I'm sure this travel vlogger's experiences & inturn his views would've been different had he been a female.

Does he intend to say that all documentaries have to be macroscopic? Sure, it'd be great. But documentaries can be microscopic. Did Udwin try to convey that hers is the entire picture of the Indian society? "India's Daughter" was the term given by the Indian media/people to the girl & Udwin used it to tell her(the girls) story. In that story, it just tells us that along with the convicts, the defendants' lawyers too are misogynist. Thats it! Nowhere does it say that Indians are misogynist. But the misogynist among us, because of superiority complex or whatever would never want to associate with these rapists bastards, cause that would make them(the general misogynists, rapists!).

We dont need common sense to know that being misogynists =/= rapists and neighter is it a crime, but the general public misogynists for thier hair brained logic felt threatened that they're being labelled as such. Dont worry, you arent. But still, I dont know if rapists are a subset of misogynists. If they are, they you might get there, or wont! (I dont or have read about rapists' thought process, so that sentence needs scrutiny. Still by common sense, and from what I've read....that rape is/also the display of being more powerful, of shaming the girl/woman, does go with misogyny) But if you consider men and women have equal rights, you'd see the documentary for what it is; if you dont, you might see yourself as rapists. Now answer me, did I call you a rapist?

If you think that people will become biased by watching the documentary, maybe you should stop undermining the intelligence of the general people. If you think that the documentary is a propaganda, maybe you should tell people why it is so, unless you think its a dictatorship country, in which case you do what you did (ban).

Also, I felt that the government's notice regarding the reason for banning was all mombo-jubo and pretentious words of a true kulcha warrior. if it had stated to the point that the convicts appeal is pending rather than sounding like the defendants proud proclamations of patriotic circlejerk, then the ban would've been taken seriously by most.

Would certainly like to improve understanding of the situation. Any insights welcome, cause I've gone a bit extreme and world like to be more articulate if not tone down a bit.