Sacchi Ramayan / सच्ची रामायण

Pretty vague and weak arguments often repeated with no substance added. Redundancy of thoughts bores the reader.
There are only a few points that he seems to be making:
1. Ramayana was written for the sole purpose of glorifying north Indian Aryan kings. It's not real history either.
2. Ram and everyone else knew that Bharat should have been the king but they all accepted Ram as a king-to-be in absence of Bharat.
3. There are doubts about Sita's birth.
4. Ramayana characters are not ideal gods/humans. They have despicable qualities except Kaikayi, Ravana etc.

So on and so forth.

Despite being against Brahamanical Hinduism, the book offered little to me as a reader.