Bhaiya, kitne ka diya?

Hypergamy (n): the action of marrying a person of a superior caste or class.

Women of India are as hypergamous as their western counterparts.  Any man below their social standing is seen as an asexual being.  The Rational Male is the manosphere’s foremost collection of essays about this natural female trait.

Auto-rickshaw drivers, roadside vendors, bus conductors are from the poorer sections of society.  They are also somewhat dirty and unkempt.  By all measures, their sexual market value is much lower than that of their customers.  The customers know this too.

In North India, urbane women wearing their Fabindia kurtas and otherwise well-brought-up young women of the middle classes preclude any notion of sexual attraction by calling such men bhaiya (or brother).  Don’t for a moment think that by calling the man “brother” they are equating him with themselves.  No, bhaiya is a polite way of saying, “I don’t see you as a sexual equal.”

If you think that is just a polite thing to do, notice how many men call women of lower classes behenji (sister).  And how many women call women of lower classes behenji.  It almost never happens.

To call someone Bhaiya is to put him in his place.

No wonder that thus castrated by all the attractive women that they meet during their day-to-day life, a lower-class man might just hit back with rape.  You won’t see a class analysis of rapes in urban India.  At least not in any mainstream publication.

You will only see the left-liberals crying their hearts out at “Patriarchy!”.

Abolish Section 4 in Indian Rape Law

Marriage is a promise to do and not do certain things.  Whether one realizes it or not, by marrying, one implicitly agrees to thousands of regulations and case law about property division, alimony, child custody, maintenance, “conjugal rights”, bar on sexual intercourse with anyone else, and so on.

Marriage is not just a piece of paper, it is a legally enforceable contract with the modern state especially interested in enforcing it.

In most modern cultural settings, before one decides to commit to getting married, there is a period of courtship and “getting to know each other”.

During that period, depending upon the cultural mores, there is a degree of physical intimacy up to and including sexual intercourse.  Sexual compatibility is considered a major factor in deciding to get married to someone.  In US and most parts of Europe, sex is a natural part of dating.  It is becoming so in urban India as well.

The very purpose of dating and courtship is to determine whether a long-term bond is realizable or not.  That long-term bond may eventuate into a state-sanctioned legal contract (“marriage”) or it may remain informal (a “live-in”).

In recent times in India, there is a growing tendency for grown, literate women (air-hostesses of Mumbai seem to be topping the charts here) to cry “rape” when a man they were involved with refuses to eventually sign the marriage contract.  I call this a travesty.

There are two ways in which a woman can allege rape on a man while having had consensual sex with him:

  1. That he had sex with her by pretending/misrepresenting to be her lawful husband, when in fact he wasn’t.
  2. That he had sex with her by promising that he would marry her.

(1) has been codified into law.  IPC 375 is the Indian law on rape, and section (4) in it states that it is rape when the intercourse happens …

With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be law­fully married.

One must wonder.  Isn’t there something called a proof of marriage?  How can a woman “believe” that she is having sex with her husband when in fact it is not her husband.  If the man merely applied some sindoor on her forehead, or did some ritual at a temple, why doesn’t the woman also insist that they register their marriage in court or with a public authority before she opens her legs?  Is she that dumb that she thinks that law can be circumvented by symbolic gestures.

(2) has been codified into law as well.  IPC 90 states:

A consent is not such a consent as it intended by any section of this Code, if the consent is given by a person under fear of injury, or under a misconception of fact, and if the person doing the act knows, or has reason to believe, that the consent was given in consequence of such fear or misconception; or Consent of insane person.—if the consent is given by a person who, from unsoundness of mind, or intoxication, is unable to understand the nature and consequence of that to which he gives his consent; or Consent of child.—unless the contrary appears from the context, if the consent is given by a person who is under twelve years of age.

Let us dwell a little more on this “consent by misconception of fact”.

The Indian High Courts are conflicted on this issue (the Bombay High Court clearly saying it is not rape, with Gujarat High Court recently agreeing), and the Supreme Court of India seems to side with the rape interpretation, while the case law is confusing.

Interpreting a “false promise of marriage” as “rape” is just another nail in the coffin of men’s rights in India.  Of course, the police is only too happy to register such cases and arrest the accused, as they are scared of the wrath of the feminist NGOs in case they refuse.

In my opinion, it is rape only if the raped person was coerced, intimidated or drugged.  Inducing wistful daydreams, promises of everlasting love, and suchlike, is the very stuff that romance is made of.  A romance not culminating in a contract is NOT a crime, it is a failure of compatibility, an emotional tragedy, a breaking of hearts, but it is NOT a crime.

If a woman alleges damages (loss of reputation, loss of virginity, pregnancy, etc.), then there are two questions to be asked:

  1. Assuming the age of consent is not an issue, whether the sex was consensual.
  2. Whether the sexual partners knew that the legal contract of marriage had not been signed yet.  That is, there was no misconception that the marriage of some sort (say, at a temple) had already taken place.

If these two conditions are satisfied, then there is neither cheating, nor rape, nor can there be any question of exploitation.

If the first condition is not satisfied, it is rape.  If the second condition is not satisfied, then it is cheating.

If the woman is indeed wanting to protect her reputation and virginity, then let her withhold physical intimacy till the man signs the contract.  If she is unwilling to get pregnant, let her use the pill or insist on safe sex.

If she is an adult, she should know the consequences of her actions and the law should not become a white-knight excusing her own culpability in the matter.

On the other hand, if she is not to be treated as an adult, then how can anyone even marry her?  Then, she must be considered developmentally challenged, and treated at an appropriate facility.  If she is an adult, then she, and the concerned police officials, must be tried for harassment and for making a false complaint.

A marriage is a promise.  There cannot be a promise to make a promise.  It is not a breach of contract to not sign a contract.  It is as simple as that.

Thousands of young men of India are being imprisoned due to these two laws.  It is high time these laws were more widely known..

The Manosphere Spectrum

The Manosphere is a collective of loosely-knit groups focused on men navigating the current social, legal and family landscape.

There are important groups in the manosphere (though many people subscribe to the tenets of more than one of these groups).  The stands of these groups aren’t in conflict with each other.  They just follow different ways of dealing with the world after a red-pill awakening.

  • TRP: Swallowing the Red Pill is essential to espousing the opinions and attitudes of all the groups mentioned below.  /r/TheRedPill summarizes the Red Pill thus:

The recognition and awareness of the way that feminism, feminists and their white-knight enablers affect society. Seeing the world for what it is, seeking truth no matter how painful or inconvenient the truth may be.

  • MRA: A Men’s Rights Activist.  Such activists comprise the MRM (the Men’s Rights Movement).  This group of people are for equality between the genders and are against special concessions to women (legally and otherwise) at the cost of men.  One of the major issues this group deals with is ensuring justice and fairness in Family and Marriage Law and in safeguarding Fathers’ Rights.
  • PUA: A Pick-Up-Artist.  PUAs adjust to the post-feminist landscape and their goal is to get high-SMV women to have sex with them, without providing any financial or contractual commitment and while escaping false rape accusations and suchlike.
  • MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way.  Men who are not interested in being either an MRA or a PUA.  They would rather sidestep the complications of inter-gender relationships and not pursue women at all.  They might be open to sex if it comes their way, but they will not make efforts in that direction.  If that results in celibacy, MGTOWs are entirely comfortable with it.

To educate yourself about more terms used in the manosphere, visit the TheRedPill Glossary.

The Male Factor on “Marital Rape”

It is high time Indian men recognize that despite the existence of many biased and draconian anti-men legislation in India, feminists are not yet content.  They want to continue enacting more and more laws which are to be used only by women.

In India, as is well-known, the definition of rape is not gender-neutral:

A man is said to commit “rape” who, except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following de­scriptions …

From The Male Factor:

One argument given by feminists in all such cases is how cases of such male abuse do you see to even have a section for men? Reiterating Barkha my reply goes to them, when there is no section to report such crimes against men then how do you conclude that men do NOT need any section to report violence?

As an Indian it is time for you to understand this criminal mindset of the feminists like Barkha or her channel. The male hating attitude will continue unless we have a ministry for men to address men’s issues and create balance in judiciary that punishes criminal women. This is the only way to ensure justice for men and save innocents from criminal feminists. This will also ensure justice for real women victims as the cases will be judged based on their merits and NOT on the gender of the applicant.

Another False Rape Accuser Goes Unpunished

From the 29-Apr-2015 edition of The Times of India:

An insurance agent studied law to fight rape charges leveled by his wife. Acquitted by courts, practicing advocate Pankaj Chavda, 37, has now slapped a Rs 50 lakh defamation suit against his wife for implicating him and a friend in a false rape case.

And as is to be expected, the liberal media names the men falsely accused, but keeps the identity of the unscrupulous woman hidden.

Through our investigations, however, we hope to identify her.  The case in question (as per this document) is Sessions Case No. 221 of 2008 in Ahmadabad Sessions Court.  Any help in identifying her is much appreciated!

It is important to name and shame such an unethical, criminally-minded, greedy woman guilty of falsely accusing two innocent men of rape.

Needless to say, given the state of Indian criminal justice system, no penalty was imposed on the criminal wife.  In fact, after being charged with defamation, the great lady has now asked for maintenance.

Following the defamation notice, Chavda’s wife has moved the family court seeking maintenance .

We can imagine her saying in court: “OK, he didn’t rape me.  Fine, he can be considered my husband.  Now give me maintenance.”

It is time these criminally-minded women are severely punished, not just for the false accusations, but also for wasting the time of already-overburdened Indian courts.

The interesting thing is, Indian Police seems to jump on cases of rape or of “marital cruelty”.  The reason is not hard to guess.  These cases are usually between urban, educated folks and the corrupt Indian police stands to make a quick buck from both the parties.  They are bribed to proceed further in the case, and they are bribed to not proceed further in the case.  The “investigation” in such cases is not worth the effort spent to spell the word “investigation”.

In this particular case, we surmise that the impressionable girl fell in love, got married in a hurry, went on the honeymoon and when she returned and started regretting her impulsiveness, to socially absolve herself of any guilt or shame of leaving her man, filed a case of rape (egged on by her family and relatives, no doubt) not just against her husband but also against her friend who probably helped arrange the wedding.

Now the stupid bitch will remain a woeful burden on her vile family.  No man will want to marry such a “victim”.  That’s some justice.

Manu Smriti on Women

Liberals love to bash Manu Smriti for quotations like the following.  But Purushatma is of the opinion that much of it is sound advice.  Women are wanton by nature, crave leadership and domination (the success of books like Mills and Boon novels, and Fifty Shades of Grey is ample proof of that), and are repelled by weak men.

The exhortation to women to obey their husbands exists in almost all scriptures of the world.  It is therefore not surprising that feminists loves to bash religions and traditional views on marriage.  Making the husbands obey the wives is alright with feminists, though.

On with the quotes from Manu Smriti:

  • It is the nature of women to seduce men in this world; for that reason the wise are never unguarded in the company of females.
  • Women, true to their class character, are capable of leading astray men in this world, not only a fool but even a learned and wise man. Both become slaves of desire.
  • Wise men should marry only women who are free from bodily defects, with beautiful names, grace/gait like an elephant, moderate hair on the head and body, soft limbs and small teeth.
  • Girls are supposed to be in the custody of their father when they are children, women must be under the custody of their husband when married and under the custody of her son as widows. In no circumstances is she allowed to assert herself independently.
  • Men may be lacking virtue, be sexual perverts, immoral and devoid of any good qualities, and yet women must constantly worship and serve their husbands.
  • In case a women, proud of the greatness of her excellence or her relatives, violates her duty towards her husband, the King shall arrange to have her thrown before dogs at a public place.
  • It is the duty of all husbands to exert total control over their wives. Even physically weak husbands must strive to control their wives.
  • Consuming liquor, association with wicked persons, separation from her husband, rambling around, sleeping for unreasonable hours and dwelling – are six demerits of women.