Balancing the scales: Bringing equity to women at work

 I have pondered over the question of the equality of men and women and their roles in society for past few years, and often racked my brain on what would be a truly balanced expectation from a "modern" woman. Ignoring the woke bullies that will rant that everyone can do everything, to me it is very clear that if men and women are not the same biologically, then they are very much like 2 different tools, made to accomplish different tasks.

Biologically speaking, women have tender bodies, and it is extremely difficult for them to develop muscle mass. While they can develop great endurance to do physical work, their bodies are not designed for fighting. Women however, have better eyesight and metabolism than men in general. They can see more colours and generally encounter fewer problems in their digestive system in their later years. Women also are less susceptible to heart problems than men. The human female brain is designed to have both halves working with equal activity, whereas male brain is designed to have one half of the brain as more active than the other.

This means that women are better at multitasking and make for great managers, while men are better at navigation and make better leaders. In military roles, women are better at defense, and men are better with attack. Every entity – a home, a business, a country – needs both types of roles to be fulfilled, and instead of running amok by buying into woke communist propaganda of men and women being "equal", we need to accept that both are "equitable" and necessary parts of society.

No society can sustain itself without BOTH men and women. No society can become truly prosperous without BOTH men and women understanding their strengths clearly and cooperating with each other in fulfilling their roles in society. Men in commerce define function, and women define aesthetics. Can a product that works well but has poor aesthetics be sold in the market? You can try – and bankrupt yourself in the process. Can a good looking product that doesn't work sell? Get ready for customers abusing you.

In the 20th century, many fallacies and deceptive ideas were propagated by communists as well as lobbyists working for corporations post WW2. " Woman can do all the things that men can do" "Women working in the industry are doing credible work, but housewives don't work"

"Women don't need men for a happy and fulfilling life"

"Women shouldn't have to bear children, and being made to bear children is oppression of the ((Patriarchy))" "All men are trash." Every single one of these conceptions have hurt only women.

By saying that men and women are "equal" meaning they are same and replaceable with each other, greedy corporations and communists obsessed with uniformity deprive women of their femininity and importance in society. Chivalry and good manners are endangered by this sameness.

This "sameness" narrative is one of the reasons that has lead our world into impotency. We sent people to the moon with ANALOG computers less powerful than a cheap smartphone of our age. Why are we stuck in earth's orbits for last 50 years?

Computing was a women's profession in its early days, while mechanical and other forms of "hard" engineering were men's fields. The first "Program" ever was "written" by Ada Lovelace.

Then we got into the stupid argument of "Men vs Women", because according to uniformity loving communists, they should be considered the same! Not just that, by turning "software engineering" into a male-dominated profession, the work culture has been completely destroyed with infinite hours and abusive workforce hierarchies. There are many capable women in the field, but this abusive work culture forces them out.

Coming back to the original thought, my second question has been about the ideal expectations of society and ideal conditions for work for women. Owing to their biology, women have different needs than men, and this does make an impact on how they deliver commercial value, not on how well they do it.

To put them in the same roles that are actually designed for men is to be amateurish in the use of human resources. With the amount of large scale data available today, we can easily analyze the opportunities for redesigning jobs where women excel to match their needs, allowing better utilization of their talent and capability. The costs incurred will outweigh the benefits. I advocate the acceptance of the family and social duties of women by commercial establishments at EVERY scale. Small firms allow women to take care of family needs, but it is always grudgingly, or after a woman has done significant work to add value to the firm.

It should be perfectly acceptable and even expected that there be few women working between the age of 24 and 32, and most women in an office be either new workers below 24 years of age or married with kids in school above 32 years. Women in an office between 24 and 32 years should be the exception. They either married even earlier so have school-going kids earlier, or are in courtship and looking to settle down as soon as the economics work.

Unlike some apologetic fools, I don't believe in accepting "open relationships" in society. Such relationships always favor womanizers and degenerates. Marriage has been one of the foundations of strong societies, and it is not wrong for society to expect youth to marry. Even a "Live In Relationship" must adhere to the rules of a Gandharva Vivah, that is, commitment of the partners to each other through thick and thin.

Supreme Court of India is right in recognizing "live in relationships" as equivalent to "marriage", or Daiva Vivah. Along with this, the pride associated with "going out to work" needs to be completely demolished. It is 2021. We have all been working from home for a year. Homemakers' efforts need to be recognised at par with commercial work.

Impacts of colonization on Hindu society and reviving its dynamic structure.

While we pride ourselves in inheriting the legacy of a great unbroken Hindu civilization, the last 1200 years have been a history of bitter truths – of losing to the deceitful and asymmetrical tactics of warfare utilized by theopolitical creeds of middleast.

There is much that has become obfuscated in our history, and a large chunk of it is the twisting and distortion of our customs and social structure.

Specifically, how the sections of our society that resisted foreign aggression were enslaved and forced to bottom of our society.

Throughout the world, great empires and civilizations crumbled in front of Islam and Christianity, but the legendary warriors of Bharatvarsh fought hard for 600 years to keep the barbarians at bay.

The first crack appeared in Afghanistan, where the barbarians kept attacking the RAJPUT kingdoms till they uprooted it, while the kings of Afghan states barely received help from mainland of Bharat owing to the difficult terrain and them being in the frontiers.

Then came the conversion of the king of Kashmir in the 9th century.
(While Sindh was the first frontier state to be attacked, Afghan states were first to collapse under the Islamist onslaught.
This is where the cautionary tale of repeated exodus of Kashmiri Pandits began, as they refused Islam.

Still, the kingdoms of northern Bharat kept the Islamist invaders at bay till the end of 12th century.
However, from Muhammad of Ghor onwards, a series of Islamist invaders ravaged the heartland of Aryavart.

We have read this and the many atrocities these marauders committed.

What the Hindu nationalist easily picks up is the violence committed on all sections of Hindu society. What she or he cannot wrap her/his head around is the indignities all Hindu Jatis were made to suffer.

The first aspect of it was the systematic destruction of our knowledge centers, beginning with the campaign of Jalaluddin Khalji. The Islamists systematically destroyed universities, burned libraries which contained millions of unique manuscripts with irreplaceable knowledge.

Along with this they killed and anslaved all academics who were source of all that knowledge, restricting its flow in society. The only gurus left were those outside of the universities and major institutions, still being a substantial lot, but not as capable as the Masters.

This meant the creation of a knowledge vacuum in society, which the missionaries of Islam could exploit to confuse and convert the most vulnerable Hindus – the regular working class or the Shudras.

Islam being the antithesis of Sanatan sanskriti, defines quality of income in the exact opposite way.
While Hindu teachings stress on honest earning through hardwork, the best kind of income in Islam is considered from the work of slaves.

This ethic was pushed hard upon the subjects by the Islamists, as their was no slavery in Bharat before them, and they saw Hindus as lowly people who did all their work by their own hands.

This ethic meant a fundamental change in Hindu society – instead of a symbiotic relationship between all Hindu jatis, this ethic of abhoring hard work meant those who work with their hands in vocational skills went to the bottom of a Jati hierarchy.

Over the course of 6 centuries, this hierarchical social structure became formalised in Hindu society, as every new generation of Hindus were taught these values by their elders, who didn't know any better.

Despite this distortion, till the time the British conquered Bharat, people of different Jatis could easily change their trade, and enter another "Biradari".
This can be clearly seen in biography of Raja Ramamohan Roy.

The British took the distortion of Hindu society a step further, forcing the freezing of family professions from the first census onward.

It was the British that created the Scheduled Castes.

The other aspect of distortion of Hindu society was "untouchability" becoming commonplace.

As per our original social structure, people of the four Varnas – Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra were part of the respectable society.

Only outcast criminals and Chandals – people who lived in filth, had no manners and consumed meat indiscrimately – were untouchable.

When Islamists enslaved Bharat, they often force fed beef to the captured people, leading to them being labelled untouchables.

Eventually as these captured Jatis were released with the aim of causing more 'pollution' in society, and it was essentially impossible to figure out who was force fed beef and who wasn't, the whole Jati would get branded as "untouchable" after being captured by Mlechchhas.

The combined effect of the destruction of dignity of labour, expansion of untouchability, and the freezing of Jatis has left Hindu society in paralysis, and is the toxin that has been killing it, slowly but surely.

While we may never be able to regain the lost knowledge of ancient universities like Nalanda, it is imperative that we identify these 3 factors in Hindu society and begin transforming it into and equitable and dynamic community.

1. We must teach our youth to respect hardwork and skills of hands. This will ensure both an economically stronger community and preservation of traditional crafts.

2. While untouchability has been mostly removed in society by force of law, chauvinistic attitudes and looking down upon Shudra Jatis needs to be uprooted completely. This can be helped by reestablishing the Sanskars in these Jatis.

3. The crypto-Christian colonial state of "Republic of India" reinforces "Caste" by asking the Jati of our ancestors. We can easily turn it on its head by registering our Jati based on our profession, and not passing it to our children unless they take the same profession as us.

Finally, we must stop looking at bureaucracy, law enforcement and government to improve our lot, as the ball is in our court.