Abhinav, Sindhu and the Indian Media

India is a country of more then 1.25 billion, however very few Indian athletes are able to get a medal at Olympics. Hence any medal win is regarded as a very great achievement. In Rio Olympics, P.V.Sindhu and Sakshi Malik have won a medal each. Which is a great a achievement. However media and feminists immediately started a campaign of male bashing. Media and social media is filled up with these bigoted feminists(women's groups) comments about how women have beaten males.
It is noteworthy that both these athletes are from states of Haryana and Telangana, which feminists have always being arguing are worse off for women. Then the question arises how come states which are called as insecure for women have churned out best women athletes while so called progressive states have none. Haryana is supposed to have the lowest male-female ratio in India. But still women are excelling. Which points to the fact that the media has painted a very wrong and perverted image of Haryana.
It was good to note that during Sakshi Malik's interview, the Indian reporter was trying to eke out a statement on women's power from her. But instead she gave the message to women, that "do something which will make the nation proud".

When Abhinav Bindra won a gold medal in Beijing Olympics, or Sushil Kumar won a silver, or when any male athlete wins a medal, no one mentions their male gender.

This tendency of women's rights groups and media to always highlight the gender of women when women do something good is extremely perverted. When women win they run a propaganda that women are superior to males. When women loose, they run a propaganda that women are denied a fair opportunity. It's always a win-win situation for feminists. Feminists always raise the gender issue when women are involved. Thus feminists themselves don't want equality, and are too conscious about their gender. Feminists are losers who have a complex, hence try to always subjugate males on every opportunity.

Motherhood is not tied to female gender, and females are NOT goddesses

In many debates, one point often raised by feminists and orthodox/socialists/communists/PC's is, Ah, but women is a mother/Goddess, and NO mother can be evil. Further these perverts want us to believe that women are Goddesses.
This argument implies, that only a women can be a mother. In ancient Indian texts, lot of sanctity is attached to the term Mother. While going through the ancient Indian texts, it is pretty clear, that the term mother is not at all attached to the physical female gender. Relating Prakriti to physical female gender, is plain stupid and nonsense. It exposes a very shallow understanding of these ancient text.

Females are not goddesses, and females were never worshiped in ancient India. In Devi Bhagwat, the Devi (Goddess) herself says that she is not a female, and considering her as a female is stupidity. The Goddess further says that she is beyond all these physical classifications.

In Maharashtra(India), there were many great saints like Dnyaneshwar, Tukaram, who called Lord Vitthala, as their mother. This even though Lord Vitthala has a wife (Rukmini). But these saints call Vitthala as their mother and not Rukmini.
The definition of Mother as given in these texts is someone who cares for, who is the creator, and not the one whose gender is female.
Devotees of  these saints term these saints as their mother. Hence Dnyaneshwar is referred to as "Maauli" in marathi, which means a very affectionate mother. This is because Dnyaneshwar cared for people, and he created Dnyaneshwari for the masses. There are plenty of references in spiritual text,where the traditional male God is referred to as Mother.

Hence please stop glorifying female simply because they can give birth. In the future this dependence on females is going to be anyways eliminated.