This is one of the hymns, much quoted on freedom of women. It says:
पिता रक्शति कौमरे भर्ता रक्शति यव्वना |
पुत्रः रक्शति वार्धक्ये नस्त्री स्वतन्त्र्यमर्हति ||
Pita rakshati kaumare, bharta raskshati youvana,
putrah rakshati varddhakye, na stree swatantryam arhati
Translation: A woman is protected by father in childhood, her husband protects her in youth, and in old age she should be protected by her son. At no stage in life should a woman be left alone and destitute. She deserves protection by man at every stage in her life. – Manusmriti.
Now, there are strong arguments that this hymn is being misinterpreted. I opine it might now have been, it made perfect sense provided the social context of 2nd century BCE. Also, If at all they wanted “women deserve protection” to be written, it could’ve been stree rakshanmarhati or anything else he likes, sanskrit pretty much never runs out of good vocab.
The Bach 
sorry the explaination was so long that i had to write an entry — Women don’t deserve freedom..!!??
LikeLike
I agree. I always say the same thing – why leave so much scope for misinterpretation?
LikeLike
Indians (from the beginning of history) did not treat women well. Now, when asked, try to dilute it. I want all these registered in history as it is.
Thanks for the comment,
Hey, may be you can use this hymn in our blog. It is more blog content for you than me.
LikeLike
Thanks. I will do that and also link it back here. And I agree with you, Indians bullied anybody who they could get away with bullying, the women, the so called ‘shudras’ and also children, including sons, were bullied by the parents.
LikeLike
I dint mean my post, I meant the hymn. 🙂
Glad that you liked it.
LikeLike
Oh, I’m writing about this one.
I’ve always wanted to go back in time, find the useless idiot who wrote the Manusmriti and shoot him.
LikeLike
Thanks.
Before you go back, you need to tackle present day Manus 🙂
LikeLike