Voices from all over

Seems the confusion about legislating gender roles and relationships is really a worldwide problem.

from IPC Section 498-A: Misuse by Jinesh Zaveri Location:Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Dedicated to the Victimised Indian Families, Who are falsely threatened & Blackmailed by the Indian Daughters-In-Law & her family members, and those Victimised families who are already falsely charged under the Section 498A.

Its all about False charges of Dowry Law, Domestic Violence, Alimony, Marriage and Divorce. NOTE: All articles are my personal copyright. They may be republished if the source is acknowledged and a link provided to this site. This is not an Anti-Women Blog. Read Disclaimer.

This blog is like reading a parody of english as a second language, but the ideas will seem very familiar to those who have been victimized by Australian courts.

And this from Kenya:

Kenya: Why the Sex Bill is a Legal Misadventure on the Opinion page of The Nation, Nairobi .

The Bill could therefore be seen to be criminalising sex even amongst consenting adults. Also, the Bill fails to distinguish between sexual assault and rape or defilement, which are different offences in law.

Funny that, Australia's legal prose seems more in order, but the nonsense continues.
Read below, A View.

And further:

Clause 1(3) of the First Schedule of the Bill, which deals with transitional provisions, says proceedings commenced by a law that is repealed by the Bill will be continued under the Bill.

This goes against Section 77(4) of the Constitution, which says no person shall be held to be guilty of a criminal offence on account of an act or omission that did not, at the time it took place, constitute such an offence.

(Kenya has a Constitution based on the US Constitution and the UN agreements on human and civil rights.)

One good question that never seems to be asked or answered is: Considering the malevolent bias of so many nations' laws, why aren't the legal scholars wading into this argument?
A gender-biased law is no less discrimanatory than an ethnically biased law; or a racially biased law. Why is the world full of lawyers, but no legal scholars will speak out?

There is a simple test of an unfair law: The law produces a backlash which establishes the opposite of its intended effect.

Human nature being what it is, --dichotomous--, any unreasonable pressure in one direction evokes a movement in the other.
That's why there must always be checks and balances built into a government at all levels -- to provide a means for pressures to be balanced within the system; not forcing reasonable people to become outlaws, or simply flee the regime.

We all remember the story of King John and Robin Hood. Illegitimate taxes and laws forced good people to become outlaws. It took the return of Richard the Lionhearted to reverse the conflicts. -- Supposedly, we have a better understanding of human nature and law 800 years later.
Or do we?