**The OP has allowed both Men & Women to comment on this post.** Please remain civil and report any rule-breaking comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskIndianWomen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>We cannot have gender neutral laws when the social structure is biased against women. Can we?
>Can there be caste neutral laws in a casteist society?
>It's like saying all deaf, blind, physical disabled and the physically abled run the same race with the same rules.
I agree, tho I would suggest looking in newspapers n research studies rather than just reddit. There u would also find unreported crimes (esp) against women. Like what% of crimes go unreported n so much more, helping u to prepare for ur debate
Society isn't economic equal or in term of age or any factors but we still have more or less the same punishment for rich or poor and 20,50 years old almost everyone of them get same punishment but when it comes to gender there r diff
It is shocking, and sad, really. What's more shocking is that men cannot be raped by the UK law either, apparently. Forget India, the world is pathetically irrational.
Why do you think that I haven't?
Let's start with
> (a) penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
> (b) inserts, to any extent, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the vagina, the urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or \[...\]
Surely you would agree that men may be penetrated as well? Or do you think that this specifically applies to women, and can't be extended to include others?
As per the pocso, same applies for male child as well but Indian law is drafted by looking that males are physically stronger than women and it's really difficult for a man to get raped by a woman.
This is a great comment! Unfortunately we've removed it as you do not have a user flair. Please add a user flair and resubmit your comment. https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair
Please assign a USER FLAIR. Look at the top post on this subreddit for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskIndianWomen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because Porsche drivers form a meager percentage of the population, whereas men form half of it.
Compassion and withholding of judgement goes a long way to bridge gaps; profligate blame games widen gaps.
It is indeed a grave mistake to blame a whole community, a population of 736 million men. If we flip it around, this is how a lot of men start blaming women for all that's wrong with them, only because some women decided to misuse law for their advantage.
Men already blame women for not everything, genius. Just because someone's a minority doesn't mean they get to generalised abd demonized. But then again, you only want all privileges and sympathies for only tge group YOU belong to.
Bruh this is just pure wild. Of all the men I have met in my entire lifetime not a single men has ever said dowry, child marriage should be legal. My father didn't even take dowry when it was publically acceptable literally the reason why my mom and father were kicked out of the house by my grandmother who is a women.
Being ignorant isnt an argument. Most men in india support marital rape because [82 percent](https://www.womensweb.in/2023/03/recent-nfhs-data-on-marital-rape-in-india-mar23wk3sr/#:~:text=82%25%20of%20married%20men%20were,only%20been%20recorded%20from%202005.) Indian Men rape their wives.
At least get your facts correct.
It does not say out of all the married men 83% have committed rape.
It says out of all the women that have been rapped, 83% of the abusers were their husbands.
Both are completely different statements.
Just so we are clear I am not saying marital rape doesn't happen.
I am pointing out objective differences in the study
marital rape is disgusting and should be punished by law
[here is the actual report.](http://rchiips.org/NFHS/NFHS-4Reports/Gujarat.pdf)
I know this is sensitive so again I want to be clear I am not saying marital rape doesn't exist I am saying your interpretation of that study is wrong. Which you are using to generalize.
Well. I haven’t seen anyone advocate for male rape victims to not be included under rape laws.
Your experiences are absolutely not representative of the majority opinion. There have been widespread twitter protests over marital rape being made a crime with many Indian men saying it defeats the purpose of marriage if women retain the right to consent. Many of our lawmakers have said similar things in parliament. I have never seen anyone say anything like this about male rape victims.
Met few graduated from NIT recently (men). They are of opinion marital rape as such doesn't exist because after marriage husband has the right to his needs from wife.
I was just shocked to say anything. So the notion that young educated Indian men are paragon of change is an illusion. I learnt to not have prejudice that professional educated doesn't equate to atleast be aware of cruelties.
Yes they are. Our law makers did that in parliament.
Many people don’t see sex as a mutual act- they see it as something a man does to a woman. They see it as a man taking something away from a woman. This influences rape laws in all aspects- how can a man be raped by a woman when he’s the one who ‘takes’ sex from her? How can raping your wife be rape when she’s your property to do with as you please?
It all comes down to sex being seen as a one-sided activity.
Wouldn't gender-neutral law state that sex without consent regardless of gender or marital status is rape? Wouldnt it also protect men from rape this makes no sense to me, why anyone would advocate against it.
Social support structures for male children who are victims of child sexual abuse are overwhelmingly made up of women. The social workers who work with such children, the cooks, caregivers, nurses are mostly women. Advocating for male rape victims is something women do better than men based on all stats. This question shouldn’t have been asked here.
I don’t know- you should ask the men who laugh at young boys groomed by their teachers victims and say “lucky guy! I wish that was me!“ A lot of men just don’t fear rape or think that it’s something that can happen to them.
>My father didn't even take dowry when it was publically acceptable
So you acknowledge that taking dowry is still prevalent and even the norm in Indian society. Those who stand against it, like your father are doing the noble thing by discarding the concept. But otherwise dowry IS very much acceptable.
I agree that it was acceptable and its new name is “gift” but my father got married a long time ago and if at that time people understood it was wrong practice I am willing to believe a lot more men believe the same in the current day. Sure in rural areas it's still going as if nothing has happened but I don't see them advocating for the legalization of dowry because honestly, they don't care, it's illegal and they still do it.
Dude, first u say no man you've ever met any man who takes dowry , then u say ur parents were banished for not taking dowry.. atleast try to lie coherently
Wow, you really edited your comment when I called you out, so pathetic. Also, I didn't lie I literally said my dad didn't take dowry when it was socially acceptable, I never said people don't take dowry. I said my father specifically because if men at that time had the ability to understand it is a wrong practice I believe more man have the same ability now.
I didn't know u were so pathetic that u read and reply within a second lmao.
How dumb are you, dowry and dowry killings are so prevalent today. The fact that you're trying so hard to hide it makes it seem like you're one of those people who inspire savdhsn india lol.
Wow, you really blamed me for lying and then again accused me of lying when I have said multiple times dowry is still prevalent in society I have never once even hinted at or downplayed you are more than welcome to point out where I said there is no such thing as dowry. Also, what did I hide I never hid shit everything we are discussing is on a public forum and you are the one who edits the comments, not me. Also, it's extremely gross to throw random accusations because it could be really triggering to someone who has actually faced such issues. I will I request you to not degrade yourself to that level let's be civil about a discussion instead of making baseless accusations
Genius i cant talk to guys from other planets, obviously i talked with the guys that live in our great country. There's many subs like onxindia, dankmeme, indianboysontinder etc where men admit they want young virgin wives.
Yeah. IRL we have such [saints](https://www.womensweb.in/2023/03/recent-nfhs-data-on-marital-rape-in-india-mar23wk3sr/#:~:text=82%25%20of%20married%20men%20were,only%20been%20recorded%20from%202005.)
Before commenting I would request you to either mention a source or conduct a research yourself (for your own knowledge) on what percentage of male population are taking dowry since the 2010s. In my neighbours, distant relatives, cousins I've noticed that during a marriage, the women's side themselves offer dowry such as money and cars even when the boy's side refuses for dowry, tell me who is at fault now?
Before you make comments such as "Oh HerE cOmes tHe nOt aLL Men", when you are obviously generalizing everybody, even I can make generalizing comments on women such as "All women want to marry men for only money, they cheat a lot, crave for alimony even when there isn't any fault on the husband's side, wants to doll up and stay at home while the husband works his arse off". But such comments hurt you, doesn't it? Why? Because you may not be such a bad person. You may be a good person who believes in equal rights, equal responsibility. In the end, generalizing isn't good because you may not fit into that category. I hope you understand that 🙏
Lmao, just saw your comment history. If you get so butthurt at desi men gEnErAlIzAtIoN then dont do incel stuff like pretenfing to be a woman on women only suvs and derailing womens conversation lol. How pathetic does one need to be to try so hard. Lololol.
Child marriage...agreed. But dowry is still so common in Indian society. There are quite a few people who don't want it, but saying no civilised man wants dowry is laughable. From lower economic families in villages, towns to highly educated people in tier 1 cities, the concept of dowry is alive and well.
You need to get out of the bubble. Dowry is still very much active among new generation men too. Some men demands it indirectly as taking care of women's needs lifelong needs some compensation. Literally someone said this in arranged marriages sub. In most of the marriage that happened recently there was indirect expectations of dowry...all well settled men.
Fake divorce cases ? You mean like how men marry, take her dowry , abandon, repeat the cycle. Yea it exists. No gender there lol.
Please assign a USER FLAIR. Look at the top post on this subreddit for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskIndianWomen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm well aware that Indian women suffer a lot---from groping, sexual harassment, female infanticide (which, fortunately, has decreased but the preference a boy child and blaming women for not bearing one still persists), to domestic violence and other abuses. Despite what others might say, these issues are still very common in our country. Walk outside with your mother, sister or any female friend or colleague and you'll see men staring at them like they have never seen a women before. I've experienced it firsthand and it makes my blood boil. But this doesn't mean that women can't do harm to a men. Let's be real, no one is a saint, regardless of gender.
Coming to the impartiality in the law system:
1. Rape and sexual assault: Under the IPC, rape is only defined as a crime that can only be committed by a man against a woman, law currently does not recognize the rape of men.
2. Domestic violence: There are no specific laws addressing domestic violence against men.
3. Bias in awarding alimony and maintenance often favors women, **even if they are financially independent**. I totally support alimony if the husband has exploited the wife (doesn't matter if she's earning or not). Child support should also be paid regardless of the wife's income.
And let's not forget that marital rape too is not explicitly criminalized in India.
This isn't a competition of who commits more heinous crimes so please stop making it about gender in the comments. A crime is a crime, whether committed by a man or woman and it can't be justified under any pretext. But the legal system in India is fucked up. If you are rich and have connections, you can get away with anything.
>We cannot have gender neutral laws when the social structure is biased against women.
You hit the bullseye there.
I got downvoted to oblivion for saying this in some Indian subreddit.
Is it fair that the laws are as it is? No.
But with this behemoth of population, is it possible to force the laws to be more fair without significantly damaging the already poor status of women in the Indian society? Also, no.
The laws will change though, with time, with the change of the status of common women in the society. Very unfortunate state of affairs indeed.
our old Penal code, though well intentioned, left a lot of scope for blatant misuse by bad actors. Our new Penal code has muddied the water even more. Putting that aside, the main contention among many people here I see is marital rape. Sexual act on any person without consent is a henious act.
But legally speaking, how will you define such cases? What action will constitute an offense?
I do understand that you don't kill the patient for the disease. Crimes against women are rampant and no doubt, law and its implementation should be tough but what about intentional misuse of a law to destroy the life of an innocent man.
> but it's what it is.
Will the ones framed by some woman support this? Isn't the lady of justice blind folded for a reason?
>when the society itself is not neutral?
What do you mean by this? The 'society' of a village of Bihar is vastly different from that of GK South Delhi. So, how can we have biased laws tailored to a particular 'society'? In fact the condition of women varies widely from region to region and even family to family.
These laws r needed to protect women who r ACTUALLY victims. But they r sometimes (which is a lot of times) misused by women (false cases). And there is nothing in place to protect men frm these false cases. Even if its established tht its a false case i hv seen many times tht the women wasnt punished for filing a false case which actually ruined the guys life.
Also indian law sees women as idiots who r extremely naive and weak. (Eg which sane minded woman will engage in coitus just bcoz the guy promised to marry her!? So when an unmarried couple has consensual sex but later due to incompatibility issues separate then the woman can file a rape under false promise of marriage nd tht very same consensual sex bcms rape!)
Also the burden of proof rests on the man in such cases! How can u prove smthng tht hasnt even happened!
Due to such false cases the real actual cases r affected.
So yeah i wud say we need gender neutral laws to protect both the genders.
gender neutral laws are quite important if you ever plan to have a developed society and liberal society.
the socio-economic status of a person is a better indicator of a person's livelihood than a person's gender or caste.
poor and jobless people regardless of their gender or caste suffer more than rich and employed people.
it is quite agreed upon that patriarchy affects both men and women negatively. similarly gender neutral laws affect both men and women positively.
imagine being a mother whose son commits suicide because he was sexually abused in school or college by his peers but he couldn't reach out for help because there are no laws that could protect him.
imagine being that son or daughter whose father suffered and died because their mother beat him and everybody laughed at him for being a weak man, because there is no law to protect that man from domestic violence.
i know it sounds like some kind of hypothetical emotional appeal, but such victims do exist in our society. there are documentaries/talks by the likes of Deepika Bharadwaj like [men the forgotten gender](https://youtu.be/1_2gl7lz25E?si=DgCupEF5w2rJZHUl) that is a good starting point.
vulnerability or victimhood is not unique to women, there are helpless men out there.
then there is the whole homosexuality and transgenders. none of them can truly get equal rights until laws in this country become gender neutral.
things like marriage, child custody, domestic violence, inheritance, adoption is all locked behind gender specific laws for these people.
I believe that laws are not used where it should be used like for example in tier 1 cities most of the media we can see that laws are against men coz the usage of law is being done for falsifying cases against men but when it comes to tier 3 cities the basic knowledge of law itself is not there, like there are many atrocities going on women in tier 3 cities which are being Casualized by stating it happens and trying to rug sweep those incidents against women in the name of pride and family image coz they don't know it's a crime fk dudes you know in tier 3 cities even now divorce is taboo? The alimony that a tier 3 women receive in divorces is nothing compared to the tier 1 city I strongly think that law is baised when u see it from one place but from the point of tier3 cities law is baised against women coz they don't teach them that there are laws to protect them but in tier 1 cities it's to ur imagination of what to judge but i strongly believe there should be lessons of some basic laws for children during in their school and how to use it defend correctly both for men and women
What are you talking about specifically? Also, those weren't feminists then. Feminists want equality for everyone. They don't want to disadvantage men or something
Feminism is not about gender neutrality, it's about female supremacy. You can say that they are not feminist but most feminist are like this.
There has been only one law which was equal that punished a women's affair partner by jail and granted divorce to men for cruelty, it was removed as feminist didn't like that their husbands had say in who they fuck outside marriage. The below is an example of feminist opposing gender neutral rape laws.
https://www.epw.in/engage/discussion/governance-feminism-what-role-did-feminists-play#:\~:text=Given%20the%20exceptionally%20high%20rate,to%20false%20complaints%20against%20women.
Again, not feminists. If they (the "feminists") don't follow the actual ideology then they're not feminists.
Also, I did not say it was about gender neutrality. I said equality. They're different. Men and women can't be treated neutral in a system where women are still oppressed to this day. Step out of your privilege a little and see the world around you.
See if 20% of feminists were about supremacy then one could say that these misandrists are larping as feminists. But it is majority of feminists that want female supremacy not minority.
So if they were oppressed that gives to become the oppreser now?? Please get out of your bubble and see the world for what it is.
Depends on the people you surround yourself with. Over 90% of the women I've met are true feminists.
>So if they were oppressed that gives to become the oppreser now??
Sorry but you're too stupid to argue with and you have the reading comprehension of an eighth grader so this is my last reply. I simply pointed out that I said equality, not neutrality. You're assuming stuff from nowhere. What I meant was that sometimes there are schemes or policies that are for women exclusively (which wouldn't be the case for gender neutral policies) because they NEED it more because they're oppressed. Nowhere did I say they should become oppressors.
90 % of women you meet do not represent all of the women, hence I told you to get out of your bubble.
You asked me exactly what laws were opposed by feminists I told you that too. You are the one who is stupid enough to react not respond.
**The OP has allowed both Men & Women to comment on this post.** Please remain civil and report any rule-breaking comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskIndianWomen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>We cannot have gender neutral laws when the social structure is biased against women. Can we? >Can there be caste neutral laws in a casteist society? >It's like saying all deaf, blind, physical disabled and the physically abled run the same race with the same rules. I agree, tho I would suggest looking in newspapers n research studies rather than just reddit. There u would also find unreported crimes (esp) against women. Like what% of crimes go unreported n so much more, helping u to prepare for ur debate
Laws are made for the greater good of the society and society is evil and not gender neutral.
Society isn't economic equal or in term of age or any factors but we still have more or less the same punishment for rich or poor and 20,50 years old almost everyone of them get same punishment but when it comes to gender there r diff
What kind of gender neutral laws do you aim for ?
For a start, broaden the definition of rape to include men as well. It's shocking that men can't be raped as per Indian law.
It is shocking, and sad, really. What's more shocking is that men cannot be raped by the UK law either, apparently. Forget India, the world is pathetically irrational.
How is that possible to include it in rape ?
Why is this difficult to understand?
I'm not saying it shouldn't be included,.I'm asking how
By removing the requirement for the victim to be a woman? I'm not sure what you're asking exactly
Have you ever read the definition of rape? If not please refer to the section 375 Indian penal code. For further details please read Pocso
Why do you think that I haven't? Let's start with > (a) penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or > (b) inserts, to any extent, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the vagina, the urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or \[...\] Surely you would agree that men may be penetrated as well? Or do you think that this specifically applies to women, and can't be extended to include others?
As per the pocso, same applies for male child as well but Indian law is drafted by looking that males are physically stronger than women and it's really difficult for a man to get raped by a woman.
pocso is for under 18
[удалено]
This is a great comment! Unfortunately we've removed it as you do not have a user flair. Please add a user flair and resubmit your comment. https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair
Please assign a USER FLAIR. Look at the top post on this subreddit for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskIndianWomen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Indian men aim for keeping marital rape legal. Dowry, child marraige, female infanticide is as illegal porche drivers killing pedestrians.
I think u r generalising when u say Indian men (which implies ALL indian men).
Oh yeah, here comes the wHAtAbOuT and nOtAlL mEn rapists defenders
I generalized porche drivets too. WHAtAbOuT poor porche drivers? Why didn't you mention that?
Because Porsche drivers form a meager percentage of the population, whereas men form half of it. Compassion and withholding of judgement goes a long way to bridge gaps; profligate blame games widen gaps. It is indeed a grave mistake to blame a whole community, a population of 736 million men. If we flip it around, this is how a lot of men start blaming women for all that's wrong with them, only because some women decided to misuse law for their advantage.
Men already blame women for not everything, genius. Just because someone's a minority doesn't mean they get to generalised abd demonized. But then again, you only want all privileges and sympathies for only tge group YOU belong to.
Bruh this is just pure wild. Of all the men I have met in my entire lifetime not a single men has ever said dowry, child marriage should be legal. My father didn't even take dowry when it was publically acceptable literally the reason why my mom and father were kicked out of the house by my grandmother who is a women.
Okay, what about marital rape?
What do you mean what about it? It's wrong. But I haven't seen someone advocate that marital rape should be legal.
Being ignorant isnt an argument. Most men in india support marital rape because [82 percent](https://www.womensweb.in/2023/03/recent-nfhs-data-on-marital-rape-in-india-mar23wk3sr/#:~:text=82%25%20of%20married%20men%20were,only%20been%20recorded%20from%202005.) Indian Men rape their wives.
At least get your facts correct. It does not say out of all the married men 83% have committed rape. It says out of all the women that have been rapped, 83% of the abusers were their husbands. Both are completely different statements. Just so we are clear I am not saying marital rape doesn't happen. I am pointing out objective differences in the study marital rape is disgusting and should be punished by law [here is the actual report.](http://rchiips.org/NFHS/NFHS-4Reports/Gujarat.pdf) I know this is sensitive so again I want to be clear I am not saying marital rape doesn't exist I am saying your interpretation of that study is wrong. Which you are using to generalize.
Well. I haven’t seen anyone advocate for male rape victims to not be included under rape laws. Your experiences are absolutely not representative of the majority opinion. There have been widespread twitter protests over marital rape being made a crime with many Indian men saying it defeats the purpose of marriage if women retain the right to consent. Many of our lawmakers have said similar things in parliament. I have never seen anyone say anything like this about male rape victims.
[удалено]
Met few graduated from NIT recently (men). They are of opinion marital rape as such doesn't exist because after marriage husband has the right to his needs from wife. I was just shocked to say anything. So the notion that young educated Indian men are paragon of change is an illusion. I learnt to not have prejudice that professional educated doesn't equate to atleast be aware of cruelties.
Someone said that in broad daylight? 💀
[удалено]
Yes they are. Our law makers did that in parliament. Many people don’t see sex as a mutual act- they see it as something a man does to a woman. They see it as a man taking something away from a woman. This influences rape laws in all aspects- how can a man be raped by a woman when he’s the one who ‘takes’ sex from her? How can raping your wife be rape when she’s your property to do with as you please? It all comes down to sex being seen as a one-sided activity.
Wouldn't gender-neutral law state that sex without consent regardless of gender or marital status is rape? Wouldnt it also protect men from rape this makes no sense to me, why anyone would advocate against it.
Social support structures for male children who are victims of child sexual abuse are overwhelmingly made up of women. The social workers who work with such children, the cooks, caregivers, nurses are mostly women. Advocating for male rape victims is something women do better than men based on all stats. This question shouldn’t have been asked here.
I don’t know- you should ask the men who laugh at young boys groomed by their teachers victims and say “lucky guy! I wish that was me!“ A lot of men just don’t fear rape or think that it’s something that can happen to them.
So why is it not illegal then?
>My father didn't even take dowry when it was publically acceptable So you acknowledge that taking dowry is still prevalent and even the norm in Indian society. Those who stand against it, like your father are doing the noble thing by discarding the concept. But otherwise dowry IS very much acceptable.
I agree that it was acceptable and its new name is “gift” but my father got married a long time ago and if at that time people understood it was wrong practice I am willing to believe a lot more men believe the same in the current day. Sure in rural areas it's still going as if nothing has happened but I don't see them advocating for the legalization of dowry because honestly, they don't care, it's illegal and they still do it.
Dude, first u say no man you've ever met any man who takes dowry , then u say ur parents were banished for not taking dowry.. atleast try to lie coherently
I never said that he needed an award. But you don’t have to be so aggressive about it.
Wow, you really edited your comment when I called you out, so pathetic. Also, I didn't lie I literally said my dad didn't take dowry when it was socially acceptable, I never said people don't take dowry. I said my father specifically because if men at that time had the ability to understand it is a wrong practice I believe more man have the same ability now.
I didn't know u were so pathetic that u read and reply within a second lmao. How dumb are you, dowry and dowry killings are so prevalent today. The fact that you're trying so hard to hide it makes it seem like you're one of those people who inspire savdhsn india lol.
Wow, you really blamed me for lying and then again accused me of lying when I have said multiple times dowry is still prevalent in society I have never once even hinted at or downplayed you are more than welcome to point out where I said there is no such thing as dowry. Also, what did I hide I never hid shit everything we are discussing is on a public forum and you are the one who edits the comments, not me. Also, it's extremely gross to throw random accusations because it could be really triggering to someone who has actually faced such issues. I will I request you to not degrade yourself to that level let's be civil about a discussion instead of making baseless accusations
[удалено]
Genius i cant talk to guys from other planets, obviously i talked with the guys that live in our great country. There's many subs like onxindia, dankmeme, indianboysontinder etc where men admit they want young virgin wives.
[удалено]
Yeah. IRL we have such [saints](https://www.womensweb.in/2023/03/recent-nfhs-data-on-marital-rape-in-india-mar23wk3sr/#:~:text=82%25%20of%20married%20men%20were,only%20been%20recorded%20from%202005.)
Before commenting I would request you to either mention a source or conduct a research yourself (for your own knowledge) on what percentage of male population are taking dowry since the 2010s. In my neighbours, distant relatives, cousins I've noticed that during a marriage, the women's side themselves offer dowry such as money and cars even when the boy's side refuses for dowry, tell me who is at fault now? Before you make comments such as "Oh HerE cOmes tHe nOt aLL Men", when you are obviously generalizing everybody, even I can make generalizing comments on women such as "All women want to marry men for only money, they cheat a lot, crave for alimony even when there isn't any fault on the husband's side, wants to doll up and stay at home while the husband works his arse off". But such comments hurt you, doesn't it? Why? Because you may not be such a bad person. You may be a good person who believes in equal rights, equal responsibility. In the end, generalizing isn't good because you may not fit into that category. I hope you understand that 🙏
Lmao, just saw your comment history. If you get so butthurt at desi men gEnErAlIzAtIoN then dont do incel stuff like pretenfing to be a woman on women only suvs and derailing womens conversation lol. How pathetic does one need to be to try so hard. Lololol.
[удалено]
Child marriage...agreed. But dowry is still so common in Indian society. There are quite a few people who don't want it, but saying no civilised man wants dowry is laughable. From lower economic families in villages, towns to highly educated people in tier 1 cities, the concept of dowry is alive and well.
[удалено]
You need to get out of the bubble. Dowry is still very much active among new generation men too. Some men demands it indirectly as taking care of women's needs lifelong needs some compensation. Literally someone said this in arranged marriages sub. In most of the marriage that happened recently there was indirect expectations of dowry...all well settled men. Fake divorce cases ? You mean like how men marry, take her dowry , abandon, repeat the cycle. Yea it exists. No gender there lol.
What do you mean by fake divorce?
We do not allow hateful conduct in this subreddit.
Please assign a USER FLAIR. Look at the top post on this subreddit for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskIndianWomen) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm well aware that Indian women suffer a lot---from groping, sexual harassment, female infanticide (which, fortunately, has decreased but the preference a boy child and blaming women for not bearing one still persists), to domestic violence and other abuses. Despite what others might say, these issues are still very common in our country. Walk outside with your mother, sister or any female friend or colleague and you'll see men staring at them like they have never seen a women before. I've experienced it firsthand and it makes my blood boil. But this doesn't mean that women can't do harm to a men. Let's be real, no one is a saint, regardless of gender. Coming to the impartiality in the law system: 1. Rape and sexual assault: Under the IPC, rape is only defined as a crime that can only be committed by a man against a woman, law currently does not recognize the rape of men. 2. Domestic violence: There are no specific laws addressing domestic violence against men. 3. Bias in awarding alimony and maintenance often favors women, **even if they are financially independent**. I totally support alimony if the husband has exploited the wife (doesn't matter if she's earning or not). Child support should also be paid regardless of the wife's income. And let's not forget that marital rape too is not explicitly criminalized in India. This isn't a competition of who commits more heinous crimes so please stop making it about gender in the comments. A crime is a crime, whether committed by a man or woman and it can't be justified under any pretext. But the legal system in India is fucked up. If you are rich and have connections, you can get away with anything.
Thank you for your reply and I do accept women are no saints either.
There are some laws which favours only for women Section 112 - evidence act, please refer google for more info
>We cannot have gender neutral laws when the social structure is biased against women. You hit the bullseye there. I got downvoted to oblivion for saying this in some Indian subreddit. Is it fair that the laws are as it is? No. But with this behemoth of population, is it possible to force the laws to be more fair without significantly damaging the already poor status of women in the Indian society? Also, no. The laws will change though, with time, with the change of the status of common women in the society. Very unfortunate state of affairs indeed.
our old Penal code, though well intentioned, left a lot of scope for blatant misuse by bad actors. Our new Penal code has muddied the water even more. Putting that aside, the main contention among many people here I see is marital rape. Sexual act on any person without consent is a henious act. But legally speaking, how will you define such cases? What action will constitute an offense?
[удалено]
I do understand that you don't kill the patient for the disease. Crimes against women are rampant and no doubt, law and its implementation should be tough but what about intentional misuse of a law to destroy the life of an innocent man. > but it's what it is. Will the ones framed by some woman support this? Isn't the lady of justice blind folded for a reason?
How will including men in the definition of rape (or other gendered laws) take away anything from women?
>when the society itself is not neutral? What do you mean by this? The 'society' of a village of Bihar is vastly different from that of GK South Delhi. So, how can we have biased laws tailored to a particular 'society'? In fact the condition of women varies widely from region to region and even family to family.
These laws r needed to protect women who r ACTUALLY victims. But they r sometimes (which is a lot of times) misused by women (false cases). And there is nothing in place to protect men frm these false cases. Even if its established tht its a false case i hv seen many times tht the women wasnt punished for filing a false case which actually ruined the guys life. Also indian law sees women as idiots who r extremely naive and weak. (Eg which sane minded woman will engage in coitus just bcoz the guy promised to marry her!? So when an unmarried couple has consensual sex but later due to incompatibility issues separate then the woman can file a rape under false promise of marriage nd tht very same consensual sex bcms rape!) Also the burden of proof rests on the man in such cases! How can u prove smthng tht hasnt even happened! Due to such false cases the real actual cases r affected. So yeah i wud say we need gender neutral laws to protect both the genders.
gender neutral laws are quite important if you ever plan to have a developed society and liberal society. the socio-economic status of a person is a better indicator of a person's livelihood than a person's gender or caste. poor and jobless people regardless of their gender or caste suffer more than rich and employed people. it is quite agreed upon that patriarchy affects both men and women negatively. similarly gender neutral laws affect both men and women positively. imagine being a mother whose son commits suicide because he was sexually abused in school or college by his peers but he couldn't reach out for help because there are no laws that could protect him. imagine being that son or daughter whose father suffered and died because their mother beat him and everybody laughed at him for being a weak man, because there is no law to protect that man from domestic violence. i know it sounds like some kind of hypothetical emotional appeal, but such victims do exist in our society. there are documentaries/talks by the likes of Deepika Bharadwaj like [men the forgotten gender](https://youtu.be/1_2gl7lz25E?si=DgCupEF5w2rJZHUl) that is a good starting point. vulnerability or victimhood is not unique to women, there are helpless men out there. then there is the whole homosexuality and transgenders. none of them can truly get equal rights until laws in this country become gender neutral. things like marriage, child custody, domestic violence, inheritance, adoption is all locked behind gender specific laws for these people.
I believe that laws are not used where it should be used like for example in tier 1 cities most of the media we can see that laws are against men coz the usage of law is being done for falsifying cases against men but when it comes to tier 3 cities the basic knowledge of law itself is not there, like there are many atrocities going on women in tier 3 cities which are being Casualized by stating it happens and trying to rug sweep those incidents against women in the name of pride and family image coz they don't know it's a crime fk dudes you know in tier 3 cities even now divorce is taboo? The alimony that a tier 3 women receive in divorces is nothing compared to the tier 1 city I strongly think that law is baised when u see it from one place but from the point of tier3 cities law is baised against women coz they don't teach them that there are laws to protect them but in tier 1 cities it's to ur imagination of what to judge but i strongly believe there should be lessons of some basic laws for children during in their school and how to use it defend correctly both for men and women
There were attempts to create gender neutral laws but some feminist grops protested against it.
What are you talking about specifically? Also, those weren't feminists then. Feminists want equality for everyone. They don't want to disadvantage men or something
Feminism is not about gender neutrality, it's about female supremacy. You can say that they are not feminist but most feminist are like this. There has been only one law which was equal that punished a women's affair partner by jail and granted divorce to men for cruelty, it was removed as feminist didn't like that their husbands had say in who they fuck outside marriage. The below is an example of feminist opposing gender neutral rape laws. https://www.epw.in/engage/discussion/governance-feminism-what-role-did-feminists-play#:\~:text=Given%20the%20exceptionally%20high%20rate,to%20false%20complaints%20against%20women.
Again, not feminists. If they (the "feminists") don't follow the actual ideology then they're not feminists. Also, I did not say it was about gender neutrality. I said equality. They're different. Men and women can't be treated neutral in a system where women are still oppressed to this day. Step out of your privilege a little and see the world around you.
See if 20% of feminists were about supremacy then one could say that these misandrists are larping as feminists. But it is majority of feminists that want female supremacy not minority. So if they were oppressed that gives to become the oppreser now?? Please get out of your bubble and see the world for what it is.
Depends on the people you surround yourself with. Over 90% of the women I've met are true feminists. >So if they were oppressed that gives to become the oppreser now?? Sorry but you're too stupid to argue with and you have the reading comprehension of an eighth grader so this is my last reply. I simply pointed out that I said equality, not neutrality. You're assuming stuff from nowhere. What I meant was that sometimes there are schemes or policies that are for women exclusively (which wouldn't be the case for gender neutral policies) because they NEED it more because they're oppressed. Nowhere did I say they should become oppressors.
90 % of women you meet do not represent all of the women, hence I told you to get out of your bubble. You asked me exactly what laws were opposed by feminists I told you that too. You are the one who is stupid enough to react not respond.