Property division law (The divorce law) and some random questions – my answers

This post is in response with some comments in Indian home makers blog posts . Even after a day or two, she didn’t published my responses to those comments. So, I don’t have other options than publishing them here. And that too, she published my comments made after these comment.

May be she didn’t have enough time to read all the comments and publish them. Especially,if they have external links. She is getting more than 100 comments for many posts. So, I can understand her. But my priority is make people aware of the situation. I can’t leave those comments unpublished. So, I feel my act is justified.

I Brierly explain under which circumstances I made those comments, what are the other parties arguments. If you find that is not enough, you can check the article and the person’s comment.

Scenario1 – Comment by Indian Home Maker (blog owner). Blog post: Instead of eyeing their husbands’ ancestral property, why don’t Indian daughters in law make their own homes?

I replied to one comment and said women never left without proper alimony. They all compensated as per the living standards of her man. But, It Is the greed of the women that make them asking man’s property earned before marriage and ancestral property of man. for that she gave some statistics regarding this maintenance …

7. 58% of the divorced women did not receive any maintenance at all (most of their cases are pending in court).
8. The remaining 42% received approximately 10% to 13% of their spouses income as maintenance. In one case from Kerala, the woman fought for 17 years to be awarded a maintenance of Rs. 900 per month even though her male spouse was earning Rs. 56,000 per month.

my response to that comment, that she didn’t published (why I don’t know) is..

7.58? don’t you think it’s small percentage? I don’t mean to say we can leave them, but the law definitely work for them too. All we need is proper implementation of the law. Even after IrBM pass the statistics looks like this only. Because property division is a civil case. They stay in courts for years. I am sure about that and that’s why WCD ministry oppose this move of including ancestral property. I must say.

And the amount of alimony depends upon not only husband’s earning, the women’s position also. If she have other source of income she will get less alimony. And even maintenance law goes against men, if the judge is biased.

Is maintenance law fair with men?

And why do you think proper implementation of the law is the answer for it instead creating another biased law? which is not gender neutral at all?

Scenario 2– comment by Satish : Blog post: Should women be given a share in residential property of the husband, including inherited and inheritable property?

I replied to a comment made by satish who pointed women are oppressed for ages. We have a shameful history of women oppression. So, we have to share the property. But I answered him with suicide statistics of men and IHM asked me the proof for that data. I provided her two links related to married men suicides. But she didn’t published both of those comments. So, I am publishing them here.

Sharing property is not the problem. But which property thats the question we are rising. You can’t share property earned before marriage and ancestral property. That is too much. No one is denying wife shaer in martial property.

If women are oppressed since independece or before independence, it’s not my fault or any man who is alive now. You can’t punish people for the sins of their fathers or forefathers or previous generations. It’s unfair.

And every year nearly 66000 married men suciciding because of family problems, married women suicide rate is less than half of it. But women orgs and intellectuals claim many of them related to financial problems. But now they are increasing financials woos of divorced men. The suicide rate increase more and more.. after this bill passed. Why do men deserv that, because in the past men oppressed women, so some feel it’s justified if men oppressed now?

IHM: Please substantiate your claims with links, random numbers and personal opinion are not facts. Never heard/read of men committing suicide because they didn’t get enough dowry or inheritance. Or because the wife doesn’t bear male children? Generally one reads about them killing the mother,and/or child.

My reply to her questions on married men’s suicide..

These are some links that explain suicide rates of men.
One married man commits suicide every 9 minutes

NCRB stats show more married men committing suicide

Society becoming anti-male day by day with these kind of biased laws. We know domestic violence is not gender issue. Men and women both commit domestic violence but our feminist orgs and biased studies don’t show that and no body cares about a man in India. At least there is a study in america which explains doestic violence is not gender issue.
Unprecedented Domestic Violence Study Affirms Need to Recognize Male Victims

Still in India there is no study on domestic violence on men. Why? our feminists don’t let it happen. When ever people talk about male victims of domestic violence they debunk it as rare cases. The same thing american women also did in america. But the study gives different picture.

What I want to say is I am not against giving some maintenance to divorced women, but extortion they do in the name of “contribution women made”. There is no way that a women contribute to man’s property before marriage and his ancestral property. So, that should not be divided. Only marital property that means acquired during relationship need to be shared. That’s the fair game for both men and women. I ask feminists not to be greedy. Which have far reaching consequences.


The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

5 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Here’s what the bill amounts to:
    ‘In case of marital discord women have been thrown out of joint families in the middle of night and when they ask for spousal or child support men wash their hands of the responsibility by saying the house belonged to the family and he like her was just living there thus has nothing to give her. If she insists the man seek his coparcenary rights and take his share of property and then give her what is rightfully her due be it a room or an amount that would be half of what his share amounted to. The “karta” the head of the family, father of the man can immediately alienate/disinherit the man from his coparcener rights thanks to HSA 1956 in order to prevent the daughter-in-law from begetting anything. It is more complex than it is visible to our eyes. It is basically about primary residence of the married couple during the entire duration of the marital union no matter where it is, in the extended family or ancestral house they live in and other family members may be living abroad.
    The share will be calculated according to the duration of marriage and it will be subtracted from what ever is man’s share with respect to other share holders in the joint family so that woman can have a roof over her head or be provided with money so that she can buy a place or pay the deposit for a rented home (deposit often runs in lakhs). A woman who was married for three years cannot have same percentage of share as the one who was married for twenty years. Use some common sense.’
    From, ‘Her Marital Home, His Joint Property’

  2. The problem here is the draft bill approved by the ministers is different from what you guys are arguing. It’s not just the home. It may be property of factory or any thing. So, the argument of joint family home is not valid here.

    Suppose let us assume, a man who is very richer than bill gates. He and his son live in India. His son marry an ordinary girl. The girl, seduced him or trapped him or decently loved him whatever may be the case, she married him. Now she want divorce. She enjoy all comforts in the in-laws house that she don’t deserve, if she didn’t marry that rich man’s son. Then after divorce, she want a share in his property, his ancestral property ( a big organization like micro–soft), and she hilariously claim she contributed to his property and his ancestral property. she deserve 50% of amount. What about this case.

    Though, it’s an extreme case, in India we have practice of women marrying men who earn much and rich. Of course, the whole world has this trend. The only quality she have is her good looks and she do. Then what happens? there are many such cases exist. The contribution of women is nothing but a lame excuse to extort man’s hard earned money. She may not contribute that much, in most of the cases. All women deserve is maintenance for her living as per the living standards of her man. Nothing else.

  3. Where can the draft bill be read? Have you read it somewhere?

  4. Just a small correction…it’s not 7.58%; it’s 58%…the 7 refers to point no. 7 :).

    Also, I didn’t mean to suggest that we have to pay for what our ancestors did, but I just wanted to point out that our lawmakers didn’t suddenly wake up one day and think “I’m bored…what can we do to discriminate against men today?”. I’m just pointing out that the pendulum has been swinging in one direction for a long time. Now it’s started to swing in the other direction just a little bit. That doesn’t justify this bill (if it talks about ancestral property), of course. It’s still unfair and it still needs to be revised.

    Regarding your point about male suicides being close to double that of female suicides, you are right. The situation is dire as not many people have shown much concern about male suicides…at least I have not come across any. While the data you’ve provided is a valid cause of concern, I do not agree with the narrow interpretation you’ve placed upon it. I request you to please go through the below analysis by the Indian Journal of Psychiatry

    Your point blaming the lack of domestic violence studies on men because of feminist groups seems very far fetched. For one thing, feminists have far more political lobbying power in the US than they do in India. If studies on domestic violence against men could be performed there, it can certainly be performed here. Also, as long as this study is not used to trivialize violence against women, feminists would have no reason to “not let it happen”. I think the problem here is that no one realizes that high number of male suicides is a problem that needs to be addressed.

    Also, you seem to be under the impression that feminists in India are like some sort of shadow mafia organization who can arm twist and mind wash our central government and judiciary into passing anti-male legislation. Yeah right…we wish! :).

    If you look at the comments on IHM’s blog posts, majority of the people are against ancestral property being included in maintenance. So I’m not sure about your paranoia regarding feminist greed.

  5. @Satish, Sorry for the late response.
    Thanks for the correction. But, my argument don’t depend upon that number, so it remains same. And in your point 7 you mentioned that those 58% didn’t get maintenance because they are pending cases in the court. It’s not fault of the law. Even after the divorce law passes, the same thing repeats. This time it takes more time. Because of the ancestral property involves here. That’s the reason WCD opposed ancestral property inclusion.

    And the study is also biased, I can say that. Because, the number of cases are less, though they did study on many states. And the sample space is not the “general people”. They took many women who came for their help. And many women are from low economic group. And they claimed many women has to do all work in the home, they have to work even on holidays and all that. The women in low economy group are minority, When it comes to taking divorce. It’s start from upper middle class to high class. And these women have many fecilities having electronic appliances and a maid, Why they didn’t take them into consideration? They must be the mejority in any sample space. It clearly shows that, they [the peole who made this study] tried to made some statistics to support their arguemnts.

    When it comes to male suicide rates, when people accept domestic violence on men, then the reasons for the suicide definitely changes. I don’t say all of them commit sucide because of DV but mejority of them faced domestic violence and that could be the reason. Look at a paragraph from the link you provided…

    In India, the top 10 causes or correlates of suicide in 2009 were family problems (23.7%), illness (21%) [including insanity/mental illness (6.7%)], unemployment (1.9%), love affairs (2.9%), drug abuse/addiction (2.3%), failure in examination (1.6%), bankruptcy or sudden change in economic status (2.5%), poverty (2.3%), and dowry dispute (2.3%).[21] The high rates of suicide among persons with mental illness and drug abuse/addiction, though not a measure of intent, are of much concern. Many of the remaining causes [namely, suspected/illicit relation, cancellation/nonsettlement of marriage, not having children (barrenness/impotency), death of a dear one, dowry dispute, divorce, ideological causes/hero worship, illegitimate pregnancy, physical abuse (rape, incest, etc.), poverty, professional/career problem][21] reflect the unique social structure of our society and the social pressures that individuals face.

    The two links I provided regarding male sucides, actually mentioned above data. Perhaps you didn’t recognised it. 23.7% mejority of the people suicides becuase of the family problems. 21% illness. But the problem is they dismiss it as poverty or career problems. Remember, suicide is the effect of many Issues, but can be stopped with the support of the family. But, it dind’t worked for men, why? That’s the point we are stressing, there is no support for these poor fellows. If we include domestic violence that men facing, the family problems percentage occupies the remaining percentage too (here the total percentages they mentioned above don’t reach 100.

    Coming to domestic violence studies. In US though feminists lobbies are much powerful, the law is gender neutral at least on the papers. But, In India, it is gender specific. And we must rememeber how govt passed this law. First, many opposed it. Then parties gave whip order on this bill, so, MP’s voted. Why these things happened in India? Many laws like preventino of sexual harassement at workplace are gender specific, they are not gender neutral, even pakistan have a gender neutral law on this Issue. Why not India? Adultery is a crime for only men not for women. A suggestion to make it criminal for both opposed by NCW. They stopped it,How? And we all know what happened after Nirbhaya Incident. Varma committee only bothered about feminists views, not a single men’s right group’s views though they send many suggestions. Feminists even try to liquify govt proposal to punish the false compliners in sexual harassement cases. Varma committe gave one utter biased report because of our feminists. Thanks to the govt, they included the misuse clause in the sexual harassement bill. But, you must remember how feminist tried to manipulate things.

    you seem to be under the impression that feminists in India are like some sort of shadow mafia organization who can arm twist and mind wash our central government and judiciary into passing anti-male legislation. Yeah right…we wish! 🙂

    feminist whish it, but they don’t admit that they already have that power. That’s what we are saying.

    And in IHM blog, many people even supported the ancestral property inclusion and what about the property man acquired before the marriage? Why man need to share that with women? And what about women’s property? Why no share in women’s property these are the main questions of our arguments. Sadly, many empowered women in th IHM blog (including heself) supported these law as it is.

All comments will be moderated. No personal attacks and abusive words allowed in comments

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: