In a surprising incident from Uttar Pradesh, two women made headlines after they left their respective husbands and chose to marry each other. What caught the attention of many was not just their decision to enter into a same-sex relationship, but the extreme reason behind it — their intense dislike and hatred for men. According to reports, both women had experienced bitter marriages and developed a deep resentment toward their spouses, which eventually evolved into a broader contempt for men in general. Finding solace in each other's company and shared views, they decided to leave behind their traditional relationships and begin a new life together.
While same-sex relationships are protected under indian constitutional rights following the decriminalization of Section 377, the motivation in this case seems less about love and more about a mutual disdain for men. Their union appears to be a symbolic rejection of what they claim to be patriarchal oppression and emotional trauma inflicted by their husbands. This story has sparked widespread debate on social media — not just around LGBTQ+ rights, but also about the underlying gender tensions and growing mistrust in modern marriages. Some view the women's actions as a radical form of rebellion, while others see it as a reflection of toxic generalizations based on personal bitterness.
Reacting to the news, some commentators online have offered tongue-in-cheek prayers that all man-hating women should just marry each other — suggesting that such unions might "save some husbands from being murdered." While sarcastic in tone, this sentiment reflects a growing fatigue among men who feel vilified in a landscape where gender-based accusations are increasingly weaponized. Though hyperbolic, such reactions highlight the need for balanced discourse — one that acknowledges genuine grievances without slipping into extremes of hate or prejudice, whether it's against men or women.
While same-sex relationships are protected under indian constitutional rights following the decriminalization of Section 377, the motivation in this case seems less about love and more about a mutual disdain for men. Their union appears to be a symbolic rejection of what they claim to be patriarchal oppression and emotional trauma inflicted by their husbands. This story has sparked widespread debate on social media — not just around LGBTQ+ rights, but also about the underlying gender tensions and growing mistrust in modern marriages. Some view the women's actions as a radical form of rebellion, while others see it as a reflection of toxic generalizations based on personal bitterness.
Reacting to the news, some commentators online have offered tongue-in-cheek prayers that all man-hating women should just marry each other — suggesting that such unions might "save some husbands from being murdered." While sarcastic in tone, this sentiment reflects a growing fatigue among men who feel vilified in a landscape where gender-based accusations are increasingly weaponized. Though hyperbolic, such reactions highlight the need for balanced discourse — one that acknowledges genuine grievances without slipping into extremes of hate or prejudice, whether it's against men or women.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel