Legalising feminazi terrorism

[Arrian]

I'd still like answers to:

1) Men have dowries? Further, men have been the victims of "dowry death?"

2) Why the hell would a man forbid his wife from accessing part of their house?

-Arrian

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Arrian

I'd still like answers to:

1) Men have dowries? Further, men have been the victims of "dowry death?"

No, and no.

But laws have to be neutral, for the sake of principles.

But they do undergo something similar - when an Indian man marries an Indian woman, and then goes to the USA so that he may build up something there in one or two years to take his wife to, and then the wife demands money in order that she not file a case, because if she does, he can't set foot in India again without being arrested.

Originally posted by Arrian

2) Why the hell would a man forbid his wife from accessing part of their house?

-Arrian

No clue. But doesn't he have a right to do that? A little personal space?

[Arrian]

No, and no.

But laws have to be neutral, for the sake of principles.

But it's pointless if men don't have dowries, which they don't.

But they do undergo something similar...

The law does seem to have been abused in some cases. And I'm sure that can be improved.

No clue. But doesn't he have a right to do that? A little personal space?

Ugh. What is the wife? A servant or something? She's not ALLOWED into parts of the house? It's like she's a dog or something (not mine - my dogs have run of the house, but nevermind that). I seriously cannot imagine a situation where forbidding one's wife to enter certain rooms in a house would be ok. Granted, I'm an American, not an Indian.

I have to think that bit was put in the law for a reason. I'm curious as to what that reason was. I'm guessing that maybe, just maybe, there were many instances of a husband who, because he owned everything (the house, all the money, etc) was able to basically treat his wife like a slave, and did so.

-Arrian

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Arrian

Ugh. What is the wife? A servant or something? She's not ALLOWED into parts of the house? It's like she's a dog or something (not mine - my dogs have run of the house, but nevermind that). I seriously cannot imagine a situation where forbidding one's wife to enter certain rooms in a house would be ok. Granted, I'm an American, not an Indian.

I don't think it's OK either, but I still respect the idea of property rights.

Originally posted by Arrian

I have to think that bit was put in the law for a reason. I'm curious as to what that reason was. I'm guessing that maybe, just maybe, there were many instances of a husband who, because he owned everything (the house, all the money, etc) was able to basically treat his wife like a slave, and did so.

-Arrian

Nah. Nobody puts that much effort into crafting laws. They usually try to push through everything they want, and leave it to the courts to strike down, or creatively re-interpret, all the rubbish. Which is difficult if the rubbish isn't rubbish enough to strike down, or too plain to re-interpret.

[Arrian]

Yep, I'm sure it was put in for no reason at all. Ok.

-Arrian

[Tattila the Hun]

Re: Legalising feminazi terrorism

Originally posted by aneeshm
Quite an interesting read:



Does anyone here support this law? If so, why?

Eh, it's an indian law, what's my support got to do with them native americans?

[Shrapnel12]

Originally posted by aneeshm


We are, actually. Our laws actually give women equality. It's taking time for society to catch up, though.

And retarded legislation like this one isn't helping much.

Alright, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, because I use the same arguement when discussing equal rights here in the U.S. I always say there is no legal discrimination in the U.S., but plenty of illegal discrimination.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by aneeshm


The bits I quoted WERE directly from the law; you can get it here.

We're talking about 2 different laws.

I linked to the Indian Penal Code, which contains § 498a, which is what I thought this thread was about.

You linked to the Domestic Violence Act, which I suspect is a civil law (because I don't see it in Chapter XX of the Penal Code [Offenses Relating to Marriage] or in Chapter XXA [of Cruelty by Husband or Relatives of Husband]).

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm


I don't think it's OK either, but I still respect the idea of property rights.

[Ramo]

You linked to the Domestic Violence Act, which I suspect is a civil law (because I don't see it in Chapter XX of the Penal Code [Offenses Relating to Marriage] or in Chapter XXA [of Cruelty by Husband or Relatives of Husband]).

Yep. The Domestic Violence Act doesn't impose criminal penalties for insults or the other things aneesh is talking about. What he's referring to is clearly a form that a victim of spousal abuse can submit to the authorities so they could look into the dispute and take appropriate action.

This thread is pathetic, misogynistic rat feces.

Not that I'm surprised...

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by aneeshm


I don't think it's OK either, but I still respect the idea of property rights.

So you're of the mind that if the husband is the primary (or only) wage earner and a couple buys a house, the house is actually his and he should be able to designate where his wife is and isn't allowed to go?

[Elok]

Originally posted by Arrian
Why the hell would a man forbid his wife from accessing part of their house?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluebeard

The wiki doesn't mention Indian origins of the tale, but one never knows...

[Hueij]

Looks to me that India totally missed the 2nd femimist wave we had in the West during the 1970's. I wish I could arrange a meeting with my then-girlfriend (and still very good friend) and Aneesh...

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Elok

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluebeard

The wiki doesn't mention Indian origins of the tale, but one never knows...

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


We're talking about 2 different laws.

I linked to the Indian Penal Code, which contains § 498a, which is what I thought this thread was about.

You linked to the Domestic Violence Act, which I suspect is a civil law (because I don't see it in Chapter XX of the Penal Code [Offenses Relating to Marriage] or in Chapter XXA [of Cruelty by Husband or Relatives of Husband]).

The DVA came into force in the month of August last year.