Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Why this selective outrage? Why does “smashing the patriarchy” suddenly change with religion? If you (Rahul Gandhi) truly stood for women empowerment, then why did the Congress government overturn the Supreme Court’s Shah Bano judgment through legislation? Selective feminism isn’t empowerment. It’s political convenience. - Sushree Bansuri Swaraj Watch...

30,866 views • 13 days ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Rahul Gandhi’s “Smash Patriarchy” campaign raises a simple question: does his crusade apply to every religion, or only to Hinduism? The Allahabad High Court recently held that there was no material to establish hijab as an essential religious practice of Islam and upheld the school’s uniform requirement. Will Rahul Gandhi acknowledge this? If he selectively quotes Hindu scriptures to lecture Hindus about patriarchy, why the silence on difficult passages in other religious texts? Quran 4:34 describes men as “in charge of women” and contains the instruction to “strike them” in the circumstances specified. 1 Timothy 2:11–12 says women should learn “in quietness and full submission” and does not permit a woman “to teach or to assume authority over a man.” Ephesians 5:22–24 instructs wives to submit to their husbands. These passages deserve context and honest debate. So do difficult passages in Hindu texts. But Rahul Gandhi’s selective outrage is the problem. Why is Hinduism subjected to one standard while other faiths receive another? Hinduism is not defined by its most controversial verses. Its remarkable strength lies in its capacity to question, debate and reform itself from within—as it has done for millennia. If Rahul Gandhi really wants to “Smash Patriarchy,” he should apply the principle universally. No selective outrage. No vote-bank exemptions. Read everything. Understand everything. Then lecture.

Amit Malviya

19,814 views • 14 days ago