India Plunges into Rape Hysteria

by W.F. Price on January 2, 2011

There’s been quite the debate over feminism in India occurring on The Spearhead, so I thought I’d do a little more research to see what’s going on in the subcontinent. Amazingly, in some respects it appears that feminism is being taken even farther than it has in all but the most extreme examples in the West.

Below, we address two separate, new policies regarding rape in the Hindu civilization:

Under a new centrally sponsored government scheme, Indian women who claim to be rape victims will receive $450 cash within two weeks if they claim rape and a medical exam demonstrates unspecified evidence of rape, and then over a year’s time additional benefits are added that bring the total to at least $4,500 (RS 2 lakh), and up to $6,700 (RS 3 lakh) worth of benefits.

No conclusive conviction is required for the money; only the medical exam.

A medical exam cannot prove rape, but it can prove that sex took place, which makes it fairly obvious how this system can be abused, particularly in a place like India where a woman’s value as a wife is still dependent on her virginity.

Say a girl gives in to lust and fools around with the neighborhood bad boy, things get hot and heavy, and she has sex with him. This happens all over the world, and in liberalizing India it must be happening more than ever. Realizing that she just blew it and mom and dad are going to go ballistic when that guy she’s never met to whom she’s promised in marriage makes an angry phone call upon discovering that his new bride is damaged goods, she thinks of the rape program and calls the police.

Maybe she points the finger at the bad boy, or maybe she makes up some imaginary assailant — it doesn’t matter to her, even if some innocent schmuck gets pulled out of bed at 2AM by a gang of mustachioed Indian police and thrown in the slammer. At least she doesn’t have to face her parents’ wrath, she doesn’t have to marry that guy she wasn’t too sure about anyway, and she’s getting paid more than she could have made in years of work.

But according to an official with the women and child development ministry, “no Indian woman would make a false claim of rape just to get financial support.”

That official must be pretty sure of himself to make such a claim about a country with hundreds of millions of women. If I were an Indian man, I wouldn’t be so confident.

In addition to the rape reporting payments, India has expanded the definition of rape to include men who lead women to believe they will marry them, and then fail to follow through with it. It is a formalized sort of “shotgun marriage” law that is backed up with the severe penalty of hard time in prison.

In a Delhi court verdict, an Indian man named Chhotey Lai ran off with a neighbor, taking her around the country and carrying on a torrid affair. The neighbor believed that he would marry her, or perhaps she simply fantasized about it — this is an almost universal tendency for women involved in affairs.

Regardless, the woman’s father filed a missing person report and when the two lovebirds arrived back home Mr. Lai was promptly arrested and hauled off to court, where he was convicted of rape and sentenced to seven years’ hard labor.

If this were the law of the land in the US, tens of millions of men would immediately have to be reclassified as rapists, and we’d have to build some sort of galactic penal colony to hold all of them. The precedent this sets is breathtaking in its scope, as almost all women “believe” the man-du-jour is going to marry them.

For all the international outrage over the stoning sentence for Iranian adulteress and murderer Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, who helped poison and electrocute her husband, I’ve heard nary a peep about Mr. Lai, who may be a cad and a rake, but who certainly doesn’t deserve time in prison.

What appears to have happened is that the screaming hysteria over rape that gripped the Western world in the 1990s, manifested at the time in “take back the night” marches, demands for prosecuting college boys and VAWA, has been seized upon by governments around the world as a pretext for abusing the rights of men. If you give the state a weapon, it will most certainly be used, and rape with its attendant taboos and emotional power has proven to be a very good pretext for repealing human rights, which have always been an annoyance to governments everywhere.

Just as the black population in the United States correctly identified the “War on Drugs” as a war on blacks – and this is clearly borne out by incarceration statistics – men have to understand that heavy-handed state solutions to intersexual violence constitute a war on men. Furthermore, men have to come to a solid understanding that to condemn the abuses of the state does not imply that ordinary men support rape or violence against women any more than your typical black American supported the plague of crack cocaine in his community. Clearly, it is not a matter of choosing one side or the other: both are wrong. And the crack analogy is not a perfect one, because there has not been a demonstrable rise in sexual violence or crime since the 1970s; the current hysteria is a purely fabricated moral panic.

It is time for men to stand up to a state that is using women as a pretext to strip us of our civil liberties. As in Sweden, India is making a mockery of the concept of consent, which should give women some cause for concern as well, because the logical conclusion of all this is that women have no legal standing to make any agreements or decisions in the sexual realm — it is all up to the judge to decide whether or not the woman made a “legal” choice when she took her pants off.

{ 150 comments… read them below or add one }

barbarossaa January 2, 2011 at 11:42

this is why i call for a rape conviction boycott

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdPeJ4wqE7g

men must refuse to convict any man of rape, and the justification for this is pure and simple. Due to the capacity for misuse and abuse, regarding false rape accusations and rape shield laws it is impossible for a man in the west to get a fair trail in the west. therefore any man called to jury duty for a rape trail where a man is accused should refuse to convict no matter how damning the evidence appears to be.

its harsh but this is what it has come to

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 9
Dadar Baap January 2, 2011 at 11:57

This is great the indian gobmint is going to be so screwed. First of all they don’t even got the resources to keep the people it has now in jail. So many cunts will do this for the money. 450 dollars is like a small fortune. One positive thing is, it will effect scum like sotyojit roy more then any other. If some mens rights group there wanted to effect change, they would help women file rape charges on gobmint officials, politicians, puleesh scum, those manginas etc…. They can even take a cut of the 450 dollars. As usual though they will just come on groups like spearhead and whine. Wow even I am tempted for 450 dollars. This might be fun.

I can’t help but laugh. I would encourage all women to make false rape claims. So when the unarmed indian puleesh (police) try to arrest certain people, the mobs go and burn down a few police stations and jails. Actually it should focus on politicians homes as well.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 4
Anti Idiocy January 2, 2011 at 11:59

It’s beginning to seem that the best matriarchy can do is morally equivalent to the worst patriarchy has done.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 2
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 12:47

The Government of India is a bunch of idiotic mama’s boys and saas ki bahus (daughter-in-laws) who still live with their parents and in-laws.

While it is true that many Indian women will not report rape, even if the rape is real, because like I said before, India is a shame-based society that still puts a high premium on virginity at marriage and her future marriage prospects will be dim, I still think that there is a demographic of women, however small, who will indeed claim false rape.

Heck, we have entire families and communities who can digest the fact that young men and women are choosing their own partners and seek to punish one or the other of them through MURDER!

One thing to remember about India is that it’s a place where if an adult woman makes a choice to run off with a man of her choice, her community may have them tracked down and accuse the man of abduction, even though the two were mutual lovers, especially if that man is of another religion or caste.

One recent hullaballoo was the case of a young couple from the same gotra who got killed because they fell in love and ran off. The “logic”, if you can call it that, from the community was that same gotra is equivalent to same family and they cannot allow “incest” to take place.

Sometimes just the “boy” is killed. Sometimes just the “girl” and sometimes they commit suicide, you can read about it here;

http://passion786.com/?p=630

Notice how legal adults are referred to as “boys” and “girls” in India instead of “men” and “women”.

Our culture does not allow a young adult to grow up, carve his or her own way in the world and make his or her own decisions.

A hot topic in India is “does India’s culture help or hinder its progress?”

My answer is: HINDER.

The police in Merut were called upon to punish men in public places who stalk and harrass women. You know what they did? They went to a park where local COUPLES were walking hand in hand and started beating up those BOYFRIENDS and HUSBANDS!

They even started slapping around a BROTHER who was lounging on the park lawns with his SISTER!

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Couples_thrashed_for_sitting_in_a_park_in_Meerut,_India

http://www.hindu.com/2005/12/24/stories/2005122402651002.htm

On Valentines Day one crazy religious group threatened to go out and forcibly marry young couples in the streets who were brazen enough to walk around, like, well, COUPLES. They took to the streets and whenever they would see young couples they went up to them and started chanting the mantras for MARRIAGE!

Many articles on that;

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=valentines+day+india+moral+police&rlz=1R2ADFA_enUS362&aq=f&aqi=m1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

Forget rape and real sexual harrassement, India is a country that punishes consensual relationships between legal adults!

India has to decide which direction it wants to go in and fast.

Either we become a Taliban and moral police state like Saudi Arabia and Iran, or we become comfortable with allowing “boys” and “girls” to grow up into men and women and honor healthy, consensual relationships.

http://ccs.in/ecatalyst/caught_tanvi.asp

India, you are on the precipice, make up your mind.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 30 Thumb down 30
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 12:52

False rape claims? Ha!

India is a place that punishes even CONSENSUAL relationships between legal adults.

See here the Merut “Operation Majnu” that sought to punish BOYFRIENDS and HUSBANDS for holding their partner’s hands in public:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Couples_thrashed_for_sitting_in_a_park_in_Meerut,_India

http://www.hindu.com/2005/12/24/stories/2005122402651002.htm

And here for the attacks on couples romancing on V-Day:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=valentines+day+india+moral+police&rlz=1R2ADFA_enUS362&aq=f&aqi=m1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

And here for the attacks on couples for daring to choose their own life-partners:

http://passion786.com/?p=630

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 19
Hughman January 2, 2011 at 12:52

“A medical exam cannot prove rape… ”

Sorry to burst the bubble there, but it can (sometimes). How India classifies the level of damage required, I don’t know.

I suspect if the government is going to be losing money, the requirements are going to be strict – tearing of the vagina and bruising consistent with physical struggle being the obvious choices.

Governments do not care about feminism. They care about money and power. ‘Empowering’ women allows for a bigger and cheaper labour pool. Expanding laws allows for a bigger ‘justice’ department, more lawyers.

This may be an unpopular opinion on this site. But I believe it is a correct one. Capitalism doesn’t have morals, or opinions. The baseline is profit, via money and via control.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 12
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 12:54

India is a place where the cops and “moral police” punishes men for even holding the hands of their wives and girlfriends in public, so this does not surprise me.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 22
Anti Idiocy January 2, 2011 at 13:02

@Hughman

“A medical exam cannot prove rape… ”

Sorry to burst the bubble there, but it can (sometimes). How India classifies the level of damage required, I don’t know.

I suspect if the government is going to be losing money, the requirements are going to be strict – tearing of the vagina and bruising consistent with physical struggle being the obvious choices.

Consensual rough sex.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 6
Anti Idiocy January 2, 2011 at 13:03

Damn. Blew the blockquote, so the above might not be clear. Trying again:
@Hughman

“A medical exam cannot prove rape… ”

Sorry to burst the bubble there, but it can (sometimes). How India classifies the level of damage required, I don’t know.

I suspect if the government is going to be losing money, the requirements are going to be strict – tearing of the vagina and bruising consistent with physical struggle being the obvious choices.

Consensual, rough sex.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 4
Dadar Baap January 2, 2011 at 13:04

sotyojit,

Those couples should show their affection at home instead. Don’t worry about not being able to show effection to your wife on the street. someone like me is already showing her effection at your home.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 16
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 13:15

India is full of “conservative misandry” like the social-cons in USA.

It is a land that makes normal, natural, heterosexual attraction between legal adult men and women a taboo.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 20
armorknight January 2, 2011 at 13:48

India is full of “conservative misandry” like the social-cons in USA.

It is a land that makes normal, natural, heterosexual attraction between legal adult men and women a taboo.

Being an Indian myself, I can say that there is indeed some conservative misandry in India. The biggest problem is, like you said in another article, how men are expected to stay with parents even when they don’t want to. That social practice has created tons of white knights and momma’s boys among Indian men.

However, Indian culture is still much more preferable to the feminist West. Especially since there are many cultural controls to keep women in check.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4
Captain Save-a-Ho January 2, 2011 at 14:08

Greetings,

Here’s an excerpt from an online article discussing the Chotai Lai case:

In the present case, Chhotey Lal, the convict and father of six children, had eloped with his neighbour in New Delhi in September 2004, and took her to far away places like Jaipur and Chandigarh. According to the girl, the duo established sexual relations after Lal assured her that he would marry her ‘very soon’. Meanwhile, the girl’s father lodged a ‘missing’ report with the police. The police detained Lal and the girl in March 2005 at Sarai Kale Khan Bus Terminal when they were returning to Delhi. Chhotey Lal was prosecuted for abducting the girl and having sexual relationships with her on false pretext.

“The so-called consent under a false promise to marriage is no consent,” additional sessions judge Mahavir Singhal said.

Highlighting the difference between ‘will’ and ‘consent’, the court said that a nod for sexual relations obtained by a man on the false pretext would not amount to a ‘legal or valid’ consent to save him from punishment for rape.

The Court observed that, even if the woman is assumed to be a willing partner in having a physical relationship, that the accused had no intention to marry her would make it a case where consent was given under misconception of facts, nullifying the efficacy of the nod.

Jesus can anyone imagine what would happen if we had the same sort of law here……?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
Nico January 2, 2011 at 14:13

“no Indian woman would make a false claim of rape just to get financial support.”

The man who said that isn’t afraid to become a laughing stock.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 1
Hughman January 2, 2011 at 14:21

Anti Idiocy – true, true, but I’m saying drawing the line deep in the ‘blood-play’ territory. I’d guess few Indians are into that sort of kink.

It’s not fool-proof, far from it, but it is normally apparent when someone has been raped.

But due to the nature of Western justice systems, any woman claiming rape to a doctor will be referred on to the police (with the patient’s consent) , even if rape does not appear to have occurred. No doctor wants to be brought infront of a tribunal for causing ‘psychological damage’ and sexism charges.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 14:36

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 24
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 14:42

@ Captain Save a Ho:

Greetings,

Here’s an excerpt from an online article discussing the Chotai Lai case:

In the present case, Chhotey Lal, the convict and father of six children, had eloped with his neighbour in New Delhi in September 2004, and took her to far away places like Jaipur and Chandigarh. According to the girl, the duo established sexual relations after Lal assured her that he would marry her ‘very soon’. Meanwhile, the girl’s father lodged a ‘missing’ report with the police. The police detained Lal and the girl in March 2005 at Sarai Kale Khan Bus Terminal when they were returning to Delhi. Chhotey Lal was prosecuted for abducting the girl and having sexual relationships with her on false pretext.

“The so-called consent under a false promise to marriage is no consent,” additional sessions judge Mahavir Singhal said.

Highlighting the difference between ‘will’ and ‘consent’, the court said that a nod for sexual relations obtained by a man on the false pretext would not amount to a ‘legal or valid’ consent to save him from punishment for rape.

The Court observed that, even if the woman is assumed to be a willing partner in having a physical relationship, that the accused had no intention to marry her would make it a case where consent was given under misconception of facts, nullifying the efficacy of the nod.

Jesus can anyone imagine what would happen if we had the same sort of law here……?

Would be the end of PUA and “game”.

In Indian “modern urban centers” if you so much as DARE to ask a girl out on a date and her parents come to find out, they want to meet you, interrogate you, and, if you are wealthy as well as of the same religious and caste background, they WILL pressure you to marry her.

All before you get to even go to the movies!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 19
W.F. Price January 2, 2011 at 14:42

I guess it got held up in moderation because of all the links?

-Satyajit Roy

I found one medium comment with a bunch of links. It’s approved now.

Captain Save-a-Ho January 2, 2011 at 14:45

Sorry looks like I got the man’s name wrong — per the article, it’s “Chhotey Lal.”

I wonder if the Indian courts require any evidence of the man’s alleged promise other than the accuser’s say-so…? If the man says “I never promised to marry my accuser; she had sex with me solely because she wanted to,” and the accuser says “no, I only had sex with him because he said he’d marry me” — what then?

Barring other evidence (a letter/email from the man to the woman promising marriage; a letter/email from the accuser to the man confirming it’s her understanding they are going to wed at some point), I guess the outcome would depend on who the judge/jury believed.

What a tremendous weapon this law is for jilted women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
scot January 2, 2011 at 14:52

“Under a new centrally sponsored government scheme, Indian women who claim to be rape victims will receive $450 cash within two weeks if they claim rape and a medical exam demonstrates unspecified evidence of rape, and then over a year’s time additional benefits are added that bring the total to at least $4,500 (RS 2 lakh), and up to $6,700 (RS 3 lakh) worth of benefits.

No conclusive conviction is required for the money; only the medical exam.”

ISAY.. My false rape accuser got a chunk of money for her false rape accusation against me, that she used to feed her drug habit; and it was right here in the states.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
Captain Save-a-Ho January 2, 2011 at 14:59

@Scot — feel free to share the details, if you wish — I’m curious, but will understand if you don’t want to post them.

What does “ISAY” stand for, btw?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 15:12

For people who want to understand the cultural idiosyncrasies
in India that have given rise to such an anti-male proposal as this, please read here;

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/01/02/india-plunges-into-rape-hysteria/#comment-61842

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 17
Avenger January 2, 2011 at 15:29

Jesus can anyone imagine what would happen if we had the same sort of law here……?

Actually there was a tort called “breech of promise” but it was civil and only amounted to being sued for damages and some monetary award. I guess a lot of females would have sex if they though they were going to be married and men would tell them what they wanted to hear and then eventually back out of the marriage.
There were some criminal offenses too like “seduction” but I’m not sure many men were prosecuted under it because I believe that the female had to be a virgin and you couldn’t be charged if it involved a married woman or a divorced or widowed one. Perhaps in cases where a man was going to be charged under the law he just married the girl but that’s sort of like a coerced wedding.

I don’t know if this is true but someone once told me that in Kansas if you went to like a motel with a girl and had sex that you were considered married, like back in 1970. It doesn’t sound like this can be true but who knows, stranger laws were on the books.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
The Caliph January 2, 2011 at 15:41

I’ll expect a lot of poor schmucks from India’s lower caste to start actively getting accused of rape.

The women will decide they are poorer, and less likely to afford decent defence not to mention easier to legally go after by the police than those from the higher richer caste.

All the bad boys will still get away with premarital sex, only they wont be the ones getting accused of rape. Just watch

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 10
Keyster January 2, 2011 at 15:59

So in the new “global economy”, India engineers products and provides support services and China manufactures everything. Meanwhile back at US based corporate headquarters sitting in a small section of the main building of what used to be the “corporate campus”, are some grossly over paid executives, a few lawyers, some accounts, PR and investor relations, a small marketing department and of course HR. Essentially they oversee a US shell organization, to keep up appearances. “Operations” are handled elsewhere. The only male employees might be a couple facilities guys and a token gay marketing weenie or black lawyer.

As the middle class in China and India rises the US middle class vanishes.
It’s the fat middle class that feminism rises from. That’s what we’re seeing. A HUGE swath of men and sassy independent women going off to work so they too, can afford “the better life”. They yearn to consume.

Wait until they all own cars and gas goes to $10 a gallon.
We had it good for a little while. Kiss those days good bye.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 16:21

I’ll expect a lot of poor schmucks from India’s lower caste to start actively getting accused of rape.

Which lower caste? Lower than what?

The women will decide they are poorer, and less likely to afford decent defence not to mention easier to legally go after by the police than those from the higher richer caste.

Which higher caste? Higher than what?

India has several castes and several more sub-castes.

Caste and finances are not correlated in India.

Most people are poor in India, certainly by US standards.

Those who are rich, those who are poor and those in-between come from a wide variety of “lower” and “higher” castes.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 23
Anonymous January 2, 2011 at 17:32

@ Keyster
“So in the new “global economy”, India engineers products and provides support services and China manufactures everything. Meanwhile back at US based corporate headquarters sitting in a small section of the main building of what used to be the “corporate campus”, are some grossly over paid executives, a few lawyers, some accounts, PR and investor relations, a small marketing department and of course HR. Essentially they oversee a US shell organization, to keep up appearances. “Operations” are handled elsewhere. The only male employees might be a couple facilities guys and a token gay marketing weenie or black lawyer.

As the middle class in China and India rises the US middle class vanishes.
It’s the fat middle class that feminism rises from. That’s what we’re seeing. A HUGE swath of men and sassy independent women going off to work so they too, can afford “the better life”. They yearn to consume.

Wait until they all own cars and gas goes to $10 a gallon.
We had it good for a little while. Kiss those days good bye.”

what if the middle class you are talking about were just the left over of the household that fleed from the overtaxing gov and obamas annoucement that he’ll raise the taxes some more. Basically, all the people that got a job oversea are the best the brightest while the average chunk stays in the US. Since richest people are mostly men and they got drafted oversea by their company all that’s left are women and some underperforming manginas => “mencession/womenconomics”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 18:06

The Mens Rights Movement in India is really a front for Women’s Rights.

From the Indian mens rights sites I was linked to Save Indian Family

http://www.saveindianfamily.org/

and Protect Indian Family

http://protectindianfamily.org/

And finally the real kicker, The All Indian Forgotten Womens Association!!!

http://aifw.info/about-us

These are all orgs designed to protect the rights of INDIAN MOTHERS to require that their grown sons and daughters-in-law live with them!!!

That is what is meant by “mens rights” in India.

Classic.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 16
Anti Idiocy January 2, 2011 at 18:17

I think this business, of a man being convicted of rape for misleading a woman about himself and then having sex with her, will become widespread internationally, we’ve already seen examples in India and Israel at least. I’m aware of some men, who, to protect themselves from false accusations, go to another city and present false identities in bars where they hook up with women. That way, if the women want to falsely accuse them of rape, it will be harder to track them down.

This defensive action may soon be a felony in many jurisdictions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Lara January 2, 2011 at 18:33

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 56
TFH January 2, 2011 at 18:53

I just hope the western men on here realize how lucky they are that they get to marry us for love.

That is it. I am convinced Lara is a man, posing to make women look bad, yet in a realistic way. A superb acting job, that took us quite a while to figure out.

Well played, sir. You had us going for quite a while.

I encourage you to work your magic at places where men are not yet aware of misandry.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
TFH January 2, 2011 at 18:54

“no Indian woman would make a false claim of rape just to get financial support.”

The man who says this has never fucked a woman, Indian or otherwise.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
TFH January 2, 2011 at 18:58

I can say that there is indeed some conservative misandry in India.

Totally. This is what happens when a system carefully constructed by leaders who had a superb understanding of female psychology, gets tampered with.

Men who never had to do anything to get a virginal bride provided to them, instead have to do some work themselves in a new ‘dating’ market.

And guess what? Their first reaction is to try and out-whiteknight each other.

That video clip of a man being beaten on a gameshow by an army of whiteknights, just for defending himself from assualt, sadly is the medium-term fate of India.

Can someone find that link and post it here? This is a good place to keep that archived. Indian men are like birds who have lived their whole lives in cages, and are a million miles from even knowing what they don’t know, let alone learning about the female mind that a centuries-old system kept tightly controlled for the benefit of society.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0
Matt K January 2, 2011 at 19:18

TFH, ask and ye shall receive.

Just Google for…
how can she slap

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Matt K January 2, 2011 at 19:26

In the meantime, OT, a little gender equality from the US, Joe Arpaio style…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8236125/Arizona-sheriff-introduces-all-female-chain-gang.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 19:28

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 20
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 19:47

As in Sweden, India is making a mockery of the concept of consent, which should give women some cause for concern as well, because the logical conclusion of all this is that women have no legal standing to make any agreements or decisions in the sexual realm

W.F.Price, the thing about India is, its a place where even consensual sex between 2 adults is considered taboo. Despite Kama Sutra and our ancient temples with orgies carved on them, we are currently a very sexually repressed society.

Some of us blame Islamic influence for that, others blame Victorian morality during the British Raj, but whatever it is, there is something in the psyche of every Indian that does not want to believe that Indians are having sex outside of wedlock.

There is something in the collective psyche of Indians that does not sit well with human sexuality. Something that does not want to acknowledge ourselves as sexual beings rather than holy men, sadhus, yogis and chaste asexual mothers.

Back during the onslaught of the AIDS scare in the 80s the official INDIAN HEALTH DEPARTMENT refused AIDS awareness programs and research because “we are Indians. we are not doing things that will result in AIDS”.

In the meantime India became #2 in the world for AIDS, right behind Africa.

In short, Indians are in deep denial.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 18
ElectricAngel January 2, 2011 at 20:08

Hughman wrote:

Capitalism doesn’t have morals, or opinions.

I couldn’t disagree more strongly. Not to go too far off-topic, but I would refer you to Jane Jacobs’ Systems of Survival. A good summary is at Wikipedia. To wit: “In the preface, Jacobs explains, ‘This book explores the morals and values that underpin viable working life. Like the other animals, we find and pick up what we can use, and appropriate territories. But unlike the other animals, we also trade and produce for trade.’”

Some of the characteristics of the Commercial (i.e. Capitalist) syndrome include: Shun force
Compete
Be efficient
Be open to inventiveness and novelty
Use initiative and enterprise
Come to voluntary agreements
Respect contracts

But read the book and decide for yourself.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
doclove January 2, 2011 at 20:27

I’d like to bring something up. If India is anything like Satyagit Roy says, how did it get this way? The Indian subcontinent is a very old civilization, and it is in the top four for being one of the origional founding civilaztions alongside China, Egypt and Iraq( Mesopotamia) in human history. Do you think that South Asia hasn’t experienced many of the things that we in the West do now in the past? I believe that South Asia has experienced many of the same things regarding sexual libertinism, feminism, white knighting and manginaism to one degree or another in the past. It may not have been exactly the same, but in my opinion there were similarities. I remember 22 years ago being in the British Museum in London which has artifacts from all over the world including South Asia. They had an ancient freeze from South Asia which showed an orgy between men and women. Some were of 2 women servicing one man, and others were of 2 men servicing one women. I understand that Satyagit Roy wants India to be more like the USA, and I understand his point to a degree. However, I agree more with TFH in the fact that Satyagit Roy should be careful of what he asks for because he may get it( the bad with the good). Feminism, white knighting, manginaism and sexual libertinism is ruining the West and the USA in particular in their present forms in the present day and for the forseeable future. These problems listed in the previous sentence aren’t the only problems, but they are a significant portion of them that the West and the USA faces. The most important concept I’d like to introduce to Satyagit Roy and others like him is the word HYPERGAMY!!! Women have a tendency to put themselves in Revolving Virtual Harems in our American culture with the Alpha Cad Player men. The Alpha Cad Player men may be so in highschool but not 10 or 20 years later while the loser with the ladies in highschool may be the winners 10 or 20 years later, or the winners may remain winners and the losers remain losers. Just as promiscuity is a permanent feature of all men whether or not they control it or not, or they are successful with the ladies or not, HYPERGAMY is a permanent feature with the ladies whether or not they control it and whether or not they are successful with the men or not; yet, remember that when you think about the description of the ancient Indian freeze I described above. Satyagit Roy and others like him, be careful of what you wish for India because you may get it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 20:27

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 18
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 20:36

declove, see here;

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/01/02/india-plunges-into-rape-hysteria/#comment-61925

Also, the beta male is pedalstalized in India because our culture places a premium on smart, domesticated men who can support their families.

Just like video game winners are oooooed and aaaaaahed over in Korea, similarly, engineers, ibankers, doctors and computer programmers are ooooooed and aaaaaaaed over in India.

The somehwhat geeky provider beta male is considered a “great catch” in India.

The only thing that a modern Indian woman (or any woman) asks is that he man up and move out of his parents home and pair-bond with her, which is a very reasonable demand, in my opinion.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 19
TFH January 2, 2011 at 20:38

Satyajit Ray,

W.F.Price, the thing about India is, ….
…..In short, Indians are in deep denial.

This is the first comment from Satyajit Ray that I actually agree with.

In India, driving a motorcycle on the highway, without a helmet (in fact, fitting a family of 4 on it), is OK. But consensual sex is not, outside of the upper class of a few major cities.

I have seen Indians, however, who came straight from India, from wealthy but not super-wealthy families in Delhi and Bombay, and immediately start to score with decent looking white chicks. Within a month of landing in the US for the first time. Not many guys were like this, but a few were.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
TFH January 2, 2011 at 20:44

doclove,

India has had period of extreme sexual freedom. Not just the Kama Sutra, but lesser-known things like the Ananga Ranga, etc. were created in India. Much of what is called ‘Game’ today was known in India 500 years ago.

But as I often say, no society where women have 5 or more sexual partners in their lifetimes can survive. Indian civilizations collapsed due to too much sexual freedom, and thus Indians today are extremely vigilant about keeping the average sexual partner count of a woman low. Most still marry as virgins. A non-virgin is immediately of lower value. A hot woman who might have had 1-2 prior sexual partners will be rejected by a lot of men, and so is a low-hanging fruit for any man who is not troubled by her having 1-2 sexual partners prior to marriage (that sounds amazing in the West).

But there is a vacuum in the Indian psyche – they just will not talk about sex. Movies that have no problem showing graphic violence will not show kissing (but have no trouble showing cleavage and big bouncing boobs while dancing).

It appears that prior civilizational collapses seared into the Indian psyche the crucial importance of keeping the # of sexual partners low. They take that code to illogical extremes sometimes.

Satyajit Ray is correct to say that this is a bit extreme at times, but on the flip side, he does not know the perils of a society where women have multiple sexual partners (and also have the ability to vote themselves more and more money and ‘rights’).

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 21:12

I don’t know that South Asia was ever sexually liberated or libertine. The Kama Sutra was written in Sanskrit by a scribe patronized by a royal court. Sanskrit was always like Latin, an elite literary language.

While some sections of society may have been more sexually free than others, my research into ancient South Asian cultures reflects that although not as repressed as current India, still, the values of chastity and celibacy were very highly regarded, and sex within marriage was the accepted norm.

My opinion is that we Indians are naturally sexually reserved (may be due to low testosterone levels, I don’t know) and that if we were just allowed to have a normal sex life with our wives and/or girlfriends without getting jailed or shamed for it, we’d be happy.

Unfortunately, due to the taboos surrounding sexuality in our country we are extremely frustrated and come across as very horny, as you imagine any red-blooded 27 year old male virgin would be.

Our society needs to allow us healthy outlets. For god sake at least allow us to hold hands in the park, and that too – with women – not other men!

(Funny how public displays of affection between men and women in India are shamed and criminalized yet public displays of affection between men are perfectly acceptable)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 15
doclove January 2, 2011 at 21:51

@Satyagit Roy
Thankyou for responding to me in this post and Gorbachev’s post. It sounds like a reasonable demand for a man to move out of his parents’ home if he can even if it is next door like theAmerican sitcom ” Everybody Loves Raymond” according to the cultural and personal expectations of my American culture. However, adults usually live with their parents either because they are too poor to move out or they are trying to inherit the family business such as a farm for example or they are retirement benefactors for their parents. Most of the world has behaved this way now and also in the past. There was a time in the past even in my family when one son would inherit the family farm and his wife and children would live with the grandparents under one roof. Later when most of them moved to the cities, they would live in the same neighborhood within the same city. After this they would live within different neighborhoods within the same metropolitan area. Now more and more we live in completely different metropolitan areas. This has happened within 4 generations.
This said, I advise you to be careful of what you ask for because the slippery slope ofsliding into rampant divorce, illigitimate bastard childbirth and a whole host of other social maladies could and from the looks of it will probably happen to India if it continues on the same trajectory as the USA. There was a time in which beta provider nice guy men had it good in the USA. My grandfather’s generation was the last generation for the most part to experience this, and I’m age 42 now. I understand that you want adult children to be more mature and independent in your opinion. However, what we have in the USA now is not only a disaster for men, but a worse disaster for the children who all too often grow into being messed up adults. It’s difficult to see how India is doing worse in raising its children to be adults. India may be just as bad but in a different way or maybe even better. I’ve never been there so I’ll reserve judgement on that one. Most of the Asian Indians as a group seem to be standup beta provider guys even more so than my own White race as a group here in the USA though, and that’s just my opinion.
When I was in Korea, I knew women who hated being married to the oldest son even though most of them weren’t living with the parents because they thought the female in-laws were a pain even though they adored their husbands and male in-laws. This said, South Korea’s bastardy rate is 2% while the USA is 40% and, the divorce rate in Soth Korea is 45% while the USA is 50% today. South Korea had a divorce rate of 1% as recently as 1990 A.D. It got the 45% divorce rate as early as 2000 A.D. Things changed rapidly. Before 1990 men got the children and the home unless they were heinously bad in South Korea, and it was usually Korean men initiating divorce. After 1990, Korean women got the children and the home unless she was heinously bad just like the USA. Now South Korea has a 45% divorce rate with 65% of the Korean women initiating divorce while the USA has a 50% divorce rate with 70% of American women initiating divorce. The USA let men get the children and home unless they were heinously bad up until about 1855. After that, women got the children and home. Divorce rates started going up in the USA after 1855. Then when no fault divorce laws were put into effect after 1965 in the USA, divorce rates skyrocketed to disturbing percentages.
Please listen very carefully to what TFH and I with othersare saying to you. You have the right to disagree and even be wrong the same as I do or anyone else does on this set of issues or other issues completely unrelated to what we are discussing here on this site. The USA is a better country now, but continued success is not guaranteed. The present day feminism, white knighting, manginaism and sexual libertinism will take its toll on the USA if we keep doing what we’re doing long enough and with enough intensity. It seems as if mild benevolent patriarchy is the best for building civilization and the prosperity of a country. Mild to moderate feminism seems to erode our civilization. Severe patriarchy like what you have had in India seems to have stopped the fall if not reversed it and is the least expensive for a government and society to maintain law and order. South Asian culture has changed over the centuries. I can’t imagine anyone making public pornographic art in Southern Asia in the 19th century, but clearly public pornographic art was being made in Southern Asian thousands of years ago and even to some small extant today for example. I believe there was a reason ossified into a severe prudish patriarchy. Adult Children living with the parents and all the 19th century prudish mores may have been the best option when India’s fortunes stagnated and fell over the preceeding centuries. Again, be careful of what you ask for, you may get it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
TFH January 2, 2011 at 22:14

doclove and Satyajit Ray,

It all comes down to this :

In India (and China, etc.), almost all kids grow up with their biological father living in the same home as them, all the way until the child is an adult.

In the US, more than half of all children do not have their biological father all the way from birth to until adulthood.

To me, that is the bottom line. ‘Sexual freedom’, etc. are not as important as a child benefiting from having uninterrupted proximity to his biological father.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 22:17

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 17
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 22:19

To me, that is the bottom line. ‘Sexual freedom’, etc. are not as important as a child benefiting from having uninterrupted proximity to his biological father.

Then give up your sexual freedom, have a child, and give him or her your uninterrupted proximity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 15
TFH January 2, 2011 at 22:53

Then give up your sexual freedom, have a child, and give him or her your uninterrupted proximity.

What the hell is this gibberish?

In the West, feminism forces fathers out of children’s lives AGAINST THEIR WILL. He is FORBIDDEN from seeing his own children. But his money is still seized, of course.

You don’t seem to have a problem with this.

You-just-do-not-get-it. No matter how many people have tried to educate you.
________________________________

Also, Satyajit, someone like you would get more sex in India than in the US. The sexual freedom in the US enables women to sleep with only the top 20% of men. A few men have multiple women, while the lesser men get nothing.

In India, you would get an arranged marriage, even if she is not compatible with you.

In the US, someone like you would get no women whatsoever. You would be allowed to spend your money on women, in return for a ‘thank you’, and nothing more.

This is apparently what you want.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Lord Viktor January 2, 2011 at 23:03

@Hughman:

Capitalism doesn’t have morals, or opinions. The baseline is profit, via money and via control.

The same can also be said about Socialism and Communism. Either way, the gov’t gets rich. The bastards.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Satyajit Roy January 2, 2011 at 23:04

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 16
x2 January 2, 2011 at 23:07

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 32
doclove January 2, 2011 at 23:20

@ TFH Thankyou for responding to me. It seems as if you and I agree on a lot. All civilizations must provide at least 2 out of 3 things and preferably 3 out of 3 things to survive. They are:
1) Law and order
2) An orderly transition of power
3) The rising expectations of the people for a better life or at least the same life as good as they have had without a diminishing standard of living
If one is missing one of the above there is trouble but it can be managed with some difficulty. If two are missing a civilization is in serious trouble. If all three are missing the civilization is in extremely serious trouble.
The expectations of men and children have been lowered due to insane feminism, white knighting, manginaism and sexual libertinism. It is costing the government a lot of of money in order to maintain law and order, and in fact cost the government much less money inflation adjusted before 1965, and probably even less money inflation adjusted before 1855. There were probabaly less people involved working for the government percentage wise too especially to maintain law and order. For now our orderly transition of power is secure, but law and order is under increasing strain while the expectations of the people is being savagely diminished. This is not good to say the least.
Feminism as it is now is an offshoot of Marxism, and we all should know Marxism has imposed savage tyranny before it collapses and leaves chaos in it’s wake if not properly dismantled. Even if any form of Marxism is properly and adequately dismantled there is pain, but if not properly and adequately dismantled there is even more pain for the civilization or society. Marxism doesn’t work because to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher said the problem with even a relatively benign Marxism is that you run out of your own and everyone elses money, wealth, resources, ingenuity, creativity, desires and labor. You can’t take from the productive class, kill your golden egg laying goose from being overworked, and blame the ever sickening dying overworked goose even though that seems to be the path the USA is on. Government may be necessary, but it is a necessary evil, and the less we have of it the better. Feminism etc. increases the growth of the government. There are less productive people to support it all. It will eventually collapse as a result if we continue on the same tajectory as we’re on.
Satyagit Roy is surprised that in the past India was much more sexually libertine, and he says only a few Ancient Indians were like that. He may be right, but if a large enough a minority is like that especially if they are the ruling elite, it will eventually lead to the collapse of the said civilization. It’s not the only reason for the collapse, but it is a big enough of a reason for collasing civilizations. It’s why the sexual morals changed.
I believe you are correct that if most women have 5 or more sexual partners, they are useless for marriage although they may make wonderful temporary sexual partners for the men who can successfully seduce them. Not all men can be in the top 20% to experience they joys of consistently doing this though. Citezen Renegade( formerly Roissy in DC) http://www.roissy.wordpress.com using a Donlak link as much says that when women have too many sexual partners, they are useless for marriage. I believe they said after a woman has 2 or more previous partners, a man has a more than 50% chance of being divorced from her. However, considering women have the anti-slut defense syndrome to one degree or another and under- report their number of partners, one has to use the sitcom” Seinfeld” multiply by 3 for the woman’s reporting of the number of sexual partners to get her true number as a rule. The reason why women have a tendency to become useless as good stable marriage partners is they have a tendency to have their emotional well being damaged to a greater degree by each new partner they have sexual relations with more so than men as a rule. Also they have a tendency to want a man to be the Alpha Cad Player type with the ladies which most men can’t be. I believe Satyagit Roy doesn’t see that even somewhat ugly women can easily sleep with the top notch men while the reverse is decidedly not true. Womens sense of entitlement becomes too high as a result. He also doesn’t see that women have a tendency to want the same men that other women want and put themselves into Revolving Virtual Harems due to HYPERGAMY unless they are educated, trained and disciplined to control their HYPERGAMY the same way a man must be educated to control his tendency to promiscuity. The image of the Indian pornographic freeze is instructive as in some men will get 2 or more women to service them while some men are competing for few women; yet even the among the multiple men competing for one woman, only one man will be her favorite. I’ve come to the conclusion that for humans the core of our humanity is first, our gender second, our sexual orientation third and our race fourth and our religion, culture, language etc. last as to how we human beings think, act and say things.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Rey de Corazones January 2, 2011 at 23:28

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 37
codebuster January 2, 2011 at 23:37

W.F.Price, the thing about India is, its a place where even consensual sex between 2 adults is considered taboo. Despite Kama Sutra and our ancient temples with orgies carved on them, we are currently a very sexually repressed society.

Some of us blame Islamic influence for that, others blame Victorian morality during the British Raj, but whatever it is, there is something in the psyche of every Indian that does not want to believe that Indians are having sex outside of wedlock.

There is something in the collective psyche of Indians that does not sit well with human sexuality. Something that does not want to acknowledge ourselves as sexual beings rather than holy men, sadhus, yogis and chaste asexual mothers.

Back during the onslaught of the AIDS scare in the 80s the official INDIAN HEALTH DEPARTMENT refused AIDS awareness programs and research because “we are Indians. we are not doing things that will result in AIDS”.

In the meantime India became #2 in the world for AIDS, right behind Africa.

In short, Indians are in deep denial.

Interesting comments, Satyajit Roy, forcing me to think outside the square.

It is now fairly well-established that women’s choices, within the permissive cultures that characterize the sexual revolution, are pretty lame. The choices that Anglosphere women make focus principally on the extremes of the exciting, bad-boy thug, versus the nondescript, safe-but-predictable, beta/omega provider (I don’t buy into the myth of dominant alpha that seems to be favored by the Game community – women’s choices are too arbitrary, too dominated by the impulse of the moment, too grounded in solipsism and security needs to conclude that they make intelligent choices based on mate superiority). Why shouldn’t Indians be horrified? Of course this does not justify their extreme morality either. But nor should we be surprised.

Satyajit Roy’s comment about the Victorian morality during the British Raj also caught my attention. Perhaps the ways of the Anglosphere might be more toxic than we previously gave credit. It seems to me that the entire world is in deep denial.

To me, that is the bottom line. ‘Sexual freedom’, etc. are not as important as a child benefiting from having uninterrupted proximity to his biological father.

Indeed. Methinks that some kind of global revision of all assumptions is called for.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
codebuster January 2, 2011 at 23:47

Rey de Corazones:

Lots more than 20% of the men I know are sleeping with women. In fact, more like 100% of them are, except the ones who bat for the other team. The only involuntarily celibate guy I know is an elderly widower, who, at his age, almost certainly doesn’t care.

I suspect that the truth lies somewhere between TFH and Rey de Corazones. The idea that “everybody’s doing it” is as flawed as the idea that all the women are choosing dominant alphas. Women are just not that clever.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
misterb aka misterbastard January 2, 2011 at 23:53

@ Satyajit Roy

Your country sounds like its in deep trouble like Britain. man I pity the Indian men for the mess what women done.

to everyone

the world had already become a mad house. Scream the word a MadHouse and someone would utter two words shut up. I am not surprised on how bad things are in India and the rest of the world.

Women are natural born destroyers and killers. Feminism had unleashed their bestial natures threefold.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 00:14

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 30
doclove January 3, 2011 at 00:48

One of the things which is not spoken of enough is that on almost any measurable human behavior, not only is there a glass ceiling which is difficult for most to go above there is a glass floor which one can fall below. It is true that there are a higher percentage of male geniuses, tremendous athletes, leaders etc., but there are also a higher percentage of of men who are homeless, mentally retarded, in jail etc. Present day feminism complains about the glass ceiling women can’t get through, but they don’t seem to care about the higher percentage of men who fall through the glass floor with noone willing to help them even when such said help could genuinely help them. Where this is leading, I’ll explain below.
It is true that almost all men in my generation or younger can and probably have had more sexual partners than in my father’s and grandfather’s generation. I’m 42 years old. What is also true is that the ability to have a stable monagamous healthy marriage relationship has become much more difficult to have than in previous times due to a large extant because of the changing laws and enforcement of such laws because of insane policies enacted due to feminism, white knighting and manginaism. A spouse either man or woman can be sexually assaulted or raped which wasn’t true in times past. In almost half the states, adultry isn’t even grounds to secure the home or children at all and in the other states adultry is hardly likely to affect the outcome of which spouse will recieve the children and home unlike in times past. What’s the point of getting married if one can not secure exclusive sexual rights to one’s spouse and can not secure rights to sex upon demand in most circumstances? There doesn’t seem to be any point. A man can not even stop making payments for child support in most states to his present or ex wife if the child is not biologically his and he can prove the woman committed an act of fraud on him. What’s the point of getting married again? There doesn’t seem to be any for at leas the man yet again! Our society does a great job for making any sane, knowledgeable wise man not want to get married for these reasons. Why so many men still want to get married should be regarded as a great wondrous miracle by all women, but I think the majority of the ladies don’t think so.
There was a higher percentage of men who could get sex upon demand from their wives in the past because there were no sexual assault or rape laws concerning one’s spouse. The same could be said about women could not be charged with raping or sexually assaulting their husbands. While most people today may have more sexual partners than in the past, they can not guarantee sex upon demand at least within the confines of marriage like the past. Most people especially men need marriage to have safe satisfying sex lives which usually means sex upon demand in most circumstances with the confines of marriage. Only a few people especially men can have satisfying sex lives and get sex most of the time they want outside of marriage especially as they get older, poorer, physically uglier and become more socially awkward. Although most men today may have had more sexual partners than men of my father’s and grandfather’s generations, they also have more grinding periods of celibacy not of their own choosing. Remember all too often in this world in order for someone to win someone else has to lose. Well on this issue and a whole host of others these days the winners are winning more than they ever did in the past and the losers are losing more than they ever did in the past.
Where does this lead? Like almost any other measurable human behavior, when it it comes to sex men are more likely to be found to be at the left and right ends of the bell curve than women. This means there are a higher percentage of male virgins even among those who are not mentally retarded, clinically insane, physically handicapped maimed or mutilated especially if said males don’t really want to remain virgins. There’s also a higher percentage of males who have had an extremely high number of sexual partners for example extending into triple digit numbers or higher than women. We can dispute what the numbers or percentages are, but not the trends of what is really happening. Remember it is much easier for a higher percentage of women to get sex if she sets her sights realistically than it is for men even if he is setting his sights realistically or even taking anything he can get. That’s why the overwhelming majority of prostitutes are women and the overwhelming majority of prostitution customers are men The same could be said about strippers and their customers. Even in Tucker Max’s book, Assholes Finish First, noted that even if a man has the greatest ” game with women” in the world, he still has to line up, go out and try to get them while famous men have women line up for them. Disturbing as that may sound to you, he’s right.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
codebuster January 3, 2011 at 01:05

Codebuster, my observations are colored by (lack of) age; most guys in my social circle(s) are in their twenties or thirties. But, yeah, all of them are getting laid. That includes the married ones.

If a guy who isn’t morbidly obese, homeless, or autistic wants to get laid, and can’t, it’s likely that his standards are at least somewhat miscalibrated. Yes, men can have overly high standards, too… Gasp! Imagine that.

In any case, as a neutral observer, I feel compelled to say that the comments section of this site *will* repel visitors.

I agree with the gist of your premise, RDC. I don’t buy the assertion that alphas are getting all the women and everyone else is doing without. But I also think that the Anglosphere’s obsession with getting laid is perverse. There are as many liars among the getting laid camp as there are in the alleged celibate-because-all-women-choose-alphas camp. And if one walks around with their eyes open, they will see enough women pairing up with non-alphas to realize that “If a guy who isn’t morbidly obese, homeless, or autistic wants to get laid, and can’t, it’s likely that his standards are at least somewhat miscalibrated.“. Women are creatures of impulse who prioritize security and groupthink (belonging), and that alone makes them accessible irrespective of whether one has Game or not. In fact, how many people realize that good, well-executed Game can actually work against you in some situations? Of course we probably need to clarify terms, like “getting laid” (in marriage? once in a blue moon? once a week? multiple partners?), but yeah, I agree that getting laid (whatever it means) is not the impossible goal that many people are complaining it to be.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
TFH January 3, 2011 at 01:08

TFH, where do you get these statistics? Do you just make them up? These sort of comments are why we can’t realistically direct people who might actually be movers-and-shakers to this website — you’d have to be a complete loser to think that the percentage is anywhere in the zip code of this figure.

Dude, it is pretty well known that in a hypergamous urban setting, women spend their 20s in pursuit of the top tier of ‘alpha’ males (~20%), while ignoring the rest. Then, with their looks fading, they show up at age 32-33 and then agree to marry a beta that they aren’t really attracted to.

That would not be quite as bad, except that the woman divorces the beta and takes alimony and CS from him.

So no, that beta is not celibate, but he spends most of his 20s with very little action, as all women pursue the alphas.

Rob Fedders’ site used to say that 95% of women sleep with 5% of men, if all controls are lifted. That may be exaggerated, but 80/20 is pretty accurate in the 20s dating scene…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
TFH January 3, 2011 at 01:13

Satyajit,

Again, more hogwash, and inability to answer simple questons, or digest points that multiple people are telling you.

You truly have a very inaccurate picture of both India, and the US.

The worst thing is that you think American children who grow up without their fathers is because the father voluntarily abandoned the child.

You have no awareness that the government, and many women, forcibly separate the father and the child (while seizing the father’s money). This is the reality of America.

But you want to put your fingers in your ears and sing ‘la la la I can’t hear you’. You have zero concept of the tradeoffs that would ensue if you dismantle the Indian system.

And yes, YOU would get less sex in America than under the Indian system, for reasons that have been explained to you in excruciating detail.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 01:13

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 29
TFH January 3, 2011 at 01:23

Rey de Corazones,

You really have no clue about basic statistic and proportions. Go to any nightclub and see all the beta males standing around the dance floor looking at the women, and going home night after night, week after week, with nothing. They get married years later after the women ‘settle’, but the woman often either deprives them, cheats on them, etc. after a few years.

If not for female hypergamy, Game would not have evolved.

If you think 90% of single men (including who you call ‘nerds’) are getting regular action at will, you, quite frankly, have no real experience.

The concentration of female sex during the college years, and the post-college years, among a relatively small tier is common wisdom in the Game community that is widely accepted. Whether it is 80/20 or slightly different, the point stands.

That you include married guys in your list of ‘guys you know’ merely proves my point, rather than yours.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
alpha January 3, 2011 at 01:28

Satyajit,

Again, more hogwash, and inability to answer simple questons, or digest points that multiple people are telling you.

You truly have a very inaccurate picture of both India, and the US.

You have no awareness that the government, and many women, forcibly separate the father and the child (while seizing the father’s money). This is the reality of America.

TFH, he is NOT unaware of anything.He does not merely have a misleading picture of India, He is deliberately painting a misleading picture of India in order to justify his obsession with “modernising Indian society” Gee where have I heard that before?

Feminists,Marxists,rationalists, whatever, their foe is the same-tradition. all of it.

He openly alternates between claiming that tradition hurts women-to tradition hurts men. He KNOWS what danger men face from feminism-and he bashes on regardless. This guy is practicing his politics here.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
TFH January 3, 2011 at 01:33

Rey de Calzones,

http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2008/03/love-is-for-suckers-blood-suckers.html

Here is more about female hypergamy and how multiple women pursue a small proportion of men. It requires a strict adherence to the institution of marriage (as in marriage 1.0), to create 1:1 monogamy. That is why traditional India, Muslim societies, etc. have been extremely serious about keeping women virgins until marriage (Christian societies were rather serious about this two just a couple of generations ago).

This is common, common knowledge among the Game community, which I have been in for 9 years.

Plus, surely you know that in the old days, the King had dozens of consorts and nobles had 2-4 each. What happened to all the surplus men? Or do you think they all got laid at will as much as they wanted.

Basic math, Rey, basic math.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
TFH January 3, 2011 at 01:34

alpha,

TFH, he is NOT unaware of anything.He does not merely have a misleading picture of India,

You might be right.

His type are quite dangerous. Just like the crowd who beat up that man on the Indian game show…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
codebuster January 3, 2011 at 01:35

Although most men today may have had more sexual partners than men of my father’s and grandfather’s generations, they also have more grinding periods of celibacy not of their own choosing. Remember all too often in this world in order for someone to win someone else has to lose.

There are cultures throughout human history where large proportions (majorities) of men had to do without. In Muslim or Mormon cultures where only the most powerful men have several wives, for example, many men have to do without.

From an evolutionary-pschology perspective, baboons, seals, elephants, meerkats are animal societies where only the males at the top get to mate with the females of the group. All the others have to do without, or compete, or die.

In his blog, Assanova discusses why ugly men don’t get women, and a couple of the commenters were whining that it’s all so unfair that just because they’re ugly they have to miss out. What about ugly women? Don’t these whingers realize that women also have to compete on the sexual selection pecking order? Where do these fuglies get their sense of entitlement from? And I bet they’re hitting on women way out of their league. I have no sympathy for them. There is no pre-ordained natural law that makes sex an entitlement for all men – or women for that matter. And the only reason that we can entertain this mirage of sexual plenty is because of our contraceptive technologies. It’s an artificial, wholly unnatural situation. Take away the contraceptive technologies, and we’ll be back to the old morality, where doing without was, for the most part, the default – sex in marriage usually becoming stale after the romance period has passed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 01:42

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 32
TFH January 3, 2011 at 01:42

There are cultures throughout human history where large proportions (majorities) of men had to do without. In Muslim or Mormon cultures where only the most powerful men have several wives, for example, many men have to do without.

From an evolutionary-pschology perspective, baboons, seals, elephants, meerkats are animal societies where only the males at the top get to mate with the females of the group. All the others have to do without, or compete, or die.

This is correct. Actually, it is common knowledge at Roissy’s comments and elsewhere.

I still maintain that in a 20s dating scene, 20% of men are getting most of the sex, with many betas getting only infrequent lays.

The women then get scared and settle for a beta at age 32-33. A few learn to love the beta, but many others either deprive him, cheat on him, etc.

Rey’s claim that all the men he knows, which include nerds/geeks, are getting ‘all the sex they want’ is laughable, and betrays a severe lack of understanding of female hypergamy, and the modern sexual marketplace (which necessitated the emergence of Game and other strategies).

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
TFH January 3, 2011 at 01:48

Rey,

“It is pretty well known,” hmm? So are you actually saying that only twenty percent of men in their 20s are getting laid?

A deliberately distorted interpretation of what I said.

Plus I see you dodged the source I provided from Rob Fedders,….

…..as well as the basic logical point of kings in the old days having multiple wives, while lesser men didn’t get any.

Dodging points doesn’t build your cred as a thinker, Rey.

And, yes, Virginia, the vast majority of people are getting laid.

Ah, you are up to ‘people’ now… Yes, most women (except for the very ugliest) are getting laid.

Most married men do ‘get laid’ but often not in the quality or quantity they would like if they are more than 4 years into the marriage.

But most single guys in their 20s aren’t getting much action. The bottom 80% have infrequent action with large periods of involuntary celibacy in between. Your source does not disprove this, as it does not talk about frequency.

Nothing I have said here is anything but common knowledge here and at Roissy’s. You have a lot to learn, kid.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3
codebuster January 3, 2011 at 01:50

I still maintain that in a 20s dating scene, 20% of men are getting most of the sex, with many betas getting only infrequent lays.

The women then get scared and settle for a beta at age 32-33. A few learn to love the beta, but many others either deprive him, cheat on him, etc.

This is closer to the truth. Betas make terrific, predictable providers who won’t question anything. Ideal as marriage partners.

Rey’s claim that all the men he knows, which include nerds/geeks, are getting ‘all the sex they want’ is laughable

Yes, I have trouble with this, too. But I believe, from what I’ve been told about a friend’s son’s experiences, that the contemporary situation might be very different to how I remember it. Maybe girls are just throwing it away at random these days?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
x2 January 3, 2011 at 01:52

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 28
doclove January 3, 2011 at 01:54

@Rey de Corazones
I’m glad you are not disturbed by any of this. I’m not being sarcastic. I mean it. I too realize life is hopelessly unfair and that in order for someone to win someone has to lose. I too have to wake up in the morning and go to work for a living. I’m happy that you and your friends seem to get laid whenever you want. This is simply not the case for everyone especially men. I’m even speaking about men who seem fit and normal to me.
I personally think based on what I’ve anecdotally seen among my friends in their 20′s, 30′s and 40′s that TFH is telling the truth that 20% of the men are really cleaning up and getting sex an unbelieveable number of women. It’s possible that I’m wrong and you are right, but I have not seen it that way for the past 20 years or so. I also agree with you that men can set their sights to high for what they can actually get, but it seems to be a more common occurance among women. Any woman can get a higher quality man for at least a short term fling of sex than your typical man can. Women and men I think fair about equally when it comes to a long term relationship. Because women when they are young and preferably but not necessarily in shape, can get a better man for a short term fling, they think they are worth more than what they truly are for long term relationships. Certainly being in the top 50-60% of men these days can be good, but if you are in the top 20% it’s even much better than ever before for the number of women a man can get and the lack of unwanted celibacy. If a man is in the bottom 40% and especially the bottom 20% these days it’s much worse than in times past.
Please answer these questions. Why are there more many more women who are prostitutes and strippers while most of their customers are men even today when women have more money than ever before? Do you believe that the bell curve is essentially correct when measuring human behavior especially regarding the differences between men and women, and that there are a higher percentage of male virgins than female virgins as well as a higher percentage of men who have had a high number of voluntary non paying partners than women who have had a high number of voluntary non paying partners( no prostitution)? Why do you think this is?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 01:54

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 30
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 02:02

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 30
TFH January 3, 2011 at 02:05

codebuster,

Maybe girls are just throwing it away at random these days?

There does seem to be a bit of questioning among younger women that they can party it up well past age 35, now that they see a lot of cougars that they don’t want to end up like. At the same time, they don’t like the prospect of ‘settling’ either.

The Rob Fedders article below has a pretty good explantion of female hypergamy :

http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2008/03/love-is-for-suckers-blood-suckers.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
x2 January 3, 2011 at 02:05

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 29
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 02:11

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 28
TFH January 3, 2011 at 02:12

Another thing Rey ought to read is Ferdinand Bardamu’s ‘Contract Between the Sexes’ :
http://www.inmalafide.com/2009/08/06/george-sodini-and-the-contract-between-the-sexes/

It goes further into the issue of a majority of men getting much less sex than they would like in an era without a healthy institution of marriage.

Again, this uneven distribution of sex among single people is pretty common knowledge among this entire sphere of blogs.

And, do you think that your idealized arranged marriages would be filled with hot sex? Ha!

Idealized? Hardly. That you have to make up lies about what I said shows your basic emptiness of your position.

Please answer doclove’s questions, and also demonstrate that you read the Rob Feders and Inmalafide links I provided.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
doclove January 3, 2011 at 02:19

@Rey de Corazones
It’s possible that you are right and the bell curve is not as bad as everyone else here on this site is saying that it is. That’s not my experience, but I understand that others have different personal experiences from me. Maybe I didn’t ask the questions right. Why are there many more female prostitutes than male prostitutes? Why are there many more female strippers than male strippers? Why are there more male customers than female customersfor prostitutes and strippers?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 02:24

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 30
Dadar Baap January 3, 2011 at 02:26

Sotyojit roy,

Stop talking like your some eckspurth (expert) on india. Your just a some commie bong mangina out for a disinformation campaign. Your kind has done more for helping the feminist movement then anyone else. Luckily the indian government are incompetent and can’t really implement the thousands of unenforceable laws they have there.

This sotyojit just makes up stuff as he goes a long. He really goes out of his way for cunt validation. I am not even sure why he is posting on the spearhead. The posters here are actually more politically aware then the usual people this bong mangina commie is use to dealing with.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Rey de Corazones January 3, 2011 at 02:29

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 29
doclove January 3, 2011 at 03:07

@Rey de Corazones
You are correct that most men are sexually satisfied with sticking their penises into any warm wet holes on women which will have them as long as these women meet minimun standards of said such men. Each man’s standard will vary. It’s also true that men tend to be much more deliberate pursuers and women are the ones who are pursued and think ” things just happen.” It’s true that men are men and women are women. There’s no disagreements here, but this is not really answering the questions I posed and seems to be honest yet at the same time evasive because you are not stating the full answer as to why there are more female prostitutes and strippers than male prostitutes and strippers.
I’ll give you the rest of the answer why there are many more female prostitutes and strippers and many more male customers for prostitutes and strippers. Now as in the past a higher percentage of men had to pay in order to get sex from a female because they couldn’t find a female to give them sex upon demand simply by either getting married to them or seducing them. Any woman if she sets her sights realistically and is not retarded, deformed or otherwise abnormal can find a man to have sex with her quite easily, and in fact more easily than your typical man who is not retarded, deformed or otherwise abnormal because the men are the pursuers and the women are the pursued. If a woman pursues a man, she is much more likely to get him for a short term sexual fling than if a man pursues a woman for a short term sexual fling. Also women can get men who are more attractive than they are for short term sexual flings whereas a typical man can not. Typically, women are also much more likely to get men to do things sexually to them within reasonable limits just for asking and not paying money for it such as having two naked men in the bed at the same time with one woman. A typical man is much more likely to have to pay to get a woman who is much more attractive than he is in the act of prostitution than a typical woman would likely have to pay a much more attractive man the money in order to get laid. A typical man is much more likely to have to pay two women money to have sex with him at the same time than vice-versa. Do you agree with the statements I made above? Why do you agree with the statements I made above or why do you disagree with the statements I made above?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
doclove January 3, 2011 at 03:42

@Rey de Corazones
In short, Why are there more female prostitutes and strippers than male prostitutes and strippers? Because a higher percentage of men have to pay for sex in order to get laid at all than women do. Because a higher percentage of men have to pay in order to get laid with the women they find desirable than women do. Because a higher percentage of men have to pay for the kind of sex they want from women than women have to pay to get the kind of sex they want from women. Do you agree with my statements above? Why or why not?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
doclove January 3, 2011 at 03:45

@Rey de Corrazones
Sorry about the typo. I meant to say because a higher percentage of men have to pay to get the kind of sex men want from a women than women have to pay to get the kind of sex they want from a man.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 04:48

Satyajit Roy,

You are pointing to cultural conservatism in India as a problem. Agreed.

But this?
“The only thing that a modern Indian woman (or any woman) asks is that he man up and move out of his parents home and pair-bond with her, which is a very reasonable demand, in my opinion.”

What a great Mangina way to shit on Indian men! Its not a crime to move out of your parents home or divorce your wife. So stop boohooing about it here. You can do either and not face any jail time, or even beatings! If you think the cultural pressure is oppression .. as one author says – You deserve to feel true oppression on your back, just so you know the difference.

First not everyone can afford to move out of their parents home. Yes, poverty is still quite dominant in India. Could be the fact that ALL poor Indian men are mamas boys.. they couldn’t earn as much as YOU, right?!

Second, earning male children are the natural providers of their old parents. Your “modern” Indian woman would allow that once you move out of the parental household? Again, the relatively poor men cannot afford paying for two households.

Third, WHY does a man have to move up and move out? If a “Modern Indian woman” demands such, she is welcome to provide a new house for them to live in and the man can fulfill his obligations to his parents. Why use the man to get what SHE wants? F’in parasite!

Fourth, Why is it better for a man to move out? Are parents a burden, or would they might interfere with anything they consider immoral.. like say cheating on your husband, abusing the kids, or bad spending habits?

On one hand, you do bring up things that are truly bad.. like beating of couples for holding hands or staying too late in parks. But you ruin your own position by attacking perfectly benign and decent things, due to your self-involved view that people should have more dating freedom. I actually agree strongly with that as well, but in the drive to change things, you are ignorantly attacking things that have nothing to do with the concept of dating!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 05:05

I am glad someone covered this – Rape hysteria is not new in India. For the last 50 years or so, rape has been portrayed as “a crime worse than murder”, as something that causes women to commit suicide etc. through popular media.. Bollywood, if you did not know. I am willing to bet quite a bit, that this is how Satyajit developed the idea that Indian women would not report rape. 50 years! that is two or more generations.. for whom the majority of exposure to the issue of rape is “Fictionalized accounts of fictionalized rape”. You say “Rape!”, and they picture “Rich” villian Raj Babbar/Shakti Kapoor and “poor” Zeenat Aman and her “poor” sister Padmini Kolhapure. The theme is so repetitive that I do not remember any movies of Anita Raj where the character she plays is not raped! The propaganda is laughable, once you understand that it is propaganda!

From the article “But according to an official with the women and child development ministry, “no Indian woman would make a false claim of rape just to get financial support.”

This is actually a statement by that evil feminist minister Chaudhary.. I forget her first name.

Amazingly enough, there is also a judicial directive stating something to the effect (I am translating from a local newspaper) – “No illiterate woman lies about rape, because it involves too much shame and so must be believed without any evidence at all”. This is quite interesting because India does have very strong rape shield laws. This coupled with intense rape-hysteria

I have yet to come across a case of this being translated into actual verdicts as I am not much into reading local news. But it is a position that gives any illiterate power to send any man to prison, with mere words. Can you say “Witchcraft”? I mean “Rape!”?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 05:40

One last thing, I see some people have some weird ideas about virginity and sexual reality in India. It is true that a “good” girl would get more/better marriage prospects, but this is not related to virginity. It used to be, but you cannot return your wife as “damaged goods”, most men wouldn’t be able to tell anyway.
In reality, women in India have just as many wild oats to sow as western women.. and they were always sowing them. The only ones that face any consequence are those caught in the act. Easy access to abortion and birth control takes care of all other problems. It is not hard to get laid in India (anymore than in the US), especially if you have PUA skills adapted to Indian conditions (non-bar pickups). Quite commonly married women will signal their availability to the young men, and occurances of “conjugal visits” with such women while their husbands are at work, is not uncommon.
And no, you wont be harmed in anyway, as long as you play it well and be safe, use a condom etc., and don’t get caught. If you do, the woman will simply cry “Rape!” if she feels pressured and you would be in hot water.

There are cases where husbands have “adjusted” to the new situation, too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Kave January 3, 2011 at 06:27

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 20
Kaushik Chatterjee January 3, 2011 at 06:59

Satyajit Roy, is I presume a “Bengali progressive”. There are many such “Bengali progressives” in India. They can be called the Indian counterpart of the “liberal intelligentsia” in the west. Most are basically wimps, they do not have the guts to defend freedom. I simply do not understand as to how would complete sexual chaos and freedom lead to happiness. The West is a case in point. Secondly, the family in a poor country is a social welfare net. The parents sacrifice for the children with the hope that their children look after them in their old age. Now, I understand that with rising age of marriages most women do not like to act as economic agents in their married families. — Point taken. But then we would see how they survive in their old age. Secondly, I would like to raise a point which is rarely commented on — Feminism, blah blah are perhaps manifestations of increasing affluence. Had Satyajit Roy linked economics with society, it would have made a far interesting read. This is something that most feminists do not realise. Imagine feminism in an agricultural economy or where families depend on farms. Now the world has changes, women have been liberated. Yipeeee!!! But the poor males. The poor males have not been liberated. The state wants to shore up marriage in a post-agriculture, post-industrial age. Why??? People here may gasp but what else is alimony, right to conjugal household etc etc. If marriage is outmoded, and I feel it is, let the law of the jungle rule. Let us meet, enjoy and go our respective ways. No laws, no norms. But then the Roys would be complaining along with the Sistahs at the lines. Reminds me of Whiskey’s maxim — Women hate hate beta males. Don’t be a beta, have some alpha attributes. Am trying.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Lalit Singh January 3, 2011 at 07:16

I gotta admit Pankaj’s nailed it…!

Satyajit Roy sounds to be a feminist American-Indian woman who’s family moved to West 4-5 generations ago and has no idea of what she talking about.

Calling all Indian Men as to low is testosterone levels, You have made it clear to what kind of a Whore you really are and want out of India..

If it really bothers you, STOP whining about it and stand out of all and try to make a difference.. And when I say difference in society, I mean a positive one where every Family is bonded, every MAN or Woman holds equal respect for each other.. and not open up a brothel in every colony as per you fantasies !!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Lara January 3, 2011 at 09:16

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 25
Anonymous age 68 January 3, 2011 at 09:40

Rey de Corazones means King of Hearts, FYI.

Rey, I for one resent your threats directed at someone for daring to disagree with you. This sort of thing is not suitable on any man’s board.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 2
Rollory January 3, 2011 at 10:00

“Marriage itself for all but the ruling class is a modern day arrangement. ”

You have no fucking clue what you’re talking about.

I can trace my ancestry back to the 1600s, with bits and pieces dating back to the 1400s, dirt-poor farmers all the way. How is that trace performed? Marriage and inheritance contracts, written out by the local town’s notary public, piled up in chests and boxes in the attic of the old family farmhouse. The house itself got built somewhere around 150 years ago, so the older documents got carted along from previous places. The pattern of existence had been set for a long long time.

Marriage was _the_ default and basically the _only_ mode of existence for 95% of the adults of (at least Western) Europe for something like a thousand years. Do not fool yourself into thinking the present chaos is anything approaching normal, or that it can sustain itself for any serious length of time.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 3, 2011 at 10:13

Again, we see a lack of nuance coming from the Indian Troll Brigade out to whiteknight for Bharta Mata.

I am, like most Indians, am socially and sexually conservative. I am not out chasing strippers (like one of our commenters here) nor am I unaware of the many problems in the West wrt to divorce, single parentng, etc.

I am simply calling for the right of Indian boys to grow into men, leave the nest of their parents home and carve a place for themselves as men in the world and choose their own spouse.

What is wrong with that?

The Indian Trolls here know that Indian parents do not demand that their sons live with them all their lives ONLY if they are poor. They know damn well that even the wealthiest of families in India are doing this.

My parents are financially set, in perfect health and YOUNG – only in their early 50s – YET STILL they want me, as a grown marrried man to live with them!

Is that healthy?

re: TESTOSTERONE

There are currently studies taking place wrt testosterone levels amongst various ethnicities throughout the world. If Indians are on the lower spectrum it is nothing to be ashamed of.

Quite frankly I am happy that my anger and lust is easily controllable. I consider it a blessing and conducive for a rational, pious, and dharmic life.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 13
Kave January 3, 2011 at 10:27

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 22
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 10:34

“Is that healthy?”

Of course it is. Wanting is not FORCING. Desire is not compulsion. Seems are having problems identifying simple concepts. Again, your back and true oppression need to meet. Only then you will realize what is what.

“re: TESTOSTERONE”
and
“Quite frankly I am happy that my anger and lust is easily controllable. ”

Satyajit,
Do you know anything of the effects of Testosterone on men?

Maybe you should hear your own calling and grown up into a man.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Satyajit Roy January 3, 2011 at 10:52

I fail to see what is “healthy” about young parents in their 40s who have no other life but in the home bossing around their son and daughter-in-law.

I signed them up for gym, swimming, dance, yoga, tennis – u name it.

All they wanted was to feed and coddle a grown man.

Doesn’t make any sense.

Life is meant to be lived – and not through others, but directly.

40′s is the prime of life and here they were acting as if they were 90 +.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 11:02

On a sober note,
There is a difference between changing/advocating a system to be more accomodating and simply calling people names based on Bollywood stereotypes and political propaganda. I too would prefer if people arrive at a system that allows people to pick their partners, but simply mimicking the West is a dangerous and disasterous plan, given the past and present conditions.

The west got where it did, due to a whole set of norms, customs and conditions. They had their own values (quite awesome values too, Indians could benefit from them). There are economic factors too. All in all, the development of the west and that of India has NOT followed the same paths, there is a whole lot of things to harmonize, even if you are to adopt a western style of dating.
So its quite naive at best, and destructive at worst, if I take your words as advocacy. If anything you will end up with worst of both sides.

Sadly it is this reckless culture destroyers like you, Satyajit, that are winning the numbers game, slowly and day by day. The “Bhabi” (Married women f’king around while their husbands are at work) culture is in still strong and growing. Great, isn’t it? You can rejoice already.

India will be a man’s nightmare in the future, much worse than the west – but it will take 15-20 more years for the feminized law enforcement to get the muscle and stupidity needed. Indian Men.. if you understand these issues, get out of India. Save your future. Save your children. You have just seen the beginning of the decline, much more is coming.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Kaushik January 3, 2011 at 11:04

Satyajit, if only things were just that easy. Why live separately? I would love to live at Times Square in New York. As someone who shifted back to his parent’s place but with a job after having lived a decade and a half separately, Let me introduce you to the concept of Affordable Family Formation. Despite what many of our Indian feministas say, many of them are entitlement princesses. They can be as materialist as any Yankee girl. What is more important that children, both male and female live separately from parents for some time. It helps to give you a wider exposure, makes you pick up skills such as cooking, cleaning etc. I think that especially for girls, so that they know what it takes to put food on the table and guys know that housework can be drudgery. And while it may surprise the Yanks here, when I was on the lookout for a bride (assisted and not forced, despite the stereotypes), my friend advised me to go for someone who had worked, knew that life was not just a bed of roses. This of all places in India (for Yankees, this is common in large cities). And to you westerners out there — Yes, I had an important say in the choice of the bride. I also asked her whether she was not being forced. She had also worked and lived apart. And yes, we do go out on dates (not dating). Think of it has being introduced to a girl by Aunt Sally. So, no it is not that we treat women like cattle always. What bothers many of us is the implicit hatred of men among feminists, some being divorced and others unmarried. I would love to have women in satisfying marriages enact legislation. It would be far more balanced. Or agree that marriage is obsolete and don’t bother with laws. To end, despite not being a Christian and having no intentions of becoming one, the vows of through sickness or in health or in our case, the circling around the sacred fire make more sense with our vows. Both should cherish and support and sigh! love one another. Given a choice between pumps and dumps and a wife I know who would stand by me, love me and cherish me, I would prefer the latter. In turn I am willing to uphold my side of the bargain in all respects and aspects. There is nothing white knight or mangina. Both men and women have to uphold their respective ends of the contract.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 11:06

Satyajit,

Can you read? Do you have the patience to read what I wrote? At least a couple of paragraphs? Or are you just a troll?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Jonathan Mann January 3, 2011 at 11:17

Giving women a financial incentive to claim rape will, of course, make rape claims skyrocket and give feminists increased ammunition in their arsenal to attack men. The men of India really need to start fighting back tooth and nail. Slashing tires on the cars of pro-feminist government employees and throwing red paint on feminist academics (in order to symbolize the blood of all the men that have committed suicide due to false allegations) is a good start.

Men need to engage themselves in a non-violent Resistance Movement against feminism. Perhaps, in time, MRA will come to mean Men Resisting against Assholes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 11:25

Kaushik,

Relax, westerners know much more than Indians give them credit for about India. No one, but the most hopped up idiots think that Indians treat their women like cattle or that we still use elephants for transportation. Very few people actually buy into the horror stories about Indian women. Most damaging is that Indian women eagerly confirm and spread these horror stories without actually attempting to explain the reality of the matter. Lets not contribute to the disaster by calling all westerners as “Yankees” (some may take offense to that, in case you didn’t know).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 11:49

There are cases where Indian “Romeo and Juliets” run away to get married, only to find out that you cannot live only on love. Once they return to their families, either parents get them formally married, or girls are pressured to file FIRs alleging kidnapping with “promise to get married”. Adding rape to these false accusations would be greased by the monetary pay offs. After all, in for a dime, in for a dollar. In those cases, rape accusations would increase. Actual rape conviction rates would fall and more rape hysteria can be raised.

The good news is .. civilians generally ignore laws (this could change). So, only certain sections of indians (e.g. lawyers, feminists, police) will ever read these provisions. I can see some ways these benefits will be utilized to feed the rising shelter movement in India, which is a bad thing in the long run. But Indian women, due to their overall ignorance of laws, wont rush out to make rape allegations. So, please do not make predictions about results of this – there are more factors acting in the real world than just monetary gain.

Some folks have speculated what would happen if these laws were implemented in the west. The west could get higher rates of false accusations with such a setup. On the other hand, western courts sometimes do punish the false accuser – and so it may not be worth the risk.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 3, 2011 at 12:16

There are cases where Indian “Romeo and Juliets” run away to get married, only to find out that you cannot live only on love. Once they return to their families, either parents get them formally married, or girls are pressured to file FIRs alleging kidnapping with “promise to get married”.

Because Indian families refuse to acknowledge sexual autonomy in their adult children.

As W.F. Price wrote above:

“It is time for men to stand up to a state that is using women as a pretext to strip us of our civil liberties. As in Sweden, India is making a mockery of the concept of consent, which should give women some cause for concern as well, because the logical conclusion of all this is that women have no legal standing to make any agreements or decisions in the sexual realm — it is all up to the judge to decide whether or not the woman made a “legal” choice when she took her pants off. ”

And this;

“It is time for men to stand up to a state that is using women as a pretext to strip us of our civil liberties”

……….. is EXACTLY what’s going on in the Indian “mens’ rights movement”.

Indian mens’ rights is just a front for the rights of Indian mens’ mothers to require that their sons and daughters-in-law live with them as is evidenced on the sites I linked to above “protect indian family” and “save indian family” and “the all india forgotten womens association”.

Either Indian men come out from under the saris of their mothers and stand alone as men in the world or sit down and silently drink ma’s dudh, because PRETENDING to be concerned about mens rights when all you are doing is protecting the rights of a WOMAN, your mother, to treat you and your wife like a child is a DISGRACE to men everywhere!

I moved out. So can you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10
Lalit Singh January 3, 2011 at 13:00

Satyajit Roy,
You really must hate you parent’s man. No wonder hence such an outcome.
Anyways, If someday you do manage to pull your head out and hit metro cities to even unban ,
In India, You will see how Indians live liberal and free even in different cities than to where they grew up or their parents live. The days you are talking about are long gone though some exceptions do exist yet not as you describe here.
Youngsters are encouraged to pursue their careers and them living separately is no big deal.
Yes, Men are still a little chained to some customs such as financially supporting his parents but forcefully getting him married is just not true and also unlawful (look around), Most find their life partners through their social lives unless you don’t have any and some exceptional parent have really locked you up and tied you in a room.(call 100 for HELP)

As you said, Indian males need to grow into men and not stay boys by living with their parents, and its possible only If you are able to let go your parents and all you personal issues involving them. Its not them but us (You and I) that have to make a choice.

What we need to do is teach and warn our sons of what’s happening around. Wipe tears off our eyes and stand as One against Feminism, It is this, that’s locking our brothers in prisons, it is this that’s compelling young boys to turn into wimps or suicidal. We need to unite and gain back our strength and respect and burry feminism back in the ground to where it came from.

No man is save whether you live with or without your parents from Rape, DV, dowry accusations, sexual harassments or any of it. Feminism will not care, as a matter of fact even your parent are prone to false dowry accusation (IPC-498a) and can be locked up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rollory January 3, 2011 at 13:15

” it was at most a civil ceremony without recognition”

What the fuck is the matter with you?

The whole thing is written out in those documents. Name of the priest, names of the couple, location and date of ceremony, etc. etc. etc. Dozens of these things, generation after generation. I don’t need to read somebody else’s stories or speculations, I have the PRIMARY SOURCES. Do you understand that?

And you have the insufferable gall to tell me not to believe internet opinions?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Kave January 3, 2011 at 14:03

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21
SingleDad January 3, 2011 at 14:20

@ Satyajit Roy

That is exactly what I did. I gave up my sexual freedom for continued proximity to my son.

In my case it really isn’t appropriate to bring women around my son. I tried it and they don’t care for him as I do and resent him.

I had to choose. I chose my son over crack (the female kind).

You would choose crack over your children.

That is what men did in the west in the 1960′s and now you are reading what their children have to say.

We are the ones who inherited a country in which men bought into sexual freedom just to see this illusion used against us by our mothers, sisters, wives and lovers.

You would trade your childrens future for snatch.

I will not, that is the difference and THF nailed it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 3, 2011 at 15:09

@Single Dad, TFH dates strippers. He said as much on this very site.

As a religious Hindu I take offense at your suggestion that I would choose “crack” over my own child.

I don’t HAVE a child.

YOU do.

You made the ludicrous mistake of trying to chase tail WHILE you had a child. As a cultured Hindu this is something I wouldn’t even THINK of doing.

You came to your sense and stopped.

Good.

Now wrt to your language towards me – check yourself before you wreck yourself.

You and I are not of the same mold.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12
Lara January 3, 2011 at 16:03

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 24
W.F. Price January 3, 2011 at 16:11

SingleDad,
Why is it inappropriate to bring women around your son? If you are a heterosexual man I don’t see anything wrong with sometimes preferring to be with an adult woman instead of always with a child.

-Lara

LOL, in my house it wouldn’t be my son who would have a problem with me bringing a woman around — it would be the little lady of the house.

Lara January 3, 2011 at 16:11

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 27
Lara January 3, 2011 at 16:13

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 23
TFH January 3, 2011 at 16:42

@Single Dad, TFH dates strippers. He said as much on this very site.

I dated A stripper, several years ago. Just one, who was a Vegas stripper, who did not work as a stripper in the Bay Area (where she and I lived), and who was otherwise a relatively normal urban nightlife girl.

And the reason I brought that up was to talk about how much they make in a weekend.

Anything I say gets so heavily exaggerated (f0r the sole purpose of having something to tear down) that I am going to have to restate exactly what I did and did not do.

Things quickly devolve into “You claimed you dated 100 strippers all of whom are 10s. You are a LIAR!!!! And therefore your other articles and anything else you write are all BOGUS!!!!“, when I never claimed anything of the sort (again, see above).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 3, 2011 at 17:41

Anything I say gets so heavily exaggerated (f0r the sole purpose of having something to tear down) that I am going to have to restate exactly what I did and did not do.

Join the club. All I wanted to do was move out of ma-baba’s home, date and marry the woman of my choice and you TFH, as well as the other members of the Indian Brigade labled me a …
a) faggot
b) mangina
c) Indo-mangina – lol!
d) communist, and
e) destroyer of the great Indian culture!!!

Lara, regarding being a single parent dating, I don’t think it’s a good example to set for your kids to have strange women on rotation.

If I were a single dad I would just wait til my kids were grown before I started dating, or date privately, without involving them, then bring her home to meet the kids ONLY if I were serious about her, that means thinking about marriage or cohabitation.

But even that is risky.

I think single parents should just put a lid on their sex lives and forget about it for a while – a long while.

Who has time for dating and sex anyway when you’re raising kids alone AND have to work at an outside job?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 12
TFH January 3, 2011 at 17:54

All I wanted to do was move out of ma-baba’s home, date and marry the woman of my choice and you TFH,

That is not how your framed it. You started out with with a ‘women need more rights and empowerment in India because they are too oppressed’.

No other Indian out of the 4-5 here has supported your views on the need for the sort of feminism in India, that your describe.

Your subsequent points about Indians having mental blocks about certain things, etc. are not bad.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price January 3, 2011 at 17:54

I think single parents should just put a lid on their sex lives and forget about it for a while – a long while.

Who has time for dating and sex anyway when you’re raising kids alone AND have to work at an outside job?

-S. Roy

The dirty little secret is that most of us do just that. Frankly, you don’t have time, and women aren’t interested in you. Who wants to deal with someone whose life revolves around their kids and has very little disposable income?

For divorced American men whose wives went must on them it’s either be a dad, buckle down and live like a monk – all the while cutting checks to the woman who fucked you over – or be a “deadbeat” and live life under the threat of prison.

You whine about oppression, Satyajit, but I don’t think you even have a clue.

Lara January 3, 2011 at 18:06

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 25
Lara January 3, 2011 at 18:11

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 25
x2 January 3, 2011 at 18:12

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 28
x2 January 3, 2011 at 18:13

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 22
Lara January 3, 2011 at 18:17

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 23
x2 January 3, 2011 at 18:29

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 22
x2 January 3, 2011 at 18:32

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 24
Lara January 3, 2011 at 18:35

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 22
Lara January 3, 2011 at 18:38

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 22
anonymous January 3, 2011 at 19:12

Maybe I’m being naive,…

Lol!

Nope, you passed that point about a year ago.

Now you are just viewed as a disruptive, trollish bitch who just speaks to make sure she still exists in this world.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price January 3, 2011 at 20:02

Lara’s actually remarkably honest for a woman. It’s a rare quality, but it does happen. Guileless is the descriptive word, and although some might see it as a slight I don’t, really.

I’d say that what angers us about her is simply that she openly and accurately reflects female nature. Yes, it bothers me sometimes, but a lot less than a woman who tries to pull the wool over my eyes.

Women are what they are — I can’t fight it so I might as well know it.

Jordan January 3, 2011 at 20:31

Anon Age 68,

Rey, I for one resent your threats directed at someone for daring to disagree with you. This sort of thing is not suitable on any man’s board.

I second this. It is shocking that someone can be as immature and petty as Rey is, to threaten another commenter who was not even talking to him. This is a serious matter, and should be against the comment policy of the spearhead. It is far worse than simple race-bashing, as he is trying to harm an individual.

Rey’s posts reek of insecurity and obsession, and barely makes any sense. There is no place for this on any board.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 20:32

There was some good advice Lara posted on here, at least rings true from my experience. Let boys interact naturally with the opposite sex. Sadly, that is not a safe proposition anymore as proven by the sexting thing.. not that the kids are doing what they are, but the overidiotic overreaction of “concerned” adults and law enforcement.

Satyajit is a person who cannot read much anyway, so his behavior is understandable. I advice my Indian friends to ignore him. It does seem that he is a actually a SHE, based on the propensity to use shaming language for people she has never met and probably will never meet. Another factor is that she has idealized her expectations and wants Indian men to adpot it or face shaming from her. Nevermind that there are serious drawbacks to her idealized worldview, nevermind that adopting the worldview would deteriorate the conditions of men even further. She says so, and hence must be done otherwise, shame on you (any Indian men who disagree with Satyajit), whiteknights of Bharat Mata. For that particular shaming attack, I can’t help but laugh considering my post to TFH on the previous thread “Feminism in India” where I specifically denounced Indian government.

Satyajit, THERE IS NO BHARAT MATA. India is a geographic phenomenon, where as Indian culture is a personal issue. We have bigger fish to fry than your petty needs and discontent with your own parents (that is your personal issue). Indian men should be considered about alimony, about loosing their mortagefree-homes if they have one. Indian men should be concerned that their boys are being abused and mistreated in so-called “schools”! So just enjoy your petty misery (something you claim to have fixed, are still alive, are supporting a household and are free to post messages here, if yourself are to be believed at all). All you want is for others to confirm your worldview. I strongly suggest seeing a psychiatrist or a therapist for that low self-esteem.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 20:34

Oops! I meant “Feminism in China”.. not India

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 3, 2011 at 20:38

Eh.. too many mistakes in the last long post, my english is getting worse! Why is there no edit/discard function? Maybe I should shame spearhead webadmin into providing one, like satyajit here.. just kidding.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy January 3, 2011 at 20:48

Divorce gives women a bad stigma that it just doesn’t give to men.

Divorced women are stigmatized in the West? I’ve not seen it.

In India both men and women are stigmatized for divorce. Not just the divorcees themselves but even their kids! It will be hard to arrange a marriage for a young man or woman who’s parents are divorced, or even if there is a divorce anywhere in the family – aunt, uncle, whatever, it’s viewed suspiciously.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9
Dadar Baap January 4, 2011 at 03:53

Sotyojit,

Bongs should have a stigma for being born bongs. Anyway don’t worry when your wife divorces you, there won’t be any stigma to pump and dump her. Just make sure the alimony is enough that she can pay for all the motels.

Mangina, bong commie agent scum, need karma to get them screwed over. As some mentioned this sotyojit might be a disinformation cunt. Which is possible. Though alot of these bong mangina scum are usually feminized anyway. Whatever the case, he might be get some weird kind of mangina gina tingles from being humiliated on this forum.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Lara January 4, 2011 at 04:12

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 21
Seed January 4, 2011 at 04:56

Hey, I have an idea. Ban these fuckers, they are not contributing anything to this site and they are making a mockery of the article.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3
Charles Martel January 5, 2011 at 06:08

@Rey de Corazones

TFH, start showing a little respect, chief. As I said, your credibility is hanging from a thin thread, and the scissors to cut that thread are readily and publicly available.

I like your style, dude. TFH went quiet after that one.

TFH has a lot to say that’s interesting, but is the “legend in his own mind” type. I put that down to the fact that, as I understand it, male children in upper class (caste?) Indian households are somewhat pandered to. From his comments here, he’s probably a techie living in the Bay area.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12
Lara January 5, 2011 at 06:29

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 24
Lara January 5, 2011 at 06:32

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 23
Ks January 5, 2011 at 07:20

“Under a new centrally sponsored government scheme, Indian women who claim to be rape victims will receive $450 cash within two weeks if they claim rape and a medical exam demonstrates unspecified evidence of rape, and then over a year’s time additional benefits are added that bring the total to at least $4,500 (RS 2 lakh), and up to $6,700 (RS 3 lakh) worth of benefits. ”
3 lakhs is like the annual income for middle class Indians and 33% of Indians earn less than RS20 a day

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Ks January 5, 2011 at 08:26

“no Indian woman would make a false claim of rape just to get financial support.”

The man who said that isn’t afraid to become a laughing stock.

http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/four-constables-woman-arrested-for-blackmailing-farmer-in-false-rape-case/391127/
Send this link to all white-knights and manginas like him.

Being an Indian myself, I can say that there is indeed some conservative misandry in India. The biggest problem is, like you said in another article, how men are expected to stay with parents even when they don’t want to. That social practice has created tons of white knights and momma’s boys among Indian men.

However, Indian culture is still much more preferable to the feminist West. Especially since there are many cultural controls to keep women in check.

There was conservative misandry and misogyny in India before the rise of feminism.The tradition of man staying in his parents house after marriage has been around since middle ages in patriarchal states.The reason for it is to keep a check on wife while the man is away.

Also, the beta male is pedalstalized in India because our culture places a premium on smart, domesticated men who can support their families.

The upper middle class doesn’t account for entire India.

The only thing that a modern Indian woman (or any woman) asks is that he man up and move out of his parents home and pair-bond with her, which is a very reasonable demand, in my opinion.

It is reasonable,but the only group of women who demand that are liberalised Indian women who have the highest divorce rate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 5, 2011 at 20:45

Ks,

“It is reasonable,but the only group of women who demand that are liberalised Indian women who have the highest divorce rate.”

It is reasonable in the kind of way as playing with fire (and eventually getting burned) is reasonable. For people who want to have a decent life it is not reasonable. Any woman who demands that you leave your parents house in India is not a good woman worth the risk of getting married to.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Jamie January 5, 2011 at 22:26

In case anyone is still reading, from Roissy -

Yet more proof that a few men are getting most of the action.

I agree with those talking about the concentration of sex. Rey de Corazones doesn’t seem to know jack, and, as others have pointed out, quickly showed himself to be too insecure to take even the slightest disagreement.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Anonymous January 6, 2011 at 04:52

It is reasonable in the kind of way as playing with fire (and eventually getting burned) is reasonable. For people who want to have a decent life it is not reasonable. Any woman who demands that you leave your parents house in India is not a good woman worth the risk of getting married to.

Yes and some wives demand to move out while the couple can’t really afford a new house.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Pankaj January 7, 2011 at 02:52

“Yes and some wives demand to move out while the couple can’t really afford a new house.”

It is actually worse than that. Most of these women/wives demand throwing parents out of the house as a cheaper solution to their incapability to get a new one. These days at least they are honest and straight forward about that – but most of the times, it is so easy to create enough friction/terrorism in the household.. until they get their way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Sha January 7, 2011 at 13:00
Tongpok September 9, 2011 at 09:38

Im coming to know about that $450 just now… I doubt the applicability of such a provision. Can it stop the rate of incidence of rape?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: