India- Women only carriages- men humiliated

Remove all ads!

If the women are getting groped on a regular basis, I can see that to address the problem they might have a woman only carriage. Sexism and othert forms of prejudice exist everywhere of course, but they especially exist for those whose sole purpose in life is to see them, situation be damned.

Admittedly, if this were a men only carriage, there would be such a hue and cry that the world would reverbrate. And no amount of explanation, reason, or logic would ever convince the man hating feminists that it was anything less than the first step toward the subjugation and rape of all woman everywhere in the omniverse. To me, it is the double standard that is the issue. There may very wll be good reasons for such segregation to occur from time to time. But you'd never know it to talk to the feminazis -- unless it were the men getting the short end of the stick. Then, our unwillingness to take an injustice sitting down means, of course, that secretly we men desire the subjugation and rape of all woman everywhere in the omniverse.

 

Cara, Aldeth has taken the comment in the context it was meant, you have taken it wrong
"were talking about a country which is trying to convince us that it is a modern civilised country, theyve just held the commonwealth games, and theyre still advocating sexism in society "

I cant see how you have understood it to mean that India is a barbaric lesser country.

the curry remark was a joke, but since you cant see it as that, please make this list for me of all the things that india has done for britain as you promised in your earlier post.

does this have some kind of personal meaning for you? because you are the only one here getting offended and fighting for the fact that being civilised doesnt mean being white, when noone else has suggested this.

what does the age of a people have to do with their civilization? the mongols were an ancient people yet the chinese called them barbarians and built a massive wall to keep them out.

because someone could interperate it that way, just as sexism - it requires an observer to think "he's done that because of...."

just like every action taken against a black person isnt racist, but it doesnt stop people thinking it.

strange to me that the law allows these men to be humiliated in public, violating their human rights and people dont seem to care... because theyre men.

 

This is what happens if you are a man and get on the women's car.

 

Shampoo, Bangles, Bounce Lighting for films, Drills designed for fragmenting gems, Buttons, Calico, Cockfighting, Chintz, Corrosion resistant Iron, steel, dental surgery, levees, dice, docks, advanced dyes, furnaces, hookahs, hospital systems for people and animals, carbon pigmentation (india ink anyone?), the Indian Club used by british military officers, muslin, fibreoptics, the modern build oven, pajamas, cosmetic surgery, the en suite bathroom, puppetry as an art form, rulers, rockets, sewage systems, some of the most popular board games, swimming pools, the USB, several more fabrics, zero, medical studies that the brits hadn't quite cottoned on to yet, the study of linguistics as a formalised method, the concept of a greater universe, subtitles for the deaf.

And a lot more I've heard of but can't confirm

 

I just spoke to a woman who hails from India. She is in full agreement with the women's behaviour in that video. She says that sexual harassment is rampant on the buses and trains there. When i said that the men felt their rights were being violated and that the men getting onto that car saw themselves as the equivalent of Negroes doing sit ins at white only lunch counters, she just laughed and said that was a totally off base comparison. She said that the men of India have brought this on themselves and that many women feared to go out in public. She said as a 13 year old girl she was frequently fondled and pinched on public transportation.

 

Fair enough. I'm not Indian if that's what you're asking. I just hate it when people use the word "civilized" in such a context... Something that happens a lot in the media today and something I have very little patience for.

Given the context I wasn't even sure that you were joking about curry. Sometimes a smiley helps getting the tone of a comment.

8people already provided a list and a pretty good one at that (including a few things I didn't know).

I think that if we did a little more research we'd find other things to add to this list.

 

I didn't take it that way, because you'd have to be pretty ill-informed about the world to still consider India some backwater, 2nd-class nation. While they still have a ton of subsistence level farmers, not to mention a very high poverty rate in a lot of their cities, India, much like China, has modernized considerably in the last couple of decades. In addition to moderizing their cities, they have greatly enhanced their technological development. Heck, they're even a nuclear power in the world.

Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't really know what they're talking about. Since Shoshino seems to be pretty well aware of the world stage given his informed position in other posts, I took it to mean that most people DO think of India as modern and civilized, and these actions do not seem becoming of such.

 

my issue is the sexism, theyve seperated out the males, but not the females, the men cannot go on female cars but the women can travel as they please, why not segregate the whole system? men only cars women only cars, if the metro system is over crowded then better measures need to be taken, after all, male children on these cars could easily be fondled by perverts. How about maximum capacity? more trains? other methods of transport? London could be looked at from this perspective, as despite opinion, london has one of the best public transport systems in the world.

the concept of massaging oil into hair came from india, shampoo itself was invented in the UK.

totally pointless, lets add that the UK had bracelets before bangles came along.

can india truly be credited with refraction?

while there is evidence of buttions going back to indus vally tribes circa 7000 BCE, buttons were brought to the UK by the Romans, and the Romans learnt of them from the Greeks.

is illegal for a reason.

no such thing

Brought to the UK by the Romans, originated in land inhabited through history by Hittites, Phrygians, Lydians, Persians, Greeks, Assyrians, Armenians, Romans, Byzantines, Anatolian Seljuks and Ottomans - I would add was perfected by Henry Bessemer who was a british inventor.

once again there has been evidence of dentistry going back to the Indus valley tribes, however dentistry in the UK came from the romans, who learnt it from the Egyptians.

once again brought by romans to the UK, learnt from the Egyptians who used this method to farm the nile.

most likely made their way to the UK by the romans, who picked them up in greece, where they were very popular.

how?

did they? while Im not completely sure what is meant by "advanced" dye itself was also brought to the UK by the romans who aquired it from what is modern day Lebanon, Syria, and northern Israel.

bit vague, ceramic furnaces possibly, but metallurgic furnaces no

you mean the bong pipes used to smoke the tobacco brought to india by europeans?

once again, brought by the romans from egypt.

tough one while being invented by an Indian he recieved his degree in optics in london and invented fiberoptics while working in the US.

what style of oven in particular?

while pajamas were worn in India, the british first encountered them from sikh's and muslims

made their way to europe from the mongols, who stole them from the chinese.

im guessing your refering to "the great bath" however swimming pools in the UK came from the concept of baths from the romans, and the greeks.

did the USB have anything to do with india?

as a number, yes, though the babylonians had already represented 0 by the lack of a number which was represented as a space between other numerals.

incredibly vague.

 

Except for the women attacking and humiliating men, we have women-only carriage on our MetroRails for years already. Almost the same rule except that elderly men or men with several little children are allowed in the women-only carriage. Guys accompanying pregnant woman are also allowed. I don't know about you guys but I've never hear any guy here complain that it is discriminating.

It's being considerate to one sex, it's not trying to discriminate the other. Just my 2 cents. And yes, I've got my fair share of squeezing in those jam-packed carriage too.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
OT: Hmmmm. I didn't know he departed... couldn't take the heat?

 

It's still discrimination, no matter the intent. It seems to me like the attitude about it is more offensive to people than the act itself. Especially the slapping and abusing of men who enter the female only train. They should be removed if they don't have a valid reason (with a pregnant woman, etc). I have no idea why those guys were on the female only car. Maybe they were being fondled on the other cars too. Maybe they had a girlfriend or wife on the female only car.

In any case, if there was car for men and a car for women or a plan to stop the overcrowding of trains. Reschedule times, make a smaller female only car if there are less riders than the normal cars, etc. I doubt the outcry would be as great.

As it is, there are some problems: I can see is a full train with 50% women/50% men in the normal cars and a bunch of empty space in the women only car. A more serious problem would be the mindset of 'gropers' on the normal train. "If she didn't want to be groped, she'd be on the female only train!"

By the way, I don't think all discrimination is bad, if that wasn't evident. I'm also all for stopping subway groping; I've only been witness to one such occurrence (when I was in Japan) but I promptly stopped the act. All I had to do was say something, no physical contact was required. The sad thing was that no one really seemed surprised or cared... they wanted to mind their own business and not "cause a scene." While I was there I read a study that said thousands of (Japanese) men were arrested each year for groping and that over 80% of female students at polled highschools were groped at least once. I don't know the truth of the studies, but it doesn't seem too far fetched.

He got banned because he previously was banned under another name.

 

Can't argue with that, it has a valid point. But I don't know their setup over there, here, we have securities over seeing things. There is a guard post marking the women-only carriage. Once they spotted trying to cross that line, they are stopped, if a guy happened to get into the women-only, they are called out by the guards. This is effective as the guard are the ones who signals the driver to leave or wait. So the women in there don't need to exercise violence or whatever.

In a way, I think the problem lies with either implementation or culture.

Ahhh, I see where you are coming from. But here's a real everyday scenario. The main problem actually is with rush-hour. There's no amount of rescheduling or increasing/decreasing carriage size can do if everyone wants to go to work or come home at the same time-frame. Our rail here passes by every station at an interval of 4-5 minutes. And even the women-only carriages are jam packed. I have my fair share of "round-trips". Meaning riding the rail that goes to the opposite direction (because fewer people rode there at that time frame) and take the same train back to where I originally was heading. And even with that technique, I still find myself standing. Again... it's rush hour.

 

Women and men are just different. Women have more 'naughty parts' at risk of being fondled, men are more likely to want to fondle them, etc. So I don't see differentiating between the sexes as automatically bad. That said, I don't think there should be separate sex cars. Make it illegal to grope women (or men), which I'm sure it already is, prosecute offenders, which I imagine they already do to some extent, and let the rest be. If you don't want to run the risk of being groped - much like if you don't want to run the risk of being mugged or pickpocketed, which is also illegal - don't use the trains.

 

I'm sure that tecnnically it is illegal to grope -- it's a form of assault under the law here, though a supposedly minor one. But in a society as crowded as India, it becomes something of a nightmare to prosecute (or even find!) all the perps, and many women likely don't have the time or resources to pursue a court case.

It sems to me that the simplest solution is to have a car for the women and then the problem is solved comparatively easily. I have come to the conclusion that the men getting onto the women only cars are just troublemaking douchebags. It's not the overcrowding they are opposed to, they just want to exercise some control over women, and they are surprised when the women are basically saying "enough it enough!"

The thing is, sometimes there's a valid reason for discrimination regarding gender. As a man, I can recognize and accept that. The trouble is that the feminazis have not yet got that message because they are too busy pitching hissy fits.

 

have they?

 

That's probably more in the perception of what we believe to be naughty. Man boobs aren't perceived to be naughty, so the chance that man boobs will be fondled are very little. The same reason a knee or a elbow isn't likely to be fondled.

Naughty is subjective, I would say yes our culture portrays more of the female body as naughty compared to men.

There's also the distinction between what men and women are deemed physically attractive by, visually. A lot of the time for women it's their breasts and buttocks. For men it's more likely to be arms, shoulders, chest and perhaps buttocks. Culturally, there's a big difference in reaction to: "Can I feel your breasts?" and "Can I feel your biceps?"

 

Indeed they do.

 

Hokay woman's opinion here.

Sexism and discrimination exist everywhere. I t is alive and well here in the USA. It may have taken on a cover but it is here. Recently on another forum someone made a list of vulgar terms or terms that some people consider vulgar. The person making the list was from the USA, a teenager.

I almost went up in flames at the terms considered vulgar. Scientific, medical terms. It seems that even calling a woman a woman is now an insult. Gee whiz, I am getting old. I was taught that being a woman was a fine wonderful thing. Wouldn't be any men without us. Oh, sorry being called pregnant I guess is an insult. Hokay enough of a rant.

The Indian men are so uncivilized and barbaric that they sexually assault women on the trains and buses? I want to know about this. Having ridden the New York subways for years during rush hour I mainly feel sorry for the men. Those subway cars are packed. You are pushed up against other people, other people are pushed up against you. Believe me, you are butt to stomach with no room to slide a thin piece of paper in between.

Until I get more authoritative information regarding the situation I see the women in this situation in India as being sexist.

Oh, by the way I agree with Caradhras, at least speaking for the USA, we do hold ourselves superior to much of the rest of the world. We forget all the things that have come from the East, China and Japan for example. We forget that European civilization grew out of the Mediterranean area. We tend to think we and are way of doing things is right. We here in the USA a child of European culture have founded a country that is superior to our parents and they should listen to us. Or have we?

Nakia who of course knows more than anyone else simply because she is older. Believe that one and I have a bridge for sale.

 

I work door security for a busy night club, I wear a cricket box for protection, not from being kicked there, from being grabbed there. I also keep keys in both my back pockets, so that when women slap my arse, they hurt their hand

 

What about your boobs?

Guy targets: genetalia and butt = 2
Girl targets: genetalia, butt, and boobs = 3 (or 4)

I don't see how this can really be in dispute.

 

India is one of those countries in which a vast number of women is under such subjugation that we as westerners cannot even comprehend it.

Once one even considers the numbers of abortions because the viable fetus just would have happened to be born as a girl...well, one might begin to understand how bad the status of women in that society can be...

All things fair, having an only women cart and then having an only men cart couldn't harm anyone...

I can't see how arguing that forcing people to use only unisex bathrooms would mean more equal rights and I don't think anyone in here'd think that way either...