Saturday, January 20, 2007

SOWRY Harassmen the new bane of indian society

This is classic article in NewZealand equality forum .
I am reproducing her
and the suicides tell a story
November 19 th 2006Rajesh hasmukh
november 20th 2006 Murthy ( Deccan Herald )
November 21st 2006 Manjunath( Deccan Herald )
One womders what would have happened if victims had been women ?
All classified as sucides or accidental deaths
without cause inspite of history of immediate matrimonial fight prior to death

Sowry Harassment – The new Bane of Indian Society
© Peco Chakravatru 2004

S.O.W.R.Y = Son's Own Wealth Released to You
D.O.W.R.Y = Daughter's Own Wealth Released to You
There is a new evil in Society. This is the SOWRY harassment of husbands and their families. This is a new feature of Indian society. The genesis of this harassment can be traced to the birth and spread of NRIs (Newly Rich Indians) around the Globe, with their money. The method of SOWRY Harassment is linked to the Matrimonial courts, which are geared more towards “teaching husbands a lesson “.
The NRIs, with their money and their peculiar position of having to leave to work, in the USA, Europe or wherever, were the first to feel the heat. These NRIs were educated and the thought of violence was anathema to them, and one encounter with a Police station was enough . Poor guys -- they were threatened with loss of livelihood, prestige and so were forced to make a lifetime settlement -- Rs 25 Lakhs, Rs 30 Lakhs etc. Women's organisations readily admit that there is some abuse. Of course, when a women's organisation admits there is some abuse, then there is lots of abuse.
This 25 lakhs and 30 lakshs of settlement was enough for others to follow suit. This spurted in around 1996 and by 2001 every woman was on their bargain for getting easy money out of a poor sod who did not know what hit him. After all, filing a 498A is as easy as ordering an Idly Sambhar. Actually, it is easier -- the proprietor could refuse to give you an idly sambhar, but the police cannot refuse.
The pattern of behaviour is very simple. The girl would force him, belittle him continuously, harass him, and keep saying you are “harassing me”. “Harassing me”. Keep provoking the guy and his family, till at some point in time the guy and his family decide to speak up, and hey presto your wife becomes a 498A girl. Every family personally knows of men who have been harassed for Sowry .But very few people know of women being harassed for Dowry . Strange ! How come the media sees things differently from what is around me ? This is because of "consciousness-raising" – i.e. propaganda. No matter how gentle the guy is. it is important to force a 498A and ask for settlement. Marriage should not be a regime whereby, for no work on your part, you maintain your “lifestyle”. But through 498A that is what it has become .
Police commissioners and the judiciary have clearly recognized that there is large-scale abuse of the 498A law, and that it is being used for SOWRY harassment. Hats off to them -- they are the first ones to recognize the abuse, seeing that they do not have the power that an idly Sambhar vendor has to refuse to take part in SOWRY harassment
“Oh, but men are not driven to death ! “ Really, the most ignored fact is that men’s sucicide rate goes up by 50% after marriage, while it remains the same for women. Who is harassed more, then ? Where are our tears when men are driven to suicide by women and they are classified as death due to financial problems ? What are these financial problems, if not SOWRY harassment ? One dowry death every 102 minutes and one Sowry death every 30 minutes, but no protection for SOWRY victims .
“Girls are independent and will not just put up with things, and hence now they are using 498A”. Where was their independence and tolerance if they tolerated levels of harassment to 498a levels, before filing for divorce ? Why do I see a 498A being filed before divorce ? That is because a 498A is a weapon of divorce and an instrument of SOWRY harassment.
SOWRY harassment is defined as any demand for money, property or lifestyle which interferes with one's peaceful existence or lifestyle .
Unfortunately this "independence" has brought in more SOWRY harassment and more demands for money from the guys. Why couldn’t the divorce and separation be: ”I don’t like living with you . I go my way, you go your way, you live the lifestyle to which you are entitled, and I live the lifestyle to which I am entitled. I am thankfull for the lifestyle you gave me while you were with me “
It is always Money Money Money. I want all your money and more . I will not give you anything back in return. Neither will I allow a child to visit you. Neither will I provide a weekly amount of sex, or whatever I used to give. Because in marriage only a man is supposed to give . A woman is not supposed to give anything.

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Supreme Court is Right in Appasahebs case

http://timesofindia .indiatimes. com/NEWS/ India/SC_ dowry_ruling_ Reality_not_ taken_into_ account/articles how/1187453. cms

Dhanajay Mahapatra wrongly castigates the Supreme Courts for not understanding the reality .However It must be looked at that this is a poor farmer. When faced with a financial hardships very few options are left . The farmer has to take care of his family which includes his wife . He needs manure to till his farm . He does not have money . What are the options left

One of the options left is to commit suicide . This is an option which is being exercised in alarge number when their families are unable to adjust to the diminished lifestyle the farmer would provide . A surprising reality is that though poverty should have affected both men and women equally and we should see the sucide rate at the same rate but still only male married farmers are commiting sucide . This is reflection of the stress whcih is caused by their family memebrs who cannot adjust to this reality

Another option is to sell ones organs . There are many rackets which have come to light regarding organ trade .

Dhanajay would probably have this farmer choose these two options because men are not supposed to have life force and are supposed to be only a toil animal or kolhu ke bail .

If the reality of farmer asking money for manure is bad , criminal . Then almost every women should be treated as criminal becuase they ask their husband for money for wheat , rice etc & note the sucide of married farmers is many fold higher then wifes of farmer.

I do not have the heart to call this farmer a criminal. He had love for life did not probably want to sell his organs and who can blame him for that .

It is Dhananjay Patra who does not undestand the social reality and the poverty which exists .

Supreme Court has understood the far better social reality of poverty.

Otherwise every women who asks for money from husbands will have to be treated as dowry harasser . because demanding money by either wife and husband is crime under section 2 of dowry prohibition act.

On technical point manure is not property or valuable security so Supreme court is correct . It is a necessity for a farmer .