bible says: in the beginning there was the word, and the word was god. then god created man in his own image. if so, michaelangelo’s famous painting has got god not in its form of the word. otherwise, god’s creation of man, too, would be in the word form, as: then man was created in the image of the word: ‘man’. but michaelangelo was a painter, and not a writer who creates three dimensional images in the form of thought that is outside of the geo-physical realm; like descartes’ expression: “i think, therefore i am.” for, the thinking is verbal, spoken or unspoken. it has no living physical form. but then the word spreads in reams of paper, canvas and in three dimensional forms, all nothing but the evolution of the thought. the very bible itself is a collection of words, so a wordy character of the bible, named god then thinks further in words how woman was thought out surgically from a rib bone taken from man.
that, the thinking faculty had god acquired posthumously from descartes. the bible itself is thus thought out and improvised umptieth times until the printing press finalized the script, from page one to the last.
one may think that it is the literal description of how things happened as a believer, when in sunday school, but outside of the church even a devout believer comes under the spell of the domain of capitalist reconstruct governing the human thought, speech and action, particularly the last one, the actual living. this is further dissected into an individual act of individual man or woman, even when any such act is happening only in cooperation of both genders. both woman and man justify each other’s existence. remove one, and the other, too, does not exist. the biblical god, existing in word form had no gender, and therefore, had no offsprings. all the wordy god could do was to think-create.
this is the self existing thought out form, the world is. its myriad forms, both conceptual and acted out are forming the human thinking of the individualized existence of a thing or being or even a thought. further yet, not just a human being as a separately existing species, but even within the human beings, the separate existence of woman from man. each one acting according to the script called the job description.
the women’s rights is such a compartmentalized perspective of rights denied to women based upon the gender even when her gender plays no role in the matter. any work that requires no muscular body, such as the mental work or working using the machines, both women and men have done equally well. not considering the queen elizabeth, but including queen victoria and other prominent politicians, like golda meyeirs, margaret thatcher and indira gandhi among a few others, women fared equal to men, both in doing good and bad for the common good.
in an action that requires the unison of both the female and male genders‘ genitals is logically not a single gender issue, such as mastturbation, and hence it cannot be thought over as a matter of women's right. nor can the act’s aftereffects be loaded upon the woman only. when the act involves both the woman and man without force, intimidation, deception or coercion resulting in pregnancy, neither man nor woman may take upon himself or herself to terminate the pregnancy, which is the ecologically natural function of life process. since it is a collaborated act, both woman and man must be together in the afterthought. further yet, not just ecologically, but socially and economically interdependent coexistence, any action decided upon does have consequential effects upon others in emotional, psychological, societal relations, and even in obvious financial matters. so the society does have a say. that say was denied to two women, helen of troy and sita of epic ramayana. both these women were kidnapped and fought over an innumerable lives of humans and other creatures were lost.
there is a precedence of the acceptance of perceived after effects of such human interaction by one woman named amrapali living in a democracy in the time of the buddha. she was beautiful of such an extreme that everyone was in love with her. the city council persons perceived the danger of rivalvery and deadly fights over obtaining her in marriage. so they reasoned with amrapali that she would marry no one, but would relate to anyone provided one could meet her ‘flame with flame’. one lover of hers was an enemy king in disguise of a local soldier. when the secret was out, he fought with the town’s army over her. amrapali was sickened with the outcome in which many people lost their lives. grief stricken she went to the refuge of the buddha, and became a buddhist nun. and from the buddha she observed the distinction between the origin of the word, love -- v. lubh> n. lobh, meaning greed, and compassion, which is mutually evolving concern for beings. even in english language love does mean greed, such love of money.
in case of rape, whether by a stranger or even by her own husband, that is, any physical intercourse which is devoid of a totally mutual participation, that act is a rape. and rapist may be a man or even a woman, who imposes one’s sexual organ purely for one’s own personal pleasure or benefits or both. the recent court cases involving the sexual abuse by the men in position taking advantage of intimidated women and prison inmates, and priests imposing upon the defenseless children now acknowledge such onesided acts, yet do not consider how they have sprouted from the hero worship. and heroes of the commercial world are those who have created a niche in the world of their own expertise - a head of the state or commercial conglomerate, a religious sect, or even a prominent household. one of gandhi’s observations of the man-woman relationship puts the question: how many men rape their own wives each night; how many women prostiture themselves to their own hsbands?
for compartmenting the body parts to be functioning in isolation for a one sided act to happen there has to be a total disregard for another person’s side in terms of what ill effects one’s personal acts brings for the other persons. then, on the personal side such persons do not experience a wholesome living due to the stressed concept of the self identity. children are not born with this overpowering obsession with the “me” of the modern human species. it is the effect of the commerce induced educational dissemination and mode. the dissemination is only to cultivate the dependence upon acquiring the myriad of consumer goods; and the competitive mode is for selecting the crop of the class to improvise and invent consumer goods, or to manage the factories producing the goods; and also to safeguard the consumer society at governmental level.
brought up thus, the learner, especially the top scoring student employs every means thought out by one’s thinking faculty to match one’s physical existence with one’s thought out image. one equalizing effect (for, until recently, only women were supposed to feel insecure standing before the mirror) of the competitive mode of education on men is the sense of insecurity, where men are losing out to other men outside of the job. the loser man also loses self esteem not just in one’s own thinking, but also among one’s coworkers and in the community. and the audiovisual and print media depict the winner men surrounded by desirable women, even if such men may not appear to be sexually appealing to women. in this instance, woman’s attraction to such man for his favourable living conditions may be called seduction and a child born of such alliance a future safety net.
all this happens from the original misconception of thought mistaken for what it stands. and almost nothing is not mistaken, whether it is life, liberty and happiness. the denial of woman’s natural femininity is negating some of the ecologically non sexual elemental aspects of being a woman, which not only men admire, but other creatures, too, acknowledge. animals who have come in contact with humans behave differently with women, perhaps due to women’s natural tendency for caring and nonaggressive gentleness that is even audibly discernable from a woman’s voice.
as the modern human being, whether a woman or a man is spending considerable time, mind and resources first in trying to live up to the self image picked up from the coffee table books and tv screen, and then try to interact with others make-believing that they are the persons they have chosen to be. this acting works fine on stage. but even actors charish to be those persons they are portraying on stage.
it is not gender equality where a woman is socioeconomically forced to live up to what the commerce created authority of man’s idea of who she is. this is all stemming from the beginning, and in the beginning, there was the word. in vedic perception it is the “shabda”, meaning word. and since then, every one, man or woman, has been struggling to live in words. and words exist only in thoughts. at one time it was the religion -- and there are almost as many religions as there are heads of the state and corporations. now it is the commerce sector that acts supreme. the church was molding the thought, and now the commerce sector is reforming not just the thought created person, but also assembly line producing the entire theatre with its stage, the set, the decor; and the script, making the human world a stage.
no wonder, why people associate the sense of freedom with natural living of the wild life.
