Now I fully agree that marital rape should definitely have the same repercussions as rape. However, the summary posted made me think initially that there was no protection for women against domestic violence in India at all.

After some googling, I found some more context

“It is submitted that the act colloquially referred to as ‘marital rape’ ought to be illegal and criminalised. The Central Government asserts that a woman’s consent is not obliterated by marriage, and its violation should result in penal consequences. However, the consequences of such violations within marriage differ from those outside it. Parliament has provided different remedies, including criminal law provisions, to protect consent within marriage. Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 498A IPC, and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, ensure serious penal consequences for such violations,”

Tl;dr marital rape is illegal and can be prosecuted. But somehow the court thinks that the act of marriage changes the situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCo3XwTRg9o&t=10

That’s exactly my point as well. I’ve got a pair of shoes that I got for $40 around 5 years ago and I still wear them everywhere.

I’m lucky in the sense that I’m bang on average. So most off-the-shelf stuff fits me good enough.

My point was about myself actually. I didn’t mean to generalize to any group as much.

Also, I do agree that super cheap t-shirts don’t really last very long. And my point wasn’t that I’d buy t-shirts only if they’re under $5. But rather that “I’m not spending more than $50 on a t-shirt”.

I’ll go with shoes and clothes (not the work kind)

That does not mean that I’m going out to buy the cheapest I can find. I just mean to say that I don’t buy expensive ones.

And my definition of expensive is $100+ I always make sure to not spend more than $50 on a shoe or any item of clothing (shirts, t-shirts, shorts, jeans)

Nvm, I just read the other comments you’ve posted and it really just feels like you’re trolling and trying to evoke a response out of people. So I’m gonna ignore anything further from you.

Okay I have no idea what your point is here. And it seems like you missed my point too which was that “people who bring in money help fund research, but their contribution of funding shouldn’t diminish the work that the actual scientists do with that money”.

While I do agree that funding is necessary for research, I don’t think the politician who may or may not have brought funding to the project should receive more appreciation than the actual scientists.

Presidents and politicians can claim responsibility for any achievement they want to. Doesn’t mean that they actually have a legitimate claim.

Nobody is mad at india for landing on the moon. Everybody likes that and congratulates the scientists for doing so. However, that doesn’t mean that the rest of the world forgives all the problems that india has.

To draw a comparison, Qatar did a great job of hosting the FIFA world cup 2022 (transportation, immigration logistics wise, excluding accommodation). That doesn’t mean that everyone forgets about the human rights abuses in those countries.

Why would anyone attribute credit to politicians for the work that scientists do ?