In response to PauI Elam’s request to hear from the men of India, I have the following to say. I am what you may call the average Indian male and I fall into the category that is the most hated, a young Indian male. Now, I cannot really provide you with statistics as I am no researcher, but I can provide you with accurate descriptions of misandry I have seen and experienced throughout the country. I have seen it happen countless times and have been subjected to official discrimination based on my sex as well.
In New Delhi, which is infamously called the Rape Capital, men are treated like beasts. Since the preconceived notion is that men are the perpetrators and a woman cannot lie about being troubled by a man, even the slightest hint of discomfort shown by a woman could mean doomsday for a man. The rapes that actually do happen are mostly at night when girls roam around unguarded in isolated places, but the media portrays it as a crime that happens around the clock in every possible area. I do not know anybody who has known rape victims personally but I know many who knew murder, attempted murder and assault victims. Statistics would easily tell you that murder and assault are more common in New Delhi than rape, and that men are murdered and otherwise harmed much more frequently than women.No one is rioting on the streets about what is happening to men.
It is an attitude you see reflected in many other ways in Indian culture. Our buses have seats reserved for women; the front half. One row is reserved for senior citizens and one more row is reserved for handicapped travelers. Now, the rows reserved for senior citizens and handicapped travelers may or may not always exist. But every bus will have seats reserved for women. I stand up out of courtesy for middle-aged men and women. I believe that they deserve respect as they are an elder to me.
But I have seen girls, young college girls, making old men sitting on seats reserved for women stand up so that they can have the seat. I come home after working for 10 hours in the office. I never get a seat in the bus. The back of the bus is always full and if the front half is empty, I can only sit there for a few minutes unless I am really lucky. As soon as a girl enters a bus, I am out. Due to sheer embarrassment and fear, men continue to stand even when the seats at the front are vacant. Due to this, buses are often very crowded at the back. Men never take the front seat unless they feel really lucky and all the seats at the back are full. A few air conditioned buses do not have reserved seats (I travel in these as far as possible).
You. In the back!
In Delhi metros, there is a coach reserved for women. This coach can remain empty but men cannot enter it. Apart from this, we are also constantly reminded (through announcements) to give our seats to ladies if they are standing. I would be willing to give my seat to an old woman or a pregnant lady. But young women? Healthy college girls?
There is more. I was recently standing in a very long queue to buy an interstate bus ticket. After waiting for more than an hour the queue had hardly moved. Why? A smaller queue had materialized next to our queue. A queue for women only. The tickets were being given to them first. A few women buy, they leave and then more women come, while the men wait. I got my ticket after 2 hours. It was 2am. I wanted to board the midnight bus.
If you try to make people understand that even men can be raped, they don’t believe it. It took me some time to convince my friends, all of whom are well-educated. Imagine how difficult it is going to be to make the entire country believe that this crime exists. In India, it is assumed that no girl likes sex whereas sex is all that men can think about.
Most of the discotheques in India are openly sexist. The entry fee structure is usually something like this:
Ladies – FREE/negligible
Couples – 1000 Rs., since you are getting a MAN (rapist, demon, molester) with you
Men – 1500 Rs., or NO ENTRY
The justification? The same as it is in the west. Girls attract crowds. Girls will attract men and men will pay. Okay, so sexism is a business decision. But many discotheques don’t even allow men unless they have women with them. Recently, I saw a man trying to go alone inside a discotheque. He was denied entry. So, he went out and asked a random girl to accompany him to the discotheque. Now get this. He was still denied permission because they had seen him before without a girl.
Our Constitution is shit in written form. Check out this link:
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1942013/.
According to our Constitution, nobody can be discriminated on the basis of gender. But, if you read the sections related to dowry, rape, other sexual offences, etc., you’ll see that our Constitution itself is hostilely misandrist. The “modesty of a woman” is a common phrase in our laws. It is not even clear what modesty of a woman really is but it roughly makes a woman’s body a treasure which every man wants to possess by force (Read Section 354 of the IPC for more information). In cases of adultery, only the man can be held guilty. There were efforts made to make this law gender-neutral. But take a look at the following article which provides 1. the justification for having such a biased law and 2. the reason why it was proposed to scrap the law (it’s not because it’s against men).
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/consider-scrapping-adultery-from-indian-penal-code/1/163101.html
In general, men are considered evil everywhere in the country. Videotapes of women beating men are showcased here and any acts of violence against women (even if its self-defense) are condemned. You already have a lot of videos on your blog. When the Delhi girl was raped, newspapers, magazine articles and Facebook walls were flooded with brutal remarks calling for barbaric punishments like public beating and castration. The physical violence involved in the crime against the man was completely overlooked. Nobody was concerned about the girl’s friend (probably her boyfriend). He saw his friend getting raped and he was beaten up by the men, too.
During the protests, a policeman was killed while performing his duty. There was hardly any news about him. Indians are concerned only when a woman is the victim and the concern is doubled if the woman is raped.
A film actor was convicted of rape a few years back. The whole country went berserk. Later, the victim changed her statement and said that she was not raped. This time nobody cared. Many people are still not aware of this development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiney_Ahuja#Rape_conviction
Yes, in our country some women are raped, tortured and subjected to humiliation. So are men. But we do not recognize those crimes against men. There are no laws to save or help men, only laws to attack them and keep them down. You can see the results of that on our streets in recent days.
But I was already aware. I saw the real problem with my own eyes; in a queue to buy a bus ticket, and in the eyes of old men, forced out of their seats to stand on a bus so that smug, entitled college girls can have a comfortable spot to rest their asses. I seem to remember hearing of similar rules, in one of the darker chapters in the history of America.
♦
Publisher’s note: For Indian readers visiting this site for the first time, here are some resources in your country.
http://menrightsindia.blogspot.com/
http://www.confidareindia.com/
https://www.facebook.com/MensRightsIndia
http://www.saveindianfamily.org/
http://www.mensrightsassociation.org/joomla/
1 Posts in Total
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.
If you don't have paypal, check out the other options.
If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store.
Adam McPhee:
Black Knight:
حبيب الامين:
Nightwing1029:
Druk:
Nice to hear from India Anil, this is a well written piece. Hopefully you can start bringing attention to these issues and be an inspiration to other Indian men and women to start putting an end to this nonsensical hysteria that has gripped your country.
How terribly sad.
The kicker is this; what will happen as worldwide the deluge of men tired of the double standards who read about sites like this on the internet get sick and tired of the misandrist culture?
The men in the military are either going to not join, or maybe women will take it over in droves; so as better to lord it over men when a recession hits and there is no need for international war. Just maintaining the population from rioting?
The Army came out with something on that that specifically stated right wing, white male, tea partiers taking over a small imaginary town in NC.
Between the services around the world using robots more, and strong male backs less; is it only a matter of time before socialist governments the world over employ female only police armies?
A woman with a gun can take down a few unsuspecting men; but an army of well trained women backed by government could kill hundreds.
As unlikely as it seems, and however implausible; the government push to elevate women around the world defies logic and reason if they think men will not eventually get the point.
Unless that is what they are planning?
The easiest way for any government to control the entire population is to turn women against men, while telling them it is empowerment.
Toss in a couple of shiny trinkets, and presto, you can pass any law you want and no one will make a peep.
Bingo
Later on, give’em some guns and tell them all the men are out to get them and their benefits and momma is gonna get her new pair o shoes out daddy’s ass.
Basically, I think it comes down to what you said; but the difference between now and any other time in history where a nation gets enough financially to let women have rights is that we are actually going to not just let ours fight but expect them to win.
The thing is, we have a lot of girls who are convinced they can do what any man can. When she finds out she can’t, they give her a free pass. That will not work in all situations; even with better technology and robotics.
I am partially joking about women using robotics and service in the military to destroy us. I got a good laugh; but honestly, with the way things are going, you never know. The liberals who run things seem convinced of some things that are contrary to nature, reason, and something euphemistically called common sense.
Exactly. But governments are going beyond simply turning women against men. They are turning MEN against men. (The former, of course, being manginas, of which there will be a number in the latter category as well.) Worse.
Divide and rule. Then, government becomes your only friend. Only government loves you.
Chilling. Wake up world.
I’ve been hearing a lot about rapes in India, even from MRAs who haven’t taken their full dose of the red pill yet, but knowing how deceptive almost anything about female oppression is, I was always sceptical. I’m glad this article explains what the situation really is, and next time any blue pill or purple pill person talks about the rapes, I’ll link to this article.
I give my full support to the men in India who are suffering all this misandry.
Zerbu, Indian men are oppressed by our culture’s ancient arranged marriage and joint family living system. Please see my comment at the bottom of this page explaining how it works and the problems its created for Indian men and women in terms male/female relations.
It was very sobering to hear all about the new ‘Jim Crow’ laws that are in operation. It sounds absolutely despicable. That an old man, a male elder, has to give up his seat for a college girl makes my blood boil…
Thank you for bringing me up to speed on the situation there.
I was thinking the same.
Having vacated my seat for elders of both genders all my life, I will continue to do so until I’m unable to…
What do you think of the proposal that all this is really about ideological imperialism, funded and organised by the US through IVAWA?
Anil, thank you so much for sharing your experience, of overt and legislated anti male discrimination in your country. I hope you can provided us with more information in due course and encourage you Indian brothers to join you in speaking out against this misandry.
One of the big issues for Indian men as I understand it is the DV Industry and laws ( Dowry ACT), which is being used as a tool against men by Indian feminists. It would be interesting to hear more stories of men affected by this.
Holy shit. I didn’t think misandry could be any worse than it is in the west. Brings to mind this infamous incident.
The only thing worse in that video than her genuine surprise that her violence was met with equal violence, was the number of white knights ready to defend her “right” to abuse men without provocation.
Why do white knights defend women even when women are clearly the perpetrators? Interestingly, when I watched footage of the rioters in India concerning the raped woman, most of them were men.
I think that there is something wrong with me as my internal white knight is almost non-existent. I have a natural sense of justice that precludes me siding with women just because they have a vagina. If anything, I am a little biased in the opposite direction.
Just recently, there were many MRA’s – some prominent, some less so – who got upset at the outing of those violent gender ideologues outside the Farrell lecture in Toronoto. Not me. Not one friggin’ iota.
White knightery really is the zenith of despicable behavior; it is psychological somnambulism at its worst.
I am the same – my allegiance is to my sense of fairness first and foremost. White knights are often alpha male wannabes from my observations. Doing down other men is not even a novelty for them because behind their fake smiles they regard ALL men as potential competitors for either sex or position in some hierarchy real or imagined.
“White knightery really is the zenith of despicable behavior; it is psychological somnambulism at its worst.” I cannot agree more to this.
It seems to have struck a chord of discontent with some in India, though.
Check this
An Indian PSA regarding the possible consequences of violence?
The addition of Anil Sharma is going to educate a few of us, myself for sure.
And, here I thought we had it pretty rough in Canada. That resolving this without losing MRA’s to feminist and chivalrist violence would be difficult if not unlikely.
I can only hope those voices in India grow louder in denouncing blatant misandry.
From the way it’s been filmed, it doesn’t look like a real incident but a shot one, because the camera seems certain about all the future events
But I may be wrong.
Well that is one good sign at least. Not all in government are fully onboard with the Misandrist Express!
Thanks for the video Paul.
@gateman: As much as I despise women who freely hit men and expect she will not be hit back, I hate the people who don’t see the double standard more because they perpetuate the idea that this behavior is acceptable. Good on him for hitting her back; she deserved it.
Nice, great to see a fellow south asian on this site. Things are similar in your neighbor Sri Lanka as well. My grandmother worked as a nurse and my grandpa a police officer (this was in the 1950s well before fem-borgs infested my country). My mom once told me of how my grandpa would always bring his paycheck home and give it to his wife, my grandma. She would spend it all on family expenses (like groceries and stuff for the kids) and keep a little to herself and give the remainder back to my grandpa is any were left. If my grandpa even spent 1 rupee of his pay before it reaches my grandma, there was going to be trouble at home. My mom told me that one day, my grandpa did exactly that because he was hungry, and my grandma got pissed offf. Wasn’t sure what age my mom was back then but she yelled at grandma telling her to cut grandpa some slack and let him spend HIS money… he was hungry and it wasn’t as if he wasted his money on gambling, or alcohol. There is misandry everywhere in every culture to one extent or another.
So, let me ask you this: if she was also working, what did she do with her paycheck?
Anil, very good to hear your perspective.
The recent rape/murder and grave assault of a woman and man in Delhi was a tragedy, but I had an inkling that it was being used wrongly for political gain, and used to criminalize all men.
We must fight back against those who use rare tragic although rare events to promote or justify misandry.
Thanks for writing this Anil, the world needs to hear this. Currently, Western media is saturated with the female victimhood narrative
Thank you for stepping forward with what I hope will be the first of many articles, Mr Sharma.
Few concepts symbolize bigotry against a group more odiously than relegating them to the ‘back of the bus’. I’m sorry for being so ignorant about this – I had no idea. I hope to hear more from our Indian/Sri Lankan brothers (and, hopefully, sisters). You have our support.
This is sort of a ‘confirmation bias’ article for me…
I find Indian women to be INCREDIBLY attractive looking.
Problem is, every last one of them I have met…and I mean EVERY one of them, have been complete, utter bitches in every way imaginable.
ot sure why this is the case (aside from them KNOWING they are hot)…it’s just a trend I’ve noticed.
But I really do mean every last Indian woman…ALL of them…that I have met have suited the ‘man hating harridan’ meme to a T.
No exceptions.
Sadly, I have to agree.
Being in the company of every single one of them, have been like being forced into a very small box with a porcupine.
You just wanted to get out and away.
Dan,
Were they born-and-brought up in the West, or were they “very well-educated”?
coz.. the women I grew up with in India in the late 80s and early 90s were nowhere near being bitchy and entitled. Indian culture controlled female sexuality quite well.. and since thats the source of their power and they were unable to use it.. they didnt grow up bitchy. Most middle-class women I have seen.. complete their education and sort of hope to settle into a SAHM role. Typhonblue’s InflatableFem comes to mind when describing them. Sure.. there are lots of middle-class working women too. Lower-class women work all the time.
I have dated many Indian women who migrated to the west like I did.. and they loved the power a dating culture offers.. god were they solipsistic. weren’t bitchy yet. Maybe I was lucky.
Indian women do have to put up with a lot of shit in their traditional roles and they are constantly told that they are the victim. When they play the game they feel entitled to put as much shit back on men as they can.
I dated an Indian-Fijian woman for a short time (25 years ago), but she wasn’t prepared to go against her family so we didn’t go far. I could see how she resented the control her family had over her and how someone in her position could become bitter and resentful towards men because of this.
Both Indian men and women have to put up with traditional shit. You wont believe what an aha-moment it was for me to move away from traditional shit over the years and ultimately ingest the red-pill. As the song goes “Every generation blames the one before”.. and ultimately it is stupid to blame others. Nothing like the red pill
Family control (and to a lesser extent community control) over individuals is something that everybody in India faces. The core issue there is collectivism vs individualism. As you may imagine in more-primitive times and societies, it makes sense for elders of the family to make important decisions for young adults.. simply because the youngsters just dont have enough information. This aspect is codified in India through a “Respect your elders” value.. which in reality translates to “dont go against them”.
V.S.Naipaul even had this to say in 1977 in his book “India: A wounded civilization”
The indian ego is underdeveloped. The world of magic and animistic ways of thinking lie close to the surface. … This underdeveloped ego is created by the detailed social organization of Indian life, and fits into that life. The mother functions as the external ego of the child for a much longer period than is customary in the West, and many of the ego functions concerned with reality are later transferred from mother to the family and other social institutions. Caste and clan are more than brotherhoods; they define the individual completely. The individual is never on his own. he is always fundamentally a member of his group, with a complex apparatus of rules, rituals, taboos. Every detail of behaviour is regulated. Relationships are codified. And religion and religious practices lock everything in place. The need, then, for individual observation and judgement is reduced. something close to a purely instinctive life becomes possible
As India grows in prosperity and moves from joint-family-system to nuclear-family-system-with-man’s-old-parents-included (which is the current setup) to nuclear-family system in the future.. people will become more individualistic.
” Indian culture controlled female sexuality quite well”
This along with Anil’s statement, “In India, it is assumed that no girl likes sex” is at the very root of India’s sexual politics and male/female issues.
Please read my comment at the bottom of the page wherein I attempt to explain India’s collective psycho-sexuality to the non-Indians on this blog.
“I have dated many Indian women who migrated to the west like I did.. and they loved the power a dating culture offers”
I’m sure you did too!
Your post about the needed sexual revolution is a great summary.
Re: the dating culture here.. unfortunately its gone awry, and I suspect thats why AVFM on its intro pages doesnt recommend it for men.
At other places in the manosphere, you will see that the sexual revolution here has proved great only for some males (~40% IIRC) considered suitable by women.. while the rest get chewed up.. thanks to hypergamy. Hence the PUA movement. I have sometimes wondered what would be an ideal scheme thats fair to all (or most).
The dating market, like all markets, is competitive. Nothing wrong with that. We are forced to improve ourselves to meet market demands, hence “game”. However, for those unable or unwilling to compete, there is no reason why the arranged marriage market cannot still be kept in place for them to opt for. NRIs basically do this. They try their hand at dating and if it doesn’t work out, they get Ma to find a “nice girl” or “nice boy” for them.
No.. its not just about competition. If you study the subject for a while.. you will realize biological realities that traditional society was wise to suppress for civilization to flourish.
And the sexual revolution here also needed several conditions to happen.. none of which exist in India.
Its naive to think all is well in the West, and it’s systems can be mimiced elsewhere, esp since India is so vastly different given its class structure and lack of prosperity. Since the sexual revolution in the 60s here, over time there are enormous problems that have been pushed under the rug by society and many men have paid a very steep price.
Maybe the work of Roger Devlin will be a good starting point for you. Here’s a teaser:
Sexual Utopia in Power – Roger Devlin Part 1
I dont want to enter into a lengthy discussion, so this is my last post on this subject.
Astrokid, “No.. its not just about competition. If you study the subject for a while.. you will realize biological realities that traditional society was wise to suppress for civilization to flourish.”
I’m don’t drink the Kool Aid of “traditional societies” and “ancient civilizations”. I don’t believe there was ever a “golden age” and I don’t harken back to the “good ol’ days”. Humans, civilizations and cultures, all evolve and come and go. I look toward the future, toward progress.
“And the sexual revolution here also needed several conditions to happen.. none of which exist in India.”
Our Swadeshi Sexual Revolution will of course be different and reflect India’s own unique environment and history.
As far as Devlin, I’m already aware of him, probably a lot longer than you are. He is a “western civilization” cultural chauvanist and I am an unapologetic post-colonial South Asian Hindu.
I think Bharat has a good point here – “raising women to be marriageable” isn’t a step towards the destruction of gender norms or egalitarianism. It traps us in the same systems that endager and limit the potential experiences of everyone.
The bus example is one that should resonate very well among Americans. Laws that required blacks to sit in the back of the bus, like Rosa Parks’ refusal to give up her seat to a white passenger, are symbols of the Civil Rights movement that almost everyone will recognize.
We had Clemintine Ford (in OZ) saying men should not sit next to a girl on public transport even if no other seats were available because it might invade her space and make her uncomfortable. Clemintine would be right at home in New Delhi.
Thank you, Anil, for speaking out.
More than anything, it is the silence that allows these laws to spread and get worse.
Every time someone speaks up, it helps others to show the same courage and honesty.
In Romania, if you dare to ask an elder (male or female) to sit up so you, an entitled college girl, to stay – most likely the whole bus will tell you that you are „jackass”, „a person that had a bad upbringing” or even a „bitch”. The same goes in Ukraine, Moldova, Hungary, Russia or Serbia.
Eastern Europe has a lot of shit to deal with – but virtually NO ONE dares to ask the elders to stand up because the „poorly oppressed” young healthy females need to stand. No way! Not gonna happen!
We have had slavery too. But we abolished it in 1859. But even before 1859, when we had the gypsies that could be used as slaves by the wealthy (the boyars – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyar), the gypsies were still treated much more fair than men are treated now in India.
And I mean it! There were no „gypsies only” venues or places where a gypsy could not attend without being accompanied by a Boyar or a non-gypsy. We did not have that.
In Romania, dowry was a common practice for everyone (gypsies included) until the 1860s. Nowadays, only the gypsies practice it. But even prior to 1859, when we had a feudal/cast system still largely in place (in theory it has been abolished in 1848) – the laws with regards to dowry were gender neutral – specifying that the spouse who eternally leaves the parents’ home is responsible with the dowry.
I cannot believe that in 2013, a country can still have a law that is even more medieval than it was 150 years ago in medieval Eastern Europe.
I knew about the women only wagons. I also knew about the abuse to which a man can be subjected if he steps into a women-only train car. It happens in Thailand too.
I also knew about the legislation proposal to make men ‘donate’ a part of their wage to their female spouse as ‘payment for the housework’. I also knew about the thing about discotheques – because it happens literally EVERYWHERE in the world.
So I knew all of these and beyod. But I just could not imagine that they can go that far as to make someone (who happens to be male) miss the bus because the women needed to be served first. I just could not imagine that India can have laws (or practices) to make men stay in the seats at the back of the bus even if the front half is empty. This is not only outrageous. This is EVIL misandry.
And yes, I do blame Indian women. To me, every Indian women that accepts this bullshit and does nothing to make things right is a direct accomplice to this and should be treated as such!
It might seem too radical for some – but if I were an Indian man, I would NEVER EVER respect ANY Indian woman without undeniable proof that she had done anything possible to try to change this. In any other case – I would simply treat her as non-existent.
I sincerely hope Anil that you will not stop with this article and you will keep writing for us.
For me, what is happening in India now is a little look into the future that Femo-Fascism intends for the world as a whole – unless we start connecting each other. This is a global problem – and it stands better odds to address it globally.
Hats off to Anil – and keep the good work, sir!
Coming of age in India in the late 80s and early 90s, I would say the biggest agents of male-disposability and female-protection in India are other men.. fathers of daughters. Their daughters can do absolutely no wrong, and they can never lie. Why.. our culture tells us that “women are the goddesses of the house“. Beware of fathers with daughters. All the special provisions for women in society that this article talks about.. have been instituted by them.
Unfortunately, knowledge of the differences of the sexes is by and large unknown to both men and women there.. the only way is to learn by experience after arranged marriage (by and large).
And the popular culture is saturated with movies and songs of romance and fighting bad guys and happily married thereafter. Brainwashing of both the sexes.
And just like in the West, the profiteers from male-disposability are the absolutely corrupt institutions.. the police, courts, lawyers. In fact, corruption doesnt care who/what you are.. as long as you have the money. I am pretty sure in the ‘Shiney Ahuja’ rape case, the maid servant would have extracted enormous amount from the accused. Family Law White Knight judges openly say “Why would she lie about her husband? In India, husband is like a God. Would she lie about her God?“.
Guys in the West.. you have absolutely no clue to what extent corruption can go.. until you lived in India. It shows at grassroot levels. You want to pass the driving license test? Pay the instructor beforehand. Your property tax assessment seems quite high? That can be fixed for a price.. and so on and so forth. I say this.. just so we get the big picture. Its not only gender at work.. its so much more.. kinda like here, but other elements thrown in.
PS:
Article 15 in The Constitution Of India 1949
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children
Cool provision eh? I remember W.F.Price saying that there was a similar clause in the ERA, which would have made it useless for men even in the US.
Anil,
A heartfelt welcome to AVFM.
It’s great to have you here reporting on the sexual apartheid I’m sorry to see you endure in India.
Please return and tell us more about misandry in India so that readers here can be more informed and empowered.
Thanks for that account Anil.
When feminism arose in the West, whatever advantages women enjoyed over men tended to be held in place, while men’s rights were steadily removed (an ongoing process). The net result is that men have become less than 2nd class citizens, and many of the human rights that Westerners once enjoyed, and what the West was once proud of, no longer exist (eg right to trial, right of assumption of innocence, right to be unmolested by state agents).
In those regions where the divide between men and women was greatest, it appears to me that these have become the most misandric, as the women there enjoyed an elevated level of respect simply because they were women and insisted on retaining it, whereas the men lost whatever advantages they may have had, and gained nothing in exchange.
Imagine, for example, if Feminism took hold in Saudi Arabia. The men would lose all male advantage, while the women would lose absolutely none of their culturally elevated position. It would probably become the worst misandric country in the world (and that is saying a lot).
The question I had for you was this: would you say that Indian women have traditionally enjoyed an even greater level of respect compared to that enjoyed by European or American women?
I once wanted to visit India but this Jane Crow bullshit killed that.
What’s the situation in India with providers and stay-at-homes? When you get on a bus or a train, are the majority of the men assumed to be providers and the women stay-at-homes? If so, then it amplifies the absurdity. Men, who are required to work and to provide, have to make way for women, who spend their ample free time swanning around shopping centres. Men, who have deadlines to meet, have to wait it out in lengthy queues, while women, who have all the time in the world to do nothing in particular, are fast-tracked to not have to wait at all, so that they can hurry to a cafeteria to exchange gossip and while away the hours. So, just out of curiosity, what proportion of those women using public transport are workers with deadlines to meet and families to provide for?
Most Indian women would not fit the “swanning around” stay-at-home image you’ve painted here. Incredible poverty means women do not have access to the labour-saving technology and external childcare that allows Western women so much more freedom. A mother’s work to care for and feed children, or supplemental employment due to the low wages of the father, should not be dismissed.
It’s worth noting that this is where Indian culture has led to- where battered men don’t just face arbitrary arrest at the hands of a false accusation by an abussive woman, but “vigilante justice”: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151105452381347&set=a.447933696346.242216.74156301346&type=1
An interesting piece. I would refer anyone who sees rape as a uniquely male-on-female crime to the following story from Papua New Guinea. 10 women assault a 17yo boy, threatening him with knives, four have forced intercourse with him. It’s feared the boy may now have HIV/Aids as a result.
http://news.in.msn.com/crimefile/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4611178
The men in the Delhi rape case may hang for their crimes. Will THESE women hang? Ha. Will this story make the major TV/radio programmes? Ha.
Mike Buchanan
ANTI-FEMINISM LEAGUE
http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com
Hope this helps to educate Anil.
Feminists are using what happened in India to leverage off and extrapolate to all men in all cultures. She goes on about the lack of convictions for rape being about blame the victim and the rest of the clap trap. I tried three times to get this study mentioned but to no avail. Guess the moderator doesnt want the truth to be broadcast.
http://www.aifs.gov.au/acssa/pubs/newsletter/n17.html#What
What is the outcome of reporting rape to the police?
Study of reported rapes in Victoria 2000-2003: Summary research report
Zoë Morrison
———————————
The Article on the DRUM
Fight against rape should focus on changing attitudes
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4454784.html
——————————
Got some comments in which I have edited down here to display most relevant.
——————————
WhatAreRights :
07 Jan 2013 9:25:58am
I think it is a mistake to think in terms of the rights of women. It is necessary to think of the human rights of
every person. The right to not be physically attacked is the right upon which to focus. We have the right to our own life.
Bev :
07 Jan 2013 11:16:05am
Have agree. In India feminism is pretty much confined to middle class women who really don’t care about the rights of lower class men and women or what happens to them. In New Delhi there are separate carriages for women and any man who gets into these carriages will be beaten up by the women or worse thrown off the moving train with resultant horrific injuries. We don’t hear about that. The buses are segregated with men at the back of the bus even when the seats at the front are empty. It has separate cues for tickets were women are served first not in order of cuing. India has apartheid based on gender exclusion of men (mostly lower classes). We don’t hear about either. Getting rid of the caste system in India should be their first priority
Bev :
07 Jan 2013 12:16:57pm
Apparently it is more common than we would believe for a man to be beaten up trying to protect his girlfiend. The news reports just don’t mention him (or only in passing). We have the same problem here in news reporting. In an accident which may involving men, women and children women and children always get cited first and men last or in some cases hardly at all. A man getting beaten up or stabbed/shot will never attract the same news cover even though it is far more common than a woman being attacked. The media have a bais and empathy for women and children and far less so for men.
OUB :
07 Jan 2013 1:29:37pm
I wouldn’t be too harsh on the media there Bev. I think they are only reflecting community attitudes. Even as a guy I feel more strongly when women or children are killed. It might not be logical but I think it is part of our culture to feel more protective towards women and children.
Bev :
07 Jan 2013 2:24:45pm
It is part of most cultures. Does not make it right.
Ted :
07 Jan 2013 1:53:18pm
The article and issue is about violence towards women. Your continual parroting on with ‘what about us poor males’ completely misses the point.
Bev :
07 Jan 2013 2:30:54pm
This article is about prevailing culture. I presume you have male relatives so obviously you think its OK for their stories to be ignored, downgraded or trivialized. I to have male relatives and I recognize that bad things happen to them too. There is violence against women but more violence against men which we tend to ignore. That to is part of culture but that does not make it right.
Another thread.
Rape of women was and still is in some parts of the world a well known weapon of war. So I am not sure that argument holds up too much water as a reason for not properly dealing with rape cases against women, or standing up for their rights. Rape is not simply the act. It is about the culture of power of what I would call small in mind men over women. Where rape of women is part of the culture, women have no rights; they have no power in their own right.
Bev :
07 Jan 2013 12:33:05pm
Rape is a weapon of war. Yes however it just not women. There is a report written for the UN which documents the rape of up to 80% of male prisoners of war during the Bosnian war and how the vast majority of male prisoners in the Congo were raped up to 11 times per day destroying their bowels and crippling them for life. It has not received the same attention and publicity that the UN report on rape of women during war has.
John51 :
07 Jan 2013 1:12:35pm
Bev, I agree and I did think to mention rape against men as well, but in this case we were talking about rape against women, but of the cultural drivers of it. Rape of men is also used in most prisons and it is usually use as a power thing, of control as well as of brutalisation.
Bev :
07 Jan 2013 2:38:17pm
I know in the case of the UN report feminists worked hard along with the Dutch Oxfam (Congo) to have the report suppressed as they said it would detract from the UN report on rape against women. I believe similar forces are at work here.
———————————–
I got more comments up but they are not relevant to this discussion.
One of the best blogs for Indian men caught up in false cases in India – gives a good picture of what one committed person can do to fight femi-fascism -
http://ipc498a.wordpress.com/
Great website.
God.. the long fight against 498A, and the immovable force that it is.. is stunning. There have been protests on the streets, articles in print media, debates on TV, Govt (Malimath) commission that said its misused and recommended serious changes, supreme court judge saying that it’s legal terrorism.. and yet the corrupt machinery (cops, lawyers, judiciary, NCW) is immovable. What is it going to take? Revolution?
I dont think the US fight against any misandric law got to the level 498A did. Media coverage is out of the question here.
A brilliant well researched and written piece. I really hope to see more of you.
MRALondon.org
I agree, this was an excellent piece, very well written. Really hope Anil writes more.
While the rape incident was horrific and the rapists deserve adequate prison time, here is news that goes relatively unnoticed. 15% false rape rate, but we are supposed to have quick trials with death penalty and castration.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/of-63-rape-cases-in-december-10-false/1053720/
Excellent piece. I had suspicions as to how bad misandry was in India, and indeed spent 6 months there with my work (back in my blue-pill days) but this is still an eye-opener.
I fear that the MRM is going to have a lot of work to do in India in the coming days. The recent rape cases will be leveraged and I can foresee some even more draconian misandric rules and conventions following. I hate to have to say it Anil, but look out for yourself.
I actually planned on emigrating to eastern countries after I get my engineering degree here in Canada, but it seems the east is turning out to be far more dangerous for men than the west. Now I’d like to know how bad things are in places like Singapore and China.
You have to understand the feminism in the West started out as a kind of sex/relationship Union for women. And much like any Union they want a monopoly on men. Look at legislation designed to “protect” foreign women who mary American men. What the laws actually do is put men into a greatly worse situation then if they married an American woman.
I have a gut feeling that part of the international spread of misandry is a kind of poisoning the competition type thing. It will likely only get worse as the number of women who realize they will never have a shot at marriage or quality relationships increase.
I’m not interested in marriage or relationships with foreign women. I just want to go work in a country that wont have much feminist bullshit getting in the way in the workplace. I’m not interested in paying huge ass taxes here in canada to pay for social programs that hardly address the problems they claim to address (like welfare programs), offer bloated contracts to crony companies that pocket most of the money and provide absolute shitty service (have you looked TO’s infrastructure lately) etc etc etc.
I have been trying to tell people for awhile now: What is happening in India has to do with population control, and the imbalance of more men than women in India.
India didn’t do as China did, and in the end India official “gave up” on population control. So instead they are working to make the men of India hate the women of India. All they are doing is using known ways to anger Indian men that will cause the desired reaction.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/indias-population-growth-rate-declines-2258767.html
Open up a history book, much of what is going on has already been done during the colonial period. Instead of “White” they are using “Woman”.
Causing men in India to hate women has an added bonus: Historically, whenever you had a large pool of men who had zero prospects of marrying it tended to lead to civil war(especially when you add in poverty, famine and other horrible things).
Also, there is the globalist aspect. The globalists want their one world and the death of nationalism. Traditionally, men have been the main proponents of nationalism. Nationalism is after all an extension of the local family.
By attacking men in this way, pitting them against women, you are guaranteed to destroy individual men’s faith in government, society and more importantly family.
I still find it “odd” that things got weird in India after a critical mass in the Western MRM was reached.
Because there is nothing like shared suffering to bring radically opposing sides together. In many respects, as I have said many, many times, there is a degree of dialogue happening now between men of different cultures/countries that would of been highly improbably just half a decade ago.
I find it all incredibly suspect, and I can only see two paths forward that go to the same place. We either embrace the globalist option, since the problem can “only be solved” at the international level, or we cling to nationalism only to see the persecution and oppression escalate till a third world war breaks out.
From my vantage point, if I say or do anything to support India, I feel as if I am being used by those who caused this problem with the goal of getting people like us to act in a certain way. A lose-lose situation.
A very well articulated article which gave me great pleasure in sharing with my twitter followers
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Thank you for your comment, Sudhulika. I appreciate all perspectives and would like to learn more about the situation in India.
„Both the girl and her boyfriend were beaten up. Although the girl was raped, tortured and mutilated viciously and her boyfriend ‘saw his friend getting raped’. Do you still want us to sympathize with the boyfriend equally?” – Yes. Because men are human beings too. Quite a shock isn’t it?
„2. Please get your information correct about the instances of rapes. They DO NOT mostly happen ‘at night when girls roam around unguarded in very bad neighborhoods’.” – I think you should bring some data, don’t you? Throughout the world, rape is committed by someone the victim knew and in the very rare cases when the perpetrator is a stranger – it happens in bad neighborhoods during the night. This is supported by numbers almost everywhere. Therefore, it is safe to say that this might be the case in India too. If you beg to differ, you should bring some evidence.
Until then, according to Hitchens principle – what can be claimed without evidence, can also be dismissed without evidence.
“3. If you are not rioting on the streets about what (wrong/bad) is happening to men, then I say – shame on you. I, for one, is rioting for issues around both genders.” – Again! Evidence! I never saw any others except the MRA groups rioting against the misandry.
“4. Indian buses DO NOT have the entire front half reserved for women. In a bus consisting of 50-60 seats, only 0-10 seats are reserved for women. As an Indian, I have traveled in many Indian buses and in 80% of situations, the passengers occupy those seats without any concern to their gender and nobody objects.” – Anil referred particularly on Delhi. So it’s safe to say that it might not be the case throughout the country. It is anyhow still extremely bad that it happens even in one place.
“Delhi is inside India, but not India itself. Whatever happens in Delhi is not reflective to the situation in the entire country.” – Well, large cities tend to be reflective to the situation in the entire country since in most countries in the world, the situation in the country side is worse than in the cities.
And still, having 10 seats/bus for women only and women-only trains it is still extremely misandric and an evidence of sexual apartheid.
“5. The Delhi metro didn’t have a separate coach reserved for women in the beginning, but due to overcrowding during peak hours, eve-teasing increased to no proportions. After many voices were raised against this issue, a separate coach is now reserved for women. True, men are not allowed to enter that coach even if there’s empty seat in the reserved coach, but then allowing men would beat the purpose of having a separate coach, wouldn’t it?” – Why would you have a separate coach to begin with? I mean really, are women incapable of “eve-teasing” against other women? How about men against other men and women against other men? This is state-sponsored bigotry ma’am regardless of how you try to say it isn’t.
“6. Separate queues for women is limited to very rural or backward areas of India, not prevalent throughout the country.” – So it’s true. That’s all we needed to know. The fact that it’s not a general phenomenon is a relevant detail – but it’s still bigotry.
“I have had to wait longer many many times in ATM queues, apparently because many people in India with spare time in their hands want to check their balance again and again, hardly ever any female. How do you want me to react? [...] I can’t and wouldn’t put it against men in general and call it discrimination! Even though I might raise my voice against misuse of ATMs if I feel so.” – Is usually only one ATM machine on a 5 mile radius in India? I’m just asking. In my country, it’s usually females that spend a lot of time in front of an ATM machine. You know what I do when that happens? I go to another ATM machine! Some people are slower! Deal with it.
I still don’t get it why queuing at an ATM machine is such a huge issue.
“8. Women in India don’t like Indian constitution as much as men in India don’t like it, trust me, for various different reasons.” – Really? Nobody ever heard of a protest organized by women to demand “down with misandry and sexual apartheid”. To me, any woman that says nothing about the issue – is a direct accomplice to the situation.
“A lot of long-due amendments need to be made in the constitution and both genders are affected equally.” – Really? Does the Indian Constitution says that “the state has the right to include special protections favoring men over women”? I read the Indian Constitution twice and never saw anything like that. However, I saw it the other way around!
Hi Lucian. Thank you for your thoughts
“Yes. Because men are human beings too” – I never disregarded the fact, although, in my humble opinion, a girl getting raped and brutally tortured and a man having to see that are two different scenarios. While the people are sympathizing with the boyfriend too, the intensity differs by the same proportion. I haven’t heard anybody saying the beating of the boyfriend was okay or fair. But would you accept that he was probably beaten up because he was with the girl and was probably trying to stop her from getting raped, and not because the molesters had specific intentions to harm him per se? The protests are specifically against rape and anything that happens in that situation, it still doesn’t make beating or the police constable dying okay in any way possible.
“Throughout the world, rape is committed by someone the victim knew and in the very rare cases when the perpetrator is a stranger – it happens in bad neighborhoods during the night” – there, you said it! This was exactly my point – rapes happening in bad neighborhoods with girls roaming around unguarded at night (as Anil had put it) is a very small proportion of the entire rape situation.
“Again! Evidence! I never saw any others except the MRA groups rioting against the misandry” – Articles are mostly written with proper thoughts and after some research has been done and data has been collected. Comments, on the other hand, are mostly instantaneous reactions. I don’t keep a stack of links and videos each time to prove my point. Anyway, if you insist, here it goes – in India, there was a time when majority of the buses had reserved seats for females and people would entertain that. Some men raised their voices against this and things changed. You don’t see seats reserved in the newly built buses or private buses in India any more (although state-owned buses still have to follow the law, by default). In India many years ago, a separate queue for females was a norm and was followed as such. With the growing protest, the situation in changing rapidly and people are accepting it with open hearts and minds. These days, many Indian females readily offer their seats to elderly or disabled passengers and nobody bats an eyelid – all due to the growing dissent against able-bodied women having priority seating over other passengers. Satisfied?
“It is anyhow still extremely bad that it happens even in one place” – yes, agreed!
“Well, large cities tend to be reflective to the situation in the entire country since in most countries in the world, the situation in the country side is worse than in the cities.” – Would you say whatever happens in Las Vegas is reflective to the general lifestyle of USA?
Even if I were to take your argument about the situation in the country-side being worse than in the cities to be true, wouldn’t it be fair to assume it applies to both genders?
“And still, having 10 seats/bus for women only and women-only trains it is still extremely misandric and an evidence of sexual apartheid” – Agree. But the point I raised is that it’s not omnipresent and shouldn’t be taken as if nothing has been/is being done to rectify the situation. People are very much acknowledging the misandry and the situation is only improving, at least in this regard.
“Why would you have a separate coach to begin with? I mean really, are women incapable of “eve-teasing” against other women? How about men against other men and women against other men? This is state-sponsored bigotry ma’am regardless of how you try to say it isn’t” – I never said the separate coach for women is fair. I explained how and what happened and if enough people protest against the reserved coach things would change. I also tried to explain why it’s not allowed (by law) for men to enter the reserved coach. And well, women ‘eve-teasing’ against other women would only probably be 0.5% of the entire eve-teasing populus, speaking of India. It’s sad that instead of women being taught how to protect themselves and men being taught how more to respect women (or men themselves), the state is sponsoring laws to separate them even more, as if we belong to different universe. Even sad that some people accept it.
“Is usually only one ATM machine on a 5 mile radius in India” – Yes, in towns like mine, we only have 1 ATM machine for one bank.. in the entire town.. for each bank. Until very recently, we’d be charged extra to use another bank’s ATM. Moreover, long queues aren’t outside a single ATM, it’s everywhere.
“Some people are slower! Deal with it.” – How about I ask men to deal with misandry? Careful! I specifically mentioned that I’m not holding longer queues or longer wait against anybody, even though it happens 90% of times that I have to use ATM in my town. I did mention, also, that there could be many different reasons why Anil had to wait longer for the bus ticket. It was probably one of those days, one of those places, and it’s definitely not a norm and therefore, people shouldn’t start screaming in horror and tag India as a country where every single man has to wait until all women are served, every single day.
“Really? Nobody ever heard of a protest organized by women to demand “down with misandry and sexual apartheid”. To me, any woman that says nothing about the issue – is a direct accomplice to the situation.” – Women in India have issues of their own to deal with, that are closer to their heart, for obvious reasons. Would you say a person donating to a charity closer to their heart is discriminating against all other charities because they are not donating to the rest of them? Misandry is something that men deal with. If men don’t like it, protest, speak against it, and other folks, women included, would join the cause.
Anil spoke about the discotheque situation in India. Disc owners giving preference to women – misandry? May be. Business tactic? May be. Men agreeing to this and not protesting/boycotting – misandry? No. It’s men being direct accomplice to the situation. Women accepting separate queues and reserved seating – misandry? Yes, and also, women being direct accomplice to the situation. Men accepting the same – misandry, and also, men being direct accomplice to the situation. Hope I’m clear!
“Really? Does the Indian Constitution says that “the state has the right to include special protections favoring men over women”? I read the Indian Constitution twice and never saw anything like that. However, I saw it the other way around!” – I can’t argue over what you read and what you didn’t. I’d however say that their are certain sections in the constitution that favor men, directly or indirectly. Example – law only considers sexual penetration to be rape/molestation of serious nature and has decided the punishment accordingly. It has outright ignored many other situations where a woman might have only just, but not exactly been penetrated, stripped naked in broad daylight in the middle of the road, etc. Would you say it is fair and/or shouldn’t result in as severe a punishment? Women don’t like many such sections of Indian constitution as men don’t like the same or other sections of the constitution. The Indian constitution does not specifically favour women in every given situation, in some, yes it does and that needs to change. A gender-neutral constitution would be ideal, wouldn’t it!?!
You raise some good points, and I agree with your overall thrust that what Anil has painted here are some of the worst encounters that he’s had in social norms.. and it would be wrong to take the worst case as the average case. That said, I will address a few of your points.
1) Although the girl was raped, tortured and mutilated viciously and her boyfriend ‘saw his friend getting raped’. Do you still want us to sympathize with the boyfriend equally?
You left out the key portion ‘he was beaten too’. Nobody is claiming that the man needed to be sympathized with equally. The fact that he’s being completely ignored is whats railing us.
Other crimes, as referred to by you are (mostly) done by men against men. Men are equally entitled to raise their voices and these voices are acknowledged as well.
You dont go deep enough into the problem. Sure other crimes are committed by men.. and if one peers deep into the lives of men and women, you understand how men are biologically and culturally evolved and required to be agents and women pretty much acted-upon objects. Women have played an equal role in that, through sexual selection.
We are unhappy that society sees the injustices against women, but not men. for e.g most of police brutality is directed at men, and you can see the policewoman act as brutally as men do.
Men raise their voices, but they arent heard. You are ignorant if you dont understand that. have you seen the numerous voices against 498A for last 20 years Love, Marriage & Sex in the city-498A. The commercial movie 498A-a-wedding-gift wasnt made for no reason. All conventional forms of protest and even judges referring to the law as “judicial terrorism” had no impact on public consciousness. Nobody rioted.
Re: 4,5,6) Queues: I lived in a Southern Indian city back in the 90s.. and I dont remember whether its 50% reservation for women or not. Nor do I remember seeing women-only queues encroaching on general-queues. Like Anil, I paid the higher rate for buses which had no reservation, and no standing either, so that I could get a seat to sit down. But the point remains that there were separate queues/small sections for women in trains, movie theatres, restaurants, etc. This is to show that women are always treated better than men in the public sphere.
Re: eve teasing.. Boo fucking hoo. You have one problem and the world comes down? Take precautions and deal with it. Dont fucking go on a slut walk or “teach men not to rape” if you want to be taken seriously. If you walk in a man’s shoes.. you will get the shock of your life. Ask Norah Vincent. Self made man
8) A lot of long-due amendments need to be made in the constitution and both genders are affected equally
Oh really? How come you didnt address Anil’s point about only men being held legally accountable for adultery? Not to mention the social thrashing that also occurs. Cheating husband beaten up by wife in India
You could add this lovely British-Indian lady to your list;.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/mother-kills-son-who-failed-to-learn-koran-20130108-2cdfm.html
At least she got 17 years minimum, but probably 5 to ten years less than a man would have got.
Hi Astrokid – Thank you for your thoughts and I appreciate your opening statement.
“You left out the key portion ‘he was beaten too’” – Have I? Umm.. no. ‘Both the girl and her boyfriend were beaten up. Although…’ is what I wrote.
In my response to another comment, I have tried to clarify why I think the sufferings of the girl and her boyfriend were of two different kinds and the boyfriend’s sufferings didn’t warrant the same level of attention/sympathy/provocation. In another post of mine, with the example of a person donating to a charity of their choice and shouldn’t be accused of discriminating against other charities, I hope I have made my point why it looks perfectly okay to me when the people protesting against this particular rape case aren’t paying too much attention to the boyfriend – they are more concerned with issues closer to their own hearts.
Having said all of that, I see more people around me feeling for the boyfriend and the cop who died in the protests, too, than people completely ignoring him. I appreciate there’s a section of population who can relate themselves more to the boyfriend than the girl and it’s quite understandable their feelings are different from the mass.
“You don’t go deep enough into the problem. Sure other crimes are committed by men.. and if one peers deep into the lives of men and women [...] We are unhappy that society sees the injustices against women, but not men [...]” – I appreciate your mature way of looking at things. While I may not agree with everything you said here, it certainly gives me food for thought.
“Men raise their voices, but they arent heard. You are ignorant if you dont understand that [...] Nobody rioted.” – Yes, I don’t understand (and/or pay as much attention to) a lot of issues around men as clearly as you do, but if enough people feel offended, why don’t they protest? What are they waiting for? There are many different ways to show your discomfort, one of them being this forum, there you go! You can’t expect everybody to turn their thoughts around as quick as you would like them to. I still maintain, voices are heard and acted upon, not all, not every single time, but they are, nevertheless.
“I lived in a Southern Indian city back in the 90s.. and I dont remember whether its 50% reservation for women or not. Nor do I remember seeing women-only queues encroaching on general-queues. Like Anil, I paid the higher rate for buses which had no reservation, and no standing either, so that I could get a seat to sit down. But the point remains that there were separate queues/small sections for women in trains, movie theatres, restaurants, etc.” – There you go. Isn’t it exactly my point? It happens, but not always and everywhere. Don’t judge the situation in India by a few worst-case instances and start making your one-sided opinions. My reasons exactly to comment on this article!
“Re: eve teasing.. Boo fucking hoo. You have one problem and the world comes down? Take precautions and deal with it. Dont fucking go on a slut walk or “teach men not to rape” if you want to be taken seriously” – You don’t tell people what to take offense of and how to deal with it. No, we don’t have ONE problem, but this is definitely the MAJOR ONE.
Would you stop a moment to consider there are people who take people seriously who do exactly the same that you are advising them against? To each, their own. The world keeps rotating!
I would have liked for you to also consider that we are sick of ‘taking precautions’, but I stopped myself at “Boo fucking hoo”. But hey, how do you suggest a little girl ‘takes precautions’ with her own brother/father/uncle; and maybe later deal with the molestation done by them? I know it’s not the right forum to discuss this, but, just curious!
If you walk in a man’s shoes.. you will get the shock of your life” – Same for you, buddy!
“Oh really? How come you didnt address Anil’s point about only men being held legally accountable for adultery? Not to mention the social thrashing that also occurs” – Incidentally, I didn’t address any specific point. I don’t claim to know the entire constitution, but the same way as you know sections in the constitution that are offensive to men, I also happen to know sections in the constitution (or the lack of them) that are offensive to women. Moreover, I haven’t been able to take time out to check the credibility of his point, therefore, not entitled to speak more about that in particular.
If you walk in a man’s shoes.. you will get the shock of your life” – Same for you, buddy!
…
I don’t claim to know the entire constitution, but the same way as you know sections in the constitution that are offensive to men, I also happen to know sections in the constitution (or the lack of them) that are offensive to women. Moreover, I haven’t been able to take time out to check the credibility of his point, therefore, not entitled to speak more about that in particular.
Listen.. There are people in the MRA who have analyzed gender relations for decades.. and they are very far along the curve than where you are. There’s a reason ex-feminists Erin Pizzey, Hoff Sommers, Warren Farrell et al who started addressing women’s issues.. have turned their back to feminism decades ago and and rubbish their literature, and have started fighting against it, in favour of men’s issues.
We understand that culture flourishes by making the most of men and women. Follow the work of GirlWritesWhat, typhonblue et al, so that any bias due to being male is eliminated. Read scholarly work like Is There Anything Good About Men?: How Cultures Flourish by Exploiting Men. Roy F. Baumeister.
Come up to speed, and get a comprehensive view of the situation of both sexes. Otherwise these conversations are by and large useless for us.
So, I’m supposed to accept everything Anil has written on its face value, because apparently A, B and C have turned their backs on feminist movements and X, Y and Z are writing scholarly works on MRA movements?
I am very grateful that you referred to me proper sources, references and links, that I WILL go through (and have gone through just a little bit, too), but I also have a mind of my own and see things and have the ability to judge the situations, too. As a 15 year old (when the reservation issue in India was at its peak), I knew that reservation for women (and reservation of any kind) was wrong and is only going to make situation worse, even though it would ensure me an easier access to the colleges of my choice, but as a 13 year old I also knew that when I grow up, I need to adopt a girl child, because incidentally, of all orphans in India, a staggering number of boys are picked up for adoption than girls (the situation has only somewhat improved in the later years).
With regards to reserved seats, as a male passenger, you might want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever being asked to leave it to another able-bodied person, as a female passenger, I would want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever worry about the ‘deliberate’ attempt of having my boobs touched, butts pinched or groping of any kind, which happens 40%-50% of times that I travel in a public transport, and I travel A LOT, throughout the country. I have grown to realize that sometimes these incidents can occur ‘unintentionally’, therefore I have dropped the percentage by almost 20%.
Being an able-bodied young female, I have made a conscious choice to resist reservation of any kind for myself. I don’t support misandry, but I do support a safer environment for all. It will take a lot of oscillations for the situations and mind-sets to reach an ideal mid-point, where every human being is treated equally.
I have read your comments/responses very carefully and I’ve enjoyed getting into your mind, at the same time, the issues and situations in India are very close to my heart. The incidents Anil has quoted are exaggerated and extreme in their nature and only paint a very dirty picture, which is not reflective to a comprehensive country-wide situation. That was the sole purpose that I commented here. If even 10% of people can realize that, my job is done here.
P.S.: I have a strong inclination to laugh at your statement – “The men and women MRAs on this site have risen above this”. While you might have come to believe this, my experience says different about most of them.
Yes, I don’t understand (and/or pay as much attention to) a lot of issues around men as clearly as you do, but if enough people feel offended, why don’t they protest? What are they waiting for? There are many different ways to show your discomfort, one of them being this forum, there you go!
I meant to quote this also. There are very strong reasons why men’s suffering is ignored.. people have protested for decades, but no luck.. Indian’s own Uma Challa has done a “jail-bharo”.. look at the photos.. there’s a concept called male-disposability. Its driven into the psyche of BOTH males and females. Its in both biological and cultural programming. The men and women MRAs on this site have risen above this.. and it has taken them years to intellectually understand this. We want both our sons and our daughters to be dealt with in a just manner.
There is no male disposability in Indian families. Sons are coveted, daughters not so much. JOINT FAMILY!
Wow. “men are biologically and culturally evolved and required to be agents and women pretty much acted-upon objects.”.
While there are certainly cultural and societal norms that create the actor/acted-upon dynamic, there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that we should be legally or culturally treating women and men differently. One of the great tenets of the MRM is equality – and everyone knows, separate isn’t equal.
1. “How many times have you seen people rioting on rape-cases in India?”
All the time. This time it got nationwide, probably worldwide. But riots against even the eve-teasing instances are common. College students regularly fight over single instances and newspapers are full with such incidents. You can refer to the Indian news websites like indiatimes.com etc.
“the fact that in most such cases women are the ones who are ultimately blamed for whatever happens and nonetheless hardly ever get justice”
Like in the present case? Or was it true of the present case before it got worldwide attention? Can you show me one news story blaming the victim, even prior to it becoming so widespread? If not, why do you think people should believe you at your word? Everything you stated is based on your own perception of the things. (I’d say the same about the author of the article as the author has not bothered to collect any data, but that is at least real incidents and not just feelings. This commenter is completely shooting up the pigs in the air.)
“Do you still want us to sympathize with the boyfriend equally?”
Personally, no. Your or anyone’s sympathy doesn’t mean iota. I’m only concerned about the laws and policies that are being proposed and that would be implemented. You can bet that they’ll take away the most basic constitutional rights of the men alone. In Mumbai, a wife murdered her husband around the same time and cut his body into 17 pieces. Is there anyone concerned about such events increasing nowadays? Is there any recommendation for laws targeting all the women?
“Men are equally entitled to raise their voices and these voices are acknowledged as well.”
As one commenter pointed above, horse-shit. Get your facts straight. “Facts” is something different from feewings. Look up. Voices were silenced by the police torture of the boy students who protested against female students’ 15% increase in entrance exam marks in the most prestigious institutions like the IIM’s. There are tens of such instances of obvious bias going on daily that don’t become national or international news. And you get to call these specific rare instances! Really? Anything bad happening to a woman is instantly something widespread and happening on a grand scale, anything bad happening to men at however large a scale is specific one-time instant! Reverse this for good instances! Pure feminist logic. Everyone here is aware of these dishonest tactics. Read more about feminist logic (and other terms) here.
“Rape is (mostly) done by men against women. Other crimes, as referred to by you are (mostly) done by men against men.”
Yeah everyone knows those men are so bad and evil and only they do something wrong. Since when do women have agency, except when it comes to demanding rights? Doesn’t mean that all men are evil. You’re vilifying the entire sex! Common feminist tactic. In fact this is all they do. By the way, was the wife in the news story I referred to above a man? Oh in that case you’d say that her boyfriend was responsible. How about the mom killing her son in the Qur’an story posted by another commenter above? Oh patriarchy is responsible. What about the everyday cases of false rape accusations, misuse of 498A, and proxy violence? Just because those women are never held responsible for their deeds (because presumption of innocence has been legally removed for the males) does not mean that most crimes are committed by men. Women commit more crimes, it’s just that they’re not seen as criminals when they do.
“Gender-neutral issues such as corruption see equal amount of participation (in various different forms) and discontent from both genders.”
Who said otherwise? Is this presented to give weight of truth to your lies? Like, with some insignificant bits of truths, some lies would also fly, right?
2. “Please get your information correct about the instances of rapes. They DO NOT mostly happen ‘at night when girls roam around unguarded in very bad neighborhoods’.”
Yeah, you said it, so I believe you. Entitled much? But I also criticize the author of the article here for not linking to a source. But a commenter who has chosen to refute that is also making the same mistake is doubly ridiculous, as in, the author’s claims without evidence are not ‘straight facts’, but mine somehow are!
3. “If you are not rioting on the streets about what (wrong/bad) is happening to men, then I say – shame on you. I, for one, is rioting for issues around both genders.”
We don’t need your advice. Shame on YOU for coming up on our forums and telling us to be ashamed of ourselves. Learn some manners. Rioting on streets for issues of men HAS taken place, only you’re unaware of the fact that they get beaten up badly with zero result or hearing, unlike what happened in the present rape case riots (constable got beaten up to death, special police cars made available to women only a their one call, autos requitred to take women anywhere they want after 7 PM whether that path falls into their root or not – this last one I heard but not confirmed. If true, what do the poor auto owners do? They get fined on the spot by police for not going to wherever the woman says. You think men’s protests ever brought about such a change?) If you’re rioting for issues around both the genders, why are you unaware of these unequal results? By the way, not that I believe you just because you said that you riot for issues of both the genders. Are you a professional rioter?
4. “Indian buses DO NOT have the entire front half reserved for women. In a bus consisting of 50-60 seats, only 0-10 seats are reserved for women.”
That is the case for some of the buses. As the author pointed out, there even are some AC buses that do not have the reserved seats at all. But you’re obviously lying. There ARE buses where half of the seats are reserved for women (the entire left row or the entire right row). This is enforced by a police official traveling in civil dress. Do you really not know this, cupcake? Pathetic liar. Your phrase “DO NOT” in capital letters is… what? A big bad symbol of your dishonesty. Wear this badge with pride forever. What a shameless fellow! In short, there are reserved seats, ranging from 20% to 100% (the last one meaning women-only). Saying that the buses “DO NOT” have 50% reservation is patently a lie, a blatant one.
“Delhi is inside India, but not India itself. Whatever happens in Delhi is not reflective to the situation in the entire country. Having traveled far and wide overall India, I say, the situation presented here is overly exaggerated.”
Not that you have any credibility left but the situation in other parts of the country are worse as well. Delhi is kinda average of the situations and perfectly represents India. Your mentioning of only the better situations is like the feminists in the West claiming that feminism is still needed in the West because the women in some third-world countries are being oppressed. You’re claiming that the situation in some parts of India is still better and justifying the average and worse conditions on its basis! Or you do not want those situations to be brought forward, painting only the bright picture, right?
“I have given my seat to elderly passengers hundreds of times too.”
That was your CHOICE and you did it out of your own good nature. The men are FORCED to do that, even when they’re elderly or weak. Getting the difference? As I already said, I don’t care if someone shows some kindness or acts of humanity. It’s the laws and policies that are discriminatory.
“but believe me, it’s not omnipresent. It’s more of an instance-given-as-example than a widespread phenomenon.”
Yeah we know, women acting bad is always instance-given-as-examples. Womansplaining much? You’re telling this to residents and daily passengers of Delhi? The people from the other countries may not know any better and that’s only where your bullshit works. Those who live there have to deal with this shit everyday. Stop lying, we know the truth. No way it’s a one-off instances. It’s absolutely pretty common. (That is why the seats reserved for women remain vacant. Had there been no widespread insistence from the girls to vacate them, wouldn’t the men always sit there? Only those sit there who do not feel insulted when asked to stand up when the better human being shows up.)
“The Delhi metro didn’t have a separate coach reserved for women in the beginning”
It still does not have a separate coach reserved for men, nor one is planned in future for those men who remain outside and have to wait for the next metro just because they cannot enter the reserved coach even when it’s empty.
“After many voices were raised against this issue, a separate coach is now reserved for women.”
So you admitted that women’s voices are heard, as opposed to your previous claim that nobody hears them? Plus, why is there not a corresponding male-only coach as well, just for the sake of equality? Can you point out to one instance of a male-only service that does not have a counter female-only equivalent even if just to make women happy? In the metro case, male-only coach is even badly needed, as you yourself pointed out how much the crowd had increased.
“True, men are not allowed to enter that coach even if there’s empty seat in the reserved coach, but then allowing men would beat the purpose of having a separate coach, wouldn’t it?”
Sure. But first, why don’t they tell them on the gate to not come in? You do know that men, especially the illiterate ones who can’t read, can get into those coaches unknowingly. Should they be beaten and thrown out? And the police then should praise the brave women for beating up the poor illiterate mill-workers? Yes, that is what happens, you know. Have you heard of something similar happening to a group of women who entered a male-only space? Cite.
6. “Separate queues for women is limited to very rural or backward areas of India, not prevalent throughout the country.”
Excuse me, what? Obviously false. First off, most of India is rural. Secondly, separate queues are present EVERYWHERE, especially in the cities and metro areas.
“Whenever there are separate queues, one person from each queue is entertained alternately”
Absolutely wrong. Women are ALWAYS treated first, exactly like the author of the article has described. This commenter is a liar. Families that are traveling send their women to get tickets just so that they can get it early! What does that suggest? A woman intrudes a ridiculously long line of men and get the ticket; men keep waiting in line. This is the routine phenomenon.
“contrary to how Anil has explained the situation, where the entire women queue is always entertained prior to entertaining ANY person in the other queue.”
What a liar!
“I can’t and wouldn’t put it against men in general and call it discrimination!”
You cannot label ATM queues as discriminatory because no human being is distributing the money there. A machine doesn’t differentiate between male and female. First come first served. “I wouldn’t put it against men” haha, you’ll look like a fool if you say that an ATM machine has discriminated against you. (Wait, YOU can do that, sorry. Feminists can do anything.) Now, compare the situation to a cash counter inside a bank, where the cashier is handing out or depositing the money. There IS the discrimination, and again, it’s against the men. Women routinely come at any time, intrude the long line, get their check or whatever cleared, and are on their way. Men keep waiting in the queue. Say it ain’t true?
7. “Men can be raped and are being raped every single day! But a major percentage of men raped are by men themselves and very few of them by women, in India”
Yeah, because the rape definition states that women cannot rape, period. And for your kind info, men raped by men are also only a few in India. The percentage therefore still compares where women rape men. Stop spitting half truths.
Thank you for commenting. I have gone over it carefully. First to a mistake of mine. It was my error in transcribing and editing the article that led to the use of “bad neighborhood” That was not Mr. Sharma’s mistake, so my apologies to all concerned. I have changed the text to more accurately reflect what he said.
Now, to answer your question. I have seen people in India riot over a rape once. And it was once too many, given more people were hurt and a police officer died. Hysterical mobs don’t solve a crime, or make for better laws.
And I vehemently disagree with your notion that rioting on the street over these issues is justified or warranted. Becoming a criminal is not what I consider activism, though it is clear you disagree with that.
Of more concern to me is the shrill calls for even more unjust laws on the books than India already has, but that is another subject.
Mr. Sharma did not say the women’s seats were in the front HALF of the bus, but in the front. I take him at his word, and find that you are criticizing something that was not said.
Additionally, just how many seats do men need to be excluded from in favor of women before it is wrong?
How about one?
I also offer that as a response to your other points. I don’t care what the excuse, or where it happens, treating men (or women) legally and systematically as though they are less than others is just wrong. Overcrowding? Please. Just wait your turn like everyone else.
Nor did Mr. Sharma, or anyone here, say that the boyfriend should have had equal sympathies to the woman who was murdered. What was noted was that he, like the slain police officer, are barely visible sideshows in the story. I have confirmed that myself in reading Indian media accounts.
As to comparing your experiences to Mr. Sharma’s in queues and otherwise, there is nowhere for me to go with that. I am not doubting your experience, or his. And now they are both on the record here.
While I appreciate your response to this, I find part of it lacking.
Watching the news worldwide, I see constant reference to the struggles of women in India. It reaches from the UN, to the US Secretary of State, and now the whole world is clamoring for laws and assistance for Indian woman.
At the same time I see men struggling to have their issues recognized at all.
I don’t pretend to know all the nuances and customs of your country, and there appears to be plenty of injustice going around for everyone, but it still appears to me that you have a very sour attitude about a man telling his side of the story.
This place is for men to tell their stories, and I remain grateful that Mr. Sharma told us his.
Hi Paul. I really appreciate your response to my comments and the fact that you responded, in particular. A very mature way to consider both sides of the story and a very mature and articulate way of responding. My replies to the other responses are delayed, but I have more, much more to say. However, that, in no way, implies that I am against Mr. Sharma, or men in general. Would you believe if I said that I am against misandry myself, in fact I’m against most things/causes that goes to unreasonably extreme proportions so as to start hurting others (in this case men)? My gripe is with the points that Anil had presented and the way most people have taken most of them on face value and considered it a general phenomenon. On that note, I appreciate Astrokid for understanding the undertone of my comments!
With regards to your point about women seats in the buses, here’s the exact statement from the article – “Our buses have seats reserved for women; the front half”.
I will write more when I have some time, but for now here’s what I have to offer – some people here are confusing a fight against misandry with a fight against females.
Thank you again for responding. The implication of the statement as written was that the reserved seats were within the front half of the bus, but I can understand why the way it was worded could make it look like the entire front half.
Hello Sudhulika. It’s great that you have put down your views here. This would help people understand how the average Indian woman thinks. I am also a hated Indian male. Let me, like everybody else, comment on each of your points.
“How many times have you seen people rioting on rape-cases in India?”
Many times (if by rioting you mean protesting). Two examples – Thangjam case, 2004 and Shopian case, 2009. However, this is the most widespread protest ever. Such large scale protests should have been carried out for bigger problems like murders, illiteracy, poverty etc. due to which far more people are affected. Obviously, this does not mean that the ongoing protests are meaningless or unnecessary.
“Do you want us to sympathise with the boyfriend equally?”
I feel that the sympathy for the girl is nothing compared to the people’s desire to see the criminals punished brutally. Also, the physical brutality of the crime is being neglected. It’s just about the rape i.e. the sexual nature of the crime. The physical brutality should be the main concern here but it’s not. So, here’s how it works. Rape is a crime committed only by men and only women are victims > This incident involves rape > Let’s get mad and blow it out of proportions. The girl’s friend is forgotten and the police constable who died during the protest is just another disposable man. I am pretty sure that the friend wouldn’t even care about being forgotten. But can compassion be so subjective? Why aren’t there posters saying “Do not brutally beat people” or “Do not kill a man doing his duty”?
“Please get your information correct about the…”
Well, I am quite sure that finding information about when rapes are most likely to occur in India, is going to be very difficult. But most of them happen in areas which are dark and/or secluded, which, according to me, is what the author probably means by using the word “night”. Besides, it is indeed common during nights. The other cases where family members, friends etc. are involved, may not happen during a particular time of the day as these criminals have their own houses and the trust of the victims. Certainly, it does not happen all the time and murders are more common without a doubt.
“If you are not rioting on the streets about what (wrong/bad) is happening to men, then I…”
I truly hope that your constant use of the word “riot” instead of “protest” is a result of your carelessness and not a reflection of your mind. Otherwise, it just gives me a reason to believe that anarchy is all you want.
The problem is that nobody cares about oppressed men. Most men won’t even come forward. This society would just turn them into a laughing stock and they would be portrayed as weak and effeminate…things that a man just cannot take. The minimum requirement for these protests would be to have real victims as the protesters. Among the girls who took part in the Delhi protest, how many girls do you think were rape victims? It is safe to assume that very few were. But if you think men who have not been victims can come out and protest like this and they will get attention in the same way, then you are seriously mistaken. More misandry is what you are going to get. Men can actually be blamed for this. If all the men came out and protested there would be a big change. But, evidently, in our country, big movements require big sexual crimes.
“Indian buses DO NOT have the entire front half reserved for women…”
I do not know how much you have travelled Sudhulika. But apart from the north eastern states I have been to almost every state. This reservation is present everywhere. Most of the buses have two doors – one at the front and one in the middle. All the seats before the middle door are reserved seats – ladies, senior citizens and handicapped citizens. This is not exactly 50% of the bus, but it is roughly half the bus. The number of seats would be 15 to 20. But the number of reserved seats is irrelevant. Why are there seats reserved for women? The author has not mentioned that this happens only in Delhi, so I do not understand why you and the other person are trying to argue over whether things that happen in Delhi can be used to generalise what happens in the entire country or not. I have seen this in all the local buses (buses within a state). I agree that a few air conditioned buses do not have this reservation. In interstate buses, if a seat has been booked by a woman, the seat next to it is blocked automatically for a woman. A man cannot book that seat even if his father is dying and it’s his last chance to meet him. If no woman books the seat, it stays empty. For overnight journeys it might be weird for a woman to travel with an unknown man (our society is very conservative). So maybe in some cases, it could be justified. But it’s still discrimination. As one of the writers pointed out, you stand up for people elder to you of your own volition. You, as a person with good ethics, stand up out of respect. It is not the same thing as being forced to stand up. 80% of the people do not sit without concern. The ones that do will have to get up when a woman comes. Your condemning is not enough. I condemn atrocities against women. But does it help anybody?
“The Delhi metro didn’t have a separate coach reserved for women…”
If eve-teasing was such a big issue, why didn’t they just provide separate trains for men and women? Even from a feminist’s point of view, special coaches for women cannot be the solution as women can still go with men and according to a feminist, that would be lethal. It’s true that you can’t have all the trains marked as either “men” or “women” because that would separate couples and families. So, why not have, in each train, one coach for men, one coach for women and the others available to both?
“Separate queues for women is limited to very rural or backward areas of India, not prevalent throughout the country”
I disagree. This is a popular trend in many major cities. The author clearly mentions that he was buying an interstate bus ticket for a midnight bus. So, there’s a very high chance that it was a big bus station. The ATM argument hardly makes any sense. You will easily find out that women take much more time than men while using the ATM. Also, the queue at the ATM is long because other people came before you and not because they are men and they get to go first. That’s why you can’t call it discrimination. What Anil has mentioned happens more often than you think.
“Men can be raped and are being raped every…”
Yes, men can be the victims too. But what can men do when the government doesn’t even recognise the crime? I am not sure if you know what section 375 of the IPC says. There is a slight chance that this might change soon…Equality for the first time!
“Women in India don’t like Indian constitution as much as men in India don’t like it, trust me, for various different reasons.”
Yea…and that’s why I am scared. I am pretty sure the amendments include things like allowing the possession of weapons by women without the need for a licence, killing men and not being punished, etc.
Sudhulika, how is it that women demand equality and then ask for privileges? If women are so weak that they can’t even stand in a bus, how are they going to do “a man’s work”? The law is biased towards women, the country considers every man a criminal, a man has to prove his innocence to save himself from being punished…is this really equality? Are the criminals being punished for committing crimes or are men being punished for being men? I fear that you won’t come back to see the replies, but I hope that you do.
I have come back to see the reply and I will respond too
. I don’t have the luxury of time and a good internet connection, therefore, my replies would be delayed. I have however, come back to apologize for using the word ‘riot’, where I should have used ‘protest’. In my mind I knew what I should have said, but while writing, the improper usage of word made a lot of difference. I appreciate you politely pointing that out. More on the other points later
Even I have an extremely slow connection. Stop playing victim or powerless at every turn, which seems to be habitual. I’m replying here to subscribe to the comments so I can expose your lies. In your future responses, don’t make the mistake of assuming the audience to be from the foreign countries that doesn’t know anything about India other than what you tell them.
By the way, how about pointing out one more lie before I leave. An “average Indian female” reading and commenting on the AVfM and knowing Dr Elam too? LOL LOL LOL
And in response to his comment you said, some people here are confusing a fight against misandry with a fight against women.
Yeah, tell us unholy masses how we should think and what our definitions of misandry should be. What do we know? What statement from any commenter here reflects a ‘fight against women’ or a ‘war on women’?
“And in response to his comment you said, some people here are confusing a fight against misandry with a fight against women.
Yeah, tell us unholy masses how we should think and what our definitions of misandry should be. What do we know? What statement from any commenter here reflects a ‘fight against women’ or a ‘war on women’?” – Yes, this was specifically directed towards you. I’m glad it has hit the bull’s eye! You considering every female a feminist, and thereby criticizing them whether or not there is an opportunity, gives me such an idea. I would have liked to ignore your comments considering you an immature fool who doesn’t understand the difference between a fight against misandry and a fight against women, except that you are so hateful, it literally makes me sick in my stomach.
I’m not obliged to respond to you or anybody else, in a time-frame that is convenient to you.
“Even I have an extremely slow connection. Stop playing victim or powerless at every turn, which seems to be habitual” – Really? You’re able to comment every few minutes and complaining about an “extremely slow” Internet connection? I have to copy-paste articles/comments/notes/… that I want to respond to on a notepad, complete my response over a reasonably long stretch of time and then post it at an off-peak hour, to be able to stay connected. Now, THIS, my friend, is what I call a slow internet connection. None of this makes me any less powerful than you, but it does divert my time and attention to more important things, like doing my job and taking care of two toddlers. Surfing Internet might score very high on your daily schedule, since you are probably an average Indian alpha male, whose mum/sister/wife/daughter cooks and cleans for you. Tell me it’s a lie!
Westerners, taking the plight of Indian men in consideration, sometimes forget the average social structure of the country, where males get the “cream of the milk”, by default, throughout their life. I don’t often hear men complaining about it then. Tell me it’s a lie!
“By the way, how about pointing out one more lie before I leave. An “average Indian female” reading and commenting on the AVfM and knowing Dr Elam too? LOL LOL LOL
” – I never claimed to know Dr Elam, unless you are referring to (Dr) Paul Elam, who I know only as much from his comments as I know you from yours. I stumbled upon AVfM through a link posted on facebook. Is it unheard of for an “average Indian female” to keep a facebook profile and go through links that catch their attention? Tell me it’s a lie!
“All the time. This time it got nationwide, probably worldwide. But riots against even the eve-teasing instances are common. College students regularly fight over single instances and newspapers are full with such incidents. You can refer to the Indian news websites like indiatimes.com etc.” – You can refer to the same Indian news websites to find evidences for whichever of my statements do you need evidence for. If eve-teasing/rape instances and the related riots/protests are reported in the newspapers ‘all the time’, these newspapers wouldn’t be limited to only so many pages. Protests are mostly only done (if at all) by the affected female’s family members, friends and relatives and most of the times these protests don’t get them anywhere. Please check the said source for evidences and statistics. Rape cases are getting growing attention due to the growing number of such instances.
“Like in the present case? Or was it true of the present case before it got worldwide attention? Can you show me one news story blaming the victim, even prior to it becoming so widespread?” – Yes, hundreds of people are blaming the said victim for being outside at that hour. They do so very regularly in multiple different rape cases in multiple different forms. Sometimes it’s the dress, the other times it’s the time, or place where she was, or person who she was with (or wasn’t with), or what she said, or did, or didn’t do. Go on, check the Indian news websites reporting the prominent people every day claiming in one way or another how this particular victim could have stopped that being happening by doing (or not doing) one thing or another. These news websites don’t even bother to report what common people say. I have thousands such examples but hey, so do you. Tell me it’s a lie!
“This commenter is completely shooting up the pigs in the air.)” – so are you, my friend, so are you!
“Personally, no. Your or anyone’s sympathy doesn’t mean iota. I’m only concerned about the laws and policies that are being proposed and that would be implemented.” – So am I. Your or anybody else’s hatred doesn’t mean iota, however, ironically, you seem to fishing for sympathy for the ‘cruelty’ happening against men quite often, sheesh!
“In Mumbai, a wife murdered her husband around the same time and cut his body into 17 pieces. Is there anyone concerned about such events increasing nowadays? Is there any recommendation for laws targeting all the women?” – Yes, people are concerned and she would be punished if not already. No, there isn’t any recommendation for laws targeting all the women and there shouldn’t be. Again, laws should be gender-neutral for gender-neutral issues.
“As one commenter pointed above, horse-shit. Get your facts straight. “Facts” is something different from feewings. Look up. Voices were silenced by the police torture of the boy students who protested against female students’ 15% increase in entrance exam marks in the most prestigious institutions like the IIM’s. There are tens of such instances of obvious bias going on daily that don’t become national or international news. And you get to call these specific rare instances! Really? Anything bad happening to a woman is instantly something widespread and happening on a grand scale, anything bad happening to men at however large a scale is specific one-time instant! Reverse this for good instances! Pure feminist logic. Everyone here is aware of these dishonest tactics. Read more about feminist logic (and other terms) here.” – I have already pointed those ‘instances’ in another post of mine. You choosing to disregard them doesn’t make them disappear.
“Doesn’t mean that all men are evil. You’re vilifying the entire sex! Common feminist tactic.” – And you are vilifying the entire (female) sex, too! I have very carefully used the word ‘mostly’. In what universe does it not make sense?
“What about the everyday cases of false rape accusations, misuse of 498A, and proxy violence? Just because those women are never held responsible for their deeds (because presumption of innocence has been legally removed for the males) does not mean that most crimes are committed by men” – Such cases happening is wrong and it’s misandry. Me refuting/commenting on some statements posted by the author doesn’t imply that I support everything wrong happening against men. You don’t give a shit, do you?
“Women commit more crimes, it’s just that they’re not seen as criminals when they do.” – shooting up pigs in the air, are you?
“Who said otherwise? Is this presented to give weight of truth to your lies? Like, with some insignificant bits of truths, some lies would also fly, right?” – So, what are you saying? Am I not allowed to write anything that YOU perceive to be true?
“Yeah, you said it, so I believe you. Entitled much? But I also criticize the author of the article here for not linking to a source.” – please check the statistics from the same news websites for the credibility of my statement that you have referred to me.
“Shame on YOU for coming up on our forums and telling us to be ashamed of ourselves.” – Last I checked, it was a public forum.
“Rioting on streets for issues of men HAS taken place, only you’re unaware of the fact that they get beaten up badly with zero result or hearing, unlike what happened in the present rape case riots (constable got beaten up to death, special police cars made available to women only a their one call, autos requitred to take women anywhere they want after 7 PM whether that path falls into their root or not – this last one I heard but not confirmed.” – people protesting/rioting against issues around females get beaten up, too, with zero results often. So, what’s new?
“By the way, not that I believe you just because you said that you riot for issues of both the genders. Are you a professional rioter?” – Do you have a problem?
“That is the case for some of the buses. As the author pointed out, there even are some AC buses that do not have the reserved seats at all. But you’re obviously lying. There ARE buses where half of the seats are reserved for women (the entire left row or the entire right row)” – My point exactly! The author’s statement ‘Our buses have seats reserved for women; the front half.’ does imply that such is the case in every single bus in every single city. Tell me it’s a lie!
“Do you really not know this, cupcake? Pathetic liar. Your phrase “DO NOT” in capital letters is… what? A big bad symbol of your dishonesty.” – No, honey-pie, it’s a manner of written communication.
“Not that you have any credibility left but the situation in other parts of the country are worse as well.” – yes, worse for both genders, not that I need your approval for everything I say.
“Delhi is kinda average of the situations and perfectly represents India.” – shooting up pigs in the air, are you?
“Or you do not want those situations to be brought forward, painting only the bright picture, right?” – Yes, I want those situations and the situations I mentioned, both to be brought forward, for the reason so people who see India from our eyes, can see a fairer picture, not just the dirty one.
“That was your CHOICE and you did it out of your own good nature. The men are FORCED to do that, even when they’re elderly or weak [...] I don’t care if someone shows some kindness or acts of humanity. It’s the laws and policies that are discriminatory.
” – both fair points.
“It still does not have a separate coach reserved for men, nor one is planned in future for those men who remain outside and have to wait for the next metro just because they cannot enter the reserved coach even when it’s empty.” – Wow! With the population in India/Delhi, there would almost always be people waiting for the next bus/metro at peak hours. Reservation in metro is wrong, people waiting outside is not. The women-only coach, during peak hours (when men have to wait for the next metro) is also crowded. Tell me it’s a lie!
I’ve lived in Delhi for a decent period of time for me to base my statement upon.
“So you admitted that women’s voices are heard, as opposed to your previous claim that nobody hears them?” – When did I claim that? Two negatives don’t always make a positive.
“Sure. But first, why don’t they tell them on the gate to not come in? You do know that men, especially the illiterate ones who can’t read, can get into those coaches unknowingly. Should they be beaten and thrown out?” – Ha! Does anyboy here seriously believe girls start beating up any male who enters the reserved coach without first asking them to leave because it’s a reserved coach. Tell me it’s a lie!
Again, the reservation is wrong, but, so is your claim.
“Have you heard of something similar happening to a group of women who entered a male-only space?” – Yes, most of those women get raped! Tell me it’s a lie!
“Secondly, separate queues are present EVERYWHERE, especially in the cities and metro areas.” – shooting up pigs in the air, are you? Or have you only been confined to your own city, with a computer and “extremely slow” Internet connection to work on?
“Absolutely wrong. Women are ALWAYS treated first, exactly like the author of the article has described.” – And we are supposed to believe you, because apparently we don’t know better!
“Families that are traveling send their women to get tickets just so that they can get it early!” – Men supporting misandry? In my humble opinion, yes. Or are you going to resort to the ‘powerlessness’ or ‘victimization’ of men? Aww, poor you! There, there.
“You cannot label ATM queues as discriminatory because no human being is distributing the money there.” – You completely missed the point!
“Now, compare the situation to a cash counter inside a bank, where the cashier is handing out or depositing the money. There IS the discrimination, and again, it’s against the men. Women routinely come at any time, intrude the long line, get their check or whatever cleared, and are on their way. Men keep waiting in the queue. Say it ain’t true?” – Yes, there’s a separate queue for women at places, but doesn’t happen everywhere, not even in most banks in a small town like mine, not even in most banks in a metropolitan city. Tell me it’s a lie!
“And for your kind info, men raped by men are also only a few in India. The percentage therefore still compares where women rape men.” – So, if I’m not wrong, you’re saying that the percentage of women ‘raping’ men is greater than the percentage of men raping men? Oh, do I sense an irony here, since, you earlier stated that by definition, women cannot rape men? Period!?!
And for your kind info, the original article never compared any percentages in this case. Tell me it’s a lie!
“I personally don’t care about sympathy etc but you must know that according to Ms Clinton, the war deaths of male soldiers are more horrific to women who have to face the shock of the death for life, because those soldiers have already died. Whichever is right, I don’t care. But I presented this to give you a perspective.” – In the case of rapes, however, people don’t die as often. They live to suffer, most of them, their entire lives. Tell me it’s a lie!
Anyway, the fact remains that the recent protests are against the rape and not against the people who suffer from having to witness that. Those people are equally entitled to start their own battle against the rapists for making them see that.
“Yes. Remember though that men alone are also attacked, and more so than women. Don’t make it sound like only women and only those men that accompany them are attacked.” – You can turn and twist the statement however you wish. I still maintain that everybody is entitled to fight against the issues they find unjust.
“Nope. The protests are a feminist propaganda to get those laws described in the above article passed.” – No, my friend. A majority of people are protesting against rapes and the laws that allow rapists go free or with minimum punishment. Tell me it’s a lie!
“People that are non-feminists and taking part in the protests are the useful idiots and goats to be stabbed. Usual trick.” – Aww, I feel sorry!
“On a common sense basis, what idiot would rape in broad daylight in front of all?” – Really? Are your so ignorant? People do get raped in broad daylight, in front of all, at homes, at schools/colleges, in playgrounds, in offices, on roads, in buses/trains… and also in bad neighborhoods. Tell me it’s a lie!
Common sense takes a back seat as soon as a person intends to rape another person.
“This has never happened.” – Yes, it has happened, as you yourself has mentioned the situation in ‘newly built’ AC buses. Go around more often, you’ll see many more non-AC buses, too, without reserved seats.
“Laws and policies are applied irrespective of the buses’ model.” – This law applies only to government owned buses.
“actually there’s more and more demand for separate windows because then at least the women won’t intrude the male queue” – Wow, so does that imply that men are the ones vouching for separate queues/windows for their own comfort? Men supporting misandry? Go, fight against them. Stop blaming females for everything.
“No way in the hell is anything like this happening. Women are becoming more and more self-centered and demanding seats from even the elderly, as the author of the article described.” – Yes way, on this very earth, and in this very country is this happening! You have no obligation to believe anything I say, the same way I haven’t.
“We don’t care about the women’s problems whether they’re better or worse” – the same way feminists don’t care about men’s problems? Why complaining then?
“Why should he be silenced or ignored? Because you’re uncomfortable?” – He’s only being corrected. If that bothers you, don’t silence me because you’re uncomfortable!
“What is being done is making more and more reservations in the buses, not less as you claimed. If your claims are true, give a single link” – Aren’t you ‘doubly ridiculous’ (your own adjective) for doing the same that you accused me of?
“You’re a fool if you think anyone here will believe that just because YOU said.” – So are you!
“And it was explained to you that it has happened and didn’t work. Multiple time” – Horse shit!
“Feminists are proposing all those laws.” – Your kind are doing the same, for the opposite sex! Boo-hiss
“Generally speaking. Women are happy to or neutral to. Men are forced to.” – Indian men are happy or neutral to accept better treatment inside an average Indian family, Indian women are forced to.
Deal with it, or speak against it, like the opposite sex is doing.
“So you know more about Anil’s situation on that night than Anil himself??” – Anil is speaking on behalf of all Indian men here. I claim to know otherwise about the average situation in India.
“Why can’t you face the simple and plain fact that women regularly intrude the men’s queues and are always served first?” – I would, if it was a ‘fact’!
“[...] and this feminist says it favors men because women are being stripped naked (for which separate punishment already exists, of course)!” – Do you even know what’s the punishment? One year. Geez, and we’re supposed to accept it as a just punishment, only because you don’t know any better!
“Let us talk about the present situation rather than the ideals and dreams.” – You do your business and leave me to mine. I don’t need your permission to talk about things that I choose to.
“Take your vile opinions elsewhere. Look at her guts! She comes over to a men’s forum and says we can expect and ignore the harm being done to the countless men because it’s being good to women!!” – I don’t need your approval to present my opinions here; how you wish I would have
!
What I’m really saying is, there are times when something bad is ignored or tolerated for a greater good. Doesn’t turn that “bad” into “good”, but any law made specifically for men is bound to harm the opposite sex, too, and is bound to be misused, too. Hence, my support for gender-neutral laws for gender-neutral issues.
“So which is it? Is it important to take the misuse into account or is it fine to ignore it if it’s inevitable and happens only to benefit the women?” – Seriously, grow up. I wrote a perfectly neutral statement. Tell me it’s a lie!
“Tee Hee
After reading my first link (on top of this comment), please please tell me she’s for real.” – Not my problem if you choose to wrap yourself up in a knowledge bubble and filter what your see and perceive to be as true.
:
“Have you heard of something similar happening to a group of women who entered a male-only space?” – Yes, those women get raped, in the same proportion as the men beaten up and thrown out for traveling in a reserved coach. Tell me it’s a lie!
I have traveled in Delhi metro quite regularly and mostly when there are enough vacant seats, women don’t object to men occupying them.
“With regards to reserved seats, as a male passenger, you might want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever being asked to leave it to another able-bodied person, as a female passenger, I would want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever worry about the ‘deliberate’ attempt of having my boobs touched, butts pinched or groping of any kind, which happens 40%-50% of times that I travel in a public transport, and I travel A LOT, throughout the country. I have grown to realize that sometimes these incidents can occur ‘unintentionally’, therefore I have dropped the percentage by almost 20%. ”
Our government does not entitle us to grab your boobs or pinch your butt. It is a felony. However, our government does entitle you to ask a man to stand up if he is sitting in a seat reserved for women. So, this is not even a reasonable comparison.
Let’s take the example of a pickpocket instead. I want to be able to travel in any bus without being robbed. If I am in a more crowded bus the chances of me getting robbed are higher. Also, a pickpocket would almost always be poor. So, shall we just restrict the use of buses to the rich people? What about the millions of poor people who work hard to earn their bread?
Even I hate the way how some women look at me as if I were a molester when in reality I would not even touch them even if they asked me to. If some retard grabs your boobs it is not my problem. I am sitting quietly thinking about Einstein’s theory of Relativity and your butt is not even the last thing on my mind. Why, then, should I be treated in a way that only the retard deserves? Giving you a special seat does not even solve the problem. Separate buses would be a better alternative. You don’t have to worry about your private parts and we don’t have to worry about being blamed for shit we don’t even care about.
I would also like to give you a completely different perspective. You talk about your boobs being touched and your butt being pinched. Well, neither of the acts really hurt and, as everybody willingly assumes, it is done by someone of the opposite sex, so you should not feel weird and enjoy it. Why doesn’t anybody think like this? Why don’t men (savage beasts) think like this? Aren’t they dying to molest women? But that does not surprise you, does it? Are you thankful that men sacrifice their so-called natural instinct and understand your problems? You take that acceptance for granted. It’s because most men do not do it and consider it wrong. When the bus is crowded at the back, do you think we enjoy brushing up against each other? A few days back, a dirty woman (i.e. with poor hygiene) came and stood next to me. She kept brushing up against me. Should I protest to have all the disgusting women thrown out? You cannot justify the reservation of even one seat unless you accept that women are handicapped and inferior to men to a very great extent. Even if 90% of the men molest women, you should not reserve seats. What about the 10% who didn’t do anything? And what good does reserving seats do anyway? Besides, the reality would probably be just the opposite with 90% men doing nothing. Bottom pinching is a rare act no matter what people say. It happens very rarely. Even, if 1000 women get their bottoms pinched everyday, it is still a rare event because India has a population of over a billion people. 1000 women and 1000 “pinchers” would constitute less than 0.0002% of the entire population. NO, It does not justify the act, but then the act does not justify gender discrimination either. I fail to understand how reserving seats can stop a molester from molesting. It just does not make any sense.
PS: you came back but you did not reply to my post.
Behind the hysteria in India over the Delhi rape case is that the young woman’s male friend was beaten to a pulp, stripped naked and had his leg broken. When they were dumped under an overpass they laid there for almost a half hour while several vehicles ignored them until police fianlly arrived.
Also, the rapists were “migrant workers” (yeah I know, very politically incorrect) that are know to cause trouble with the locals. And it was also disclosed by the male friend that the “migrant workers” directed some smart-ass remarks towards the young woman and she mouthed off back to them – prompting their brutal act.
I’ve been the only white guy on a subway late at night when a half-dozen Crips or Bloods got on board. Believe me, I remain very respectful while they taunt me.
Same here. In such a circumstance, I wouldn’t dare to talk back to argue at all.
If you want to get out alive in those circumstances, it’s a basic common sense to at lease act respectful towards the assholes.
“Believe me, I remain very respectful while they taunt me.”
Yes, an overtly inflated ego and sense of entitlement can be a real bitch to live with sometimes.
Perhaps she thought the boyfriend would take the heat? It’s different being a guy – you know no one will save you.
I found this article very interesting. It reminded me of the importance of keeping an open mind and hearing both sides of the story. There should be “a voice for men” from India here regularly to keep us updated on the developments there. I had no idea these conditions existed.
This whole discussion/fixation on seats reserved in Indian buses misses the real crux of misandry in India. I personally have no issue with seats being reserved in Indian buses for women. Sexually repressed males do often behave inappropriately in crowded buses against women.
The real, pernicious misandry has been taking place in the legal system – whether it is criminal courts or civil courts and family courts, or the law enforcement. The real misandry is taking place in the myriad government departments conducting studies, collecting statistics, performing legislative analyses to help drafting legislation – that is where the bulk of tragedy inflicted upon males is originating. Legislation such as – IPC 498a, PWDVA, CrPC 125 just scratch the surface of entrenched, deep rooted whiteknightery and misandry in India. Sec ipc 304-B states if a woman dies within seven years of marriage, her husband and his extended family are presumed guilty of causing her death. Many families are languishing in prisons as they are not rich enough to bribe their way out or hire expensive lawyers to unprove their presumed guilt. In the seventies, many inexperienced young married girls died handling defective kerosene stoves. The feminist machinery was successful in converting this tragedy into a special bogus category called dowry death. Now, for any one in the west, India, a center for spirituality and ancient wisdom, is now characterized as a barbaric society willing to burn alive young women for money. Not one sensible elder from the country has the cajones to counter this malicious and vicious propaganda.
There is a very dynamic mens movement in India under an umbrella organization “Save Indian Family Foundation”. Many blogs are written, many street protests carried out and many petitions submitted to the authorities. But the stranglehold the Indian feminazis have on the upper echelons of power (executive, judicial and legislative) and on the mainstream media is so pervasive, it is hard to make any dent. With the rape hysteria gripping the country now, the Feminist machinery is now busy dusting off all the perverse legislation they were unsuccessfully pushing for sometime. You will now see a slew of new rules and laws on books that will make the ones currently on the books look like a child’s play.
http://feministmedia.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/anniversary-of-the-abomination-called-pwdva-2005/
“Sec ipc 304-B states if a woman dies within seven years of marriage, her husband and his extended family are presumed guilty of causing her death. Many families are languishing in prisons as they are not rich enough to bribe their way out or hire expensive lawyers to unprove their presumed guilt.”
This is just horrible.
MateNeo they involve the husbands extended family because of the joint family system wherein a bride goes to live in the house of her in-laws. That system is actually the root of all misandry and misogyny in our country.
I think it is important to remember that these laws, while definitely immoral, are often being written in response to specific problems in Indian culture. Bride-burning, the systemic abuse perpetrated by mothers-in-law against step daughters, the system of dowries which commodifies women and impoverishes men.
While this law is obviously not the right solution, I understand the legislative struggle that must be ongoing – how to protect women and men from the systems of oppression we’ve created is difficult and complex.
Let’s examine the following passage:
“This whole discussion/fixation on seats reserved in American buses misses the real crux of rasism in America. I personally have no issue with seats being reserved in American buses for white people. Sexually repressed and non-bathed blacks often behave inappropriately in crowded buses against whites.” – How does that sounds? Does it sound “OK”? NO! It does not. It’s racist and bigotry.
And since the aforementioned passage is racist and evidence of bigotry, so is this passage misandrist and evidence of bigotry and lack of compassion for men and boys. What passage? This:
“This whole discussion/fixation on seats reserved in Indian buses misses the real crux of misandry in India. I personally have no issue with seats being reserved in Indian buses for women. Sexually repressed males do often behave inappropriately in crowded buses against women.”
Lucian, you are overreacting.
I am Indian, and I am sure Kris is too. You cant just switch words/groups to form a “racist” statement.. and deduce an equivalence. The dynamics are different for the two situations.
India has to solve its problems with the resources it has. It doesnt have a ready police force that can be instantaneously reached through 911, cars and wide roads for cops to show up at a crime scene in minutes. We want women to be able to co-exist and compete with men in the public sphere..where they are significantly outnumbered right now because lots of women prefer to be SAHMs.. and the public sphere is lots more rough-and-tumble in India than in developed countries.. some sexually repressed males do often behave inappropriately in crowded buses against women is a fact, whether palatable or not.. given that Indian males and females typically do not get sex till marriage.
Given this situation.. certain concessions have been made, such as reserved seats on buses (maybe a 30% women-70% men scheme would be more appropriate). Society will always treat women better than men. I dont think we can do much about that. So.. this is not about lack of compassion for men and boys.. this is more about being pragmatic, and focusing on where the better-treatment goes off the rails.
Hi Lucian – Thanks for all the great reporting you do from Europe. My point is – as an MRA you dont need to give a pass to someone just for being male. The realities in overcrowded India are such. When men misbehave with women in a public transport bus, many women don’t complain, but should one complain, the accused is met with what is equivalent of lynching.
If the extent of misandry in India is just segregation in public transport, I wouldn’t have much to complain. If you read the rest of the post, you should be able to see the true misandry that is extant in the legal system of India. I hope you also saw my other comment on the vigilante killings by cops of men accused of crimes against women. No courts, no due process, just plain simple shoot dead in broad daylight and everyone is all applause for their heroic cowardice in killing unarmed barely twenty young men. Now you see, which type of misandry should you be concerned with! I hope you understand!!
Yes, in a way what you say is right. The discussions seem to revolve around “reserved seats”. But I feel that it’s the most common form of discrimination, one that most Indians can relate to. Like you, almost everybody in this country accepts this and would never object to this discrimination. Once while travelling on a bus, I overheard a young man asking a middle-aged man the following question, “Why are there seats reserved for women but not men?” The middle-aged man replied, “You should never question such things. You should just accept it.”
This is probably the worst time to correct our laws. We have at our hands, one of the most sensational crimes in recent times and it’s against a woman committed by a group of young men. Any change or amendment introduced, would be against men. Nobody is going to care about men’s rights right now.
Vigilante justice by the police white knights is actively encouraged and widely praised in India. Three young men suspected to have allegedly throwing acid on a girl were summarily executed in the name of encounter. Everybody was all praise for the police officers concerned. Not one civil rights group raised an eyebrow.
These sentences sum up the misandry -
“But public, baying for the blood of the acid attackers, applauded the extra judicial killing. s the news of the encounter trickled down, a large number of jubilant women and girls thronged Mamnoor, the encounter site off Warangal, to get a glimpse of the three. ”
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-12-14/india/27893334_1_acid-burns-acid-attackers-encounter
Thank you so very much for speaking on behalf of Indian Men. Thank you.
I would seriously like to know more about the issue of ‘dowry harassment cases.’ (see below.)
http://peterzohrab.tripod.com/dowrylaw.html
“Laws originally meant to protect from the dowry menace are being misused by urban ill-intentioned, unscrupulous women and their families as “an assassin’s weapon.”
When India does away with the joint family system wherein women actually live with their in-laws in the same house, then these false accusastions will also disappear. Joint family living system is the root of all these problems.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hi Brian,
Well, let’s see. We have the man who lives there saying there is reserved seating, and a woman who lives there who commented against the article, but also confirmed the reserved seating. Maybe their observations might weigh more than a westerner on vacation.
Now, I am not calling you a liar. Just maybe though, you’re full of shit and don’t know what you are talking about.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Brian, this is not fiction this is reality. I can assure you that. I was born in this country and I haven’t ever stepped out of it. If elderly men were sitting, it’s because there were probably decent women in the bus. Maybe you couldn’t read what was written on the sides of those seats because it was not written in English. It’s also possible that you were not travelling in a ‘local’ bus. It could be an interstate bus or a new air conditioned bus. If none of the above are true then I am really amazed that you were able to find such a bus in New Delhi…who knows maybe there is hope. But the article is definitely not fictional. Almost every average Indian male would have experienced some of the incidents mentioned in the article.
Almost every average Indian male would have experiences to share that are similar to the ones mentioned in the article.*
This is the bus in which I travelled today. I am standing right next to the middle door. Read the words written on the sides.
The seat right in front of me (next to the door, seen briefly when the video shows the door) was occupied by two men. One of them had grey hair and grey moustache. Two women and a girl boarded the bus ten minutes after this video was taken. The girl asked the men to stand up. They stood up and the two women sat down. This immediately reminded me of your post. Wish I could videotape the whole incident but then I would have been charged with something like “outraging the modesty of a woman” and thrown in jail. Even creating this video took a lot of courage.
shared
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“The above statement still does not justify the occurrence of a rape.”
The above statement did not try to justify the occurrence of rape. I will let others read the rest of this, whatever it says.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“The whole article has a tone that implies every women fighting against the high frequencies rape of rape in India are ganging up on every male alive.”
From which sentence of the article do you conclude that?
“I assure you it is no fun to be a women in a bus past 11:00pm. I do wish there were more men out there with the mind sets like the people from this blog. There aren’t, hence the generalization, which is indeed unfair to you.”
And you found the above generalization of all the women unfair at the same time? The one which I don’t even see in the article and you yourself made up?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
@Frogsrus “If you don’t see that tone (I said tone of the ‘whole article’)and believe it to be a figment of my imagination then there is no point in continuing this discussion.
Plus if you are not generalizing, why the rage in every response.”
I answered your questions point by point. You do the same or fuck off. We’re too used to the tactics you’re employing here. Moron. When you asked about your rights to go out any way you please, I thought you were genuinely misguided by some feminist propaganda. But now I know the truth. You’re a fembot, which means you’re literally too stupid to waste any more time on. Moron.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Dhanu, there’s no point trying to argue a point with feminists. It’s like teaching a pig to sing; it can’t be done, it annoys both you and the pig, and even if you do manage to get a singing pig, no one wants to listen to it anyway.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
If it quacks like a feminist… Seriously though, do you not consider yourself to be a feminist? Because that is very much how you come off.
As for your use of NAWALT, that shit doesn’t fly with me. As far as I’m concerned, all women ARE like that. The consequences for guessing wrong are too dire. Guilty until proven innocent. And you can’t ever be proven innocent. You might not want to use those wonderful laws this week, but next week, those laws are still gonna be there, and you could be on your rags.
It is NOT worth the risk.
So, no I am not a feminist, but riddle me this my use of NAWALT is not to be believed, does it also not work the other way? For what its worth, I believe NAMALT.
Frog, it’s not that he’s assuming you’re a feminist because you’re a woman. He’s assuming you’re a feminist because you sound like a feminist. This is because in your first post, you implied that male rape victims should be taken less seriously because they “didn’t complain” and then accuse us of hating women for pointing out sexism.
The singing pig is a common saying about worthless actions(I’ve heard it as ‘might as well teach a rock’). Not a “women = pigs” thing. I’ll assume that’s a cultural miss instead of intentional from you, but a lot of the feminists that post here do that on purpose as a shaming tactic.
You say you’re not a feminist, so stick around and read the other articles. There’s a beginners intro on the main page. You’ve likely been hearing feminist dogma your entire life, so some of it’s gonna sting. Push on! It’s a wonderful feeling to be treated like an adult, even if sometimes you have to suck it up and deal with your mistakes.
“This is absolute horse-shit and I apologize on behalf of my sex.”
By this do you mean it is true and horse-shit because it’s true, or do you mean it’s not true? Just trying to clarify.
I did not see anyone trying to say anything was justified except that hysteria against men in this manner, and ignoring male victims of violent crimes (sexual or not) is deplorably problematic.
“I would like to know that if I were to walk on the street in a bikini and were drunk I still wouldn’t be raped.”
I would like to be able to do a lot of stupid irresponsible things. And if I do something stupid and irresponsible that does not make someone who hurts me any less guilty. But it is infantalizing to demand an unreasonable standard for women in matters like this, or men.
I’m glad you agree that it’s stupid to think men are interested in nothing but sex. It’s a common trope here as well, and very offensive.
I mean it is terrible that this law is so sexist and that men can’t legally claim to be victims.
I understand and am terribly sorry that a lot us show such anger and hatred towards men.
I agree. Me(independent of my gender) doing something stupid and irresponsible is still not an excuse for someone to hurt me. I am ready to face the consequences of my actions and hope not to have to face the consequences of another (Male/female).
Why do you think wanting basic human rights are infantalizing? Its every man’s right to be able to lie passed out without the fear of having his penis cut, right?
Anything can happen to anyone when drunk or passed out.
“Male visitor gang-raped after passing out at university dorm”
http://digitaljournal.com/article/269465
It is the infant that does not understand that.
Yes, I agree. Males/females/infants of either sex can protest against males/females/infants of either sex. Generalizations don’t help the cause.
“Why do you think wanting basic human rights are infantalizing? Its every man’s right to be able to lie passed out without the fear of having his penis cut, right?”
The man in your example is not demanding everyone else to care for him. If he does get his penis cut, it’s he who would be solely responsible, not the whole group of people of the kind one of whom cut his penis. For example, if a woman cuts his penis, all men won’t suddenly start blaming all the women and demanding laws against them or criminalizing the womanhood itself.
Feminists demanding laws that chip away at the human rights of men and criminalize that whole group for the stupidity of a woman is what is called infantilization. They want women to be irresponsible and then free from its consequences AT THE EXPENSE OF ALL MEN. That is the problem.
Let me make this even simpler. Consider you and me. It’s your right to do whatever you like. I’m not stopping you. You visit a dark bad neighborhood with your purse hanging out and get robbed and beaten. There already is a law dealing with those criminals, but since you’re a woman, the feminists now have a chance for eroding male rights. So they lobby for additional laws for women to make them feel safe no matter how irresponsible they behave. So the next week there’s a new law stating that no man would be out of the house after 8 PM so that the women can feel safe. This affects me although I hadn’t done anything to have deserved that. Now getting it? This is called infantilization.
Really how about if all the women in a state were to take it upon themselves to do so? Not even then, most benevolent of all gender’s.
Yes, feminists are crazy but us normal people are just asking for gender neutral laws with good execution. If a guy’s penis gets cut by a women she sure as hell should suffer the legal consequences, likewise if a man rapes a women he should suffer the legal consequences of the same. You assume that I am a feminist just because I am a female.
quote “I would like to know that if I were to walk on the street in a bikini and were drunk I still wouldn’t be raped”
on par, a guy would like to to have sex with a girl without need of an alcohol test in advance
quote “I would like to know that it is okay for me to dress up and look sexy and that it is still not okay to rape me”
…and I’m sure that you recognize the right of men to look at you and make their own evaluations (you know the meaning of the word sexy).
By the way you comment is pretty rhetoric since what you say is already the case. It is not ok to rape anyone for no reason. But rapes will always occur, as other crimes that affect men more than women.
Meanwhile, thanks to feminism, in some cases/countries it is ok to jail a man for having sex with a woman that regret it the morning after…
In some cases/countries is ok to jail a man for looking at a woman…
But as usual w’ve got to the rape, the justification for all the feminist crimes…the feminist mantra
Frogsrus, we need a Swadeshi Sexual Revolution! Its the old traditions and backwards ways of thinking like arranged marriage and joint family household that is at the root of our country’s sexual politics and male/female issues. The younger generation wants change. We want to date and choose our own life partners. We don’t want to live under the thumbs of our parents and in laws whole life, as if we were children.
” We want to date and choose our own life partners. We don’t want to live under the thumbs of our parents and in laws whole life, as if we were children.”
Looks like you’ve heard of this term “sexual revolution” from some feminist site and are hell bent to bring it on somehow, without realizing how the situation is already screwed up in India. Look at the new proposals about the husbands required to pay monthly salary to the wives, just for being men. This is also a step toward killing the traditional heterosexual marriage. So more dating, right? This, according to your ideals, must be something great. But this is at the expense of millions of men who do not want to date or anything like what you want. “We are young blah blah”. You’re inexperienced and naive as well. Young does not mean desperate for sex and ready to give up anything and everything for it, especially if it’s only costing men and not women. Grow up. Young is not the only demographics that describes India. There are people from all age-groups and all kinds of thinking. They cannot be sacrificed to accommodate the ideas of misguided and feminist indoctrinated youngsters like you.
Dhanu, ” So more dating, right? This, according to your ideals, must be something great……They cannot be sacrificed to accommodate the ideas of misguided and feminist indoctrinated youngsters like you.”
My fellow non-Indian brothers. As you can see, if you date women and choose your own life partner, rather than have your mother do it for you, you are “misguided and “feminist indoctrinated”.
This is the type of mentality we, both men and women, have to deal with in India.
And you wonder why our country is so whacked out?
Forget Feminism. Our own regressive culture is what oppresses Indian men the most.
I mean, there are literally millions of Indians who share Dhanu’s opinion about a GROWN MAN dating and choosing his own life partner.
MGTOW will never take off in India. Our mothers simply would never allow it. And like good little betas (beta is Hindi for son by the way, how appropos), we’ll whimper with our tails between our legs.
Try to understand my point. The laws like the ones I mentioned are the problem, not dating etc. The latter is just a false promise that is being sold to the young men to cash on their sexual desires. It’s happened in the Anglosphere and India should take its lesson. Instead, it’s following it.
“MGTOW will never take off in India. Our mothers simply would never allow it.”
What??
@dhanu
Its the arrogance of the youth. Let them live and learn.
Give up.
“Give up.
Its the arrogance of the youth. Let them live and learn.”
You’re not even Indian. You’re an NRI who in his own words “dated several woman”.
In your next life take birth in India where you’re not even allowed to grow from boy to man, then we can talk about “live and learn”.
I was born and brought up in India.. lived a few decades there before migrating.
Dhanu is right when he says “It’s happened in the Anglosphere and India should take its lesson. Instead, it’s following it.” About 10 years ago, I used to have the same ideas you have now. Experience has changed that. Thats why I offered some recommended reading to you.
Astrokid, “Dhanu is right when he says ‘It’s happened in the Anglosphere and India should take its lesson. Instead, it’s following it.’ ”
– Dhanu supports the misandric arranged marriage and joint family living system.
“About 10 years ago, I used to have the same ideas you have now.”
- You left India which shows you never had the “same ideas” as me.
“Thats why I offered some recommended reading to you.”
- You can scroll up and read my reply to your Devlin recommendation.
All this focus on rape. Ho-hum. Can we change the channel please? I’ve seen this program a few times now, and it wasn’t that good the first time.
Pinetree – Thank you, appreciate the welcome!
“For example, a new feminist law is ready to be passed in which any gov’t worker who has been convicted of a sexual charge is to be released form their employment. This of course gives huge powers by women over men and creates a unhealthy working environment. Women ‘will’ use this law to make false sexual harrassment charges against men — like what has happened in the west.
Also do you not find it ironic that when rape really occurs it is often men who go after the rapists with a vengance more than it is women in most case?
So men are not the problem, it is the laws of your country that need to be addressed and changed.”
Many many laws are presented, but not necessarily passed. The one you mentioned is only one of them. It’s true that it could and would be misused for false accusations, if passed. However, I would like to think that the one law in India against ‘domestic violence’ that has been presented in this forum time and again, has done more good than harm to the citizens of this country. We cannot always assume nothing bad will follow any change, although, it’s extremely important to be aware of the possibilities and ways to avoid what bad might happen.
I don’t think it’s true that it’s often men who go after the rapists with a vengeance more than women. Sorry, I find it difficult to accept without supporting examples. My experience says different.
If you go to the crux of the protests going on in the country, you would realize (supported by the fact that an astonishing number of men are also supporting and participating in the protests) that the voices are raised against the law, which makes it very convenient for culprits to get away with most crimes. No, majority of the protests in this particular rape incident are not against men, they are against the law and the law-enforcement authorities.
First of all, I’d like to refer everyone to what’s coming up in the wake of the odd rape incident in India: Government plans to incentivize the false (yes FALSE, as stated in the proposals) rape accusations with money and jobs: http://wemen.us/articles/views/850-wake-up-call-for-indian-men-government-prepares-law-to-destroy-indian-men.html
The feminists infesting here are just trying to divert people’s attention.
Now, I’ll address the points raised by the feminist here:
@Sudhulika
“in my humble opinion, a girl getting raped and brutally tortured and a man having to see that are two different scenarios”
I personally don’t care about sympathy etc but you must know that according to Ms Clinton, the war deaths of male soldiers are more horrific to women who have to face the shock of the death for life, because those soldiers have already died. Whichever is right, I don’t care. But I presented this to give you a perspective.
“But would you accept that he was probably beaten up because he was with the girl and was probably trying to stop her from getting raped”
Yes. Remember though that men alone are also attacked, and more so than women. Don’t make it sound like only women and only those men that accompany them are attacked.
“The protests are specifically against rape and anything that happens in that situation”
Nope. The protests are a feminist propaganda to get those laws described in the above article passed. People that are non-feminists and taking part in the protests are the useful idiots and goats to be stabbed. Usual trick.
“rapes happening in bad neighborhoods with girls roaming around unguarded at night (as Anil had put it) is a very small proportion of the entire rape situation.”
This feminist is trained to shoot as many opinions masquerading facts from her ass as possible. And when asked for links, her standard ready-made response is: “Don’t bother with facts. I’m telling you everything based off my feelings and just trust it all.” Nope. Stats or it didn’t happen. On a common sense basis, what idiot would rape in broad daylight in front of all? Does this feminist mean that rape have been accepted as normalized in the culture and are happening everywhere all the time, as in, a “rape culture”?
“Anyway, if you insist, here it goes – in India, there was a time when majority of the buses had reserved seats for females and people would entertain that. Some men raised their voices against this and things changed.”
This has never happened. What has happened and is still happening is more and more reservation of seats, not only in buses but everywhere, in every field. If something like what you said has happened, provide link as you promised evidence. (By the way, again, evidence is NOT whatever you’ve cooked up in your mind.)
“You don’t see seats reserved in the newly built buses or private buses in India any more”
Does anyone believe this shit? Newly built or old built means zlich. Laws and policies are applied irrespective of the buses’ model. This feminist is completely making stuff up. As I said, more and more places are making the bus seat-reservation compulsory.
“In India many years ago, a separate queue for females was a norm and was followed as such. With the growing protest, the situation in changing rapidly and people are accepting it with open hearts and minds.”
As has been already pointed out, bull. Nobody is protesting for removing separate queues; actually there’s more and more demand for separate windows because then at least the women won’t intrude the male queue. And that is happening. I’m surprised this feminist is absolutely cooking stuff up! Total opposite is true.
“These days, many Indian females readily offer their seats to elderly or disabled passengers and nobody bats an eyelid – all due to the growing dissent against able-bodied women having priority seating over other passengers. Satisfied?”
Hell no. No way in the hell is anything like this happening. Women are becoming more and more self-centered and demanding seats from even the elderly, as the author of the article described. Nobody CAN protest women no matter how able-bodied because the police guard and the conductor (the ticket distributor in the bus) ensure their rights. This feminist is the most shameless habitual liar I’ve ever seen.
“Even if I were to take your argument about the situation in the country-side being worse than in the cities to be true, wouldn’t it be fair to assume it applies to both genders?”
This is getting boring. This is a MEN’S rights site, please. We don’t care about the women’s problems whether they’re better or worse. The author of the article resides in Delhi and has described the situation there and that is average of the country. What is the problem again? Why should he be silenced or ignored? Because you’re uncomfortable?
“the point I raised is that it’s not omnipresent and shouldn’t be taken as if nothing has been/is being done to rectify the situation.”
What is being done is making more and more reservations in the buses, not less as you claimed. If your claims are true, give a single link. What an utter liar!!
“People are very much acknowledging the misandry and the situation is only improving, at least in this regard.”
You’re a fool if you think anyone here will believe that just because YOU said.
“I never said the separate coach for women is fair. I explained how and what happened and if enough people protest against the reserved coach things would change.”
And it was explained to you that it has happened and didn’t work. Multiple time.
“I also tried to explain why it’s not allowed (by law) for men to enter the reserved coach.”
Yes, because they’re sub-humans and can wait for the next train. The better humans deserve the seats. If they don’s show up, the seats can remain vacant. But no male-only coach will be added for the passengers.
“the state is sponsoring laws to separate them even more, as if we belong to different universe”
Feminists are proposing all those laws.
“Even sad that some people accept it.”
Generally speaking. Women are happy to or neutral to. Men are forced to.
“How about I ask men to deal with misandry? Careful!”
Doesn’t matter.
“I did mention, also, that there could be many different reasons why Anil had to wait longer for the bus ticket.”
Stop womansplaing! So you know more about Anil’s situation on that night than Anil himself?? WTF is wrong with you? Why can’t you face the simple and plain fact that women regularly intrude the men’s queues and are always served first?
“It was probably one of those days, one of those places, and it’s definitely not a norm and therefore, people shouldn’t start screaming in horror and tag India as a country where every single man has to wait until all women are served, every single day.”
That IS the case! You can try however hard to convince people otherwise, everyone from the country can confirm your lies. If someone here has a friend from India, one can always call/email and ask; it’s so common an observation. You don’t have to rely upon talks from her or me.
“I can’t argue over what you read and what you didn’t. I’d however say that their are certain sections in the constitution that favor men, directly or indirectly. Example – law only considers sexual penetration to be rape/molestation of serious nature and has decided the punishment accordingly. It has outright ignored many other situations where a woman might have only just, but not exactly been penetrated, stripped naked in broad daylight in the middle of the road, etc. Would you say it is fair and/or shouldn’t result in as severe a punishment?”
Oh. My. God. So, folks, do I need to say something on this? This rape definition, which the feminists in the anglosphere are still having difficulty in getting passed, has already been written in India and this feminist says it favors men because women are being stripped naked (for which separate punishment already exists, of course)!
“The Indian constitution does not specifically favour women in every given situation, in some, yes it does and that needs to change. A gender-neutral constitution would be ideal, wouldn’t it!?!”
Let us talk about the present situation rather than the ideals and dreams.
“Many many laws are presented, but not necessarily passed.”
The policies in the form of government recommendations already show up in the offices, even if to measure the effect. Just recently, an old employee accused of workplace harassment had to resign and he than committed suicide. The charges were never proved. I’ll post a link soon if I can find that, but it was in one of the sites linked in the article at bottom. (Also read this article on the workplace sexual harassment bill and especially the point number 6 which has examples of false accusations.) And, like the dowry laws, this has a strong possibility of getting passed. But then you’ll say that it’s doing more good than harm, just like you said for the dowry law. We’ll be coming to that point below.
“It’s true that it could and would be misused for false accusations, if passed. However, I would like to think that the one law in India against ‘domestic violence’ that has been presented in this forum time and again, has done more good than harm to the citizens of this country.”
Question is, harm to whom? And why? We’re only concerned about the harm being done to the men and that too LEGALLY!
“We cannot always assume nothing bad will follow any change”
But we do consider the slightest of harm when it concerns women. Men are disposable, right? If something bad happens to them as a result of something nice being done for women, why care? It is exactly this attitude this site and the MRM are for. Take your vile opinions elsewhere. Look at her guts! She comes over to a men’s forum and says we can expect and ignore the harm being done to the countless men because it’s being good to women!!
“although, it’s extremely important to be aware of the possibilities and ways to avoid what bad might happen.”
So which is it? Is it important to take the misuse into account or is it fine to ignore it if it’s inevitable and happens only to benefit the women?
“If you go to the crux of the protests going on in the country, you would realize (supported by the fact that an astonishing number of men are also supporting and participating in the protests) that the voices are raised against the law, which makes it very convenient for culprits to get away with most crimes.”
Like the ones described in the article I linked in the beginning of this comment?
“No, majority of the protests in this particular rape incident are not against men, they are against the law and the law-enforcement authorities.”
Tee Hee
After reading my first link (on top of this comment), please please tell me she’s for real.
Wow, Anil, I really feel for you and your fellow Indian men. I never suspected that the situation would be as unbalanced as you describe. Quite frankly, I’ve always wondered if Indian women in India were as difficult to endure as the ones who live in the west. I never thought such a thing would be possible, but I really do think that Indian women make even the most militantly feminist Western women seem almost endearing by comparison.
The friend of the Delhi gang rape victim has spoken out several days ago,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/jan/06/delhi-gang-rape-victim-friend-video
Hindi version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75uMQgSAtJU
describing in detail the incidences, they attacked him first and she tried to help (all this crap about her mouthing off and thus provoking them, really you guys need to get your facts straight) public and police apathy and the Delhi police, charming people that they are, have decided to sue the tv channel that the interview was aired on:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/account-indias-brutal-gang-rape-201959058.html
He has also spoke to Headlines Today. Until then he was just too traumatized to speak out and his father advised him to leave the city until the furor had settled down. On a personal note to Anil, this guy is a hero, and this particular incident was the last straw in a long history of brutal incidences, these men out on the streets are protesting the treatment of their sisters, mothers and daughters, they realize that this isn’t a ‘women’s issue’ any longer, it involves them, and let me add that this it’s pathetic how you’re using it to further your own little lost privileges.
Do you even know what the hell you are talking about? Do you think that people here hold the girl responsible for the rape? Who disagrees that the male friend isn’t a hero? Who said that the girl deserved what she got? No human being with a sane mind would ever say that.
“these men out on the streets are protesting the treatment of their sisters, mothers and daughters, they realize that this isn’t a ‘women’s issue’ any longer, it involves them”
Yes, they are protesting for their mothers daughters sisters…all of them are women, all of them are loved by them. It isn’t a woman issue, but it is definitely being portrayed as one. But it does not matter. It involves them because it hurts someone they love. Moreover, Anil never mentioned the rape incident in his article. Besides, why should any man be considered a rapist unless he actually rapes? As you said men are protesting too. So at least men understand that this is not a woman issue. But why doesn’t the government understand this? Why all the hatred? Why do we see posters which say “Dont teach your daughters what to wear, teach your sons not to rape” and “The only mistake a woman made is to give birth to a son”? This is just utterly disgusting. Is this what you are fighting for? Are you fighting against men or are you fighting against crime? Even if 90% of the men rape, there should not be a law that gives special privileges to women. What about the 10% men who did nothing wrong? Why are they being look down upon? And this is just a hypothetical situation. 90% of the men would never do anything like that. It’s just the remaining 10%. Why should I hear about women constantly blabbering about how they are afraid of being raped? It may be interpreted as “Oh God I am so hot that everybody is out there to get me. Men are so pathetic that they are just dying to have sex with me and since I am not going to allow them they are going to rape me.” But nobody thinks like that. If everybody including me clearly understands a woman’s problem, why can’t men expect the same?
Our Indian govt have introduced women only trains in 4 of the major cities. See how they talk about women in workforce to mask the sexism against men.
@Sudhulika
“Really? You’re able to comment every few minutes and complaining about an “extremely slow” Internet connection?”
I have an extremey slow connection and the site admin can confirm that using proper tools. Don’t womansplain to me my own connection speed.
“I have to copy-paste articles/comments/notes/… that I want to respond to on a notepad, complete my response over a reasonably long stretch of time and then post it at an off-peak hour, to be able to stay connected. Now, THIS, my friend, is what I call a slow internet connection.”
Look up the definition of slow connection. The procedure you described means YOU are slow. BTW can we get this out?
“None of this makes me any less powerful than you, but it does divert my time and attention to more important things, like doing my job and taking care of two toddlers.”
Yeah, we’re all free here always waiting for your replies and have nothing else to do. Govt pays our bills, right?
“Surfing Internet might score very high on your daily schedule, since you are probably an average Indian alpha male, whose mum/sister/wife/daughter cooks and cleans for you. Tell me it’s a lie!”
That’s omansplaining. I’m living alone. BTW what does it have to do with anything?
“Westerners, taking the plight of Indian men in consideration, sometimes forget the average social structure of the country, where males get the “cream of the milk”, by default, throughout their life. I don’t often hear men complaining about it then. Tell me it’s a lie!”
Womansplaining again. Avrage Indian men know better than you what they’re getting.
“You can refer to the same Indian news websites to find evidences for whichever of my statements do you need evidence for.”
Let me give you some links (though mixed up) supporting my claims because they’re so common: http://www.google.com/search?q=eve+teasing+protest&num=100&hl=en&newwindow=1&safe=off&gl=in&sa=X&ei=Jd7uUIDHE5GIrAfG-IDYAw&ved=0CCMQpwUoBg&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A%2Ccd_max%3A1%2F11%2F2012&tbm=nws
If you want, I can select specific news stories of protests. Now it’s your turn to give links supporting yours.
“Please check the said source for evidences and statistics. Rape cases are getting growing attention due to the growing number of such instances.”
What source? Provide one.
“Yes, hundreds of people are blaming the said victim for being outside at that hour.”
Link or I don’t believe you.
“These news websites don’t even bother to report what common people say.”
As I already told you, I’m not interested in what people’s opinions are; they’re free to have any opinions. Who is anyone to control them? I want to see an official do that. Provide a link for that or you’re a liar.
“So am I. Your or anybody else’s hatred doesn’t mean iota, however, ironically, you seem to fishing for sympathy for the ‘cruelty’ happening against men quite often, sheesh!”
Where did I ask for any sympathy for anybody? I understand that you’re probably mixing up other people’s comments with mine and labeling me dishonest, but please be careful next time as I would assume that you’re intentionally lying.
“Yes, people are concerned and she would be punished if not already. No, there isn’t any recommendation for laws targeting all the women and there shouldn’t be. Again, laws should be gender-neutral for gender-neutral issues.”
But you said that the dowry laws (that target all innocent men by scapping up their right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty) are good? And similar was your opinion on the workplace harassment laws? So when a woman’s crimes are brought to front, you change your tone to “gender-neutral”, otherwise it should target all men, huh?
“As one commenter pointed above, horse-shit. Get your facts straight. “Facts” is something different from feewings. Look up. Voices were silenced by the police torture of the boy students who protested against female students’ 15% increase in entrance exam marks in the most prestigious institutions like the IIM’s. There are tens of such instances of obvious bias going on daily that don’t become national or international news. And you get to call these specific rare instances! Really? Anything bad happening to a woman is instantly something widespread and happening on a grand scale, anything bad happening to men at however large a scale is specific one-time instant! Reverse this for good instances! Pure feminist logic. Everyone here is aware of these dishonest tactics. Read more about feminist logic (and other terms) here.” – I have already pointed those ‘instances’ in another post of mine. You choosing to disregard them doesn’t make them disappear.
I didn’t get you. Did you ever read my point carefully? What specific instance of men’s resistance against their rights being chipped away in the name of women’s empowerment/freedom/choice/whatever being successful have you provided a proof of? I have yet to see a single one.
“Doesn’t mean that all men are evil. You’re vilifying the entire sex! Common feminist tactic.” – And you are vilifying the entire (female) sex, too! I have very carefully used the word ‘mostly’. In what universe does it not make sense?
Yes, ‘mostly’ means the most of that sex, while cases like rape and other evils are performed by an extremely small minority.
“What about the everyday cases of false rape accusations, misuse of 498A, and proxy violence? Just because those women are never held responsible for their deeds (because presumption of innocence has been legally removed for the males) does not mean that most crimes are committed by men” – Such cases happening is wrong and it’s misandry. Me refuting/commenting on some statements posted by the author doesn’t imply that I support everything wrong happening against men. You don’t give a shit, do you?
How many times will I tell you that your or my assumptions about misandry/misogyny isn’t important? I’m talking about the attitude of the justice system, because THAT is the real thing. It has removed the very basic rights of men and that is the problem. Simple as that. What part of this don’t you get again?
“Women commit more crimes, it’s just that they’re not seen as criminals when they do.” – shooting up pigs in the air, are you?
Proofs: 1. (crime) http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showthread.php?tid=181
2. (prison) Number of women rising in prisons: http://www.theage.com.au/national/number-of-women-in-prison-rapidly-rising-20121206-2axq6.html
So why are more men in prison? Because the Duluth model based policies (like dowry and dv laws) and gender profiling in the DV and sexual assault cases automatically assume males to be the perpetrator. There also are mandatory arrest provisions of males wherein even police is handcuffed by the policies (you know the dowry laws – and other laws, equivalents exist in other countries). And irrespective of increasing number of female prisoners, countries are talking about abolishing female prisons altogether. It has been proven that women get much less sentence for the same crime than men (in India it should be common observation anyway; even in case of Rajiv Gandhi’s suicide bombing incident, all the male bombers were given death sentence but the woman was left out because she was a woman).
3. (abuse) http://antimisandry.com/articles/teenage-girls-more-likely-abuse-but-vp-biden-skirted-truth-173.html
4. (social) http://www.avoiceformen.com/women/girls-behaving-badly/
“Yeah, you said it, so I believe you. Entitled much? But I also criticize the author of the article here for not linking to a source.” – please check the statistics from the same news websites for the credibility of my statement that you have referred to me.
I checked and couldn’t find. It’s YOUR responsibility to prove what YOU said.
“Rioting on streets for issues of men HAS taken place, only you’re unaware of the fact that they get beaten up badly with zero result or hearing, unlike what happened in the present rape case riots (constable got beaten up to death, special police cars made available to women only a their one call, autos requitred to take women anywhere they want after 7 PM whether that path falls into their root or not – this last one I heard but not confirmed.” – people protesting/rioting against issues around females get beaten up, too, with zero results often. So, what’s new?
All the protests that have ever brought up results have been in women’s favor (for which I wouldn’t have a problem had they left men’s rights unchanged) AND AGAINST MEN (opposing which is the goal of the MRM).
“That is the case for some of the buses. As the author pointed out, there even are some AC buses that do not have the reserved seats at all. But you’re obviously lying. There ARE buses where half of the seats are reserved for women (the entire left row or the entire right row)” – My point exactly! The author’s statement ‘Our buses have seats reserved for women; the front half.’ does imply that such is the case in every single bus in every single city. Tell me it’s a lie!
The lie is that you wrote the buses “DO NOT” have half the seats reserved, trying to imply that NO BUS has a 50% reservation. I refuted that and you can’t deny. Don’t try to change the direction.
“Do you really not know this, cupcake? Pathetic liar. Your phrase “DO NOT” in capital letters is… what? A big bad symbol of your dishonesty.” – No, honey-pie, it’s a manner of written communication.
Let’s ask what this implies in this public forum. I request readers who are reading this comment to please make us aware of your opinion as to whether her statement with “DO NOT” meant that no bus contains 50% reservation or just a few do not. Thanks in advance.
“Delhi is kinda average of the situations and perfectly represents India.” – shooting up pigs in the air, are you?
You agreed that “for both the genders”, situations are better as well as worse than Delhi in other parts of the country. Doesn’t that make Delhi an approximate average? Further, the author lives in Delhi and described what he feels was most Indians were facing. These things are such that I cannot provide you numbers and data even if I wanted, because there’s no way to define what average means. But you cannot either. Delhi is average of India – I’ll say this. You can continue to hold your own opinion whether it’s better or worse than average according to your own standard of an average. The author has his own measure of average, which happens to match mine.
“Yes, I want those situations and the situations I mentioned, both to be brought forward, for the reason so people who see India from our eyes, can see a fairer picture, not just the dirty one.”
We’re only interested in correcting what’s wrong. We’re not here for celebrations. You’re trying to cover up the dirty one with your LIES.
“It still does not have a separate coach reserved for men, nor one is planned in future for those men who remain outside and have to wait for the next metro just because they cannot enter the reserved coach even when it’s empty.” – Wow! With the population in India/Delhi, there would almost always be people waiting for the next bus/metro at peak hours.
Point is, are women special among those people whose problems have been specifically considered but not the men’s? Women face teasing so special coach for them. Men heavily outnumber women and cannot find seats equal to worth one coach because women got it reserved, and nobody got concerned.
“Reservation in metro is wrong, people waiting outside is not. The women-only coach, during peak hours (when men have to wait for the next metro) is also crowded.”
So? Since women as well as men are crowded, why not have coaches for both?
“So you admitted that women’s voices are heard, as opposed to your previous claim that nobody hears them?” – When did I claim that? Two negatives don’t always make a positive.
You wrote (again in your previous comment) that men and women both protest without results. I said men’s protests for their rights NEVER get results; whenever any protests get results, it’s only the women’s that do, as in case of reserved coaches.
“Sure. But first, why don’t they tell them on the gate to not come in? You do know that men, especially the illiterate ones who can’t read, can get into those coaches unknowingly. Should they be beaten and thrown out?” – Ha! Does anyboy here seriously believe girls start beating up any male who enters the reserved coach without first asking them to leave because it’s a reserved coach. Tell me it’s a lie!
Again, the reservation is wrong, but, so is your claim.
Proofs: 1. (man thrown out because he mistakenly boarded the coach reserved for women) http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/man-thrown-from-moving-train-by-police-for-boarding-womens-car/
2. (men getting into the reserved coach beaten up by women, and women praised by police for bravery) http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/government-tyranny/human-rights-day-an-indian-fraud/
3. Irrelavent but see this also, think of a similar policy with genders reversed and tell me your thoughts on that. This is to show how ridiculous gender-based treatment gets, reserved coaches are also a gender-based treatment, unless they make me-only coaches also.
“Have you heard of something similar happening to a group of women who entered a male-only space?” – Yes, most of those women get raped! Tell me it’s a lie!
Stop considering your feelings of fear and insecurity (or nightmares) as true incidents. Provide links. Liar.
“Secondly, separate queues are present EVERYWHERE, especially in the cities and metro areas.” – shooting up pigs in the air, are you? Or have you only been confined to your own city, with a computer and “extremely slow” Internet connection to work on?
Since it’s difficult to prove this thing by stats as no stats probably exist on this, let me just apply some common sense. You said men and women are opposing separate queues and are accepting single long queues with “open hearts”. Suppose you’re to buy a ticket. Would you rather like two queues so that they’re shorter and everyone on avergae gets the tickets in half the time (two windows = approx. half time, simple math), or would you like to see the gender harmony on the railway platform, like, “Wow! Men and women are looking so cute in a long queue”? Well, for you, the answer can be anything but any practical person with a double-digit IQ would certainly prefer separate queues. Moreover, if you now say that even in the separate queues the genders can be mixed, for your info, only the men’s queue is available for both the genders – a man cannot get a ticket from a women’s ticket window.
“Absolutely wrong. Women are ALWAYS treated first, exactly like the author of the article has described.” – And we are supposed to believe you, because apparently we don’t know better!
Enough with this shit. Let us just leave out what cannot be proved with data. As I already said, the only way to confirm this is to phone/email Indian friends and get the facts.
“Families that are traveling send their women to get tickets just so that they can get it early!” – Men supporting misandry? In my humble opinion, yes. Or are you going to resort to the ‘powerlessness’ or ‘victimization’ of men? Aww, poor you! There, there.
What? What do you mean? I genuinely failed to get you.
“You cannot label ATM queues as discriminatory because no human being is distributing the money there.” – You completely missed the point!
So the point might be that men are taking more time? Is this something written in law? Are they entitled to take extra time? If YOU decide to take the same amount of time, does anyone stop you? What is the problem again?
“Now, compare the situation to a cash counter inside a bank, where the cashier is handing out or depositing the money. There IS the discrimination, and again, it’s against the men. Women routinely come at any time, intrude the long line, get their check or whatever cleared, and are on their way. Men keep waiting in the queue. Say it ain’t true?” – Yes, there’s a separate queue for women at places, but doesn’t happen everywhere, not even in most banks in a small town like mine, not even in most banks in a metropolitan city. Tell me it’s a lie!
What do you mean? When there’s only one queue, women intrude the queue even when there’s already a long queue of men waiting. They get their work done and men keep waiting even when they came hours earlier than those women.
“And for your kind info, men raped by men are also only a few in India. The percentage therefore still compares where women rape men.” – So, if I’m not wrong, you’re saying that the percentage of women ‘raping’ men is greater than the percentage of men raping men? Oh, do I sense an irony here, since, you earlier stated that by definition, women cannot rape men? Period!?!
You specifically mentioned “in India”, to which I replied that the ratio of women-on-men to men-on-men rapes is still comparable to that in the other countries, for some of which I do have stats. yes I said, “by definition, women cannot rape men”, because the definition is feminist. In reality, women CAN and do rape men; it’s just that the law refuses to recognize this rape. See this to know how the legal definitions favor female rapists. Also see this how feminists destroy our attempts to get the rape definitions changed to gender-neutral.
“And for your kind info, the original article never compared any percentages in this case. Tell me it’s a lie!”
Explained above what I meant by comparison.
“Anyway, the fact remains that the recent protests are against the rape and not against the people who suffer from having to witness that. Those people are equally entitled to start their own battle against the rapists for making them see that.”
Okay. Who knew?
“Yes. Remember though that men alone are also attacked, and more so than women. Don’t make it sound like only women and only those men that accompany them are attacked.” – You can turn and twist the statement however you wish. I still maintain that everybody is entitled to fight against the issues they find unjust.
It’s you who don’t remember your own statements and then twist mine. The above was in response to your claim that the boy got attacked because he was with the girl, which kind of implied that it’s only the girls that are attacked, and the boys only when they’re accompanying them. I meant, anyone can be attacked. There’s no need to make it an issue of the whole collective of men attacking the whole collective of women. That’s what the feminists always do.
“Nope. The protests are a feminist propaganda to get those laws described in the above article passed.” – No, my friend. A majority of people are protesting against rapes and the laws that allow rapists go free or with minimum punishment. Tell me it’s a lie!
Of course it’s a lie. This is the sweet face of the lie being shown to the people (useful idiots) who are participating in the protests. Behind the walls, the feminists are planning what I showed in the linked article on the rape law proposals.
“On a common sense basis, what idiot would rape in broad daylight in front of all?” – Really? Are your so ignorant? People do get raped in broad daylight, in front of all, at homes, at schools/colleges, in playgrounds, in offices, on roads, in buses/trains… and also in bad neighborhoods. Tell me it’s a lie!
Common sense takes a back seat as soon as a person intends to rape another person.
Do I need to refute this?
“This has never happened.” – Yes, it has happened, as you yourself has mentioned the situation in ‘newly built’ AC buses. Go around more often, you’ll see many more non-AC buses, too, without reserved seats.
I already told you new and old has nothing to do with reserved seats, it’s the policy that matters. “Many more non-AC buses” is a lie; absolutely 0% of govt buses have no-reservation policy, and most buses are govt. Private buses can or cannot have them, it’s their choice (just like discotheques) and not the law or govt policy – so I don’t bother about them, even though whenever they do have reservation it’s always for women.
“Laws and policies are applied irrespective of the buses’ model.” – This law applies only to government owned buses.
Yep, THAT is exactly our target. To remove such discriminatory laws and policies from govt.
“actually there’s more and more demand for separate windows because then at least the women won’t intrude the male queue” – Wow, so does that imply that men are the ones vouching for separate queues/windows for their own comfort? Men supporting misandry? Go, fight against them. Stop blaming females for everything.
Do you even know what misandry means? I think you’re confusing misandry and misogyny?
“We don’t care about the women’s problems whether they’re better or worse” – the same way feminists don’t care about men’s problems? Why complaining then?
Who complained to you? YOU came here.
“What is being done is making more and more reservations in the buses, not less as you claimed. If your claims are true, give a single link” – Aren’t you ‘doubly ridiculous’ (your own adjective) for doing the same that you accused me of?
Google is your friend.
“You’re a fool if you think anyone here will believe that just because YOU said.” – So are you!
No. I was talking about your claim that men’s situation is improving. Everyone knows this is false. Which automatically makes me true
“And it was explained to you that it has happened and didn’t work. Multiple time” – Horse shit!
Didn’t I give you the example of IIM students protests being suppressed by police beatings?
“Feminists are proposing all those laws.” – Your kind are doing the same, for the opposite sex! Boo-hiss
You’re not realizing that there’s a govt ministry for women, from which come the feminists bills. Men do not have a political represntation.
“So you know more about Anil’s situation on that night than Anil himself??” – Anil is speaking on behalf of all Indian men here. I claim to know otherwise about the average situation in India.
Womansplaining again? You were talking about Anil’s specific situation. Don’t lie now. BTW I have already told you that the average situation of all the men is the same. Anil is absolutely the representative. You can choose to believe otherwise and as I said, let us just leave these subjective things.
“[...] and this feminist says it favors men because women are being stripped naked (for which separate punishment already exists, of course)!” – Do you even know what’s the punishment? One year. Geez, and we’re supposed to accept it as a just punishment, only because you don’t know any better!
You were talking about making it into a rape case, that is, extending the definition of rape to include stripping someone (oh sorry, stripping men might not be included in your definition). See how terrible things happen to men in India (read comments, especially post # 4). If this is not rape, I don’t know what is.
“Let us talk about the present situation rather than the ideals and dreams.” – You do your business and leave me to mine. I don’t need your permission to talk about things that I choose to.
Hehe
“Take your vile opinions elsewhere. Look at her guts! She comes over to a men’s forum and says we can expect and ignore the harm being done to the countless men because it’s being good to women!!” – I don’t need your approval to present my opinions here; how you wish I would have
!
What I’m really saying is, there are times when something bad is ignored or tolerated for a greater good. Doesn’t turn that “bad” into “good”
It does, sweet cake, it does. Misandry has been legalized on the pretext of it being ‘good for women’.
“but any law made specifically for men is bound to harm the opposite sex, too, and is bound to be misused, too.”
Except that there’s no such law, nor do we demand it, unlike feminists.
“Hence, my support for gender-neutral laws for gender-neutral issues.”
Your support means diddly squat.
And oh, I just noticed, someone has posted a video proof of the women becoming self-centered. So that claim of yours is now officially over.
@Sudhulika
Looks like my comment is getting stuck in the spam filter. I posted twice. Wait till it’s released, if a mod sees this comment
I’ll hold my breath
“With regards to reserved seats, as a male passenger, you might want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever being asked to leave it to another able-bodied person, as a female passenger, I would want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever worry about the ‘deliberate’ attempt of having my boobs touched, butts pinched or groping of any kind”
Sudhulika, our constitution does not entitle us to grab ur boobs or pinch your butt. It is considered a felony. However, the government does give entitle women to special privileges that clearly show the prevalent gender discrimination. So, the two instances clearly do not match.
A better example would be that of pickpockets. I want to be able to take any bus without the worry of being robbed. Since, a pickpocket will almost always be poor, shall we restrict the use of buses to rich people? What about the millions of poor people who work hard to get their bread? Also, you should be thankful that people understand your problem of “boobs being touched” because a touch is not going to kill you and frankly it being touched by a person of the opposite sex should not make you uncomfortable. Why do you expect people to automatically understand? How can men (savage beasts) understand a problem (being touched at intimate parts) like this? But we do, don’t we? That never surprised you, did it? But what happens when men face similar problems? It’s a joke! Do you think men do not face these problems? A bus filled with men at the back…do you think we enjoy brushing against each other all the time? It is not deliberate but it is a problem. We do not ask for separate seats do we? You can never justify special seats for women even if it is a single seat unless you claim that women are handicapped and inferior to men to a very large extent. It just tags every man as a molester. Why didn’t they have separate seats for men as well as women? Also, if your boobs are being touched by some random retard, why should I leave my seat? I was quietly thinking about Einstein’s theory of Relativity and your butt was not even the last thing on my mind. Why am I being subjected to the shit that only that retard deserves?
I am not sure if you understand the nature of the separate queues mentioned in the main article. Many places have separate queues for men and women. There are separate counters for both men and women and the services are imparted simultaneously. This is not a problem. Arun is talking about a different situation. The queue was created out of nowhere and there was only a single counter which gave preference to women. This happens at major bus stations and I have seen this happening too.
PS: you did come back but you did not reply to my post.
Hi Anil,
I have been reading the responses and must apologize for claiming the section on buses was fiction. If you had said that many buses have signs saying that the seats are reserved for women and that on some buses people actually pay attention to the signs, that would have jived with my experience of India (there are numerous signs most of which are ignored most of the time). While it makes your situation less dramatic, it still must be quite aggravating in that rare case when it actually enforced and the signs would be a constant source of annoyance whether they are ignored or not.
As an elderly (59 does that make me elderly, my kids are grown) Westerner, the signs never bothered me but I never noticed them.
I might share some thoughts from another culture (U.S.) which might be of interest to you, though Indians will manage things in their own way in any case. I was struck by the extreme segregation in India. This extended beyond the obvious separation of men and women but to separate classes and castes as well. I wondered why there were almost no women drivers, bus fee collectors or skilled construction workers (while I saw numerous women working on construction sites, they only did the most menial tasks). There were women soldiers but the units were segregated.
Buses in the U.S. often have seats reserved for the elderly (I don’t take them even when offered but I am in excellent health), handicapped, pregnant women, and adults with young children. Anyone can use the seats, but if a qualifying person arrives, you are expected to surrender the seat to them. They are usually about 20% of the seats. There is little objection to these rules as most everyone agrees that those people do have a greater need for a seat (at least in our culture).
Having special seats for women is intended for the segregation part which is a distinctly Indian problem, but complicates life for everyone. I was going to a talk by the Dahli Lama at New Delhi University and got in most easily as there were lots of women going through the security check point and not that many men but it often would work the other way as well (just a problem caused by segregation). However, the implications of eliminating segregation of men and women is just huge. India seems to be about the only quickly developing country where arranged marriages has survived along with the inherent family ties. A lot of the good things of an extended family have been lost in the U.S. with these changes and you might miss the close family ties. What to do?
The other interesting thing about reserved seats for women is that it seems to imply that women are incompetent (we have seats for handicapped rather than for women). That might explain the limited job opportunities for women. Of course I feel that women should be allowed to do whatever they choose to do and are able to do (firewomen, skilled construction workers, CEO, whatever), but that is a very painful process as there are many assumptions in every culture about appropriate roles. In Japan I have read that women who now have good jobs are not marrying or having kids as their role as wife and mother is too difficult (why would they become subservient). If India breaks down those assumptions (of which the reserved seats is but one), there will be major and serious disruptions of every one (it is not an easy process I can say as one who has lived through some of it). Anyway, I am glad to have heard the perspectives of several Indians and you all have my best wishes (it is not an easy issue).
Brian
Hi. First of all, Thanks to AVFM and the author for touching on this subject. Again, I am a layman, no bundles of data to back me up.
Still, as an fyi, I too would like to share some info about the position of women in India.
Oh, where to start.
Maybe with the apartments reserved for women exclusively.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20111110/haryana.htm#6
Or the proposals to reserve Parliament seats for women.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/keyword/women-s-reservation-bill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_Reservation_Bill
Or with a tiny comparison. After the brutal rape(and later death) of 1 woman in Delhi, the country was on the verge of a revolution. Sane minds actually did try to point out that imposition of draconian laws would not help, but were ignored.
HOWEVER, recently,
the Pakistan military BEHEADED 2 Indian MALE soldiers and kindly returned one of the heads.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/pakistan-army-two-indian-army-soldiers-beheaded/1/242009.html
No protests . However our governments did assure us that trade would not be affected but SOMETHING would be done. Maybe.
quote
The Indian Government appears unwilling to escalate the incident.
unquote
Horror stories abound.
Like the man who tried to sell his kidney so he could pay alimony
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-08-27/india/28191602_1_interim-maintenance-kidney-crpc
Indian Men are more likely to commit suicide than women. and sometimes the reason is:
http://www.dailypioneer.com/state-editions/bhopal/100382-harassed-by-wife-in-laws-battered-by-police-man-commits-suicide.html
It’s a huge issue.
Indianmale, I checked out the link you provided
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20111110/haryana.htm#6
and it oddly refers to the women who live in that all women’s apartment complex as “housewives”.
So where are there husbands? Obviously its a complex for many widows and a few divorcees (divorce is minuscule in Haryana). Also note that Haryana and Punjab are the two Indian states with the highest skewed sex ratios due to sex selective abortion, female infanticide, gynocide. Punjabis and Haryanvis often have to look outside their states for brides.
Nevertheless here is a complex full of SINGLE WOMEN – widows and divorcees (who are nonetheless being humorously called ‘housewives’).
As we know widow remarriage is still not commonly accepted in India and divorcees also rarely marry again due to stigma.
The neighboring state of Uttar Pradesh is also full of widows and many of them not old (Varanasi, Vrindavana), so why aren’t these Haryanvi men seeking the as brides? Its the remarriage taboo.
Such a taboo that even single, unmarried women who are divorced and widowed are still considered “housewives”.
And I’ll bet your bottom dollar that if any of these women in the all women’s complex dare to start dating men and bringing them home with them, they will be told to stop or leave the complex.
Even female hostiles and dorms in colleges have rules against having boyfriends or male friends there and the girls’ curfew hours are earlier than the boys’ dorms and hostiles.
Please see my comment at the bottom of the page addressing our need for a Swadeshi Sexual Revolution.
“Obviously its a complex for many widows and a few divorcees”
What? What kind of explanation is this? This can only be given by either the feminists or the government. Why would the widows and divorcees (Sorry, I meant, the female widows and divorcees only) need separate apartments? This is just like the women-only DV shelters that don’t allow men, nor are there separate shelters for the male victims of DV. And from which era have you suddenly popped up? You’re describing the India of 1970′s when describing the women’s situation! Hello hello! Wake up! Widows are marrying up and so are divorcees. And if not, it’s their choice. You can’t force someone to marry. What do you mean by sexual revolution? And do you plan to bring it via misandric and women-centric laws? If so, keep that revolution to yourself. We don’t need it. What a hypocrite! Claiming that women are oppressed and sexuality is not acceptable, while at the same time claiming that people expose and enjoy themselves at the beaches! If the sexual expressions were unacceptable to THAT level, how would people do anything like what you’ve described? You’re using the example of one kind of people to justify the need of laws for a completely separate group of people. This is a known tactic. How many beaches are there in India? Are the restrictions from the government or are the family members being responsible for their own safety by not exposing themselves too much? I’d also like to visit a park with a bag-full of money hanging out. Do I expect the government to ban everyone else for ensuring my safety? Or should there be a separate park for me to wander about like that? Your arguments and reasoning are extremely hollow and don’t justify anything. Women reservation is also taking place in the politics and the educational institutions. What is your explanation for that? These are lame justifications for taking away the rights of men and that’s all these explanations are. Stop being a reservation supporter.
Chill dude. I didn’t say I supported the idea of women only apartments. I’m in favor of co-ed college dorms afterall
. Just found it funny, and typically desi, that the article referred to widows and divorcees as “housewives”.
As far as “exposing” at Indian beaches, I don’t know what you mean. Exposing what? Nudity? The only nudity I see is when people piss and shit in public (quite common here) and the naked “sadhus” of North India and the Digambari Jain sadhus who expose themselves in public. I’ve not seen any nudity on our beaches.
I meant, it’s people’s own choice to not go where they don’t want to, the reason may be for preventing the exposure of their own family members.
“I’m in favor of co-ed college dorms afterall”
Because you have no idea what new policies and laws they can bring up for the male students. Your hormones are guiding you, that’s all.
“I meant, it’s people’s own choice to not go where they don’t want to, the reason may be for preventing the exposure of their own family members.”
Exposure to sun, sea and sand? Happy people swimming, laughing and playing ball?
You said families are not going to the beaches because of the fear of the sexually depraved men. I said, it’s a good choice. Nobody wants to get in danger.
So you admit then that India has a major issue with rampant sexual harassement (eve-teasing) in public places like beaches and nightclubs?
And you clearly missed the point that many of these men don’t take their female family members with them because they themselves want to harass other women without their female family members knowing.
If these men were with females, either family members or friends/girlfriends, rather than roaming in same-sex hoardes, “eve-teasing” in India would diminish greatly.
That’s also why the Delhi nightclubs that Anil complains about do not allow men in unless they are accompanied by females.
Therefore Anil should take his sisters or cousins or female friends along. Better yet, get a girlfriend and take her.
“So you admit then that India has a major issue with rampant sexual harassement (eve-teasing) in public places like beaches and nightclubs?”
YOU said so, not me. Issues are everywhere and this being major is not true at all. You’re making it blow out of proportions for no reason, without providing any evidence. If it were that bad, why are people still going there? So how many incidents of a bad sexual nature happen on average on beaches? Percentage?
“And you clearly missed the point that many of these men don’t take their female family members with them because they themselves want to harass other women without their female family members knowing.”
Why do female family members need men for going anywhere?
“If these men were with females, either family members or friends/girlfriends, rather than roaming in same-sex hoardes, “eve-teasing” in India would diminish greatly.”
“Therefore Anil should take his sisters or cousins or female friends along. Better yet, get a girlfriend and take her.”
So, you want female-only spaces for women but men must be with some woman (even if a gf) to get entry anywhere. Cool.
Dhanu, I am dead set against gendered segregation in India. That is why I am 100% in favor of a normalzing a dating culture here. Our centuries long sex segregation has made for a sexual repressed and damaged culture.
As far as rampant sexual harassement, if you are a Southie then you probably don’t have it that bad down there. I can say from first hand experience being out with my girlfriend and family members and college friends that it is daily up here in the North.
You can also read travel sites like India Mike and others. Hundreds of pages of tourist women complaining about what an awful time they had with it, especially in North India, and these are women who otherwise loved India’s culture and spirituality.
The mama’s boy thing – again, hundreds of blog pages. From Indian women to goris who date Indian guys. There is an unhealthy attachment between many Indian sons and their mothers. That is because our culture does not allow us to individuate as men from the mother figure.
Previously only we know about this and only our wives/girlfriends complained. But now with globalization, inter-cultural marriage and the internet, the whole world is discussing it.
I own it. I was once a mama’s boy too. I have since individuated and become a man.
“Or should there be a separate park for me to wander about like that?”
Actually there’s a few beaches in South India where Indians are not allowed! Female tourists had complained to their hotels that hordes of sexual harassers (I refuse to use this silly term “eve teasers) were follow them around saying all kinds of lewd things and trying to grab them as they were even swimming!
These hotels banned Indians from coming to the beaches in front of their properties.
So not only are these harassers making difficult for normal Indian men to gain access to all the beaches we may want to, they are making it difficult for Indian women as well, since the ban was on “Indians” not just “Indian men”.
We have got a problem in our country and its time we address it instead of denying it.
Unfortunately our regressive sex-segregated culture thinks the answer is to segregate the sexes even more, instead of bringing us closer together.
They want to turn the entire country into the desert villages of Rajasthan where women are in ghoonghat in the inner part of the house and the men are in the outer part.
@Sudhulika Sanghi
“So, I’m supposed to accept everything Anil has written on its face value, because apparently A, B and C have turned their backs on feminist movements and X, Y and Z are writing scholarly works on MRA movements?”
Nope, whatever he has written is not representative of India, is highly exaggerated. Whatever you say about 60-70% of times women are being harrassed when travelling is absolutely representative of India and we’re supposed to believe this. Just like your claim that women are being raped everywhere all the time. Yeah right!
“As a 15 year old (when the reservation issue in India was at its peak), I knew that reservation for women (and reservation of any kind) was wrong and is only going to make situation worse”
Excuse me, it’s at the peak RIGHT NOW. In the Panchayats, women have gotten 33% reservation, in the parliament 30%. The situation about the other fields and areas (housing plots, buses, trains, educational institutions, etc) is being discussed right here. When has the reservation for women ever stopped or slowed down?
“With regards to reserved seats, as a male passenger, you might want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever being asked to leave it to another able-bodied person, as a female passenger, I would want to occupy a seat in a public transport without having to ever worry about the ‘deliberate’ attempt of having my boobs touched, butts pinched or groping of any kind”
So how is this MY responsibility to ensure this safety for you? Why should MY right to have a seat when I came first be snatched away? If you don’t like those behaviors of your co-passengers, complain about them or do whatever you like. I’m not your body guard. But the government makes me into one by forcing me to leave my seat for you. You have all the means necessary to deal with those situations at your disposal. Reservation is not necessry for that. It’s just for chipping away at the men’s rights, which as I already said is what the feminists always do.
“I don’t support misandry, but I do support a safer environment for all.”
So, somehow, making men stand in the buses (reservation of seats) make those men safer (for example, from being fallen down)? Because from what I get from above, you support reservation of seats in buses for women because you wouldn’t want them to get pinched etc?
“It will take a lot of oscillations for the situations and mind-sets to reach an ideal mid-point, where every human being is treated equally.”
Nope. It will only take the laws.
“The incidents Anil has quoted are exaggerated and extreme in their nature and only paint a very dirty picture”
This has been proven to you numerous times that this is not so. You’re living in a rural area, have visited Delhi (one particular route) for a limited time, and are claiming to know all about everything. That is fine, there are lotsa people with mental and psychological issues like that, who believe that everything is just as they’ve thought or imagined. But this is a folly if you think that others must also believe you without you presenting any evidence except your feelings and thoughts.
“which is not reflective to a comprehensive country-wide situation.”
So what IS reflective? 60-70% of women getting pinched in the buses? And we’re supposed to believe this?
“That was the sole purpose that I commented here. If even 10% of people can realize that, my job is done here.”
You utterly failed. Send another fembot now.
P.S.: Why do you think that YOU’re free to have your own opinions about whatever Anil has described (even with all the evidence) while at the same time the other readers are supposed to believe you (even with no evidence)?
India’s sexual politics go very deep back in our history and into our culture.
For the non-Indian male commenters here who seem to be confused by the dominance Indian mothers hold on their sons, allow me to explain.
In India most people live in what we call the “joint family”. Sons do not grow up, move out and live on their own. Rather it is considered the son’s “duty” to live with his parents whole life and “take care” of them (even before they are old, sick or invalid). That means when an Indian man gets married (mostly arranged) his wife comes to live in his parents house!
The couple is afford very little if any privacy. If they happen to fall in love after marriage that is OK but love and sexual attraction are not considered very important, rather how well the new bride can “adjust” and fit into her “new family” (in-laws) household is the key factor. Its all about the larger joint family, not about the couple’s happiness.
Sometimes the couples fall in love and sometimes they don’t. In any case they will not divorce because marriage is about family, duty, society and not happiness. Now, if a couple should bond too closely to one another that is seen as a threat to the larger joint family unit because then they might decide to move out, get their own home, and live as a nuclear family. That is seen as being “neglectful” of one’s “duty” to parents and in-laws.
Now, if the couple does not ever bond deeply or develop a satisfying emotional and sexual life together, the wife will deposit all her affection, hopes and dreams into her male child who becomes like a surrogate husband in a sense. After he marries the mother then sees herself in competition with her daugther in law for the attention and affections of her son. Most of television programs portray this dynamic. You can travel the length and breadth of the world and I’ll doubt you’ll find a deeper bond between mother and son than in India.
It is psychology unhealthy and presents many problems for a young man and new wife.
Add on top of this that outside of a few more worldly pockets in the big cities like Mumbai or Banglore, there is no dating culture. Young single men and women simply don’t know how to behave with one another and their interactions in public get real awkward, real fast.
Due to sexual repression (including lack of privacy and meddling in-laws after marriage), both single and married men are quite frustrated. This is why we have rampant “eve teasing” in our country.
The reason why some nightclubs in metros do not allow lone men or men without female accompaniment to enter is because of large amounts of sexual harassement in these venues. The female patrons will of course complain and even stop patronizing such establishments.
Its the same on India’s beaches. Hordes of men will harasse female beach goers, particularly foreign tourists.
What is stopping these men from asking their girlfriends (most don’t have them, but anyway), wives, moms, sisters, cousins, female friends or neighbors to go out nightclubbing or to the beach with them?
Well, these men DON’T WANT their female family members are the beach or clubs. Part of the reason they don’t want their female family members to go out and about is precisely because they know they too will harassed. And partly because many of them want to be free to harass other women without their family members knowing that’s what they do.
In short, India needs a sexual revolution. There is so much shame, fear and control around allowing young single men and women to mix freely and even choose who we want to marry, that this has a domino effect and produces a very sexually frustrated and awkward culture.
Hi, this chimes with a conversation I have had with a female Hindi friend who migrated after a love match with her Muslim husband…she pretty much said the same but in different words.
My take as a western woman who has travelled in the east a fair bit…I’ve dealt with ‘eve teasing’ by a fierce stare and saying ‘would you tolerate a man doing this to your sister?’
If there are women’s only coaches on the metro let there be men’s coaches too, for men who wish to avoid false accusation
Aimee, “I’ve dealt with ‘eve teasing’ by a fierce stare and saying ‘would you tolerate a man doing this to your sister?’”
So you’ve never heard the slang “bhein chode” then, huh?
Google translate failed me…
I’m sure it is something along the line of “its different when it is done to a western woman”…
I always dress very modestly (long skirt or loose trousers, arms covered) and will cover my head in Islamic areas, when traveling in the east. I also risk assess where I am going.
Anyone making any advances will back off quickly if I use my best glare and cool voice tones.
“I’m sure it is something along the line of “its different when it is done to a western woman”…”
Wrong.
Bhein chode is Hindi for “sister f*cker”. So saying, “would you tolerate a man doing this to your sister?” doesn’t mean a damn thing to those “eve-teasers” who use such terminology shamelessly.
What do you mean by “sexual revolution”? Define exactly how you intend it to be. If you mean it should be as in the Anglosphere, well, they know what it has brought them to. If it’s something entirely new that you’ve thought of, I’d like to know.
Not entirely like the Anglosphere since they do not have the option of arranged marriage, which is necessary for those who are either unable to unwilling to compete in a competitive dating market.
So basically, normalize and mainstream dating and love marriages, while also keeping arranged marriage as an option to fall back on for those who opt for it.
Also, encourage young men and women with means to move out of the parental home upon adulthood or sometime before marriage so that they can individuate. After marriage, encourage nuclear family households, or at least stop shaming Indian men into living with our parents forever out of a sense of “duty” when our parents are not even old and sick yet.
“basically, normalize and mainstream dating and love marriages, while also keeping arranged marriage as an option to fall back on for those who opt for it.”
I think time has rolled back by a few decades for you. This already is the case. What changed? Only more misandric laws and policies have shown up, criminalizing male sexuality and freeing up women to express female sexuality. That is how it always goes.
“Also, encourage young men and women with means to move out of the parental home upon adulthood”
What about their parents? Should the taxpayers support them? You do know Indian people are not that rich on average?
“After marriage, encourage nuclear family households, or at least stop shaming Indian men into living with our parents forever out of a sense of “duty” when our parents are not even old and sick yet.”
This is not shaming, men have to repay what their parents did for them. This is a perfect model and had been working well forever. Is expecting anything from the sons in return of whatever the parents do “shaming” them now? Most people don’t consider it shaming and have no problem with this model. So why even disturb it? It’s just that the new laws are breaking this model and educating people like you to support this breakage with similar words you just uttered.
“What about their parents? Should the taxpayers support them? ”
Indian parents support themselves like they always have until they retire, then they live on pension and/or savings. The only time they need their adult children to “take care of them” is when they are actually too old or sick to take care of themselves. Not when they are merely 40, 50, 60 years old and perfectly healthy.
Of course if someone wants to live with their mommy and daddy their whole life, that’s their choice. But its expected, shamed and pressured here. For no logical reason.
That’s why we are known as “mama’s boys” all over the world!
Hey, I love my ma-baba just as much as the next Indian but I have no reason to live with them as an adult until they need me to (old age/sickness). I am not a child and they are not in need.
“Indian parents support themselves like they always have until they retire, then they live on pension and/or savings. The only time they need their adult children to “take care of them” is when they are actually too old or sick to take care of themselves. Not when they are merely 40, 50, 60 years old and perfectly healthy.”
You’re living in a la la land and have no concept of an average Indian family. You must know that MOST of the population is not even dependent upon paid jobs with pension, that’s a comparatively small demographic.
“But its expected, shamed and pressured here. For no logical reason.”
I don’t consider anything forced unless it’s required by law. So I’d stop here. BTW, people leave their parents all the time, and are not forced by law to come back.
“That’s why we are known as “mama’s boys” all over the world!”
That’s new to me. Source? I think THIS is what shaming looks like, people from other countries making fun of some country for it not being like them. And people like you get on hook.
“Hey, I love my ma-baba just as much as the next Indian but I have no reason to live with them as an adult until they need me to (old age/sickness). I am not a child and they are not in need.”
As you wish.
“This is not shaming, men have to repay what their parents did for them. ”
Real men don’t have to do squat. If we do something its because we CHOOSE TO.
My parents chose to bring me into the world and its their responsibility to care for me until I am able to care for myself. It ends there.
I love them but I don’t “owe” them anything. And I certainly don’t owe them to choose my wife for me.
Dhanu and Indianmale, if I may ask, what objections do you have to the all female (except for children) apartment complex discussed in the link provided? Do you object to private individuals or organizations creating such a space? Government organizations creating such a space?
Do you also object to female only hostels and female only college dorms or are you in favor of co-ed college dorms?
How about all girls or all boys schools?
How about ashrams that are (mostly) all male?
What exactly is your beef with gender segregated living spaces?
I just happened upon jolly old PZ Myers making a rebuttal against this article. He says, “Those ‘privileges’ women have in India? They’re just necessary accommodations to protect them from a culture gone mad over groping. And the reason men are treated as beasts? Because they act like it.”
You heard right. Women do have government-sponsored advantages and men are treated as beasts. But it’s all men’s fault! They don’t deserve equality because they’re just not good enough for it.
“I just happened upon jolly old PZ Myers making a rebuttal against this article. He says, “Those ‘privileges’ women have in India? They’re just necessary accommodations to protect them from a culture gone mad over groping. And the reason men are treated as beasts? Because they act like it.”
Remember that India’s population is over 1 billion. There are millions of gropers here. But again, I blame our culture of arranged marriage and sexual repression, including the joint family household that gives zero privacy to a young couple very much in need of exploring their sexuality with each other.
Even married sex is shamed here.
Anil links to http://www.saveindianfamily.org/. That site supports arranged marriage and joint family living.
Both of those systems are misandric and inhibit the individuation of the young adult Indian male.
First of all, stop this “sexual revolution” trollop. What you are spewing out is the same garbage that is being advertised to you by all this commercial crap surronding you and which has simply heightened whatever “sexual stallions” which are waiting to be unleashed inside. Stop being a slave to them and control whatever it is to unleash it when the time is right – your time will come, just wait for it.
Remember, we have countless problems in our country right now, trying to adapt a model of some other culture for our own does not decrease but simply adds to the already existing carnage. THIS we simply don’t have the resources to tolerate right now.
AND you seem to be against our parents residing with us?? What in rotten hell is that for? You are only concerned about your own individual unlicensed freedom forgeting the very fact that they similarly sacrificed theirs to rear you up – shouldn’t you atleast mirror it??
Fundamentally yes, there is cutbacks to our freedom when people are around us, but it is not totally lost as you seem to imply repeatedly or the relational proximity tensions, you are only blaring about the disadvantages here.
Your parents are always a treasure trove of wisdom and experience that can provide valuable inputs to your own dealings, it in fact accelerates your own maturity when applied or entertained with a receptive mind. I am not advocating herd mentality or blind obedience but the sort of responsible growth before their very eyes that commands their respect, I mean the respect that comes from the satisfaction that at last their offspring has molded into a man/woman and not by his/her words but their actions.
And most importantly, they act as a beautiful buffer. Even we are humans and can heat up with our spouses or children at times, even give the child the occasional “thappad” for their unruly actions. You don’t know how reassuring for the child it is at that moment to go to their grandparents – can’t you remember how valuable children are to grandparents and vice-versa?? Why should you deny this valuable resource both for you progeny and parents for your own selfishness?? You can even occasionally take out your wife for some time for yourselves reassured in the manner your children are held.
And in these busy times in what better manner can you imbibe the knowledge of your own culture/myths/history to your child than from grandparents??? And just check the suicide rates, other than from teens – the greatest suicide rate are from the old age group – it is at this time that they most crave for company, they delight in their children and grandchildren and everything around them. Why do you want to willingly pull back this win-win situation which we already have from ourselves??
And you are trying to entrust the already unreliable government your own parents?? REST ALL I am can somewhat understand, after everything that our country faces and you very well know, how the hell can you throw a relatively defenseless group of population out to an already messed up system?? You SIR, YOU need a brain scan and an immediate one at that
that apartment complex is just for widowers and divorcees? someone who lives there will have to verify that-but what about single working women and female college students?
oh and one more thing. it does not say they are ALL housewives
one last thing. a “sexual revolution” will increase our problems not decrease them-imagine the epidemic of FRAs