All India Men's welfare AssociationUma Challa

Men Are Human Too

Uma Challa — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:52:11 +0000

Today, 10 December 2009, marks the conclusion of the “16 Days of Activism Against Global Feminist Terrorism” by All India Men’s Welfare Association (AIMWA) and All India Forgotten Women’s Association (AIFWA).

Today, UN and all countries around the world are also observing Human Rights Day, with “non-discrimination” as this year’s theme.

Commenting on this year’s theme Mr. Ban Ki-moon said, “Discrimination targets individuals and groups that are vulnerable to attack: the disabled, women and girls, the poor, migrants, minorities, and all those who are perceived as different.”

Most people will not miss seeing the word “men” in the list of “vulnerable groups” mentioned above. I am sure majority of men, including the UN Secretary General himself, do not know that they belong in the list.

This is not surprising, as Mr. Ban Ki-moon himself said, “It is often those who most need their human rights protected, who also need to be informed that the Declaration exists — and that it exists for them.”

During our 16 Days of Activism Against Global Feminist Terrorism, we highlighted the serious human rights abuses that men are subjected to in the name of women’s rights and the collateral damages suffered by women, children and families.

While the Universal Declaration of Human Rights claims to be “a reaffirmation of the faith of the peoples of the UN in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women”, it is amply clear that in most parts of the world men are not treated with the dignity and respect that human beings deserve.

On the contrary, social and legal discrimination against men and violation of their human rights are now projected as praiseworthy goals for all present nations and future generations.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

In blatant violation of all the above rights, thousands of husbands and their families are arbitrarily arrested every year, without evidence or investigation, under IPC Sections 498A, 304-B, Dowry Prohibition Act, and related laws which presume that the accused are “guilty until proved innocent”.

India’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has noted the misuse of dowry laws, arrest of innocent individuals and the resultant overcrowding of prisons. NHRC has urged the judiciary and law enforcement agencies to take measures against these abuses.

Nevertheless, police routinely enter people’s homes at ungodly hours, take accused individuals into custody, and incarcerate them without bail for variable lengths of time, ranging from a couple of days to several months. Innocent citizens are illegally detained, humiliated, subjected to mental and physical torture, blackmail and extortion, driving many to commit suicide. The honor and reputation of these accused individuals is attacked through media trial and unrestrained slander by feminists every day.

The Universal Declaration of Human rights states:

Men and women are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
All are equal before the law, and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.

Family and marriage related laws in India exhibit nothing but discrimination against men and fathers. Men are blatantly denied social and legal protection from domestic abuse. Men suffering domestic abuse are compelled to endure several years of legal harassment and are often denied divorce citing “lack of strong grounds”.

Men also endure false allegations of abuse made by wives seeking divorce, and end up with a divorce they never wanted. Fathers are ruthlessly denied contact with their children, and forced to pay exorbitant sums of money as alimony and child support.

The Universal Declaration of Human rights states:

Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

The Indian Domestic Violence Act empowers a wife to violate marital norms with impunity and claim residence and maintenance from the husband. Many men and their families are thrown out of or deprived freedom of movement in their own homes, upon baseless allegations of abuse made by unscrupulous wives.

Mr. Ban ki-moon asserts, “It is our duty to ensure that these (human) rights are a living reality — that they are known, understood and enjoyed by everyone, everywhere.”

It is ironical that the United Nations and its affiliate organizations sponsor these human rights violations and legal terrorism through feminist initiatives claiming to uplift and empower women.

On the occasion of Human Rights Day 2009, AIMWA and AIFWA urge you to raise your voice against global feminist terrorism, which is responsible for large scale human rights abuses against men and their kin.

We demand that the UN declares “Men are human too” as the theme for Human Rights Day 2010.

Dowry death and bride burning: A look beyond the smoke screen

Uma Challa — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 07:50:07 +0000

The phrase “bride burning” conjures up images of a cruel husband and his family members dousing a young woman in kerosene, flinging a lighted matchstick on her and gloating as the hapless bride goes up in flames. The term “dowry death” also sparks off vivid imaginations of a woman being taunted and harassed for money and finally, hanged to death within the four walls of her house. We also have watched movies and TV serials where a malicious mother-in-law poisons the unsuspecting daughter-in-law’s meal or quietly causes a gas leak and locks the new bride in the kitchen right before she lights the stove to make tea for the family.

There must be many families who burn their brides for dowry as a routine practice otherwise, why would there be so many news reports about dowry deaths? As they say, there cannot be smoke without a fire. Right?

Feminists would have you believe that every unnatural or untimely death of a married Indian woman is dowry death. Not only that, the feminist hyperbole on “bride killing” and “dowry harassment” makes it look like Indian men have an uncanny propensity to commit violence on their wives for money, while men in other countries commit domestic violence for other reasons.

In reality, it is the number of registered suicides of married women which are passed off as statistics of dowry death, and even these numbers are almost always exaggerated. It has become a custom to claim that all the women have been “driven to suicide” due to dowry harassment.(Links No.1-6) The husband and in-laws are immediately arrested under IPC Sections 304B and 498A and incarcerated for a couple of weeks to several months without bail. They are promptly subjected to media trial and labeled criminals even before investigation or trial can begin.

Even if all the noise about Indian brides being “driven to suicide” for dowry is indeed well-founded, one would expect that the number of suicides of married women would be significantly higher compared to that of unmarried women. However, the National Crime Records Bureau’s statistics show that there is no significant difference in the rates of suicide by married and unmarried women.

Justice Saldana’s remarks (in Crl.A. no. 589 of 2003) are testimony to how anti-dowry laws are being misused to the detriment of innocent citizens:

…we need to sound a note of caution that the police and investigating authorities should not improperly and technically jump to the conclusion that merely because death has occurred that ipso facto a criminal offense has been committed . In as many as 44% of these cases prosecution is thoroughly unjustified. Unless there is cogent and convincing evidence and unless there is material to sustain these charges, it would be totally impermissible and completely unjustified to embark upon legal action. The consequences of these charges are extremely grave because the accused husband and invariably family members are placed under arrest. There are serious social and economic repercussions.

The fact that we do come across considerable number of instances where prosecution was unjustified seems to indicate that in every case of death of young woman or recently married women that prosecution and filing of charge sheet has become automatic. There does not appear to be a proper application of mind at the stage of scrutiny and having regard to this position we direct the concerned authorities to ensure that requirements of the law are correctly and responsibly followed.

It is important to note that more than 56,000 married Indian men end their lives every year. According to statistics obtained from the National Crime Records Bureau, every year, twice as many married men, compared to women, commit suicides unable to withstand verbal, emotional, economic and physical abuse by their wives and in-laws. Deaths of these men make for the brief stories we often read in newspapers stating that a certain man “killed himself due to family issues or financial problems”. (LInks No.7-12)

Thanks to the concerted efforts of the feminists, thousands of men are also becoming victims of “legal terrorism” unleashed through laws like Sections 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code, Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, adultery laws, laws against rape and sexual harassment, and even divorce, maintenance and child custody laws. Many men are ending their lives unable to endure the fear, humiliation and trauma caused by the legal harassment.(Links No.13-18)

While it is insisted that the death of every young married woman is a case of dowry death requiring immediate arrest of the husband and in-laws, accompanied by media-hype, male-bashing and breast-beating, driving thousands of men to commit suicide is considered social service in India.

Feminists have always wanted “dowry harassment” and “bride burning” to remain hot issues that fuel the Indian Domestic Violence Industry.

The feminist Taliban will surely burn in rage as we look beyond the smoke screen and call their bluff.

Domestic Violence – The Industry of Lies

Uma Challa — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:43:00 +0000

The problem of domestic violence has, for decades, been misrepresented by radical feminists as an exclusive problem faced by women. Using horrific images of battered women as a marketing tool, feminists have successfully commercialized domestic violence and converted it into an evergreen industry.

Feminists have even arm-twisted and bullied many countries into enacting laws which actually promote domestic violence and human rights abuses against men, women and children in the name of women’s empowerment and protection.

Unbiased research on domestic violence the world over shows that:

Domestic Violence is not a gender issue.
Men and children are victims too.
Women are just as likely as men to commit domestic violence.
Women initiate domestic violence just as frequently as men do.
Men and children are less likely to report the incident when they are abused by their wives/girlfriends or mothers.

Domestic violence against wives or girlfriends is addressed by several laws (civil and criminal) in most countries. However, there are no laws to protect husbands, children and other family members of the husband from domestic violence by wives or girlfriends.

The credit goes to the Domestic Violence Industry run by the feminists and other stakeholders -law enforcement machinery, legal fraternity, politicians and bureaucrats – whose survival depends on inciting and fueling a gender war, spreading myths and false statistics about domestic violence, encouraging false allegations, breaking families, and siphoning funds in the name of women’s empowerment from National and International funding agencies.

If the problem of domestic violence is solved, would not the booming Domestic Violence Industry, which is immune to all vagaries of the economy, suddenly go bankrupt?

It is no wonder that as more and more draconian and inhuman laws are passed under the guise of protection of women, we keep hearing that domestic violence against women is always increasing, instead of decreasing.

Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Violence Reporting (RADAR) has compiled a comprehensive report (link given below) called “Fifty Domestic Violence Myths”. While the report primarily speaks about the situation in the United States, the observations made herein apply to all countries where the feminists have expanded their terrorist operations through the Domestic Violence Industry.

http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/RADARreport-50-DV-Myths.pdf

Compromising National Security to Address Feminist Insecurity?

Uma Challa — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:54:45 +0000

When I was a little girl, I used to witness my brothers playing cricket with the other boys in the neighborhood. They seemed to have such a good time, bowling, batting, fielding, catching, screaming, falling over and rolling in the dirt. I insisted on playing with them even though they warned me that it would hurt.

They were gracious enough to allow me to play one day in order not to break my heart, but they couldn’t avert physical hurt. It was a hard cork ball for heaven’s sake and I, not too alert.

I sobbed until they felt sorry and bought a rubber ball for me, and allowed me to play “baby overs”, which meant I got three balls to bat on every turn.

I quickly understood that I wasn’t enjoying the game the same way as the boys could. I was not capable of playing by the standard rules of the game.

I was not happy about concessions they made for me all the same.

I realized that if I really wanted to play, I had to assume all the risks that came my way.

This personal anecdote comes to mind whenever I hear feminists disparage many demanding and high risk careers as “male-dominated”, and seek concessions for the “weaker sex”.

In recent years, Senior Officers in the armed forces have been criticized by feminists for making “discriminatory” remarks and for not being able to accommodate women into all ranks, in all regiments and divisions of the three forces.

Politicians promptly take the bait and make tall promises in an urge to pacify their perceived “female vote bank”.

Union Defence Minister Mr. A.K Anthony, who had initially cited “operational reasons to rule out inducting women as combatants into the armed forces”, changed his mind two days later, on the occasion of Women’s Day 2008, and declared, “I’m sure that at some point of time it will happen.”

Former Defence Minister Mr. Pranab Mukherjee once went to the extent of saying, “We are encouraging more and more women to participate in the armed forces…They should be encouraged not only to equal pay, equal allowances and other opportunities, but we should create an atmosphere where they feel comfortable.” Mr. Mukherjee also envisioned “setting up of institutional arrangements for enhancing their (women’s) level of comfort”.

That is indeed very “gender-sensitive” of Mr. Mukherjee, but I wonder how such politicians propose to fulfill their promises, at what cost and at whose expense!

In a game of “galli cricket”, it is easy to replace a cork ball with a rubber ball and introduce “baby overs”. But what about a career in the armed forces especially involving combat duties? Can we provide “pansy training” and expect “rubber bullets” in the battlefield? Are we going to go as far as compromising National Security for pampering women, and call it women’s empowerment?

In a recent article (reproduced below), Seema Goswani provides a candid and incisive commentary on the issue of recruiting women as fighter pilots in the Indian Air Force. I hope the politically correct Government authorities, politicians and citizens are listening.

Spectator – Ladies’ Special – Hindustan Times

The brouhaha about female fighter pilots shows how feminists are falling prey to the culture of entitlement.

NO, THERE WAS NOTHING REMOTELY SEXIST ABOUT AIR FORCE VICE CHIEF P K BARBORA’S STATEMENT

By Seema Goswami

I KNOW I’M going to get sack-loads of hate mail for this (bring it on, ladies!) but I simply have to say this. When it comes to women being inducted as fighter pilots in the Indian Air Force, I’m one with the IAF Vice Chief, Air Marshal P K Barbora, who famously voiced his reservations on the subject.

As Barbora explained, an obscene amount of money goes into the making of a fighter pilot. So, it makes no sense to train someone who would then take ten months off on maternity leave.

Hence, if women are to be inducted as fighter pilots, they should undertake not to have children until a specified time.

Honestly, what is so chauvinistic about this statement that it has feminists foaming at the mouth with indignation? It’s a valid point, surely? If the Indian state is going to spend several crore on training someone with a specific set of skills, it stands to reason that it would want these skills to be available to it for a certain period of time.

In the Indian Air Force, that period is defined as 14 years. If a male fighter pilot quits before that, he has to compensate the Air Force for his training costs. So, if women are also expected to serve for 14 years without taking nearly a year off on pregnancy-related leave what is so scandalous about that?

After all, isn’t feminism all about equal rights for men and women?

Isn’t it all about equal pay for equal work? And in that case, isn’t it a given that women should be held to the same service standards as men? So, why target Barbora for saying something that should be obvious to everyone, irrespective of gender?

No, there was nothing remotely sexist about the Air Force Vice Chief’s statement. But what is indubitably sexist is what some women are doing: claiming special rights for female fighter pilots when they finally are inducted into the Indian Air Force merely because they are women.

It’s not the Air Force Vice Chief who should be apologising for his remarks. It’s the women who are making a mockery of feminism who should say sorry to the rest of us.

Surely it is self-evident that if women are to gain respect at the workplace it has to be on the basis of equality. We have to embrace a level playing field, not ask for special sops for the girls. And anyone who does ask for special treatment is a traitor to our cause. And yet, such is the culture of entitlement has begun to take root within the ranks of feminists that their demands have now become faintly ludicrous if not down right surreal.

Now, it is no longer enough that women get enough time off to have babies, they should also be able to work flexible hours or part-time once they rejoin office. What’s more, despite putting in less work (for the same pay) they should still remain on the fast track for promotion.

Surely, this kind of self-serving nonsense beggars belief. Why should a woman who puts in fewer hours, makes less contribution be treated on par with her other colleagues male or female who are far more invested in their jobs, just to fulfill the demands of political correctness? And why should women take for granted their place in the sun no matter how long they have been in the shade?

None of this makes any sense. I am not suggesting that we deny women the right to a family life, or make it impossible for them to have a healthy work-life balance. I am merely making the point that these are choices that women make. And when they decide to put family first they cannot realistically expect to be treated the same as someone who puts work first.

Unfair? Not a bit. You make your choices and you take the consequences. After all, it makes little sense to replace the much-derided glass ceiling with a baby vault in the boardroom.

So, if you are female and want to become a fighter pilot, then there are some sacrifices you will be expected to make. Postponing childbirth will be one of them. Because no matter what the posters may tell you, you really can’t have it all well, not all at the same time, certainly.

The kind of militant feminism that says otherwise actually harms the cause of women. It makes women especially those of an age to have babies a much less attractive employment prospect. And it predisposes businesses and employers to choose men over women instead.

But more than that and this is what really worries me it leads to the infantalisation of women. Instead of being seen as equal partners in the business of life they are projected as some sort of special-needs minority group that needs extra protection. Rather than being seen as strong adults they are portrayed as helpless little kids who need looking after.

That is what is truly offensive. That after all these years, we are still asking for special dispensations to help us cope.

If we don’t want to be treated like the weaker sex, perhaps it would make sense to stop behaving as if we are, in fact, weaker.

Rape Law: YES can mean NO

Uma Challa — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 03:44:51 +0000

A woman in Chennai happened to notice a missed call alert in her mobile phone and returned the call. The recipient of the call was a man. What started off as a matter of curiosity quickly turned into regular phone conversations which, after a few weeks, culminated in a face-to-face meeting and, finally, a whirlwind romance.

A few months later, the man’s name and picture were flashed in a widely circulated newspaper, along with the news that he was charged of rape and arrested under sections 366 (Kidnapping) and 376 (Rape) of the Indian Penal Code. The woman’s version of the story was published in detail but her identity was kept secret for “security” reasons. The editor seemed to have run out of space or forgot to fill in the man’s version.

Nobody was surprised at the news. After all, we have been told, “a male is, prima facie, a rapist!”

According to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, a man is said to have committed rape if he has had sexual intercourse with a woman against her will and without her consent.

The definition of rape does not end there!

Even if a woman has given her consent for sex, the man would be deemed to have committed rape when

her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt.
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.
at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.

In addition, a male having sex with a female under sixteen years of age is rape regardless of whether the act is done with or without her consent.

What is striking, at the outset, is the inherent bias in the definition of rape itself. According to this law, rape is a criminal act that is committed by a man against a woman. Not only that, the crime is entirely in the mind of the female “victim”.

Another aspect that stands out in this law, as with many other “pro-women” laws, is the urge to protect the female AT ANY COST, even if it means innocent men are thrown into jail, the judicial system is taken for a ride, and public resources and time are squandered to satisfy the whim of a dishonest, criminal minded, depraved woman.

People often ask, “Why would a woman lie about being raped?” The answer is “Why wouldn’t she?” When a crime is so loosely defined and when the law is severely biased towards the woman, and when the sole testimony of the female “victim” is enough to charge or convict the accused, why would it not tempt a mischievous woman to misuse it?

There are innumerable cases of celebrities being threatened of rape complaints by fortune-hunting vixens. Successful businessmen, fashion designers, film producers, publishers, and many other simple, honest, decent men are among those who have been threatened and falsely charged of rape.

The judiciary, oozing compassion towards the “fairer” sex, has only helped in emboldening women to play both “Madame Bovary” and “Pavitra Bharatiya Nari” as per their own convenience.

The following excerpts from a judgment of the apex court of India illustrate the point:

“It is a settled law that the victim of sexual assault is not treated as accomplice and as such, her evidence does not require corroboration from any other evidence including the evidence of a doctor. In a given case even if the doctor who examined the victim does not find sign of rape, it is no ground to disbelieve the sole testimony of the prosecutrix”

What? The testimony of the victim is the gospel truth? What is the basis for such presumption of veracity? The judgment provides a simple answer to these questions:

“Indian women have tendency to conceal such offense because it involves her prestige as well as prestige of her family. Only in few cases, the victim girl or the family members have the courage to go before the police station and lodge a case.”

It is no wonder that former Union Law Minister Ram Jethmalani, said, “Before I could go to bed with a woman, I would have to call a notary public.’’

Legal experts have observed that rape complaints are often made by women who have been jilted, by minor girls who have had consensual relationships with older men, by commercial sex workers who have been shortchanged by their clients and by women who are just “caught in the act”. They have observed instances where women admitted to having consensual sex but claimed to have done it “out of fear”, thus, taking advantage of the loopholes in the law and the credibility they enjoy under the law. As the burden of proof is on the accused man, he has to produce evidence that he had consensual sex with the complainant woman.

Unfortunately, the sneering quips and serious observations by many legal experts and police officers have not been able to improve the situation with the rape law and its implementation.

The reason for this deplorable situation -

Radical feminists have successfully tied the hands of the police, gagged the judiciary and blindfolded the public to advance their agenda of hate and malice against the entire male gender.

Police officers claim that they are always under intense pressure from feminists and fear being attacked by women’s rights activists if they are not prompt in registering rape cases and framing charges.

While radical feminists over-zealously fight to make existing provisions harsher and demand more and more absurd laws, it is heyday for criminal minded women. News reports show that incidents of women extorting money from men under the threat of registering false rape complaints have become commonplace.

Despite having caused so much damage and creating so much fear in the society through the rape law, the female Taliban still feels that “Feminist Utopia” will not be achieved until they bring the legally wedded husband’s head under the guillotine too.

They claim that the rape law is not loaded against men. They, in fact, think that the Government should broaden the scope of the rape law by including marital rape.

We should not be surprised if our Government buckles under pressure and concedes to their outrageous demands, but we should not forget to ask the Government one question:

Which law is going to protect all the men, women and children of our country who are being gang-raped by the feminist Taliban?

16 Days of Activism Against Global Feminist Terrorism November 25 – December 10

Uma Challa — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 06:50:29 +0000

Radical feminist groups across the globe have declared a war against men, boys, marriage and family. Enormous sponsorship from various Governments and the United Nations not only provides legitimacy to this war, but also serves to drown the voices of reason trying hard to be heard.

Under the innocuous guise of women’s rights and women’s empowerment, radical feminists have systematically destroyed the institutions of family and marriage in most Western countries. During the last decade, they directed their attack at the so-called “developing” nations like India, which is known for its strong family culture and marriage values, and where the only means of social security is the extended family.

The weapons and tactics employed in feminist terrorism are:

Hate speech against men and family
Fabricated and false statistics
Blatant lies
Opportunistic arm-twisting, guilt-tripping and bullying
Draconian gender biased laws

Through these weapons and tactics, radical feminists have successfully hijacked the concepts of fairness and equality under law, sabotaged the ideals and goals of democracy, slaughtered human rights and are insisting on a Taliban-like regime in every nation.

The victims of this global feminist terrorism, as with any other form of terrorism, are unwary men, women and children.

The fallout of this global gender war is steep rise in divorce rates, number of fatherless children, violence against men, number of men ending their own lives, number of “unwanted” pregnancies and juvenile crimes.

Feminist terrorism is one of the worst dangers faced by all nations today, and the threat transcends all social, economic and religious barriers. Civilized and respectable citizens of all countries, religions, and socio-economic groups should actively counter such feminist terrorism for the sake of the well-being of our families, communities and our future generations.

“16 Days of Activism Against Global Feminist Terrorism” is a campaign initiated by All India Men’s Welfare Association and All India Forgotten Women’s Association. Our 16 day internet campaign will involve publishing a series of articles, fact sheets and research findings by men’s rights, fathers’ rights and family rights activists across the world.

Through our campaign, we wish to:

Spread awareness on the perils of radical feminist ideologies
Emphasize harmonious gender relations
Protest discrimination and abuse of men and children in the name of women’s rights
Advocate equal protection for men, women and children from all forms of violence
Condemn all gender biased laws
Condemn male bashing and stereotyping of men
Promote gender equality in all walks of life
Protest the export of weapons of family destruction
Promote family harmony
Promote respect and justice for genuine victims of violence

Organizations supporting “16 Days of Activism Against Global Feminist Terrorism”:

Please stay tuned and visit this web site frequently for updates!