Men’s rights organizations in India, under the platform of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), collectively, categorically and severely condemn the ban on Kamal Hassan’s movie – Vishwaroopam.
SIFF, the umbrella organization of men’s rights organizations in India, working towards creating awareness of men’s problems, supporting distressed and victimized men, demanding gender neutral laws, protesting against misuse of anti-male laws, has termed the current ban on the movie Vishwaroopam as yet another form of legal terrorism in India, where democracy and right to free speech are becoming emblems of mockery.
SIFF Save Indian Family Foundation (Bangalore),and its allied NGOs Like Save Family Foundation (Delhi), Men’s Rights Association (Pune) to name a few, have a completely neutral stand on the content of the movie.
They neither support nor oppose the movie and its content and make a categorical statement of not taking sides with any party involved in the Vishwaroopam controversy.
1. Having said that, it is appalling to see the failure of the Indian Judicial System in this particular case, as the think tank of SIFF believes that the primary onus for the movie goes to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and if the protestors have an issue, if any, they must address it with the CBFC instead of filing case on the movie maker.
2. It’s the onus and responsibility of the CBFC to determine which movies are viewable and which aren’t and what is the audience for a particular movie and if the CBFC has given the go-ahead to a particular movie, SIFF sees no point in dragging Kamal Hassan into this controversy.
3. SIFF is also wary of the fact that partisan social double standards are coming up. If the claim of the protesters is that Muslims have been projected badly in the movie (if it has been done so), and hence they have a right to file a case against the movie, then where do these so-called socially active organizations vanish, when day in and day out, men are projected badly in almost every other movie.
Due to such bad portrayal of men in movies, society has become insensitive to “Violence against Men”, as a result of which, violence and crime against men never become social issues. Added to this, such portrayal of men creates an atmosphere of gagging against men which suppresses their problems and concerns.
One such movie is the movie called “Provoked” wherein a murder by a woman is justified. Another such movie is “Saat Khoon Maaf” wherein once again a criminal minded woman is projected as a victim and her blood thirst is justified by vilifying men and projecting them in bad light. These types of movies create a social atmosphere which makes it acceptable for a woman to murder a man and later claim that she did it to escape his “torture”.
SIFF alleges that when no one is bothered to raise voice against such movies which openly target the entire clan of men, why we are creating an exception for Vishwaroopam?
It’s because of such movies as above that men have been turned into “silent beasts of burden” when they are treated as FREE ATM MACHINES and UNPAID BODYGUARDS, in families and societies.Many a men who aren’t able to sustain the harassment and pressure succumb to it and commit suicide. This is directly evident from the suicide statistics published by the Ministry of Home Affairs as shown below.
We see that every year almost 80,000 men commit suicide compared to 40,000 women. So, while men aren’t double in terms of population when compared to women, but almost double the number of men do commit suicide. But because men are disposable entities, large scale suicides by men have never become a social concern let alone a social problem. And married men form the largest chunk of suicide victims as we see below,
In the year 2011, 62433 husbands committed suicides compared to 32582 wives. A cursory glance at the previous years, establishes the trend.
The Honorable Supreme Court of India had termed misuse of Section 498A (Dowry Law) as “Legal Terrorism” as it was a clear case of state sponsored extortion of innocent men and their families.
SIFF feels the way Kamal Hassan in being treated; this is yet another form of legal terrorism wherein the Govt. has failed to action against violent protests. If the protesters had so much of an issue against the movie they could have either filed a case against the CBFC for allowing the movie to be screened or they could have simply refrained from watching the movie i.e. boycotting the movie and announcing the same using media.
Men’s rights activists had demonstrated a very peaceful style of protest against the latest Aamir Khan starrer “Talaash” which they boycotted from watching and announced the same in media. The boycott call received widespread media attention, yet there was no violence and the protest was registered and message was conveyed.
SIFF also feels that the Indian Judiciary is equally at wrongs by admitting every controversial case when it claims that it is overburdened. If, the judiciary is really overburdened, there must be a strong mechanism to filter cases and not listen to every case. So, it clearly means that either judiciary is not overburdened or it likes it to be that way. Both the situations are extremely grim as it harms the ordinary litigants who have to spend years and decades in courts to get justice.
Today, Kamal Hassan is talking about leaving the country, tomorrow; many such men will leave the country as legal terrorism goes on unabated in this country where democracy and free speech are emblems of mockery.
SIF would like to conclude the press release with a final set of demands as follows:
1. Gender neutral laws to be made.2. The Govt. and law makers must ensure that legal terrorism is stopped in this country so that innocent people are not harassed.3. National Commission for Men is formed.4. Men Welfare Ministry is formed.5. Adequate steps are taken to safeguard people from false, frivolous and vexatious litigation with the following lines being enshrined in the laws,Notwithstanding anything contained in the laws, whosoever makes any false andfrivolous or vexatious complaint shall, on conviction, be punished withimprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years but which may extend to five years and with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees.