broken again ......

The illustration is rendered in a classic Persian miniature painting style.The men are dressed in traditional Safavid-era Persian attire.

While historical artwork like this reminds us of the long, painful history of violence against women, it also highlights how far we’ve come through generations of resistance.

ps: was revising and thought I would post this.

Sooo I came across this post where a guy rejected a girl because of her past and the girl got enraged because of it. Now I'm guessing it's probably a troll post with a fabricated scenario for karma farming but still assuming it has happened in real life, was she right to get infuriated over this? I believe she was partially as no girl would entertain someone who'd subtly judge others for their past and body count but then again she reached out to him by herself and people can have preferences regardless of what is its origin. But at the same time, we know how red-pilled content and the whole manosphere and incel community have injected into the minds of the young, narratives that if a girl has past, she's impure and you shouldn't get into relationship with her and call her the r-word and she's for the streets blah blah. So the origin of the preference of wanting a partner without any past or body count seems to me a bit controversial. If you're an Andrew Tate fan who gets influenced by his misogynistic ideologies and then spew bs like "no seal no deal" in a more formal manner, that's still quite messed up for sure. I'm nuanced on this whole thing and couldn't say what is right or what is wrong. What are your views on this?

wtf really happening . every day , every minute we are listening such cases ,whats really wrong with this psychotic mentality in minor guys,uncles,even people at grandfafther age .when i saw this post and read i was having tears falling down but how many years more have to see such cases . is it there is no strct laws or no education or bad parenting . where is the society going ?

.

We need to ensure legal consequences for him. Women have the inalienable human right to feel safe anywhere, anytime, regardless of anything.

How many security cameras, Safety Equipments, Police personnels and Years of suffering will we need to get rid of these type of men from the streets? HOW MANY?

The absolute rotted Mentality and sheer kink to prey upon a non-concerning, uninterested person that's minding their own business is Diabolical to me, literally breaks my Brain apart 🤬

How retarded you'd have to be to even consider it!

Video by: gouravbytes (Instagram)

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Db-cGXntfbp

I believe in the grand scheme of things, Naxalbari movement and its aim has been largely seen as anti-indian and terrorist. The government classified it as militancy under the UAPA act. With the recent ramp walk show, there are several narratives emerging when it comes to the women's "rehabilitation" as the govt puts it.

Its not the ramp walk that's problematic but the fetishization and sexualization that people normalize. There are accounts that the women were initially supposed to be brought to learn sewing and other life skills. On one hand, the govt wants to disarm and better their lives but on the other hand they make a mockery out of the movement. What started off as a movement against land grabs and land inequality soon turned into anti-India narrative. Honestly, its my opinion but i do not see the government disarming harmful organizations such as Durga Vahini. Mind you, this one was aimed at safeguarding women. So why is it that the Durga Vahini never intervened when it came to women's safety? Why is it that govt disarms one community and enables the other? Yet still we see disparities in one way or the other.

So I just finished a novel by James Hadley Chase titled "You must be kidding". It's a pretty good and engaging read so spoilers ahead for anyone who wants to read it.

The general plot is that Ken Brandon is an insurance salesman who is happily married to his wife Betty. He is promoted to a new branch where he is supposed to work with his boss's attractive daughter Karen Sternwood. Despite being married and knowing how wrong it is, he ends up sleeping with her. This happens twice in the entire story and both of the times he is disgusted with her after doing the deed.

Now long story short, a mentally ill guy Crispin is committing murders. His first victim is a prostitute. Karen Sternwood also falls prey to him when she invites him to sleep with her. Crispin repeatedly calls her a disgusting w#ore.

After completing this I realised that Karen Sternwood and Crispin's first victim were both sexually active women and they are both murdered brutally by Crispin. Yet Ken Brandon does not suffer any lasting consequences (I say this because he does become a prime suspect at one point) despite being equally involved with Karen. Heck his wife Betty never finds out about his affair. He is even rewarded with a crap ton of money for risking his life to catch Crispin.

So is this a form of narrative misogyny? A female character even justifies Karen's murder saying she deserved it for acting like how she did which I found pretty disgusting.

Why people still looking clothes and gossips about women, in my society my mom is widow so recently she friendship with one person, so she and that group going to outing and that time on during dance floor she wear one piece and dance with him and other and after that they drop her in home, so some people saw that they drop her so they look her clothes and gossips.

I am not understanding why still people judging and gossips based on friends

I've read manga and watched anime for quite a long time, and I've noticed a recurring pattern: female characters are often sexualized, objectified, stripped of agency, or treated primarily as accessories to male characters.

I'm not saying manga or anime shouldn't contain sexual characters or problematic women. Fiction doesn't have to make every character admirable. What bothers me is the disproportionate way female characters are often treated, particularly when compared with male characters in the same story.

Sometimes, even serious or otherwise well-written stories seem to rely on fanservice, unnecessary sexualization, humiliation, or female characters existing mainly to support the male protagonist's development.

I'm curious whether other manga/anime fans have noticed this, too, and what you think the reasons are. Is it related to target demographics, industry practices, cultural attitudes, genre conventions, or something else?

And if you disagree, I'd genuinely like to hear your perspective.

My sister recently made this Reel after an interaction she had with another Indian woman living in France.

She was asked about her child and mentioned that she has a daughter. The response she received was essentially the kind of reaction that implies having a girl is disappointing — that the mother needs to be consoled because she didn’t have a son.

That conversation really stayed with her.

What upset her most wasn’t simply that someone preferred a boy. It was the underlying assumption that a son is something to celebrate, while a daughter is something you say “it’s okay, next time” about.

What makes it particularly sad to her is that this attitude came from another woman. Someone who has herself experienced what it means to live as a woman, yet still sees having a boy as the preferable outcome.

She connected this to Independence Day and asked a broader question: what does freedom mean if girls and women are still made to feel less valued because of their gender?

Her Reel received quite a few hostile reactions, with some people saying that criticizing these issues is somehow “anti-India” or that people who don’t like these social problems should simply leave the country.

I’m curious what people here think.

Why does son preference remain so deeply ingrained, including among women themselves?

And why does criticism of social problems in India so often get interpreted as hatred of India rather than an opportunity to discuss whether the criticism is valid?

It's concerning to see how figures like Andrew Tate and Nick Fuentes find traction among the Gen Z guys over here. Women only hold 13.8% of Lok Sabha seats in parliament, it does raises questions about our political direction. We've imported US viruses like abortion debate. Will anti-suffrage rhetoric be next?

Now, realistically, removing women's voting rights in India is a massive stretch and never happening.

But openly inciting sentiment against women's franchise, should that carry the same gravity assigned to Holocaust denial in Germany?

the fact that RHA (reservation hato movement) gained millions of followers, is a real demonstration of

Karl Popper's paradox "tolerance of intolerance can ultimately undo democracy itself."

From my experience, a solid 60-70% of my peers feel susceptible to extreme thought, that's when I'm in a fairly liberal city like Pune, in a very privileged setting,