4 ms·

I was with you until you started talking about dowry, proving once and for all (literally, for everyone who reads your comment) that you have no clue about Indi

I was with you until you started talking about dowry, proving once and for all (literally, for everyone who reads your comment) that you have no clue about India. There is hardly any problem related to dowry. Come, have a look. 'Dowry' exists in media which consists of third grade students turned women-right activists. For mathematically minded people, I will just quote recent supreme court judgment about the reality of dowry and dowry harassment lawsuit (498(a) IPC): "The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bed-ridden grand-fathers and grand-mothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested. "Crime in India 2012 Statistics" published by National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs shows arrest of 1,97,762 persons all over India during the year 2012 for offence under Section 498-A of the IPC, 9.4% more than the year 2011. Nearly a quarter of those arrested under this provision in 2012 were women i.e. 47,951 which depicts that mothers and sisters of the husbands were liberally included in their arrest net. Its share is 6% out of the total persons arrested under the crimes committed under Indian Penal Code. It accounts for 4.5% of total crimes committed under different sections of penal code, more than any other crimes excepting theft and hurt. The rate of charge-sheeting in cases under Section 498A, IPC is as high as 93.6%, while the conviction rate is only 15%, which is lowest across all heads. As many as 3,72,706 cases are pending trial of which on current estimate, nearly 3,17,000 are likely to result in acquittal." I suppose 85% acquittal rate is just collateral damage, except that dowry was exactly how women used to get their parental property rights in India! But that is too Indian for Indians educated in western schools. So instead of codifying dowry as mandatory to protect women's rights from being infringed by her family, feminists would rather use misandry and enable women to vent their frustration on her husband. So we got ridiculous laws like dowry harassment lawsuit (1983) and dowry prohibition lawsuit, and then they realized that husbands demanding dowry is actually a rarity and reality is not at all as media would like to have use believe. So finally they passed equal property rights for women in 2005. Bit by bit, you know. There is a reason why villages in India give an impression of being lawless.

general_failure 12y ago
Step outside your well. The issues you talk about are very much there in every arranged marriage (which is almost 100% of all marriages in India), they just exist differently.
- cubancigar11 12y ago
  I am not sure what issues you are talking about. I was talking about how external type of education (western in this case), in general, and specially when conducted over generations, completely changes our moral compass and understanding, by using specific example of dowry.
infinity0 12y ago
Do you have any clue about India? You just pasted a long paragraph from one source and gave no explanation of how it backs up your point. What even is your point? You seem to think that dowry harassment lawsuits are all there is to dowry.
- cubancigar11 12y ago
  I don't get it. If you think supreme court judgement is 'one source' then you cannot be argued with. And complaining about 'long paragraph'... hmm... I think you are just angry and without argument. Regarding second paragraph, the citation is not handy right now, but this is what Indian feminists actually write. You know, the ones actually involved in drafting government policies. There was a similar article by NCW I read around 3 months ago. You can also talk to the head of http://samajsevasamithy.org/ http://samajsevasamithy.org/ regarding it (I volunteer there).
  - infinity0 12y ago
    No, you cannot make an empty argument and then say I have no argument. Quoting the supreme court randomly, does not argue anything. You fail to explain why the supreme court's quote is relevant to anything you said, or anything I said for that matter. You will need to back up your assertions about "Indian feminists" with actual real data; otherwise it is just an inappropriate generalisation.
    - cubancigar11 12y ago
      The supreme court judgement is not random, it is a judgement from SUPREME COURT which proves that even the most respected institution of India knows that there is hardly any problem of dowry. If, instead, I would have just said that, then you would have given me citations from news articles showing 'how bad the problem in dowry is', and then I would have pasted this same judgement to show you the "real data". I posted it to cut short that argument. There is obviously a difference between our perception of self-infallibility and my attempt to cut short that argument has failed. So why don't you show me some "real data" to prove that dowry is a major problem in India against which there is an 'ongoing campaign', because I have shown you already that there is a 'ongoing campaign' in India to match reality with fictional bullshit (that most probably you learned about India when you were a kid) by curbing down the abuse of the exactly same rhetorical argument you presented in your original post. Seriously man, Dowry Prohibition Act was passed in 1969. You are 50 years late to the party. Now we are passing laws to water it down. Regarding the second paragraph, that whole argument comes from Madhu Kishwar but because I don't have the exact url I will leave it at that. As per the effects of feminist media upon Indian villages (where, as Gandhi said, real India lives), I would ask you to go through these: 1. http://fathersforlife.org/pizzey/DV_is_not_a_gender_issue.htm http://fathersforlife.org/pizzey/DV_is_not_a_gender_issue.ht... 2. http://www.odsg.org/Said_Edward%281977%29_Orientalism.pdf http://www.odsg.org/Said_Edward%281977%29_Orientalism.pdf 3. http://www.rediff.com/news/special/ls-election-madhu-kishwar-modi-when-a-feminist-turns-right/20140402.htm http://www.rediff.com/news/special/ls-election-madhu-kishwar...

general_failure 12y ago

Step outside your well. The issues you talk about are very much there in every arranged marriage (which is almost 100% of all marriages in India), they just exist differently.

cubancigar11 12y ago
I am not sure what issues you are talking about. I was talking about how external type of education (western in this case), in general, and specially when conducted over generations, completely changes our moral compass and understanding, by using specific example of dowry.

infinity0 12y ago

Do you have any clue about India? You just pasted a long paragraph from one source and gave no explanation of how it backs up your point. What even is your point? You seem to think that dowry harassment lawsuits are all there is to dowry.

cubancigar11 12y ago
I don't get it. If you think supreme court judgement is 'one source' then you cannot be argued with. And complaining about 'long paragraph'... hmm... I think you are just angry and without argument. Regarding second paragraph, the citation is not handy right now, but this is what Indian feminists actually write. You know, the ones actually involved in drafting government policies. There was a similar article by NCW I read around 3 months ago. You can also talk to the head of http://samajsevasamithy.org/ http://samajsevasamithy.org/ regarding it (I volunteer there).
- infinity0 12y ago
  No, you cannot make an empty argument and then say I have no argument. Quoting the supreme court randomly, does not argue anything. You fail to explain why the supreme court's quote is relevant to anything you said, or anything I said for that matter. You will need to back up your assertions about "Indian feminists" with actual real data; otherwise it is just an inappropriate generalisation.
  - cubancigar11 12y ago
    The supreme court judgement is not random, it is a judgement from SUPREME COURT which proves that even the most respected institution of India knows that there is hardly any problem of dowry. If, instead, I would have just said that, then you would have given me citations from news articles showing 'how bad the problem in dowry is', and then I would have pasted this same judgement to show you the "real data". I posted it to cut short that argument. There is obviously a difference between our perception of self-infallibility and my attempt to cut short that argument has failed. So why don't you show me some "real data" to prove that dowry is a major problem in India against which there is an 'ongoing campaign', because I have shown you already that there is a 'ongoing campaign' in India to match reality with fictional bullshit (that most probably you learned about India when you were a kid) by curbing down the abuse of the exactly same rhetorical argument you presented in your original post. Seriously man, Dowry Prohibition Act was passed in 1969. You are 50 years late to the party. Now we are passing laws to water it down. Regarding the second paragraph, that whole argument comes from Madhu Kishwar but because I don't have the exact url I will leave it at that. As per the effects of feminist media upon Indian villages (where, as Gandhi said, real India lives), I would ask you to go through these: 1. http://fathersforlife.org/pizzey/DV_is_not_a_gender_issue.htm http://fathersforlife.org/pizzey/DV_is_not_a_gender_issue.ht... 2. http://www.odsg.org/Said_Edward%281977%29_Orientalism.pdf http://www.odsg.org/Said_Edward%281977%29_Orientalism.pdf 3. http://www.rediff.com/news/special/ls-election-madhu-kishwar-modi-when-a-feminist-turns-right/20140402.htm http://www.rediff.com/news/special/ls-election-madhu-kishwar...