I’m not talking about women having standards or wanting different things from a relationship. I mean situations where the expectations are clearly different depending on which side is being asked to do something.

I’ve run into a few examples that made me wonder if this is more common than I thought:

- A woman expects her boyfriend to pay for most bills and also purchase the house by himself because “men would do it if they wanted to love her,” while also expecting him to do an equal share household work. When you point out that traditional expectations are being applied selectively, the response is basically that providing is what makes a man, a man, but chores are both people's role.

- Another expects the man to approach, plan dates, initiate conversations, make the relationship official, propose, and generally keep things moving, but consider it “controlling” if he expects her to take comparable initiative. She wants the benefits of being pursued without accepting that pursuing someone is also an effort.

- Another one I’ve seen is the expectation that it's men's duty to make the relationship exciting, loving, make her feel secure, make her feel beautiful. That is to say, the man loves her and her contribution in return is she feels loved and cared for. Kind of like, the man is the active participant putting in the effort and she is the passive receiver.

The thing that interests me isn't whether these expectations are right or wrong. It's the selective application of relationship roles.

Have you guys encountered women who wanted a very traditional relationship when it benefited them, but a very egalitarian relationship when it did not?

What was the most blatant example you've personally seen?

Here are the latest pictures attached:

Initially I thought of comparing both the headings of total and functional but that would not be fair as there are much more girls only school than boys only, both at the government and private level. Also, a presence of a toilet which is not functional means almost nothing.

Functional toilets simply mean in terms of percentage: Number of working toilets for a gender/Number of total toilets for that gender * 100%.

So, let's say there are 1000 girls' school and only 500 boys' school apart from coed ones but if 900 of the girls' schools has functional toilet and 450 of the boys are functional, both would have same percentage even if number of available toilets may not be same due to number of schools being different.

Note: The study measures only presence of a functional toilet as a yes and no question not quantitative answer.

Conclusion:

• Girls have 1.6% more functional toilets than boys in all. And this is not a small number as we have 14 lakh schools, the math comes to 38,142 extra schools with no functional washroom for boys. (The exact numbers are given in the previous page of the report)
• Girls have 2.4% more functional toilets at government level. The math comes to 34,442 extra schools with no functional washroom for boys at government level.

Availability of washrooms in school is a very important avenue for maintaining hygiene yet why do we have such a difference in numbers with article 14?

girls data

boys data

The other day while going through the collection of scientific studies on domestic violence on the website of The International Council for Men and Boys (ICMB) to expand my compilation of "violence against men", I encountered this study which is done by Murray A Straus. In the graph chart presented on the site I found the column for India and thereafter this paper. In this post I want to summarise the findings of the paper and data on India in simple language.

This is a fantastic piece of paper that is worth reading, because the author was a "feminist" with regards to his views on DV but in this he states that in 35years of his research he has been proven wrong about his assumptions. He is also one of the few people who openly criticise scholarly malpractices to "appease ideology" in context of domestic violence.

What is the abstract of this paper and what is this paper about?

This paper seeks answer to a few questions based on empirical data collected across 32 countries and 68 universities.

The questions are:

1. Are most of the domestic violence only Male perpetrated? Is it true for both minor and severe forms of DV?

2. Is the violence by male partner motivated by desire for control and dominance?

3. Is self-defence the main motive behind female perpetrated domestic violence?

4. How does this data (as in pattern not number) change across nation?

5. Is it consistent with other peer reviewed literatures?

Also, how UN and WHO falsifies reports and hides data on male victims.

The paper begins with the author admitting that he has previously stated in his own research that:

>I stated that “wives are much more often the victim of violence by their husbands than the reverse” (Straus, 1976).

>In relation to the second principle, in that article I attributed male PV to “the hierarchical and male-dominant nature of society…” The second core principle is that when men are violent the purpose is to coerce and dominate, whereas when women are violent it is almost always an act of self-defence…"

People also do not believe women can hit a partner in context other than self-defence:

>"The idea that women are motivated to hit in order to coerce a male partner, or out of rage and anger over misbehaviour by a male partner (such as sexual infidelity), is regarded as outrageous, and is taken as a sign of sexism and misogyny."

But then slowly these assumptions were proven wrong:

>In the 35 years since I began research on PV, bit by bit, these assumptions about prevalence and etiology have been contradicted by a mass of empirical evidence from my own research and from research by many others..." [This study is one of them.]

But most scholars do not state that publicly as has been mentioned in (Straus,1900c, in press) because many scholars fear that they will face ostracism. He also presents proofs that "Instead, the evidence on gender symmetry in prevalence and etiology is typically disregarded and often explicitly denied or withheld from publication."

Now the real part starts:

What was the sample?

The data is from students of 68 universities across 32 nations, including India. Total n= 13,601. Of this, in this article, the author is analysing a convenience sample of 4,239 students who belonged to departments of psychology, sociology, criminology, and family studies.

Overall assault rate:

Table1(in image) gives the percent of students in each national setting who reported a physical attack on a dating partner during the 12 months prior to completing the questionnaire. The data in the columns for violence by men are based on the reports by male students, and the data on violence by women are based on the reports of female students.

India is highlighted

Minor assaults = slapping or throwing things at the partner, etc.

Severe assault = punching, kicking and hitting with an object, etc.

We notice in 21 of 32 entries in minor assaults, there is higher or equal female perpetration than male with only 4.5 point higher male perpetration than female in India. In severe assaults, 20 entries show equal or higher female perpetration with 6.4 point higher female perpetration than male. This is also consistent with PASK review (largest DV database), which will be discussed later. This is totally different from claims of feminists and women's orgs in India.

But this data does not tell the full story, as we need to also analyse in how many of the cases, only one partner was violent, and in how many both were violent. Because this above image may group in all those men or women (in their respective categories) who hit their partner without being hit back and where both were violent with each other. This was answered as follows:

Types of Abuse:

Most of the violence involves both parties being violent

The median again correlates with meta studies which have been done even after this paper that the order of types of violence is: Bilateral violence>Female only violence>Male only violence. It is noteworthy that in none of the countries male only violence is the highest category and sometimes it is below the 10% mark too. In India 75% of these are bilateral followed by 8 points difference between male and female only violence.

This is still insufficient as most of the violence is bilateral and it may very well be the case that a woman slaps a man (minor violence) and the man proceeds to take her out by a powerful kick or punch (severe violence) and vice versa. So, the author did that part too:

• Of all the men who perpetrated mild violence, partners of 13% of those men (aka women) used severe violence.
• Of all the women who perpetrated mild violence, partners of 10% of those women (aka men) used severe violence.
• Of all the men who perpetrated severe violence, partners of 14% of those men (aka women) used mild violence.
• Of all the women who perpetrated severe violence, partners of 25% of those women (aka men) used mild violence.
• In most cases where one partner used severe violence, the other did too:
  • 85% of men with severe violence had partners who also used severe violence.
  • 74% of women with severe violence had partners who also used severe violence.

So, when both partners are violent, they usually match each other’s severity. But when one partner is more severe than the other, it is more often the woman who is the more severe one.

We now try to understand the next part:

Is male dominance the main reason of violence for all of the 3 types?

https://preview.redd.it/roiron06vohh1.png?width=761&format=png&auto=webp&s=d957b30e478dea3fd89ef24024befe0773ff86c2

All participants were asked a series of questions like, is your partner in charge, does he/she have the final say etc. and they had to answer with strongly agree...strongly disagree based on which this graph was plotted. The inferences are:

• Male only violence is caused mainly my male dominance, female dominance has little impact.
• Female only violence is caused almost entirely by female dominance, male dominance has little to no impact.
• Both persons being violent was caused by dominance by either gender, but female dominance meant a higher probability of bilateral violence.
• In relationships with no party being dominant (i.e. egalitarian), violence was always the least, all graphs show small probability near 1.

Note: "This study used the conceptualization of dominance based on the feminist literature." - The Author

He states:

>In general, dominance by either partner is associated with an increased probability of severe violence, but dominance by the female partner increases the risk of severe Female-Only and severe bidirectional violence, even more strongly than does dominance by the male partner.

What about the large number of women who were just trying to defend themselves?

This study does not measure directly self-defence, but it provides to indirect evidence for the argument coupled with studies which have found that self-defence is the least of the reasons for female violence and male violence too.

• A good section of the entire pie of violence is female only violence, so these cases were never because of self-defence.
• For the bidirectional part (largest), self-defence is a factor but a minority one as, dominance scale shows bilateral violence increase with female dominance even a little more than male dominance. Dominance causes violence due to struggle for power or being "in charge" rather than defence.
• Reports from other studies:

>At least six other studies report data on self-defense. Like the DeKesseredy et al. study, five of the six found that only a small percentage of female violence was in self-defense (Carrado, George, Loxam, Jones, & Templar, 1996; Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Felson & Messner, 1998; Follingstad, Wright, Lloyd, & Sebastian, 1991; Pearson, 1997; Sarantakos, 1998; Sommer, 1996). For the one study that found high rates of self-defense, the percentage in self defense was slightly greater for men (56%) than for women (42%) (Harned, 2001). Rather than self-defense, the most usual motivations for violence by women, like the motivations of men, are coercion, anger, and punishing misbehavior by their partner (Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Fiebert & Gonzalez, 1997). For example, Pearson (1997) reports that 90% of the women she studied assaulted their partner because they were furious or jealous, or frustrated and not because they tried to defend themselves. These motives are parallel to the motivations of male perpetrators. Research on homicides by women shows similar results. For example, Jurik and Gregware (1989) studied 24 female perpetrated homicides and found that 60% had a pervious criminal record, 60% had initiated use of physical force, and only 21% of the homicides were in response to “prior abuse” or “threat of abuse/death”

How the data is being falsified, some evidence from the paper:

• WHO lied about the data on self-defence which many feminists quote:

>On this issue as well as the two core issues, there is a huge discrepancy between the assertions and the evidence. For example, the influential World Health Organization report on violence states that “Where violence by women occurs it is more likely to be in the form of self-defense (32, 37, 38)” (Krug et al., 2002). However, examination of references 32, 37, and 38 found that although all three asserted that women's violence was primarily in self-defense, #32 Saunders (Saunders, 1986) reported no data on self-defense, #37 DeKesseredy et al. (DeKeseredy, Saunders, Schwartz, & Shahid, 1997) does report data but their data shows that only 6.9% of the women acted in self-defense, and reference #38 Johnson & Ferraro (Michael P. Johnson & Ferraro, 2000) is a review article that cites references 32 and 37 and other references which also present no empirical data.

• Many researchers lied that "men are violent in relationships due to dominance":

>Another recent example by an experienced and respected researcher is the assertion by Hamberger (Hamberger & Guse, 2002) that “Men in contrast {to women} appear to be motivated to use violence to dominate and control”. Their article cited about 80 studies, but none of them provided empirical evidence on gender differences in dominance and control motivation

>Behind Closed Doors: Violence In The American Family(Strausetal.,1980, 2006) found that equalitarian couples were the least violent and that dominance by either the female or male partner was associated with an increased rate of violence.

It doesn't stop there; they won't even leave boys out of it let alone men: (they never ask questions about women's violence but their victimization)

>The results showing the predominance of bidirectional violence even in traditionally male-dominant societies may seem implausible to many readers. However, they are consistent with results from the ongoing Global School-based Health Survey conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) among students 13 to 15 years old. The students were asked if they had been hit, slapped or hurt on purpose by a boyfriend or girlfriend in the past 12 months. Results for the first few countries show 15% of girls and 29% of boys in Jordan responded “yes”, as did 9% of girls and 16% of boys in Namibia, 6% of girls and 8% of boys in Swaziland, and 18% of girls and 23% of boys in Zambia. In all five countries, more girls hit partners than boys. Perhaps the results from both the International Dating Violence Study and the WHO school study occurred because both studies are of dating relationships. The WHO could have answered that question in another survey it conducted of married and cohabiting violence**, but the organizers of that study followed the usual practice of restricting the study to the victimization of women and refused requests to include questions on perpetration by the women in the study.**

The request of the author is same as mras and egalitarians that DV is not a "gendered sport", the social service and support policy must help male victims and also incorporate programs to help female dominance just like male dominance.

STUDY(click me)

This game's preface is "you are a serial killer who exclusively targets men". The dev who posted that the next game will be about hating men.

I think men never report these games. The games graphics are indeed horrible and cheap. But this open promotion of misandry which even the dev is advocating for is disgusting. What do you think?

Edit: Femme Fatality on Steam

Scroll and find the flag icon and report it please, you do not need an account or login to do that. Men shouldn,t be the target of hate and murder.

I don't know where to start, I thought it would work but it didn't. Long story short: she had affairs with 2 men. Now we are divorced, except for raising our daughter. Our daughter is 22 and we have a son who is 25. We were not that intimate during that time, I had neglected her for sometime due to my work and our financial status was not so good either. I caught her due to her negligence for the first time. She had been in an affair for 3 whole years with him, they met with each other quiet frequently, slept in same bed and even shared small gifts with each other. It was more of a "timepass relationship". I believed I had faults, we didn't understand each other and it was just a mistake. We had moved on... The second one was discovered when I was getting anxious about our relationship because there was a point where she wasn't even interested in most things with me and had stopped putting in efforts. person was her work colleague.

This was around the time that we had our daughter. I had doubts about his paternity. She got extremely defensive about how I am trying to "remove" our daughter from our life. But I went ahead and did a swab test from a private lab. The results came that she was indeed my daughter. She was 8 at that time, it was a long affair. We had two young children and despite everything, I was coward enough to not leave. She wasn't working for 8 years now. Time flew by, he went to US for higher studies, she was still underage. Then one day, she asked for divorce, just like that, there wasn't any particular reason to it. The matter went till state high court. She got a good amount of alimony and child support for our daughter. According to judges, as I hadn't filed for divorce around that time of affair, they wouldn't consider that. I got the weekend visitation rights. She took her reward for cheating. I did what I could for both of them. I still support them in their choices.

This Friday, my daughter called me, she informed me that, her mother has been diagnosed with HLH, treatment would need lots of money. They knew about it from 2 weeks ago, I got to know that day. She (ex) has funded some part of the treatment but cant do more without selling gold, house and other things and still there would be more bills. She (daughter) was crying that she was going to lose her and wanted my help. I couldn't bear that but there was hate for her in my heart. The anger and sadness over the years and the fact that she has given me nothing but pain had created that deep disgust. With every drop of empathy that was possible for me to spend, I let her know, unfortunately I can't do anything and I do not plan to do more. I am not rich either. If she sells the house, you can come to my house. If you need anything in life you can always ask me. If you want to do something for her, I have no right to stop you, but she is a stranger to me and has nothing to do with me. I will never sacrifice myself even by an atom's weight to extend anything good to her. I know how hard it is to lose your parents, as I have lost them. I can understand her, feel her but I believe I have given enough to her, whether willingly or unwillingly. We talked for about half an hour, she was repeatedly requesting me and describing how she could not bear to loose her but all in vain.

I feel like an evil person, as I held back even when doctors have said that she has at max 3 months of life. She hasn't suffered anything for what she did and this time she should. I know this way of thinking is horrible but I cant help but desperately pray for an intense suffering of her. Some nights I feel guilty, I feel hateful towards my own self and it’s just too much for me to handle....

How I did this?

1. I have used a browser on Android phone, "Pawxy" for this.

2. Using the "Browser++" feature I made 4 independent browsers for USA, UK, INDIA and GERMANY. This selection was intentional as: USA has one helpline(gov) which admits they are gender neutral and even non age specific. UK has ManKind Initiative (non gov) which is dedicated to men along with female helplines(gov). India doesn't legally recognise male victims of Domestic Violence. Germany is the least misandristic with a government backed helpline for both genders unlike others. I wasn't logged in, in either of these browsers.

3. I marked the region choice in google settings as these countries respectively. I also used the built in VPN services hitting these countries to change my IP location.

4. I made these 2 queries "my wife is yelling at me" and "my husband is yelling at me" and no other search query related to DV or other topics.

5. I took the screenshot of these results.

6. For men (for those countries where AI overview was available), I checked the AI overview to find what sources were being quoted by the AI to arrive at the conclusion.

7. I checked these sources, for the resources they offer to both genders, to understand the differential reaction.

8. I also searched and found the google official page stating the behaviour of search engine with regards to terms indicating abuse.

Results:

Results by country:

USA: For men, it did not appear but for women it did. The helpline is gender neutral regardless.

https://preview.redd.it/yhk4agtm7sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=46bf10a4a9e95a29e3297df5fb45d0af53879aa6

https://preview.redd.it/lt1kcntm7sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ac90cbc8588782226a897b8d0b45de50069f8c5

UK: For women a helpline was shown, not for men.

https://preview.redd.it/1ut21hlt8sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c33953e26a72e90702796c2b47fc6af1d8e481d3

https://preview.redd.it/segolflt8sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6ad12536dfc7cf41cd00b799b2af09e59e45c8a8

India: For women a helpline was shown, not for men. This can be due to the fact that only women can be victims of this crime legally in India.

https://preview.redd.it/05wzoq7f9sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=542baebce8bba578a5faacf32e4ecf30e65a6fba

https://preview.redd.it/14ftid709sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=284d61675562be755fdbe467c8c93f9db4492d60

Germany: No helpline was shown for either gender. But the search results had more serious resources at the top for women.

https://preview.redd.it/cs0kkd3r9sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5d60872258d2fba82df0fc086400274653e2610c

https://preview.redd.it/07l285wr9sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4e0d074031881a9d567f00e1a3ff85625b2be5a5

Resources:

The Gottman Institute: This website has two posts, one for husband and one for wife, written from the pov of a marriage counsellor aimed primarily at reconciling than breaking up. However, in case of female victims only, the site has two additional headings describing explicity that "yelling can be a red flag" and yelling can cause "power imbalance" and be a reason for disrespect. This over emphasis is also a reason of why the AI answers like that.

https://preview.redd.it/tsbge0ow9sfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe6ff4d073f66ddc40d38345b0f5ce1a3dc3444e

https://preview.redd.it/fdnko6ilbsfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5a7bb8d6e1679457701a6ba413a6e47fe767d192

Married Life Counselling: This has only one article for "abusive wives" where they portray the reason as the wife not feeling loved. An analogous article for "abusive husband" is not present.

Googles Official Policy (not AI and statistics): Keeping these sources aside. What appears to be the case is that, google states in its official website that, if there is a sentence signifying harm or abuse in the search box, it shows the warning to intentionally provide resources. Thus, this is a deliberate usage of semantic search rather than AI statistically siding with one gender. This is also a fantastic finding that google terms DV as a "gendered sports" upon consultation with UNWomen, a branch of UN, an organisation with a record of misandry in its social media, studies and programs.

What is even more fascinating is the fact that many of the organisations to which it provides links are gender neutral. However, these do not appear for men, which shows that under the influence of ideology, it has never trained the engine in same manner for both genders. This is unlike self-harm related terms, where we get help resources for both genders for gender revered scenarios.

I was even taken aback by the fact that the list did not mention well known men's helplines like ManKind Initiative, endtodv.org and SIF ONE Men. It appeared to be a case where in between so many websites, phone numbers and resources, most of which are women specific, they could not place one helpline dedicated to men.

https://preview.redd.it/kp3d24o6asfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cb07ed577e592bce6bf177ca89bd9723d451a495

https://preview.redd.it/egxphpq8asfh1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=986d5eefa693d92f185dac9a4172115a3ffaf0f6

Conclusion:

This experiment demonstrates that the gendered asymmetry in safety-resource triggering is not a statistical byproduct of model training: it is a rule-based, intentional design choice, confirmed by Google's own documentation. "My husband is yelling at me" reliably surfaces a DV helpline; "my wife is yelling at me" does not. Same context, same severity, different output because the trigger fires on the gender of the discloser, not the content of the disclosure.

This asymmetry does not reflect reality. PASK's (the world's largest DV database) consortium-level review and subsequent peer-reviewed meta-analyses point toward rough parity in partner-perpetrated abuse rates across genders, the evidence does not support treating male victimization as rare. But the argument doesn't even need that finding to hold. Take the most conservative, deliberately lowballed hypothetical possible - say only 10% of disclosures represent male victims. On a platform used by billions of people, including a vast population of men, 10% is still tens of millions of individuals. A number that large cannot be waved off as a rounding error unworthy of automated care, on a site with this much reach and this much responsibility to every demographic it serves.

A safety system that cannot recognize identical disclosures of abuse as equally deserving of intervention is calibrated to answer who is assumed to be capable of experiencing it by a gendered organisation. Extending the same resource to men costs women nothing. Denying it to men costs male victims everything. That is the correction being asked for here: not less protection for anyone, but the same protection for everyone the policy already claims to serve.

Links: Googles Policy

Why Is My Wife Yelling At Me? Gottman

Why Is My Husband Yelling at Me? Gottman

My Wife Yells at Me All the Time • Married Life Counseling (No gender reversed post)

Details: The Domestic Violence law by latest BNSS describes victim as only woman and perpetrator as only man. So if you are being abused by your wife, you can't file any case or seek any legal relief. That is violation of extremely basic human rights.

But considering how our judiciary has been acting in recent years with regards to protecting the ruling party and doesn't even care to process gender neutral issues our youths face, this may simply remain to be a statement for a while. But this was made by a High court, which holds the highest authority in a state, so that's something praiseworthy.

Also note that: our country has state wise data on female victims of DV, no study or survey for male victims of DV. With this law, that can also change.

This post shares an assemblage of data on sexual violence, domestic violence and online violence:— Statistics and mouthpieces from researchers and other reports. Apart from general data drive discussion, it has also datas assembled from multiple countries and breakdown of violence from various perspectives like impact, motives and types of violence.

If you think there are more information that needs to be included, please share them in the comments, with link to the study and the major claims at a glance. It will be updated from time to time.

**Women and women-led groups worldwide are actively working to address domestic violence against men, promote gender equality, and protest unfair policies.**

**A summary of women only achievements.**

**Argentina**

\- Women’s Front of Argentina Against False Allegations and Women’s Argentinian Front (Andrea Guacci) organized rallies and have been at the forefront against false allegations.

\- Demonstrations featured the slogan “I am a father, not a criminal,” with strong participation from women.

**Australia**

\- Men’s Rights Agency (Sue Price) advocates for fairness and equal treatment for both genders.

\- Bettina Arndt led a successful campaign that pressured Telstra to reverse a policy cutting services based on allegations against men.

**Denmark**

\- Marie Bjerre, Minister for Equality, spearheaded equal support for male victims of domestic violence.

**England**

\- Lyn Crabtree of International Falsely Accused Day leads global efforts against false allegations, organized events, and continues advocacy for men and boys.

**Bengal, India**

\- All Bengal Men’s Forum (Nandini Bhattacharjee) sponsors programs to support men and organized International Men’s Day events.

\- Ekam Nyaay Foundation (Deepika Narayan Bhardwaj) organized a conference on female-centered laws featuring women speakers including Jyoti Tiwari, Antara Das, Indu Subhash, Mahan Richa Saini, and Savita Arya.

**Nigeria**

\- Life After Abuse Foundation (women-led, Halima Layeni) provides education, mentorship, and support to boys and men who experienced trauma and abuse, and works to establish a Commission for Men.

**Northern Ireland**

\- A group of women marched through Belfast calling for increased support for male victims of domestic abuse

**South Africa**

\- Odette van Rensburg of Dogs on the Run produced the documentary \*MEN TOO – Domestic Violence Against Men\*.

**Spain**

\- ANAVID (Maria Legaz) organized demonstrations in Madrid for all victims of domestic violence, including large protests with women participants issuing a manifesto stating contemporary feminism no longer represents them, and chanting for equality as allies.

**Canada & United States**

\- Janice Fiamengo (Canada) published critiques of university gender studies.

\- Lisa Britton (US, Evie magazine) wrote a tribute highlighting men’s contributions.

These efforts are highlighted in press releases by the Domestic Abuse and Violence International Alliance (DAVIA), a coalition with hundreds of member organizations from dozens of countries advocating for science-based, gender-inclusive domestic violence policies.

https://endtodv.org/pr/women-forge-new-pathways-to-stop-domestic-violence-against-men/

https://endtodv.org/pr/thousands-take-to-the-streets-to-protest-feminist-policies/

https://endtodv.org/pr/women-speak-out-to-advance-gender-equality-for-men/

At the end of the day, man will be attracted to women and women will be attracted to men, that's literally how we are made. Systematic bias, bias in law definition and implementation as well as societal sexism exists. But hating on each other, when men and women are state tags is illogical.

Presence of the tag man or woman on an individual doesn't mean they are trying to achieve anything at all by virtue of this tag. The word man means: individuals with XY chromosomes, high testosterone and male secondary sexual characteristics. And a similar argument holds true for women too. On the other hand functional tags like misandrist, feminsts, anti feminsts and misogynist does depict that all individuals with this tag is trying to achieve a goal consistent across all individuals with this tag.

So why are we trying to hate a gender, which doesn't even have any functional implications? For the benefit of society and family and mental health of people the algorithms and forums should enable and encourage posting positive content on other gender.

This is the post:

I feel no empathy towards male victims

My feed has been flooded with people bashing Siya Goyal for the past few days. Every time something like this happens, it gives people an excuse to blame feminism and turn it into another gender war, even though this wasn't a crime rooted in feminism.

I've seen so much outrage over this, especially on Pune pages. Yet there wasn't even 10% of this outrage when a 4-year-old girl was raped and murdered just a month ago.

The moment something horrific happens to a man at the hands of a woman, it becomes the argument people cling to for the rest of the year: "What about Atul Subhash?" "What about the blue drum case?" Meanwhile, women dying because of misogyny has become little more than another statistic.

If people showed even half this energy every time a woman or a child was raped or murdered, maybe I'd believe this outrage was actually about justice. Instead, it only seems to appear when a case can be used to score points in a gender war.

I'm exhausted by the hypocrisy. Every case involving a man becomes the latest example of "how feminism is destroying the world," while countless cases involving women barely register before everyone moves on.

Not only did this post have 600+ upvotes but also many awards.

URL: https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXIndia/s/zIMiLofJYb

ANOTHER GOLDEN COMMENT: next time they say men only spaces have misogynistic discussions show them this.

> but this will be taken out of context and add fuel to the fire fyi

Which is why this sub should be private. Women shouldn't have to self-censor themselves in their own spaces.

Url: https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXIndia/s/dJPAKbrVrI

What the actual heck? What is this?!!

So UK recently announced the changes.. but I have few questions:

1. If your wife cheats on you, is that a ground that may nullify it?

2. If your wife forces you to divorce by say being emotionally off, no intimacy, other valid violation of boundaries or changing what you all had decided before like habing kids etc..

3. Is it binary like if she doens't have a job, she gets the share, but if she has a job she doesn't?

4. What if the house is not fully paid for? Let's say the man was paying the house in small sums each month, what happens then?

I have come across some articles claiming that, the system assumes a man is perpetrator even when he is a victim. But as a non Australian, I didn't really get it. Can someone elaborate, exactly what it is...

So how do we even make it popular? Everytime something even happens, feminists will lobby first, they have UN and more than 1 women's rights organisation in every country. Even if someone points out the biased researches and flawed methodology, those won't show up on first page of search engines.

So at this point what should each countries' men do, to draw some attention to their issues too?

Laws That Are Structurally Biased Against Men in India

1. Section 498A IPC / Sections 85–86 BNS — Dowry Harassment

The law only recognises the husband or his relatives as possible accused. A wife has no equivalent liability under the same provision, even if she is the one causing cruelty. More critically, the husband does not enjoy the presumption of innocence when facing charges under Section 498A. **Under normal criminal law, the prosecution must prove guilt. Here, the accused must disprove it.** (You read it right!!!)

The offence is cognizable and non-bailable - meaning police can arrest without a warrant and bail is not a right. In quite a number of cases, bedridden grandfathers and grandmothers of the husband, and sisters living abroad for decades, have been arrested under this section. (You again read it right) The Supreme Court itself noted in 2014 that the provision had a "dubious place of pride amongst laws used as weapons rather than shields by disgruntled wives."

After giving interim bail, cases are referred to mediation where the man is kept in legal limbo neither arrested nor free attending court dates indefinitely without resolution.

2. Section 63 BNS — Rape

The law is written so that only a man can be a perpetrator, and only a woman can be a victim. A woman who sexually assaults a man commits no offence called rape under Indian law. Under BNS Section 63, rape is defined in a way where only women can be the victim and only a man can be the perpetrator.

Before BNS, Section 377 IPC covered non-consensual sexual offences regardless of gender. BNS has completely omitted this section. Relegating the rape of men and transgender persons to "grievous hurt" under Sections 114 and 115 of BNS trivialises the gravity of the crime — the maximum sentence under these sections is 7 years, compared to potential life imprisonment for rape under Section 63.

In practice, a man who is raped by a woman is legally treated as someone who received a beating, not a sexual violation.

3. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

The law by design covers only women as protected persons. A man being physically abused by his wife has no equivalent statute. He cannot get a protection order, a residence order, or monetary relief under this act. He must instead rely on general IPC provisions for assault, which carry no family-law-specific remedies like restraining orders or the right to stay in the shared home.

The asymmetry is structural: the same act of domestic violence is a specialised, fast-track legal remedy for a woman, and just a regular criminal complaint for a man, with entirely different access to courts, timelines, and relief.

4. Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013 (POSH)

The Act only applies when the complainant is a woman. An Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) is mandatory under POSH, but its mandate covers only women's complaints. A man sexually harassed by a female colleague or superior has no dedicated statutory mechanism, no ICC jurisdiction, and no defined investigation process. His only recourse is the general criminal law route, which has no workplace-specific provisions.

5. Section 144 BNSS (formerly Section 125 CrPC) — Maintenance

While the text of personal laws like the Hindu Marriage Act is technically gender-neutral, the BNSS maintenance provision is specifically written for "wives, children, and parents" — not husbands. In April 2025, the Supreme Court refused to make Section 125/144 gender-neutral, dismissing a PIL. The bench noted that any change must come from Parliament, and reiterated that maintenance is rooted in social justice for wives and children.

The law is designed such that a woman married for a single day is entitled to receive maintenance from her husband for life, until she remarries or dies. Duration of marriage, her educational qualifications, her family's income, her age, and her earning potential — all become legally irrelevant. The husband is duty-bound to pay. A husband seeking maintenance from an earning wife succeeds only in rare cases where he is genuinely incapacitated, and courts apply far stricter scrutiny to such claims.

6. Child Custody — Default Presumption Favouring Mothers

No statute explicitly says mothers win custody, but the judicial practice produces that outcome. Only 25% of men in marital conflicts were granted visitation rights by courts, and even those orders are frequently disregarded by the child's mother, according to a 2025 study by the Ekam Nyaay Foundation. Fathers who have been granted even limited visitation have no fast, effective enforcement mechanism when the mother refuses compliance.

7. BNS Section 69 — Sex on False Promise of Marriage

This section criminalises a man who has sex with a woman after making a false promise of marriage. The law is explicitly one-directional: only a man can be accused, only a woman can be the complainant. A woman who makes a false promise of marriage to a man, under which he consents to a relationship or financial commitment, faces no equivalent criminal liability.

🗳️ Part 2: Political Schemes & Policies Only for Women

BJP (Central Government)

- PM Ujjwala Yojana — Free LPG connections, primarily targeting women beneficiaries

- PM Matru Vandana Yojana — Cash transfer of ₹5,000 to pregnant and lactating mothers

- Beti Bachao Beti Padhao — Girl child welfare scheme

- Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam (Women's Reservation Bill, 2023) — Seeks to reserve one-third of seats in Parliament and state assemblies exclusively for women.

- Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana — Savings scheme only for girl children

AAP (Delhi)

- Mahila Samman Yojana — Announced ₹1,000/month cash transfer to all women over 18 in Delhi.

BJP/Mahayuti (Maharashtra)

- Majhi Ladki Bahin Yojana — Offers ₹1,500 monthly to women.

JMM-Congress (Jharkhand)

- Maiya Yojana — Provided ₹1,000 monthly to women, helping consolidate the alliance's electoral base.

Congress (Manifesto Promises)

- Promised 50% reservation of Central government jobs for women, re-incorporation of the Bharatiya Mahila Bank with an all-women Board of Directors, and night shelters for migrant women workers.

- One-third reservation in Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

DMK (Tamil Nadu)

- Kalaignar Magalir Urimai Thittam — ₹1,000/month cash transfer exclusively to women household heads.

West Bengal (BJP)

- All women to get free bus rides in state bus transportation and any women who doesn't have a government job will get ₹3000 thrown into her bank every single month.

This is a tight slap in face of feminism. They are busy fighting exactly which inequality??? There are many issues in rural provinces and misogynistic attitudes in society, but if you are fighting to get recognition as human beings, why are they not even saying anything about how this is open discrimination???

So tell me again, why exactly should a man even serve this nation?? When it doesn't do anything but humiliates you at every single step as a second class creature?