Samajwadi party promises safeguarding men’s rights in manifesto

http://www.ndtv.com/elections/article/election-2014/vote-for-us-will-check-misuse-of-anti-rape-law-says-mulayam-s-manifesto-503640

Vote for us, will check 'misuse' of anti-rape law, says Mulayam's manifesto

Lucknow: Mulayam Singh Yadav believes that voters should pick his Samajwadi Party because it will fight to check “the large-scale misuse” of the tougher anti-rape law introduced after the fatal gang-rape of a young woman on a moving bus in Delhi. His commitment was made in his party manifesto which was released today.

When the new laws were proposed in Parliament, Mulayam Singh Yadav’s party had objected to features including stalking being made a criminal offence, arguing that they could be twisted to implicate men in fake case.

“There is a large scale misuse of laws including anti-dowry, SC/ST (atrocities prevention) act and the new anti-rape law that came into existence after ‘Nirbhaya’ rape case…SP is in favour of implementing them strictly and at the same time will initiate strict action against those misusing them,” the party’s manifesto said, adding that the laws are currently being misused without elaborating how.

Finally, a party which was known for opposing 33% women’s reservation bill has come out strongly against men’s rights violations by putting that in its 2014 Lok Sabha election manifesto.

Before release of this manifesto probably no one would have taken Samajwadi party’s stance seriously terming them as backward because anything said against women’s rights is automatically termed backward.  It is conveniently forgotten that guaranteeing 33% reservation to women in parliament violates men’s rights because it allows women to get elected from all seats, but doesn’t allow men to stand for election from women’s reserved seats.  So in effect that percentage 33% guarantees many more than 33% women in parliament, never mind whether many of them want a career in politics (or a career at all).

The Samajwadi party has mentioned misuse of 3 laws:

1. Anti-dowry: IPC 498a

2. SC/ST (atrocities prevention) act

3. New anti-rape law: IPC 376 with the amendments

Two of these laws IPC 498a and IPC 376 are used against men and result in violation of men’s rights.  IPC 498a results in arrests of women too so basically rights of many women in family are violated to supposedly protect rights of wives.

So this is a great milestone in Indian men’s rights movement that a political party has the guts to call a spade a spade, and come out openly against abuse of laws against men.

IPC 498a arrests, conviction rate, statistics show gross abuse of human rights

It is no hidden secret that IPC 498a is a weapons of human rights abuse of husband and his family/relatives, and judiciary including Supreme Court has given instances of its gross misuse and directives to government and law ministry for prevention of IPC 498a misuse and amendments.  Some police circulars have been issued in various states to prevent arbitrary arrests under 498a, but they are often not followed by police.  The suggestion to law ministry for amending 498a has also been pending for 2 years.

We analyze the conviction rate and arrest rate (number of people convicted/ number of people arrested) under IPC 498a using 2012 data from National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).

From page 33 of compendium issued by NCRB for 2012:

Cruelty by husband or his relatives (Sec.498-A IPC)
(Incidence: 1,06,527  Rate: 8.8)
A total of  1,06,527  cases were reported in the country during the year 2012 showing an increase of 7.5% over 2011 and an increase of 21.1% over the average of last 5 years (2007  -  2012).  In terms of percentage, 43.7% of such crimes in the country were reported from three states  only  namely  West Bengal (19,865  cases), Andhra Pradesh(13,389  cases) and Rajasthan (13,312 cases). Tripura has reported the highest crime rate of  23.4 followed by West Bengal (21.9) and Assam (20.6)  as compared to National average of 8.8.

Following table shows our calculations based on data in NCRB report.  Our methodology is as follows:

1. Our main objectives are to find the ratio of number of convictions under IPC 498a versus the total number of cases filed, and ratio of number of arrests under IPC 498a versus the total number of cases filed.

2. Why do we use IPC 304B data also?  It is so because IPC 304B (dowry death) is applicable in case where a woman has died within 7 years of her marriage, and IPC 498a (Cruelty by husband or relatives to married woman) is always added as an additional charge along with IPC 304B by police.

3. So we deduct the numbers relating to IPC 304B to arrive at the total number of IPC 498a only cases in 2012, and then calculate the conviction rate in 498a cases = convicted/total 498a cases

4. Similarly we use the data from NCRB compendium on number of arrests in 2012 under IPC 498a, and use that data to calculate percentage of people arrested under IPC 498a = convicted/total 498a arrests

5. Unlike previous years, the 2012 report does not give data on number of persons arrested under each IPC, so it is not possible to analyze based on arrest and disposal figures. However, we have attempted a good approximation using the disposal of cases.

6. The approximations used (given lack of time-series data by NCRB) are: the disposed cases belong to earlier years whereas the number of arrests are from 2012, so given the increasing number of IPC 498a cases every year, the convicted/arrested figure will be slightly higher than our calculation.

ipc498a-arrest-conviction-rate-2012

So we come to the grand conclusion, the open secret, the lifeblood of Indian bail industry: that IPC 498a is the best way to slow and clog down the criminal courts, to make money for legal system to arrange bail for 1.97 lakh people (and increasing) arrested every year.  With percentage of convicted people to arrested people at 4%, is surely goes in line with the judicial maxim “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”When you arrest 25 people to convict 1, that must be a sure sign of a great civilization near the Indian ocean on a sure and steady path to become the next superpower!

india-superpower-ipc498a-arrest-men-suicides-rising

While this data analysis has been done for whole of India, another NGO Family Harmony has done analysis based on RTI replies from Bangalore police stations, and they report a magnificent success ratio of 0.66% for whole of Bangalore for the number of convictions/number of arrests within Bangalore city.  Kudos are due to both Bangalore police and its courts for wasting taxpayer money in such effortless way while striking terror at the hearts of all husbands and their families!

UK follows the ‘standard’ to expand definition of domestic violence

In UK they have proposed to expand the scope of domestic violence as per the following news report.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204778/Domestic-violence-include-mental-torment-laws-applied-aged-18.html

Men who bully their partners by verbally abusing them, taking control of their finances or isolating them from friends and family are guilty of domestic violence and could be prosecuted, ministers will say tomorrow.

In a dramatic shake-up, details of which have been leaked to the Mail, the definition of domestic abuse is to be widened to encompass a wide range of coercive or threatening behaviour.

At the moment, domestic abuse is generally taken to refer to acts of physical violence. But police and prosecutors will be expected to use the new definition when identifying and monitoring cases, meaning men who abuse partners in a ‘controlling’ fashion could face charges too.

It will also be applied to those under 18 for the first time as concerns grow that increasing numbers of teenage girls are the victims of abusive relationships.

Such definitions of domestic violence are actually already part of Domestic Violence legislations in many countries already.  E.g. under the Indian law covering domestic violence, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; things like verbal, emotional, financial abuse are specifically covered with words of the same effect as part of the statute.  Further the news says:

The new definition will not be written into law, however, as the CSJ has proposed. Instead it will be broadened to define domestic violence as ‘any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are or have been intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality’.

A source said: ‘This isn’t about people having a row and shouting.  It’s about people’s whole lives being controlled, whether that’s not being allowed a bank account, access to a phone or to leave the house.’

Really?  So now the police and state will have powers to telepathically ascertain whether a particular person is under coercion or she(it’s always she people) is being controlled by a rascal of a male.  Since they cannot have such telepathic powers, the foregone conclusion is that the domestic abuse will be decided to have happened based solely on the allegations of a woman.  It is another in the string of ‘presumed guilty until proven innocent’ provisions in law and judiciary.

Further the news says:

Prosecutions for domestic abuse in Britain more than doubled from 35,000 in 2005 to 74,000 in 2010, and the conviction rate increased from 46 per cent to 72 per cent.

Last year, according to the Home Office, there were more than one million female victims of domestic abuse in England and Wales, with domestic violence accounting for 18 per cent of all violent incidents.

The last sentence above makes it very clear the intended gender who will be the main beneficiary of these changes: females.  And no prizes for guessing the gender which will have to pay the price: males.

Sole testimony enough to convict for sexual assault under communal violence bill

Under the proposed PREVENTION OF COMMUNAL AND TARGETED VIOLENCE (ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND REPARATIONS) BILL, 2011, the sole testimony of a victim will be enough to convict a man of sexual assault.  From the draft bill:

EVIDENCE
70. Evidentiary  standard  for  sexual  assault.-  Upon  the  sole  testimony  of  the  victim  of  sexual assault, the  Designated Judge appointed under this Act  may conclude that an offence of sexual assault has been committed by the accused against the said victim.

 

Provided  that  in  a  prosecution  for  the  offence  of  sexual  assault,  it  shall  not  be permissible  to  put  questions  in  the  cross-examination  of  the  victim  as  to  his  or  her  general immoral character or to rely on any evidence of such victim’s previous sexual conduct.

The definition of sexual assault includes rape and other acts as given below:

7.  Sexual  assault.-  A  person  is  said  to  commit  sexual  assault  if  he  or  she  commits  any  of  the following acts against a person belonging to a group by virtue of that person’s membership of a group:
(a) against a woman,
(i)  rape;
(ii)  gang rape;
(iii)  rape or gang rape as part of or in the course of organised communal and targeted
violence.
(b) against any person, without their consent or against their will,

(i)  the  introduction  by  a  man  of  his  penis  or  any  other  body  part  or  an  object  into vagina, mouth or anus, to any extent;
(ii)  causing harm or hurt to reproductive organs or genital organs;
(iii)  exposing one’s sexual organs in front of any person;
(iv)  sexual contact of any sort, including the performance of sexual acts for any length
of time;
(v)  removing  the  persons  clothes,  partially  or  fully,  or  compelling  that  person  to
undress  himself  or  herself,  partially  or  fully,  in  public  view  or  otherwise,  or
parading that person in undressed state in public view or otherwise;
(vi)  any other act or conduct that subjects that person to sexual indignity.

Provided that where sexual assault under sub-section (a) or (b) is committed as part of
or in the course of organised communal and targeted violence, it shall not be necessary to prove that the said act was committed against the victim without their consent or against their will.

 

Nevermind that the sole testimony principle is being discredited by judges because of prosecution and imprisonment of innocent men.  Excerpt below:

Noting that the legal principle of reliance on the sole testimony of the victim had become “an easy weapon” to implicate anyone in a case of rape, Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhat observed that once a man has been arrested for rape, he was forced to live a life of stigma even after acquittal.

“Their life is no better than the rape victim’s. They are ostracised by the society and nobody helps them lead the life of a normal citizen. They are made to suffer for no fault of theirs,” said the court.

Observing that “the government must frame a comprehensive policy for rehabilitation of such persons so that the future of a responsible and law abiding person, who has been jailed on the false rape charges, is secured… after his acquittal”, the court asked Secretaries of the Home Ministry, the Law Ministry and the Law Commission of India to consider the suggestion for the Rehabilitation Policy.

 

So what will be the effects of this proposed bill if passed into a law?  More justice for women, or more false cases against men?

Delhi: the false rape capital of India

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/judge-says-girls-shouldnt-have-sex-before-marriage-ex-cji-calls-ruling-absurd/1/316969.html

An additional sessions judge in Delhi is facing flak for observing that girls are morally bound not to have sex before marriage.

A former Supreme Court chief justice said that he would have taken action against the Delhi judge.

Former Chief Justice of India V.N. Khare said he would have taken action against the judge. “What he said is absurd.”

Justice Khare also said that the times had changed and focus needed to be on equality for men and women.

Ex CJI Justice Khare wants equality for men and women.   How about allowing men to file rape cases on women who have sex but then go back on promise to marry?  Obviously he thinks that a woman having sex gives her license to trap a man into marriage but no such privilege is given to a man.  Which flies in the face of logic of Equality between men and women!

The trial judge’s comment about ‘morally and socially bound” is absolutely correct from legal point of view also.   It reflects the Indian society’s mindset which looks differently upon consequences of sex before marriage for a man vs a woman.  It is precisely because of that mindset that the laws are made which allow for filing of a rape charge by woman on alleged refusal of promise to marry by a man.  In no other country they will allow a woman to file a rape case because the man refused to marry.   So people like justice Khare should instead work to get the laws changed if they believe in true equality before the law.

image

As an aside, another ex-CJI Mr Balakrishnan had made a public comment that a rape victim should be given the choice to marry the accused.  Really?  Obviously the top judiciary of this country do not believe in any equality before law between men and women but thinks that women need to be given exclusive privilege to file criminal cases against men to be able to get what they want from those men.

“Male Privilege to Die” certificates for feminists’ male family members

In a recent discussion on a TV channel about men’s suicides in India, the woman panelist gave some interesting opinions about the importance (or lack of it) of men’s suicides.  The video is linked below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cT6n9D0PZY

At 36:00 min, the woman makes a comments which would gladden the hearts of all radical feminists.  She says:

“If we are doing this… at least we are giving you the opportunity to kill yourselves.”

Then she says a sentence of two about Sati system about how it was forced suicide for the woman who was asked to jump into the fire and kill yourselves.  Of course she would not want to give any details about how many women killed themselves as Sati in the last 30 years.  A total of 5, as per this wikipedia article, and we cannot claim that all of these of forced.  Given the media and society’s outcry against Sati, it is highly unlikely that such cases will be ‘vastly underreported’ or brushed under the carpet, as the feminists are wont to say about rape.

Compare that number 5 in last 30 years to the yearly suicide rate of married men of 65,000 per year which is double that of married women’s suicides.

And then she airs her view that forced suicide under Sati is somehow worse than cold-blooded murder of a man forced to commit suicide!

Then she says about men’s suicides: “I think it is a privilege to die once and for all and go to hell, heaven whatever than being abused everyday… the woman is not even given the privilege to die or kill herself…”

So now we are given to believe that the law called IPC 498a passed in 1983 to prevent married women’s suicides was a diabolical idea of a patriarchal society to relieve married women of even their privilege to commit suicide and die!

Logic and reason were never strong points of feminists.  Forever crying about victimization and oppression are.  We propose a certificate (see below) to be distributed among all those feminists (including males) who believe in this fantastic idea that men have a privilege to commit suicide and die.  The certificate is called “Certificate of Male Privilege to die”.  We would like such male-privilege-to-die-feminists to distribute this certificate to their male family members, relatives, and friends to enlighten them about this huge and exclusive male privilege they might yet be unaware of.  After all, if it is such a great privilege, you wouldn’t want them not to know about it!

 

 

World needs more ‘worst husbands’ like Einstein

There is a trend in media and society to discredit and denigrate all men in general, and so it should come as no surprise that the personal life and reputation of someone like Albert Einstein could also not have been immune to such perfidious onslaught.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2133922/Was-Einstein-worlds-worst-husband-Wife-ordered-room-tidy-serve-meals-day–expect-NO-affection–stop-talking-demands-it.html

Instead of dismissing Einstein’s demands as misogynistic manifesto, let’s take a reasonable look at those demands and analyze them from the counter viewpoint of what women expect in marriages today, and can in fact enforce them legally using laws like Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) in India.

First of Einstein’s conditions below:
(Source: Einstein: His Life and Universe)

CONDITIONS

A. You will make sure:

1. that my clothes and laundry are kept in good order;

2. that I will receive my three meals regularly in my room;

3. that my bedroom and study are kept neat, and especially that my desk is left for my use only.

There is nothing wrong in these conditions.  I think if Einstein can be blamed for something, it is probably lack of tact.  A middle class married woman in India today can expect the following from her husband, and he must obey or be ready to be charged with domestic violence:

1. You must keep the family car ready and be willing to drive me around. (If not, emotional and economic violence)

2. That I will receive enough of your salary to sustain a better lifestyle than at my parents’ house. (If not, economic violence)

3. That you cannot use the same bathroom as mine. (If not, physical violence)

Further conditions put forth by Einstein:

B. You will renounce all personal relations with me insofar as they are not completely necessary for social reasons.

Specifically, You will forego:

1.  my sitting at home with you;

2.  my going out or travelling with you.

 

C. You will obey the following points in your relations with me:

1.  you will not expect any intimacy from me, nor will you reproach me in any way;

2.  you will stop talking to me if I request it;

3.  you will leave my bedroom or study immediately without protest if I request it.

Above are probably the points which the news writer is utilizing to brand Einstein’s conditions as making his wife as a maidservant rather than lover.  Well the writer has omitted to mention that Einstein promised her wife a status of housewife (and mother) in return for the conditions.  What a crime! — to be a housewife and mother.

And since the conditions put forth by Einstein are being analyzed in this day and age, let’s be clear that in 2013, in most countries the marital laws are such that a husband cannot enforce legally upon his wife practically anything which might be socially considered as duties or desirable conduct of a wife towards husband.  A wife however can legally enforce upon a husband maintenance/alimony for herself, get exclusive child custody, throw him out of the house and practically claim it as her own.  He becomes basically an ATM machine!

Regarding not treating the wife as lover.  That’s a joke.  Legally a wife is not required to guarantee anything to husband including sex.  And in any case, how do we know the state of affection between Einstein and his wife, and that only he is to be blamed for putting forth these conditions!

Laws of many countries allow a woman to file marital rape upon husband.  It is her word against his.  However if a husband refuses sex to his wife, he could potentially be charged with domestic violence under categories of emotional abuse, sexual abuse and so on under the DV Act in India.

Further, the last condition of Einstein:

D. You will undertake not to belittle me in front of our children, either through words or behavior.

There is no need to even defend it.  But it gives a suspicion that Einstein was facing such behaviour at home or otherwise a man with his ordered and reasonable mind will not put forth a condition like this.

Now the news writer doesn’t stop there because so far probably he hasn’t done enough damage to Einstein’s personal character.  He proceeds with more fault finding in Einstein’s character.

Given the circumstances in which they met, Elsa may have expected a certain level of dalliance from her new husband.

And of course, although Einstein married Elsa in 1919, within four years he was already involved with Bette Neumann, his secretary and the niece of one of his friends.

‘His conquest of general relativity proved easier than finding the formulas for the forces swirling within his family,’ Isaacson says.
Something the women who loved him learned the hard way

 

Well, the facts mentioned seem different and wikipedia article on Einstein’s wife Elsa below point to Einstein’s traits of being a gentlemen and committed father to his stepdaughters as below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsa_Einstein

With daughters Ilse and Margot, the Einsteins formed a close-knit family. Although Albert and Elsa did not have any children of their own, Albert raised Ilse and Margot as his own.[6] They lived in the Berlin area, also having a summer house in Caputh in nearby Potsdam.[7]

 

And then the news headline as a question about Einstein being the world’s worst husband.  What about the man who kills his wife and children? Surely we need more of those and less of Einsteins!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Women waiting for no-fault divorce bill to be passed

Here is an interesting news story based on statistics about divorce filings in Mumbai:

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/1896919/report-women-put-off-divorce-to-benefit-from-marriages-law-amendment-bill

 

Women are playing the waiting game when it comes to getting divorced.

Between January and August this year, divorce cases in Mumbai fell by 23% compared to the corresponding period last year.

Women have directed their lawyers to slow down proceedings till the Marriages Law (Amendment) Bill is passed in the Lok Sabha in the winter session of Parliament. The bill proposes that a woman should get up to 50% share from her husband’s inheritance and properties.

According to the Bandra family court, there were 2,826 divorces in the first eight months of last year. The figure fell to 2,157 in the same period this year.

We are glad to see that an important fact is being implicitly acknowledged here:  that not only in developed Western countries, in India too the divorces are mainly initiated by women (80-85% according to this Tehelka story).  Which gender is playing the ‘waiting game’ here – women!

Further, it is clear that just like the existing divorce laws this new law allowing for IrBM (Irretrievable breakdown of marriage) being passed under Marriage Law (Amendment) Bill will also be used by affluent and middle classes.

Divorce lawyer Mrunalini Deshmukh says a few of her female clients, especially those from affluent families, are adopting the wait-and-watch approach before rushing for a divorce. “They stand to gain a lot more from the husband’s

property if the Bill in its current form becomes an Act,” she said.

 

Don’t expect any ‘weak’/dis-empowered/rural women to line up in family courts to escape from defunct marriages.  The usual statements about protecting women and woman empowerment are just the ruse given to force ill-drafted laws through the parliament.  The beneficiaries will be middle and upper class women who will be eagerly helped by legal professionals in their quest to maximize returns from divorce.

Further, there are natural fears being expressed by men rights activists and being acknowledged by lawyers too.

Men fear that just like the anti-dowry law, the proposed law might also be misused by women. Lawyers, too, believe many women might misuse this Bill for financial gains.

The reality is as follows.  The use (and not misuse) of this new law will be to get unjustly enriched at the expense of the husbands.  When incentives are being given to get a no-fault divorce and thereby get financial settlement and man’s property, it will be very difficult for any woman to accept a lesser ‘share’ on moral and ethical grounds.  If at all, the usual slow judicial process in Indian courts may force some women to settle for lesser amounts than they hoped for, but the real losers will be children and society by the onset of a new regime of no-fault divorce (only for women) in India.

One has to take a look at divorce rates and marriage rates in Western countries to see what happened there after no-fault divorce laws (albeit for both men and women) were passed there.

The divorce rates in Australia spiked after IrBM law was passed there in 1975.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/947114F16DC7D980CA25773700169C64?opendocument

Graph: 7.40 Crude divorce rate

Some folks have pointed out that the crude divorce rates (divorces per 1000 population) has been stable or declining in last few years.  However, that has to be seen in light of the fact that the marriage rates have been declining throughout last few decades too.  E.g. chart giving marriage and divorce rates from UK below shows continuous decline in marriage rates.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2011/02/divorce_and_marriage

Marriage and divorce in decline

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gender neutral rape laws are welcome

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-19/india/32746164_1_sexual-assault-sexual-violence-sexual-abuse

Government’s proposal to include sexual assault on men and boys on par with erstwhile term rape under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) is a welcome and long overdue move.

The proposal before the Cabinet seeks to change the definition of “rape” as a crime involving sexual assault of women and defined by forcible penetration. The move now is to expand the definition to include male victims of sexual assault as well by changing the relevant provisions of the IPC, Evidence Act and CrPc. If the proposal goes through, “rape” as a category of crime will cease to exist in the statute books, as the proposal is to replace it with “sexual assault”—a gender-neutral distinction.

What is perplexing is opposition by some feminists to criminalize sexual assault on men and boys.

Those opposed to the move, like Flavia Agnes, said the government had suddenly woken up after the assault on a girl in Guwahati. “I oppose the proposal to make rape laws gender neutral. There is physicality in the definition of rape, there is use of power and the victim has a stigma attached to her. If made gender-neutral, rape laws will not have the deterrence value and it will make it more complicated for judges in court,” Agnes said.

The complications are only in the mind of such feminists who vehemently protest against women’s human rights violation but consider it their God given duty to protest against laws to protect men on par with women!

National Commission for Women at it again

What exactly is the message National Commission for Women(NCW) has for Indian women is an interesting question!  Just a few months back, the NCW chairperson Mamta Sharma made news for advising women that being called sexy could be taken as a complement rather than as an affront.

Well here is a complete about turn from the same Mamta ‘foot-in-the-mouth’ Sharma now advising women to dress carefully in order to avoid attacks on them.  News below:

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-19/india/32745853_1_ncw-chairperson-rajasthan-pradesh-mahila-congress-molestation-case

NEW DELHI: National Commission for Women (NCW) chairperson Mamta Sharma’s statement asking women to dress carefully to avoid crimes (like molestation) against them has sparked outrage and disgust with rights activists questioned the selection process of NCW office-bearers.

Sharma’s comments came close on the heels of the removal of Alka Lamba from a fact-finding committee probing the Guwahati molestation case for revealing the victim’s identity.

While speaking about the molestation case on Tuesday, Sharma stopped short of prescribing a dress code. She said, “Be careful about how you dress… Aping the west blindly is eroding our culture and causing such crimes to happen.”

The statement is all the more perplexing and absurd being made in context of the well-publicized Guwahati molestation case.

We sincerely hope that the so called women’s commission which is nothing more than National Confusion for Women is either overhauled completely or maybe even closed down since it is not serving any useful purpose whatsoever.  Several well known feminists and women politicians themselves have expressed the same sentiment:

There has never been an assessment or social audit of the NCW’s work in taking up women’s issues, advocate Flavia Agnes said. “They have nothing to do with women’s groups or women’s movement. Rather than taking women’s issues to the government, they are busy doing a PR job for the government,” she added.

While Agnes wondered who were selected as NCW office-bearers and their credibility, Ranjana Kumari suggested an electoral college to choose NCW functionaries. “Now, it is a parking lot or a rehabilitation centre for bureaucrats and politicians who the ruling party can’t accommodate anywhere else.”

Sharma was removed as the chief of Rajasthan Pradesh Mahila Congress after she was accused of anti-party activities in 2010 after a six-year stint. The PMO found no substance in the complaint and named her the NCW chief.

CPM leader Brinda Karat demanded the NCW chairperson withdraw her statement or quit. “Such advice is unwarranted and militates against the mandate of the commission. It only strengthens the forces who blame victims for the crimes against them,” she said.

Earlier, at a seminar in Jaipur in February, Sharma had told women, “Don’t be offended if someone calls you ‘sexy’, rather take it positively.”

BJP spokesperson Nirmala Seetharaman said, “The NCW’s role in the Assam molestation case undermined the probe and privacy of the victim. We hope the NCW chairperson and its members will focus on standing by women rather than giving them advisories.”