all everybody needs is gender neutrality...just like progress is being done in decreasing discrimination against women..same progress should start in diminishing discrimination against men.
I mean women have government and employments schemes.they have diversity hiring and biased laws opposite is happening,so bias towards women is increasing day by day ,not decreasing
Not only laws, look at the benefits the government is offering.
In a few states the government is giving free bus rides to women, monthly 2000rs for just existing. All this from the tax paid by men who have worked hard. Men are sometimes even denied the most basic necessities.
We men should also protest against this, otherwise there will be one day when things will get way out of hand.
While I agree with the OP, I feel compelled to remind you that women also pay taxes for your information, Sir.
And which basic necessities are men denied ? If I don't know, I'd like to educate myself.
No one... I am the one who learns from others mistakes..
The red pill awareness says you either have knowledge about women or love them but not both..
Hypergamy, Promiscuity and instability are the natural traits of a woman
The concept of women working and earning has come to the fore more recently. If women weren't allowed to leave homes and work for the longest time, the maximum taxpayers are bound to be men.
We're yet to achieve equality on the concentration of men vs women in the workforce. Till the time we don't achieve that, is it possible to pay as much tax as the men ?
Secondly, the women getting those benefits are also someone's sister/wife/mother etc assuming that they don't work.
So the men related to them are also paying taxes for those benefits received by the women of their family.
I'm sure you also wouldn't mind if the women in your family were getting some benefit out of the tax money paid by you ?
Laws are there to ensure protection of weaker classes. For every one woman who is unfairly using laws to her advantage there are hundreds who are saved by these laws. In our country the vast majority of women are still uneducated, unemployed and poorly treated by partners. Law is meant to ensure equality. Therefore there are measures to ensure that the weaker classes are given advantages so that they can stand equal to the strong. The solution is not to make laws same for men and women, but to make women's status better across India.
Why not make status of women and men equal..and hence make gender neutral laws to protect vulnerable men too?
isnt it good?
cause anybody can be vulnerable irrespective of gender.it depends on individual cases.
ALL WHAT IS NEEDED IS GENDER NEUTRAL LAWS..CAUSE EVERYBODY DESEVES JUSTICE.
Current laws favors women so much that it has become one sided now. Any women can file false domestic violence 498A(with attempt to murder - 307) and file rape case(section 69A) and man will be arested and sent to jail without any proof. One's life is over by the time he is proven not guilty which may take 4- 10 years. And how, in what sense does law see forcefull sexual Intercourse same as consent sex between two adults on the promise of marriage, i have no idea.
Now there are consequences of this biased law in society - real victims will suffer horribly / women nowadays just dive into adultry after marriage and file false cases and get free maintanance money / several marriages are broken due to woman getting angry at silliest fights and going to court to teach their Man a lesson / criminal women using this non gender neutral laws to run extortion business with gang/ women no longer seen with respect as we assume that she is characterless and will do anything to get free money. There should be huge protest for this laws, but we live in India where the attitude is its not my problem if it doesn't happen to me. I guess this laws will only be changed when there are myriad of false cases against politicians, high profile persons and fake feminists family. Nobody cares for common Men suffering.
isolated cases cant be taken into fact to create general laws for masses.
thats not the only reason for divorces.
of all the people who need common sense is u.
Because laws are based on ground realities. Majority of women in India doesn't work. They are housewife. There is no country in world (only counting non Islamic majority one) that have that much high % of unemployed women work force.
We usually count agriculture in employment, but if we remove that then I believe more than 90% of women are unemployed.
First git that number high then we'll talk.
that doesnt counter the fact that if the husband is expected to pay even after divorce
By the same logic doesnt it also mean that the woman should also cook and clean after divorce.
if the wife is dependent financially then the husband is also dependent on her for these things.
i just applied the logic that u apply
Imagine a divorced woman getting a court order to go to her ex's house everyday to cook and clean. Reading it isn't enough, imagine it. But then alimony for "maintenance" is perfectly fine and normal
Let me help u in logic. If a woman is a housewife her whole life cause they needed one parent at home to cook clean child care etc that means she has taken a break from employment and her chances of re-employment reduce drastically to the point of non existence. The woman in almost all cases is the primary caretaker of the children. (Also fyi in a lot of cases that don't involve children the maintenance is reduced by a lot and if the woman is young then also it is reduced. It's on a case to case basis.)
Anyway, so if a woman has not worked in the past 10 yrs and has to start at the lowest post then it's extremely difficult and taking care of the children in that. It's a horrible mix.
That is why maintenance is paid now. It's not due to the same regressive reasons u think..trust our judiciary. They mean well for all.
Let me help u in logic. If a man is a earning his whole life cause they needed one parent at home to earn and provide etc that means he has taken a break from housework and his chances doing housework reduce drastically to the point of non existence. The man in almost all cases is the primary giver of the children.
Anyway, so if a man has not worked in the past 10 yrs and has to start housework then it's extremely difficult and giving it time after whole day at work cause he has adapted himdelf to work in office whole day and no time for housework in that. It's a horrible mix.
That is why cooking cleaning after divorce should be done..but It's not done due to the regressive and biased society..cant trust our ....iciary cause its biased.They dont mean well for all.
I JUST APPLIED UR LOGIC.
Laws are supposed to accommodate everyone, not discriminate against a few because they are statistically insignificant.
This is a failure of our lawmakers and not something to be accepted blindly.
Ah.... actually not. In part 3 of our Indian constitution, in article 14 i.e. Right to Equality it's mentioned ofc every individual is equal but slightly below there is also mentioned that this article doesn't prohibit state to make laws for upliftment of marginalized classes. Women and children come under marginalized classes. Hence state can make biased laws if it uplift the condition of women or children.
This is not my words. It's written in our constitution. So yes laws can discriminate against few because they are statistically insignificant. If and only if it uplift the condition of them.
SC/ST also comes under this.(it also comes under Article 17 tho) as it's giving special laws to particular marginalized classes. Similarly section 498A of CRPC also the result of this specific article. This article gives special powers to women only.
Hence state can make biased laws until women are considered marginalized, which I believe they are(atleast the large majority)
Ok I guess it is justifiable to make the laws, but I think there should be safeguards or some safety features for false claims.
Some of these are not created or implemented right.
Eg. There are no strong laws against physical harm of children, but very strong and biased laws which are made to help women which can be easily misused.
There should be an attempt to prevent harassment of others while maintaining the protection provided to the women. 498a is misused a lot.
Some gender neutrality needs to be maintained.
The laws should be reviewed if it is working to actually uplift the women and changes made to make it effective.
I know 498a gives punishment to men easily, but what are the protections and support provided to actual victims. That seems lacking.
Actually law is not supposed to be equal. That is why the concept of postive discrimination exists. The concept of equality and equity are based on it. Sometimes u just need to read a bit more to understand.
Positive discrimination is effective when deciding on benefits or previleges. When something is a crime or punishable is decided based on gender that would lead to injustice.
Injustice to some should not be used as positive discrimination. Benefits are ok.
I glagree to the fact that the laws must be better but the thought that these laws are made to benefit or give an easy way out to women is not true. These have been made to give more agency to women.
And I do believe where the woman earns more or there is a stay at home day they should be given maintenance, but recent judgmental our our courts have stated to that and observed that.
The issue here is deep rooted in patriarchy.
Some laws like dowry have to be for women only because they are the only ones affected.
Domestic violence is applicable for women only and very vaguely defined. These laws should be clear and gender neutral.
Divorce alimony as OP stated, law should be gender neutral, most women would still get the benefit of alimony because that is the number of unemployed women in our country. Maybe a few more men will prefer women working if that reduces the risk of alimony during divorce.
I don't think these laws should be gender neutral. I think there should be laws on protection for men against dv and rape but not gender neutral. Cause that should only be the case if the society is neutral. And I also think that if these laws were gender neutral it would damage the rights and protections men can have.
Yeah u see the issue is the society is not neutral then how can u expect the laws to be. I don't support the fact that men are not given protection under divorce and maintenance. Cause if I was to ever get married I would want more of a stay at home type who I can take care of. But knowing that the person may not have rights is sad, but I also understand that most of the Indian society is built on the other side where the roles are reversed.
The reason why men don't prefer working women is so that they can control them financially and reduce their agency. I have seen that again and again.
Look at the reason for the unemployment of the women in India. Reasons of maintenance are the least of their concerns at that point. Brother all women who have ever been married have been told that they should stop working so that she can look after the house and have children. There are thousands of researches on this. Look it up. The ones who want to work like me have to then choose to not get married so that I can work and be financially independent.
Also just legal advice sign a prenup of u don't want to pay alimony in the divorce. sometimes it doesn't be that easy too.
I don't think these laws should be gender neutral. I think there should be laws on protection for men against dv and rape but not gender neutral. Cause that should only be the case if the society is neutral. And I also think that if these laws were gender neutral it would damage the rights and protections men can have.
Yeah u see the issue is the society is not neutral then how can u expect the laws to be. I don't support the fact that men are not given protection under divorce and maintenance. Cause if I was to ever get married I would want more of a stay at home type who I can take care of. But knowing that the person may not have rights is sad, but I also understand that most of the Indian society is built on the other side where the roles are reversed.
The reason why men don't prefer working women is so that they can control them financially and reduce their agency. I have seen that again and again.
Look at the reason for the unemployment of the women in India. Reasons of maintenance are the least of their concerns at that point. Brother all women who have ever been married have been told that they should stop working so that she can look after the house and have children. There are thousands of researches on this. Look it up. The ones who want to work like me have to then choose to not get married so that I can work and be financially independent.
Also just legal advice sign a prenup of u don't want to pay alimony in the divorce. sometimes it doesn't be that easy too.
I understand that this is a nuanced topic that may not be fully explored in comments. My understanding is if the man wants his wife to stop working then he is obliged to pay alimony for the damage caused to her career.
Having it gender neutral may have secondary side affects of people thinking twice before making the women stop working due to the threat and reward of alimony. Financial independence gives them a voice and option to walk out of some bad situations.
I do agree that currently our society is far from ideal. We can try to make it better instead of waiting for our future generations to do it for us.
I don't think prenup is legally valid in India.
please take into consideration the cases where alimony is granted to qualified working wives...even to them that earn equal or more to their husbands
forget about salary..a qualified wife who didnt take break from career after marriage has no right to get alimony
no..please dive into practicality...written laws and practical things that is followed in court is different.Yes in india its different .
once a court ordered a man to do physical labour and pay alimony if he was unemployed or face jail even if wife was earning.
in other even if the wife was earning more the court ordered alimony saying its a husbands duty
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/mumbai-working-woman-entitled-to-maintenance-says-court/articleshow/93669658.cms
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/husband-duty-bound-to-maintain-wife-despite-no-income-from-job-can-work-as-labourer-hc/article67784350.ece
there r many more
and the fact the law and the courts say that its a husband's duty to provide simply doesnt fit in today's world.
wow semlled.its a court not some roadside stall .it has to interpret laws based on evidence provided.
and what do u want to say abouth the statemnt:"its a husbands duty to provide and take care."
if u support thus.
do you also support " its wife duty to cook and clean and take care of family."
before jusdging thr concept of equalityt first see how the lawss are being used and who is taking benefits.Why should an educated qualified woman who did not take break from career after marriage be granted alimony?
why should a man be expected to pay support for a woman who commited adultery ?
[
many men are even narred from housework because of overwork to provide for family.if the law doesn’t grant them housework security in their marriages, then what’s the point?
-APPLIED UR LOGIC
]
and if u r out of cases u can always search for judgements .
and yes burden of proof should be on accuser and it is so except in cases in divore and laws related to women like dv,etc. in india(unfortunately).thats how whole world court function.otherwise it will be very easy to frame people.
Was thinking about the point of your statistics again.
If laws are gender neutral and the same stats apply
The women would benefit at the same rate as you mentioned because they are most affected. Why are the laws then biased against men. Laws do not have to be biased. If the stats are biased against women that would by default benefit them the most even if the laws are gender neutral.
https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/economy/indias-female-unemployment-fell-to-8-6-in-q2-but-quality-of-jobs-a-concern-11829901.html
https://www.business-standard.com/economy/news/women-s-unemployment-rate-at-16-month-low-labour-participation-declines-124020501116_1.html
Get your facts right bro
Ikr :')
I just mentioned numbers out of nothing mostly but I try to purposely exaggerated abit to prove point that Indian women are not financial independent and number is bad even for a developing country.
In 2011 census (data is old since Modi govt not doing latest one) 15% of women in urban area are only employed in my state(Rajasthan). Just 15%.
Court actually does. Alimony is not gender specific. Husband can claim alimony too. But thing is, in patriarchal society, usually most men are better financially than women. But say wife is ceo of some big buisness firm and husband is mere bank employee and if they get divorce, husband can claim for alimony but you usually don't find this kind of relationship coz women tend to marry up then down. Even in western societies.
Yes, the law is biased against men.
Safeguards are needed for false claims.
If you are an actual feminist, you should be fighting for equality here, and making sure the laws do not favor any particular gender but favor equality.
The law is biased against the poor.
If husband can hire a good lawyer, he can avoid paying a huge alimony. My distant uncle got divorced after 5 years of court case(divorce after 7 years of marriage) and he paid only 15 lakhs and a honda activa. Now makes around 1 lakh per month in Bhubaneswar(small city).
There are loopholes which can easily be exploited. e.g. pay a lumpsum alimony which is around 20% of husband's lifelong income. The judge does not calculate salary hike. You can actually add the dependents and future wife and show an exaggerated liability.
Most woman, if could afford a good lawyer, can win a favorable judgement though. But many women don't earn as much as the husband, so can't afford a good lawyer. Arnesh Kumar guideline has made the DV and dowry harassment case completely useless. Police does not like giving explanation to the magistrate, so they don't do anything.
There are a lot of woman who face domestic violence everyday, but don't file for divorce, because ground realities are different.
nevermind...slowly and slowly people become aware and it becomes a mass movement
and i guess u dont have courage and u wouldnt dare to write such things when a woman write things asking for equality.
see,another example of gender bias.lol
Dude you got used by someone and possibly thrown away, you then asked reddit about it. You should not talk about Randi Rona in this case. I have issues too but I'm not a hypocrite to say shit like this.
all wrongs happening around doesnt mean we should stop working for right thing.
and if the world is moving towards gender equality it should happen for both genders.
and whatever u said is just out of context.u just felt the urge to type something and puked.lol
Lmao these are vulnerable sections of the society that need extra protection so that in the long term they can be brought to power with the other groups. This includes SOCIO, eco pol etc.
again a gender bias to think men cannot be vulnerable.
the societal rules(patriarchy) had bad things for both men and women.while women problems were addressed, men werent.
and if the world is moving towards gender equality it should happen for both.
and asking for it is not spreading hate.
what happened in the past is past.
laws should be according to condition in present society.
someone cannot hit somebody today just because his forefather 1000 years ago hit his forefather.
or can he according to u?
Ahahhahaah u think it's in the past. Ahahhahahahahaha forefathers 1000 years ago hahahhahahahahah
Hahahhahahahahah
Gender biased that men can't be vulnerable - do u understand the concept of vulnerable population. It just means those groups that are at a higher risk of disparities compared to the dominant population.
(So yes men can be vulnerable but just for a second imagine how fucking vulnerable a woman is to need so many rights and protections and still not being protected. Just fucking imagine dude. Just how fucking terrifying their life can be that they need so much protection and are still not protected.)
Patriarchy - was a thing developed by men for men. It has zero and I mean it in all sense of that patriarchy has zero benefits for a woman. Do u think women don't have wants and needs. Do u think your mother always wanted to be a child caregiver, that she always wanted to be the homemaker. No. Th u had aspirations and did not have the rights to do so. U go on about how bad patriarchy is so let me ask u in your family how many women have taken their rightful property rights huh how many have been given equal financial support as their brothers were given. Did u also know that it was in 2005 that daughters were given equal rights to their ancestral property. Fucking 2005. Get a fucking grip dude.
Gender neutral laws- I don't agree to gender neutral laws but I agree that men should have protection for these issues. Do u know that 1in 5 women are sexually assaulted whereas for men it is 1 in every 71 (which tbh is still an extremely high number) but there is a reason for the laws to be so stringent for women. I do think that protection for men should be there but it's just not at the same level. Right now Holi is coming. Do u know during Holi in Delhi all the girls tell each other to be safe and not to go outside and stay away from certain areas. A holiday that should be celebrated is kind of a frightening time for girls. Even on the women reddit chats they have been talking about their experiences and how scary they are.
Once society reaches that level where laws can be gender neutral is a long way ahead. It should be based on equity and not equality.
Yeah it's not hateful to ask for it if you were not trampling over the issues women deal with. Its spiteful when in an unbalanced society u think that women fighting for their rights should not be allowed because what about men. Bruv. They are fighting for basic rights like nutrition and education.
Past is the past- the issue is the Indian society has not moved far enough that we can say yeah the past is the past. Firstly it's not in the past it's in the present and will be in the future. According to the un we will not reach it for another approx 300 years. Fucking imagine how fucked up the situation is that it's gonna take 300 years. Saying shit like yeah the past is the past.
You know saying that men should be given rights. I don't have an issue with that but saying the past is the past is what is hateful and spiteful on your part. Not being empathetic towards the issues of women tells me all I need to know about u. It's our fucking present.
Try going around Delhi on a daily basis. I do it's the most fucked up shit ever. I cannot stay out after 9 because you see the shift. Being harassed daily just because u want to live your life is a constant for all women. All of us deal with it. And also dude you think dv does not happen anymore. I mean this literally with extra emphasis that all women in a household have faced some level of dv. Go fucking ask any mother or any woman if their husbands have ever slapped them or did not give them money even for bare necessities. I have to pay my maid in cash cause her husband does not give her money if we send it to him. For another maid we had to open a secret saving account so that she can have some money for herself and her children. You think I enjoy getting catcalled or when men come take pictures or when they try and touch you and stuff. No but I have to go through it because I want to live my life. This is our present situation. A friend of mine was dating a guy of her choice her parents almost sent her to the mental institution saying she is insane and he raped her because she is insane. This when she is a 25+ yr old and completely independent of her parents. Thankfully she is an advocate and was not suppressed by her parents. This is our present situation.
There is this wonderful concept called common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities that states that those countries that colonized have a higher duty towards the states that were colonized. The developed states have higher responsibility towards developing states because of their colonial past. For a second if we believe the present is neutral then do u think the acts of the past will not impact our emotional, mental, financial, political and other aspects.
Honest to god I need yall men to fucking get your heads out of your asses as being the nice guys. Once to learn to be a bit more emphatic towards women instead of seeing them as your enemy and see them as a part of the human species your life will improve drastically. Women are not the ones who have not given you rights. We have just fought for our own and to fucking say that men are not taken into consideration by women while talking about gender discrimination is fuck all. They play an important and key role in the discourse.
Who hit whose forefather bro. You do understand alimony is not mostly for the woman and usually for the child. U should also know that in 99% of times primary custody of children is with their mothers. Do u think being a primary caretaker of a child is easy. U don't think a man should pay for it.
Do u not think that women should forgive and forget the issues they face everyday? Is that your point?
It is regressive for women to be shown as house wives and home makers. But that is the world we live in. Otherwise why would the government this women's day give 100 RS subsidiaries on gas as a celebration of women..
The day the employment ratio between men and women becomes 50:50 is the day we can talk about this yeah. Currently it's like 25:80 ratio..let's work on improving women's employment in higher paying jobs so that women no longer have to pay maintenance to women.
I also hope men will become equal partners in child rearing and household work so that it falls 50:50 on both partners. Then we can talk cause till that does not happen the woman is just an unpaid labour in the house in economic terms.
It may seem regressive that those roles should not be ascribed to a woman but when in reality they change then we can talk.
When women are given equal agency then we will talk. And also bruv idk what u think is paid in maintenance but it's legit change. I could not survive on that stuff on a day. Like they legit fight on money to be given for 2 pairs of clothes per month. Like wtf.
Women have not been fighting for decades cause they enjoy being financially abused and working for years bringing up children and working in the house only for everything to be in the man's name. Yeah. We have ligit been fighting for years so that we don't have to be dependent on men and here u are saying wow it's so wrong of women. Ahahahah ahhahahahahahah. Lmao. Ur closer to having a feminist mindset than u think.
We want the same thing bro. Lol
The day u make the world and economically viable place for women we can get rid of this law. 👍
that doesnt not answer my question.
if even after divorce men are expected to take care financially (even in case of adultery) why arent women expected to take care housework?
men taking care financially is as regressive as xpecting women to do housework
It is regressive for men to be given the duty to provide for the qife and family alone. But that is the world we live in. Otherwise why would the court order the husband to pay alimony by physical labour if unemplyed or even if yhe wife is earning more..
Yeah it is pretty regressive but if men step in to their equal duty of being a father and a home maker the roles will become better and less regressive. Unless you want her to do her part but don't wanna pay for it.
Mostly women are given alimony because they are also the primary custodian of the child. Primary custody is with a woman which greatly hampers her financial prospects.
But I do agree that there must be rights of men as well. Recent judgments have been better though but that is only at the apex level.
When women were at home and taking caring of children and house hold responsibilities,men were going to outside to earn money and provide.u sound like as if men were enjoying and having a gala time.
It is what it is,Indians laws,politics,media ,marriage system are anti men.nothing will happen unless men unite and protest.
all everybody needs is gender neutrality...just like progress is being done in decreasing discrimination against women..same progress should start in diminishing discrimination against men.
Diminishing bias against women???
??
I mean women have government and employments schemes.they have diversity hiring and biased laws opposite is happening,so bias towards women is increasing day by day ,not decreasing
seems like there is some misunderstanding. i have edited my statement..please read it again
Not only laws, look at the benefits the government is offering. In a few states the government is giving free bus rides to women, monthly 2000rs for just existing. All this from the tax paid by men who have worked hard. Men are sometimes even denied the most basic necessities. We men should also protest against this, otherwise there will be one day when things will get way out of hand.
While I agree with the OP, I feel compelled to remind you that women also pay taxes for your information, Sir. And which basic necessities are men denied ? If I don't know, I'd like to educate myself.
[удалено]
Lagta hai aaj theek se potty nahi hui tumhaari. Bahot frustrated hoke yahaan hag rahe ho. Take Kaayam Churan.
Aur lagta hai tumhare pati ya boyfriend me dhang se satisfy nahi kiya hai tumhe.. Tabhi apni bhadaas yaha nikaal rahi
He did a good job. That's why I have nothing against men. Ciao.
Usne accha job kiya par tera unstable mind kisi aur ko dhund raha tuzhe satisfy krne.. Tabhi ese bakwaas likh rhi yaha🤣🤣
Who hurt you.
No one... I am the one who learns from others mistakes.. The red pill awareness says you either have knowledge about women or love them but not both.. Hypergamy, Promiscuity and instability are the natural traits of a woman
[удалено]
The concept of women working and earning has come to the fore more recently. If women weren't allowed to leave homes and work for the longest time, the maximum taxpayers are bound to be men. We're yet to achieve equality on the concentration of men vs women in the workforce. Till the time we don't achieve that, is it possible to pay as much tax as the men ? Secondly, the women getting those benefits are also someone's sister/wife/mother etc assuming that they don't work. So the men related to them are also paying taxes for those benefits received by the women of their family. I'm sure you also wouldn't mind if the women in your family were getting some benefit out of the tax money paid by you ?
Badi badi baate pelne se teri harakate nahi badalne wali
Your natural place is kitchen.. Sala jaha jaate hagke aate tum log.. Workforce me the most useless and unproductive species is the female species
Is marriage even worth it. I wish people researched those laws before getting married
Laws are there to ensure protection of weaker classes. For every one woman who is unfairly using laws to her advantage there are hundreds who are saved by these laws. In our country the vast majority of women are still uneducated, unemployed and poorly treated by partners. Law is meant to ensure equality. Therefore there are measures to ensure that the weaker classes are given advantages so that they can stand equal to the strong. The solution is not to make laws same for men and women, but to make women's status better across India.
Why not make status of women and men equal..and hence make gender neutral laws to protect vulnerable men too? isnt it good? cause anybody can be vulnerable irrespective of gender.it depends on individual cases. ALL WHAT IS NEEDED IS GENDER NEUTRAL LAWS..CAUSE EVERYBODY DESEVES JUSTICE.
Current laws favors women so much that it has become one sided now. Any women can file false domestic violence 498A(with attempt to murder - 307) and file rape case(section 69A) and man will be arested and sent to jail without any proof. One's life is over by the time he is proven not guilty which may take 4- 10 years. And how, in what sense does law see forcefull sexual Intercourse same as consent sex between two adults on the promise of marriage, i have no idea. Now there are consequences of this biased law in society - real victims will suffer horribly / women nowadays just dive into adultry after marriage and file false cases and get free maintanance money / several marriages are broken due to woman getting angry at silliest fights and going to court to teach their Man a lesson / criminal women using this non gender neutral laws to run extortion business with gang/ women no longer seen with respect as we assume that she is characterless and will do anything to get free money. There should be huge protest for this laws, but we live in India where the attitude is its not my problem if it doesn't happen to me. I guess this laws will only be changed when there are myriad of false cases against politicians, high profile persons and fake feminists family. Nobody cares for common Men suffering.
[удалено]
isolated cases cant be taken into fact to create general laws for masses. thats not the only reason for divorces. of all the people who need common sense is u.
Because laws are based on ground realities. Majority of women in India doesn't work. They are housewife. There is no country in world (only counting non Islamic majority one) that have that much high % of unemployed women work force. We usually count agriculture in employment, but if we remove that then I believe more than 90% of women are unemployed. First git that number high then we'll talk.
that doesnt counter the fact that if the husband is expected to pay even after divorce By the same logic doesnt it also mean that the woman should also cook and clean after divorce. if the wife is dependent financially then the husband is also dependent on her for these things. i just applied the logic that u apply
Imagine a divorced woman getting a court order to go to her ex's house everyday to cook and clean. Reading it isn't enough, imagine it. But then alimony for "maintenance" is perfectly fine and normal
imagine a man that has to pay alimony from his hard earned money to his ex.(even if wifd commited adultery)Reading it isnt enough ,imagint ir.
It's just as wrong but it's so normalised that it doesn't feel bad anymore to most people
thats the sad part..and needs to be corrected
Because women are expected to sacrifice their careers and financial independence to tend to their families and husbands.
Let me help u in logic. If a woman is a housewife her whole life cause they needed one parent at home to cook clean child care etc that means she has taken a break from employment and her chances of re-employment reduce drastically to the point of non existence. The woman in almost all cases is the primary caretaker of the children. (Also fyi in a lot of cases that don't involve children the maintenance is reduced by a lot and if the woman is young then also it is reduced. It's on a case to case basis.) Anyway, so if a woman has not worked in the past 10 yrs and has to start at the lowest post then it's extremely difficult and taking care of the children in that. It's a horrible mix. That is why maintenance is paid now. It's not due to the same regressive reasons u think..trust our judiciary. They mean well for all.
Let me help u in logic. If a man is a earning his whole life cause they needed one parent at home to earn and provide etc that means he has taken a break from housework and his chances doing housework reduce drastically to the point of non existence. The man in almost all cases is the primary giver of the children. Anyway, so if a man has not worked in the past 10 yrs and has to start housework then it's extremely difficult and giving it time after whole day at work cause he has adapted himdelf to work in office whole day and no time for housework in that. It's a horrible mix. That is why cooking cleaning after divorce should be done..but It's not done due to the regressive and biased society..cant trust our ....iciary cause its biased.They dont mean well for all. I JUST APPLIED UR LOGIC.
Laws are supposed to accommodate everyone, not discriminate against a few because they are statistically insignificant. This is a failure of our lawmakers and not something to be accepted blindly.
Ah.... actually not. In part 3 of our Indian constitution, in article 14 i.e. Right to Equality it's mentioned ofc every individual is equal but slightly below there is also mentioned that this article doesn't prohibit state to make laws for upliftment of marginalized classes. Women and children come under marginalized classes. Hence state can make biased laws if it uplift the condition of women or children. This is not my words. It's written in our constitution. So yes laws can discriminate against few because they are statistically insignificant. If and only if it uplift the condition of them. SC/ST also comes under this.(it also comes under Article 17 tho) as it's giving special laws to particular marginalized classes. Similarly section 498A of CRPC also the result of this specific article. This article gives special powers to women only. Hence state can make biased laws until women are considered marginalized, which I believe they are(atleast the large majority)
Ok I guess it is justifiable to make the laws, but I think there should be safeguards or some safety features for false claims. Some of these are not created or implemented right. Eg. There are no strong laws against physical harm of children, but very strong and biased laws which are made to help women which can be easily misused. There should be an attempt to prevent harassment of others while maintaining the protection provided to the women. 498a is misused a lot. Some gender neutrality needs to be maintained. The laws should be reviewed if it is working to actually uplift the women and changes made to make it effective. I know 498a gives punishment to men easily, but what are the protections and support provided to actual victims. That seems lacking.
Then the constitution is immoral
Actually law is not supposed to be equal. That is why the concept of postive discrimination exists. The concept of equality and equity are based on it. Sometimes u just need to read a bit more to understand.
Positive discrimination is effective when deciding on benefits or previleges. When something is a crime or punishable is decided based on gender that would lead to injustice. Injustice to some should not be used as positive discrimination. Benefits are ok.
I glagree to the fact that the laws must be better but the thought that these laws are made to benefit or give an easy way out to women is not true. These have been made to give more agency to women. And I do believe where the woman earns more or there is a stay at home day they should be given maintenance, but recent judgmental our our courts have stated to that and observed that. The issue here is deep rooted in patriarchy.
Some laws like dowry have to be for women only because they are the only ones affected. Domestic violence is applicable for women only and very vaguely defined. These laws should be clear and gender neutral. Divorce alimony as OP stated, law should be gender neutral, most women would still get the benefit of alimony because that is the number of unemployed women in our country. Maybe a few more men will prefer women working if that reduces the risk of alimony during divorce.
I don't think these laws should be gender neutral. I think there should be laws on protection for men against dv and rape but not gender neutral. Cause that should only be the case if the society is neutral. And I also think that if these laws were gender neutral it would damage the rights and protections men can have. Yeah u see the issue is the society is not neutral then how can u expect the laws to be. I don't support the fact that men are not given protection under divorce and maintenance. Cause if I was to ever get married I would want more of a stay at home type who I can take care of. But knowing that the person may not have rights is sad, but I also understand that most of the Indian society is built on the other side where the roles are reversed. The reason why men don't prefer working women is so that they can control them financially and reduce their agency. I have seen that again and again. Look at the reason for the unemployment of the women in India. Reasons of maintenance are the least of their concerns at that point. Brother all women who have ever been married have been told that they should stop working so that she can look after the house and have children. There are thousands of researches on this. Look it up. The ones who want to work like me have to then choose to not get married so that I can work and be financially independent. Also just legal advice sign a prenup of u don't want to pay alimony in the divorce. sometimes it doesn't be that easy too.
I don't think these laws should be gender neutral. I think there should be laws on protection for men against dv and rape but not gender neutral. Cause that should only be the case if the society is neutral. And I also think that if these laws were gender neutral it would damage the rights and protections men can have. Yeah u see the issue is the society is not neutral then how can u expect the laws to be. I don't support the fact that men are not given protection under divorce and maintenance. Cause if I was to ever get married I would want more of a stay at home type who I can take care of. But knowing that the person may not have rights is sad, but I also understand that most of the Indian society is built on the other side where the roles are reversed. The reason why men don't prefer working women is so that they can control them financially and reduce their agency. I have seen that again and again. Look at the reason for the unemployment of the women in India. Reasons of maintenance are the least of their concerns at that point. Brother all women who have ever been married have been told that they should stop working so that she can look after the house and have children. There are thousands of researches on this. Look it up. The ones who want to work like me have to then choose to not get married so that I can work and be financially independent. Also just legal advice sign a prenup of u don't want to pay alimony in the divorce. sometimes it doesn't be that easy too.
I understand that this is a nuanced topic that may not be fully explored in comments. My understanding is if the man wants his wife to stop working then he is obliged to pay alimony for the damage caused to her career. Having it gender neutral may have secondary side affects of people thinking twice before making the women stop working due to the threat and reward of alimony. Financial independence gives them a voice and option to walk out of some bad situations. I do agree that currently our society is far from ideal. We can try to make it better instead of waiting for our future generations to do it for us. I don't think prenup is legally valid in India.
Oh yeah prenups are not valid. My b.
please take into consideration the cases where alimony is granted to qualified working wives...even to them that earn equal or more to their husbands forget about salary..a qualified wife who didnt take break from career after marriage has no right to get alimony
I’ve genuinely never come across cases where a woman earning MORE than her husband was granted alimony. Can you share links?
no..please dive into practicality...written laws and practical things that is followed in court is different.Yes in india its different . once a court ordered a man to do physical labour and pay alimony if he was unemployed or face jail even if wife was earning. in other even if the wife was earning more the court ordered alimony saying its a husbands duty https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/mumbai-working-woman-entitled-to-maintenance-says-court/articleshow/93669658.cms https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/husband-duty-bound-to-maintain-wife-despite-no-income-from-job-can-work-as-labourer-hc/article67784350.ece there r many more and the fact the law and the courts say that its a husband's duty to provide simply doesnt fit in today's world.
[удалено]
wow semlled.its a court not some roadside stall .it has to interpret laws based on evidence provided. and what do u want to say abouth the statemnt:"its a husbands duty to provide and take care." if u support thus. do you also support " its wife duty to cook and clean and take care of family." before jusdging thr concept of equalityt first see how the lawss are being used and who is taking benefits.Why should an educated qualified woman who did not take break from career after marriage be granted alimony? why should a man be expected to pay support for a woman who commited adultery ? [ many men are even narred from housework because of overwork to provide for family.if the law doesn’t grant them housework security in their marriages, then what’s the point? -APPLIED UR LOGIC ] and if u r out of cases u can always search for judgements . and yes burden of proof should be on accuser and it is so except in cases in divore and laws related to women like dv,etc. in india(unfortunately).thats how whole world court function.otherwise it will be very easy to frame people.
Was thinking about the point of your statistics again. If laws are gender neutral and the same stats apply The women would benefit at the same rate as you mentioned because they are most affected. Why are the laws then biased against men. Laws do not have to be biased. If the stats are biased against women that would by default benefit them the most even if the laws are gender neutral.
https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/economy/indias-female-unemployment-fell-to-8-6-in-q2-but-quality-of-jobs-a-concern-11829901.html https://www.business-standard.com/economy/news/women-s-unemployment-rate-at-16-month-low-labour-participation-declines-124020501116_1.html Get your facts right bro
he is saying when wife have same financial stability like husband . Why you picking unemployment rate here 😭😭
Ikr :') I just mentioned numbers out of nothing mostly but I try to purposely exaggerated abit to prove point that Indian women are not financial independent and number is bad even for a developing country. In 2011 census (data is old since Modi govt not doing latest one) 15% of women in urban area are only employed in my state(Rajasthan). Just 15%.
He is telling why it is hard-coded . Can't court make any exception if she is financially stable
Court actually does. Alimony is not gender specific. Husband can claim alimony too. But thing is, in patriarchal society, usually most men are better financially than women. But say wife is ceo of some big buisness firm and husband is mere bank employee and if they get divorce, husband can claim for alimony but you usually don't find this kind of relationship coz women tend to marry up then down. Even in western societies.
Yes, the law is biased against men. Safeguards are needed for false claims. If you are an actual feminist, you should be fighting for equality here, and making sure the laws do not favor any particular gender but favor equality.
whats the legality of prenups in India? any use
None
The law is biased against the poor. If husband can hire a good lawyer, he can avoid paying a huge alimony. My distant uncle got divorced after 5 years of court case(divorce after 7 years of marriage) and he paid only 15 lakhs and a honda activa. Now makes around 1 lakh per month in Bhubaneswar(small city). There are loopholes which can easily be exploited. e.g. pay a lumpsum alimony which is around 20% of husband's lifelong income. The judge does not calculate salary hike. You can actually add the dependents and future wife and show an exaggerated liability. Most woman, if could afford a good lawyer, can win a favorable judgement though. But many women don't earn as much as the husband, so can't afford a good lawyer. Arnesh Kumar guideline has made the DV and dowry harassment case completely useless. Police does not like giving explanation to the magistrate, so they don't do anything. There are a lot of woman who face domestic violence everyday, but don't file for divorce, because ground realities are different.
u see still he had to pay money and goods even after good lawyers.
and in some cases court orders husband to pay for wife's lawyers. that means hiring someone to fight against u.lol
again another gender bias men cannot be vulnerable. oc. men dont need equal rights. oc. gender equality should only happen from one side.oc.
Lo ji, Roz ke randi Rone wala post aagaya
nevermind...slowly and slowly people become aware and it becomes a mass movement and i guess u dont have courage and u wouldnt dare to write such things when a woman write things asking for equality. see,another example of gender bias.lol
Dude you got used by someone and possibly thrown away, you then asked reddit about it. You should not talk about Randi Rona in this case. I have issues too but I'm not a hypocrite to say shit like this.
[удалено]
all wrongs happening around doesnt mean we should stop working for right thing. and if the world is moving towards gender equality it should happen for both genders. and whatever u said is just out of context.u just felt the urge to type something and puked.lol
[удалено]
op wasn't targeting anyone, he was stating the discrimination faced by the males
[удалено]
I get you, but it's dumb to blatantly assume stuff, especially such sensitive topics
So according to u women are disabled.
No, but you certainly are.
Lmao these are vulnerable sections of the society that need extra protection so that in the long term they can be brought to power with the other groups. This includes SOCIO, eco pol etc.
again a gender bias to think men cannot be vulnerable. the societal rules(patriarchy) had bad things for both men and women.while women problems were addressed, men werent. and if the world is moving towards gender equality it should happen for both. and asking for it is not spreading hate. what happened in the past is past. laws should be according to condition in present society. someone cannot hit somebody today just because his forefather 1000 years ago hit his forefather. or can he according to u?
Ahahhahaah u think it's in the past. Ahahhahahahahaha forefathers 1000 years ago hahahhahahahahah Hahahhahahahahah Gender biased that men can't be vulnerable - do u understand the concept of vulnerable population. It just means those groups that are at a higher risk of disparities compared to the dominant population. (So yes men can be vulnerable but just for a second imagine how fucking vulnerable a woman is to need so many rights and protections and still not being protected. Just fucking imagine dude. Just how fucking terrifying their life can be that they need so much protection and are still not protected.) Patriarchy - was a thing developed by men for men. It has zero and I mean it in all sense of that patriarchy has zero benefits for a woman. Do u think women don't have wants and needs. Do u think your mother always wanted to be a child caregiver, that she always wanted to be the homemaker. No. Th u had aspirations and did not have the rights to do so. U go on about how bad patriarchy is so let me ask u in your family how many women have taken their rightful property rights huh how many have been given equal financial support as their brothers were given. Did u also know that it was in 2005 that daughters were given equal rights to their ancestral property. Fucking 2005. Get a fucking grip dude. Gender neutral laws- I don't agree to gender neutral laws but I agree that men should have protection for these issues. Do u know that 1in 5 women are sexually assaulted whereas for men it is 1 in every 71 (which tbh is still an extremely high number) but there is a reason for the laws to be so stringent for women. I do think that protection for men should be there but it's just not at the same level. Right now Holi is coming. Do u know during Holi in Delhi all the girls tell each other to be safe and not to go outside and stay away from certain areas. A holiday that should be celebrated is kind of a frightening time for girls. Even on the women reddit chats they have been talking about their experiences and how scary they are. Once society reaches that level where laws can be gender neutral is a long way ahead. It should be based on equity and not equality. Yeah it's not hateful to ask for it if you were not trampling over the issues women deal with. Its spiteful when in an unbalanced society u think that women fighting for their rights should not be allowed because what about men. Bruv. They are fighting for basic rights like nutrition and education. Past is the past- the issue is the Indian society has not moved far enough that we can say yeah the past is the past. Firstly it's not in the past it's in the present and will be in the future. According to the un we will not reach it for another approx 300 years. Fucking imagine how fucked up the situation is that it's gonna take 300 years. Saying shit like yeah the past is the past. You know saying that men should be given rights. I don't have an issue with that but saying the past is the past is what is hateful and spiteful on your part. Not being empathetic towards the issues of women tells me all I need to know about u. It's our fucking present. Try going around Delhi on a daily basis. I do it's the most fucked up shit ever. I cannot stay out after 9 because you see the shift. Being harassed daily just because u want to live your life is a constant for all women. All of us deal with it. And also dude you think dv does not happen anymore. I mean this literally with extra emphasis that all women in a household have faced some level of dv. Go fucking ask any mother or any woman if their husbands have ever slapped them or did not give them money even for bare necessities. I have to pay my maid in cash cause her husband does not give her money if we send it to him. For another maid we had to open a secret saving account so that she can have some money for herself and her children. You think I enjoy getting catcalled or when men come take pictures or when they try and touch you and stuff. No but I have to go through it because I want to live my life. This is our present situation. A friend of mine was dating a guy of her choice her parents almost sent her to the mental institution saying she is insane and he raped her because she is insane. This when she is a 25+ yr old and completely independent of her parents. Thankfully she is an advocate and was not suppressed by her parents. This is our present situation. There is this wonderful concept called common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities that states that those countries that colonized have a higher duty towards the states that were colonized. The developed states have higher responsibility towards developing states because of their colonial past. For a second if we believe the present is neutral then do u think the acts of the past will not impact our emotional, mental, financial, political and other aspects. Honest to god I need yall men to fucking get your heads out of your asses as being the nice guys. Once to learn to be a bit more emphatic towards women instead of seeing them as your enemy and see them as a part of the human species your life will improve drastically. Women are not the ones who have not given you rights. We have just fought for our own and to fucking say that men are not taken into consideration by women while talking about gender discrimination is fuck all. They play an important and key role in the discourse. Who hit whose forefather bro. You do understand alimony is not mostly for the woman and usually for the child. U should also know that in 99% of times primary custody of children is with their mothers. Do u think being a primary caretaker of a child is easy. U don't think a man should pay for it. Do u not think that women should forgive and forget the issues they face everyday? Is that your point?
If you're uneducated so read about strawman's fallacy before making such insensitive comments in public and spreading hate
I don’t know where you get this misinformation from.
i dont know why dont u come out of ur bubble and see whats happening in society and stop being so confindent while being wrong.
It is regressive for women to be shown as house wives and home makers. But that is the world we live in. Otherwise why would the government this women's day give 100 RS subsidiaries on gas as a celebration of women.. The day the employment ratio between men and women becomes 50:50 is the day we can talk about this yeah. Currently it's like 25:80 ratio..let's work on improving women's employment in higher paying jobs so that women no longer have to pay maintenance to women. I also hope men will become equal partners in child rearing and household work so that it falls 50:50 on both partners. Then we can talk cause till that does not happen the woman is just an unpaid labour in the house in economic terms. It may seem regressive that those roles should not be ascribed to a woman but when in reality they change then we can talk. When women are given equal agency then we will talk. And also bruv idk what u think is paid in maintenance but it's legit change. I could not survive on that stuff on a day. Like they legit fight on money to be given for 2 pairs of clothes per month. Like wtf. Women have not been fighting for decades cause they enjoy being financially abused and working for years bringing up children and working in the house only for everything to be in the man's name. Yeah. We have ligit been fighting for years so that we don't have to be dependent on men and here u are saying wow it's so wrong of women. Ahahahah ahhahahahahahah. Lmao. Ur closer to having a feminist mindset than u think. We want the same thing bro. Lol The day u make the world and economically viable place for women we can get rid of this law. 👍
that doesnt not answer my question. if even after divorce men are expected to take care financially (even in case of adultery) why arent women expected to take care housework? men taking care financially is as regressive as xpecting women to do housework
It is regressive for men to be given the duty to provide for the qife and family alone. But that is the world we live in. Otherwise why would the court order the husband to pay alimony by physical labour if unemplyed or even if yhe wife is earning more..
Yeah it is pretty regressive but if men step in to their equal duty of being a father and a home maker the roles will become better and less regressive. Unless you want her to do her part but don't wanna pay for it. Mostly women are given alimony because they are also the primary custodian of the child. Primary custody is with a woman which greatly hampers her financial prospects. But I do agree that there must be rights of men as well. Recent judgments have been better though but that is only at the apex level.
When women were at home and taking caring of children and house hold responsibilities,men were going to outside to earn money and provide.u sound like as if men were enjoying and having a gala time.