Do the scriptures treat women as the property of men?

Thank you.

Any other questions? Question Do the scriptures like the Mahabharata treat women as properties of men? Answer this is a value judgmental question which is loaded and rather than giving a yes no answer we need to understand the nature of relationships when there is love it is natural that love is accompanied with a sense of belonging and when there is love naturally a person who loves I belong to you and you belong to me so that sort of belonging in terms of affection and in terms of responsibility may sometimes be seen as a gross possessiveness sort of thing but it's different now for example if we see in the Mahabharata Yudhishthira gambled Draupadi so based on this somebody might argue that you know a woman is just a property of a man and man can do whatever with her that she wants that is one only one way of understanding this another way is that more valid way if you look at the unfolding of events is that Yudhishthira lost all his property and if we see the way he gave up things is normally when something is at risk that which is the least important for us that we will put at risk first and then that which is more and more important for us we will put it like that so initially just he gave some ornaments which he had then he started waging his other more precious thing then he started waging his kingdom then he started waging his weapons and eventually when he had lost everything so we can say that whatever he was losing was was slowly moving upwards on the scale of value so then after he lost everything then he gambled his four brothers and himself and after that he gambled Draupadi that would mean that actually Draupadi was considered to be more valuable than himself so that's quite all his property he considered less valuable than himself but his wife he considered to be more valuable than himself that's why he gambled her afterwards so that's what it means is that yes there was a sense of belonging and possessiveness which was there in the relationship but that was more in a sense of affection and responsibility that was not at all in a sense of dehumanizing or demeaning women and considering to be nothing but property rather just as property is something that is cherished but more cherished is oneself so when there is affection and then there is a sense of belonging within affection then whatever is possessed or whatever belongs to that affection is cherished not just like property but much more than property much more than even oneself.