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?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Man-seeks-alimony-from-partner/articleshow/6164976.cms

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.

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:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/article304563.ece

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.

Domestic violence survey on men is welcome step

Recently a high court judge had said in a seminar that if he went strictly by definition of Indian domestic violence act against women(PWDVA), he will be guilty of domestic violence on his wife.  Actually, if the domestic violence act was made gender neutral, his wife will also be guilty of domestic violence on him.  This is because the definition of domestic violence is defined to be very broad, and further a woman has simply to allege to get the wheels of justice (read: torture for men) in motion.

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOICH/2010/04/19&PageLabel=19&EntityId=Ar01901&ViewMode=HTML&GZ=T

 

Seeking to counter certain “exaggerated” claims made by some women’s organisations and in a bid to draw the attention of the government to the plight of men victimised by lop-sided laws drafted on the basis of such claims, men’s organisations in the city have now embarked upon the task of conducting a massive domestic violence survey.

    The results of the nationwide survey, widely believed to be the first of its kind for men in the country, will be used to find out if whether Indian men too are victims of domestic violence, the percentage of Indian men subjected to such violence and the kind of violence they are subjected to.

    The need for the survey has been triggered, it seems, by the controversial Domestic Violence Act - 2005, which seems to have been drafted on the assumption that only women suffer domestic violence.

    Says Suresh Ram, member of the All India Men’s Welfare Association (AIMWA), an NGO working for the rights of men and boys, “Certain women’s organisations have been stereotyping the issue of domestic violence. They have presented a picture that conveys the impression that only women are victims of domestic violence while we have with us global surveys and over 250 scholarly studies that show that women are at least as likely as men to engage in partner aggression and that partner violence is often mutual. This fact is established if one goes through the Domestic Violence Study conducted by a well known global organisation that
has done the survey in over 32 countries including India. However, the Domestic Violence Act in India offers protection to only women and not men.” He further adds, “So, to set things right, we men’s organisations have joined hands to ensure that a credible and transparent survey on the issue is done. Eight men’s organisations are involved in this effort which is being led by the AIMWA. We have begun negotiations with survey agencies to conduct the survey in certain cities of the country including Chennai, Delhi, Kolkata, Bangalore and Hyderabad. We intend to publish the results on Nov 19, the International Men’s Day.” So, what do they intend to achieve by conducting such a survey? Says Suresh, “We intend to create an awareness in society about the problems faced by men. We wish to present to them the real situation in society. We will also seek to draw the government’s attention to issues concerning men and reiterate our demand for setting up a National Commission for Men and a Men’s Welfare Ministry.” Men in the city are delighted with the move by the men’s organisations. Welcoming such a survey, Shankar, a graphics designer, says, “I certainly welcome the move. It is high time that facts were presented on this issue.” Women too seem to be for such a survey. Says Dakshayini Sampath, a media professional, “While I think that more number of women suffer domestic violence, it’s also possible that men are victims. I think the law should hold good for both genders and if this survey is going to help bring about a uniform law, then I’m all for it.”

Will feminists ask for equal opportunities in such deadly jobs?

Refer to news below about death of miners in Russia in dangerous mines.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7121731.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=797093

Rescuers were searching desperately for 58 people still missing in a Russian coal mine yesterday as the death toll from twin methane blasts rose to 32.

Hopes were fading of finding survivors more than 450 metres underground at the Raspadskaya pit in Siberia, Russia’s largest underground mine. Eighteen of the victims have been rescuers who died in the second explosion on Sunday after going in search of miners trapped by the first blast late on Saturday.

Twelve miners died and 71 were hurt in that explosion as 370 people worked underground at the mine in the Kemerovo region. Sergei Shoigu, the Emergency Situations Minister, said that the body of the 31st victim, a rescue worker, had been recovered as a large-scale search mission resumed.

The feminists take great pains to point out statistics about why there is still less percentage of women CEOs in corporations, why women are being denied powerful jobs, there is a glass ceiling blah blah… They never seem to highlight the fact that even today, most of the deadly, dangerous, life-threatening, debilitating jobs are done by men and which do not pay any great amounts either!

Men who become CEOs also have to go through years of grind, being away from family on travel, miss out on life beyond work, to be able to have a chance at reaching that position.  It is not served to them on a platter simply because of their gender.  But for feminists, the logic of female supremacy reigns supreme, that just by her gender, a woman should be entitled to equal outcomes, irrespective of whether she is willing to put up same amount of work or travel to reach a top job.

Man gets divorce confirmation from Mumbai HC after 18 years

So if you are a man and want divorce, pray that your wife breaks into your house after alleging you are having extra-marital affair, and hopefully in your lifetime you will be granted divorce by supreme court, err high court in this case.  Surely things are improving for men since Supreme Court’s Justice Katju’s comment to a husband who had applied for divorce: “you have waited for 17 years, you can wait for few more months”.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_false-allegations-of-infidelity-can-be-ground-for-divorce_1373294

Mina’s act of breaking into Amit’s house and alleging that he was having an extramarital affair were enough to prove the charge of cruelty, the court said. “The appellant [Mina] must have obviously caused tremendous hardship, inconvenience, unnecessary expenses, and mental anguish to the respondent,” the judges said in their order. “Such conduct would definitely constitute cruelty.”

Mina said she wanted to live with Amit, but the court observed that the couple had been living separately for 18 years, of which 10 were under the same roof.

Upholding the family court’s order granting divorce, the judges said, “The conduct of preventing the respondent from entering the matrimonial home is not the conduct of a wife who wants the marriage to be continued. Similar is the conduct of making unprovoked false allegations of an extramarital affair.”

Feminists’ myths about domestic violence being busted

Newer Perspectives on Domestic Violence

That domestic violence is a preserve of men is demolished by this data on lesbian couples:

Nor is the incidence of DV among lesbian cohorts minimal. In fact, abuse among lesbians occurs with far greater frequency than among heterosexuals (given as 24% by the study above), and far more frequently than male-on-female abuse. Estimates of abuse have ranged between 47% and 73% (Coleman, 1990; Bologna, Waterman, Dawson, 1987; Lie. et al. 1991) among lesbian subjects who responded to questionnaires assessing prevalence of some form of physical, sexual, or emotional-psychological abuse in at least one relationship. Estimates of verbal abuse in lesbian relationships have been as high as 95% (Kelly & Warshafsky, 1987). About half of lesbian subjects who participated in research surveys indicated they had experienced 10 or more abusive incidents during their relationships, and about three-quarters had experienced 6 or more (Renzetti 1992).

That men are more aggressive than women is probably only a convenient stereotype associated with physical aggression of men.  The study has to say this about differences in aggression behaviour between men and women:

In a paper from the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Anne Conway⁶ summarizes her important study on “Girls, Aggression, and Emotion Regulation” as follows: “Many studies have demonstrated that boys are more aggressive than girls (see J.D. Cole & K. Dodge, 1997, for a review) and that emotion regulation difficulties are associated with problematic behaviours. However, recent findings indicate that gender differences in aggressive behaviour disappear when assessments are broadened to include relational aggression—behaviours designed to harm the relationship goals of others by spreading rumours, gossiping, and eliciting peer rejection of others (The author has heard the term “Soul Murder” given to such behaviours and the results can often be deadly.) Moreover, although difficulties regulating emotions have been reported for physically aggressive children, little research has examined these processes in relationally aggressive children.”

And goes on to demolish the myth of women being always peacemakers and men always being violent from point of view of anthropology:

In her seminal study, Male and Female, the renowned anthropologist Margaret Mead¹⁴ states the following: “There are even those who have argued that women are inherently more peaceful than men. On further examination, it would seem that there is little evolutionary basis for this argument. There seems very little ground for claiming that the mother of young children is more peaceful, more responsible, and more thoughtful for the welfare of the human race than is her husband and brother.”

Rape of men and boys can not be brushed away

According to a UK study, 8% of recorded rape victims are male.

Rape is not just a women's issue

According to the Stern Review, the victim is male in around 8% of all recorded rape cases. The unrecorded figure is thought to be far higher.

Rape and sexual assault are seen as women's issues – the victims are female, the perpetrators male. But it is no longer acceptable to pretend, as some do, that rape and sexual assault are only committed by men against women. The proportion of men who go on to report sexual assault is extremely low and the number of victims greater than the government or media coverage would suggest. Male rape victims face an enormous amount of social prejudice in coming forward. One organisation working with male victims told the Stern Review: "Very few men will access the police to report a rape, they don't want to feel less of a man, don't want to be regarded as gay."

If the logic of sexual abuse and rape laws exclusive to women because most victims are females, was applied to murder statistics, then murder laws should be applicable only against males. 

Because in India, more than one lakh people are murdered every year and 90 % are male.

More than two lakh people die in accidents and 85% are male.

So if feminists’ logic of using statistics to push for gender biased laws was true, then laws related to murder should apply only to murder of males, and accident compensation should be given only to men!

Now men have to wake up and change the biased laws they helped create!

Who needs fathers: BBC documentary

BBC is recently doing a documentary on cruel system in UK denying fathers access to their children.

Agony of the frozen-out fathers: BBC documentary

 

Watching a preview of next week’s BBC series Who Needs Fathers?, I felt ashamed to be a woman. The men on the programme appeared to be loving, attentive fathers – not extremists in Batman costumes. All they wanted was to play their part in the upbringing of their children. But, at every turn, it seemed, vengeful, short-sighted women were selfishly trying to thwart them.

Further there are some statistics on number of children who are growing up without fathers, the figures do not seem much different from India’s:

Too few children are growing up with that balance. Ninety three per cent of children live with their mother after a separation, and half then lose touch with the non-resident parent. That’s a tragedy not only for the fathers, but for the grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins who would otherwise provide a support network for those children.

The most tragic part is that such an initiative by BBC to highlight injustice to fathers may be the first and last:

Despite fears that speaking out will harm participants’ contact arrangements, Fielden is glad to have found the brief window of opportunity in which to tell their stories. Last year, it became legal to report on the family courts, but a Bill is going through Parliament that would make it impossible, once again, to film people who have been involved in family legal disputes. “It’s unlikely that we would ever again be able to make a programme about this important issue,” she says.

Rape by women, and why gender biased laws are evil

Two newspaper articles below show the reality of rape by women.  Anyone in Indian government or legislature who is making laws only to protect women must be having their eyes closed, or waiting for a near and dear one to be sexually abused or raped by a woman, before they admit reluctantly to it.

Interesting point is: the feminists always protest against making sexual abuse laws to be gender neutral.  If the same logic was applied to murder statistics, then murder laws should be applicable only against males.  Because in India, more than one lakh people are murdered every year and 90 % are male.

More than two lakh people die in accidents and 85% are male.

So if feminists’ logic of using statistics to push for gender biased laws was true, then laws related to murder should apply only to murder of males, and accident compensation should be given only to men!

Enough rave and rant, now the 2 news items below:

University of California, Santa Barbara
http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/article/rape-by-women

Rape by Women
=============

Occurrence

Although it is not commonly reported, or even discussed, females commit a significant number of rapes. It has been estimated that around 10,000 rapes committed each year in the United States are perpetrated by women. In fact, many experts believe that this number is an under representation, due to the fact that female rapes are very rarely reported.

Characteristics

Victims of female rape are usually older, weaker, or handicapped. Frequently, female rapists use objects to sodomize, rape, and overpower their victims. However, most females accused of rape are accomplices to male rapists and do not physically violate the victim.
Children are the most frequent victims of female rape. This usually takes form in statutory rape, or sexual intercourse between an adult woman and a consenting minor. Studies have shown that women involved in these relations are frequently seeking a substitute lover because they are alone, have a low self-worth, or are in a bad or violent relationship. Female rape of children can also take the form of incest or child molestation. In both of these cases, victims are not likely to come forward because the perpetrator is female.

Why Women Rape

Studies have shown that female rapists are driven by the same forces as their male counterparts: power, hostility, violence, alcohol or drug abuse, mental illness, and opportunity. Many female rapists were themselves victims of rape, incest or molestation at some point in life. Also, female accomplices to male rapists are commonly forced by threat of bodily harm to help in the perpetration of the crime.

Male Victims of Female Rape

Female rapes of men go largely unreported by male victims, and few men seek counseling or support. Men who do talk about their experience show similar effects as female victims of rape: loss of self-esteem, self-blame, fear of intimacy, and depression. Because many states do not include women in their rape statutes, female rapists go largely unpunished. Men are also discouraged from bringing female rapists to trial for fear that a judge or jury will not believe their story.

---------

http://www.merinews.com/article/women-can-rape-men-too/155880.shtml

Women can rape men too

Lina Sinha, 40, began having sex with one of the pupils at the private Montessori International School of New York, when he was 12. And you thought only men could rape women, there's a darker side to the truth? Read on...

Rohan Mon, Jan 12, 2009 17:54:47 IST

THERE IS a false notion among people that all rapists are men and that women can never rape men or commit sexual crimes on men. This article intends to educate the society about the darker side of the truth and to get men shed their false ego that men alone can rape.

A glaring example of reverse case is that of an Indian origin female teacher and director at an exclusive Manhattan private school who was, a couple of years ago, charged with statutory rape and sodomy of two male pupils.

Lina Sinha, 40, began having sex with one of the pupils at the private Montessori International School of New York, which encourages pupils to learn and develop their creativity at their own pace, when he was 12, assistant district attorney Florence Chapin told the court.

Sinha began sexual liaisons with the other boy, now a New York City police officer, when he was 13 and she was 29, the prosecutor said, adding that the liaison lasted for years.

Earlier, Sinha was charged with crime against just one boy. Later, Chapin disclosed the case of the second boy during a hearing in Manhattan's state Supreme Court, in which she told Justice Carol Berkman that Sinha was now charged with 81 crimes. Chapin had asked the judge to set the teacher's bail at $ 100,000.

Prosecutors had said Sinha had family ties in India and could possibly flee.

Chapin said Sinha, on administrative leave from the school on Manhattan's East Side, began a sexual relationship with the first pupil in June, 1996, when he was a 13-year-old, an eighth-grader. She was charged in October 2005, with raping him.

When he had tried to end the affair in 2004, Chapin said, "Sinha tried to ruin his life by making up heinous allegations that he raped a young girl and then made separate allegations that he also brutally assaulted the defendant (Sinha)."

Sinha assumed another person's identity on at least 10 occasions in 2004-05 to file rape charges in person, by telephone and by e-mail, claiming the policeman had raped her niece, the prosecutor had said.

Investigators found the person whose identity Sinha had assumed and that person said she did not have a niece, had never reported any rape and did not know the victim or the defendant, the prosecutor said.

The officer reported his former relationship with Sinha to police after the teacher tried to frame him and about a week before the five-year statute of limitations on her sex crimes would have expired, the prosecutor said.

Prosecutors said Sinha could not be charged with improper sexual contact with her former pupil after he turned 17 because that is the age of consent in New York State.

Meanwhile, in January 2001, Sinha began a sexual liaison with the second pupil, who was 12 and in the seventh grade, Chapin said.

Besides rape and sodomy, Sinha was charged with criminal impersonation, bribing a witness, tampering with physical evidence, endangering the welfare of a child and falsely reporting an incident. If convicted on the rape or sodomy charges, she would face up to 25 years in prison.

Gender neutral sexual harassment bill is welcome step

 http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100321/jsp/7days/story_12243297.jsp

They were buddies at the call centre they worked in. Rohit and Shalini would often party together or go out for a drink as a twosome. But gradually, Rohit started feeling uncomfortable. It seemed that Shalini had other thoughts about their platonic relationship.

One day, Shalini — who is married and has a nine-year-old son — moved to the desk right next to Rohit. Rohit, who is also married, would find her gazing at him between calls. She would brush against him when she passed by.

“Even now, she makes no bones about wanting to sleep with me; she says she’ll book a hotel for the occasion if I agree,” says Rohit, adding that the struggle to stay away from Shalini is taking its toll on him. It worries him that at the call centre in Malad, the two are the daily staple of office gossip.

Does the above scenario seem impossible.  Yet the feminists would have you believe that sexual harassment laws should be made only to benefit women! 

 

The Bill, which is touted as being gender neutral, proposes the introduction of a new section — 376 (E) — to the Indian Penal Code, 1860, on unlawful sexual acts. “Whoever touches directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, any part of the body of another person (not being the spouse of such person), with sexual intent and without the consent of such other person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both,” it says.

The Bill does not specify the sex of the victim. So in effect a man can accuse a woman — or another man — of sexual abuse. But ironically, the Bill has its seeds in the 172nd report of the Law Commission of India, and recommendations drafted by women’s groups around the country, spearheaded by the National Commission for Women (NCW).

When women’s groups lobbied for a stronger law they did not have gender neutrality in mind. They merely wanted to tighten laws on sexual assault. Men who touched women with sexual intent and without consent had to be punished, they said.

Hmmm.. they did not believe that there could be men rights advocates who will fight for laws to be made gender neutral.  Wake up feminists!  Men’s team has shown up in the match, so now you got to make effort, make your play, and only then you can hope to win.

Finally government waking up to abuse of boys

 

http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/ArticleText.aspx?article=18_03_2010_012_012&mode=1

…The other is that there will be redressal for the boy child in cases of molestation. A study by the ministry of women and child development shows that more boys suffer sexual abuse than girls and that one out of two children have suffered some form of molestation usually between the ages of 9 to 12. In the case of boys, only proven sodomy is an offence so far and does not take into account other forms of sexual offences or harassment. Already, the law has evolved mechanisms to lessen the trauma of child victims, providing them the means to have hearings at home. The same goes for women victims of sexual crimes.

So far, the definition of sexual crimes, particularly rape, has been in the context of women and the girl child. This seems to have led to a quantum increase in crimes against the boy child. In Delhi alone, a government study showed that far greater number of boys were abused than girls. This suggests that the boy child has little protection and that offenders have taken advantage of the gaps in the law. So far, the law has not taken other forms of sexual abuse, including verbal, seriously enough. This has encouraged offenders to get away with all manners of abuse short of rape. The next step is to sensitise the police, the first port of call for a victim, of the changes in the law and the need to treat all forms of sexual abuse seriously and in a gender-neutral manner.

Why marriage is a losing game for urban men?

The social reality for any kind of marriage has changed in India, I think after year 2001 or so. (Maybe it coincided with large scale job creation for middle classes).

Now, a woman who earns 1/3rd income of husband and gets housework done through maids etc paid for by husband; still thinks she is in some way superior to husband.  This is the effect of financial freedom (read parasitic freedom) and easy social environment for women in large cities at least.

Some women may actually be doing good work in managing both career and household, but the point I am making is not about contribution to family, but about respect for both spouses in marriage.

For example these days in urban areas, if a woman earns 5K per month, hubby earns 15K per month.  The power equation is not same as if woman earned 0, and hubby earned 10K.

Taking another example, a woman earns 15K per month, hubby earns 45K per month.  The power equation is not same as if woman earned 0, and hubby earned 30K.

In all such cases, woman has become more powerful, due to influence of like minded earning-women, and constant media talk of woman empowerment.  The gender biased laws are the final weapons for unscrupulous women which give them that audacity to go out to police and courts, and create havoc.  Much larger is the number of women who do not openly threaten their husbands but are simply dominating, and disrespectful to their men.  Men at the receiving end of such relationships may continue to suffer the abuse because:

1. They are used to the marriage, marriage is a one in a lifetime affair for most Indians, and no one is prepared to even think about life after a broken marriage.
2. Men with children fear for future and upbringing of children in a broken marriage.
3. Many men are somewhat aware of the gender biased laws which wives/in-laws can use and make men run around courts, lawyers for long time to come, given pathetically slow justice in India.
4. Men have the burden of manhood thrust on them by society.  A broken marriage casts automatic suspicion on man of being not manly enough in some way to be able to ‘control’ his wife.  Imbecile may be too strong a word, but many men worry about being labelled something close to that if their wife leaves them

========================================
Coming back to the analysis, how is a woman earning 15K vs hubby earning 45 K /mth become more powerful than hubby?
========================================

Well if she is one of feminist supremacists, she is.

She can file for DV, maintenance etc and expect to get 12-15K per month as maintenance.  Or more likely she will get hubby to knees by threat of legal and criminal cases and extort some financial favour and property etc.

So after maintenance case wife's income: 15K + 12K = 27K
And hubby's income: 45K - 12K = 33 K

Now they have come close to each other in terms of income.  And woman still has sympathy of society because no one is ready to believe yet that Indian women will tell outright lies about marriage.

If she has child with her, she can extract more in name of child, so she now becomes financially equally powerful as husband.

Most Indian courts will give custody to mothers unless the mother does not want custody and leaves child(ren) with husband.  So a man is set to lose both money, property, and children in case a woman is determined even a little bit to stick it to him.  The rest is taken care of by greedy lawyers, corruptible mediators, and a meek judiciary who cannot bear to stand up to women organisations’ (read feminists’) propaganda.

The laws and social reality in cities has tilted in favour of married women who want to bend the system to their will.  The system is ostensibly created to support needy and oppressed women, but in reality laws like Domestic violence act (PWDVA) etc were always meant to be abused to favour female supremacists’ agenda and create income for lawyers.

Do men see societal structures oppressing them?

There is a nice article here on discussion about structures in society and how feminism is able to exploit discussion around societal structures well to benefit their cause.  Why are men unable to look at some of societal structures as being harmful to men or putting too much burden on them?  I guess the reason is men are trained to be self-reliant and in protector and provider mindset most of the time.  So read about some of the societal expectations about men (some of them true more in West) as given in the article.

In the field of gender issues, this means that the only way to combat misandry and the prevailing perception that men are a privileged group that willfully oppresses women, is to describe how cultural and societal structures keep men stuck in their own kind of straitjacket:

• It is a man’s job to keep society safe. This cultural expectation means that men are expendable in wars and in dangerous jobs.
• Cultural expectations of men are narrow. Be successful. If you have a family make sure you support it. If you fail at these tasks, there’s no place for you in society. This in turn leads to men being 3-5 times as likely as women to be homeless or commit suicide.
• The societal structure that is our educational system produces far more women than men who go to college and university.
• Men’s harsh reality under the current structures leads large amounts of random street violence between men.

Husband can’t rape wife, but you can marry woman you raped!

No.  I did not make that one up.  Read the news below, and figure out for yourselves:

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_husbands-can-t-get-away-with-marital-rape-government_1356512

Should a rape victim be allowed to marry the man who destroyed her self-esteem? “Yes,” feels chief justice of India KG Balakrishnan. “No,” indicates popular wisdom.

As the world celebrates International Women’s Day on Monday, the government plans to protect women from all possible tormentors, including their husbands, by introducing “marital rape” as a separate provision under the proposed new law against rape and sexual assault.

I could say as in the IDEA advertisement -- “kya idea hai sirji”, except in this case it is hardly funny.

If one thinks about the 2 diametrically opposite views expressed by experts above, it will become clear the the sole idea is to allow women to express their choice without legal repercussions, howsoever reprehensible that choice may seem by social standard of conduct.

For example, a woman can file rape case on a man in case of broken promise of marriage.  But a man cannot file any case of fraud, cheating of money on woman in case of broken promise of marriage, leave alone rape.  The woman is now being given the option by judiciary of changing her mind again at judicial stage and get married to the rape accused!  Why I always loved my rapist!

A married woman can accuse man of rape at any time of marriage.  Of course, there was no notary public present at the time the alleged event happened, so the man will be made to run around to arrange bail, then to prove his innocence, and so on.  And the woman could always condone the rape against husband based on some settlement, say some property or money in her name!  After all, judiciary is quite open to condoning non-marital rape, they will only be too glad to condone an alleged marital rape.

A man who is forced to give presents or money to wife who does not fulfil her promises cannot accuse her of marital robbery, or marital cheating, or marital fraud etc.  But a wife will now be allowed to accuse husband of marital rape, because her rights must be protected.  And her rights are whatever she wants at the moment, there should be no reciprocity of rights when it comes to man-woman relationship, that is so 19th century ….right?

70% of all BJP MPs are opposed to Women Reservation Bill

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/BJP-chief-whip-spills-it-out--70--of-MPs-oppose-Women-s-Bill/589444 

“At least seventy per cent of MPs are protesting against the women’s reservation Bill and the way the party supported the Bill despite marshals being used in Rajya Sabha. Top leaders of the party have assured that grievances of the MPs will be taken into account,” Bais told The Indian Express, adding that Murli Manohar Joshi and Yashwant Sinha had already held the first round of discussions.

I would not be too surprised at such a statistic.  After all, the resentment against 33% women’s reservation has been suppressed only because of overall media championing and political-correctness of the ‘cause’ of women empowerment.  No body of any importance wants to be seen voicing opinion against women reservation in parliament, because they will be labelled as Neanderthals, or male chauvinist pig, or something like that.

Countries like Germany have women reservation in parliament but it is not by proposed lottery system of making a constituency reserved.  The political parties there have to make sure 30% or so of women candidates are selected by them to represent people.

Evidently, the masters of our fate have decided that giving responsibility of ensuring women’s representation to political parties will not work!  It is a strange argument where the politicians attempt to ignore a much better legislation on the ground that they are incompetent to practise the much better law.

When men forgive women

This 19 Feb news of 2 Iranian women assaulting police officers in Bangalore was was covered in all Bangalore papers.

http://www.bangaloremirror.com/article/1/2010021920100219075405340960290be/iMaafii-%E2%80%98I-forgive-them%E2%80%99.html

What is interesting is one of the assaulted cops saying he has forgiven the women.   Nothing wrong in that per se, after all this is reputedly the country of Mahatma Gandhi and Ahimsa parmo dharma.  Let us get a glimpse of the events:

She allegedly broke open the side box of Rao’s patrol bike and took back the insurance documents her friend had handed him. Fazile allegedly tried to drive away in the car. Rao closed the barricade. Police say she then assaulted Rao all over his body and kicked his private parts.

She also bit him on his hand and punched his face. Fatima also assaulted Rao.

Rao fell after he was kicked on his private parts and sat on the road median. Other motorists came to Rao’s rescue and some damaged the girls’ car.

….

….

“Forgiveness is the best revenge. I am ready to forgive the women. But as a government servant, I will go by whatever my senior police officers want me to do,” he said. My family saw the news on TV. “They telephoned me and started crying
after they learnt that I had been assaulted.”

All this is fine, I wonder what would have been the public reaction if it was 2 male drunk drivers stopped by a female cop, and then the cop was assaulted by one of the male drivers!  Maybe a push on her chest will automatically qualify as sexual assault, whereas a woman kicking male cop in the groin is all game!  It is difficult to think a magnanimous gesture of forgiveness on her part, and that apart the men themselves will come to her defence.