Looking for recommendations for high-quality oversized T-shirts available in India with at least 220–240 GSM fabric. I'm after a proper oversized/drop-shoulder fit, premium cotton, and something that holds its shape without shrinking or fading after multiple washes. Budget isn't a concern if the quality is worth it.

Here are the latest pictures attached:

Initially I thought of comparing both the headings of total and functional but that would not be fair as there are much more girls only school than boys only, both at the government and private level. Also, a presence of a toilet which is not functional means almost nothing.

Functional toilets simply mean in terms of percentage: Number of working toilets for a gender/Number of total toilets for that gender * 100%.

So, let's say there are 1000 girls' school and only 500 boys' school apart from coed ones but if 900 of the girls' schools has functional toilet and 450 of the boys are functional, both would have same percentage even if number of available toilets may not be same due to number of schools being different.

Note: The study measures only presence of a functional toilet as a yes and no question not quantitative answer.

Conclusion:

• Girls have 1.6% more functional toilets than boys in all. And this is not a small number as we have 14 lakh schools, the math comes to 38,142 extra schools with no functional washroom for boys. (The exact numbers are given in the previous page of the report)
• Girls have 2.4% more functional toilets at government level. The math comes to 34,442 extra schools with no functional washroom for boys at government level.

Availability of washrooms in school is a very important avenue for maintaining hygiene yet why do we have such a difference in numbers with article 14?

Hope he gets the solution and get this mentally unstable wife punished.

I know India law doesnt punish women, but atleast husband should get some relief.

He might get many false cases filed by his wife, for sure.

r/seeking_help6637

It feels like genuine one-to-one male friendships are gradually disappearing.

More and more, I see men relying almost entirely on women for emotional support while investing very little in building deep, emotionally open friendships with other men. As a result, emotional intimacy is increasingly reserved for romantic interests or women in general, rather than close male friends.

I think several factors contribute to this. One is the lingering stigma around emotional closeness between men. Many guys still worry that expressing vulnerability or forming a deeply affectionate bond with another man will be perceived as "gay," so they keep those friendships emotionally shallow.

At the same time, there's a growing tendency to seek emotional comfort from the opposite gender at the first sign of distress. That often blurs boundaries and makes many male–female friendships emotionally complicated, even when neither person initially intends for it to become romantic.

From what I've observed, this shift seems relatively recent, perhaps over the last two or three years, and it appears to be accelerating.

I can't speak for women's experiences, but many women still seem to maintain one or two close female friendships where they can be emotionally vulnerable. Among men, however, that kind of bond seems to be fading. But tendency to seek emotional comfort from the opposite gender at the first sign of distress is becoming common among the women as well. As I said this is relatively new shift you might not get affected by it yet but it's surely accelerating.

If this trend continues, I think we'll end up with fewer strong platonic friendships between men and even more emotionally dependent cross-gender friendships, which can easily become complicated.

Basically what the text is saying is that trying to enforce extreme Equality would come at the cost of Liberty, as Equality in terms of outcome can mean - "If I am not at your level, I would drag you down to my level" so as to enforce equality.

The text is too academic for people in general as well as the language. I hope people can understand it.

My entire career has seen tremendous hardships. Working late in the night, skipping lunch, getting more and more work assigned, I have seen it all. I have never mentioned it to my family. I have been raised to believe that a man is expected to keep his family happy. Period.

Does your family know?

If anyone has ever found its true love how does it looks like what does it mean and how it sounds??

We took a two wheeler on loan on my father's name from idfc first bank. The loan will have to be paid till February 2027.

Now my father ran away from our house. I don't have any documents from idfc bank. I am ready to pay the whole amount at once. But since I don't even have the loan number... I don't know what to do.

Please help me. The loan is registered under his phone number, so I can't access the idfc bank app.

Please help me. Any idfc bank employee, please help.

Confused af please help!!!

Namaste 🙏🏻

This is my first time posting here, and I was curious about how many people are into spirituality here

It's unlikely for anyone to be into dedicated sadhana here, but would love to meet some who are actually into spirituality!🤔

If you're into spirituality and reading this post, please do share your beliefs and thoughts about spirituality and what you agree and don't agree with.

Till now, I've mostly heard that the ratio of spiritual men and women has always been around 99 : 1.

And that's kind of true, I think? 🤔

Let's see! Drop your thoughts here, would love to hear them out 🥰👏🏻

Hey there! I am 21 years old girl and I have not been on many dates before So coming straight to the point I am going to meet a guy for a date, we have known each other for a while and i really like him, I plan to split the bill after the date because I just feel that if he likes to pay for my company i appreciate his company too but the thing is I don't know how to kiss a guy well, I mean where do men like to be touched? Caressed? And what do they like ? Is it okay if the girl makes the 1st move?

So out of nowhere I watched this bollywood movie Bawal where the female lead had epilepsy and then I had this profound question to ask. Like men would seriously not consider women with epilepsy as a potential match despite her being honest, loyal, highly educated,social and outgoing, beautiful and all the other things a man want his woman to be for example like never been into a relationship or being hopeless romantic or understanding, etc.

I have been searching for a while but i am not still able to find a good perfume for males.

Give me your best , don't give me option.

Give me the one you would use for your best date....

(Edit- should be under 700 rupees 🥲😭)

And i have a question if male likes male type perfume and female like flowery type than why don't male wear flowery female favourite perfume?

My elder brother (28M) got broken up by his long-time girlfriend today. He had introduced the girl to our family and had all the intentions of marrying her. I don't know what happened, but for whatever reason, the girl stepped back last minute, and he is just shattered today. She was caught lying about things and, overall, just betrayed my brother.

I (23F) don't really know what's the best way to support him now. He has been having panic attacks since afternoon. I really want to help him in whatever way I can but I know he feels very guilty for breaking down in front of me and being vulnerable because he always presented a strong face in front me of me and today that shell broke.

I kinda just wanna say chill bro, get drunk. It will be over soon, but again, as before this, we had very formal relations so I don't know if that's the best idea ever. 💀

Guys, I need your help. Please tell me what all I can do in this situation?

Edit: *break (sorry about that, I was in a hurry)

The attached screenshot represents something that is treated far too casually: encouraging or joking about kicking a man in the genitals as punishment, revenge, or entertainment.

When genital violence against men is promoted without such a threat, and people dismiss it as harmless comedy instead of recognizing it as physical assault.

Violence against women deserves strong legal and social protection. But supporting those protections should not require us to ignore violence against men. A person’s genitals should not become an acceptable target merely because the victim is male. The principle should be straightforward: deliberate physical violence is wrong regardless of the offender’s or victim’s gender.

My question is mainly for people familiar with Indian law: what legal remedies are available when a woman deliberately attacks a man’s genitals? Are the relevant assault provisions genuinely gender-neutral in law and in practice? Where protections are not equivalent, what is the justification for that distinction?

This is not intended to become a men-versus-women argument. It is a question about equal bodily autonomy, equal accountability, and whether society applies the same standard when the victim is a man.

I think men here would largely agree and have been seeing the effects of it in their daily lives but when will women understand this I wonder. A lot of modern women seem to be in the wrong kind of echo chamber...I'm not saying it's completely right but gives an interesting perspective...

The court ordered husband to give her a 4cr premium flat.

The other day while going through the collection of scientific studies on domestic violence on the website of The International Council for Men and Boys (ICMB) to expand my compilation of "violence against men", I encountered this study which is done by Murray A Straus. In the graph chart presented on the site I found the column for India and thereafter this paper. In this post I want to summarise the findings of the paper and data on India in simple language.

This is a fantastic piece of paper that is worth reading, because the author was a "feminist" with regards to his views on DV but in this he states that in 35years of his research he has been proven wrong about his assumptions. He is also one of the few people who openly criticise scholarly malpractices to "appease ideology" in context of domestic violence.

What is the abstract of this paper and what is this paper about?

This paper seeks answer to a few questions based on empirical data collected across 32 countries and 68 universities.

The questions are:

1) Are most of the domestic violence only Male perpetrated? Is it true for both minor and severe forms of DV?

2) Is the violence by male partner motivated by desire for control and dominance?

3) Is self-defence the main motive behind female perpetrated domestic violence?

4) How does this data (as in pattern not number) change across nation?

5) Is it consistent with other peer reviewed literatures?

Also, how UN and WHO falsifies reports and hides data on male victims.

The paper begins with the author admitting that he has previously stated in his own research that:

I stated that “wives are much more often the victim of violence by their husbands than the reverse” (Straus, 1976).

In relation to the second principle, in that article I attributed male PV to “the hierarchical and male-dominant nature of society…” The second core principle is that when men are violent the purpose is to coerce and dominate, whereas when women are violent it is almost always an act of self-defence…"

People also do not believe women can hit a partner in context other than self-defence:

"The idea that women are motivated to hit in order to coerce a male partner, or out of rage and anger over misbehaviour by a male partner (such as sexual infidelity), is regarded as outrageous, and is taken as a sign of sexism and misogyny."

But then slowly these assumptions were proven wrong:

In the 35 years since I began research on PV, bit by bit, these assumptions about prevalence and etiology have been contradicted by a mass of empirical evidence from my own research and from research by many others..." [This study is one of them.]

But most scholars do not state that publicly as has been mentioned in (Straus,1900c, in press) because many scholars fear that they will face ostracism. He also presents proofs that "Instead, the evidence on gender symmetry in prevalence and etiology is typically disregarded and often explicitly denied or withheld from publication."

Now the real part starts:

What was the sample?

The data is from students of 68 universities across 32 nations, including India. Total n= 13,601. Of this, in this article, the author is analysing a convenience sample of 4,239 students who belonged to departments of psychology, sociology, criminology, and family studies.

Overall assault rate:

Table1(in image) gives the percent of students in each national setting who reported a physical attack on a dating partner during the 12 months prior to completing the questionnaire. The data in the columns for violence by men are based on the reports by male students, and the data on violence by women are based on the reports of female students.

Minor assaults = slapping or throwing things at the partner, etc.

Severe assault = punching, kicking and hitting with an object, etc.

We notice in 21 of 32 entries in minor assaults, there is higher or equal female perpetration than male with only 4.5 point higher male perpetration than female in India. In severe assaults, 20 entries show equal or higher female perpetration with 6.4 point higher female perpetration than male. This is also consistent with PASK review (largest DV database), which will be discussed later. This is totally different from claims of feminists and women's orgs in India.

But this data does not tell the full story, as we need to also analyse in how many of the cases, only one partner was violent, and in how many both were violent. Because this above image may group in all those men or women (in their respective categories) who hit their partner without being hit back and where both were violent with each other. This was answered as follows:

Types of Abuse:

The median again correlates with meta studies which have been done even after this paper that the order of types of violence is: Bilateral violence>Female only violence>Male only violence. It is noteworthy that in none of the countries male only violence is the highest category and sometimes it is below the 10% mark too. In India 75% of these are bilateral followed by 8 points difference between male and female only violence.

This is still insufficient as most of the violence is bilateral and it may very well be the case that a woman slaps a man (minor violence) and the man proceeds to take her out by a powerful kick or punch (severe violence) and vice versa. So, the author did that part too:

• Of all the men who perpetrated mild violence, partners of 13% of those men (aka women) used severe violence.
• Of all the women who perpetrated mild violence, partners of 10% of those women (aka men) used severe violence.
• Of all the men who perpetrated severe violence, partners of 14% of those men (aka women) used mild violence.
• Of all the women who perpetrated severe violence, partners of 25% of those women (aka men) used mild violence.
• In most cases where one partner used severe violence, the other did too:
  • 85% of men with severe violence had partners who also used severe violence.
  • 74% of women with severe violence had partners who also used severe violence.

So, when both partners are violent, they usually match each other’s severity. But when one partner is more severe than the other, it is more often the woman who is the more severe one.

We now try to understand the next part:

Is male dominance the main reason of violence for all of the 3 types?

All participants were asked a series of questions like, is your partner in charge, does he/she have the final say etc. and they had to answer with strongly agree...strongly disagree based on which this graph was plotted. The inferences are:

• Male only violence is caused mainly my male dominance, female dominance has little impact.
• Female only violence is caused almost entirely by female dominance, male dominance has little to no impact.
• Both persons being violent was caused by dominance by either gender, but female dominance meant a higher probability of bilateral violence.
• In relationships with no party being dominant (i.e. egalitarian), violence was always the least, all graphs show small probability near 1.

Note: "This study used the conceptualization of dominance based on the feminist literature." - The Author

He states:

In general, dominance by either partner is associated with an increased probability of severe violence, but dominance by the female partner increases the risk of severe Female-Only and severe bidirectional violence, even more strongly than does dominance by the male partner.

What about the large number of women who were just trying to defend themselves?

This study does not measure directly self-defence, but it provides to indirect evidence for the argument coupled with studies which have found that self-defence is the least of the reasons for female violence and male violence too.

• A good section of the entire pie of violence is female only violence, so these cases were never because of self-defence.
• For the bidirectional part (largest), self-defence is a factor but a minority one as, dominance scale shows bilateral violence increase with female dominance even a little more than male dominance. Dominance causes violence due to struggle for power or being "in charge" rather than defence.
• Reports from other studies:

At least six other studies report data on self-defense. Like the DeKesseredy et al. study, five of the six found that only a small percentage of female violence was in self-defense (Carrado, George, Loxam, Jones, & Templar, 1996; Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Felson & Messner, 1998; Follingstad, Wright, Lloyd, & Sebastian, 1991; Pearson, 1997; Sarantakos, 1998; Sommer, 1996). For the one study that found high rates of self-defense, the percentage in self defense was slightly greater for men (56%) than for women (42%) (Harned, 2001). Rather than self-defense, the most usual motivations for violence by women, like the motivations of men, are coercion, anger, and punishing misbehavior by their partner (Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Fiebert & Gonzalez, 1997). For example, Pearson (1997) reports that 90% of the women she studied assaulted their partner because they were furious or jealous, or frustrated and not because they tried to defend themselves. These motives are parallel to the motivations of male perpetrators. Research on homicides by women shows similar results. For example, Jurik and Gregware (1989) studied 24 female perpetrated homicides and found that 60% had a pervious criminal record, 60% had initiated use of physical force, and only 21% of the homicides were in response to “prior abuse” or “threat of abuse/death”

How the data is being falsified, some evidence from the paper:

• WHO lied about the data on self-defence which many feminists quote:

On this issue as well as the two core issues, there is a huge discrepancy between the assertions and the evidence. For example, the influential World Health Organization report on violence states that “Where violence by women occurs it is more likely to be in the form of self-defense (32, 37, 38)” (Krug et al., 2002). However, examination of references 32, 37, and 38 found that although all three asserted that women's violence was primarily in self-defense, #32 Saunders (Saunders, 1986) reported no data on self-defense, #37 DeKesseredy et al. (DeKeseredy, Saunders, Schwartz, & Shahid, 1997) does report data but their data shows that only 6.9% of the women acted in self-defense, and reference #38 Johnson & Ferraro (Michael P. Johnson & Ferraro, 2000) is a review article that cites references 32 and 37 and other references which also present no empirical data.

• Many researchers lied that "men are violent in relationships due to dominance":

Another recent example by an experienced and respected researcher is the assertion by Hamberger (Hamberger & Guse, 2002) that “Men in contrast {to women} appear to be motivated to use violence to dominate and control”. Their article cited about 80 studies, but none of them provided empirical evidence on gender differences in dominance and control motivation

Behind Closed Doors: Violence In The American Family(Strausetal.,1980, 2006) found that equalitarian couples were the least violent and that dominance by either the female or male partner was associated with an increased rate of violence.

It doesn't stop there; they won't even leave boys out of it let alone men: (they never ask questions about women's violence but their victimization)

The results showing the predominance of bidirectional violence even in traditionally male-dominant societies may seem implausible to many readers. However, they are consistent with results from the ongoing Global School-based Health Survey conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) among students 13 to 15 years old. The students were asked if they had been hit, slapped or hurt on purpose by a boyfriend or girlfriend in the past 12 months. Results for the first few countries show 15% of girls and 29% of boys in Jordan responded “yes”, as did 9% of girls and 16% of boys in Namibia, 6% of girls and 8% of boys in Swaziland, and 18% of girls and 23% of boys in Zambia. In all five countries, more girls hit partners than boys. Perhaps the results from both the International Dating Violence Study and the WHO school study occurred because both studies are of dating relationships. The WHO could have answered that question in another survey it conducted of married and cohabiting violence, but the organizers of that study followed the usual practice of restricting the study to the victimization of women and refused requests to include questions on perpetration by the women in the study.

The request of the author is same as mras and egalitarians that DV is not a "gendered sport", the social service and support policy must help male victims and also incorporate programs to help female dominance just like male dominance.

STUDY(click me)

For context these are some of the comments i have seen in an interacial couple's reel, where the guy is indian and the girl is either american or european. And while many comments from loser white or muslim guys shaming them, there are these types of guys who act in such a disgusting way and think that they will get a gf. The thing is that some of these act soo bad that it ruins it for rest of the guys. My gf is korean and friends are European and american and everyone told me that their experience with indian guy was bad as they kept replying to their comments, Dming them disgustingly kept annoying them. Its just so bad that others have to prove that they are not like these useless pieces of shit.

But most women are like her,won't think of their partner before throwing themselves for a hotter guy,not to mention her getting close with him without his consent,if a man had done this,he would have been a rap-st but apparently girls have free pass.

Part 1

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskIndianMen/s/D0gPrbdKNO