"Family Legacy" and Women

Part I
The other day I was having a discussion with R on the issue of "family name". It was more of a debate, and it centered around the appropriateness or inappropriateness of this system of "family legacy". The point in contention was basically whether a proper family name is essential and/or desirable, or whether it is outdated in the modern world and breeds intellectual, moral and gender prejudices. I am loath to remember how exactly the debate started, but it proceeded with R saying he'd prefer a son to a daughter, as a son would enable him to realize his unrealizable dreams, and also continue his family legacy. Now the staunch libertarian that I am, I was, needless to say, a bit offended, but we decided to take it as a point for a healthy debate.

His points were simple but not without thought: a) He wanted to be a great cricketer; a son would help him fulfill the dream (women's cricket is not as popular as men's); b) A son would be able to keep his family name. Complementing this line of reasoning he said that 1) Family system is essential to keep society in shape, even though the former may be patriarchal and flawed; 2) A family with different surnames looks appalling; 3) He admits that women do not get their fair share of recognition due to this system, but that this might be inevitable, and 4) The family provides an established standard for each of its successive generations to accomplish something in life, and without this concept of family lineage, such a measuring stick would not exist.

These are valid points, and deserve their share of acknowledgment. Points 1) and 3) are the key ones here. 2) is a pure personal opinion and 4) is an individual preference. So let me concentrate on points 1) and 3) here to form an analysis and express an idea. The detailed analysis in Part II.

God and Individuality

I saw some beautiful Ganesha idols today at K-Star Mall in Chembur.

Unfortunately they were in a set.

What I loved most about them was there was just Ganesha there, with a violin, flute, or a tabla.

The other idols of Ganesha were enclosed in glass, or just like wall hangings or pictures in frames.

I hate religion, but I loved the only-Ganesha idols because there was nothing else there to take away Ganesha's greatness, splendour.

Nothing else to diminish the effect of his individuality in other words.

These only-Ganesha idols were depictions of Ganesha as an individual, as a force, as a sum of his qualities of wisdom and intellect.

This is the kind of God that appeals to me. And this might only be my opinion, but the world today needs this kind of God, not the one who preaches scriptures, prayers and adherence to certain set virtues.

When I say this kind of God, I don't mean Ganesha, I mean God as a force or quality. The individual embodying the quality.

If we look around us we find inspirational people still. Sachin Tendulkar, Nelson Mandela, Stephen Hawkings, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, still exist. A few more could be named. These individuals stand for one or another quality - balance, patriotism, knowledge, power, science, and so on.

No doubt they could be called the Gods of today.

I seriously doubt it was any different in the ancient days when Eastern religion found its "Gods". All these "Gods" must just have been extraordinary individuals in one or another way.

But religion in its present state has twisted and distorted this concept to encourage idolatory, discourage idolatory, create divisions in society, introduce ridiculous concepts like salvation and damnation and so on.

A person's salvation is achieved only when she or he is extremely happy and content, and looking to forces and qualities might just be the way in the world of today.

Because though some people may not like it, individualism is the ideal of today and will continue to be so for a long time.

And forces or qualities are nothing but expressions of individualism.

A Dilemma of Modern Times

Today I am going to say something about a very specific trend I have been observing amongst a lot of my female friends, something that requires attention, something I may or may not be able to do justice to in this post, yet feel both obliged to and interested in expressing.

In modern India, especially in India of the 21st century thus far, though debilitating gender prejudices against women remain, admittedly, there is a growing willingness among educated middle-class parents, especially in the metropolis and Tier-2 cities, to fund their daughter's education after she graduates, and "allow" her to study further without as much as a protest. Now, "allowing" someone to practise their own rights is in no way a sign of emancipation, but it is a start anyway.

Now the present situation in these households affords considerable liberty to the girl at least till she turns about 23-24. Certainly, I know several households where the girls are still controlled, threatened, their freedoms severely curtailed and their choices stamped on. But this is thankfully declining in pure percentage terms.

Please note here that I am referring to a very particular aspect of gender rights, that of "having no opposition" to higher education for women, and not to the generic idea of gender equality. Indeed, many, many prejudices against women still remain even in the most educated of Indian households, and even though a lot of the family keeps denying this, they keep cropping up through dress restrictions, behavioural sermons and so on.

Coming back to girls being "permitted" to seek higher education. I have made a very discerning observation in this regard, I think. But before that, let me concede that there is considerable pressure on me to become well-qualified and financially strong. Perhaps it is society's dictum that men financially run the household once they cross 25, and this expectation remains in today's world. To that extent, men's freedom gets curtailed by social restrictions. We have considerable freedom to make career choices, even marriage choices, but we are not expected to be unambitious and safety-seeking. It is also a matter of truth that biologically, naturally, men are the slightly more ambitious species, though this definition may not apply to all men and negatively (i.e. a lack of ambition), to all women. There are many ambitious women, but many more ambitious men, and this difference helps the society cultivate legendary stereotypes.

What is implies though, is, that in the "liberal" households that I spoke of, as far as making career choices/ seeking home comforts goes, girls have more choice than boys do, at least for a certain length of time. Now many a woman has two instincts: the ambitious and the homely. I have seen some very good friends struggle to fight this material dilemma. Just last night I was advising/ talking to/ consoling/ explaining to a female friend who'd lost out on a few interviews and felt frustrated. Like me, other boys/men face little dilemma as they graduate, owing to a combination of the social expectation of career success and a slightly more ambitious bent of mind. We know what exactly we have to do. Many of our female friends, it seems, don't.

What does a girl do faced with such an issue as this? She knows that if she were to stay home and not run after a good career, few would object. But she dreams too- of success, of achievement, of recognition and fame. And besides, if she were to follow this conservative path, in a few years' time, she'd start facing tremendous pressure from her family to get married. This would leave her in a very disadvantageous position- being financially dependent and blackmailed into a marriage she, in the majority of cases, would not want to make. Of course, there are parents who "believe" in a daughter's right to marry the person she wishes to, and yet the family pressure does come in when they believe she's getting "too old".

On the other hand, if she were to seek a successful career, she'd most certainly have to abandon her comfortable family life. She could do that; however the struggles and prejudices associated with a quest to achieve are very high, especially for women, in a crude male world. And the familial pressure does come in nonetheless; even today one of the first questions people ask when they see a 30 year old executive woman is, "is she married?" She also knows her reproductive age is running out, especially if she is the type who loves children.

In this double edged scenario, there is often the danger of the woman sitting on the fence, being neither here nor there, neither achieving anything, nor being comfortable about it. It brings about a very understandable frustration, because the woman knows she has been whiling away time and is yet not sure of what to do. Some finally discover a path, some drift into marriage with a faceless stranger, some others drift into a purposeless and wasted life- the worst cases.

Sometimes these girls/ women turn to their friends for help. The parents can definitely help; but fortunately or unfortunately, a lot (though not all) of our generation regards parental interference as an impediment, and fears that once you let them into your personal lives, they would attempt to control all of it. This belief may or may not be a misguided one.

One of my good female friends was subjected to hours of personal counselling sessions by me, though I by no means can call myself successful or knowledgeable. At the end of these discussions she remained as confused as ever. Later she even asked me to tell her what to do. I was quite miffed about that prospect; I refuse to ever decide anything for a woman in a personal capacity. It contradicts my life principles of being pro-choice.

Added to this is the problem that parents often fail to see the world with fresh eyes and discourage offbeat careers, or unusual choices. They also feel their daughters would be better off living closer to home and try getting them into nearby educational institutions which may be far inferior to those which these girls are worthy of getting into. This is very sad. Even sadder is the widespread belief that "giving" freedom to a woman is a "noble" act and demands extreme gratitude on her part. Consequently parents try to set moral and material limits to their daughters' freedoms, without using the same yardstick for their sons.

Last but not the least, fortunately, India is not the home of firebrand "feminists" who actually defeat the very purpose of women's freedom by playing up pressure on them to jump headlong into the competitive world. Isn't "freedom" all about choosing your way of life? Then why the pressure to conform?

In this scenario, I believe it is essential for women to take a long, hard look at their lives post-graduation, and firmly decide what they would want to do hence. In my humble opinion I would suggest some sort of financial independence to be a necessity in order to avoid having to succumb to outmoded familial beliefs and traditions. Women must take advantage of this double freedom they attain during these few years of their lives to pursue their dreams, realize their ambitions and generally live a happy and productive life, whether it is that of the CEO of an MNC , a small-time painter or architect or simply a nature-lover. First and foremost, they must be firm, determined and confident. Only then can they succeed in their endeavours and successfully fight and defeat the monsters of social backwardness and prejudice.

A Major Discovery

Just one thing.
I have just discovered that my philosophical expression in the post "Clear the Smoke" is merely an elucidation and fits in with the philosophy of René Descartes on the definition of "Self" and "Truth".
I'm feeling very good.

Another thing- I dearly want to read the works of these great philospohers- Descartes, Plato, Aristotle, Friedrich Nietzsche, Socrates et all. I also wanna read the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital by Karl Marx.

The Consequence of Stardom

Firstly, I think my blog looks bland, with hardly any pictures. I'm gonna add a picture for most posts I make from now on. I started this practice with the last post.

So finally IPL-2 is over and the Deccan Chargers have won. Personally, I supported the Bangalore Royal Challengers, after the Mumbai Indians exited unceremoniously. But I'm happy the better team on that particular day of the final, won.

A lot has been said about the stalwarts, the seasoned campaigners, having had a gala time in this version of the IPL, making merry with runs and wickets, sprawling dives and mind-blowing catches.

But the youngsters? The ones from the Indian domestic cricket scene? Those who had never been to South Africa before? Those who, not being part of Team India, had never known the limelight?

Some of them failed, unable to cope with the pressure and the bounce and pace of the livelier wickets. But some others like Manish Pandey and Abhishek Nayar shone brightly. In the end, it was not whether they failed or delivered, but simply that they were there, on that grand stage, playing alongside international players whose reputations had gone through the roof, who had scored 20,000 to 30,000 international runs, played 15 or 20 years on the international scene, who had taken 600 wickets, 800 wickets, 1200 wickets. Cricketers who were the cleanest hitters of all time, who were the most complete batsmen, the most techically correct batsmen. Cricketers who had single-handedly demolished powerful batting line-ups, won series after series with their unparalleled skills.
Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis, Matt Hayden, Adam Gilchrist, Muttiah Muralidaran, Shane Warne, Anil Kumble...the list of these super-heavyweights was considerably long.
How would it have felt for a youngster from the hinterlands of India to stand alongside the great Adam Gilchrist, who was holding the IPL trophy aloft, in a foreign country, fluff falling from the air, 40,000 people on their feet, Ravi Shastri's booming voice..."the IPL Champions, the Deccan Chargers!!"....

It is quite an unprecedented thought, a truly overwhelming moment. It is, the stuff of dreams, a fairytale so wonderful it becomes unbelievable even for a fairytale.

How do these youngsters feel? They would never have been on such a terrific stage before and some of them never will again. This would be a moment in history, that would be loath to be over. It would be over, it was over, for time waits for none. But in the mind of the youngster, that moment should have been still forever. Time should have waited. The clock of Nature should have stopped. The leaf blowing away in the wind should have remained suspended in mid-air. Parrots and mynahs should have turned their heads towards this wonderful place. Rain should have forgotten to come down. The sun should not have set. The world should have abandoned its daily, mundane routine and stood absolutely still. It must almost have happened so, for the fleeting moments that these youngsters occupied the podium. The feeling, the emotion is so very deep, so profound, yet so simple to comprehend. The joy is indescribable, unfathomable. I've felt this way once or twice before- under different circumstances of course- but the realization of success, in whatever measure it might have come, is really very astounding, incredibly beautiful.

The aspirations of youth are some of God's miracles. They are so eternal, so earnest, that their realization is almost unpalatable, surreal. How deep is the mind of a youngster, boy or girl, how optimistic his/her beliefs, how crazy the assumptions, how utopian the ideals, is perhaps incomprehensible to any poet, musician, lyricist, writer or artist. Youth is like a bird which wishes to fly and fly and fly into the open blue skies, without hindrance, without any chains, without a look behind. The potential of youth is immense, unrevealed, unmeasurable.

To what extent this brazen desire for the pinnacle takes the not-so-pleasant form of ego and self-centeredness is something to be thought of. Certainly, it is extremely easy for success to go to one's head. Again, I've known it myself- and my achievement was a very small one compared to that of these youngsters, behind closed doors, in a virtual world, in closed forums. However, being nearly 22 and close to home, I was able to pull myself back down to Earth before it had eaten me away. What about these poor souls then, thousands of miles away from home, 18, 19, 20 years of age, with instant fame and unprecedented adulation? Some handle it well, some don't. Those who do rise to the occasion, the opportunity, become greats, legends, stamping their legacy on the sands of time. Those who don't, wither away, either wasting away in indulgences or mitigating back into their ordinary, anonymous lives.

I shall leave this post here, unfinished. It does not deserve a conclusion; the incompleteness completes the journey.

P.S.: "Language post" later. Don't think interested people mind anyways. I thought this was a better topic to write about.

Amen.

An Epilogue to Confessions

Firstly, thanks a lot for the considerable response to my last blog post (positive and negative). To the people (and they are in majority) who found it great/ interesting/ readable I thank them for the like-mindedness, though this is inherent, not cultivated. Also thanks for speaking out to say that I have a right to publish whatever I wish. We need more, many more such heads in India today.

To the naysayers and constructive critics that sit in the minority opinion (there were a few who haven't commented on the post) I acknowledge and respect their opinion and their right to it. Meanwhile I must reassert my position that I am entitled to any opinion I wish, and even more so, entitled to publish it anywhere which constitutes my space. Some of you have decided to "stop talking" to me after this post and an argument. Apparently it is something blasphemous and derogatory that I have written.

I do not think it is. I like the fact that I can write without inhibitions. Those who cannot (or do not want to) need not complain. More upsetting is the fact that people who most certainly form part of society's "classes" found the post revolting. To these critics, I must say this- you cannot complain about half the things around you being unfair and undesirable if you cannot summon the guts to come out and speak out, a bare minimum essential to enable any kind of change, whether in society or in politics. If you are so deep in the closet- for example if you make remarks at college girls with coloured strands of hair- calling them names- I'm sorry you do not deserve the change you want in India. Change cannot be lopsided or only in part. It has to be universal and preceded by a change in the basic mindset of the populace, an entire paradigm shift, a transformation in social dynamics. This change can only begin at the micro level. We the youth of this country need to lead by example.

I am not perfect in any way whatsoever. But I feel for certain issues, and my imperfections cannot come in the way of dealing with them in the way I possibly can.

My only appeal to my disgruntled friends is- do not be judgemental. Do not be stuck with preconcieved notions of things, people and ideas. Do not presume and then read. Do not presume at all.

All of us suffer from presumptions and stereotypes- whether it is of the life in a small town, the corrupt nature of a politician, or the South Bombay girl across the street wearing a miniskirt and walking with such confidence that unnerves many. This is where we need to unclutter our minds.

I've discovered some things in the last few months. I am still firebrand, I still get absolutely livid with certain happenings all around me. But there is a growing sense of satisfaction coming from a spiritual liberation that is slowly beginning to happen. I have started seeing various things in a different light over these few months. I have been more active in these months than in the past several years. I hope it gets better. Life is so much more fun when you can see all sides of a picture.

I hope those who have shut their eyes tight and existed in pitch darkness for long finally open their eyes and draw back the blind to the light outside.

Of course, all of this is my personal opinion and unbinding on anyone. I have been quite utterly shocked by some of my friends' comments and their (issue-based) support for some unbred, goonlike, sexually frustrated Mr. Anonymouses in the comments list. They very carefully registered their "dislike" for the dirty, vile, abusive language used by Mr. Anonymous, while exhibiting defeaning silence when asked about the content of his/her post.

As for Mr. Anonymous, I saw no reason to give you undue respect with a befitting reply to your despicable post. You seem to be one of the million trolls roaming the cyberspace, your unworthy tummies filled with malice and impunity. Period.

P.S.: I had informed a very good friend of mine that my next post after Confessions would be on my use of English and Hindi and my unhappiness with the latter dominating my talk nowadays, in spite of me not being great at it. Now that will be the next post.

Regards,
Pranav

Some Interesting Facts Related to My Birthday

Since my birthday is coming closer, I thought of putting up some facts about myself I discovered on http://www.dayofbirth.co.uk/
Frankly this post was not an original idea..I discovered the link and a similar description on a friend's friend's blog.

Results for 6th June 1987 ( My birthdate):

• You were born on a Saturday.
• Your star sign is Gemini.
• Your birthstone is Perl or Moonstone.
• The season was Spring.
• You were born in the Chinese year of the Hare.
• The US President was Ronald Reagan (Republican).
• The UK Prime Minister was Margaret Thatcher (Conservative).
• You are 21 years 11 months 7 days old.
• It is 24 days until your next birthday.
• In dog years you are 147 years old.
• You are 8,012 days old.
• You are approximately 192,299 hours old.
• You are approximately 692,277,565 seconds old.

Clear the Smoke!

I don't think this world exists. I exist, but then the Pranav my mother knows is different from the Pranav I know, the Pranav you know, the Pranav one of my friends knows, and the Pranav another friend knows. So there are about a hundred Pranavs and only one real one-the one I know. But it cannot be so with the world because it has no universal soul. Or may be it does, but not on an earthly level. Therefore everyone "knows" something different from everyone else, even about the same thing. Therefore reality does not exist. Most animals see trees to be grey or black or white in colour. We think they are green. So the truth is that "colour" does not exist, and neither does the tree. But when the world ruled by humankind ceases to exist, we have a problem.

Senseless? Made no f*****g logic? But it does.

Firstly though, we need to differentiate between good illusion and bad illusion. Good illusion is the apparent difference in things due to the difference in naturally bestowed qualities. Animals are colour-blind, humans are not. This cannot be a cause for indignation. It is a fact. But bad illusions arise when humans create something, and destroy it themselves a million times over.

Let me explain with a potentially outrageous example. Did the Holocaust really happen? Methinks it did. Iran doesn't. The USA and Western Europe think 6 million Jews were murdered. Lets not forget that the USA and Great Britain won World War II and rewrote history. Methinks the figure was closer to 2 or 3 million-an educated guess-the golden mean always takes us closer to the truth.

Now we cannot ask Hitler, or Goebbels, or Himmler, for they are all dead and gone. And if they were to be alive, what was the guarantee they'd tell the truth? So the truth will never be out.

Similarly, everything before us is a cloud of thick smoke. No one knows the truth about virtually anything. Did Mahatma Gandhi actually say "Hey Ram" while dying? Was Shakespeare a plaigarist? What is the real aim of the BJP? Who actually runs the media in India? Does the Illuminati exist? Who really wielded influence while naming the street across my society?
In other words, in the huge mass of information, and the fact that humans create and destroy knowledge for their own selfish motives, results in a haze of smoke over our eyes. No wonder then, that the world is an illusion- in short, no one really knows who they are, what they are, why they are what they are, or who someone else is and what is their motive. Period.

Mind One versus Mind Two

Hi everyone.

As promised here's Part 1 of the Mind One versus Mind Two debate. Basically both represent the dilemma and conflict I face every day, at virtually every juncture.

Mind One is the liberal, pro-freedom, pro-women, pro-globalization, egalitarian humanistic mind. It is the stronger one in this mind war. It has been strengthened by years of training and persuasion. Mind Two is the Indian mind, the conservative, family and society-oriented mind. It is not absolutely anti-women, but certainly a cynic and a traditionalist. It is very weak and fragile, due to years of invasion and erosion perpetrated by Mind One. Nevertheless, the two minds are still at war, even though Mind Two knows it's losing fast.

Mind One: Ahh..what a nice day..Ramadoss is very likely to resign. I feel so happy. No more moral policing in the name of protecting people's health.

Mind Two: Oh really, Mind One? What about the girls billowing smoke at the hookah parlours in Bombay? Isn't it shocking?

Mind One: So? Have you ever noticed the guys there? Or just the girls?

Mind Two: Men are intrinsically, biologically wasted creatures. No use grudging their activities.

Mind One: What an excuse! So it's fine to be imperfect if you're a guy, but girls must live as society wishes?

Mind Two: But smoking is harmful to a woman's reproductive system.

Mind One: And what about men? Does it not harm them too?

Mind Two: But if a woman's reproductive system is damaged, how will she produce children?

Mind One: (Angry) Is that all a woman is supposed to do? Is she born so she can raise children and look after them all her good years?

Mind Two: So how will a society survive? Do you know that Western Europe actually has a negative population growth rate?

Mind One: We don't need any more population in India than we already have. Also this family preservation thing is stupid. Anyway your whole premise is biased and chauvinistic, baseless.

Mind Two: Why? Why?

Mind One: Any philosophy that actively or passively seeks to or promotes subjugation of half the human race, over several centuries, in order to "preserve" society in the way it sees fit, is evil, purely Satanic.

Mind Two: That cannot be helped. An equal society will self-destruct in a short while. Look at the West.

Mind One: Oh do you know the West so well? You've never been there. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at others.

Mind Two: It's quite plain that the West is a decaying society. And it's primarily because of this equality rubbish.

Mind One: When will you learn not to point fingers at women for each and every ill of society?

Mind Two: C'mon, it's true.

Mind One: NO IT'S NOT!!! It's just bias, bias, bias. Look at India first. What about our social evils?

Mind Two: Some of them.....are curable....should not...be there...

Mind One: Why only some?

Mind Two: Gender equality...will ruin everything...our religion...our families..

Mind One: That is because you are unwilling to change fundamentally. Yes the present social structure will be uprooted, replaced, and all for the good. But you are not ready for the change.

Mind Two: This is our culture, our tradition. It's comfortable. Don't shake us up so badly.

Mind One: I will. I will do it for my fellow beings. You will have to face it, accept it.

Mind Two: I can't...

Mind One: You will. Slowly, surely, you will.

Mind Two: I'd rather perish.

Mind One: Oh you will, certainly, if you so wish. You are so weak within the brain of this Pranav Joshi.

Mind Two: But I'm really strong elsewhere. In fact in many people I'm the only mind that exists.

Mind One: Oh, I'll fight my way in there. I can.

Mind Two: You can't, never. I'm too strong there.

Mind One: (Sad) Hmmm..I have hope. And you are just a cynic.

Mind Two: I'm a realist.

Mind One: Stop living in the old world for God's sake! Learn to respect women, their choices, their feelings.

Mind Two: All this...leads to erosion of manhood..man's power and control....but I'm tired now.

Mind One: You would be. You're so weak and you're yelling too. Fine. We'll end it here for today. I have other things to do.

Mind Two: Yes, later. I'll be back with renewed energy.

Mind One: Bye!!! But I won again! 

At this point Mind Two is further weakened, exhausted. These debates are what have been killing it slowly.

I go off to office, or for a quick shower. Hope it wasn't boring! I'll publish more of this later if it wasn't.

My Transformation through the Ages

In my last post I mentioned that the regeneration phase was still not over. Ever since I started discovering myself, my ideas, my desires and world view, I have been continually confronted with these questions: The equality of the sexes and the freedom of expression. The first one is irrevocably intertwined in the second, for depriving 48% of the country's population of human rights does not seem a good advertisement for the freedom of expression, a basic fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India.

It was not always that I was egalitarian. It was not always that I felt this way. But by the time I was 14, I had enough brains to think beyond cricket and homework.

Firstly, though, let me say that for all the Puritanism and prudishness in my family, never were we, the children, taught to abuse women, physically or mentally. There were quarrels, as there are in every household, but never did (and never does) my dad hit my mom, neither did my grandfather hit my grandmom. However, this by no means implies that my family ever believed in gender equality. I have seen plenty of women suffer, struggle in my family, because of orthodoxy and harassment. I would not like to elaborate on that as it would be too personal.

So by Age 14, I finally began to analyze the world around me. I firmly believed in the concept of everlasting love, romantic love, so glamorized and popularized by Hindi cinema. I visualized my ideal companion as being pretty, caring, loving, and understanding. I expected her to obey me and be modest and simple. It was the typical doll-like interpretation of a "good girl". It was accentuated and bred by the society's indoctrination. I considered "skimpy wear", smoking and drinking as things undesirable to be practiced by women. However, I always believed in reciprocating love, and never dreamed of violence against women.

By Age 16 and a half, I was in college and the youth years had hit me. I had managed to carve out a considerably more liberal personality. I began to question, internally and with my friends, society's old mores and traditions. I began to see women's freedom as a sign of advancement and liberation. My views regarding the "sanctity" of women became less extreme and I began to accept humanism for the first time, though serious dilemmas undermined this. I was still the kid with the "suburban mentality", the person who so wholeheartedly believed in the demureness of women. Their freedom would be granted to them out of righteousness and compassion. It never occurred to me then that freedom could be a woman's birthright, unquestionable.

By Age 19, I had opened up considerably to the world outside, widening my horizons through both seeing and hearing things I had never seen or heard before. The notion of a class divide between the "high-class" "liberal" metropolis and the "conservative" suburbs began to disappear. By now I was quite clear in the head about my ideas and values, the left-liberal stance. Although I finally began to realize the unquestionability of human rights for one and all, the "protective streak" remained, a faith in acting as the government in regulating the actions of women by occasional intervention.

By Age 20 and a half, several external experiences and changes had caused almost seismic shifts in my social ideologies. A mass wave of moral policing finally began to completely antagonize me from the right-wing once and for all. It was a reactionary sentiment against the censorship of youth culture and values, but it did the trick of finally liberating me from a perverse "Indian" mindset. Theoretically, ideologically, my regeneration had reached the pinnacle, or as close to it as possible, already. Practically though, the internal conflict was reaching its peak too. It was all right to theorize, but now the challenge had finally shifted to the practical application of my beliefs.

Today, at Age 21 years, 9 months and 17 days, the realistic change has finally begun taking place. I am now driven by internal, psychological, spiritual forces. My desire for a free and equal world has transformed itself into action. I have come face to face with the ideologies that I myself theorized about, shaking the ground beneath my feet, attempting to live up to the challenge of women sharing equal psychological and material place with men. The internal conflict just got tougher, the world just got more interesting, and the Enlightenment that I so desperately seek is now very achievable and very close.

I have published this overlong post in order to sketch my journey through the shackles of dogma and tradition into the arms of humanism and self-realization, at least in one particular way. I intend to convey this psychological dilemma further in my next (shorter) post, in a Mind 1 versus Mind 2 debate.

Of Fanaticism, Revolutions and Soul-Searching

1) Some fundamentalist goons from a little-known Sri Ram Sene attacked women in a pub in Mangalore, since they felt it was against Indian culture for women to visit pubs and consume alcohol.
I was infuriated, unhinged, my blood boiled and I was desperate, I wanted to do something, to rip out Muthalik's intestines, but I couldn't. I was distraught.
Then I joined the Consortium of Pub-Going, Loose and Forward Women.
I joined Blank Noise too.
Now I have a purpose, a vision, a cause. Now I have an emotional sink too-though we know too well that there would be little we could do to stop fundamentalists if they came calling elsewhere.

2) The activism has been running strong within me. Ask the owners of Blank Noise and Pink Chaddi and they'd tell you I'm very enthusiastic, a far cry from the lazybones that I'm known as at home. I ascribe it to the dual nature of Gemini.
So I have been very active, running around, getting Marathi stuff translated, getting in touch with printers for wallet cards, and shooting videos on Women's Day. Because I've got a thing that I'd love, I've discovered something here- a goal, a dream, an ambition, a utopia.
Now that I'm into social causes, it's easy to see how difficult it is to maintain one's composure, to live up to your own expectations, to understand people, attitudes, the milieu, and things. That is one part. The other part is constantly lifting yourself, reminding yourself of the tasks ahead, and visualizing all this as the starting point of self-actualization.

3) Self-regeneration is a HUGE task. An onerous ordeal. Things are much easier said than done, and much simpler to preach than practice. It may be human nature, male nature, it may be because I've lived in the suburbs all my life, or probably because it is very deeply ingrained in the Indian male psyche to consider themselves the only deserving species on Earth, and relegate women to lesser animals.
I've been trying, trying since the age of 16. I've tried to wash away the chauvinism, the feeling of superiority, that keeps hammering itself on my mind through the external, twisted world.
It's hard. Very hard. Methinks women may do as they wish, methinks egalitarianism is great. Me also thinks it scary to see women occupying equal space, physically, psychologically, with men on a public platform. But I want them to. I want them to tear away the bonds of social expectation, social prudishness and oppression. I love it when women apply for divorces. I love it when they are still spinsters at age 30. I love it when they are powerful heads of organizations. I also love it when they assert their independence and equality by smoking, drinking, abusing and freaking out, though these are not necessarily desirable habits for either men or women.
There's still this tinge of chauvinism left though. Still some fear, some intimidation from experiencing such free-spirited, assertive, independent women. It's one thing to say you believe in it and quite another to experience it. And yet, in this deep, conscious, spiritual struggle, I find my heart winning, I find the chauvinism losing, egalitarianism and feminism winning. Slowly but surely, the right side is taking over. I don't yet claim to be completely reformed. But I'm getting closer, very much closer.

The End of an Empire; the Salvation of Another Nation

Yes it has finally happened. The Aussie Empire, built over 13 years of sheer class, brutality, a loud mouth, uncouth arrogance and physical and mental disintegration of the opponent, has collapsed like a pack of cards, washed away like the sands on the shore, blown away like a leaf in a gale and burgeoned to death like an elephant crushing an ant.
It's not that it's been done. It's the way in which it has been done. Beaten 2-1 in a Test Series that could have been 2-0 if not for severe injuries to the visitors' captain, and 4-1 in the ODIs. And in Australia. Inside the lion's own den.
The Deliverers are South Africa, once a nation hounded into cricketing wilderness due to an inhuman regime of apartheid; an exile that truncated the careers of some of the would-have-been greatest players in cricketing history: Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards and some more. It's a great moment for the rainbow nation, and even more heartening is to see Makhaya Ntini and Graeme Smith embrace, Hashim Amla and AB De Villiers do likewise, for it shows that the wounds caused by apartheid are healing, that they are not incurable, that AIDS, poverty and economic crises cannot keep the determined ones down. It holds the promise of a wonderful world, amidst the atrocities of fundamentalists, economic downturns and global warming. It gives us all HOPE.
Now back to Australia. What a team they were. And what a team they have become. When this Colossus ran roughshod over the cricketing world, nobody else came within a whisker of eternal glory. The massacres were unparalled, and the few indiscreet times became great epics, so invincible were Australia and so rarely lacklustre. An Australian defeat was a cause for great celebration; today it runs the risk of becoming just another target for another expletive thrown out with glee or indignation, depending upon your loyalties. Not that it hurts us, for with all the class and spectacle that was Australian cricket, it was not loved, nor disliked, but hated. The Aussies never knew how to conduct themselves; they were downright rude, "strutted about like peacocks" as one ex-player himself put it, and never showed any apparent regard for the opposition's calibre. They also talked, before the series, during the series, after the series-they talked a lot and performed a lot. The occasional opposition victories, or near-misses, became the stuff of legend, for sometimes the bloodied, heroic vanquished are greater than the victors. But no reign, and certainly not a scorching, oppressive one, can go on for ever. The Aussies shot themselves in the foot against India in Sydney last year: they cheated to win, they were despicable, unsportsmanlike, unforgiveable. It exposed a baffling desperation, as if they knew Sydney would be their Waterloo. The disintegration started the very next match in Perth, Australia's now-erstwhile strongest bastion, when they lost convincingly and deservedly. And it has continued. The freefall seems so endless that one begins to feel pity for the wreck of a once-great side. The world wanted competition. It got annihilation.
But in many ways that might be a really good thing. What goes up, must come down, and every sunset must give way to a new sunrise. I cannot thank Australia, for their twilight is glowing with bloodstreams of bad legacy, but I can welcome the South Africans and the Indians into the glorious dawn of a new era.