“Let’s Talk About Men” is a tagline I saw on a blog that had articles about the men’s rights movement in India. I immediately connected with the tagline and I thought what would be its implications when we ask a commoner?
What are the images of a man that are formed in the mind of the “Aam Aadmi” (ordinary male) and the “Aam Aurat” (ordinary female) when we say, “Let’s Talk About Men”. I did a sample survey of this exercise and the results were,
90% of the audience drew a blank on what to say. They had nothing to share about men!
When the audience was given further hints, why don’t you share your views about men and then the responses improved slightly and the results were,
At least 70% of the respondents could connect men to crime and responded that men shouldn’t commit crime and they should respect women.
Date: 6th August 2013
Sub: Men’s Rights Activists refuse to vote for MPs who will support Marriage Law (Amendment) Bill, 2010
Men’s Rights Activists all over India, under the auspices of the Men’s Right Association (MRA) Pune have made a clarion call to the society against the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010.
Terming the bill as extremely anti-male, anti-husband and anti-marriage that seeks to incentivize divorce, men’s rights activists have come out in large numbers against the bill which is supposed to be debated in the current ongoing monsoon session of the parliament.
Activists belonging to the Men’s Rights Association, Pune have highlighted the dangers of passing the bill,
- Men will stop marrying after this bill is passed.
- Men will stop investing in real estate after this bill is passed.
- This law, if passed, shall promote family breaking and divorces.
- This law, if passed, will lead to the formation of a fatherless society in India.
- Marriages will be converted into property transfer bureau.
- Women will marry only for property and shall break short marriages eying property of their soon to be ex-husbands.
- This may also lead to promulgation of crime in the society as property is a sensitive issue and if men are forced to part with their hard-earned property merely because their marriage did not work, the social consequences of such a badly designed law can be potentially dangerous.
- This law, if passed, will also contribute to the growing tendency of gynophobia (fear of women) in the society.
- This law, if passed, shall contribute to the growing number of suicides by married men. Currently every year 64000+ married men commit suicide.
- This law, if passed, will leave men bankrupt after divorce as they would lose their property and also face additional extortion under false 498A (Dowry) case, false domestic violence case, false maintenance case.
Subject: Indian husbands stand to lose their property in wake of new divorce law.
The Government is in such a great haste to amend Hindu Marriage Act that, it is doing flips flops in its own stands about details of property division in last one year. This shows that its own ministers have neither clarity nor consensus about how to handle the issue of alimony and property division, when this no fault divorce law is enacted. The other parliament members representing the common man are even more clueless, about what is cooking. Yet, the Government is under pressure to pass this law in haste before its term expires in less than a year.
In the process, the Government has refused to involve law commissions, parliamentary standing committees to draft this will, which will impact lives of millions of young men and women in future. It is certain that, if this current draft bill is passed as approved by Group of Ministers, the end result will be another badly drafted law, which will only add to the misery of people facing marital problems.
Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF) strongly objects to the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010 in its current form and demands its rollback. SIFF demands that the bill in its current form should not be tabled.
SIFF is also against too much discretion to be given to judges and courts in deciding monthly spousal support and how the property is to be divided.
Marriages are breaking up? Blame Men, extort them.
Families are being destroyed? Blame Men, extort them.
Materialism is increasing? Blame Men, extort them.
It is increasingly becoming a social tendency to have laws, social structures and provisions in place which make it convenient to blame men for every social problem and also consider it politically correct to have a law which will extort men in the event of a fallacy.
Such a feeling is promoted by misandry (social hatred against men) and its misandry within the society which makes look extortionary laws look “progressive”.
One such extortionary law in the pipeline is the “Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010 which seeks to introduce a new ground for divorce known as the “Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage”. Under the guise of providing quick divorce, the Govt. of India is on the brink of passing a law that will rob men off their hard earned properties merely because their marriage didn’t work.
This proposed bill has provisions to give away at least 50% of a man’s hard earned property to his wife in the event of a divorce. If a man doesn’t own one, his ancestral or inherited property shall be divided but in the event of a divorce, a woman shall be guaranteed free property from husband’s family irrespective of the properties she may/may not get from her parents.
Subject: Just like Suraj Pancholi, thousands of helpless men get victimized with threats of Suicide from wives and girlfriends every year.
Based on media reports and alleged suicide note of Jiah Khan, 22-year old Suraj Pancholi was arrested and sent to jail for committing the crime of abetment to suicide. We have to understand that such laws do not exist in other countries in the world. Is suicide a solution to break-ups or separation? Jiah Khan attempted suicide 8 months ago and nothing was done to ensure that she does not repeat it. It is absurd to assume that all human relations will remain everlasting in this age of modernity. Finally, women are portrayed as victims, and men as abusers.
Suraj Pancholi is not alone. Thousands of men across India call SIFF helplines every week. Half of them have faced threats of suicide from their wives from time to time, if they do not meet her unreasonable demands. These men are scared. These abusive wives refuse to come to a counselor or a psychiatrist. When these young men plead to the parents of women about their suicidal nature, parents do not take it seriously. These men cannot run away from home or file for divorce, fearing that this may prompt her to commit suicide. They suffer mental and physical abuse from possessive, controlling and suspicious wives. In fact, the society laughs at them as “Harassed Husbands” rather than helping the man and making arrangements for counseling of such women. Now, this phenomenon is getting extended to relationships before marriage as well. Being obsessively possessive and controlling is not a sign of love.
In short, India is sitting on a ticking time bomb as the society refuses to recognize the issue of threats of suicide inside marriages or in relationships. The society just behaves as if such incidents are rare or wishes that this problem will go away on its own. Then, it recommends revenge on the man if the woman commits suicide. Home Ministry (NCRB) data says, 24% of all suicides in India are due to Family Reasons and 3.4% due to failed love affairs.
Sub: SIFF opposes Marriage Laws Amendment Bill; demands additional clauses to be inserted
Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), an organization fighting for men’s rights and working to support distressed and victimized men has raised cudgels against the upcoming Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010.
Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010 seeks to introduce a new ground for divorce in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Special Marriage Act, 1957 – The Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Ground, providing for a quick no-fault divorce after three years of separation.
SIFF vehemently opposes the bill in its current form terming it as unconstitutional, gender discriminatory and anti-male.
Why is the bill unconstitutional?
This bill is unconstitutional as it violates Article 14 of the Indian constitution. Article 14 says all are equal before the eyes of the law, whereas in the current bill at hand,
- Only a wife can oppose the divorce petition filed by a husband if she ‘feels’ financially insecure with the divorce settlement.
- Only a husband will lose at least 50% of his hard earned property to his estranged wife.
- There is no guarantee that a father would get access to his children post-divorce and the bill does not talk about shared parenting at all.
- The bill does not cater to ‘Social Security’ of men while it caters to ‘Financial Security’ of women post-divorce.
- The does not recognize contribution of men in marriage while it talks about contribution of women in marriage.
Why should men pay?
Subject: SIFF Calls for a Peaceful Protest March Demanding Rollback of Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill 2010 (IrBM).
Theme of the Protest:
The theme of this protest is to register Strong Protest against the Marriage Law Amendment Bill (2010), commonly known as IrBM (Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage) OR No-Fault Divorce. It is a common practice to ask men to make huge financial payment to his wife when a marriage breaks. The same injustice to men is now being extrapolated by this new Bill which incentivizes a Wife to take Divorce for NO FAULT of the Husband with minimum 50% of his owned / acquired / inherited / inheritable / moveable / immoveable Properties. Often, the man is implicated in false cases in order to coerce him towards a settlement. Even the state machinery is hand-in-glove with the wife in this financial extortion of men.
1. SIFF being men’s rights organization identifies such abuse of men as a violation of the human rights of men. It vehemently objects to men being forced to pay huge and hefty Property or amounts to end marriages.
2. SIFF vehemently opposes upcoming laws like Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill which talks of giving away at least 50% of the property owned by husbands at the time of divorce apart from possible division of other properties like inherited, gifted, acquired properties.
3. SIFF also opposes all forms of pressures being put on a man to cough out huge alimonies and maintenance including the existing maintenance laws (Domestic Violence Act, Section 125 CrPC).
4. Such laws act as a great motivator for a woman to marry and break the marriage in order to enrich herself at the cost of the man (her husband).
Does it sound like a self-contradictory statement when I say, “No Money in Alimony”? Because, everyone knows that alimony is the money that a husband pays when he gets divorced from his wife, so when we say, “No Money in Alimony”, what exactly does it mean?
It simply means, “Abolish Alimony”. And do we have the eyebrows already raised?
Well, yes, then I guess this article is pretty much needed. I have often experimented by talking to people asking them, “Is it OK to abolish alimony?”
And the answer has been a majority NO, even from many of those men who are themselves paying alimony/maintenance.
And when I asked them as to why would they support alimony, the answer was, “I know my wife doesn’t deserve alimony, but there are many genuine women who should get?”
And this made me ponder and wonder, “Is it OK to burden a husband with the financial burden of his ex-wife even when the relationship is over?”