सरबजीत की मौत बेहद दुखद खबर है। ये अलग बात है कि मुझे आश्चर्य नहीं हुआ। ये मौत सम्भावित थी। ये एक तयशुदा मौत थी। पकिस्तान जैसे कानून विहीन और अराजकता के शिखर पर स्थित देश के लिए किसी की मौत क्या मायने रख सकती है! वो तो केवल ओसामा बिन लादेन को शरण दे सकती है फूलप्रूफ। दाऊद इब्राहिम और अजहर महमूद को ही बेहतर पनाह दे सकती है। सरबजीत की हिफाज़त करके उसे क्या मिलता? लिहाजा सरबजीत का मरना तय था। कसाब और अफज़ल गुरु के फांसी लग जाने के बाद अन्दर ही अन्दर सुलगते पाकिस्तान के लिए सरबजीत से बेहतर बलि का बकरा तो कोई हो ही नहीं सकता था। सरबजीत की मौत तो उसी वक्त तय हो गयी थी जब पाकिस्तान समर्थित दो आतंकवादी कसाब और अफज़ल गुरु फांसी पे लटका दिए गए।
ये शान्ति वार्ता की नौटंकी, सरबजीत को माफ़ी देने की नौटंकी, उसका बेहतर इलाज़ कराने की नौटंकी ये सब आवरण उस कुटिलता को छुपाने के लिए था जिसकी झलक हर नज़र रखने वाले को साफ़ साफ़ दिख रही थी। सिर्फ ना देख पाने का भ्रम भारत की सरकार कर रही थी। खैर सरबजीत की मौत से एक बात तो साफ़ हुई। दो राष्ट्रों की राजनीति में मोहरे बनते है आम आदमी। जब मै राष्ट्र शब्द का इस्तेमाल कर रहा हो तो इसका मतलब ये नहीं है कि पाकिस्तान को मै एक राष्ट्र के रूप में देख रहा हूँ। ये एक राष्ट्र नहीं है। शैतानी लोगो का हुजूम है। शैतानी लोगो का भीड़ तंत्र है जहा पे राष्ट्रपति कोर्ट से भागकर नज़रबंद हो जाता है। खैर मै बता रहा था कि दो राष्ट्रों की दुश्मनी का शिकार सबसे कमज़ोर और मासूम लोग होते है।
कोई बताये सरबजीत का गुनाह क्या था कि पहले तो सोलह साल जेल में काटे बिना किसी गुनाह के और फिर इस तरह बर्बर मौत? उसकी मौत का जिम्मेदार कौन सा राष्ट्र ज्यादा है? रीढविहीन नेताओ के जरिए शान्ति की बात करता भारत या गुनाहों को साए में पलता पाकिस्तान? खैर एक बात तो समझ में आई की जेल में कैदियों को न्याय पाने की आशा से नहीं रखा जाता है बल्कि अक्सर सरकार की आँख की किरकरी बन चुके लोगो को चुपके से खत्म कर देने के लिए रखा जाता है। चूकि मौत पाकिस्तान में एक भारतीय की हुई है लिहाज़ा मानवाधिकार की वकालत करने वालो का ना भौकना लाजमी हो जाता है। ये तब भौकते है अगर भूले से कोई जम्मू कश्मीर में कोई भारतीय सैनिक के हाथो मारा जाता है। इनकी मुखरता तब देखते बनती है।
सरबजीत की आत्मा को शान्ति मिले। मेरी तरफ से यही विनम्र श्रद्धांजलि है सरकारी नौटंकी के इस दौर में। सबसे दुखद यही है कि मरते सिर्फ मासूम आदमी ही है। बिलखते है शोक संतप्त परिजन ही है। मुल्क के नेता तो हर अवसर को कैश कर लेते है। दुःख हो या सुख हर रास्ता सत्ता की तरफ ही मुड़ जाता है।
” तुमने जिस ख़ून को मक़्तल में दबाना चाहा
आज वह कूचा-ओ-बाज़ार में आ निकला है
कहीं शोला, कहीं नारा, कहीं पत्थर बनकर
ख़ून चलता है तो रूकता नहीं संगीनों से
सर उठाता है तो दबता नहीं आईनों से
जिस्म की मौत कोई मौत नहीं होती है
जिस्म मिट जाने से इन्सान नहीं मर जाते
धड़कनें रूकने से अरमान नहीं मर जाते
साँस थम जाने से ऐलान नहीं मर जाते
होंठ जम जाने से फ़रमान नहीं मर जाते
जिस्म की मौत कोई मौत नहीं होती “
During one of the conversations with close friend Carmen, who happens to be a gifted conversationalist, the idea of men wearing skirt came to haunt my imagination. She picked up the idea from some fashion show. Her casual reference to men in skirt made me remind of the famous phrase that there is “method in madness”. If anyone wishes to realize how madness has become a passion in our times, the present age is fittest time to witness the mad show. Just organize a fashion show and introduce horrible sense of dressing as a new passion among youths. No wonder men wearing skirts does not sound amusing. Anything is possible in our times. Overnight we can find “he” emerging as “she” the next day! Now I am wondering what else could follow if men start wearing skirts?
The purpose of fashion shows also defies my sensibilities. Often the trends shown in it are not meant for masses. The dresses exhibited in it are beyond the range of common people. Still we find an unending craze for such fashion shows. Remember the movie “Fashion”? That movie disclosed the harsh realities prevalent in world of fashion. Anyway, I am talking about the craziness existing in our real world, wherein the distinction between men and women is getting reduced with each passing moment, and even in the virtual world with help of Photoshop. The write-up is merely a humorous take on the whole issue.
Notice the fact that wearing “ear rings” by the boys is new craze. My friend endorsed usage of ear rings by boys since that make guys attain a look that attracts females. I feel that in every man there is female essence and in every woman there is some male element. Only today I saw a girl riding a motor bike meant for men. Few days back, I had seen an young girl having two girls pillioned behind her on a slender scooty! That makes it very clear that there is urge in both the sexes to give way to each other’s essence. Has anyone heard “Aake Seedhi Lagi Dil Pe” song from movie Half Ticket? Kishore Kumar has given voice to male and female characters on whom this song has been picturized!! Pran and Kishore Kumar have performed in mind-boggling way in this song. And that’s why this song always makes me smile! In many Indian movies dance sequences have male actors disguised as females. The same has been the case with female actresses as well.
Right now, I am wondering what would follow the skirt? I am sure male bras are next hot item. Please read this excerpt borrowed from news item:
“Japanese men are getting in touch with their feminine side thanks to a new trend in male lingerie.They are hitching up their man boobs (moobs), finding out their cup sizes, and getting into male bras. Akiko is the woman behind this underwear revolution. She started selling the bras online from her Tokyo shop – The Wishroom. She said: ‘I think more and more men are becoming interested in bras.’ “
Now if that’s the case I feel new perceptions would emerge. Now men, like women, would often be found complaining: I found her staring at my assets !!! New harassment laws would also be introduced for men that would take cognizance of men’s complaints, accusing the passers by of indecent gesture !!! I feel that such tactics are very cleverly promoted by market. That makes them sell their products. That’s the reason why “Mardo wali cream” (fairness cream for men) has come in existence and actors like Shah Rukh Khan, having dark complexioned wives, are promoting it. They are making us develop guilt complexes to promote the sale of fairness cream for men!!! Anyway, for me black is beautiful.
I request the likes of Carmen not to create chaos in society by feeling excited about idea of seeing men in skirts. I love women with long hairs. I am sure not many would love to see a woman proclaiming bald is beautiful! Please be traditional, at least, in some matters. Women in long hairs are epitome of sensuality. Unfortunately, it’s age of short cuts. No wonder women love anything from short hairs to short skirts.
A trap is always there for genuine souls. A sponsored hand is always there. Negative forces are all the time trying best to keep you confused about the reality. A truly conscious mind is aware of all these developments quite well.The sponsored love, sponsored hatred, sponsored disputes, sponsored issues, and , above all, sponsored whistle blowers, supported by hidden negative forces, make the cause of genuine souls weak. That’s the worst development. That’s why if there arises any opportunity to wipe out negative forces, do it well, not for the sake of one’s natural moral duty but for the sake of cause of genuine souls. It would help to create space for right people.
The only option left for positive forces is to keep doing what’s in their hands. One cannot change the whole world.That not even an Avatara (Lord’s incarnation) can do. However, we must do all that’s possible in our own capacity. At least, in that regard, we should not be reluctant in playing our part well. Our whole energy gets lost in blaming others. Let’s learn to play our part well. Our small insignificant steps also matter a lot in resurrecting right values. I agree negative forces are in operation in much organized way but that’s no excuse for the right souls not to do anything. Let’s play our part well. It’s entirely in our hands either to be swayed by Manisha’s innocence or Katrina’s sex appeal!
We need better rulers. We need conscious individuals, who can get their priorities right. That’s the only way we can bring better changes. Or else, a “better future” shall always remain an utopia. It’s a sad commentary on state of present day affairs that people at helm of affairs are behaving in irresponsible manner. This tendency has to be curbed that you can fool all the people all the time !
And as we do that, let’s allow the wrong souls to laugh at our efforts. Their ridiculing, their taunting, their silly remarks and their devaluation should only encourage the right souls to remain on right track. A good and powerful soul should refuse to be disappointed. Let that’s be the case with all good souls really wishing to act as agent of change. Let’s that be the guiding force of all positive elements. I don’t know about others but my aim is absolutely clear: Wipe out the negative forces in totality as much as you can.
But be careful as you get involved in the process of resurrection of better ideals. “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.” So never ignore the strength of stupid people. The power of stupidity should not be undervalued. It would take few minutes to wipe out Lord Rama but the arrival of another Lord Rama takes place million of years. It’s easy to demolish any good formation but to simultaneously create another beautiful world at the same speed is beyond the capabilities of human beings. That could be better understood if we witness the impact of atomic attack in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The future generations paid heavy price for attack which lasted for few minutes. “लम्हों ने खता की है…सदियों ने सजा पाई ” ( The errors got committed in few seconds, but many generations paid the price). Therefore, the good souls need to be wise enough while handling the “Aasurs” ( Demons) and “Aasuri Vrittis” ( Demoniacal Orientations). The beautiful souls should realize their worth and keep themselves safe until the “Lord’s Will” finally ask them to quit the drama of life. This beautiful Urdu couplet says all:
हजारों साल नरगिस अपनी बेनूरी पर रोती है,
बड़ी मुश्किल से होता है चमन में दीदावर पैदा।
– Allama Iqbal
( For a thousand years the narcissus has been lamenting its blindness;
With great difficulty the one with true vision is born in the garden )
I am neither misogynist nor anti-feminist, and not even a Men’s Rights Activist (MRA). Many of my friends working for these organisations feel I should be one like them in a formal way, but being on a different route, I prefer not to identify with any organization, be they ones from spiritual or political background. So it would be useless to measure the worth of author’s views as someone acting as mouthpiece of any organization. Let’s not forget that to come up with entirely different set of facts, a different version of reality not in tune with set patterns, is not bizarre. On the contrary, it’s the result of having viewed the world from close angles! An open mind would certainly realize it. To follow a different route does not make anyone regressive, biased, much less a Talibani with a capacity to issue a fatwa! Ridiculous assertion!
Why should every analyst of our times present a syrupy version of happenings taking place in world of present times women, wherein “every bad thing any man has ever committed highlighted and exaggerated; every bit of good systematically undermined, vilified or ignored”? It’s only that I feel inclined to represent the cause of men, not out sense of any “same gender” feeling but only from justice point of view, which demands that other side should also be heard well. It’s the other side of the fence that I am presenting with total sincerity, different perspective and neutral stance !
कुछ नहीं दिखता था अंधेरे में मगर, आंखें तो थीं,
ये कैसी रोशनी आई कि सब अंधे हो गए।।
(Though we cannot see in dark with our eyes,
It’s strange that we cannot see even as there is light around us)….
Feminism, as a movement, was started in late nineteenth century to demand female rights in society. “At the end of the nineteenth century was that women began to realize that it is unfair for them to be constantly under the power of men simply because the social system has traditionally favored males.” At this point, it’s inappropriate to discuss the impact of this movement in West, but this movement seems to have lost its impact there in modern times. May be because women have gained enough rights there but, in my eyes, it’s because both have realized well that battle of the sexes serves no purpose other than breeding animosity. “To know the road ahead, ask those coming back”.
The Indian women, who have misplaced beliefs that having all the rights ensures better days should, at least, have the guts to critically analyze the impact of such divisive and lethal movement in Western societies. Anyway, it’s better that I confine myself to Indian landscape. It’s better to understand the essential elements of Indian society, viewing it not through the myopic terms coined by the so-called progressive elements, but in a conscious way to tear apart the great game of gender equality. It’s interesting that many arguments have been forwarded to show the worth of female mind. Many love to cite the growing academic excellence of Indian women as one of the parameters to upheld the intellectual superiority of women. However, wisdom and real understanding have nothing to do with academic excellence. Many of the great contributors, in fact, nearly all creative geniuses, were very poor in academic terms plus they were never part of institutionalized structures. I say that not to lessen the importance of academic excellence but to highlight the worth of education offered in Indian schools and universities, which are killing all the good elements which a child possesses.
The Indian society might have so-called patriarchal model but it’s a sheer diabolical myth that it was framed to suppress the position of women, much less, exploit the women. The Indian society has always been women-centered society. The concept like “”Ardhanareeswara”, aimed at equality of women, which ensured that Shiva without female principle “Shakti” means nothing, always made Indian women enjoy dignified position in Indian society. Even in modern Indian Hindu families, having a balanced and sensible approach, the women always gain upper hand in all issues. All important issues have her consent, wherein her views gain as much importance than any male member. Have a look at the marriage vows. They in clear terms ensure that women come to enjoy an equal ground.
Gribhnami te saubhagatvaya hastam mayapatya jardastirayathasah|
Bhagoaryyamma savita purandhiramahyam tvadurgaharpatya devah||
That is – “Oh dear! On this auspicious occasion of our life, I take your hand in mine in the presence of invoked deities. Oh blessed woman! You be with me as a fortunate partner for a very long time. I hand over the control of my family in your hands, discharge your duties joyously.”
It’s a fallacious assertion that men enjoyed privileges in past while the women remained an oppressed lot. “Society is largely constructed for the benefit of women and children and always has been, otherwise it doesn’t survive. …It takes a gigantic lack of imagination (usually the sole province of baby feminists) to believe that women wanted the economic and political involvement they claim now when the demands and risks of these endeavours were as they were then (ancient times)”. The Indian society is also no exception. It’s always portrayed as if women in the past were some sort of domestic slaves, devoid of any sort of right to decide by themselves. Well, such a claim can only be made by people who have not bothered to know Indian society in its entirety. Even the most ancient ladies in Indian history had the right to chose their husbands via a ceremony called Swyamvara. The women were well versed in scriptural knowledge and many among them were qualified scholars.
True, with advent of time many of the glorious traditions (the great spirit which led to their origin) faded away to give way to their corrupt versions. It would not be out of place to mention that practice like dowry was basically the Streedhan to ensure that a woman is “not left wanting anything after the wedding”. The impression of men being unconcerned about the rights of women is quite powerfully projected but lesser known aspect is that men have played an instrumental role in any movement aimed at improvement of women. The greatest example in this category is abolition of Sati Pratha and banning of child marriages. Anyway, the division in labour in Indian society was done by the sages, who played an impartial role while framing laws related with basic structure of Indian society. It favoured none.
Had Indian society been truly patriarchal in nature, as suggested by new age scholars, it would have never led to emergence of bold Indian women who always played equal role in Indian society. Be they queens of ancient era, or the women freedom fighters of pre-Independence era, the Indian women played a significant role. It would not have been possible had women been denied the right to make choices. The modern Indian society is facing new set of complexities but the solution is not devaluation of ancient practices. The empowerment of Indian women does not mean women be entitled to make arbitrary choices on the grounds that men also did the same! In fact, it presupposes that men enjoyed unlimited freedom of all sorts. It’s totally false and erroneous notion. Their choices were also determined by the prescribed rules, keeping in mind the interests of women and children. Let’s be clear that the empowerment of women does not mean to give way to propaganda that “women alone have sufferings and women alone have problems in life”.
At present, the situation has become pretty confusing and dangerous for the growth of Indian society. The men are being repeatedly portrayed as abusers, leading to anti-family and anti-marriage laws. Indeed, there are problems related with Indian women but then effective measures in form of stringent laws are already there to take note of them. There are many institutions to take care of plight of women, whose recommendations have led to new rules, fresh amendments and etc. in form of Domestic Violence Act, Dowry Act and Maintenance Act, to name a few. In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, the Supreme Court of India in 1997 laid down the guidelines to ensure that sexual harassment at the workplace does not take place, which resulted in framing of the “The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Bill, 2012”. The problems pertaining to women are being systematically dealt with, and much of the problems have not arisen out of lack of concern for the cause of women in Indian society, but because of lack of effective implementation. So it’s really shrewd to suggest that patriarchal society favours men!
Let’s understand that in name of personal freedom and personal choices one cannot give way to lifestyle which ensures conflicts and dilemmas of disturbing nature. A choice has to be in league with prevalent norms and customs. Or else, women need to effectively satisfy that their choices would not lead to turbulent state of affairs. There is nothing like absolute freedom. She has to convince what would be the state of affairs in such a society, which allows women unrestricted freedom in name of personal choices? That’s because, if there comes no plausible explanation, and still we went in for such a society, it would be hard to wipe out the new set of complexities. That’s the case in other parts of the hemisphere. To see the resistance offered by men, or by the people belonging to old order of living patterns as an attempt to hold back the privileges enjoyed in the patriarchal set-up is not the right interpretation. It’s also not fear to lose the power or monopoly. On the contrary, it’s an attempt to prevent the citadels of society from crumbling down.
It’s simply not issue of having choices/making choices in free manner; it’s more about long term consequences of having choices, which indicate the high probability of single women, pills, abortions, extra-marital relations, same-sex relations, stress-related burdens, broken families, deviant kids and etc.? What about the dangerous interference in the evolutionary process, wherein for ages men played the role of protector and women the role of nurturing the kids? With this kind of perverted “role reversal”, are’t we on the wrong track? One of my friends, during gender related conversation, referring to Sunita Williams ( as if only after that Indian women learnt the art to make exceptional choices) stated that she did not have kids for the sake of work! It would be suffice to say that if all women made such a choice, it would not be hard to imagine the fate of evolution of human species! However, this is classic example of selective approach, wherein a woman seeks benefits of traditional society when she feels trapped by her weaknesses but she is absolutely modern when it comes to making choices and rights. That’s paradox at its best since.
After all, it involves taming of the men species to ensure that inequality gets reduced! That has begun in a cruel fashion. Men are now supposed to do something which is never their strength, and a retaliatory gesture on their part is enough to get them the tag of being an abuser and an oppressor! Who will bear the consequences of “placing men and women in a conflicting role and creating confusion in values”? But that’s still not as ominous as an attempt to create a society which denies even the right to protest on part of men. “Under cover of the notion of chivalry, as understood by Modern Feminism, Political and Sentimental Feminists alike would deprive men of the most elementary rights of self-defence against women and would exonerate the latter practically from all punishment for the most dastardly crimes against men. They know they can rely upon the support of the sentimental section of public opinion with some such parrot cry of: “Treat a woman in this way!”/ “What! Hit a woman!”.
It’s interesting that women learnt to move out of their houses, refusing to remain confined to prison like state of affairs within the home, and began to notice that world outside is a different affair altogether. It missed the “having all the pleasure factor” which they had assumed prevailed in men’s life as they began to venture outside. The world would remain a hell’s replica and it would not going to change whether women remains inside the home or moves outside, fulfilling their aspirations and dreams in fullest manner. However, having said that, let’s make the world safer and better for the women community. Nobody said that problems pertaining to women’s life, be they of any type, sexual assault, low wages, discrimination, should be ignored.
What I wish to suggest is that while dealing with women’s issues, the gender politics should not get mixed with the reforms. An attempt to distort the intimate relationship with men and women should not become the prime motive in guise of welfare. Sadly, that’s how one feels while analyzing the current state of affairs, wherein right from biological facts, psychological facts and legal truths, all are being selectively quoted, or quoted in perverted manner to suit the vested interests acting as agents of change in world of women.
That’s why all conscious souls, interested in right developments, should become alert when “there is no distinction between potential and probability. An allegation suffices for proof. Hearsay is taken for gospel.” (Charles E. Corry). Rohan, Men’s Rights activist, Bangalore, conveys the same sentiments in a different way: ” Women have the right to be seated when in a bus or in a train. They have the right to 50% reservation in govt. jobs and academics. They have the right to claim alimony and maintenance, even in a live-in relationship. They have only rights and men only have duties. This is called equality, according to feminazis.”
Precisely, it’s for the very same reason it has become need of the hour to present the happenings taking place in world of men in an aggressive and conscious manner. The happier side of the movements aimed to improve the life of women has been “demolition of the idea that women are inherently nice”. The thing that’s now taking place is that discrimination and abuse stories related with women are being presented both in right and wrong way, with help of paid media. Facts, right and wrong, are flowing thick and past to show that how women have been underprivileged and suppressed lot. No one is bothered to check either the authenticity of facts nor the source, forget about probing them from wide angles.
Anyway, since all this is happening in the name of ensuring a better world for women, I am but compelled to endorse them. But with a condition and appeal: Let’s also reveal the true picture of the sufferings, pains, humiliation, torture faced by men side-by-side the stories which talk about sufferings of women, with the same honesty and intensity! That alone will bring the true story, true picture. At present, we are witnessing with abuse stories related with women only. That’s unfair to hear/see only one side in any story and jump to flawed conclusions applicable to totality.
Why such a wish irks those concerned with rights of women? Will society be a better place only if you enable the women to have all the rights? Why shouldn’t the rights of men be discussed in the same breath? Why should not adequate attention be paid to silent sufferings of men? It leaves me aghast that tragedies, stories of discrimination associated with men, their precarious state of affairs being involved in hazardous and tough activities and regular interaction with dilemmas and ironies of peculiar type are being talked about in matter-of-fact tones. Worse, any attempt to bring the truth get checkmated by giving the impression that since men are about to lose the power, lose the privileges, these are reactionary backlash. That’s an absurd and fleeting observation. The right interpretation is that men have now begun to get organized to make “gender equality” attain a right shape, a right balance, a right proportion. And this would never stop.
P.S.: Many thanks to my friend, Rohan, whose views I have borrowed from the conversation we had on Instablogs on one of my posts having the same theme. He is Men’s Rights Activist hailing from Bangalore.
Society Always Tilted Towards Women
The women community seeking “equality of gender”, should either accept this concept in entirety, or else, follow desirable norms. The point is why so much insistence on rights for behaving as you want, for doing whatever you want? Why not give way to responsibilities shared, supposedly always considered as role of men since time immemorial! That includes all menial jobs requiring intense labour in tough conditions. That also means serving the men community, inside homes, for ages. The men community did that for ages, supplying money like ATM machine, despite suffering severely at hands of cruel wives. That too silently! These employed, high salaried women, should also marry unemployed youths and offer them all comforts for many centuries without feeling the pinch just the way men community did that in past! I am just trying to convey that this drama of gender equality gained momentum in wake of the world becoming a sophisticated place to live, largely shaped by men and women in the same patriarchal mode, which the bunch of derailed feminists saw as an obstacle for the emancipation of woman.
I am not interested in narrating the consequences of feminism in other parts of the world, but in Indian context, it has given rise to new set of complexities. There was already healthy division of labour but with the rise of feminism, or call it curse of modernism, the world inside home got projected as insult to the capabilities of women. The traditional roles were projected as subservient. However, as the modern women, shattering so-called shackles, stepped out of the confines of home, they realized that world is not bed of roses, or on par with their expectations, largely because of limitations caused by their physicality. So another set of calculated efforts came into action, to make the outside world seem a safer domain. And for that very reason, males were advised to co-operate inside homes, doing household work, after all, that’s what true equality demands! That also meant loving “fathers, brothers, sons” all be presented as “potential rapists” so that a false alarm can be raised, and thus, International bodies can come to dictate us, calling it a nation, which does not respects and honours women! The problems pertaining to women were highlighted in exaggerated way so as to ensure that hocus-pocus, called feminism, can make its presence felt in India.
It’s not that the problems related to woman community do not exist but a shrewd attempt to use them to create rift between the relationship, using the same bothering issues, is simply an attempt to hit hard at the cherished institutions called family and marriage. One never said that problems related with women be it female foeticide, rising sexual crimes, health concerns, low literacy level and etc. should never be dealt with in a conscious way. However, why should one not be alarmed when these very issues became a part of the plot to destabilize Indian society? It’s amazing that lesbians, drunk female girls, prostitutes not by condition but by choice, females involved in all sorts of complex relationship should be hailed as appropriate but the same women living inside the confines of home as an ideal wife is seen as insult to womanhood! I mean what sort of values are being professed in name of equality? What’s being achieved? It leaves one in deep pain that even the most heinous crimes “rapes” are also being used as tool to ensure that gender imbalance sharpens in name of equality.
This sort of heightened false consciousness in Indian women is a necessity because the governments in future would largely be shaped by minorities and women, and so it’s necessary to appease them, to keep them ignorant about real implications of chasing imported theories related with equality. At global level, this sort of destabilized society, wherein men and women, are living highly individualistic lives, caters well to the needs of consumerist society. So why would corporate demons make women aware of consequences of aping such wayward lifestyle, which is resulting in single women, divorced couples, broken homes, fatherless children, eventually leading to rise in crime level too? It’s safer for them that women come out of their homes, work for them, leading to greater productivity.
On the other hand, political class is all prepared to use them as a tool to make their political dreams come alive with their help. Only to attain such diabolical interests, the concept called feminism-the great game of gender equality-came in effect. It’s a myth that it got introduced to make their lives better. At least, in India, it’s not the case. Indeed, women have a set of their own problems, but to remove them, was it necessary to fall in the trap of complex notions of feminism, having goals which even Western world has failed to exhibit in totality or demonstrate with perfection? However, the problem starts when New Delhi starts living the pattern of life found in New York and Washington. That’s why borrowed concepts become a necessity. That’s why “equality” also becomes a necessity. That’s why a highly reputed media publication is bound to see “Sunny Leone” as woman of exceptional talent and merit. And that’s why it’s necessary to give rise to conflicts wherein woman is equal when it comes to enjoy benefits of modern society but woman feels no longer equal when threat is directly to her body. At that point, she is woman! Be equal to enjoy benefit, but be a woman in helpless positions!
Bringing qualitative differences in lives of woman is quite a different issue than using these very issues to demonize men, or, in fact, use the same issues to shatter the citadels of society. The positive side of this gender equality is that it has allowed men to reshape their own priorities. It has given them a huge chance to realize their own worth and get united to fight for the cause of men in a spirited way-something never done until now. This gender equality is a great phenomenon. At least, now everything related with woman shall be put on trial and it’s a great chance to shatter all stereotyped notions with them. They are no holy cows, and they are as shrewd and manipulative as men needs to be ably projected. It’s a myth that they are a weaker sex and that they were the harassed lot in past. They have always enjoyed deep respect, care, both in external world and within the four walls of home. However, it’s ironical, and diabolical too, that instead of highlighting this aspect, all the men got clubbed in one category of abusers of women. So it’s time to tell that who actually has been abusing-man or woman? The men community should discuss their own issues in a more organized way-their concerns, their dilemmas, their worries, their pain and their sufferings etc. should get highlighted in a better way. It’s for them to decide that they have to live like a male or as a female in a male body. That’s the real agenda of feminism- to curb the instincts of men to make them in tune with absurd concerns of women.
Lastly, there is nothing like gender equality. There are honorable differences and these differences should persist for the growth of society in a better way. Radha, Seeta, Draupadi, Savitri and other such great women were the by-product of same patriarchal society. Even in modern times, the same society has produced women for whom their fathers have been the role model. Let’s not topple such a society or else the future will be more darker than one would have imagined. Agreed that women have suffered discrimination and face problems. But are the lives of men devoid of problems? Aren’t they facing host of complex problems? Some times back in Kargil War, the Indian soldiers were killed in barbaric manner. Their genitals were cut. That was simply treated as war crime. The same done with woman would not have not only been treated as a war crime but also as sexual assault, rape. Now there lies the difference. That’s the paradox. One wishing true gender equality should treat both bodies as mere bodies! If that’s not possible then stop this nonsense about gender equality. At present, there is a difference and no difference in the name of equality. Difference when you can’t face the heat and no difference in sophisticated scenario. That’s not equality. That’s opportunism. That’s selfishness. That’s shrewdness of highest type.
Pic Two Internet
Grappler Sushil Kumar’s back-to-back medals at the Olympic Games-the first Indian sportsman to do so-enabled India to register its presence in a big way. It is India’s best performance at the Olympic Games. Sushil Kumar won silver medal in the 66kg free style category. He had won bronze in the previous Olympics held in China. However, one cannot ignore the recent spate of controversies which marred the London Olympics 2012. These infamous episodes have brutally hurt the sentiments of sports fans across the globe. The allegations related to biased decisions of referees have given a bad name to the 30th Olympic Games. Let’s not treat these allegations as shallow outbursts of teams lost. We need to take note of them in a serious manner in order to retain the faith of sports lovers.
Let’s not forget India’s boxer Vikas Krishan controversial defeat at the hands of Errol Spence of USA.The AIBA overturned the result of his pre-quarterfinal bout, after five hours, following a review. The Indian contingent filed an appeal which produced no result. The IOA tried its best to drive home its point but the the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS) rejected the country’s appeal.”There is no provision in the AIBA Technical and Competition Rules allowing for an appeal against the decision of the Competition Jury in relation to a Protest. The decision of the Competition Jury is final and cannot be appealed.”(CAS). In this regard, the argument of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) vice-President Tarlochan Singh is worth mentioning:”There are four different judges and they make their separate decisions. It is baffling why did none of them objected to this. Four people have given verdicts and it is wrong for USA to appeal after the decision has been given.”
Such biased decisions lower the morale of players and sports fans. The game is not on par with life and death issue, and, therefore, it’s quite baffling to see big nations using every trick in the book to emerge as winner. It doesn’t matter to them if such a victory makes mockery of fair play. Such brazen display of unfair tendencies, all in the names of rules, brings into open the real character of such nations, who can go to any extent to gain an upper hand. The Indian contingent needs to view such murkier developments from fresh angle and come to understand that world of sports are not only regulated by excellence but also by shrewd maneuvers. It’s anybody’s guess that sports fans treat such sponsored victories less honourable than defeats keeping intact values associated with the game! The Indians need to grasp this fact that for some nations, the thing called dignity in defeat just doesn’t exist.
If that was not enough Amit Kumar’s defeat in 55 kg freestyle repachage against Bulgarian Radoslav Marinov Velikov gave rise to another controversy. Former Gold Medalist at Asian Games Satpal Singh, in an interview given to BBC, said that ‘ referees have turned highly professional. After watching the proceedings at the Games, I am pretty convinced that these referees have compromised with the values. You now cannot win the game without taking into confidence judges and referees involved with the game! The three points awarded to Bulgarian opponent, in actuality, belonged to the Indian wrestler Amit Kumar. These three points made the game slip away from the hands of Amit Kumar.”
It’s not only Indian contingent, which is feeling blue after the Games got over. Usain Bolt, who became the first athlete to win the 200 twice at the Olympics, harshly criticized Carl Lewis of United States for his doping remarks. At a press conference organized just after his historic victory in the men’s 200-metre, Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt minced no words in targeting Carl Lewis., ” I’m going to say something controversial right now…. Carl Lewis, I have no respect for him…. The things he says about the track athletes is really downgrading for another athlete to say something like that. I think he’s just looking for attention, really, because nobody really talks much about him” Bolt said. One needs to recall the words of Carl Lewis to realize that Bolt’s anger is justified.”Countries like Jamaica do not have a random program, so they can go months without being tested. I’m not saying anyone is on anything, but everyone needs to be on a level playing field.” Carl Lewis made this remark in an interview given to Sports Illustrated just after Bolt’s stunning performance in Beijing Olympics.
Now this battle of words might not be directly related to the controversies that marred the London Olympics 2012 but the timing of Bolt’s furious remarks is amazing. It provides clear insight about the affairs that take place behind the scene, which ordinarily remain hidden from the eyes of average sports fans. It makes it evidently clear that how bigger nations come to treat the victories of smaller nations. And if that becomes clear, it would not be pretty difficult to understand that India’s strong protest against the biased referees at the Olympics is not simply unleashing of frustration. It reveals that games have no longer remained events, solely dominated by the performance of committed athletes, trying to attain height of excellence. They are now dominated by forces beyond the control of players. India’s protest needs to be seen in the same perspective.
The Indian boxer Vikas Krishan’s defeat at London Olympics is, in reality, victory of politics and not sports. Vikas Krishan emerged victorious in the 69 kg category bout against his American opponent Errol Spence 13-11. However, the happiness inside the Indian camp proved to be a short lived one. The review by the competition jury, under the aegis of AIBA, amended the final score 13:15 in favour of the USA. The jury members, accepting the protest, unanimously declared Errol Spence of the United States winner of the bout. India also filed the appeal later but the world governing body for the game rejected their appeal. So India’s sensational victory in the pre-quarter-final bout got doomed to nothingness.
It’s pretty unfortunate that some nations can go to any extent to gain an upper hand in battle of supremacy. The ouster of Vikas from the London Olympics proves the point that when politics gets mixed with sports, it leads to such nasty developments. Thanks to United States for letting us know that you cannot win boxing match without playing some politics! Before I have a take on the merit of the decision, I need to say that I am sure had Indian Olympic Association as powerful as BCCI, Board of Control for Cricket in India, this would not have been the fate of the bout. Such happenings make it crystal clear that in present times, be its politics, cinema or sports, a certain shrewd manoeuvring, by people behind the curtain, always exists.
Imagine the team declared World Cup winner in FIFA World Cup Final match declared loser after few hours by the competition jury! Imagine another team declared winner by the ICC in the World Cup Cricket Final at Lords after few hours! The things would definitely become murkier in the world of sport if this sort of bizarre change becomes commonplace. This sort of crazy decision marks the beginning of manipulating decisions all in the name of laws! Anyway, let’s put under lens the merit of the decision. It’s strange that even those aspects were taken into consideration to make the bout in favour of USA, which generally cannot be judged by normal human way. The Competition Jury should have limited its review to those aspects only, possible for any referee to take note of them from normal human angle. To extend its limit to those angles, which no referee can intercept in normal way is absolutely nonsensical.
That’s why I feel that to award points only because “referee’s view was blocked by the boxer from the USA” is height of absurdity. It is okay to include the unnoticed fouls within the realm of review but to ensure “correct gesture” on part of referee, in name of review, totally defies logic. Why should he have awarded points when something was beyond the range of his normal vision? If that’s the case why India’s appeal got rejected on same grounds, wherein it had been stated that “our guy did not hold Spence for more than seven times. The American was guilty of holding Vikas four times according to us.”(That’s an observation on part of National coach Gurbax Singh Sandhu)
This high-voltage drama at the London Olympics reduces the difference between politics and sports. It’s really sad that hopes of bright athletes, boxers, swimmers and shooters, to name a few, get checkmated by the will of minds who feel that politics needs to go together with sports. The performers next time should not only learn the tricks involved in their respective fields, but also come to master the art of politics, if they are really interested in winning medals at Olympics!