23/09/2026
When society witnesses a horrific crime like r**e, people instantly label the perpetrator a “beast” or “animalistic” (pashvik). But the legendary satirist Harishankar Parsai argued that this linguistic habit is deeply flawed and unfair to the animal kingdom.
Here is why Parsai believed this term is an insult to animals:
• Animals Follow Nature, Humans Choose Cruelty: Animals operate purely on natural instincts for survival, hunger, and reproduction. They do not possess the capacity for calculated malice, systemic oppression, or sadistic violence. R**e is a crime of power, control, and degradation—concepts invented entirely by humans.
• The Myth of Human Superiority: By calling a criminal an “animal,” society tries to protect the fragile ego of humanity. It creates a false comfort that “a civilized human could never do this; it must be an animalistic slip.” Parsai exposes this hypocrisy, reminding us that monstrous cruelty is uniquely human.
This post is for awareness purpose only 🙏🏼👈🏽
• Insulting the Innocent: Animals do not wage wars, build torture chambers, or commit calculated sexual violence to assert dominance. Therefore, comparing a human monster to an animal degrades the innocence of nature.
