so the "protectors of Hinduism" are out here doing exactly what they accuse others of. radicalizing a festival that was never rigid to begin with
ngl the whole garba gatekeeping arc is wild. aadhaar checks, tilak at entry, muslim bouncers fired in hyderabad, muslim women with valid tickets turned away in kota, a hindu girl questioned in jamshedpur for showing up with her muslim friend even after her parents said it's fine. and the reason? "religious sanctity." ok let me actually engage with that since apparently nobody else is.
first, the "it's an act of devotion to Durga so non-believers shouldn't be there" argument. bro. gods are not exclusive clubs. you don't need a membership card to show up. sikh langar serves everyone, you don't get asked if you're amritdhari. people eat iftar food during ramadan without converting. nobody checks your aadhaar before letting you eat biryani at a muslim friend's wedding. festivals are not just about the deity, they're about people coming together. and if belief was really the bar, then let's talk about the lakhs of hindus who don't actually believe in Durga. atheists exist. agnostics exist. people go for the dancing and the food and the vibes. so why is the purity test only applied to non-hindus? pick a lane.
second, the "commercialization is ruining tradition" argument. lmao. temples were commercialized way before garba was. VIP darshan, paid aarti slots, ₹500 for a closer look at the idol. where's the outrage about that? commercialization actually made these festivals accessible and fun. festivals shouldn't feel like a school assembly. the spice is the point. obviously there should be limits, nobody wants a full nightclub with a Durga cutout, but using "anti-commercialization" as a cover to filter out muslims is not it. you're not protecting tradition, you're doing bigotry with extra steps.
third, security and identity checks. no take here, honestly. check IDs, do bag checks, keep people safe. that's fine. but notice how the security argument suddenly becomes a religion filter. checking everyone is security. checking only non-hindus is discrimination with a lanyard.
fourth, the "they only come to harass women" argument. this one is genuinely lazy. there are creeps in every crowd. there are hindu men who harass women at garba, there are men of every community who do terrible things. you deal with individuals. you don't blanket ban a whole religion because of the worst people in it. that's like banning all men from the metro because some men are creeps. you'd call that insane and you'd be right.
and the people defending this are the same ones who lose their minds when someone says hinduism is regressive. because hinduism has never been rigid like that. it's famously one of the most flexible, pluralistic, "believe what you want, do what you want" religions out there. you can be a theist, an atheist, a nastika, an agnostic, and still be hindu. that's the actual tradition. the second you start putting up gates and tilak checkpoints and asking people to prove their faith, you're not protecting hinduism. you're inventing a version of it that looks suspiciously like the thing you claim to be defending it from.
so yeah. the protectors are protecting hinduism by making it exactly what they say other religions are. rigid, exclusionary, insecure. congratulations.
the irony is doing push ups in the corner.
for anyone who disagrees, can call me out in comments....i have tried to reply to each point i have heard of...
Plz be critical....✌️✌️✌️
