Featured Articles

How Did the Patriarchy Start – and Will Evolution Get Rid of It?

https://science.thewire.in/society/patriarchy-origins-evolution/ 

• Contrary to common belief, research shows that the patriarchy isn’t some kind of “natural order of things” – it hasn’t always been prevalent and may disappear eventually.
• Hunter-gatherer communities may have been relatively egalitarian, at least compared to some of the regimes since. Female leaders and matriarchal societies have always existed.
• Norms, attitudes and culture have a huge effect on behaviour. They can and do change over time, especially if the underlying ecology or economy changes.
• As men and women both increasingly generate their own wealth, the old patriarchy is finding it harder to control women.

The patriarchy, having been somewhat in retreat in parts of the world, is back in our faces. In Afghanistan, the Taliban once again prowl the streets more concerned with keeping women at home and in strict dress code than with the impending collapse of the country into famine.

And on another continent, parts of the US are legislating to ensure that women can no longer have a legal abortion. In both cases, lurking patriarchal beliefs were allowed to reemerge when political leadership failed. We have an eerie feeling of travelling back through time. But how long has patriarchy dominated our societies?

The status of women has been a long-standing point of interest in anthropology. Contrary to common belief, research shows that the patriarchy isn’t some kind of “natural order of things” – it hasn’t always been prevalent and may in fact disappear eventually. Hunter-gatherer communities may have been relatively egalitarian, at least compared to some of the regimes that followed. And female leaders and matriarchal societies have always existed.

by Ruth Mace

20/10/2022

read more

Century Workers' Struggle - Five Years

सेंचुरी श्रमिक संघर्ष के 5 वर्ष । 5 Years of the #Century #Labor #Struggle
Bahujan Sanvad
Oct 18, 2022 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mz4Ga-VcUFc  live at 6 pm 18th Oct 2022
5 साल पहले यानी कि 17 अक्टूबर 2017 को बिरला मैनेजमेंट के द्वारा सेंचुरी मिल को अवैध तरीके से दो-दो बार फर्जी बिक्री कर बंद कर दिया गया था। न मजदूरों की सहमति ली गई थ और न ही राज्य सरकार से अनुमति ली गई थी। इतना बड़ा भ्रष्टाचार जिस पर सरकार और प्रशासन मौन है। यह आजादी के अमृत महोत्सव की एक तस्वीर सेंचुरी आंदोलन है।
1000 से ज्यादा मजदूर बेरोजगार हुए, और तब से लेकर आज दिनांक 18 अक्टूबर 2022 तक अहिंसा, त्याग, समर्पण का चुनौतीपूर्ण संघर्ष सत्याग्रह रोजगार आंदोलन के रूप में अभी निरंतर भी जारी है।

Struggle of the Century https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQADySVmXrU Durgash Khavse put their agitation in perspective.. a development story, where basic land of farmers and tribal is taken for factory projects, and when the market does it cycle, the land finds new uses, and workers get abandoned even by the Unions.. Narmada Bachao Andolan has spoken about the Development model.. Vikas Chahiye, Vinash Nahi.

This Century & The Workers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mK3gILQtF-Y Nov 21, 2020
The story of the Centyry Satyagraha Andolan, goes on as the Lockdown sees more and more Laws being changed just to make it easier for a certain type of economy, where stack holder value rather than social goods and livelihood decide if a factory should be closed and capital moved to more business friendly regimes.. apparently labour laws are outdated because investment will not come our way...

Split verdict: Why it leaves me, a Left-Liberal, at odds with me, a Progressive Muslim

Why it leaves me, a Left-Liberal, at odds with me, a Progressive Muslim  Javed Anand https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-court-verdict-on-hijab-split-wide-open-8207010/

Justice Dhulia noted the main thrust of his judgment was that the entire concept of essential religious practice was not essential to the dispute. The high court took a wrong path. According to him, it is ultimately a matter of choice and Articles 14 and 19. “The foremost question in my mind was the education of the girl child. Are we making her life any better?” He also held the view that the judgment in the Bijoe Emmanuel case “squarely covers the issue”. This refers to the 1986 ruling of the apex court that upheld the fundamental right of three school-going children from the Jehovah’s Witness sect to stand respectfully but not join others in singing the national anthem during the school assembly as it conflicted with the tenets of their faith. ..

The Liberal Me has no doubt that Justice Dhulia’s views are in consonance with constitutional values. But the Progressive Muslim Me fears that were a larger bench to subsequently rule accordingly, it would effectively strengthen the regressive sections among Indian Muslims...As is public knowledge, cutting across sectarian divides — Sunni, Shia, Barelvi, Deobandi, Wahhabi, Salafi, Maududian — virtually the entire Muslim clergy in India is of the view that hijab (niqab, burqa) is mandatory in Islam. The abstract principle of a woman’s freedom to choose, I fear, will feed into the it-is-mandatory argument; act as convenient cover for Islam’s patriarchs to keep, even push, women behind the veil...

Two, do Muslim girls studying in Muslim-run schools, 3-year-olds included, have the right to choose or they simply must conform?

In the event that the March order of the Karnataka High Court is struck down by a larger bench of the Supreme Court in the coming period, we might ponder on what students committed to Hindutva politics will make of the right to choose verdict. Classrooms becoming the new arena for competitive communalism? Muslim girls in hijab, Hindu boys in saffron scarves? Diversity, anyone?

Hijab Judgment of Supreme Court | सर्वोच्च न्यायालय का हिजाब पर फ़ैसला | Faizan Mustafa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83qGIZE0z70
Oct 14, 2022 Some comments on Youtube: Matir Manush We thank Dr. Faizan Mustafa as usual for his dedication to explain the matter of law to us with commitment and devotion. Justice Gupta expressed his opinion on the practice of Hijab with sincere reasoning. But we believe he failed to realize a simple matter.
Wearing Hijab is not harming or hurting anybody. It is not even disrupting the uniformity in the education places. But banning hijab is surely damaging one's freedom of personal choice. Banning hijab is shattering one's dream of education.
..justice Dhulia's verdict protect the integrity of our constitution. His judgement promotes the right of education of the girls. In other words the judgement of justice Dhulia is helping our girls to acquire knowledge which is very important for the nation. Our girls are a vulnerable group of people in the country. The judicial system should not and must not increase their vulnerability.

Rohit gupta New doctrines are laid down like trust doctrine, cross obligations and tolerance, laying down new dimensions of constitutional interpretation.
The question is of acoustomed to other way of living and there are countries, who have no school dress

Yazdy Palia I disagree with the line of reasoning. In their enthusiasm, the petitioner, the respondent and the judges, have not realised, that, the only issue in this case is
1. Does an institution, in India, has the right to frame their own rules?
2. Do the students and their supporters, have the right to impose their will on the institution created by individuals to educate children? It appears that all the three are competing with each other to violate fundamental rights.