Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

We cannot say anything about authoritatively about Ramayana, because it’s an epic. We cannot say anything about the existence of pubs in Rama Rajya or the restrictions imposed on women against visiting Pubs. Similarly, we cannot say anything authoritatively that in Ravana rajya women were allowed to visit Pubs and allowed extramarital relations, because nothing was mentioned about them and other social life in Ramayana, at least in the version of Ramayana available in this state.
In Bhagavata Purana, Mahabali was described as a benevolent Asura. There are no merry making sessions in Mahabali’s Rajya.
But we can say authoritatively that Ravana kidnapped Sita because, that’s the central theme of all innumerable Ramayanas available in this country.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

We cannot say anything about authoritatively about Ramayana, because it’s an epic. We cannot say anything about the existence of pubs in Rama Rajya or the restrictions imposed on women against visiting Pubs. Similarly, we cannot say anything authoritatively that in Ravana rajya women were allowed to visit Pubs and allowed extramarital relations, because nothing was mentioned about them and other social life in Ramayana, at least in the version of Ramayana available in this state.
In Bhagavata Purana, Mahabali was described as a benevolent Asura. There are no merry making sessions in Mahabali’s Rajya.
But we can say authoritatively that Ravana kidnapped Sita because, that’s the central theme of all innumerable Ramayanas available in this country.

If we bring Ramayana in this discussion as solution then we should begin from the beginning- Surpankha went out to have fun and the whole episode took place. Ravana wanted to die for Moksha with blessings of Rama therefore he kidnapped Sita. If he wanted to seduce her, he could have done it easily but it was not his aim.
Here the emphasis should be on Suparnkha and not on Ravana because in this case if merrymaking is the theme it was Suparnkha who started the party.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

We cannot say anything about authoritatively about Ramayana, because it’s an epic. We cannot say anything about the existence of pubs in Rama Rajya or the restrictions imposed on women against visiting Pubs. Similarly, we cannot say anything authoritatively that in Ravana rajya women were allowed to visit Pubs and allowed extramarital relations, because nothing was mentioned about them and other social life in Ramayana, at least in the version of Ramayana available in this state.
In Bhagavata Purana, Mahabali was described as a benevolent Asura. There are no merry making sessions in Mahabali’s Rajya.
But we can say authoritatively that Ravana kidnapped Sita because, that’s the central theme of all innumerable Ramayanas available in this country.

If we bring Ramayana in this discussion as solution then we should begin from the beginning- Surpankha went out to have fun and the whole episode took place. Ravana wanted to die for Moksha with blessings of Rama therefore he kidnapped Sita. If he wanted to seduce her, he could have done it easily but it was not his aim.
Here the emphasis should be on Suparnkha and not on Ravana because in this case if merrymaking is the theme it was Suparnkha who started the party.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

We cannot say anything about authoritatively about Ramayana, because it’s an epic. We cannot say anything about the existence of pubs in Rama Rajya or the restrictions imposed on women against visiting Pubs. Similarly, we cannot say anything authoritatively that in Ravana rajya women were allowed to visit Pubs and allowed extramarital relations, because nothing was mentioned about them and other social life in Ramayana, at least in the version of Ramayana available in this state.
In Bhagavata Purana, Mahabali was described as a benevolent Asura. There are no merry making sessions in Mahabali’s Rajya.
But we can say authoritatively that Ravana kidnapped Sita because, that’s the central theme of all innumerable Ramayanas available in this country.

If we bring Ramayana in this discussion as solution then we should begin from the beginning- Surpankha went out to have fun and the whole episode took place. Ravana wanted to die for Moksha with blessings of Rama therefore he kidnapped Sita. If he wanted to seduce her, he could have done it easily but it was not his aim.
Here the emphasis should be on Suparnkha and not on Ravana because in this case if merrymaking is the theme it was Suparnkha who started the party.

Merry making is not the theme. We were discussing about the living conditions in Rama rajya and the Ravana rajya in which merrymaking is just one of the points.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

We cannot say anything about authoritatively about Ramayana, because it’s an epic. We cannot say anything about the existence of pubs in Rama Rajya or the restrictions imposed on women against visiting Pubs. Similarly, we cannot say anything authoritatively that in Ravana rajya women were allowed to visit Pubs and allowed extramarital relations, because nothing was mentioned about them and other social life in Ramayana, at least in the version of Ramayana available in this state.
In Bhagavata Purana, Mahabali was described as a benevolent Asura. There are no merry making sessions in Mahabali’s Rajya.
But we can say authoritatively that Ravana kidnapped Sita because, that’s the central theme of all innumerable Ramayanas available in this country.

If we bring Ramayana in this discussion as solution then we should begin from the beginning- Surpankha went out to have fun and the whole episode took place. Ravana wanted to die for Moksha with blessings of Rama therefore he kidnapped Sita. If he wanted to seduce her, he could have done it easily but it was not his aim.
Here the emphasis should be on Suparnkha and not on Ravana because in this case if merrymaking is the theme it was Suparnkha who started the party.

Merry making is not the theme. We were discussing about the living conditions in Rama rajya and the Ravana rajya in which merrymaking is just one of the points.

Actually the theme was rape of two women after they were returning from Pub. There was remark that those women thought that this is Ram Rajya and so they would not be raped. Then the issue emerged that no woman would go to pub in Ram Rajya. Then this turned to Ravana Raj where such pleasure could be derived. Actually Ram Rajya is not the main issue. The issue is whether women can take the liberty of being in pub till mid night and thereafter get in some car and expect they would not be raped. In fact, women should consider the ground reality and not invite rape as they did. But they have the liberty to invite rape for which they should thank themselves.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

I am not in favour of this. In this way women are giving chance to rape. All men are not monk.

All men are not monks and all women are also not monks.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

We cannot say anything about authoritatively about Ramayana, because it’s an epic. We cannot say anything about the existence of pubs in Rama Rajya or the restrictions imposed on women against visiting Pubs. Similarly, we cannot say anything authoritatively that in Ravana rajya women were allowed to visit Pubs and allowed extramarital relations, because nothing was mentioned about them and other social life in Ramayana, at least in the version of Ramayana available in this state.
In Bhagavata Purana, Mahabali was described as a benevolent Asura. There are no merry making sessions in Mahabali’s Rajya.
But we can say authoritatively that Ravana kidnapped Sita because, that’s the central theme of all innumerable Ramayanas available in this country.

If we bring Ramayana in this discussion as solution then we should begin from the beginning- Surpankha went out to have fun and the whole episode took place. Ravana wanted to die for Moksha with blessings of Rama therefore he kidnapped Sita. If he wanted to seduce her, he could have done it easily but it was not his aim.
Here the emphasis should be on Suparnkha and not on Ravana because in this case if merrymaking is the theme it was Suparnkha who started the party.

Merry making is not the theme. We were discussing about the living conditions in Rama rajya and the Ravana rajya in which merrymaking is just one of the points.

Actually the theme was rape of two women after they were returning from Pub. There was remark that those women thought that this is Ram Rajya and so they would not be raped. Then the issue emerged that no woman would go to pub in Ram Rajya. Then this turned to Ravana Raj where such pleasure could be derived. Actually Ram Rajya is not the main issue. The issue is whether women can take the liberty of being in pub till mid night and thereafter get in some car and expect they would not be raped. In fact, women should consider the ground reality and not invite rape as they did. But they have the liberty to invite rape for which they should thank themselves.

Two women returning from a pub in Gurgaon at midnight were raped in moving car. It is really disgusting but it is surprising how the women returning from pub could assume that they were safe even at midnight. They identified one offender as one who danced in the pub.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gurgaon/Gurgaon-Two-women-raped-for-over-two-hours-in-moving-cab/Article1-1083404.aspx

Certainly they invited the trouble Perhaps they thought that they are living in Ram Rajya.

In Ram rajya women would not go to pubs. This could be in Ravana's Lanka. :unsure: :unsure:

Ravana's Lanka, an apt comparison.

I don't think even Ravana would have allowed this kind of behavior in his kingdom. He was a damon but not a rapist.

Yes, Ravana was not a rapist, but a kidnapper.

I had just remarked that women would not be allowed to go to pubs in Ram Rajya. They could do so in Ravana's Lanka. Rape is forced sex and this would be permitted neither in Rama rajya nor Ravan rajya. In Ram rajya, there could be no extramarital sex but this would be allowed in Ravan Rajya. Eat, drink and make merry- this was the norm in Rakshas Raj. Acharya
chatur Sen Shastri has well explained in 'Vayam Rakshama' that the Rakshas believed in merry making. .However, Ramayana is an epic and we cannot say anything authoritatively.

We cannot say anything about authoritatively about Ramayana, because it’s an epic. We cannot say anything about the existence of pubs in Rama Rajya or the restrictions imposed on women against visiting Pubs. Similarly, we cannot say anything authoritatively that in Ravana rajya women were allowed to visit Pubs and allowed extramarital relations, because nothing was mentioned about them and other social life in Ramayana, at least in the version of Ramayana available in this state.
In Bhagavata Purana, Mahabali was described as a benevolent Asura. There are no merry making sessions in Mahabali’s Rajya.
But we can say authoritatively that Ravana kidnapped Sita because, that’s the central theme of all innumerable Ramayanas available in this country.

If we bring Ramayana in this discussion as solution then we should begin from the beginning- Surpankha went out to have fun and the whole episode took place. Ravana wanted to die for Moksha with blessings of Rama therefore he kidnapped Sita. If he wanted to seduce her, he could have done it easily but it was not his aim.
Here the emphasis should be on Suparnkha and not on Ravana because in this case if merrymaking is the theme it was Suparnkha who started the party.

Merry making is not the theme. We were discussing about the living conditions in Rama rajya and the Ravana rajya in which merrymaking is just one of the points.

Actually the theme was rape of two women after they were returning from Pub. There was remark that those women thought that this is Ram Rajya and so they would not be raped. Then the issue emerged that no woman would go to pub in Ram Rajya. Then this turned to Ravana Raj where such pleasure could be derived. Actually Ram Rajya is not the main issue. The issue is whether women can take the liberty of being in pub till mid night and thereafter get in some car and expect they would not be raped. In fact, women should consider the ground reality and not invite rape as they did. But they have the liberty to invite rape for which they should thank themselves.

@Gulshanji

I can understand what prompted you to float this thread. The point which is compelling me to reply to your question involves both the legality as well as pragmatism behind a woman's decision to return late from a pub and risking herself to all kinds of undesirable consequences. If one goes through the provisions of our Constitution what is wrong if a woman does so on the test of equality ? We may question her wisdom of behaving in that particular fashion taking into account Indian realities but if anyone has failed it is that agency which is entrusted with the duty of enforcing each and every intention and will of the Indian Constitution. I fail to see any inappropriateness in her conduct if the same is enjoyed by any male!!!!