Jump to content

Indian feminists !!!


velu

Recommended Posts

On 9/21/2019 at 9:11 AM, beetle said:

:giggle: Wahan bhi bikte hain.

 

They can choose whichever career and then find a girl who loves them and marry her instead of going throw the arranged route because that is a different animal .

 

If the guy has average salary....find a girl who also works and then both can run their homes with two salaries.Treat her like an equal partner....

 

Or if you want to go the arranged route...look for girls from poor background and have a simple wedding without dowry...

There are plenty of good girls in poor middle glass families ready to marry guys who wants a simple wedding without dowry.

 

Why would parents spend their ife earning and savings and may be go into dept for marrying their daughter to a poor guy ?

 

So either have love marriage or settle for a simple marriage without dowry/ gifts or pay for own marriage ....bahut ladkiyan mil jaengi ......

 

 

This is where theory needs to meet reality. Go to any Matrimonial website and see that even girls forward mindset have written income limit of 10 lakhs or above to contact them.  If you think that Girls are happy to share financial responsibility then its not true.

 

Most women are very happy with the system of their parents finding a well settled financially well settled guy with his own house. They don't have any problem with this patriarchal system because it benefits them.

 

Similarly Girls are more crazy about lavish weddings . Most girls see their cousins and friends marrying in this way and they too just dream to marry in that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, velu said:

@Real McCoy i think dmk & co put  these fake indian feminists in their place well .. 

 

"kanimoli is my daughter , but her mom is not my wife" - kalaignar

"naan mutram turnatha munivar alla , aval padi thanda pathinium alla" - anna :hail: 

That's all nice but when push comes to shove they can't go against central govt much less the UN. They can be non-feminists but they are politicians first of all and they are bound by their corruption. If they get all moralistic, come to their senses and resist, they will be held up in corruption charges. That's how it works. It comes to the people as a whole to reject their doctrine and the powers that rule this world will pull back and chose another time to attack again. Think how tamil people reacted to jallikattu when the SC and everybody was against it. I liked how they barred any politician or movie stars from participating. They had to resort to bringing LTTE sympathizers, seeman, prostitutes, naxals from AP, to break the movement.

People will resist if they get the accurate info. That is why they are all converging on children to indoctrinate their ideology. All that we can do it resist from our side. Luckily all my friends are closer to my view. Feminists are zombies. One of my cousin is one (separated and single mother) who always takes digs at men and praises "strong" women in movies. She always said her husband is at fault. One day I told her, it takes two to tango and maybe she is underplaying her role in the divide. She rarely speaks to me these days. Good for me I guess :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Bhai, I wished you could have come out of this individual stories. 

It may be one Muslim friend of your living peacefully, but there are millions in Pakistan who are suffering badly while their wives are not able to help them financially. Or the wives have to suffer badly at hands of mother-in-law and others. 

Individual stories are more real than news reports. I can't trust any news these days because every channel has its agenda. I'm not saying all men are angels but women are not as well. My view is shaped by the people around me. My single income friend has a happier life than two income friends. That's not the only story. I have several and I can write an essay like mulo :laugh: but I would be wasting my time. I also have seen a distant relative whose husband wants her to work but she wants to stay at home. The guy wants to earn more money. The dude is greedy. I wish I could present my theory but his greed and ego are not ready to listen to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, beetle said:

Well...that says it all.

No need for arguments now.

What next..stay in purdah too....find some way to justify that too.

 

Why are guys ashamed of accepting their thoughts are from the dark ages?

 

 

 

Did I say women should wear a purdah. Its a simple observation. No need to get triggered and extend my comment into the dark ages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2019 at 9:20 PM, Alam_dar said:

Yes, they were respected for it to jump into the fire along with their dead husbands too.

Wrong. This only happened during the Islamic conquest of India and is restricted to certain communities in Rajasthan as @coffee_rules mentioned. Women and children were enslaved and sold to whorehouses and slave markets in the middle east. Women thought it better to die with their husbands and not end up in a whorehouse. Modern feminism would say to the women "Be a whore to those people who killed your husband and children" :facepalm:There are people like Swara Bhaskar who say it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

Wrong. This only happened during the Islamic conquest of India and is restricted to certain communities in Rajasthan as @coffee_rules mentioned. Women and children were enslaved and sold to whorehouses and slave markets in the middle east. Women thought it better to die with their husbands and not end up in a whorehouse. Modern feminism would say to the women "Be a whore to those people who killed your husband and children" :facepalm:There are people like Swara Bhaskar who say it

You are confusing sati with jauhar.

The practice of sati has existed from much before the advent of Islam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Singh bling said:

This is where theory needs to meet reality. Go to any Matrimonial website and see that even girls forward mindset have written income limit of 10 lakhs or above to contact them.  If you think that Girls are happy to share financial responsibility then its not true.

 

Most women are very happy with the system of their parents finding a well settled financially well settled guy with his own house. They don't have any problem with this patriarchal system because it benefits them.

 

Similarly Girls are more crazy about lavish weddings . Most girls see their cousins and friends marrying in this way and they too just dream to marry in that way.

Your line of reasoning is not consistent. 

Even if we assume your claim that most girls have set a limit of 10 lakhs as a limit for any kind of a discussion, it in no way implies that they aren't happy to share financial responsibilities. It maybe a minimum guarantee for a certain level of life style that the girl has maintained through out her life. To better it/ afford a family, the girl would have to work.

And as distasteful the practice is, it can't be viewed in isolation from the dowry. If the man can pick his would be wife keeping in mind what he would rake in as 'wedding gifts' (read dowry), then the girl can be expected to look for her best financial interests as well.

 

Guys are crazy about cars and bikes and end up spending a lot a much larger percentage of their income on these things. Its their dream. What is the problem with having a dream?

The ancillary auto and wedding management industries gain the most. So do banks providing loans for the same. What exactly is the problem if girls are crazy for a lavish wedding? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

Wrong. This only happened during the Islamic conquest of India and is restricted to certain communities in Rajasthan as @coffee_rules mentioned. Women and children were enslaved and sold to whorehouses and slave markets in the middle east. Women thought it better to die with their husbands and not end up in a whorehouse. Modern feminism would say to the women "Be a whore to those people who killed your husband and children" :facepalm:There are people like Swara Bhaskar who say it

You are mixing two separate things. 

Muslims took captive all the women (widows and as well as virgins as well as those whose husbands ran away) and raped them. 

But this has nothing to do with Tradition of Satti, which is older than Muslim arrival to India. 

 

Religion is opium.

Muslim women are brainwashed and claim they feel themselves safe in Burqa, and they feel comfortable when their husbands have multiple wives. 

This was same with Hindu women who were brainwashed in name of religion/tradition that it is a great deed to jump into fire along with their dead husbands. 

PS: Somewhere I read that Indian Kings also used to rape the slave girls. Let me find the reference. It was new to me as I thought it didn't happen in India. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

You are mixing two separate things. 

Muslims took captive all the women (widows and as well as virgins as well as those whose husbands ran away) and raped them. 

But this has nothing to do with Tradition of Satti, which is older than Muslim arrival to India. 

 

Religion is opium.

Muslim women are brainwashed and claim they feel themselves safe in Burqa, and they feel comfortable when their husbands have multiple wives. 

This was same with Hindu women who were brainwashed in name of religion/tradition that it is a great deed to jump into fire along with their dead husbands. 

PS: Somewhere I read that Indian Kings also used to rape the slave girls. Let me find the reference. It was new to me as I thought it didn't happen in India. 

https://www.quora.com/How-and-why-did-the-practice-of-Sati-come-into-existence-and-become-followed-by-priests

 

It doesn't get a mention in scriptures, but was popular only in some Rajput communities. It was not mentioned in Tamil Sangam which dates back to 3rd century CE. 

 

Quote

Sati was/is rampant in the Rajput families in the northwest India and most other parts of India have not had a rampant practice of Sati. In Tamil literature, for instance, one doesn't find any mention of Sati at all. Many popular figures in the ancient times, such as Kannagi, were widows.


So, what is so special about northwestern India? It lies close to the entry point of invasions. That is where we see the emergence of Sati. Some of the initial occurrences of forced burning goes to the end of Gupta empire that was besieged by invaders. Puranas written at that time mention Sati, but were ambivalent. Some extolled the practice, while others banned it.

But, things got really rampant in the 14th century with the Islamic invasion of Rajput territory. Hindus committed mass suicides called Jauhar to avoid the consequence of invasions - including mass rape and servitude. The most famed [notorious?] of this is the suicide of Rani Padmini during the invasion of Alauddin Khilji. This suicide became a major trigger as it got really extolled and praised by all sides. Suddenly temples were erected of her sacrifice and the suicide became something of a virtue.

 

Although Jauhar was for married women, widows without any protection from families would be coerced to give up life, like the Jauhar, which was widespread because of Muslim invaders. Ghunghat is also the same. Nobody wears Ghunghat in the south. All these cultural changes due to Muslim Invasions which were inhuman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2019 at 9:36 AM, Moochad said:

+ add moving the target constantly at the end

 

 

It is more like an unattainable, loosely defined target than a moving target. The shapeless nature of the target allows for constant and selective whinging. 

Quote

Also add somewhere, never taking responsibility for your own role in the system, always someone else creates it, always its someone elses fault.

100%

 

 

Edited by Tibarn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...