Marriage is an institution primarily to support women. It is easier for men to be uncommitted. Modernity has attacked this institution in the name of “feminism” but this modernity and feminism is ultimately anti-women.
Yes, this is true from evolutionary biology. Women have a 9 month gestation period, bear the responsibility of pregnancy. Men don't. But biology is regulated via society, hence the institution of marriage.
I'm not interested in politically correct slogans but reality as it exists. Indians will get this wisdom, after aping destruction of family, once it is re-packaged and "certified" by the West. Slave-Indians who only follow will alway be "Regressive" 😏
We must not try to map this into narratives of Western patriarchy. Neither is Western feminism really mappable to us.
Marriage as an institution supports women—and men are enjoined to do this. Not because women are "weak" but because their role is central for society to prosper.
I've change more diapers than you can count. Cloth ones required more frequent changing since we didn't want to burden the environment and our baby with toxic disposable diaper.
Yes, marriage is an institution designed for the proper propagation of society. The care and raising of children is central to that. And the mother plays a critical role in that; notwithstanding our fantasies of "sameness." And the father to support that.
A dead give away. A "Hindu org" whose primary job is to attack "Hindutva" and has "Art for Shaheen Bagh" is yet another Marxist front org. They create these to "partner" with vicious anti-Hindu orgs to attack Hindus, while appearing to give "Hindu representation" for Hindu hate.
But the real question is, why are Hindus sitting ducks in the narrative war? Why do they not invest in counter-narratives? Is over-reliance on RSS—which believes in "ground work" without managing narratives—part of the problem?
Hindu perspective is entirely *absent* worldwide.
No surprise, it is the same founder as Sadhana, "Sunita." This Hindu-hater has been appointed as the "Hindu Religious Life Advisor' at Columbia University.
This is the level of Marxist presentation, Hindus cannot even represent themselves in religious affairs. @RajivMessage
While Communism and Capitalism both have their flaws. when given a choice, people always fled Communist regimes for free societies. The verdict is clear. Vs State-mandated "equality" (which never works since some are always "more equal") people prefer freedom. Communism fails.
Some more pictures of North Korea vs South Korea. Totalitarian societies, with little freedom or progress is what "progressive" Communists produce.
What about it? The Soviet Union collapsed and failed. People fled the iron curtain for freedom. Fled East Germany for West.
Let’s not blame the victims Shefali ji. The crime and responsibility is squarely on the predators and killers fueled by an ideology of religious supremacy over kaffirs.
Also very often they misrepresent their religion in the initial stages, and then use coercion & blackmail.
Most responsible are “seculars” who hide and normalize predatory religion and even worse, abject Islamic apologists like @kavita_krishnan who whitewash this.
Forgetting that communists were strung up trees in he Islamist takeover they fight for.
As "depression" is the talk in India in modern times, it may also be a phenomenon we're importing in scale from the West. Western culture with isolating individualism and materialism with lack of connection, *results* in depression. This is what "progressives" in India push.
Both "capitalism" and "communism" are predicated on materialism, another superstition of Western "enlightenment."
"Progressives" in India attack the fabric of society and social cohesion. Of the 4 purusharthas, artha & kama are the only ones left. And they leave a void.
"Killing a cow" is not "blasphemy"—cows are rural wealth—go dhan. It's like someone broke into your home, stole gold. Cow rustlers are killed all over the world. If you want to be slightly better informed I'll attach a thread below.
Next we can throw grocers in jail for selling sugar (maybe even hang them), parents for serving it to their children. All for their own good of course.
There is data that sugar is bad, it's not a perception. Shall we rule the country on statistics? Ban everything that is found statistically worse than another thing?