Multiple impressions on: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/20/opinion/sunday/the-good-men-of-india.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB
1. Rhetorically, too much information, too many metaphors packed into one essay. The allusion to GoT is too gratuitous, unless the image evoked is carried through.
2. The concept of feral men and the disruption in social fabric is interesting and would have loved to hear more about it. But, that too was quickly abandoned.
3. On an aside, the prose could have used some more editing: " fighting poverty, exhausted, denied access to regular ...". Leave out exhausted for better rhythm, and also better coherence.
4. The introduction of common indian male comes too late in the article. Looks like an after thought. How about introducing early and describing it.
5. Despite the casual inclusion of lower socio-economic classes, this male species is specifically drawn from urban middle classes. The author does not seem to realize it. All the quoted examples are from there.
6. Most of the female empowerment examples given are those that took over from their husband/father. The peculiar curse of Indian polity.
7. The "Madonna whore complex" -- or a variant of it at least -- describes men at ease respecting their mother and yet harass women. It is common enough most places and in particular in India, with its seemingly contradictory roles for women --[Cf: Women should be worshipped; Women do not deserve independence -- both from Manu's laws.]
Interested to hear what my G+ friends think of this oped from Lavnaya Sankaran.