Feminists Unhappy with NaMo's Master Stroke

As the clock struck 8:30 PM on 8th November 2016, the whole country was stunned when Prime Minister Narendra Modi's speech was aired on various channels. The speech was on discontinuation of 500 and 1000 Rs notes from midnight. People were shocked beyond imagination with this sudden unexpected step.
Most people were supporting the PM wholeheartedly as this giant step ensured that the following evils are tackled from immediate effect:

1. Black Money.
2. Corruption.
3. Fake Currency.
4. Terrorism.

These evils have been eating away our nation from last few years. People were fed up of these and were desperate for measures to tackle the same. This decision was like rains after a long stint of hot summer weather for them. But there were quite a few silent offenders who were gravely affected by this step, people practicing corruption and stashing huge amount of unaccounted money, people who evaded taxes, people trying to use counterfeit notes and terrorists.
Apart from these, there is another name group which stands out here. The FEMINISTS. Not only they are habitual offenders stashing black money with them, but also they evade taxes, support terrorism and are outright Anti-Nationals.
It can well be said that Feminism is more dangerous than the other evils mentioned above. It not only involves the other mentioned evils within itself, but creates a support for itself among people using victim-hood and gaining sympathy. It then spreads like a virus and creates ruckus in the society. Though they project their main aim as protecting women's rights, but they are actually least bothered about anyone's rights and have certain hidden agendas. Women's rights just forms their desperately needed veil.
In the background, they just seek money from any left-liberal organisations and NGOs and promote their agenda.

Some of the agendas driven by feminists in India are:

1. Creating a gender bias by focusing on one sided laws and thus creating a Civil war like          scenario. This is to weaken the social fabric of the nation and thus weaken the nation itself.

2. Supporting Maoism, Terrorism in the name of freedom. Spread Anti National ideology among people. Some examples listed below, where they openly supported JNU, Condemned the hanging of terrorist Afzal Guru and supported separation of Kashmir from India.

Why JNU is a feminist issue? (Feminists link to JNU issue).

3. Tarnish the image of the nation in the global arena.

4. Spreading Left ideology throughout the nation. Feminism is and always has been the part of the left ideology.

5. Missionary Work.

6. Selectively hinder growth in the name of Environment or Social Activism. The main reason why Indian Govt decided to keep watch on such NGOs.

Most the money received by them for these purposes are foreign funded and most of their NGOs are regular offenders of the FCRA rules. These funds are stashed in and are used to promote their unscrupulous agenda.
Recently, the Government had initiated a crackdown on Foreign NGOs supporting feminism and funded by them in India. The main reason stated was that they worked against the country's economic progress and public interests. The second reason being that multiple accounts were being opened to use foreign donations without informing the authorities.

Examples of certain NGOs under scanner of Modi Govt:

1. Greenpeace and Ford Foundation: Read More.
2. Lawyers Collective by Indra Jaisingh : Read More.

( Also read the tracking of the feminist funding by the MaleFactor here. )

Now, coming back to this bold and huge step taken by the Modi Government has left the Feminists fuming. Their sources of huge amount of black money has been stalled. Also, as this step affects terrorism by curbing their funding, it can be called an indirect attack again on feminism. Now, they might all be at a loss on how to convert all their black money into white.

And to add to all this, we have a wonderful result in the 2016 US elections where Donald J. Trump has comprehensively beaten big time feminist candidate Hillary Clinton 276-218. This has infuriated feminists all over to a huge extent and left them Red Faced as this had been categorically marked as a huge defeat for feminist ideologies in USA.

Why is Section 125: Maintenance immoral and unconstitutional

Section 125 states: Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents – If any person having sufficient means, neglects or refuses to maintain: -
a. Wife, unable to maintain herself
b. Children who are minor, unable to maintain itself
c. Children (not married daughter), who is major but due to mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself
d. Father/Mother unable to maintain themselves

The definition of wife here who is liable to get maintenance has also been defined as the one who has been divorced by or has obtained divorce from her husband and has not remarried. But, still courts give maintenance to wives even when divorce is not settled.

Some analysis on why maintenance is immoral:

1. Women mostly never marry down. Dowry made illegal, but looking for “well settled” groom is rampant. This needs to be made illegal too. The status a girl gets post marriage is a “Borrowed Status” not “Earned status” and thus lawfully should not be able to claim the same status post breakup (in maintenance). It’s the man who does a favour to the wife by lending her his status and thus definitely not liable to provide her the same status as she enjoys during marriage after separation.

2. In most maintenance cases, the judge invariably pens down this statement: “It is the moral obligation of the husband to maintain his wife”. It never says “It is the moral obligation of the earning spouse to support the destitute spouse”. Our question should be, men and women are born as human. Then, “What is the source of this statement?”. The answer which we might get is either: “Age Old tradition” or “Religious Texts”.  Whatever source is mentioned, we need to analyse those and find responsibilities for women/wives. Right now there is no responsibilities for women defined by law, whereas responsibility of men has been defined by law such as section 125 which clearly shows who is the oppressed gender. Also, as per DV laws, whether wife is asked to work and share finances or work as home maker, both becomes domestic violence and thus no one can enforce a responsibility on women.

3. The point to ponder here is: Why is no moral obligation of wife defined by law? Why should responsibilities in marriage be one sided? Why are we making a wife a liability by only giving her rights and no responsibilities?

Mainly there should be laws similar to Section 125 where:
    a. A law should be made such that husband can put case against a wife, if she is not performing her designated responsibilities in the marital home.
    b. In case of divorce/separation, husband can demand wife to continue her responsibilities till husband re marries.

4. In case, it is not possible to ensure that women’s responsibility in marital home be defined, then there should be scrapping off duties of men as well by removing the scope of maintenance and other things such as HMA24, alimony under other religions and maintenance under DV Act. One sided responsibilities being defined under law is immoral and unconstitutional.

5. Now days’ women have been given many rights such as she can be head of a HUF, she will get equal share in father’s property, etc. Thus, husband should not be made liable for maintenance until her responsibilities are defined and enforced by law. A husband provides a lot for his wife till she stays with him maintaining a smooth married life whether she fulfils any duty in the marital home or not. This is highly immoral. 

6. Even there is no enforcement of duties to women by law, there are jobs being reserved for them. This is highly derogatory for the society. This is because that means it’s still a man’s duty to work and support lot of people. Now by reserving jobs for women who are not liable to support anyone, tremendous pressure is being put on men who are missing out because of such reservations. This will lead many of them towards crime/suicide and might also cause huge brain drains. Both are highly detrimental to nation and society. Reservations should not be allowed till duties are enforced to women by law.

7. By allowing only rights and rewards to women in form of money, more harm is being done to them than good. This makes them a liability in society as no one can enforce responsibilities on them as law makers are still hesitating to frame laws to put responsibilities on then. Parents cannot claim maintenance from them in old age, Husband cannot enforce her to fulfil her duties in matrimonial home, children can’t claim maintenance, if she becomes head in HUF other relatives cannot press her to take care of their needs in case she ignores. By framing laws to enforce responsibilities on them, we can ensure that women do not become a liability in society. This also explains the inclination towards male child (that too is a myth as reports have shown male infanticide outnumbering female infanticide: Please read here ), because the major reason of wanting a boy child is having someone for support in all spheres. Once, they are educated, they are expected to take care of a lot of people around like parents, wife, kids, young brothers and sisters, grandparents, etc. And they cannot ignore these as they are duty bound by law to do the same. Similarly, responsibilities shouldn’t be an option for women, it should be enforced by law. If not possible, we demand that men also be relieved from any duty by law i.e. scrap section 125, HMA24, DV Act, etc.

8. #RightToPray did away with age old customs to allow women to pray. Then, why can’t we do away with the age old custom of only husband having duty towards wife? Let’s either have duties for women defined or do away with duties of men as well. In this age of equality, we cannot have just one gender bearing the brunt of all duties whereas the other just enjoying all rights.

India : A country of rapes?? The truth behind...

India has been named as the country of rapes in international arena. Whenever one asks a foreigner about India, he/she will mention many good things about the country but in the end will give you a uncomfortable look and tell you politely trying not to hurt you... "India is a country known for lot of rapes!! Women are very unsafe here and we have heard that everywhere in roads, women are teased and molested."

Many of my country men might agree to this very easily looking at the way feminists are hell bent on tarnishing the image of the country by projecting selected stories in the media regularly and the way in which media is obliging. In fact, the incident of rape is much much less in India than many other even "Advanced" countries.

(Fig showing no of rapes per 1,00,000)

(~Source: http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-rate).

The most weird argument put forth by feminist is that the 90% of cases go unreported which is an absolutely insensible figure. I do not deny that there might be a few unreported cases, but saying that 90% cases goes unreported is contradictory within itself. When you say, cases are unreported, then there can not be any count which will provide the figure of 90%.

These are all gimmicks to ensure that India always is on the rape map of the world and so that feminist agendas can be implemented. The institution of marriage is already in jeopardy in the country due to such feminist agenda.

In fact, most of the reported cases of rape also turn out to be fabricated stories where many unscrupulous women misuse the law for vengeance, blackmailing and extortion. In many cases, this law is also used to put the blame on a guy to save oneself. Consensual sex is termed as rape by women when get caught.

Even molestation cases are being heavily misused. They are being mostly used again for vengeance and to satisfy one's ego. The law gives women a power to teach a lesson to guys who do not agree to their terms.

Below you can view a video which gives a fair idea on the reality of rape cases in India.

Note: By writing this article, I do not support rapes in anyway. I condemn rape whether the victim is a male or a female. But for one, the society fails to recognize the pain of men and for second, because of false cases in huge numbers not only many guys' lives are spoiled beyond repair, but women who are genuinely facing this heinous crime risk not being taken seriously. Thus, it is imperative that government and courts take steps to ensure this grave misuse of the laws come down.

MRA Rakshak