02 Oct 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou need evidence of violence and abuse in marriages in India and its prevalence? Surely you are kidding, robbie?
I provided evidence which is damn more than you have. Look I am interested in evidence, if you ever manage to produce any let me know, ill be happy to consider it and go away happy that I have learned something.
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by FMFI do not need evidence of domestic violence in India. I have not called for evidence of domestic violence in India. What I have actually called for is evidence that its a significant contributing factor in India's low divorce rate.
But why do you need evidence of the high rate of domestic violence in India? Haven't you already conceded that it is high?
Originally posted by FMFyou do not believe there is any correlation between domestic violence and low divorce rates in India? then your previous statement citing domestic violence and low divorce makes NO SENSE. Perhaps you can explain why you cited it?
But I have not claimed anything of the sort. Why do you require evidence from me of something I have not claimed?
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI have said exactly nothing about the divorce rate being low because of the prevalence of violence. You are attempting to attribute it to me. You are pretending that it is my point. But it is not. I quite simply did not say it. You have absolutely no reason to keep harping on about it as if I did.
you do not believe there is any correlation between domestic violence and low divorce rates in India?
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by FMFThen what is your point?
I have said exactly nothing about the divorce rate being low because of the prevalence of violence. You are attempting to attribute it to me. You are pretending that it is my point. But it is not. I quite simply did not say it. You have absolutely no reason to keep harping on about it as if I did.
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat I have said does make sense. Pretending that I said something different and then saying THAT doesn't mistake is just you clowning. Talk about this issue seriously, come on, robbie.
then your previous statement citing domestic violence and low divorce makes NO SENSE.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAs I wrote before, I am saying that low divorce rates ~ this statistical fact that you lionize ~ disguise the horror of marriage in India, except that they don't disguise it - because the phenomenon is well known - it is just ideologues like you who seek to disguise or distract from the horror: why else would you praise these low divorce rates? Why else would you praise 'Indian marriage' as an examplar?
Then what is your point?
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by FMFIt makes no sense unless you are attempting to draw some kind of significance between low divorce rates and domestic violence.
What I have said does make sense. Pretending that I said something different and then saying THAT doesn't mistake is just you clowning. Talk about this issue seriously, come on, robbie.
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou are attempting to claim that I said something I didn't. I am talking about domestic violence. And I am talking about the divorce rate. Please address what I am saying.
It makes no sense unless you are attempting to draw some kind of significance between low divorce rates and domestic violence.
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by FMFLow divorce rates disguise the horror of marriage in India? I have provided reasons why i think that the divorce rate is low, you may make reference to those, none of which seek to disguise anything.
As I write before, I am saying that low divorce rates ~ this statistical fact that you lionize ~ disguise the horror of marriage in India, except that they don't disguise it - because the phenomenon is well known - it is just ideologues like you who seek to disguise or distract from the horror: why else would you praise these low divorce rates? Why else would you praise 'Indian marriage' as an examplar?
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by FMFOn the contrary you seem to think that low divorce is because of the prevalence of violence. That is the impression that you are giving.
You are attempting to claim that I said something I didn't. I am talking about domestic violence. And I am talking about the divorce rate. Please address what I am saying.
02 Oct 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThen go back and read again. Pretending-to-miss-the-point is one of your least funny routines, robbie.
On the contrary you seem to think that low divorce is because of the prevalence of violence. That is the impression that you are giving.