Review - Manu Joseph's latest book 'Miss Laila, Armed and Dangerous'

There are two Manu Josephs. One, Manu the author. Two, Manu the journalist. The first is an inspiration while the second is a warning. In his previous two books, Manu the journalist took a backseat and Manu the author – capable of staining the blank page with timeless wisdoms - shone through. In this book, however, exactly the opposite has happened.

First and foremost, this book should be deprived of its “fiction” tag. The only fictional element here is the lame stage names given to really well known, real-life public figures. This book is essentially an extended, heavily biased, opinion piece laying out the author’s thoughts on a particular case that rocked India over a decade back, and continues to emit aftershocks. Although I will avoid spoilers, anyone with a fair command on current affairs will be able to guess the real-life equivalents of the book’s characters and its plot, just a few pages into it.

The book’s best part – the author’s quintessential, though grossly generalizing, barbs against human rights activists – also turns out to be its most ironic. In presenting a completely one-sided view of important real-life events and the people involved in it, while ignoring all evidence to the contrary, Manu exposes himself as an activist, and perhaps a cowardly one at that, for his activism hides in the garb of fiction. I should mention here that asking tough questions is the job of a journalist, but asking them in a way so as to turn public opinion favourable to one’s own is not only irresponsible, but also dangerous. But then, as I said, Manu the journalist is a warning.

Of course, not everything about the book is bad. Like his previous works, this book has Manu’s signatures – underdog male characters, strong female characters, and of course, timeless wisdoms. Although the beginning seems jagged due to one too many interjections by the author’s voice, it soon picks up pace and reads like a thriller. It’s a given that the enjoyment readers gets out of this book will be directly proportional to their ignorance about the goings-on of the world. The plot twist towards the end is admirable, too.

I’ll leave you with some gems that only Manu is capable of writing:

“Hope is a premonition of defeat”

“There is no evidence of Damodarbhai’s guilt except one. Hindus adore him and they can’t explain why.”

“Damodarbhai is not right, Damodarbhai is not wrong. He is a secret thought that people have already thought.”

“You can defame love by calling it madness, which only confirms its existence.”

One of the character’s response when his daughter asks him why he doesn’t leave India when he dislikes it so much - “India is a wound. But it is not a wound like a whiplash. It is a wound, like a spouse.”

“Sweetheart, I’ll always be yours because no one else might want me or I might be too frightened to stray, for that is what faithful men are, unwanted or cowards.”

Wait, I forgot to ask the most important question. Considering the entire book is based on true events, what if that man turns out real, too? If he does, I will go back the very day and change this review, as well as my thoughts on Manu the journalist.

Satire - Marital rape from a Bharatiya POV

All this silly outrage over the government trying to preserve the right to marital rape. Don’t all these feminist libtards get it? By defending marital rape, the government isn’t just protecting the “institution of marriage”, it is protecting something much bigger – the very future of this country. Let me explain how.

Bharat is a nation of sanskari men, where a majority of men observe strict celibacy before marriage. They don’t succumb to the Western sins of attempting to woo girls to date. The only exception is a minority who sometimes force their hands into the tee shirt of an unsuspecting girl who agrees to venture into a desolate park with them. She makes some noises but usually not those that indicate trouble. If she does no one really cares, including the top-button-loose khaki-clad protectors of the people. Because everyone supports the men, they must be right. If you think they’re not, remember what our dear Netaji said, “boys commit mistakes, will you hang them?”

Given his preoccupation with being sanskari, Bhartiya nar leaves the job of finding a girl for him to his parents, before he dies of sexual frustration. Have you seen the “V” sign proudly brandished by a Bhartiya nar’s friends at his wedding? That’s they celebrating his overdue loss of virginity. V= Victory = Virginity (lost). Once the marriage is done, he loses little time in claiming this much deserved victory. After all, if the girl in the park didn’t complain, why should the wife? Obviously, once she’s sitting all decked up in the bed, she is craving relief from the 50kg lehenga that’s about to bury her in the ground. That, combined with the glass of milk (or perhaps Red Bull these days, given India’s embrace of modernity) - can you really blame it on the men? Silly Ajay Devgun, backed out despite Aishwarya’s kinky pallu-ripping invitation in Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam.

Sometimes we hear an incident or two of wives complaining that their husbands raped them. Those insolent ones get thrashed even by their parents. If the girls’ parents support the husbands, they ought to be right. If you’re in doubt, remember what Netaji said.

At the heart of marital rape lies another underappreciated reason – Indian men’s love for their wives. Denial of sex is a ground for divorce. Some Indian men love their wives far too much to divorce them, so they don’t let them deny sex. In any case, only 10-20% of the wives get raped. That’s just a few crores. Big deal.

So, do you now understand why marital rape – a perfectly justified activity as explained above – is also essential to the future of this country? It’s the kids, stupid! For a lot of sanskari Indian men who assiduously shield themselves from the Western notions of romance and consent, the right to rape make love to their wives is essential to the continuation of progeny, and thus to sustain the fast-dwindling population of India.

However, our sanskari government didn’t stop at this. It presented still more arguments to convince people of the necessity of marital rape. One of those is that, “This country has its own unique problems due to various factors like literacy, lack of financial empowerment of the majority of females… and these should be considered carefully before criminalising marital rape”. Now, the government understands these aren’t “problems” at all, but crucial to the continuation of the institution of marriage – after all, Westernization of women through education and empowerment makes their rape by sanskari husbands unlikely. Criminalizing marital rape would be a big step towards empowering women, hence it must be avoided.

Another brilliant argument is, “What may appear to be marital rape to an individual wife, it may not appear so to others.” Assuming the government isn’t talking about eyesight, it’s right in saying that women who get raped by their husbands are too dumb to figure it out for themselves. Estrogen, you see. Here they are on common ground with another women’s rights champion, All India Muslim Personal Board (AIMPLB). While defending triple talaq, AIMPLB said that it should be preserved because men have greater decision-making power than women. Such nouveau wisdom!

Lastly, the government rightly touches upon the misuse of Sec 498A to punish innocent husbands for domestic violence they didn’t commit, fearing that a law against marital rape will be similarly misused. This argument is based on careful analysis of data from countries – US, UK, Nepal, Bhutan etc. – where laws against marital rape have forced all husbands to flee to India, where men are still allowed to be men. Added to this is the government’s concern over how to prove marital rape. It’s saddening that this concern hasn’t been extended to non-marital relationships, where proving marital rape can be equally hard. This presents us with a golden chance to revoke anti-rape laws for boyfriends too. After all, why ruin a brewing marriage? And boyfriends never rape anyway, their girlfriends just invite it, so there’s little use of keeping a redundant law.

While we’re on the subject of revoking laws, let’s also revoke Sec 498A, the biggest threat to the institution of marriage. India has deftly avoided making a law to protect male victims of domestic violence, and now needs to correct its folly of trying to protect women. If women can undergo rape, what’s the harm in taking a few beatings at the hands of pati parmeshwar? And all those reports of burnings for not paying dowry are #FakeNews about kitchen accidents by presstitutes.

Let’s all be thankful to our sanskari government and Bhartiya nar for fighting tooth and nail to shield our great nation from existential Western attacks. Together, they shall defend our superior civilizational ethos and keep evil notions of romance and consent at bay.