India's Hidden Incest Crisis

Very good article. Very relevant too. Unfortunately, until victims start going public (once they grow up) and accusing their tormentors, the public will not be sensitised on this issue.

Please check blog by Richard Marcus
http://desicritics.org/2006/07/19/090439.php

It clearly states that abuse among men/boys is hardly reported. Also in this article Shantanu Dutta focuses this issue as a women issue. Mostly people who are abused turn out to be future victims. Marcus even states that until 1970 there existed no help for women and men have no options at all.

The rapid changes brought by Industrialization in 18th century and world wars brought humiliating abuse to men. Some men eventually turned abusers. As I was trying yesterday to understand why Fritzl behaved that way and came across this link


http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2488449,00.html


Fritzl's severe personality disorder is rooted in the abuse he himself suffered at the hands of his mother, the psychiatrist said.

Born in Amstetten, a nondescript town west of Vienna, on April 9 1935, Fritzl was constantly beaten and had few friends.

But, as is often the case, he turned from victim to perpetrator, developing a "massive need for power," which with the onset of puberty, became sexual.

Fritzl was emotionally stunted, the psychiatrist told the court.

"He is aware - he says so himself - that he has an evil side. He is aware that he was born to rape. He has that partly under control. But as soon as he loosens his grip, everything erupts out."


'The stronger the opponent, the bigger the victory'


When Kastner asked him why he had chosen Elisabeth, out of his seven legitimate children, as his victim: "His reply was: because she was most like me. She was as stubborn me, as strong as me. The stronger your opponent, the bigger the victory."

The seven children that Elisabeth, 42, gave birth to during the long years of horrific abuse were a means for Fritzl to chain her to him even more tightly, Kastner said.

"The more children, the greater the power."

"Although the issues of shame, family honour and plain depravity means that very little statistics are available, it also means that every statistic available speaks not just for itself for a lot many others in the shadows"

Very little statistics available? And yet the author builds its case by citing statistics

"a Delhi based NGO working with child sexual abuse titled “ Voices from the Silent Zone,� suggests that nearly three-quarters of upper and middle class Indian women are abused by a family member - more than often an uncle, a cousin or an elder brother."

"As per women's organizations and activists nearly ninety-five percent of the abused are girls"

"more than ninety-five percent abusers are males."

"Surveys carried out in schools and informal chats reveal that around 40% girls experience incest abuse or sexual abuse in one or the other form in India."

"6% of all calls made to CHILDLINE (a 24-hour Indian helpline for children in distress) in the last ten years have reported Child Sexual Abuse(CSA) --- 6% of 10 million calls!"

And if you disagree with these dubious statistics and their sources or methodologies, you can be accused of "disbelief, denial and cover-up". How sweeping generalizations and clinching arguments are built out of thin air, how draconian judicial activism are enacted for ideological agenda. It looks like Hillary clinton's is coming to India with her goody bag.

Talk about missing the wood for the trees - the issue is incest - the article is not "India's hidden female incest crisis" - it's as ghastly if it happens to a boy or a girl so get beyond your gender fixation.

On a different note, I don’t think ‘incest crisis’ is the appropriate term to describe this issue. Incest may or may not involve coercion or may not involve children. In other words, it is too broad a term. As rightly pointed out by you, many south Indian communities have marriage traditions that involve incest. Indian marriage laws permit such marriages provided they are customary for the community concerned. I think it would be better to call this crisis, the ‘child abuse crisis,’ with most abusers being related to the victims.

I dont want to genderify it but its appaling that crime takes place where children are supposed to be protected and guided?


http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/video/video.aspx?id=62774

Three teachers including the principal have been arrested for sexually exploiting 6 physically challenged girls of a rehabilitation center in Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

Looks like gutter inspection is in full swing in Desicritics.

Keep repeating the mantra that abonormal is normal in India, until it becomes the prevailing truth.

Creepy board!

Teacher hitting child may become crime

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Teacher-hitting-child-may-be-criminal/articleshow/4294992.cms

Dear Shantanu,

Very good article, though incest is just a part of the problem. In my opinion, child abuse exists everywhere including India. My personal experience has been that it is very common and nobody wants to even talk about it because, parents are usually all too trusting or children simply don't talk about it. One could dismiss this problem out of hand (as Kerty does) but the least the parents could do is closely watch who their children are with. Close relatives, male and female, neighbors, teachers, nobody can be fully trusted.

Regards,

Ravi

I couldn't agree more with you, Ravi.

- Deepa

Welcome to Jerry Springer's asylum where sex and breaking taboos are the norm, not exceptions, where rape is a fantasy and kids are delicacies are the fantasies, where there are no rights and wrongs, they are just fetishes and fansasies for different strokes, where everybody and everything is a fair game, be it a co-worker of same workplace or accidental fellow commuter, be it co-inhabitant of same mohalla or same village or same house, be it next-door neighbor or someone within circle of relatives or within one's own family, be it young, old, pre-teen or handicapped, be it same sex or opposite sex, be it a son or daughter, mom or pa, sister or brother, Grampa or Gradma, uncle or aunt, cousin, nephew or niece or playing by yourself, be it a dog or a horse or a goat, everything is a fair game, a highly sexualized object and not a relationship - and we are supposed be alarmed and outraged only when they encroach upon our sacred space and relationships? What were Kumbkarna's doing when sexual anarchy gate crashed your village, than your moholla, than your neighbours, and now crying foul that it has gate-crashed the inner sanctum of homes?

So please save the phony outrage. These staged outrages are not about taming the sexual anarchy - its about having more of it and ideologically profit from it - the implied cynicism behind such activism is why these dysfunctions are not happening in every home, with every women and what should be done to promote them - that is how sexual politics work - so they can pose as saviors. They are merely about judicial activism, about feminist agenda, about exploiting the fall out of their own sexual politics. However, sexual politics has came to India 40 years little too late, and people by now already know all its arguments, its devious modus operandi and the fall out. So you will have to live with the apathy, denial, ridicule and contempt such activism so richly deserve. You make your bed, than you sleep on it.

at least mira nair tackles it in _monsoon wedding_. the likes of kerty will no doubt acccuse her of denigrating our country for the benefit of "the west" (pointless personal attack alert)

kerty you really are disgusting. honestly, save your crap for another venue. as someone who survived rape I personally think you should save your disgusting philosophizing for yourself. how the fuck did I or anyone else benefit from my rape? HOW? How did it further this agenda you talk about?

you are a horrible person kerty. the reason for it is that you do not realize the difference between ideology and reality. you can wax stupid about all this crap day and night, but it is others that suffer. others that are forcibly held down and violated, and have to live with that and carry it with them.

#13

"you do not realize the difference between ideology and reality. you can wax stupid about all this crap day and night, but it is others that suffer"

Reality do not drop from the trees, it does not come out of the blue, out of thin air. It comes out of ideologies. Realities are produced and sustained by Ideologies. That is why you can not compartmentalize or micromanage realities - only those who seek to exploit the fall out at reality level would resort to it, only those who promote these very ideologies that create such realities would seek hind behind it. That is why it is pointless to shoot the crap all day and night about this fallout or that dysfunction or this abuse unless one is ready to engage the ideologies that are behind these dysfunctions. And as you said, people do suffer when fallout of these ideologies translate into realities for them. Unfortunately, the fallout is co-opted to promote the activism/agenda of those very ideologies - that is why such activism becomes prophetic, self fulfilling, vicious cycle that reinforces what it outwardly seeks to redress. The fallout is likely to spread, not tamed, and that suits these ideologies perfectly as it gives them captive issues to fake self-righteousness and wage their war on society.

no kerty, no more rhetoric. I am asking you to draw it out. you tell me how feminism causes rape. you tell me how it is self-fulfilling. you tell me how this suits my ideology.

go ahead. I am waiting. no more chasing your tail.

SS

- Feminism focuses at gender level
- When an ideology focuses at gender level, it politicizes gender roles, gender functions - sex and reproduction becomes the prominent ones
- In order to redefine them, it has to liberate genders from existing definitions - and since they too are built on sex and reproductive functions, they have to be liberated from them by redefining sex and reproductive functions. Thus its focus remain on redefining sex and reproductive functions of genders in the society. Thus is born the sexual politics
- As existing society is subjected to sexual politics - roles, functions, relationships and institutions built around them undergo chaos, mutations and dysfunctions. The power and roles from traditional relationships and institutions is released - and gets redistributed as per the mandates of ideologies pursuing feminism as their tool. That is the mandate of sexual politics - power transfer.
- Family is built on an alliance of sex minus power. Genders give in their power to create consentual union. They leave power at the door, and adopt its antithesis - love and duty. Rape and incest, on the other hand is an alliance of sex + power. Sex is about consent. Power is about overcoming the consent, about acquiring consent by any means, about creating the redundancy of consent. Absence of consent, involuntary objectification is the pinnacle of absolute power. Thus, they personify the antithesis of foundation on which society rests - and those ideologies that seek to redefine society and redistribute power find common cause in it.

- When you open a door, any kind of bugs can come in too. You can catch a few and weed them out, but you can't keep them out, because you have left the door open. When you open a door for sexual politics, sexual anarchy comes with it as one undivisible package(buy one, get the other one free!). You can't keep the unwanted sex out of it. When sex is subjected to freedom of choice, freedom of speech and freedom individualism, sex is going to saturate every sphere and every institution and every relationshop of society. You can't have sex-free sanctuaries or safe relationships. You can pretend to outlaw it, but you can't oust it from society. What you get is a one hell of a poisonous cocktail, where each ingredient poses to be a holy grail, and has nothing to do with the poison.

Feminism and rape go hand in hand. Feminism can not live without rape.

Hail BBC.

"A report produced by the BBC a decade ago had opined citing research sources......"

Incest and child abuse are issues in India just like any other society.

However, BBC has to do research and tell us.

The Firangs have not forgotten the colonies whom they have looted for more than Hundred years and never tendered an apology.

If no one opposes, then gender and feminism is forced on any issue as in this case related to child abuse with claims that only a very small percentage of boys face child abuse.

ss, the problem with ideologies and ideological world-views (in general) is that 'false positives' generate the same amount of heat as 'true positives', because lack of all facts/ half-known facts/ blanks are filled in by ideological world-view to present a complete case and a complete understanding of events, and fails to draw distinction between different events or consider the nuances in different cases. ["A newly-married woman sustained some burn injuries? Surely, that has to be a case of bride-burning related to dowry and no other explanation will fly."]

Furthermore, this problem is compounded by ideologues who don't admit their mistakes, but justifying it by pointing fingers at others ("they do it too") or citing past historical mistakes to cover their asses, because, well, if one believes in an ideological world-view and that is one's bread-and-butter, then instances where that world-view comes up wrong, is highly inconvenient and shakes the foundation of that world-view. And we can't have that because our very identities (or jobs) are intricately linked with such ideologies.

Point is not that ideologies are wrong (they are correct to some extent and correct in many cases), but that they only provide a limited understanding of events, and more often than not, 'false positives' are ignored or brushed under the carpet to perpetuate the ideology.

Two examples: The inaccuracies in media reporting that led to national reaction regarding Jena Six; and Duke University case.

Or take Sakshi Juneja's recent post regarding condoms which was given a feminist spin of sexism without bothering to find out all the facts, and then most brought out their holier-than-thou outpourings in their responses (except for Aditi) and it becomes a battle between the sexes.

Actually, a lot of heat in the blogsphere is generated by (half-known facts and not bothering to find out all facts) + (ideological spin) + (knee-jerk reaction). I wonder if the bloggers re-visit their past posts just to put what they wrote in perspective, and whether they were correct in their analysis and understanding of events, or not.

Dear Kerty (#11, #14),

While it is true that the media and society today promote hedonism and indulgence, such was not the case when I grew up in India in the 70s and 80s. And yet, it has been my personal experience that children were commonly sexually abused and to this day I don't believe it has changed much. So to blame it on the current culture misses the point: it is human nature. Married men, young women, old grandpa, I have seen it all.

One may think I am exaggerating, but all this happens just under the radar. Our culture teaches that we must respect our elders and we should. Who would suspect a neighborly 50+ year old man who wants to be friendly to a 8 year old. Or for that matter uncles and aunts who live in the household or visit often. Children are scared to talk about any abuse and when they grow up tend to forget such events. In fact children don't even consider it as wrong or abuse. I have an unusual memory for my childhood events. I was also a very sexually aware child, so I could interpret the happenings around me more clearly.

If it could happen in a small town 70s India, I am sure it happened big cities and villages then and happens now. I am not advocating outright American style paranoia about children and other adults, but a close watch over who your children are and what they do is certainly advisable.

Regards,

Ravi

Dear Kerty (#16),

You put it very eloquently and I like your facility with words. Your points about ideologies and ideologues are also correct.

However there is a flaw in the argument. You are assuming that rape, incest and child abuse are a new phenomenon brought about by ideology and modern culture. That's not the case. Human nature is as old as humans themselves and as I pointed out, I have seen it first hand growing up.

It is also not true that modern society has made us more tolerant of rape, incest and child abuse. If anything, today it is more likely that the perpetrators are punished than ever before. There is more awareness about such issues and laws are constantly being rewritten to protect the victims. Can you imagine a 19th or even early 20th century court punishing a sitting Bishop? There is not cause of complacency for sure, we all need to be aware and cautious when it comes to children and the weak.


Regards,

Ravi

kerty, all I will say to you is this. your whole theory is bogged down by ideology. and it is built on false stilts. rape has existed long before feminism. it exists in cultures where women have no power. children have no power and are still raped, as are old people.

you, kerty, are a sick sick man. and you are woefully ignorant about why rape happens. so ignorant that to unravel all the crap you've put up there would take ages. suffice it to say that the reason rape happens has almost nothing to do with the things you list above. you have warped psychology to suit your needs, but any therapist worth his or her salt would tell you that you've got it so twisted up it doesn't resemble reality anymore. the problem in that you have taken some of the real factors and gotten them confused. you are so involved in blaming the victim you don't even care about reality.

I think you should stop for one blessed minute and think long and hard about the shit you spew. take out all the rhetoric and think about it.

you are a sick hateful man and I am sorry for whatever happened to you that made you a warped and sorry individual. but your whole theory is total bullshit.

Ravi raises some good points. There was a pedophile (he was in his mid-to-late 20s and lived with his parents) in our locality (this was in the early 80s) and he sexually abused many of my teenage friends (a few of them warned me after it happened to them), yet there was no open discussion of this issue among adults, though I have a feeling that it was talked about in private, and was mostly hushed up. Finally, he went too far and abused a manager's (or a higher-up's) son, and that prompted his family having to leave the locality and moving out, though no criminal charges were ever brought about. (The locality was owned by the company and was for its employees.)

Kaffir

"Point is not that ideologies are wrong (they are correct to some extent and correct in many cases), but that they only provide a limited understanding of events, and more often than not, 'false positives' are ignored or brushed under the carpet to perpetuate the ideology."

Ideologies are about power. Power to shape realities as per its mandates. So whatever it takes remain its approach. All the negative fallout is framed as:

1) Justifiable cost of transitions.
2) Blamed on the opposition
3) Frame its victimization as redress and justice, and its victims as victimizers
4) co-opted for issue-based politics for empowering its ideological bed-mates ie. statism. So it kind of feeds off it own victimizations and dysfunctions. That is why equate it with Surpankha.

Kaffir

"Point is not that ideologies are wrong (they are correct to some extent and correct in many cases), but that they only provide a limited understanding of events, and more often than not, 'false positives' are ignored or brushed under the carpet to perpetuate the ideology."

Ideologies are about power. Power to shape realities as per its mandates. So whatever it takes remain its approach. All the negative fallout is framed as:

1) Justifiable cost of transitions.
2) Blamed on the opposition
3) Frame its victimization as redress and justice, and its victims as victimizers
4) co-opted for issue-based politics for empowering its ideological bed-mates ie. statism. So it kind of feeds off its own victimizations and dysfunctions. That is why I equate it with Surpankha.

SS:

"you, kerty, are a sick sick man. and you are woefully ignorant about why rape happens. so ignorant that to unravel all the crap you've put up there would take ages."

proof positive that it is possible to make non-ideological, factual statments, at least on some rare occasions when dealing with some rare individuals.

kerty:

"Actually, a lot of heat in the blogsphere is generated by (half-known facts and not bothering to find out all facts)"

one cannot blame him for ignoring the ancient, traditional indian dictum "know thyself"...

seriously though, i do agree with kerty. sexual abuse of children, incest etc. are all due to british colonialism and our senseless aping western culture (sarcasm alert for the humor imapired :)

Ravi

To have sexual abuses occur in a society and to have a political ideology around it are two separate things. I have not argued that sexual and rapes can not occur in absence of certain political ideologies.

Sex is a biological urge, and no matter how it is channeled into positive directions or suppressed for common good, there will be personal lapses - somewhere, somebody is going to do the unthinkable. When it begins to happen on a very large scale, than we need to examine what is really going on - why moral safeguards are failing, why societal norms are breaking down, why relationships are failing. Sure you can apply a quick band-aid by passing some laws, but that is not a holistic approach, because you have not addressed the root problems that have become society wide.

Vices, dysfunctions and abuses are as old as mankind, and societies have always had to grapple with them. Societies have tried to build cultures and traditions to help them tame and civilize them. But now, we are witnessing advent of ideologies that actually thrive on proliferation of vices, dysfunctions and abuses, who seek to politically profit from them, who seek to exploit them for the empowerment of ideologies.

SS

'rape has existed long before feminism. it exists in cultures where women have no power. children have no power and are still raped, as are old people."

Rape and incest have existed as aberrations of sexual deviancy, not as sexual politics or gender power play or alternative sexuality/lifestyle, thanks to feminism, they are now.

Cultures(at least eastern cultures) have not treated individuals, be they male or female, kid or adult, young or old, to be their center of universe, their basic unit or their main power centers - so no, real power has not rested in man, woman, child or old or youth. Culture have always viewed them as a collective - as indivisible family unit and developed very protective support systems around them, integrating their mutual needs and welfare. Now feminism is trying to unleash violent sexual politics against such basic unit of society, turning all men and women into preys and predators, victims and victimizers, abusers and abusees - just so it can effect power transfer from all the institutions and spheres that have family as the basic unit.

"When it begins to happen on a very large scale, than we need to examine what is really going on

And who determines the scale kerty? You? Please tell us what would you consider a large scale to "begin examining what is really going on": 1 out of 10, 1 out of 5 or 5 out of 10 people raped?

Or maybe the severity would matter too: are the individuals being raped and killed or just raped, are they being raped by metal rods or just by the deviants who cannot control their "urges"?

By the way "aberration of sexual deviancy". Really? Are you sure about that term? Think again. Wouldn't aberration of sexual deviancy be sexual normalcy?!! :) Two negatives should make a positive, no?

SD

"Wouldn't aberration of sexual deviancy be sexual normalcy?!!'

It should read as Aberration caused by sexual deviancy.

Looking at this article as an outsider, I can suggest the following: ideology is irrelevant to issues of rape and child abuse. Issues of power - and the real norms of a society (as opposed to what folks in that society want to show outsiders as the norm) are the real issues that one see when looking at both rape and child abuse.

Smallsqirrel has already dealt with the issue of power. More needn't be added to her comments.

However, the real norms of a society may be very different from the picture it seeks to paint to the outside world. Various archaeological finds in Greece indicate that sexual abuse of young boys by men was considered normal, the expected thing to do in ancient respectable Athenian society. So, if this was true 2,500 years ago, why should it not be true now?

It may simply be that the real norms of society - as opposed to what various societies wish to project as their image - include a great deal of sexual abuse of women and children - and animals.

In Ma'ale Levona, we have a fantastic view of the landscape. In towns like 'Ofra, that fantastic view is lacking. So when the residents take out their infrared lenses and focus on their Arab neighbors at night, they see Arab men sexually abusing sheep and donkeys. What goes less mentioned, but what exists as well, is the rape of boys in various yeshivót by rabbis and other boys. The stories abound, unfortunately.

These activities reflect the real norms of sexual behavior here, as opposed to what folks would prefer you to believe about them.

The first step in combating both rape and sexual abuse, is to admit that it is normally tolerated behavior. It's easy to point the finger at someone else's depravities, but admitting one's one can be most painful.

Ruvy

"Various archaeological finds in Greece indicate that sexual abuse of young boys by men was considered normal, the expected thing to do in ancient respectable Athenian society."

How can you detect sexual abuse from archaeological finds that are 2500 year old? One can interpret the finds any which way, can't one, and that would be more a reflection on contemporary culture rather than ancient finds, no? And even if you were to have incontrovertible find, how can it be generalized the whole culture or society? Doesn't that amount to juxtaposing contemporary prisms onto ancient past? Based on caseload of rape and molestation found in contemporary USA, when interpreted posthumously, would you interpret that USA is a rapist culture that considered it normal to date-rape women and drug children, and US government paid welfare to the abusers as US constitution protected rapes as pursuit of happiness and personal choice - one can connect the selective dots any which way to concoct any kind of archaeological thesis out of them, no?

Kerty,

How can you detect sexual abuse from archaeological finds that are 2500 year old?

The pictures were of youths (boys) presenting their genital organs to older men, with both youths and older men smiling. Others looking at these pictures kind of deduced the obvious. The point of my comment was that this behavior was not considered wrong but acceptable and normal. We would consider it abuse. The Greeks evidently did not.

In other words, the pictures represented accepted norms in ancient Athenian society. Looking at the real patterns of behavior in our own societies, we can see that what is acceptable behavior varies from what we like to say it is.

The Greeks, it appears, were not lying to themselves. We, by contrast, are and make an art form of denial.

Ruvy

"In other words, the pictures represented accepted norms in ancient Athenian society."

How can pictures tell the whole story? If somebody were to dig out archaeological ruins of playboy mansion, would you surmise how Americans must have lived?

Here is the parable: an archeologist dug up a barren site, and found no remains from the excavation - so he concluded a thesis that the ancient people of the region were primitive, and lived without having any culture or material progress, and they eat their dead family members, leaving no trace of their human remains. In absence of evidence to the contrary and challenges from culture of bygone era or affected modern-day constituency, the thesis is accepted as scientific discovery, repeated by academicians, historians and researchers to pile on.

Kerty,

Pictures do not tell the entire story. They can't. Often finding a legal contract can tell a great deal about a society that is now dead. But the Chinese do say that a picture is a thousand words. In other words, pictures say a lot.

As for your example, if a species from outer space could deduce the meanings of the photos in Playboy they might assume that the society was obsessed with sex. And they would not be far off the mark....

kerty: there is a reason why what you cite is termed "parable" and not fact or history.

one only wishes that in reality a thesis (any thesis: be it archeology or biology) was so easy to write.

fyi a thesis cannot be referenced (to pile research on). the word "thesis" itself means that it is a hypothesis with some arguments supporting it. only if a thesis consists of substantial evidence demonstrating the hypothesis will it be published. and only the publication can be referenced and that too with quite a narrow margin as to its applicability within the context of the research.

if you don't know something, don't create parables to support your own theories. at least in a thesis people have to provide experimental or empirical data...not fake parables.

Ruvy

"Pictures do not tell the entire story. They can't........But the Chinese do say that a picture is a thousand words. In other words, pictures say a lot."

That is exactly my point - those words do not come from the picture, they come from the interpreter, interpreter is projecting those words. That is like a parable of elephant and 5 blind men - each one touches a small part of elephant and vexes eloquence about what elephant is like.

SD


"one only wishes that in reality a thesis (any thesis: be it archeology or biology) was so easy to write"

In fact, it is so easy to write. All it needs is a vested imperative or some expediency which governments, ideologies, politics etc can easily provide. In modern times, communists and liberals are heavily into de-construction of societies and history to fit their ideological prisms - archeology, anthropology, history have ceased to be art or science but their handmaidens.

"the word "thesis" itself means that it is a hypothesis with some arguments supporting it. only if a thesis consists of substantial evidence demonstrating the hypothesis will it be published."

And those arguments can be provided by ideologies. Ideologies have their own system of references and argumentation, and one merely needs to fit the evidence in that framework to reach made-to-order conclusions.

You might be tempted to bring up physical sciences and science research to bolster counter arguments and lend credibility of sciences to pseudo research and pseudo sciences. But we are not talking about exact sciences here. In these fuzzy pseudo sciences, one can pick and choose, be subjective, impose biases and agenda, muzzle the contrary arguments and evidence. Just look around how things that are happening as we speak, that exists in our own real time are being processed - do you think evidence and argumentation counts how they are being processed?. What makes you think history and things that happened eons ago would fare any better?

Semitic worldview rests on enlightened world originating only with the birth of their prophets, and everything predating them as the age of darkness and Jahalia that had no redeeming value or civilizational status, which had to be conquered, converted, saved and civilized. You will only see caricature and demonization of pre-semitic world - such a treatment of past is a theological necessity. Ever since, liberation theologies or liberation ideologies have found a cause celebre to caricature and demonize whatever that went before and whatever that prevails at present in order to redefine them according to their theological or ideological prisms, and battles lines get drawn how history and present need to be interpreted and by whom.

kerty: What thesis have you written? Which subject? What was your hypothesis and the experiments that you carried out to demonstrate it. Can you link us to it? Please. You seem to know a lot about how easy it is to write a thesis. Maybe you can help us all by pointing us to your thesis which can give us clues into "easy thesis writing".

BTW arguments cannot be supported by idealogies. That is like saying goals can be brought to fruition with more goals. In any given thesis, an argument requires empirical data in order to even be seen as a theory.

Otherwise it is not a respectable, solid thesis at all. In which case nobody "piles" anything on it except criticism.

SD,

He is an eminent "theoretical physicist" ie. a physicist in theory. aka as an expert in cooking "khayali pulao". aka an expert builder of castles in the air.

"Not everything that is immoral has to be illegal," said Justice Ministry legal expert Valerian Cioclei. "We cannot help these people by turning them into criminals and punishing them."
**********
Romania weighs decriminalizing consensual incest
By ALINA WOLFE MURRAY and GEORGE JAHN,
Associated Press Writers â€"
Sat Mar 21, 1:37 pm ET
BUCHAREST, Romania â€" Surprising as it may seem, incest is not always a crime in Europe.
Three European Union nations â€" France, Spain and Portugal â€" do not prosecute consenting adults for incest, and Romania is considering following suit.
The shocking case of Austrian Josef Fritzl, found guilty this week of holding his daughter captive for 24 years and fathering her seven children, has focused new attention on incest â€" which is a crime in itself in Austria even if the acts are consensual. But in the Fritzl case it was in connection with rape, homicide and other charges that led to a sentence of life in a secure psychiatric ward.............

commonsense yes, I agree. All his arguments are empty. Only idealogy, no empiricism. Its no surprise that thats what he would think a thesis is. His "khayali pulavs" range from "I lived in Chicago so I know what a crook Obama is" to "I will help mortals distinguish pseudo-science from exact science" :)

Desicritics seems much like our society: plagued by numerous uneducated "literates" who can ramble on utter nonsense with a great deal of confidence armed simply with impressive vocabulary and hollow sophism. And they have chamchas called Anons who immediately sprout with priceless and profound supportive arguments such as "Great points kerty!" etc but are so ashamed to lend the support that they choose anonymity to even a suggestive pseudonym.

It has become a pain to have any kind of discussion on this forum plainly because one knows with certainty that characters like kerty will take every thread on predictable lines: anti-feminism, British ruined India, evil West, anti-Obama. Practically every thread has met this precise same fate with kerty shunting all discussion into these same categories.

Royal pain in the butt.

Uh..oh. Off-topic comment, SD. :)

SD:

"His "khayali pulavs" range from "I lived in Chicago so I know what a crook Obama is" to "I will help mortals distinguish pseudo-science from exact science" :)"

yup, i remember these gems together with many other pearls that were cast at but utterly wasted on a swine like me...

kaffir, au contraire, my comment is actually applicable for all the threads for every topic here on DC. Every thread has been kertified into damnation and pigeon-holed into only those topics that cover kerty's prejudices. Sure, one can ignore him but then there will always come a time such as this to finally vent.

kerty and a bunch of assorted maniacs have ruined desicritics for me, to the extent that I no longer post or comment here with the frequency that I otherwise would.

Basically every interesting post is hijacked into the same old rants. I avoid people who rant all the time in real life, I prefer to avoid it online as well. Why give myself stress.

Deepa,

You and SD do help me answer my question: "is DC running out of steam"? perhaps it's just the kertification of everything in sight...

and talking of deranged ranters, check out somebody called "citizen"...

"kerty and a bunch of assorted maniacs have ruined desicritics for me, to the extent that I no longer post or comment here with the frequency that I otherwise would"

I totally agree with this and with SD. It is just frustrating. I used to love hanging out here on my down time and now the sheer stress of knowing that a perfectly good discussion will be kertified keeps me away from DC.

I think SD puts its best:

"Every thread has been kertified into damnation and pigeon-holed into only those topics that cover kerty's prejudices"

Aditi

I do not pick topics. I only comment on comments, which others are welcome to comment, ignore, refute, disagree, attack. If my comments are incorrect or prejudices, than they should be easy to be repudiated, which I welcome without malice towards none.

kerty: you don't pick topics. You just somehow manage to shunt the discussion into a distant, remotely connected subject which, we as regulars on DC are now aware, encompasses your many prejudices.

Film reviews turn into anti-West debates. Threads about incest turn somehow in the most bizarre of twists into anti-feminism. Anything about America, Europe, anything at all: movies, food, idealogies is immediately compartmentalized into an "evil West" discussion. Critiques of India, be they cultural, political or financial are immediately met with stale "West is responsible for all our woes" counters.

Repudiation is very easy. If this were a debate with a refree, it would be very easy to win against someone who just presents preformed conclusions and no evidence or supportive data.

BUT its not losing the debate that frustrates us. Its the sheer menace of having every thread led astray into the same topics which we already know cover your prejudices and preconceived notions.

The thing is we are not here to change your mind. Its just that you have an overwhelmingly large chunk of time versus those of us who cannot spend a whole day just dismantling your empty rhetoric.

To put it simply, it is sad to see such empty, prejudiced rhetoric have the last word at the end of the day for an article that makes an important and relevant point.

I wonder if crime is done by people we know. Another case where a child was targetted by a guru. He even took her life at an tender age of 8. Horrific to say the least.

Girl raped, murdered by former tutor
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Delhi-8-year-old-raped-killed-by-tutor/articleshow/4310895.cms

Aditi

Lets face it. We all have our views and pre-formed conclusions - that is why we have opinions. We call them prejudices when we happen to disagree with them.

We often run into same line of discussion here because some of the posters on both sides of the arguments happen to have strong pre-formed 'prejudices' and closed minds. Their positions come with that baggage, and discussion naturally follows there.

BTW, feminism is discussed in the incest thread in the context of sexual politics. Those who disagree have the opportunity to present other views. But feminists can't engage out in open. They have a different playbook. Feminism is called Feminazi for a reason - it has a close mind, shuns debate, calls names, evades accountability, exploits the fallout of its own sexual politics that victimize and rides on government to pursue fiats. Sorry. Couldn't help throwing that in.

Some of you guys are attributing me extra-ordinary powers of being able to shunt, divert or hijack threads and discussion. IMHO, I try to be relevant to the comments I am trying to respond to and I try my best to deal with the macro and micro issues raised by the comments and topic at hand. You may have heard my line of argumentation umpteen times, but if topic or comment requires it, I would do it again, if there is a context in the comment thread. If it is getting too boring and repetitive for some of you, you can always post something different, something more interesting. There are lots of topics that draw complete blank from me. I speak only when it is my turn.

kerty: "We call them prejudices when we happen to disagree with them"

You might do this but thats not why we (at least I) think you are prejudiced. Prejudice has two qualities to it that just opinions don't: they are indiscriminate in application and irrational.

You don't repeat certain sentences because they are relevant in that context but because you are convinced beyond reason that you are right. Its obvious. You know how Americans are, you know how Western society is, you know what Obama thinks, you know how all feminists act, you know how easy it is to write a thesis, you know which science is pseudo and which exact, you know what rape is. You just present idealogies. No reasoning. Thats prejudice. These are just notions. Biases. No rationale, no specific logic. That is prejudice. Not formed, well-grounded opinions. People with opinions also are able to see other people's perspectives. I have never once seen you recognize that anybody else has a point.

I personally don't think people are pissed that you have these different takes. All of us have different opinions. Deepa, Aditi, CS, Ravi, Vinod have all expressed different varying takes and we all have at some point disagreed on DC. But you and probably another commentator called Ledzius have displayed prejudice specifically through your comments.

So maybe its time to think about why you are being singled out. Take this present scenario for example: you just will not budge, won't admit why it is we see prejudice in your comments.

You take generalizations, gross generilzation, extrapolate those and apply them to every scenario.

We are not calling for you to be boycotted or banned from the forum. But we are merely expressing our own opinion about why we think you are a malady for this forum. And we too are entitled to that opinion. You too have the right to ignore us or repudiate us.

SD

Lets just say, we (and that includes names you listed) are not likely to see eye to eye on number of issues. My opinions will always be at variance with hardcore feminists, liberals and assorted ideologues as well as lay persons schooled in populist media. There is not much I can do about that. What I can try to do is to present my opinions(oops, my prejudices) in a civil manner without getting too personal. Now lets give back the tread before someone accuses you or me of hijacking this thread.

kerty: "My opinions will always be at variance with hardcore feminists, liberals and assorted ideologues as well as lay persons schooled in populist media"

Oh get off your high-horse and get over yourself. Puhhlease! You don't know any of us commentators personally so I don't think you can just dump all our varied opinions under a handful labels. Political views often depend on context for a lot of us.

Firstly, you don't usually use the term "harcore" when speaking of feminism. This is the first time. You do not distinguish between feminism and radical feminism. And hence your views seem irrational. The names I listed do not include any radical/ hardcore feminists...at least it doesnt seem that way to me.

Besides I gave you plenty other examples of why your opinions...oops prejudices seem prejudices and not opinions.

You of all people should not be afraid of hijacking any threads.

In my opinion, Kerty makes outrageous or indefensible comments in certain cases. However in some cases his points are actually quite valid. I think lot of folks get offended because, at least sometimes, he offends their sense of PC. I think that must be one reason why so many of them get upset about his comments. It is important to distinguish between PC and logic.

I have never seen Kerty engage in personal attacks, which several commentators here do, including some of the "respected" ones.

I am not writing this in defense of Kerty, but just to point out that in a public discourse it is normal to have disagreements. Everyone is free to ignore other commentators if you don't like them.

Regards,

Ravi

"I am not writing this in defense of Kerty"

Yes Ravi but you do it so well with your comment!

Most times kerty's "valid points" get ignored or lost NOT because he makes outrageous or indefensible comments BUT because he makes lofty extrapolations of gross generalizations and states conclusions repeatedly but without rationale. Being a bigot or bearing unyielding prejudices is not outrageous or sensational Ravi. It displays an inherent inability to evolve intellectually.

BTW you too are free to ignore our views about kerty.

i understand the concerns expressed by deepa, sd, adi, ss and many others at the gems splashed by mr. i-know-the-price-of-everything-but-the-value-of-nothing on almost all boards

and at the same time when you speak incessantly on every topic under the sky all the time then
inadvertently there may be occasions when one hits the bull's eye too (as is evident from ravi's views on him)

as he has admitted here he has a lot of time to spread his wisdom (though not enough to write articles here - because then he would have to show consistency in defending his views)

the best way to handle him is to let him be

and

give him a w i d e berth

;)

Dear SD,

"BTW you too are free to ignore our views about kerty."

I am not complaining about anybody complaining. It is just that I can't understand why people have to take someone so seriously that they don't enjoy being on DC anymore. I have heard people complaining about me that I give them a headache. Please don't take these debates THAT seriously.

Regards,

Ravi

And believe me, I ignore many posters here who are totally annoying.

Ravi

Ravi: being irritated and taking seriously/ taking offense are separate issues. If someone cuts pastes bits and pieces of your comments, takes them out of context and uses them as a trampoline to bounce off their own responses then it does make it less enjoyable to comment on a website.

Temporal: point taken!

If we learned to ignore Sumanth then we can learn to ignore kerty too. :)

"If we learned to ignore Sumanth then we can learn to ignore kerty too."

=

Added to the list of ignoring Islamic extremism, Islamic misogyny, Islamic homophobia, criticism of pub culture by Congress-wallahs and acts of violence in Congress-ruled states. Nice going - the secular, egalitarian and equality utopia is just around the corner. ;)

Among sexual crimes, incest as such is a lot less reported anywhere in the world. In 2004, Pinki Virani published her much talked about book, 'Bitter Chocolate' about child sexual abuse in India. Even when on the subject, you should notice how 'incest' as such is underplayed in the discussion. In India, I believe, families would commit mass suicides than admit that incest haunts them within the four walls of their homes. It is horrific and terribly sad.

Incest has been going on since the time of Adam and eve and i think it is time that Indian parents learn to believe their children when they seem to show nervousness around certain adults. My friend used to get panic attacks everytime she had to go for her kathak class to a relative's house. Her mother obviously thought tough love was in order and always forced her to go even on days when she would be the only student at the class.

A few years ago, this friend finally broke off all ties with her mom and the reason was clear: the uncle who taught her kathak used to touch her inappropriately.

They had a family meeting about this and guess what? Most family members tried to blame my friend for imagining things! Can you beleive that?

sarah, its takes a lot of courage on the part of the victim to bring abuse to the attention of the family for this very reason. They fear outright rejection and being told 'it was all a figment of their imagination'.

Deepti

"its takes a lot of courage on the part of the victim to bring abuse to the attention"

Not always. In fact it is also as easy to make frivolous and false accusations, especially when something is at stake or something is to be gained out of it or have an axe to grind.

To allege that parents do not take it seriously is also over generalization. Most parents would know their kids better than anybody else would. Parents understand the body language and little personality quirks of their kids better than we give credit. And most of them would raise hell if something is wrong that effects their kids. Families tend to be very protective of their own. This premise that families do not protect their own, that families abuse their own is alien to family-centric ethos - and should be more an abbaration and a reflection on erosion of those ethos and a tale tale sign of proliferation of sexual culture that has infiltrated all relationships, including those that are supposed to be most sacred and caring.

Oh really Kerty? then what about courts AND families in India who pressure their daughters who've been raped to marry the attacker? The courts consider it restitution, and the families think no one else will ever want their daughter. Also, many parents the world over do not see the signs of sexual abuse for many reasons. one of them is that it is too horrific a thing for many to tackle, and they go into denial. another is that since the perpetrator is oftentimes close to the family, the accusation often causes massive problems. and in many cases the perpetrator already has a place of prominence in the family and threatens to take something away if the act is uncovered... like a home or money. and lastly, the child is threatened. the perpetrator threatens to hurt the child or his or her parents, and almost always tells the child that no one will believe him or her even if s/he does tell.

It is NOT easy to make false accusations. you just perpetuate that myth because it is convenient to your cause. the fact is that rapes are underreported in EVERY country, and the conviction rate for rape is very low. it is very hard especially to prove child abuse of this kind unless some kind of physical damage is done. This is why perpetrators usually get away with abusing HUNDREDS of kids before they are caught.

you clearly know NOTHING about sexual abuse, Kerty, so please, do us all a favor and stop spouting off this stupid nonsense of yours. it is maddening and it is just plain factually inaccurate.

SS

My comment #68 was about Incest and child abuse within family relationships. Not about rape in general. Families as well as communities would have different reaction to incest vs child abuse vs rape. Again the context is India, not Usa or Austria.

What you describe in para #1 can happen. But you can not generalize, not across all families, castes and cultures, especially in a non monolithic and socially/culturally diverse country like India. The social and cultural conditioning of parents, kids, men and women is not uniform across all castes, all classes, all regions. There are exceptions to everything in India, but exceptions do not make the norms. One can extend the logic of 'this or that is under-reported' and 'families do this and do that' to just about any absurd claim. It is easy to cook up myths based on such logic. May be there are people who eat cockroaches in India, and may be it is grossly under-reported, may be people would not readily admit to it, but I would not build myths around it.

Arrey kerty bhai saheb !

Why you poke the libbies? Inbreeding of ideas is apparantly a good thing in asura-speak. They are high on soma and under an asuric trance.

Devas have sequestered asuras from naras and for a good reason. They need their venting(or hyper-ventilating) space.

Scratch a liberal/feminist and you'll find an asura under his/her skin. Infact, if you cut a libbie, green blood will drip. Considering global food shortages, Solyent Green(asuric Soma) will soon be their way of getting sozzled.

When you enter the libbie cave, you are trespassing into their orgies. How did Doom feel when Conan gatecrashed into his orgy?

Exactly!

Leave 'em be(also leave reason and logic outside before entering the cave).

In asuric southern European countries like France, Portugal, Spain and now Romania, incest has been legalized.

Poor Lolita got reamed. So the logical extension of hippies(er, libbies) in India is that its now Lalithaji's turn. That self-fulfilling prophecy of getting her knickers(er, chaddis) in a tantric twist.

Apparantly all this behaviour is widely prevailing in a patriachial society, so bring in the social engineering, now!

Creepy ideology, no? Well, that's their way of saving Lalitha and civilization. Them poor misunderstood souls!

So, shhhh! Just tiptoe in occassionaly and try and figure out the libbie mental makeup. Its like sudoku. :-)

Here's one such soduku for your enjoyment:

Two men met at a bus stop and struck up a conversation.One of them kept complaining of family problems.

Finally, the other man said: "You think you have family problems? Listen to my situation."

"A few years ago, I met a young widow with a grown-up daughter.We got married and got myself a stepdaughter.

Later, my father married my stepdaughter.
That made my stepdaughter, my step-mother.
And my father became my stepson.

Also, my wife became mother-in-law of her father-in-law"."Much later the daughter of my wife, my stepmother, had a son.

This boy was my half-brother because he was my father's son.But he was also the son of my wife's daughter which made him my wife'sgrand-son.

That made me the grand-father of my half-brother."
"This was nothing until my wife and I had a Baby.

Now the half-sister of my son,my stepmother, is also the Grandmother.

This makes my father, the brother-in-law of my child, whose stepsister is my father's wife, I am my stepmother's brother-in-law, my wife is her own child'saunt, my son is my father's nephew and I am my OWN GRANDFATHER" !!!!

"And you think you have FAMILY PROBLEMS!!!"

Punjab BJP leader held for raping daughter.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/punjab-bjp-leader-held-for-raping-daughter/88643-3.html

Daddy

That sudoku had me in splits laughing and my brain in twists trying to figure out relationship mutations. It looks like a big bang theory where all relationships wither away - you shouldn't give such dangerous ideas to 'libbies', they would make it an ideological plank to neutralize the family.

kerty: "In fact it is also as easy to make frivolous and false accusations"

So then I'm sure you also know how easy it is for rapists and their defense lawyers to claim that real accusations are false allegations? Because frankly it is difficult to prove abuse or even rape...and there is very little investment for the victim to come forward and make "false accusations" of rape and sexual abuse especially against a family member. Most victims of incest are minors and why you think these kids would make false accusations is beyond me. In India social stigma makes it even harder to report rape or sexual abuse.

I could understand the "false allegation" angle in cases of physical abuse...but w/ sexual abuse or incest or rape, the victim has to overcome a great deal of personal and social barriers to come forward.

But we "libbies" aren't privy to the moral and cultural understanding you seem to have about rape and incest.

SD

Its actually very easy to make false accusations and frame persons, and quite fashionable, thanks to media. They come in very handy in domestic disputes, property disputes, family disputes, disputes among relatives, where stakes are high and anger flies. Just skim thru all the popular Indian TV serials that masses are hooked on to - they are like how-to tutorials, they come with complete package including frame ups and dialogues.

System of justice has to rest on 'innocent until proven guilty'. It must provide due process to the accused. There has to be a proof of crime and guilt. Mere accusations are not proof of crime or guilt. The guilty verdict must rest on evidence and witnesses. You can not bend or subvert the system of justice for ideological expediency or vested-interest constituencies. Because once the judicial system stands subverted, it will corrupt and crash, it will bring most harm to the the most vulnerable section of society who needs the system of justice the most.

Bedroom crimes and domestic quarrels pose greatest challenge to judicial philosophy. Judicial system was not invented to deal with these kind of issues. It never envisaged it will have to deal with bedrooms and family rooms and affairs of very private nature. They were left to the social sphere, to be dealt by social institutions at local level. But social sphere is melting away, social institutions are losing their hegemony, relationships are sexualized and commercialized and atomized, and we have entirely new categories of chaos and no effective judicial philosophy or social infrastructure to deal with them. Libs have grafted the redress in the judicial philosophy by crafty interpretations, but in the process, judicial philosophy has lost the consensus and universality it once enjoyed. Judicial philosophy stands divided and subverted. Judicial benches and appointments have become the battle zones. It has been ideologized, politicized, radicalized. The divide-destroy mechanism is in place. It will not see long shelf-life. Hopefully, people will come to their senses long before it is too late. They might have to burn few libs at the proverbial stake and start all over again - and, of course, apologize for it later on, once mission is long accomplished!

okay, it's official Kerty you have lost your mind or whatever was left of it. You live in a happy draconian bubble and I'm going to leave you there. I could take you on as you are so damn ignorant about everything, but I won't. So stew in your own little pool of poison and keep dreaming.

How dare you talk of false memories without knowing my friend?

God! do you have to jump into every single thread and spew your nonsense?

sarah islam:

"okay, it's official Kerty you have lost your mind or whatever was left of it."'

now THAT's quite a feat! most regular humans cannot ever lose something they never had to begin with. But then, we are not dealing with a mere mortal here...

CS,

good point! :-)

Sarah

"I could take you on as you are so damn ignorant about everything, but I won't."

You should illuminate your knowledge, at least, for the benefit of other readers, now that I have spread so much ignorance. But perhaps, a wiser decision to leave my ignorance alone and let it fall on its own weight.

SD to kerty:

"But you and probably another commentator called Ledzius have displayed prejudice specifically through your comments."

what happened to Ledzius? due to his absence, kerty has to pick up all the slack.

as for asking kerty to come up with a "thesis" that he finds so easy to write, one should not forget that "thesis" and "faeces" sound pretty much the same.

Ravi Kulkarni:

"I have never seen Kerty engage in personal attacks, which several commentators here do, including some of the "respected" ones."

I totally agree with this. Particularly since one of the so-called "respectable" commentators who revels in personal attacks (but only those "deserving of personal attacks") happens to be me!

i suggest that somebody should write an article on Kerty; perhaps he could do it himself. then he can be defended, taken apart, partly defended, partly taken apart etc. etc. how's that for a nightmarish scenario?

SS:

"you clearly know NOTHING about sexual abuse, Kerty, so please, do us all a favor and stop spouting off this stupid nonsense of yours."

oh yes he does! just as he knows all about what it feels like to be pregnant by reading books about it; and he can swim without having ever stepped into a pool or pond, by reading books about it, plus his own opinions. In the world of pure ideology, prejudice, illogic, no "knowledge" is impossible. please don't level malicious accusations. Typical of "feminists", isn't it?

hey folks, i remember reading once about the condition kerty has, but that term is way too difficult to pronounce or even to spell. as temporal says, please give him a wide berth, even though i am not exactly practising what i preach. but then, i have never had illusions of being a prophet...

kerty: since you re-stated your comment, I'll refer you to mine...again: re-read comment 74

If your empirical data and logic is derived primarily from Indian TV serials then we obviously have different premises.

cs pls stop baiting

above comment 85 is from me.

SD,

Aditi was referring not to #85 but to my silly baits. I try to resist, but sometimes cannot follow my own advice ie. "when arguing with a fool, make sure he/she isn't doing the same thing".

The good side of me (yes I have it too) likes to believe that I am doing Kerty a service by baiting him. Some people just like to be disliked and he's one of those. The polar opposite of the "disease to please"...but both existing in their bubbles, unhinged from reality, unable to change their views, to admit mistakes, to learn...

"If your empirical data and logic is derived primarily from Indian TV serials then we obviously have different premises."

Would it be better if empirical data and logic came only from accusations, non-reported statistics, or TV about something happening somewhere, may be somewhere in Austria, and we ring draconian alarm bells here based on sweeping generalizations?

What people consume on TV and other media does become part of popular mass culture. It eventually does show up as empirical data.

eeeks! this thread now is not just officially kertified but CS'fied too. the worst of all worlds. I bow out to give others some space. hey, i heard that sigh of relief!!

"Would it be better if empirical data and logic came only from accusations, non-reported statistics....we ring draconian alarm bells here based on sweeping generalizations?"

I have used none of the above. Just plain logic. I didn't say you were wrong. I said just as false allegations can be made, real accusations can be claimed as being false by clever lawyers and criminals. Both scenarios are credible ones. No reason why the former would be any more likelier than the scenario I present. In fact the latter might be likelier simply because a rape victim in India has to face social stigma. This is not a generalization. It is a fact.

The above article chronicles 2 examples in media and states facts about some laws in India, I would hardly call those generalizations or "alarm bells".

SD

"article chronicles 2 examples in media and states facts about some laws in India, I would hardly call those generalizations or "alarm bells""

How is jumping to conclusions from 2 examples in the media not a generalization? Than using 'they get under-reported' as logic, dubious statistics as empirical data, and sensational screaming headlines to create propaganda and judicial activism out of it, not to address the root of problems, but to create self-fulfilling prophesies.

"just as false allegations can be made, real accusations can be claimed as being false by clever lawyers and criminals. Both scenarios are credible ones. No reason why the former would be any more likelier than the scenario I present."

We will always have both set of scenarios. But system does not acknowledge so.

When justice system is built on cross-checking of evidence and witnesses by both sides, the issue of false accusations would be a non-issue. The issue arises when the system is not built on cross checking of evidence and witnesses but rather built on accusations alone.

"a rape victim in India has to face social stigma. This is not a generalization. It is a fact. "

Firstly, we are not talking about rape. Rape, incestual advances, molestation, harassment, abuse involving adults, children, among different age groups, among inter-caste, inter-class, inter-religious groups etc can have different set of stigma and reactions, they would not be the same. I would be generalization if you take the extreme variety of crime - say rape, and predicate that same set of stigma would happen in case of harassment or teasing or molestation etc.

Secondly, stigma is produced by social sphere. When social sphere vanishes, stigma vanishes too. So stigma as a deterrent can not always be present. Where individuals choose to live as individuals and not as larger social unit, when people are dropping out from their social circles to live as they please, social stigma can have very minimal role to play. There is a concerted movement to get the people out of social organisms and social stigma and social taboos. There is a large constituency that is amoral, non judgemental and does not subscribe to social or cultural taboos or stigmas.

SD (and others),

I do hope kerty does not get hold this top secret and eminently message, but had we not in principle decided to give him a "wide berth", much like Sumanth?? :)

Note:

message #93 is an eminently private message intended expressly for the non-kertys. if it has reached you by mistake, please do not read it. if you do, hair will start growing on your palm in about three days. no, tiger balm won't help.

kerty: what conclusions? I didn't see any derivations of conclusions in the article.

"But system does not acknowledge so"

How would the "system" acknowledge cases of unreported rape if it is...umm unreported?

"we are not talking about rape."

If by "we" you mean you, then I'm sorry but I am commenting on an article about rape and incest, not teasing or just general harassment. I have made it pretty clear what I am talking about.

"There is a large constituency that is amoral, non judgemental and does not subscribe to social or cultural taboos or stigmas"

If I remember correctly you had once on DC told me that women wearing jeans is akin to "vice" culture. Is this the same constituency that holds you or a different one that represents majority of Indians?

SD

"what conclusions? I didn't see any derivations of conclusions in the article."


That was in reference to: "The above article chronicles 2 examples in media.....I would hardly call those generalizations..."


Kerty:"But system does not acknowledge so"

SD: How would the "system" acknowledge cases of unreported rape if it is...umm unreported?

My comment was in reference to your point about clever lawyers and criminals getting away by calling valid charges as false accusations. Thus, we can have false charges an well as false denial of charges - while legal system recognizes that false denial of charges do exist, it does not acknowledge that there can be falsification of charges as well.

Kerty: "we are not talking about rape."

SD: "If by "we" you mean you, then I'm sorry but I am commenting on an article about rape and incest, not teasing or just general harassment. I have made it pretty clear what I am talking about."

Than we would be talking apples and oranges. Rape and incest are two different breed of sexual genres. The former does not involve family members, not in most cases. And in case of incest, lack of consent may not always be absent. Incest may or may not start off as non-consentual affair. The consentual affair can end in guilt and acrimonious blame game. And non-consentual affair may grow into a consentual affair. Incest does not always involve kids, it can be among grown up adults as well. Incest can come in many flavors. To equate incest as rape would be over-generalization.

Kerty: "There is a large constituency that is amoral, non judgemental and does not subscribe to social or cultural taboos or stigmas"

SD: "If I remember correctly you had once on DC told me that women wearing jeans is akin to "vice" culture. Is this the same constituency that holds you or a different one that represents majority of Indians?"

I do speak about vice culture where it is relevant. But 'wearing jeans' as vice culture, is not what you will find as my comment. But I recall, that is something you like to inject in the debate about vice culture. Like when we dispute dubious social research, you like to bolster its credibility by injecting science research in the discussion. Just like you like to inject rape into discussion when discussion is about incest. It allows the credibility or stigma associated with one thing to rub off on another thing. But who am I to complain. Because I do that all the time too. Its a lazy way out, but it works.

Dear CS (#81),

"I totally agree with this. Particularly since one of the so-called "respectable" commentators who revels in personal attacks (but only those "deserving of personal attacks") happens to be me!"

I didn't think of you when I wrote that. Hmmmm, but you are right after all ;)

Ravi

Ravi:

"I have never seen Kerty engage in personal attacks, which several commentators here do, including some of the "respected" ones."

Actually...hmmm, come to think of it, I think much of the time kerty keeps insulting basic commonsense. Which, not surprisingly, I do take as a personal attack :)

Mom forced me to frame papa on rape charge'
....
A man was sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment by a lower court for raping his daughter. The high court found holes in the prosecution story and acquitted him.
....

And now the daughter, on whose complaint the father is in prison, has confessed in a sworn affidavit that her dad was innocent.

She said she had framed him at the instance of her mother whose relationship with her father was strained. This bizarre caseâ€"senior lawyers say they've not heard of a more weird twist to a caseâ€"has raised several questions.
....
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1307752,flstry-1.cms

Minor alleges rape by father
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Lucknow-Minor-alleges-rape-by-father/articleshow/4357188.cms

Drunk man held for raping four-year-old daughter in Delhi

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Man-held-for-raping-daughter-in-Delhi/articleshow/4362270.cms

yet another rapist father in Jaipur. The country has gone to dogs.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Jaipur-13-yr-old-raped-by-father/articleshow/4553980.cms

In a shocking case, father was freed after 9 months in jail. He was accused by his daughter of raping him. This was proved by court the allegations are false. The man has shunned his wife and children.

If rape deserves death penalty, what should false charges of rape deserve? what a society we live in?
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/rape-charges-dropped-after-daughter-says-she-framed-father/466587/3