It is many years since I read Dharampal's book so I do not remember every detail of it. But I remember that I did not keep a copy of the book for myself because I was not impressed by it. It has a whole series of statements based on no documentation or very defective documentation. So though I was happy to read the book since I would like India to be what he says it was in the past, as a student of history I could not accept it as serious historical work. It was ideologically perfect but not historically. Then to add that missionaries took the idea of plenty of schools to Britain is a figment of the imagination, not based on facts.
However, I regret not keeping a copy of the book because I realised later that many others were using that book as the source to prove their own conclusions. That is what happens with such books. Statements are made with no proof or documentation and others who hold similar views use that statement or book as proof of what they want to say and turn a work based on imagination into an authoritative book.
In any case I am not worried about that book but about what you say about women. Your statement smacks of a very patronising attitude towards women and unconditional acceptance of their subjugation. Cynthia Stephen speaks of women as flesh and blood by which is meant human and you distort it to speak of flesh alone. That is not acceptable.
Replying to this email will send an e-mail to 8500+ members of Jharkhand Forum.