I wrote a piece that got published on Arabian Gazette website sometime last week. It was about how rape accusations are increasingly being used as a tool in a conflict-prone world by the masters of the declining empire, as Theft-Capitalism rapidly falls apart.
The idea was to build awareness on the following crucial points:
a) Some very personal and powerful tool/form to protect women (the right to appeal against gender injustice) is gradually being hijacked by different policy makers across levels to justify whatever they have been doing ? everything done right under our noses
b) This has been possible because of individual greed ? it is fairly easy to lure common people like me and you; and short-sightedness ? there is already an increasingly visible chunk of ?fringe? population actively manipulating perception
c) As a result, the playing fields that were earlier disconnected ? regular man/woman being separate from political/business leaders ? are gradually being merged; this could have a really devastating effect on any ordinary man/woman?s personal life
The piece was not written to endorse or disparage anything else.
Reading whatever I’ve written above, most of you would find my views fairly agreeable, I reckon. Well, that was how far I actually went in my previous piece, Pitching Women Against Men. The reactions, however, surprised me.
There were two broad reactions. Name calling and a failure to grasp the elementary logic that the piece tried to explain.
Now I think I am a reasonable chap. If someone pushes me and hops onto the bus on my way to work, I’ll let him do that even if that means I’ll miss my ride. Maybe the fellow is running late, he likes to push others, or whatever. As per my logic, I?ve to try to be early, to avoid him pushing me everyday.
By that same logic, I believe that people are entitled to their opinion, so they would want to put them across. For example, I could say that men, as products, are definitely more intelligent than women. Check your university score sheet (if you want), or merely digest the fact that applied science ? the inventions and innovations ? is a male domain. Almost anything that is mobile or immobile, which is not a plant or an animal (or a part of nature) ? has been created, invented, innovated or perfected by men. From the mobiles we use, cars we drive, or houses we live in. Even Roberto Cavalli is a man.
If I say so, a certain section of netizens would probably label me as an exclusivist, sexist, misogynist? an aspiring Tea Party candidate or one of the Taliban. Few would disagree, and probably put across some reasons for their disagreement. And under my logic, I will bear with them all; because it is their opinion.
Very few will realise and acknowledge that the points made above are true, and will probably civilly try to highlight the historical male dominance as a reason behind. And about one or two would realise that I probably don?t have anything against women, or that I probably am not strutting around looking for a fight ? just stating bare and probably unpleasant facts.
Dwindling number of dispassionate people…is bothering.
In the article last week, when I wrote:??Western women of postmodern era are increasingly being driven by a scary agenda: Hatred for men?? the operative word was not ?Western?; the operative word was ?increasingly?. Google up ? the increase in the number of Repressed Memory Lawsuit is true. The increase in the so-called ?fringe? female population is also for real. ‘Western’ because the Internet doesn?t have records that speak otherwise. Make sense?
Don?t know it if does. Where logic doesn?t matter, people are free to cling to whatever they like.
I always heard that you get maximum listeners only if you told them what they liked to hear. To aid to that, a certain section of writers write what the readers ?prefer? ? rehash the known, seldom venture into the shadows. Political correctness ? it is called.
That?s a disturbing picture.
Today we have a huge section of youth who wander the web looking for places they identify with ? and mostly find or create ?closed groups?. They remain inflexible because they want to retain the liberty to ?filter?.? This blinkered habit limits vision, and as a result, metabolises ?outside? and often ?uncontrolled? information properly, as if it does not exist. The monkey remains on the back.
Intolerance in full-blooded, young, cyber-connected and well-read global citizens is disturbing. Thus, it remains near-impossible to level-off faith/bias/ignorance with logic ? even within educated masses, even in 2012.
If these pictures are not disturbing, I don?t know what is…
Arindam Mukherjee is a?current-affairs and geo-politics observer by passion with a special interest in Central Asian and Middle Eastern affairs.?He has appeared as a column writer for the Times of India. The Calcutta-based analyst has authored a book titled ?The Fifth P? which is a comparative analysis between the USA and India and the role people play in the development of a nation state.?Arindam is currently finishing his second book on International Conflict in Central and Middle East Asia, besides his association with CPMR -?a journal where aspiring PhDs get their thesis published.