Which is what Im calling a perception. Maybe. This was the basis by which Kerala HC passed its law in 1991. This was also the basis by which the argument wasn’t made in the SC. The basis of the SC argument was that the deity has a right to have women not go to see him because he’s a nitya brahmachari. Which is what I said is a perception. People don’t strictly follow it anymore. I personally know men who don’t follow the vritham but go anyway. Women in my extend families are all ok with the ruling. I don’t know about others. Women who don’t want to go, can stay home. They aren’t being forced to go. The fact that women who don’t want to go are calling the women who want to go as non devotees and going there just for a picnic are all taking it too far. How do they know that women who go aren’t true devotees? Also the fact that women are stating that a Muslim cannot make a case against the practice is jarring. When did the lord or his abode become a property of the Hindus alone? That itself says these women don’t know the lord of the hill.