Jump to content

Barkha Dutt gives a reality check to a foreign reporter

Cricket_Hacker

By Cricket_Hacker
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

amiret Newbie

amiret

Posted
Posted

Why Barkha Dutt is wrong

While fabulous if the intent was to play to the gallery, all of these are exceptionally flawed and one-dimensional arguments that obfuscate the very real and frankly chronic problem of women's safety and position in India. Let's deal with them one by one. 1) That the US & UK have a higher incidence of sexual violence. Even if this is indeed true, how does it in any manner absolve us from the moral burden of the fact that 93 women are raped every single day in India? And why must the US and UK perpetually validate or become benchmarks for what is and isn't acceptable for us? To the very assertion that these countries are more unsafe for women than India however - did Dutt consider the fact that sexual violence is sparsely reported in this country? The British medical journal The Lancet puts the number of victims in India reporting sexual violence to the police at a paltry one percent. In the US, according to Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, 32 out of every 100 rapes get reported. In the UK, the figure according to one charity, is 20%. Statistics, even when bandied about by Nobel Laureates, can be deceptive. 2) That India has had a woman Prime Minister 4 decades ago. How is this anything other than a fact of deceptive symbolism? We are a nation that has been unable to pass the Women's Reservation Bill for 18 long years. We are a nation where women have only 11% representation in Parliament. We are a nation with an abysmal 3% women holding top positions in BSE 500 firms. The comparative figure in Europe and America is 10% and 14% respectively. Women in both Indian politics and business are often dynasts or proxies. Dutt would know that. 3) That we don't have conversations about abortions Could it be because we simply kill the foetuses anyway, no questions asked? Estimates are that between eight to twelve million girls have been victims of Indian patriarchy in the last three decades. That's a genocide of mammoth proportions and a continuing one, with probably more girls being killed in Dutt's own backyard than anywhere else. Affluent South Delhi incidentally tops the charts when it comes to female infanticide.
http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/why-barkha-dutt-is-wrong-about-women-s-safety-in-india-115042900083_1.html
amiret Newbie

amiret

Posted
Posted

" Sadly, it did seem very much like misplaced national pride inhibited the avowed feminist in Dutt from calling a spade a spade. Pitifully it might also precisely be the reason why the horrendous mob online that usually attack her for her unpandering views, found themselves to be in agreement with their daily trolling target. " :haha:

randomGuy Grand Master

randomGuy

Posted
Posted
On points no. 1 and 2 , Barkha is correct imo. On point #3 (on abortion), she is on the wrong side. India doesn't have a relatively large number of total (reported+unreported) sexual violence cases imo. But among these cases, the most hideous ones like rape+murder, gangrape , raping a minor etc, though being a tiny %age of the total cases, still seem to be greater in number.
amiret Newbie

amiret

Posted
Posted
" The Lancet puts the number of victims in India reporting sexual violence to the police at a paltry one percent. In the US, according to Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, 32 out of every 100 rapes get reported. In the UK, the figure according to one charity, is 20%."
So the numbers in India could be at least 32 times higher if indian women were able to report the crimes against them , like in the USA !
randomGuy Grand Master

randomGuy

Posted
Posted
So the numbers in India could be at least 32 times higher if indian women were able to report the crimes against them ' date=' like in the USA ![/quote'] Rapes reported in India in year 2010 is 1.8 per 1,00,000. US and UK, its 27.x per 1,00,000 in the same year - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#Rape_statistics_by_country Even if you assume in India only 1% cases get registered and 20-25% in UK , US, India doesn't have relatively large number of rapes happening. EDIT: while we must strive to be the best, I dont believe India has a large number of rapes happening per capita, relatively speaking.
Crookbond Newbie

Crookbond

Posted
Posted
Rapes reported in India in year 2010 is 1.8 per 1,00,000. US and UK, its 27.x per 1,00,000 in the same year - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#Rape_statistics_by_country Even if you assume in India only 1% cases get registered and 20-25% in UK , US, India doesn't have relatively large number of rapes happening. EDIT: while we must strive to be the best, I dont believe India has a large number of rapes happening per capita, relatively speaking.
Statistics 101 - You can NOT compare rape statistics across countries.
Crookbond Newbie

Crookbond

Posted
Posted
But can label India as rape capital w/o any basis?
India does not need to be compared to others to name it as a rape capital or NOT. Your argument against India being a rape capital is "Look at the rapes in other countries".
Gollum Grand Master

Gollum

Posted
Posted

Ever since 2014 she is trying too hard to do an image makeover. But we know what she actually is and what she stands for.

AmreekanDesi Newbie

AmreekanDesi

Posted
Posted

LMAO She starts by saying she is a not a defensive person than goes on the most defensive diatribe ive seen on TV And I make fun of Pakis for saying oh we had Benajir bhutto so I will put the same argument here. Benajir and Indira Ghandhi did not become leaders on their own accord and them being women had no bearing on their election. They were only and only leaders because they were the daughters of other great leaders. Their was nothing abt them personally why they became rulers

JourneyMan Newbie

JourneyMan

Posted
Posted
LMAO She starts by saying she is a not a defensive person than goes on the most defensive diatribe ive seen on TV And I make fun of Pakis for saying oh we had Benajir bhutto so I will put the same argument here. Benajir and Indira Ghandhi did not become leaders on their own accord and them being women had no bearing on their election. They were only and only leaders because they were the daughters of other great leaders. Their was nothing abt them personally why they became rulers
Even if you discarded Gandhi based on nepotism, women have still been a lot more active and influential in Indian politics than in the US.
Deleted_User_1 Newbie

Deleted_User_1

Posted
Posted

No one is saying that US has less rape than India. Domestic violence is a big issue here as well. But there is a vast difference in the attitude towards women and rape. Most of the rapes in India do no get reported. It will several generations for that to change.

AmreekanDesi Newbie

AmreekanDesi

Posted
Posted
Even if you discarded Gandhi based on nepotism' date=' women have still been a lot more active and influential in Indian politics than in the US.[/quote'] fair enough. havent really conducted enough research to know but ill take your word but its a lie when ppl use figures like indira or bhutto to say how south asian women are so far ahead ithan their western counterparts its just ridiculous to claim that
AmreekanDesi Newbie

AmreekanDesi

Posted
Posted
No one is saying that US has less rape than India. Domestic violence is a big issue here as well. But there is a vast difference in the attitude towards women and rape. Most of the rapes in India do no get reported. It will several generations for that to change.
the definitions are pretty loose in the US too if we used the definitions of america back in india then there are sexual assaults every day on our buses and public spaces
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...