If you've never been to India, if you've never spent hours riding the cramped commuter trains where men press themselves thickly into the ladies sections, where it's not just your breasts that men are groping, but you also find their hands grasping your thigh trying to push themselves between your legs - you can't understand the real necessity of these trains. I didn't grow up in India, but when I first rode the trains there I thought the women's section was just a quasi-sexist novelty, until I was sexually assaulted on one of the trains, and the only way I was able to stop it in that cramped environment was to yell and physically strike my assaulter, embarrassing him. Now I ONLY ride in the ladies section, and although it's not always free from problems it's far less fraught.

Cultural shifts take a long time. It requires a paradigm shift - and that's happening in India, there are a lot more progressive people, and slowly things are changing. But the fact is, unless women feel safe, they're not going to venture out as much. And it's still a fairly macho culture, despite the gains being made.

Also, the rates of crime are complicated. First, remember that women were largely sequestered in the home for much of India's history (except for very low-caste women), and much of the violence against women was happening in the home and staying unreported and unseen, or was happening against low-caste women and thus also remaining unreported and unseen. As more women venture out into the public sphere, they are more at risk for crime because they are physically outside their homes. So it follows that reported crime rates would rise.

I also wouldn't be too sure that the reported rates are coinciding correctly with actual rising rates of crime. The work that has been done to raise awareness and encourage women to report violence means that crimes are being reported more often. As women become more empowered, they are reporting crimes against them more frequently. And there are still a huge number of crimes against women that go unreported in India, particularly against members of oppressed groups, such as Dalits and other low-caste women.

...I still think that it would be a great idea to tax the hell out of fast food chains, and use that money to subsidize organic fruits & vegetables on family-owned farms, and bring down the prices so that families would see without a doubt that it would be cheaper to eat healthfully than to eat fast food. That's one of the main problems in the country - fast food is so cheap and easy to get compared to healthy food that families tend to just buy 99 cent burgers rather than make healthy meals at home.

Tax the hell out of junk food, too - candy bars, soda, all of it. Make it easier to buy healthy food, and harder to buy junk food.

Of course, the industry would have a field day with THAT one.

seriously?

good for a chuckle, though.

Her father is your husband. He helped raise her, he has been there for her highs and lows, he loves her, and she loves him. He is her father.

Where the sperm came from doesn't matter. Don't tear your family apart over this. You have no need to feel guilty or slutty or whatever. What happened happened - you were all adults and made the choices you made. This seems to be more of an issue of your own feelings of guilt than anything that would be of real consequence, regardless of the variety of worries that come up.

And just because somebody "looks Czech" doesn't mean that they are Czech. That professor might have been sure of himself, but there's other genetic mixes that can create a look of one region or another.

In Britain, the whole point is (and has been for many years) to call a man a "cunt" or a "twat" because it feminizes him. The word is used with some frequency by laddish types, and it's meant to be emasculating. Calling a man a "cunt" is equating him with something feminine, and therefore inferior.

Using it against a woman is seen as less acceptable, but when it is used it's typically in a sexualized context - a woman is a "cunt" because she's ill-tempered, must be that time of the month, etc. It's the same origin of the word "bitch." A bitch is a female dog who is in heat, and requires penetration from a male dog in order to be subdued. But of course, people don't think of this when they use them. All of these terms are tied to menstruation and a woman's particular sexual cycle, particularly in reference to the need to be sexually subdued by a man in order to be put into her proverbial place.

And people wonder why women get offended by these words...

If this letter is real (many respondents seem to think it is not!), then I would point the LW to the story of Ashoka, the Indian king who waged a bloody war to unite India, and then on the battlefield was appalled by what he had done and all the blood that was shed to attain his goal. Upon seeing this, he vowed to follow a path of non-violence and became a Buddhist, and one of the most beloved kings of Indian history.

Of course, all of this is hagiography. There were still times that Ashoka had to exert influence, occasional violence, etc., to maintain the safety of his kingdom. But for the most part he ruled in peace and found ways to avoid violent conflict through diplomacy and fairness.

Moments like this can change your life and bring you to a new place of maturity. I would follow that path, and if your friends don't get it, then you will certainly find new ones who do.