| Feminists’ talk of Women Empowerment is hollow |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Virag | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Friday, 18 May 2012 23:57 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The terms “Feminist” and “Women Empowerment” are well known today – thanks to the voluminous media coverage and societal attention they enjoy. For decades, the feminists have been ranting about the need of “Women Empowerment” and holding society, especially men, at ransom for the same. So a couple of questions came to my mind like,
Let us try to answer each of these questions based on the data available. Q1. Who are the feminists? The feminists are none but a bunch of loser women who have never had a happy life and thrash out their sadistic concerns onto the society, especially men, and constantly keep on asking about one or the other concessions for women. Also, the feminists are big-time liars and they do not even refrain from uttering white lies even on national media to the extent of getting exposed. For example, yesterday, there was a TV debate going on in a very popular media channel and very famous and well-known women’s rights activist aka the Feminists were shouting at the top of their lungs that the proposed “property-division clause post-divorce” will apply only on property acquired post marriage. However, the truth is, as per a modified draft of the bill, it will apply blindly on all properties in the ownership of husband. In another instance, they claimed in the media that, in 70% of the cases women are denied maintenance on grounds of adultery, which is causing grave financial hardship for women and thus, even adulterous women must be granted maintenance. However, when an application under the RTI Act was filed to know the source of the data of such horrendous and extravagant claims, the reply received was “The organization, that had earlier made the claim, had no such data”. Feminists make huge hue and cry in the media about “Dowry-Deaths”. However, as a matter of fact, as per law, “any death of a married woman within 7 years of her marriage”, is to be ‘registered’ as a dowry death. Which means, even before investigation, the death is registered as a dowry-death in the official statistics and the same are never rectified, if later, it is found that the death of the married woman was not due to dowry harassment but some other reason like accident, insect bite, snake bite, disease etc. And, when they are confronted with the data about suicides by married men they vehemently deny that any such data exists. As a matter of fact, data is available with the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), a unit of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Ironically, it’s the same department, whose report on dowry-deaths is used as a basis of unconstitutional, undemocratic and inhuman and anti-male dowry laws, that have been instrumental in getting millions of innocent people being thrown behind bars without trial or investigation and has also abetted the suicide of millions of innocent young men. And the biggest blame for this social massacre goes to feminists, because they created such a big hoax about the so-called dowry harassment and dowry deaths of women that the society has gone blind in pursuit of a section of society popularly known as husbands and their families. Q2. How genuine are their claims? Majority of the claims of feminists are either false or highly exaggerated. For example, there have been umpteen number of cases where “dowry-death victims” (women supposed to have been killed by their in-laws for dowry) have returned alive while their husbands and in-laws rot in jail, as these women roam freely, putting a false case. And feminists support such women. How can we just ignore the famous case of Nisha Sharma, who shot to fame in 2003 for allegedly calling off a marriage citing “additional demands of dowry by groom and his family, just before the marriage”? Fact of the matter was, Nisha, was already married and to hide her marriage, she falsely accused the groom and his family and ruined their life with a false criminal case. And, feminists hailed such a liar as “Icon against fight in dowry”. Well, when their icon herself is a big liar, one can just imagine the truthfulness of their own claims. Feminists have never taken up the cause of young unmarried girls facing harassment from their own parents, in their natal homes, or the cause of widows who suffer social bias, or the cause of old women being harassed in their families, especially old mothers-in-law tortured by their daughters-in-law. Feminists have readily taken up and blown the trumpet far out of proportion for young and newly married women because the money lies there. It is a highly politically correct issue to create channels of tax-free wealth transfer from husband to wife because the social role of a PROVIDER has been ascribed to a man and there is no concept of responsibility on a woman, nor are there any penal provisions for a woman not fulfilling her responsibility as a wife in a marriage. Claims by feminists are highly bogus and when they are challenged with actual data, they come up with hollow analogies like Sita and Savitri. First of all, these are all mythological characters and there is no evidence at all if they existed and the stories that we’ve been hearing about them since childhood have any iota of truth in it. Secondly, assuming, it was true, how relevant are those analogies in today’s time, whence every year 72000 crores of annual budget is allocated for “women welfare” and none for men? Feminists claim that men have historic advantage, but what exactly is the advantage that men have? Men, have always protected women, children and elders in society by taking maximum risks upon themselves, exploring unknown areas and making them safer for others to dwell and prosper. So, how can someone who lays down his life for others be oppressive? Feminists never admit that women can be cruel and always justify abuse by women as their right. So, for someone who justifies abusive behavior as a right, one can imagine the genuineness of their claims. Feminists are extremely vicious characters who simply exhibit, propel and emanate male-hatred. In fact, so deep is their hatred for men, that they are fine with not providing any redress mechanism to women, but are not ready to share the same with men. I will not fail to cite here the example of a proposed bill called “Sexual Assault Bill, 2010” which talked of preventing rapes/sexual assaults of women inside police stations. When men’s rights activists demanded that the bill be made gender neutral because lakhs of male prisoners have been sexually denigrated, sodomized and raped inside police stations, the feminists simply withdrew the bill. This only proves their sadistic nature. Q3. How tangible are the measures they propose? All of the solutions that come from feminist have the same undertone – “Hard earned money of a man must go to a woman”. And they call this as women empowerment! How can someone be empowered when they are treated worse than kids and provisions are created that you complain and walk away with a fortune. No self-respecting woman would ever support such an empowerment paradigm. In fact, those women, who do, are not real women. Undisputed sign of empowerment is entrustment of responsibility. However, feminists call “imposing responsibility on a woman as her oppression”. This single statement should tell us their thought process and any solution proposed out of such a thought process can never be tangible. For example, they are asking the Govt. of India to amend the Hindu Marriage Act in such a manner that in the event of a divorce a woman gets the children, half of husband’s property (irrespective of when purchased and who contributed) and alimony as well. So, they are calling Incentivization of divorce as a sign of empowerment. In short, they are promoting breaking of family and unfortunately this misandrous society is not challenging them. They are promoting father-less society and thus contributing to growing crime in the society, as it is an established fact that a father acts as a role-model for children and children from broken families and grown up without a father are 8 times more likely to resort to crime. Also, feminists are leaving no stone unturned in turning marriage into a crime for men from all angles. If a man stays in a marriage, he is abused by his wife and he cannot escape as there are no laws to protect a man. Also, feminists have effectively plugged any/all communication channels for men. And if he files for divorce he loses all of his fortune, his peace of mind and ends up fighting lifetime bogus litigations containing all sorts of false allegations. Moreover, a single man faces a lot of problems surviving in the society. Banks do not give loans easily, getting a rented house is an issue and a single man faces a lot of problems in adopting a child as well. Hence, feminists are totally focused on cornering men and it is said, “Even a cornered rabbit is dangerous”. So, in coming times, if these cornered men, resort to crime being exasperated and kill their wives, feminists will be solely responsible for this because they left no stone unturned in creating a society that simply exploits men and denies them even basic human rights. By the way, most of these men are brothers, sons and cousins of these feminists. Feminists are promulgating economic parasitism for women, at the cost of men and are encouraging the women to indulge in victimization. Ultimately, it needs to be realized, are they really fighting for the larger benefit of women or are just unleashing their personal hatred against men because majority of these women, who claim to be women’s rights activists aka the feminists do not have a happy, peaceful and blissed family life. Q4. How serious are the issues they rant about? Feminists create cacophony and rhetoric without logic or data. For example, how can they ignore the constantly rising suicides by married men and claim that women are the weaker sex whereas data clearly shows otherwise. Or, how can they ignore the fact that, in our society, it’s not the daughters but the sons who are burdened with the responsibility of taking care of old parents? Or, how can they ignore, that in our society women always marry up and it’s the men who marry down? Hence, in marriages, actually women are treated as second class citizens but no feminist till date has raised an issue about this insubordination of women in marriages? Now, feminists are claiming that in 70% of divorce cases the women are left with no home to live, which means:
But when even the Govt. of India does not have the above data, how can feminists have? In fact, in the current discussion about the property division clauses, no data is being presented at all. Only arguments in thin air, are flying and media/society are taking it to be Gospel Truth. These revelations cast a serious doubt on the seriousness of the issue because feminists are merely taking advantage of the general sympathy that women enjoy in the society and residual misandry that the society harbors against men and using both to the furnish their misandrist and saddist agenda of war against men/boys. There are far more serious issues that the Govt. needs to focus on, rather than feministic issues and some of them being,
Keeping all this in view, the hollow issues of feminine victimization that feminists raise, majority of which are false, misrepresented and mythical, we can safely say that the issues raised by feminists are not at all serious and can easily be ignored. Q5. What if, they are ignored? Lot of good things will happen if they are ignored. The concept of men’s rights and men’s abuse will become mainstream. Abuse of men will stop and this will lead to a more stable society because ultimately it’s the young and disposable males of the society who slog it out to run our systems and if their rights are protected, overall life quality will increase, benefits of which will go to one and all – men, women and children, because, by nature men are sacrificial in nature and do not even think twice before sacrificing their own lives/interests for the sake of others. No more anti-male laws will be created which will result in reduction of suicides by men. Our beloved sons, brothers, and men would live in a fearless society instead of the current scenario where men are blackmailed day in and day out owing to super-flowing feminist agenda in the societal veins. Problems of both men and women can be addressed in a gender-neutral manner, as opposed to the current scenario wherein entrapment of men is projected as empowerment of women. Hence, we see that feminists’ talk of women empowerment is very hollow and is narrowly focused on passing tax-free and effort-free wealth from husband to wife and rest all other issues are buried under the carpet. Now, it is up to the society to decide: “Do feminists really deserve the attention and seriousness they are currently enjoying?” “Should not they be subjected to strong scrutiny about the claims they make?” “Is it fine to punish a man on the verbal statement of a woman taking the same as Gospel Truth?” “Should not, the feminists be punished for unleashing crimes against men?” “Should feminists be allowed to exist?” Quote this article on your siteTo create link towards this article on your website, copy and paste the text below in your page. Preview : Powered by QuoteThis © 2008
Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26
3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved." |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Related Articles: |
|---|
|
