Pen Yen Adimaiyanal: When the Truth Refuses to Be Polite
I finished reading Pen Yen Adimaiyanaal by Periyar last week. I’m still thinking about it. Not because I agreed with everything in it. But because it made me question things I had never thought to question before.
This is not a book that asks for your approval. It demands your attention.
What the Book Does
Written in 1930, Pen Yen Adimaiyanaal translates to “Why is Woman Enslaved?” The title tells you exactly what you’re getting into. Periyar doesn’t waste time with pleasantries. He goes straight to the heart of the matter.
Women are not born oppressed. Society makes them that way. Through family, through religion, through tradition, through marriage. Through a thousand small lessons taught from childhood. Sit quietly. Don’t ask too much. Adjust. Sacrifice. This is your duty. This is your virtue.
Periyar tears through these ideas like they’re paper. He doesn’t argue gently. He confronts. He provokes. He refuses to soften the edges of his thinking just to make you comfortable.
And that’s exactly what makes this book so difficult to put down, even when you want to.
The Arguments He Makes
Periyar looks at marriage and asks uncomfortable questions. Who does this institution really serve? Who benefits most? Who gives up more? He points out how marriage often traps women economically and emotionally. How it’s dressed up as divine duty when it’s really about control.
He goes after religion too. Not out of hatred, but because he sees how it’s been used to justify inequality. Sacred texts quoted to keep people in their place. Rituals performed to maintain hierarchies. Faith turned into a fence.
Education, he argues, is not enough. A woman can be educated and still be dependent. What matters is economic freedom. The ability to stand on her own. Without that, liberation is just a word.
Questions That Cut Deep
What makes Periyar’s approach so powerful is how he questions things most people simply accept. He doesn’t make grand philosophical arguments. He asks simple questions that expose contradictions we’ve learned to ignore.
If prostitution is considered immoral, why is only the woman shamed? Aren’t both parties equally involved? Why does one walk away unscathed while the other carries the stigma for life?
If a social norm binds women, why are men exempt from it? What makes one half of humanity subject to rules the other half gets to escape?
Marriage is supposed to be sacred. Made in heaven, people say. Then why do marriages fail? Why is there misery, violence, abandonment? If they truly came from a divine place, wouldn’t they be perfect? And if they’re not perfect, maybe they were never heavenly to begin with. Maybe we just called them that to avoid questioning them.
When religious texts tell women to sacrifice, to endure, to submit, he asks the question no one wants to hear. Were these texts actually written by god? Or were they written by the sex that benefited most from these rules?
He even takes on Thiruvalluvar, one of the most revered Tamil poets. Thiruvalluvar wrote about chastity as a virtue for women. Periyar asks a thought experiment that makes you stop cold. If Thiruvalluvar had been a woman, would she have written the same thing? Would she have said chastity matters only for one gender? Or would her lived experience have led her to something different?
These aren’t abstract philosophical puzzles. They’re questions that force you to see the double standards baked into everything. The way rules get written by those in power and then declared universal truth.
Where It Gets Uncomfortable
I won’t pretend I agreed with everything Periyar wrote. Some of his arguments feel absolute. Some conclusions feel too sweeping. There were moments I wanted to push back, to say “but what about this” or “it’s more complicated than that.”
And maybe that’s fair. Maybe some of his positions don’t translate perfectly to today. Maybe some nuances are missing.
But here’s the thing. I think Periyar knew he was being extreme. I think he was doing it on purpose. Because moderate arguments get nodded at and forgotten. Sharp ones stick in your mind. They bother you. They won’t let you go.
Why It Still Matters
Nearly a century has passed since this book was written. A lot has changed. Women vote now. They work. They own property. They lead.
But some things haven’t changed as much as we’d like to believe. Women are still told to adjust more than men are. Still judged more harshly for the same choices. Still expected to carry more of the emotional and domestic load.
Religious and cultural justifications for inequality still get trotted out when convenient. Economic dependence still traps people in situations they can’t escape.
Periyar’s observations feel uncomfortably relevant in ways they shouldn’t be.
Reading This Book
This is not a relaxing read. It’s short, but it doesn’t feel light. You’ll probably pause often. Not because the language is difficult. But because the ideas land hard.
You might get angry. You might disagree. You might feel defensive. That’s normal. I felt all of those things.
But you’ll also find yourself thinking. Really thinking. About things you’ve always taken for granted. About systems you’ve never questioned. About who benefits from the way things are.
Who Should Read This
If you’re interested in social reform, this book belongs on your list. If you’re willing to engage with radical ideas without needing to accept all of them, you’ll find value here. If you like books that challenge rather than confirm, this will do that.
But if you’re looking for a balanced, both sides approach, this isn’t it. If you want your beliefs affirmed rather than examined, look elsewhere. If you need every argument to feel fair and measured, Periyar will frustrate you.
Questions You Might Ask Before Reading This Book
Is this a book only about women’s issues
No. It is about power, control, and how society constructs obedience. Women are at the centre, but the questions extend far beyond gender.
Is the tone aggressive or angry
It is direct and uncompromising. Periyar does not soften his arguments, and that can feel uncomfortable at times.
Do I need to agree with everything to appreciate the book
Not at all. In fact, disagreement is part of the reading experience. Engaging critically with the ideas is more important than accepting them wholesale.
Does the book feel dated
Some references belong to its time, but many arguments still feel disturbingly current.
Is this a difficult or academic read
No. The language is accessible. What makes it demanding is the content, not the prose.
Is this a hopeful book
It is more honest than hopeful. It exposes problems clearly and leaves the reader to sit with them.
Who will benefit most from reading this
Readers interested in social reform, feminism, rationalism, and questioning inherited beliefs.
Who might struggle with it
Readers looking for moderate or conciliatory viewpoints may find it too confrontational.
Summing It Up
I didn’t agree with everything Periyar said in this book. I don’t think you have to. But I’m glad I read it.
Because even when his conclusions feel too stark, his questions are worth asking. Even when his tone feels too harsh, his observations cut through to something true.
The point of this book is not to get you to nod along. It’s to make you think. To make you uncomfortable. To force you to look at systems you’ve stopped seeing because they’ve always been there.
And in that, it succeeds completely.
You don’t have to obey Periyar’s thinking. But you should probably listen to it.
If you are ready to question deeply ingrained ideas rather than defend them, this book is worth reading.
Affiliate link. I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you.
