Rape Victim in India Dies of Her Injuries

[Datepalm]

Intent means fuck all when the way it's done is oppressive. This isn't bickering about saying something in a particular way or bullying because of some off issue. This, to me, is part and parcel of the issue - that instead of listening to women talk about their thoughts men are telling women that what they do think is counterproductive to dialogs with men. That all might be totally true - but it's also an example of men telling women that their feelings and thoughts about something that effects them is not valid enough, and they don't have a right to be angry at that moment.

I can't for the life of me see a disembodied internet disagreement over the political utility of a particular rhetorical tactic as oppression. Nor do I think this is an instance of 'men telling women to shut up'.

I see where you're coming from, and I broadly agree that when people harp on about gradual change blahbbitty blah etc, they're ignoring the fact that gradual change is pushed by protests, anger, opposition and disagreement. This IS what gradual change looks like. But that's not what Naz said and I really don't understand why you're pouncing on him this way.

[Tears of Lys]

I certainly didn't mean to come off as Internet posturing, and every situation demands its own way of reacting. In the case of this poor girl in India, there wasn't much she could do. She was outnumbered.

Also, I'm not intending to imply that my way should be everyone's way. It would most likely get me killed. The only truly best way to deal with a horrific situation is to live through it.

[litechick]

There will always be some people who say "slow and steady wins the race" and others who favor sprinting full out until collapse. I am unaware of a situation where people who want the same thing achieve greater success by in-fighting.

On topic, that blog post makes me want to start a movement in Delhi that specializes in cross dressing and training for armed combat. If your boobs are too big to corset yourself into a man shape then we'll disguise them as man boobs.

If gangs of girly men start to harass other men who are harassing women, that would be a matter for the police. I'm sure they'll get right on it.

*No, I'm not entirely serious but it's the only thing I can think of.

[Larry of the Lawn]

I seriously think the death penalty would lead to effective short term change.

eta: Just to be clear, I'm not really for capital punishment. But I do think it is worth considering in this case as a deterrent. If it prevents one more case of rape perhaps the balance is worth it?

The only thing I don't like about capital punishment for rape is that it gives a violent attacker no reason not to kill the victim. Not to say the rapist doesn't deserve it, but that if they already know they are facing a capital crime, they may be more likely to go further. I'm not sure if this argument has any statistical information to back it up or if it's just a gut feeling. Certainly stronger sentencing without the victim blaming would be deterrents. I'm not against rapists being executed on principal, other than worrying that the threat of capital punishment might make them more dangerous.

I hope this doesn't come off as insensitive to the victim, or being lenient with the rapist. It just seems there are too many variables that work against the death penalty being an effective deterrent (on it's own) agianst rape. And I'm not suggesting nothing be done, just that the death penalty on it's own might have some negative consequences of escalating rapes into rape/murders.

[Xray the Enforcer]

I can't for the life of me see a disembodied internet disagreement over the political utility of a particular rhetorical tactic as oppression. Nor do I think this is an instance of 'men telling women to shut up'.

I see where you're coming from, and I broadly agree that when people harp on about gradual change blahbbitty blah etc, they're ignoring the fact that gradual change is pushed by protests, anger, opposition and disagreement. This IS what gradual change looks like. But that's not what Naz said and I really don't understand why you're pouncing on him this way.

I disagree with this. The cherry-picking "well, it's OK to be angry, but not the way you're being angry" or "it's OK to be you, but as long as you don't rock the boat" is pretty much the textbook example of how minorities have been disenfranchised and their voices smothered. You know, like "if the gays wanted to win more straight allies they should stop being so gross by holding hands in public. That in-your-face act might offend someone and lose an ally." I support gay people holding hands wherever the hell they want to, just like I support that woman who wants to tell people to go fuck themselves with their five-year plans.

Again, I don't think Naz thinks women need to STFU. If I did, he wouldn't be my friend. I just disagree with some of his interpretations and I wanted to highlight how certain responses in this thread are, totally unconsciously and unintentionally, feeding into common narratives in rape culture.

ETA: At this point I am going to bow out because I don't want to hammer on Naz, considering that we generally agree on the overall topic. I just wanted to clarify where I was coming from. And I get where he's coming from, even if I don't necessarily agree with some of his conclusions. At least we can agree that naan is a second-rate bread product. ;)

[Xray the Enforcer]

I certainly didn't mean to come off as Internet posturing, and every situation demands its own way of reacting. In the case of this poor girl in India, there wasn't much she could do. She was outnumbered.

Also, I'm not intending to imply that my way should be everyone's way. It would most likely get me killed. The only truly best way to deal with a horrific situation is to live through it.

Just wanted to say that I totally know where you are coming from. Hell, a different day I might have made the exact same post -- I like to think that I'd be all bad-ass and would totally take someone out as well. But when I read yours and SIC's comments without being invested in the thread itself (the topic is way too upsetting and I am trying to stay as objective as I can), it really struck me how troublesome comments/posturing can be and how it totally feeds into the old trope that "if you don't fight, you must have wanted it." :grouphug:

[Tears of Lys]

Thanks, Xray. I'm trying to stay as level-headed as I can too. Wild thoughts of the women of India forming vigilante groups, etc., have popped into my mind as well. It's hard to know how to react when faced with such madness.

[Fragile Bird]

I know this topic really sucks. It is so depressing to think of the way women are treated in India, the way the victim was attacked and brutalized, to think of the 17 year old who killed herself because the police refused to even register her complaint.

It particularly sucks because of the how helpless you feel on this side of the world. You want to be able to do something or say something that will help change things for the better. Is that restricted to giving moral support? Do you boycott products from India? Do you flood the Indian embassies around the world with protest e-mails and snail mail?

[Sci-2]

You want to be able to do something or say something that will help change things for the better.

People could easily do things to help women, or any other victims of injustice, in their part of the world.

That's sort of why it's hard not to be cynical of the media, which often presents problems has distant things happening elsewhere, whether "elsewhere" is in another country or the bad part of town.

[Fragile Bird]

Sci, you can do things locally of course. But in my city women are not afraid to be out after 8.00 pm, and if they are assaulted and complain to the police, the police don't suggest they marry their attacker or take a cash payment. [deleted the rest]

Perhaps a better analogy - the fight against apartheid. Most of the world united to show their disapproval over the treatment of non-whites in that country, even when the treatment of non-whites in their own countries wasn't perfect. We can think about trying to do something more than just wringing our hands to help women in India, can't we?

[Robin Of House Hill]

People could easily do things to help women, or any other victims of injustice, in their part of the world.

That's sort of why it's hard not to be cynical of the media, which often presents problems has distant things happening elsewhere, whether "elsewhere" is in another country or the bad part of town.

Sci,

People don't intervene because they are afraid that doing so puts them at risk.

Sometimes, there are more bad things that occur "elsewhere", just as there really are "bad" parts of towns.

[Sci-2]

Most of the things people could do internationally they could do locally - donate to organizations like the one Naz mentioned or volunteer at a battered women's shelter.

Beyond that, I'm not seeing many possibilities save perhaps pushing companies/nations invested in India to pull out unless major changes are enacted. Of course, economic sanctioning has its own repercussions but it may be the most effective thing people not in India could do.

[Admittedly I might have missed something, but these are the only things that come to mind.]

[ants]

Blog post by a woman who has experienced Delhi's molestation culture.

The more violent assaults won't stop till the less violent incidents become seen as unacceptable.

I found some of the comments just wrong, disgusting and very worrying. This is one of them:

Indian Male says : December 30, 2012 at 13:24

I read this article, and I understand the outrage. There is so much hatred in this article and the comments, that all the emotion seems to override reason. People who talk reason are shouted down but I don’t see any practical solutions being offered either. Call me a chauvenistic pig, and I don’t give a damn. For all your screaming, your comments are only revealing the absolute absence of thought.

Anyway, for me, both these issues are critical to addressing this problem. I am sure it is there in the mind of every right thinking person (specially men) but they are too scared to voice them. Well,not me.

First, in all this crazy rage, it worries me to think of what solution the Government will come up with. Already, existing laws against rape are pretty strict. The word of a rape victim is accepted at face value. So the man is guilty until proven innocent – Shiney Ahuja’s case?? Now the Govt will make the laws even more stringent. There is no doubt that this will lead to a reduction in rape crimes, but at the same time, lead to an increase in false victimization of men. The motivation for complaints could be anything – avoiding promotions, political vendetta etc. As a man, I would be worried about that. This is exactly what is happening with the current draconian dowry harassment laws. So isn’t anyone worried about swinging to the other extreme? How many innocent men will have to be given the death penalty before we see daylight? Doesn’t that trouble anyone?

Second, every woman here wants men to understand them, but not a single woman has spoken about understanding men better. It is common knowledge that every man is hungry for sex from the day he hits puberty till the day he dies. Like it or hate it, that’s how nature has designed us. Man woos, woman chooses. That’s Darwin’s theory. All would be fine if it were only this. But in India, the accessibility to sex is extremely minimal for an unmarried male – for cultural reasons. There is no culture of wooing. There is no culture of flirting. Most men cannot strike up a conversation with a lady stranger because he has never been schooled in that way. Hence, in many males, frustration (for a mate) builds up over time to alarming levels. Of course, you could always ask them to go to prostitutes, but most men will not go for it – for whatever reasons.

Also, no one is acknowledging how difficult it is in our country with an abysmal sex ratio for a man to have sex with an attractive woman (some women are more “attractive” in a sexual sense. You can cry all you want, but that’s life). All of this increases the man’s need for sex. And add to this high society women who walk on roads in mini-skirts and bare backs, its like a starved man seeing a feast laid out in front of him but there is a fence separating him from the feast. So if you want to solve rape, then solve the problem of ready access to quality sex for men. Change culture, change sex ratio.

Think. Even if you make strict laws, what will the excess 200 million men in this country do without mates (thats about every one in 4 males)? Oh, you don’t give a damn – why would you? You are safe. That’s all that counts, isn’t it?

There are other reasons for rape, but lets not kid ourselves. The primary driver for rape is the need for sex. Otherwise, men would just hit women and be done with it. Sex is a primal need. Every man has a right to sex. Every woman has a right to security. If one does not exist, the other will not either.

Oh, the poor males aren't getting enough sex because their parents generation were racists, and you can't expect them to hold themselves back can you? WTF?

[Fragile Bird]

Isn't this exactly what Indian women have been talking about?

[jurble]

Blog post by a woman who has experienced Delhi's molestation culture.

The more violent assaults won't stop till the less violent incidents become seen as unacceptable.

Learned pundits question why.

Unrelated this horribleness:

Given she's Indian, I'm not sure which sort of pundit is implied here.

[ants]

Isn't this exactly what Indian women have been talking about?

Yes. And it illustrates that despite the fact he'd obviously read the blog and the comments he still thought this was a valid justification or explanation of what was happening.

[Galactus]

Well you could just make rape a crime where someone gets the death penalty. Though the possibly better solution is to start making lesser crimes illegal and make rape carry a life sentence.

Not that I expect much to happen, just as I don't see governments or majority of citizenry anywhere tackling these types of issues in their own area.

I should point out that even if rape was turned into a capital crime, these particular rapists still wouldn't get it (for rape anyways, murder is another issue)

[Robin Of House Hill]

Second, every woman here wants men to understand them, but not a single woman has spoken about understanding men better. It is common knowledge that every man is hungry for sex from the day he hits puberty till the day he dies. Like it or hate it, that’s how nature has designed us. Man woos, woman chooses. That’s Darwin’s theory. All would be fine if it were only this. But in India, the accessibility to sex is extremely minimal for an unmarried male – for cultural reasons. There is no culture of wooing. There is no culture of flirting. Most men cannot strike up a conversation with a lady stranger because he has never been schooled in that way. Hence, in many males, frustration (for a mate) builds up over time to alarming levels. Of course, you could always ask them to go to prostitutes, but most men will not go for it – for whatever reasons.

Also, no one is acknowledging how difficult it is in our country with an abysmal sex ratio for a man to have sex with an attractive woman (some women are more “attractive” in a sexual sense. You can cry all you want, but that’s life). All of this increases the man’s need for sex. And add to this high society women who walk on roads in mini-skirts and bare backs, its like a starved man seeing a feast laid out in front of him but there is a fence separating him from the feast. So if you want to solve rape, then solve the problem of ready access to quality sex for men. Change culture, change sex ratio.

That is possibly the biggest load of manure I've ever seen. If can only have come from a male who has no qualities any female would want.

[naz]

Most of the things people could do internationally they could do locally - donate to organizations like the one Naz mentioned or volunteer at a battered women's shelter.

Beyond that, I'm not seeing many possibilities save perhaps pushing companies/nations invested in India to pull out unless major changes are enacted. Of course, economic sanctioning has its own repercussions but it may be the most effective thing people not in India could do.

[Admittedly I might have missed something, but these are the only things that come to mind.]

Indeed. Regarding the former, there are countless NGOs in India that are dedicated to empowering women, educating the poor, and improving the urban environment, all of which will slowly create a better society for women in India. Donating to them or helping them in other ways is certainly a great way to do something from far away. As far as sanctions go, to some extent the market may already respond automatically. Foreign companies that are investing in India will want to pull out if they feel conditions are not safe for their female employees or if such gender inequality exists. In the last few years, there's been a slight pullback of foreign investment because of the slowness with which India is addressing its infrastructure problems. You all remember the massive power outage from last year, right? Foreign companies look at that and suddenly become less enamored of investing in India. So it may go with this issue as well, if the protests keep up.

Ultimately the only thing this government really cares about pushing up the GDP and if starts to look like bad business to not promote social reforms, only then will the government react in any meaningful way. Of course, relying solely on the market to solve the problem is not nearly enough, so yeah... sanctions could work. But they'll never happen. India is too strong an ally of the West now for them to even consider sanctions for something like this. If social inequities were enough to warrant sanctions of a strong economic ally, don't you think more Middle Eastern countries would've been sanctioned by now?

The sad fact is that the Indian government at all levels doesn't really care enough about social inequities to do anything more than offer lip service about it, especially when the ruling party is already on the brink of collapse (it's highly doubtful that the Congress party will win the next general elections). The sadder fact is that the other parties are just as bad with social reform as Congress is. The current star of Indian politics is Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of Gujarat, who's done some amazing things in his state economically. More and more people are talking about him as the next PM. But his party - the BJP - has a strong Hindu fundamentalist strain and Modi is a known Muslim-hater. That kind of political power seems ominous to me and will replace one type of social inequity with another.

The even sadder fact is that foreign governments also don't give a shit about the state of women in India. Note the virtual silence about this rape issue from foreign governments, despite its widespread coverage. So you're not going to see sanctions or anything from them.

[deleted the irrelevant stuff]

[Altherion]

Oh, the poor males aren't getting enough sex because their parents generation were racists, and you can't expect them to hold themselves back can you? WTF?

I think you mean sexist rather than racist. Also, I looked it up and it appears that this is not limited to previous generations. Here are the sex ratios from 2011:

at birth: 1.12 male(s)/female

under 15 years: 1.13 male(s)/female

15-64 years: 1.07 male(s)/female

65 years and over: 0.9 male(s)/female

total population: 1.08 male(s)/female (2011 est.)

There are more males than females at birth for practically every country, but not by this much (only China, Pakistan and, even more bizarrely, some of the Caucasus countries come anywhere close). Why is it so lopsided? Do they practice selective abortion on a wide scale?