TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Men traveled in over crowded trains, ladies train ran empty. So railways decided to allow few general coaches in ladies train. But female travelers created ruckus, leading to withdrawal of decision. Male passengers who had to travel in overcrowded trains decided to demand justice & equality.

karamchand69

August 26, 2015
173 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1150825/jsp/calcutta/story_38957.jsp#.Vd2KkH2qDZ5
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Men traveled in over crowded trains, ladies train ran empty. So railways decided to allow few general coaches in ladies train. But female travelers created ruckus, leading to withdrawal of decision. Male passengers who had to travel in overcrowded trains decided to demand justice & equality.
Author

karamchand69

Upvotes 173
Comments 41
Date August 26, 2015 9:57 AM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3ig5zm/men_traveled_in_over_crowded_trains_ladies_train/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/men-traveled-in-over-crowded-trains-ladies-train.972549
https://theredarchive.com/post/972549
Top posts by karamchand69

Girl likes boy in dance > she develops relation with boyfriend > But girl gets married to another guy > Girl then elopes with boyfriend > Girls parent file missing complaint > Girl & boy brought back by police > Girl files rape case on boyfriend > Boyfriend goes to jail > Girl called victim

126 upvotes
July 14, 2015
/r/MensRights

A male government employee, facing allegations of sexual harassment at workplace, can be suspended even before filing of the charge-sheet though a male government employee cannot complain of sexual harassment by female colleague.

32 upvotes
July 18, 2015
/r/MensRights

Two Girls try to rape Men in Delhi, One arrested. But both women will escape punishment for attempting rape as India does not have any law to protect men raped by women.

27 upvotes
July 16, 2015
/r/MensRights

Such letters should be sent to all condom manufacturers asking them to help in tackling fake rape menace

27 upvotes
July 9, 2015
/r/MensRights

Rohtak Molestation Case: Will Media Pay Back The Accused Boys?

19 upvotes
August 21, 2015
/r/MensRights

Many times in online or offline discussion we see, feminist try to protect mothers who murder own child. They give excuse that the murderer mom maybe suffering from postpartum syndrome. Ask them, if they would similarly support male rapist assuming he suffered from paucis coitus syndrome?

19 upvotes
August 23, 2015
/r/MensRights

When relation turns sour and women file rape case on their lovers. At least one High court accepted fact and said - In a relationship, woman responsible for own chastity.

12 upvotes
August 20, 2015
/r/MensRights

Every ostrich head working with Untied Notions is an obstacle in safety for not just men but the entire world.

6 upvotes
August 5, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]RedditorJemi 25 points26 points27 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"We are requesting all passengers to not obstruct trains. Kindly help the railways to run the services smoothly. Damaging railway property will not help the situation...".

Bullshit it won't.

Also, way to go men of India! Glad to see people taking action!

[–]xNOM 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

NO kidding. This is amazing. Look how many men are there!!

[–]dangerousopinions 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They should have done this the day this bullshit started. It was always unjust.

[–]GenderNeutralLanguag 42 points43 points44 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

LOL

Angry phone calls from a dozen women > thousands of men standing on the tracks to blockade trains!!!!! Men have all the power.

[+]DavidByron2 -11 points-10 points-9 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not even that good. Read my comment here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3ig5zm/men_traveled_in_over_crowded_trains_ladies_train/cug9zr4

[–]TheWheatOne 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

First time I've seen someone link to their own comment in the same comments section outside of AMAs as the host.

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I used to just say see my other comment and people would complain where the heck is it blah blah blah I can't be bothered searching the entire thread.

[–]Cee-Jay 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There idea of "Men's Trains" and "Women's Trains" is the first problem, I imagine...

[–]Lethn 21 points22 points23 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Feminists getting a dose of reality, it just goes to show you that the morons who make the most noise and start threatening people aren't actually representative of the majority.

[–]tallwheel 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They have womens trains?! Not only carriages?! Good God...

[–]DavidByron2 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

A correction to the summary of the article in the title here. It's a subtle correction but important. (on review it seems this article doesn't actually contain this fact but I've read other articles about this)

It was women who demanded that men be allowed on all-female coaches, but for their benefit, not for the benefit of men

Specifically some women complained that when they were going about with a man that they had to either leave the guy behind and then hang about waiting for him at the other end, or else skip the privilege of the women only trains altogether and travel with him. They lobbied for a second class carriage on the women-only trains to carry their men, so they wouldn't be inconvenienced by the sex discrimination against men.

Almost all opposition to feminism has come from other groups of women in this way.

[–]yummyluckycharms 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

But this "opposition" is really only about when one of their privileges interferes with another privilege that they have - none of it actually comes from wanting to help men first and foremost.

[–]DavidByron2 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

For the most part and that's the part I am looking at here.

Sometimes the motivations are just mixed. Men and women live close with each other and love each other; what's good for men is good for women. So it can be hard to tell. For example the women of the second wives club campaigning against alimony and child support have a clear financial interest in those issues, but they also see the pain that the bias in family court does to their husband.

So whether for selfish reasons or not.....

I don't think this observation is out of step with other rights movements. Most 19th century abolitionists were White for example. People with no power lack the power to demand equal rights effectively, especially if you only count methods of protest that are seen as legitimate by the authorities. Black slaves for example certainly were involved in slave revolts a lot more than white people were, but they are not seen as part of the abolitionist movement. In the same way MGTOW would not ordinarily be counted as a protest against feminist policies.

[–]yummyluckycharms 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

While I have no doubt that there will be times where competing interests align to the benefit of men, the fact remains, that most often these are only temporary periods. Afterwords, its back to being enemies. Also, one must remember - no woman would ever allow her primary privileges to ever be sacrificed

For example, the second wives club do notice that men are victimized by the court, but if the couple breaks up, will she continue to advocate for family court reform? Probably not. After all, the family court exists to provide for the matriarchy, and one day that woman might still benefit from it

The danger is that men might forget that temporary allies are still only temporary. Briffaults law remains the guiding principle for interpersonal relationships for a reason.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Individuals are not so crass. We're talking about a phenomena averaged over a lot of people. I think many women who see the discrimination against men at first only because it effects them personally will continue to support it when it no longer does, and for that matter, the same is true of men. Also many people come to be MRAs or anti-feminists completely on theoretical grounds and without ever knowing anyone who suffered because of it.

But as an average observation men's rights fights up hill, women's rights have always just gone with the flow. Feminism is like playing the game on the easy setting with cheat codes. It's fundamentally reactionary, whereas men's rights is fundamentally radical.

[–]yummyluckycharms 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I think many women who see the discrimination against men at first only because it effects them personally will continue to support it when it no longer does, and for that matter, the same is true of men

Question:

Blended families and 2nd or 3rd marriages have been common for about 30 years now. Yet, we rarely see women speaking out against hate movements such as feminism

Shouldn't there have been a huge mass movement spawned by now if your thesis is correct? After all, there certainly have been enough daughters, wives, sisters, etc who have seen how the matriarchy spits and chews up men

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

There certainly are a lot of groups of women that fight feminism on certain issues but it seems like they rarely identify feminism itself as the problem. There's too much credit given to feminism for other issues so it's often still seen as good over all even if personally each individual sees the issue they are working on as feminism "has it wrong".

A lot of women if they are conservative minded anyway are happy to say feminism is wrong, but I think that's got more to do with the branding of the two corporate parties in the USA for example.

[–]yummyluckycharms 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

To paraphrase a famous quote.....

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good (wo)men do nothing."

While there are various reasons as to why women remain silent, the fact remains that the vast majority do. In many ways, not speaking out against a hate movement while benefiting from it, is the same as offering defacto support for it.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah it doesn't say much good about men that they let this happen, but it really doesn't say much good about women. However in their defence (humans that is), men's rights is a really hard and unnatural thing to support. And for whatever reason we tend to constantly forget that. Why do we forget that?

Fighting for women's rights is like pushing a boulder down hill. It's pathetically easy and frankly would have happened without you doing anything. Fighting for men's rights is pushing a boulder up hill. It's fucking hard.

Frankly the only reason it happens at all is because we have so many other rights movements that have been successful that it makes for an easy comparison. Should men have rights too? It's like a theoretical thing. Nobody likes men. Nobody wants the best for them. But you sort of have to concede at some point that I guess they ought to have rights the same as everyone.

It's like campaigning for rights for sex offenders or something. In fact society sees those two as pretty similar.

[–]yummyluckycharms 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

looks like this thread is getting brigaded

[–]ZimbaZumba 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Trouble started when a group of male passengers tried to board a Sealdah-bound Matribhumi local from Bongaon at Habra station around 7.45am.

Women on the train protested and pushed the men out. The male passengers then sat on the tracks demanding their share of coaches.

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Oh sorry. I just assumed it was another article about the women's protest the other day.

http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/protesters-clash-with-policemen-at-khardah-station-seven-held/

It does seem to be a response to those events.

The release said: “A section of lady passengers had approached the Railway administration for permitting male passengers in a few coaches of the train for the convenience of their accompanying male relatives to board the same train.”

This is what is put forward as the reason for the change in policy to allow some mixed carriages on the female-only train.

But women created such a scene that the decision had to be reversed in three days.

In response to that decision to allow mixed carriages the 150 women protested and blocked the trains on the 18th August, and the mixed carriages were removed. The pattern here is : authorities do whatever women say, whenever they say it.

And now three pro-male protests took pace in the week since then of which this article is about the third.

[–]RedditorJemi 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Oh sorry. I just assumed it was another article about the women's protest the other day. http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/protesters-clash-with-policemen-at-khardah-station-seven-held/[1] It does seem to be a response to those events.

Yes. It looks like there were three protests. The most recent was men demanding equal rights. The one before it was women demanding unequal rights. And the first one was women demanding a couple of special cars on the train for their dogs.

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Right except the first female protest didn't even require an actual protest to get attention.

The second one was by women and an actual physical sit down.

And the third protest by men was a series of physical sit down protests numbering I think at least 4 on different days, with masses more people and some of them leading to violence and clashes with the police, and they were all ignored.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]SilencingNarrative 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

because the country doesn't have a system to deal with men who sexually assault women.

How do you figure? At least its against the law for a man to rape a woman in india. Not so for the reverse, thanks to partisan women's groups there.

[–]Deefry 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Even if that were true, demonising and inconveniencing all men because of the actions of a minority with the same gender as them is absolutely an issue for the MHRM.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Daxidol 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then give men their own trains, as at least one of the protesters advocated for. Personally I'm against gender segregation, but it would be better then the current system.

Discrimination against an entire gender based on the actions of a few is sexism. Personally I'm against sexism.

[–]Tering 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In the UK Jeremy Corbyn wants female-only trainwagons as well. So I am guessing the UK also doesn't have a system to deal with men who sexually assault women.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/26/women-only-train-carriages-a-possibility-under-jeremy-corbyn

[–]Imnotmrabut 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This Indian stuff needs to be kept out of Mens Rights. It's making us all look bad. The reason why women have separate trains in India is because the country doesn't have a system to deal with men who sexually assault women. The police is corrupt and dysfunctional.

Please stop being a racist idiot and jackass!

The Dominant reason for the social acceptability of female only trains is to meet religious beliefs/practices where women expected to travel only with a male family member, else be in a female only environment. As Indian law has prohibited religious discrimination for some decades the legal fudge to meet one groups religious needs is to use All Women as the focus.

[–]goodfoobar 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

What India does not have is a good system of dealing with women that falsely accuse men of rape and has laws that promote false accusations. If a male and female in India have sex outside of marriage and the male does not propose then she can charge him with rape. It is known as a tool used by women to force men into marriage.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-53-rape-cases-filed-between-april-2013-and-july-2013-false-delhi-commission-of-women-2023334

[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]goodfoobar 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

women should be forced to share trains with men who can just sexually assault them with no repercussions

In India it is women that can sexually assault and accuse with often no repercussions. They were talking removing women only trains not women only carriages. It is a practice issue, if the service is not being fully used then reduce the service and put those resources where it is needed. I'm not from India.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What india needs is a human/workers rights movement. It shouldn't focus on gender. If you advance women only, india will end up with liberated women, downtrodden men, and a feminist movement that refuses to aknowledge men's issues.

[–]Imnotmrabut 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Your views have a shrillness that is only ever seen in rabid feminists who ignore reality, preferring dogma. Maybe It's a Norwegian Trait.

You are wilfully ignorant of the abuse of Indian legislation which causes men and women to be subjected to arbitrary detention and prosecution without evidence. Go and get up to speed on IPC 498a abuse and come back to lecture when you have something educated to say!

498a.org - This website is an attempt to create awareness among Indian nationals about the rampant misuse of 498a (Dowry Law misuse) by unscrupulous women to extort money and harass their husband's entire extended family. This website is dedicated to the victims of gender-biased laws of India (498a and domestic violence against women law) and provides comprehensive and free information about how to protect yourself and take preventive measures to save your family from this law which has been termed as 'legal terrorism' by Honorable Supreme Court of India.

[–]Finger-Guns 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Besides, wouldn't it be good to have separate carriages?"

Did you read the article? That's exactly what they want.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]DavidByron2 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ha. Wikipedia the feminist indoctrination center.

women in India can't even own land

That's a lie and your source doesn't even say that.

[–]DavidByron2 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Your own source says India discriminates in favour of women, not against:

The Constitution of India guarantees to all Indian women equality (Article 14), no discrimination by the State (Article 15(1)), equality of opportunity (Article 16), and equal pay for equal work (Article 39(d)). In addition, it allows special provisions to be made by the State in favour of women

Always some are more equal than others, right?

[–]dangerousopinions 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This may be true, but you're talking about inheritance discrimination which is not based in the law but decisions by the person giving the wealth. The law to which you refer is just a silly law all around. It gives the parent the right to disinherit the daughter but not the son entirely. It requires active discrimination on the part of the parent however, and while it should be changed, is pretty minor considering a fair law would allow the parent to do whatever they want including disinherit the daughter and not the son if they so chose.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter