Showing posts with label male. Show all posts
Showing posts with label male. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 5, 2025

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 all are written by the elites and for the elites. Of course, over time the entire society adopted these epics as their 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 shared, 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 so profound influence in various societies that even women view themselves through the lens inculcated in their minds by these stories. 

Social Media and 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 

Saturday, May 12, 2012

Are you kidding Dr. Zakir Naik?

A few weeks back while surfing on the net, I came across a few YouTube videos of Dr. Zakir Naik's seminars and Q&A sessions. I heard him long ago when I was in India on cable TV and was impressed by his sharp memory, but not with the content of his talks. Surprisingly, even after almost a decade his style and content are still the same. During his seminars, he continuously throws verse numbers, page numbers, book names, and many other details for whatever he quotes from ancient scriptures of the major religions of the world. He became a very popular and influential figure among Indian Muslims and even started his own channel to propagate his views. He claims to do a comparative religious study, which according to him is to compare every other religion with Islam and try to prove how Islam is the best. His style sounds very impressive in the beginning, you get impressed by his memory, but then he overdoes this thing so much that after some time his speech becomes irritating, monotonous, and utterly boring with so many page numbers and verse numbers. All you remember from his speech is 'this guy has a sharp memory' and nothing else. His speeches are rich in quotes, and literature citations (bibliography) but mostly poor in content. If one wants to know who wrote what, and which particular lines are from which book, then his speeches may be a good source of this information, but now one can find all these things easily online so why tolerate this torture? He does a good job in translating verses but many times his justifications, comparisons, and interpretations are biased and totally without any logic. One thing that I don't like is when he tries to intimidate questioners, especially from other faiths by ridiculing their beliefs and questioning their knowledge about their own faith by throwing a lot of bibliographic information and verses. He tries to prove his superiority over them by throwing memorized material at them. It seems he draws a lot of pleasure in scoring brownie points against such individuals and feels satisfaction in humiliating them. He doesn't even try to listen to their point of view, his only intention seems to force his opinion down to their throat. 

This post is not about Islam or the Qur'an, their mention is only in context with Zakir Naik's particular talk which I want to discuss. Recently I heard part of his speech where he tried to justify why polygamy is allowed in Islam (ref. 1).  One should watch that video to see how pathetic was his attempt to justify something that is totally outdated in today's world. According to him, it seems that whatever is written in the Qur'an is law and then he takes the task of justifying it. No doubt, the Qur'an is a very well-respected book among many. It's the basis of one of the popular religions of the modern world. According to me, polygamy was allowed in Islam because the social and political situation at that time resulted in a huge difference in male to female ratio (heavily in favor of females) and to maintain social balance polygamy was permitted. All religious scriptures were written in a certain era, they all have many things that are still relevant today and people can them for their own benefit. However, at the same time, we should also understand that most of them have many things that are outdated now and are not relevant in today's world. It's surprising to see that many people expect us to take these scriptures verbatim, and follow each and everything mentioned in them

He justifies the practice of polygamy first by citing the verse from the Qur'an which says 'marry women of your choice in 2s, 3s or 4s but if you can't do justice then marry only once' (ref. 1). He also claims that only Qur'an tells person (male) to marry once (if possible) rest all scriptures from other religions doesn't say anything like this about marriage (that is, marry once, if possible!!) and it seems other religions allow as many marriages as man wants. Note that no religion is giving females the same option. He further claims that even though at birth male to male-to-female ratio is equal, it seems female infant is stronger than male, and because of this, there are more deaths of male child compared to female child. I don't know on what basis he draws this conclusion. So, according to him, among children also male to female ratio is in favor of females (which is not true, check the table below and in ref. 2). The Female survival rate is higher for so many reasons, males die in larger numbers compared to females (alcohol, accidents, war, stress, etc.). However, if we look at the table still ratio is still in favor of males in most countries for the age group 15-65, it shifts heavily in favor of females only after age 65. Then he further claims that due to all this, there are more females in the world compared to males except in a few third-world countries like India. He does a good job in criticizing female feticide and infanticide in India which affected this ratio, good to see that he speaks against it. Then he continues his argument and puts one hypothetical scenario where because of more females than men, for example in the USA, if all males select their female partners then there will be still some females left without any male partners. Here, he conveniently ignores gay and lesbian people. Now, these poor females are without any bachelor males, as all males are already engaged. It seems now they have only two options, one is to marry with already married male, become a second wife, or become a 'Public Property'. I don't know what he means by 'public property'. Also, notice how he puts the woman questioner in an awkward position and tries to force her to accept his logic, even if he wants to justify polygamy I think he can do a better job than this.

Now let's see whether his argument contains any truth or it's all crap. If you look at the list of countries by sex ratio (ref. 2), it's very clear that in most of the countries, the male-to-female ratio is greater than 1 for most age groups (that is more males compared to females) except for the group above age 65, in this age group (65 and above) in most countries females are in much larger number compared to males. We all know that the mortality rate is higher in males compared to females in later stages of life (after 65) due to various reasons. A lot of research has been already done in this area and there is a lot of literature available about this for anyone who is interested in the reasons behind it. So, this argument of Dr. Naik about being more females per male in the world and especially in developed countries doesn't stand, rather, it's a totally opposite scenario (at least in the 15-64 age group).  Even if we take the example of some Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE we can see in all age groups (except the age group above 65) M/F ratio is greater than 1 (in UAE it's 2.74 for the age group of 15-64). Let's have a look at data for some selected countries from ref. 2. 
 
Country/region
at birth
(CIA estimate)
under 15
15–64
over 65
total
at birth
WDB estimate)

Afghanistan
1.05
1.05
1.05
0.92
1.05
1.06
Brazil
1.05
1.04
0.98
0.73
0.98
1.05
Canada
1.056
1.05
1.02
0.78
0.98
1.05
India
1.12
1.13
1.07
0.9
1.08
1.08
Iran
1.05
1.05
1.02
0.92
1.02
1.05
Pakistan
1.10
1.06
1.05
0.88
1.09
1.05
Saudi Arabia
1.05
1.04
1.29
1.06
1.18
1.03
United States
1.05
1.04
1.00
0.75
0.97
1.05
UAE
1.05
1.05
2.74
1.82
2.19
1.05
UK
1.05
1.05
1.03
0.76
0.98
1.05

Now after looking at this table who has the possibility of becoming 'public property' by his logic, male or female? And based on this logic will he support polyandry (one female marrying more than one male) to maintain social harmony? I don't understand what is his aim behind misguiding people like this? Why he is doing this? If he wants to preach Islam or spread the teachings of the Qur'an, there is nothing wrong with it, but why tp insult other religions or scriptures? What does he want to achieve by doing that? He claims to study comparative religion, but all he does is insult religions other than Islam. Many others also do similar things, they compare their own beliefs with others to show how theirs is the best, and Dr. Naik is also one of them. I don't know why people like him believe that they have to prove all others wrong to show that they are right. He is using all his talent or knowledge for the wrong purpose, the sooner he understands this is better for him. Millions of Muslims follow him, and he can use his influence to do something better rather than trying to insult people from other faiths who attend his gatherings.

A lot of research has been done in the area of anthropology and social science. Many marriage systems, like polygamy, polyandry, group marriage, monogamy, etc., have been studied and researched. Based on all this research it is clear that with experience our society evolved from polygamy to monogamy (one spouse at any one time). Scriptures or books have nothing to do with that. In the modern world, most countries have laws related to marriage, they don't try to follow any religious book for family law. Everything in our lives can not be controlled by any single religious book. Scriptures can be a valuable source of information for their followers but they should not dictate what we should do in our bedrooms, or what we should eat or wear, common sense is enough for this. 

Thanks for reading and please share your views.

References:
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)