The Modesty of Man

“Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both”, reads Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code.

Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code prescribes a maximum sentence of two years in prison to a person convicted for outraging the modesty of a woman.

The Supreme Court of India has, on various occasions, elaborated on what modesty of a woman means. According to the apex court,

  • Modesty is a virtue which is inherent to a female owing to her sex;
  • Modesty is an attribute associated with female human beings as a class;
  • A woman, young or old, intelligent or imbecile, awake or sleeping, possesses modesty, which is capable of being outraged;
  • Modesty of a woman is outraged when the act of the offender is such that it is shocking and can be perceived as an affront to feminine decency and dignity. Example: slapping a woman on her butt, disrobing her, asking her for sexual favour etc.;
  • Mere knowledge that the modesty of a woman is likely to be outraged is sufficient to constitute the offence without any deliberate intention of outraging her modesty.
  • Section 354 will apply to all sexual acts committed or intended against a woman that stop short of penetration. (Note: The latest Criminal Laws Amendment Bill 2010 proposes to include ALL sexual acts as rape);
  • Lack of protest by a woman cannot be an alibi for the “offender” who has “outraged her modesty”.

Women’s organizations are also constantly up in arms about beauty pageants, movies and commercials indulging in “objectification” and “commodification” of women and outraging the modesty of women as a class. These gender zealots are of the firm conviction that female models and actresses are rather forced to trade their bodies and prance around half-naked purely to satisfy the perverse desires of men.

I will reserve my comments on how much I agree or disagree with the above laws or views on the modesty of a woman for a later time.

What I wish to point out here is the popular, egregious notion that men have no modesty to outrage, and the reinforcement of this view by our legislature, executive and the judiciary.

A more recent, very alarming trend spreading in India is the full blown attack on maleness and male sexuality in the print and electronic media, a phenomenon I found quite common in the United States.

Today, men and boys are routinely portrayed as idiotic, pathetic, uncouth and inferior creatures who are constantly in need of rescue by their “superior” wives, girlfriends or female relatives who are all set to overhaul them.

The society considers kicking, punching and slapping men as acceptable and even laudable behaviour on the part of women and girls.

Ridiculing male sexuality is considered harmless entertainment, and the few men and boys who protest are considered peevish and lacking in humour.

There are scores of men who, upon their modesty being outraged, resort to self-destructive behaviours such as giving in to substance abuse, depression and suicidal urges. One such “humourless” young man, incapable of handling “innocuous” attacks on his dignity and modesty, recently ended his life.

When I was growing up, I noticed that every time a woman or girl suffered injustice, insult or attack (real or perceived), in the hands of a male, someone would promptly ask the offender, “Don’t you have a mother or sister?” Men and boys in India are constantly reminded of their mother, sister and daughter no matter what another woman is pained about.

I eagerly wait for the day when women will be reminded of their fathers, brothers, sons, partners, male colleagues and friends every time they cause, commit or witness injustice, insult or injury against a man. I look forward to the day when men will shed their silence, stand up and thwart the slightest attack on the sexuality, dignity and modesty of men.

About Uma Challa

Uma Challa was inspired to submit this article after reading A Voice for Men. If you too have ideas or experiences you would like to share with our readers. please click here

Main Website
View All Posts
  • AVFM seeks app writer volunteer

    Are you an MHRA? Can you write apps for iPhone and Android? Are you willing to do that for AVFM on a special project? Please contact us.

    A Voice for Men seeks a volunteer with solid app writing experience to help us develop an app that will be linked to the AVFM brand. If you have the qualifications and are serious about following through, we would love to hear from you. Your efforts could be of great assistance to this website and to our cause. Please contact Paul Elam at paul@avoiceformen.com for more details...

  • Wikimasters, Editors, Translators, and Writers Wanted *Apply Now*

    Fight Wikipedia censorship! Add to and improve the AVfM Reference Wiki. Volunteers needed for writing, proofreading, and organizing. Some knowledge of the German language will be helpful but *not* required.

    Please create an account and then follow instructions here

  • http://counterfeminism.info/ Porky D.

    Amazing that such a thing happens in a country as “patriarchal” as Sweden, oops excuse me i meant India.

  • http://echosofwhisperspast.wordpress.com/ Capt. DaPoet

    I wasn’t aware that there was such a thing as a modest woman…

  • http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

    What boggles my mind is how it seems that women the world over have developed an intense hatred of men. It is almost as though it were a genetic predisposition. I know all women don’t hate men, but if it is genetic, it seems the nonmisandrist gene is the recessive one. Even more mind-boggling is the number of men who seem to possess the misandrist gene.

    Ionce thought I would love to visit India someday. Now I think the time has passed. Like Sweden, it would appear more like a place to avoid.

    TDOM

    • http://uchalla.wordpress.com Uma

      TDOM, from my experience and observation, women, in general, have a natural propensity for self-pity. Combine that with low self-esteem about being a woman, and you have a misandrist who believes that all her (real and perceived) disadvantages and sufferings are because of men and because she is a woman.

      It is very important to inculcate self-esteem among young women, enable them to discover the beauty of womanhood, and help them grow into balanced, self-respecting, hard working women, with a healthy attitude towards themselves as well as towards men.

      Feminists do the exact opposite and expect that women be treated as over-grown children…or worse yet, infants, and call it equality.

      Sarojini Naidu once said –

      To be a feminist is to acknowledge that one’s life has been regressed. The demand for granting preferential treatment to women is an admission on her part of her inferiority and there has been no need for such a thing in India as the women have always been by the side of men in Council and in the fields of battle…. We must have no mutual conflict in our homes or abroad. We must transcend differences. We must rise above nationalism, above religion, above sex.”

      As for men, I feel it is the propensity to be chivalrous which makes them behave in an apparently misandrous manner. Some people attribute it to intrasexual competition for survival and propagation. However, I fail to understand how men bending over backwards or losing their spine can be a good strategy for survival or propagation.

      • http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

        I’m not sure where it began in men, but I think low self esteem has something to do with the attitude in women. Those most likely to seek power are those who are most likely to abuse it. Those who are most likely to abuse power are those who feel they have been abused. By portraying themselves as victims, feminists can convince themselves they have been abused and can then justify both their quest for power and the right to abuse it. Those with high self esteem don’t see themselves as victims or abusers.

        Feminists have convinced women they are worthless and have robbed them of their self esteem and by accepting the feminist resolution, their lives are in fact regressed.

        Someone once said that the only one fit to lead is the one who refuses the job. This is the one who has no need for outside confirmation to maintain self esteem. True self esteem is confirred from within. To regain it, women must look within themselves.

        The feminist concept of empowerment is the equivalent of self esteem. To the feminist, empowerment can only come from conquering others. But this can always be taken away. True empowerment comes from conquering oneself.

        TDOM

        • Snark

          You’re both wrong. The problem with women is too much self-esteem. They literally see themselves as princesses and men as inconsequential slaves.

          Remember that famous psychological experiment – maybe Paul can help us out here – where the teacher split the class into blue-eyed and brown-eyed children, and told them that the blue-eyed children are more intelligent? And accordingly she showered them with privileges.

          What happened next? The BLUE-EYED children started attacking the BROWN-EYED, and not the other way around as conventional wisdom would have had us believe. The brown-eyed kids just got depressed and stopped trying. The ‘superior’, blue-eyed kids became active in their supremacy.

          This is the way it works – it is not the underprivileged who attack, but the overprivileged. To me, feminism works on precisely the same principle. Feminists told women they are superior; now they attack men.

          We need to bring down the self-esteem of women until they wouldn’t dare do what they do now.

          • Dusty

            I would add to this that the kids in the experiment had self esteem based on nothing of consequence (blue eyes), and the same goes for our girls today.

            People with self esteem based on ability or accomplishment are generally humble. People with unfounded self esteem have to force themselves on others because their value is not readily apparent. They don’t COMMAND respect, so they DEMAND respect.

          • http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

            I vaguely recall that experiment, I’ll have to look it up. But I’ll also agree with what Dusty said. The blue-eyed children didn’t actually have more self esteem therefore they may have felt the need to prove their superiority.

            I know of no revolution that was ever lead by the over-privileged.

            TDOM

          • http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

            I found a reference to the “exercise” (not experiment) on Wikipedia. It was conducted by a teacher named Jane Elliott after the MLK assassination as an exercise in discrimination and race relations. While it produced some interesting results, it was hardly scientific.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott

            For instance, she claims to have only told the children that they were different and did not suggest that they treat each other different. She attributed the result to the “superior” children acting in the same ways as they had seen their parents act. However, she treated the children differently (giving the “superior” children extra privileges and disparaging the “inferior” children including making them wear collars. So it could be that the “superior” children were only following her example. This would have had little to do with self esteem and more to do with a desire to please the teacher.

            TDOM

          • http://Avoiceformen Patrick

            Snark, I saw that Vid in my Communications class, I know see how it can be applied in the context of Female Superiority. I will look for it when Wtr qtr starts.

          • Dusty

            Another one is the experiment involving the Eagles and Rattlers by a group of researchers at the U of Oklahoma in 1954. They picked out a group of boys carefully tested for sameness. They divided them into two groups, set them up in two separate camps, and let the groups “find” each other. What followed was crazy. Both groups made up their own name, created separate slogans, flags, and codes of behavior. Then they started warring on each other, just like nations do. And the boys were all the same size, shape, intelligence, background, religion…

          • http://echosofwhisperspast.wordpress.com/ Capt. DaPoet

            Years ago I watched on tv a report about the self esteem movement and of all those tested the ones scoring the highest (had the most positive self esteem about themselves) sit behind bars…Yep the common criminal has the highest self esteem of anybody…

        • http://www.mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/ MasculistMan

          Who cares about women. They can go peddle their papers.

          Men count women don’t.

  • http://avoiceformen.com Paul Elam

    Uma Challa Rocks.

  • Stu

    I laugh and dance when the muslims take over india altogether…….and the men….regardless of religion or political view…..do nothing to stop it.

    • Matthew Graybosch

      The Muslims took over India once, and ruled as the Mughal dynasty (from which we probably got the word “mogul”). There’s no reason why those demon-ridden idiots can’t take over India again.

  • John A

    To paraphrase Churchill,

    Women may well be modest, but they have much to be modest about.

  • Steven DeLuca

    I believe women’s anger was built by men allowing feminists to lie about men. Generations of not hearing how men sacrificed their bodies, health, in fields and forest and on farms and in coal mines, while only hearing that we “heartlessly” kept them out of the male work place … while never considering that they were being protected and our sons were not… to allow such teachings for years and not having women and girls, young men too, realize that over thousands of male broken bodies and spirits the work place of men one day included: electric lights, central heat, public transportation, and reasonable work hours. Do you think it was a coincidence that at that time men and women said “Hey, girls can do it too”… so these angry women pretend that they fought their way into the old boys club and now let’s rub men’s face in shit as we dominated the colleges and managerial classes… It wasn’t me and my MRA brothers that let this happen, it’s that 99 percent of men who wanted to please domineering and manipulative moms, Sunday school teachers and public school teachers… and today they want to please the female voters and wives and female journalists, men guilt ridden after being brainwashed that their gender is evil and now angels are taking over their rightful place.

    • Snark

      When work was difficult, women DID NOT want to work.

      When work could be done by pushing buttons in an air conditioned office, THEN women demanded to work.

      And then we heard these fairy tales about how men kept women out of the workplace for centuries.

      • http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

        And for the most part they still don’t want to work when the work is difficult. How many protests have we seen concerning the lack of women in construction, foundries, mines, or driving garbage trucks? Instead they focus on corporate board rooms, research labs, and tech jobs.

        TDOM

        • bob

          “How many protests have we seen concerning the lack of women in construction, foundries, mines, or driving garbage trucks?”

          This kind of low jobs are for the inferior males! Not for superior being like them…

  • Keyster

    “What boggles my mind is how it seems that women the world over have developed an intense hatred of men.”

    It very upsetting to them once they begin to find out men are the superior sex.
    Feminism offers them the perfect outlet for denial and rage.
    Feminism makes it OK to blame men for women’s innate inabilities.
    The reason CAN’T be biological.

  • Pankaj

    Uma,

    Let me suggest my explanation for this wondering of yours

    “However, I fail to understand how men bending over backwards or losing their spine can be a good strategy for survival or propagation.”

    Do you really think an average, even above average woman can tolerate a man complaining about female privileges? It is in fact a good survival strategy to not voice your views, if you want to preserve domestic peace. It is the pampering and over built self-esteem thru which women really assume that they KNOW there is nothing wrong with what they do! How DARE a man shatter that world view?

    Besides, getting involved in this struggle for one’s rights is to draining that it saps out the life of any man who chooses to engage in it. It is even said many times that it is better not to protest and risk the consequences in the future than to protest and face the damages right now. There are very limited things that a vocal minority of men can do.
    1. Marriage strike. Okay this is one way to defend, not a perfect one if you are cohabiting or having anything to do with women.
    2. Complete celibacy – this is an almost a scorched earth kind of defense.. but works
    3. Engage in political aciton – try it, its not as easy as it sounds, and people don’t really care to understand anything, even to their own benefit, there is scarcely any chance to get them to understand it to the benefit of other men.

    One famous saying comes to mind – Every man thinks it won’t happen to him, until it does.

    As to survival strategy – I don’t know if women simply don’t get it, but finding a woman who wants to romantically associate, have a family with you is not quite a easy thing. Talking Men’s rights will blow whatever tiny chances you may have if you are poor. If you are rich, you risk becoming a good extortion target by female opportunists. It is far easy to believe a “misogynist” (that is another popular name for a men’s rights activist) is a sexual predator of some sort.

    So tell me – if you were a man, would you fight the quixotic battle or would you just adapt and pass your short life in peace?

    • Y

      “So tell me – if you were a man, would you fight the quixotic battle or would you just adapt and pass your short life in peace?”

      I would fight. Life’s too short to live in misery. If she can’t deal with the truth that’s HER problem, not mine.

    • http://www.mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/ MasculistMan

      I’m an activist so I would fight. Why appease those that hate you?

  • Pankaj

    By the way, there is a totalitarian spirit here

    “intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture”

    Let me identify the degrees of freedom

    intent – mind reading skills
    insult – me not bowing to her royal highness is an insult?
    modesty – what does that even mean? another grab bag?
    of ANY woman? – so If I give Britney spears, the middle finger, that is a punishable crime

    The degrees of freedom are just fabulously wide open to interpretation. Just wait for the govt to have enough prisons and police force in India to grow a bit more powerful and a bit more honest.
    The so-called hate crime legislation in the west cannot even compete with “Mera India”.. HURRAY!

    • Drukoziz

      Fill the government with women, and then any political dissent is outlawed! Victory for the motherland!

  • Pankaj

    OOPS, I meant give middle finger to a photograph of Britney spears while I am in India .. that would be a crime.

  • thehermit

    “However, I fail to understand how men bending over backwards or losing their spine can be a good strategy for survival or propagation.”

    Don’t forget, when it cames to men vs women, men are nearly defenseless.
    We are hardwired to protect, not to attack.

    • http://www.mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/ MasculistMan

      “We are hardwired to protect, not to attack.”

      I believe we a socialized to be that way.

  • Nergal

    “Remember that famous psychological experiment – maybe Paul can help us out here – where the teacher split the class into blue-eyed and brown-eyed children, and told them that the blue-eyed children are more intelligent? And accordingly she showered them with privileges.”

    There was another experiment where a group of adults were separated into two groups, one group which played the role of “guards” and another which played the role of “prisoners”. The “prisoners” were actually locked into cells and at the mercy of the “guards”. At first, they were all talking and laughing about it, but after about a week, the “guards” were physically and psychologically abusing the “prisoners”, causing sleep deprivation in them, starving them, just really inhuman Lord of The Flies-type shit.

    Basically the same thing.

    • Snark

      That was Zimbardo’s Stamford Prison Experiment I believe.

      As far as I know, it didn’t actually get to the point of physical abuse, but the experiment was stopped after six days because of the psychological toll it was taking on the prisoners, and on the guards, who were becoming increasingly sadistic.

      The truly worrying part is that the guards didn’t spend all their time at the ‘prison’ – for most of the day, they were back in the real world, living their normal lives. Despite this, their treatment of the prisoners radicalised.

      I pondered recently, on what the outcome would be if this experiment were re-run today, with various male-female combinations.

      1. Male prisoners and male guards, would likely turn out the same.

      2. Female prisoners and female guards, would likely turn out the same, perhaps with more carefully thought-out sadism (i.e. designed specifically to cause more suffering).

      3. Female prisoners and male guards – the prisoners would hardly be touched. Male guards would do any dirty work themselves and end up serving the princesses.

      4. Male prisoners and female guards – the worst imaginable sadistic tortures would be quickly unleashed. We’re talking 120 Days of Sodom shit. That’s simply how women have been trained by feminism.

      • Nergal

        “As far as I know, it didn’t actually get to the point of physical abuse, but the experiment was stopped after six days because of the psychological toll it was taking on the prisoners, and on the guards, who were becoming increasingly sadistic.”

        You may be right. It’s been a long time since I read about it and the fine details are kind of sketchy in my mind, but I do remember reading that their actions were appalling and that it escalated to inhuman sadism rather quickly.

        “4. Male prisoners and female guards – the worst imaginable sadistic tortures would be quickly unleashed. We’re talking 120 Days of Sodom shit. That’s simply how women have been trained by feminism.”

        Shit, we don’t have to imagine what would happen,look how that Lynndie England shit went down.

  • thehermit

    “There was another experiment where a group of adults were separated into two groups, one group which played the role of “guards” and another which played the role of “prisoners”. The “prisoners” were actually locked into cells and at the mercy of the “guards”. At first, they were all talking and laughing about it, but after about a week, the “guards” were physically and psychologically abusing the “prisoners”, causing sleep deprivation in them, starving them, just really inhuman Lord of The Flies-type shit.”

    There was another experiment where a group of adults were separated into two groups, one group which played the role of “guards” and another which played the role of “prisoners”. The “prisoners” were actually locked into cells and at the mercy of the “guards”. At first, they were all talking and laughing about it, but after about a week, the “guards” were physically and psychologically abusing the “prisoners”, causing sleep deprivation in them, starving them, just really inhuman Lord of The Flies-type shit.

    Source:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

  • Pankaj

    Please don’t take psychology experiments too seriously. As a researcher who has analyzed work of so-called psychologists, a whole lot is just push-for-publish with a whole lot of fuzzying around. Human beings are not like hydrogen or a ball of steel and are far more unpredictable than these psychologists claim. Often there is a predetermined conclusion about human nature and experiment is really designed to get support, and if it does not, data fudging is far too convenient.

  • http://www.blogtalkradio.com/learnercurious1 Richard Brown

    Thanks UMA.I am happy to be part of this group.The feed back is terrific.Thanks Guys.

  • Aharon

    Next vacation skip the following foreign countries:

    Sweden
    India
    San Francisco

  • bob

    It’s amazing to see law of this kind. This law is so large in it’s wording that any man can be jail when a girl say ‘Gard!’. How do you call a country where a ‘class’ can send in jail any member of another ‘class’ at will? How do you call a regime who demonize and maginalyse a minority (men)? This is exactly what india is, what all femistified country are.

  • Pingback: Welcome New York Times Readers « A Voice for Men()

  • SS

    One can not talk of women without talking about the terrible toll of pregnancy and child rearing on her body and pysche, an even greater toll in prior times before some scientific and personal control could be exercised over pregnancies. The resentment such a sapping of ones own vital forces causes for the otherwise life fulfilling role of reproduction is and was enormous. The proximity to pure evil and nihilism to which this contradiction places the individual in contradiction to the same individuals’ life affirming impulses creates a never ending contradiction.

    The philosopher Frederick Nietzsche explained this same paradox in approximately these words: “men at their worst are simply bad, women evil.” I believe that starting the conversation about the sexes any place else without recognizing the toll of our biological processes on our emotions and thought patterns is to begin the journey on the wrong road.

  • Elder Swami

    I lived in india for a few years and was discusted by some of the stuff I read in the magazines there…. it was open female supremisy.

    I read an article about females using their looks to control men and the metaphor was used “attractive females effectivley slice of the mans family jewels and pocket them”.
    The mangina who wrote the article said ” I admit that my sex is inferior”. This is a feminists movement that will be much more aggressive than what we have in the west.

  • Stu

    On the subject of women and work, and how they didn’t want to work when most jobs were slavery. They still don’t want hard jobs. An example from my own life follows.

    30 years ago I was working for a transport company. A dock hand. We loaded trucks by pushing and pulling pallet jacks and trollies full of freight and stacking it into trucks manually. Some pallets were loaded by forklift, but that was only whole pallet orders. Where the loads were made up of lots and lots of small lots….everything was stacked in by guys on the truck pushing trollies or pallet jacks full of freight into the truck and stracking it. There was practically no limit on how much you had to lift…..if something was too heavy for you…..you were a wimp……probably gay. There were no women there at all….and none ever applied for jobs on the docks.

    Fast forward to now. I work in a big distribution centre now. The trucks pull up to the docks….electric doors and ramps……forklifts and reach trucks bring pallets to numbered lanes to be loaded onto particular trucks. The loaders drive machines called loaders……these pick up and carry two pallets at once…and you drive the pallets into the trucks and put them down. Even plastic wrapping is put on by computerised machines that do two pallets at once….smart machines that know how tall the pallet is…..and how much to put on by the weight and height of the pallet. High visability clothing and safety boots are supplied…..so many saftey rules are in force that only a moron could have an accident. Cameras are everywhere……you are never out of site no matter where you are. Rules about lifting…..limits on what one person can lift…..limits on the time you can spend doing a manual handing duties in one session……limits on how long your can drive forklifts and loaders…..computer screens on all forklifts with your instructions appearing on it……for every next pallet to collect…..pick up from here…..take to there…..headsets…..earmuffs…….etc etc. In other words…..the nightmare job in the harsh and unsafe environment that I used to have……has morphed into a safe…..clean…..easy job. Guess what…..there are more women there now then men. Human Resources dept is 100pc female. It’s obvious to me that half of these lifting rules and so on……exist for the sole purpose of making the jobs possible for women to do…..and to force men to have to work at a slow pace so that they can not out perform the women……so it becomes artificially just as productive to hire women as it does men. It’s still not…and male workers are still outperforming women……which is hidden as best as they can do…….but it’s still obvious to anybody who works there.

    Now women are saying that they have been discriminated against in the transport industry in the past. But it is technology invented and manufactured by men that makes it possible for them to have those jobs……worse……it is doing men out of jobs. Your see…..as soon as a job becomes easy..and safe…..and clean……it becomes a womens job…..and gradually men get cleaned out of them…….and get left with the remaining hard unsafe jobs.

    How about this…..women have been discriminated against in the construction industry. Yep….women have been struggling for decades to join the men on contruction sites and get injured and die in droves working out in the rain and sun…..lifting and carrying heavy shit and wearing boots…..overalls……helmets….gloves…..and listening to those lovely jackhammers and compressors……all day…..if your really lucky……you might even go deaf. Yes it’s true…..and you are all going to hear about it in the future some time

    I was reading about these machines that are in prototype stage now. Big massive printers that are the size of those big gantries that unload containers off ships……you know the ones…..like big moving bridges on tracks. These massive printers……….print buildings. Thats right……they work like a giant bubble jet…..laying down a few millimeters of material with each pass…….back and forth……..laying on layer after layer……I suppose only the floors and walls can be done before some sort of formwork has to be applied before the roof or next level can start…….I suppose putting in the formwork will still be done by men……while a woman operates the printer from her cosy aircon office…..and gets to say…..i built that building over there…..with microsoft building works and the latest Epson Stylus building printer. It’s so easy I even surfed adultfriendfinder for my next ex marital affair while the printer churned out a new housing estate.