A NOBLE VALUE OR PHILOSOPHY THAT YOU FIND VERY INSPIRING IS PROBABLY JUST A BEAUTIFULLY PACKAGED PERSONAL VENOM.
ESPECIALLY IF IT IS BEING PEDDLED OUT WITH VEHEMENCE.
“Should a woman be identified for her own merits, or through her relationships?”
Recently, a noted Indian journalist stoked a discussion around this sensitive and important question about the inherent patriarchy in the Indian society.
Of course, for many pseudo-feminists who joined this rant did find fulfilment venting out their venom and must have thoroughly enjoyed the gall, but many others who were caught into this cross-fire didn’t even realize that they had willingly jumped into a ditch deliberately crafted to make waves by having them fall into it.
This journalist had taken umbrage to the players of the Indian Women’s Hockey team being referred to as “daughters of India“, and questioned why a woman, regardless of her high achievements, can only be identified by “relationships”. To quote her, she found it “reductive” and “misogynist”.
It is so tempting to fall into such traps. A vehement support or a vehement opposition to this statement – both are equally a manifestation of falling into a well-crafted pitfall, and zombies that we are in our every day lives, we keep falling into such ditches like proud lemmings jumping off high cliffs, without even wanting to find out who dug this ditch for us and why.
It would have been one thing to refer to the Indian hockey captain consistently as “J K Singh’s daughter” rather than calling her by her name. THAT – I agree, would be equivalent of identifying a woman by her relationship. Or, consistently referring to a high-achieving woman as Mrs SURNAME rather than calling her by her personal name – I would give it to this one, too.
But to call a group of bright young women as “daughters of India” – patriarchy?
In our content-driven world, where we only hear, understand and respond to “words“, without even worrying that words are always shaped by “intent“, we often miss out the fact that a word is just a concatenation of letters. A sentence is just a combination of words.
I could assemble any arrangement of letters and words, without meaning a thing, and throw the ball in public. You are most welcome to grab the ball and keep fighting among yourselves on the validity of this combination of letters and words, while I laugh all my way to my intended outcome.
It is not even worth mentioning that the journalist who said this belongs to a religion where eminent, highly respected religious leaders are on video claiming that “a father has the first sexual right to a daughter, as he is the one has done all the hard work raising her“, or “a wife is a husband’s harvesting lands. You can enter your harvesting land from whichever side you want“. No, these are not an education on sex, but religious sermons. A religion, where it is almost a cardinal sin to NOT look at a woman as a “moving assemblage of assets”, and they do it so well that often even the THICKEST line between female relationships appear blurred.
But this discussion is not about that, either.
This discussion is about something totally different. Why a horde of dimwit pseudo-feminists join the rant is easy to explain. We expect them to. I would be shocked if they didn’t.
What is not very obvious for us lemmings who fall into such ditches day in and day out is this – why would a journalist object to national players being referred to as “daughters of India”?
It can be laid out as a bet that every national player who was referred this way would have gloated in the warmth of this affectionate phrase.
Where do our thoughts, words and actions comes from?
We are rarely aware of what gives rise to our thoughts, words and actions. Our words, and actions, the final tangible “products” of our cognitive process, are not direct reflections of what we think, feel or believe in. Before a combination of our thoughts and emotions find a verbal manifestation, a lot goes within us to give these the final shape that is perceived in the world out there.
The primary ingredient that shapes what we exactly speak is – “INTENT” – the invisible magical wand that dresses up the foulest of our thoughts, feelings and emotions into a pretty, charming doll that everybody wants to engage with.
Just as the behaviour of objects in vacuum is considerably different than the behaviour of objects when subjected to the viscosity or pressure or movement of air, our behaviour in vacuum would be unrecognizably different from the way we behave in our every day lives.
Our tangible actions and words are a complex and confusing mix of a thousand parameters, a lot of which comes from external influence, context or objectives.
We never “speak”. We always “speak to someone”, “speak at someone”, or “speak because of something”.
A very obvious example is the way the mindset of a lot of Hindus have transformed in the last one decade. As a free thinking Hindu just about a decade ago, words like “Hindu Nation” was almost non-existent in my world. I would have even opposed such an idea. To me, living by the freedom of my own philosophy, my own ideology, my own sense of morality or ethics (or lack of them), was of foremost importance.
As was for most other people like me.
What changed in these years?
Nothing in the tangible world. The world was what it had been for centuries.
What changed was an “awareness“. For good or for bad, the social media took the machinations of the evil minds to everyone’s doorstep. There is a reason why you see memes floating around urging you to switch off the Social Media, or the TV, and they promise that if you do so for one month, you will be at peace, and the world would be a better place again.
Just think of this – who in the world loves you so selflessly that they would take all the pains to create memes and quotes tirelessly to ask you to keep off the Social Media and all media for your own good? Who do you think wishes you THAT well?
That is part of exactly the same scheming that we are discussing in this post. They are not just asking you to switch off the Social Media or the TV. They are literally asking you to switch off the spotlight which is making the functioning of the evil minds so difficult, which they could execute so efficiently operating in the dark in the last several centuries.
This spotlight of social media, this hyper-activism of the “awake” intelligentsia is throwing spanner in the works of the devil and the woke alike.
What changed in the last decade or so was the awareness of what lay behind these gold-plated masks. They glittered brilliantly for years in the dark, but when the spotlight of Social Media shone over them, the truth crumbled out. Their intentions became a commonplace knowledge. What became so obvious, with the websites, original manuscripts, religious texts becoming public was a total rubbishing of misconceived notions that had been fed into our unsuspecting minds. We got to know that the doses of the drugs of “every religion taught the same thing” or “a few bad eggs do not make a religion bad” was served to us not as medicine, but narcotics, so that we can enjoy our slumber while they carried out what they intended to.
It became so clear to everyone that these bad eggs were not an anomaly, but were laid by the founders of these ideologies themselves.
What became so clear that everyone asking you to “lend the other cheek” or “not respond with an eye for an eye” was doing it in order to have a free run slapping you and gouging your eyes out. What became relevant that those who were talking about “love for entire humanity” had a very explicit condition that you would be defined as human only if you became one of them. What became very clear that everyone wanting you to fight for “one world“, “borderless countries“, “equal wealth for all” were doing so to intrude into your borders, seize your kingdoms and grab your properties.
What changed in the last one decade was the realization that every philosophy was primarily aimed at stealing from you.
When you have multiple parties with religious duties aiming at making you one of them, you just cannot continue sleeping like zombie.
In a world where everything is up for grabs, you have to protect what is yours.
All conversation around humanity, ethics, morality are scheming machinations by the manipulators to appeal to your sense of higher self, to drop your weapons so that you can be beheaded with pleasure, with all the time in the world to relish every cut they make at you.
This awareness was what made millions of Hindus like me to bat for “Hindutva”. If you do not grab it, others who have been working tirelessly for centuries and have all the skills and resources at their command, will, and would leave no space even to live with the freedom of a free-thinking individual.
Millions had to assert being a “Hindu” just to ward off impositions that loom so imminent.
Hence, what we speak, what we act, and heck what we think, feel and emote have a lot to do with the awareness of the world around us. In a world, where every thing that we hear or see is a trickle-down of a universal propaganda, we need to guard the space around us.
The thoughts, words and actions of a majority of Hindus to the current day world-order is a reaction to the awareness of what threats await us if we continue to slumber. How we behave in vacuum is quite different from how we behave under atmospheric pressure.
So, why did this journalist object to the “daughters of India” being referred to as “daughters of India”?
To understand that, you only need to look as far as her everyday tweets, and if you are a little more inquisitive, you might stumble on a year-old video of hers, where she made a public statement, urging her ilk to “use an inclusive language till we become that ideal society where OUR religious identities, beliefs and slogans gain an acceptance. This is not an ideological compromise, but a change in strategy“.
Why is any discussion either for or against this statement a stupid pitfall to fall into?
The statement had nothing to do with any ideology, any belief, any opinion, any social reform, any progressive thought, any feminist view, any battle against patriarchy or matriarchy, none of these. This journalist doesn’t have the remotest connection with any of these, nor does have any capability to invoke any of these.
It just so happened that the Prime Minister of India referred to the Indian team as “daughters of India”, and it was an obligatory religious duty of this journalist to rubbish everything that the Prime Minister of India says in public domain, and make him look evil for whatever he says or does.
Of course, she is not naive enough to name him and get trolled for being a jealous journo. She has to gold-plate it, and make it glitter and shine before throwing it out in the public to get the world to grab it by both hands.
Rather than ridiculing the Prime Minster, she turned it into a debate about female individuality, and her need to be recognized for her own individual merit than being recognized as “daughters of India”. The intent was to create a narrative that would automatically dub the Prime Minister as a regressive patriarch who doesn’t look at a woman for what she is, but only notices the relationships that define her.
What all the “feminists” who chimed in with her didn’t know that they were not getting into an informed debate about creating an ideal society, but just responding to a toxic vomit of an eternally toxic person.
Every single humanitarian, philosophical view being peddled and propagated out there vehemently is someone’s evil machination, scheming propaganda, OR someone’s personal venom and toxin spilling out.
Falling for these and start debating these in public for or against only helps them reach their goal.
What is being peddled out there are not “values“. Only “toned down strategies“. These will remain toned down only till they are able to create the “ideal society” where their identities, beliefs and slogans gain the widespread majority and support.
Once that is in place, they would not feel the need to tone down anything and would be free to run amok with abandon.
Whenever you are falling into, debating for or against any abstract “-ism“, including and especially, sublime ones like “Human-ism“, you are polishing their masks and adding to their noise, cacophony and chaos they are dying to unleash on the world.
Behind Pretty Masks 