Posts Tagged ‘ women ’

Uniform Civil Code -choosing between devil and deep blue sea.

The last post on Muslim Divorce laws have evoked lot of discussion of Uniform Civil Code..I haven’t done much reading on this,so I am yet to form my own opinion.Enacting UCC is easier said than done,but I have no idea how it is practical in a country of excessive plurality of religions.I think gender-equal and secualr concepts emulated into personal laws will be more acceptable and more fesible in our current state of nation-atleast,it may serve as a first step towards reform.Otherwise,we and our coming generation will die ranting UCC and nothing is going to happen.

While I do my reading,I would like to share an article that echo my current thoughts.

Why I Support The Uniform Civil Code

Author: Tariq Ansari

Publication: Outlook

Date: July 29, 2003

URL: http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20030729&fname=ucc&sid=1

The Supreme Court has once again set the cat amongst the pigeons on the matter of a Common Civil Code. Gloating and breast beating has commenced on all sides of the politico-social spectrum. As an Indian Muslim I would like very much to be heard….

 

The Supreme Court has once again set the cat amongst the pigeons on the matter of a Common Civil Code. Gloating and breast beating has commenced on all sides of the politico- social spectrum. As an Indian Muslim I would like very much to be heard.

 

Let’s get some ridiculous myths out of the way first:

 

Myth 1: All Muslims are opposed to a Common Civil Code.

 

Clearly, this is not the case. I am one who is not, as are many others.

 

Myth 2: The Muslim Personal Law gives Muslims some great benefits that are being withheld from non-Muslims.

 

Nothing can be further from the truth. The personal law only gives Muslims the right to be governed by Shariah principles in the personal matters of marriage, inheritance, property rights and religious observance. Commercial and criminal law is the same for all Indians.

 

So why do I support a common law for all Indians in civil matters? For four very good reasons.

 

First, there are at least six schools of jurisprudence among Muslims, four among Sunnis and two among Shias. The Indian Muslim Personal Law is a curious amalgam of principles from different schools, but most particularly the Hanafi branch of Sunni legal belief.

 

While most Indian Muslims are from this sect, our so-called Muslim Personal Law does not cover large numbers of Muslims, who prefer their own interpretation of Shariah law. Therefore, this is hardly in conformity with pure Koranic practice, as the more extreme elements among the Muslim clergy would have us believe.

 

Second, I believe the most important demand that Muslims should make in secular India is that we are treated equally. That we have equal rights and opportunities as all other Indians and that the State will afford us the same protection of our rights and property as it would Hindus. I do not believe Muslims can make that demand when at the same time we want to be treated differently in matters of personal law. This is an irreconcilable inconsistency.

 

Third, at least half of all Muslims are badly served by the Muslim Personal Law. Triple talaq, no rights to maintenance (thank you, Rajiv Gandhi!) and subordinate rights of inheritance are all examples of how my Muslim sisters labour under an unfair and, dare I say it, unIslamic set of regulations. I have a daughter and if she should want to marry a Muslim it will be under the Special Marriages Act, thank you very much.

 

And lastly, this ridiculous Muslim Personal Law is a convenient stick for Hindu communalists to beat Muslims with. Giving us the right to be governed by our own personal law gives them the right to claim that we are some kind of privileged minority with a suspect commitment to the Indian Republic. Take away the law and deprive Pravin Togadia of the stick.

 

However, I would also like to raise two very specific and critical qualifications to my support of the Supreme Court mention. We cannot move towards a Common Civil Code without absolute clarity on these matters:

 

One, understand and do something about the fundamental reasons why Indian Muslims cling to their own Personal Law. Deep within the psyche of the Mussalman is a fear of disenfranchisement, of complete loss of identity and marginalisation within Indian society.

 

Two, every time you burn homes in Gujarat, every time you treat Urdu as an alien tongue, every time a Muslim boy loses a job opportunity thanks to discrimination and every time Mr Togadia hints darkly at ‘the enemy within,’ you compound the siege mentality.

 

When everything is taken away, goes the ghetto belief, let us cling tightly to what we are. The Muslim Personal Law, sadly, has become one of the symbols of identity, an identity under threat.

 

A Common Civil Code must imply that ALL citizens are covered under the same laws on civil and commercial matters.

 

Let us dismantle at the same time, special privileges under the Hindu Undivided Family provisions as also any special laws governing the personal affairs of Christians, Parsis, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs as well as other groups like the Nairs of Kerala who follow the principles of matrilineal descent.

 

Do away not only with Muslim Personal Law but also other laws on the statute books that grant legal sanctity to unique practices of the diverse communities of India.

 

As an Indian Muslim I wholeheartedly support the idea of a Common Civil Code. It is a fair and equitable Directive Principle of the Constitution of India. Let us, however, understand this matter in its entirety, away from the hysterical jubilation and frantic wailing of communalists on both sides.

 

One people. One law.

 

Yes, for sure!

 

Tariq Ansari is Managing Director, Mid Day Multimedia,

Mumbai

Yes,Uniform Civil Code may require muslims to give away their religious rulings and idendity,but what else can do done in a nation where Personal Law Board members are not ready make any reform even after 60+ years.. (oh,I forgot to give them due credit.They are smart enough to reform Sharia so that men can divorce vis SMS,phone and email..Apart from these sexist reform,I haven’t heard of nay reform that would benefit women who are still at mercy of men )If muslims are bothered about giving away the freedom of religion,they better reform their gender-biased laws,or else may shut up and do as the state enacts Article 44 of Indian Constitution ( Article 44 provides that the State shall endeavor to secure for all citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.)

Women’s day -this picture says it all..

ceowoman

 

 

A long way ahead…Happy Women’s day to all my dearos 🙂

Good day

Image source :  http://www2.marshall.usc.edu/web/Undergraduate.cfm?doc_id=3484

Conclusive thoughts on ‘provocative dressing’ ..

I just want to thank you all for your participation on this thread.. I have learned a lot,and every comment counts..I just want to highlight two comments ,that made lot of sense and struck the right chord in me..Alankrita and 1conoclast(he wrote this as a comment on IHM’s post)..Thanks again..

 

Alankrita said :

Nimmy, this is just to reply to your “do our part”. What is “our part”. What dress is provocative? Ankles? Knees? Short sleeves, short sleeved blouses- and how much cleavage? Is a Sari conservative? With the back and the shoulders bare? Is a salwar kameez good enough- and if so how should the chunni be draped? Over the head? Hair- Short? Long? Makeup- now that can be a turn on… so what is “non-provocative”? It is so difficult to define. And therefore just as abuse-worthy- if the “she was immodestly dressed, she provoked me” defense is to be taken seriously. Because what is “accepted” by some may not be by others.q

  And we are not even looking at things from the other point of view. Why is it that we never take into account how the way men may dress may be as “provocative”. You know, with 50% of the population men, that should be an issue too. So why isn’t it common to hear of women having heir baser instincts aroused by some man and assaulting him. Maybe, it is not so common because of the assumed privilege that men enjoy- women learn to “control” themselves. Men, well, it is always the woman’s fault.
I can understand why this conversation can be a reality- but when you really pare it down to the bare bones, you realize how inherently sexist the view is. Just replace “men and women” by different races or religions and “provocative dressing” by something else, maybe the right to walk down a certain street. It will immediately begin to seem very offensive. Living in a sexist society, we do not realize how completely sexist and “slut-shaming” assertions about “proper dress” or”decent behavior” are.

Indeed, this is a conversation I have heard several times. And quite often felt too that Miss B makes sense, but on deeper examination her attitude reflects just how completely she has been engulfed by a world view which inherently makes a woman inferior. Being careful is a good thing. But it boomerangs in that it breeds a degree of helplessness and lets the perpetrators go unpunished. It lets a lassitude creep into society, a tolerance for law breaking and it demonizes the other sex too. “Men are animals” is easy to say, but that is as bad a stereotype as “women are weak”. Be careful is excellent advice, but haven’t we heard it always? Careful in terms of what to wear, how to behave, whom to mingle with- and does it really help. As far as I know it serves to let crimes of harassment be trivialized, rape justified as “she asked for it” and a reckless lawlessness take over.
We cannot change everyone in society.We cannot make everyone view things our way. We cannot make people view the sexes as being equal. What we can do, however, is to call out on inherent misogyny when we observe it. We can also think deeply about issues we come across, even he very “compelling arguments”. And above all we can and should not keep curtailing our own freedoms just because perverts live in our society.

 

1conoclast said:

I said I’m on blogging hiatus & I intend to be, but I just had to correct the misconceptions that Ms. B has (& a few that the author has).

1. Idealism is what moves society ahead. Inventions, Discoveries, Art, Science, Laws, Civilization, everything comes from being idealistic. It’s called evolving.
Realism is an excuse for stangnation, for extinction. No planes would’ve existed if men hadn’t wanted to fly. So much for the realists!

2. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance yes. Yes we should be able to walk around nude & leave our doors unlocked & our wallets lying around in the house. And we do.
In olden times, no one locked their doors. Did we have a problem? I’ve heard some towns/villages/colonies still do that!
In my house, I leave my wallet lying around. By God’s grace, the maid doesn’t steal anything. I’m trying to illustrate that just like stealing happens, the opposite also happens. So having faith & encouraging trust are equally important.
Nudism isn’t a problem. Go to Goa. Lounge on the beaches. Take in the nude breasts. There’s no stopping you. Just don’t rape. I was in Goa & I took in the sights smilingly. I didn’t rape anyone. I didn’t even feel like raping anyone. I didn’t want to touch or pass a comment. I may have wanted to compliment a few of them, but that’s not the same thing as pawing.

3. Take it from a man. Men like looking at women. Period. A figure hugging churidar-kurta is as ogle-able as a bikini.

4. Women who wear shorts/skirts outside the house definitely wear them inside the house.

5. Zulm sehna bhi gunaah hai. Opting to take care of yourself, like IHM suggested, could be carrying pepper spray, car keys, learning karate etc. Not hiding behind ghunghats & burqhas!

6. You think modesty avoids problems? Where do most of the rapes happen? In naked urban India or in fully clothed rural India?
Was Phoolan Devi wearing a little black number when she was raped? Was Banwari Devi?
What was the 17 year old college girl that was raped by constable sunil more on Marine Drive wearing???
Boss… Living in fear will not solve the problem. Locking up the goons will solve half the problem. Giving them an education will help solve the problem. Making society more open & sex more acceptable (& accessible) will solve the problem.

7. IHM… The ultra-feminist in you misread the poor man. He was not going to pass a comment at the doctor’s offending blouse. He wanted to ask her to cover up, but was scared because of sexual harassment laws that are biased towards women. Maybe they should be that way, but that doesn’t take away the fact that they’re currently biased.

This desire to keep men well behaved is not very different from the male desire to keep women well behaved.

I take offence at your claim that it’s the fear of punishment that keeps men well behaved. If that were true sunil more wouldn’t have raped the young college kid! He was a lawkeeper. He knew the law!!! Your logic is flawed. The problem is deeper than that.

I don’t have statistics on this, but is the %age of rape lower in more sexually permissive societies? That could possibly be one part of the answer… one part only.

And if it is, doesn’t that again mean, that it’s the liberal, idealistic thought that solutions lie with, instead of conservative regressive thought?

 

I understand why I was wrong..Good day to all…

Why/why not should women dress modestly/provocatively?

Miss A : Hey hey,read what IHM has written about so called provocative dressing

Miss B: Yeah,I read it,she is talking about an idealistic society,where everybody is mature and is aware of one own responsibility.Idealism is good,but reality and practicality is different.

Miss A :Can you expand?

Miss B: Yup..See,she is right when she says that ‘She does not invite it’..But in a multicultural and multifaceted society,how can you expect everybody to belive in your version of right?

Miss A :I agree,everybody is free to have their own opinion and that is what my point is about.Women are individuals and they should be free to choose what they wear and how they carry themselves.

Miss B: Any woman should be able to wear what she wants anywhere, and for that matter, so should men, but if we go by that ideology, then nudism should be perfectly acceptable in all spheres of society too. We should all be able to keep our doors unlocked when we leave home and also to keep our valuables on the table unattended while we nip to the toilet in a busy cafe too.However, human nature is unpredictable and thus we must always be on our guard. “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”

Miss A : I agree,women who dare to break the so called norms should be prepared to face the consequencies of the effect that the dressing will bring-for instance eve teasing (yeah,I know I got into ‘blame the victim’ theory) But I still stand by what I said,women are free to wear what they like . If you don’t like it,don’t look at it.

Miss B: You messed it,In fact men like to look at such women who reveal their assets,who make private things public.

Miss A : Women don’t dress to please men,they dress to please themselves.

Miss B: Ha ha,if that was they case,why don’t they wear such revealing dress inside their house and in front of family alone ? When she wears it to public,the message is simple-that she feels good being looked at,maybe by men or maybe by women. Isn’t this ‘feel good’ thing called attention seeker?

Miss A : Oh well,some women like attention,but that doesn’t mean you can go and touch her.. Revealing dress is not a invitation for rape or abuse..

Miss B: Tell me are you offended if somebody pass comment on you while you walk down the street..

Miss A : Hell yes,I hate it.

Miss B: So tell me why do you dress in a way that will attract comments.?

Miss A :Passing comments is his problem,not mine.

Miss B: Agreed,but why do you get offended at somebody else’s comment if you feel you are right?

Miss A : ***Silence..***

Miss B: Tell me why you women want to portray yourself as sexual objects while you go on 40 km essays on asking men to stop viewing women as sexual objects?When you yourself feel and is proud of being a sexual object,why do you complain about others looking at you through such glasses..?

Miss A : See,I don’t like others looking at me as a sexual object,so I dress modestly..But modestly is subjective.What is modest to me needn’t be to another person and what is immodest to me,maybe modest to the next person.So we can’t generalize.If somebody likes to dress in a particular way,she should be free to do so.

Miss B: Tell me something,when women know that there are some sick devilish men out there in the society,should she opt to take care herself by dressing modestly,or should she go around enrolling all eve teasers to mental asylum..Tell me which of the two choices is practical?

Miss A :Taking preventive measures is practical and feasible.But well,your logic is stupid bcoz in that case,wonder how men rape 18 month old babies and 89 years old grannies? Is diapers and sluggish clothes provocative?and you think women are free from all such harassments in places like Saudi and Afghan??**rolls eyes**

Miss B: You get my point..rape is about control and not about sex.When a baby or a granny is raped,it is all about overpowering and controlling rather than sexuality. So,no matter how you dress,you are prone to such dangers..But what is wrong in taking care?

Miss A :You are asking me to shut down myself in my room so that perverts may roam around freely in the streets uh? To accept that dressing is a moral issue is to accept this: a woman must not tempt a man. We focus on Adam eating the apple because Eve gave it to him. We don’t focus on Adam’s responsibility, on why he did not say no.

Miss B: No,thatz not my point. We are a society and we have norms and cultural barriers .Your freedom ends where mine starts.Men are like that they will keep drooling over public display or private parts..

Miss A : Shame on men who are proud to declare that they are so weak enough not to control their libidos..And Oh,please don’t talk about culture.. Rape and incest and sexual abuse of children are not our culture, even though they happen all the time.I am sick of men and women who, while holding their imported cellphones and driving their imported cars, say that women should conform to certain gender roles so as to preserve our “real” culture.

Miss B: Yes,I am aware of the double faceted hypocrisy. I agree that society should provide a safe environment for all its citizens and not punish women for the few criminal men who can nor control their urges. But then again, how can government take care of each and every single citizen in the country?We have our share of responsibility..The bottom line is that in public some modesty is required to avoid problems.

Miss A : Any man who takes offence at women’s clothing should reassess his ideas. Have your opinion, but leave it at that. Perhaps if these men cannot control themselves then they should not be allowed out on the street. Moreover,it is his responsibility to act as a reasonable and decent human being. Rather than impose dress codes for women, I’d propose blindfolds for hypersensitive men.

Miss B: I completely agree with you that women are not responsible for crimes committed on them and I agree with the ‘She did not ask for it’ theory.But in our real life.theories have less importance than practicals..I agree that as far as the dress code is concerned, the problem is the uneducated and ignorant observers not the dresser. Having said that, a person cannot but be mindful since there are just too many uneducated and ignorant people out there.So,it your choice whether you choose to be daring and outgo these vultures..But trust me,it is better to take care..“The stronger sex is actually the weaker sex because of it’s weakness for the weaker sex.”

Miss A : I am going for a tea break…phew…..

Why are women enemies to each other?

Australia‘s prime minister joined Muslim leaders on Thursday in condemning a cleric’s comments that husbands are entitled to smack disobedient wives and force them to have sex. “Amazing, how can a person rape his wife?” Hamza said, adding that wives must immediately respond to their husbands’ sexual demands. [more]

 

Islamonline.net is a pretty authentic source from where one can learn about Islam.They have a decent take on various matters-political or religious-around the world.I am shocked to read a statement from a FEMALE Islamic scholar..In regard to a question on marital rape,she says :

 

Of course if the husband insists on sleeping with his wife by force, it would not be considered rape since this is a right granted to him, but it is also not in accordance with Islamic teachings . Such an act contradicts the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the ethics of intercourse. Gentleness and kindness are among the manners of intimate relations in Islam…

 

The complete article can be read here,  so that one may verify if I have taken anything out of context..Yes,she says that ‘it is not right’..I am wondering what on earth stopped her from saying that IT IS WRONG..

 

I have seen people(this includes both men and WOMEN) boasting that men have uncontrollable sexual desires and hence women must be ready-money setup 24/7.Many women have argued with me that men have ultra sexual desires that one single woman alone cannot satisfy them..What the heck..Forget them,they are brainwashed and seasoned ,but sadly to a higher degree that nothing on earth can change their attitude,but is the same expected from a learned person who is addressed as a scholar..

 

Coming back to the point,there are many rulings floating around stating that it is the RIGHT of husband to have intimacy with his wife,no matter even if she disagree.Marital rape is an alien concept to me,but reading the above statement by Zeinab Mostafa made me look into it.I was wondering how can a husband rape his own wife!Marital rape is not to be confused with boring physical intimacy.

Question: What is marital rape?

Answer: Marital rape is any unwanted sexual acts by a spouse or ex-spouse, committed without consent and/or against a person’s will, obtained by force, or threat of force, intimidation, or when a person is unable to consent.

These sexual acts include intercourse, anal or oral sex, forced sexual behavior with other individuals, and other sexual activities that are considered by the victim as degrading, humiliating, painful, and unwanted.

It is also referred to as spousal rape and wife rape.

Forget the definitions,I am just feeling bad about this lady ,that ,who as a scholar should have bothered to stand by fair and just side.IHM has a great post here-some gems from Manusmrthy..Bible too has some gems..and again,Hadiths,not Quran,too have many great gems like one telling that angels will curse you if your husband goes angry to bed and one which says that you have to provide for husband,even if you are on camel top..   How disgusting and how sad that one is afraid to talk about justice and fairness..Now I understand why IHM is angry over Nirmala Venktesh…Yes,her’s and my posts are about two different contexts,but the bottomline is “Women are women’s enemies..”

 p.s:

 

Marital Rape: A Non- Issue In India

 

India: Violence Against Women on the Rise

 

 

Hindutva-ization/Gujarat-ization(or whatever it means) of my India..

Edited to add :This is not a post about Manglore pub attack.

Yeah,I am adding more to those endless posts on ‘Holy people preserving Indian culture’ floating around in blogoshpere.My friends have already put it in best words,that I have hardly anything better to say.I support you in the fight of individual freedom.Lets not make our nation another Saudi or Afghan..

Amrutha has a post on the topic,but the link she provided seemed disturbing.The author of that article justifies this incident as,‘The Rama Sainiks have done a good job in saving Hindu girls.  I am not saying this.  The masses in Mangalore stand by these so-called hooligans because they want to protect their women from the clutches of the oh-so-peaceful Islamic jehadis ” I was wondering when and how did islam or jiahdist or terrorism come in the frame..Reading more on the thread,I stumbled upon articles in OutlookIndia and IndiaToday,which persuaded me to have a look into the matter,from their viewpoint.Sharing some thoughts.

The incident of pub attack is not simply about moral policing or about political drama.See a few communal stirrings that the state (Karnataka ) has witnessed, especially in the coastal districts, after the BJP came to power last May.

  •  June 9, 2008: Temple affairs minister Krishnaiah Shetty issues circular to 34,000 temples to perform special puja for newly sworn-in CM. Order later modified after protests.
  • August 10, 2008: Karnataka Rakshana Vedike attacks a group of 35 people allegedly holding a ‘rave party’ at Manchanabele Dam
  • August 14, 2008: State-owned Mahabaleshwara Temple in Gokarna transferred to Ramachandrapur Math, known for its save-the-cow campaigns
  • August 29, 2008: The Public Instruction Department issues notices to all Christian institutions in the state to shut down to protest the violence against Christians in Orissa. Notice precursor to statewide attacks on churches.
  • September 14, 2008: With Mangalore as the epicentre, Sangh parivar activists attack Christian prayer halls and churches across state. More churches attacked three days later.
  • October 16, 2008: The largest-selling Kannada newspaper claims on its front page that conversions have gone up alarmingly after Sonia Gandhi-Congress came to power. Debates the issue on its Op-Ed page for over a month.
  •  October 30, 2008: Bajrang Dal activists attack two undertrials in Mangalore district sub jail; sixth such attack after its chief Mahendra Kumar’s arrest on September 20.
  • December 12, 2008: Aggressive posturing at Baba Budangiri by parivar leaders and Hindu pontiffs
  • December 27, 2008: Hoysala Sene attacks Fuga bar in Bangalore, alleges illegal activities
  • December 28, 2008: Bajrang Dal activists attack a bus ferrying students on a study tour to Mysore, saying girls and boys from different religions can’t travel together
  • January 6, 2009: B.V. Seetharam, editor of Mangalore-based newspaper Karavali Ale, who followed a strong anti-parivar editorial line, handcuffed and arrested in alleged extortion case. Prior to his arrest, parivar elements vandalise paper’s office.
  • January 7, 2009: Laddoos distributed in some schools across the state on Vaikunta Ekadashi. Congress demands biriyani should be distributed on Ramzan.
  • January 19, 2009: An arrested dacoit reportedly confesses links with radical Hindu groups and admits to carrying out the Hubli district court bombing before the May assembly elections
  • January 25, 2009: Sri Rama Sene activists attack pub in Mangalore and molest and beat up women
  • January 25, 2009: Bajrang Dal activists attack a private party in Mangalore
  • January 28, 2009: Muzrai department orders temples to perform special puja to ward off “ill-effects” of the solar eclipse [source]

Coming back to the recent incident of pub attack,BJP has distanced itself from Muthalik.But Outlook reports that in August 2007, when Yediyurappa was deputy CM in the H.D. Kumaraswamy cabinet, as many as 51 cases were withdrawn against parivar men, of which Mutalik is the first accused in many of these cases while VHP leader Praveen Togadia figures prominently in others.

Earlier,these guys were back of cows..They wanted the Centre to declare cow as a national animal and ban its slaughter. In March 2005, the outfit paraded naked a Muslim father and son in Adi Udupi in front of 500-600 people for allegedly “illegally trading in cows”.

However, the most common reason by far for a communal flare-up relates to the ‘mingling’ of youngsters from different communities. G. Rajashekar, co-author of The Dark Faces of Communalism, a book on communalism in Karnataka, says that according to data he has collected between May 2008 and now, there have been “14 recorded incidents of violence against Hindu girls for having been seen with either a Muslim or a Christian boy”. Prof Phaniraj, a rights activist teaching at a Manipal engineering college, says: “Since 1998, the frequency of communal incidents in the Dakshina Kannada area has increased.

The invariable plot for violence, he adds, is about a boy from a Muslim or Christian community ‘found being friendly’ with a Hindu girl, which leads to the self-styled protectors of the Hindu faith ‘intervening’ to ‘free’ the girl. Except intervening here means thrashing the boy. “We should remember that there was a sustained campaign against the Muslim community in Gujarat before Godhra happened,” says Phaniraj. Just prior to the Surathkal riots in 1998, a lot of pamphlets warning young Hindu women against going with Muslim boys were circulated.

The man who instigated the pub attack, Prasad Attavar, had in 2007 assaulted a Muslim boy at the Ideal Ice-cream Parlour in the heart of Mangalore for talking to a Hindu girl. More ghastly, however, was the 2005 incident in a Puttur cinema when two men (one Muslim) and two Hindu women working in an areca processing factory had gone to see a movie. Around 150 Bajrang Dal activists barged in, dragged the four out and assaulted them before handing them over to the police. As recently as six months ago, a Muslim and Hindu couple living together were forced to return to their native Gadag by parivar activists. “Intrusion into private spaces has become common,” says Phaniraj.

Besides the coastal districts, there has been an uneasy calm at other flashpoints like Baba Budangiri since 2004, where the Sangh parivar is hell-bent on converting the Sufi shrine with a rich tradition of religious syncretism into an exclusive Hindu pilgrimage centre. BJP leader H.N. Ananth Kumar had vowed to make it the ‘Ayodhya of Karnataka’. The Hubli Idgah Maidan issue had cropped up temporarily in September 2004 when Uma Bharati courted arrest and lost her chief ministership, but there has been little noise since then. The silence is eerie, however, and with a BJP government in power, pregnant. [source]

 

My dear friends,this incident is not about culture,but about religion..Its for you and me to decide on what  lessons do we learn from this incident.

 

 

p.s:

On January 17, 2008, while addressing a rally in Udupi, Muthalik said: “It’s time for blasts. Malegaon is just a trailer. Every house should have a person like Pragya Singh. Every housewife will carry bombs now.”[Watch video ]..

Mangalore’s on-the-rampage Ram Sene is drawn from the ranks of the Bajrang Dal and the Shiv Sena : http://tehelka.com/story_main41.asp?filename=Ne070209the_devoutly.asp

 

Dear Readers,what do you think of veil/pardha/hijab?

These days,I am not feeling so well..Also,a cooking bug has infected me and i want to cook something new every now and then.So,I am wandering on the internet like a hippe (err,does that comparison make any sense **scratches head**) I am really sorry to all my dear readers who have commented but I am yet to reply..I have learned lot from you all and I am thankful too you for spending time to read my rants 🙂

 

 Today,I would like you all to speak about ‘What do you think of hijab/Pardha/veil of muslim women?’..This is a plain question and you are free to say what you have it in your mind..The first and last rule here is to be honest  🙂 There is no such thing as ‘Am I right,Am I wrong,What will she think,Am I being prejudiced,Am I judging somebody’ etc etc etc..I ask,because I want to know more and share more..I thought of making this post as a poll or like type,but then again,it would make it difficult for those of you who would like to talk more on this subject..It would be great if you had made a post on this,but even otherwise,it would still be great if you comment here 🙂

 

 Finally,do make sure to answer one single question ‘ What do you think of those women who don’t wear veil’..Do you think of them as less religious,or rebellious,or stupids??

While you write,have a piece of my healthy Pizza (there isn’t any mozarella cheese and the dough is of wheat flour)  and Cappichino muffins

 

cheeseless-pizza

 

cappichino-muffins

 

Good day to all..

 

p.s:

 

Those who copy my pictures will burn in hell 😉