Yes, Indian society is chauvinist/patriarchal/misogynist. And this chauvinism/patriarchy/misogyny (CPM) comes from 1000 years of Turkish/Mughal/British feudalism – not from Hinduism. So the traditional bar on females (of age 10-50) at Sabarimala temple had nothing to do with today's Indian society's CPM.
What is Hinduism? It is not a monolithic religion like Islam and Christianity with a uniform set of beliefs and practices. Hinduism is a way of life with a thousand different traditions – each with its own unique set of beliefs and practices. This co-existence of a multitude of different traditions – ie, diversity – is what gives Hinduism (and India) its strength. So the best way to weaken Hinduism (and India) is to erase this diversity by imposing an artificial uniformity in the name of a false equality. And that is exactly what liberals have done. They cleverly portrayed the bar on girls/women at Sabarimala as another instance of Indian society's CPM – and won the battle.
There are about 2 lakh temples in India. All except around 20 of them - ie, 99.99% - allow both men and women. Around 10 temples don't allow men and around 10 don't allow women. This is due to the unique traditions of these 0.01% temples. It has nothing to do with 'equality' or 'inequality'.
Many right-thinking Hindus are trying to defend Sabarimala against the Supreme Court verdict by talking about the entry of women into mosques. This is a wrong approach. If tomorrow Supreme Court orders the entry of women into mosques, then will that make the Sabarimala verdict right? Should Hindus then accept the Sabarimala verdict? Absolutely not. The bar on girls/women aged 10-50 at Sabarimala is based on a logical reason, and should therefore remain - regardless of whether women are allowed into mosques or not. Entry of women into mosques is a separate issue - and must not be connected with Sabarimala in any way whatsoever.
See:
1. A brief explanation of the Sabarimala tradition (5 mins)
2. A detailed explanation of the Sabarimala tradition - 1 (25 mins)
3. A detailed explanation of the Sabarimala tradition - 2 (25 mins)
4. Famous temples where MEN are not allowed
What is Hinduism? It is not a monolithic religion like Islam and Christianity with a uniform set of beliefs and practices. Hinduism is a way of life with a thousand different traditions – each with its own unique set of beliefs and practices. This co-existence of a multitude of different traditions – ie, diversity – is what gives Hinduism (and India) its strength. So the best way to weaken Hinduism (and India) is to erase this diversity by imposing an artificial uniformity in the name of a false equality. And that is exactly what liberals have done. They cleverly portrayed the bar on girls/women at Sabarimala as another instance of Indian society's CPM – and won the battle.
There are about 2 lakh temples in India. All except around 20 of them - ie, 99.99% - allow both men and women. Around 10 temples don't allow men and around 10 don't allow women. This is due to the unique traditions of these 0.01% temples. It has nothing to do with 'equality' or 'inequality'.
Many right-thinking Hindus are trying to defend Sabarimala against the Supreme Court verdict by talking about the entry of women into mosques. This is a wrong approach. If tomorrow Supreme Court orders the entry of women into mosques, then will that make the Sabarimala verdict right? Should Hindus then accept the Sabarimala verdict? Absolutely not. The bar on girls/women aged 10-50 at Sabarimala is based on a logical reason, and should therefore remain - regardless of whether women are allowed into mosques or not. Entry of women into mosques is a separate issue - and must not be connected with Sabarimala in any way whatsoever.
See:
1. A brief explanation of the Sabarimala tradition (5 mins)
2. A detailed explanation of the Sabarimala tradition - 1 (25 mins)
3. A detailed explanation of the Sabarimala tradition - 2 (25 mins)
4. Famous temples where MEN are not allowed