5. Husbands would have no right to appeal as now your extortion is codified in the law and power has been wrested with the insensitive and anti-male Indian judiciary.
The Govt. chose to brush aide the aforementioned concerns of men’s welfare groups giving a clear message that the Govt. in India is not interested to work in men’s favor to even an iota’s extent. It’s
up to the men now to realize as to whether they should vote for such political parties or even paytax to such a Govt.Some of the arguments that were used by Honorable Minister of Law and Justice, Shri Kapil Sibalto help build a case for this law were grossly misleading and totally inaccurate . His statements andour counters are as below.1.
India is a patriarchal society; hence laws must be pro-women.
This is a big myth which is conveniently used to pass any anti-male law. If the society was indeedpatriarch
al, then in that case, the laws would have protected a man’s right. Why would a patriarchal
society even bother about women and pass so many anti-male laws just to appease women? Actually Indian society has never been patriarchal. Life has always been tougher for mencompared to women. Men have always been expected to take more pains and make moresacrifices compared to women and when men try to speak about their rights, their own fellow menwork against them and suppress them. It is just a convenient argument to support anti-male lawsso that men can be continuously harassed and tortured in order to make them work for thebetterment of the society.2.
World over 2% of assets are owned by women, so since 98% of property is owned by 50% of the population i.e. men, hence women must get free property at the cost of men.
This is another grossly incorrect statement propagated by feminists and is not true because till date
no authentic data source has been traced to, which scientifically proves the contention and it’s
virtually impossible to do so as no one has access to this level of global data. No law was ever framed to have men a free run on properties by virtue of their relationship status that would enrichthemselves. Then, why do we want to enrich women by robbing things off men? And such amathematically weak argument coming from an eminent lawyer and a graduate from Harvard LawSchool is equally shamming for India.3.
This law is gender-neutral as both husband and wife can apply for divorce
This a grossly misleading and untrue statement When it comes to property division, only husband’s
property will be considered and even if wife owns property she can keep it, while claim a share in
We are only considering post-marital property but will take into account inherited and inheritable property
.This is a big grossly misleading statement. INSAAF has seen the draft of the bill, which clearlymentions that any property owned by the husband at the time of divorce, whether it is inherited,inheritable or self-acquired, shall be considered for division. However, our learned law minster chose to mislead and said we are talking of only post marital property, however, inherited and