Acharya Prashant begins by addressing the notion of a woman's honor being 'looted' through rape, a common phrase in old films. He questions how honor can be looted and asserts that it is the rapist who loses honor, not the victim. He strongly disagrees with the value system that glorifies a woman taking her own life to save her virginity, stating that life is not so cheap. He gives a hypothetical example of a woman jumping into a river to escape attackers, calling it a wrong decision and emphasizing that life should be fought for. He makes a critical distinction, stating, "If someone defiles your body, feel bad. But if someone defiles your mind, feel even worse." He criticizes the media for sensationalizing rape cases, not out of sympathy or compassion, but as a form of entertainment for TRP. He explains that rapists are not always just seeking sex; a primary intention is often to humiliate the woman. If it were understood that rape does not humiliate the victim, the motivation for the crime would diminish. He reiterates his disagreement with the value system that praises a woman for dying to protect her virginity. Acharya Prashant agrees that all forms of sexual exploitation, including casual sexism, are heinous crimes that should not be taken lightly. He explains that the societal outrage is often greater for rape than for murder because of a flawed value system that considers a woman's sexuality and virginity more precious than her life. This objectification of the female body is also the root of honor killings, where a daughter is killed for making her own choices in relationships. He argues that this flawed value system makes women soft and easy targets for attack. He concludes by emphasizing that a woman's life is infinitely more valuable than her sexuality. A woman is a human being first, with the same potential for knowledge, liberation, and skill as any man. Her primary identity is her consciousness, not her body. Therefore, while an assault on the body is bad, an assault on one's freedom and mind is far worse. He states that if a choice must be made between an assault on the body and an assault on freedom, he would choose the assault on the body, as freedom is more important.