ONE FEMENIST DEBATE WITH THE UMA CHALLA ON TV9
BEFORE YOU READ PLEASE SEE THE VEDIO LINK AS FOLLOW:
sandya (Fminist) is saying that women need the equal property rights. Because women are deprived from parents property.
My argument is way you need a law for this, it is an understanding that in the society that all women, children, men are getting equal property rights and it is being shared with out a laws. your parents hard earn money and you need law for that.
2nd argument is during the marriage most of the women take her share as a “sthree dhan” or a cash gift or a property along with her which is more than her property share. And brother and parents give gladly because she is going to settle in a well do family perhaps she will have better life than us.
3rd argument is there marriages like love and arranged,were groom family disagree to accept any “shree dhan” or a cash gift, property.
Now just see the argument, NTR made the law in equal property right it may the liquid cash or the movable or immovable property. She is very happy with the law. But how come to her words parents should not take any money or any gift, property. Or give.
Other hand she is saying that there should be a law and another hand you are saying that during the marriage no exchange or financial transaction. If happen so it will name as a dowry (what is the meaning of dowry?)
- She (Sandya feminst) is claiming that our organization is for women not for the wife.
How many cases they have received from the mother-in-law and what action had been taken so far? You all know very well. Yes we are worried about the mother-in-law because they have been putting jail with out a trial. They have been abused by the daughter-in-law. So far society is treating them as evil. We have been separated from the basic mind set of human being.
But way are you not claiming that you are a wife right organization. When my mother requested for to the feminist organization to reconcile my daughter-in-law, but your have refused saying that daughter-in-law should complaint.
In kolkata when rezwanur rehaman died, feminist organization visited the priyanka todai not to the mother of rezwanur way? Is rezwanur mother is in more loss? Or a priyanka. Did priyanka fight for rezwanur justice? or his mother ?
- Sandya (Feminist) is claiming that no one should dominate at house.
This is another problem of the feminist organization. They have objection on domination of mother-in-law or any senior member of the house. They understanding is it self is wrong leadership is not domination. Leadership holds the responsibility it works for wealth of the family. And it dose not come in one day it’s comes after so May efforts in the family. Leadership is not given; it is taken by his/her best with effort and efficiency. Leadership is not the post it is a quality. Leadership is not made it is born.
Sandya (feminist) wants a non leadership family to prevent the violence.
As per her point is very clear that leadership of mother-in-law will not be tolerated any more, if that is there we create more and more laws and fight for the cause. Now we can understand what she is saying. This is what a women organization.
- Sandya (Feminist) is saying that you all take a stand that we will not take a dowry mother-in-law can have a peaceful life.
Here the massage is clear that mother-in-law is suffering and they have lost the peace and they need a peaceful life. Such dowry will transaction will not affect husband mother-in-law or father-in-law of husband. Were both are liable for such transaction.
- Sandya (Femist) again saying men leadership should not be there. other wise mother-in-law will not have peaceful life
As per her statement; whole problem is leadership in the domestic violence not the dowry demand. Any institution should have the leadership that to a senior person, other wise that institution will fail. It’s believe that no institution will run peacefully with out a leadership.
- Sandya (feminist) saying by forming mother-in-law association will not help to prevent the exchange of dowry. And we should not separate the women.
First of all this organization formed to save mother-in-law and sister-in-law from various legal Terrorism laws. This group formed by those who have been separated from the women and women organizations. So there is no question of uma challa to separate some one from women or a women organization. These women organizations have bee separated men from women and women from men. Mostly husband from women, and women from husband. Child from parents and parents from child, father from child, child from father.
Protest is a human and democratic right, it may be a from of women group and men group you may name any group so, uan is doing well this is a last clip of the video I have elaborated you all requested to comment on this
Uma I am your fan, you did a wonderful debate, with lot of patience your stand was very strong and effective.
