VIRGINITY AND CHASTITY
Virginity and chastity are the imagined
virtues strictly assigned to the fair sex in many societies. Why such stringent
conditions were imagined and imposed on the fair sex by the male chauvinists?
The popular Tamil actress Khusboo famously said some time back that it is silly
for the men to expect their brides to be virgins. That statement brought her
some problems. Luckily till now she did not say that it is foolish for men to
expect their wives to be chaste. Why everywhere such a biased tradition is in
vogue relating to fair sex? In addition
to male chauvinism any thing else is also a reason? Virginity and chastity are also
states of mind. They are not merely associated with abstaining from pre-marital
or extra-marital sexual affairs. Why this is imposed on women only is not
known. Though it can be blamed easily on male domination and chauvinism and
selfishness of men, it can have still deeper implications requiring enquiry and
understanding.
Before venturing a journey into such an enquiry,
we can observe contemporary mood and expressions. Khushboo’s statement to a
certain extent reflects the mood of the “elite” in our country. No marriage, or
living with a companion or permissive and promiscuous life seems to be the
fashion of the cultured and civilized. If one has money in abundance, one can
live as one likes. Restrictions are only to those whose lives are made or
marred by money. It is now not a taboo to discuss these things in public and
express ourselves as we feel and not necessarily as we behave. This is the
culture of the day.
Now trying to understand the origin of the
concepts virginity and chastity concerning imposition only on fair sex, it
might be to protect the fair sex from the advances of and exploitation by
unscrupulous men. It was then imposed because women were not financially
independent.
Also the character Kunthi in Mahabharata
may provide an answer. She was sixteen years old when she first conceived
Karna. Though a story that a seer gave her boon to the effect whomsoever man
she wishes to be with her he will be with her. In her teens and adolescent bent
of mind she thought of Sun God. The result is conception of Karna. She became panicky
and put him in a basket and left him in the Ganges. Radha found him and brought
him up. Later when at a convenient time she wanted to claim that Karna is her
son, Karna was not charmed or enchanted. He considered and considers forever
Radha to be his mother. This informs that a woman becomes a mother when she
brings up the off-spring also and not by merely giving birth.
So Karna was clear in this aspect, but his
great virtue, charity, in him made him to give Kunthi a word that he will not
kill other Pandavas except Arjuna in the ensuing war. Though Kunthi is the
biological mother, once she has forsaken him to save her honor, she ceased to
be Karna’s mother. Kunthi is a princess so could some how save her honor by
making her son the scapegoat. But will life be as smooth to any ordinary girl
if she conceives by pre-marital sexual encounter? Whether we like or not it is
the female species that has to bear the effects of biological consequence of
sexual-act and the burden and brunt of delivering, rearing and bringing up a
child under any or such circumstances. This
is the law of nature and animal kingdom and we are animals first and last. And
mind, no pills, condoms or other safety family planning devices were available
then. Also the well-knit and togetherness in family living then makes it
impossible for the girl to resort to abortion. Even a genuinely married couple
together is not able to bring up the off-spring in these days of high prices.
How can a single girl not economically independent do that? So to be as a
precautionary measure the restrictions were imagined and put into practice. So,
virginity was imposed in the days of non-availability of family planning
devices and avenues for secret abortions, for economically dependent fair sex. So also chastity is proposed. Common sense is the
basis for such propositions.
We also have the story of Sakuntala. She
was an unwanted child for her mother Menaka. This shows how some mothers behave
irresponsibly. They just enjoy and do not want to take care of the
consequences. The infants will be the sufferers and victims. And again in the
case of Sakuntala, how after enjoying, Dushyanta feigned ignorance that he ever
met her and started talking man-like about her honor (Vyasa, who wrote this
story in The Mahabharata has no mental inhibitions in the characterization of
Dushyanta as Kalidasa who invented a curse in Abhijnana Saakuntalam to not
besmirch his hero of conceit and deception). This story too tells girls or
women that they should not be enamored for the sweet talk and promises made by
promiscuous men and offer themselves. Though it is an enjoyment to both, it is
the fair sex who has to bear unwanted pregnancy. Some may dismiss the stories
of the Ramayana, Mahabharata and the like as the imaginations of some exploiting
class and question the existence of such characters.
If we show such radicalism
towards Panchatantra stories we will be missing a mine of wisdom useful to us.
In Panchatantra stories animals speak; rationally this can never happen. Shall
we miss all these just because irresponsible atheists selectively abuse our
culture? We always take the essence and
useful information from such stories and fiction. Just because something is
fiction it never loses its significance, usefulness and value.
Now many young women are financially
independent. After having economic independence other needs come into picture.
One must not falter in one’s own interest during the process of fulfilling
emotional needs. Let them have a course of life as they like and let us see.
Their experiences will be useful examples for next generations. Definitely
virginity and chastity are equally applicable to men also.
I never understand why the white people are
so much sympathetic with us and raining money in the welfare of HIV affected
persons and thus are providing livelihood to so many committed workers. Some of
the over-enthusiastic workers having white skin kiss in public during such
campaigns “celebrities” who were humiliated by models of worse culture. It is as if white skin people overcame aids
threat themselves or careful enough to demand use of family planning devices by
their partners in their countries. Test-tube conception and taking wombs for
rent may solve the problems of the rich and technologically advanced people of
different culture and save them from the travails of conception and delivering.
Such enlightenment is not available with our women-folk who are ignorant or not
in a position to demand their genuine partners to use condoms. So much is
involved in promiscuity. This is known to all of us but we are frail.
Virginity and chastity might be “outdated” words
to a few neo-rich and “elite” sections of the society. But for millions of
Indian girls and wives virginity and chastity are still guiding principles. And
every life and everything in life revolves around money, economics and
financial position though not on culture and tradition. One must not lose sight
of this truth. A wealthy man or woman is capable of doing something for the
indiscretions committed; but not all. So an awareness of such realities may be
useful for girls and fair sex to take their own decisions.
THE INSENSITIVITIES OF SOME INDIAN RATIONALISTS
Rationalism is a favorite slogan of many
modern Indian intellectuals, caste leaders, (some) regionalism leaders,
champions of separatism, sub-nationality and social justice in addition to
sworn atheists including some leftists. They are of the opinion that logic and
reasoning can resolve all outstanding human problems. They go to the extent of
ridiculing faith and faiths. But they do not know that their utterances are
based on belief only and not on individual quest, search or experimentation.
They quote scientists, famous radical humanists and older social justice leaders
to support themselves and their attack on the faith and selective faiths.
Indian rationalists mainly target Hinduism, its ancient culture and
civilization.
Most of them lack intellectual training in any
field-research, analysis or the like. They are more prejudiced than the people
whom they attack and dub are prejudiced. Their enlightenment is confined to
hurting and irresponsibly commenting on selected faiths. None of them are
trained in modern sciences, technologies or enlightened philosophies. Most of
them are educated in their regional tongue and their horizon of knowledge or
scholarship or vision is highly limited to their belief and geographical
locations rather than to study and learning. But they criticize with impunity
centuries old expressions and ridicule them claiming to be the champions of
rationalism and social justice.
For example, a rationalist who never
studied physics will agree that electron exists. How is he sure of the
existence of electron, he himself never trying to verify its existence? He does
not know that he is simply believing what scientists say and what is written in
the books. When he believes the existence of electron so naively, on the other
hand he ridicules saints and sages without he himself ever verifying what they experienced
and said. By simple logic or his affiliation to atheism or a famous
non-believer, he dismisses ancient and modern Indian saints and seers who
contributed to Indian wisdom and their teachings are publicly ridiculed. Why and
how he is able to take this license?
Because he happens to criticize Hinduism and the infamous Brahminism and
his rationalism is confined to irresponsible criticisms on Indian culture and
civilization which are based on Sanskrit Texts, though many Buddhist and Jain
Texts are also in Sanskrit language.
He does not see any deficiencies in other
faiths in his limited intellectual sincerity. His intellectual insincerity and
selective ridicule of certain faiths only are condoned by his friends and
followers. He also does not know that rationalists in other countries ridicule
the majority faiths of their societies. Rationalism is thus confined in modern India
mostly to negatively commenting on faith and faiths without any intellectual
training or analysis and blindly believing what their leaders say. He can not
verify on his own the truth or otherwise of Einstein’s theory of relativity and
like a child keeps mum and believes it. But the same personwho never cares to
verify what sages have experienced and said, vulgarly criticizes them. This
selective rationalism is with a view on vote banks but not because of love for
truth or real knowledge or concern for the social sections he claims to uplift.
Many rationalists in India have developed
vested interest in commenting without themselves ever verifying the truth or
otherwise of what ancient or modern Indian seers or saints have professed.
Their ability to garner many votes and hence political influence and power is
protecting them from all insulting comments they make on Indian culture and
civilization and hurt many Indians. These insensitivities of many Indian
rationalists are to be condemned and answered in a healthy debate.
Majority
opinion and votes can rule democracy but many times truth and justness can not
be democratically decided. Truths professed by science, seers and philosophies
can not be put to democratic vote and decided. It requires a trained mind and
committed individuals to knowledge and truth to comment on them. Every Dick,
Tom and Harry does not have jurisdiction in the determination of truth though
he happens to be a leader who can garner votes by promising free bees with tax
payer’s money and in the process builds dynastic empires to his sons and
daughters. Rationalism is sincerity and not selective negative and hurting
statements on selective and selected faiths.
No comments:
Post a Comment