The Human Beast:
Some might argue that this article opposes everything Sikhi stands for. Because after all, is Sikhi not the faith of equity and freedom? But at the same time, we Sikhs must sift fact from fiction to establish which of our modern standards conform to Gurmat and which fall short irrespective of how emotionally appealing and utopian they might be. It is not a journey for the fainthearted and the flames of truth will forge a much more enterprising but also savagely dominant Khalsa. After all, the line between freedom and ferality is the same as the line between triumph and tyranny-blurred and seemingly absent though subtly present. Conversely, Gurmat endorses that freedom is a responsibility undertaken only by the valorous few while ferality is the natural state of the human animal. Which side of the line will we cross to and why? It is our journey penultimately and we will reap only what we sow.
Feminism:
Feminism commenced as a rights movement for women on the freedom side of the line. It endorsed the logical conclusion that men and women had an equal stake in growing society as without either parent a child was more prone to destructiveness societal absence. It recognized the dissimilar roles of the sexes but also their equal importance in terms of nurturing the future seeds of society. On the whole, first wave feminists contended for the more realistic rights of obtaining a valid stake in sociopolitical and religiopolitical affairs while refusing to forfeit their duty as mothers. Motherhood was their naturally divine prerogative and not that of men and through their endeavours they renewed its vitality in the eyes of their contemporary society.
The devolution of feminism from a realistic rights grounded movement into an abstract garbage dump of human ferality signalled the rise of a new epoch in which the sacredness of motherhood was denied and the primacy of the nuclear family dethroned. Subsequent generations of feminists crossed over the threshold from freedom into ferality and lo and behold! We entered the generation of dimwitted idiocy where men are ignoble for exploiting the sexual organs of a female for their own pleasure but at the same time a woman providing these services is exercising her feminist rights. While we would argue both men and women are at fault, hell hath no fury like a feminist scorned and that too one who is confounded as to whether to earn easy profit by retailing her natural “wares” or earning a honorable and dignified living.
In a nutshell, current feminism is a cancerous aberration of its original form and is a one-way route towards making our daughters prostitutes all the while laced with dystopian tropes of some impending global femicide engineered by all men in existence.
Weak Fathers, Weaker Excuses:
W. Bradford Wilcox observes that the current feminist ferality arises out of weak or absent fatherhood. Stronger and present fathers will make boys into men while providing an emulative template for their daughters who will seek the same virtues in whichever male they select to wed and have children with. Add a religious context and the father’s responsibility increases tenfold. The sacredness and purity of the religion has to be upheld and the children are oriented towards finding a life partner with a hundred percent similar outlook. While of course woke liberals will cry foul and allege one of many imaginary phobias, the grim reality is that fanciful delusions of love melt away after the organs are satisfied and the truth sets in that the inter-relational disparity will breed confused offspring lacking any distinct ideological grounding in who they actually are. More often than not, the woman’s heritage is sacrificed on the altar of love. This conspicuous inequality, though, is resolutely ignored by today’s hypersexed feminists.
Whose to blame? God? Society? Community? School? Technology? Social media? Or the Quisling fathers who would rather sell off their daughter’s heritage and future for the more temporary pleasures of the moment? The weaker the father, the more disoriented the daughter. We humans are naturally wired to identify and attract opposites. While boys often share a profound bond with their mothers; girls share the similar bond with their fathers. The mother is well aware of the qualifiers that will allow her to wed her son to the most befitting woman. Similarly, a father is cognizant of what traits to identify in any future suitor for his daughter to ensure her lifelong happiness. Religion, naturally, provides an easier yardstick against which to adjudge any weakness but only if the opportunity is taken.
In the current scenario, feminist mothers seem more overjoyed to wed off their daughters to the latest model minority or freshest professional victim (we use this term very lightly) community given that their own experiential existence too has been one of both mental and physical prostitution.
“But Sikhi”:
Damaged ships seek any port. Whichever port offers them shelter, they take. The inability to differentiate between Sikhi and western cultural deterioration by first generation Sikh migrants has furnished a generation of so-called Sikh feminists whose primary goal is to contort Sikhi to conform to their perversely twisted worldviews. One can easily deduce this from the outcry that resulted after Simran Kaur Ladli’s song Lahu Di Awaz rose to the top ranks of Punjabi music. The song translates to cry of blood in English and is an acerbic denouncement of feminism’s devolution of womanhood into whoredom on western lines. Given Ladli’s own Sikh heritage, self-proclaimed Sikh feminists descended vulture-like on her social media accounts accusing her of slut-shaming and femicide. Of course, more rationale individuals were left wondering whether the term slut-shaming was an apt description given that Ladli was after all shaming self-proclaimed sluts. The irony, though, was lost on feral feminists.
More ludicrously, Gurbani is constantly weaponized by these Sikh feminists to evade responsibility. Their ferality is justified with the below verse,
ਭੰਡਿ ਜੰਮੀਐ ਭੰਡਿ ਨਿੰਮੀਐ ਭੰਡਿ ਮੰਗਣੁ ਵੀਆਹੁ ॥
ਭੰਡਹੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਦੋਸਤੀ ਭੰਡਹੁ ਚਲੈ ਰਾਹੁ ॥
ਭੰਡੁ ਮੁਆ ਭੰਡੁ ਭਾਲੀਐ ਭੰਡਿ ਹੋਵੈ ਬੰਧਾਨੁ ॥
ਸੋ ਕਿਉ ਮੰਦਾ ਆਖੀਐ ਜਿਤੁ ਜੰਮਹਿ ਰਾਜਾਨ ॥
ਭੰਡਹੁ ਹੀ ਭੰਡੁ ਊਪਜੈ ਭੰਡੈ ਬਾਝੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥
ਨਾਨਕ ਭੰਡੈ ਬਾਹਰਾ ਏਕੋ ਸਚਾ ਸੋਇ ॥
“Women birth men, within women men are conceived and to women they are wed. Women become their friends and through women arise their future generations. When their women die, men seek another and to women they are bound. Then why is she vilified from whom emperors are born? Women are born from women and without women none can be born. Nanak, if anything then only the true Creator is without women.”
-Guru Granth, 473.
Comically enough, Sikh feminists have not realized that Guru Nanak in the aforementioned verse is solidifying his view that only women have the divine prerogative to give birth and none other. Out goes all talk of pro-trans Sikh spaces. Delusional Sikhs have yet to realize what Guru Nanak knew centuries prior, only women give birth and not mutilated gender dysphoric men.
Digressions aside, let us see the two types of women Guru Nanak has identified. Their is the fundamental woman: the mother, the caregiver, the leader in times of crises and the mother of emperors. Contrary to what feminists believe, Sikh women did not solely pop out a heir occasionally. They also ensured they raised him as an emperor. We see this with the younger sons of Guru Gobind Singh who were atrociously slain by Islamofascists. Their grandmother and stepmother repeatedly instilled in them a the spirit of valor and sacrifice.
More tellingly, the author and his forefathers were raised in houses where the womenfolk recounted to them tales of Shahids and how Sikhi was more purer than other fallacious and misleading faiths. This tradition seems to have ended currently given that martyrdom sagas have been replaced with the retardation of BLM (‘Shahid George Floyd! Our struggle is one. We will be degenerate together’) and the even more jeopardous insanity of unbounded liberalism, trans-ordained self mutilation and open borders.
The second class of women are the ਰੰਡੀਆ (whores). What does the Guru think of them?
ਚੋਰਾ ਜਾਰਾ ਰੰਡੀਆ ਕੁਟਣੀਆ ਦੀਬਾਣੁ ॥
ਵੇਦੀਨਾ ਕੀ ਦੋਸਤੀ ਵੇਦੀਨਾ ਕਾ ਖਾਣੁ ॥
ਸਿਫਤੀ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣਨੀ ਸਦਾ ਵਸੈ ਸੈਤਾਨੁ ॥
ਗਦਹੁ ਚੰਦਨਿ ਖਉਲੀਐ ਭੀ ਸਾਹੂ ਸਿਉ ਪਾਣੁ ॥
ਨਾਨਕ ਕੂੜੈ ਕਤਿਐ ਕੂੜਾ ਤਣੀਐ ਤਾਣੁ ॥
ਕੂੜਾ ਕਪੜੁ ਕਛੀਐ ਕੂੜਾ ਪੈਨਣੁ ਮਾਣੁ ॥੧॥
“Thieves, adulterers, whores and pimps-make alliances with this unrighteous lot and be eaten by them in turn. They know no value of the truth and have devils forever in their minds. Decorate an ass with sandalwood but it will still run to the dust. Spin a false thread and obtain a false cloth in turn. False the cloth, false the dimensions and false the pride in such apparels.”
-Guru Granth, 790.
What category do our Sikh feminists fall in today? Definitely not the one that any self-respecting Sikh mother would wed her son to. Maybe this is why they are attracted to the dregs of fallen communities. After all, who to value them but the equally feral? Damaged ships look for any port. They retain no loyalty after all. Why would our Sikh feminists?
“But Warriors”:
The Sikhs of yore never believed in the myth of intergenerational trauma. This disbelief galvanized them into continually warring for their freedom and not entertaining the delusions of professional victimhood unlike today where intergenerational trauma is the mantra to explain away our failings. It is this idiocy of intergenerational trauma interspersed with our inability to construct relevant historical narratives based on meticulously analysed chronicles that has seen us discard intelligence for utopianism. It is undeniable that the Gurus initiated Sikhi as an unique way of life in which both men and women were afforded equality on the recognition of the irreconcilable biological disparity between them as well as merit. It is equally undeniable that Sikh women such as the legendary Akali Mata Bhag Kaur and Maharani Sada Kaur participated in battles and turned the tides of destiny for the Khalsa. But does this give our current Sikh feminists the right to spread their legs for anyone?
Woke liberalism argues that military service is akin to prostitution but prostitution is some glorious endeavour. This narrative pushed by both nymphomaniacs and simps is an incredible devaluation of warriordom’s prestige. Consider two Sikh women: Dip Kaur who slaughtered two Mughal Islamofascists attempting to flirt with her as a sign that Sikh women were not a free for all and Anoop Kaur. The latter was a personal assistant to the women of Guru Gobind Singh’s household and was abducted by the debauch Sher Khan of Malerkotla whose opportunistic refusal to execute the younger sons of the Guru is brandished about as some evidence of his saintliness. Far from it, when he attempted to molest Anoop Kaur she fell on her own concealed Kirpan and killed herself. This sordid event was one of the many factors running through Jathedar Jassa Singh Alhuwalia’s mind when he sacked Malerkotla.
Sikh history provisions us with countless priceless examples of the true calibre of Sikh women. Modern feminism provisions us with invaluable examples of what our daughters should avoid, namely the entire feminist charade itself and Sikh feminists themselves. Another factor to be considered here is that Sikhs who fell into Islamofascist and Sanataani hands were guaranteed the most macabre of fates which they joyfully accepted for the upkeep of their Guru’s revolution. While in certain times of crisis women rode out to the field of battle, it seems they were the exception and not the norm as most often they were armed to protect Sikh offspring. Otherwise the Khalsa would not risk the debasement of its own women at the hands of virulent religions. As brutal as it may sound, the reasoning would have been this:
ਭੰਡਹੁ ਹੀ ਭੰਡੁ ਊਪਜੈ ਭੰਡੈ ਬਾਝੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥
“Women are born from women and without women none can be born.”
-Guru Granth, 473.
As much as the warriors of modern feminism vilify their divine right to give birth by screeching “we are not baby making machines” reality does not change. Offspring is conceived and formed within them. Not within men and definitely not trans women. Their profound value is in the continued legacy they bequeath the world which is only possible through the virtues they gift their children. Not in denying their divine nature.
“But Ganika”:
The Sikh scholar Bhai Gurdas provides an analogy through his poetic odes or Vaars. One particular ode misinterpreted by Sikh feminists is that of Ganika the whore.
ਗਨਿਕਾ ਪਾਪਣਿ ਹੋਇ ਕੈ ਪਾਪਾਂ ਦਾ ਗਲਿ ਹਾਰੁ ਪਰੋਤਾ।
ਮਹਾਂ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਆਚਾਣਚਕ ਗਨਿਕਾ ਵਾੜੇ ਆਇ ਖਲੋਤਾ।
ਦੁਰਮਤਿ ਦੇਖਿ ਦਇਆਲ ਹੋਇ ਹਥਹੁੰ ਉਸ ਨੋ ਦਿਤੋਨੁ ਤੋਤਾ।
ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਉਪਦੇਸੁ ਕਰਿ ਖੇਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਦੇ ਵਣਜੁ ਸਓਤਾ।
ਲਿਵ ਲਾਗੀ ਤਿਸੁ ਤੋਤਿਅਹੁਂ ਨਿਤ ਪੜ੍ਹਾਏ ਕਰੈ ਅਸੋਤਾ।
ਪਤਿਤ ਉਧਾਰਣੁ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਦੁਰਮਤਿ ਪਾਪ ਕਲੇਵਰੁ ਧੋਤਾ।
ਅੰਤਕਾਲੁ ਜਮ ਜਾਲੁ ਤੋੜਿ ਨਰਕੈ ਵਿਚਿ ਨ ਖਾਧੁਸੁ ਗੋਤਾ।
ਗਈ ਬੈਕੁੰਠਿ ਬਿਬਾਣਿ ਚੜ੍ਹਿ ਨਾਉ ਨਰਾਇਣੁ ਛੋਤਿ ਅਛੋਤਾ।
ਥਾਉ ਨਿਥਾਵੇ ਮਾਣੁ ਮਣੋਤਾ ॥੨੧॥
“Ganika the prostitute was such a sinner that her neck was weighed down by heavy garlands of her misdeeds. One day a great soul halted in her abode and expressed mercy for her fallen state. He gifted her a parrot and instructed her to teach it to recite the name of the all pervasive Lord. Then having explained the merits of this deed, he went on his way. With full focus Ganika commenced tutoring the bird. Such is the name of the Master that it liberates one from transgressions and uplifts the fallen ones. Her tutoring cleansed her misdeeds. Upon death she was not stricken by any fears. She did not drown in the worldly ocean. Totally purified from sin she ascended to higher planes. The Master is the shelter of the unsheltered.”
-V10:21.
Just because Ganika acquired a reprieve, do we allow mass production of Ganikas today on the grounds that if one whore was pardoned then all whores are destined for pardon? Bhai Gurdas, in his wisdom, was conversant with human gullibility. He foreknowingly wrote a specific ode to caution against feral stupidity:
ਪਉੜੀ 9 ( ਪੂਤਨਾ ) ਜੇ ਕਰਿ ਉਧਰੀ ਪੂਤਨਾ ਵਿਹੁ ਪੀਆਲਣੁ ਕੰਮੁ ਨ ਚੰਗਾ । ਗਨਿਕਾ ਉਧਰੀ ਆਖੀਐ ਪਰ ਘਰਿ ਜਾਇ ਨ ਲਈਐ ਪੰਗਾ । ਬਾਲਮੀਕੁ ਨਿਸਤਾਰਿਆ ਮਾਰੈ ਵਾਟ ਨ ਹੋਇ ਨਿਸੰਗਾ । ਫੰਧਕਿ ਉਧਰੈ ਆਖੀਅਨਿ ਫਾਹੀ ਪਾਇ ਨ ਫੜੀਐ ਟੰਗਾ । ਜੇ ਕਾਸਾਈ ਉਧਰਿਆ ਜੀਆ ਘਾਇ ਨ ਖਾਈਐ ਭੰਗਾ । ਪਾਰਿ ਉਤਾਰੈ ਬੋਹਿਥਾ ਸੁਇਨਾ ਲੋਹੁ ਨਾਹੀ ਇਕ ਰੰਗਾ । ਇਤੁ ਭਰਵਾਸੈ ਰਹਣੁ ਕੁਢੰਗਾ ॥੯॥
“Just because the witch Putna was pardoned for her sins, this does not allow us to go forth to poison others. Just because Ganika the whore was pardoned at the end, we do not receive the prerogative to cause rifts in households (like whores)…”
-V31:9.
“But Captured Women”:
From Jaswant Lal Mehta to Hari Ram Gupta, historians have paid valuable tribute to the martial prowess and tactical acumen of historic Khalsa warriors who often rescued enslaved women from Islamofascists. These rescues were rooted in the sixth Guru’s military sanctions that no women be molested by the Sikhs. Most often, these women were victims of religiously sanctioned gangrapes. If returned to their homes they would be rejected on account of their impurity. As a result, they received a new lease on life with the Khalsa. After conversion they would either be wed to a Singh of their choice as a means of guaranteeing their upkeep (one of the multiple reasons Singhs in the past had multiple wives), with any marital obligations decided between the couple or allowed to guard the younger Sikhs. A vicious distinction, however, exists between those women and current feminists of all hues. Those historic women had dignity and were violated forcefully; a majority of feminists sell theirs on digital auctions without compulsion.
Another side of the coin here is the fate of enemy women who did fall into Khalsa hands. Noblewomen were ransomed off and never maltreated though kept confined. If, however, spouses and families were dead and they had nowhere to go to they were wed off to Singhs to provide them with sustenance though their newer husbands rarely associated with them maritally or otherwise. Once again, even these women were adamant that their dignity not be violated. Modern feminists have none.
Awaken Singhs:
A retailer of stolen goods and a purchaser knowingly purchasing such goods are both as equally guilty as the burglar. If some cataclysmic compulsion is forcing someone’s womenfolk into prostitution than a Singh should endeavor to liberate them from such a lifestyle if they desire to be liberated. On the other hand, to argue that prostitution is some justified endeavor and some element of female rights is peak inanity. Avoid such women even if they profess to be Sikhs. Ostracize them from your lives and raise your daughters right. The young Khalsa Singhs should remember that a self-declared Sikh woman opening her legs for the followers of Anmat and profiting of such degeneracy sans any compulsion is not a woman. She is neither Akali Mata Bhag Kaur, nor Anoop Kaur, nor Sada Kaur or even Dip Kaur. She is neither warrior nor leader nor preacher. She is but one among many ਰੰਡੀਆ. Value yourself and refrain from being in their company. Their charms will supplant your discipline with solicitation. You will traverse from freedom to ferality without even realizing it.
Tough to read. Lots to say but it's hard in a time of plenty and peace to get people to take things as seriously in times of life and death. I think this is true for everyone.
I’m embarrassed to say how much I enjoy hip hop music encouraging such feral behavior, even if I don’t take part in it.