Men always mattered, now it is the turn of women and others

"Do you think Taylor Swift has a cultural impact equal to Michael Jackson?" My daughter asked while we were chitchatting during a commercial break of the TV show Survivor.

"Not at all, MJ has a huge cultural impact, Taylor has just started, there is no comparison," I responded immediately, without even pondering for a second.

"What about equal to Beatles?" the follow-up question came immediately. 

"Again, no, she is too young, maybe in a few years," I replied.   

"As expected, men will never accept that a young girl can be a cultural icon, such misogynistic thinking," she replied. 

Ouch, that did hurt, especially for a person who calls himself a feminist. But was she wrong? Might be a little harsh and exaggerated reply, but maybe that's what was required for me to learn more about Taylor. No matter what I call myself, I was born and raised in a misogynist culture where females were treated in a certain way, and no matter how much I deconditioned from all that cultural conditioning, I think some residues still remain in the system and show their subtle effects. Much has been written about feminism and how it is helping women to break various barriers. This has resulted in a sort of counter-attack from some people by calling feminism anti-men, starting male-matters movements, or shamelessly glorifying toxic masculinity. I personally feel pity for such attempts, but one cannot deny that all these are desperate efforts to counter feminism, counter attempts by women to claim their place in society for the first time in human history. The problem with movements like "all lives matter," "male matters", or with counter statements like "not all men," is with the timing and intent, they are started not to raise those issues but to divert attention and raise doubts about the intentions behind the movements from which they want to divert the attention. For example, feminism is not against men but it is against toxic masculinity, patriarchy, misogyny, and other prejudices against women. Fighting against these social evils also helps men as much as it helps women. Fight against sexual harassment, patriarchy, toxic masculinity, or misogyny is not a fight against men, but it is a fight against the mindset that confines men and women in certain categories and doesn't allow any freedom. Feminism is to about replacing men with women but about providing women their own space that was always occupied by men not because men were more capable but because women were never given a fair chance to fight for it. Also, people fail to notice how inclusive and pivotal feminism is. Just look at various other movements that started after feminism to assert their identities and claim their place in society, for example, the LGBTQ+ movement. It did not conflict or clash with feminism, rather, feminism has created a path and space for all such movements to start and flourish, often this aspect of feminism is ignored. Men always mattered, but they like it or not, it is the turn of women and others to also matter. And women and others are not taking men's space but they are claiming their own space and controlling their own narrative that was always controlled by men. 

Now coming back to Taylor Swift, no doubt she is talented and famous. She worked really hard to earn her fame and success. Many celebrities attend football matches, but when the NFL tweets about your presence in the stadium that's not a small thing. When your concerts fill the biggest stadiums in different parts of the world, that's not a small thing. When a generation of young females look at you as their inspiration and icon, then it is not a small thing. Yes, she is a cultural icon like any other music legend in their prime days, nothing more, nothing less. I was not aware of it, but my ignorance doesn't change this fact.  

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  

I am a proud feminist

There are very few labels that I like to associate myself with, being a feminist is one of them. I think the feminist movement is one of the few moments that has transformed societies across the world. Feminism has revolutionized every society, every country, region, religion, and even many families including mine. This is a movement that does not have a single face, single leader, any book, or a set ideology. Feminism is about gender equality. Every feminist revolution is led by individual brave women and men of this world. Yes, you read that right, by women and men, both. The biggest misconception about feminism is that it's all about women. Mostly it is about women as they are at the forefront of this movement, but men are also an integral part of it. We men are part of the problem, so, we need to be part of the solution also. 

I agree that the label of feminism is a recent phenomenon, the fight for gender equality has been going on for decades. Many brave women tried to break barriers that tried to cage them, mostly without much success, but they all were as feminist as any of us can claim to be. No matter how recent is the label, feminism is now synonymous with gender quality, and the fight still continues as a lot still remains to achieve gender equality. Another important point is that a to of well-intentioned people who support gender equality hesitate to associate themselves with the word "feminist." This may be due to some hyperactive or radical feminists acting as if men are the origin of all the problems, the perception created in some sections of media is that feminism is about hating men. Both these things are not true. Like every movement when it spreads widely, feminism also has attracted a variety of people from different social, economic, political, and cultural backgrounds. Based on their personal experiences they shape their own feminist ideology and some of them behave like radical activists who want to bring overnight change by demolishing everything that exists today. This is neither a practical nor sensible approach, and this does not represent the entire feminist movement. For comparison, we can take the example of another widespread ideology, capitalism. Capitalism has transformed the economies of many countries, it has helped to generate and distribute wealth. However, at the same time, it has created a class of radical capitalists who believe that anything coming from socialism is evil, the market should have absolute power, the government should be only a spectator, and many more things. This does not make capitalism an evil movement per se, one can be a capitalist and still support equitable distribution of wealth, and one can be a pro-market and still support required regulations and oversight. Many times, we want things either to be good or bad, positive or negative, no matter how easy the binary view is, most things don't fit into the binary world, we now live in the world of the spectrum. Everything is like a spectrum and we need to find our match within that spectrum. 

I have witnessed gender discrimination since my young days, I know what it can do to children and how it can shape their thinking and behavior. Gender discrimination is devastating, not only for people who suffer because of it, it degrades the entire society. There are many examples around the world to demonstrate this. I have committed myself to doing my bit toward gender equality. This is how we can bring change, from one person to another, from one family to another. I invite everyone who is now aware of feminism or is skeptical about it to read more and talk with people like me to know about feminism and what can you do to bring change. What type of society will take pride in saying that they don't want gender equality. I hope no society wants to suppress almost half of its population so that it only benefits the other half. I define feminism as a fight for gender equality. If you support gender equality, you are a feminist. I am a proud feminist. I hope that you will join me in being a proud feminist and walk the path toward gender equality.

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

Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com

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. 

Guilt is an effective weapon used against women for centuries

A feeling of guilt is not a good feeling. It makes us feel bad for whatever we did or failed to do in the past. It makes us feel responsible for whatever bad is happening around us. This feeling is necessary many times to make us realize our mistakes and take corrective actions, but this feeling can also hurt our progress if we feel guilty for no reason, or for doing things that we were supposed to do but which were against the established social norms of that time. The feeling of guilt has been used against women for centuries to make them fulfill stereotyped roles. Overcoming this imposed feeling of guilt is an integral part of every woman's struggle to break the shackles of unreasonable stereotyped restrictions. Women are successful to overcome this feeling and achieve substantial progress to prove that they are no less capable of achieving success in every field, but even after all these years, I read posts on social media where a woman feels guilty for not doing enough for their families by prioritizing their careers. They feel or are made feel guilty for not paying enough attention to their in-laws or kids at the cost of their flourishing careers. They are blamed more for neglecting their familial duties compared to their male counterparts. In contrast, I rarely see any such posts by men, where they regret focussing on their professional lives at the cost of not paying enough attention to their family members, especially young kids.

So, why career-oriented women are selectively targeted for not being involved enough with their families? Because many times this strategy works, many times society becomes successful in imposing that feeling of guilt in women's minds. This weapon of guilt has been used for centuries against women and it is still one of the most potent weapons used against them. Victim shaming also comes in the same category where the motive and behavior of the victim of sexual crime is criticized instead of a blatant act of harassment or assault by the perpetrator. It is not easy to deal with such attacks. As human beings, we are sensitive to our surroundings and have a tendency to fit in. Both women and men are targetted by outdated and rigid social norms to fill in certain types of roles and whenever they try to break those boundaries they are targetted for not being real men or women. We as a society need to fight this mentality if we want each and every member of the community to contribute to the welfare of our society to the best of their capabilities. In an era where a lot of professional help and care is available, it is unreasonable to expect only a particular gender to fulfill particular responsibilities. There is nothing wrong with being a career-oriented person for a man or a woman. Partners can help each other to fulfill their career aspirations and achieve professional as well as personal success. Without support from each other, men and women will fail to achieve their aims no matter what those aims are. 

Hilary Moore, a lawyer who decided to leave law to look after her family wrote in her article, "A real freedom is freedom from condemnation, no matter what choices we make. A woman's place is where she pleases. In a truly egalitarian society, a woman's value will not be measured by her ability to reach the traditional male definition of success." Make your own choices, go through the struggles and hardships that come with it, and reap the rewards. If the imposed feeling of guilt is only used to deter you from breaking stereotyped roles, just ignore it, we need to diffuse this weapon as it has been used for quite some time to frustrate the efforts of brave women. 

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

Gender equality is as much about educating men as it is about empowering women

It is a common perception that "gender equality" is all about women's empowerment and equal rights for them. It is true, but that's not the entire truth, gender equality is also about making men aware of this changing environment and shifting of gender dynamics where there is no weaker sex anymore. This might sound trivial and obvious, and many might ask why is it hard for men to understand this simple thing about gender equality? But it seems, it's not that easy for many men to grasp and adjust to this change. Many of them sincerely want to support gender equality but fail to understand how to practice it in their private lives. Especially during those special moments like going on a date or during intimate moments like sexual encounters. A recent story about Indian American comedian Aziz Ansari is an example of one such behavior where things can go terribly wrong without malice from either side.

Why do people fail to grasp the real meaning of gender equality? Why do many societies and cultures fail to accept gender equality in its true sense? Even in developed countries that pioneered and fiercely advocated gender equality in the modern era, why do many people fail to treat their partners the way any society that believes in gender equality should treat them? All these questions point towards only one major problem, somehow men were not as involved in this moment as they should have been. Maybe the entire focus was to make women aware of their rights and encourage them to stand up against the blatant discrimination practiced against them. It was the right thing to do, but at the same time, it was also necessary to engage men in this process. After all, they are the rest of the 50% population who are equally important if as a society we aim to succeed in our efforts to develop a culture without gender discrimination. A lot of progress has been achieved towards gender equality, still, it is not perfect but it is much better than just a few decades before. As women became aware of their rights and started demanding equal treatment, men also should have been made aware of the changing dynamics of the man-woman relationship.

The concept of a male as a dominant partner in a relationship is very old. Men were supposed to take initiative, they were supposed to initiate the relationship, and were supposed to play lead roles even in sexual encounters. The concept of enthusiastic consent was alien to most couples, but now times have changed for good and every individual participating in any relationship must make sure that he or she is aware of these changed notions. There are initiatives undertaken by many Colleges and Universities in the USA to make their students aware of these things. These educational tools are useful for everyone and I think everyone willing to be in a relationship should go through these materials to learn what is proper and what is improper conduct. Old social norms won't change unless people become aware of new norms and educate themselves. I hope the Aziz Ansari incident acts as a wake-up call for all who didn't bother to educate themselves about the importance of enthusiastic consent in any relationship. Relationships are beautiful only when both partners voluntarily participate in it, one's enjoyment should not become another partner's trauma. Gender equality is as much about educating men as it is about empowering women, and without their education we will not be able to achieve true gender equality.

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

Sunita Deshpande - A woman who introduced me to feminism

People around me, especially Indians and even many of my American friends wonder why I am so passionate (and even sometimes adamant) about the issues related to gender equality and woman empowerment. Sometimes people ask, from where I was introduced to the concept of gender equality? My family in India thinks that it is because I came to the USA my traditional views about women got spoiled by the Western influence, but this is not at all true. The USA did influence me a lot, it helped in my understanding of concepts of liberty, freedom of expression, as well as feminism, but it didn't introduce me to all these ideas, especially feminism. I started expressing my views about gender equality before my daughter was born (in 2000), and I came to the USA in 2003. So, my immigration to the USA is not the reason for my feminist views, maybe it is the reason why I express those views so strongly, but the USA didn't introduce me to this idea.

India might claim pride in its glorious tradition of having a progressive and liberal society where individual freedom was celebrated and books like Mahabharata and Kamasutra were written, but today's India is completely different and has a lot to learn from developed countries about gender equality and individual rights. Gender equality didn't exist in the culture in which I grew up. There was complete male dominance. I can only think of two major reasons why my views are so radically different from the society in which I lived and the family in which I was born. These are also the reasons why I revolted against the male-dominated atmosphere around me. First, I saw a tremendous amount of suppression of women around me, and as a teenager, it affected me a lot. Women were treated differently than men, there were hardly any rights or freedom given to them, they were abused for no reason, and they were considered physical objects of lust and physical enjoyment. For the name's sake, society worshiped female goddesses, but when it came to equal rights for them, there were completely different standards. These things raised many doubts and questions in my mind. I always wondered why women don't revolt against this subjugation and discrimination. I was too young to know about the patriarchal culture, but all these things made me very uncomfortable and angry.

The second reason might shock many of you, it was a book by Sunita Deshpande. Yes, this lady introduced me to the concept of gender equality. When I read her book "Aahe Manohar Tari," (meaning: even though it's beautiful), I was blown off to know about a woman who was so independent, strong, and powerful to fight against the patriarchal system and live life on her own terms. The book is a very impressive and sincere narration of her own story. In a true sense, in her autobiography, she introduced me to the concept of feminism and I am very grateful to her for this. Since then, some other books, and my immigration to the USA confirmed those ideas and made them stronger. I am a flag bearer of gender equality, and I take immense pride in supporting this cause and this cause is a part of my identity. I am sure for everyone who supports the idea of gender equality there must have been some incident that triggered the thought process or some person who introduced them to this idea. In my case, it was Sunita Deshpande. Since then this idea has become part of me, and I have become part of this cause. 

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]

Stereotyping also happens for men, and it is equally bad

Are men also stereotyped in our society like women? Do they feel pressure to fit in a certain image to define their manliness? Does society expect a certain type of behavior from them or associate a certain set of qualities with their personality because of their gender? Do they face any discrimination because of their gender? Normally we ask these types of questions to point out gender stereotyping of women, but we can also ask these questions about men and the answer to most of them is YES. I am sure both men and women will be surprised to know that men are as much stereotyped as women or transgenders. There is a certain perception about men in our society. Our media and movie culture has built a certain image of an ideal man, masculine, fearless, and ever-ready for sex are some of the characteristics that most of us associate with men. This image is the result of years of stereotyping of male behavior, and males grow with this image in their minds. The effect of this is very strong. Knowingly or unknowingly men try to mold their behavior to fit into this image. The effect of this stereotyping is so much that if we come across any post or article adulating men the automatic response is "wish there were more men like this" or "We need more men like this." If you don't believe me then just check the comments section of any Facebook post or article adulating men or describing any incident which doesn't fit typical stereotyped male behavior. This is strong evidence to show how much our society has generalized the behavior patterns of men.

The truth is that most men want to be kind and very well-behaved. Patriarchal culture all over the world has put a lot of pressure on them to do justice to their so-called "manliness." Most of them try really hard to fit into that image. Often all those efforts and struggles are not recognized or appreciated as it is expected from them as a part of their duty as men, especially their responsibility to feed their family. This happens with women also where they are expected to take care of their families and all their efforts in that direction go completely unnoticed as it is considered as their "natural" duty. But unfortunately, when men misbehave, and commit crimes like murder or rape their gender becomes significant, and many times that criminal behavior is blamed on their gender. Even ridiculous statements like 'boys will be boys' are often used to justify or defend some misbehavior. Sometimes while criticizing sexual harassment incidents people try to put blame on the criminal's gender rather than accusing that particular individual for that mistake. The point is, men and women both face problems of gender stereotyping in our society and both get affected negatively because of this. Agreed, women are much more harshly targeted than men, but if we want to resolve the issue of gender discrimination we should look at the complete picture. Just because some men are misbehaving with women this type of behavior doesn't become a characteristic of all men. Just because some men are brave and masculine, this should not become a criterion to describe all men. Every person, whether it is a man, woman, or transgender comes with a unique set of qualities and emotions. A particular gender might have a certain type of emotion that dominates in its group, but there is no hard and fast rule for these things. Humans are not robots, they are not manufactured in factories with a certain set of characteristics. We all are different. Let's acknowledge and respect these differences. Such stereotyping of any gender can only result in feelings of low self-esteem and guilt among people who don't fit into those descriptions.

Stereotyping men is as bad as stereotyping women or transgenders. It doesn't serve any useful purpose, we all should avoid it. Just because for centuries, certain things were expected from certain gender doesn't mean we should continue with such wrong traditions. Once we realize that certain traditions are wrong, we should dare to challenge them and change them no matter how old they are. Like women, men have also suffered long because of stereotyping and gender bias. Let's try to end this injustice. 

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.