Teenage German tourist raped on Indian train

[MADem]

105. Your citation just isn't true. How's that for a problem?

Go down to the end of your 2006 "cite" and click on "Original article." It goes to a story about birds. So....whatever.

Here are a few sources that are first, more recent than 2006, aren't from blogs with bad "original article" links, and say the exact opposite of your insistence. I'm just flummoxed that you're so anxious to minimize what is a problem so overwheming that diplomatic agencies in several contries have issued travel warnings. Now, to me, that's just flat-out weird.

Why India Still Allows Marital Rape.

Supporters of the government’s decision, including the police, claim it is hard to prosecute marital rape, because unlike an unmarried victim, evidence of penetration is not considered sufficient evidence for rape. The law, they argue, could be misused by couples.

Some activists acknowledge it is hard to prove rape among married women, but argue this is not a good enough reason to deny women a legal framework to fight sexual abuse. “A murder is also hard to prove,” says Vrinda Grover, a human rights lawyer. “But that doesn’t deny victims from seeking legal recourse,” she says.

Ms. Grover criticized the observations made by the Parliament appointed-panel of lawmakers as “misogynistic.”

“These statements defeat the entire purpose of the bill itself,” Ms. Grover said. “One hears about cases of marital rape everyday… Why then is the government turning a blind eye?” she asks.

While official data on marital rape remains sparse, activists and lawmakers claim there is plenty of evidence to suggest it is on the rise.

In early 2000, for instance, two-thirds of married Indian women surveyed by the United Nations Population Fund claimed to have been forced into sex by their husbands.

New India sex crime laws not tough enough: UN rapportuer

New measures passed by lawmakers in March increased punishments for sex offenders to include the death penalty if a victim dies, and broadened the definition of sexual assault.

But Rashida Manjoo, the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against women, said the laws were still not tough enough.

She told a news conference it was unfortunate that the opportunity to establish a substantive framework "to protect and prevent against all forms of violence against women, was lost".

Her comments echoed those of other Indian women's activists who praised the intent of the legislation but said it still had huge holes.

Campaigners are unhappy about lawmakers' refusal to criminalise marital rape or increase the punishment for acid attacks on women from a minimum seven-year jail term.

The UN official, who toured several Indian states to obtain first-hand reports about violence against women, said she would release her findings to the world body next year.

She said she had heard on her 10-day visit about "sexual violence, domestic violence, caste-based discrimination and violence, dowry related deaths, crimes in the name of honour" and other offences.

She quoted one person on her trip as describing violence against women as spanning the "life cycle from womb to the tomb".

India passes tough new rape law - but does it go far enough?

Yet activists have complained that much is missing from the bill.

Notably, it does not criminalize the rape of a woman by her husband. That oversight contravenes the Indian constitution, "which considers women as equal human beings who have a right to live with dignity and be free from violence within and outside marriage," Sudha Sundararaman of the All India Democratic Women's Association told the Times of India.

Neither does the bill tackle incest or child trafficking, ban politicians charged with rape from running for public office, or lower the age of consent from 18 to 16, which campaigners had hoped would prevent the unfair criminalization of consensual relationships between teenagers.

Furthermore, there are concerns that "the rush to put tougher penalties in place and defuse public anger over the issue may create further problems for India's already beleaguered justice system," Agence France-Presse said, citing the danger that inadequately trained police would misapply the new laws.

Now, that's three cites, recent ones too, that belie your weak, curious insistence (using an EIGHT YEAR OLD blog as "evidence" with a bad link) that what I said was not accurate.

My cites tell the truth about what the law is in India--your lousy one is not.