RISING LEVEL OF IMPOTENCE IN INDIA

My reply! let us not intrude into the privacy of others. We are not talking personal, right? Let me know your source, and I will let you know mine. But neither I have right to ask your personal history nor you have right to ask mine.

@Mr. Anil,

Thanks for your queries. I join you in asking  the same.

YES , I AM A '498A PERSON'. PLEASE DO NOT ASK WHAT IS '498A PERSON' - BECAUSE I KNOW YOU ALL WELL AWARE OF IT.

ONE FINE MORNING, ONE OF MY FRIEND BEING CALLED BY MY SO CALLED WIFE AND TOLD THAT I AM IMPOTENT. THE SAME THING SHE TOLD TO ME IN FRONT OF MY MOTHER. I DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILD FROM HER.

AFTER FEW YEARS  I STARTED ' LIVE IN ' WITH ANOTHER WOMAN. NOW I HAVE A GIRL CHILD FROM HER.

WHAT WILL YOU SAY MR PRABHAKAR?

Lets discuss female impotence.

ACTUALLY I DO NOT BELIEVE GROUPING OF MALE AND FEMALE, I AM ALWAYS IN FAVOUR OF JUST.

I WANT - "JUST FOR EVERYONE, JUST EVERYWHERE ".

 BUT WHEN A GROUP OF WOMENISER, MAKES THE MATRIMONIAL HOME A POLITICAL ARENA, THEY APPLY THE SAME 'DEVIDE AND RULE, POLICY AT HOME - I COULD NOT CONTROL MYSELF.

I AM SORRY.

498A is a potent weapon in the hands of unscrupulous women. Since no body can fathom what is in their minds, a modern wife can go to any length. 

First the collapse of joint family system.

Now the family system (only husband, wife and their own children)  itself has collapsed.

Shakespeare said: Woman, they name is jealousy. Some more adjectives can now be added.

@Arun Kumar Gupta

Sir, what do you mean a group of womeniser? Please see the meaning of the word in any good dictionary and then if you feel you need to correct it, do correct. In your reply I think it does not fit in the context. 

Sorry to point out. 

Liked the idea of non groupism. we all have brothers and sisters at home, if not all, majority of us. And if a sister happens to be in a bad marriage, a brother's arguments and tone would change, won't it? and Vice versa if a brother is in  trouble. So instead of always talking personal , one can discuss an issue, as you pointed out in an objective manner rather than calling names. 

Regards

RG

finally CONCLUSION 'THE SATIRE'   we can conclude that impotent men have a genetic defect leading to hormonal imbalance in their body which leads to activation of  thought process of greed in threir minds. Lets take a PET research study on this. since there is almost a 100% correlation in this triple blind study (natural setup or an experiment by nature) all world bodies like WHO and international reserach in andrology should study it.

What difference it will make if the husband becomes impotent after the marriage.

If a woman is barren, is it impotency of a woman?

If either partner is unable to cohabit because of a serious accident, what is the remedy? Divorce? How does it solve the problem? There can be many situations which can be termed impotency.

Let us not degenerate ourselves to suggest that the virility of man and child bearing capacity of a woman should be tested before the marriage.

@ Renuka, there is no point asking the guys to not get personal and be objective because it gets more and more obvious that they don't know how to do it (pun intended) ;-).

It is one of the most difficult things to be objective.  For that a person must first value of the importance of "objective thinking" and "subjective thinking".  A cynical person can never be objective.  In our day to day life we interact with various persons and we will have pleasurable experiences or bitter experiences.  For example, I meet a person from Uttara Khand and will have a very good experience.  For me all the Uttara Khand people are very gentle, kind hearted and amenable persons.  Further, I extend my though and startt to say that all the hilly people are very gentle, innocent and kind hearted.  Similarly, I meet a Tamilian and got cheated by him.  I start to tell that all the Tamilians are of same breed and cunning at heart.  The same thing is happening on this web site.  Some one says - "My so called wife called me impotent before my frined.  But I got a girl child through some other woman.  Hence, my wife is so and so".  If he stops there, there is no problem. But he extends his experience to all the women and intentionally or unintenationally say several things, which hurt the decent persons, whether they are men or women.  Some other person comes on the site and talks about her brother's bad matrimonial experience on the first night and starts to abuse the laws, which have been enacted to protect the women.  Every one is talking from his personal experience.  I do not have any problem, if they do so.  But do not generalize your experiences.  If I talk some thing in favour of women and defend the laws and judgments in favour of women and give legal advise, the people who are sadists in their day to day behaviour come on this web-site and put imputations by saying that I have been doing all this for my professional benefit.  Shame on them.  You heroes, you got very good pieces of advice from your learned advocates, and as per advise, that you being "innocent of Section 498-A" went to High court to get FIR quashed and also you filed "perjury" cases against your wife for filing "false statements" in the courts of law and disrespcting the courts (Are you respecting the courts and law on this web-site by spitting venom always against the judges and advocates, parliament and administration) and defamation cases.  How many times you succeeded?  You never answer for that.  If a close look towards your postings clearly and loudly say, why your marriage has been broken down and who is culprit.  So far...So good.  If any one comes on this website defending the women and their rights, you punce upon them discrediting them and try to chase them away.  Some gentleman on this site asked me - "your name suggests you are a man.  but your postings are in support of woman.  Why so?"   He cannot understand, a large section of men join hands for the  rights of women.  He cannot under stand why "Raja Ram Mohan Roy" worked for women.  Why a large section of men fought for the right of "widow marriage" and against "kanya sulkam" (Before 1950 in some parts of the country, women were paid money by the men to get married).  This practice also, men dominated society used against women, as the 70 to 80 years aged people used to pay huge "kanya sulkam" for 8 to 12 age girls for marriage purpose and young men could not get wives in those periods. 

Have you thought at any point of time there are hundreds and thousands of women, who cannot reach internet and defend their cases.  My repeated question is that if woman's life is such a happy and rosy , if she can use a man as ATM, why the life of a girl child is snuffed in the womb?   

All of you are right in respective ways. But I still wonder from where this nice post stats come from or is it that the sample size is judgmental at the end of the board ?


1. No two sides of a coin are ever the same. One side will always bully down the other side. Moreover that same one side will always have specific passion which the other side will never come in terms with for so long.

 

2. Ld. Prabhakar has raised again a very good point on defending the real "poor" class. Shall we assume that out of the growing collective strength of 77 K + LCI members some 7 hundred ld. professional members here will take up the cause of "poor" class out of the honorarium they earn from other regular clinets this quarter and further shall we assume that the next 7 hundred regular Jack and Jills here will take 1 good common cause before the end of their personal legal shelf life and all these to add to ones karma !
 

Rgds.

to simplify my conclusion i will say why all 498a men went impotent , can anybody answer that?

IT IS NOT A GREAT FACTOR THAT - WHETHER A PERSON IS  'IMPOTENT'  IN REALITY OR NOT, IN MY OPINION THEY ARE SEXUALY HANDICAPED ONLY, JUST LIKE BLIND; DEFECTED LEG; ETC.

BUT IT IS A COMPLETELY SEPERATE MATTER, WHERE WITH  INTENTION TO DEFAME A PERSON, HE IS BEING CALLED AS ' IMPOTENT'. THE VERY POINTED ISSUE - WITH  INTENTION TO DEFAME A PERSONCONSTRUCTED CRUELTY TO HIM.

WHEN THE SAME DONE BY AN WIFE / SO CALLED WIFE; - IT IS MATRIMONIAL CRUELTY.

YES MS AVNISH KAUR, I HAVE THE ANSWER OF YOUR QUESTION. REPEATING THE QUESTION AGAIN,

QUOTE   

to simplify my conclusion i will say why all 498a men went impotent , can anybody answer that?  

UNQUOTE.

A SECTION OF  'WOMEN'  USING THIS WORD - WITH INTENTION TO DEFAME HER HUSBAND, LOWERING HER HUSBAND BEFORE THE OTHER MALES.

THIS CLEARLY INDICATS - THE IRRITRIVIABLE BREAKDOWN OF MARRIAGE OR SO CALLED MARRIAGE.