Indian Woman Sodomizes Girl with Aluminum Rod

From the mensactivism.org Our Philosophy page:

Women's Violence and the Portrayal of Women

We believe that one of the misperceptions that is currently harming equality and men's rights is the myth that women are less violent than men. Although pointing readers to examples of women's violence is one way to help break down this myth, we do not wish to attack women merely for the sake of "exposing women's faults" - after all, the media is currently too eager to portray men as abusers, murderers and rapists. Therefore, unless the news story is related to an issue which is more closely tied with men's issues (ie, an example of domestic violence against men, or inequality in sentencing female criminals), we will generally not post stories that are simply about women being violent.

I'm curious, do people think this story or the philosophy statement are out of line? I personally find myself conflicted when I see stories like this posted on MANN, but maybe I'm the one who needs to change. What do you think?

Scott

Violence is never pretty no matter what the perpetrator’s gender happens to be. Fortunately, most women are not violent nor are most men. However, the media and the justice system hype-up cases when the perpetrator is male and minimize and under-report cases when the perpetrator is female. Many are still of the opinion that females rarely perpetrate violence. The only way to break down the walls of denial is to serve-up proof. If someone is offended or inconvenienced by reporting the truth; oh well.

Here are a few related topics I think should be taken into consideration:

Is it hypocritical for pro-male activists to complain about the negative portrayal of men as violent when they are working to promote examples of women being violent?

Does this focus on violent women help us to introduce men's issues to a greater audience and bring more people into the movement?

Does a story like the one above provide rational justification for people who think the men's movement consists of woman-haters?

Again, more food for thought.

Scott

I agree bull. It's not so much that we are exploiting a story of a violent act simply because it involves a woman. I think it important to post stories like this to show that women are just as deeply ingrained in the "patriarchal" and class system as men are. The fact that her violent act (that would be also considered a sexual assault if a man did it) was perpetrated towards another female, a female child, helps to balance the onslaught of articles that villify and exploit men at the slightest hint of violence or accuasation of said violence. If nothing more, it may allow casual readers and those curious of the men's movement to see an alternative to what is presented in the "legitimate media;" as I thought this site did from its inception.

Evil White Male Oppressor
"I am Not a Number I am a Free Man"

It takes a lot to choke me up, but this story, certainly, did it.
What have we become as a species when we torture and murder an innocent child, a CHILD like this woman did?
"Inhuman" doesn't even BEGIN to cover this. I simply can NOT wrap my mind around this. It is completely incomprehensible to me that some one could do this to a little kid.

And as for those who question weather or not we should publish atrocities, such as this one, done by women, I say Yes. Yes we should. It is not anti-female, per say to do so. It is simply because while the misdeeds of men are covered constantly and magnified by the press, evil doing by women is down played or out right hidden and buried by the press. One of the goals of the men's movement is to tell the truth. To reveal the truth.
No one in the men's movement denies that there are men who do unGodly and horrendous things. But the feminist can not or will not come to terms with the fact that members of their own gender are capable of in-human violence and depravity, as well. And a complicit media plays right along with them. The truth is; Men can and do commit horrible acts of violence. But the truth is also; that WOMEN can and do the same. The difference is; men are held accountable, demonized and reviled by the just, while women are protected, given therapy and "understanding" when they commit horrors. And it doesn't matter how horrible the deed a female perpetrator can always count on "understanding" and sympathy for HER, (not her victim) Even when that victim is a child.
So no, it is NOT anti-female to cover the evils that women commit. The evil that men commit are front page news, why shouldn't the evils of women be shown likewise, instead of hidden or buried by our press?
Is it anti-German to tell the truth about the Nazis?

And lastly. The feminists are very fond of pointing out the evils that some men do to validate their points. They do this cloaked in false innocence. When they point out the evils of men, it is only fair that we point out their evils as well, because then they have no shield of innocence and superiority to hide behind, therefore making the "battle" both more fair and more EQUAL.
And it is all about EQUALITY, is it not?
Either we are treated as equal or we are not.
The media will not show some women for what they are. So there fore it is our DUTY to reveal the part of the truth that the media strive so hard to hide.
There and there only lies true balance.

Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"

Scott

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that we would be justified in posting every female-violence story out there, or do you mean that posting that particular story conflicts with the philosophy?

It may be hypocritical, but let's face it, we are forced into the offensive. We are up against the mainstream media, as well as a whipped government(s). We are not trying to promote the notion of women as violent per se (although there are many arguments to support that), but that violence is not a gender-specific phenomenon. Women's negative portrayal of men is an attack. To me anyway, its a completely different thing.

I don't know if this increases the audience, but I think it may help correct misconceptions held by skeptics.

As for your last question, I guess it might. But a lot of people will start out with that idea and never change, regardless. Besides, I may not hate women, but I hate certain aspects of what some (maybe many) women stand for. I'm not ashamed to let that be known.

Laws are made to Punish criminals and prevent crime from society. Same Laws are amended as time
changes or when people started to misuse it, if there are bugs in it. Or same laws are no longer
serving the purpose. But in India there are some Barbarian and Stone Age time laws still exist, one
of such law is Dowry Prohibition act of 1961. It is also called IPC 498A.

Under this law, one word of a wife against her husband can land him in jail, send his old
age parents behind bars, or anyone whoever she name in her complaint, even husband married pregnant
sisters along with her breast fed small children. Wife’s one word and some crocodile tears will
enough to lock them up for months; without any investigation or enquiry. This 498A of IPC is non
bailable and non compoundable, so these innocent victims are harassed for long for sure.

The Law Authority of India, knows about this misuse, Even Supreme court of India called it
“Legal Terrorism” http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050722/asp/nation/story_5020229.asp - Dowry law no license to settle scores: SC.

And this law no longer serves any purpose, nor it’s solving any problem of women.
Show me single family live together after 498A;
Show me single Family Solved its problem after 498A;
Show me Single Daughter-In-Law live happily after her false 498A dumped her husband family in jail.
Show me single family / Marriage is not ended after husband arrested under 498A.

There are 1000 Plus Families harassed by this Law [http://victims-of-law.blogspot.com and [http://498a.wordpress.com – 498A Victims Stories]

If its not serve the purpose,
If its not solve the Family / Marital Problem.
If its not stop menace of dowry System.
If its used as tool to blackmail husband family;
If its used to harass innocent old age people;
If its breaking Families;
If it’s a Marriage Splitter;
If its give way to single parent system.

Then why this law still exists…?

Not only this law, there are many other laws to protect women Interest but none for Men, who are victimised;

IPC 376 - Rape Law; Even women had consensual sex still she can charge man with RAPE;
When someone caught her red handed, with her Pre marital or Extra marital sex, she can charge man with RAPE;

Domestic Violence (Prevention) Bill, 2000
- Under this Law man has no right to talk also, women can charge husband with mental harassment;but man cann`t charge her with same WHY?

And Recent Supreme Court verdict;
- No sex can be lead to Divorce; but if women without sex for no reason man cann`t have sex with his wife
coz she can charge him with rape or Beastality, if he had sex. If women withhold sex thats ok with Law.

Under Child Custody
- there are only few Chances for men to get his child;
Even Man is Perfect and women is Prostitute, still law gives child custody to women; even Father is natural guardian.

Show me Single Law which Support Indian men,Husband and Father.

For this my statement i have Proof also.
We asked men and women of India in our online compaign to report dowry and dowry law Misuse.
For last one year None of the dowry Demand statements Recorded [http://mynation.net/demand]
but we only have ample Victims data of dowry Law misuse.[http://mynation.net/db]

By: Rudolph Dsouza
http://mynation.net/abio - AutoBioGraphy of a Dowry Law Victim
I`m writing this as a Victim of this Law; Why i`m still harassed by this law, Even she has not
came for a single court date for 7 long years, still judge is not ready to drop this case. So
there is no need to give any more examples than this, that this law is misused than used correctly
and not all women are victims they are villains too.

In America, IMO, these kinds of monster women have flocked to the gender feminist movement and gender feminist online blogs in droves. Many of these women are in the domestic violence industry - running it. Thanks to VAWA they now have VAWA to continue their psycho abusive behavior.

When one looks at the cumulative effect of the violence coming from these kinds of cold, calculating monster women, they make the occasional Father who is driven over the edge look like the poor, isolated, persecuted Dad he truly is.

When are these kinds of monstrous, battering women going to be held accountable for the massive abuse and harm they are doing to children, men and families in our society?

I have to wonder if it's a catch-22 situation we're in, for the following reasons:

If our goal in posting these stories is to educate the public, we need to tailor our message a bit so that it can appeal to the public. I doubt that MANN is considered very "mainstream" and so all we could effectively be doing is reminding our self-selected group about issues we already understand and can articulate.

Second, if people are skeptical of our message to begin with, they will look for reasons to doubt our credibility. The jump to the assumption that men's rights activsts are a bunch of woman-haters is not hard to do when there is so much material here which seems to relish in villifying "evil women," even if they are a minority of all women.

That's led me to believe, personally, that the cost/benefit ratio of promoting these stories is very low.

I've come to firmly believe that one of the most neglected problems in the men's movement today are efforts to help bring our issues into the mainstream, to "market" them, if you will, to a broader audience. I've debated off and on whether MANN should be directed more as a tool to that end. But then again, I do not want to diminish the value of this site to regulars who find it an important outlet to connect with other activists who may hold reasonable views that aren't ready for the mainstream. My comments on this story have been an attempt to prompt some discussion on this.

Scott

Great comments, Scott. By the way, I'm new here, so I hope I'm coming across too strongly.

I think you have raised some things worth addressing. I've been to a number of men's/father's rights sites, and a common factor does seem to be anger or "revenge". In my opion, this is valuable for a few reasons:
1)just as you indicted, its an outlet
2)it can remind frusterated men that they are not alone, and other men are having the same issues.
3)it reminds men that, while we do have violence issues, its a human problem. We are not "more inherently evil".
4)we need to expose women's violence for the sake of the victims. How can the victims (especially children) be helped when the "system" (for lack of a better word) refuses to even acknowledge the problem?

What you said about reaching a broader audience is true, as well. And I think there is value to putting more focus on the positive aspects of men's rights. By doing so, we may bolster men's battered self-esteem, rid them of the "oh well, we derserve it" attitude, and thus get them more interested in standing up for their own rights. Also, it may be less intimidating for interested men, and less threatening for the women in their lives. Maybe we can focus more on things like:
-the responsibilties and burdens men have accepted for the good of their families and society
-the actual low number of "deadbeat dads" out there.
-the studies that have shown how important men are to their children (how about that...we are good in the boardroom and the home!!!)

Any other ideas?

Scott wisely questioned -- "Although pointing readers to examples of women's violence is one way to help break down this myth, we do not wish to attack women merely for the sake of "exposing women's faults" - after all, the media is currently too eager to portray men as abusers, murderers and rapists."

In what sense is there an "attack" when you expose truth? Facts? And deconstruct feminist myths?

This may sound harsh, but I detect a toxic quotient of naive Chivalry in this philosophy statement.

Exposing women's faults is logically imperative if there can even BE a so-called Men's Movement.

This is not to tear down women, but to level the rhetorical playing field and bring some objectivity into what has been for the past 40 years a feminist rape of dialogue.

When you "expose" anything you redefine the terms of the argument.

That is what this site does, and well.

Being "exposed" is a feminist's worst nightmare.

And that in itself should be reason enough to continue advocating for truth, onbjectivity, and real "equality."

Feminism will wither away in the face of equality... it has always been about terror.

I apologize in advance for what may seem like a lecture, but crap that’s how I earn my living anyhow ...

It’s critical that MRAs take into consideration that the very roots of radical feminism are inseparable from Marxist philosophy.

Feminists achieved the world’s greatest con when they convinced reasonable people to accept that woman and men are like capitalists and workers. Class warfare imposed upon interpersonal relationships.

Marx was correct about many things. His theory of "alienation”" is genius. And more relevant today than when he wrote it.

But if MRA’s want to dismantle feminism, it will be critical to debunk its main, invisible, accepted assumptions.

Class warfare is the lynchpin of feminism, transferred psychologically onto gender relations.

In its most basic and pure form, accepting feminism means believing that women and men are enemies, with no possiblity of reconciliation.

Just as workers and capitalists can never escape irreconcilable competition.

Feminism depends upon perpetual gender conflict to maintain itself.

It pretends to seek "equality," but that would be its suicide, its extinguishment, yes?

Feminism is a shill.

A disposable tool.

A comic ruse.

Why?

For whose benefit?