Lesson learned. Or Lesson taught.

Yesterday was a different day for me. Just moving around the Tim-Berners-Lee invention couple of weeks ago, I came across much forgotten website called karmayog. Over there I saw a session which was to be conducted in Pune on Saturday, 28^th regarding ‘Involving men in Gender Equality’. I was free of work as it was Saturday. I planned to have a visit.

The session was undoubtedly great. I got to know enormous about the framework of ‘Gender Equality’. I realized why it was really necessary to include men when it comes to Gender Equality. I encountered variety of statistic, which was still unknown to me. The dignitaries and the speakers were master of their fields. I loved to hear them speak about their work, experiences, the challenges, and their accomplishments. It sound pretty curvy(J) when you here such thing. At the end, there was a panel discussion and then a QA session.

Now for people whom have been to my blog or at least know about me do know my religious view (for the kids in school for first day, see the blog name on the address bar above…. Yes, I am an atheist.). The moment the session started, I was very curious about one word – religion. I was very keenly listening to every word the speaker, the audiences and the host said. None mentioned religion (although some did mentioned ‘caste’, but it was not close enough). I mean, everybody was looking at all the reason why the cruel relationship of inequality exist between and in the society, but what I felt  is everyone was hitting the symptom’s rather than cause. I noted the speakers saying the family system, the education system, the media, etc. are all influencing the evil of gender inequality. Where is the religion? Doesn’t it play an important role when it comes to gender discrimination? People don’t point fingers on things they love.

For me the main cause of specific gender inequality is the structure of our religious book and the way it is written (purely two-faced). We can undoubtedly say that they we are superior to women when we have little or just little knowledge of mythology and religion. They may very well say that they respect woman, but then they consider them as something lower. This behavior pattern is the very same we keep towards nature. We know she is superior, elegant, smart and worth respecting, but at the end of the day, we selfish human are screwing her up day by day. So what religion says is that women are great, they are vital for existence of life, but they are not up to man. Man is superior. He can hunt, he can kill, he can burn himself in sun, but bring bread to home. He can fight with the army to save his family, he can build the house, break it, and build a new one.

When you see religion, I see women in long big black cloth sweltering in sun walking down the road. I can only see their eyes (although sometimes every that is blurred). I see them walking like a prisoner, who have now taken a choice of living that way. Generation after generation, if you do the same thing again and again, it gets into your DNA, and then it becomes a part of individual. I can see a Hindu women taking cover on her face (less brutal than earlier, yet brutal) when she is out of house or in front of some so-called respectful elder. Women are not allowed to speak about family matter not because they choose not to speak, but it’s in the religion, that women should not do anything. She should cook and clean and serve. Women can deceive men (stated by Ambrose (339-97): "Adam was deceived by Eve, not Eve by Adam... it is right that he whom that woman induced to sin should assume the role of guide lest he fall again through feminine instability." ). Women has to maintain her credibility either physically, mentality or spaciously. She has to be pure (funny word) when it come to her virginity, although the guy can touch and sleep and do whatever he want for his lifetime, but girl should be pure(funnier this time). I can go on with examples. Many examples.

I can’t stop writing when I start writing. God doesn’t want you to treat men and women equally. He has not put this in your plate. If you do it, you disobey his commands.

My only argument is when we talk about bringing gender equality and all other equality in our life, we cannot accomplish this goal when we have a blood running in our body which is undoubtedly  deeply religious.

How could you say that men and women are equal when I still hear about Sita sacrifice, when I still see crawling women in Burkas, when I still say the God is my Father…...

Social Suicide - The Thinking Atheist.

Don’t know if it’s true or not, but I haven’t felt the way these people do(might be because not many people are aware of the fact that I am the 'side-walker').
I am very touched by the mere fact that when people decided to live their life in a way they want to, other fellow being start torturing them, forcing them to feel distress and thrown-away. This is absolute murder of freedom. But guess what, that the maximum support of our society we can expect. The human-social  web is been moulded and melted in a way, so as to not let people have a vivid idea regarding anything.
 

I am very touched by the mere fact that when people decided to live their life in a way they want to, other fellow being start torturing them, forcing them to feel distress and thrown-away. This is absolute murder of freedom. But guess what, that the maximum support of our society we can expect. The human-social  web is been molded and melted in a way, so as to not let people have a vivid idea regarding anything.

 But this is the taste of adventure I guess. When people refute you, what they actually do is motivate you to move one with your ideas and thought. The problem is, many of us give up while walking the journey

The difference between Bhagat Singh and Ajmal Aamir Kasab

Before I jerk my words, I would like to mark it clear that I don’t shadow any kind of social-mentality. My entire lifetime (although I am still 23 – the age of miracle!!) is dedicated in getting to know something and trying to chase non-discriminated knowledge. I don’t trust something just because someone says it. I like to question. So I asked this profound yet very necessary question on the time –Do Bhagat Singh and Ajmal Aamir Kasab walk on same page?  Make sure you understand what I am asking. I am not comparing a national hero and a terrorist. I am comparing the act of these two people. Asking this question, expresses my response. I don’t find any difference between the two. Morally, no difference. Legally, yes a lot. I am regretful for people who have lost countless beautiful things in this world. It was not your mistake, neither theirs. I was not the part of the incident, I was a onlooker. I can feel the pain, but at same time I am compelled to think. My view would not harmonize with yours. By writing this, I don’t intend to say Bhagat Singh was wrong or undeserved or unjust, I am just not comfortable that whole world is running behind the bullet rather than finding the gun. But trust me, I got to speak.

We would study this situation with respect to the subsequent questions about Bhagat Singh and Ajmal Amir Kasab. We would be very brief when we answer these questions. The questions go like this:-

Who are these people? What have they done? Why did they do it? What did they achieved?

Who are these people?

“Bhagat Singh (28 September 1907 – 23 March 1931) was born into a Sikh family which had earlier been involved in revolutionary activities against the British Raj, as a teenager Singh studied European revolutionary movements and was attracted to anarchist and Marxist ideologies. His grandfather, Arjun Singh, was a follower of Swami Dayananda Saraswati's Hindu reformist movement, Arya Samaj. His father, and uncles Ajit Singh and Swaran Singh, were members of the Ghadar Party, led by Kartar Singh Sarabha and Har Dayal.  To avoid getting married by his family, Singh ran away from his house to Cawnpore.”

“Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab was born in Faridkot village in the Okara District of Punjab, Pakistan, to Amir Shahban Kasab and Noor Illahi.[8]His father is a dahi puri vendor[9][10] while his elder brother, Afzal, works as a laborer in Lahore.[10] His elder sister, Rukaiyya Husain, is married in the village.[10] A younger sister, Suraiyya, and brother, Munir, live in Faridkot with their parents.[10][11] The family belongs to the Qassab community. He left home after a fight with his father in 2005. He had asked for new clothes on Eid, but his father could not provide them, which made him angry. He then became involved in petty crime with his friend Muzaffar Lal Khan, soon moving on to armed robbery.”

You could find much more details about them when you could Google. For now, we just need plain information. Let’s try to investigate the condition of both these personality. Before they were born, they weren’t under question. Now when you see Bhagat Singh, he was from a bright family. A family which was very discipline kind-of as well as cultured. When you see his family background, we calculate that his previous few generations were already involved in the revolutionary acts. His upbringing was concentrated and concerned with a feeling of doing something for his country. He was motivated by his surroundings.

Moving on to Kasab, he was born in a family of no significance importance when it came to the society. He was just another kid born on this planet. No special motivation, no special education. He was surrounded by agony and fear. Born in Pakistan, he was true to consider that his nation is ‘bad’ as the world say. Then you see, at a young age, he was forced to be a labor, he was never been educated.  He left his father, just because he was not provided with new cloths for Eid. The moment he got into the umbrella of various group of people who were fighting for the agony of Muslim people, he got his aim in life. And with this aim, he also was sure for his family future (they would have been provided with Rs.150,000). What else do we need?

So Singh was a highly motivated boy. He wanted to fight for his nation. Kasab been the same, but with a different eye also aimed to fight for his people. They started their journey in almost same way, but on a different route.

What have they done?

In most literal way, they killed someone. More elaborately, Singh killed 1 high profile British officer John P. Saunders, an Assistant Superintendent of Police. He was actually intending to kill Sir John Simon, but some miscommunication made him hit the wrong target. On the other hand, Kasab killed maximum 40 people (166 were killed by 10 people, so let’s not blame him for all). Is killing bad? You bet it is not. There are hell lots of killing going on. The intend is what which matters.

Why have they done it?

Doing is acting. It is a process of making something which is buttered in our thoughts or words to come into picture. For common people who don’t want to think a lot, and who are easily and highly manipulated by emotional and personal attribute(and that’s what make us human, the instinct of feeling sorry), the reason why both the personality have done the things may very highly differ. Like they will argue, that Singh died for nation, Singh never killed so many innocent people, that Singh never went to foreign land and created destruction, etc.

Will we take each contradiction one by one. The first one, Singh died or sacrificed himself for his nation and land. Kasab also did it for his nation and people.  It really doesn’t matter if it was not our country, it is his nation his belief, and he did it. The second, Singh never killed so many innocent people. Define innocent people. For me none are innocent. We all people are at the stake of our authority whether it is our family, our state, our nation. Been an Indian, I am part of everything of this country. The good, the bad.  Giving an analogy, If a man is running naked on a road in Mumbai, and if that become international news(hopefully it won’t), and if I go to America someday, then I should not be surprised if people ask me ‘Hye bro, I heard that a man was running naked in your country, really???’. I am not separated. If somebody hates our nation, then they would not care about how ‘good and innocent’ people stays at that particular land are. Also, John P. Saunders was an innocent man. He was just doing his duty, that’s all. Even he had family. So the emotional situation was equal on both side of the game.

Some argue that Singh only killed 1 man, whereas Kasab killed many. Does that matters? I was recently listening to lecture of famous political philosopher Micheal Sandel. He gave a very profound example of this situation. He actually proved that number of people doesn’t matter. What matter is where you find the morality of the act. And again, we are sure, each of our participants considered their act to be moral (different way of thinking).

That said, let me put this thing in a very succinct words, what independence was for us 66 years ago, is the same for the terrorist now(trust me, they are fucked big time!). Like we Indian wanted to get rid of maltreatment and wrong done by the Britisher, in the very same way, people (whom you call terrorist) are trying to get rid of the damage that has happened to them(and trust me a hell wrong has happened to these guys). The only difference is when a non-Muslim fights for something, it is called revolution. When a Muslim (or any other non-majority clan) does the same, its termed terrorism.

Blaming someone terrorist and making an arbitrary world of terrorist won’t really solve the problem. We can very well give away the duty of being truthful to family, to our friends, to our nation. But we can’t defeat ourselves. People whom we call terrorist are just people who have difference way of thinking.

Let me end this with some lovely verses:-

“Mama,I am crying,

Please feed me, I am dying,

Can’t you hear me mama, I am crying,

Let me bite your nipple to make you feel I’m trying.

Ouch you fool, you made blood come out me,

Mama, I was hungry, I was just trying, and I was just trying…..”