Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Man seeks maintenance from live-in partner

It is a a sign that Indian men are not taking it lying down.  A man in Hyderabad has asked for monthly maintenance from his working live-in partner of 10 years, relying on a recent Supreme Court judgment which allowed maintenance to a woman from her live-in partner.  It is to be noted that there is as yet no provision in Indian law for maintenance to a man from live-in partner, but it is a sign that men are asserting their rights based on what is available to women.  If a woman in live-in relationship is allowed to get same benefits as a married woman, then why the same logic can’t be applicable to a man?


HYDERABAD: Giving gender equality a fresh twist, a jobless man has sought Rs 8,000 a month as alimony from his 'gainfully' employed partner.

This gender bender case, which has landed at the Andhra Pradesh High Court, however, gets even more curiouser in its detail. The couple in question are not legally wedded but have been in a live-in relationship for the last 10 years and even have a daughter.

The Mahbubnagar-based couple's happily ever after story hit a roadblock when the woman, who is 42, in a fit of rage filed a case of 'dowry harassment' against her jobless live-in partner, who is 51, alleging that he was physically assaulting her.

The woman, a multi-purpose health worker with a government hospital with a decent monthly salary of Rs 20,000 (especially in the context of a small town like Mahbubnagar), even moved out of the house with the child.

With sections 498 A, 506 and 509 of IPC pressed against him, the man moved the AP High Court seeking anticipatory bail stating that the charges were invalid since the two were never legally married. And then he served a googly — he filed a simultaneous petition seeking maintenance of Rs 8,000 from his live-in partner of 10 years.

When the case first came up for hearing at the High Court a few days ago, the counsel representing the man referred to a recent Supreme Court judgment wherein the apex court had granted alimony to a woman in a live-in relationship from her partner citing that the number of years the two had put together were 'considerable', akin to a marriage. The man in this case has now pinned his hope on the apex court verdict with his counsel arguing how he too has put in 10 years of his life into this relationship and is thus a 'considerable' time period for him to earn his alimony from the earning partner.

In the first hearing, the HC judge had asked the man's counsel to look into the merits of the case himself and also consider whether the SC judgment can apply here, given the difference in the gender of the alimony seeker.
A similar case was filed by a Tamil Nadu resident Kalaiselvan who had sought a whopping Rs 25 lakh from his ex-wife, a news story that flashes on many websites catering to aggrieved husbands. But the judgment on the case is awaited.

On Tuesday, the HC posted the Mahbubnagar man's alimony petition case for its next hearing on July 30. Clearly, an unusual gender test for the AP High Court.

One more false molestation case falls flat

Blah blah blah… blah blah blah…that is the sound and fury of crazed feminists whenever they get news of a high profile case where a professional woman alleges molestation or sexual harassment against male co-workers or superiors.


The earlier air hostess incidents were found to be complete cock and bull stories.  Now it is turn for an army officer with rank of Lt Gen to be held not guilty.  But the officer’s reputation was clearly affected because of this.  See earlier news below:

Lt. Gen. Nanda neither resigned, nor asked to resign: Ministry of Defence clarifies

Preliminary investigations show that there are number of loopholes in the account of allegations.

Further investigations are in progress. It is also clarified that Lieutenant General AK Nanda has neither resigned nor been asked to put up his resignation. He is holding the appointment of the Engineer-in-Chief," said a Ministry of Defence release on Thursday evening. (ANI)

Men should fight for their own rights, of course!

It is interesting that in a panel discussion on women and violence/ safety, the panellists are venting frustration about men’s rights activists (MRAs).  See the news and my comments below:


HYDERABAD, March 25, 2010

For every woman who is fighting for a law to protect her rights, there are a handful of men who say: what about us?

“Why don't they struggle for their rights,” asks Flavia Agnes. The fiery women's rights lawyer was here on Wednesday for a panel discussion on “Women and Violence/ Safety.”

“Men need to stop taking away the gains of the women's movement,” she said. “Women are fighting for their rights because men and women are not equal. If you make laws assuming they are equal, the law will hardly serve its purpose.”

Comments: So the feminists seem to be frustrated by the activities of a handful of MRAs!  Organisations like Save Indian Family Foundation and AIMWA (All India Men’s Welfare Association) have taken the fight for men’s rights into the feminists camp, and they are not very happy that they have to now play football with a real opposition team in front, while all this while they could score goals since there was no opposition team to begin with.

And that point about men and women being equal or not equal.  These feminists have guts to say in the same sentence that men and women are equal, and that men and women are not equal.  Heads I win, tails you lose!

India's legal system dominated the discussion - panellists agreed that despite their rigid formality, the courts were the only place where victims of rape, dowry harassment or any other assault could demand justice.

Points to ponder

But for them to get justice, other things would have to change. Stop expecting women to be this or that, said historian Urvashi Butalia. “People seem shocked that women harass women. But we can be as nasty, rude and aggressive as a man. Why should we be expected to behave any differently?”

Comments: Shocked that women can be as nasty, rude, and aggressive as men? Not me!  And not the men’s rights activists who believe strongly that the bias in laws in favour of women is just plain nonsense in garb of women empowerment, constitutional provisions for women, and so on.

The law will respond to violence against women when society responds to it rather than merely trying to cure it. “We spend too much time thinking about how to make men better husbands,” Ms. Agnes said. “But the question is why are women committing suicide when they have the option of obtaining a divorce?”

Comments: How people are out of touch with reality.  The men’s rate of suicide is double that of women, and in fact increasing continuously since 2002 while the suicide rate of women is stable.  Of course, this comment comes from a feminist who believes women ought to be happier living their lives away from men  -- an assertion most women themselves will not agree with!

When the law offers them a way of exiting their marriage, why do women continue to struggle or suffer? “Is suicide the only choice she can afford to make? We need to ask ourselves that.”

NALSAR professor Dr. Amita Dhanda also spoke.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

UN super agency to help women or help radical feminists?

A recent news has made a United Nations’ super-agency out of 4 existing agencies working for benefit of women.  Read full news later:

It is however not clear if this move will really help in empowerment of women.  Most likely the consolidated funds will be used to strengthen the position of the few top feminists in these organisations.


By Samantha Singson Amanda Pawloski

     NEW YORK, July 8 (C-FAM)  Last Friday the General Assembly voted to consolidate four separate United Nations (UN) bodies dedicated to women’s issues into one new gender equality entity called “UN Women.” The resolution capped a victory for radical feminists who lobbied for years for the new entity and is the latest in an overall push to bring women’s issues even more onto the UN agenda.
     After four years of sometimes harsh negotiations, member states agreed on simplifying the disjointed efforts of four UN offices dedicated to women’s issues; the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women (INSTRAW), Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW) and the Office of the Special Advisor on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women (OSAGI).
     The framework for UN Women is the Beijing Platform for Action, which calls for an end to discrimination against women especially highlighting education, employment, political participation and human rights. An Under-Secretary-General appointed by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will head the new body and member states are calling for a prompt appointment before the General Assembly meets in September. Many are speculating that former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet will be chosen. Bachelet is a socialist who promoted reproductive health and women’s rights during her political career. The Under-Secretary-General will hold a 4-year term with a possibility of one renewable term.
     The Gender Equality Architecture Reform (GEAR) campaign, a coalition of radical feminist groups and abortion advocates, has relentlessly lobbied to create a UN super-agency to deal with women’s issues. Charlotte Bunch, executive director of the Centre for Women's Global Leadership and the leading advocate of the GEAR campaign, said, “We have high expectations for this new agency [...] The coalition of women’s groups and other social justice, human rights and development organizations that played a pivotal role in this effort will now turn its efforts toward ensuring that the new body has the human and financial resources necessary to succeed.”
     The new body will be governed by an executive board consisting of 41 members: 10 African, 10 Asian, 4 Eastern European, 5 Western European/Other States, 6 Latin American/Caribbean, and 6 from contributing countries, of which 4 seats are allocated to the largest donor countries and 2 seats to donors from developing countries.
     Some member states have expressed concern that the cultures and objectives of recipient countries would not be respected. The resolution reaffirms that there is no “one size fits all” approach to development assistance, reflecting what is generally a split between rich industrial states where radical feminism holds sway and poorer countries where basic necessities must be met.
     Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women of America, told the Friday Fax, "Women need respect and opportunity, not a global agency demanding money and power for its well-heeled elitist leaders. The money would be better spent going directly to the areas and people in need with programs that have proven to work, not to another agency to empower the people who run it."

The money meant to be spent on women empowerment and on poor women usually goes to fund lifestyles of radical feminists associated with few ‘top’ women organisations.  A proof of that can be seen in glaring mismanagement of funds shown in Comptroller and Auditor General of India’s (CAG) audit report on NCW (National Commission for Women) here: