1. The latest salvo in the psyops blitzkrieg being carried out against Hindu-dom - in the form of the fraudulent docudrama - which seeks to project India as rape central and tries to foist the blame onto Hindu males and hence Hindu religion for it, is reminiscent of historian and ex-catholic priest Joseph McCabe's documenting of the christian dawaganda against the Roman heathens as a society that committed and condoned infanticide (which defamation method mohammedans later copied in blackening the reputation of Arabian heathens, who also were conveniently genocided and hence left no defence against the psyops created around them).
Anyway, christians had it - and long sold the story - that the ancient Roman heathens committed infanticide in epidemic proportions (compare with christianism - it is none other - projecting India as rape central now). The irony, as "encyclopaedic brain" McCabe pointed out in his usual manner of publishing irrefutable facts based on primary sources, was that if there was anything the Roman Hellenes reviled, loudly protested and would even consider taking violent action against, it was infanticide. The Roman Hellenes abhorred such cruelty so profoundly, that - as per McCabe IIRC - nothing could form a vengeful Roman heathen mob faster than the mere rumour of infanticide/exposure. In contrast, we know from historians quoting faithful christians and christian councils themselves, that christianism inculcated infanticide for centuries in its very nunneries and monasteries (still ongoing, as seen in India too).
The above is all quite like the current Hindu situation. The same inversion. The same use of abominable lies to justify ongoing genocide of Hindudom by christoislamania. Few things are more reviled by Hindu society, including by Hindoo men foremost, than attacks against women (starting with Hindu women) - and children. The Hindoo man - I speak only of the heathens here - continues to take violence against women and children (and at times even other animal species) more seriously than threats against their persons.
Anyway, HindOO men have at times been murdered trying to protect unfamiliar [Hindoo] women from rapists, or trying to protect children and even other animals (not just the cows, either, so sacred to Hindoos, but other species besides).
Violence against females does not at all sit with the Hindoo heathen male, and is found to be so utterly unacceptable to them, in fact, that the Hindoo - even aged Hindoos, well past being hale - have been brutalised and at times even been murdered protecting victims from christoislamicommunisecular rapists.
BTW, notice also how traditional=Hindoo men are the only Indians who have consistently never used gender-specific insults, which are by nature misogynistic, such as 'slut' [in its modern meaning] or 'biatch' etc. (This is in contrast to an unfortunate number of the vocalist de-heathenised "nationalists" on the web that has used a range of words that are uniquely insults to women, many of which don't have equivalent male counterparts. After the rape cases got sensationalised internationally, many vocalists pointlessly shrieking at women with gender-specific curse words realised that they didn't want to get mistaken for misogynists and consequently indiscriminately lumped with the rapists by the christowest, and so have piped down. Even their tacky and embarrassing sexual anecdotes stopped proliferating on the web to some extent. Phew, because tackiness makes one come across as sleazy. But their characters haven't changed. People don't change that way. Still, despite such inherent weaknesses in the character of some vocalist nationalists, which for some time had reflected in their thoughtless behaviour, they're nevertheless all infinitely better to and for women than the psecular and communist Indians who are ultra anti-women, surpassed only by christoislamics who spell death to not just women but men, kids and animals too.)
[Foulmouthedness in general and against women in particular was always ill-advised. But then, so many things are, and certain modern Indian angelsk-speaking "nationalists" - their foulmouthedness cleanly corresponding to the level of their de-heathenisation - are incorrigible. An embarrassment, but incorrigible. (And it was just waiting to happen that the christowest would use the behaviour of a few de-heathenised as further ammo - as further "proof" of their psy-ops - to attack India's heathens.) As a silver lining, most of such embarrassing behaviour got silenced by the fallout from the "rape central" psyops. Pity it had to take something so drastic to curb such persons and that these individuals never had it in themselves to eschew such low behaviour altogether. But then, it's better to behave as per one's inclination, than to deceive others by putting on a show of good behaviour to appeal to others. Women especially seem to hate false pretences at "good behaviour", possibly for evolutionary reasons, not sure. Therefore people should behave - in their words - as comes naturally to them, and thereby expose their character for all to see/to be warned off. Of course, I myself never pretend to be anything but the rowdy that I am, except on the occasions where I remember that I don't want to set a bad example to youngsters. 'Cause I guess I'd feel bad about that.]
2. There's many reports on the sinister trails leading to and from the christo docudrama. [Must archive links in subsequent posts.]
But there's also been lots of spin-off dramas. Apparently, as per a headline in indiafacts and an screengrab of a tweet there, Dawkins decided to move past his field of expertise to revel in ignorance by pontificating on matters he has no full appreciation (or rather no clue) about: he has no idea how he has been played by evangelical forces arrayed to insinuate "rape culture" onto heathendom in India. Not that Dawkins or other atheists would care either way about Hindoos and their heathenism, but he would not like to discover that he has been manipulated here into playing a Useful Idiot pawn in christendom's large designs against Hindoo heathenism. Just like McCabe's expertise lies in christianism and ancient Rome to Byzantium and some western history, while the same McCabe was out of his depth as regards the villainy of communism, and was quite .... shall we say shallow in his knowledge of heathenism (ancient and living), likewise, Dawkins' field is zoology/evolutionary biology. Let's be generous and say hard sciences. But he is not remotely knowledgeable about the real facts of Hindu society, of which he can only have got a picture from the dawaganda he has been fed and which he has happily ingested. Ignorance is not a virtue, he should know. Someone who made his living lecturing christian ignorants on educating themselves with facts 'for a change', really ought to follow that rule himself in *all* matters - not just his own field - before pronouncing opinions. Of course he is welcome to announce uneducated opinions, but then people may choose to take everything he said with a pinch of salt - including his biological declarations - assuming that, since he hasn't done his research in one, that he may have been equally sloppy in other matters too. And such a uniform censure of Dawkins would be a great shame, though not my problem.
[Also, lots of people distanced themselves from Dawkins in his militant atheism when he denounced the merit of fairy tales, fortunately upheld by Einstein as others quickly pointed out, after which, IIRC, Dawkins tried to do a little u-turn by clarifying his already clear statements about what he was to have "actually" meant. And of course, he had to clamber out of a much bigger hole he had dug for himself when he blasted pregnant women who continued to give birth to Down syndrome kids etc instead of getting their foetuses... annulled or what-ya-ma-call-it. Then Dawkins committed that other faux-pas when he treaded on abuse victims' experiences by downplaying his own experience of sexual abuse under some church father or British private school teacher or some such: IIRC Dawkins made it out as if he had comparatively little right to complain/it was no big deal in his case, and after people were audibly displeased with his trivialising his experience - and thereby the same events that befell others - he tried to defend himself by saying that he only meant that his experiences of abuse were less severe than that of others and that he therefore felt he had relatively less to complain about than others (and made it sound like he had no right to complain). People still protested, saying that others who had experienced up to the exact same degree of sexual abuse would - by logical implication of Dawkins' weighting of abuse - be expected to have 'just as little' to complain about.
Dawkins was never tactful, has a mechanical view of not only animals and nature [which he shares with some western and modern Indian biologists] but even of how expectant parents should regard human babies, instead of how they may actually feel (and instead of what a budding life-form may itself feel). And when it comes to forming opinions and value judgements, Dawkins is frequently found to be wrong and hence frequently denounced by his own (atheist British) kind. I don't think he's a racist per se for falling blindly for dawaganda. Indians do so too. [I just noticed that the Rajeev2004 blog's San - typically for him - had gullibly fallen for the latest social engineering attempt and ends up championing the documentary as something other Indians must watch and introspect over. He benignly uses "we" and "us" but he doesn't mean himself, and even though he's preaching to the choir.]
While Dawkins needn't necessarily be racist for his false twithead statement, I do think, however, that his criticism of blind faith in christianism on one hand, coupled with his blind faith in the anti-Hindu anti-Indian dawangada on the other [sadly very common in older generations of alien atheists], has shown up a degree of hypocrisy in him which he cannot easily live down. It is a failing which he could have easily avoided had he but bothered to get all the facts (which would admittedly require years of studying the anti-Indian nexus and its players and their methods, but then, if he doesn't want to put in the time, he ought not opinionate. It's like biology: the non-experts have the right to Shut Up. <- A view he is familiar with.)
3. But speaking of said dawaganda, the whole rape psyops directed exclusively at Hindu India - when no one even covers the paedophile rings of "Jim Will Fix It" Saville or the rapist suspicions connection regarding Prince Andrew (or whatever his name) and not to mention the paedophilic church - is so obviously for the purpose of Manufacturing Consent to act against Hindus and Hindu India. The mleccha demons are paving the way for some form of genocide to come. More even than what's happening now, I am certain of it. It may be more than cultural genocide, which is already occurring at an increasingly rapid pace, as are varying levels of physical genocide courtesy christoislamicommunism.
The parallels with christomedia manufacturing consent against Serbia are rather apparent for anyone who cares to notice. Not just in the general villification of a natively elected government not aligned with US/western interests, but also in creating odium against the resisting native heathens, of whom the males are more visibly vocalist and hence seem more empowered, and are therefore targeted for silencing by inflicting "rapists by association/by nationality" on them. Remember the manufactured, widely-trumpeted "systematic rape" allegations painting Serbs as evil demons, and which christowestern lies seen in US papers like NYT and Euro newspapers were slowly retracted? (<- documented in the Yugoslavia thread here.)
This is exactly how the christowest operates when it's earnestly starting on a warpath against entity X. Now X is India. And the US and their much weakened but no less vicious older brothers (UK and rest of Europe) have begun to more seriously focus on dissolving Hindu-dom hence India's future as anything meaningful. Insinuating 'rape culture' and having their idiot parrots peddle it for them was a masterstroke - though they did it in smaller scale against E Asian Americans already - as it acts both as dawaganda to manufacture consent against India/Indians (as happened to Serbians) and as social engineering to alienate women from men in an attempt to prevent the success of heathen family structures (as was done against East-Asian Americans, as seen in the thread on that subject).
4. But the German professor's explanation (seen in recent reports) that her refusal to supervise an Indian male student's research for the crime of being an Indian male and hence belonging to the "rape culture of India" manufactured allegation, is racism. But it was not born after/in consequence to the Jyothi Pandey case nor is it founded on any actual instance of Hindu Indian violence or misogyny against women. I say this because in a year before Jyothi Pandey's misery was turned into a sick sensationalist story overnight, to be fed to condition international readership against India, a female German colleague came to enquire my opinion on a matter that was apparently bothering her. She told me how she felt, just like two other German female supervisors of post-graduates - all are card carying feminists and I am actually afraid of their feminist sermons (they reduce my lifespan) - she told me she had been approached by one or more Indian males looking for supervision and that she and the other two supervisors were averse to accepting Middle-Eastern and Indian males because she felt they would be disrespectful of her (not treat her supervision like that of a supervisor, but look down on it as that of a female). She said her 2 colleagues had supervised Middle-Eastern male students before, complained to her about the experience, swore to her "never again" and warned her against it too, and how she did not require convincing. She - and her two colleagues - had admittedly had Zero experience with Indian males (and not with Hindu ones, certainly). But to christoconditioned aliens - from the US to Europe - Indians are merely darker variants of Middle-Easterners and are viewed as practically islamic (since so much of "South Asia" is islamic when you include Pukestan and Bunglingdesh, and for some reasons aliens like lumping Hindu heathens with the islamised Arabs, as if we're already converted to islam, as is aliens' wish). They have an equal dislike and mistrust of Indian christians by the way: they don't discriminate between Indian islamics and christians. They're all considered equally vile.
I initially had no idea why she wanted to speak to me on the subject since her mind was already made up on what Indian males "must be" like. Then in the course of her long monologue it all became clear: she asked me if she was being racist in refusing them. She wanted my approval, basically shifting the problem of whether it was conscionable or not onto me. Brilliant. (I thought being a feminist meant you could think for yourself, but guess not.) Of course, I didn't count as an Indian - I notice this treatment frequently - presumably for being raised in alien climes etc. By these older generations I get treated like some honorary alien. (It's not complimentary.) Anything I do well is magically attributed as a European achievement - "I must have learnt it there". Nah, those skills are from my heathen Hindoo ancestors and from personal practise, no training.
Anyway, by informing me of her moral quandary and requesting my opinion she (unconsciously) had attempted to make me party to her racism: requesting my input to decide whether she was racist or not. If I - the token Indian being conferred with on the matter - were to say she wasn't racist, she'd be off the hook. But, if I was wrong in absolving her, the blame would magically rest on me: as then it would still not be her fault, as I would then be partaking of her racism too, having greenlighted her. Weird how adults can't come to ugly conclusions by themselves and have to try to involve others.
As it happened, I told her that she should do whatever she was comfortable with. Which, of course, was to not supervise Middle-Eastern or Indian males, as per her wish.
Works for me: wouldn't wish Hindu male students the discomfort of working with supervisors who suspected their innocent Hindu selves of being criminals and misogynists. I mean, not getting to work with such people is not Hindoos' loss, is it? Of course, it remained racism on her part (and apparently that of her 2 like-minded colleagues), but when racism is a problem that remains confined to the individual suffering from it, instead of them taking it out on others (not necessarily violently, but even passive-aggressively) then it really doesn't bother me. People are free to irrationally think ill of anyone. Their loss. And it only speaks of the smallness of their (often allegedly educated) minds. It does not reflect on the native heathens that are the subjects of their dark fancies.
Anyway, the above narrative when combined with the latest news on some German professor seeing an opportunity to high-handedly denounce Indian males and India's Hindu society via refusing an Indian student who foolishly approached her thinking her to be an educator rather than an ideological entity, shows to me that there are some German female supervisors/professors who have merely been *waiting* for an excuse to think the worst of and avoid Indian male students. They want to justify their irrational dislike of heathen Indian males - which dislike I personally know to have existed before Jyothi Pandey's misfortune occurred and was broadcast as some disgusting installment of torture porn. And so the whole "Indian rape culture" propaganda against Hindu heathenism and Hindu heathen males has come as a gawdsend for them: they can pretend to the public that they're taking the high-road even as they are actually indulging in their petty racism by their obscene and low insults ill-suited even to the proverbial "viswijf"*. (* No offence to fisherwomen intended, as I have no experience with them being foulmouthed.)
5. Alien christoworld keeps foisting dramas onto India with great regularity. Every year or couple of years there is something new and major. And it's all done with little effort on alien's part too: a butterfly effect, where they make a Slumdog Millionaire or rape documentary or something else to create or exacerbate problems, and thereby create yet another a large, nationwide issue in India. They keep Indians forever on the backfoot, defending. Never going on the offence, let alone silencing alien lying once and for all by giving them a sip of their own medicine.
So This time, the christowest pulled another "Mother India", but with upgraded technology: instead of writing a book they made a video, paid a rapist to shift personal blame onto Hindu-dom, hired opus dei hand Freida "Slumdog" Pinto (reprising her role of native convert facilitator of christolies), and then pulled a Doniger/Penguin by pretending that a ban of their fraudulent mockumentary is actually an affront to freedom of speech or that it is to be seen as Hindu society condoning rape/affirming misogyny and sexual violence.
Anyway, christians had it - and long sold the story - that the ancient Roman heathens committed infanticide in epidemic proportions (compare with christianism - it is none other - projecting India as rape central now). The irony, as "encyclopaedic brain" McCabe pointed out in his usual manner of publishing irrefutable facts based on primary sources, was that if there was anything the Roman Hellenes reviled, loudly protested and would even consider taking violent action against, it was infanticide. The Roman Hellenes abhorred such cruelty so profoundly, that - as per McCabe IIRC - nothing could form a vengeful Roman heathen mob faster than the mere rumour of infanticide/exposure. In contrast, we know from historians quoting faithful christians and christian councils themselves, that christianism inculcated infanticide for centuries in its very nunneries and monasteries (still ongoing, as seen in India too).
The above is all quite like the current Hindu situation. The same inversion. The same use of abominable lies to justify ongoing genocide of Hindudom by christoislamania. Few things are more reviled by Hindu society, including by Hindoo men foremost, than attacks against women (starting with Hindu women) - and children. The Hindoo man - I speak only of the heathens here - continues to take violence against women and children (and at times even other animal species) more seriously than threats against their persons.
Anyway, HindOO men have at times been murdered trying to protect unfamiliar [Hindoo] women from rapists, or trying to protect children and even other animals (not just the cows, either, so sacred to Hindoos, but other species besides).
Violence against females does not at all sit with the Hindoo heathen male, and is found to be so utterly unacceptable to them, in fact, that the Hindoo - even aged Hindoos, well past being hale - have been brutalised and at times even been murdered protecting victims from christoislamicommunisecular rapists.
BTW, notice also how traditional=Hindoo men are the only Indians who have consistently never used gender-specific insults, which are by nature misogynistic, such as 'slut' [in its modern meaning] or 'biatch' etc. (This is in contrast to an unfortunate number of the vocalist de-heathenised "nationalists" on the web that has used a range of words that are uniquely insults to women, many of which don't have equivalent male counterparts. After the rape cases got sensationalised internationally, many vocalists pointlessly shrieking at women with gender-specific curse words realised that they didn't want to get mistaken for misogynists and consequently indiscriminately lumped with the rapists by the christowest, and so have piped down. Even their tacky and embarrassing sexual anecdotes stopped proliferating on the web to some extent. Phew, because tackiness makes one come across as sleazy. But their characters haven't changed. People don't change that way. Still, despite such inherent weaknesses in the character of some vocalist nationalists, which for some time had reflected in their thoughtless behaviour, they're nevertheless all infinitely better to and for women than the psecular and communist Indians who are ultra anti-women, surpassed only by christoislamics who spell death to not just women but men, kids and animals too.)
[Foulmouthedness in general and against women in particular was always ill-advised. But then, so many things are, and certain modern Indian angelsk-speaking "nationalists" - their foulmouthedness cleanly corresponding to the level of their de-heathenisation - are incorrigible. An embarrassment, but incorrigible. (And it was just waiting to happen that the christowest would use the behaviour of a few de-heathenised as further ammo - as further "proof" of their psy-ops - to attack India's heathens.) As a silver lining, most of such embarrassing behaviour got silenced by the fallout from the "rape central" psyops. Pity it had to take something so drastic to curb such persons and that these individuals never had it in themselves to eschew such low behaviour altogether. But then, it's better to behave as per one's inclination, than to deceive others by putting on a show of good behaviour to appeal to others. Women especially seem to hate false pretences at "good behaviour", possibly for evolutionary reasons, not sure. Therefore people should behave - in their words - as comes naturally to them, and thereby expose their character for all to see/to be warned off. Of course, I myself never pretend to be anything but the rowdy that I am, except on the occasions where I remember that I don't want to set a bad example to youngsters. 'Cause I guess I'd feel bad about that.]
2. There's many reports on the sinister trails leading to and from the christo docudrama. [Must archive links in subsequent posts.]
But there's also been lots of spin-off dramas. Apparently, as per a headline in indiafacts and an screengrab of a tweet there, Dawkins decided to move past his field of expertise to revel in ignorance by pontificating on matters he has no full appreciation (or rather no clue) about: he has no idea how he has been played by evangelical forces arrayed to insinuate "rape culture" onto heathendom in India. Not that Dawkins or other atheists would care either way about Hindoos and their heathenism, but he would not like to discover that he has been manipulated here into playing a Useful Idiot pawn in christendom's large designs against Hindoo heathenism. Just like McCabe's expertise lies in christianism and ancient Rome to Byzantium and some western history, while the same McCabe was out of his depth as regards the villainy of communism, and was quite .... shall we say shallow in his knowledge of heathenism (ancient and living), likewise, Dawkins' field is zoology/evolutionary biology. Let's be generous and say hard sciences. But he is not remotely knowledgeable about the real facts of Hindu society, of which he can only have got a picture from the dawaganda he has been fed and which he has happily ingested. Ignorance is not a virtue, he should know. Someone who made his living lecturing christian ignorants on educating themselves with facts 'for a change', really ought to follow that rule himself in *all* matters - not just his own field - before pronouncing opinions. Of course he is welcome to announce uneducated opinions, but then people may choose to take everything he said with a pinch of salt - including his biological declarations - assuming that, since he hasn't done his research in one, that he may have been equally sloppy in other matters too. And such a uniform censure of Dawkins would be a great shame, though not my problem.
[Also, lots of people distanced themselves from Dawkins in his militant atheism when he denounced the merit of fairy tales, fortunately upheld by Einstein as others quickly pointed out, after which, IIRC, Dawkins tried to do a little u-turn by clarifying his already clear statements about what he was to have "actually" meant. And of course, he had to clamber out of a much bigger hole he had dug for himself when he blasted pregnant women who continued to give birth to Down syndrome kids etc instead of getting their foetuses... annulled or what-ya-ma-call-it. Then Dawkins committed that other faux-pas when he treaded on abuse victims' experiences by downplaying his own experience of sexual abuse under some church father or British private school teacher or some such: IIRC Dawkins made it out as if he had comparatively little right to complain/it was no big deal in his case, and after people were audibly displeased with his trivialising his experience - and thereby the same events that befell others - he tried to defend himself by saying that he only meant that his experiences of abuse were less severe than that of others and that he therefore felt he had relatively less to complain about than others (and made it sound like he had no right to complain). People still protested, saying that others who had experienced up to the exact same degree of sexual abuse would - by logical implication of Dawkins' weighting of abuse - be expected to have 'just as little' to complain about.
Dawkins was never tactful, has a mechanical view of not only animals and nature [which he shares with some western and modern Indian biologists] but even of how expectant parents should regard human babies, instead of how they may actually feel (and instead of what a budding life-form may itself feel). And when it comes to forming opinions and value judgements, Dawkins is frequently found to be wrong and hence frequently denounced by his own (atheist British) kind. I don't think he's a racist per se for falling blindly for dawaganda. Indians do so too. [I just noticed that the Rajeev2004 blog's San - typically for him - had gullibly fallen for the latest social engineering attempt and ends up championing the documentary as something other Indians must watch and introspect over. He benignly uses "we" and "us" but he doesn't mean himself, and even though he's preaching to the choir.]
While Dawkins needn't necessarily be racist for his false twithead statement, I do think, however, that his criticism of blind faith in christianism on one hand, coupled with his blind faith in the anti-Hindu anti-Indian dawangada on the other [sadly very common in older generations of alien atheists], has shown up a degree of hypocrisy in him which he cannot easily live down. It is a failing which he could have easily avoided had he but bothered to get all the facts (which would admittedly require years of studying the anti-Indian nexus and its players and their methods, but then, if he doesn't want to put in the time, he ought not opinionate. It's like biology: the non-experts have the right to Shut Up. <- A view he is familiar with.)
3. But speaking of said dawaganda, the whole rape psyops directed exclusively at Hindu India - when no one even covers the paedophile rings of "Jim Will Fix It" Saville or the rapist suspicions connection regarding Prince Andrew (or whatever his name) and not to mention the paedophilic church - is so obviously for the purpose of Manufacturing Consent to act against Hindus and Hindu India. The mleccha demons are paving the way for some form of genocide to come. More even than what's happening now, I am certain of it. It may be more than cultural genocide, which is already occurring at an increasingly rapid pace, as are varying levels of physical genocide courtesy christoislamicommunism.
The parallels with christomedia manufacturing consent against Serbia are rather apparent for anyone who cares to notice. Not just in the general villification of a natively elected government not aligned with US/western interests, but also in creating odium against the resisting native heathens, of whom the males are more visibly vocalist and hence seem more empowered, and are therefore targeted for silencing by inflicting "rapists by association/by nationality" on them. Remember the manufactured, widely-trumpeted "systematic rape" allegations painting Serbs as evil demons, and which christowestern lies seen in US papers like NYT and Euro newspapers were slowly retracted? (<- documented in the Yugoslavia thread here.)
This is exactly how the christowest operates when it's earnestly starting on a warpath against entity X. Now X is India. And the US and their much weakened but no less vicious older brothers (UK and rest of Europe) have begun to more seriously focus on dissolving Hindu-dom hence India's future as anything meaningful. Insinuating 'rape culture' and having their idiot parrots peddle it for them was a masterstroke - though they did it in smaller scale against E Asian Americans already - as it acts both as dawaganda to manufacture consent against India/Indians (as happened to Serbians) and as social engineering to alienate women from men in an attempt to prevent the success of heathen family structures (as was done against East-Asian Americans, as seen in the thread on that subject).
4. But the German professor's explanation (seen in recent reports) that her refusal to supervise an Indian male student's research for the crime of being an Indian male and hence belonging to the "rape culture of India" manufactured allegation, is racism. But it was not born after/in consequence to the Jyothi Pandey case nor is it founded on any actual instance of Hindu Indian violence or misogyny against women. I say this because in a year before Jyothi Pandey's misery was turned into a sick sensationalist story overnight, to be fed to condition international readership against India, a female German colleague came to enquire my opinion on a matter that was apparently bothering her. She told me how she felt, just like two other German female supervisors of post-graduates - all are card carying feminists and I am actually afraid of their feminist sermons (they reduce my lifespan) - she told me she had been approached by one or more Indian males looking for supervision and that she and the other two supervisors were averse to accepting Middle-Eastern and Indian males because she felt they would be disrespectful of her (not treat her supervision like that of a supervisor, but look down on it as that of a female). She said her 2 colleagues had supervised Middle-Eastern male students before, complained to her about the experience, swore to her "never again" and warned her against it too, and how she did not require convincing. She - and her two colleagues - had admittedly had Zero experience with Indian males (and not with Hindu ones, certainly). But to christoconditioned aliens - from the US to Europe - Indians are merely darker variants of Middle-Easterners and are viewed as practically islamic (since so much of "South Asia" is islamic when you include Pukestan and Bunglingdesh, and for some reasons aliens like lumping Hindu heathens with the islamised Arabs, as if we're already converted to islam, as is aliens' wish). They have an equal dislike and mistrust of Indian christians by the way: they don't discriminate between Indian islamics and christians. They're all considered equally vile.
I initially had no idea why she wanted to speak to me on the subject since her mind was already made up on what Indian males "must be" like. Then in the course of her long monologue it all became clear: she asked me if she was being racist in refusing them. She wanted my approval, basically shifting the problem of whether it was conscionable or not onto me. Brilliant. (I thought being a feminist meant you could think for yourself, but guess not.) Of course, I didn't count as an Indian - I notice this treatment frequently - presumably for being raised in alien climes etc. By these older generations I get treated like some honorary alien. (It's not complimentary.) Anything I do well is magically attributed as a European achievement - "I must have learnt it there". Nah, those skills are from my heathen Hindoo ancestors and from personal practise, no training.
Anyway, by informing me of her moral quandary and requesting my opinion she (unconsciously) had attempted to make me party to her racism: requesting my input to decide whether she was racist or not. If I - the token Indian being conferred with on the matter - were to say she wasn't racist, she'd be off the hook. But, if I was wrong in absolving her, the blame would magically rest on me: as then it would still not be her fault, as I would then be partaking of her racism too, having greenlighted her. Weird how adults can't come to ugly conclusions by themselves and have to try to involve others.
As it happened, I told her that she should do whatever she was comfortable with. Which, of course, was to not supervise Middle-Eastern or Indian males, as per her wish.
Works for me: wouldn't wish Hindu male students the discomfort of working with supervisors who suspected their innocent Hindu selves of being criminals and misogynists. I mean, not getting to work with such people is not Hindoos' loss, is it? Of course, it remained racism on her part (and apparently that of her 2 like-minded colleagues), but when racism is a problem that remains confined to the individual suffering from it, instead of them taking it out on others (not necessarily violently, but even passive-aggressively) then it really doesn't bother me. People are free to irrationally think ill of anyone. Their loss. And it only speaks of the smallness of their (often allegedly educated) minds. It does not reflect on the native heathens that are the subjects of their dark fancies.
Anyway, the above narrative when combined with the latest news on some German professor seeing an opportunity to high-handedly denounce Indian males and India's Hindu society via refusing an Indian student who foolishly approached her thinking her to be an educator rather than an ideological entity, shows to me that there are some German female supervisors/professors who have merely been *waiting* for an excuse to think the worst of and avoid Indian male students. They want to justify their irrational dislike of heathen Indian males - which dislike I personally know to have existed before Jyothi Pandey's misfortune occurred and was broadcast as some disgusting installment of torture porn. And so the whole "Indian rape culture" propaganda against Hindu heathenism and Hindu heathen males has come as a gawdsend for them: they can pretend to the public that they're taking the high-road even as they are actually indulging in their petty racism by their obscene and low insults ill-suited even to the proverbial "viswijf"*. (* No offence to fisherwomen intended, as I have no experience with them being foulmouthed.)
5. Alien christoworld keeps foisting dramas onto India with great regularity. Every year or couple of years there is something new and major. And it's all done with little effort on alien's part too: a butterfly effect, where they make a Slumdog Millionaire or rape documentary or something else to create or exacerbate problems, and thereby create yet another a large, nationwide issue in India. They keep Indians forever on the backfoot, defending. Never going on the offence, let alone silencing alien lying once and for all by giving them a sip of their own medicine.
So This time, the christowest pulled another "Mother India", but with upgraded technology: instead of writing a book they made a video, paid a rapist to shift personal blame onto Hindu-dom, hired opus dei hand Freida "Slumdog" Pinto (reprising her role of native convert facilitator of christolies), and then pulled a Doniger/Penguin by pretending that a ban of their fraudulent mockumentary is actually an affront to freedom of speech or that it is to be seen as Hindu society condoning rape/affirming misogyny and sexual violence.