he said he condemn. he is also telling about one of the main reason behind such rapes. that is giving youngsters jobs and that way civilising them. whats wrong in what he said.
its a shame mediocre people dont even understand such advices.
What he said is fair - there are links to unemployment and rape. What pisses me off is the way he phrased it. It comes across as condescending and a justification (yes, even though he said it isn’t a justification. Just because he said that it doesn’t mean that).
His point should have been straightforward, but he looped through various things:
1) sex is a natural urge to men
2) In India, people can really only have sex after marriage.
3) But no one wants to marry unemployed guys, so we are left with a bunch of horny, sex craving freaks.
4) Population went up, jobs didn’t. Rapes are obviously going to increase.
5) We have to create more jobs.
Unemployment is perhaps one, among many factors, why rape is prevalent in India AND the world. He failed to explain WHY unemployment causes men to rape women. He just made an assumption (which some research has shown as possible).
He can deny it being a justification, he can condemn it for all he wants, but he handled a sensitive topic in an idiotic way.