How BPL families could be divided into BPL females and BPL males

A Marriage Bill is attempting to unleash a new kind of MISANDRY. It proposes to discriminate men from the Below Poverty Line.

As per a news report from The Economic Times, The Marriages (Compulsory Registration and Prevention of Wasteful Expenditure Bill, 2016 proposes the below:

“If any family intends to spend more than Rs 5 lakh towards expenditure on marriage, such family shall declare the amount proposed to be spent in advance to the appropriate government and contribute 10 per cent of such amount in a welfare fund which shall be established by the appropriate government to assist the poor and Below Poverty Line families for the marriage of their daughters”. 

If this bill is passed, even the very poor – who aren’t able to make ends meet in their daily lives and who are completely uncertain whether they would get the next meal in their life or probably they will survive the next year – will be no more be looked as “poor” or “those belonging to BPL category”. Rather they will be looked at as “BPL woman” and “BPL men”.


Feminism attempts to create a perception that Climate Change in South Asia affects women more than men.

Some time ago, feminists had called climate change sexist. They opined that climate and nature takes a course such that it differentiates women and men in its treatment.

Reading that if you thought feminism can’t get more stupid in its objectivity, you will be in for a surprise. 

In a similar attempt in South Asia, feminists are creating a theory that severe acute climate change in South Asia – precisely India and Bangladesh – which includes continuous periods  of lack of rains and draught is being unfair to women.

As men from the sub-continent, who used to be solely dependent on agriculture for their livelihood, were forced to venture out to cities & towns for better prospect of livelihood and who in the process had encouraged their wives and women-family members to be on their own and give themselves as well as agriculture a chance, are being blamed for thrusting responsibility on women.

As per this news report from ‘The NEWS Minute’, men are being unfair and ignorant of their family members.

The reporter has conveniently failed to highlight the facts or outcomes of the process:

1. Women have been presented a situation where they can be on their own and be independent on their spouses for livelihood.

2. Women have been given a chance to be decision-makers when it comes to decisions related to their work and agriculture.

3. Needless to say they have become more empowered overall in the long run.

4. Boys, who had to dropout of their schools in villages in an attempt to earn along with their fathers, are forced to live an entire life of uncertainty as they will not be able to complete their education, most will stay uneducated forever.

5. Lack of education amongst boys will contribute less or will be counter-productive to the success and happiness quotient of themselves and the family in the long run, including their mothers and sisters they have left education for.

6. In their efforts to move out of the comforts of the village home, men are also taking up more challenges thrusted upon them, taking more responsibility for the sake of their families, which includes the women the report seems to be complaining about.

Below are a few reactions the news post has got from twitteraties which sumup the entire situation.  

  1. #FeminismIsRetarded Gets What It Wants
  2. It seems Patriarchy has transformed into clueless Matriarchy 
  3. Boys dropping out of school for lowwage jobs, lifelong uncertainty is unimportant. #FeminismIsCruel, stupid, idiotic.

Leaving you with the original news which is being referred to in this post.

Title: Climate change affects all, but women are facing new, more severe challenges, reports ‘The NEWS minute’.

Sub-Title: On the positive side, women are discovering new roles as decision-makers.

IANS| Monday, January 30, 2017 – 11:

By: Azera Parveen Rahman


Men migrating to bigger towns in search of employment, to support their families back home in the villages, is not uncommon. Climate change, which has caused a spike in natural disasters, has upped this “push” factor, adding to others like poverty and unemployment.

But what about women?

Not only has there been a rise in trafficking of women, but a World Bank study has also found that 14 per cent households in India are now women-headed, mainly because of male migration, creating an additional burden on them.

This feminisation of climate change-induced challenges has, however, not got the attention of government agencies. This is a serious gap that needs to be addressed, says a new study by ActionAid, Climate Action Network-South Asia, and Brot Fuer Die Welt (Bread for the World). The study, Climate Change Knows No Borders, analyses climate-induced migration and the challenges involved in South Asia, including India.


One read the news post here.

Why Pink needs to be boycotted – and why Pink is painting men Black and Blue

​Pink movie has not only unleashed the Misandry within most of us but also taken it to dangerously extreme levels.
I have faced first hand reactions of people hating men more than an incident or an act.

I was having a discussion with someone who had watched the movie Pink and then I was grilled by a series of questions that were disrespectful towards men. Later during the same discussion but in some other context I was told something with the phrase so widely used “… just because you are a man.” The discussion implied that my thoughts weren’t respected as much as I am disrespected as a man.

I don’t want to divulge too much into what was being discussed but want to focus on how I felt.

During that grilling session, I felt as if I am being prosecuted, forced to answer questions and specifically in a way the person wants. Sharing my individuals thoughts would lead to further grilling. Silence, I thought, was the best answer.

After that grilling session, I felt completely humiliated. And humiliated not just because of the percieved thoughts of the other person about me – percieved as I had hardly said anything and barely expressed my thoughts – but more because I belonged to the male gender as all the venting out I was subjected to was centred around the fact that I am a man.

It was a forgettable experience. I had to gather myself. I wondered what went wrong and why I had to experience what I had during that discussion. It was clear – I was a victim of Misandry.

Thoughts generally prevailing in our society consider only woman can have modesty, however there are good men too out there and they too have a modesty, dignity and with that some self-respect.
Thoughts and opinions about being critical of all men in general are surfacing more after people have watched the movie Pink.

And this is just my experience and my story… I am sure there are many men out there having a similar humiliating discussions in their circles with which they are disgraced and dishonoured simply because they are men.

In the very language of the ideas and thoughts the movie wants to provoke, such discussions mocking all men is an ‘abuse’ of men for the simple fact that they are men.

People have started generalising and bucketing men they know or in their circles as criminals or probable criminals in imaginary situations with them!
Hatred against men has increased and people hating all men have stooped to new levels putting-down and criticizing men, in general.
This is nothing but utter radicalization and polarisation of our society against men.

Given the fact that this has increased substantially after the release of movie Pink and by the people who have watched the movie Pink, this radicalization and polarisation is directly due to the movie Pink.

I suggest a complete boycott of this movie called Pink.

Bahu Lao Maa Bhagao

​#BahuLaoMaaBhagao is what GOI and MinistryWCD are propogating when they say that Domestic Violence can happen only on daughter-in-laws and not on mother-in-laws!

As per this report, Government have submitted and affidavit to Supreme Court as per which mother-in-laws cant sue under Domestic Violence Act. This in turn means that as the government interprets, mother in law’s can not be victims of domestic violence. With this they have not only rendered The Protection Of Women under Domestic Violence Act more useless, but also made it more prone to misuse, legal extortion and abuse of law! Only God can save India!

Let’s forget for a moment that they are and always have been completely ignoring the male cohabitants which they think can’t suffer from domestic violence! 😂
It’s clear that women for them are only the ‘smarter/younger women’ just like a Child for them are only the ‘female child’.
#Hypocrisy #Misandry

Reply To MKatju: Lynching of Mohd Akhlaq at Dadri

This is in response to below post from retired Supreme Court Magistrate M. Katju.
Justice Katju : I can take this no longer

It can also be read in the below screenshot from Facebook.

Original News:
In Dadri Lynching Case, Victim Mohd Akhlaq’s Mother, Wife Face Charges.

Story Highlights

  • Mohammad Akhlaq, 50, was lynched last year for allegedly eating beef
  • Villagers in Dadri had demanded action against Akhlaq’s family
  • Akhlaq’s family has left the village and are living in Delhi

My Reply to M. Kajtu:

​Sir, I also can take this no longer.
Where was your ferocious anger when in Dimapur, Nagaland an innocent man was lynched after someone who wanted to avenge a personal grudge got a fake rape case filed against him?
Where is your anger when daily, men commit suicide (suicide because they took their lives) due to threats and extortion using frivolous complaints and #FakeCases at the hands of greedy inlaws (wife and her kiln) due to a martial discord? This is in fact murder of married men, and not suicide, who end their lives at a rate of nearly a suicide every 8 minutes. Why do you keep quiet for this avoidable development?
Why do you turn a Nelson’s eye to such grave injustice meted out to ordinary men who are left alone – due to lack of support from Misandric society (Misandric men because they have been always ignorant about men’s issues and Misandric women because they find weaker men unattractive and ofcourse because benefit of doubt is usually given to women and for many other reasons)?
Sub Topics: MKatju, Suicide, Married Men Suicide

2016 Olympics: Mockery of Mocking the Mocked

In 2012 Olympics when Indian men won more medals – four as compared to two –  than women, we talked about how men had outshined women and how can women’s performance be improved. A similar discussion had happened after the 2008 Olympics during which India has won 3 medals, all of which went to men and in 2004 when Rajyavardhan Rather had won the solitary medal for India. It’s important to highlight that during  all these Olympics, women were not mocked at, and rightly so, much in contrast to the  recently concluded 2016 Olympics, during which Indian women won two medals, while none went to men. As this happened, we Indians, in all our jingoism, circulated many sexist messages on social media, the mainstream media came up with many sexist headlines and carried many sexist articles in the lure of increasing their TRPs/viewership by tapping the common emotional Indian’s sentiment that women have bettered men and men aren’t doing enough. In fact much to disbelief of some, a sporting authority durung a media debrief went to the extent of prompting and forcing a winning athlete to talk in words synchronous to the nationwide Sachcha Bharat campaign, with an intent to reap in political mileage and benefit out of her win.

For all this fiasco of mocking the not-so-successful Indian Olympic delegates on the basis of their gender and painting a political colour to India’s wins, I need to ask, can’t we just enjoy the game and be happy for the winners or the participants?

There is a Gymnast Deepa Karmakar, who represented India first time in an Olympics final and there is a racewalker Manish Sigh Rawat who – with 408 times less funds than what his US counterpart gets – defeated former world champions, three Asian champions, two European champions and two Olympic medallists only to finish a few seconds behind the bronze medallist in the racewalking finals. Both these real life winners, with all the struggles they faced, failed to win India a medal. But in any possible way, is Deepa’s struggle more difficult than that of Manish, just because she belongs to a gender which is considered to be lesser privileged? Without any such comparison, why don’t we encourage everyone to do better? 

To everyone who has indulged in circulating messages or articles that unnecessarily mock make olympics participants down, while comparing them to their female counterparts, I ask a few basic questions:

1. Out of a country of more than 1.25 billion, only 117 Indians participated in 2016 Olympics. Should we now bash up all the other 1.25 billion population who didn’t qualify, didn’t participate or didn’t even attempt to participate at the Olympics?

2. Out of a total of 28 sports, India participated in 15. On being unsuccessful in participating in the remaining 13 disciplines, should the Indian players of these 13 sports be subjected to Court Marshalls and stripped of their sporting uniforms for not being able to represent India?

3. Should all the Indian cricketers and kabaddi players be humiliated for choosing a sport that doesn’t find itself in the Olympics? Does anything of this sort take anything away from efforts the Indian Olympians put in?

4. Out of 207 participating nations at the 2016 Olympics, India finds itself around the 70th position, which is abysmal for the biggest democracy, 2nd most populous country or one of the top 10 geographically largest nation of the world. Now on being lesser successful narion as compared to the remaining 60-odd nations, should the Indian contingent be beaten up black and blue? Have they in anyway put lesser efforts than the other supporting nations?

5. Another matter of fact is that Indians with ‘special abilities’ won more medals in Paralympics as compared to able-bodied Indians in Olympics. Does the lack of success of Olympians as compared to Paralympians give us a justification to disrespect and humiliate them?

6. I am sure most of us do not know the name of a single Paralympic player. Does this lack of awareness amongst us Indians give us a license to mock each other and amputate each other’s body parts in an effort to support those specialty abled Paralympians?

Can we just accept the fact that it is hard for an Indian to pursue sports – mainstream of otherwise – and much more difficult to be an Olympic player?
Can we all for a moment pause and applaud these masters of the games, bow down in front of them for their dedication, hard work and efforts and shower them with a lot of love, respect and blessings instead of demeaning their efforts, being critical and smirking at them? Because it won’t be a long time before they disapper from our memories completely only to find them in a dilapidated shanty or running pillar to post trying to make their ends meet, desperately struggling for basics in their life, while we enjoy a priviledged cup of our daily coffee in an air-conditioned room.
Keywords: 2016 Olympics, Gender Discrimination, India, Men, Olympics, Misandry