women's education in India has actually helped men

 If you have found yourself, no need to proceed further

Else

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Women's education in India has actually helped men

The claim of this article is - woman's education in India has actually helped men. In technical terms, it has led to a better social atmosphere rather than raise industrial productivity. Lets examine. 

Jump back to our grandparent's era. Women were generally married off at a younger age than at present. Mostly she wasn't allowed to choose her life partner; and many of our grandparents got off with beautiful and caring wives without having ever qualified the basic threshold of education. 

The social planners identified several problems in that state of affairs. 

a. Men never had the need to go for higher education.

b. A mother being the first ever teacher of her child was ill equipped to deliver basic education.

c. Since the choice of life partner was skewed towards men, it lead to domestic violence.

d. Female foeticide thus threatening the continuity of the society.

Such problems still exist in our society but has eased off gradually. 

Another generation ahead (our fathers' one) we find women graduating from colleges. At least this happened in major urbanized places. Hence our fathers couldn't get away with a matriculation degree but had to aim for higher qualifications in order to get that beautiful and caring wife. We also witness a rise in number of marriages where women choose their own life partners. 

In my generation, a man cannot get away just with a higher degree. The society had seen a rise in women employment levels aided by liberalization of the economy, thus more job opportunities. Here an important parameter kicks in - the earning potential of a man. 

As a testimony to this hypothesis one can crawl major matrimonial websites and count the cases of a working woman. Mostly one will find that one of the expectations she looks in her partner is equal or more income compared to her.

In a way, we can clearly see that women's education has led to raising the standards of men's education. 

Now, lets turn to the industrial productivity part. 

Well, India never had any industrial revolution for anyone to participate. 

And this is where we differ from our Western counterparts. 

In that part of the world women's education stemmed from a pressing industrial demand. When the world was torn apart by two world wars, most men were at battlefields. A war of that magnitude required a lot of fighter jets, tanks, vehicles, tonnes of ammunition and a lot other stuff like canned food, medicines, lots of paperwork etc. It was during these times the Western industries heavily relied on women to deliver. 

Hence the conclusion that women's education in India was driven by the goal of a better society rather than the demands of the industry. 

Way to go ladies !!

(the last line definitely means brickbats for the author :-)

Free Will

This free will is not about dying. But life.

Hence, My agreement with God.

ǝƃɐıɹɹɐɯ oʇ spɐǝן ʎןuo ʇɥƃıɐɹʇs ƃuıʞuıɥʇ

Three decades and one year of solitary existence demands a good explanation.


I have a descent job, descent looks, can talk sweet and reasonably committed to a cause. Still I am unmarried. So, I thought this needs an explanation.

Several ancient European cultures had fancy punishments for people who opted to remain unmarried, though, this didn't extend to priests. They couldn't leave a will (reasonable), or hold a public office (Atal Behari would never be PM) or appear as a witness at a trial. (hmm ..) Ancient Rome levied more tax on the unmarried. So, does modern night clubs in my city. Less if you have a partner, more if alone. May be civilizations were driven by the zeal to increase superiority via headcount.

Women of my city have a different explanation for the love marks of my celibacy. Sometime back I was accused by couple of my female colleagues that I ignored them at a public place. And that, I was accompanied by another man at that time. Hence, they seemed to conclude that I am different ! A few decades back, they would have labeled me arrogant. Courtesy modern openness, that is not fashionable anymore.

I ask them to focus on the title of this post now. The text is written upside down without using any images. How ? English characters have been substituted by Latin ones, wherever needed. For e.g. 'ƃ' replacing 'g'. Might have been the digit 6 as well. So, please stretch your imagination. At that moment, after a few drinks and junk food, I was searching for a washroom. And it was a pretty serious search. Thats why I didn't have the luxury of breaking into an elaborate conversation. A little bit of spiritual explanation here wouldn't do bad. I do not search truth in beauty but beauty in truth. Which is even a more serious search.

However, I do not hold that futile search guilty of not returning any results. Life's certain circumstances have forced me to focus my time, energy and money on things other than marriage. Like my mother's treatment, a long standing property dispute and an unexpected turn of events when I had almost converged on the search result. It is this simple. The script of my life has already been composed by the almighty and this is what he (or she) had designed.

This was not an advertisement of my bachelor life, neither a mating call for the eligible spinster. Only a word of wisdom, that has been passed to me by my teachers. Please, please, please. Do not jump to a conclusion, arrive at them.

The search result will always be sweet.

The Class Struggle

No, comrade. This ain't for you, though you can continue to read.

Since boyhood, I heard my parents say, we belong to the "Middle Class". (Its still that way !) Time and again, the same categorization has also been emphasized by my extended family and friends. Why were we called so ? Is it because we didn't have a car or because we travelled in side-upper berths in a non-AC train compartment. Gradually, I deciphered that all the reasons why we weren't called the "Upper Class" requires money. Henceforth it was etched in my mind, that class and money are interchangeable.

A teacher of mine said, if you have doubt about an established thought, figure out the etymology of the words that describe it. I resorted to the age old general classification of our Hindu society - Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya & Sudra. The established thought said it was by birth. Could our ancient wisdom be so over-simplified ? The Rig Veda describes the primordial man - "The Brahmin is the head, his arms were Kshyatriya, his lower abdomen became the Vaishya and feet is the Sudra". Nowhere is it mentioned that a person is born to any class. On further investigation, it can be found that the social status depends on someone's deeds and actions. In fact, each of these is a state of life. The Sudra is the person seeking mundane pleasure, someone running without The reason; the Kshyatriya realizes the fallacy and symbolizes the conflict within. The Vaishya is knowledgeable (currently Subject Matter Expert) whereas Brahmin is the enlightened. Ideally a person starts as a Sudra and elevates to a Brahmin. If Brahmins were by birth, why are they also called 'Dwij' or Twice Born.

In ancient times, maybe the Kshatriya really fought those who resisted free thinking and the Vaishya made money owning to his/her working knowledge, the Brahmin relinquished everything to live in the temple and the Sudra kept running around for opportunity. Probably the existing form is an aberration or the Rig Veda was rigged in favor of the the privileged, and from his debris was born the Middle Class.

Not even McKinsey can "status-ify" India more accurately than the Indian Railway express train compartment does, unknowingly - too many people cramped into the General Compartment like you see in slums & MHADA complex, some chair cars for the middle class in waiting, a lot of sleeper class for the gigantic middle class, few air-conditioned cabins for the upper middle class and a large compartment with butlers for the few belonging to the upper class. In fact Indian Railways have been polite to drop the word 'class' which was a British leftover and changed to only General, Sleeper, 2AC, 1AC, etc. like the Americans calling us 'Third World'. Would you have liked if they said 'Third Class' country instead ?

And yes, without a doubt I belong to the large middle class. Because neither am I a genius nor too good a person. But there is a slight caveat if you are either genius or good. There is no guarantee where you will land up - low or high classincome. But definitely not middle classincome.

This will be the class struggle of my life.

Mens sana in corpore sano

This Latin phrase translates to "healthy mind in a healthy body" - Roman poet Juvenal (10.356)

A comparison among the greatest two exponents of this quote - Michelangelo & da Vinci

Leonardo said, "Nature is the source of all true knowledge; she has her own logic, her own laws; she has no effect without cause; no invention without necessity." He had no formal education, hence couldn't write well, instead, drew his ideas. He wanted to know everything & his life has been the quest of unraveling the mysteries of nature. Michelangelo was a perfectionist & couldn't withstand criticism. Once a co-painter, Torrigiano, broke his nose; a damage that never healed, which made him look even uglier. So he remained obsessed with beauty throughout his life. People still debate who among these Italians is the ultimate "The Renaissance Man".

Both of them grew up alone, without a mother.

Leonardo dwelled in the future tense. His notebook is a testimony of the grand ideas he had conceived, 500 years before those were actually realized. It included design for the flying machine, battle tanks, under-water diving suits, study of human anatomy and maps, even the design of spectacles. Michelangelo lived in the present tense. He was an ferocious executioner, completing most of the works he had commenced - the Pita, statue of David, Sistine chapel fresco and even engineered the revamped architecture of Medici chapel and St. Peter's Basilica. Once Michelangelo scoffed Leonardo because Leonardo never completed the magnum bronze status of a warhorse he had promised to his patron, Ludovico Sforza.

Both of them loved symmetry and dissected human corpse.

Leonardo was the Class. According to folklore, he was courteous, sober and affable. He kept a good company and participated regularly in discussion circles. Michelangelo was the Mass. He was known to be unkempt, rude and braggish. Its also said that he rarely bathed and slept with his shoes on; to the extent that it peeled off his skin when he took those off.

Both of them never married.

Leonardo was the brain of God & Michelangelo, the hand of God. Leonardo thought what no one had ever thought, Michelangelo did which no ever had ever done. Leonardo's highly accurate studies of anatomy match the modern medical textbooks and Michelangelo's amazing layout and perception of Sistine chapel fresco can undermine the advanced designing software. According to Vasari, Leonardo and Michelangelo were pitted against one another by the shrewd Machiavelli, to draw side by side, the walls of Council Hall of the Palazzo Vecchio in Florence. The competition never completed. Instead he could have asked Leonardo to "think" and Michelangelo to "do".

Leonardo is the mind, Michelangelo is the body. Following is my humble tribute to these amazing men.

Why Communism failed before Religion ?

Neither am I a devout follower of Religion, nor member of any Communist party. This statement is to justify my neutrality to both these before I begin.

There are several theories explaining the downfall of most Communist ruled states - USSR, Yugoslavia, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, et al and most recently, my own state of West Bengal, India that has been ruled by the Left Front headed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist). At present, any person in my state think you're a supporter of Trinamool Congress (the party overthrowing Left Front) if you speak against the Left Front and vice versa.
A few say that the American anti-communist propaganda machinery was more effective than the enthusiasm of communist ideologies; others are of the opinion that the principles of communism were against the natural law of inequality and hereditary succession. In fact, the later is reverberated in the opinion of majority high-net-worth Chinese who are looking to invest abroad fearing that the state might cede their wealth. None of them is totally false. But we overlook one important factor - religion. Post-World War II, when the world was polarized, headed by the US and the USSR and the fascinating rivalry that followed, we have seen the USSR excel the US in many departments - missiles, space, chess, literature, medicine. However, USSR failed ! It has been best summarized by Robert Hanssen, ex-FBI who was believed to be working for the USSR and later sentenced for life - "The Russians were Godless".

I will now attempt to make a scientific explanation based on the Nobel prize winning author Elias Canetti's "Crowds and Power". Canetti does not make any reference to communism but only analyses crowd dynamics. The points in italics are verbatim from the book.

Any **-ism is followed by enthusiasm usually anti-establishment in its nature. However, it isn't the work of a single individual. The ideas of the individual are propagated to the crowd (the people) who join him or her which makes it stronger. Canetti describes the main attributes of a crowd and I am trying to use it as a corollary. According to Canetti - the four main attributes are

The crowd always wants to grow.
Throughout the world, whenever governments are challenged by public unrest, we see them impose a curfew, restriction on assembly. During violent protests the goal of the police is to disperse the crowd for which they resort to tear gas, rubber bullets even water canons. (I would also recommend shit water)

Within the crowd there is equality.
All supporters of a football team wear the same coloured jersey regardless of their socio-economic status. The next point follows from the above.

The crowd loves density.
Nothing must stand between the crowd. Canetti says that the density is maximum at the moment of discharge i.e. when the crowd forgets all differences and feel equal, say, when the team scores.

The crowd needs a direction.
People do not gather without a purpose.

This final point is of utmost importance. As soon as the crowd loses the reason why it gathered it will disperse as quickly as it assembled. And here religion beats communism.

If we look at all major religions of world, we notice that there is something about these which isn't attainable in a human life. The concept of heaven and hell are found in most of them. All of them preach that neither heaven nor hell is the earth - those are some unknown places which you visit only after you die. We also find the concept of re-birth which maybe this world in a different life-form or in another world. Some speak of the great journeys which every human being needs to undertake after mortal life. Regardless of the foundations, re-birth, hell or heaven depend on one's deeds. And there is no cut-off period. Everything is recorded till the very last moment, even on the great journey. Hence, crowds united by a certain religious faith always have a direction. Although, we see a certain faith has internal fragmentation but it is safe to assume that everyone is equal in that fragment. Density, for a religious faith or its fragmented groups is ensured by the rituals. And its a natural law to grow.

All religions veto the male-female form of holy matrimonial union which also ensures growth. Communism had all these but as soon as it overthrew the proletariat and trumpeted victory in the class struggle, it lost its direction. The purpose was achieved. The match ended. Celebrations complete. Communists never had a woman in any major post. (exception: Rosa Luxemburg). Women are central to the natural continuity of human beings. The lack of woman leadership in major communist parties is testimonial to the fact that they never had a continuity plan.

Communist use Karl Marx for all explanation and I used Elias Canetti. Can communists ignore the divine intervention that both were Germans ?

Now, for those who need a more simpler explanation. Imagine the following teams whose all members are still alive; and consider that they will do what you know they did. Which one will you support ?

Team A
--------------
Karl Marx
Vladimir Lenin
Fidel Castro
Che Guevara
Jyoti Basu

Team B
--------------------
Jesus Christ
Gautama Buddha
Zoroaster
Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh
Sankaracharya

Adult Entertainment or Fear & Greed.

This is not a analysis of the online porn industry; anyone who wishes to enlighten in such knowledge may stop reading.

This is my personal opinion of why do we buy or sell and why aren't monks counted in the census of a country.

The first investment that I made when I started to earn is buy a life insurance. Why ? Fear. I feared that I may die before my natural life expiration and needed to have an exigency for the people who are financially dependent on me. Each year, I pay the premium gripped by this "fear". Since then the world has seen two financial crisis and two major wars. And I happened to read about a new investment plan. Euphemistically, these are called life settlement-backed security. In simpler words these are known as "death bonds". Suppose an aged American is in urgent need of cash and also has a life insurance policy, say, which assures $1M on maturity or death. The smart dude at Wall Street will negotiate to buy the policy at a lesser price, say $40,000. Thereafter, he continues to pay the premium and collects the sum insured. The quicker the person dies, the lesser the premium and more the profit. So, when the policy is negotiated the mortality of the person is scrutinized. What drives the person doing it ? And thus enter "greed". My death is sold or bought for either greed or fear.

The origin of fear is debatable. However, most agree that "fear" is of the unknown. We usually fear something we cannot anticipate. When we enter a dark room, do we fear if its our bedroom. But we are afraid to enter a supposedly haunted house by the highway. In short, we fear what we cannot see. On the other hand, greed is born out of things we can see. I wish I had that nice sports sedan which Mr. X parks in his garage. I may feel amused to buy a car which runs on human urine but do not really yearn for it. Because I cannot see it yet.

Fear: I managed to frighten a young girl because she had pimples and was afraid of losing the prom-night Queen to her best friend.
Greed: You perhaps didn't know that I tempted the guy at the cosmetic company to add harmful chemicals to the skin lotion she's using.
Fear: Uggh ... ly..
Greed: It was cheaper than fruit extracts. He planned to save a lot and make good profit.
Fear: Actually he feared of losing his promotion once again !
Greed: Yup. The company promised to give him a better apartment, the ones with heated pools.
Fear: Is this the same company which was on the verge of bankruptcy a couple years back ?
Greed: I heard that too. And I had to persuade a drug mafia to invest.
Fear: Ah. I remember. The mafia wanted to elevate his social status and broaden his portfolio to white-collar business.
Greed: Now, you get the point.

(They realize that Sourajit Basak is eavesdropping and abandon their chit-chat)

In the words of a chartered accountant, fear accounts for the bottom-line and greed adds to the top-line. When real estate stocks were skyrocketing, everyone wanted a share of the pie. When the cat was out of the bag, a mad frenzy of selling plummeted those. The monthly high is pushed by greed and the monthly low pulled by fear giving us those exotic statistical curves. My tongues cannot resist the greed of that ice-cream but my heart fears cholesterol choking his arteries and persuades my legs to go for jogging. A gastrointestinal test may give wonderful insights on the dominant feeling.

We can never abandon these two for we do not wish to stop riding the roller-coaster ride of life. The world will be a rather dull place if it were filled with monks. Monks and monkeys need to co-exist to complete the tapestry of life. But its worthwhile to ponder on the other question. Why aren't monks counted in the census ? Well, small perturbations are often ignored from the main readings of an experiment. But doesn't anything drive them when they abandon mundane pleasure. Maybe they wish to make that celestial journey to the other world to see the wonderful things beyond. But one thing is certain.

They fear what they cannot see and are greedy for what they can..not.