India is a land, where all women are looked up to the highest possible respectable position, "Mother". Even the 3 supreme gods, Shiva, Vishnu & Brahma were made to bow before "Adi Shakti", the divine mother. Supreme Shiva is depicted to beg before his wife Annapoorna, to show that, women are indeed superior. The nation is recognised and loved as "Mother Land" ( clearly disproves, society is patriarchial). The respect comes because, women make sacrifices to bring up future generation of valuable citizens. Without this "sacrificial" action, the respect given to women will not survive.
Historically a dancing statue was recovered from Harappa. Precious gems adorn the figurine. It clearly depicts, men were offering the "precious" objects to women right from this prehistoric age to show their respect. The respect & love for women exists from pre-historic times in india. Men never demanded equality of burden, when a war was thrust on the nation. Men excluded women of hard work out of respect. In vedas, many compositions are attributed to women. Ramayana, Mahabharatha wars were fought for the respect of women. Many men died in the war for the respect of Sita or Draupadi, although they were in no way connected to women in question. Rama was not a king. Vanaras fought on his side to bring back Sita. How justice is served to massacre 1000s for the sake of 1 woman? and why would one risk his life & fight for a wanderer like Rama against a mighty king like Ravana? It happened because all Vanaras considered sita as their mother. If it was just another "woman" not even a dog would have fought for sita. When it is "mother' or mother land, infinite value get asoociated. Not just 1000's, masacre of million of life also get justified for the cause. Akkamahadevi composed vachanas among male dominated Sabha. She was well received and respected not just in the men's club of social reformers, but also in society. She was offered the role of akka, the elderly sister to societal population. In the absence of king, many women ruled kingdom as "Raja Mata" and not as "Queen". Ruling "Queen" is a western concept. The relation in queen role was royalty vs subjugates. Indian "Raja mata" position offer mother - Children relationship. Women were never excluded from any of the positions or roles. If there were exclusion, it was only for their protection or to save them from hardship.
Unlike India, in west, women were treated as objects of pleasure. Women were subjugated to slavery. Women were barred from many roles (due to gender bias). Women were discriminated and looked down. West respected muscle power always. Hence women were treated as weak and second class citizen. The suppression existed till 18th century. After industrialization, as cheap workers were required suddenly in large numbers, industrialists started to look at women as a source for employment. This necessitated education in women. Schools were opened for women in west only in 18th century. However look at India. In 8th century, at kaashi, shankaracharya selected opponents wife as the judge. Kaashi was the seat of intellectuals. There was no paucity of learned men to act as a judge. Any debate between scholors at kaashi was something of paramount important to society at that time. If woman was not educated, how one could judge a debate between 2 big titans on a complex set of subjects? So, it proves women were educated in medivial India. Customs & practices changed due to muslim invasions. The discussion at kaashi between shankaracharya & mandana mishra was an open challenge. It went on for several days, spanning a wide range of subjects. A woman was selected as judge. At that time a learned woman was known to hold justice with impartiality, as she adorns the seat of mother. The elevated position of motherhood was giving the lady to look at both participants as her children and hence there was no scope for partiality. That's what happened. Shankara with superior intellect was judged winner, although the lady lost her husband, pride & riches from her life due to her judgement. But her act unified India under Shankaracharya that resonates even today. That is the kind of sacrifice a woman can do, hence she was respected with highest possible position in India. When none of the powerful learned men at kaashi stoped a woman from occupying a judgemental seat to script an important event in history in medivial India, why would anyone stop the progress of an Indian woman in modern India, if she is talented and capable to achieve in her chosen field? If opportunity is naturally given, why fight for it?
When we have such an example from medivial India, that is uncomparable in world, do we really need a women's day? India had a woman PM & president. US has not offered this role to a woman even after 3 centuries of Democratic rule. Should US companies preach Indians or should it be the other way? Indira Gandhi tried to snatch power with emergency (like women are instigated to snatch positions by leftists). She was defeated misearably. The same Indira came back with a promise of playing a "motherly" role. She was not just pardoned, but re-elected with resounding victory. Kumari Jayalalitha was not even married. When she adorned the hat of "Amma", entire state simply surrendered at her feet. No question asked. Absolute power & respect was given. No where in the world a second example can be given. That is how "position of mother" connects to Indian hearts.
When Indian customs and tradition calls for respecting women on a daily basis as a motherly God, what is the need to celebrate a materialistic womens day on only one day of the year with a notional respect? Women's day is hijacked by left ideologists. Today, the leftists are calling for fight between genders for womens rights. They are advocating to garner positiion like a reservation policy. It is not out of merit, talent or because of respect. They are infact advocating women not to make sacrifices. Children enjoy benefits because parents pay for it. If women are instigated to avoid sacrifices, it will reflect on children. If children are affected, the future of the country is at stake. Look at America. Why majority of kids are obsess? They are obess because their "super moms" do not have time, but feed junk food. Who is affected because, mom is busy? It is the kids and future of USA. USA is fast loosing its clout from No.1 position.
The "fight" between genders will create tensions and pressure in society. It increases societal burden. Leftists are instigating women to snatch benefits in the name of "rights" without paying a price (or taking liability). There is no free lunch in this world. This snatching of benefits without paying for it, amounts to theft and skews the burden in family. It will basically create hatred between genders. For the sake of women votes, & to sell some beuty products citizens are taken for a ride in the name of women's day. Western women's day is preaching Indian women to lower their standard from the seat of "mother" to "just another woman". Woman who fall for this trap will be summarily rejected by the society. That is the "hard" fact.
Indian culture doesnot connect with this kind of materialistic women's day. In Indian context, if it is celebrated as Mother's day, it will be more meaningful. An event that doesnot connect to peoples heart will not lost long. Indian festivals & customs that connects to their hearts were carried forward from ages, inspite of many onslaughts by invaders. If the spirit of women's day is celebrated as mothers day, it will have a chance of survival in this country.
Afterall do we really need to blindly ape the west and lower our standard? When entire tamilnadu state bowed and bundled absolute "power" at the feet of Jayalalitha, is there a merit in the leftist argument, women rights are under threat in this country?
