Diary of Sathya Sathya

Don't miss to read these two links

Sun, 19 Aug 2007 00:59:15 +0530

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/stories/s244535.htm

http://www.sowetan.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=413523

What is rape?

Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:46:43 +0530

Almost the entire world is biased towards
women while defining the term "rape". Very often, media uses "rape" as a
synonym for "intercourse". They consider intercourse even with the woman's
consent as rape; also, according to the laws in most countries, intercourse
without man's consent (i.e., rape of men by women) is also considered as rape
of the woman by the man.

You may visit this link from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape

Penis envy

Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:45:56 +0530

I found it informative to go through this
link from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis_envy

(It is also interesting to go through the
links contained in this article)

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD)

Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:11:55 +0530

There are many mental disorders that are hardly noticeable
even by friends, family members and people who know the affected person very
well. Of course, these can affect both the genders. But I have seen many many
men who are destined to live a dog's life because of these disorders while
nobody identified their disorders even in an era when treatments to these
disorders, which would enable these people to lead very normal lives, are
available.

The link to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive-compulsive_disorder

Link
for the personality disorders is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorders

This
link provides some information on neurosis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosis

One can get the links to problems related to neurosis from
the section "Psychoanalytical account of neurosis" of
the above link.

(All links are from Wikipedia)

The paradox

Wed, 16 May 2007 17:48:13 +0530

According to a legendary epic, when a character was asked "Which is the strangest thing in this world?", he replied "Individuals always see people dying; still everyone believes that she or he is eternal". In the present world, if a ghost comes to you and bothers to answer the same question, you can safely answer: "People tell that men have an edge over women while the fact is perfectly the opposite. What can be stranger than this?" If the ghost is sincere, it should say "perfectly true".

If you go to a person of the lowest rank (like a bankrupt in the street) and ask "Who is dominating? Women or men?", answer will be bounced without delay: "Definitely women". Now, if you go to a genius and ask the same question, spontaneous reply would be: "It is women only; I can't imagine how you could get doubt about this". But the rest of the world is under ignorance and all lead just fraudulent lives, proclaim fraudulent life and even force all to live fraudulent lives.

Every historian and authority on history agree that Kalhana's "Rajatharangini" is the most authentic (many authorities tell that it is the only authority which gave the history of ancient India 'as it is') book. It not only pictured bad kings but also vividly explained the atrocities of contemporary women including queens. Have you read "Jathaka" stories of Buddha, which are considered to reflect the society of Buddha's time? What about "women" in those stories? For sample, according to one story, a step mother forces a young prince to have sex with her and when he sternly refused, she complained to the king that the prince tried to rape her. What about "Arabian Nights"? Is it fair and right to tell that whatever women do, whatever they tell is always correct and unquestionable? Even writers like Tolstoy who is known for his unbiased, clear and sane views didn't hesitate to point out when women did mistakes.

I know that sometimes I write like "men" and that is intentional. If women can always be "women" (not essentially humans) why can't men be "men" at least sometimes? One can argue: "If a dog bites you, why should YOU bite the dog?" I would say: "If there is no other means, I won't mind biting the dog back if I think it will help me get rid of the dog". There may be one more advantage of aping women. If women can't see what they are doing, and if they don't have a mirror, an ape which tries to mimic them can help them see what they are doing. After all, how many write about men? As I have mentioned in one of my previous blogs, if we take the ratio of the number of men harassed to the number of people who write about men and compare the ratio with the ratio of the number of women harassed to the number of people who write about women, we can see that men have less voice, no.. no.., hardly any voice, sorry, men have no voice. Is it not better to give voice to the voiceless instead of adding voice to the people who are already making noise?

By equality, people believe that if the number of men harassed is equal to the number of women harassed, then men and women could be considered equal. If feminists have a humanist face, why can't they see that "equality" could also be achieved if there is no harassment of either men or women? 1=1 sounds ok, 2=2 sounds ok but 0=0 sounds quite odd?

One can ask me: "How can you be sure that what you see is real? Why can't that be an illusion?"
According to Swami Vivekananda: "One who KNOWS AND KNOWS THAT HE KNOWS is a teacher". But don't call me teacher! I am a blogger!

One asked: "Why are you writing about men only? Why can't you see things in entirety?"
"What can be a better, noble and satisfying job than giving voice to the voiceless, trying to clearly express ideas which are hardly expressed?"

What is the right marriageable age for men?

Sun, 13 May 2007 17:25:00 +0530

I am giving you the link for the list of minimum age for marriage prevailing in different countries. Medically, suppose a couple marries early, say, at the age of 12, boy may be required to be a little older than the girl, since boys are thought to reach full puberty a little later than girls. But according to any authority, if a couple want to get married at around 18, the boy need not necessarily be older than the girl.

Now see yourself how several countries discriminate men against women (although several other countries don't do this), by going through the following link (from Wikipedia) :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age

How to identify men's issues?

Wed, 09 May 2007 02:23:07 +0530

One simple but quite effective way is to refer to a book, article or web resource by a famous, "authoritative", and "highly regarded" feminist. You will soon see yourself that the "problems" they are shouting to have been facing are really faced by men; not by women. This way one may easily identify men's problems if one is not carried away by their "wind" and if one has independent thinking capability which does not get affected by their "main stream" thinking, although this methodology can't be considered a universal tool to identify men's problems.

Now, somebody asked me to give a thought about how men can handle evil women. Awareness among men could be a first step in the right direction. Although the goal is very far, "a thousand miles journey begins with a step".

Somebody told that the number of men harassed is less than the number of women harassed. If I were to adopt the "feminist" style, "What is the percentage cut off for the harassment to be qualified as "more"? How can you PROVE that men are LESS harassed?"
Now if I adopt the humble style of a contemporary man, still I can say "Take the number of women harassed and the number of feminists, feminist writers, quantity of published feminist literature; same way write down the number of men harassed, number of people who write about men's issues and corresponding literature; Now from these figures, don't you think the contemporary men don't have any voice and men's issues are hardly expressed and need expression? Moreover, in the present fast moving world, the "movement" during one year can be more than the "movement" during hundred years of a previous century; so, if men lag by one year in the present world, it could be equivalent to a lag of hundred years in previous centuries; so, pushing men down on account of the so called pushing down of women in olden days can not be justified since this "pushing down men for revenge" does much more than just taking a "just revenge"; moreover, it is not quite right to take revenge on men for their so called earlier faults if everybody believes in the happiness and equality for ALL; taking revenge may only tend to make the pendulum swing to and fro."

Someone asked "which man is burnt alive for dowry?"
First answer me, "which innocent woman is convicted of dowry harassment case? Which good woman is accused of sexual harassment? Which woman has been roared at for righting about women's issues?"

Someone told "if someone speaks harsh against women, it will remain in their mind"
I can say that men have better hearts; why all expect men to become heartless brutes? Just because if they MAKE men heartless, then men can be proved heartless, they can be scorned, their harassment may be justified, they may be punished and hence women can get "enjoyment"?

Finally someone asked "you are righting like this because you can't face women in the work place?"
I would like to say: "Do you think there is the slightest possibility that a person who can write like this can ever be less competent than flirtatious and carefree girls?"

Myth about adolescence

Mon, 07 May 2007 20:39:59 +0530

To illustrate how modern superstitions can affect our daily lives, take the word "adolescence". Every "rational" person in the contemporary society agrees that there is a stage called "adolescence" in human life. But see the fact here (copied from a web archive on sexology):

"Adolescence: The period between the beginning of puberty and adulthood.
The phenomenon of adolescence as we know it today is the result of certain social and historical developments. "Pre-civilized" cultures do not know an adolescence in the modern sense of the word, but use so-called puberty or initiation rites by which they confer the status of adults on their children as soon as these have reached a certain age (usually between 12 and 14 years). This means that, in these cultures, the period of transition from childhood to adulthood is very short. The same was true for our own culture in ancient times. The traditional customs from that period live on in contemporary religious ceremonies, such as the bar mitzwah and the Catholic and Protestant confirmations. However, with the development and growing complexity of civilization, the transitional period between puberty and adulthood has gradually become longer until, as in many contemporary societies, it now extends well over 10 years and more. It is not impossible that, in the future, the period of adolescence will last even longer. As is obvious from this short sketch, adolescence is less a biological than a cultural phenomenon."

If you don't mind, the link for the above is:
http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/CDS.HTM

Not isolated incidents

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:08:29 +0530

First, I apologize for hurting any woman whose conscience says that they are not the kind of "women" I am talking about and if they really feel that they belong to a perfectly opposite category (though I don't think there are many such women in the world).

Now, somebody told that what I wrote about men were all isolated incidents. Perfectly not! I wrote "rape accused are usually beaten by several people for hours". Here "many people" does not refer to "mob"; it refers to police men. You can verify this by actually
verifying facts from a police station. But rape cases are rare; you have to wait and check this fact. One can say that the law of the land does not allow this; but just because the law does not permit this, we cannot ignore the facts or say such things don't happen. And this may not happen if the accused is a famous person. If a person is caught for pick pocketing, he is usually beaten for about half an hour by 2-3 people; he can not walk; some of his bones may break because of which he may not be able to properly do his daily works in future; does the law of the land permit this? No. But we all know that these are all very "common" things and since they are so "common", we do not tend to worry about them.

Somebody told that the tortures employed in Tihar jail were isolated incidents. A few years ago Editor in chief of a Kannada weekly (Taranga) wrote in one of his editorials which explained the state of jails in general and Tihar jail in particular. His editorials were always based on elaborated studies and research and they were highly acclaimed editorials and were considered authoritative by all. He wrote like this (about Tihar jail): "Forget rollers and aeroplanes; they are very common; tortures like fully filling the anus of inmates with chilly powder and taking sadist pleasure seeing the inmates writhing with pain are very common here." It is a well known fact that police cut some part near the feet so that prisoners can no longer run and escape for ever. Rowdies get their tongues chopped off; what about encounters? Do you know the number of custodial deaths per year? Recently a person was caught by the police in Bangalore for "eave teasing" and he was beaten so harshly that he died in the police custody. There are several other torture methods which are very common but I can not mention all of them, in detail, here, e.g., burning with cigarettes. One student (in Karnataka) appeared for exams on behalf of another student and was caught; what the police did?; police came with a knife to cut his genitals!

Yes! All these are very common in this "modern", "civilized", "21st century". The situation is worse in third worlds like Africa. What about America? You know how these "cultured" and "civilized" people tortured Iraqi prisoners; haven't you seen the photograph of a UK woman pulling a naked male Iraqi prisoner a few years back? You would have shouted with all your voice if such things ever happened to any single woman in the world. As per a first hand account from a soldier from Indian Army "We caught an enemy person; we dipped him in the boiling water which was so hot that steam was coming out of the water; but still he didn't reveal any of their secrets; he was so patriotic about his nation". Who knows whether that poor fellow knew any single secret so that he could reveal that during the torture.

Now, had I wrote that there is child abuse in India, all the contemporary "good" people would have roared against me telling that such a thing is unimaginable in our "great" nation except a very few "isolated" incidents. Now all of you know from the survey (which was announced in the newspapers recently) that nearly 50% of children in India are abused; it also mentioned that boys are subjected to more physical abuse compared to girls (but this information was pushed to the last line; see the politics here also!)

Now, I expect ideal women and women supporters to say: "These tortures may be there; so what?; these culprits deserve these kinds of punishments; there is nothing wrong in taking law into hands in these incidents; these tortures must be legalized; why do you worry about that?"

What I am trying to say is that while you are so sadist and so happy about these tortures, I am definitely not going to talk against these; "Why should I worry about these?" (as long as I am not affected by them? But, all I want from you people is to agree that these people have got enough punishments; I am against the insincerity which argues that these people didn't get "sufficient" punishment, even after undergoing such heinous tortures.

I have heard the popular saying "A woman is a woman's enemy". But it is not quite valid these days. This "modern popular saying" may probably best describe the current situation: "A man is a man's enemy; a woman is also a man's enemy; women are women supporters; also, men are women supporters"

Somebody told me: "Why can't you implement in your life what you are telling in your blogs?" I would like to clarify that my blogs are results of my life. Hence where is the need for my life to become a result of my blogs?

Somebody commented that I was writing these blogs because I was after cheap popularity; I invite anybody to come forward to publish these in your name and you need not give any credits to me; I will only be happy if you publish books on this theme and embed my blogs in those books too; I can even deleted my blogs which are in my name, if I am convinced that someone does that. Of course, although for some people these blogs themselves are unnecessarily lengthy (someone told: you take 100 words to tell something which requires only 10 words), for some others, these blogs are too short to comprehend and hence they in fact need many book volumes on these themes to fully get an idea of what I am saying and to get all their doubts clarified, to get all my arguments proved (somebody told: I don't understand the difference between a "dream society" and a "dream world").

Now I am expecting somebody to ask: "Don't you have any other work to do? Why are you singing your usual song always?"
What I would like to point out is that these things are relevant now more than ever before.
Recently one of the world top economic bodies told: "Never in the history of mankind the gap between rich and poor has been as large as it is now". But according to our modern superstition: "In earlier days there was a lot of gap between rich and poor; now in the modern world this gap has been reducing"
Now, the real thing is: "Never in the history of mankind the gap between women and men has been as large as it is now". But according to our modern superstition: "In olden days, condition of women was not good; now the things are improving". To clarify the first statement (i.e., the real thing): "Even in olden days women used to dominate men; but now this dominance is increasing at least exponentially". Hence the subject I am talking about is relevant now more than ever before. Somebody wrote: "It took 100 years for women to come out of the kitchen". I agree that women didn't have the privilege of sitting in front of a computer even just hundred years back. But may I draw your kind attention to the fact that many men didn't have the privilege of sitting in front of a computer even just 25 years back? While women were comfortably inside the kitchen, men were ploughing the ground under the sun. While privileged men (like kings) had a good life, privileged women (like queens) also had a good life (but kings had to fight wars, get wounded). One cannot compare Bill Gates with a beggar woman and say that men are privileged than women. Just think of Bill Gates working very hard in his office while his wife eats ice cream with other men, chatting and laughing (this is just a guess); and after returning home, it is "chauvinism" if he talks anything about her eating ice cream; and she will nag him telling that he drank coffee with his secretary, even though he drank coffee with his secretary very seriously; Poor Bill Gates! Also, even if a man chooses to be inside the kitchen, he doesn't have that option while women have the option of either staying inside or outside the kitchen and they even have the option to switch between the two.

So nobody saw these facts?
A few years back "Frontline" published a cover page article detailing how girls are dominating boys in the contemporary society. There is a group of men who assist men in getting free legal help for harassed husbands. In the West, there are a few groups who fight for men's rights. Many authors, poets, big figures in literature (both men and women) talk about these things indirectly or by giving these a humorous touch (they don't want to go directly against their time). One famous woman from Bollywood told in her article: "Sexual harassment is not restricted to harassment of girls by boys; in the present world, the opposite is also true; usually "small boys" are caught; catch big boys, if you can; it will be even better and interesting if you could catch "big girls"". Recently one researcher found out that condition of male prostitutes is much worse than the condition of female prostitutes; interestingly, the person is a woman from India; she also suggested different measures to bring them up. All authorities agree that the suffering of harassed men is more drastic compared to that of the harassed women, may be due to the attitude of the society towards men.

THIS WORLD IS A BIG FRAUD IN WHICH ALL MEN ARE FOOLED; THERE IS NO WAY FOR ANY MAN TO ESCAPE FROM THIS FRAUD WHETHER HE KNOWS ABOUT THIS FROUD OR NOT.

You will immediately ask: "Then, why, why, why are you wasting, wasting, wasting time writing these blogs???"
That is. That is because the fraud is covered by another fraud. While the first fraud ensures that all men are made fools, this "covering fraud" ensures that all people believe men have an edge over women although the truth is otherwise. Although nobody can avoid the first fraud, I believe that the second "covering fraud" may be avoided, if we can move the mountains; and I am hopeful that it may be possible to avoid this "covering fraud" because somebody told "we can move mountains if we really wish"!
So, the main purpose of my blogs is to make an infinitesimally small contribution towards melting this outer "covering fraud" so that all can clearly see the inner fraud, though nothing could be done further to ward off the inner fraud.

So, there is no cure for men's problems (we can do nothing about the inner fraud); but there is treatment for men's problems (we can ward off the outer "covering fraud"); but since this treatment is too tedious, although not impossible, it is not feasible. So, what is the first aid at least? The FIRST AID FOR MEN'S PROBLEMS which I can think of now is:
MEN, YOU SPEAK OUT! ; OPENLY TELL ABOUT ALL YOUR PROBLEMS; DON'T BE AFRAID OF SHEDDING OFF THAT SELFDEVASTATING PSEUDOPRESTIGE; WHY A BEGGAR WHO DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING SHOULD BE AFRAID OF A ROBBERY?
AND WOMEN, SHUT YOUR MOUTHS PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE.

Earth rotates round the sun or sun rotates round the earth?

Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:24:31 +0530

When the whole world believed that the sun rotates round the earth, and when a person argued that the earth is really moving around the sun, he was branded "blasphemous" by the contemporary "good" people. The harsh comments to my earlier blogs are all well expected from our contemporary "reasonable" people. But STILL what I can say is that women DO have an upper hand over men in the contemporary society.

You are most welcome to comment on my blogs either favourably or otherwise; I won't delete it. I had deleted comments from three people so far. Sorry for that. I will put them here (In all the three cases I had sent my replies to the respective people while deleting).
(1) Comment from "The Princess" was : "A woman can be a man most of the times but can a man be a woman for a single day?"
My reply was: "If a woman can be a man most of the times, a man CAN be a woman; but that will be possible only in my dream society"
(2) Comment from Nilesh was (for the blog:"What Dr. Johnson told might be correct?"): "The point no 6 apllies to either ways ,remember; your comments at the end of the blog suggest that only the people who commented your blogs favourably have rational thinking; Is it fair and right?"
(3)My reply to "Harmless Lawyer" may be found in his guest book; His comments may be got from his iland. Since his comments are too long and many in numbers, I can't put them here.

I thank all who commented favourably or otherwise.

THE BEST COMMENT I saw was:"woman or man ...does'nt matter... just look at them like humans... all will be fine ... Nature made us to dwell together... its better for the man the woman and for humanity as a whole... " .But sadly this has been implemented from mens' side only.

I think many have misinterpreted my sentence:"it is better to be murdered while one is a feotus than to suffer the whole life of harassment". What I am really intending to convey by this is:"Women are really lucky to be murdered while they are feotus while men are not killed while they are feotus forcing them to undergo a whole life of harassment".

Also people tell "Is it possible for a man to give birth to a child?" What I can say is: "Is it possible for a woman alone to give birth to a child?"(human cloning is still not legal!)

NOW, by just reading a blog about mens' rights, if people get so much irritated, can you just imagine the harassment men have to face while reading every news paper, magazine (since they have thousands of articles like this; but arguing about womens' rights and no comments against them)? If it is irritating to just read my blogs what shoud be the frustration level of men who are made to sit hearing the speech by womens' activists?

Finally, I would like to quote from the autobiography of Gandhi who was a good lawyer (these are not the exact words since I don't have the copy of the book besides me now; don't think that these are not the exact words translated from Gujarathi and hence incorrect; but the meaning is exactly the same): "Many a times wrong can be proved right and the right may be proved wrong by lawyers; but this is not the limitation of the subject "law" and it does not mean that the right is wrong and the wrong is right; it is the limitation of the advocate who argues in favour of right; if an able lawyer argues, it should be possible for the right to win" . SAME THING MAY BE APLLIED FOR BLOG. If I cannot properly "prove" what I am telling, it only indicates that I am not a good "advocate" but since what I am saying IS THE truth, a better advocate should be able to prove these.