Indian mother sells baby boy to buy mobile phone, jeans and tops

An Indian mother sold her baby boy, for Rs. 5000 (less then $100). 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Mother-in-Odisha-sells-baby-boy-to-buy-mobile-phone-jeans-and-tops/articleshow/16657212.cms

the money was used to buy a mobile phone and a pair of jeans among other things. "Rakhi Patra of Mundamala village who sold her 17 month-old son for Rs 5,000 purchased a new mobile phone, a pair of jeans, few new tops (to go with the jeans) and memory cards for her mobile with the money," Jajpur superintendent of police Deepak Kumar said on Wednesday.

And further
Rejecting the mother's claim that she sold the child to meet the legal expenses of her jailed husband, Kumar said her new acquisitions were evidence of the fact that she did not sell her baby boy due to poverty.
...The woman refused to take back her son after police handed her the boy after recovering him from Cuttack on Tuesday.

Now in place of the baby boy, if it would have been a baby girl, imagine what would have had happened ? The news would have been plastered over everywhere. News media would be full of reports, as to how girl child are treated in an in-humane way in India.  How the gender ratio is so skewed in India. How girls are unwanted, blah blah blah.

Now this women has acted in an inhuman way and lied. But don't think, that she has committed any offense. Since it is a well settled principle of law in India, that women cannot commit any offense. And if she does, that would be because of some grave compulsion. And if anyone presses for charges against her, that person will be termed as "Anti-Women".

The false propaganda of Crime Against Women

If a women hurts/cheats another women, shall it be labelled as crime against women ?  Yes it is. However, for all crime against women, Men are held responsible, and laws are enacted to that effect, to harass Men. Going by the same logic, when a man is hurt/harassed, it should be labelled as crime against men. And should laws be framed to hold women responsible for that ? And going by numbers, crime against men is a much much bigger issue, then crime against women. Please refer http://ncrb.nic.in/ for statistics.

The general perception is that crime against women, necessarily means that a man, must have harassed an abla naari. Going by reality on ground, this is very incorrect. Unfortunately by reality, people today believe, what is shown in media. Media doesn't show reality, they show, news items, that are spicy(aka yellow journalism).  A news like "girl molested/raped" gets more viewership, then one, which says, "farmer used innovative techniques to improve crop production". So media tries hard to find news about women being harassed. And if they don't find one, they stage it.As is evident from the recent news about molestation in Assam. http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Guwahati/Scribe-behind-Assam-molestation/Article1-889772.aspx   Crime against Men, well people don't even think about it, since it is not so spicy. Not a spicy topic to do time pass discussion.

Crime against women, very clearly implies, that don't treat women as equal to men. Such narrow minded classifications, are orthodox, and regressive. Normally the self proclaimed women reformers are in the forefront, of always, classifying anything related to women in a very perverted manner. This is very dangerous for society, and is very destructive.A glaring example of this destruction, is the huge number of male suicides in India. Due to the biased Indian laws, tens of thousands of crores are wasted due to lost productivity of Men who get caught in false cases of crime against women.

Ladies and Jerks

It is a common practice by males to refer to "any kind of" women as a lady. Though the synonym of lady is gentleman, men are rarely referred to as gentleman. Men are mostly referred to as guy, man, etc. The general attitude of such males is that by default most males are jerks. But they forget that they themselves are the jerks.

Most men, think, that they are showing gentlemanly behavior, when they are referring to any woman as a lady. But since they themselves don't show much respect to males overall, this behavior of referring to any women as lady, makes them look like a jerk. This rubbish practice is widely prevalent in Indian society.  These men, are the fallacy of propaganda, which tells people, to respect a women, solely on the basis of her gender. This chivalrous behavior cuts through all  strata of society. By showing chivalry towards women, while showing disrespect  towards other males, makes them look sex starved.

But there are still some gentleman left, who  refer to their male counterparts as gentleman. May their tribe increase.

The need of the hour is to in-culminate gender neutral behavior, and not be blinded  by gender of any person, specifically females :-)

Does Family Implies only Females ?

Different people have different viewpoints about anything, but in social norms, normally not many viewpoints are available. Case in point is the definition of a family. Though some may argue, that there are different views about family, when it comes to practice, there is still a majority view, which is acceptable to most people. The majority view is normally conservative. What is that view ? That view is that females are an essential part of a family, and that they need to be protected. Take an e.g. of family room/areas in a restaurant. If a group of females(with no accompanying male), enters the family area, they are greeted. It can be that none of the females are related by any blood relationship, or they may be just acquaintances of each other. But they can go in the family area. However, if say two men, who are brothers, try to enter the family room, they are normally stopped, and requested to occupy the general area. If they have a female(who may not be a "family" member) accompanying them though, they can enter the family area.

Even when people inquire a man about his family, they essentially are asking about his wife. (Indian) Society feels that females, more specifically wife is an essential part of any family. And without a wife, there can be no family. So even though, you have a loving an caring mother, sister, father, brother. That amounts to nothing, for general people. It is a faulty and shallow viewpoint though. Since these people think, that if you are not pro-creating, you aren't part of the society. It is essential to note that Indian scriptures do not mandate such a thing. Though scriptures speaks about Grushasthshram, it is not mandatory. God Hanuman never married, even when many efforts were made towards that end  by his "well-wishers". Though, if we think about it, Hanuman is an essential part of Ram's family. At their core, even other religions would subscribe to this view.

Tolerance for legal terrorists (and their supporters) ?

Normally everywhere the norm is now, zero tolerance for sexual harassment. In India, what this means is particularly zero tolerance, for any even suggestive action against young females. Indian law, identifies this female, as young female, and mostly a wife. The law is trying to be more broad, and broaden the base of what it means by  "females". There is a huge industry around,  which has got its own vested interests (with of course not so honest motives) in shaping the opinion of general public, as to how these venerable females need to be showered with protection, care, benefits, etc. These people, are very much behind  campaigns like Domestic Violence Against Women(Bell Bajao), Save the Girl Child, etc. On the face of this, even though this campaigns sound, very noble, they are not. If you do a little surface scratching, you easily understand the sham behind all these campaigns. Keep in mind, all these campaigns are funded by the money of tax payers. Money is just one aspect of it. The social implications, of this feminist onslaught is catastrophic. Take a look at western europe. By some estimates, due to low birth rate, we will start to see the end of western civilization as we know of. (males aren't marrying, due to feminist laws, resulting in low birth rates, and resulting in declining population). Thanks to the feminazi's, the same disease has taken firm roots in India.

It is the feminists, who are spreading the poison of  misandry (male hatred), and worse are those, who blindly believe them. The ones, who support them, are equally evil, because, without their support, these feminists, won't make much headway. Silent supporters of evil, are equally evil, history is  testimony to that. This evil nexus needs to be broken.


Well of course, we need to weed out this evil. And do we need to show any tolerance to those who perpetrate this evil ? Of course NOT. We need to have a zero tolerance policy against the perpetrators of legal terrorism, and also those, who are silent supporters.

Note - I will keep updating this post.