PRESS RELEASE: Strongly condemning the upcoming Marriage Laws (amendment) Bill

PRESS RELEASE

Subject: Strongly condemning the upcoming Marriage Laws (amendment) Bill

Introduction:

Confidare Research is the education and research wing of Confidare Consultancy that specializes in dealing with problems of men.

Confidare Research strongly condemn the upcoming “Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill” that was supposed to be tabled today before the Cabinet.

This bill is a further evidence of the growing misandry (male hatred) in the society and how the society treats men as disposable entities. Even in this modern age when we talk of Gender Equality, the stereotypical patriarchal notion that the financial responsibility of a family should lay on a husband still prevails in the society, and this pervert social mindset is the root cause of abuse of men, especially husbands in a marriage.

In such a situation, where men are already burdened with so much of load, another law which makes divorce extremely costly for them is thoroughly unwelcome.

Highlights of the law:

  1. This law recognizes “Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage” as a ground for divorce.
  2. While the law empowers the wife to oppose the divorce at any point of time if the husband has filed for divorce, it restrains the husband from doing so when the wife has filed for the same.
  3. This law also contains a clause by which courts will be empowered to snatch away half the property of husband and give it away to wife.
  4. This law only talks about women’s rights and has no considerations whatsoever for men.

Brief Background:

Due to demand from various quarters, this ground for divorce was introduced by the Govt. of India by way of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010 which sought to amend the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act. However, the bill contained clauses that facilitated financial extortion of men.

The bill read that courts would have power not to grant the divorce unless the wife was paid adequate amount of money under the cute name of “Financial Security of Woman”.

And the bill also mentioned about special powers being given only to wives to oppose the divorce if the wife was unhappy with the money she received from the husband.

Such clauses being outright anti-male and gender-biased in nature were vehemently opposed by various men’s rights activists and organizations, who even deposed in front of the Standing Committee on personnel, public grievances, law and justice. The panel, chaired by Shri Santaram Naik, was presented with the objections raised by men’s rights organizations who sought to make the bill gender-neutral and ensure that no man faced any kind of financial hardship because of gender-biased clauses in the bill.

Oppositions ignored:

However, the objections raised by men’s rights organizations have been conveniently ignored by the standing committee panel, that has gone ahead and recommended the very clauses to the Govt. of India for the bill to be tabled, to which the men’s rights organizations has raised objections against.

What will happen if?

  1. Husband purchases a property just 6 months after marriage out of his hard-earned savings earned before marriage and his marriage breaks and he loses half of the property. In that case the husband will be doomed.
  2. Men start fearing this law and stop buying real estate which adversely affects the economy of the country.
  3. Husband has dependent parents and owns a single property and if 50% of that goes to wife post-divorce, how will the husband take care of his old parents? Is the concept of family restricted to only husband-wife in the Indian context?
  4. What, if the family is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) owning a single joint property? Will the wife get 50% of that? What about other sibling’s share in it?

Confidare’s objections:

  1. Marriages are tumultuous for men. This fact reflects in the suicide statistics that are published year-over-year by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and it’s the married men who top the list of suicide. Suicide rate of husbands’ increases 4 times the rate of wives’ and 6 times the rate they are born. Every 9 minutes a married man commits suicide. This fact clearly proves how bad marriages turn out for men and if divorces are also made costlier by way of such laws, this will lead to further increase in suicides by men. Is the Government of India trying to facilitate the suicides of men?
  2. There is one more law in the pipeline – Matrimonial Property (Rights of Women upon Marriage Act), 2012 – which talks about making wife the co-owner of husband’s properties right at the time of marriage; then, why this law? Why is the Government hell bent on making redundant anti-male laws and convert marriage into an extortion industry thriving on men?
  3. In a democratic law making process, objections raised by a particular group or individual cannot be ignored without any proper justification. The panel has failed to give any just and proper reason as to why the objections raised should not be considered.
  4. As per Dowry Prohibition Act, any demand of cash/kind in relation to marriage is “Dowry”. Is not this law legalizing dowry to be paid to wife from husband under the cute name of “Financial Security of Wife”?
  5. Right to Equality is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of India and cannot be disrespected under any circumstances. Current bill thoroughly violates it, as far as men are concerned.
  6. Feminists are claiming that nearly 80% of women do not have a place to live post-divorce. This is completely false because no such study has ever been conducted. India does not have any standard data collected as to how many divorces are happening, of those how many own a house and how many do not, how many are nuclear, joint and HUF families. Without any such data in place, any claims made are just airy claims without any data. Formulating a law on airy data is dangerous.

 Confidare’s demands:

  1. Marriages and Divorces should not be made a property-transfer-bureau.
  2. If property division is to be done then wife’s share in her ancestral property must also be considered and then division must be done.
  3. Duration of marriage must be a crucial factor of consideration. The difference between a 2 month marriage and a 20 year marriage must be clearly understood.
  4. Property division must take into account contributions made by both the spouses and also the fact that the property was acquired from wealth earned post marriage and not from previous savings.
  5. Any and all outstanding financial liabilities on the property like loan for property, loan against property, mortgage etc. must also be equally divided and wife must be made to be equally paid for it. If she is not working then she should get her share from her ancestral property.
  6. Both the partners should have equal and unbridled right to oppose divorce and there should be no gender-bias in this.
  7. There should not be any power wrested with the courts to decide upon property transfer or stalling of proceedings as the Indian judiciary is highly incompetent and has not shown positive trends favoring men when it comes to disposing cases. The Indian judiciary is highly anti-male and does not consider twice before ordering a man to either “sell his kidney” or “beg, borrow or steal” just to pay maintenance to his estranged wife. What is the guarantee that the same judiciary will make judicious decisions when it comes to this law?
  8. Institute a National Commission for Men, that can systematically collect issues, concerns and problems of men, study them and recommend to the Govt. about measures to be taken to address those problems.

If the Govt. of India does not take these considerations seriously then we have only one message for the hardworking Indian men, who think putting self before others, is a social norm –

Your hard earned property does not belong to you.

Advertisements

35 thoughts on “PRESS RELEASE: Strongly condemning the upcoming Marriage Laws (amendment) Bill

  1. BE HAPPY THAT AT LEAST BY GIVING SHARE IN THE PROPERTY, YOU ARE ABLE TO GET RID OF ILL MARRIAGE AND START AFRESH OTHERWISE PEOPLE KEEP FIGHTING AND STILL DONT GET DIVORCE FROM THE WIFE WHO WANT TO KEEP THE MARRIAGE JUST FOR THE STATUS STAKE AND ENJOY LIFE ON THE MAINTENANCE GIVEN BY THE HUSBAND. ON THE TOP SUCH WOMEN DONOT LEAVE EVEN A SINGLE LAW TO MISUSE AGAINST HUSBAND AND IN LAWS. SO DONT CONDEMN THIS BILL.IT IS A GREAT BREATHER FOR ALL THE MEN. MOREOVER, NOW, EVEN WOMEN WLOULD ALSO BE SCARED BEFORE PUTTING FALSE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE HUSBAND AND IN LAWS AS THIS LAW WOULD ENTITLE THE MEN TO TAKE RECOURSE OF IRRETRIEVABLE BREAKDOWN OF MARRIAGE FOR DIVORCE AFTER SEPARATION OF THREE YEARS. SO GUYS CHEERS……………….NOW WOMEN CAN NOT EXPLOIT THE DOWRY LAWS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE LAWS. IF THEY ARE UNHAPPY, THEY CAN CLAIM MAINTENANCE, STAY SEPARATE FOR THREE YEARS AND GET DIVORCE AND START AFRESH.

    • Rahul, this is financial extortion of men and not acceptable. There’s nothing to be happy about getting divorce at such a big cost. Divorce should be not be a pre-condition to start life afresh. No one stops you from enjoying life. Merely because the society pampers women does not mean men should bow down before it. This is financial slavery of men.

    • Can you enlighten that how does this bill save men from other exploitation and legal blackmail by women like 498a and DV and why men should ‘rejoice’?

      If anything Men of India should do is shoot themselves in their head as all their rights are being taken away by this feminist govt. I would have said Men of India should wear ‘chudis’ but that would be too Ironic.

      There’s still time guys – wake up and FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE.

  2. Have they defined “grave financial hardship” ?
    Personally i am in favour of splitting property earned after marriage 50 – 50 and likewise splitting child custody 50 – 50, appeals to my sense equity & justice. However, one without the other is ofcourse extortion.
    Does anybody have a copy of the bill ?

      • @ Mra Atit;

        Do read my follow-up comment … there is no quid-pro-quo concept at work here, just that a man & a woman in marriage may perform different tasks during their married life together, we just need to value them equally … As i have clarified, sharing of money is restricted to money earned during the time they are living together & not before or after that … A woman may turn around & say that since she has borne & breast-fed the child, therefore the child is entirely her “property”, would you buy that argument ?

      • @Nichrome: regarding your comment about ‘women claiming child being her propoerty’ – I am not sure what women think but courts and laws here certainly do think that children are property of women and that is why in most of the cases the child goes with women after the separation while men -if they are lucky-become weekend dads or get to see their children once in a blue moon (while providing for their upkeep through maintenance all along)..

    • Whoever acquires the property deserve to keep it. A man and woman in marriage may perform different tasks. But it should be upto each partner how much value he/she gives to work done by the other partner….No one should be forced to give any value to the work done by another unless there is a pre agreement.. If somebody wants the other partner to pay a price big or small, they have to put it an a condition before doing the work. If my wife wants half my property for cooking, then she has to tell it upfront and get my approval before cooking, then only she deserves it. She cannot do service to husband just like that and claim a hefty price later on.
      If somebody does any work without keeping compensation as condition, then cannot claim anything later on. If the woman’s work is really worth it, she could commend an agreement before marriage itself. But in free world, in many cases such contracts will not happen. SO feminists want it imposed.

  3. There are two major problems with this ‘marital property split’ bill:-

    1. There is no concept of pre-nuptial agreement like in all western societies – which makes it impossible for men and women to enter a marriage even if they are okay to split their assets based on their contribution should a legal separation should happen.
    2. There is no minimum period after which this ‘equal split’ should become effective. How could a women justify contributing for a marriage and demand half the marital property just after 3 months of marriage?

    • This is only going to add further fuel to the fire. The girl in love with somebody may marry some rich boy, get separated on the pretext of irretrievable marriage after getting share of property through such draconian law and enjoy rest of the life with her lover. Ensure post retirement benefits for her beloved parents. There is already abuses of existing laws and further such amendments would force the boys to get ruined through police and court wallahas harassing him. Dont you think that such an amendment will not lead society for an official prostitution giving it white colour process.

      • Only option is unite and fight with these goons. The problem for man is we talk too much but done nothing. We have time for all political partis, we have time of other entertinement but no time for ourselves.Why nobody is `-objecting it. man want others fight for them but feminists themselves come forward and fight for their right. As long as man sleep like this what surprise more laws will be enacted.

    • Hi Ash,

      Isnt your point totally invalid, the two people must have lived separately for three years before anyone can claim divorce on this ground. Moreover I don’t think a never married women’s only future objective would be to get married for just three months and then wait three years to get divorce and money. Women do extort money out of their husbands but that is after the relationship has gone sour, but your kind of situation would happen only if women plan it even before marriage

      Aragon

  4. @ ASH:

    a). I agree with your predicament, though a rather “simplistic” solution is to take ITR’s of both, sum them up, take away some realistic expenses and split the remaining equally between the two … Ofcourse numerous issues arise with respect to “black money”, lack of ITR’s, tracing property bought from that particular money etc … However, i do believe that both spouses contribute equally for the period of time they are married & staying together and some such system which is restricted to sharing of earnings for that period of time must be devised …
    b). Also, i strongly believe that rural india cannot be equated to urban india & therefore, just the way government is proposing differential laws based on gender (though discriminatory), it may be a good idea to have different societal (& marriage) laws for urban & rural India, probably based on women’s education levels eg: a woman who is a graduate or above should be allowed to enter into a pre-nuptial, can only claim “alimony” based on ITR calculations mentioned above etc, while a non-graduate woman (for her earning capacity is highly limited) may be given slightly wider rights.
    c). Does anybody have a copy of the proposed bill, sometimes “highlights” can be extremely misleading … ??

    • @Nichrome:

      – W.r.t. rural women / urban women: I agree that condition of ‘education’ should be a reqt. for a women or men to enter a alimony clause not sure if this condition should be a reqt. for ‘equal split’ clause. I still don’t think that women should get blank half of the property gained during the marriage – that I think is quite unfair for the primary earner.

      – Another side effect of this bill would be – why would men marry a low income or no income women ? Is it not a ‘death knell’ on the marriage of these women? How is this women welfare?

      – Another aspect is that would not it promote dowry? If one knows that one may have to split
      their wealth they would want to gather maximum moolah when the marriage happens?

      – The word women or men should be totally abolished from this law – only use the word spouse.

      – One condition of this split should be – that women will not claim any amount in terms of maintenance – through DV or any other mechanism

  5. The Indian government is only bent upon ruining the family structure by drafting laws based only on feminist views , this is total injustice to the 50% percent population that is men who make property with their hard earned money and the wife comes and grabs tie property claiming her rights on it. where will the husband and his family go? why not draft a law where the husband too can claim rights in the in-laws’ property.

  6. This is ridiculous. We are simply trying to copy west ignoring the fact that western women work full time and share financial responsibilities with their husband. Indian women on the other hand just prefer to sit back at home and enjoy husband earnings. And now they have equal rights in property without any contribution….what a joke!!

  7. Women gets her share from her parents, then she gets share from her Husband, then she marries again and get another share ……….. and another ……….. and another.

    How ridiculous the logic is for Marital Property Act?

    Why should men marry at all? Coz, an abusive wife rides away with 50% of his hard earned earning? Coz, a adulterous wife takes that 50% away with her paramour? Coz, a greedy Mother-in-law gets a ready business of real estate and makes money on her innocent son-in-laws hard earnings?

    If the logic is that women also contributes to family in building assets, then where is the account of the contribution that man did to the women while the marriage was on? How is a women expected to pay that back to man?

    India is a great country where laws are made just not to credit women but to debit men ………. only 1 side flow.

    absolutely wrong and bad and NALAYAK law

  8. in essence Women ONLY has the right to live, all men in this country (specially brahmins) are by default criminals, rapists, chauvanists, lazy, irresponsible and most importantly INHUMAN. Why women married us in first place ? Why there are large number of extortions happening all done by Women ? Nobody wants to hear such thing because its not a HOT topic yet neither GUT feelings & blind sentiments of the crowd yet understands this 🙂

  9. If 80% women are left without home after divorce, does it means before marriage they were homeless and grown on streets ? How about the girl’s parents property ? If parents were responsible in upbringing of the girl child and after dissolution of marriage why husbands should born the weight of dead marriage and regain control of his life ?

    ANYBODY want to think about the men ? I am sure NO…..

  10. @ankush verma: Kya aap soch rahe hain kee yah ladki ke saath sahunbhooti hai. yeh politician to apne baap ke bhi nahin hotey. Ab jab court ne DV Act ka aur HMA ke abuse pad ankush lagaana shuru kar diya to en police waalon kee kamaayee khatam hone ja rahee thee. esliye amendment karney kee jaroorat pad gayee taakee koi na koi business model chalta hai. wah re politicians kaisey kaisey business model dhoodtey ho. kutch to logic rakho.

    • Actually Bhuktbhogi bhai ……….. the plan is even bigger.

      Lets analyse it from 3 sets of parents:
      SET 1: Parents with No Kids
      No Kids so no pain

      SET 2: Parents with only daughters
      100% of property goes to daughters from her parents (or % depending on number of girls)

      SET 3: Parents with both daughters & sons
      Parents will be afraid to give any succession to their sons as some other bitch not from their family will snatch 50% of their sons so they still give 100% of their property to their daughters only.

      SO THE MAIN FOCUS IS : MEN WILL NOT GET ANY PROPERTY RIGHTS EITHER THROUGH SUCCESSION OR THROUGH PURCHASE.

      POLITICIANS WHO HAVE FOUND GOLD IN NAME OF REAL ESTATE ARE MAKING WOMEN OF INDIA LEARN THE SAME TRICK.

      • @Ankush: Set 2- parents sey property mil gayee. ab jab woh shaadi karke divorce kargee to uss husband ko bji loot key 50% property le ke aa jayegi. to kitna hua: 150%. ab woh bechaara husband kya karega tabla bajayega.

        Set 3: No counter statement.
        Set 1 : Agreed no pain. additionally there is no fear of DV act. shaanti hee shantee.

        Jai ho hamaari cabiunet ka jinka koi dimaage nahin hai. yeh chahen to apney kapde bhi utarwa den. bus inko to vote hee chaiyee.

  11. This is legalization of prostitution…get married..get divorced…get money…get married…get divorced…get money…..so on and so forth…

  12. if such laws come into effect and one is screwed .. the best course of action is to shoot the wife and then shoot oneself .. because either way .. life is screwed for most men ..

  13. We should never vote the congress. I wonder how these feminists get the government what they want .I think men should start doing civil disobedience as that is the only way left for us

  14. I can’t believe this is happening. what kind of idiots the Indian legislators are ruining families and making marriage a money making business. Instead of vanishing existing gender biased laws they are making situation worst.

  15. The Indian government and industrialists want to break families and ruin marriages so as to increase consummeriism as more homes will be generated and more products will be sold and their swiss bank accounts will increase manifold, to hell with this government

  16. The whole marriage act is gender biased towards woman. Probably, this entire act needs to be re-written considering both men and women welbeing in particular and whole society in general. These kinds of biased laws will only increase inequality in long run. Even the panel/forum which recommends such amendments should be made of equal representation and should be data driven. It seems to me that the panel which recommended this amendment is biased.

  17. In my opinion, the time has come to take opinion on the streets before any damn amendment is brought to approval and implementation. Once the Act is amended, it will be too late for its reversal and all guys will have to face threat and extortion. How to undertake this activity is really to be thought of.

  18. Feminazism is on a expanding arsenal spree. We Shall soon outpace the western hemisphere where the Family structure has already been shown the door, thereby enhancing the spending spree, and collecting more direct and indirect returns.

    This must be strongly thwarted. Men, wake up, NOW

    • Men should oppose this . I think we should hold dharnas , meet BJP folks , leaders like Mulayam Singh / Laloo who opposed WRB bill . Leaders like Mulayam can pressurize UPA from not passing this bill due to Mamtas coalition being weak now. Unless we meet ministry people nothing is going to change. We should pressurize for Mens ministry until then nothing is going to change. I really wonder what is the magic that these feminists like Ranjana Kumari do that they get law passed as per their likes. We have to revolt against this UPA govt which has passed all anti male laws.

      We need to use opposition parties

  19. I request all to use social media like facebook and twitter to post your messages opposing UPA move on amendment. use BJP and SP facebook.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s