The analysis for the cause of rapes in subcontinent and it's solution

[Edevelop]

it is a part of the Indian subcontinent. ..like it or not.

Good joke. You must have heard it while watching Bollywood.

 

[Dubious]

I'm sure this works for you but no woman I know would agree with you and all of them would find such an attitude both regressive & primitive. Using common sense in dressing, where you go, at what time is par for the course but no one would agree that women have to dress in a a particular fashion or risk being attacked. I don't agree with your views either.

@Bang Galore just wait until long clothes will become the in thing ....and all girls wearing short clothes will get this: "that is soo like ancient" ...no matter how much you deny SOCIETY does decide HOW YOU PEOPLE THINK even HOW YOU people dress!

If some ugly thing is worn by some Bollywood actress no matter how ugly it will be, it will sell for like thousands! So, please do not tell me about PRIMITIVE!

 

[Dillinger]

@Dillinger to you are your beliefs and to me are mine....

I did not say that...I am a girl why on earth will I side such twisted mentality?

So this is more about personal morals and religious/cultural sensitivities. So while you are content with your beliefs pertaining to this you do not judge others who believe and behave differently? As in you do think that a woman or man with a different outlook- be it extremely liberal or libertarian- is as deserving of the basic modicum of respect as you are, yes?

 

[Dubious]

So this is more about personal morals and religious/cultural sensitivities. So while you are content with your beliefs pertaining to this you do not judge others who believe and behave differently? As in you do think that a woman or man with a different outlook- be it extremely liberal or libertarian- is as deserving of the basic modicum of respect as you are, yes?

@Dillinger maybe I WOULD answer you if you do not use too much flowery language....I am not sure but in my field we are more concerned about passing the message rather than showing our command of the language...But since I did understand you....

I am not judging we are having a debate/ discussion about why covering is necessary and how society plays are role in making CERTAIN situations complicated!! Not sure what you are hitting at!

Here respect was brought up by your country men who did not understand why a woman's body is part of her izzat = respect...Maybe the question should be thrown at him!

 

[Ayush]

Good joke. You must have heard it while watching Bollywood.

nope.u can hear it too if u search on Google. ..

 

[Spring Onion]

So this is more about personal morals and religious/cultural sensitivities. So while you are content with your beliefs pertaining to this you do not judge others who believe and behave differently? As in you do think that a woman or man with a different outlook- be it extremely liberal or libertarian- is as deserving of the basic modicum of respect as you are, yes?

liberatarian? does it mean nudity?

 

[Dillinger]

@Dillinger maybe I WOULD answer you if you do not use too much flowery language....I am not sure but in my field we are more concerned about passing the message rather than showing our command of the language...But since I did understand you....

I am not judging we are having a debate/ discussion about why covering is necessary and how society plays are role in making CERTAIN situations complicated!! Not sure what you are hitting at!

Here respect was brought up by your country men who did not understand why a woman's body is part of her izzat = respect...Maybe the question should be thrown at him!

So covering up is necessary, because it is about a woman's izzat. Yup, this debate is over for me even before it began. Too many conservatives everywhere these days...time to run away. And nope completely disagree with you...but then to each his/her own as you said before.

liberatarian? does it mean nudity?

You can take it to mean anything, promiscuity, pre-marital sex and that too in copious amounts, not adhering to any sanctioned religious rules pertaining to affairs conjugal...the list is long.

 

[jaibi]

@Talon,

i am not replying for whole post but only part of it as some points in this post has been discussed subsequently by samantk and zaibi.



1. Humans did not evolved for apes. They just had a common ancestor. From there they had gone their way in evolution we have gone our's.

2. Chimpanzees are not the starting point of evolution. The first organism to evolve was single celled and it evolved during Eo Archean period. The fossils of subsequent evolution relics are preserved in Australian stromatolites.

3. Reptilian brain is the term used for primitive brain, primitive in the sense of evolution. This is the part of brain which controls basic bodily functions and urges. Meddula oblongata and cerebellum belongs to this part along with some part of occipital lobe and central suculus. These part control bodily functions and urges and drives and is found in reptiles also. The later part is buily upon this foundation.

4. Frontal cortex is the part of brain in-charge of thinking process. It is the one which enables you to do planning, being creative and do algebra and the rest three are part of brsin responsible for linguistic capabilities




No, i am not bipolar. State needs to take action and society needs to make stricter laws but the type of laws is what i differ on.

Prohibitory laws never make sense as

1. They are derogatory to humans. They treat subjects like infants and state like a nanny state.

2. When i ask state to make strict laws i meant that they should make strict punitive law. An example of that would be that you could drink but engage in hooliganism and you would serve an year in jail. Pretty much i am in partial consonance with Saudi philosophy of extreme punishments as it has been proven that punishments work only if they are extreme.

3. Under prohibitory laws, people do get access to the prohibited substance by illegal means and usually the worst one gets primary access. An example would be on-going gun control debate in USA. A simple proposition which i think participants there ignore is that, irrespective of restrictions you place on guns,criminals are going to have access to guns.

4.We may be able to prevent some crimes using prohibition law, but any legal measure has to judged by the social benefit of the law. A law is not an Islanded entity. It is a harbinger of political philosophy a state follows. A law which places restriction of an individual is a sign of state which regulates thought process of individual. this leads to muffling of creative thought process and is in toto bad for society. An example of this would be anti-terror laws .They are highly effective but they do not justify the erosion of rights to public.




Now this is an supremacist argument that i encounter a lot on this forum. Look around yourself and see as to how many things you are using have been invented in east.

Coming to basic science.

1.Did someone in East propounded laws of electro mechanism before maxwell

2. Motion before galileo

3. Relativity before laplace and einstien

4. Planetary motion before Keplar

5.Quantum mechanics

.
.
.
.
.


The only worthwhile contribution of east that has been build upon by west is in field of mathematics.

Some islanded contributions would never count as it was never part of eastern cultures to provide theoretical frameworks hence their inventions could not be developed upon.



It is also proved that parents carrying a dead relationship is much worse than single parent as far as psyche of child is concerned.




Noe that is putting words in someone's mouth.The fact that i think it to be a socialist conspiracy would have made it clear that i am not in favor of state regulating private affairs.




But only fundamentalists have this as a default option. Have you heard of evangelical christians theory that if a women become pregnent during rape, she had enjoyed it and it is a just rape.In their view a women suffering rape could shut down her reproductive system.



A very good post sir. I left out social constructionism because my grasp on it is weak.

I'll look forward to more posts of yours and try in my little way to contribute. Great effort, sir!

 

[SamantK]

@samantk Nope none of us think of a woman as a thing but we are very much down to earth and talking about reality not about being in the clouds...

Another accusation but nicely covered up.

dont be frustrated. I did not put my words in your mouth...I am talking about those women who are proud of what they wear and then there are women like you who do not understand why they wear it but blame society....2 different groups...I advice you not to show pity to those who are proud and try asking those who complain to remove their burqa...foran yahin word aaiga : “THARKI” hopefully a slap or sandle or even public trying to get a piece of you ...MANY such women complain as long as someone lends them an ear

This is really frustating, how many time should I say that I do not have a problem if they like it, it is my feeling because I have had some friends tell me it was very inconvenient. I blame those people who are forcing them to wear burkha against thier will, that is where my contention lies. Not for you the god fearing and burkha wearing women.

Yes I have asked those who complain and they have never said or did any such thing. I guess you are a women who will slap them for being sympathetic to your inconvenience. There is another term called humanity not just Tharki.

Now you are putting your words in my mouth...I said if they are wearing a burqa they DO NOT WANT to be stared at....had they wanted to be, they would not be wearing a COVERING to COVER themselves! Common sense

Wow, another vieled accusation at those who do not, they want guys to be staring at them
Your logic defies common sense.

Do you understand when 1 says LEADS to or states is the beginning....not necessarily ALWAYS...but it is a factor....Go talk to rape victims, how many of them were either coming home from a pub, got picked up at the pub, dissapeared while with friends near a pub or in a drunken state and many more FACTORS....few have other reasons....do your research...

I have reacted to your assertion that they lead to so the burden of proof and research lies on you, another respected member @jaibi pointed you in the same direction but you did not listen to him too.

What is soo difficult in covering up? why against it?

But why if they do not want to?

Dont act naive...A man gets arosed due to a number of factors, 1 is seeing MORE THAN NECESSARY SKIN or silky flowing hair.....you are talking about a serial rapist or whatnot, a mad man...I am talking about those points in the 1st post....like frustration, rejection or 1 time rapist or people who force a random woman in a drunk state or a woman who has rejected them at the pub....

No, im not talking about a serial rapist or mad man that is why I said what does it matter when a person has decided to rape.
Aroused means he need to have sex So why do not I see women raping men in the dungeons and dark alleys by the dozen? Of course thier chest hair must be provocative,thier beard must be too, muscles so on and so forth.

Ok...soo now I have to give you a lesson on good behaviour...this is soooo trolling!

You cannot, because your good behaviour values does not fit mine.

coz all you talk about is a rapist who has done such a crime more frequently than one who just does it coz he was provoked on the street....using the points in post no.1

No, read my point above. Wrong assumption.

What do you mean?

You asked me why women in my life are more important than others and I explained. Do you treat men in your life (Father, brother) important than other men?

 

[Spring Onion]

You can take it to mean anything, promiscuity, pre-marital sex and that too in copious amounts, not adhering to any sanctioned religious rules pertaining to affairs conjugal...the list is long.

what a nerdy definition of liberalism which is often not applied by men on their own mothers and sisters.


the bottom line is you have fkd up meaning of liberalism and thats why no wonder you find objection to it by groups both in yours and mine country.

 

[Bang Galore]

@Bang Galore just wait until long clothes will become the in thing ....and all girls wearing short clothes will get this: "that is soo like ancient" ...no matter how much you deny SOCIETY does decide HOW YOU PEOPLE THINK even HOW YOU people dress!

If some ugly thing is worn by some Bollywood actress no matter how ugly it will be, it will sell for like thousands! So, please do not tell me about PRIMITIVE!

I didn't make any comments about clothes, long, short or medium. I only pointed out that your idea of wearing clothes so as to not provoke would be seen as regressive & primitive by the women I know. I make no other comments.

 

[jaibi]

It's surprising how and why this discussion turned to an ideological battle. Sadly, we can only put forward proofs and propositions but if a person still refuses to argue logically or give the other a good listen little can be done.

 

[Dubious]

I didn't make any comments about clothes, long, short or medium. I only pointed out that your idea of wearing clothes so as to not provoke would be seen as regressive & primitive by the women I know. I make no other comments.

@Bang Galore I look forward to meeting such women, if they exist

 

[Dillinger]

what a nerdy definition of liberalism which is often not applied by men on their own mothers and sisters.


the bottom line is you have fkd up meaning of liberalism and thats why no wonder you find objection to it by groups both in yours and mine country.

Its a limited one but needs must...warna pura page bhardena padega..so instead I highlighted the points which would be the most problematic..that is to say the one's which most people don't agree to- in the manner as you've stated.

Hey freedom is freedom- even to do things that you might think are "stupid" or "fuc#ed-up". As far as one's mothers and sisters are concerned they should be left to decide on their own and not have a adjudication handed down to them by their sons ans brothers.

 

[Dubious]

@samantk long reply...but its lunch time...Will read it later