By Hans Laven
The horrible case in India involving the rape and homicide of a 23yo female student has led to worldwide campaigns demanding greater protection for women. The student was tricked into boarding a bus that was actually being taken for a joy ride by a group of drunk men who then beat her with an iron bar, stripped her, gang raped her and threw her out of the moving vehicle naked on to the street then tried to run her over presumably to ensure her death. The woman died in hospital some days later from her injuries.
The violence committed by the offender(s) was despicable and unworthy of human status. Although the safety and costs of the death penalty are deeply problematic, personally I would have no moral objection to a death penalty for one or more of these offenders if proven beyond reasonable doubt to have led or participated actively in this violence. I’m sure most in the men’s movement will agree with protests by large groups of Indian women and men demanding that violence including sexual violence against women be properly investigated and prosecuted to the full force the law. I’m sure most here would agree also that Indian police and justice system deserve criticism and to be held accountable if they have been turning a blind eye to, victim-blaming, treating as unimportant, excusing or minimizing such violence.
One incredible aspect of this depraved episode though has been the apathy shown towards the female victim’s boyfriend. Many news articles completely failed to mention him at all or to report on his injuries or recovery. Media eventually reported more on him but only because he had recovered enough to make a statement about the events including criticism of how police responded when they found the pair. From occasional comments in media reports we learned that this man was also locked in the bus, beaten with the iron bar, stripped, thrown naked from the moving bus and targeted to be run over. He was knocked unconscious, then he regained consciousness at some stage and rescued the injured woman from being run over by the bus they had just been thrown from. He was forced to endure seeing or being aware of the physical and sexual violence towards his girlfriend and this will undoubtedly cause him post-traumatic stress disorder and lifelong psychological damage. But who cares? Nobody it seems has cared a damn about him.
The protestors and world media have shown appalling misandry by focusing only on the female victim of this violence and disregarding the male victim. Seriously violent crimes were committed by a group of drunk men against both a woman and a man. Some articles mentioned that the man had also been beaten but his victimhood and welfare were almost totally ignored. The exclusive focus of the response to this crime has been on women’s rights and wishes.
Such feminist myopia is more than simply a moral issue of fairness. The calls by many have been for responses unlikely to reduce violence whilst contravening important principles of justice, equality and social cohesion. Feminist-focused protestors and media have demanded special treatment of women complainants throughout the process of Indian law enforcement, automatic assumptions by police of the truth of their allegations, expansion of definitions of rape and sexual assault, ‘fast track’ justice for those accused of violence towards women, and much harsher punishments including the death penalty for such crimes against women specifically. Sound familiar? The Indian government now appears intent on introducing some of those measures. Many western countries including New Zealand have pursued similar approaches with little protective result for women but massive injustice towards accused men and a degradation of the status of men in general, associated with erosion of family, community cohesion and serious increases in antisocial behaviour and gang membership by boys and young men. Well, what do we expect? If we treat the male half of our population as undesirable, discriminate against men and show widespread disrespect for them while still exploiting them financially and physically, what have young men to aspire to in their society?
Laws in most countries already, quite appropriately, exist against sexual violence and usually provide for harsh punishments. If authorities are not applying those laws properly then that is what needs to be addressed. Encouraging reduced standards of justice, more gender inequality and increased state violence towards men can only be expected to result in violent attitudes. Ignoring, excusing or tolerating violence by women and towards men can only be expected to perpetuate a violent society. To reduce violence it will be necessary to encourage non-violence and respect towards all humans male and female, to show understanding and mercy regardless of gender, and to identify and address the real factors that increase the risk of violence. These are likely to include alcohol and amphetamine abuse, poor conflict-resolution skills, lifestyle stress, erosion of community, reduction in care and safety for mentally disordered people, sexual and relationship deprivation for males who are not alpha males, unfair family laws and loss of family. The ‘patriarchal power and control’ and ‘man bad, woman good’ models have misled us badly, causing western countries and now the rest of the world to misunderstand the causes of violence and to look towards false measures that ironically promote violent and uncaring attitudes.
{ 49 comments… read them below or add one }
Hans, it’s going to be a cold day in hell before feminists start caring about anyone but themselves. Things will probably get worse before they get better.
Feminists have myopia regarding any violence whose direct object is not a female. You should know this by now.
The woman was not “beaten”. She was raped with a metal bar and her intestines pulled out as a rope through the perforated vagina.
“The violence committed by the offender(s) was despicable and unworthy of human status.”
I could be wrong, but I think this is a case of faulty parallelism.
It should read, “The violence committed by the offender(s) was despicable, and they are unworthy of human status.”
The way it is now, it is “the violence” that is both despicable and unworthy of human status. I think you meant the offenders are unworthy.
Also, I think it is clear that there are multiple offenders, so you should lose the (s), though their participation likely varied in the degree of despicableness. The youngest, from what I hear, was utterly barbaric, slicing her belly open. Even if one merely stood by and watched, that in itself makes him an offender.
/pedantry
/OCD
/nitpicking little attitude we can all really do without, Buster!
Perhaps Naomi Kline, the author of The Shock Doctrine, would like to add a chapter or appendix describing how feminists around the world wait for stories like this to then implement even more draconian restrictions on male behavior.
I know, i pointed this out on one of the news articlecs (Daily mail). There was only one sentence on the man it, but it blatently focused on the women even within the sentence (the man and women where taken and beaten and the women was raped). I called some of these “feminists” out about this blatent sexism towards the man. The man was put through the situation just as mich as the women (i think they stuck a medal rod up his ass ( i read it somewhere) and it damaged his spinal cord and rectum. All we have heard of is the women dieing and being raped, not the horrible violence that the man recieved. Even after being tortured the man was still able to work up the strength to carry and protect the girlfriend first. He could have most likely got away easier and let the women be raped and hurt, but made the choice to fight and carry her away to the medics even while sustaining the induries
This goes to show you where most men’s minds are in a situation where someone is in trouble. They will muster up the courage or strength to save others (most of the time women and children) instead of themselves. Not one commenter comented on the man pulling his girlfriend to safty and making the best effort to save her from death (even though she died in a few days).
I hate to see what this has become already, a pitty party for women without even mentioning the man who risked his life fighting for her safety. I feel bad for the women, i really do because rape ( not the modern day crap) but geniune rape of forcing a women (who isnt married to you ) to sleep with you is awful, but when stuff like this happens, you have to see that no ammount of laws is going to stop rape or even prevent it, it will just go undergroud (sex slaves) and stuff instead of raping women in public.
These feminazis dont want true equality, they want to be held accountable only whne it turns out good and blam men for their short comings. For it will only take time before enough men start to get angry and start to break the laws and the police become a fraid they will ignore anything not serious. If enough men get anry enough, and shoot a few cops, who will protect these women from beaing raped, thats right no one. They have ro survive on theremown truely “withhout men” they will get raped and killed and taken advantage because no man is thier to protect them. You saw this in fall of ussr. Single women became easy targets and were often raped even out in the daylight, because who will protect them when things get bad. No one because they have said “we dont need a man” be forget that the only thing standing in the way of a man from raping here or stealing hers stuff is a man . Kinda like the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with amgun. Then the good guys dint respond, the self entiled pieces of shit will truely see what “equality is like”, not being susizidized by their gov and the men that run and keep it going.
Sorry for ranbling, but the i know so many women fee they are “equal” but whne it comes down to skills in order to survive without out comfy gov job, they are basically worthless.
I should add that the “men are disorderly, violent and irresponsible” meme has worked for women over and over since it was used in the first stirrings of the women’s temperance movements of the 1820′s.
Eventually, the use of this meme (along with some casual racism, like handbills with a picture of an angry drunk black man holding a bottle of rum in one hand, and a gun in the other) got an amendment to the Constitution passed along with the even more restrictive Volstead Act.
Yes, it’s a notion that sells like crazy, and has done so for almost two centuries now. Women aren’t going to give it up.
There are glaring inconsistencies in the reporting of this issue. Not only has the attack against the boyfriend been ignored but all the demonstrations have been characterized in the mainstream western media as protesting violence against women. At the same time other international news sources have characterized the protests as being driven by “Kashmiri Sikh students”.
Digging a little deeper, in the past there seems to have been a rash of similar abduction-rapes specifically targeting Sikhs as an ethnic minority in the region. Abduction and gang rape as an act of ethnic violence seems more plausible. There’s lots of precedent in many regions around the world. On the other random abduction and rape strictly as an issue of violence against women hand seems unheard of except in states with a complete breakdown of social order. But if this rape is primarily an issue of ethnic violence rather than an issue of violence against women why has any mention of that history of ethnic tension been so completely omitted from the mainstream media that it’s hard not to conclude the omission was deliberate?
The media hasn’t failed to clarify the issue from lack of opportunity. We’ve heard the same slanted facts repeated countless times in coverage that adds nothing new while that same coverage continues to avoid any mention of the deeper issues. Is it because the mainstream media only speaks feminism? The level at which this slanted media coverage misinforms us is worth digging into. So far it’s a strong argument for Libertarianism. In a world were none of us have the time to make research projects out of every issue, it’s a matter of morals and principles to recognize that this misinforming media has made us puppets out of all of even the best intentioned among us.
If the entire worldview given to us by western mainstream media is warped through a feminist lens (among other biases), how can we as citizens of western democracies become informed enough about what goes on in other countries to vote for interventionist foreign policy from an informed and unbiased perspective?
As expected, an unusual event is used to push an agenda. In this case it even has the absurd effect of minimizing the crime, since the abduction, severe beating of two people, and disembowelment(!) of a woman has little to do with the trivial/illusory “male aggressions” and “female cultural disadvantages” that feminists want to use the event to target.
Sadly, it is simple. The alleged perpetrators were non-White (perhaps not actually, but they are not European or American so it doesn’t count). Because they are not White in the Euro-American sense they could not possibly be guilty of a racially-motivated crime according to current leftist “thinking.” But they are, certainly, men. While it is not permissible to criticize the actions of ethnic minorities per se (even though they may be the majority where they are), it is permissible to criticize non-White men, but only if you do so without mentioning their ethnicity. Hence the focus on the rape/murder to the near exclusion of every other salient point about the event. All that gets scrubbed out to make room for the men-perpetrate-women-suffer meme.
As for the male victim: he’s a man, and a woman suffered more, so his pain is semi-officially irrelevant. Let us ask ourselves this: if the same crime had been perpetrated against two men – and there had been no female victim – would any of us have heard anything about this at all?
Not a chance.
Or: if a group of White men (European or American) had perpetrated this crime against any two members of any other group (women or other ethnicity), would this become a huge international story with mass protests and endless pontificating?
Of course.
The Huffington Post sort of published the boyfriend’s point of view, but its comment section is still full of comments that discussed virtually nothing about the the dude.
“Although the safety and costs of the death penalty are deeply problematic, personally I would have no moral objection to a death penalty for one or more of these offenders if proven beyond reasonable doubt to have led or participated actively in this violence.”
I’m dead against the death penalty in any form as it provides no room whatsoever for remorse, repentance and redemption in the punished. It shows a callous disregard for the sanctity of human life that is in essence no different to that shown by those who commit genocide.
More than this, however, under no circumstances that we can yet conceive as civilised beings is the revenge killing of many people justified by the rape and murder of a single person.
If the Indian government goes down this path and takes the lives of those men, especially on the basis that the assault victim was a woman, it will have shown itself to be nothing more than a mob itself. Indeed, the very same moral vacuum that was behind the rape and murder of the woman and the assault of her male friend would be behind the sanctioned murder of the attackers.
I’m watching this case unfold carefully as it will change the entire complexion of India as we know it. You can be sure that if mass murder of men is sanctioned on the basis of the rape and murder of one woman, the country will be at war with itself.
Perhaps because of the moral vacuum in which Indians live, coupled with lingering self-loathing for not being English and all of the misconceptions that brings, feminism as the Devil’s instrument may well find the path of least resistance to its evil nadir in that country. Hindu India seems to sense that an evil like no other in its history is rising, but no more from outside as has been the case previously. This time it is a recignition that the evil is deep in its own guts; a recognition that its own soul is weak and unable to resist; a recognition of the inadequacy of its culture and religions to fight evil and care for its people as God intends. Feminism has realised this inadequacy and finds in India the weak moral ground that allows it to proliferate. India seems to know its soul is being consumed but that it is powerless to stop it. The pain of its people is tangible, even across the internet.
But it also wants out. Over 20,000 Christian churches have been planted in India in the last 20 years. I just hope state-sanctioned male genocide can be avoided before the country reaches moral safety.
Didn’t the Trojan War begin in a somewhat similar manner? There is no way the western media dare mention that the violence may have an ethnic base as their line is that race does not exist and that even if it does we all love each other. I believe The Sikhs regard themselves as top Indians, so I wouldn’t want to mess with them. They came out fighting in our riots two years ago.
Today, I am seething as I am once again the victim of Misandry, I won’t bore you with the details but I am drafting a letter to the culprits employers pointing out the Misandry, and further that had I been Black or Female there is no way the young woman would have so abused me in public, and suggesting that the government should treat misandrist abuse in the same manner that they treat racial abuse. In my letter I compare her to Marie-Antoinette and suggest a similar fate. Had the young lady been a man, my parting ‘fuck you’ would perhaps have ended in fisticuffs but as it was I walked to avoid further trouble. In a fair fight of course she would not have stood a chance, but I have to metaphorically bind both hands behind my back – so much for female empowerment. I tend to find as I have said in my draft letter, that anglo ameri-canadian women are personally aggrandised in inverse proprtion to their personal merit and physical attractiveness. This one was fairly gruesome, of the passive-aggressive sort. I expect her employers will have to look up the word Misdandry, but I think they will get the message.
Ethical
According to progressive liberalism, the white man is tainted with moral inferiority. Do you notice that it is only PC to use the word “racist” to mean a white person racist against a non-white.
White society, has for the overwhelming part, given up on racism. Most of the racism and thus, inter-ethnic violence, today is between nonwhites.
Progressive Liberals do NOT want to admit this because it violates their ideological belief that the nonwhite world possesses moral superiority….thus the mainstream media silence.
If a man attacks you, you as a man, have the power of immediate response. Women, being weak and generally quite cowardly, seek to use the government as the means of immediate physical response to attack. This is why the justice system is so unsatisfying to them; too slow, too fair and not nearly brutal enough. Women, want the government to be the loaded gun they are too enlightened to carry for their own defense.
Thankyou Hans for the erudite posting I’ve come to expect.
Great to see you hear by the way.
Time for more Kiwis to reach out and join the international manosphere I reckon. We have a lot to offer as your first post here proves.
Kia Kaha (Stand proud) Bro.
This is common. A couple years back you may recall a case, I believe in Saudi Arabia, where a woman was sent to prison for being raped.
Well, actually, she was sent to prison for adultery. Apparently, she was parked in a car with a man who was not her husband and having sex with him. Some men happened by and for whatever reason they were enraged by this and decided to gang rape her.
Even though the men in this case were arrested and facing serious charges she was also being charged with adultery. Oh yeah, and she also disobeyed a court order not to talk to the media.
All anyone could talk about was how this woman was gang raped and now being punished for being raped.
Did I mention that the man she was with was also raped and also charged with adultery? Well so did Western Media. I only found out about it because I thought the story was unbelievable. Turns out it really was unbelievable–as in not exactly true.
Even though her boyfriend was raped he was not considered a victim. Even though he was beaten he was not considered a victim. Even though he was being charged with adultery he was no a victim.
Remember folks, only female victims matter. This is what feminists call “equality.”
Before I posted this I looked this case up on the Internet. There is a wiki about it called the Qatif rape case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatif_rape_case
The wiki tells a different story than what could be found in foreign media sources like Al Jezeera.
Frankly, I find the woman’s account of events to be suspect. She claims that their vehicle never stopped moving until the assailants pulled in front of them and stopped them. I’m sure you can see the problem here. That a random group of strangers just so happen to target this couple and that the girl was only there because she was being blackmailed into it? As always, the women have an excuse to justify or explain their actions and to place responsibility on someone else.
Did the assailants deserve to be punished? Yes. And if you look at the wiki you see they got up to 1000 lashes and up to 10 years in prison. I imagine that 1000 lashes would kill them so I’m sure they gave the lashes first before feeding and housing them for the next 10 years.
Whatever the reason for the rape I want to point out something to you. The girl was not punished because she was raped. She was punished because she broke the law. And the man she was with was punished EQUALLY. And despite the fact that they were both treated equally before the law the truth of it doesn’t make it into Western Media. The only thing we heard was that women were being oppressed and men were their oppressors.
“One incredible aspect of this depraved episode though has been the apathy shown towards the female victim’s boyfriend. Many news articles completely failed to mention him at all or to report on his injuries or recovery. ”
– So much for the feminist concern for the survivors of violence.
You know, like the women and children who remain alive and unharmed after their men folk are annihilated through acts of war.
Oh well, what’s one more act of ignoring the worth and value in the long series of just one more man?
I think you bring up a good point about Sikh Ethnic attacks. However, what if it is also a push by Sikhs internationally to piggy back feminism and rape hysteria to better try and help their own?
Not saying I agree or think its cool; but feminists will use anything, are Sikhs using feminism to push the safety of their fellow worshipers?
“Digging a little deeper, in the past there seems to have been a rash of similar abduction-rapes specifically targeting Sikhs as an ethnic minority in the region.”
That tactic is a favorite of Muslims. Forcible religious conversion of the raped woman usually follows. For other victims see also: Copts in Egypt, Maronites in Lebanon.
The mainstream media does a bang-up job of covering for Muslims by refusing to identify them in news reports.
Because feminism so dominates the media, it doesn’t matter what happens to men or to women, or because of men or because of women. They are always going to find a way to use the results to further promote/justify the feminist cause. Unless what happens needs to be ignored. Things like childhood and female obesity. Or women killing their own. Or psycho mothers running off the fathers of their children, failing to bring up their children properly so that they become psycho and then giving their psycho children gun shooting lessons and then laying guns around the house. The kid was insane. I have no doubt his mother had a role in his insanity. I have no doubt his mother should have known he was insane unless she was insane. If she wasn’t insane, she was at least as responsible as he was. The India rape is going to be used to motivate women, induce group guilt in men and forward the agenda. Same feminist modus-operandi used and still used in this country again and again. Of these young men doing these terrible things. I would like to know more about the actual functionality of their home/family life. My guess is that there moms were far from virtuous wives or mothers.
It’s a genuine surprise to discover that there is an ethnic element to this case that is not even mentioned by the MSM. I knew that they were bad at reporting all of the facts, but I didn’t realize that they were completely dreadful.
Ironically, the “rape shield” laws that prevent the media from disclosure of the identiy of the victim appear to be shielding the Indian government from acknowledging the possibility that this was a hate crime.
As the victim is dead now, it appears that there is no logical reason to shield her from any further harm.
Let’s be serious. This young woman was gangraped by 6 men, then raped with a rusty iron bar, and then had her intestines (and possibly her uterus) ripped out while she was still alive. For absolutely no reason. If anything, the media has avoided releasing the gory details in order to not inflame the country.
There is no question that her male friend also suffered a great deal and deserves sympathy and help from us, but to equate the two victims is ridiculous. It is only natural that the focus will fall on her.
I respect the mens’ rights movement, but I think you are off on this one.
RIP Nirbhaya.
As for the above post, the attack had nothing to do with ethnicity, the victims and criminals are all basically the same ethnicity.
Simply put, 6 men tricked a pair into entering this bus, picked a fight with them, the pair obviously resisted, and we have the results in full view.
@Hans and Ethical
Excellent posts. I was not even aware that a man had also been abused in that incident. Certainly, the abuse the woman suffered was worse. Newspapers sell newspapers, and thus advertising space, by printing the most shocking or striking news possible. So on one hand the slant toward the woman is understandable; she suffered worse, so they print that, in the hope of selling more papers. (Is it bad when a business profits from promoting, or at least reporting on, misery?)
But if the papers were non-biased, and wanted to print the worst possible story, then surely they would have printed details about two victims, instead of just one. Increase the abuse, increase the indignation in the readers.
Thus, from strictly a financial viewpoint, it is strange that they are leaving him out of the reports. But then the reporters and editors have been raised in a feminist culture. This renders certain priorities and views.
And it is not like there is competition from a fully-truthful media; at least not in Canada. In my (large) city there are only two newspapers. If both are singing the same song, where is the ability to vote with my dollars?
Sad times. Sad that abuse of people can be accepted as routine, both physically in India, and in the different but still-profound financial way here.
Oh yeah, I can’t wait to expose by heart, future-children and finances to a female raised in a feminist environment… not.
Dale
If first world feminism thinks that it can take free strides and make free hay off the back of third world India’s rape saga, then feminism is only deceiving itself. You have no clue feminism, so don’t even go there.
What does feminism say about kinds of third world atrocities always exclusively perpetrated against males for the titillation and consumption of onlooking females ? And not ever reported by feminist dominated media here as a problem for third world men.
Wanna talk about and wank over gendered atrocities feminism ? Well madam white feminist of world feminism here’s a sneak peek preview at GENDERED ATROCITY !!!! And No, the boys weren’t crooks but hapless, ambushed creditors of crooks.
http://mizsunshine.com/2012/10/06/4-uniport-students-burnt-alive-for-stealing-phones-and-laptops/
http://globalvillenews.com/2012/10/08/nigeria-four-uniport-students-murder-in-cold-blood-video/
http://raw.prochan.com/Raw/t/759_1349714256
Since the mob are demanding castration for the alleged rapists, perhaps now is the time to be demanding forced sterilisation for women who abuse and murder their children (ie remove the offending body parts so that the criminal cannot repeat the crime).
As if the Creator had a keen sense of irony, we have today the example of an Indian woman who murdered her own 7yo son, for failing to memorise the Koran.
Perhaps, in the interest of equality, we could have joint stocks made, with his and hers chopping block sections. Once a rapist is identified, lock him into the little hole. Then wait until a woman kills her own child, and tie her into the big slit-shaped stencil. Then, when the bloodlust of those seeking justice is satisfied, females are guaranteed 50% participation. Perhaps we could promote this with equal board representation?
@Ethical
It’s true, there is a whole ethnocentric component to this not being reported. These men were “migrant workers”, from another area of the country. India is a vastly diverse country of religions, casts, and sub-ethnicities.
Also the male companion had his leg broken and said the men were taunting the woman and she mouthed off to them, which is what prompted the incident. I know that’s considered “victim blaming” by rape culture propagandists – but if it’s late at night and you’re on a bus with a bunch of men taunting you, you should probably keep your mouth shut regardless of gender.
Men get the shit kicked out of them, women get raped by societal miscreants. Sometimes men get raped and women get the shit kicked out of them. As a matter of fact had this just been a beating rather than “gang rape”, we’d have never heard about it. In Rape Culture nothing is worse than rape, including murder.
“To reduce violence it will be necessary to encourage non-violence and respect towards all humans male and female, to show understanding and mercy regardless of gender, and to identify and address the real factors that increase the risk of violence.”
Dead on. I’ve always said that you can’t reduce violence against women without working to reduce violent against men. If a man will assault or kill another man than why wouldn’t he do it to a woman who is much weaker and less likely to fight back? Despite this, men still assault other men much more than they do to women. It simply doesn’t become a problem that needs to be acknowledged until a woman gets caught in the crosshairs.
The question is would they rather continue to keep ignoring male on male violence and have something like this happen again, or try to stop violence in general? I still believe they think they can somehow stop violence against women while the males continue to assault and kill each other in large numbers. If it takes a few more incidents like this to open their eyes to the amount of violence males have to face as well, then so be it.
It’s also somewhat discouraging to know that the only reason they will work to stop violence in general in the future is because a few women got caught in the crosshairs. It was okie dokie when it was simply males being killed, but when a few females became victims they suddenly had to step up and stop the violence.
As The Spearhead and other have pointed out, men are considered disposable, dangerous livestock, that is “niggers” (because that’s how Southern Whites treated darker skinned males, and it is a turn of destiny that they are now treated as “niggers” from their own women).
And who cares about a “nigger” who gets done by other “niggers”? Especially if his actions give the lie to the myth that “niggers” are all vicious beasts? What matters is that “niggers” be lynched, whethet they have actually committed a terrible crime like here, or they are merely suspected of it, because better safe than sorry, and “niggers” don’t matter anyhow.
Treating any or all men as “niggers” is something that benefits two influential constituencies: the powerful conservative business elites and the powerful female supremacist movement, which many posters here only dimly realize are allied, against men who aren’t “docile”.
Only the evil and diabolic feminist opportunists can grab this torture and abuse of both a man and a woman, and spin it around as an excuse to demand more and more privileges for women.
Even if it was the man who died, and the woman who survived, they would STILL use it to demand more privileges for themselves.
It doesn’t matter what really happend, ANYTHING is a good excuse to expand female privileges further to absurd levels.
When feminists get power in government, they use it step by step, to change every single aspect of the law and regulation, up to the smallest detail, and twist it so that guaranteed the woman will always profit, and the man will always lose.
They are on a warpath against men, and their goal is nothing less than total enslavement and terror.
Palantir
“There is no question that her male friend also suffered a great deal and deserves sympathy and help from us,”
This is the point of the article. He isn’t receiving sympathy neither help from almost nobody.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/indian-rape-victims-boyfriend-speaks-out-20130105-2c9kv.html
(He said the police who came to their rescue took his girlfriend to a government hospital, but failed to take into account his injuries and mental trauma.)
(“I was treated like an object by the police…. They wanted all the help to solve the case even before getting me the right treatment. Nobody witnessed the trauma I suffered,” he said.)
Paulo – I don’t disagree with you that he needs help, but it seems to me that the article, and many of the commenters seem to think that his suffering is anywhere close to the same level. I am Indian and have followed this case extremely closely. FYI even the girl’s father has said that they have not received aid from the government that they have been promised. There is no comparison in their fates.
One commenter (keyster) has resorted to foolishly blaming the victim because she “mouthed off to them”. She didn’t “mouth off” to them. They tricked this pair into entering this bus and started taunting them for no reason. And because this woman refused to submit to their wishes (!), she was raped with a bar until her intestines were pulled out. Think about that for a second. It is natural that the media is going to focus on her. She is from a poor family who had sold their farmland to invest in her education, and upon getting a job, her salary was going to fund her brothers’ education. That is all gone now. They have a far greater need.
There is no ethnic angle to this. Both victims and attackers are north Indian Hindus. To suggest that this was motivated by ethnicity is to minimize this brutal crime.
Nothing but a painful death would be justice for these animals.
[i]Nothing but a painful death would be justice for these animals.[/i]
Please enlighten us what painful death would be suitable for the female animals who brutalise and murder men – and name a case of a female brutalising a male that you would like to go on record for.
If you haven’t been keeping up, and can’t think of any, I can provide plenty of choices.
Palantir, no offense but I resent being told how I should apportion my sympathies to these victims. What really bothers me about people like you is how doggedly you demand that you alone are the judge of exactly who is more deserving and that for some reason, you believe the 100% and 0% is a legitimate division. What happened to BOTH of these people is tragic and swift and certain justice for BOTH should be demanded. That to recognize the man’s victimization is interpreted as somehow diminishing the woman’s tragedy is offensive and you should be ashamed to say such a thing.
Anyone who enjoys doing that kind of harm to anyone with a blunt instrument until they basically kill them deserves to get a bullet between the eyes. It’s true, though- that the usual suspects will use the event to further demonize men as a genus. Many angles to this story, none good that I can see. The group must have gone into primate gang mode and basically gone berserk once the action reached a certain point.
When did I say “100% and 0%” is the right division? When did I say recognizing the man’s victimization is to diminish hers? Please point it out. I clearly stated in my first post, that he is a victim and deserves sympathy and help, but equating the two is ridiculous. Please try to read. I said “blaming it on ethnicity is to minimize the crime”, not “recognizing the man’s victimization”.
This whole article is about one victim not getting enough “sympathy” (Is it a contest?), you have no problem when the author tells the world how to allocate their sympathies, but when I state the obvious, you have an issue.
We will be happy when these 6 hang, just like when Kasab did.
We will be happy when these 6 hang, just like when Kasab did.-Palantir
Name 6 women you would like to see hang.
Pardon my insistence, but we men have to be careful about who we associate ourselves with.
If you can only direct your bloodlust at male miscreants (in spite of the fact there are plenty of female ones to go around), we are left with the possibility that you are no more than a violent bigot masquerading as someone with a passion for justice.
If you cannot desist from these violent outbursts, without some sort of explanation, we can do without your kind here.
@Palantir
You’ve dismissed the contradictions I pointed out without addressing them. Are you attached to your point? Or are you dedicated to uncovering the truth?
I understand from the little I’ve read that addressing the underlying issues must be extremely painful for many Indians.
But given the feminist slant the issue has taken, the painful truth must be investigated.
It’s important to note there are reports that the protesters WERE indeed Sikh and that they weren’t protesting just against random rape, but against rape as an act of police abuse.
There are also reports of mass-rape of Sikh women by Indian soldiers. One report specifically linked rape protests to protest against rape as a hate crime in India:
This same report seemed to indicate that the hate crimes in their opinion were in some way organized or coordinated.
Finally the description of the Kashmiri Sikh struggle against an Indian Army “occupation” clearly indicates some kind of larger conflict.
Whether or not the assessments of these sources are reliable or credible, whether I’ve erred in calling this ethnic instead of religious violence, clearly SOMEONE believes there is targeted violence in the form of rape.
TO ALL THOSE PUSHING NONSENSICAL ETHNIC ANGLES:
There is zero reliable evidence that the woman was Sikh. Her identity has not been released, as per Indian law.
Second – Young sikh girls are NOT identifiable by their appearance in Delhi. They don’t wear turbans. The boyfriend was not a turbaned Sikh either. There is basically no way the rapists could have known whether she was Sikh or Muslim or Hindu or Christian.
It doesn’t matter what is the ethnicity and religion of the victims and criminals.
What matters is the fact that feminazi’s and white knights in India and all over the world are using and abusing this crime as an opportunity to mobilize their forces and push forward more and more legal privileges for women.
It’s just a political activist theatre that’s being played out, to get closer to their goal of complete female global tyranny.
Men are getting murdered and tortured all over the world, all the time, but they couldn’t care less about that.
When a woman cuts off her sleeping husband’s penis, just because she suspects him of having an affair, women are cheering and laughing from happyness and pleasure, but when something bad happens to a woman, … oh my, then it’s a whole different story.
Hey, where are our Feminists on this one? Nothing to say girls, eh?
Palantir,
You’ve made some assertions. So far, so good. You have also been asked to clarify your position with regard to female criminality and/or male victimhood. You have remained silent. Obviously you are under no obligation to answer anyone’s questions, but if you expect the guys here to take you seriously it would help if you did.
Anybody can say that there are bad man and that some women are mistreated – even horribly so as this case appears to illustrate. We all knew that anyway, but even so – feminists has done little but scream that at the top of their lungs all day every day for the past forty-five years. Enough! We get it.
We. Get. It. Get it?
But we also know that when women sexually mutilate men it gets a good laugh on mainstream T.V. directed at women. And here’s something else we know – we know that if the sexes were reversed feminists would consider the surviving woman to be a “greater” victim than the dead man.
How do I know that? Because Hillary Clinton said so. Here’s how she looks at it when it is men dying horrible deaths and women being left behind to live with the loss, “Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.”
Yeah… she really did say that.
Feminists did not take her to task for that statement. And given their enthusiasm for criticizing anything they hear that they even remotely disagree with, silence indicates agreement. The surviving widow/daughter/mother who is safe at home is, apparently, more victimized than the guy who is blown to bits – or dies at the tip of a spear – or bleeds out from some tropical disease in a filthy camp in a jungle.
So according to one the world’s arch-feminists, if a man dies a horrible death in war, the women he leaves behind are the greater victims, even though they suffer no physical harm themselves. By that metric, how much more is THIS guy a victim than his girlfriend?
She died and he has to go on living without her, so according to feminist-logic, that alone should be enough to declare him to be the “greater” victim. But there’s more:
She didn’t die while he was safe at home – he was there trying to save her despite his own injuries. Not only did he have to WATCH his girlfriend being raped and tortured, but he was tortured as well – things that do not happen to war widows. So not only does he have to live with the loss, but also the horrendous trauma that HE suffered.
Let’s recap using feminist logic:
Situation #1) Man dies horrible death in war. Woman safe at home and suffers no physical harm. “Primary victim?” The woman.
Situation #2) Man and woman tortured together on a bus. Woman dies a horrible death and man is forced to observe while he is being horribly brutalized himself. “Primary victim?” The woman again.
Go figure.
Of course I’m not suggesting that he was actually more victimized than she was. But it’s interesting that when the shoe is on the other foot, a leading feminist declares that a woman who suffers FAR less than this man did is a greater victim than a male soldier who suffers as much as the female victim did.
See? We get it. And the questions still stand by Piercedhead, GT66, and Ethical. You don’t have to answer them, but if you don’t we’ll all know you aren’t someone to be taken very seriously.
Lyn87 – I do not see punishing female criminality mutually exclusive with my point, and I have no issue with supporting capital punishment on female criminals. Since you want specific examples, here is a recent case:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/dec/03/mother-stepfather-arrested-beating-death-7-year-ol/
It seems to me that you and the other commenters seem to think that whenever men are punished, an equal token condemnation MUST be made for female criminals (are men and women ethnic groups at war?). Your Situation 1) is simply a strawman that nobody has brought up, but for some reason you charge me with it, just out of convenience. Why did you even bring it up? Does the fact that archfeminists minimize male victimhood suddenly mean that poor Nirbhaya is no longer given the dignity of even being noted as a victim?
Speaking of which the victim-blaming has started already – http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-09/delhi-rape-accused-to-plead-not-guilty-lawyer-says.html .
The man here was not her boyfriend, please get that straight. I’ve followed this case extremely closely, the woman here was clearly THE target of this attack, starting with the lewd comments made at her prior to the assault, and then when she had her intestines ripped out while she was still alive. The man was certainly attacked, and he bravely defended his friend and saved her from being run over by the bus, but to say they were “tortured together”, is another mistaken attempt to make the man an “equal victim” as if it is some sort of contest. So perhaps you really do not get it. That is ok, if squabbling with feminists is your goal.
Ethical – you keep talking about ethnic angles, and other things that have literally nothing to do with this case. Your reports are wrong. Sikhs were not the primary protestors. The victim is not Sikh. Many many people were out there buddy. Believe me, my comments on hanging these 6 (which hopefully happens soon!) are pretty tame, compared to the anger brought on by this.
“It seems to me that you and the other commenters seem to think that whenever men are punished, an equal token condemnation MUST be made for female criminals (are men and women ethnic groups at war?). “-Palantir
You don’t appear to have considered what this site is primarily concerned with. Namely, the marginalisation of men in many countries today, and the exchange of their rights with a subservient position to women.
A very strong symptom of that is widespread misandry, an eager acceptance of male disposibility, and a willingness on the part of many men to accept their own demise.
Men are brutalised everyday. Wider society is generally indifferent to their suffering and fate. When people such as yourself appear out of nowhere, with such an obvious personal interest in one individual among thousands, allow us to be a little jaded when the victim happens to be female. All we hear is the clippitty-clop of a white-kight riding in, passions all astir, rattling out all the over-the-counter, media made-to-measure outrage we are all exposed to day after day – whenever something awful happens to a female.
However, you must already know the prevailing point-of-view on this site, yet still you fail to acknowledge it. Instead you try and use it to promote your bigoted white-knightery.
You’re about as welcome here as an outraged Alabama racist at a 1960s black civil rights meeting, screaming for another black to be lynched for having raped a white-woman. You lot grow tiresome. You are our enemy, yet you have the gall to walk in our door and lecture us.
@Palantir
You expect that your opinion be taken as gospel with no justification or verifying sources whatsoever, while refusing to address the many inconsistencies pointed out to you. This is condescending. To avoid being labelled as incapable of carrying on a rational and factual discussion some research is called for on your part before you jump the gun and reply again. This condescension when you don’t appear to have understood the basic arguments put forth is IMHO generally a mark of either profound ignorance, a hostile agenda, or both.
The feminazi war machine is rolling forward, and will use any incident, like they are using this one, to speed up to their goal: total submission of all men.
Women’s talk shows in the main stream media all over the world are using it now to promote their ideology of women’s supremacy and women’s entitlement for privileges in every field of life.
Their message is clear: women unite your forces, and fight (vote!) for securing an ever more stronger and ruthless legal superior position over men.
While men foolishly are letting numerous social, political and economic factors determine their voting decision, an enormous amount of women are voting for only one thing: more female privileges.
This radical feminazi narrative is so omnipresent in the media and education system, that for many (most) women, it is being considered as normal ideology and absolute truth.
In writing the books on the feminist problem, I came across an article in The Times (of India) which particularized a hate crime against Sikh MEN. The gendercide of violence against men in which fourteen men and no women were taken off a bus and murdered was given SOME limited media coverage but no burst of opposition by the feminist media nor governments.
Such should have been coverage fourteen times the order of magnitude of that given vis-a-vis the recent violence against a man and a woman as this Spearhead article discusses. Of course it wasn’t but awareness of such and the utter negligence of government and society as a whole to oppose and abhore such violence could be used by victimized boys and men everywhere where feminist hate propaganda is the norm.
Such includes the women’s government schools. Awareness of this website and others such as that of A Voice for Men and SAVE would aid the boys and men everywhere in defending themselves from the utter hate top-down, bottom-up and sideways which pervades the atmospheres of such places and so much else everywhere.
Thank you, Welmer and others for your contributions here and elsewhere. May God be praised because of you.
@Palantir
@ Palantir
Animal begets animal. Once the blood revenge you seek is exacted, 6 men for one woman, and when the media storm subsides, and this tragic incident is forgotten, the hearts of those you have influenced with your bloodthirsty revenge will be just a little emptier and the life of an Indian man will be just a little cheaper.
Bhaya, you are a profoundly foolish individual to recycle evil so wantonly. The moral vacuity of men like you has allowed the worst of feminism to run rampant through India’s lymphatic system.