Home

India: 'Don't be a wife, live-in and extort'

Submitted by anthony on Sun, 2008-07-20 04:19.

Article here. Excerpt:

'NATIONAL COMMISSION of Women (NCW), recently proposed an amendment of Section 125 of Code of Criminal procedure (CrPC) to include women involved in livein relationships to be eligible for alimony from their livein partners. This proposed amendment has far reaching consequences, which it is evident that the champion of womens causes, National Commission of Women seems to have conveniently ignored.
...
What the logical rationale fails to understand is how any person having the slightest of common sense can draft any provision on the basis of a generalised statement that all men are criminals and all women are truthfully innocent. When there is a provision to extract money legally, why will a woman not initiate a livein relationship, break it at will and then harass the man for whole life. As it is, the concept of livein relationship has not come of its age in the Indian society and will also not come, as Indian societal scenario is hundred times more complex than western society, which is being beautifully attempted to be aped here.'

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

By the same author

Submitted by Matt on Sun, 2008-07-20 16:35.

Off-linked to this article by the same author. I started reading and knew just what he was referring to: chivalry. So it seems we have a more clinical word for it now, "nymphotropism". I'd like to encourage its use instead of "chivalry" since "chivalry" seems almost too trite a way to describe it and evokes visions of horses, knights, and so on, all of which seem to trivialize the phenomenon. Starts with:

'PROTECT WOMEN, as they are the propagators of the clan - the age old line of thought reflects itself in the design of the oldest and hitherto most sacrosanct social institution called marriage, which forms the basis of blissful life and the foundation of societal structures. And that is fairly acceptable too, if we delve deep into the factual synopsis leading to the concept of marriages. The institution of marriage was in actuality designed to provide protection to the female members of the social clan. Biologically, females have reproductive power and this makes it important to the society to take care of the females by protecting them. Genetically, males are designed to feel heroic saving a woman, and want to go overboard in their bid to protect a female from another male. Welcome to the euphoria of nymphotropism which has so far been very influential in the major events worldwide.'

»

So, what's the next goal?

Submitted by tac0965 on Mon, 2008-07-21 17:44.

So, what's the next goal? Are men going to have to pay alimony if they dated a girl for a certain period of time?

»

Re: So, what's the next goal

Submitted by digitalhermit on Mon, 2008-07-21 18:08.

> So, what's the next goal? Are men going to have to pay alimony if they dated a girl for a certain period of time?

That's exactly the goal! After all, according to the PC feminist crowd any girlfriend / wife is now considered an "Unpaid Sex Worker" ( Reference Here ). We can't have all these women running around giving it away for free, now can we? But those women who actually charge for their services are considered exploited by evil men. So either way, the man's gotta pay and yet he's somehow wrong to do so. Gotta love that bit of feminist illogic.

»