Irony of the Indian Male

I love my India and its spirit to live and hope in the face of adversity, poverty and hardship. But suddenly, all its spiritual inclinations, positivism and the goodness seems to pinch me as a superficial farce, when acts such as the ones below (watch video) tarnish the Indian image.

Yes, I do accept that India is a patriarchal society, contrary to the belief of any overtly optimistic liberal or feminist. The 'men' in India call the shots. From politics to Bollywood, from businesses through to thought leadership, in the house and outside.

Women are either raised to the pedastal of a goddess (e.g. "Durga" - the divine warrior mother God) or demeaned to the status of non-existant, insignificant dregs. Indian men mostly marry to find a cook, a caretaker, a  porn star and never a companion or a soul mate. Women are rarely 'friends' of their Indian male counterparts. There seems to be no middle ground, which clearly demonstrates the irrationality, confusion, nervousness and a major complex that the Indian men possess in understadning their sexual opposites.

No excuse is strong enough to justify the act that has been brought upon this helpless woman. I wonder what could be the reason behind this young man's barbaric, insane act of idiotic male hedonisim and psychotic chauvinism. Could it be - illetracy, poverty or lack of teachings of moral science in the formative years. Even the animals have a code of conduct, which is completely missing in these Indian men, who are seen laughing, clapping and celebrating the insult and degrade of a lady in public. 

I would be delighted to question this coward of a man, and all the others like him, whether such acts are a reflection of  their Strength or a demonstration of their Weakness?

Philosophy & Philosopher: A bit of both in all of us!

I revisited History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell the other day and was deeply influenced by it yet again. Without going into the complexity of the content of the book, I would like to press upon just two quotes from the book, their relevance to our understanding of our society and our individuality, is startling.

Philosopher defined:

" Philosophers are both effects and causes: effects of their social circumstances and of the politics and institutions of their time; causes (if they are fortunate) of beliefs which mould the politics and institutions of later ages."... "an outcome of his milieu, a man in whom were crystallized and concentrated thoughts and feelings which, in a vague and diffused form, were common to the community of which he was a part."
(Russell: 1946, pg 5)

Philosophy defined:

"All definite knowledge - so I should contend - belongs to science; all dogma as to what surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. But between theology and science there is a No Man's Land, exposed to attack from both sides; this No Man's Land is philosophy."
(Russell: 1946, pg 10)

No man is an island and even an island is what it is, because it is sounded by water from all sides. If you get my drift...The point that I am trying to make is that we need to be patient and compassionate in understanding other people and their actions. Their rights and wrongs are governed by their own belief systems which are a direct outcome of their environment or in Russel's words - milieu. On an extremist viewpoint 'one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter'. Even though humanity and fundamental rights are the only two markers, which cannot be compromised and the oppression of one sect, culture, race or nation by the other is eternally inappropriate but still the understanding of how individuals are developing these extremist viewpoints because of their closer and wider economic, social and political circle, is important to analyse.

Keeping this in mind, I want people to be a little more understanding of each other - parents and children, husbands and wives, girlfriends and boyfriends, teachers and pupils, employers and employees, India and Pakistan, US and Iraq, black and white, uppercast and lowercast, coaches and players, government and citizens.....

As you would realise that Russell defines the philosopher as a direct result of his / her environment, in a similar light, philosophy is defined as a delicate balance between dogma and science.... So let us embrace and open our arms to world religions, beliefs, faiths and ideologies as well as individuals. Those erring on the extemist and fundamental viewpoint need our help and are begging to be educated in a more liberal mindset.

Let us help each other, smile more, travel, explore and be intrigured by other's actions rather than consider them to be insults. We should never forget that - our life cycles come full circle. With time the opressors will become opressed, the poweful weak and the the rich poor...

If we cant create a romantacised idealist world, we can still always try to make an honest effort.... Think about it.