@Ushaji

Interesting Remark!

I will like you to please shed more light.Wish to know from you the reason as to why such murky developments have become order of the day ?

I think it is because the number of men is far greater than the number of women so women can be more choosy about who they are married to unlike the past where they were pretty much bought and sold in marriage.

Also, it might be that a long history of mistreatment of women has made them bitter and they are compensating.

@Nuya

”they were pretty much bought and sold in marriage.”

.....I hope you are aware of the fact that this has not been the integral part of marriage in Indian landscape.If marriage has become a contract ,it’s because of new laws that has come in existence.

Marriage was an institution designed to protect women when food and security was tough. Men went out in the dangerous world, risked their life and brought food to the house. In fact in primitive societies, 80% males died in violence to procure food and security for women and their children.
Men must realise that in the modern society, a women is capable of earning her livelihood. Men are not needed. In such a situation, there is no need for man to get married. Men should refuse to marry.
http://masculist.wordpress.com/2009/05/12/why-should-men-refuse-to-marry/

Hi Padmaja !

Good Morning!!

In my eyes,women have always been mean..ha..ha.

The present age has provided them an opportunity to reveal their hidden facets in no-holds-barred manner.They are just manifesting something latent in them since time immemorial...ha..ha

@Ankita

Ankita you are suffering from sort of mental hallucination if you say that men are in the awe of women of present era.

If you have really read the article, I have tried my level best to retain the balance in views. I am not paid representative of media house and therefore I am not interested in ignoring the harsh changes.

I am certainly happy with the way females are expressing themselves in various fields but it would be nothing less than burying one’s head in sand if I come to ignore the wrong trend patters.

If you wish to hear only glamorous and unrealistic things you can better join other forum having a motto” ignorance is bliss” .Luckily, you will have no difficulty in locating such a forum as such sponsored forums-dealing in lies and distortions- have become order of the day...ha..ha

@Ankita,

Your very statement that you love to see men feeling threatened is proof of your sadistic instincts. Its akin to gaining pleasure at the sight of somebody suffering - feeling threatened is a negative feeling. But it is also your foolishness that you see men being threatened as something funny or pleasurable. Ultimately, it is this feeling of threat that would make men organise and fight back.

Yes, you are right. Majority of men are not feeling threatened at the moment. In a few years, a larger number of men would feel threatened as women would be more and more aggressive. Immediately after that, men would realise the mistake of empowering women and would work hard to disempower them.

History repeats itself! In earlier societies, women were empowered too. Then, women became aggressive, misused laws and society plunged into immorality. Men then realised their mistake and disempowered the women. Call it primitive if you wish. But, your very first statement that you derive pleasure by seeing men threatened is evidence of the negativity or sadism in women who want to see men subordinate to them.

Lastly, I feel glad to see men feeling threatened. Not because I take pleasure in their suffering. But because I know that such feeling of threat will eventually lead to the concept of men’s rights and men would fight back at sadistic women and feminists.

@Ankita,

Do we men say that we love to see women feeling threatened by men? I would never say that. But, women like you seem to enjoy the suffering of men. AS a man, I can tell you that I certainly feel threatened by women. I have no regrets about it because nature didn’t make the way things are today. Men were the hunters who always led society and women were the gatherers. WE are now disturbing this nature’s law. So, men will definately feel threatened as much as women feeling insecure when society tales away their natural role of nurturing. Imagine if there are incubators and there is no need for wombs. The role of mothering would be done away with. Women will start feeling suffocated in such a system when they cannot perform their natural role.

Anyway, your first statement has proved the point that women can be sadists too. Your ultimate goal is to trample on men and humiliate them and then enjoy the suffering. Now we know how women were oppressed for centuries! History repeats itself!

You are right Ankita, many men are liberal and treat women with equality. Some time they go to pubs together, have weed and sleep in same apartment. In the morning the women cries gang rape and all the liberal men goes behind bar for years.
The liberal men are beling falsely accused of rape, 498A, false charges of sexual harassment at work place etc. etc.
I have just written on something on false allegation of rape-
http://masculist.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/false-allegation-of-rape/
In the present legal scenario men must stop talking to women, going out with then, refuse to marry and refuse to work with women. It is just for protection of innocent men rotting in jails for no crime, where false accuser and extortionist women walk free with sympathy and occassional state financial help too.

@Rajesh

You sound correct but is it practically possible ?The best way to end the menace of liberal women is to have laws at par with the changes that are taking place in our society.A sound legal mechanism that takes note of the grievances of both the parties in a fair manner will eventually lead to decrease in number of fake cases.

Ketul,

I really respect the fair sex and that’s why I wrote this article. Better read it once again and you will find that I have asked for speedy justice for them.

I am no women hater but at the same time I am quite aware of the menace of arrogant and corrupt women, who are sabotaging relationships for their vested interests. There are always two sides of a coin. I am not interested in just admiring one side of theirs. Pampering is quite different from appreciation, isn’t it ?

@Ketul

Just have a look at Top 10 list showing position of articles based on comments received. One article named ”Pamela Anderson flashes her nipple!” is on the seventh position.

Are you interested in emergence of Pamela Andersons in this land? If that’s your dream, go ahead and pamper wildness in women. One day when you will be crying you will have no women by your side to wipe out your tears other than women interested in cashing-in-on your tragic state of affairs!!

Hi Arvind,

Thanks a lot for mentioning my article (Pamela Anderson flashes her nipple!) in your esteemed post.

@Aneez

Thanks a lot for commenting!!!

@Andy

Andy, I expect you to be more realistic.

”women owes you your existence”..but not without help of man..ha..ha

Well, I am interested in creating an atmosphere wherein women come to retain their feminine instincts-something you seem to boast of. If corrective steps are not introduced ,I am sure that female attributes loved by likes of Andy would become a thing of past as all we have women no better than prostitutes!! The Nirupa Roy types of mothers shall be replaced by likes of Mallika Sherawat in Murder.

Let’s act before it’s too late!!!

Hey Andy,

You meant ’existence’ and not ’conception’, right?? ;-)

Because it’s the ’conception’ thing where women need a man!

And... is ’conception’ and ’existence’ two words for same thing??

Ha...ha

@Andy,

What about respecting men? Did you forget that? I didn’t know that humans were in asexual reproduction. I always thought that men and women were both needed for reproduction.

Didn’t you have a father? Or was he criminal?

Just give them a little time, I know it is hard but they have only had their emancipation a short time. Women’s rights is a relatively new concept in India. Of course they are flexing their muscles and spreading their wings right now. It will calm down and even out after awhile.

The same thing happened in America, the women were RABID at first but not as much now. Indian women will start to calm down too.

It doesn’t happen in months or years but in decades.

Hang in there, try to be understanding and best wishes.

Andy is just got impressed with feminist writing. It happens to some men. Well andy, dont you think when a women does not respect a man, he does not respect his father & brother. Father of that daughter must always be ashamed.
Nuya, I have seen in all writing that the crux of the problem is marriage. Women say they are salves in marriage- well I dont know any man who has married to get a slave. In that case women should not marry. Further I feel that a man get nothing in marriage, except slavery and legal threat, I think men should refuse to marry.
Dont you think it is great solution. Remove the problem itself, that is marriage.

@Shameem

I think most of the readers on IB don’t bother to read the posts before commenting. The article is compilation of several pieces borrowed from here and there. The only piece that belongs to me is one titled” Resurrecting the rights of women”.

In other words, it’s not my double standards ,if at all you people are hell bent on naming accurate portrayal as double standards, but the double standard of people who have actually written them. Anyway,I would have also written the same thing but found it safe to put at one place to make you aware that what I feel is also being felt by others !!!

It’s not me but people from the very refined class like engineers, lawyers ,judges and writers all are of the opinion that so-called progressive behavior of women is shattering the foundation of an ideal society. All these people are trapped in double standards ,isn’t it ?

Sahmim you are living in a fool’s paradise. That’s why you cannot see the reality. That’s why you cannot intercept other side of coin.

What will be your reaction if you get married with a liberal woman, who has slept with many women/men in her teens? Going by your progressive nature, I think you will say: Hats off! You are my prize possession”.

Recently, during a raid at one of the call centers in Delhi, young guys and girls were caught in compromising position. The pipe for the exit of waste water in that building was choked as used condoms have blocked the flow of water.

Have you ever been to rave party? All kinds of drugs and beer bottle can be found in hands of these liberal boys and men ?

Should I treat them as ”Devis” ? What about recent trend pattern in which boys and girls have fallen in love with four or seven partners at the same time? Should I hail them as incarnation of virtue ?

How will you feel if I put you behind the bars for no fault of yours?? But that’s the fate of old and aged parents , relatives etc. if a women files a fake case. It’s not me but reputed institutions like SC that are worried over falling level of morality in women.

It’s only blockheads like you who think everything is alright.Nobody is against the rise of women but that does not mean accepting wrong as right.

Don’t worry about my dignity or for that matter dignity of females in my manner.Fortunately, we are not liberal souls.Worry about your dignity as it’s you who are in love with liberal women of our times,usually found at pubs or rave parties!!1

One thing more.It’s love of double standards like us who come to feel the pain of helpless and aged women freedom fighter like Laxmi Panda.!!!

It’s time for you to share some lighter moments with ”liberal woman” instead of developing the ability to see the ”other side of coin”

Hi Shameem,

why do you fail to get the idea?

Arvind is not bashing the women but just looking at ’both sides’ of the coin. Unfortunately, though, he is happy with magnifying just ’one side’ of the coin, maybe he wants the other side (the good side) to just fade away.

According to his logic, all men are pimps who sell away their mothers and sisters and daughters!! (this is the ’other side’ of coin as fas as men are concerned and go at par on ideology with Arvind’s article.

And, I’m afraid we have no choice but to accept it. That is... if we accept his points.

@Aneez

No ”the other side” of women is never going to fade away.

It’s a remote possibility because Aneez, Andy and Shameem will always be there to take care of the good side of women via nipple show or via any other progressive activity on par with modernity ....ha..ha

I hope Aneez you have seen the movie”Kalyug”.

Till now it’s men who have been selling the women. It’s quite possible that after some time women start selling men. After all,we are progressing very fast!..ha..ha

”What will be your reaction if you get married with a liberal woman, who has slept with many women/men in her teens? Going by your progressive nature, I think you will say: Hats off! You are my prize possession”.”

That is exactly your problem...you think everyone is same as you are...

Lemme tell you...I don’t care...people can have relationships in the past...you might have heard the joke ”virginity is lack of opportunity”...this joke in fact holds some truth....I know you will be filled with hatred and contempt after reading this...but that’s the way I am...& many people are...& neither Muthalik nor you can stop them...

BTW the way you use the phrase ”liberal woman” so derogatorily...talks volumes about you mentality...

@Shameem,

Women oppress men in their own ways. They rape them, gang-rape them etc. but financially, emotionally and in other ways. I have seen that enough.

If women start a movement, we men will not keep quiet. If innocent men are targetted and made to suffer, we will not keep quiet about it. If women can do things hook or by crook, we men will do that too!

Beware of men! Men are back!

@Jitaditya,

Liberal women have many facets to it. One of them is obviously looseness and forwardness. Most guys in India are hypocrats. They support loose women so that they can enjoy. But when they get married, they want traditional women.

Shameem, what you are saying is right. Women dont rape men. Even if they do, it is not a crime, hence there is no crime statistics against men.
Do they sexually harass men. Yes. Sometime back I read an article by a women on the issue. But sexual harassment of man at workplace is not a crime. Sexual assualt on man is not a crime. There is no crime like male molestation.
When no crime exist against men, how can a women commit a crime against men?
Yes, a few statistics exist. Abuse of Dowry prohiition act against men, extortion by women of man’s property (legalised extortion in the name of maintenance or alimony). These are well docuemnted, and you are accepting that too. Just that you feel no redressal is required.
Most of the rape allegations are false. You can always read the studies,
http://masculist.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/false-allegation-of-rape/
The worst part is even when the truth comes out in open, no women is punished. Take the example of recent Inderpuri Police Station gang rape case- the women made false charges, the issue is proved but no action will be taken against women.
I have seen the movie Bandit Queen. It made me sick too. But I also saw ”Undertrial”. It made me sick too. Have you heard of this movie?
http://masculist.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!38CC0DA95D83C9C7!121.entry
The only solution left to men to protect themselves to stop interacting with women. Refuse to marry. Refuse to work with women. Refuse to go to pub with a women. Non cooperation. A non violent man cannot do anything more than that.
Poor men. What have they made of themselves. I pity.

@Rajesh

Your idea of non-cooperation sounds interesting !

@Jitaditya

Nice to hear something from you after a very long time.

It will be a great blunder on your part to hail me as an-feminist..ha..ha

Well,loving someone does not mean that we should ignore his/her negative traits.On the contrary,a better way of honouring an individual is to make him aware of his weaker or negative aspects so that he/she can remove them.

Sadly, in our times very few have the guts to place the concerns of women in right perspective.What we are doing is that we are promoting them in a wrong way.I don’t know why even the flawed behaviour of women is being hailed as something progressive.There is certainly a ”great game” behind all these talks associated with empowerment of women.

I respect women and that should make it very clear to you that I am not-anti feminist...ha..ha

Jitaditya

I have just highlighted wrong developments in the world of females and that in no way can be seen as pointing accusing finger at women? Why will I single out women?

you take a stance based on a idea that is strongly rooted in your mind...

you need to accept that people can have different values and ways of life as opposed to yours and that is not necessarily negative...(well this view was more about your previous posts rather than this one)

coming to this post...why do police consider that the in laws are at fault by default?...because this is what has been going on for ages...thousand years of oppression in a male chauvinistic society has given rise to this situation and it’ll take couple of generations more to get rid of biases (in both sides)...

@Jitaditya

”you need to accept that people can have different values and ways of life as opposed to yours and that is not necessarily negative.”

....Thanks for stating it.I am too aware of it.

What you don’t realize is that aping Western beliefs is not the ideal way to move ahead in life.Why are they being imposed on all of us in the name of progressiveness?

That’s exactly what I was talking about...
you have explained it for me...

”Why are they being imposed on all of us in the name of progressiveness? ”...

Who is imposing it on you???....on the contrary you are imposing a certain stereotype of woman that only cooks, rises children & doesn’t even have the right to choose what she can wear...

As far as western clothing is considered a trouser is anyday more comfortable than a dhoti...or saree...even if you don’t accept it...

@Jitaditya


Defending the better thought patterns is no crime. Nor should I be forced to accept newer thought patterns as ultimate .Yes,if nobody is imposing how come so many unwanted trend patterns have become order of the day.It’s necessary that I should name who is the culprit. Well, if you don’t understand that all is being done in a very pre-planned manner, there is no need for me to shatter your ignorance.


You better live with the illusion that all is well.I know one day you will realize that in all these years you served the false prophets but by then all chances of coming on right track will vanish forever.I am not interested in dhoti vs trouser debate.It’s about the mindset.

Correction:

It’s not necessary that I should name who is the culprit.

”if nobody is imposing how come so many unwanted trend patterns have become order of the day”

it may be unwanted for you...but other people wanted it...and you have no right to question it...

I dunno why you look at thing with such complicated views...it’ll only complicate your own life...don’t think you’ll ever bring about any change to anyone...

”You better live with the illusion that all is well.I know one day you will realize that in all these years you served the false prophets but by then all chances of coming on right track will vanish forever.”

I know you are so dogmatic that you’ll never accept it...but rest assured...it is your pseudo moral & hypocritic idea of so called ”indian society” which is an illusion...& I live my life...I don’t serve any prophets...u might serves your prophets like Muthalik...

& in every debate u always avoid the question that how come we became such a corrupt nation if we harbored such great values...

@Jitaditya,

Being an anti-feminist doesn’t mean being anti-women. Just a being an anti-Talibanist is different from being a man-hater.

Feminism is an anti-family, anti-male, anti-marriage and a pro-abortion movement of some disgrunted women. They have enrolled some males too as their lapdogs to fight for them.

@Jitaditya,

How do you know that women were oppressed for thousands of years? Have you been alive for so many years?

How do you know that men are not oppressed? Just because you were not told about it right?

@Jitaditya,

”coming to this post...why do police consider that the in laws are at fault by default?...because this is what has been going on for ages...thousand years of oppression in a male chauvinistic society has given rise to this situation and it’ll take couple of generations more to get rid of biases (in both sides)...”


You wouldn’t be saying all this if you were a victim and your parents were taken into police custody at 2 AM on a Friday night for an oral statement by your wife that she was harassed. The terms, ”Male Chauvinism” and thousands of years of male domination are feminist rantings. I will not accept it at all. Because there is another side to this. Men have been as oppressed as women. Just that nobody has questioned the feminists. Lastly, even if we take your statements on face value, it is no reason to assume or jump to conclusions. It like assuming that all muslims are terrorists just because Osama and majority of terrorists are muslims. That’s absurd.

@Jitaditya,

”Who is imposing it on you???....on the contrary you are imposing a certain stereotype of woman that only cooks, rises children & doesn’t even have the right to choose what she can wear.”


The media through its power and the education system are doing their bit in imposing their own values through the backdoor through the process of popularising their own concepts. They violate their own rules and the PCI norms. This is where the problem lies.

How is Arvind imposing an idea? He is powerless before the reach and influence of the media. All that I am saying here is rights come with responsibilities. If women wear revealing clothes, it creates problems for men as sexual arousal in men is much faster than women, generally speaking. Women have the right to walk freely on the road. So do men have the right not to get aroused and disturbed by women. So, women and men have to behave and wear sensible dress. Rights with responsibilities.

Well, the media is misusing its powers to push for women into the workforce. None of their business to do it! Social norms are on the contrary. Men are supposed to provide for their families and if women take away our jobs, what are the men supposed to do? If there are 100 jobs and 100 men and 100 women, and if 50% of jobs go to women [50 jobs], then that means 50 women and 50 men will be unemployed. The 50 women can be housewives. What about the 50 men? This is untenable. Before supporting women in the workforce, think about a situation where you lose your job to women simply because of adhering to equality.

Persistent Myths in Feminist Scholarship:-

http://chronicle.com/free/v55/i40/40sommers.htm

By CHRISTINA HOFF SOMMERS

”Harder to kill than a vampire.” That is what the sociologist Joel Best calls a bad statistic. But, as I have discovered over the years, among false statistics the hardest of all to slay are those promoted by feminist professors. Consider what happened recently when I sent an e-mail message to the Berkeley law professor Nancy K.D. Lemon pointing out that the highly praised textbook that she edited, Domestic Violence Law (second edition, Thomson/West, 2005), contained errors.

Her reply began:

”I appreciate and share your concern for veracity in all of our scholarship. However, I would expect a colleague who is genuinely concerned about such matters to contact me directly and give me a chance to respond before launching a public attack on me and my work, and then contacting me after the fact.”

I confess: I had indeed publicly criticized Lemon’s book, in campus lectures and in a post on FeministLawProfessors.com. I had always thought that that was the usual practice of intellectual argument. Disagreement is aired, error corrected, truth affirmed. Indeed, I was moved to write to her because of the deep consternation of law students who had attended my lectures: If authoritative textbooks contain errors, how are students to know whether they are being educated or indoctrinated? Lemon’s book has been in law-school classrooms for years.

One reason that feminist scholarship contains hard-to-kill falsehoods is that reasonable, evidence-backed criticism is regarded as a personal attack.

Lemon’s Domestic Violence Law is organized as a conventional law-school casebook — a collection of judicial opinions, statutes, and articles selected, edited, and commented upon by the author. The first selection, written by Cheryl Ward Smith (no institutional affiliation is given), offers students a historical perspective on domestic-violence law. According to Ward:

”The history of women’s abuse began over 2,700 years ago in the year 753 BC. It was during the reign of Romulus of Rome that wife abuse was accepted and condoned under the Laws of Chastisement. ... The laws permitted a man to beat his wife with a rod or switch so long as its circumference was no greater than the girth of the base of the man’s right thumb. The law became commonly know as ’The Rule of Thumb.’ These laws established a tradition which was perpetuated in English Common Law in most of Europe.”

Where to begin? How about with the fact that Romulus of Rome never existed. He is a figure in Roman mythology — the son of Mars, nursed by a wolf. Problem 2: The phrase ”rule of thumb” did not originate with any law about wife beating, nor has anyone ever been able to locate any such law. It is now widely regarded as a myth, even among feminist professors.

A few pages later, in a selection by Joan Zorza, a domestic-violence expert, students read, ”The March of Dimes found that women battered during pregnancy have more than twice the rate of miscarriages and give birth to more babies with more defects than women who may suffer from any immunizable illness or disease.” Not true. When I recently read Zorza’s assertion to Richard P. Leavitt, director of science information at the March of Dimes, he replied, ”That is a total error on the part of the author. There was no such study.” The myth started in the early 1990s, he explained, and resurfaces every few years.

Zorza also informs readers that ”between 20 and 35 percent of women seeking medical care in emergency rooms in America are there because of domestic violence.” Studies by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Bureau of Justice Statistics, an agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, indicate that the figure is closer to 1 percent.

Few students would guess that the Lemon book is anything less than reliable. The University of California at Berkeley’s online faculty profile of Lemon hails it as the ”premiere” text of the genre. It is part of a leading casebook series, published by Thomson/West, whose board of academic advisers, prominently listed next to the title page, includes many eminent law professors.

I mentioned these problems in my message to Lemon. She replied:

”I have looked into your assertions and requested documentation from Joan Zorza regarding the March of Dimes study and the statistics on battered women in emergency rooms. She provided both of these promptly.”

If that’s the case, Zorza and Lemon might share their documentation with Leavitt, of the March of Dimes, who is emphatic that it does not exist. They might also contact the Centers for Disease Control statistician Janey Hsiao, who wrote to me that ”among ED [Emergency Department] visits made by females, the percent of having physical abuse by spouse or partner is 0.02 percent in 2003 and 0.01 percent in 2005.”

Here is what Lemon says about Cheryl Ward Smith’s essay on Romulus and the rule of thumb:

”I made a few minor editorial changes in the Smith piece so that it is more accurate. However, overall it appeared to be correct.”

A few minor editorial changes? Students deserve better. So do women victimized by violence.

Feminist misinformation is pervasive. In their eye-opening book, Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Women’s Studies (Lexington Books, 2003), the professors Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge describe the ”sea of propaganda” that overwhelms the contemporary feminist classroom. The formidable Christine Rosen (formerly Stolba), in her 2002 report on the five leading women’s-studies textbooks, found them rife with falsehoods, half-truths, and ”deliberately misleading sisterly sophistries.” Are there serious scholars in women’s studies? Yes, of course. Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, an anthropologist at the University of California at Davis; Janet Zollinger Giele, a sociologist at Brandeis; and Anne Mellor, a literary scholar at UCLA, to name just three, are models of academic excellence and integrity. But they are the exception. Lemon’s book typifies the departmental mind-set.

Consider The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World (2008), by the feminist scholar Joni Seager, chair of the Hunter College geography department. Now in its fourth edition, Seager’s atlas was named ”reference book of the year” by the American Library Association when it was published. ”Nobody should be without this book,” says the feminist icon Gloria Steinem. ”A wealth of fascinating information,” enthuses The Washington Post. Fascinating, maybe. But the information is misleading and, at least in one instance, flat-out false.

One color-coded map illustrates how women are kept ”in their place” by restrictions on their mobility, dress, and behavior. Somehow the United States comes out looking as bad in this respect as Somalia, Uganda, Yemen, Niger, and Libya. All are coded with the same shade of green to indicate places where ”patriarchal assumptions” operate in ”potent combination with fundamentalist religious interpretations.” Seager’s logic? She notes that in parts of Uganda, a man can claim an unmarried woman as his wife by raping her. The United States gets the same low rating on Seager’s charts because, she notes, ”State legislators enacted 301 anti-abortion measures between 1995 and 2001.” Never mind that the Ugandan practice is barbaric, that U.S. abortion law is exceptionally liberal among the nations of the world, and that the activism and controversy surrounding the issue of abortion in the United States is a sign of a vigorous free democracy working out its disagreements.

On another map, the United States gets the same rating for domestic violence as Uganda and Haiti. Seager backs up that verdict with that erroneous and ubiquitous emergency-room factoid: ”22 percent-35 percent of women who visit a hospital emergency room do so because of domestic violence.”

The critical work of 21st-century feminism will be to help women in the developing world, especially in Muslim societies, in their struggle for basic rights. False depictions of the United States as an oppressive ”patriarchy” are a ludicrous distraction. If American women are as oppressed as Ugandan women, then American feminists would be right to focus on their domestic travails and let the Ugandan women fend for themselves.

All books have mistakes, so why pick on the feminists? My complaint with feminist research is not so much that the authors make mistakes; it is that the mistakes are impervious to reasoned criticism. They do not get corrected. The authors are passionately committed to the proposition that American women are oppressed and under siege. The scholars seize and hold on for dear life to any piece of data that appears to corroborate their dire worldview. At the same time, any critic who attempts to correct the false assumptions is dismissed as a backlasher and an anti-feminist crank.

Why should it matter if a large number of professors think and say a lot of foolish and intemperate things? Here are three reasons to be concerned:

1) False assertions, hyperbole, and crying wolf undermine the credibility and effectiveness of feminism. The United States, and the world, would greatly benefit from an intellectually responsible, reality-based women’s movement.

2) Over the years, the feminist fictions have made their way into public policy. They travel from the women’s-studies textbooks to women’s advocacy groups and then into news stories. Soon after, they are cited by concerned political leaders. President Obama recently issued an executive order establishing a White House Council on Women and Girls. As he explained, ”The purpose of this council is to ensure that American women and girls are treated fairly in all matters of public policy.” He and Congress are also poised to use the celebrated Title IX gender-equity law to counter discrimination not only in college athletics but also in college math and science programs, where, it is alleged, women face a ”chilly climate.” The president and members of Congress can cite decades of women’s-studies scholarship that presents women as the have-nots of our society. Never mind that this is largely no longer true. Nearly every fact that could be marshaled to justify the formation of the White House Council on Women and Girls or the new focus of Title IX application was shaped by scholarly merchants of hype like Professors Lemon and Seager.

3) Finally, as a philosophy professor of almost 20 years, and as someone who respects rationality, objective scholarship, and intellectual integrity, I find it altogether unacceptable for distinguished university professors and prestigious publishers to disseminate falsehoods. It is offensive in itself, even without considering the harmful consequences. Obduracy in the face of reasonable criticism may be inevitable in some realms, such as partisan politics, but in academe it is an abuse of the privileges of professorship.

”Thug,” ”parasite,” ”dangerous,” a ”female impersonator” — those are some of the labels applied to me when I exposed specious feminist statistics in my 1994 book Who Stole Feminism? (Come to think of it, none of my critics contacted me directly with their concerns before launching their public attacks.) According to Susan Friedman, of the University of Wisconsin at Madison, ”Sommers’ diachronic discourse is easily unveiled as synchronic discourse in drag. ... She practices ... metonymic historiography.” That one hurt! But my views, as well as my metonymic historiography, are always open to correction. So I’ll continue to follow the work of the academic feminists — to criticize it when it is wrong, and to learn from it when it is right.

Christina Hoff Sommers is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. She is the author of Who Stole Feminism? (Simon & Schuster, 1994) and The War Against Boys (Simon & Schuster, 2000), and editor of The Science on Women and Science, forthcoming from the AEI Press.

@Aneez

No time for repetition.So many people are projecting ”honest answers”.Time to take note of them.

And, please understand that I do understand your answers but when will you understand what I am trying to make you understand :-)

You are trying to make me understand your rulebook :-)

Unfortunately, I have my ethics and my rules.

However, if we continue with the debates, I’m sure one day we’ll be able to strike a balance between these two extremes.

And... you again avoided the answers :-)

Take your time, I’ll wait for you to get free. Then we’ll see what you have to say about the ’good women’, and why do you always avoid mentioning them while bashing the ’bad ones’.

@Mita

”I personally don’t see any harm in it (as long as he/she is not suffering from AIDS - which sleeping around usually does).”

....That’s make any conversation with you a futile exercise.

”A few such cases cannot be labeled as ’trend-pattern.”

.....You appear to be like an Ostrich that has buried its head in the sand!!!

Just visit the site :http://498a.org/

Time to kill your ignorance,isn’t it ?

***************************************
HARASSED HUSBANDS

A news report published in The Times Of India

( http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Harassed_husbands/articleshow/2677627.cms )

The promises made in the dark and gloomy prison cells last for a long time. Hardcore criminals make professional pacts with the kids locked up for
picking pockets. And the bond is stronger if the men are innocent. Slurping a cup of pale tea while evading the prying eyes of hardened killers, or being heckled by petty thieves while standing in queue for lunch, such men often wonder: what am I doing in this place?

The days somehow crawl and pass off. But, when night darkens the stinking cells and dirty corridors and the warders begin to beat their wooden sticks against the metal bars, such ‘innocent’ men are gripped by panic. They share their grief with other such men. The stories are always similar: “I had a life, a good job, a happy family and some dreams. Now it’s a life of minuses: jobless, penniless and hopeless.” Many of them have one more thing in common: They all have been done in by the accusing finger of a woman - their wife, actually - for “harassing her for dowry”.

Enter section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. A woman files an FIR. The man goes to jail. There is no bail. He thinks he is guilty by suspicion. And there is no chance of proving his innocence because the law is “pro-women”. The accusation is enough to prove his guilt.

So, when such men - accused of harassing their wives for dowry - meet, they spit fire on 498A. They are not so angry with the women who put them in such terrible position, but they are at war with the law which fails “to distinguish between real and fake cases of harassment for dowry”.

Sitting under a tree with their lawyers just outside the court or pushing a wad of currency notes into the hands of an officer in a dank police station or talking to each other in hushed tones in murky jails, their tongues turn venomous against 498A: “It’s a marriage splitter; it’s been made to harass the innocent; and this is legal terrorism.”

There is nothing new about the instances of abuse of the dowry harassment law. It has already become a pan-Indian phenomenon. Even the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, has cautioned against the misuse of the anti-dowry Act. But there are new fears now. With a new anti-dowry law - with harsher punishment - on the anvil, the men who claim to be victims of 498A are already getting nervous. They think their hopeless situation may now sink into an endless abyss.

The worries are written clearly on their faces. Many of them meet every week in Delhi’s Patiala House court premises. They discuss their stories. They all have something horrible to tell - stories of disintegration. Amit Kumar had a flourishing business. And then his wife slapped a dowry case on her family. He, his mother and sisters spent weeks in jail. Now he spends time with his lawyer trying “to get out of this mess”. Suraj Prakash lost his job, money and his father within a month of his wife taking him to court. Azam Shaikh’s story is almost the same. So is Kevin D’souza’s.

Now, they are members of a group called Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), which fights for the rights of men “falsely implicated in dowry cases”. “If the government makes it a bailable offence, half the problems will be solved automatically,” says Rakesh K Lakra who represents many SIFF members. “Women file fake cases to take money from their husbands and get out of marriage,” says Lakra, with an air of authority on marital issues. He looks determined to help his “innocent clients”.

Almost all of these men are educated, many of them English-speaking professionals working with good firms. A good number of them work and live abroad. And many of them have been born and brought up many shores away from India. Now they are all in the same boat, “fighting the draconian law” from different platforms. There is a Men’s Cell whose signboards hang on the central verge at traffic junctions in Delhi, asking a direct question: “Are you being harassed by your wife?” And offering the solution: “Contact the Men’s Cell”. A group of victims in the US set up 498a.org in 2006 to fight the “pro-women laws”. In its first month, the website had 100,000 hits. There are groups and helplines, offering help and sharing tragic tales.

The stories have similar beginnings and endings: “She didn’t like my parents, she didn’t cook, she was always bossy, she ignored me, she already had a lover, she didn’t want kids, she wanted to run away, she wanted my money... she filed a fake case”. For some reason the problem always begins with a small thing: a burnt toast, a leaking tap, a sharp taunt or a tight slap. And then she files a fake case. In all these stories - told in first person and posted on the Net - the women are always scheming sluts who are protected by the law for some strange reason. In all these stories, dowry is almost a myth.

But in India and wherever Indians live, dowry is not a myth. It’s a fact of life. It’s a curse. It takes life. It ruins families. Every year, thousands of women are done to death - burnt alive for a big car, hacked to pieces for cash and jewellery, thrown from a running train for a colour TV and pushed into a river for a bicycle. There are millions of stories - told, hushed up and muffled - of women being tortured for dowry. It’s also a fact that domestic violence against women is on the rise. That’s why there is a law to check it. But it has failed to do so. And, in many cases, it’s being misused.

Some women seem to have learnt a few lessons from men on how to extort money. Trapped in bad marriages or married against their will, they use 498A to get out of it with some money in their purse. This is subversion of the law meant to protect women from harassment. Now, with the new anti-dowry law being proposed, all eyes are on 498A. The women would like the law to be harsher. The dowry seekers would like it to be scrapped. Innocent victims of 498A would like it to be “balanced and reasonable”. And the lawyers and policemen would want a bigger mess, as they are the biggest beneficiaries in this battle of the sexes.

(Some names have been changed)

shobhan.saxena@timesgroup.com

@Mita,

”A few such cases cannot be labeled as ’trend-pattern’.”

Are we into a number game Mita? Its like saying that until the numbers exceed, we will not deliver justice. Or justice belongs to the majority and not minority. Its absurd. I can say that dowry problem is also a minority and we don’t need to solve it.

”what is your concept of ’an ideal society’? Is it where girls must do the household chores (while their brothers romp about the house doing nothing constructive), and the mother of the house works from dawn to night, cooking, cleaning, rearing and doing thousand and one other odd jobs with no time for physical and mental relaxation, and a dutiful wife bringing forth an offspring every alternate year and being beaten up and abused if she gives birth to a girl? Would you prefer those women who are obedient, meek, and have come into this world just to cater to the needs of a man? Is that your ’ideal society’?”

What is your concept of an ideal society, Ms Mita? Is it where a man is hen-pecked, subordinate to his wife? A society where a man is supposed to be the primary breadwinner and yet women get the same education and reservations? A society where women can sleep with bfs and men cannot do anything about it? A society where women are dominating and they dictate the laws, pay less tax, have women’s organisations that intimidate men? A society where a wife says, ”bastard, if you don’t obey me, I will call the cops and you will be arrested, have to sell your house etc”. A society where women work and yet men have to pay alimony to them. Is this progressive?


”I personally don’t see any harm in it (as long as he/she is not suffering from AIDS - which sleeping around usually does). And by the way what is your opinion of men sleeping with four wives and that too legally? I am certain you won’t find anything amiss in that. Huh! Why should women feel bad about it, right? Its the ideal society!”

Do you know that a woman can sleep with millions of men legally? Do you know that IPC 497 [Adultery act] is anti-male and no man can sue a woman under this? What is your opinion about this? Again, why should women feel bad about it or men for that matter when paternity fraud takes place? A man struggles and when he comes back, he finds his wife flirting with another man. Then, she files a DV case and the man is not allowed into his own house! This is justice and equality.


”In my opinion, SC and other reputed institutions have much more important things to do than worry about the level of MORALITY IN WOMEN.”

I cannot comment on this but the more important work of SC seems to be delivering anti-male judgements and making men pay alimony to adulterous and IT/ BT wives.


”Why do you think that your ’thought pattern’ is better than others? People who do not think like you do are not necessarily worse or insane.”

Everybody thinks that his/ her thought process is the best. lets not get hypocritical.

@Mita,

THIS IS A SMALL PART OF AN IDEAL SOCIETY FOR YOU WHERE ADULTEROUS WOMEN ARE REWARDED WITH ALIMONY!

Wives accused of adultery must get alimony: NCW
Wives accused of adultery must get alimony: NCW
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Wives_accused_of_adultery_must_get_alimony_NCW/rssarticleshow/2289645.cms

Wives accused of adultery must get alimony: NCW

NEW DELHI: Divorcing your wife may soon cost you more. Advocating big changes in maintenance law for women after divorce, including an alimony hike, the National Commission for Women (NCW) will move Supreme Court for a review of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Amongst the provisions that the commission wants reviewed is an increase in the amount of interim maintenance.

NCW contends the present amount is paltry for a woman to meet her and children’s expenses. It has suggested the amount should not be less than 30% of the husband’s monthly income.

The commission also wants the provision that deprives a wife from claiming maintenance if she is living in adultery to be deleted. ”This provision is mostly misused and adultery cases framed against a woman to deny her basic expenses,” NCW chairperson Girija Vyas said.

The commission has recommended that the section that stops a woman from recovering the maintenance amount on the expiry of one year should also be removed. According to NCW, 60-80% women do not receive maintenance despite court orders.

”The law is misused and very often women are not given even the paltry amount they are entitled to,” Vyas said. Another problem women face is that maintenance is paid for sometime and then stopped.

@Mita,

Women cannot be punished for adultery
Women cannot be punished for adultery
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Women_cannot_be_punished_for_adultery/articleshow/925116.cms

NEW DELHI: A woman, even if she is involved in an illicit relationship, cannot be punished for adultery and is treated as the victim under law.

And the National Commission for Women (NCW) has shot down proposals for amending Section 497 so that women can be prosecuted for adultery.

The Commission had been asked by the Centre to review Section 497 which does not envisage prosecution of the wife by the husband for adultery.

The section provides expressly that the wife shall not be punishable even as an abettor, based on the reasoning that the wife, who is involved in an illicit relationship with another man, is a victim and not the author of the crime.

According to NCW sources, the Commission does not feel that by merely prescribing punishment for women by amending Section 497, the marriage can be protected or saved.

The NCW has forwarded its recommendations to the government, in which it has stated that considering the relatively socially disempowered position of women, the Commission suggests no amendments to Section 497 of IPC.

The existing provision in the IPC is based on the mindset that the wife is a personal possession of the husband, who is the sole aggrieved person in an incident of adultery.

The Commission has, however, recommended suitable amendments to Section 198(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPRC), which as of now disqualifies the wife of an unfaithful husband from prosecuting him for his promiscuous behaviour.

It has told the government that as the wife already can take action against her husband under various other legal provisions, such as Section 498A of IPC, there is no reason that she should be debarred from initiating prosecution under Section 198 of CRPC.

The wife, in such cases, ought to be the person aggrieved and competent to file a complaint under Section 198

What the article says is that MEN lie about adultery to keep from paying and 60% to 80% don’t pay any way. So how did it support your claim of of adultery being paid for?

As for this ideal society that they long for, that they want to return to, it only existed in their tiny little minds, it was never ideal for women.

@Nuya,


”What the article says is that MEN lie about adultery to keep from paying and 60% to 80% don’t pay any way. So how did it support your claim of of adultery being paid for?”

The article does not say that. The article reports the excuse given by the women’s commission to make men pay for adultery committed by women. On the pretext of some men misusing adultery clause, the women’s commission wants all men to pay for the crime committed by adulterous women! Even if we assume that some men do it, there are various means to stop it. They have no damn business to make innocent men pay for adultery by women! SHIT!

Hi Arvind, I really have no qualms about women sleeping around as long as men are free to do so (maybe by visiting a whore house, if they don’t get anyone else). I don’t have a problem with dutiful wives bringing forth an offspring as long as they are respected for it and not treated like dirt. By the way, you are doing okay with distorting Rabindranath Tagore’s poem. Not bad. I hope you really understand what he meant to say by those words.

@Mita

I don’t have a problem with dutiful wives bringing forth an offspring as long as they are respected for it and not treated like dirt.

.......Who informed you that they are not being respected and treated like dirt?

Probably, you people want to enter in immoral,indecent and wild activities.Therefore, it becomes imperative for you people to start labeling the old order of living as primitive.It’s the age of offering lame excuse to justify their corrupt behavior.

@Mita

Well, I have very well understood the essence of poem.But seeing the attitude of liberal men and women , I feel it’s time to modify all that which reminds me about ”knowledge oriented society”.What’s the use of refined knowledge in ”sex oriented society” ?

@Mita

Your views are devoid of substance.They are mere second-rated projections of what’s written in literature of the communists.First open your eyes and have some first-hand experiences.Nobody is against the changes but then changes should not engulf the values.

Instead of taking offence at my language, take offence at the corrupt behaviour promoted by the people speaking refined language.

@Mita

Don’t talk about substance in your views? The borrowed and hollow percepts can’t be perceived as substance .Well, as per you views thought process should change. I too endorse the newer thought patterns. But change in thought pattern can’t be used to accommodate ”women sleeping around”!! Well, if that’s the substance of your views, I can’t do anything but condemn it .

@Mita,

Ram sana has done the right thing in the wrong way - the worst possible way! I don’t think progress implies moral degradation, drunkard women and men, drugs, sex, AIDS, divorces, paternity frauds etc. That’s not progress. Feminism is not progress. The progress that you hail is nothing but enslavement of men!

@Mita,

Ram sana has done the right thing in the wrong way - the worst possible way! I don’t think progress implies moral degradation, drunkard women and men, drugs, sex, AIDS, divorces, paternity frauds etc. That’s not progress. Feminism is not progress. The progress that you hail is nothing but enslavement of men!

Just woke up and found my inbox filled with some 30 mails all from the same ppl...din’t have time to read them all...just want to tell u a few things as my last post in this most twisted, hypocritic & regressive thread in the history of instablogs...

I dunno wat’s ur problem is...Brother Aravind thinks he is the saviour of Indian civilization without knowing what it means & even without knowing what democracy is...as far as Rohan D is concerned, he picks up some random news of some kid becoming mother or father while he fails to pick up 1000s of news involving dowry deaths & honor killings...

Your SRSs has done the worst thing in worst possible was...be thankful that nobody kicked Muthalik then and there...he deserved that...


Why do you thank even a reference of sex is immoral?...isn’t it the very reason of your existence?...how were u born? or did u fall from sky?...

get rid of this morality crap...yes people want sexual freedom because we are tired of a society that pretends to be so much against sex that they look like impotents suffering from erectile dysfunction....& still they have given birth to 100 billion...

You are free to live in your wells in a democratic society...but don’t try to push down your thoughts into others throats...it’ll be vomited out as it is worth that only...

bye bye...

@Jitaditya,

The media covers only women’s problems and violence committed on men. In Mangalore, for example, men were also beaten up but they didn’t show that. So, STOP telling me that problems of men don’t exist or are a minority. Men like you need to wake up from your slumber of traditional thinking that women are all angels. Women are liberated and are doing the same crimes which men are doing.

Regarding the news of paternity fraud that I posted, I did it with reference to Mita’s allegation that it doesn’t happen. I also posted those news clipping about alimony to adulterous wives to wake you up from deep slumber.

Nobody said that sex is immoral. Infact, Indian philosophy gives enormous importance to sex. I am just against random sex that you guys advocate. Imagine if you didn’t know who your dad was or if your wife were to sleep with other men. How would you feel about it?

@Mita,

”Rohan, this page will run out of space if I started giving you examples of women being suppressed, opressed, repressed in India. :)”


Nobody has denied the oppression of women. The denial is on your side - you simply deny the oppression of men. That is the reason I am posting examples. Secondly, the oppression of men is not even accounted for. While millions and tons of paper has gone into the research of oppression of women. Just because women’s oppression has been recognised, doesn’t mean that men are not oppressed nor does it mean that the oppression and sufferings of men are in any way less. Oppression of men is hidden, forcefully denied and men don’t even know that there are oppressed. Oppression is deep rooted and clandestine. START RECOGNISING THE OPPRESSSION OF MEN.

Arvind, I take offence at your language. What do you mean by ’you people want to enter in immoral,indecent and wild activities.Therefore, it becomes imperative for you people to start labeling the old order of living as primitive’. I never said that old order is primitive. With all due respect to old order, times are changing, and so should the thought process. And the faster it is done the better it is, otherwise India will be put to shame by the ’moral and upright’ activities of Ram Sene, the custodians of our culture. I hope you understand.

Stop throwing abuses at me. If you can’t get the substance of my views that is your problem. Read it again, maybe you will get it this time. I don’t take advice from anti-women, coarse people, so no thanks for your suggestions.

Rohan, this page will run out of space if I started giving you examples of women being suppressed, opressed, repressed in India. :)

My thoughts exactly.

Arvind and all the participants to this discussion:
Let me begin by wishing all of you a very happy holi. But, a holi which is celebrated in the right spirit (not spirits) with colour and water and lots of fun (not hooliganism).
I mean no offence to anyone but I think this discussion has tumbled off the rails.
To begin with, I think it is not fair to talk about progressive women without talking about progressive men.
As a human being I personally believe that Man and Woman are made equal and we have no business to mess around with this. The Indian Constitution clearly states that there shall be no discrimination on the basis of sex. That is clear as a bell.
We come across these problems because we refuse to look at the other sex with respect.
I do not deny that some women could have put men to mental agony but the opposite is equally true.
After reading through all these exchanges, I felt that many of them are lopsided.
If we are humane; if we are reasonable; if we care for life; if we care for one another, we cannot point fingers at each other like this. I remember an old saying: When you point a finger at someone just remember that you are pointing the other four fingers at yourself. For some reason, all of us see the one finger that is being pointed at others yet we fail to see the four fingers that are pointing towards us.
All I say is: the principles of equality and justice are very important in a man-woman relationship.

@Vincent

I am more than happy to receive your comment on my page. I guess it’s your first appearance on my page. Comments from sensible readers always help in gaining right insight.

I appreciate your simplistic views and even as I come to admire plainness in your thoughts I don’t think that’s a right way to change the distorted dynamics between man and woman. Earlier I too used to have a simplistic view of affairs but I have realized with age that such an attitude generates only good feeling and noting else takes place beyond that!! To bring relationship between man and woman back on track ,it becomes imperative to look beyond the obvious.


To begin with, I think it is not fair to talk about progressive women without talking about progressive men.

..........My dear friend Vincent, that’s the real problem. The whole society seems to be so conscious about progressive men that it has failed to realize that it’s time to prevent progressive women from playing spoilsport.

”As a human being I personally believe that Man and Woman are made equal”

Though they are equal, but who can deny that there are huge differences as well!!!

”The Indian Constitution clearly states that there shall be no discrimination on the basis of sex. That is clear as a bell.”

The Constitution can be amended. In fact , there is huge demand to review the Constitution to make changes a par with recent times .I am not sure but I think there is a committee that’s exploring the possibilities of amending the constitution in light of new changes. I hope you are aware of the fact that many laws have been amended and new laws have been roped in to be in tune with the times. If both men and women are equal why are some people afraid in having new laws that take note of flaws of modern progressive women ? Why a double standard in this regard?



”We come across these problems because we refuse to look at the other sex with respect.”

... You please first ask these modern progressive women do they really respect men’s respect towards them ?
I don’t know what’s the situation in foreign lands but being an Indian I know quite well that Indian women have always received great respect and love from Indian men.But today scenario has changed dramatically- courtesy sinister and dubious designs of feminists.

”I do not deny that some women could have put men to mental agony but the opposite is equally true.”

...Rohan has already dealt with this point in a very fitting manner. He says in one his comments on this page: ”Are we into a number game Mita? It’s like saying that until the numbers exceed, we will not deliver justice. Or justice belongs to the majority and not minority. It’s absurd. I can say that dowry problem is also a minority and we don’t need to solve it.” ..” You cannot call the arrest of more than 1.3 lakh women and another 5 times that figure of men under false cases as stray incidents. Further, even assuming for a sec that they are stray, those people have a right to justice”

Now I want to ask you what’s the right time to take corrective steps? Why can’t be take steps before the situation goes out of control? Why do we allow the situation to go out of control and when there is little scope for improvement we start doing the soul-searching? Vincent there is something called “nipping in the bud “.Don’t you think we wouldn’t have been facing so many problems had many issues dealt with a proper attitude in their nascent stages? Why we have so many sleeper cells of the terrorists in our country? Because when the terrorism spreading it’s tentacles, we were engaged in beating the bush instead of taking concrete steps. Same thing is happening now. We are ignoring the harsh changes in the female world all in the name of “principles of equality and justice” .I am sure future generation is going to pay a heavy price of blunders committed by us.

Like to quote Lynne and thank God these are words of a refined lady (I mean they can be taken with more seriousness amid women oriented souls) :
“How ever I believe people need to understand and learn to be aware and to be responsible for their actions, not to deceive, manipulate or willfully hurt someone else whether it be having random sex, or in marriage or any kind of relationships.”

Great words. It’s Time to think what we really want. Choices determine our future. We love and respect women but not ones carved in wrong set of ideals. And if we are so conscious of “equality” then please don’t raise hue and cry over harsh methods introduced to keep women in check.

It’s ”HOLI” time.I can see people still playing with clours.I can also hear a song played by the guys around me.In Allahabad the thing you cannot fail to notice in Holi is a loudspeaker.It can be found in company of every pole..ha..ha

Well, the song played by these guys is very much linked with ongoing debate:

” Bela Chameli Se Sej Sajaya...Soye Gori Ka Yaar Balam Tarse Rang Barse ...Ho Rang Barse Bheegein Chunarva Le Rang Barse.”

HAPPY HOLI TO ALL OF YOU ONCE AGAIN.

@Vincent,

The Indian constitution is full of contradiction and it also contradicts with the social norms. Article 14 talks about equality before laws. Article 15 talks about equality of opportunity. But article 15 [c] talks about discrimination of men vis-a-vis women and calls that positive discrimination. This is rubbish! Social norms mandate a man to be the breadwinner. If so, how can women take away all the jobs or a significant number of jobs? Above all, how can there be positive discrimination in favour of women when men are supposed to be the bread winners?

Further, the DV act, alimony act, child custody act, IPC 498A etc. are all anti-male and contradict the constitution of India [Article 14, equality before laws].

@Arvind,

You said it all. The society just talks about women’s rights and not their duties. Everybody is conscious about women’s rights but ask them about duties and they are blank about it. Progressive women are arrogant as money and power has gone into their head! Yet, society wants to do nothing about it.

Several laws and social norms are anti-male. Yet, these equalists don’t want to address them as women would be made accountable by that. For example, alimony act and child custody acts are anti-male. A man cannot claim alimony from his wife. But pro-women equalists don’t want an amendment as women bear the consequences of such amendments.

I guess Vincent or Mita or any other pro-women people will not be able to answer about when we should start making the corrections. This is a cycling process and in history we have seen this happen. Women’s empowerment and freedom has always led to moral corruption and misuse of power by women. Future generation of men will unite and disempower women as they will be seriously affected by empowerment of women. Today’s generation of men are confused and their weakness for women is getting the better of them. Lack of foresight is also a major problem with people. So history repeats itself!

Arvind and all Instabloggers who responded to my comment:

I withdraw my comment on this page in toto not because I am afraid of entering into an argument but because I realise the futility of doing so. I now realise that it was a mistake to post it in the first place.

I have been misunderstood, misquoted and termed pro-woman.

Everybody is out to prove that I am wrong instead of appreciatung the fact that I stand for equality and justice.

I have not written a single word in there which should suggest that I am a feminist or anti-feminist.

I can communicate with a common man with average intelligence because that is what I am. I find myself at a loss to argue with intellectuals.

So, I sign off from this page and let the intellectuals take over from here.

I offer my best wishes to all of you.

@Vincent

Well,I appreciate your comment from core of the heart and if you have read my comment than you must be aware of the fact that I have not neither labeled you feminist nor anti-feminist.True, I have entered in refutations and that’s not unwanted in wake of complexities inherent in the issue raised.A sensitive issue needs to be intercepted from as many angles as possible.The refutations offered by me are just intended to bring in light missing elements.What’s more these refutations have been offered in light of proper reason.So there is no reason for you to avoid the debate.

Anyway,I must thank you once again for your views.

@Vincent,

I request you to come back. Nowhere did I mention anything against you as a person. I don’t think anybody else has done that either. Just that majority people of our times are ignorant as the media doesn’t show problems and issue in their right perspective. on emotive issues, there are bound to be arguments. I strongly feel that men are severely discriminated. And such discrimination is heaped upon more by men themselves than by women. Such is the extent, cunningness and deep-rootedness of the oppression of men!