The ultimate weapon of radical feminists in India. Article 375.

[iamsheikhadil]

Article 375 of the Indian constitution basically equates all men as rapists on the simple acknowledgement of a woman.

Basically the article says, that if there's a sexual act between a man and a woman (doesn't matter if it was consensual), and at a later time, the woman goes to court and files a complaint that there was no consent from her, the man will be immediately arrested and put on charge of rape and given 10 years prison term.

The burden to prove innocense falls on the man.

So, if there's an act of consensual sex, and a woman simply wants to blackmail the man, she can do it freely, and the law says it's okay.

It boils my blood that a country that claims itself to be largest democracy and of liberty has put all men under the bracket of rapists with just the push of a button of a woman.

Should then the men be allowed legally to have cameras in the bedrooms so if a woman later issues a charge, the video will be a proof of her consent?

What can be done to counteract such a heinous act and the misuse of such insane power of women?

Please share your opinions!

[1714667738]

1714667738

[1714667738]

1714667738

[Rikafip]

Hm, this is Article 375, i don't see anything about rape there

375. Courts, authorities and officers to continue to function subject to the provisions of the Constitution All courts of civil, criminal and revenue jurisdiction, all authorities and all officers, judicial, executive and ministerial, throughout the territory of India, shall continue to exercise their respective functions subject to the provisions of this Constitution

Source
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1921761/



Do you maybe mean Section 375 in the Indian penal code?

[375. Rape.—A man is said to commit “rape” who, except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following de­scriptions:—
(First) — Against her will.
(Secondly) —Without her consent.
(Thirdly) — With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt.
(Fourthly) —With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be law­fully married.
(Fifthly) — With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupe­fying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
(Sixthly) — With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age. Explanation.—Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.
(Exception) —Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.

Source
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/623254/


What i find "interesting" in this section 375 is that by the Indian law, only man can perform rape.

[TECSHARE]

A similar laws was recently passed in Canada. Feminism is rapidly becoming a supremacy movement hellbent on making men second class disposable work mule tax slaves who can have their lives ended on the word of any woman.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089923.0

[Saltius]

Dude, don't be so surprised. Everything is possible in India.


WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
--from the very beggining in preamble of Constitution of India.

Well, when I saw that first time, I can't help saying WTF

[iamsheikhadil]

Hm, this is Article 375, i don't see anything about rape there

375. Courts, authorities and officers to continue to function subject to the provisions of the Constitution All courts of civil, criminal and revenue jurisdiction, all authorities and all officers, judicial, executive and ministerial, throughout the territory of India, shall continue to exercise their respective functions subject to the provisions of this Constitution

Source
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1921761/



Do you maybe mean Section 375 in the Indian penal code?

[375. Rape.—A man is said to commit “rape” who, except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following de­scriptions:—
(First) — Against her will.
(Secondly) —Without her consent.
(Thirdly) — With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt.
(Fourthly) —With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be law­fully married.
(Fifthly) — With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupe­fying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
(Sixthly) — With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age. Explanation.—Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.
(Exception) —Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.

Source
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/623254/


What i find "interesting" in this section 375 is that by the Indian law, only man can perform rape.

Yeah, I mean article of the penal code thanks for the quote, it's so saddening to see this. Those fourth and fifth point is so fucking ridiculous. Any woman can make up lies that she thought "the man" was her husband or that they were of unsound mind when the act took place. Yikes, such power which is meant for misuse!

A similar laws was recently passed in Canada. Feminism is rapidly becoming a supremacy movement hellbent on making men second class disposable work mule tax slaves who can have their lives ended on the word of any woman.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089923.0

Yikes! So now they will even restrict proof for consent?! That's pure oppression and I feel pity for the "guys" who support such bills and moves thinking it will lead to "equality". They are just making the future of their sons dangerous if I consider they have given up on their own future.

[tsaroz]

Article 375 of the Indian constitution basically equates all men as rapists on the simple acknowledgement of a woman.

Basically the article says, that if there's a sexual act between a man and a woman (doesn't matter if it was consensual), and at a later time, the woman goes to court and files a complaint that there was no consent from her, the man will be immediately arrested and put on charge of rape and given 10 years prison term.

The burden to prove innocense falls on the man.

So, if there's an act of consensual sex, and a woman simply wants to blackmail the man, she can do it freely, and the law says it's okay.

It boils my blood that a country that claims itself to be largest democracy and of liberty has put all men under the bracket of rapists with just the push of a button of a woman.

Should then the men be allowed legally to have cameras in the bedrooms so if a woman later issues a charge, the video will be a proof of her consent?

What can be done to counteract such a heinous act and the misuse of such insane power of women?

Please share your opinions!

This is same for almost every countries around the world. It's considered a female won't fake about the matter. And no female who have provided a consent would ever blame her partner.

It's not that a court would not look for any evidence but there are enough to prove you were with some female at some time in a closed place, you could be convicted on the sole testimony of the female.

There are many cases of conditional consent which involves promises or blackmailing that can't be considered a full consent. A consent of child or a mentally unstable person and even a person with depression in some case can't be considered as a consent.

So, if you are having sex with someone, make sure she's okay with it and would be okay even in the future.
Having a monogamous relation would save you from many troubles. But again you need to keep her happy as martial rape are also a punishable crime in most of the world.

[TECSHARE]

This is same for almost every countries around the world. It's considered a female won't fake about the matter. And no female who have provided a consent would ever blame her partner.

It's not that a court would not look for any evidence but there are enough to prove you were with some female at some time in a closed place, you could be convicted on the sole testimony of the female.

There are many cases of conditional consent which involves promises or blackmailing that can't be considered a full consent. A consent of child or a mentally unstable person and even a person with depression in some case can't be considered as a consent.

So, if you are having sex with someone, make sure she's okay with it and would be okay even in the future.
Having a monogamous relation would save you from many troubles. But again you need to keep her happy as martial rape are also a punishable crime in most of the world.

Does having a vagina somehow impart more honesty and virtue just by the pure merit of its existence? No? Advocating for a system that allows one human to imprison another human based only on their word is ABSOLUTELY INSANE. Your whole premise assumes women would never lie, and I am sorry if you believe that you are fucking retarded. This is not a sufficient standard for due process.

[iamsheikhadil]

Article 375 of the Indian constitution basically equates all men as rapists on the simple acknowledgement of a woman.

Basically the article says, that if there's a sexual act between a man and a woman (doesn't matter if it was consensual), and at a later time, the woman goes to court and files a complaint that there was no consent from her, the man will be immediately arrested and put on charge of rape and given 10 years prison term.

The burden to prove innocense falls on the man.

So, if there's an act of consensual sex, and a woman simply wants to blackmail the man, she can do it freely, and the law says it's okay.

It boils my blood that a country that claims itself to be largest democracy and of liberty has put all men under the bracket of rapists with just the push of a button of a woman.

Should then the men be allowed legally to have cameras in the bedrooms so if a woman later issues a charge, the video will be a proof of her consent?

What can be done to counteract such a heinous act and the misuse of such insane power of women?

Please share your opinions!

This is same for almost every countries around the world. It's considered a female won't fake about the matter. And no female who have provided a consent would ever blame her partner.

It's not that a court would not look for any evidence but there are enough to prove you were with some female at some time in a closed place, you could be convicted on the sole testimony of the female.

There are many cases of conditional consent which involves promises or blackmailing that can't be considered a full consent. A consent of child or a mentally unstable person and even a person with depression in some case can't be considered as a consent.

So, if you are having sex with someone, make sure she's okay with it and would be okay even in the future.
Having a monogamous relation would save you from many troubles. But again you need to keep her happy as martial rape are also a punishable crime in most of the world.

Are you trolling? So, just because a person is a woman means she will never lie? Heck, statistics say women are more pathological liar than men. But that's another thing. So, if a girl does consensual sex, she will never lie, then what stops the law to give the same right to men? Such a gross generalization!

This is same for almost every countries around the world. It's considered a female won't fake about the matter. And no female who have provided a consent would ever blame her partner.

It's not that a court would not look for any evidence but there are enough to prove you were with some female at some time in a closed place, you could be convicted on the sole testimony of the female.

There are many cases of conditional consent which involves promises or blackmailing that can't be considered a full consent. A consent of child or a mentally unstable person and even a person with depression in some case can't be considered as a consent.

So, if you are having sex with someone, make sure she's okay with it and would be okay even in the future.
Having a monogamous relation would save you from many troubles. But again you need to keep her happy as martial rape are also a punishable crime in most of the world.

Does having a vagina somehow impart more honesty and virtue just by the pure merit of its existence? No? Advocating for a system that allows one human to imprison another human based only on their word is ABSOLUTELY INSANE. Your whole premise assumes women would never lie, and I am sorry if you believe that you are fucking retarded. This is not a sufficient standard for due process.

I agree 100%

[darkangel11]

(Fourthly) —With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be law­fully married.
(Fifthly) — With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupe­fying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.

These two are good.

Basically when you have sex with a married woman and you have the bad luck of looking a bit like her husband she can say in court that you're a rapist. She got confused and thought it's marital sex.

Hello? Police? That woman raped me! She told me she's my wife so we had sex and then I found out she was lying! Arrest her!

Also watch out when you take a drunk woman home. She'll later say you raped her because you took advantage of her state. It doesn't matter that she went to your house and took off her clothes. What matters is that she was drunk.

[tvbcof]

A similar laws was recently passed in Canada. Feminism is rapidly becoming a supremacy movement hellbent on making men second class disposable work mule tax slaves who can have their lives ended on the word of any woman.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089923.0

Best to not be around women at all.  That's why God made porn.

If you want a kid just make sure that the wife will be better off with you as a free man* and reasonably happy, and choose a jurisdiction which is not so 'progressive'.  That probably means waiting until you are old and rich.

(*) That might be one of the reasons that God made Bitcoin

[Mometaskers]

Ah, I see "believe all wamen" has finally hit India. Of course, everyone knows women would "never" lie about rape. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TzTCWfiRew

The penalty for false accusations should be the same as the crime they've accused.

What i find "interesting" in this section 375 is that by the Indian law, only man can perform rape.

Crazy Space Lesbians: Hooray! It's not rape coz we don't have a penis!

[KingScorpio]

Article 375 of the Indian constitution basically equates all men as rapists on the simple acknowledgement of a woman.

Basically the article says, that if there's a sexual act between a man and a woman (doesn't matter if it was consensual), and at a later time, the woman goes to court and files a complaint that there was no consent from her, the man will be immediately arrested and put on charge of rape and given 10 years prison term.

The burden to prove innocense falls on the man.

So, if there's an act of consensual sex, and a woman simply wants to blackmail the man, she can do it freely, and the law says it's okay.

It boils my blood that a country that claims itself to be largest democracy and of liberty has put all men under the bracket of rapists with just the push of a button of a woman.

Should then the men be allowed legally to have cameras in the bedrooms so if a woman later issues a charge, the video will be a proof of her consent?

What can be done to counteract such a heinous act and the misuse of such insane power of women?

Please share your opinions!

get used to this, this is how live in a secular democracy runs, this will continue until there will be powerful women and men alike.
only escape is converting to a male dominating religion,(christianity/islam).

i multiple time supported to list women as a seperate ethnic group or "species"

[finzyoj]

Should then the men be allowed legally to have cameras in the bedrooms so if a woman later issues a charge, the video will be a proof of her consent?

It makes sense to me but still the worst way to resolve such problem. Putting hidden cameras in a room where you gonna make love is very bad in a sense that you are doing it without the consent of the female. I'm not sure on what article of law falls but it definitely violates women rights as well. Another, for me it was a bad idea because the man can used it for sextortion or the worst case is that it can degrade the dignity of particular woman if accidentaly leaked on social media/public.

What can be done to counteract such a heinous act and the misuse of such insane power of women?

I think the least thing you can do is to make sure that your partner on the bed is your true love to avoid this instances. Remember, she will not betray you if she truly loves you. Well there's another option but I bet you can't do it ~ abstain and stay virgin forever .

[tvbcof]

What can be done to counteract such a heinous act and the misuse of such insane power of women?

I think the least thing you can do is to make sure that your partner on the bed is your true love to avoid this instances. Remember, she will not betray you if she truly loves you. Well there's another option but I bet you can't do it ~ abstain and stay virgin forever .

You are not thinking very expansively (though your sentimentalism is heart-warming.)

There's normally a good supply of ho's in almost any city and it contributes to the service sector of the economy.

Or you could go gay and help save the world by not contributing to the overpopulation problem.  All the kids are doing it!  Especially in S.E. Asia it seems.  The young people seem to have taken to fagotry like a fish to water after a couple of kabalistic MTV vids with the EDM or whatever,  Probably in the U.S. metro areas as well but I'd not been to one of those areas for about 5 years even when I lived in the country so I was pretty out-of-touch.

[finzyoj]

There's normally a good supply of ho's in almost any city and it contributes to the service sector of the economy.

I think of this also but I never put this into my consideration. I'm sure that all of us don't want to put our health at risk just for a one night stand, right? Most probably 'using condom and forms of contraceptives' would be your next rebuttal but are you 100% sure that it worked, that you are still free from STDs? No one knows until the symptoms starts to show.

Or you could go gay and help save the world by not contributing to the overpopulation problem. 

No thanks, I'm contented for being straight. Maybe I'll just fo Family Planning instead.

[tvbcof]

There's normally a good supply of ho's in almost any city and it contributes to the service sector of the economy.

I think of this also but I never put this into my consideration. I'm sure that all of us don't want to put our health at risk just for a one night stand, right? ...

Just being in love with and dedicated to someone doesn't get rid of their herpes.

[finzyoj]

Just being in love with and dedicated to someone doesn't get rid of their herpes.

Why would you choose a woman with herpes anyways? As a man you should know your prospective partner very well before committing to her. As simple as that . And besides it's not so hard to know whether she got herpes or not since it was visible in appearance so you still have of time to back out just in case.

[tvbcof]

Just being in love with and dedicated to someone doesn't get rid of their herpes.

Why would you choose a woman with herpes anyways? As a man you should know your prospective partner very well before committing to her. As simple as that . And besides it's not so hard to know whether she got herpes or not since it was visible in appearance so you still have of time to back out just in case.

Everyone has different ideas about what 'love' and 'commitment' mean I guess.

Actually I think almost everyone carries various strains of the herpes virus.  It's super common.  Only a few strains are the VD type, and not everyone has them thank God.  But even those who do rarely have breakouts.  Like for a week once every couple of years.  Women are advised to have a c-section if they happen to have a breakout when the child is due.*

Someone who would ditch an otherwise 'loveable' person because they carried the herpes virus probably is not well educated on the condition, on virology, or on commitment.

(*) Similarly, herped out 'moils' (a type of Jewish religious leader) are advised to not use their mouths to suck the blood off the newly mutilated penis of the baby when they put the knife away because they could and sometimes do pass the virus to the infant.  Some of them do it anyway.

[criptix]

Maybe this actually helps against the hyper promiscuitivity of modern times?