Students of share their thought on which gender is more privileged in India –
Students of share their thought on which gender is more privileged in India –
If you are a differently abled male living in India chances are you will still not get all benefits given to differently abled persons in The Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995.
What it means is that now government may give women with less disability more job opportunities than men with more disabilities. As this is only at a policy stage today and the exact degree of benefits can’t be quantifies at this stage but this kind of policy will bring gender discrimination in an otherwise gender neutral Act.
This above point coupled with specific mention that all provisions to be women friendly –
makes it pertinent to think the WCD ministry is heading towards a policy of creating gender discrimination even for differently abled people making a living difficult for them.
The above will encourage and ensure that women own more land and property. This will even increase pressure on state exchequer and the burden is likely to passed on to the property owned by the males.
The above policy as mentioned in the National Women’s Policy will not only create undue disadvantage for the farmers’ collectives managed and owned by males but will make them non-competitive by selectively making them at a position of disadvantage.
When women will be given benefits like flexi work and affordable housing males in similar position even under the regime of equal pay for equal work will be deprived of the same resulting in them getting less net pay for same job. Same roles for males will be made difficult and more challenging as they need to go through the complete grind of the role and for making women’s life easier in same roles.
The dangerous proposition in this Policy is ensuring more women participation in important services like Civil Services, Judiciary and in CXO levels in corporate houses though quota and financial help. So now we can expect companies with more women CXOs to get more financial help from govt and thus making them discriminate against males in all promotions.Even if there is no competent woman for the position the provision of quota will ensure incompetent women are taken for these coveted roles.
The above policy changes soon to be made will not only create huge discrimination against males at all levels but will ensure that these men are selectively thrown out of the mainstream society by a structured approach driven by Ministry of Women and Child Development. Surely this has nothing to do with development and will create unnecessary gender hatred and huge imbalance in the society.
For 28 year old Aditya Tiwari, a Pune based IT Professional it was not easy to adopt Binny from a Bhopal orphanage. From his own family members to the orphanages he had to struggle getting approval for the same. Some orphanage officials have gone ahead to discourage him saying no girl would ever marry him if he did so. This is because, not only Aditya was unmarried but Binny was a special child with down syndrome and a hole in his heart along with other ailments.
But no such discouragement from the society or from his own family members could deter this 28 year old single man to adopt Binny. As he said in his interview to media that he felt amazing attachment and connection to the child the first time he met him in an orphanage. Even Binny used to recognize him every time he visited the orphanage.
His story and dedication for the child and for a great and noble cause to adopt a child and give him a family, love, care and protection. In this process of being the first youngest single father to adopt the child he had to write ~ 100 letters and approximately eight months to overcome all obstacles.
This interview of Aditya tells us the struggle he had to go through to get the child in his family. Originally when WCD ministry was working on creating this legislation (Juvenile Justice Bill) they had kept in mind only girl children. The interview below tells us how the ministry kept its focus to girl children so much that increased the adoption of girl children but not boys.
When the new adoption laws were enforced in August 2015, everyone has hoped that thousands of children will get their new homes and love of parents –
Aditya’s fight was for a boy child and was for a child with special needs. We get shocked to see the kind of hurdles he had to go through especially when the new guidelines assure easier adoption norms.
From minister’s own statistics we come to know that more girls are being adopted but what about our boys? WCD ministry is also responsible for our boys’ and when we see that despite intervention of her ministry and CARA authorities, Aditya had to undergo so much pain in adopting the child we understand the fate of our boys in orphanages.
We hope the WCD ministry and CARA authorities will look into the welfare of our boys and will encourage noble and kind hearted parents like Aditya Tiwari to come forward and give family to those unfortunate children.
Aditya Tiwari’s act has not only a new history created because as an unmarried man he adopted a special child, but also because he had gone against the Govt. created hype of saving only girl children (‘Beti Bachao’). He has also shown us that the so called patriarchal male dominated Indian society do abandon their boys and we need our Child Welfare Ministry to work for them as well.
Also published in Legally India
It is unfortunate to see that Indian courts have started interfering in Hinduism traditions. It is surprising to note that being atheist institutions themselves, our courts including The Supreme Court of India are ruling over Hindu religious matter which is not supported by Indian constitution. Restricting anybody’s entry in any temple or places of worship depends upon the customs set by the religion; not by the courts. Even our constitution does not permit our courts to interfere into such religious institutions.
Both cases of Shani Shingnapur temple and the Sabarimala temple are showed as violence of equal rights guaranteed by the constitution which is not so.
Let’s look at the Article 14 and 15 of the Indian constitution that guarantees equal rights and no discrimination respectively to understand this better –
Article 14 (Right to Equality; Equality before Law) of the constitution says –
The state shall not deny to any person equality before law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.
So what this Article states is that the state shall ensure equality to everyone within the territory of India. But this is to be implemented when the state itself is running an institution like temple or a trust with state funds. In case of a temple that is run by independent trusts that are in turn driven by religious customs and sentiments how can any court or state have jurisdiction to set any rule? More so, when they are not experts of religious customs or norms. They are merely legal experts. Courts can at the most advise the trust to consider implementing better norms but it is left upto the trust to implement them based on Hindu tradition.
It is important to note here that any institution operating in Indian Territory irrespective of its nature of operation comes under Indian constitution and legal framework. So the question is when certain religious customs and beliefs are against the constitution which one to be followed?
In this context it is pertinent to observe that religion itself is based on pure faith and myths. It is not based on Maths or Science. Hinduism is most ancient one and the customs may not match modern outlook. So does any state or court has the power to change them?
We will understand it in due time. Let’s check what our constitution says about equal rights and discrimination –
Article 15 (Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth)
This Article too do not give any state or court the power to set rules for any religion. Let’s read from this Article –
(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to—
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or
(b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.
you look at the Article closely 15. (2) (b) states that the provisions for general public that “are maintained wholly or partly out of state funds or dedicated to the use of general public”.
If we assume that a Hindu temple is considered as a public resort dedicated to public use, as stated in Article 15, state has no business of interfering in their affairs unless these public facilities are maintained by the state funds (either partly or wholly).
There is one more angle to this issue. One needs to observe some rituals before going to the sanctum of these temples. Sabarimala visitors need to observer penance for a certain duration, Shani Shingnapur visitors need to cleanse them and follow the dictates of the priests there to enter the sanctum. Common men without following these traditions can’t enter the sanctum. Question is will any state or any court see this as discrimination in future? If yes, then what is the need of Hinduism or any religious beliefs when our courts start dictating terms for religion when they themselves are not experts?
Many believe that Article 25 (Right to Freedom of Religion) section 2 is what was followed while delivering these orders. Let’s looks at this article to understand it better –
(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law—
(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;
(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.
Please mark the bold part in section 25 (1) above. It states any person (irrespective of gender) is free to practice religion. Point here is they are free to practice religion and not change it. So if the religion tells them to follow certain restrictions, they need to follow them in order to practice the same.
Article 25 (2) above states that govt. does have powers to throw open all Hindu (that includes Jain, Sikh and Buddhist as well) places of public character (may include temples if perceived so) to “All classes and sections” of Hindus.
Please note that it does not specify “gender” per se. So any state or court trying to throw open such places for any gender does not have sanction in constitution, too.
To understand whether either “Class” or “Section” in the above clause include “gender” we need to refer to the constitution for the definition of these terms.
If we look into the constitution all references to “Class” of people have always been towards backward (educationally, socially or financially). It never referred to gender in any of the other references provided for in our Constitution. So it is highly unlikely that in section 25 (2) it referred to “gender”.
“Sections” is referred to in India constitution in terms of Minority classes or linguistic or regional sections. It may include both genders if the definition is extended. But if we look into the constitution closely we can see that in all other places where the constitution makers wanted special mention of gender they did that. So it is unlikely that for section 25 (2) they will use ‘Section” in lieu of “Gender”. Rather it merely referred to as backward classes of Hindus.
Also in Section 15(3) of constitution we can find that both “Class and Section” and “Gender” are mentioned separately. So constitution makers did not use these terms interchangeably.
When our legislature or constitution makers did not use these terms interchangeably, there is no way any court could interpret our constitution differently and rule that Hindu temples barring women from certain sanctum is violating our constitution. Rather court dictats directing Hindu temples to amend Hindu rituals is against constitution that upholds the right to every citizen to follow any religion. But the constitution never gave the state or the courts approval to change religious beliefs or customs.
State or courts have never been the authority to decide our religious customs. That is why in 2015, Supreme Court had to rule that it could not interfere into animal sacrifice tradition in religious places and these needed to be discussed with those religious leaders. A division bench of Justice H L Dattu and Justice Amitava Roy ruled in 2015 that “Court could not interfere in centuries old tradition and the issue needed to be discussed with community people.”
We may note here that in case of “Preventing Cruelty against Animals ACT” even the legislature did not want to intervene in religious maters. We know that judiciary can only interpret and uphold our constitution but it can’t make or change constitution. Looks like these orders are coming violating our constitution and basic principles on which our legal system is standing today.
It may sound ridiculous but the flyover collapse in Kolkata may be a part of a global conspiracy.
Apparently Nigerian prophet TB Josuha had forecast about this bridge collapse in India near a river. Kolkata, the eastern city in India is situated near the banks of river Ganga.
What is even more surprising is that he exactly told that the collapse will happen on Thursday, Wednesday and in reality it happened on Thursday, 31st March.
He seemed to have known too much about this collapse beforehand. Any sane mind will think twice before believing in such prophecy. Questions are emerging from different corners if this collapse in Kolkata was a part of a global conspiracy.
The builders of the bridge IVRCL, a Hyderabad based organization already complained of sabotage.
This conspiracy needs to be thoroughly probed by by IB for such global conspiracy and the criminals be punished.
Here’s the video of T B Josuha who during a speech said a lot of things about this collapse that matched the reality –
It is also said that T B Josuha’s own church building was demolished using infrasound technology that is used in wars for controlled demolition. Here is the theory of infrasonic weapons and how they work –
The theory of infrasound technique is also described here –
The engineers of IVRCL in their first press meet in Kolkata complained about sabotage and a possible explosion as the way the bridge collapsed. This may hint to a very controlled infrasound demolition technique.
Will we ever know the truth?
You might have seen Major Gen Gagandeep Bakshi crying on national television debate over national tricolor debate. The nation cried with him. To express solidarity with this nation’s feelings and to bring the voice of men who die for us without any second thought, we bring to you the feelings of a few men in uniform over the #JNURow.
Gen Bakshi expressed his feelings on JNUrow on Facebook like this –
This post from him was really touching and showed how we civilians have failed our men in uniform and how we have been disrespectful to the sacrifices of these men in uniform and their families –
When these men are sacrificing their lives for us, see what we are giving them –
They don’t even get pension in time. Do we really care for the men who cares for us so much that they are ready to die for us?
Think! Show your respect to these valiant men in uniform who do not have any caste, creed, religion. They are only known as Indian.
Remember these women brigade for ever – they have expressed their hate for these benevolent men, this is Indian ISIS = Indian Sickular Intellectual Sisters –
Experiences are personal and not borrowed from others – When a celebrity says he is insecure in a country and wanted to leave, that means A LOT for ordinary people. That means ordinary common men have no life in the country. That is creation of insecurity among the masses – that is creation of a sense of false emergency.
Now, if the country has shown any intolerant behaviour again the celebrities like him are responsible for that. The videos like “I am not a woman” by Rajit Kapoor or “Boys Don’t Cry” by Madhuri Dixit fuels that insecurity. The TV shows like Satya Mev Jayate based on false data is responsible for creating and propagating this false sense of insecurity, his irresponsible comment like the one he has made is responsible for that. This is because if such a statement comes from a celebrity that means a lot for ordinary people. Yes, he is also responsible for fueling this false sense of insecurity in this country through his TV show SMJ that was supposed to create social awareness, but based one sided awareness, based on fake data. So all he wanted was money and fame and he didn’t mind undermining his nation and his own fellow countrymen for that.
Every tolerance has limit. Simply because this nation is tolerant we had not punished him for showing lies in his shows, simply because we are tolerant we had just let him get away with everything he did earlier in SMJ shows.
Also if a celebrity like Aamir is really insecure, one would leave the country without talking about it. They have money, power and contacts to easily do so. Only common men like us can’t leave. No matter under what condition we live. So this statement of a celebrity like Aamir Khan creates deeper sense of insecurity among the masses. Every person has problems in one’s personal life, every one of us. Some of us can deal with that, some can’t. We have this sense of insecurity within us. What a statement like Aamir Khan does is to fuel that sentiment. It is tickling those nerves that are already insecure and to create a sense of false emergency in them. This is the seed to create instability in this country. And hence his comment is summarily condemned.
Also everyone may have their feelings or personal anxiety or insecurity but freedom of expression does not mean one can say whatever one feels like saying. There comes responsibility. It is more expected from a celebrity than a common man like me. Because celebrities move masses with them. Their one statement can make huge impact in public life. Unfortunately not all of them are educated enough to understand that but they still charge money for saying certain things or endorse brands. This is what is called hypocrisy. Get benefits from a country, then sow the seed of intolerance and future unrest. This is a new form of terrorism that Indians had protested.
Also if we ever discuss about PK and its success then it confirms that Indians are not intolerant, rather majority of them have accepted the movie against them. That shows that Indians are ready to accept criticism but it is this characteristics of Indians that has made criminals get away unpunished with movies like India’s Daughter. For those who do not know, it was scripted by Leslee Udwin who paid Mukesh to say those words from her mind. Aamir did not protest that movie? That was another movie that has created public intolerance and many celebrities and a section of Indian media had supported and promoted that movie. This self-criticizing characteristics of Indians, this tolerant nature of Indians have led to outsiders ravaging this country for many years and Aamir had only shown that characteristics of anti-Indian powers.
So what Aamir did was fueling unrest in the country. This is the seed of future violence and hence can be considered as alarming as terrorist activity. This kind of tickling with human senses unnecessarily will lead to greater unrest and that is why he is condemned.
So I am thankful to the advocate who has filed Sedition Charges under section 153 (A and B) and 124A.
So Aamir you want to leave India as your wife Kiran suggested for growing intolerance in the country. Oh great Aamir, at least your wife and you have understood that it is a good time for you to leave this country.
For those who want to cry with you, I have this –
But no Aamir, I will not discuss communal matters here. Aamir, you mentioned that we Indians are too quick to label groups as violent. Your main objection was labeling Muslims as violent group / terrorists but you did mention about other religions as well. I remember, to a similar question someone in US replied that all world’s intelligence sources say 15-25% of global Muslim population is involved in acts of terror, that is as big as the size of population of USA. She said, that is the reason all nations in the world are behaving like this.
No, I am not a Hindu extremist, nor I want to debunk the theory that such labeling is unfortunate and not warranted. I will only talk about how this intolerance is created by the celebrities like you. I have never been too keen on creating a religious debate and will only stick to exposing your hypocrisy.
Today, when you see a perceived threat to your religion you come forward in debunking BJP activities (I am not a BJP supporter by the way). You said you speak for everyone. Good, but do you practice that in real life. NO.
Let me remind you of your episodes of Satyamev Jayate. I am specifically speaking of Domestic Violence and Female foeticide episodes. You have collected data from men’s rights groups but have not shown them. Rather you have shown only one sided feminist data that was biased and half-truth to portray Indian society in bad light. Let me remind you that such shows by celebrities like you create huge opinion among the masses that this blog will never create. So if you have projected Indian men as violent abusers or you have projected them as rapists then that was the seed of violence you have sowed. It was like creating anger in the mind of people against their neighbours, their own family members. I am not trying to justify any violence here, all I am saying creating one sided awareness against one segment of population has created this intolerance that you see today. That time you did not remember to speak for everyone, or was it only propaganda stunt?
Let me also remind you of the female foeticide episode that claimed to have nailed the issue in Indian patriarchy. You have shown how Indian families are killing their baby girls only to be exposed later. Well, let me remind you that your female foeticde show was exposed as false when the show directors claimed in INK Coneference, 2014 that they personally met 62000 mothers for that one episode. In this article of mine I have shown how impossible claim that was. But your crew got standing ovation from everyone (except me) present in the conference. I have caught your fraud at the venue.
I will not disagree that even I have liked some of the messages that you have given in SMJ shows. Like how to educate our children in terms of sexual matters or tell them how to safeguard them from sexual abuse etc. I have loved your films like 3 Idiot, Taare Zameen Par and many other films. I agree that you are the one who has created different kind of awareness that many of us were lacking but I am just fed up with the hypocrisy you have created too.
If you are really fed up with intolerant crowd, why didn’t you protest against criminal Leslee Udwin’s India’s Daughter. She had flouted all set norms, cheated many Indians, paid Mukesh to say her words and showed her criminal mind in her scripted movie and projected that as India’s rape culture. Where was your love for your country then? That was the movie that created deep rooted hatred against India based on Mukesh’s supposed comments, but now after she is exposed it will not create a similar outrage against UK or Leslee for that matter. How come you didn’t catch how the intolerance was created. In fact, many celebrities have joined hands condemning India’s rape culture that we know does not exist. Were you silent because it was Hindus who were shamed and not Muslims.
Let me clarify one more thing here, I have again vehemently protested against Dimapur Lynching of recent past which was also expression of public intolerance and incidentally he was a Muslim guy. But you have never commented on that innocent’s death, why? Were you afraid of getting attacked by your own feminist friends? Remember, justice denied to someone leads to injustice to everyone. And your choicest actions against this public intolerance is what scares me.
If you talk about intolerance then it is the celebrities who create this. Yes, I will refer to the video named “I am not a woman” featuring Rajit Kapoor. That video suggested chopping off a man’s genitals even in a domestic case. It was very subtle way of inciting violence in every home and justifying the same. These are the videos that has created this public intolerance you see today. It is the celebrities like Madhuri Dixit creating videos like “Boys Don’t Cry” that blames boys for all violence that create public intolerance. You have never commented against them. Those were also acute generalizations. Why? Because you didn’t want to hurt your feminist friends?
So in all your acts I find that you are only a trigger happy hypocrite. You mean business everywhere. Even when you spoke about raising funds for charity in your SMJ show, you have continued to charge them heavily for spreading lies your way. Believe me, even I have believed you initially but can’t afford to make any more mistakes. You are exposed to us. We know you do these for your personal agenda. Who knows, this time you are not supporting the intelligentsia because you see crowd there, who knows that you are not paid by someone to say those words. I am not bothered though, because many people (including your fans) have stopped believing you. May be that is another reason you should leave this country. Yes, I am not joking, please leave.
Addition on #AppWapsi and #NoToSnapDeal
Let me confess Aamir, that I had not thought of this earlier. Now that Indians have started saying no to brands you endorse, I am also joining them unless you really leave India. I request all those who read this to also boycott Snapdeal.
The world started measuring in terms of happiness indicators of individuals and nations. The happiness factors of an individual like me is a subset of that of a nation.
To understand it better let’s take a quick look at the happiness index factors for a nation –
Health (self reported health status, healthy days, long term disability, mental health)
Education (literacy, educational qualification, knowledge, values)
Culture (language, artisan skills, socio-cultural participation)
Time use (working hours, sleeping hours)
Good governance (political participation, political freedom, service delivery, government performance)
Community vitality (social support, community relationships, family, victim of crime)
Ecological diversity and resilience
Living standards (household income, assets, housing quality)
India has slipped from a global rank of 111 in 2013 to 117 in 2015 behind Pakistan and Bangladesh. This ranking is based on a study done in 158 countries globally.
Today there is serious need for individuals like me to think why we are becoming increasingly more unhappy in our lives than ever before while we continue to progress in economic areas.
If we look at Maslow’s Hierarchy theory we will notice that security, social well being, etc are considered as primary needs of any individual and none of us are different in those aspects. Maslow kept self-actualization needs at the highest end. But the question is, to be happy can we reach the highest state without caring about other lower states. May be some accomplished saadhus can do that but not common people like us. So in this aspect our social life and social support system becomes increasingly important for us as individuals to be happy. A nation of happy individuals will create a happy and prosperous nation.
Our society consists of our friends and well wishers who act as our support system and help us overcome all odds in life. In this context the gender of the friend ideally should not matter but in reality it is found that the gender of our friends matter a lot in our support system. With changing social dynamics and with influence of feminism the gender roles have evolved to a great extent and the acceptance of the other gender is reducing.
Let me illustrate this with a simple example. If you have a group of friends from both genders then in a group meeting, casually raise the point of punishing women for false cases like dowry, domestic violence or rape. Or ask your female friends to demand death penalty for the woman in the above video. Don’t be surprised if women vehemently protest the idea. Whereas in any reported rape case if you demand death penalty of the accused even before the trial is complete or may simply be on accusation you will be supported by all. In this exercise you may find how your own friends become your foes simply on gender difference.
I used to believe that we need friends from both genders until sometime back when I had undergone divorce. I have seen the same group of friends vanishing after my cases. That included both male and female friends. However, my wife didn’t lose any of her friends and her female friends continued their friendship with her. Some of our common friends who started ignoring me continued their friendship with her and still continue the same. The case is almost same with all other men who face similar situation. This in a way confirms that men can’t expect equal friendship from their women friends as friends are better recognized during the trying times and NOT during the happy times.
So today for me happiness is in living my dream and attaining self actualization needs rather than seeking social support for all actions. I started believing that one needs to search from happiness from within and not from others or outside materialistic world in order to be happy.
But not all are equally enlightened to understand this complex notion to become happy. So we have a great task ahead of us to make our nation happy. One way of achieving the same is to save our family system and ensure that we boost our social support system so that all those social parameters are taken care of. Another way is to implement a free and fair justice system that provide speedy justice to everyone irrespective of gender.
A friend of mine once asked me why I was a Men’s Rights Activist (MRA). He also wanted to know if I have become an MRA because I harbour misogynist views because of my failed marriage and if my fellow MRAs are also a bunch of Misogynists.
After a deep introspection, I replied that I bear no hatred towards any woman including my former wife. The reason I became an MRA is because I wanted to serve the society. The Indian economy is growing rapidly. Unfortunately today Indian society and culture is at risk of being obliterated by feminists’ assault.
Just as opposing Communism doesn’t mean opposing rights of the working class, same way opposition of Feminism does not mean advocating misogyny.
Hence MRAs are vanguard not only of men’s rights but also of Indian culture.
It is also surprising that no one asks Feminists similar questions even though they openly indulge in anti-male attitude.
I informed my friend that I have become Men’s Rights Activist because I realised:-
Guest post writing rules for The Male Factor
Amartya Talukdar has done his Masters in Mechanical Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology Benaras Hindu University.
He is the founder member of HRIDAYA, a Men’s Right Organization that has spearheaded Men’s Right Movement in Bengal. He has organized many events and has counselled over 1500 victims of abuse of gender biased laws.
He is an avid blogger and has received many prizes. He has been contributing regularly to Paul Elam’s online publication -A Voice for Men. He has also written books on Men’s rights.