In the light of the Delhi rapes you may have noticed a couple of the MRA websites have rushed to defend the “so called Rights” of men in India.
I does need to be repeated. Anyone who has read my blog is aware of the various “major” rapes that grip the news headlines out here. Rape is common place enough and India still doesn’t consider marital rape as rape.
But various websites and indeed the commentariat from such stellar places such as the Slymepit and a Voice for Men have shown up to defend the laws based on a variety of points ranging from “not reading the News Article” to “But I have to pay more for Nightclub Entry”.
Today’s “Won’t Someone Think Of the Menz” candidate is A Voice for Men and it’s David Cuspis.
I was reading the paper on the train the other day, when an article on the “rape crisis” in India caught my eye. Naturally, as we have been conditioned to obsess on protecting women, the mere mention of the word “rape” is eye-catching.
India has one of the lowest rape report rates in the world and has had a series of high profile rapes and has had people say various MRA things like “she was asking for it“.
I am sorry? I need a small word to describe a woman being penetrated sexually against her will and society has chosen “rape” to be that word. I could call it qwerty but honestly people would look at me like I was an imbecile so I must acquiesce to society and utilise the term rape.
The reason the word is eye catching is clearly the aesthetics. The simplicity of the “r” is set off by the curves of the “ape” section. Not because it invokes a crime against human dignity and autonomy. In the same way “Fire” is an eye-catching word as the right angled structure of the F juxtaposes with the straight line geometry of the “i” and “r” making it catch the eye.
So I read the short piece, which detailed the new rape laws that had been passed in India (a country known for its blind eye to the public abuse of men by female police officers) that set new penalties for rapists, including a mandatory 20 year sentence, and the death penalty if the victim is killed or left catatonic.
You mean the female police officers who walk around in Plainclothes and fine and humiliate sexual harassers?
And I am sorry? India is currently known as a place where women are raped and sexually harassed in alarming numbers. Rape laws don’t mean anything without rape convictions and in Delhi last year out of 500 reported rapes (An under-reporting for an area the size of Delhi) only 1 was successfully prosecuted.
It’s the first time I have heard of India being known for it’s public abuse of men…
Want to know something funny? People were so appalled by the nudity of the Delhi rape victim that no one stopped to help her and her boyfriend who were left for dead on the side of the road. It took nearly 45 minutes for help to arrive.
And clearly the issue here is “the men being discriminated against”.
The article mentioned also that the Women’s Rights Advocates in India were criticizing the law for not putting marital rape under the definition of rape.
That may very well be a legitimate concern, as there is now very little to protect women who are in fact raped by husbands. However, this was not the part that caught my eye.
Marital rape is legal in India. If you rape your wife, you can parade around the streets screaming “I RAPED MY WIFE” and there is not a damn thing anyone can do to you legally. Even if you signed a written confession without any duress through your lawyer you cannot be punished by Indian law as marriage is regarded to provide consent.
The part that got my attention was the sentence “[the new laws] define rape as a crime committed only by a man against a woman.”
I went onto the internet to confirm this, and lo and behold:
I too went on the Internet to Confirm This.
Bowing to pressure from women (sic) activists, the government has decided to restore the term rape in criminal law that states only men can be booked for committing the offence against women. 1
“Bowing to pressure from women activists, the government has decided to restore the term rape in criminal law that states only men can be booked for committing the offence against women.
It has also decided to lower the age of consent for sex from 18 to 16 years.
These are fresh changes proposed by the Centre in its criminal laws ( amendment) bill, which will replace the rape ordinance issued on February 3.
With the latest amendments, the UPA has belatedly accepted two more recommendations of the Justice JS Verma panel, which it had earlier rejected in the ordinance. It has retained all other major provisions made in the ordinance, including enhanced punishment for rape.
The panel — set up to look into rape laws after the December 16 Delhi gang rape — had recommended that the offence be kept gender-specific and the age for consensual sex be retained at 16 years in the Indian Penal Code (IPC). In its ordinance, however, the government replaced the term rape with sexual assault, stating that any ‘person’ can commit the offence.” – Hindustan Times
However, in India sexual assault on men is practically unheard of and the law exists to penalise a culture of rape where rapes are not only common place but excused by people.
Let’s just think about this for a second.
In India, a man or woman can force his/herself on a non-consenting male, and not be guilty of rape. This revolutionary new “definition” of rape, clearly advocated for by ideologues filled with hate and resentment for all people who have the Y chromosome, means that we will see a sharp increase in the cries of victimization from women, who will now claim that rape is an exclusively male crime.
Actually, that would be treated as buggery and forced sodomy.
Oh fuck off mate. Who are you kidding? The law is unfair but it hasn’t passed yet…
What is stupid is the idiotic words that you keep typing. Here’s the deal. India is one of the few countries where men outnumber women because girls are ACTIVELY KILLED because they are considered liabilities. They have to pay “for the right to get married”. Many women don’t even get to leave the house or talk to men. Many women don’t have access to proper food, healthcare, education or income because men basically chain them to the stoves.
In India Rape Is almost entirely a male crime. The vast majority of victims of rape are women and the vast vast majority of perpetrators are men. Sexual harassment is such a problem in India that guidebooks consider it “a fact of travel”.
To hear some idiot go “It’s hate and resentment for your Y chromosome” is to literally head-desk. The issue here is India has had a very relaxed set of laws with regards to the prosecution of rapists and has not done more society wise to change attitudes. So now it’s undergoing a series of knee jerk responses to the rapes caused by angry and shocked people who got told that they were over-reacting to the existence of a rape bus that was travelling around with the sole purpose of raping women.
They were told to get over the mistreatment of the victim by the police
They were told to get over the lack of care from the government.
They were told to get over the breaking up of peaceful protests.
They were told to not wear the clothes they wished to.
They were told to not wear eat the food they wanted.
They were told to not date the men they loved lest they be called sluts.
And they got fucking mad. Then more rapes came out and they got madder. Honestly? I don’t agree with the law. I think it should not be gender specific. But the problem is I think so because the law has to be universal rather than it’s a dedicated plan to ruin men by a society ruled by women or whatever persecution complex the MRA think.
When I told him that I personally know a man who was held down and raped by an abusive woman, he told me that such events are rare, and by extension claimed that such laws are unnecessary.
They are rare, but the laws are necessary.
However, you are arguing solely for men in a society where men have an inordinate amount of rights compared to women.
That’s right, gents. Protecting us is unnecessary. So unnecessary that we need to actually make distinctions in the wording of laws so as to deliberately exclude male victims (read: tin soldiers/sperm banks on legs).
In India… Men don’t need protection from women in the same way that women need it from men.
Women need protection from men. Hell just last week one woman got raped by a gang of men and another nearly got raped and only escaped by leaping off her balcony. You aren’t a Tin Soldier, you are a fucking idiot if you are trying to claim that Indian men have it terrible.
The ideologues in the Indian government deemed it necessary to deliberately and actively deny men equal protection under the law. We’ve already seen men in that country forced to the back of buses like African-Americans in 1950s America. We’ve seen them beaten up by members of the public and female police officers alike for accidentally boarding the “female only” carriage of a train. And now we’re seeing the government actively denying them equal protection under the law in sexual assaults.
Men are made to sit on the right of the bus or at the back of the bus in India because sexual harassment is so common that women have had to be separated to prevent them from being physically touched and so that they can have a travel experience that is safe from harassment.
The women only compartments are clearly labelled in the local language, hindi, english and has a picture of women on it. It’s very difficult to board one by “accident”.
Men straight up have lower Infant mortality, better education and increased lifespan in India and you are telling me that the segregation of women to keep them safe is insulting to you?
Women have their own compartments in trains for the same reason that Japanese women have their own compartments. India has a massive grope culture.
It is things like this that make me marvel at how people can still believe in the patriarchy that feminists have always claimed existed. The government of a nation bowing to the unreasonable and unjust whims of feminists should not be possible in that patriarchy. Introducing blatantly anti-male laws that deny men protection from the same crimes as women is not the imagined feminist patriarchy, not by any stretch of the word.
The same patriarchy that charged just 1 rape case out of 500 mainly because “she was a slut” was regarded as an acceptable defense. The issue this time was that they raped someone considered upper middle class. The backlash couldn’t be hushed up or bought off.
We are past the point where apologists can twist the meaning of words to suit their argument effectively. In no way would the feminist’s patriarchy lie down for misandric legislation. Whatever the feminists are selling, it can’t be called patriarchy anymore. Well, unless patriarchy, a system of female privilege at the expense of men, is what it is and always was.
Clearly you think India is “good” to women. And clearly you are delusional.
And that is a good case scenario.
My best friend, a fellow activist, had a feminist threaten to stab him when he brought up men’s issues. That’s right, she threatened to stab him. Imagine the outcry if he had threatened to so much as slap her?
Because men beat women all the goddamn time. And you can in some countries levy threat charges.
These vehement knee-jerk reactions from feminists across the globe are an instinctive, animalistic response. When an animal is cornered, it lashes out, and similarly the feminist movement is consolidating its forces and lashing out at any detractors who threaten to topple their ivory tower. Have you ever seen a legitimate human rights advocate threaten to stab someone for exercising free speech? Human rights movements have their roots in humanitarianism, not in the barn of Animal Farm.
No… they are a plan to try and get women in India to have basic human rights that have been enjoyed by men for pretty much all of Indian history.
The Indian law was designed by feminists, deliberately excluding all male victims in order perpetuate the myth that women are the only victims in this world.
Men, i.e. human beings, are now having their protection under the law undermined even in countries such as mine. I am privy to the suffering of many of men at the hands of professional victims A good friend of mine received death threats due to a false claim of sexual harassment brought upon him by a psychotic attention-seeker whose advances he turned down. The same man was the victim of beatings at the hands of his then-girlfriend when she got angry with him for disagreeing with her very strong opinions.
A patient of mine was battered until I had to intervene using medical privilege to keep her abusive husband from seeing her. Society responded with telling her she should forgive him. My family lost a family member to an abuser and covered for the abuser until he went “too far”.
The women of India are raped daily and oppressed. I am sorry. The only person being a professional victim here is you.
Another friend of mine was taken to court over false accusations that were then dropped with no apology or compensation. The same man has been the victim of a botched circumcision.
Another friend of mine was savagely bashed by his girlfriend and raped by another woman whilst semi-conscious, and was ashamed to even talk about it.
Mine was molested on a bus and was blamed for her short salwar.
Mine was prevented from reporting a crime by cops who told her she was at fault for being out late.
I have reported on women in India burnt by kerosene and acid. Thrown from trains and hung from trees.
You want to play oppression olympics in your rich first world experience with women who don’t even get to study and who are poisoned because of their gender then it is you who is the “professional victim”.
These men have been told by feminists that it was their fault that they didn’t seek help for it. Yet no help exists for men. There is only one men’s rights charity in Australia, and they receive no support from the blue-pill government and Julia “Tu Quoque” Gillard. And when MHRAs try to start charities for the support of men, feminists – the very same feminists who victim-blame males for not seeking help – condemn these charities as misogynistic.
I don’t see you offering any fucking help. I see you trying to deny women in a country where people excused rapists for centuries the right to fight a horrific culture of rape.
I don’t think you understand what a male “charity” looks like.
None of these men received any protection under the law, and now those horrible creatures in India that have the nerve to call themselves human beings are making it official: Men Don’t Matter.
Did you hear that, men? Yeah, especially you over there in India:
YOU DON’T MATTER
(But you didn’t hear it from the feminists; it’s all the fault of patriarchy)
I am sorry?
What reality do you live in? Close to 10,000 women a year die in suspicious “dowry deaths”. Haryana has 2 women for ever 3 men. Women in many parts of India are less educated than men. By less educated I mean “They Aren’t Allowed to Go to School”. In many schools women aren’t encouraged to learn. Books are saved for the boys, the girls get slates.
If you honestly think that India treats men badly then you are ignorant and stupid.
What’s there to say? The original poster is clearly ignorant and weighing in on a backlash case and rather than reading anything about the culture and history of India or indeed how women are treated there as a whole he decided that India is some sort of feminist paradise where they get seats on buses and fancy train cars to themselves.
Not a world where they are raped, uneducated, disenfranchised and killed for their gender.
India is changing. Women will get the rights they want. But the problem is it’s not feminists making the laws in Parliament.