OPINION

What Rinku Sachdeva's Death Tells Us About Ourselves

March 27, 2008
Aditi Nadkarni

I had spent countless episodes cheering the efforts of Rama's army taking on Ravana and his aides in Ramanand Sagar's interpretation of the epic. And on one Sunday morning at age seven I watched, in shock, angry flames dancing in Sita's sorrowful eyes. And then she emerged, unharmed, passing with flying colors the "Agni Pariksha" (The Fire Test). Her crime? She had been kidnapped by Ravana and spent years in captivity.

Of course her character was under scrutiny having spent time with another man. The Indian audience cheered enthusiastically as the woman, a perennial epitome of sacrifice, once again put the insecurities of a man and a shallow society to rest by stepping into a fire. He was touted as the noble king and she the redeemed goddess. That she was then banished and sent away to the forest, pregnant and weary with wifely virtue is another story.

Then there was the beautiful and proud Ahilya, who through no fault of her own, was turned to stone by her furious husband, Sage Gautam, because the lecherous Lord Indra tricked her into bed. How sagely of him. The Weaver's Wife in Panchatantra had her nose cut off because she didn't heed her husband's call and he considered that a sign of her unfaithfulness.

The Manu Smriti dictated that a woman guilty of infidelity be torn to pieces by dogs. Apparently, the forgiveness and nonviolence preached in Hinduism is not for the women.

And the men? Well, the Gods had a million wives and pranced around with multiple Goddesses. They were the ones who as pious sages blessed the barren women with child and a countless hapless damsels with the grace of their espousal. In short, our mythology presents rationale for the age-old dictum that women equal sacrifice and virtue and men equal power and ego.

Come 2006 and Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna gave us a half-hearted, unexplained peek into infidelity and the song sprinkled a love story that sugar coated breakdown of matrimony. While the overtly reticent female protagonist is consumed with guilt at cheating on her loving husband, the glorious Khan has his pitiful limp and a career driven, neglecting wife to justify his attempt at adultery. Oh and I almost forgot, the female protagonist's major handicap throughout the film is her alleged and untested barrenness. The sad, withdrawn barren heroine and the attention seeking man neglected by his busy, working wife. Was it progressive? No. Was it realistic? In some ways, in spite of being a Karan Johar film, it actually was! Why? Because that is how Indian society in general views adultery and infidelity.

If a man cheats, he was neglected. If a woman cheats, she must've been depressed beyond belief. Result: extra marital affair. The box office success of Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna (Never Say Goodbye) quite literally laid out how our society has never bid farewell to the stereotypical equations in an Indian marriage.

But films, mythology and scriptures aside, this mentality has reared an uglier head with the recent Rinku Sachdeva murder.

Yes, I will only refer to it as a murder and not a suicide because I have no sympathy for an individual who held a pillow over the struggling, gasping face of a woman he once loved simply because he believed she was cheating and then hung himself to escape consequences. I went through comments on Deepti Lamba's eloquent and touching Rinku Sachdeva Dies Again Online and in the public profiles of the doomed couple.

Honestly I was even more shocked than I was at the murder itself upon seeing how many Indian men stepped forward to justify an unauthorized death penalty as a punishment for alleged adultery. They cited the case of Kiranjit Ahluwalia who after suffering 10 years of physical and emotional abuse, raising two sons who witnessed these harrowing episodes, set her husband's feet on fire "to show him how much it hurt."

Let us evaluate how much our reactionary crowd of moral police really knows about the Alhuwalia case. Let us try her again.

Did she do jail time? Yes. Was she evaluated by a psychiatric panel to determine if she suffered from any mental ailment at the time of committing the act? Yes. Multiple times. Was her abuse proven? Yes. Countless interviews with relatives, friends and her young sons demonstrated that she had endured years of abuse.

Most importantly, the guilt was first evaluated in a court of law. Contrary to popular belief, Kiranjit Alhuwalia was not just immediately found innocent but instead her case was changed from murder to manslaughter by reason of provocation. It only so happened that by the time this verdict came about she had already finished the required sentence for the crime. Those of you who have gathered their understanding of this case by watching the film Provoked, I suspect were likely so distracted by the weeping Ms.Rai that legal implications faded into the background.

How is this even comparable to the scenario in the Sachdeva murder?

The man did not murder his wife in self-defense or in response to proven abuse but on mere suspicion of infidelity. News reports document his own friends' narrations of instances of his suspicion, times when he recorded her conversations with colleagues insisting they were romantic in nature.

Rinku's public profile on Orkut shows pictures of her with her husband while his profile shows only his. A comment by his friend hints that his wife wasn't the only one Amit had a habit of spying on. A quick look at their scrapbooks and the mentality of a majority of Indians is revealed. There are people, young men even, leaving comments on the Orkut profiles of the two dead individuals and those truly inspire goosebumps. Some praise Amit as the hero who killed a cheating wife and taught all adulterous women a lesson. Some declare how she deserved it because of a "suspected affair." Some even went so far as to conclude that "if he murdered her surely she must've been cheating."

The comments in the murder victim's scrapbook are even more upsetting. A dead woman's character is ruthlessly tarnished by people who do not even know her. She has been pronounced guilty of adultery by people who have assumed that she was murdered for a cause.

Unfortunately, under the surface of his actions, Amit Buddhiraja leaves symptoms of why the marriage may have gone awry.

Insecurities, suspicion, lack of communication, trust and compatibility. Conspicuous among all these usual suspects, is his callous murder technique which also leads one to speculate if his underlying insensitivity may have driven the rift in the marriage and found fatal culmination in Rinku's helpless gasps under the pillow.

While no court of law can ever try either Rinku or Amit, the people who expose their mentality through their reactions and comments have demonstrated on the online world how a majority of Indians perceive marriage, relationships and women in general.

Their lack of respect for human rights, human life and their zeal in pronouncing people guilty based on conjecture is being revealed daily. The Rinku Sachdeva case is holding a mirror to the many men who in spite of qualifications and social status are uncomfortable with women's changing roles, their evolving interactions, their growing confidence in today's world where gender equality is gnawing at the roots of well-established and important socio-cultural constructs such as marriage.

The cliched claims of "Loose woman!" are rampant from those who don't feel that evidence of her alleged affair is even necessary. Even if evidence were to be found, would it justify murder? People abandon the basics of humanity to proclaim that one merely suspected with the loss of ethic is deemed punishable by a death sentence without receiving a fair trial.

So while it is not uncommon to hear of a jealous and suspicious man doing the unthinkable, we now have people mimicking the fanatical Taliban school of thought where men find justifications for why a woman's stoning was a well-deserved and fitting punishment for alleged adultery. Among us are people who through their opinions reveal their potential to kill another human being and find it in their hearts to rationalize their actions. There cannot be a bigger death of humanity. What have we come to?

And as an Indian woman I am disappointed, as always, but not surprised. I still feel like the seven-year-old who shuddered as the blameless Sita stepped into a fire without a trial. I still feel like the little girl who wondered why Sita didn't fight hard enough instead of sinking into the depths of the earth. Unlike Rinku Sachdeva, she did have a choice.

 

Aditi Nadkarni is a cancer researcher, a film reviewer and a poet; her many occupations are an odd yet fun miscellany of creative pursuits. Visit her blog for more of her articles and artistic as well as photographic exploits.
eXTReMe Tracker
Keep reading for comments on this article and add some feedback of your own!

Comments! Feedback! Speak and be heard!

Comment on this article or leave feedback for the author

#1
Deepti Lamba
URL
March 27, 2008
12:30 AM

Adi, yesterday someone known for her spiritual nature told me that Amit did the right thing by killing his wife. Her Taliban mentality left me dumbfounded.

#2
Vn
March 27, 2008
01:31 AM

Kiranjit Ahluwalia had no right to kill her husband. Nor did Amit have right to kill his wife.

Nor do we have to glorify Kiranjit. Nor do we have to glorify Amit. Such people are least of all anything but martyrs for any cause.

If Kiranjit had a chance, she must have walked away from marriage. So must have Amit. Howsoever tough it is.

Tagging it as Othello's syndrome is a drama done by people who suffer from Othello's FIL syndrome.

#3
Aditi Nadkarni
March 27, 2008
01:41 AM

Dee: A lot of these subconscious biases are revealed when something like this happens. And then the superficial spirituality goes for a toss. Hence the title of my article. I have seen that a lot of people feel it is perfectly ok to rationalize murder whereas I think it is as reflective of their character as the murder is of the perpetrator's psyche.

#4
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
02:34 AM

Aditi,

As for suicide note , He did not kill her because she has cheated him. but he killed her because he thought that she might file dowry harassment case against his parents and him if he divorces her.

whether his suspicions(dowry harassment case) are well founded or not , thats open to debate.

If she did has an affair, she should have divorced him rather than continuing in the background........


#5
Preeti
March 27, 2008
02:35 AM

My heart beats for Rinku's family who have lost their young daughter. May her soul rest in peace.

#6
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
02:40 AM

Aditi,

another thing you talk about new age boys who are not coming in terms with women independence. but i ca talk about girl who have the same problem....

They want money from their husbands and boyfriend(just like in earlier days). but given chance talk about equality and independence . New age girls want independence in freedom not in responsibility (sharing) particulary in earning money

thats also clearly double standards

#7
Preeti
March 27, 2008
02:40 AM

I read in another thread where a commentator said "Infidelity is the order of the day". I couldn't agree more.

Had someone told me 10 years ago that.. if I were to have a partner who would cheat on me I would freak out and not accept it. But the reality of today is this. Today I don't freak over that thought.

If I were to find out that my partner is cheating on me, I would not freak out, yes maybe feel upset over it for a few days but definitely would not think the end of the world.

When I see couples complete 35 yrs of marriage (like my parents) I am in awe of that. It seems so impossible today.... in my times.

Why?

Because the roles have changed and expectations have changed.
Gone are the days when women would be expected to play tradiotanl roles within the home and men were the providers. Today marriage is like a business, a service, a contract, it is all about ...........

what can you give me and in return this is what I can give.
this does not work for me.
pick up your stuff.
sticky notes left on the refrigerator.
don't expect this from me.
i need my space.
leave me alone.
respect my privacy.
my career is more important.
dinner together over the weekend only.


This is purely my observation.

In a relationship or marriage it is all about the SERVICE you can provide whether emotional, sexual , companionship, friendship,love, money etc. If the service fails from either partner, the other partner wants to venture out and try out something else. Thus we need tolerance and set aside our ego and let go and move on.

Marriage these days may not be the best option for all. Especially for men who want a working wife, her salary and her services and who needs to clean his home etc etc and who fear divorce is a threat to their family etc.

Men have to leann to accept that if they do not keep their wife happy or get too demanding, she may look for happiness out of the marriage.
Husbands who cannot stand to see their wife being successful at her work should seriously seek professional help.

So also for women who nag all day to their husbands, must realize that he too may look for peace someplace else.

If a wife finds her husband to be controlling, then please leave him right away.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call it expectation, call it service...each partner needs to excel in it in order to sustain the relationship or marriage. Once there is slip, it's all over. And even if that happens, have the courage to face it and move one.

Today the calling is ....it is all about how much you can tolerate and how much you can accomodate and NOT how much you can sacrifice and compromise. That is passe.

Relationships are all about service, offer the best or else you are out of the business.
If this one relationship did not work out, another one will. Move on....

#8
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
02:45 AM

I agree with vn . his lines are "Kiranjit Ahluwalia had no right to kill her husband. Nor did Amit have right to kill his wife.

Nor do we have to glorify Kiranjit. Nor do we have to glorify Amit. Such people are least of all anything but martyrs for any cause.

If Kiranjit had a chance, she must have walked away from marriage. So must have Amit. Howsoever tough it is. "

#9
Preeti
March 27, 2008
02:46 AM

Nagesh

Read the stuff on the other threads and stop making moronic statements. He has killed her because he was jealous and could not stand to loose her. That is the highlight of his letter.

If she had a problem, she could have left him but she did not and neither did she kill him.

Do you know he harrassed her for dowry? It is anyone's guess!

His friends admitted that he had several personality issues and was a loner and a hacker. He was a lunatic possessive husband whose pyschotic imagination led him to murder.

#10
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
03:08 AM

Aditi,
trust me i have read news papers. it says that was his insecurity(dowry harassment case).... I will paste you in short time..

If you are talking about his personality through hacking softwares...
then you are wrong i can safely say that you are not from IT field. Developing hacking software is of great skill, good number of people try to do that.

they take pride in that.

from that you cannot say that he is suspicious...

#11
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
03:16 AM

Preeti,
http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IE120080323233858&Page=1&Title=Bangalore&Topic=0

Excerpts from the suicide note : "From the first day after marriage, both of us were not compatible and we had regular fights. Recently I had picked up a fight with her (Rinku) and she had apologised to me. Despite our differences, I did not intend to divorce her as I love her and I had an intuition that if I applied for a divorce, she would accuse my family of dowry harassment. I did not give this a chance.''

#12
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
03:25 AM

Lastly i do not support killing. Killing somebody for these reasons are rubbish. no sane persons will support that. At the same time blaming amit only for this is not right. if whatever amit suicide note says is true, then rinku is also responsible for this may be in small measure.

#13
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
03:45 AM

Preeti,

I am surprised with this
"If she had a problem, she could have left him but she did not and neither did she kill him. :"

i can only say if you are cheating somebody , you are completely responsible whatever happens afterwards. you never know how other person reacts.

it may not be fair, but thats how it works....


#14
Preeti
March 27, 2008
05:20 AM

There is no need to be surprised. Amit was very clear in his intentions. People who support murder like you, are to share the responsibilty of this murder in big measure.

The cheating --what is the proof?

Amit as declared by his male friends had a "peeping tom" mental problem and was always prying on their computers which is invasion of someones privacy and is illegal--he was already a criminal at work. If my employee does this I would fire him.

He was a lunatic, demented and an innocent lady (Rinku) had to bear the brunt of his pychotic pathetic imagination!

#15
Preeti
March 27, 2008
05:29 AM

Nagesh,

You may rely on the excerpts. Not me. I have better judgement and trust my intelligence unlike you. I do not want to believe a murderor who had just killed his wife mercilessly and then wrote a letter and then committed suicide himself.

His friends have called him a jerk and nothing short of that, including his own Uncle who stated that Amit had planned all this. But like always, a murderor leaves his marks behind and so did Amit. What with his friends revealing his insane "peeping tom" problems. Hacking is not to be proud of but it is a CRIME.

#16
Anamika
March 27, 2008
06:08 AM

Aditi - great post but unfortunately wasted totally on the loons that populate the web.

Btw, I hated the Ramayana even as a child when my grandmother told us the story at bedtime. By the time I was nine, I argued with her - which wasn't much of an argument because she agreed with me. As a result we never watched the TV extravaganza. And by the time I was ten, I was even more surprised that my grandmother decided it was okay for me to not step into a Rama-temple - I would stand outside and glower instead, willing the statue to notice my disapproval. :-)

I still don't go into Rama temples. And the older I get the more I prefer Shiva - especially in the shivalingam forms - at least that particular deity has a role for women that is more than sacrificing or dishrag. But yes, remind the loony men of Durga/Kali/Amba and they run for their lives. I always wonder why more Indian women don't use those as their role models than that weepy, passive Sita.




#17
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
06:13 AM

I am not supporting him. what He did was wrong.... for simple life is too precious to do that

but at that same time,I believe if rinku had an affair, then she was no innocent(don't ask for proof i dont have any thats why i wrote "if").

I dont agree with you that anybody who develops hacking software and tests that on his "friends" machines is suspicious by nature.

Have you heard about ethical hacking. read in google

if his friends are not happy with his hacking software, they would have reported it to management team. they did not. from that you can understand if you want.

how do you know that his friends called him jerk

when in college , few of my friends used to get password of other mail account and they used to tell that them and others also. that does not mean that they are suspicious by nature........

#18
ravi
March 27, 2008
06:43 AM

in the suicide note amit wrote this....
link: http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IE120080323233858&Page=1&Title=Bangalore&Topic=0

"From the first day after marriage, both of us were not compatible and we had regular fights. Recently I had picked up a fight with her (Rinku) and she had apologised to me. Despite our differences, I did not intend to divorce her as I love her and I had an intuition that if I applied for a divorce, she would accuse my family of dowry harassment. I did not give this a chance.''

"We shared no decent physical or emotional relationship. Until recently we were sharing one bedroom. Few months ago she went to Muscat to her parents and after she returned, she preferred to stay in another bedroom. She was always on her mobile phone, either SMSing or talking to someone, behind closed doors. From her indifferent behaviour, I suspected that she had an affair with someone. On March 20, I placed my laptop with a camera switched on in her bedroom.

On March 21, I saw that she was talking to one of her colleagues and she had expressed her love for him. From her gestures I understood that she had an affair with him''.

"Rinku told me that if she ever found out that I had an extra-marital affair, she would murder me and then commit suicide. I have only followed her idea''.

"I bequeath all my property, including money and other valuables to my mother''.

#19
ravi
March 27, 2008
07:08 AM

it is clear that he is not jealous about his wife success or changing roles in the society. It is a fear of false case make him take this step.

#20
ravi
March 27, 2008
07:09 AM

it is clear that he is not gelous about his wife success or changing roles in the society. It is a fear of false case make him take this step.

#21
Seema
March 27, 2008
07:23 AM

he killed the woman based on an intuition and a mere suspicion?!! just ended a life by putting a pillow on her face? whatever happened to anticipatory bail? or was he just absolutely sure his guilt would be proven if such a case were filed? maybe there was ample evidence of harassment and so he killed her to escape the consequences. and you guys are comparing that to the alhuwalia case and justifying his actions? god bless india. i agree with aditi, the reactions of people are more shocking than the murder itself (i read comments on some of the other threads).

#22
pawan
March 27, 2008
07:24 AM

Hacking is not to be proud of but it is a CRIME.
lol!!! I am sure u dont know ABCD of IT!

#23
Sumanth
March 27, 2008
08:41 AM

Feminists,

There you go again.

In stead of giving men a voice to speak, you force all half baked theories bringin in Rama, epics and patriarchy.

This puts many women in dangerous situation. It is a proven fact that women in bidirectional are in real danger. Just to prove your point, you feminists are misleading women and making them take risks with their men.

Any man who is threatened for prolonged period will be violent. A man hounded and hunted with threats, defamation, loss of job and jailing of his parents will be violent. Full Stop.

Very little can be done about it.

Women should think of their safety first and must sense the mental state of a the husband. Rinku's parents are saying Amit was unstable. If so, then why did they allowed her to take chances? A marriage can always be saved from a distance.

The arguement that women keep paying by their lives till men change themselves is pathetic.

The feminists force women into confrontation and egg on women to abuse and threaten men/husbands all the while denying men a voice.

Amit stayed in Infy for 9 years. That shows he was a stable guy. The author in this article clearly avoids the "fear of false case" angle to drive her point.

This is the exact reason why we do not think that radical feminism in not helpful for women.

A suicicidal man can kill just like so many suicidal women kill their children before killing themselves.

The feminists have not been able to reduce violence of men on women in US even after 40 years of activism because of their confrontationist approach. The same they are doing again in India.

Its their choice.







#24
Ayan Roy
URL
March 27, 2008
09:27 AM

Mars and Venus engaging in full fledged war against each other while poor Earth suffers...

In my opinion, men and women exist to complement and give company to each other. Not to fight and kill. Unless of course nature/God has decided gender war as one of the ways to control the population of the Earth. But that would be very painful and terrible.

Ego, self-indulgence and lack of compassion is the root of all problems. We should all learn to be more compassionate. Constant pampering of the ego will not lead to true happiness.

Love and peace to all,
Ayan


#25
Ayan Roy
URL
March 27, 2008
09:27 AM

Mars and Venus engaging in full fledged war against each other while poor Earth suffers...

In my opinion, men and women exist to complement and give company to each other. Not to fight and kill. Unless of course nature/God has decided gender war as one of the ways to control the population of the Earth. But that would be very painful and terrible.

Ego, self-indulgence and lack of compassion is the root of all problems. We should all learn to be more compassionate. Constant pampering of the ego will not lead to true happiness.

Love and peace to all,
Ayan


#26
Ayan Roy
URL
March 27, 2008
09:30 AM

I am sorry for the double post. The page was not getting updated for a long time after the first "Publish" click, so I clicked "Publish" again.

Love and Peace to all,
Ayan

#27
Nagesh
March 27, 2008
10:43 AM

Pawan

have you heard about ethical hacking. do google.how do you say i don't know about IT. I am working in it.


#28
temporal
URL
March 27, 2008
12:02 PM

Sumanth babu lying again!

In stead of giving men a voice to speak, you force all half baked theories bringin in Rama, epics and patriarchy....

* are von-siffers the only men around?
* has access to keyboard denied to him and other cyber jehadists?
* should people read ONLY von siffers lies and half baked ideas?

keep on lyin' babu

#29
Vn
March 27, 2008
12:19 PM

temp bhai

please read literature of surphanaka, durga, kali and kiranjit. please play it over and over and then blame every man as a von siffer.

#30
reader, sweden
March 27, 2008
12:37 PM


May their souls rest in peace! Majority of people seem to believe whatever Amith had written in the suicide note. The note itseems was very well written and was not written in a haste. Clearly, Amith needed some therapy/help. It is also possible that he had it all planned it for a while. Isn't it possible that he was a sociopath? (Even after killing her, he didn't leave her alone in death. He had to rationalize his actions and ruin her reputation?) Is't it possible that he doubted a platonic relationship/friendship?
An abuser can given any number of excuses why he yells, beats, kills, hates,hurts etc., and can do it very convincingly. Unfortunately we don't know the wife's side of the story. I wish he had given her a chance to write her last note.

#31
PH
URL
March 27, 2008
02:09 PM

Aditi,

Wonderful post indeed. There is lovely Gujju poem criticizing Ram and praising Sita for the post agnee pareekshaa thing.

And, like Anamika, it was one of my main complaints with Ram worshippers. Not my kind of maryaadaa purush

#32
Lexiss
March 27, 2008
02:10 PM


@Nagesh,
Fear of dowry harassment or infidelity is no justification for murder. It it were, it would mean any guy can murder his wife and then claim he feared dowry harassment.

You pasted a newspaper clipping "Despite our differences, I did not intend to divorce her as I love her and I had an intuition that if I applied for a divorce, she would accuse my family of dowry harassment."

He says he loved her. Can you kill someone you love ? And do you murder on the basis of intuition ? Doesn't this statement itself prove that he was a nutcase.

Then you go on and write
"i can only say if you are cheating somebody , you are completely responsible whatever happens afterwards. you never know how other person reacts. it may not be fair, but thats how it works...."

Well, the reaction has to be proportional to the problem, if a shopkeeper overcharges you, thats also cheating, you don't go and kill the shopkeeper, similarly infidelity (whether true or false) does not justify violence.

Sane people give a proportional reaction. This guy was a nutcase.

I don't think Hacking has anything to do with this incident or the guy's personality.

Another person pastes more clipping "She was always on her mobile phone, either SMSing or talking to someone, behind closed doors. From her indifferent behaviour, I suspected that she had an affair with someone."

Do you see - "Suspected". He has no evidence at all, only suspicion. What kind of person murders on suspicion and fear ? "Nutcase".



Regarding Ramayana, If there were a competition "Who is the biggest looser among Hindu gods?" I would vote for Ram. Reasons being
1. Being sent to the woods was unfair. I expect a god to stand against unfair treatment. Ram was no god.
2. Killing Ravan was no great deed. You kidnap anyone's wife, he would surely come and try to fight you. Nothing godly about it.
3. If he couldn't stand for the wife he killed Ravan for, why did he fight for her in the first place. She was probably better off with Ravan. My gods don't banish their wives under pressure.

#33
Avinash
March 27, 2008
03:16 PM

Amit was so convinced about the presumptions he had..(which is anyway hogwash)then...

He could have killed his own parents and then himself. That way he could have solved the problem permanently- the fear that he had about false case ( which is BS anyways). This is the best solution.

I would highly recommend Rinku's parents to file a case on Amit's parents on possibly "instigating their son to kill his wife".

The doubt can easily be placed on Amit's mother in whose name he has left his entire property. The parents already might have known that they have a lunatic crazy son, so it was easy to influence him and get him and his wife out of the way so that they could enjoy his money.

His parents can even NOW be placed behind bars easily.

If Amit's action was such a sacrifice and some &#@#$# asses think of him to a fucking martyr, the truth of the matter is that he has shamed his parents for the rest of their life and left them behind with legal implications.

Karma karma karma...it all comes back. Amit's parents sowed some seeds and they will bear the fruit now.

Hozzat that Sumanth??? Stop jumping around now. It is all over for you anyways.

People who support murder, even they belong behind bars.

#34
Avinash
March 27, 2008
03:19 PM

Please point a law to me that says, if the son/husband sucides, the parents of the husband still cannot be held suspects for dowry harassment.

Since we do not have "Rinku's last letter", (since the poor innocent soul had no clue that while she would be asleep a coward lunatic monster was going to attack her in her helpless state) we cannot rule out the possibilty of dowry harassment.

His parents can even NOW be placed behind bars easily.

#35
Avinash
March 27, 2008
03:21 PM

A bunch of a^@#$%es sniffers/dogs who want to distract the focus from the real underlying cause of this mishap (i.e Amit was an insecured idiot and his friends have pointed that too) because they have their own vested interests.

Kindly read up what Amit's friends have said about him and his sick demented mental state including his own Uncle.

#36
Avinash
March 27, 2008
03:22 PM

Hacking is a crime. Period.

#37
slk
March 27, 2008
04:37 PM

Why do we have so many incidents in recent times where men kill their partners suspecting infidelity?
The reason is, with the IT boom majority of the newly rich are nerds who like all nerds in the world have a simple lifestyle. But somehow a lot of them end up with women who have the opposite lifestyle. The nerds usually have late nights due to work and the opposite is to do late nights for drinking, partying and other stuff. This is obviously a mismatch.

Now why do they end up with each other. This is due to a basic difference between men and women, which has been like that for thousands of years.
If a man drinks or smokes or does other such stuff he will tell the woman about it. But a woman will never tell a man that she drinks, smokes etc. Men will always try to project themselves as brave and/or rich, while women always project themselves as homely, virtuous, caring etc. The reason they do that is because that is what the other person expects, it is in our genes since stone age and even earlier. Now when it comes to the nerds most of them like to marry a beautiful homely girl but majority of them end up disappointed. While women always want to marry to be secure and they usually marry a person richer then them and they expect them to be brave. I mean you never see a female doctor marrying a male nurse and a businesswoman marry a male air steward.
Men are not as narrow minded as women think. For Every Rinku who is killed there are thousands more women with similar stories who have divorced their husband and married their boyfriends or continue to live with their husband even after the husband is aware of the affair or suspects an affair. Even in ancient times the women were rarely killed unless the law mandates it. It was always the men involved in th affair who is at risk. Remember the famous Nanavathi case which changed our legal system. One of my own friend and another far relative had separated from their wives immediately after the marriage but not because the wife was having an affair. Strangely in both the cases the women were most independent and they choose to marry the guy. But after marriage they could not forget their old loves and wanted to go back. One of them wanted to separate within 2 days of the marriage and the other after couple of weeks.
Now, Why do so many men support Amit's action? The reason is as women become more and more independent more and more men feel cheated and exploited. If you look at all such incidents where the women are killed you will find that in almost all the cases the girl is not a nerd. In almost all the cases the women would have used the guys to get a better job, to go abroad(US/UK), higher society life etc. Then they typically want the best of everything, money, love and pleasure which is almost next to impossible. And even worse some marry to hurt her ex-boyfriend or something silly as that. So obviously the marriage will not work. My friend met his ex-wife alone many times before marriage and asked her if she liked him and she was always happy and within 2 days of marriage she told him she had a boyfriend and she cannot live without him. The story is he was a rich politician's son and she wanted to marry him but he did not want to marry then, so she decided to marry my friend. But just before the marriage he called her and told that he could not forget her, so she decided to go back to him. While my friend a very honest person with no girlfriends in his life tried to live with her saying that now since they are married , forget the past and try to make the best of what we have . He even took her to a counselor but it did not work. It was the same case with another guy a far relative of mine.
Most men lie about wealth and health, so when the truth is found the impact on the marriage is not much and women lie avoid their lifestyle and character and when the truth comes out in both the cases the happiness goes out of the marriage. In the women's case they are disappointed to know the truth and some of them are driven towards an affair. But for men due to our society and their own expectations it is a total disaster. If it is money they can make it but this they cannot help it. As long as women do not show their real colors before marriage guys will always marry the wrong women and it will end in discontent and in rare cases a murder and sometimes a suicide. But only about one in thousands of such women get killed. In other cases innocent women who come into the lives of such men suffer.
Some women like Deepti, Aditi and Preeti have been accusing men of concluding that Rinku was having an affair when the men really do not know. But they themselves have been accusing Amit without any evidence. If Rinku was really having an affair I really pity that guy for the kind of torture he had been through, though leave alone killing I feel we do not have the right to even hurt anyone. But it is not easy for a man (or a woman) to accept that he (or she) cannot satisfy his woman (or a man). There are two types of torture, physical and mental and mental torture is the worse. If Kiranjit Ahluwalia can be pardoned the any person who has suffered mental torture can also be pardoned. So stop accusing the men and try to find what is wrong with the modern women. Does freedom mean freedom in everything? I mean a person does not have freedom to kill anyone he likes or dislikes. The freedom a person gets should be used in such a way that nobody in the present or future should be negatively affected by it. There is only two ways to this. Either live according to the expectations of others or live with people who have the same expectations and dreams as you. This cannot be achieved as long as you are not truthful.

#38
Aditi Nadkarni
March 27, 2008
07:33 PM

Thanks Anamika and PH! :)

#39
Man Singh
URL
March 27, 2008
08:25 PM

"Even if evidence were to be found, would it justify murder?"

Says Aditi. It is absolutely right.

"As for suicide note , He did not kill her because she has cheated him. but he killed her because he thought that she might file dowry harassment case against his parents and him if he divorces her." saya Nagesh # 4

Clearly none knows the truth. We all are producing our opinions based on certain assumptions carrying gross percentage of error.

Still bottom line is that Murdering a women and committing suicide both acts are acts of cruelty and can not be justified in a civil society.

Let's not make it a man vs women affair. It is simple case of humanity and inhumanity.

There may be many greedy women who might have muredered or associated with murder of their husbands.

Any human may be criminal and cruel man or women.

It was acrime against humanity and can not be justified.

#40
ravi
March 27, 2008
08:31 PM

temporal

!!!should people read ONLY von siffers lies and half baked ideas?!!!

NO temporal, von pro-feminists are also welcome.

#41
ravi
March 27, 2008
09:00 PM

avinash beta..

!!!I would highly recommend Rinku's parents to file a case on Amit's parents on possibly "instigating their son to kill his wife". !!!

finally, you came with your own agenda, am i right?

It may be possible that, now also dowry harassment can file on his parents, but is there any strong proof? But there is a proof( suicide note) which will work against them isn't it? As we know failing a false dowry case at any time is the fantasy of feminists and their side kicks. may be their parents now easily get anticipatory bail (because of the suicide note by amit which clearly says the intention).

if anybody feels threat of false case they can kill their parents and themselves...another feminist and their sidekicks fantasy. But believe me no one will do this. because, now she can get his entire property, which many men won't like to give their adulterous women or 498a women's brothers. so don't think it will happen.

Some men are feeling amit's act is martyr and so on..yeah,me too feel it is not good. But what about some women who feels that killing men for domestic violence is right. don't say no one feel like that, just go and read news papers or our popular movies which portray women as kali, durga, chandi's incarnation. All will teach the same thing. I read news which feminists arguing that domestic violence making women as criminals (giving a feeling like, there is an excuse).

coming to insecurities, who is not insecure, every one is insecure. men insecure of 498a, feminists insecure of amendments in 498a. But one thing is not clear, even after reading a suicide note also people are trying to file false cases or encouraging others put false cases is really really pathetic. And people here understand the mentality of the people who are arguing pro and against amit's act. so don't worry about that.

#42
ravi
March 27, 2008
09:03 PM

avinash beta..

!!!I would highly recommend Rinku's parents to file a case on Amit's parents on possibly "instigating their son to kill his wife". !!!

finally, you came with your own agenda, am i right?

It may be possible that, now also dowry harassment can file on his parents, but is there any strong proof? But there is a proof( suicide note) which will work against them isn't it? As we know filing a false dowry case at any time is the fantasy of feminists and their side kicks.But amit's parents now easily get anticipatory bail (because of the suicide note by amit which clearly says the intention).

if anybody feels threat of false case they can kill their parents and themselves...another fantasy. But believe me no one will do this. because, now she can get his entire property, which many men won't like to give to their adulterous wife or 498a women's brothers. so don't think it will happen.

Some men are feeling amit's act is martyr and so on..yeah,me too feel it is not good. But what about some women who feels that killing men for domestic violence is right. don't say no one feel like that, just go and read news papers or our popular movies which portray women as kali, durga, chandi's incarnation. All will teach the same thing. I read news which feminists arguing that domestic violence making women as criminals (giving a feeling like, there is an excuse).

coming to insecurities, who is not insecure, every one is insecure. men insecure of 498a, feminists insecure of amendments in 498a. But one thing is not clear, even after reading a suicide note also people are trying to file false cases or encouraging others put false cases is really really pathetic. And people here understand the mentality of the people who are arguing pro and against amit's act. so don't worry about that.

#43
ravi
March 27, 2008
09:05 PM

please read #42, which is better from #41 which have more typos.

#44
Aditi Nadkarni
March 27, 2008
09:57 PM

I think #37 validates the points I raised about the mentalities of Indians being revealed by this case.

Man Singh: Thanks for getting the point.

#45
Avinash
March 28, 2008
12:05 AM

Amit said in his letter that he loves(until death do them apart) his wife alot but will not divorce her(in other words not give her freedom) but will not hesitate to kill her( because claery he is jealous) and somewhere threw in a dowry angle. Lunatic

If Amit was being threatened by Rinku, he could have easily taken AB and so also his parents. Obviously he did not feel the need to do so.

-------------------------

Ravi--the big boy

were you in the bathroom while writing your chinglish in your 'fantasy world'. I have told you before, stop reading my comments and appreciating them. You need to learn english first, then law, and stop your act of fantasy. Get a life!

#46
ravi
March 28, 2008
01:15 AM

More than English,logic and common-sense are very important. I have them both enough. you continue..with your English, and please refrain from spread conspiracies.

As far as law, if you have enough knowledge to use google, that is sufficient. Can you tell me where i missed the law.

#47
ravi
March 28, 2008
01:23 AM

replace the statement, "please refrain from spread conspiracies" by "please refrain from spreading gossips". As you know that i am not good in english.. ;)

#48
Vn
March 28, 2008
01:37 AM

Avinash, on a nice laughing note, you seem to love english words like "chinglish", is that a new word?

First thing is stop advise others to learn english. Just because you are superior in a language does not mean you can start your stupid banters on ravi. Period. This is not the way of speaking to anyone.

Even if you don't respect a man, learn the basics of speaking.

#49
Chandra
March 28, 2008
01:42 AM

May be i am reading the wrong newspapers or dont care anymore but I haven't heard of either of these individuals! Either way, relationships are complicated and as men we are confronting one of the greates changes that our society has seen in many years - The empowerement of women. Much of this change is from what many men have seen in their own homes (the roles of their mother and father). Naturally, the response to this change is different between different men. Some are able to cope well while many others cannot. Whatever the merits and justification, one should realise that it is not easy for men to deal with this change. Having said that, I see many now accepting this change and moving on. I think we should continue to highlight the hypocrisy of such men/women and hope others learn from it. At the end of the day it is about social change and should not become a debate about men vs women.

#50
Nagesh
March 28, 2008
01:57 AM

Lexiss,
I agree with you most of the cases..
"infidelity is no justification for murder" agreed.... but would like to add one more thing those who do this(boy or girl) are no angels.I believe that because they are hurting the other person's trust. I believe thats the greatest sin. reason is here that other person won't able to trust any other person in his life time.

"Fear of false dowry harassment" if its true.. i can say yes... most people won't think of their father or mother(particularly) in jail. it puts them corner. they can do anything at that time. no reasoning required...

"He says he loved her." the moment anybody realises that other person cheats you . their won't be any love. there will be only revenge

"Well, the reaction has to be proportional to the problem'
agree. but here its fear of dowry harassment that put him in corner.. yes it looks like from the news article its just intuition. then you can say he was nutcase.


"Do you see - "Suspected". He has no evidence at all, only suspicion."

no. he mention there how all he started getting suspicious. then he recorded their conversation by webcam(mentioned in news artcile). then only he decided she had an affair...





#51
Nagesh
March 28, 2008
02:01 AM

Avinash,
if you think "Hacking is a crime. Period."
no problem.

#52
Anamika
March 28, 2008
05:06 AM

#51: One doesnt THINK hacking is a crime. It IS a crime - there are laws stipulating punishment for hacking. Its a bit like saying "I think breaking and entering another person's home is a crime." NO! You don't need to "think" that - it IS a crime with specific laws attached.

GROW UP!

#53
Vn
March 28, 2008
05:16 AM

Looking into another person's orkut profile and posting into DC is also crime? Did you get special permission to print it on blogsites? This is also Hacking! The public way of hacking.

Times of India published the suicide note! Is that ot hacking?

Printing from Times of India is not hacking!

The author is perfectly right to point to public profiles of person on orkut. This is the worst hacking!

#54
Nagesh
March 28, 2008
05:41 AM

Anamika,

I can only say that hacking to friends system(thats what amit did) is not crime.Thats what i meant when i said that. just do google on ethical hacking. h

#55
smallsquirrel
March 28, 2008
06:50 AM

wow this is truly eyeopening.

I will say this, most of the men on this board are doing NOTHING good for the reputation of desi men worldwide.

for the love of God where do all these morons come from?

great post aditi, sorry it was fowled by troglodytes/

#56
smallsquirrel
March 28, 2008
06:51 AM

ahem, early morning... meant fouled. (although I guess a lot of these dudes are chicken....)

#57
Anamika
March 28, 2008
09:07 AM

Public profiles on orkut, facebook etc are one thing, Nagesh. Listening to other people's phone conversations, hacking into their private email accounts, or any other system are QUITE another. Those are both crimes and punishable by law. And yes, that means even if you hacked into a friend's system or a family member's email account, those are STILL crimes and when filed in a case of law punishable as crimes. Btw, hacking into limited profiles or accessing parts of a profile that is restricted is ALSO a crime.

I suggest you get yourself a basic guide to laws regarding the internet.

Vn - obviously your grasp of English doesn't extend to the definition of hacking. Posting on a public site such as DC is similar to writing a letter to the editor of a newspaper. It is governed by similar legal restrictions - ie there is absolutely no reason why offensive posts ought not to be deleted by the editors, and when published/posted are governed by similar rules. Btw, this means that rules regarding defamation and libel ALSO apply - something that the google/wikipedia post-nasty-stuff-anonymously nutters tend to forget.



#58
Nagesh
March 28, 2008
09:34 AM

Anamika,

As long as your your friends does not any have objections. it should be ok to hack to his systems.


I will give another example htting is also crime.
that does not make me criminal if i hit my friend if my friend is ok with it.

You do not looking at my point. what i was trying to say is that Amit hacking of friends systems does not make him criminal or suspicious by nature. he was just showing his skill to his friends..

#59
Ledzius
March 28, 2008
09:46 AM

SS, good that you got out of India just in time, eh?

#60
Ledzius
March 28, 2008
09:49 AM

Also not all Indian men are Siffers.. I am sure the majority of them view Amit's actions as inexcusable.

This is kinda like Islamic terrorism. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the few who are give the rest of them a bad name.

#61
Vn
March 28, 2008
10:03 AM

Ledzius,

Offcourse Amit's action is inexcusable. Majority of SIFFERs also think the same.

#62
Vn
March 28, 2008
10:11 AM

Anamika, please scroll down and see what DC has written.

"This site and all content © Desicritics.org and the respective authors. All Rights Reserved. In other words: articles are posted on Desicritics with the kind permission of the authors. The authors retain all rights to their work and articles found on this site may not be posted elsewhere without the express permission of the author."

Similaraly orkut has the same, so has ToI,

so do you have special permission to print or comment what is on other people's profile?

The author has repeatedly pointed to orkut profiles. This is wrong and also comes within hacking!

#63
Anamika
March 28, 2008
10:45 AM

Vn - I assume your other SIFFER buddies have the same level IQ? Birds (or idiots) of a feather and all that...especially since you make such noise about laws in India when you actually cant comprehend basic logic.

Keep going - you're doing a really good job for SIFFers Inc.

#64
Vn
March 28, 2008
10:50 AM

Thank you.

#65
Anamika
March 28, 2008
10:56 AM

Nagesh, ok so Amit was showing off his hacking skills by breaking into his friend's systems. And no, they didn't bring a case against him. On the other hand, all that demonstrates was that he was a criminal, and probably a good one, who could have hacked into other systems too....including those of people who didn't approve or agree or even know of his hacking.

You gave me the example of your friend hitting you. So here goes a simple example: your friend is great at opening safes and breaking into banks. He shows you how he can break into your safe. And no you don't report him to the police. But if you then trust him around your safes - you are seriously gullible - and if the bank gets robbed, you will surely suspect your friend.

Fact remains that Amit's hacking skills simply demonstrate that he was capable of doing so...it doesn't make him an IT genius but simply yet another petty criminal who used his skills to be a virtual peeping tom. Oddly enough between all the screaming you lot have been doing, there is little information whether his wife was happy with having him hack into her internet accounts etc.

The more you go on about his hacking skills, the better case you build for Amit being a criminal who was scared of being booked for his crimes - no, not for dowry but for hacking and privacy invasion.

The guy was a petty criminal who ended up as a murderer. Just the kind of man you want to anoint as the SIFFer saint/martyr. Jao mala chadhao and aarti utaaro...kya gazab ka hero hai!

#66
Vn
March 28, 2008
11:02 AM

Anamika,

Don't get me wrong :-) I cannot actually comprehend laws. I read one line and have to re-read it to understand. Don't take this post of mine as a reply to your post.

I have been trying to read the law, and it is so vague. It is beyond me. Need atleast 2 cups of coffee to get over one. again nothing against you or others.

Just how I cope with these laws.

#67
FF
URL
March 28, 2008
11:58 AM

*choking on laughter and wiping tears from my eyes*

Hey guys enjoy your stint here. These are girls gone wild.

Feminism is now officially a mental illness.

There are some, Who think that if I visit howstuffworks.com, read on how lock and levers operate and share that information with my friends, It means I am a potential thief.

These nerds borrow the logic from the the same clan which believes "Every p***s bearing male is a potential rapist".

Hey guys, Do not argue with fools, people may not know the difference.

#68
Aditi Nadkarni
March 28, 2008
12:03 PM

FF "There are some, Who think that if I visit howstuffworks.com, read on how lock and levers operate and share that information with my friends, It means I am a potential thief"

Not so. But if you do end up robbing somebody or ending up in someone's house having broken in, evidence does support the theory that you may have been planning to commit robbery. Police often use computer searches and literature as evidence to support motive of murder and I do not think that the world's law enforcement is on any feminist rampage.

Oh and btw, feminism aside, you guys are using a killer as your poster boy to fight an unjust law. Thats like "fighting for peace" or "screwing for virginity".

#69
slk
March 28, 2008
12:23 PM

So many comments and everybody seem to have narrow view. There is lot more to it then what we have heard.

Now what if Amit had not killed his wife and just committed suicide. Most of the women would have not commented or would have still supported Rinku and the guys would have blamed Rinku, both for the wrong reasons.

We do not know if Rinku really had an affair. But Amit suspected. Most of the women feel that they should have the right and freedom to have an affair. Preethi had mentioned that she will not be shocked to find her partner having an affair, "It is normal".

This is the root cause of all problems. Either your views are wrong or you have the wrong friends who poison your mind.

Marriage and family is not a party it is all about compromise. If a person does not want to compromise and is not prepared for it then they should not marry. Forget the spouse, when you have kids you HAVE TO compromise.

I feel that at the slightest indication of any suspicion we should try to resolve it. Either by changing your lifestyle or by gaining you spouse's confidence.

And if it does not work or if you are attracted to another person separate immediately from the current partner before starting anything new. There is a reason why most countries have a law that you should be divorced before you can marry again. If you do not do this you are a cheat and I do not see how people can support this until their views are skewed.

But now with regards to Amit and Rinku, he was suspecting that she was having an affair for a long time. If she was aware of it and did not try to change anything then he would obviously have been frustrated and depressed. This leads to very low self esteem, loss of sleep etc.

And if she was really having an affair and was continuing with it despite his suspicion then it is even worse. Though Rinku cannot be blamed for the deaths, she is to be blamed for not preventing it either by walking out of a bad marriage or by ending the affair (if she was having one) or by changing her lifestyle to avoid any suspicion.

My wife used to watch a lot of movies before marriage but after marriage she stopped going out for movies as I disliked watching movies. I liked spending most of my free time at the club or playing games. We both like traveling and outdoor activities, so now we spend most of the time doing what we both like. We have to find some common ground. It does not work if we sometimes do what the other person likes and other times expect the other person to do what you like. What happens is always one of them is not enjoying what they do. It is all about compromise and good communication. Arrogance and ego only complicate it.

#70
FF
URL
March 28, 2008
12:34 PM

Amit was a consequence and not the Cause.

Society prepares the crime, the criminal commmits it.

The earlier the society learns about it, the better it will be. It is not my society alone, it is everybody's society.

A society which thinks crimes can be stopped by killing the accused, a society which does not learn from its experiences is doomed.

My bad days are over, I have seen the worst and I can only hope for better, no matter where I go from here. But for others keep in mind "What Goes Around Comes Around".



-Happy Blogging-

#71
Avinash
March 28, 2008
12:35 PM

vn,

Glad I could make you laugh. Thanks but no thanks for you offer. I am not interested in your "respecting classes full of saga" and I pay 2 fucking hoots to your or side kick-Ravis sentiments.

Stick to the point.

#72
A.K.Rathor
March 28, 2008
01:55 PM

Extending the points raised in #70 -

Long back, Jaya Bachhan asked the same question in Parliament to Shiv Raj Patil(HM) -

"Has the Govt. done enough to go into the root cause of criminal mind-set?"

It took Shiv Raj Patil 2 minutes to understand the question after 3-4 people explained it to him. Even then he couldn't come up with any suitable answer !!!

The current lot of politicians understands that.
If the problem is solved from its root, they will be left with no issue to divide and rule!!!

Every one looks for working on the symptoms and not for the actual cure!!!

By doing that on DC, we are just playing in the hands of the politicians.


#73
Vn
March 28, 2008
02:44 PM

Seems my laugh stuck onto you. I am more glad

#74
temporal
URL
March 28, 2008
09:16 PM

Offcourse Amit's action is inexcusable. Majority of SIFFERs also think the same.

really?

chalo allah/bhagwan nay bhee declare kerdiya


***

(comprehension-challenged acquires a new dimension)

#75
ravi
URL
March 29, 2008
01:32 AM

why all comments are deleted?

#76
Nagesh
March 29, 2008
01:52 AM

Anamika,

You consider someone criminal if he can hack to his friends system.(even friends don't have objection to it).

I can't say anything more......


Go on like this .....................


The only i brought that point here is that few people are saying he has supsicious nature from his hacking skillls...

if you think like nothing to say...........

enjoy..........

#77
Aditi Nadkarni
URL
March 29, 2008
02:41 AM

It frankly is not about hacking...its the stuff he did. He set up sniffers to monitor what other people did on their computers. That is representative of his suspicious nature. It just goes to show that the so called affair may have been his imagination. He just seems like an insecure man with a beautiful wife who would do anything for attention and when he didn't get it he wrote a suicide note to implicate dowry harassment as "cause", tarnish her reputation, killed her to get silence his own insecurities and then committed suicide to escape the consequences. And those of you who support and rationalize his actions are quite capable of doing all things yourself.

Talking on the phone or SMSing frequently is not evidence of an affair. It may be evidence that she found someone to talk to while her marriage lacked communication. And even if there were evidence of infidelity or dowry charges: that does NOT justify murder. Most importantly, it doesn't in ANY WAY prove that the dowry harassment charges were false. They couldve been true. If they weren't why didn't he just commit suicide? Why murder the woman?

NOW THIS A NOTE for those who have the nerve to contact me over Orkut to debate about my article: I have to second smallsquirel's lament about desi men..., with the greatest disappointment. Last night I received scraps on Orkut for god's sake with regards to my article and my "fascist feminist schemes". Fascist? You are calling me a "fascist" while praising and supporting murder!! Can't you respect people's space? You can't stick to debating on this thread? You don't have the basic sense and decency to restrict your debates to a comments thread and NOT take it to a public community? You guys disgust me with your immaturity. I had to keep deleting these requests to carry out debates on Orkut while it is perfectly acceptable for any of you to post your opinions her on DC. Grow up!

Fighting for a law that is gender neutral is so far, far away from having to justify murder. You guys have proved that you lack basic humanity and if anything, your claims of "false dowry case" are likely untrue. You have the callousness to find your poster boy in a killer?

And some idiot accused me of "hacking" for referring to the couple's orkut scraps. Orkut is a public profile and I have not reproduced names, precise content or identities of the people who scrapped. Also, read a little more online. There are half a dozen articles in various newspapers that quote the scraps on the couple's Orkut profiles. I didn't even have to refer to the originals. And the last time I checked this was not "hacking". Check your definitions.

Get an education some of you, expand your world a little, gather some confidence from life's experiences and stop expecting your spouses to be inferior just so you can feel good about yourselves. See where you figure in the greater scheme of thing"

#78
Avinash
March 29, 2008
02:43 AM

His friends did have major objection to his hacking crimes and described Amit's nature as distrustful. Read the newspapers and comments.

When he was missing for 2 days, it was not his friends who went looking for him. In fact it was Rinku's friends who got concerned and went all the way to her home, had her door open by cops.
His contacts ( not friends) cared a damn about his missing status.

#79
Avinash
URL
March 29, 2008
03:05 AM

The truth triumphs as always! Satyameh Jayate

Amit Budhiraja was driven to murderous rage by friends who taunted him about his wife's alleged affair with a colleague, MiD DAY investigations suggest.

The Infosys software engineer had contacted a marriage counsellor two days before he smothered wife Rinku to death last week.

"He told me his wife was involved with someone. I asked him to come over the same day if he was disturbed. But he said he would come with Rinku on Monday," said Ruksana, who counsels couples in distress.

Ruksana believes she might have saved their lives, if not their marriage, if they had visited her on Friday.

On the evening of March 21, a couple of hours after speaking to Ruksana, Amit reportedly went to a party, where his friends teased and mocked him.

"I came to know about the party from his friend Raoul. It is possible Amit turned wild after hearing the insults and decided to kill his wife," Ruksana told MiD DAY.

Amit murdered Rinku and hanged himself late Saturday or early Sunday.

Raoul, a friend from Delhi who attended the party, informed a stunned Ruksana about the deaths a day before she was to meet the couple.

Amit had tried desperately to save the marriage, and had confided in Raoul, also from Delhi and a software engineer like him.

Rinku's father told MiD DAY earlier this week the couple had decided to divorce, but Amit nursed hopes that counselling could avert the break-up.

Raul had worked in Bangalore in a software firm till 2006. When his own marriage was on the rocks, he had contacted Ruksana, who had helped him separate from this wife.

When Amit told Raoul about his troubles, he suggested a consultation with Ruksana.

"Raoul called me up and sought my help for Amit," said Ruksana.

Amit called her up on March 21 and spoke to her for almost 20 minutes. She asked him all about himself, and his relationship with his wife.

Who is to blame?

HELP WAS AT HAND: Ruksana
"He was keen to continue the marriage," Ruksana told MiD DAY.

The party reportedly upset Amit's emotional balance. His friends, who were drunk, allegedly started talking about Rinku, and went to the extent of calling him "useless" and a "g***u". That left Amit edgy. He reportedly spoke about the party experience to Raoul.

Raoul called up Ruksana, told her about the party fracas, and sought her help to counsel Amit on Monday.

But on Sunday morning, he broke the news of the murder and suicide, and abruptly put the phone down.
"I then saw the horror in the media," she said.

http://www.mid-day.com/web/guest/news/bangalore

#80
Avinash
March 29, 2008
03:16 AM

A true mark of a criminal--Amit. He always leaves some evidence behind.

Q-Who is to be blamed to instigate Amit?
His friends who are idiotic men with lower class demented thinking.

Q-Who are these lower class men with lower thinking?
Some sniffers who are not humane in nature and whose wives have abandoned them. They thus make sure no one is happy. Whose happiness is dependent on some feminists because they do not have a spinal code to find their own happiness.

Q-Did the laws put Amit on pressure?
No.

Q-What kind of society put pressure on Amit?
Society comprising of sadistic men who go about breaking people's family for their own vested interest. ( just like sniffers). Call is my suspicion or call it my belief. My suspicion is as strong as Amit's was.

Q-Who is Raoul?
Amit's friend and only witness as of now.

Some facts to be noted:
1) Rinku wanted to divorce Amit.
2) It was pointed out before by me and other humane sane commentators in another thread that Amit suffered from FEAR of loosing his wife and consequent peer pressure of being teased and ridiculed. But it was Mr Vardhan who accused us of living in a Victorian age.
3) Un-menly men like sniffers drive other men to suicide and break the marriages of many couples. A close family member of mine has been a victim of sniffers demented rage and wrath.
4) Like pointed out by most people, Amit and his pals definitely belonged to a lower rung society who cannot see a woman with another man or her success or her happiness.
5) Obviously Rinku was a misfit in his class and wanted a divorce.
6) Mush to the belief that biased laws drive men to unhappiness--it is not. Excuse excuse only
7) It is their own insane possessiveness that drives them to do crazy things.
8) His friends were right to call him names. Because he really was.
9) BUT obviouly his partner -Rinku knew about his sick mentality and wanted out.

Now where are the Sumanth, FFs, Bharatis and the side kicks? Come on out and let us all have the pleasure to congratulate you all.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I salute each and every sniffer on this board who have a 100% success hit rate. If they lay their sight on your happy marriage, rest assured it is doomed.











#81
Avinash
March 29, 2008
03:17 AM

http://www.mid-day.com/web/guest/news/bangalore/article?_EXT_5_articleId=1063930&_EXT_5_groupId=14

#82
Avinash
March 29, 2008
03:23 AM

FF,
Do not fool people about your worst days are over. Per you, once a wife leaves and files criminal cases ,guys like you get stuck for 15 -20 years? What happened.

And more so..on the phone (our tele conf) you sound unhappy!

Do you thinking we are Faltu Fools(ff) here?

#83
Avinash
March 29, 2008
03:26 AM

I can actually predict Sumathy's comeback retort....

Counseling never will and has never helped anyone blah blah blah....etc etc. Excuses galore!

--------------------

Before the truth was revealed, we at least unmasked a whole bunch of murderors- in- the- making who reside in our and your neighbourhood.

#84
smallsquirrel
March 29, 2008
11:31 AM

ledz, that is not what I meant, yaar. you know what I meant... and clearly I know that all desi men are not jerks, my husband included.

what I did mean is that were I someone that knew nothing about desis, and I read the stupidity coming from people like sumanth, FF, rathor and those other "men" I would think that desi men are a bunch of violent women-hating morons.

it's sad to have such people, who are in the very smallest minority of indian men, claiming to speak for indian men. they are just a bunch of loud-ass bullies and nothing more.

a bunch of... sound and fury, SIGNIFYING NOTHING. well, except the need for more education.

#85
Vn
March 30, 2008
10:10 PM

[Edited:Unrelated to the article or discussion in this thread. Please do not use these threads as a platform for propagating your cause]

#86
Sumanth
March 31, 2008
12:43 AM

Well,

The more feminists and other fools drag this story, the more SIF will gain. It is not that SIF is 100% correct, but that SIF just gives a different point of view.

The story of conservative men murdering their wives under suspicion of adultery or men being possessive of their women (property) is too stale.

It is a fact that a man in abused situation is hunted and hounded in today's urban India.

Now, try to deny that. Please tell me if that sentence is wrong.

A man in a distressed situation have no where to go. He can not open up to his own friends, he can not trust police or judiciary. He can not even trust the elders who he believe will believe the tears of a woman more than any truth he utters.

So, prove it to me that distressed men are not hunted and hounded.

It is easy to say that a minority of men are bastards, morons, beasts and murderers. But, then ask yourself,"what next to do with these morons then?" Do you have a solution?

In this incident, SIF has got the solutions which can give a break through. Feminists can only blame men's attitudes, but they do not have a solution.

If they have any solution, then they can say what they have got....

#87
Anadiya
March 31, 2008
12:56 AM

Try a different tactic Sumanth, your whitewashing on this board won't work. Even Rinku's friend has come and commented on another thread and shamed you people for spewing crap.

We know who and what you are.

Try Selling your propaganda where people have lost their sanity and blame the world for their own weaknesses or murder their wives so you and your people can conveniently call them martyrs and the victims - bitches as you Sumanth likes to call women.



#88
Sumanth
March 31, 2008
01:09 AM

The Mid-day article proves the SIF's assertions that:

Other Men enjoy when a man has a marital problem.

Because, for other men it is another man losing out in the competition for sex. So, a male-dominated society is harsh on a "minority" of men whom it loves to butcher.

It is commonly assumed that a Male-Dominated Society will support men during distress. On the contrary, it is men, who are harshest on men and radical feminists set up by patriarchal men take advantage of that.

The result, a minority of men are hunted and hounded by a male dominated system as the influential males see it as an opportunity to eliminate a weak male and release the sexual resources (the woman).

We have seen that a female judge has much better chance of giving a favourable judgement to a man. 80% of newsarticles on SIF are published by female journalists. For males SIF is a threat as it stands for protection of weaker males who are meant to be eliminated in the battle for sexual intercourse.

Who loses out in this paradigm?

1) The women and feminists. Because, the entire paradigm in controlled by patriarchy and radical feminists join in to prove that the "revenge is taken".

2) Women are still considered as "sex objects" as the men lechering start harassing the so called weaker man.

So,

The goals of patriarchal males starved of sex are met.

The goals of radical feminists seeking revenge on men is also met.

The patriarchal males feed these weaker males to radical feminists like villagers feeding a man each day to Bakashura(a demon in mahabharata) under a deal.

The result, society and social issues remain where they are. Sometimes the weaker "sacrificial goat launches a last minute attack."

Actor Kunal Singh (of Dil Hi Dil Mey) was a sacrificial lamb as he was driven to suicide and the stronger males ignored it or ridiculed him as a bad actor.

Amit was smarter. He did something else to hit back at male dominated society and have a last laugh as he prevented reduced a sex resource and also hit deep into radical feminist stronghold.

Yes. It is unfortunate that lives are lost.

That is because of a sadistic society in which we live.




#89
ravi
March 31, 2008
01:13 AM

It clearly shows how much suffers a man when his wife cheat him and have an affair with other man. But our people who claimed and praised as sensitive towards human feelings, arguing like man need to accept it,and bear it. And treat these extra marital affairs as, "choice of women". Hats off to their hypocrisy.

#90
ravi
March 31, 2008
01:20 AM

Q) who is to be blamed to instigate Amit?

His friends who are inhuman and have no respect to a man's feelings (even though they are also men).

Q) Who are these men with this inhuman behaviour against other man?

None other than the sidekicks of our feminists. They always feel, "a woman is always right". So blamed amit for his wife's extra marital affair(according to the post #79), that's their nature. They are not happy because this man "AMIT" not accepting his wife's extramarital affair,even though she want.According to them, Man need to accept it, other wise they call him as SIFFER.According to them, a women have that right.What that poor husband will do, after all he love his wife, he want to live with her.suffers silently or make a wrong step like amit.

Q) Did the laws put Amit on pressure?
Yes, because there is no law in india to punish adulterous women. That really gives licence to many women who are in this extra marital affairs. Even she is adulterous courts can't punish her. If man want he can take divorce, but can not file case on her, but a women can do this against his husband. Our laws are like that, biased towards women. according to our pro-feminists it is equality. what a perverse definition to EQUALITY.

some facts:

1) A married man can't have an affair with other women,even though he want to divorce his wife. But a women can do that. hat's off to GENDER EQUALITY.(we should not forget according to our manly men(how they are!!!???) it is equality).

2)The article in #79 clearly told that amit not feared because of he will loss his wife, but he can't stand with the humiliation that pro-feminist has done to him at the party.

3)Some men who have self respect, like siffers, are now fighting for true equality.It is a good sign.

4) Any man who see his wife with other man can't tolerate. It is not only true for men, it is for women also actually,the difference is men face humiliation from their own gender, but women will get sympathy from both genders.That made men to go beyond limits when they face this situation.

#91
ravi
March 31, 2008
01:23 AM

Some observations

there is a word called "pativratha" in ours mythologies and epics. some famous pattivratha's are sita, drowpadhi, sati savithri, sati anasuya like women. I didn't remember her name, but one women take her husband to brothel house because he want that pleasure. So she took him to a "vesya (brothel)".she also considered as pativratha. The word "pativratha" considered as a greatest honour for women by both men and women for long time.

Now some feminists and pro-feminists trying to impose it one men. Even though a women has extramarital affair, men should not treat it as a sin. They have to treat it as "A CHOICE made by a women". And if you oppose, you will be accused of being "INSECURE","INSENSITIVE","UN-MANLY". A man must behave like a male equivalent of "pativratha" otherwise they will be called as SIFFERS.

Conclusion: The so-called manly-men give only two choice to you, One you must be male equivalent of pativratha, if not a SIFFER. make your choice.

#92
Vn
March 31, 2008
01:40 AM

I am sure this will be edited.

[Edited:Unrelated to the article or discussion in this thread. Please do not use these threads as a platform for propagating your cause. Thank you for your faith in our editing capabilities]

#93
Anadiya
March 31, 2008
01:50 AM

The SIFFer continue to pimp their cause over tragedies. Have the balls to go comment on the other thread where Rinku's friend has shamed you people for your cowardly and low views.

Shame on you SIFFErs for calling Amit a Martyr and trying to blame feminists for what a twisted murderer did to another human being



#94
Aditi Nadkarni
March 31, 2008
02:18 AM

ravi: Having read your thoughts, I have a damning feeling that educated debate would be pointless however as the author of this article in response to this comment of yours:

"They are not happy because this man "AMIT" not accepting his wife's extramarital affair,even though she want"

...I would just like to point out that we the obnoxious "feminists" are not condoning an extramarital affair but merely rejecting the idea of murder as a punishment for "suspected adultery".

There are many other ways besides murder of "not accepting" your wife's "suspected" infidelity.

However I am sure murder appeals most to you.

#95
Vn
March 31, 2008
03:12 AM

In Konkani there is a saying "Mog Assundi".

it could mean anything from
"Hey, don't keep any anger (as we leave)"
to
"Go with only good memories".

Happy to know about your editing capabilities.

- Cause is nothing
- Pushkar is everything

#96
Manoj
March 31, 2008
04:27 AM

Aditi,
I thank you for this article and for the descriptive eloquence. you have summed up in one article what rinku would've said if she were alive. As a close friend of Rinku and on behalf of her friends and family, I thank you with the bottom of my heart. May your tribe increase..

#97
Aditi Nadkarni
URL
March 31, 2008
12:48 PM

Manoj,

You are very welcome. I hope that Rinku's family and friends know that not all of the Indian community is engaging in thoughtless mud slinging about her character and reputation. The many men who have come forth on various forums to convict her of adultery and raise a toast to Amit as their hero have only bared their own mentalities and insensitivities in the process of lending their support to callous murder. It has opened my eyes to a nation which may have progressed in terms of technology and science but in terms of mentality we still have a majority of men and women struggling to come to terms with the evolving roles of the genders in society.

I can only imagine the pain and anguish of Rinku's loved ones at the sheer unfairness of the circumstances that led to her death. When a life is ended through such a heinous crime based solely on suspicion and insecurities, it is not feminist of us to denounce the act, but just human.

I believe I speak on behalf of all DC editors when I ask you to please convey to Rinku's family and friends our deepest and heartfelt condolences.

#98
slk
March 31, 2008
01:36 PM

These issues should never be discussed online on a public domain. These discussions are divisive.

When we publish anything on a public domain we have to understand that it is accessible by all kind of people and it needs just one comment to snowball into a very big debate.

We had people writing articles on how biased our society is. Our society is not made of just those few guys. But everybody has their own view and others in turn feel that these articles are biased and so forth... It is an endless loop

In the end we have managed to divide the community based on sex. Trust me many people come here with a fair mind but read something which they feel is biased and respond to it and end up on one side of the divide.

If this was a communal issue and it was reported that India/Indians are biased towards some particular community and provide evidence from mythology then we would have ended up creating more terrorists. We blame the religious leaders for the problems but they are just opportunists. The politicians and the pseudo intellectuals are the ones who create those opportunities.

We and the politicians themselves know that they are responsible for it but the pseudo intellectuals feel that they are doing a service to the community. The fact is just the opposite.

We should always focus on the people involved and never generalize. And never bring religion and culture into it.

It is no wonder that people in the west feel that our religion and culture the reason for discrimination against women and lower castes in our society and we have people like missionaries etc exploiting this.

Who should be blamed for this?

#99
ravi
March 31, 2008
01:50 PM

aditi

what is an educated debate, do you consider only the thing you know and believe is education? Where i told in my post, killing a woman is o.k. As far as i remember, i never said killing any one on base of this is good. If you read the post again, you may find this statement,
-----------------------------------------------
"What that poor husband will do, after all he love his wife, he want to live with her.**suffers silently or make a wrong step like amit**."
-----------------------------------------------

You just pointed out one random point without mentioning the context and exploited it as you like. Didn't you read the post before my post. my post that you mentioned is in similar format with that.

And i mentioned some law. people are supporting that law. Based on that i gave some statements in that post.

your accusation on me, " murder appeals most to you" is nothing but an assumption which is not true. If i am in that position ( i hope, i never be in that position), i will expose that women, and i will take divorce. I never love such women. this is my choice.

And in the next post #91,it is the result of one person's comment and current days feminists( remember that feminists doesn't mean, only you, there are plenty of feminists who support current law on adultery. And claims it is good in this so-called male dominated society).And not to mention same person's comment as, being accept all of these is MANLY.

I hope understand what i mean to say.

#100
Aditi Nadkarni
March 31, 2008
02:12 PM

ravi it honestly doesn't matter.

I do not wish to engage in debate with you or any of the other men who for the sake of propagating their extremely vested interests are speaking in support of murdering people. You guys are either too distracted by your own agendas to feel any remorse or even worse, just plainly lack a soul.

Feminism aside, some of you have cast away your humanity in rationalizing one man's cowardly act.

#101
kerty
March 31, 2008
03:06 PM

Aditi

Does it mean feminists would no longer exploit failed relationships and relationship tragedies to further their own agenda? So far, its strategy has rested on promoting dysfunctions on one hand and then exploiting the fall out within families and relationships for furthering feminist agenda. I have yet to see a remorseful feminist, only evasive feminists who want their activism to be consequence free and guilt free and let rest of the society pay the price for it.

This issue is not about supporting or rationalizing murders - this issue highlights how feminist culture can push men and women to suicidal and homicidal depth. Amit is held up, not as a poster boy, but as an opportunity for debate and education about perils of feminism and what it can unleash into millions of homes.

#102
Seema
March 31, 2008
03:31 PM

kerty: feminism had very little to do with rinku's death and you guys should be ashamed. you really, really should be. you want a debate? great! lose a daughter, a sister, a loved one, won't you? have them murdered with a pillow on their gasping face and then we can debate over societal implications of their death.

you think that when a man holds a pillow over a woman's face and then commits suicide to escape consequences he is thinking of feminism? just like all you small, inconsequential, insecure men, he too was so absorbed with himself that humanity dissolved into the background and his conscience just like yours was long dead.

this article is not about feminism. it is about a society that is so shallow and so stubborn that it will do ANYTHING to fight evolution, change, equality. EVEN IF IT MEANS SUPPORTING MURDER!

Thats India for you. Our goddesses are only in stone, in porcelain, decked in jewelry, to smile on the mantelpiece.

#103
Sumanth
March 31, 2008
03:37 PM

It really hurts when one digs skeletons out of the cupboard.

Thousands of innocent men are defamed and termed as criminals and media/bloggers discuss it quite openly.

There are enough scoundrels who had called for lynching and raping of our mothers and sisters in the name of "political correctness".

90,000 women were arrested without evidence or investigation and we were termed mother-f***ers, when we raised voice against it. Feminists looked other way as for them funds from USAID and UNICEF are more important.

-------------
For the first time, the society refused to accept Amit as a criminal whatever the friends of his wife may claim.

The pathetic attempt by feminists to picturise men as jealous murderers has miserably failed.

Now, Judiciary can not force men to take their wives back, after they are tortured with abuse and then a false 498a. Because, judiciary now knows that they will be held responsible, if anything happens to women.

This is a big blow to Indian judiciary, which wants to save marriages at any cost by denying divorce to couples. When divorce or escape route is denied, some people do get violent.

This incident is not an isolated one, but it shows a trend which "NO ONE" (feminists, masculists, judiciary or Govt) can ignore.

No one can ignore that "Family Issues" are insignificant. This needs a national debate involving all as the old structures are weak/dysfunctional and no effort is spent on creating new structures.

It also shows that feminists and pseudo-liberals of NDTV Lounge are completely bankrupt to drive anything in the society. They are not able to eliminate any social evils and their fucking solutions have created more side-effects than any relief.

Doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results is a sign of insanity.

[Edited:The article is not about these issues.Please use your own websites for vested promotions] Now, the new trend of hunted men getting violent on wives has started.

Was Amit a born murderer?

What converted a talented techie into a murderer?

What is that?

It is the pathetic society and irresponsible humans trying to bring some half-baked fucking shit from western countries and forcing it on a complex Indian society.

It is not just Amit or Rinku who paid the price. The turn will come for everyone.

The fucking bankrupt intellectuals and their "Reductionistic" ideas have their serious consequences.

The piracy of ideologies from "simple western countries" and implementing them in India has done severe damage.

All affluent states of India has very high suicide rates and it has increased 4.5% in just 1 year (2005 to 2006).

Still, feminists say this is a non-issue.

A bunch of senile retards bulldoze badly drafted laws in the parliament and the idiots in some specific media channels applaud them.

Just wait. If there is no National Debate immediately, soon you will see teenagers with STD, shootings in schools, suicides and murders everywhere.

80% of criminals in US jails are from broken families. Ask yourself, what have you done to make a difference?

One can not leave the matter with Govt and Judiciary/police and then give opinions from the galleries.

How many people are out there to come to ground and spend an hour or two in a week supporting men and women who are in distress?

In stead of doing that the game of revenge has been played for so long.

[EDITED:Unrelated]

If feminists continue their way, then men will not have mercy for women or their families as well.

Life is important, whether it is that of Rinku, Amit, [Edited:Unrelated]

But, there are a bunch of morons who say, for them only a young woman's life is important and all others can go to hell. Then they argue and contribute to conditioning of system around that.

The faulty notion is propagated that men can be corners, abused, harassed and ridiculed and that is the only way to change men. There are serious cracks in that concept.

[EDITED:Unrelated to thread]

It is pathetic when a feminist calls a man coward. It is not tolerable for a feminist if a man does not fit in his patriarchal role.

Why should not men be cowards?

Why men be trapped in their patriarchal role of always trying to be brave?

Men have every right to choose whether they are brave or cowards.

If a man is coward, then the society has to laugh at him. Feminists who claim to fight gender stereotyping does not seem to realise that they have no right to stereotype men into any particular role or behaviour.





#104
Preeti
March 31, 2008
03:43 PM

For the first time, the society refused to accept Amit as a criminal whatever the friends of his wife may claim.

Everyone has called him a criminal.
Including the society and common man.
In fact the police have registered a case against him.
His own Uncle has condemned him
His own friends have called him a lunatic

What else do you want?

Sumanth, I can understand if you are loosing ground and have no where to go. It is pretty much obvious.

#105
Preeti
March 31, 2008
03:46 PM

Sumanth,

it seems to me your political campaign crash landed even before it took off. The Mid-day article was a blow to your face.

Amit has been declared a lunatic who was victimised by his own MALE friends. Pity!

#106
Preeti
March 31, 2008
03:51 PM

It is not tolerable for a feminist if a man does not fit in his patriarchal role.

What is this BS about patriarchal role? I don't think so any women wants that patriarchal role either. It is suffocating to even think that such men exist.

Get your fundamentals right and come back with a new agenda.

#107
Sumanth
March 31, 2008
03:56 PM

[Edited:Unrelated. This article is not about feminism and this is NOT your own personal blog. Please use your own website to promote vested agendas]

Ultimately truth will prevail.

Who is converting men into murderers?

Who is funding the "murderer creating machine"?

As judiciary closes doors on men due to pressure by feminists, a small percentage of men can get converted into "murderers".

Calling them murderers and cowards is not going to solve dead woman's problem. The feminist game has hit the road block.

Yes. Men are inherently violent.

The bigger truth is, society or judiciary or feminists can do nothing about it.

If you corner and attack a man, the "pre-historic hunter" in him can wake up.

[Edited: Unrelated]


If a woman wants to file "dowry case", she should go ahead and file it. [Edited: Terrorizing women against filing dowry harassment case]

#108
Seema
March 31, 2008
04:14 PM

On reading Sumanth's comment people are going to think Indians perceive feminism as some sort of a sorority group and men some kind of seething wild animals with "pre-historic" instincts of smothering their wives :D

In all of the online material nowhere is the mention of dowry harassment. SIFF must be running out of examples and hence have sunk their teeth into this incident in the desperate hopes of publicity.

More importantly, every news piece I have read includes people denouncing Amit's actions...even his own friends and relatives. Even after his death, the police has filed a case of wrongful murder against him.

So its only the SIFF that's frothing at the mouth trying to promote him as a martyr, a hero. Just goes to show what kind of losers make up this organization. Thank god all your wives lived to file charges and that you werent the ones holding a pillow on their heads in your "pre-historic" zeal.

#109
kerty
March 31, 2008
07:29 PM

seema

"...Indians perceive feminism as some sort of a sorority group.."

You are right. Feminism is indeed some sort of sorority group. DC forum is no exception. Feminist modus operandi falls on predictable lines and it is no longer an unknown entity like it once used be. It rides on issue level politics and exploitation of dysfunctions - thereby keeping its distractors on the defensive while keeping its fake moral self-righteousness to feverish pitch, skirting critical evaluation of its claims, agenda and its destructive impact on families and society.


".... and men some kind of seething wild animals with "pre-historic" instincts of smothering their wives"

That is what feminists truly believe men to be.

In order for feminists to become sole spokesman and custodian of female gender, it has to eliminate women's dependence on males, fathers, husbands, sons, brothers for their well-being - so issue level politics center around transforming them into main source of abuses and victimization to women. Similarly, feminism tries to eliminate marriage, motherhood, family and nurturing relationships as safe refuge of women - so its issue level politics center around transforming them into den of victimizations and liberation from them as empowerment.

#110
Seema
March 31, 2008
08:12 PM

Ah is that what feminists are! Thank you so much kerty! God you are so profound and learned I wanna drop to my knees and weep. India would not be the great civilization without men and women like thou!

#111
Preeti
March 31, 2008
09:50 PM

Amit'case is not about Dowry. So stop using it for your own vested inerests. We as readers know better than your side kicks and unerstand. Feed that story to your side kicks who will buy it.

Amit's case is cleary about VIOLENT men who cannot stand to have a successful wife

Amit's case is about a conservative MCP lunatic man

Amit's case portrays and reflects that indian wives are still vulnerable to violence and danger

Amit's case should be an eye opener to the legal system that women need more protection.

Amit's case is an ideal scenario who men want to control their wife at any cost.

Amit knew he had lost his wife and he made sure that she would not live happily.

Out of jealousy he killed her and killed himself.

The feminists have to work over time in order to avoid this in the future.

Rinku's death will not be wasted. It is an eye opener for women/wives out there...that if you have a controlling dominating husband....then RUN, RUN FOR YOUR LIFE, ESCAPE, no need to try to save your marriage. It may cost you your life dearly. The way it cost Rinku.

#112
Preeti
March 31, 2008
09:51 PM

Sumanth and his side kicks

Amit's case is not about Dowry. So stop using it for your own vested inerests. We as readers know better than your side kicks and unerstand. Feed that story to your side kicks who will buy it.

Amit's case is cleary about VIOLENT men who cannot stand to have a successful wife

Amit's case is about a conservative MCP lunatic man

Amit's case portrays and reflects that indian wives are still vulnerable to violence and danger

Amit's case should be an eye opener to the legal system that women need more protection.

Amit's case is an ideal scenario who men want to control their wife at any cost.

Amit knew he had lost his wife and he made sure that she would not live happily.

Out of jealousy he killed her and killed himself.

The feminists have to work over time in order to avoid this in the future.

Rinku's death will not be wasted. It is an eye opener for women/wives out there...that if you have a controlling dominating husband....then RUN, RUN FOR YOUR LIFE, ESCAPE, no need to try to save your marriage. It may cost you your life dearly. The way it cost Rinku.

#113
ravi
April 1, 2008
12:34 AM

preeti

It is not dowry case, but he wrote in his suicide note , that he feared of a false case. It may be true or it is just his suspect. But we are all know, to get divorce mutual agreement is the best method, otherwise getting divorce is too tough.

But there is another way, accuse the husband for harassment and violence. It is true that many women who want divorce quick fallow this second method.Who knows, may be amit is true, she want quick divorce so she has plans to threaten him with dowry harassment case,(succumbs to that threat he sign for mutual divorce) Many false cases filed under dowry harassment,goes in this way.

You said that amit case is a violent man case, who can't stand with wife's success.But you didn't mention, Which success? success in extra marital affair? if that is true, not only men, women also can't stand with this kind success, if her husband succeeded in such affairs.

I came here to not support the murder, but to highlight the reason behind the murder, and mindset of the people in this society and last but not lease the laws which make men pay, even for no fault of their. These conditions drive men to extreme ends.Alas,some women here feeling that i am condoning the murder.

Amit case is the perfect example to a man humiliated by this society,(read #79 post), and helplessness situation of men which outcomes an extreme step of ending two lives and suffering of two families.

The govt should have to work towards gender equality, equality in getting justice for both men and women, not only for women. Then these things will not happen(if she file false cases,she must be punished. then women will not file those false cases, and men will not feel insecure and takes extreme steps).

#114
ravi
April 1, 2008
12:55 AM

aditi

Can you please tell how it is true that supporting rinku is not supporting extra marital affair and explaining the reason behind amit's act and asking to take steps to prevent that,is condoning murder. Every one here are going according to their "vested interests" including you.

#115
Seema
April 1, 2008
01:11 AM

ravi: You are defaming a dead woman based on the 3 page ranting of the very man who murdered her. Police have not found ANY evidence whatsoever of an affair. The only testimonies available establish Amit as a suspicious snooper. The dowry harassment reference was also stated in the letter as an "Intuition". If he had such an "intuition", he could've opted for anticipatory bail NOT MURDER.

You guys are trying SO VERY hard to justify murder based on baseless conjecture, its pathetic. And that only goes to show people how many violent men there are among you who find justifications and rationale for your own actions.

Most violent men try to justify their actions. Most perpetrators of domestic violence don't EVER acknowledge their own responsibility or admit to any folly and instead try to assign blame to the person who is allegedly "provoking" them to be violent. Its classic wife-beater psychology.

The fact that the SIFF and some of you guys are using Amit as your hero only proves BEYOND DOUBT once and for all how much you guys want to assign blame to the victim. You have all sorts of hopeless rationalizations: She was murdered but it was her fault coz she SMSed too much and spoke on the phone too much. She made him suspicious and hence the poor guy had NO CHOICE but to hold a pillow over her face and smother her life out. She was too successful, too pretty, too talkative, laughed too much, had too many friends, didn't cook every day, didn't clean the house as much.....the list of probable reasons why she should've been murdered goes on and sounds even more ridiculous to the sane ones among us who know that NONE OF THESE REASONS COULD EVER JUSTIFY MURDER. But someone who is hell bent on justifying an act of violence knows no rationale. YOU GUYS are trying subconsciously to rid yourselves of the guilt by sympathising with a guy who did what you are capable of doing.

AND HENCE MOST OF ALL, I liked the title of Aditi's article. It is a very wise choice for the title. Our reactions to this murder tell us a lot about ourselves.

To the women out there I would just like to say the following:

Learn something from this sad case. Put some thought into marriag. Don't marry a guy just bnecoz of educational qualifications. Do you see how many qualified guys there are here justifying murder based on suspicion? If you are thinking of getting out of an abusive marriage becoz you feel unsafe, becoz the marriage is wrought with suspicion, insecurities, overexpectations and humiliations...GET OUT NOW. Don't wait around for that fateful day when his insecurities get the better of him and he finds the heartlessness to end your precious life! Get out of your unsafe surroundings and make a life for yourself. Nothing is worth losing your life over. Staying with the guy, counseling or anything could never change mentality. One cannot undo or reverse years of upbringing. People who have no conscience and such consuming insecurities cannot see beyond themselves. They see themselves as the victims. Let them be the victims, you get out and be the survivor.

#116
Aditi Nadkarni
April 1, 2008
01:22 AM

114 ravi:

I sure can but I won't.

Chances are if you are too dumb to find out yourself, you are probably too dumb for me to be wasting my time repeating stuff.

#117
aditi
April 1, 2008
01:35 AM

[Edited: ravi: It is grounds for immediate banning to comment under someone else's name.]

#118
FF
April 1, 2008
01:41 AM

Seema "[EDITED]" ...

Amit's marriage was never abusive, so Rinki(or for that matter anyone), would never have found it out. All the people who knew the couple from far or from close have reaffirmed countless number of times that they couple were very clam and quite.



[Edited:Personal attack]

#119
Seema
April 1, 2008
01:55 AM

FF: "Clam and quite" does not immediately disqualify violence. And last time we checked, murder was considered "violent".

Speaking of reaffirming things "countless number of times" friends and even the police have confirmed that NO evidence of any affair has been found and yet you guys harp on it as if THAT would justify murder. Those "countless reafirmations" don't seem to affect you.

I didn't think my "theories" would be of any value to you at all...they are meant for those who don't justify violence and may in fact be suffering at the hands of people who do.

#120
Anaidya
April 1, 2008
01:57 AM

FF, an individual like you who thinks a man in anger can slap a woman, or rape is all in the mind will never understand what an abusive relationship is all about.

Its got nothing to do with feminism but you having a twisted mind where abuse is excused at all cost even when it comes to murder.

You are a prime example of the SIFF mentality.




#121
ravi
April 1, 2008
02:05 AM

Seema: what i can say to you is this, i am not supporting that murder.you are just trying to defame me.

#122
FF
April 1, 2008
02:10 AM

Seema,

Would you kindly Checkout if I even once used "affair" as a supporting argument.

And who cares to reply to "Anaidya", when she uses her own interpretations to read somebody else's mind.

I have in my last 20 years of life have never 'literally' touched any woman(including my ex-wife, my mother, sister) without their consent, and then you find somebody accusing me of promoting gender violence.

But then who cares about such accusations. Good luck!!!.

#123
ravi
April 1, 2008
02:14 AM

To editor

sorry for that, I just want to write it TO Aditi actually. just like this...

--------------------------------------------
Aditi

I don't bother if you treat me as dumb guy. after you are also a person just like me.
---------------------------------------------

the matter itself says, that was not written by aditi. but a mistake don by a person. I will take care to not repeat this mistake. And i very well know my "ip" point out who i am? so please don't consider it as cheating.

#124
Rasselas
URL
April 1, 2008
02:14 AM

The lead article which led to all this heated debate was well thought out and reasonable.Women have also acted irrationally when faced with the prospect of losing their lovers- a famous diet guru Dr Tarnower was murdered by his mistress.She was feted by sections of the media and given a very light sentence.Innumerable instances from everyday life shown both male and female anger at losing a partner.Latin American courts have traditionally turned a blind eye to men murdering their errant wives. Honour killings where where women are usually targetted is common in Pakistan and middle east.The point is-nothing justifies taking human life.Unjust laws such as new 'dowry and domestic laws" should not be lauded just because they victimise a whole gender.

#125
Anadiya
April 1, 2008
02:18 AM

Somebody? These comments were made by you and are very much part of the desicritics comments MR FF. Now you are trying to disown them. Given a few more months you will also disown calling Amit a martyr.

Ignore me all you like, but I as well as others remember what you say on the board as always and hold you accountable for your heinous viewpoints

#126
Seema
April 1, 2008
02:19 AM

ravi I don't need to defame you...you do a mighty good job of it your self.

Some of your golden contributions to this thread in apostrophes:

"It is a fear of false case make him take this step"

Ahhh! See, now we belong to a section of society where anticipatory bail would come to mind before murder.

"It clearly shows how much suffers a man when his wife cheat him and have an affair with other man"

Good god, the suffering of man. What hapless victims you all are. God bless you all with fluffy pillows to hold over the faces of all the wicked scheming women in your lives.

And all this after reports in newspapers where police stated that no evidence of any affair was found. So the ass merely killed his wife based on suspicion. Which other poster boys would you like to pick from: Jack the ripper? Was he also a victim of a false dowry case?

And lastly....

"I came here to not support the murder, but to highlight the reason behind the murder"

Yes, because justifying murder and explaining why it was a necessary step is so very different from supporting it. Right?

#127
FF
April 1, 2008
02:32 AM

[deleted - multiple nicks]

#128
temporal
URL
April 1, 2008
02:39 AM

seema aik kaam karo

pls.

just go through the interacts here quickly and determine which of the interacts appear to suffer from ASS (Attention Seeking Syndrome)

that is step one

you'd know step 2!

;)

#129
FF
April 1, 2008
02:41 AM

[deleted - multiple nicks]

#130
Aditi Nadkarni
April 1, 2008
02:45 AM

FF: Are you kidding yourself or us? Are you in denial or are you repeating all these definitions in the hope of sounding rational.

It is pretty straightforward you know and honestly the SIFF is seriously damaging their cause by using a murderer as a poster boy. In the Rinku Sachdeva case, the only mention of dowry harassment was where the murder himself wrote a rant claiming he had an "intuition" that she would file. Why would someone have such an intuition? His suspicious nature has already been proven. And more importantly you guys always said your beef was against "false dowry harassment cases". How do you know with such conviction if this case were true or false? Is this what the SIFF does? Help even those who may have beaten up their wives and help them tarnish their wives' reputations? Is that your strategy? Is this why Amit seems like such an attractive poster boy for you?

He is no martyr and by referring to him as one you are including a suspicious and cowardly murderer in the same league as soldiers and freedom fighters. He did not do this for any social justice. He just killed a helpless woman because he was suspicious and your only evidence his suspicions documented. He committed suicide not because he was "refusing to cow down" :) He committed suicide because he was scared to face the consequences of his heinous crime.

Have you all lost your minds? I mean I always thought some of you were a little nuts to begin with but this is just bizarre. This case isn't even remotely connected to any of your seeming motives.

Next you will claim that serial rapists and terrorists are all engaging in crime to support your cause.

#131
Seema
April 1, 2008
02:55 AM

Temporal:

I am really sorry if it seems like I sometimes don't heed your advice to ignore these idiots but its hard to just stay quiet and let them dance over somebody's death like this and use it to promote their agendas.

#132
FF
April 1, 2008
02:58 AM

Aditi, I am talking on basis of one of the proofs published in a national daily.

1) If the laws would not have been as harsh, as inhumane and as biased as they are today(No, I am not talking just about Dowry laws, but the entire canvas of anti-male laws).

2) if this society and law which considers males as disposable and accountable for any and every marriage failure and corners him.

I am sure this unfortunate accident would never have happened.

#133
ravi
April 1, 2008
03:01 AM

seema:

Your are just quoting the random statements from the posts of mine,placing them in one place and hardly trying to defame.And no, i haven't done any thing which defame me.It is you and some people here who are trying to do that, because i am not thinking the same way that you people are thinking. And not accepting what your trying to inject.

!!!because justifying murder and explaining why it was a necessary step is so very different from supporting it. Right? !!!!

May be it's your delusion that make you feel like that, i am explaining reason to that murder, to support why it is necessary.

It is just, how we can prevent such things in future by analysing it and taking preventing measures or fighting for that.

But you are just blind towards men and their pain. For you only a women's pain is valid and considerable.your comment
"Good god, the suffering of man......blah blah..." in response to my comment clearly shows this.

Interpreting others statements according to your own agenda or quoting random statements from different posts to support your own theory and assumptions on that person,that's all you did in your post.

#134
temporal
URL
April 1, 2008
03:01 AM

seema:

understand, but as the expression says

give them enough rope....

;)

adi:

that FF guys uses multiple nicks...stay away from cowards

#135
Aditi Nadkarni
April 1, 2008
03:06 AM

FF: No law, either fair or stringent, can substitute human conscience.

When a human being is thrashing under you for a breathe of air and you deny them that and pin them down until they are gone, social justice is the least of your concerns.

But as I said if he is the representative for your cause thank you for confirming your stance. Our heroes and those whose actions we justify are a reflection of who we are and who we want to be.

Hence the title of my article.

#136
Aditi Nadkarni
April 1, 2008
03:09 AM

Sorry Temporal: I will ignore him. I wanted to prove a point with this article and am glad these guys have bared their mentalities by justifying a murder. Now I don't need to say more.

#137
FF
April 1, 2008
03:26 AM

Aditi Nadkarni:

Aditi you and rank ignorant and have absolutely no idea whatsoever of how you get strangulated by laws and Indian courts and you get killed every moment.

All you have is an idea of "Fancy Anticipatory bail". No it is not as simple as that. If only you would have gone through that predicament would you appreciate the pain. It is like you getting killed a thousand times, because you see your parents getting devastated with awe, desperation and loss of all the dignity they ever had in life.

Just because literature is short of such experiences, does not mean such experiences are any short of horror to persons who have never been involved in these things before.

I know it because I have lived through those all those months, where I was almost on the brink of myself having committed a suicide, just because the terrorist state would eat me up. I know how frustrated it gets when you have bear the ignominy of being labeled and dragged in callous police stations and indifferent courts.

Only a person who has gone through it would understand the real pain.

If you do not, it only speaks of your ignorance.
May God give you that chance!!!.

#138
FF
April 1, 2008
03:39 AM

And "Mr temporal" or whoseever you are, who the hell you are and where did I use multiple nicks.

Just because I used a name "close" to close a bold tag left open in comment just prior to that, you jump on that opportunity to accuse me of using multiple nicks.

[Edited: Personal Attack]

And mind you whenever I close my eyes and try to picture those b**tards who teased an already traumatized and distraught soul of Amit to no ends and pushed him to the brink of becoming a cause of those two deaths [Edited: Personal Attack]

If you still fell you have some morality left, you will not delete this comment.

#139
Anamika
April 1, 2008
03:43 AM

Aditi - good going but remember that bit on "never arguing with idiots"? These psychotic nutters will continue regardless of the facts (at least they have climbed down from consecrating a murderer as their martyr/saint).

Yes, they have bared their mentalities but the two threads make for stomach-churning reading. And it makes me sad/angry for anyone who cared for Rinku that these psychos continue to malign her despite all facts.

I hope and pray that we never meet such creeps - or indeed have anyone we care for ever married to these potential murderers. On the other hand, their mad frothing at the mouth does make you realise that (thankfully) most men - in India or elsewhere - are NOTHING like them. :-)

#140
Anadiya
April 1, 2008
04:34 AM

So now it finally comes out. FF feels that instead of letting the 'terrorist state' eat you up best to kill your spouse.
Want a pillow for a gift FF to help you carry out your SIFF jihad?


#141
FF
April 1, 2008
04:41 AM

[Edited: Nonsense]

#142
Anadiya
April 1, 2008
04:51 AM

Your maths is as mangled as your psyche which allows a man taunted by society to murder a person in her sleep.

By that connotation all unmarried women or those without children taunted by society have the right to go on murderous rampages and kill their friends and family

#143
Suman
April 1, 2008
05:18 AM

Aditi,
thnks a lot for ur article and hope it will, upto some extent, help in reforming the stereotypes mentality of some men in Indian society.

#144
Vn
April 1, 2008
05:19 AM

[Edited: Unrelated]

#145
Sumanth
April 1, 2008
05:26 AM

Preeti at comment 111,

You wrote,

"Rinku's death will not be wasted. It is an eye opener for women/wives out there...that if you have a controlling dominating husband....then RUN, RUN FOR YOUR LIFE, ESCAPE, no need to try to save your marriage. It may cost you your life dearly. The way it cost Rinku."

Exactly.

Thats what SIFF is also saying. Do not control your spouse or get controlled by him or her. Just run for safety.

For man there is no option to run away as the judiciary terms him a wife deserter and screws him. So, it is for the woman to run away.

I know a large number of women living with their husbands and yet threatening them of "jailing" in false dowry cases.

Either the woman files dowry case by getting or remains peacefully. Staying in the home with husband and threatening him of dowry cases is certainly very dangerous for a woman.

Men are inherently violent, especially when they are under stress. Society and laws can do very little about it.

Courts must stop "saving marriages" and give escape route to men and women.

In newspapers everyone can make claims about saving marriages. Even the females who threaten 498a cases also claim that they will save their marriages by "keeping the husband under threats."

We will soon publish some of the recordings.

Its the feminists who are the lunatic liars, who pull out all false statistics from every possible hole and display to the whole world.

One has to be a lunatic to fight another bunch of pathetic hate mongering lunatic feminist murderers for whom murder of unborn in a hobby.

Every single Indian is told by these fucking lunatics that if they have a daughter, then she can get burnt for dowry. As a result people are eliminating girls before birth.

The feminist bitches dance with the tunes of "Mere yaar Dila De Mujhko" in a program on girl child at Indian Gate.

First they create a social problem and then they ask donations to solve the problem.


#146
Sumanth
April 1, 2008
05:37 AM

[Edited: Unrelated to the thread. PLEASE USE YOUR OWN WEBSITES TO PROMOTE VESTED AGENDAS]

#147
Anadiya
April 1, 2008
05:43 AM

And for that reason according to Sumanth, FF and their buddies it is best to become martyrs and kill all the feminist bitches wives.

Anything else? You gave yourselves away when called Amit a martyr, so acute is your hatred for women.

#148
Vn
April 1, 2008
05:48 AM

[Edited:Unrelated.This article is not about a false DV case. Please use your own forums to promoted vested agendas]

#149
Ayan Roy
URL
April 1, 2008
05:52 AM

Hmm- the battle still wages on. Interestingly, I see a lot of comments condoning violence by men, like:

"Men are inherently violent, especially when they are under stress. Society and laws can do very little about it."

Why? One central word - EGO!
And with it come ego's children: PRIDE, POWER and CONTROL. These are the worst aspects of the ego and are the root cause for stress in people, leading to violence if unchecked.

If both men and women learn to reduce the effect of the ego, and better, completely drop the ego, then most problems can be solved..

People (especially Indians) also get too bothered by what people and society around them say and think about them.
Why get so bothered? Just be cool and be happy, and lead your own life, as long as you don't bother anyone else, and as long as no one else bothers you. Politely tell anyone who tries to meddle in your life/pass unsolicited advice and comments to mind their own business.

In my opinion, in a relationship, one should allow one's partner as much freedom as possible.
There should be no possessiveness and jealousy AT ALL. If your partenr has got fed up of you and doesn't like you anymore, let him/her leave like a free bird. After all, it's their loss!

A word partly in the defence of the "SIFF"ers:
It is true that some GREEDY, CRUEL women are spoiling the name of women in general by harrassing and exploiting innocent, good natured men, mainly for MONEY. Unfortunately some men are generalizing this and labelling the entire female race as evil feminists, which is very wrong and unfair.

There are a few rotten apples in every group. Let us not make the rotten apples as a standard to evaluate the group!!

The law of the land should not be biased towards any sex. It should be for the protection of both men and women, equally.

Love and peace to all,
Ayan



#150
Nagesh
April 1, 2008
06:03 AM

well said Ayan Roy

#151
Sumanth
April 1, 2008
06:41 AM

[Edited:Unrelated to this thread]

#152
Anamika
April 1, 2008
07:37 AM

Sumanth at #145: "Men are inherently violent, especially when they are under stress. Society and laws can do very little about it."

Sumanth AGAIN at#151: "Once feminists stop generalising all men as adulterous, violent beasts, then we will also stop generalising."

Hmmm....just incapable of reason? Or an utter psychotic nutter? Or another Amit (martyr/saint - may peace be upon him) in making?

#153
Vn
April 1, 2008
07:43 AM

[Edited: Unrelated]

#154
Peter Parker
April 1, 2008
12:26 PM

Role Reversal which most women want comes at a price. This is a classic situation where women, percieved to be a disadvantaged side want to change the status quo. Men are not so eager and are slow to adopt to such changes. This situation is not only being played out in India but in far greater numbers in the Western World. The end result no one is happy. Divorce rates shoot through the roof, single women with children abound and men are fearful of entering into a relationship where they have to subservient.

#155
Apna Bharat
April 1, 2008
01:23 PM

People like [Edited: Personal Attack] can invoke men to become more and more rakshashas and women too. No body can escape the truth that every men or women are production of union of men/women. Moreover men and women are related as brother, sister, mother, father and so on. No men who blames women should forget that he also has mother, sister and daughter. No women who blames men should forget that she has father, brother and son. It is easier to widen the gap between men/women. If men don't know what women wants then women also don't know what men wants. Right ???
Gender biasing and then taking revenge is very very dangerous. Men, Women both has to realize their duty in family and society. If marching towards 21nd century is all about aping the west and fight for equality then go ahead. More spice can be added by Divorces, 498, Adultery, Homosexuality, Incest, Murder, Suspicion, Cheating, Dowry.
If Kiranjit Alhuwalia can do it then why not Alhuwalia. So talk responsibly.
Pen and media has lot of power. Don't use it to justify any killings. It is time to look at what is missing as in Landmark (LEC) they say.

#156
Apna Bharat
April 1, 2008
01:46 PM

Amit kills Rinku and does suicide ....
These two are victims of ...

[Edited: Unrelated and DOES NOT MAKE SENSE]

Nobody will write so much in the forum and waste time. ha ha ha.

#157
SLK
April 1, 2008
03:11 PM

Here are the highlights of the match so far

Some people tried to understand Amit's feeling and this is how the women reacted
Deepti Lamba #1 - Taliban mentality
Preeti #9 - Making moronic statements
Preeti #14 - "Amit is a" lunatic, pychotic pathetic imagination
Preethi #15 - I have better judgement and trust my intelligence unlike you, ;"Amit is" a jerk
Anamika #16 - loons
Anamika #57 - post-nasty-stuff-anonymously nutters
Anamika #63 - I assume your other SIFFER buddies have the same level IQ? Birds (or idiots) of a feather
Anamika #65 - "Amit" was a petty criminal
Avinash #80 (Why the male id??) - Who are these lower class men with lower thinking?
Some sniffers who are not humane in nature and whose wives have abandoned them. They thus make sure no one is happy. Whose happiness is dependent on some feminists because they do not have a spinal code to find their own happiness.
Avinash #83 - Faltu Fools
Anadiya #87 - spewing crap
Anadiya #93 - Have the balls to go comment on the other thread where Rinku's friend has shamed you people for your cowardly and low views.
Aditi Nadkarni #100 - propagating their extremely vested interests, some of you have cast away your humanity in rationalizing one man's cowardly act
Seema #102 - Society that is so shallow and so stubborn that it will do ANYTHING to fight evolution, change, equality
Seema #108 - Just goes to show what kind of losers make up this organization
Preeti #111 - Amit's case is cleary about VIOLENT men who cannot stand to have a successful wife, Amit's case is about a conservative MCP lunatic man
Aditi Nadkarni #116 - Chances are if you are too dumb to find out yourself, you are probably too dumb for me to be wasting my time repeating stuff.
Anadiya #125 - your heinous viewpoints
Aditi Nadkarni #130 - Have you all lost your minds? I mean I always thought some of you were a little nuts to begin with but this is just bizarre
Seema #131 - Ignore these idiots
Anamika #139 - remember that bit on "never arguing with idiots"? These psychotic nutters will continue regardless of the facts
Anadiya #142 - Your maths is as mangled as your psyche
Anamika #152 - just incapable of reason? Or an utter psychotic nutter? Or another Amit

And then the asumption
Aditi Nadkarni #77 - "Amit" just seems like an insecure man with a beautiful wife who would do anything for attention and when he didn't get it he wrote a suicide note to implicate dowry harassment as "cause", tarnish her reputation.

But men cannot comment on what they think about Amit/Rinku.

And then we have the BIG SIX
Aditi Nadkarni #94 - I have a damning feeling that educated debate would be pointless

Absolutely right, how can you expect to have an educated debate when you make a comment and find people calling you names and accusing you of many things? But wait, Aditi is on the feminists team!!!!

If I understand this right all lawyers are also murderers, lunatics, idiots etc. How can the lawyers argue for someone who is accused of a crime? My ladies the reason we have a court and a lawyer is allowed to argue for the accused is every crime is different and the reasons for the crimes are also different and the the guilt and punishments are also different. By law it is required that the judge hears both sides of the story before passing judgment. Thanks god you ladies are not practicing law.

But if my understanding is right you ladies feel that Amit is the worst kind of person and it is impossible for him to be a good person. But the fact is sometimes good people are also forced to do something bad. Some good women are forced into prostituion by circumstances at home. We can know the real person only when we look at it with an open mind. The reason women are not willing to accept other views is they are not willing to trust the content of the suicide note. It is an accepted fact that a dying person's testimony is usually true. So the asumptions is that the arguments are based on some facts until it is proven otherwise.

I'm certain Amit was not a Ram Bhakth and he never really believed in the hindu scriptures, and I'm certain it is not an Hindu conspiracy to subdue the "Successful independent woman".

If a Kiranjit Alhuwalia and even a Phoolan devi, who killed many innocent people, can get a fair trial why not Amit. It is not true that all victims are women and that all abusers are men. It is a known fact that the main cause for male "impotentcy" are their wives words. Many women humiliate men so much with their words, some directly targeting their manhood that some weak men just lose their confidence. Others react in a violent way, because they cannot humiliate people using the words as women can.

Just look at the comments, Even if we assume that the men are wrong they were trying to justify what they believed but women try to humiliate the other person into submission. They have a specific word for it. This is the difference between men and women. you start an argument with a women and immediately the accusations start.

A slap on the face will hurt for cuple of minutes. A word can hurt for many years.

Words are mightier than a sword.

So women always wield the mightiest weapons and some time men retaliate in their own way. But the women always escape, it is the men who are accused and punished.

I'm not saying that was the case with Amit but it certainly is the case in this debate.

But then
"These psychotic nutters will continue regardless of the facts"
- Anamika #139


PS: It is a fact that women suspect men much more than men suspect women. Suspicion is really a women thing.

There are so many cases in the west where investigators used the DNA of the father and failed to identify the dead son and later found that his wife has been cheating him for many years and he never suspected. But women suspect men of cheating even when the men drop a colleague in an emergency. Just ask the men.

#158
SLK
April 1, 2008
03:20 PM

Sumant had mentioned that in #88
"It is commonly assumed that a Male-Dominated Society will support men during distress. On the contrary, it is men, who are harshest on men"

True, Human race and most of the races on earth are meant to be like that. We have something of a power hierarchy pyramid, where men are at the top, but the top has a very small number and as we go down it increases exponentially. We can divide the pyramid into various sets of layers based on different socio-economic parameters. No matter how you divide it, almost all the women end up in the top layers. And majority of the men end up in the bottom layers.

James Cameroon the director of Abyss, Alien, Terminator, True Lies and Titanic is known to have strong women in his movies but even he says the safest people were the rich women and the worst were the poor men. Most men are expendable.

Recently the New York Governor had to resign after been caught visiting a high society call girl who earned $4000 per visit. The governor lost the job, the people who ran the prostitution ring were arrested but the girl is making millions. The girl claims that she "she had no money" so she became a Call Girl.

She might be telling the truth but when I read it I was wondering what a penniless man does for survival. We have heard stories of Madonna, Heather mills etc who have done nude photo shoots early in their career "for survival". We hear millions of girls doing it online on the web. And then many women also manage to find a guy higher in the hierarchy and "survive". And then some women work hard and become successful and "survive". Most of the women end up with a better life than what they had before. But what does a poor man do. They have just two options either work hard and achieve success or try to grab what the other man has. The second group has very high risk and survival rate is very very low and very few are successful.

It is almost impossible for a man to find a mate who is higher in the hierarchy. While around 99% of the women manage to find a man higher in the hierarchy. You will never find a female doctor who is married to a male nurse who worked for her, but you will find many female nurses who have married the doctor they worked for. You will never find businesswomen marry an air steward on the flight they take frequently, but you will find many Airhostesses who have married businessmen who travel frequently on their flights. I can go on.

Since some men are the most powerful and some of the women are ill-treated and exploited, it does not mean that women are low in the hierarchy. More men suffer much more than most women do. It has been that way since Stone Age.

In the primates branch of the mammals it is common to find a male hermits or outcasts who live a lonely and pathetic life. But the women will always be a part of some group no matter what happens to the males of the group. For a female if she lose something (other than her child) it is easy to find another one with no investment/risks involved. But for a male if he loses something he has lost a big investment and if he has a get something new he has to make a lot of investments and takes lot of risks. This is the reason women protest their children the most while men have to protect everything they have or they will end up with nothing.

So obviously the way a man reacts to something is different to the way a woman reacts and some have very extreme reaction.

Take the case of our freedom fighters, We had extrimists and moderates. Both thought the other was wrong.But the fact is people take different paths but the destination is same. Some people are just born aggressive.

Most men are aggressive while most women are not. And most men risk their lives while women never risk their lives. There are many women who kill, but if you check the crimes you will find that majority of them use some kind of poisoning to kill and trust me the ones caught are just a fraction of them. Many women kill men gradually over many months/years and the cause of death remains a mystery. Most popular, give very some dose of a chemical everyday and the chemical canot be detected as it is in very small amount at any given point of time.

But law can only protect visible crime. So almost all the crimes committed by men are punishable by law. But most crimes committed by women are not punishable by law as they are almost never visible.

This does not make men worse than the women.

#159
SLK
April 1, 2008
03:33 PM

Most women in the world feel that they can never be wrong. So they end up accusing others of being biased if they try to point out their mistakes.

Ladies, the reason civilizations started to have a concept of marriage is to avoid conflicts and killings. Physical attack is a normal human reaction when provoked or betrayed or threatened, but we are restrained from doing so by the threat of punishment and various laws and the pressure from our society.

But ladies by supporting Kiranjit Ahluwalia, Phoolan devi, Mrs Bobbit etc and hailing them as heroes and then when a guy who has not cheated anyone, has not hurt anybody, has not killed anyone, has no previous police record, kills his wife. Instead of analyzing why such a supposedly "good guy" committed such a crime you ladies are trying to portray him as demon.

You can never satisfy a woman. The reason, if you ask her to do something, then she does not even have the freedom to do anything. If she asks you to do something, then she says that there is no value for her words. In both the cases most men end up doing what the women want and still feel guilty because women always keep them on the defensive. My friend asked his wife that she has a different rule for him and a different rule for herself. She said yes we have different rules for you and I and you have to live by those rules. She was his childhood sweetheart so she told it as it is.

I cannot imagine a man saying that and everything being normal at home after that. When my friend mentioned this, the guys started teasing him. But when he said "this is the case in 90% of the families but men do not accept it", there was a silence in the room and some of them even nodded with a wry smile on their faces. The problem is women are good at keeping men on the defensive by always accusing them of something. But then that is their strength.

If men watch sports, they say men are childish. But if you offer lot of prize money women will be queuing up to play. Men play for fun. But there is also a scientific reason why men like sport. Sport or playing games is way to develop and sharpen your skills, both mentally and physically. Then why are women not interested in developing their skills. Well, women rely on different skills.

The point I'm trying to make is, whatever men do women will make them feel guilty about it. Even worse is when women make men feel guilty even when the women have done something wrong. This is a skill most women have mastered. You cannot expect justice from a woman.

Guys please check the web and you will find many similar cases where the wife has killed the husband or in some cases they have killed the children and the women support them.

YOU CAN NEVER SATISFY A WOMAN.

#160
Seema
April 1, 2008
05:15 PM

SLK: "Physical attack is a normal human reaction when provoked or betrayed or threatened, but we are restrained from doing so by the threat of punishment and various laws and the pressure from our society"

This is absolutely not true although violent men and women will use this false statement to justify their actions. Animals have such instincts. Human beings are social animals who can, if they are civilized enough, resolve conflict through communication. The laws are there to restrain those of you cannot be civilized enough and in order to protect the civilized sections of society.

Please do not bullshit us thus. You underestimate the intelligence of our readers and authors in the process of baring your own ass with Psychology Distorted 101.

How power, gender hierarchy has any place in a discussion about a woman who was brutally murdered is beyond my comprehension. When she was smothered to death it didn't matter that there was a law in place to protect her.

She simply stayed in the marriage too long, way longer than necessary, to try and work things out like our Bharatiya society requires women to, and hence suffered the consequences. If anything there is only lesson to be learned from all this, and the women who this lesson is meant for will know what that lesson is.

#161
Seema
April 1, 2008
05:24 PM

SLK: "The point I'm trying to make is, whatever men do women will make them feel guilty about it"

Yes, how true! what kind of women are these who make a man feel guilty for an error as insignificant and completely excusable as murder! tsk tsk. Women!

He was so hurt by social injustice that he just HAD to hold a pillow over his wife's face till she died. It has to be somebody else's fault. It cannot possibly be his fault.

He must've read online about all the women who kill their husbands and children and hence done this...I just wonder how other husbands keep their hands (pillows) off of their wifes. By this rate all men should be randomly killing their wifes and even daughters...cause those are the future feminazis. Nip them in the bud. That should work.

(P.S I hope my sarcasm is laid denser than your heads)

#162
Ank
April 1, 2008
06:06 PM

Aditi,

Although the rest of the write-up was good enough, your opening paragraph describing Sita's Agnipariksha was quite ill-conceived. Most of us only know about the scriptures and about our own history from what we read or what we were told. Just as how the Aryan Invasion myth and the Aryan/Dravidian divide has been hammered into us while growing up, only to find out after escaping the state education's stranglehold, that all these were highly questionable theories if not blatant lies?

Similarly, the real reason for Sita entering the fire after her release from captivity was to switch the original Sita back to Rama. You see, from what I have read (of course not in any of the widely known sources of "knowledge" on these subjects) Sita was switched by Mother Earth to protect her, when Ravan tried to carry her away. And she was switched back with the Agnipariksha which was only a cover for this take place!

And for you to liken this analogy of Sita's alleged oppression to how women are indeed oppressed to this day and age in India, was quite frankly a very ignorant way of putting your point across. None of us can claim to know the whole absolute truth or to be able to prove it convincingly to a large audience, and still come out looking credible. You just interpreted Sita's Agnipariksha as an oppression of her, which in fact might not have been one.

The rest of the article made for thoughtful reading. Thanks for that!

Now everyone please don't jump on my neck trying to disprove my version, because I freely admit that it might not be completely accurate. It IS just a version.

-Ank

#163
PH
URL
April 1, 2008
11:21 PM

Ank,

You raise an interesting point. The part in Aditi's piece that I liked most was the Sita reference:)In so far as literature is, as you concede, open to varied interpretations, hers is certainly not "ill conceived". It is however different from yours.

Your interpretation does beg the question though as to why she was banished after walking thru fire. Surely that doesn't exculpate Ram the husband, whatever it may say about the king. Recall that his own sons waged a war against him to avenge this very injustice. Valmiki's epic wasn't meant to deify Ram; that is all our doing.

#164
Ank
April 2, 2008
12:23 AM

PH,

Well, you do seem to agree that literature written in ancient languages or for that matter even written in colloquial languages is constantly subject to interpretation (example: we need lawyers interpret the law). I only meant Aditi's analogy of women of India being oppressed since ancient times and especially someone as holy as Sita, as applied to Rinku's case was ill-conceived. Not her interpretation of it. I repeat, we cannot conclude that Sita was indeed oppressed. We only believe that she might have been. In Rinku's case, clearly, her tragic unnecessary death leads to the obvious fact that she was indeed oppressed against.

And like I stated before, none of us actually has access to Valmiki's Ramayana, only the translations. Which of course means that the "scholar" doing the translation for us, has in all probability his own agenda of how to interpret things. Don't extrapolate this argument to mean that we should suspect all translations, but we cannot state as fact that Rama banished Sita because of her suspect purity. Or for totally wrong reasons.

Besides, Valmiki's Ramayana is just one version of the epic tale. There are other noteworthy, widely accepted versions of the story ; Tulasidas comes to mind. I'm sure we don't need to get into a fruitless debate about the veracity of the great epics because neither of us is an expert nor can be accepted as an authority on the subject.

To put it succinctly, (for those who wouldn't have patience to read my long winded explanation ;)) a more sensible analogy of Rinku's oppression would have been some event that could be verified as fact. Be it in ancient or contemporary Indian society.

#165
Aditi Nadkarni
April 2, 2008
02:36 AM

Thanks PH! :)

Ank: For what it is worth I appreciate your putting forth your own interpretation and can respect it as your own however my own use of Sita's reference was in no way an analogy for Rinku Sachdeva. It was an example of how society, scriptures and mythology have perceived marriage and the role of women. None of us know who Sita really was. What we know about her life itself is an interpretation and in that perception itself lies the mentality of the masses. The word Agnipariksha denotes a test...one that Sita had to take in order to prove her innocence to a judging society so her husband could prove his own credibility as a fair king.

Rinku's death itself may not be similar to Sita's end but in society's treatment of pronouncing her guilty based on the 3 page rant of her murderer is akin to the social scrutiny that Sita suffered. Rinku's character was brought into question solely becoz her murderer, a suspicious husband chose to provide rationalizations for his actions.

We as a society are harsh on women. And Rinku's death only proves that merely having a law in place cannot save the women who stay in a marriage and try to save it because society demands that they do so.

Truth be told, Rinku's case does not need an analogy. Her brutal end and the reaction of seemingly qualified men who rushed to justify her death, excuse her murderer's psyche are collectively a shocking reflection of the kind of society we live in. This society is the same one that praised Ram's fairness as a king while Sita was the one taking the fire test.

#166
Sumanth
April 2, 2008
08:28 AM

In the same Ramayana, Ram's father was driven to death by his wife Kaikeyi advised by a feminist bitch called Manthara.

Dasaratha's sons were such cowards that none of them can stop the bitches from their criminal behaviour and murder.

Since those days, the dignified men always remained away from indulging in a tussle with bitchy criminal women.

[EDITED: Please find a different, more respectful word for the opposite sex]

[Edited: Use yor own websites to market your work]

As women start behaving like chauvinistic males, all the privileges and sympathy towards will vanish.

For the first time, feminists sensed this in this particular incident that many have put a woman's wife at same level as a man's life.

------------

Jatayu was made to do his "natural duty", ie to protect women. He could have watched Sita getting raped. How many Indian feminists acknowledge Jatayu till today? How many Indian feminists acknowledged Vanars who laid their lives for Sita?

The conclusion?

There will never be any gratitude towards men, who sacrifice their lives for women or die arranging dowry for women who want to marry up to lead a luxurious life.

In the end, Ramayana and Mahabharata are just stories which were wrote by authors in patriarchal societies which considered men as disposable and baby making machines (according to patriarchy) as indispensable.

---------------------






#167
PH
URL
April 2, 2008
10:26 AM

Ank,

All very valid points you make. But I can do no better than Aditi in defending her interpretation, so will leave it at that.
We can agree to disagree on interpretations and their relevance to case at hand, but honestly, I enjoyed reading ur long winded explanation:)

Minor point: Tulsidas's version is much more recent compared to Valmiki's, and is more influenced by the bhakti tradition which makes it naturally more deifying (though no less beautiful). And the question of Sita's banishment still remains.

#168
FF
April 2, 2008
10:35 AM

Sumanth...

Molestation is crime ;).

#169
Anamika
April 2, 2008
10:42 AM

Ank, am not sure why you insist that we dont have access to Valmiki's Ramayana just because of the langauge. A lot of us grew up with English as our second language and learned Sanskrit at an early stage. It is a different matter that the text attributed to Valmiki has been modified and altered even in the classical times and so it is difficult to credit all parts of it to one single author.

Btw, you may want to consider some of the folk traditions that date back historically to classical times. In most of these Rama is considered cowardly and morally wrong for abandoning Sita especially post-agnipariksha.

PH: Tulsidas's version is definitely more deifying but also (and here few secular scholars are willing to even consider this) reflects the influence of Turkish/Persian/Arab views regarding women.

Aditi - agree totally. A scroll through this thread is enough to put one off Indian men completely. If I didn't know that this bunch of losers are the extreme fringe, I would be totally disillusioned by the idea of men.


#170
PH
URL
April 2, 2008
10:58 AM

Anamika,

That's interesting - the thing abt views on women having a Turk/Arab influence. Would love to read up on that if u have links/references.

And yeah, like I said in an earlier comment, Aditi's post reminded me of a Gujju poem that everyone sings in my family (calling it a Ram bhajan, ironically:) that questions Ram's judgement on Sita - the folk Charwakesque tradition of dissenting voices thankfully never dies.

#171
Gill
April 2, 2008
12:28 PM

>>>In most of these Rama is considered cowardly and morally wrong for abandoning Sita especially post-agnipariksha.>>>>>

Very strong statement!!! Which Ram are you talking of!!!!

Ramayan was written by Valmiki only. Tulsi Das wrote Ramchritramanas. We need to make that distinction. How can any version or work inspired by Ram and Ramayan done in different languages and times be called "Ramayan". Writers who wrote these versions never called their works Ramayan.

More over Ramayan (Valmiki) does not have so called Sita's Agnipriksha. It is the Ramchritra manas that has it. It was Tulsi Das's choice and creativity to add it in his new book and it was the foolishness of the people to believe Agnipriksha and take his work as literal translation of Ramayana.

There are hundreds of version of story of Ram and Ramayan in different languages and cultures. But none of them can and should be called Ramayan and their hero be judged as Ram of Ramayan. None of these works are literal translations they are simply new works inspired by originals and manipulated by authors own views and ethics. The best version is the Mappillapattu of kerala and the funny thing is that it is of Muslim origin. In this version Ram has become Laman and from Raja he has become a sultan.

In short there is only one Ramayan and that is by Valmiki. All other versions are stories inspired by Ramayan and they are manipulated in accordance to writers local Social fabric, language, culture and aspirations. And every version has character (Ram) inspired by "Ram of Ramayan" with distinct characteristics. But they are not Ram of Ramayan.

#172
Seema
April 2, 2008
12:40 PM

Once you get over the initial disgust of a man who routinely refers to women as "bitches", the SIFF chief Sumanth can be quite amusing. Rantings about a "feminist" Manthara, neglected Jatayu and unrevered Vanaras.

1. It is widely known that in most Hindu temples women are not allowed to touch the Bramhachari Hanuman.

2. Jatayu was a bird who was injured when an egotistical man kidnapped a woman pretending to be sadhu. Very similar to qualified men who pretend to have modern and evolved values and then turn vicious, suspicious and insecure once the marriage vows are through and they can manipulate their wives.

3. Manthara was asked by Indra the king of devas to convince Kaikeyi to demand that Rama could be sent into exile and fight Ravana. Again a powerful man had to rely on a woman and make her do the dirty work so he could fulfil his vested agendas and have Manthara carry the burden of being a "feminist bitch".

4. If you are such a masculist Sumanth how come you forgot Sampati you hypocrite :D

Thank you so much for inadvertently exposing two things

1) your ignorance of the scriptures
2) the patriarchal nature of the Indian civilization.

#173
Aditi Nadkarni
April 2, 2008
12:58 PM

Gill: In your comment you discuss at great length all the different versions of Ramayana and fail to understand that in treating this tale as an epic, as a literary work, you are actually strengthening the point I made in my article...social psyche. A society's literature and the stories on which morality and values are based are both reflections as well as determinants of social mentality towards issues such as treatment of genders. In this sense it does not matter at all if the original Ramayana had an agni-pariksha or not. Sita was banished, her character was questioned and in more than one version she suffered so that her husband's credibility be proven. Bottomline: The woman was persistently portrayed as an epitome of sacrifice and the man her judge. By mentioning all the versions you are in fact proving my point that people want to stick to this stereotype, this version. It appeals to them because that is how they like to perceive the role of women in society. Very simply, in treating the story as a literary piece one cannot distinguish between the Rama of Ramayana and Rama of the interpretations.

Also if you notice the Ramayana I refer to was Ramanand Sagar's television serial. Yet again the popular television series catered to the mentality of the masses.

If you are refering to Anamika's comment, I think she makes it very clear that she is referring to the folk traditions and various interpretations of the Ramayana, so your discourse about all the versions seems a bit redundant considering most of us are already pretty aware of the differences between the "original" and the interpretations.

#174
Vn
April 2, 2008
01:01 PM

Seema, the hypocrisy is here. Every women in this DC has been called a bitch. Just flock to other threads. If you don't agree, please read the thread "The Last Strand" from Ms. Anona and subsequent comments.

#175
kerty
April 2, 2008
01:36 PM

Aditi..

Ramanand Sagar's Ramayana actually goes into elaborate lengths to explain what so-called Agni ritual was really all about. Entire episodes were devoted to issues leading up and related to Sita's exile. One couldn't have possibly missed it. They thoroughly dispelled the arguments that have been around in twisted propaganda around Sita's exile. The problem with feminists is that they don't want to face truth or facts even when it is presented to them - they would rather wallow in their own convenient lies and stereotypes. There is a saying in Ramayana - that Rama appeared differently to people depending on their own inner 'Bhavana'. Sita has been the architect of traditional Indian womenhood embraced by women since ages in India. I am not surprised that our feminists despise Rama, Sita and everything they stand for. They see their nemesis in Sita.

#176
SLK
April 2, 2008
02:39 PM

Seema: "Animals have such instincts. Human beings are social animals"
Well, "A social animal is a loosely defined term for an organism that is highly interactive with other members of its species."
Man is a social animal and lions, dogs, wolves, hyenas and all primates are also social animals. Human beings also have instincts. It has been proven by researchers that the instincts of men and women have not changed since Stone Age. They still have the same desires and behavior patterns that their Stone Age ancestors had thousands of years ago. The male instinct is to protect their territory and possessions. The meaning of territory and the possessions keep changing but the instincts never change.

You might have noticed that a dog before going to sleep will circle on the spot couple of times before lying down. You will also notice that a male dog which has been living alone inside the compound of a lonely house, when released outside immediately pisses on the electric poles, trees etc. The dog is a domesticated subspecies of the wolf. So even after evolving into a dog and being domesticated for thousands of years the wolf's instinct in the wild to circle and press the leaves to make a bed before lying down still exists in the dog and the instincts of the dog's wild cousin to mark boundaries by piss marking on prominent landmarks also exists in it. Have you ever wondered how a baby which is in a liquid in the womb, when born immediately starts sucking? That is instinct. Instincts never change or die.

The difference between man and animal is in how they overcome their instincts. Men like Amit couldn't overcome their instinct. Laws do not help them overcome their instinct but it suppresses it. But though we should work for a cure it is always better to take precautions. My argument is not that Amit's action is justified but how it can be prevented by some minor tweaking by women by still retaining their freedom and independence. It might not always save the marriage but it can certainly save people from the pain and violence we see. I'm not saying Rinku should have done it, because we really do not know her side of the story. But women in general can take some precautions to prevent such incidents. It is not just women but any person who is in a vulnerable position should take some precautions.

I'm not sure who is "baring your own ass with Psychology Distorted 101"

"The point I'm trying to make is, whatever men do women will make them feel guilty about it"

I was not referring to the extreme reactions of some men like Amit. I was referring to the comments of some men for which they were made to feel guilty. I was referring to general some normal activities like sports etc for which men are made to feel guilty. I was referring to arguments with women where they always make you feel guilty even when they are wrong, I had even provided examples.

Seema: "How power, gender hierarchy has any place in a discussion about a woman who was brutally murdered is beyond my comprehension"

Well, How Ramayana, Ahilya, Panchtantra, Manu Smriti, Hinduism, goddesses, Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna and Kiranjit Ahluwalia and the various abuses has any place in a discussion about a woman who was brutally murdered is also beyond my comprehension"

Seema:"He must've read online about all the women who kill their husbands and children and hence done this..."

Again I was not referring to Amit. I was referring to the double standards of women, on one hand they will support women who kill and on the other hand they will abuse men who try arguing that a man's action can also be driven by circumstances and that a man can also be mentally tortured. You might feel some comment is wrong but every person has the right to have his/her own independent view. Try to point out his mistakes, if he is not reasonable ignore him but by abusing you are encouraging such abuses.

I hope the women here understand that the article for which you are responding does not mention Rinku or Amit in the first 8 paragraphs and the majority of the article is dedicated for the victimhood of women and for blaming men, religion, scriptures etc for it. I assume most people like me, who never comment on such blogs, are commenting here because we find some of the content irrelevant, unnecessary, hateful and misleading and not because we hate Rinku or support Amit. Majority of the communal violence in our country and the rest of the world are due to such articles which instead of reporting a standalone incident tries to link them to a much wider conspiracy and blames the whole community for it.

Times have changed not all victims are women. Women should stop accusing men, religion and society for every crime committed against women (or men). We should treat such incidences as "A person killed the spouse and committed suicide after suspecting that the spouse was cheating". It is very feasible that both the victim and the killer could have either been a man or a woman. There are as many bad women as bad men.

I can provide a very long list of women who killed babies and their own children/parents but that does not mean that all women are killers and we cannot blame all the women, society or feminists for it. Each man/woman is accountable for his/her actions. Circumstances can only reduce the blame but cannot make them innocent.

PS: The person I love most in this world is my daughter. And I'm not a women-hater.

#177
Ank
April 2, 2008
02:45 PM

Aditi,

Just where do I begin? I have never read so many self-contradicting statements all in the same sentence. After asserting that Sita's reference was in no way an analogy to Rinku, you have painstakingly explained how Sita's and Rinku's suffering are similar, thereby drawing even more analogies than before :-)

While seemingly accepting the argument that none of us really knows Sita, you still continue to uphold the same sentiment believed by the masses (in your own words) that she was oppressed. Should we in ignorance continue to propagate the same stereotypes just to make a convenient argument? If it cannot be stated as fact that Sita was indeed oppressed, it's absurd to say that since ancient times people have been oppressing women based on this particular "myth".

I repeat, it's futile to argue the veracity of the Ramayana or any other ancient texts; therefore your definition of Agnipariksha is irrelevant. I again refute your statement that Sita suffered social scrutiny. It cannot be stated as absolute fact that she did. You state in your article that you were influenced by the episode of Ramayana you saw on television. Which was a highly dramatized version of the epic, charged with excruciating emotion to make it look heart-rending to people.

Let me reiterate what I said in my first comment: just because some dubious knowledge was hammered into us as impressionable kids, is no excuse to still adhere to them in the face of new knowledge.

Society is harsh on women? Yes. I agree with that. Societies in all races and cultures have been harsh on the weaker people.

Your last paragraph left me totally flummoxed! Rinku's case didn't need an analogy. And yet the relentless comparison of her treatment to the treatment that Sita "supposedly" received...! Followed by yet another irrational generalization that society blamed Sita, praised Rama, etc. etc. The utter paradox is that while stating that Ramayana may be a mythological epic, you still argue that somehow the society that was portrayed in it was "real"?

I would like to say that you do make rational arguments in most of the article and I totally agree with the sentiments about Rinku's barbaric treatment. I will however refrain from further extending this argument, because unless we have a moderator to regulate the debating points, we'll forever be stuck in a convoluted cycle arguing the same points over and over... but in different words. :-)


PH!

Hope I don't sound patronizing;) But it was a pleasure reading your concise and if I may say, one of the more rational comments? Your response did reveal that you read my comment in its entirety and agreed to disagree. Of course, I do concur with your observation about Tulsidas.

As for Sita's banishment, afaik, it was because it was pre-determined that she would only spend so many years as a human on the earth. She was fulfilling a prophecy, or a penance that she had to undergo due to things that happened in her past life. So she was born from the earth and she returned to it as ordained. (Interestingly enough, this seems to be the case for every mythological character, they were all fulfilling some divine purpose)

#178
SLK
April 2, 2008
03:21 PM

"Influence of Turkish/Persian/Arab views"
The word Hindi, Hindu and Hindustan is a Persian word. The root of all these words and India,Indus is the name of the Indus river i.e Sindhu

The Persians spelt Sindhu as Hindu and the Greeks spelt Hindu as Indus. From Indus we have India. From Hindu we have Hindustani and Hindi.

The meaning of the word Khan is leader and it is a Mongol word not a Persian or Islamic word, remember Jenghis Khan, the khan who captured persia. Mongol nomads also call their house/tent made of skin 'Ghar'. The word 'Mughal' is a distortion of the word Mongol. Their ancestor is Timor a Mongol who converted to islam.

Yes there are influences but not just Turkish/Persian/Arab but Greek and Mongol influences too.

Alexander was from Macedonia which was part of Greece. The traditional dress of people around this area in countries like Romania is very similar to the traditional dress of Gujarathis and Rajasthanis. The coat, the skirt and other stuff are almost similar.

We Indians never know where our root is. But whatever the roots we cannot blame its influence for what is happening today.

#179
Ank
April 2, 2008
03:49 PM

SLK

Very enlightening information; Wholeheartedly concur with your analysis!

-Ank

#180
Aditi Nadkarni
April 2, 2008
05:51 PM

SLK & Ank: Please read this comment of mine carefully. I only went through some of both your comments and believe that while your arguments may be crystal clear your understanding of why this article was written is not.

In all honesty, this particular case had very little to do with feminism. BUT when she was murdered I did not expect men to stand up and defend, justify, psychoanalyze, explain or excuse her murderer in way whatsoever as they have. But they did.

I say this in my article that the REACTIONS to her death are what prompted me into writing this article and not her death itself.

Slk, Firstly by using psychology you have indirectly excused Amit for his actions and yet again placed the responsibility on Rinku. We all know that human beings have evolved immensely and language, social influences and communication have developed enough for a person to not have to communicate by pouncing on the other person. People who engage in such behavior will do it no matter what the person has done to provoke them. That is why they put down a crazy dog. One never knows what will instigate them.

According to your lengthy argument Amit's instincts hadn't changed and therefore women like Rinku should take certain behavioral precautions to prevent themselves from being smothered to death. This line of thinking while of no real value has suppressed women who out of such fears and reluctance go through life being what society requires them to be. It is a pattern with some men who will dig into psychology, history, anatomy, genetics to find a way to displace the responsibility. You may not realize it but it is very typical.

One doesn't have to be a women hater to have a mentality like that. I know a lot of men who adore their daughters but shocked the hell out of me by claiming that Rinku probably made him suspicious by her behavior.

Now to both of you:

The initial paragraphs of my article are not meant to establish victimhood at all. The characters are not victims. They are just characters who were "portrayed" as victims and in this process the mentality of the writer and the society he/ she catered to was revealed. I have said this in a number of my comments but I guess people choose to believe what they want to.

Scriptures, mythology, films, literature all reflect social mentality. These pieces are driven by people's existing biases and hence these examples were used. If some of you didn't get that I guess some of you desperately wanted to see the obnoxious, bitchy feminist include some kind of victimhood in the article. :) Our biases never leave us.

Personally I feel that every person has a choice, even the victims at some point had a choice. My only grouse against Indian society is that Indians collectively and persistently influence women into making the wrong choices. Starting with matters of matrimony and reproduction to careers and physical appearances are all dictated by social opinion.

And this is what was established by my examples of mythology and films. Those are very important reflections of how our society thinks.

#181
temporal
URL
April 2, 2008
05:57 PM

adi:

gentle slap on the wrist award goes to....


I did not expect men to stand up and defend, justify, psychoanalyze, explain or excuse her murderer in way whatsoever as they have. But they did.


next time, identify these delusionaly
impo(r)tent men please!

#182
Ank
April 2, 2008
07:29 PM

Aditi,

Why bother coming up with irrelevant explanations defending your article and attacking the commenter's points while ascribing to them arguments that they may not have made, if you didn't in fact read the comment in its entirety? In the same vein you accuse the readers of not having understood the title of the article. So let's see... if a commenter agrees with you, he/she got your point. If they didn't ... well, they're either too prejudiced, too narrow-minded, or a feminist?! In general, I would love to see an argument or reasoning free from passion and indignant charges.

Gill,

Your post was very interesting to read! And I do concur with your clarification regarding the Ramayan.

-Ank

#183
Ank
April 2, 2008
07:30 PM

Aditi,

Why bother coming up with irrelevant explanations defending your article and attacking the commenter's points while ascribing to them arguments that they may not have made, if you didn't in fact read the comment in its entirety? In the same vein you accuse the readers of not having understood the title of the article. So let's see... if a commenter agrees with you, he/she got your point. If they didn't ... well, they're either too prejudiced, too narrow-minded, or a feminist?! In general, I would love to see an argument or reasoning free from passion and indignant charges.

Gill,

Your post was very interesting to read! And I do concur with your clarification regarding the Ramayan.

-Ank

#184
PH
URL
April 2, 2008
07:59 PM

Ank,

Not patronizing at all:)

Well, the characters fulfilling divine prophecies doesn't diminish their agony (Sita's I mean, upon being exiled)otherwise no Christian would feel repentence drawing comfort from divine will:)
And-this may be yet another difference btwn us-as an unbeliever I lean toward a secular reading of the epics. Sita's exile, in that reading, does tend to look like injustice to me. I even think it's deliberate, to show a grayer side of Ram's character. Whatever its political merit, its ethics are a bit grey.

Have enjoyd this discussion:)

#185
Ank
April 2, 2008
08:47 PM


PH,

Again, very gratifying to read the arguments you have put forth! Firstly, I do agree that characters' fulfilling their prophecy doesn't diminish their agony. I would also like to believe that if the agony was justified (well, for lack of a better cliché, lets use Karma!) then we needn't look to find someone or something to lay the blame on. You gave an excellent example of the Christian. Hope I'm not stepping on any toes when I say this: if Jesus indeed suffered inexplicable agony, he did so willingly and for the greater good. That's exactly what I feel about my interpretation of Sita too. Why should we believe that she was some passive docile woman who didn't have the nerve to stand up to the supposed atrocities heaped on her? She could have just as easily been a strong self willed woman, who did whatever she did for the greater good.

You'll be surprised to know that I prefer a secular reading of the epics too :-) And it's the very same outlook that makes me believe that we needn't commiserate with Sita's supposed exile as injustice. Using the same analogy of Jesus as above, if Sita was indeed exiled, and for unjust reasons, (I say IF, because I don't believe she was exiled), there might been a higher purpose to it. Or indeed no purpose at all. The difference between the former and latter beliefs is therefore completely based on how we choose to interpret the great epics!

I do fervently hope that I haven't stepped into a field of landmines which will open the flood gates to inflamed arguments on Religion/Atheism/Creation/Intelligent Design!! Etc etc :-D Ha ha.

-Ank

#186
Aditi Nadkarni
April 2, 2008
09:42 PM

Ank: I only occasionally butt in if I feel that readers may have misunderstood my take, to clarify matters. I don't expect you to change your stance and immediately agree. In my comment to you and Slk I only pointed out the rationale for my article. But if you believe that my responses "attack" commentators :), I wish you better discussions for the future where your heightened sensitivities find less abrasive premises.

Its a little odd though that I only expanded what PH had said in defense of my take in the article and yet you somehow found his thoughts "gratifying" and mine "attacking".

As I said our biases crop up in odd places.

:)

#187
PH
URL
April 2, 2008
10:50 PM

Ank,

The Ramayana is intelligent design...by it's writer:)
I suppose in the end we must settle on to each his/her own on this one. Literature is like that - a mirror more than a picture.

To anyone who may know this,
One factual and purely curiosity-born question: does the Valmiki original (or most "accepted" versions of it) record Sita's walking thru fire and later moving to the ashram-whether of her own will or whatever? I'm simply asking bcos in all honesty my knowledge of the epics is what my grandfather narrated to me - all kinship, no scholarship :-)


#188
Ank
April 3, 2008
12:44 AM

Aditi,

I sure would like to understand how you can want clarify matters, without actually addressing the exact points on which the readers disagree with you? Your earlier claim of only skimming the comments still seem to hold, since I didn't see any clarification from you that you did indeed go back and read my comments in their entirety!

In most of your responses to comments so far, you have only reiterated in confusing ways, some of the original points in the article. And yet again, you have ascribed to my writing a "heightened" sensitivity, when there was only a call for rational explanations free from passion.

Ah, you did answer your own question when you wondered why I agreed with what PH had to say. It's not at all odd that I should. It was apparent from his comments that he specifically addressed the points that I had raised, even if they were disagreed with. And even more obvious was the fact that he did read my comments fully before constructing his own opinion. Hmm, "attacking" was just an expression. Hardly worth feeling sensitive about ;-)

For my part, I do wish your future write-ups won't end up judging readers' disagreements as nothing more than a "bias" cropping up.

-Ank

#189
Ank
April 3, 2008
12:52 AM

PH,

"The Ramayana is intelligent design...by it's writer:)"

That was a good one! As was this next statement about how literature is indeed a mirror more than a picture. Thanks for pointing that out.

In case you did happen to read my comment above lavishing praise on your style of writing, I hope you haven't suddenly grown two horns on the head :-))) Wish I knew the answer to your query re Sita's state of mind in Valmiki's Ramayan, so I could have pontificated some more.. haha.

#190
Aditi Nadkarni
April 3, 2008
01:07 AM

I do skim through comments that are repetitive. I also only clarify stuff I want to clarify and unless I get paid to do it won't do any more than that. My earlier comment addressed both you and Slk and some of it was for both of you and some for either of you. If they didn't clarify things for you, tough shit.

PH seems to be getting through to you better, so I'll let him take it from here. Based on previous experiences with him on DC I trust his perspectives almost as much as I would've my own.

Most importantly, you are just one commentator on one article out of my 55 other articles on DC and a couple dozen more on other sites. Hate to break it to you but whether you agree with me or not, whether all of your criticisms have been addressed or not, has negligible place in my scheme of things.

#191
Ank
April 3, 2008
02:08 AM

Aditi, Aditi, Aditi,

The gloves come off and the polite façade finally disintegrates. I'll however persevere to remain on the high road.

In your spiteful rant, you at least admitted that you only clarify arguments that you feel capable of dealing with; even if you had to stoop to the flimsy vindication of not being paid enough to compose better rebuttals to readers' comments.

Whether or not PH got through to me is again irrelevant. And you certainly didn't have to feel compelled to rattle off your resume in a somewhat presumptuous (and if I may say, a tad weak?) attempt to prove how "insignificant" readers' nay commenters' like me really are? I sure hope you realize on sober reflection that taking the high road is much more preferable to advance as an author who has some credibility.

-Ank


#192
Seema
April 3, 2008
02:18 AM

Ank ank ank that comment stank!

I dont think thats aditi's resume. me thinks it sounds more like a testimony of how little u mean to her...

...and if i may add, to some of the other commentators (moi for example) who are starting to wonder if u have a point to make besides squabbling and pointlessly pulling apart the author's credibility.

Looks like the "high road" at your end does not have a destination in particular.

#193
Aditi Nadkarni
April 3, 2008
02:23 AM

Good god Ank, how you expose me you clever clever fella. :D

#194
Anamika
April 3, 2008
03:14 AM

Aditi - shame that it seems that debate on this issue has been hijacked either by irrational, foul-mouthed men with grudges (siffers) or now an apparent erudite who insists on squabbling on flimsy grounds. In both cases, it really does say poor things about the majority of Indian men (at least on this site).

Ank - you're right: such knowledge and wisdowm. O great sage, why have you withheld your light from the world which stumbles about in darkness?

#195
Anamika
April 3, 2008
03:39 AM

PH: Re your question, Valmiki's Ramayana ends with the crowning of Rama as the king of Ayodhya, but not the events that follow. It does include the agni-pareeksha and the dialogue between Rama and Sita. If we're looking at it in literary terms, this is an interesting juncture: Rama tells her that she is "stained" by the abduction (and thus an implicit infidelity) so how can he look at her again with love. Sita replies that her "heart" is pure regardless of what has happened (You could use this in modern terms as her refusing to be blamed for Ravana's actions). She then asks for Lakshman's help who is horrified/saddened by Rama but stays silent. She pleads her case with Rama again who refuses to consider it. It is THEN that she calls on the gods to prove her right and steps into the fire.

Interestingly enough, once she passes the test, Rama addresses the public (doesn't speak to her) to explain how HE knew that she was pure but wanted to still all tongues, and then comes the explanation of him being divine and Sita as well etc.

The issue here - which I find hilarious with anyone insisting that its Valmiki's Ramayana that is the original/authoritative - is that within the Indian tradition, the text is qualified as "smriti" which means its passed by memory. This also means that verses and often entire chapters were inserted at different times and by different authors within the text to reflect the changes - most scholars tend to believe that the Bala Kand is a later addition as well as quite a few verses of the final Yuddha Kand especially because of the inconsistencies and contradictions.

The version we have as "Valmiki's" is dated historically back to 2nd century BC because of the references it makes to the Sakas and Greeks. This doesn't mean that it wasn't around before, just that this version is the "oldest" complete one.

Within the Indian classical context, it makes very little sense to talk of one author/one text as definitive, more so in the case of smritis. Valmiki's text - as we have it - is merely one of many dealing with the epic of Rama. Which is why the "remaining" bits of Sita's exile and the war between Rama and his sons is not necessary in "Valmiki's Ramayana" but forms part of the epic tradition of Rama any way (and was used quite logically and properly by Sagar in his tv saga).

PS: Earlier texts (including "Valmiki's" one) are far more evenhanded in literary terms than the later (and more popular) Tulsidas version. Sita gets to state her case. Ravana gets to grieve in extremely moving terms the death of his brothers. The Rakshasa women not only grieve his death but also absolve Sita from any part in bringing about his death.

Re: earlier query on Tulsidas's version and the Islamic influence on it, there hasn't been a formal paper - as far as I know - on this. But I attended a conference some years ago in Jhansi where this was being discussed. The JNU-types (or English medium types) vehemently refused to consider the idea while those who work in Sanskrit, Hindi, Urdu and various other languages made a really convincing case for it.

#196
Man Singh
URL
April 3, 2008
11:53 AM

"Hari Anant Hari Katha Ananta
kahahu sunahu bahi bidhi sab santa"

Says Tulsidas about Ramkatha and its expansion.

`Jaaki rahi bhavana jaisi,
Prabhu Moorat dekhi tin taisi'

Says Tulsidas how people with different mentality interpret same thing differently.
For a Hungry man full moon sounds like Huge Chapati while for a romantic man it will resemble with face of his beloved.

`Parhit saris dharam nahi bhai
par peeda sam nahi admai'

is the conclusion of Tulsidas what is Adharma and Dharma.

There is no sin equal to Torturing others. As Amit tortured a helpless women nobody can justify his actions. Such criminals should be punihsed.

What's moral of the story of episode of `Agni pariksha' ?

For crooks it is to put women in fire if she is abducted by dacoits.

For right thinking people moral of the story is not blame a women.

Rama's technique of course is democratic in nature and he always prefers to take public in to confidence.

It all depends on mentality of people if they go by wordings of teh story or by moral of the story.

#197
Ank
April 3, 2008
12:17 PM

I just HAD to be a fella if I had the temerity to demand a better argument?

Haha, glad to see the cronies piping up :-) Ignoring the hard questions, then attacking the commenters on selective points, finally stooping to personal attacks while banding together to stifle a voice? I have a niggling suspicion that you're going to continue replying to my comments, in a valiant attempt to have the last word. After all, it IS your article that I'm commenting about, so I'm going to let you have it ;)

As for me, I'm done squandering my time on this "hallowed" thread. The amusement was good while it lasted...

Ank

#198
PH
URL
April 3, 2008
12:24 PM

Anamika,
That was really informative, enjoyd reading it, and it did answer my question. The agni preekhsa episode and the "narowa kunjrowa" with Yudhishtir's chariot wheels touching the earth in Mahabharat are-to me-beautiful literary depictions of human imperfection:)

Ank,
No horns whatsoever, certainly not big enough to lock 'em with someone:)

Aditi, that's awfully nice of you:)

#199
Aditi Nadkarni
April 3, 2008
12:30 PM

Anamika: I have to say I am as impressed with your knowledge of the Ramayana as I am disturbed by the reactions of some of the men on this thread who in hindsight, as Temporal keeps warning me, are best ignored :)

I did know that different versions exist but have read only a couple. So your explanation addressed to PH was very enlightening. Thank you for that.

#200
Anamika
April 3, 2008
01:42 PM

Aditi - I have read the threads re: this murder with absolute repugnance. More so as so many of the men on the threads seem to try to peddle some absolutely misinformed/uninformed idea of "Indian" culture as justification for a heinous act.

Man Singh - I am not generally in agreement with your views, but the point you make regarding dharma and its transgression caused by a murderer is a relief, especially after the bilge that has been spouted by SIFFERs on this thread.

PH - welcome. I realised a few years ago that we had been fed so much propaganda on "culture" - from colonizers, leftists, nationalists, etc., - but few of us knew much about it that I set myself the task of reading the classical Sanskrit canon (often accompanied by a Hindi translation). :-)

Meanwhile, you may want to look up the political roots/implications of the bhakti movement re Tulsidas for some ideas on that initial point. Bhakti movement is similar in terms of being a social, political, philosophical reaction to Islam (as a faith based tradition) to some of the 19th century Hindu reformist movements which try to counter European "rationalism" and Victorian "social welfare" by taking on elements of the opposing/politically dominant culture.

Ank, be happy to continue debating/discussing if you can put aside the insulting/patronising and rely on substance. As for "crony-ism," I am sure if you searched through DC, you'll find extremely heated disgreements that I have had with Aditi on other threads.

#201
Aaman
URL
April 3, 2008
11:39 PM

And now come the copy-cats:

Peddapuri Ramakrishna, a 30-year-old software professional committed suicide along with his wife Soumya (23) by consuming pesticide at their rented flat in Chandanagar near BHEL in the city. Police sources said the couple may have killed themselves on Tuesday night.
...
"He (Ramakrishna) mentioned that there was no understanding between them (the couple). He said he was committing suicide as he did not want to trouble his parents by forever fighting with his wife," Chandanagar inspector Tamarkanth Reddy said, quoting the suicide note.

After talking to the parents of the couple, police discovered that there were some marital problems between the two. "Soumya had threatened to commit suicide earlier too," the inspector, quoting family members, said. Soumya, a graduate and a home-maker, had married Ramakrishna in April, 2007. "They are yet to celebrate their first wedding anniversary," Raghavacharyulu, a relative of Soumya, told TOI.

#202
Aditi Nadkarni
April 4, 2008
12:01 AM

This is sad. Itreally is. The educated class can do so much for their families and their community and instead we have these tragedies.

#203
kerty
April 4, 2008
02:16 AM

Adultery, threats of false dowry/dv charges, tilted legal system, gender warfare etc create tragic consequences. They subvert relationships, families and communities. The feminist attempt to promote and justify them suggests that Rinku and Amit will not be the last of the tragedies.

#204
ravi
April 4, 2008
04:29 AM

few more details on #201 incident.

That poor husband wrote 15 pages suicide note.
In this letter he explained why he has taken this extreme step.

1)He wrote how his wife harassed him,within this one year.(just one year before they married).

2)She attempted suicides 8 (EIGHT) times(OMG), and safely escaped(!!??).

*****If a man do this, he will face at least 1 year punishment for harassing his wife mentally, but what to do. He is a man, who is always a "rogue" according to some people*******.(this part,enclosed in the stars, is not in his suicide note)

3)He feared that, if she suicide he need to face lot of problems.

4) he wrote, "I feel that she may change her mentality, but she didn't".

5)He wnated to see IPL match, and wanted to vote for chiranjeevi.He felt sad about not doing both of these.

#205
Deepti Lamba
URL
April 4, 2008
05:04 AM

Sad about not getting to entertain himself but no regret for killing his wife. Yup, all hail the SIFF hero!!

#206
smallsquirrel
April 4, 2008
08:24 AM

well all, you have it straight from SIFF. If you feel that your wife stops you from watching IPL, you should murder her!

I swear to all that is good and holy you people are among the most ridiculous in the world.

#207
SLK
April 4, 2008
10:37 AM

smallsquirrel,

The IPL has not yet started. That guy wanted to watch but is sad to die before that. Some people have strage priorities. But he did not commit suicide due to IPL. And it is not implied anywhere that he killed his wife.

Not related to this incident, generally if you look at the suicide statistics there is a big difference between the sexes. Many more women attempt suicide then men. But more men actually commit suicide then women.

#208
Aditi Nadkarni
April 4, 2008
11:23 AM

None of these cases have anything to do with the 498 law or DV act. This suicide strengthens the points I was trying to make with some of my articles: Lack of societal support during marital upheavals and undue pressure from society that forces couples to stay together when their careers and personalities are incompatible beyond compromise is what is causing these tragedies.

But desperate groups will try to make these seem related to their cause somehow to get attention.

If Manthara and Surpanakha were feminists then why not dead working women who cannot defend themselves against the accusations. So add them to the list to garner publicity.

The marketing strategy is a good one but the poster boys are not so great. One murdered his wife based on "suspicion" and "intuition" and the other because "he didn't want to bother his parents with his fights with his wife".

I think we are all starting to see what kind of men and women the SIFF comprises if these are their heroes.

#209
Seema
April 4, 2008
11:29 AM

I am starting to wonder if writing long rants and letters before murdering people and committing suicide exonerates people of their crimes in India.

#210
Ankush
April 4, 2008
03:08 PM

A lot has been written in Indian newspapers, some of which, too disgusting and painful to comprehend. I will start my discussion with sharing the facts of Rinkus life written by her close friend from Bangalore (Being anonymous was this individuals choice and I respect it, I cannot however thank this individual enough for being there for Rinku in her time of need).

Also to all reading this please ask yourself this question IS PERCEIVED INFEDILITY ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR MURDER. FOR THAT MATTER DOES ANYTHING JUSTIFY MURDER. We gave our Daughter/ Sister to this individual to build a life with and take care of, we believed in his integrity, his promise to be by her side at all times. If we had any inclination of his demonic mind we could have rather had her be by our side and not married in the first place.

I can't believe me and dad took her hand and handed it to this monster. And also stop this stupidity of saying we would have gone after the Dowry allegation, LET ME BE VERY CLEAR ON THIS we would not have got our daughter/ sister married to a family asking dowry. That's insulting in today's day an age. Trust me if some one was to ask our family for dowry we would KICK BUTT, please don't insult us, let alone give our daughter to such a family.

Also I cant believe that Amit's Sister (Nidhi) is stating that she had no idea of these issues when RINKU CALLED HER UP COUPLE OF WEEKS ago asking for help. Anyways lets start with this first, and if I see this going in the way of being insulting or I receive stupid comments, I guess its the last you are hearing from me and the Family. I do also want to point out that we plan to do something social about women who are living a married life similar to that of Rinku and suffering. So lets start with this, and please be polite in your questions as this is my Dear Beloved Sister you will be talking about, getting nasty with someone is an easy trait, being polite is tough, so tread the road of being humble and polite with your questions. The letter begins:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Rinku as I knew her

I met Rinku around June last year. We started meeting up on a regular basis and soon became very close friends. Meeting each other on a more or less daily basis we soon started confiding everything about our lives in each other.

She had already started to have problems in her marriage with Amit by then. Rinku was beautiful, confident, an out and out extrovert and doing excellently in her career. She was a warm, vivacious and ever optimistic person, very caring and affectionate by nature. Amit was an introvert, bordering on being chauvinistic and egoistical by nature. They never had major fights but had minor disagreements on a regular basis, mostly sparked by their completely contrasting personalities. Rinku being a strong independent woman had her viewpoint about things which irked him because he probably was hoping for a wife who while being great arm candy when he socialized would be more submissive at home and accept his decisions on house, car and other decisions of everyday life etc. without questioning him or giving her opinion on it.

It was one day when she had taken him with her to her official party that they ended up disagreeing on something and he left her stranded at the party late in the night and went off in their car, refusing to take her home with him. It was at this time that she was crying and wondering what to do next that her colleague came forward and offered to drop her home. In her state of distress she confided in him about her marital problems and the fact that all was not well with her marriage. Since that day he became her friend and confidant in office, who was there to give her a shoulder to cry on when things went wrong which was happening on a more or less regular basis. Having come to Bangalore after her marriage, she had no close friends in the city who she could confide in and she needed to speak to someone to clear her mind and decide how to take things forward. Till her last day, he remained that friend and confidant. There NEVER was a question of him being anything else. The rapport they shared was one of strong friendship and sympathy for her plight. His parents were any case looking out for a suitable match for him and he was supposed to get married by July this year. She would talk to him about her troubles and he in turn would advise her and also tell her all about the prospective marriage candidates he was being shown and ask her opinion on them, whether they sounded promising and should he go ahead and say yes to any. If that fight had not taken place in front of her colleague, she would never have started confiding in him in the first place.

On Amit's birthday, Rinku planned flowers, cake and gifts at midnight and took him to out to dinner the next day. Ten minutes before midnight on her birthday he got into an argument with her about her dressing style. He criticized her wardrobe very rudely and then refused to apologise or make up with her when she started crying. They went o bed fighting and he did not plan anything for her the next morning either. After her work in the evening, she begged him to forget the fight and join her for dinner at a restaurant. He came in a very aloof manner and fought with her again while leaving the restaurant.

Rinku always believed in talking things out in case of an argument and moving on from there whereas Amit would just stop talking for several days in a row. This made her very unhappy. She would always be the first person to go ahead and make up with him after a fight even when she wasn't at fault as she believed that with just two people living in a house, it was extremely unpleasant to live together day after day without talking.

During one such fight, Amit got a phone call. It was from some friend he had not heard from in sometime. He started talking to him ignoring Rinku who was in the middle of a heated discussion with him. When she asked him to at least resolve matters with her first without callously moving on to other things he got upset that his friend might have overheard and came forward and slapped her across her face. He NEVER apologized for that act either then or later.

During their numerous fights, NEVER did he bring up his suspicions of an extramarital affair at any point of time. Being basically of a suspicious and possessive nature, he sometimes used to check Rinku's messages behind her back. She had come to realize this and had told him that if any point he wanted to know who she was communicating with, he just had to ask her. She requested him to not go behind her back but see her cell if he needed to in front of her. She wanted to be treated with the same trust and space she gave him.

Similarly, one day she mentioned how Amit was aware of all her investments, bank accounts etc. but had never told her about his. He found Rinku inquisitive when she asked such questions but all Rinku wanted was an open and honest marriage based on communication and trust.

In December last year they went to Mumbai to visit Rinku's parents. Though they had planned this trip several months in advance, Amit sulked about going as he wanted to go to Delhi to his parents (which they were doing in January anyways). While there, he walked out from the room rudely once when Rinku's mother was talking to him, slamming the door behind him just because he was in a bad mood. He also made last minute plans to meet his friends there without telling Rinku who he was meeting and how long he would be out, even when he knew that she had made plans for the two of them with her parents and relatives for that same time. One of Rinku's biggest grievances with him was that he did not give her parents and family the same kind of respect and understanding that he wanted her to show his parents and this was always a point of conflict between them. Two days after returning to Bangalore, he suddenly stopped talking to her altogether though they hadn't fought recently. After five days of silence with her pleading with him everyday during this time to tell her what was wrong, he said that he was not sure and he had to figure out some things first. He never gave his reasons even later when things went back to normal gradually and she was left wondering about his sudden spurts of silence.

Another point of conflict was that he did not give importance to her career and expected her to move with him out of Bangalore at the drop of a hat if he changed jobs; without even consulting her first about it. She was doing very well in her job and expected his support as far as her career went as she was sharing all household and other expenses with him including those for the new flat they had bought and furnished together.

Early February she decided to see a marriage counselor as a last resort to save her marriage as she had become completely drained from their daily fights about minor everyday things always followed by days of silence from his side. She was hoping that at least in front of the counselor he would open up enough to tell her his issues with her so they could talk things out.

I know for a fact that at the marriage counselor's, different issues mentioned above were brought forth by him but there was not even a passing mention of him suspecting an extramarital affair. If it was preying on his mind to the point that he murdered her for it, how is it that he did not feel the need to even mention it once in front of the counselor? They visited the counselor on a Saturday evening. They were then asked to come back the next weekend and in the meantime advised to go out for lunches, dinners, movies etc. where they could just hang out and have fun without discussing any of their differences.
Saturday he didn't speak to her, neither on Sunday even though she suggested several trips outside. Sunday night he invited her to the bedroom and when she refused on grounds of the fact that if there was no emotional bond between them then she couldn't resort to physical intimacy, he got extremely upset and asked for a divorce. By then she had become completely disillusioned as she felt that her requirement in his life was not for companionship but for cooking and giving him company in bed and thus readily agreed.

The next day she went to the Gurudwara after work and silently cried there for everything that had gone wrong. When she went home that night, he told her that he had behaved impulsively the previous night and asked her to reconsider the divorce. She wanted to save the marriage if possible and agreed. She had by then told her parents about her marital problems and decided to go for a few days to them to personally let them know that she was planning to work on it as she knew how worried they would be about her. During the 5 days she was there, Amit neither called nor messaged though he knew that she had gone through problems at the airport with her visa etc. She had a difficult time trying to get in touch with him and he finally responded to her calls. They spoke only twice during her time there.

She came back to Bangalore with the intention of working on her marriage but though he had promised to be more communicative and make an effort from his side too, within few weeks she realized that they were back to their daily arguments and there wasn't much change in his attitude. She carried on nevertheless till about 2 weeks before her death when she finally realized that the best thing for them both would be to move on instead of compromising on their happiness on a daily basis. She told him that it would be best to separate and he agreed. Amit told her that he was looking at job options overseas and would probably move abroad in a few months time. It was then that she requested him to move out of their present house to their Sarjapur flat as it would be closer to his workplace. She wanted to continue living there as being fairly new to the city and having to stay alone thereon she wanted to be in a locality she had become familiar with and also as she knew she could go to the landlord in times of trouble as she was on very good terms with his family and they were extremely helpful people.

One of the things she mentioned 3 days before her death was 'After all when you have lived with someone for one and a half years and that too someone you have loved, there is a bond that forms that can't go just because of disagreements. I know if I have decided to get out, I should do it soon but I've been dragging it and am still confused about my decision as I can't make myself hate him. I still care about him..." Till he decided to move out of that house, she also continued staying with him as she felt that with both of them working, they could discuss how to take the divorce forward only when they met in the evenings. At the same time, she said that since she had to cook dinner for herself anyways, she could also take care of his food at least as long as they were still living together as it would be inconvenient for him to eat out everyday.

There was NEVER any question of an affair and she trusted him blindly and so continued living with him even after they had decided to separate. He took advantage of this blind trust and made her pay with her life for something she didn't ever do. Amit not only cold bloodedly killed her but also maligned her even in death!!! As one of her closest friends, I want to make it clear to everyone that Rinku cared about Amit till the last day. He was the ONLY man she loved. Being an independent woman of the 21st century, she decided to opt out of a bad marriage but ONLY because they were not getting along together... NOT FOR ANY OTHER REASON!!!!

***

#211
SLK
April 4, 2008
03:25 PM

Aditi: "According to your lengthy argument Amit's instincts hadn't changed and therefore women like Rinku should take certain behavioral precautions to prevent themselves from being smothered to death."

I do not see anything wrong in it.

You are driving slowly on a hill on the left side of the road and if a big truck comes from the opposite direction, he is overtaking in a no overtaking zone and is on the wrong side of the road directly in front of you.

What will you do? Say that you are right and he is wrong and keep driving straight into the truck and get killed or slow down, take evasive action and then note down the number of the truck and report it. It is a different issue that police will do nothing after that.

Anyways I was making a more general comment. For e.g. a person used to staying out late for professional and non-professional reasons before marriage should change a bit after marriage or you have scope for misunderstanding. It applies to both men and women.

My comment was
"Though we should work for a cure (divorce/counseling etc) it is always better to take precautions (to avoid confrontations until you find the cure)"

The comments I'm making below have nothing to do with Amit or Rinku. It is a very general comment.

Lot of people come to Bangalore and stay on their own. But they do not know how to handle the new found freedom, money and all the opportunities they find there. It does not matter which city they are from, if they are with their family their freedom is limited, not all families allow their children to drink and/or stay out late. When they are on their own they end up doing the wrong things and end up with the wrong guys and have a very active night life.

When I was working for a big multinational in Bangalore, we used to regularly get marketing calls mostly from call centers for banks regarding personal loans, credit cards etc. I remember one guy who was in Bangalore for couple of years and was cribbing about not having a girlfriend. He reluctantly tried for a date with a girl who called him and once he was successful he found it so easy that he used to have dates with most of the girls who called. The main criterion was that the girl should not have her family in Bangalore. Initially we thought that he would get into trouble but later we were shocked to find that most of these girls were more than willing. Majority of the girls believed in the barter system, though some of the girls tried to exploit him.

The guy had no intention of marrying any of the girls he dated. Very few such people change drastically after marriage and they do not have a good chance of a happy marriage even if they married someone with a similar lifestyle, just look at the movie stars, they marry a very similar person but none of them really have a happy marriage. Because such people are used to being volatile and marriage means static. Volatility is a kind of addiction and then most of them also have real addictions for alcohol, random sex, pubs, parties, discos etc.

So should we stop believing in the institute of marriage?
I feel that people should take some precautions in life so that they do not end up ruining their life and many other lives.

Some seem to think that "that line of thinking while of no real value has suppressed women (people) who out of such fears and reluctance go through life being what society requires them to be."

Well that line of thinking has also suppressed many men and it has lot of value. We prevent many crimes and conflicts. Not all freedom is good. There is a limit to the freedom a man or woman can take. They can do as they please as long as their actions do not impact lives of other people in their lives and society as a whole. Prostitution is considered bad not because it is immoral, but because it tends to ruin the lives of many and destroys families. Now should such men go to prostitutes or "out of such fears and reluctance go through life being what society requires them to be."

Few years back a group of women in rural India used to beat up and strip men who were drunk. Their actions were hailed and there were plans to have such action groups all over India. I was wondering what would happen if a group of men decided to beat up and stripped women who were drunk. Many women drink these days.

In the former case it was "girl power". In the later it would have been rape. Recently in US a man was asked to pay child support of around 40% of his income for his ex-wife's child even though he had proved using the child's DNA that it was not his child. The reason, you cannot punish the child for no mistake of his/hers. But the woman, Good lord, you cannot punish a woman for having an illicit affair. So punish the man. A man told Hillary "My wife is illegal". Hillary replied "NO WOMAN is illegal".

Men deserve to be humiliated and punished.

#212
SLK
April 4, 2008
03:37 PM

I posted my comment before seeing your comment but it ended up below yours, it is not related to your message. A very general discussion. No hard feelings.

I beleive in knowing the truth. I never comment on anybody in particular.

#213
SLK
April 4, 2008
04:25 PM

Ankush,

Whatever happened should never have happened. It is very sad.

It is unfortunate for Rinku that she was married to a coward who instead of trying to resolve whatever issues between them has ended it by killing her.

The discussion we are having is more a discussion on feminism and other such issues. We are not discussing the behavior of Rinku or anybody else. We have no right to discuss it. We do not know anything about her.

Please do not read/pay much attention to any comments on such forums. However sensitive the issue you will always find people commenting on it. I had mentioned very early in the discussion that such issues should never be discussed on a public domain.

This is the penalty we pay for using the net.

I suggest that we start a new thread so that if people want to continue the discussion they can continue in that thread.

This way we can de-couple Rinku's name from the discussion.

#214
SLK
April 4, 2008
04:34 PM

I just read a long message from Ankush(Rinku's brother??) about Rinku, which included a letter from her friend. My last two comments were in response to that. But now I do not see that comment when I refresh.

Now my comments seem to be out of place

Anyway I feel we should start a new thread and try not to link Rinku and Amit to it

#215
Aditi Nadkarni
April 4, 2008
06:04 PM

Slk: I read your comment and honestly was tempted to edit the long generalizations with a tag of "Unrelated" because I cannot imagine how a philandering techie you know, a group of women in rural India somewhere beating up drunk men, Hilary Clinton's response about an "illegal wife" and erroneous mentions of a US law (which btw requires men to pay child support only if paternity is established) have anything to do with this murder or this article.

I repeat, if this were a man murdered by a suspicious woman I STILL would've written about it....however I am VERY doubtful as to whether Indians would've been so quick and indiscriminate in assassinating a MAN's character based on his murderer's letter as they have done for a woman.

We are Indian women. Pray don't tell us how society treats us. We know.

#216
FF
April 4, 2008
08:11 PM

None of these cases have anything to do with the 498 law or DV act. This suicide strengthens the points I was trying to make with some of my articles:


Hah...Was that supposed to be forced read as a "White lie".

You look way too challenged when you issue those kind of wayward statements to garner support for the causes which are so dear to you. This is not the first time I have seen you turning facts around just because you can collect some support for 498A/DV act. In fact as soon as you are proven gone awry, you come up with such sample asinine statements as...


"None of this proves, blah blah ...

"It Strengthens the points I was trying to make with some of my articles"

blah blah..."


For the puffed up ego that you brandish on the forum, you could do at least half as good. Are you exercising your right to "freedom of foolish expression".

Good luck !!!.

#217
Hanuman
URL
April 4, 2008
11:08 PM

Aditi Nadkarni,

Have you seen Rama and Sita,

how can you tell about things which you have not seen. illusion of words does not change facts.

if anyone shows moon by pointing finger. and if any person see finger instead of moon, what that person can do ?

If you want to find wrong meaning out of Ramayana then it's your views only.

Ram and sita still remain God. Full Period.

#218
Preeti
URL
April 5, 2008
12:58 PM

Another death, another mother

------------------------------------

http://www.mid-day.com/web/guest/news/mumbai/article?_EXT_5_articleId=1074508&_EXT_5_groupId=14

Youth kills girlfriend, then attempts suicide
Author: Ketan Ranga Date: 05 Apr 2008
Curses police for saving his life




Sumit Giri (above) who killed his 21-year-old girlfriend Samantha Fernandes (below).
pic/Ketan Ranga

NOTHING. Just let me die... That's all Sumit Giri (25), who murdered girlfriend and Sophia College student Samantha Fernandes on March 20 and later tried to commit suicide, babbled as he was taken from Rabale police station for a medical checkup on Thursday evening.

Giri (25) was discharged from the Naval Hospital at Colaba on Wednesday and was immediately arrested by the Rabale police on charges of murdering Samantha. She was found in a pool of blood at a Rabale lodge, with Giri by her side, unconscious. He had stabbed her repeatedly in the stomach before slitting her throat, consumed poison to kill himself and then stabbed himself in the stomach and slashed his wrists.

The police took both to a nearby hospital, where Samantha was declared dead and Giri, son of a retired naval officer, was taken to hospital after initial treatment. He regained consciousness two days later and was handed over to the police.

Ever since he was taken into police custody for further interrogation, Giri has been cursing the police for saving his life. "He has been sleeping and moaning in pain. Today he complained of stomach ache, so we will take him for a medical checkup," said an officer.

"You should have let me die," he keeps telling constables who are constantly keeping a watch on him, should he take some extreme step to end his life again. He repeated it when we asked him, as he was being brought out for a medical checkup, why he killed Samantha. When asked if he had killed Samantha, he simply nodded his head.

"He came to know that Samantha was going to meet a boy of the choice of her family in two days. That fired his plan for taking revenge and he decided to take her to Aniket Lodge in Rabale to execute her," said a police officer. Investigating officer Prakash More, of Rabale police station, said inquiries were on and they wanted Giri to be fully fit before being properly questioned.

The suicide note

The five-page suicide note, recovered by police from Giri on March 20, mentioned:

>> What went wrong in their relationship.
>> They were having an affair for over four-and-a-half years.
>> He couldn't live without her
>> Both families were aware of their affair
>> Samantha started ignoring him during the last six months
>> He suspected her of having an affair with another boy
>> He quit his job for an engineering company and mostly stayed at his Vikhroli home
>> He knew Samantha's family didn't approve of their relationship and were looking for a match for her
>> He accepted responsibility for Samantha's death


-----------------------------------------

So baically, when you date someone, men expect the end to be a wedding or if not death.
Whatever happened to dating?

#219
Preeti
April 5, 2008
01:13 PM

FF,

Spew you nonsense someplace else. If you find Aditi's posts egoistic etc etc, then why do you read them ? Foolish huh?? Go play some place else...

The fact of the matter is that you neither your boss can stand up to a word she says nor can you get a sane logical word out of your mouth.

Empty threats and bogus stats are not going to work here. Your frustration and loneliness is evident and a delight because it serves you right.

Take a chill pill!

#220
Vn
URL
April 5, 2008
01:29 PM

As a counterview to post #218, women also think if no marriage then kill/hurt the man. so much so the supari killings.


Same city as post #218, April 5 2008.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Girl_hires_youths_to_attack_boyfriend/articleshow/2927064.cms

MUMBAI: In a case that no TV serial writer can conjure up, a 19-year-old Malad girl hired two youths to throw acid on her 18-year-old boyfriend after his parents disapproved of their relationship, the crime branch said.

The girl, Gwendolyn Naronha, a second year B Com student of Bandra's St Andrew's college, belongs to Valsad district in Gujarat. She fell in love with her schoolmate Vivek Patel three years ago. Patel, now a first year student of Bachelor in Management Studies at Hinduja College, has been staying as a paying guest in Mumbai for the last one year. After Gwendolyn secured admission in the Bandra college, her parents shifted from Valsad to Malad.

"On March 28, after writing his first paper in environmental management, Patel along with a friend, Jitesh Gorasia (18), went to a hotel and later came to Kennedy Bridge. There Patel saw a youth opening a bottle and advancing menacingly towards him. Both Patel and Gorasia panicked and tried to escape. But the youth chased the duo and later threw acid on them before fleeing. The victims were later rushed to Bhatia hospital with burn injuries,'' said joint commissioner of police (crime) Rakesh Maria.

"But when Gwendolyn came to pay a visit to Patel in the hospital, we decided to question her and get some leads,'' an officer said. Crime branch unit-II officials then interrogated Gwendolyn, who managed to mislead them by feigning ignorance about the incident. "But we came to know of the truth after we arrested two teenagers, Saby Abraham (19) and Keyur Jagdish Parmar (19), for their involvement in the case,'' Maria said.

"Saby told us that Gwendolyn had specifically asked him to break Patel's hands and legs and not to kill him. As Saby knew Patel, he passed on the supari to Parmar. While Parmar is pursuing an information technology course in Ahmedabad, Saby is a Std XII dropout from Valsad,'' Maria said, adding that Saby had a crush on Gwendolyn.

"The girl later gave Rs 600 as initial payment to the duo, who spent Rs 150 from it to buy acid from N K Traders in Valsad, Rs 200 to buy a SIM card and the remaining amount as transportation charges,'' said sources.

"After the attack, the girl met the accused near Government Law College and paid them Rs 4,500 in cash. The girl had told Saby that Patel had raped her during Navratri in 2006 while she was in Valsad. But she kept quiet as she was in love with him. But she got enraged after hearing that Patel's parents had disapproved their relationship. In order to take revenge, she decide to retaliate,'' said an officer.

Gwendolyn has been given an anticipatory bail by the court. The police will oppose her bail on Saturday.

#221
Seema
April 5, 2008
05:44 PM

FF: No logical refutations in your response. Just a blind bashing of the author as usual. All your comments put together do not comprise even a tenth of the intelligent and rational ideas that the author has put forth in this discussion without ever having to resort to personal attacks the way some of you do.

Hanuman: The author's use of Sita's analogy is to demonstrate how literary works, scriptures, cultures and even television serials represent social mentality. So one doesn't really have to meet all the characters in person to deduce how people perceive them or want to view them. Completely asinine comment!

#222
ns
April 9, 2008
03:29 AM

guys,

u people didnt know rinku n amit but i knew them both. amit was highly possessive person. he never wanted to give any freedom to rinku n wanted her to follow the path he described. he never tried to respect her feelings because he was ' husband' n rinku was his 'wife'. he confessed this in front of counseller also. i have met amit recently. he was treating rinku as her personal property. i know n number of things about amit and his habits which can only describe as a 'pshcho'. i cant write all instances on public forum but guys he was mad. from the day one of their marriage he was jealous and suspecious.
rinku was topper in evry aspect of life.
GOD why u have rinku from us....why? she was n will always b in our hearts.

#223
ns
April 9, 2008
03:31 AM

guys,

u people didnt know rinku n amit but i knew them both. amit was highly possessive person. he never wanted to give any freedom to rinku n wanted her to follow the path he described. he never tried to respect her feelings because he was ' husband' n rinku was his 'wife'. he confessed this in front of counseller also. i have met amit recently. he was treating rinku as her personal property. i know n number of things about amit and his habits which can only describe as a 'pshcho'. i cant write all instances on public forum but guys he was mad. from the day one of their marriage he was jealous and suspecious.
rinku was topper in evry aspect of life.
GOD why u have snatched rinku from us....why? she was n will always b in our hearts.

#224
ns
April 9, 2008
03:32 AM

guys,

u people didnt know rinku n amit but i knew them both. amit was highly possessive person. he never wanted to give any freedom to rinku n wanted her to follow the path he described. he never tried to respect her feelings because he was ' husband' n rinku was his 'wife'. he confessed this in front of counseller also. i have met amit recently. he was treating rinku as her personal property. i know n number of things about amit and his habits which can only describe him as a 'psycho'. i cant write all instances on public forum but guys he was mad. from the day one of their marriage he was jealous and suspecious.
rinku was topper in evry aspect of life. how a husband can be jealous of his wife?
GOD why u have snatched rinku from us....why? she was n will always b in our hearts.

#225
commonsense
April 9, 2008
06:07 AM


NS
"GOD why u have snatched rinku from us....why? she was n will always b in our hearts.""

why is god being blamed for the actions of another human being?

#226
Man Singh
URL
April 9, 2008
01:08 PM

commonsnese # 225

Bhai Commonsense,

ye hui na commonsense ki baat.

Good one.

Add your comment

(Or ping: http://desicritics.org/tb/7490)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.






Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!