IS OUR DEMAND OF NATIONAL MEN’S COMMISSION WRONG?

Several times we were asked to reason the need for establishing the National Commission for Men. I can’t not understand why this much of opposition. Firstly, it is MEN who are demanding their commission so why should women be perturbed? Might be because they are fearing that their so called voice would be suppressed? Is demanding a Men's commission in a misandrist society a crime, a funny crime? It’s really funny, na?

Now let us see why we need a men’s commission desperately:

1.    First let us see how Article 15(3) empowers the state to make special provisions for women and discriminate in favour of women:

      a)   Article 15(1) provides that, “the state shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste sex, place of birth or any of them.”

     b)  Article 15(2) says that, “No citizen shall, not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of  religion,  race, caste sex, place of birth or any of them be subject to any disability liability, restriction or condition with regard to (a) access to shops, public places; or (b) use of wells and places of public resort maintain wholly or partly out of state funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.”

Now let’s see Article 15(3):

c)  ARTICLE 15(3): “Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special

provision for women and children.”

What a drama it is…….Article 15(1) prohibits gender based discrimination by stating NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ANY CITIZEN ON GROUNDS OF SEX and Article 15(3) tempers the strictness of Article 15(1) and permits the State to discriminate in favour of women to make special provisions.

2.   The State as well as the Courts have resorted to Article 15(3) in the field of Criminal Law, Labor  Law, Service Law, etc., numerous times to upheld the validity of discriminatory provisions in favour of women:

• In the case of Dattatraya v. State of Bombay, the Bombay High Court held that the State can establish educational institutions for women only. Why it is not being said to establish educational institutions for men only???

• Again in Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay, the validity of Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code was challenged under Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution. Section 497 of the IPC deals with the provisions relating to the offence of adultery, which only punishes man for adultery and exempts the woman from punishment though she may be equally guilty as an abettor. The Court upheld the Section 497 of the IPC as valid by relying upon the mandate of Article 15 (3) of the Constitution.

• Even Section 354 of the IPC is not invalid because it protects the modesty only of women and Cr.P.C.125 is valid although it obliges the husband to maintain his wife but not vice versa.

• Similarly, Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 converting the women’s limited ownership of property into full ownership has been found in pursuance of Article 15 (3).

3.    Article 14 of The Constitution of India speaks of the Equality before law. In the light of the Constitution of India, Article 14, both men and women shall not be differentially treated in the case of harassment too. But differential treatment has always given to male because post-independence sufficient safeguards, commissions, laws, guidelines have been enacted by the state only for the female, while all laws, rules and regulations remain silent when it comes about the males.

4.     No schemes are being furthered either by the Government or eminent social celebrities for boys the way they are happening for girls. This has led to more boys dropping out of school resulting in increase of juvenile delinquency.

5.     In the last 70 years of independent India not a single rupee has ever been allocated for men’s welfare from the Union Budget.

6.    Negligence of health issues of men like prostate cancer, short life expectancy, high suicide rates, cardiac problems, diabetes etc.? Lack of government urge on the private sector to come up with Health Products specifically targeted to diseases affecting men in large numbers? 

7.     Men are not accepted by the society the way they are just normal human beings. He is reduced to the role of a robot the eternal protector and provider with no desires of his own!

8.     Men have their own issues and problems and there is no forum where they can express them. Why not a men's welfare ministry so that they can have a forum to address their issues?

9.    Any crime that can be committed my men can be committed by women too; and sometimes in a better way than men. Murders, rapes, molestation, harassment at workplace, economic offences can be committed only by men and never by women?? So what happens when these offences are committed by women? Why different laws for men and women? Everyone should be treated equal in the eyes of law.

10.  The NCRB data of 2016 which revealed that IPC 498A cases have declined from 112403 cases in 2015 to 110378 cases in 2016, a decrease of around 3%. However, the number of arrests has increased from 187067 in 2015 to 198851 in 2016 an increase of 11784 of arrests i.e.6% increase of arrests. Feminists & politicians show just one crime against woman and run to draft abusive women protection law like #498a #DV ... a package of 49. But the same Nexus turn their face off when around 86,808 married persons commits suicide. Extreme double standard.

So………why there is a lot of opposition when we demand formation of National Commission for Men. 

People are opposing the commission for nothing; at least I have not seen any solid reason of opposition.  Do people think this commission will allow rape? or say rapists are good, please don't punish them? or say that oppress women more?....hahaha.. this commission will only look into issues that men face and bring in plans for resolution. Why do people think that should be against women? Why validation of men’s problems is being assumed as invalidation of women’s problems?

• Feminists say that “Male chauvinists are claiming commission”: Superb…….so according to feminists’ logic, are men asking for rights to rape and go scot free?

• Feminists say that “Suicide is a mental issue, needs psychiatrist and medicine and not a commission”: This logic is more than superb. When married women suicide, it is termed as a dowry death and is a criminal offence and there is specific section for that. But when married men suicide, it is a mental issue. Extreme below the level attitude. The result of mental cruelty created by women is that men are far more prone to heart attacks and stroke. Their life expectancy is some 5-6 years less than women, worldwide. Similarly, the social construct of manhood makes them NOT to complain about women, even if their women are causing them grievous hurt, resulting suicide.

• Feminists say that “Men can’t be raped”: Wow….. As if women can’t have sex against a man’s consent, or sexually assault one against his consent. When women from other countries can rape men, why can’t Indian women? Do the feminists consider Indian women as less than human?

• Feminists say that “Utter shame that men want something”: Why…….. Only women have rights to want everything according to their convenience and we men ourselves does not want anything for us.

Time has come for India to change for better...There should be no double talk. Gender-equality is all about equality and not demanding preferential treatment to one particular sect. More than six decades have passed, but no study on men's issues and right have been done so far. Validation of men's problem(s) is not an invalidation of women's problem(s).Either Dissolve WCD and NCW or form National Commission for Men on same merits.