," was my reply. This didn't make my friend happy as he insisted every woman has a fundamental duty towards her family to bear at least one child, he just couldn't fathom a scenario where a woman could have a choice of rejecting motherhood, this was an unthinkable aspect to him. He is not alone who think like this, many men as well as women think that motherhood is an inherent part of being a woman, such is the stronghold of patriarchy over our thinking.

Now, you may ask, "what's the relationship between patriarchy and motherhood?" There shouldn't be any, right? But there is, patriarchy has glorified motherhood so much to make women feel that without motherhood they are incomplete. This is one of the greatest scams successfully pulled off by the patriarchy. When I pointed out this, my friend strongly disagreed and recited the usual stuff related to the glorification of motherhood. However, he did not have any answers to why motherhood defines women, but why fatherhood is not necessary to define any man. There are many men from history who left their wives, and kids, for some other pursuit and still considered great, but one can hardly find similar examples of women. No society or culture dares to glorify a woman who abandons her kids and family and goes in search of something else. Her act of abandonment of her family and kids will overshadow everything else, however, men are immune from such treatment. 

Most cultures around the world still consider motherhood an essential element of being a woman, but fortunately, this is changing fast. Thanks to contraceptives, many women voluntarily chose their time to be a mother, and many women chose not to be a mother. In places where access to contraceptives is limited for whatever reason motherhood is imposed on women against their will. Whether they choose to be a mother or not, they all are women. Glorification of motherhood is a well-planned strategy to trap women in childbearing and childcare so that they remain engaged in other household work. To make this entrapment permanent and secure concepts like divinity, the superiority of a mother's love compared to a father's love, and how motherhood makes a woman complete were introduced. This also added a guilt factor. Any woman not following this well-guarded and exploitative path was riddled with impending guilt and shame for not fulfilling her duties as a woman. These tactics have worked stupendously so far, many women are the flag bearers of the idea that a woman is not complete unless she becomes a mother. Motherhood has to be a matter of choice, without choice, it becomes a burden as it is imposed and not by choice. 

In reality, motherhood is purely a biological incident. Like every other species we need to reproduce so that we don't become extinct, motherhood and fatherhood both result from this reproduction process. Nature has given one of the genders in every species the ability to be a host for the initial phase of the reproductive cycle. However, now with the availability of modern technology, the entire process of reproduction, starting from fertilization (union of an egg and sperm) to the development of a deliverable baby can be carried out in a lab, without the need for any host. This will become a reality sooner or later once society gets over its moral guilt about outsourcing child production. Yes, society will achieve a comfort level where kids can be produced outside the human body, same the way it did to outsource childcare. The glorification of motherhood was mainly to instill the feeling of guilt in women so that they don't complain about the imposed motherhood. Even today, if any woman decides not to have a child to advance their career or goes back to work by her own choice immediately after delivering their baby, she is shamed and made feel guilty whereas men are totally immune from such attacks. 

One may expect that after all this imposition and hard work, the woman gets all the credit, and the child at least carries her name and legacy. No, never. The child still bears only the father's name, even father dies before the birth of the child or had zero contribution to upbringing, the child still bears the father's identity, not the mother's, this is the masterstroke by patriarchy, making women bear all the pain and do all hard work but give the product of all this man's label. So, women do all the hard work, including putting their lives at risk (many women used to die and still die during childbirth), and in return, they only get a hollow glorification, the man gets to attach his name just for being a man. This is also why women's sexual freedom was heavily guarded whereas men were free to have multiple relationships or marriages. Before DNA testing, there was no way for men to confirm that the child from their relationship or marriage was their genetic child. Women didn't need any proof to confirm their genetic link to their baby as they literally produced that baby, but the men had no other way to confirm this without prohibiting other sexual intercourse until the initiation of the pregnancy. This is how the concept of purity and sanctity of the female body arose, just to prohibit females from engaging in the same type of sexual behavior that men freely engaged in. Even today, in many cultures, it is abuse to say that someone has multiple fathers, but the other way (having multiple mothers) is perfectly okay. 

Patriarchy affects both, men and women, but the way it affects women is very complex. Many traditions that look harmless and fun are designed to keep women in only certain roles and stunt their personal and professional growth so that many areas exclusively belong to men. Guilt and shame are often used to attack women who dare to break these traditional boundaries imposed on them. The sooner women realize this better it is for them. Being a parent is a choice, parents share the joy and burden of bringing a child into this world. Putting the entire onus of love and tenderness on women is unfair and brutal. Mother or father, any parent can provide childcare, just because of one's gender no one should be forced to bear a child or take care of a child, or compromise their professional ambitions, the day we realize this we move one step closer to gender equality. Until then, keep supporting feminism, because that's the best mechanism we have currently to counter all the nonsense against women.         

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

©Vinay Thakur,  Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com  

Privileges conferred on me by patriarchy

During one of our discussions related to the subject of patriarchy, my daughter, Sara said that I should be aware of and acknowledge the benefits and advantages offered to me by this system to understand the real difference between the struggles of a man and a woman in any society. The discussion was especially related to Indian society because of some of her own experiences during her recent visit to India. Sara had a valid point. I have been fighting against patriarchal traditions since I became aware of their discriminatory nature, but I never openly acknowledged the benefits conferred on me by the culture of patriarchy. Sara's comment made me look back at my life and recognize some of the advantages and privileges offered to me just for being a man. This post is to acknowledge some of those privileges and show the terrible nature of this system where half of the population is systematically discriminated against and suppressed, and it is done with so much sophistication that most who get these privileges don't realize that they get an unfair advantage and those who get suppressed also don't realize that they are being mistreated or suppressed.

The string of privileges started at the time I was born. I was told that my birth was celebrated by not only my parents but by the entire family (my parents used to live in a joint family back then). The reason, I was the first boy born after six or seven girls, so it seems there was some sort of gloomy atmosphere within the family due to the birth of only girls and my family thought my birth would change this trend. The problem with this is that if it had happened the reverse way it would not have been celebrated or even deserved to be mentioned (a girl being born after seven boys with the hope that now more girls will follow). 

Second, this is about my skin color. I have the darkest tone in my family, my two brothers have a fairer tone than me. This was never an issue for me, but I remember that many people mentioned in front of me to my mom that she was lucky that I was a boy with dark skin, imagine a girl with my skin tone. According to many people, it would have been a nightmare for my parents to find a good match for me if I had been a girl. I never felt bad or inferior because of my appearance or skin color in my life even though I was reminded about it on countless occasions, but I realize that the big part of this immunity was because of my gender. India's obsession with fair skin is well known, products like Fair and Lovely or Fair and Handsome blatantly display this racist mindset, but I did not get affected due to this mainly because I was a boy, what a privilege to have.

Third, I never faced any sexual harassment or assault and I am dead serious about this privilege. Many might think that I am exaggerating by claiming that every girl goes through such harassment, but based on my personal experience I have seen that getting taunted, sexually harassed in various ways, and things like eve-teasing was a daily ritual for most females irrespective of their age. I never went through it, but this definitely saved me from the trauma and agony of dealing with such experiences daily. It's not that boys don't get sexually harassed, but in most societies, victims of such harassment are disproportionately females.

Fourth, my education was not discontinued for being perceived as a waste of money like it was done for all my sisters. The rationale behind this was, that a girl will anyway one day go to someone else's house, so why waste money on her education, rather than save that money for her dowry and marriage. I did not have to face this challenge to justify the expenditure for my education.

Fifth, I was allowed to go to late-night parties and remain outside of the home for an extended amount of time. This is a normal part of college life, this is how we form friendships, and create some of the memorable moments. There were very few restrictions imposed on me because I was a boy, girls were not allowed similar freedom, not even close. As a boy, there was no social stigma if I smoked, chewed tobacco, or even drank alcohol. I agree it was not encouraged, and kids get punished if get caught. I never indulged in any of these things, but I had the choice, people were OK if boys did such things, but for girls, forget about it.

Sixth, even though it was limited, I had a choice to reject marriage proposals. Yes, no matter how ridiculous it sounds, it's true. The system of arranged marriage used to be heavily biased in favor of boys, but slowly it's changing. However, at the time when I got married, and especially in the northern parts of India, if at all anyone had a choice it was the boy who could reject the girl, not the other way around.

Seventh, my wife was supposed to obey me just because I was her husband. Girls used to be trained to be obedient wives, but similar training was not offered to boys (to be obedient husbands). My wife has to face all the brainwashing and conditioning where girls got trained about their so-called duties and roles, not me, why, simply, just because I was a boy.

Eighth, I don't have to change my last name due to marriage. A big advantage that many men don't even recognize. Even today, if anyone has to change the name it's the wife, not the husband, the reason, patriarchy.

Ninth, my name was used as my kid's middle name. This is the flip side of the advantage of keeping your name after marriage. The husband's name becomes a family name or middle name, another systematically discriminative tradition that patriarchy has created to favor males.

Tenth, family inheritance is guaranteed for me just because I am a man, both, by law and by social tradition which is more powerful than the law. Technically, Indian law gives equal rights to sons and daughters, however, practically, most inheritance is passed ONLY through boys. Girls are not offered their share and they are also very hesitant to ask for it, even though it's their legal right. Patriarchy conditions many girls in such a way that they feel guilty even to ask for their legitimate, legal rights. They are made to feel greedy or selfish, but if it's a boy, then that right is not only automatically awarded, there is nothing wrong if they fight for it.

This list can go on and I can add many other things to it. Some people might argue that some of the listed things are not a privilege but part of the culture and tradition. But these are discriminatory traditions and once there is discrimination it doesn't matter how old these traditions are, they are biased. Once there is discrimination, there is a privileged party and there is a discriminated party, and the truth is that I was a privileged party just because of my gender. I need to recognize this privilege, no matter even if it dilutes some of my achievements. Thanks to Sara for flagging this out. I am against patriarchy for the privileges it conferred on me because of my gender, the system that suppressed almost 50% of the population just because of their gender cannot be a just system, no matter how old it is and from which culture it originated.

Thanks for reading and please share your opinion about this topic. 

No one said sorry to my Nani

The title of this post is slightly confusing as it does not convey the subject matter of the post clearly. Who was or is Nani? Why anyone should have said sorry to her? If at all anything wrong happened to her, why didn't she expect an apology? These are some of the questions that might come to the reader's mind after reading the title of this post. Nani was my mother's mom, in the part of India where my parents came mother's mother is called Nani, and mother's father called Nana. I have not seen my Nana as he died very young, even my mom does not remember seeing her father as she was just a few months old when he died in a boat accident in the river Ganga near her village in the state of Uttar Pradesh. This was the first tragedy that struck my Nani and her life changed permanently after this tragedy. I do not know how old was she when my Nana died, my guess is she was in her teens as people used to get married quite young during those times. The death of Nana left my Nani only with her daughter to look after. There was no chance of remarriage. In that society, it was an unthinkable idea for a woman to get remarried after the death of her husband. If she had been a man, for example, my Nana, then it would have been not only easy but the entire family would have forced him to remarry. However, this option was not there for my Nani. No one even thought that there was any need for her to remarry even though she didn't have any source of income and was not educated so that she could work on her own to take care of her daughter. No one thought that this young girl also deserved to live a normal life like any other girl of her age. No one thought that it was not Nani's fault that her husband died in an accident at such a young age. No one thought that she should get a chance to restart her life. No one thought that it is wrong to force a young girl to spend her entire life without a life partner. I don't think even my Nani thought that it was proper to remarry, she just accepted her fate and continued her colorless, joyless, celebrationless life.  

I remember my Nani only wearing plain sarees, she never wore any makeup or fancy clothes. Also, I never saw her pallu coming off her head (pallu is the part of sari which women os that part us to cover their head and sometimes face). Nani always used to cover her head even in front of kids which other women never used to do. My Nana had four other siblings, and it was a joint family for a long time, Nani became part of one of the brothers' family and she took the responsibility for taking care of that household. She used to work very hard. I think that's how she maintained her relevance. She used to do all the daily chores and look after the kids of that family. My mom also became part of that family and it was a mutually beneficial existence. She was happy to see her daughter getting married and especially happy that her daughter had three kids, that too all boys. We used to visit her during our summer vacations and she used to treat us like the prince of some kingdom. No one in the entire village could say anything to us, no matter what we do, and if someone dared to say something, Nani would create havoc. She used to defend us like a lioness, this shows that she was not afraid of people or society or scared of arguing if she wanted to. She just didn't know that she had any rights and, hence never argued for herself the way she did for us. Even when my Nana's joint family divided their familial assets Nani did not get any share. Even though technically Indian law allows for a share for a daughter and a widow, Nani didn't get any, and it is not still uncommon for not giving a share in familial assets to daughters or widows without any son in many parts of India. She did not protest against this illegal act and gross injustice because she thought that without her husband and any son, she had no right to ask for any share in the family property. It seemed as far as personal rights were concerned, she didn't exist, neither for herself nor for society. The day her husband died her life became devoid of any self-enjoyment, for the rest of her life all she cared about was her daughter and grandkids.

WHY? Why did this happen to her and many women like her? Only one answer comes to my mind, just because she was a woman without a living husband and her only child was also a woman, there was no question of giving any property share. I know many Indians will not like this answer, especially when a country claims that it worships women. No doubt, women are worshipped in India, but it is also true that they are not given equal rights and freedom, they are discriminated against and judged with different standards. I did not see any man who lost his wife at such a young age living a life that my Nani lived. Also, it would be wrong only to single out India for such a discriminatory attitude towards women, but I grew up in India and I know from my personal experiences that gender discrimination is rampant there and I do not see any point in justifying it in name of culture, traditions or even offering an excuse other countries also do it.

Some traditions are bad and there can be no justifications for them, and my Nani was the victim of many such traditions. The problem was neither she nor the people around her thought that those were terrible traditions, their culture was deeply flawed. People sympathized with her, felt bad about her husband's untimely death, tried to help her as much as they could, and respected her, but they never thought that there could be an alternative to the life in which so-called traditions, religion, and culture forced her to live. Traditions and culture were more important than the right of a woman to live a normal life. As I grew older, I came to know about other women who lost their husbands at a much younger age than my Nani, some even didn't get to see the faces of their husbands and lived their entire lives as a widow of a man who they didn't even know personally. No one said sorry to my Nani for all this, I don't think she even expected an apology, and this is the ultimate tragedy. My Nani was not only the victim of this openly discriminatory and abusive culture of patriarchy which was supported by religion and traditions, but she was also a propagator of it. She didn't think whatever was forced on her was a fault of religion or culture. She was made to believe and she did believe that it was all her destiny's fault or something bad she did in the last birth that unfortunate things happened with her. This is how patriarchy survived so long, by taking support from religion and turning its victims also into supporters who were not only made to believe in that system but were brainwashed to willingly abide by it.

Nani passed away when I was in my first year of college. Her death didn't impact me that much as I was too naive and young to understand the impact of her loss. But on my subsequent visits, I realized that my maternal village was never the same for me after her death. I missed her presence there, without her I felt like an orphan, it's not like I was not welcomed there, her legacy is such that people still remember her and offer lots of love to me just because I am her grandson, but she was not there, and I always notice that. And as I know about it, it also reminds me of the gross injustice which happened to her. I am grateful to her for one thing which could have changed the course of my life. When it was clear that she wouldn't live long, people started coming to her with my marriage proposals thinking that if Nani said yes, no one could object to it. Nani did want to see the marriage of her grandson, one of the rare occasions of happiness in her life, why she would want to miss that. My mom told me that Nani was really happy to see that many so-called rich or respected people from her society were coming with marriage proposals and a good amount of dowry, but she refused all of them. Nani told them that my grandson is in college and he is going to become a "saheb" (a generic term used by her for educated people). I can't imagine how my life would have turned out if I had got married at the age of 18. I do not know how she avoided the temptation of witnessing her grandson's marriage? But I am eternally grateful to her for this.

As I grew older and read more about discrimination against women in various societies, I realized the injustice that happened with my Nani, I felt sorry for her, not because she didn't remarry, marriage is a personal choice and it's understandable if a person does not want to remarry after losing his or her partner, but because she was not allowed to enjoy even simple joys of life like wearing fancy clothes, having fun by forgetting that a big tragedy happened in her life. All symbols around her and her own appearance were tailored to remind her every moment about her tragedy, this was a psychological abuse that she tolerated for her most of life and I am sorry for that. No one said sorry to Nani, maybe she did not even expect it, and maybe none of the people who find all kinds of justifications for that discriminatory and suppressive culture will ever apologize to her as they might feel that nothing wrong happened to her, and it was all her destiny to endure all the pain and suffering, but I must say sorry to her, sorry for not understanding and acknowledging her sufferings and sorry for being part of that culture which made her to go through all this. I am determined to change that culture and challenge each and every tradition that discriminates. I know this journey is long and challenging, but I can at least do this much in her memory so that no one at least in my family suffers the same way she did.

Thanks for reading and please share your opinion about this topic. 

Me Too - easy to mock, but difficult to understand

Sexual harassment is a serious issue. This is a widespread problem in each and every country around the world. It would be really naive to assume that it is more prevalent in developed countries where women participate more in the workforce compared to developing or undeveloped countries. Also, this problem is more prevalent than one can imagine. We underestimate it because traditionally many behaviors were not recognized as harassing, for many centuries societies around the world ignored such harassing behaviors or accepted them under some lame justifications like "boys will be boys."  Patriarchy and chauvinism not only sheltered such behavior but also legitimized it and generations were raised believing that this was a part of social male-female interaction in a male-dominated society.  Now, before anyone points it out, let me make it clear that this is not a gender-specific problem, men also get sexually harassed, but women are at the receiving end of this type of harassment in disproportionately high numbers and one can confirm this by checking the data.

When the "Me Too" movement started and many women started openly talking about the sexual harassment they faced, societies got rattled. It was totally unexpected and not a very comfortable situation for them to see the elephant in the room being addressed so openly and directly. I am sure most women knew that this problem existed but somehow we accepted it as a part of the day-to-day ordeal of being a woman. Many famous and not-so-famous people got exposed for their predatory and harassing behavior, this is how it caught the media's attention. The "Me Too" movement became viral on the internet and was in the news all over the world. Now, like any other movement, some will try to misuse it, but this problem is not unique to Me Too, that's the nature of our society. Any law or popular movement is always misused by a few people, and I don't think Me Too will be an exception. Misuse by a few people cannot be a reason to question the legitimacy of any social transformation. But the way this movement got ridiculed from its start, especially in India was not a very good sign. I was tired of reading so many messages on WhatsApp making fun of Me Too and questioning the motives of women who chose to come forward with these allegations. The messages were so many that it was not easy to ignore them, for a few weeks it seemed like it became a favorite time pass on WhatsApp, especially for men. 

First of all, it takes immense courage to share any such thing publicly knowing that nothing might come out of this except ridicule, humiliation, and character assassination. Second, the kind of publicity you get after coming out is not always desirable, one can look at the way most of the victims were treated. Would any of us like to be in that situation? And lastly, for all people who ask the question, why now? Why not when it happened? Please try to understand the vulnerability, and social and personal situation of the victim before passing any judgments. Many harassment or discrimination incidents are exposed much later than the time when they actually happen. The main reason for this is that normally the victims are suppressed and not in a position to raise their voices when they face such incidents, they fear serious repercussions for their personal and professional lives and prefer to keep quiet. Normally the victim and their harasser have disproportionately different professional standings and harassers take advantage of it. This is not a failure to report by the victim but as a society, it is our failure to provide them with an atmosphere where they feel comfortable in reporting such incidents. 

I just have one request, before being judgemental about any victim of any harassment or discrimination please try to understand their situation at the time the incident happened with them. If you can, I am sure you will be empathetic towards their plight and offer them all the support and help they need. At the same time, we must acknowledge that it is everyone's right to express their opinion, no matter what it is. No one should be penalized just for expressing their opinion no matter how offensive we might feel that opinion is. It is important to offer criticism whenever we see anyone misusing any movement or law, this is necessary to keep the legitimacy of such social movements intact. Mocking any social movement like Me Too without understanding it is very easy, the difficult part is to try to understand the intricacies of such a movement and relate to the victim's plight. The choice is always ours.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

Men need to save themselves

"Men need to save themselves," my friend, Anand Pawar said in one of his interviews related to gender issues. He is an expert on gender-related issues, and I learned so many things about this subject during my interactions with him. This particular line resonated with me a lot because I saw men (including myself) struggling under a burden to fulfill the expectations of society, their family, and their own expectations. The definition of masculinity is very stereotyped in most of the societies. Men need to fit into that definition, and if they don't, they struggle with social and personal contempt, rejection, frustration, and many other things. Many men put themselves under this burden of expectations that their society or culture hands over to them, and there is no easy way for them to escape this trap. Very few dare to challenge the stereotypes or traditional definitions of masculinity. Men really need to save themselves from this burden. It is crushing many of them, and only they can help themselves to break free from its shackles.

Expectations and traditional notions about gender roles are embedded in our social culture. These norms are part of many cultures. We don't have to choose them as we are born into these traditions. Some of these things have been part of traditions for so long that they have become sacrosanct principles. This is the very reason why even after feeling the burden of these expectations very few dare to challenge them, or worse, very few even feel that these are unnecessary or burdensome expectations. But, because of people like Anand, these definitions are being challenged. I know Anand personally that's why I am mentioning his name, I am sure that there are quite a few people like him who are working in this area to help men come out of this prison of patriarchal culture, and I appreciate all these efforts. It is a wrong notion to assume that patriarchy only hurts women. In reality, it equally hurts men, they just don't realize it. Patriarchy puts an unjustified burden on women by putting so many restrictions on them, at the same time, it also puts a burden of so many unreasonable expectations on men. In the end, it results in a society where both men and women live under some kind of burden of expectations, which they can't reject even if they want to. Their roles get rigidly defined and the scope of the exchange of duties is nonexistent.

What is the solution to this complex problem? The only way is to challenge the traditional notions of masculinity and femininity. A woman can be a bread earner of a family and a man can be a stay-at-home dad. There is nothing shameful if your wife earns more than you. Women should get equal rights to choose what they want to wear, and women don't have to carry the burden of sacrificing their interests for the sake of their families. A woman's career is as important as a man's. There are so many things that one can add to this list, but I guess you now know what I mean. The central point is, don't define gender roles rigidly, a suitable person in the family or society should perform the available role, their gender should not be a factor in deciding whether they qualify for it or not. Men don't have to live under the pressure of fulfilling the roles of a caretaker of the family, they can take whatever role they feel suits them, and it can be a role of house-husband or stay-at-home dad. I think the present generation is well equipped with all the tools it needs to tackle this problem. I am hopeful that they will do far better as far as achieving gender equality is concerned compared to my generation. Women have been challenging their stereotyped image for decades, and they are immensely successful in it. Now it is the time for men to challenge their stereotyped image because MEN NEED TO SAVE THEMSELVES.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]    

Women's march done - Now, what next?

Last week, there were quite a few protests that created a lot of buzz on social media as well as in mainstream media. Depending on their liberal or conservative inclination various media houses either reported these events aggressively or totally ignored them as if they didn't happen. I was a little confused about the protests on the day of Mr. Trump's inauguration. He won a democratically contested election, the same system of the electoral college which declared Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama, and all other previous Presidents winners declared him the next President of the USA, people need to acknowledge it and accept the reality. This is the beauty of democracy, it would be hypocrisy to praise the democratic process only when it works in your favor. The Constitution gave Mr. Trump the right to contest the election and he won it, he has a constitutional right to serve as the President of the USA. I didn't understand the main intention behind the protest on inauguration day. If it was just to oppose Mr. Trump's victory because some people didn't like him personally then it sets a dangerous precedence for everyone. Oppose his policies if you don't agree, challenge his decisions if you feel they are wrong, criticize his statements, and demand an apology, but don't try to question his rights. It is dangerous to question someone's fundamental rights because tomorrow someone might question your rights also.

But, I do understand the intentions behind the women's march. Some of the comments made by Mr. Trump about women are derogatory, his so-called locker room talk was disgusting. The excuses and the apology offered by him for some of these things are lame and inadequate. So, the women's march had a valid reason. It was good to see so many women coming together and marching to protect their rights and challenge misogynist views. The culture of patriarchy still exists in some form or other in all parts of the world and the USA is not an exception. It shows its ugly face in the form of sexist jokes, discriminatory rants, prejudiced statements, or so-called locker room talks. Such things need to be challenged. Many people might feel that this is a very hypersensitive reaction, or protestors are cherry-picking things just for the sake of making a big deal out of nothing. But, the truth is that things like patriarchy are so deeply rooted in the psyche of our culture that it will need a lot of mental cleaning to get rid of it completely. Women need to be vigilant about any behavior that even remotely tries to propagate such a mindset because they are the main victims of such a mindset. Sexual harassment is still a huge problem both for men and women, but women are disproportionately victimized and that's why this protest was necessary.

Based on news reports it seems that the women's march was a huge success, not only in the US but in many other countries it was noticed. Now, what next? Just conducting one huge march or registering a protest once is not going to solve these problems. This huge protest should not be the end, but the beginning of a new movement. Marches or protests are good methods to highlight any issue or spread awareness about the problem. But efforts should not end with a one-time protest or one march. People (both men, women, and other genders) should resist any attempts to demean any group by anyone. It is going to be a long march to achieve equality and I hope that everyone in support of equality is willing to walk that long.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Woman president - no thanks

Like many, the result of the US presidential election was surprising for me. It was not shocking as the contest was very tight, but the result definitely surprised me. Politically, I consider myself an independent. I don't subscribe to any political ideology as I find some good, bad, and terrible policies from both political parties. I support some of Mr. Trump's policies, but that "locker room talk" was too much for me to take. He literally sounded like a sexual predator in that video, it was horrifying to watch a presidential nominee talking like that. Whether it was locker room talk or not, it displayed a demeaning attitude towards women. Now, I know the difference between dirty talk and sexual assault. The released conversation was not just dirty talk; he could do as much dirty talk as he wanted, but this sounded like a confession of a sexual assault, and there is a huge difference between these two things. 

The two choices presented by both parties were not perfect. Hillary's CV was much stronger for that job, but just having a strong CV doesn't guarantee you any job, the interview panel should like you and then only the job is guaranteed. Hillary failed to impress the interview panel, the voters. There can be several reasons for election defeat, but this election was special. The question is, how much her gender played a role in her defeat? According to some polls and opinions, Americans don't mind having a woman president, but so far this amazing country where women are so talented, qualified, and hard-working, couldn't find a single qualified woman fit for that job. The path to the White House for women is so hard that this was the first time a woman made it through primaries to get a major political party's nomination. It took more than 200 years to find a black person to lead the country, and no one knows how many years it might take to find a qualified woman to lead this country. 

So, why do I think that Hillary's gender played a role in this election? Was she judged with stricter standards just because she was a woman? To understand this, I want readers to imagine a hypothetical scenario by switching the gender of candidates. Imagine Hillary as a successful business person with undisclosed tax returns and an extremely lavish and flamboyant lifestyle. Imagine the release of her "locker room talk" video, where she is bragging about her attempts to sexually harass men and how she loves kissing young men, grabbing their crotch and she can do whatever she wants because she is rich, powerful, and famous. Do you think she would have had any chance to win an election or even get a nomination? If your answer is "no chance," then you know what I mean when I say that her gender played a major role in her defeat. Yes, emails mattered, the FBI director's sudden statement mattered, her image mattered, Bill Clinton mattered, her time in the government mattered, but her gender played a BIG role. This is what disappointed me. I was not sad that a Democrat lost or a Republican won, I hardly cared about their party affiliation. I was not sad that Hillary lost, as I am not her fan, I was sad that ultimately once again gender bias won.

To explain why this loss was more bothersome, let me give an example of India's parliament election of 2014. Here also Mr. Modi, with a questionable attitude towards his own wife won the election with an impressive majority, but his victory was not unexpected as his opponents were really weak. He at least looked like the most competent person among all who were competing for that job. His total disregard towards his wife was not even an issue. No one bothered to think that if a prime minister could treat his wife like this, then what about other citizens? He didn't even bother to give her a divorce, just ignored her as if she didn't exist. It showed society's total disregard for women's rights, but I hardly expected that Indian voters would even think about this issue, and as expected they didn't. So, it was not an unexpected result, but I didn't expect something similar to happen here in the USA. I know that resentment against immigrants or minorities is a very strong feeling and I wrote a post regarding this issue just a few days before the election. In that post I mentioned that the use of resentment against immigrants can result in huge political dividends, it happened in India so there was no reason why it couldn't happen in the US. It seems Hillary could have lost the election to any other Republican candidate as Mr. Trump won even after the release of that video. This is surprising to me and it puts a question mark in my mind about society's attitude towards women, and I hope I am wrong about this.

Women played a significant role in Mr. Trump's victory. It seems the majority of white women voted for him. Obviously, race was not a factor as both candidates were from the same race. So, most probably, gender might have been the determining factor. The effect of patriarchy is so strong that even women think that men are most suitable for any leadership position. This thinking is inculcated since childhood and each tradition or custom is designed to validate this thinking. It becomes so embedded in our minds that we don't even realize that most of us become proponents of patriarchy. The glass ceiling about which many women leaders talk is not just created by men or patriarchy, but women are equal contributors to make sure that ceiling remains intact. Such incidents have happened many times before and may happen in the future. But that doesn't mean women should stop trying. Indeed, it's not easy to break that glass ceiling, but definitely, efforts of all these years made it crack a little, and now it is up to us to break it. It is not going to be easy, but it is possible, let's give one last punch to break this glass ceiling.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing.]

Chanakya and his views about women - Part II

One of the most popular posts on my blog is 'Chanakya and his views about women'. I wrote it back in 2012, it is almost four years since this post was published, and now it is time to update it. Many people read that post and shared their views about it. I request readers interested in discussions related to this post to go through the comment section to see how different people perceived the post very differently. Let me warn you that it is very lengthy, but people who are really interested in such discussions might find it worthy of their valuable time. Some readers accused me of trying to malign the name of the great Chanakya. I don't know on what basis this accusation was leveled against me, but let me clarify that Chanakya is a legend in many ways, but he is not above criticism, analysis, or scrutiny like any other great historical figure, so there are and will be lots of articles, books or blog posts written about his work and my post is just one of them. It was not written with any bad intention and I don't think it is easy for anyone to malign the image of anyone like Chanakya. Some tried to defend the quotes mentioned in the post, it is all there in the comments section of the post, please go through it if you are interested. Recently I read a message sent to me by Mr. Tapan Joshi where he explained to me why he thinks my post portrays wrong or misleading interpretations of Chanakya's views about women. I think this message is worth sharing. I always appreciate counterviews, I think we all should listen patiently and attentively to people who disagree with us, it is very important. I like it whenever people try to make a point by using a rational approach. Whether I agree with their point or not is really immaterial, but I feel that anyone interested in any topic should try to read all possible sides of that topic to get the complete picture. This is the main intention behind sharing Tapan's comment about this topic.

Tapan sent the following message to me, I am quoting his message with minimum corrections. He starts by warning me (or anyone) about the dangers of wrong interpretation because of a lack of good knowledge of Sanskrit (the language in which original works of Chanakya are written).

"What people need to understand is that Chankya's literature is in Sanskrit and those who have not learnt Sanskrit properly or the grammar, or cannot interpret Sanskrit should keep their opinions to themselves and not spoil literature of such kind." 

A very fair warning, but I didn't interpret any of those verses as I don't understand Sanskrit, I used popular translations of Chanakya's work available in the public domain. So, if those translations are wrong or the corresponding author misinterpreted anything then obviously I am also wrong. 

Then he makes a very good point, "A Sanskrit word can have multiple meanings and the meaning should be put in, in reference to the context. This message is for those people who have wrongly interpreted Chanakya Niti, and Arthashastr and other books like the Vedas, which has caused great ignorance and foolish beliefs." 

Indeed, many of these ancient texts, some of which are in the form of poetry can be interpreted in various ways. That is why we see many different interpretations of the same verse from the Gita, Quran, or any other ancient book, but it is not an easy task to decide which one is the correct interpretation and which one is not. That's why we need to look into all interpretations and discuss them.  

He has provided very different interpretations of some of the verses that I quoted in my post (quotes from my post are highlighted in bold). They are very interesting. 

Coming to Chanakya's views on Women, in Arthashastr written by Arya (Noble) Chanakya BOOK 4 CHAPTER 12, 1) It is repeated many times ' No man shall have sexual intercourse with a woman against her will' 2) When a man refuses to stay in a marriage with a his wife as agreed upon, he shall be fined 200 panas. You will find many such instances in the book. Also, the verses from Chanakya Niti you have quoted are wrongly interpreted- 1) Chapter 1, verse 17, Women have hunger twofold, shyness fourfold, daring sixfold, and lust eightfold compared to men. You don't need to wonder anything here. It is self explained, but still if you don't get it, I'll interpret it for you, Women have 2 fold hunger- Well women give birth to children, help them grow, hence their food has to be nutritious, good and double that of a man. There is no mention of shyness in the verse, in fact, instead of shyness the word 'Buddhi' is used, hence the verse becomes women have four times more Brain, it is evident as women are doing better than men today (the sanskrit verse is-' striNaam dviguN aahaaro BUDDHISTAASAAM (no mention of shyness) chaturguN, saahasam ShadaguNam chaiva kaamoaShTaguN uchyate). Their daring is 6 times more than that of a man. Women are not that daring and strong compared to men, but if a woman shows some daring, then that is 6 times more powerful than a man. Now the word Kaam is used here not lust, there is a difference. Men who ejaculate during Reproduction, after ejaculation for some time their sexual desire decreases or comes to rest, but not in the case of a woman. Hence Kaam is 8 times more in a woman than that of a man. Such a beautiful verse wrongly interpreted by foolish, ignorant people who do not understand Sanskrit. 

2) One should not place trust in rivers, animals with horns, armed ones, women, or ruling families. Congrats another wrongly interpreted verse (and that too not knowing what the Sanskrit verse says). Here is the verse and I will explain each word, ' naditire cha ye vrukshaha- the trees growing on the banks of the river, parageheShu kaamini- a woman who is not faithful by comiting adultry by going to other people's houses. MantrihinaaShcha raajaanaha- a king without ministers, shighram nashyantasamshayama- these without doubt destroy themselves very soon. Another verse copied and pasted from somewhere. Before finding fault with someone please ensure you are right and not mislead people. In fact Chanakya says chapter 4 verse 20- There are 5 mothers namely, King's wife, Teacher's wife (if applicable, it can be a female teacher), Friend's wife, own wife's mother (mother in law), and our birthplace. He also says- chapter 5 verse 9 -Satstriyaa rakshayte gruham- A woman is the one who protects a house. 

3) Fire, water, women, fools, snakes, and the royal family, beware of all these, they can prove fatal. Another baseless claim, there is no mention of the word woman in this verse, the verse is in chapter 9 verse 7- ahim- snake, nrupam cha- and King, shardulam- tiger or cheetah, kiTim cha- pig, baalakam tatha- a small child, parashvaanam cha murkham- someone's dog , a fool, sapta suptaan na bodhayeta-never wake up these 7 when they are in sleep. Also chapter 12 verse 13- the one who sees a woman as his mother, other's wealth as a heap of sand, and all animals same as him (they too have a right to live), he sees everything as it is. 

4) A woman who keeps fast without the permission of her husband shortens the life of her husband. She goes to hell and is punished with the great horrors of hell. Another myth- so let's break it. This verse is found in chapter 17 verse 9- He only says those women who fast (that is not eat food) for no reason. In Ayurved you are supposed to fast only if you are unwell (like a stomach problem), so women who fast for no reason trouble the husband as he is worried about her and she herself suffers a lot from not eating anything. 

5) 'For good days one should save money, women should be protected even if it takes the money saved. But for self-preservation, the money and the women should be sacrificed!!.' Another claim not backed by proofs and lack of understanding. Chapter 1 verse 6-Aapadarshey dhanam rakshed- protect money for emergency situations, daaraan rakshedhanairapi- protect your wife more than money. aatmanam satatam rakshed- protect yourself more than money and your wife, daarairapi dhanairapi- because if you are not alive, than what is the use of money to you and the use of you to your wife. 

So you have quoted these wrongly translated verses from a foreign author who clearly has no knowledge in Sanskrit and is keen on giving Chanakya and Indian literature a bad name. So just see what you have done, you have wrongly accused Chanakya and spoiled his name and his book and mislead hundreds of people. I would like your response on this matter and please ask you to take you words back. My objective is just to know the truth and reject untruth. I was not able to post this as a comment on blogger so I decided to send u a message.

I ignore any personal remarks made against me in any comment as long as they provide any relevant or useful information related to the topic. There is no point in getting personal as it doesn't contribute anything to the topic of discussion. So, I am going to follow the same principle here also. I still find problems with some of the interpretations quoted by Tapan: 1. The explanation offered for women having kaam (sexual desire) 8 times more than men, doesn't make any sense to me. 4. Why is it assumed by a scholar like Chanakya that women don't have an understanding of their own health to decide when to keep fast and when not? 5. Will Chanakya offer the same advice to women if they face such a difficult choice? If he will, then this verse should have been gender-neutral. 

I am not discussing numbers 2 and 3 as Tapan wrote that the translations I used are wrong, as I mentioned already, if the translation itself is wrong, then obviously my criticism is not valid, but as long as these translations are out there in the public domain, and are published by reputed publishers people like me are free to use them. The only way to minimize such occurrences is to publish correct and authenticated translations certified by some independent and reliable authority so that everyone has access to them. I am doing my bit by publishing alternative views on my blog. I hope this helps to continue our discussion on the important topic of gender discrimination.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.