u/Lady22samurai

Still relatable..😌

Recently I came across a situation .

A parent of a severely disabled girl, approaching puberty, was worried that her daughter might never be able to manage menstrual hygiene on her own.

The parent asked a very simple question: could we remove her uterus so she doesn't have to go through this?

The question sounds practical and perhaps even compassionate.

But then how many of us who have never lived with severe disability have any idea what such a decision actually means?

For the parent, it may come from love, fear and genuine concern. For the child, however, it is still her body. And hysterectomy isn't a harmless way of stopping periods. It is a major, irreversible surgery. There can be bleeding, infection and injury to surrounding organs, and the loss of fertility is permanent. If the ovaries are removed as well, she would enter menopause immediately, with consequences such as hot flushes, vaginal symptoms and increased long-term risks to bone health. Even when ovaries are preserved, menopause may occur somewhat earlier.

Medical guidance therefore generally encourages less invasive and reversible ways of menstrual suppression first.

But the deeper question is not medical.

Acharya Prashant often asks us to look at how 'my' can turn a relationship into ownership- my child, my responsibility, my decision.

A child may be completely dependent on us. But does dependence make the child's body ours?

And yet, if that child genuinely cannot care for herself, is it enough to simply say, 'respect her autonomy ' while ignoring the enormous responsibility of the caregiver ?

Well..I don't have an answer.

Perhaps that's exactly why this is worth thinking about. Because some philosophical questions don't arrive as philosophy. They arrive at home, during puberty, through a frightened parent asking: What am I supposed to do for my child?

What do you think??

References:

Marquez-Gonzalez et al., 2018 systematic review on hysterectomy and menstrual hygiene in women with intellectual disability

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). (2022). Clinical management of menstrual issues in adolescents with disabilities m

Pradhan et al., 2022.

https://sundayguardianlive.com/feature/when-protection-becomes-possession-true-rebellion-begins-where-roles-end-136145/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/indianexpress.com/article/legal-news/karnataka-hc-allows-hysterectomy-intellectual-disability-case-10751499/lite/

Saw this pic while scrolling, which made me laugh.

Ever came across this situation?😅

Came across this pic while scrolling and it made me laugh.

Has anything similar ever happened to you? I’d love to hear your stories! 😄

On Independence Day, we celebrate freedom from external control.

But there is another kind of independence worth thinking about : the freedom of a child to slowly become capable of living without us.

A recent study on children aged 5–6 found that independence grows when children are given opportunities to initiate tasks, solve problems and complete things themselves. Teachers and parents who guide rather than constantly instruct really helped in this .

It sounds simple, but parenting often works in the opposite direction.

We tie their shoelaces because we are in a hurry, pack their bags because they will forget something, solve their homework because it is easier, answer for them because they might say so called 'wrong' thing.

And then, years later, we wonder 'Why isn't my child independent?'🤔

Perhaps independence isn't something we suddenly give a 18-year-old.It is something we practice with a 5-year-old.

Let them struggle a little.

Let them make small mistakes.

Let them choose.

Let them experience consequences appropriate to their age.

There is an interesting view of parenting by philosopher and teacher Acharya Prashant :Love shouldn't become a desire to keep the child dependent or under our control. The aim should ultimately be to help the child stand on their own feet.

So the deeper meaning of azadi is not

'I will protect you from everything' ..but

I will prepare you to face life without me.

If you love someone, give them wings, give them light, give them self-knowledge, and let them fly on their own - Acharya Prashant

References

Diani & Pranoto, “Developing Independence in Early Childhood Through Full Day School,” JPUD, 2025;

Acharya Prashant's discussions on parenting, freedom and self-reliance.

On Independence Day, we celebrate freedom from external control.

But there is another kind of independence worth thinking about : the freedom of a child to slowly become capable of living without us.

A recent study on children aged 5–6 found that independence grows when children are given opportunities to initiate tasks, solve problems and complete things themselves. Teachers and parents who guide rather than constantly instruct really helped in this .

It sounds simple, but parenting often works in the opposite direction.

We tie their shoelaces because we are in a hurry, pack their bags because they will forget something, solve their homework because it is easier, answer for them because they might say so called 'wrong' thing.

And then, years later, we wonder 'Why isn't my child independent?'🤔

Perhaps independence isn't something we suddenly give a 18-year-old.It is something we practice with a 5-year-old.

Let them struggle a little.

Let them make small mistakes.

Let them choose.

Let them experience consequences appropriate to their age.

There is an interesting view of parenting by philosopher and teacher Acharya Prashant : Love shouldn't become a desire to keep the child dependent or under our control. The aim should ultimately be to help the child stand on their own feet.

So the deeper meaning of azadi is not

'I will protect you from everything' ..but

I will prepare you to face life without me.

If you love someone, give them wings, give them light, give them self-knowledge, and let them fly on their own - Acharya Prashant

Happy Independence Day. 🇮🇳

References:

Diani & Pranoto, “Developing Independence in Early Childhood Through Full Day School,” JPUD, 2025;

Acharya Prashant's discussions on parenting, freedom and self-reliance.

Image - Gita participants with Acharya Prashant (after due permission.)

Better man..Robbie Williams 🎵🎶😌

On Sunday, chicken was cooked at home.

Monday, everyone again ate it with great relish.

But as soon as Tuesday came, it was announced: "No meat will be cooked today. Today is God’s day."

The next day, everything was back to normal.

The question is not whether someone eats meat or not.

The question is: if killing a living being is wrong, then how does it become wrong only on one day of the week?

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, more than 80 billion land animals are killed every year in the world for food. This does not include fish and other aquatic animals.

In India too, crores of chickens, goats, and other animals are killed every year for food. Yet, in these very societies, eating meat on certain days of the week, on some festivals, or during particular months is considered "inauspicious."

To justify these beliefs, many stories were invented:

Somewhere it was said that such-and-such deity would get angry.

Somewhere it was said that eating meat on this day would bring sin.

But there is no scientific evidence for any of these claims.

If the issue is compassion, then it remains the same on all seven days of the week.

If the issue is health, then the answer must come from science, not from stories.

The problem is not only blind belief.

The problem is that we even bind compassion to the calendar. This is exactly what speciesism is.

We cuddle some animals, we turn some into symbols of worship, and we reduce some to mere objects of taste. The decision is not based on the fact that in front of us too is a sentient life; it is based instead on what our habit, our culture, or our convenience permits.

The ego never questions its own pleasures. It only adjusts things just enough so that its habits remain intact and it can still enjoy the satisfaction of feeling religious.

If violence is wrong, how can it become right on a particular day?

If violence is right, then why does it become wrong on a particular day?

Is our life truly founded on compassion, or only on beliefs we have crafted for our own convenience?

Source

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

https://www.fao.org/

Our World in Data – Meat Production and Animal Slaughter

https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production

I came across a 2023 review on infidelity, and one thing surprised me: there isn't a single universally accepted definition of cheating.

For some people, it is sex with someone else. For others, it might be an emotional affair, secret flirting, intimate messages, or online sexual behaviour.

The review also discusses several factors associated with infidelity -relationship dissatisfaction, low commitment, attachment patterns, desire for sexual variety, psychological distress, and more.

So maybe cheating isn't just about what happens in the bedroom. It is also about expectations, attachment, boundaries and what we are asking a relationship to provide.

And this made me think about something deeper.We often expect one person to be our partner, best friend, emotional support, source of validation, sexual partner and sometimes even the one who makes us feel complete.

Perhaps no human being can carry all of that responsibility for us.

Maybe a healthier relationship is not one where two people constantly police each other's freedom, but one where both people are fulfilled enough to choose each other consciously, rather than out of fear, possession or need.

That doesn't make betrayal okay. If two people agree to certain boundaries and one secretly breaks them, the hurt is real.

But understanding why people cheat may require us to look beyond morality and ask a more uncomfortable question:

What are we actually seeking from another person and can another person ever completely fulfil it?

Sources

Rokach, A. & Chan, S.H. (2023). Love and Infidelity: Causes and Consequences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

Acharya Prashant, discussion on relationships, marriage and infidelity.

We spend so much on skincare ,haircare, anti-ageing cream( takes my salary 😭)

And we spend our whole lives obsessing over 'Am I pretty? Am I handsome? Am I feminine? Am I masculine?'

Society even creates gender roles and discrimination based on this body.

Meanwhile, the skeleton inside is like: 'Bro, none of this is going to matter to me.' 💀

One day, the skin, hair, curves, muscles, makeup, clothes and all those labels attached to the body are gone.

The ultimate equalizer is death.

Nature’s most brutal uninstall button. 😭💀

Parents often say- 'I just want my child to be happy.'

But if we're completely honest, is that all we want?

Why do we feel a special pride when our child gets into a reputed university, becomes a doctor, wins medals, or settles abroad? Why does another parent's successful child sometimes make us uneasy? If our child's achievements are entirely their achievements, why do they affect our self worth so deeply?

I read somewhere that children often become extensions of the parent's ego. Without realizing it, we begin to see them as proof of our success, our values, or even our worth. The child slowly shifts from being an independent human being to becoming a psychological investment.

Modern psychology doesn't use the word ego but describes remarkably similar patterns.

Researchers Soenens & Vansteenkiste (2010) describe parental psychological control -a style of parenting where children are subtly pressured to think, feel, or achieve in ways that satisfy the parents' own emotional needs. Love may still be present, but it becomes mixed with control, guilt, conditional approval, or expectations.

Similarly, Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan) shows that every human being has three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When parents support a child's autonomy, children develop greater confidence, resilience, and well-being. But when children are treated as extensions of parental identity, these needs are undermined, often resulting in anxiety, perfectionism, and identity confusion.

This doesn't mean parents don't love their children.It means love often gets entangled with something else ,the need to continue ourselves through another human being.

Perhaps this is why parents sometimes feel personally insulted when a child chooses a career they don't approve of, marries against their wishes, or simply lives differently. The pain isn't only about the child's decision; it's about the collapse of an identity the parent had unconsciously built around the child.

A deeper question then is:Can I allow my child to exist without making them carry my identity?

Maybe genuine love begins where ownership ends.A child is not a continuation of our unfinished ambitions. A child is a life ..complete in itself.

References

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0273229709000380

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/216743170\_The\_What\_and\_Why\_of\_Goal\_Pursuits\_Human\_Needs\_and\_the\_Self-Determination\_of\_Behavior

https://sundayguardianlive.com/feature/the-child-as-the-egos-credential-183375/

https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/1989\_GrolnickRyan.pdf

Simply love the vibe of this song..😄

Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself- Khalil Gibran

These lines used to sound very poetic to me but now I think the psychological meaning is different.

We often think we're choosing to have children. But how much of that choice is really ours? Evolution has programmed every living being to continue itself. The urge to leave behind our genes, our name, our legacy..even a sense of 'I will continue after I'm gone' runs deep.

Perhaps what we call 'my child' is, in many ways, life trying to perpetuate itself through us.

The irony is that while we claim ownership..'my son', 'my daughter', they are neither our possessions nor our extensions. We can nurture their bodies, but not own their consciousness or dictate their destiny.

Maybe the greatest act of love is not creating someone to continue us, but allowing them to live free from becoming a vehicle for our ego, our ambitions, or our longing for immortality.

What do you think??

Credit

Metacognition is a well established term of Neuroscience which has recently gained immense popularity among the youth in social media. According to this concept, the brain is analysed with a special ability to think about its own mental processes. It is a scientific concept coined by developmental psychologist John Flavell in 1979, meaning "thinking about thinking". Metacognition is basically the brain’s ability to understand, monitor, and control its own mental processes, such as learning, memory, and problem-solving. It is a special process where we refer to the brain of having the capability to think about itself. While certain species like rhesus macaques, dolphins, and rats show basic forms of uncertainty monitoring (such as undergoing a difficult memory test); only humans possess deep, symbolic, and abstract self-reflection unlike any other living species. This includes key decisions of analysis like understanding what one knows, what one doesn’t know, and also one’s personal strengths and weak points.

So if we analyse Metacognition from the lens of Science, its the amazing ability of the human brain to monitor its own apparatus (like a car’s apparatus detecting its own data of speed, acceleration, etc.) and then automatically taking critical decisions as per the analysations stored/fed in one’s memory from one’s entire life time. Its like a machine beautifully running accurate data calculations to best suit the recently emerged problems in front of it and then assigning the best possible solutions on its own to the problem. Metacognition proposes that the brain is fully capable of handling all lively phenomenal threats and problems in itself which comes its way in real-time by its own automatic thinking and calculations just like any well programmed advanced physical supercomputer with accurate results by the nature of its very design.

Now if we approach Metacognition via the lens of Philosophy, then philosophy contradicts Metacognition by the point that: Its correct that the brain is capable enough of thinking about its own mental mechanisms and then take decision accordingly, but what about the ‘chooser’ who is choosing which decision to implement or not? Especially if we take eastern philosophies like Vedanta, Buddhism, etc. here its asking us a question much deeper than just describing the function of the brain. Its asking us that if the brain is automatically assigning tasks to itself mechanically, then why does it happen that irrespective of knowing all the data, still the problems of intensive crime or problems like climate crisis exists? In all such cases, the brain knows the data, but still ‘someone’ is behind the brain which is not allowing the brain to take automatic decisions, instead that someone is forcing the brain to choose actions towards climate denialism defying the publicly available data.

So yes definitely the brain is indeed capable enough to implement its own thinking mechanically, but we shouldn’t forget that if it would have been the ideal scenario then no betrayals towards any sensitive data would have ever happened in the history of mankind. History has repeatedly revealed scenarios where humans have betrayed empirical data just to execute their own subjective desires.. which proves that definitely there’s something more than just ‘brain’ which is causing the results to distort.

👉Source Video Speakers: Acharya Prashant (Wisdom Philosopher & Author) in conversation with Prof. Stephen Fleming (Cognitive Neuroscientist) at University College London (UCL). The discussion happened recently on 4th August 2026.

▪️Full Video Link: https://youtu.be/QZ9GNAZphjY?si=eIeWuEQBJCQ48N3T