Get the latest
Fashion, Beauty & Shopping News

Sign
Up!

Culture

Dear Rajasthan Human Rights Commission, Women In Live-In Relationships Don’t Need Your Protection. We Need You To Shut Up

By  | 

According to you, what do you need to get into a live-in relationship? Most of us would say a) A willing boyfriend and b) a house. Now before you deem me to be a dim-wit for asking such an obvious question, I’d say hold that thought. Because if it were upto some members of our Government, you’d have to seek their approval to get into one. No, it doesn’t matter if you are two consenting adults. No, it doesn’t matter if your parents are okay with it. I mean, who are you, who are your parents to authorise you to do what you want in your personal life? And wait, if you thought, maybe there’s a grain of dignity to it, nope. This is only for women. The Rajasthan Human Rights Commission has taken privacy infringement to a whole new level and I seriously want to know what potent shit they have been smoking up.

For the uninitiated, while a lot of us were trying not to drown in the heavy rainfall yesterday, here’s what unfolded. The Rajasthan Human Rights Commission on Wednesday asked the Centre and state government to create a campaign, specifically for women. What campaign? You’d think menstrual hygiene, financial independence, education, domestic violence or safety but no. All that, nobody cares about. This campaign is to educate women on the hazards of live-in relationships. Seriously, what are these guys on? These guys went ahead to say that the concept of live-in relationships is against their human rights, and such women can be treated as “concubines.” Concubines means mistresses. First things first, when you have such low IQ, how did you learn such good vocab? Secondly, do you guys understand the concept of free will?

Watch the video here:

It feels like these guys were too vela since a while, and one fine day they thought what more can we do to curb women empowerment. Pay-gap is already wide spread, safety is almost negligible, dowry system is still existing in several parts, social system too is fucked – what else can we do to take away from women? And then some bitter human in the committee came up with a brilliant idea – let’s begin with taking their freedom of choice under the pretext of wanting to “protect women”. “It is the responsibility of the government and human rights organisations to protect women from the harms of live-in relationship through intensive awareness campaigns,” an order issued by the commission’s chairperson Justice Prakash Tatia and member Justice Mahesh Chand Sharma said. Slow claps for these highly intellectual individuals.

Now, you’d think that this is the absolute worst. But no. They took this misogynistic shit to the next level by asking the government to create a law that scans couples for eligibility (says people who are clearly not eligible to be in a human rights committee), then once you pass that, there should be a process for registration. Remember the annoying form-filling process for college admissions? What is next? Linking your aadhar to your relationship status? Now, knowing how slow any government process works in India, by the time you get your registration done, you must have already given up on the idea. But again, this is not even the worst. God forbid if you break up, the committee has asked for mandatory counselling. Not optional but mandatory. Like it doesn’t matter if you’re over it and completely okay, you still have to go to a shrink and sit there on a chair answering questions about your childhood and past relationships. “The law should specify eligibility of partners; how such relationships will be known to people at large; procedure of registration; and how these relationships can be ended after a mandatory counselling,” the commission said. More than anyone else, guess who needs “mandatory counselling”? The answer is as obvious as the deterioration of their cranial capacity, or the misogyny deeply-ingrained in their anatomy.

What is ironic here is that they are going ahead and insinuating that a woman in a live-in relationship is like a mistress and then saying that it is “character assassination” and they want to protect her “dignity.”

Former chairperson of women rights commission Lad Kumari Jain said that this “is a wrong move since it is the personal choice of partners in such relationships”. She further added, “Moreover, such a relationship cannot be criminalised in any way as even the Supreme Court grants right to the women partner in live-in relationships under Protection of women from domestic violence act-2005.”

ALSO READ: Not Just Sports, Women Are Bringing In Medals For Their Stellar Skills And We Are So Proud. Say Hello To Shweta Ratanpura

Honestly, this feels like just the beginning of the reversal of whatever progress we’ve achieved in establishing equal rights for women. If this gets approved, very soon they will come up with several new laws and before you know it, we’ll be needing consent to have a career, travel alone, or not wanting children. I am sorry, but a bunch of idiots cannot dictate whether we can do a live-in or not. Thanks, but we don’t need to be “protected” from freedom of choice.

Soha Ali Khan Once Had To Pump Breast Milk In An Airplane Bathroom. What About Breastfeeding Is Offensive?

GET HAUTERFLY IN YOUR INBOX!

Leave a Reply