Feminists fought to make sure that women do not get punished for rape in India

[LJ_Reloaded]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...er-neutral-rape-laws/articleshow/18840879.cms

Lawyer, Seema Mishra pointed out that one pernicious provision of the Ordinance 2013, upheld by the Committee report is blanket gender neutrality of the perpetrator of sexual harassment, assault and rape. "Put simply: unlike in existing law where the accused is male, the Committee recommendations if enacted into a proposed new Bill, will make it possible for women to be charged with these offences. This is wholly unacceptable," she said.

Stupid feminists. You can't refute the documented fact that feminists do not want laws that allow women to be charged with rape. Now get angry again, losers.

http://kafila.org/2013/03/08/gender-just-gender-sensitive-not-gender-neutral-rape-laws/

Representatives of women’s groups, democratic and human rights groups and activists are alarmed about major lacunae in current legislative protection to women, upheld by the Standing Committee report, and we insist on the following:

The Accused Must Be Male.

That's right, folks, you heard it right from a feminist website: only men should ever be accused of rape. Women who rape, should never be accused.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Womens-groups-Cancel-law-charging-women-with-rape
Women’s groups: Cancel law charging women with rape!

According to attorney Ruth Eldar of the Noga Center of the Ono Academic College, men will take advantage of the legislation to defend themselves against rape charges by accusing the women of raping them.

“The bill will cause women to stop complaining to police when they are raped by providing men with a formal alibi in court,” she warned. “The law treats men and women as being equal when it is obvious that in these matters, the men are the stronger ones.”

Eldar told The Jerusalem Post that women should be charged with rape only in cases where they encourage minors or helpless people to insert a bodily organ or object into their bodies.

Once again, we have feminists saying that women cannot be charged with raping men. Irrefutable documented fact.

Arguments over how often men rape women doesn't even address this basic fact. Arguments over how often men rape women is an attempt at distracting the reader from the documented fact that if feminists have their way, women can rape anyone they want without fear of legal reprisal.

 

[Skiddles2014]

Rape and India go hand in hand.

That's why subdude isn't here, he's busy raping.

 

[badbabysitter]

No matter how hard LT tries to spin this.. the reason why women can't be charged for sexually assaulting men in India is because

.. according to Indian law.. sexual assault does not happen to men

SIFF.. India's largest Mens Rights Group have lobbied intensely against any attempt at repealling Section 377...which is at the crux of this in justice

Section 377 criminalizes " unnatural sex" against men.. be it consensual sex between men , or any other sexual crime against men

not only does this archaic law criminanilize homosexuality, it continues to put men who are victims of sexual assault by men and women as inconsequential.. as prosecution for crimes under section 377 almost never occur.. and there are distinctly no services provided for men, so there is no impetus to step forward as a victim

not mention the public shaming of men in this society that views femininty, homosexuality or being a survivor.. as a sign of weakness


this is yet another example of LT blaming women for his not wanting to help men

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

No matter how hard LT tries to spin this.. the reason why women can't be charged for sexually assaulting men in India is because

.. according to Indian law.. sexual assault does not happen to men

And I've posted plenty of documented proof above that feminists fought to keep it that way.

That isn't spin, that's documented fact.

 

[badbabysitter]

in the articles you prefaced above...

Lawyer, Seema Mishra pointed out that one pernicious provision of the Ordinance 2013, upheld by the Committee report is blanket gender neutrality of the perpetrator of sexual harassment, assault and rape. "Put simply: unlike in existing law where the accused is male, the Committee recommendations if enacted into a proposed new Bill, will make it possible for women to be charged with these offences. This is wholly unacceptable," she said.


let me translate what this means... if a man rapes a woman... she can be charged for being a party to that rape under the Ordiance

only you would see a female sexual assault victim not wanting to be criminally charged for being raped.. as a bad thing


second article... directly linked to the Ordinance..so once again


only you would see a female sexual assault victim not wanting to be criminally charged for being raped.. as a bad thing


point three

in the Indian legal system a man has more legal authority in court..and under the ordiancne.. a a woman that;s been raped by a man.. and even if the evidence is overwhelming that she's been raped... she can be charged by her assailant

so once again



only you would see a female sexual assault victim not wanting to be criminally charged for being raped.. as a bad thing


meanwhile the MRA of India.. have fought tooth and nail to keep male rape victims India's dirty little secret,,, have fought tooth and ani; to keep homosexuality.. have campaigned vigorously to decriminalize marital rape

outrage from the mRA... nothing

because


only you would see a female sexual assault victim not wanting to be criminally charged for being raped.. as a bad thing

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

in the articles you prefaced above...

Lawyer, Seema Mishra pointed out that one pernicious provision of the Ordinance 2013, upheld by the Committee report is blanket gender neutrality of the perpetrator of sexual harassment, assault and rape. "Put simply: unlike in existing law where the accused is male, the Committee recommendations if enacted into a proposed new Bill, will make it possible for women to be charged with these offences. This is wholly unacceptable," she said.


let me translate what this means... if a man rapes a woman... she can be charged for being a party to that rape under the Ordiance

only you would see a female sexual assault victim not wanting to be criminally charged for being raped.. as a bad thing

So her solution to this is to make sure that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged.

second article... directly linked to the Ordinance..so once again


only you would see a female sexual assault victim not wanting to be criminally charged for being raped.. as a bad thing

So her solution to this is to make sure that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged.

point three

in the Indian legal system a man has more legal authority in court..and under the ordiancne.. a a woman that;s been raped by a man.. and even if the evidence is overwhelming that she's been raped... she can be charged by her assailant

So her solution to this is to make sure that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged.

so once again



only you would see a female sexual assault victim not wanting to be criminally charged for being raped.. as a bad thing

No, that's not a bad thing. Making it so that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged, however, is a bad thing.

meanwhile the MRA of India.. have fought tooth and nail to keep male rape victims India's dirty little secret,,, have fought tooth and ani; to keep homosexuality.. have campaigned vigorously to decriminalize marital rape

outrage from the mRA... nothing

Documentation?

 

[phrodeau]

Great, another thread where you two say the same things repeatedly to each other. I wasn't bored with that at all.

 

[badbabysitter]

So her solution to this is to make sure that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged.


So her solution to this is to make sure that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged.


So her solution to this is to make sure that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged.

read section 377

until it is gone there will simply be no gender neutral laws

as long as it exists.. men will continue to be victims

No, that's not a bad thing. Making it so that if a woman does rape a man, she can't be charged, however, is a bad thing.

that's because men can't be considered victims of it right now.. without them also being open to charges if the victim decides to press them

the entire root of this problem is 377 and this societal way of thinking that can't portray men as victims...both have to change




read section 377

until it is gone there will simply be no gender neutral laws

as long as it exists.. men will continue to be victims