India – one of the most dangerous places for women!

The death of a 23 year old Indian woman after an horrific gang-rape on a bus in New Dehli, India, has just been reported via the media. It is further reported that six men are in police custody and that a trial will soon follow.

The savagery and devilish wickedness of the attack on the young woman and the injuries inflicted on her were horrific in the extreme.

Is it possible that Indian culture makes women more vulnerable to assaults by men despite the fact that women in India are traditionally revered as the Mother and Goddess?
In a poll of 370 gender experts on how well women fared in G20 countries, India was ranked the worst and Saudi Arabia ranked second worst. Canada was the best country.
In a survey conducted by Thomson Reuters’ Trust Law Women, India ranks with Afghanistan, Congo and Somalia as one of the most dangerous places for women.
It wasn’t long ago that India was lecturing Ireland over the tragic death of Savita Halappanavar. The Indian authorities showed great concern about the treatment of one of its citizens abroad.
How well does India look after it’s women, most of whom we will never read about in newspapers or hear about on the radio?


11 thoughts on “India – one of the most dangerous places for women!

  1. You’re one to talk about threats to women, when you think they should get married even if they don’t want to and then be stuck at home raising children.

  2. No Susan, relate your opinion about women to this story. You say women who get pregnant should stay pregnant whether they want to or not. You say women who are married should not go out and work and take jobs away from men. You say women should not serve their country in the military. You say women should not fight for the cause of women lest they be condemned as ‘feminists’. You say women have no right to seek sexual pleasure if they are not married. Women are being assaulted in your country, Ireland, right now, and you support this. You oppose the choice of women to choose abortion, you oppose the right of women to abort fetuses conceived by rape. If this woman had been impregnated by one of her rapists you would be grieving for the fetus now and not her, you would be condemning her had she lived and aborted it. You are no woman’s friend Susan.

  3. This woman was raped by six men. Susan, if this woman found herself to be pregnant and sought to abort would you support her decision? I don’t think you would. For people like you it is easier if the woman dies. I do not think you care about women who are raped. The most dangerous places for women are places like Ireland where women are not allowed to abort the embryos of their rapists.

    • Maeve and Rachel,
      The attack on the young woman was so savage and brutal that it is extremely unlikely that she would have become pregnant. As for me not caring about women who are raped, oh how wrong you are! If I were the Judge in the trial of the six men who tortured and raped this defenceless young woman, I would show no mercy, as they showed her no mercy, and I would sentence them to death or life imprisonment.

  4. “The attack on the young woman was so savage and brutal that it is extremely unlikely that she would have become pregnant.”

    Victims of gang rape in the past have been impregnated. And they have every right to abort the embryos forced into their bodies against their will. Embryos conceived through hate. Admit, Susan, that no woman was put on this earth to serve the purpose of male-driven acts of violence.

  5. No wife or daughter of mine would be forced to bear the child of a rapist. Rape is evil and evil is inborn. Any child born of such an evil act is bound to be evil itself. As a man I find such a thing abhorrent, I could not imagine being a woman and being so violated and then finding soon after that the rapist had left his stain and I was expected to bring it to fruition.
    I find Glenn, in his many comments here to be a complete hypocrite. He says with regards to abortion that all life is sacred and yet he boasts that where he comes from people ‘take care of’ thugs. So life is sacred only before birth, after birth a human life can be ‘taken care of’ according to local ways and how that life affects the people around it? But he would deny a pregnant woman that same right to ‘take care of’ a life she did not want inside her that was affecting HER life? such hypocrisy. This blog promotes an unhealthy attitude towards women.

    • Sir,
      If it is not expecting too much, will you kindly address your comments to the post which was entitled “India – one of the most dangerous places for women”.
      By the way, our blog promotes truth and the telling of it, however inconvenient and uncomfortable. Highlighting the fact that women are vulnerable to attack in India shows genuine concern for their safety and that is a HEALTHY attitude.

  6. I would say that in relation to this article, and your others, that you opposed the stance that Indian authorities took in regards to Mrs Halapannavar, they showed concern for her and you held this against them. No law can control the evil that men do Mr or Mrs White. It seems nothing satisfies you. The Indian govt had every right to question the actions of the Irish, they killed that poor woman just as much as those men killed that poor girl.

    • Martin Wilcox,
      Are you Wendy’s mouthpiece, as you have been a commenter on her blog? After we banned Wendy from making further comments on ours, you began to comment on our blog. Is this just a coincidence?

      You have made an outrageous accusation against the Irish doctors who cared for Savita Halapannavar, stating that “they killed that poor woman”. Mrs. Halappanavar had septicaemia and E-coli, so she was not a well woman, and you, sir, are prejudging the findings of the enquiries set up to investigate the circumstances surrounding her death. Are you a doctor?

      By the way, Mrs. Halappanavar’s husband now states that he never said an abortion would have saved his wife’s life, when, in fact, he did say that very thing. Now he has backtracked, and his wife’s medical records reveal that NO request for a termination was made by the Halappanavars.

      Care to comment, Mr. Wilcox?

  7. I am a regular commenter on Cultured Views what is wrong with that? I followed your link from the site, simple as that, what has been said is certainly true. But it is a narrow mind that bans comment from any source. Mrs Halapannavar was poorly cared for in the Irish hospital and a procedure should have been performed to remove the fetal matter in order to make her more comfortable. Medical negligence, they did not act in her best interests. I am not alone in believing this, the hospital investigation will be a white wash.

Leave a Reply

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