Paalaguttapalle (Dalitwada) - A Village: Feminism, and Sarees, and Karva Chauth

Saturday 3 February 2018

Feminism, and Sarees, and Karva Chauth

https://www.facebook.com/aparna.krishnan.902/posts/1384677498258217

Do the feminists believe that women who wear kumkum, and follow traditional festivals, and say prayers before idols, and like glass bangles - that is, the large majority of the women in this land - are less intelligent than them, and need to be liberated by them.

17 comments

Comments

Kishore Krishnamoorthy The won't be in a state where they can think logically. They will simply say we are wrong.
When you're in Rome, do what the Romans do, is the the sort of ideology that Indians adopt. We accept, learn and adapt depending on situations.
But, in stark contrast, the American ideology is, When you're in Rome, make the Romans do things the American way by telling them that, the American way of doing things is the right way of doing things. Or rather, making the Romans believe that they have been doing things wrongly all along.
They achieve this by first breaking the faith system of the respective target group which they are preying on acquiring.
They take up several different tools for their several objectives.
One such tool they have taken up to break the Indian Family System is a tool named Feminism. Their objective being, break the Indian Family system and make it as useless as that of their family system.

3

Dharshana Karthikeyan You may have to also add wearing saree akka. That is also being commented

3

Raghurama Rao Suswaram Feminists may be mistaken. But, I want to know the answer to this question: If family compulsion is not there, if there is no one asking, demanding, exerting pressure or using emotional blackmail, how many women will follow all the traditional stuff willingly, out of choice? I am referring to the same things like wearing sarees, bangles, following rituals, etc.

Hide 24 Replies

Chidambaran Subramanian Many

Dharshana Karthikeyan I am

2

Aparna Krishnan Dharshana Karthikeyan + 1 (+ half the population of my village !)

3

Dharshana Karthikeyan

😊 yep, its like when you prefer and passionate about something, You don't need anybody to force to do that.I have heard many people surprisingly asking me, " oh you like to wear saree at home? How uncomfortable it will be", "Kum Kum, oh that's old fashioned" etc etc. Specially from many women aged more than 45, who prefer leggings and tops. I am tired of answering these questions

1

Aparna Krishnan dont bother - they are the deracinated minority. the majority of this land are well into traditional mores and ways. yes, they are the poorer maybe, but thats hardly an issue.

1

Raghurama Rao Suswaram That is the next question to ponder about: How will the economic status influence our choice for the tradition, if there is no compulsion of any kind?

Dharshana Karthikeyan Oh, I am not clear with your question. You mean being traditional is quite expensive?

Raghurama Rao Suswaram No. If economic status of all who follow tradition is improved, will their choice for the traditional change?

Dharshana Karthikeyan Not at all, may be with someone who are forced. But not with people who love to follow. Personally speaking, I wouldn't change based on my economical status at any cost. Because I love myself being like this

1

Pratibha Agarwal Really liked this discussion. When i was growing up my cousins not allowed me to wear bindi with pants with a saying that looks ugly. When got married my mother in law started forcing al this over me and opposed becauseacc to me low income people do all this. But today i like to wear bindi, kajal and equally in love to wear saree and salwar kameez, bangles, sometimes payal.
Mona Yadav....

3

Dharshana Karthikeyan I preferred to be traditional even after I started working and had my own income and at all times regardless of me being pretty or ugly. My life is of my choice and not how the society imposes on me as long as I don't commit a crime.But thank god that I got a chance to live in a country where I have the peace of being myself than the country I was brought up where people used to stare at you like they have seen an alien when you are in a traditional attire

😂. I hope this clears Raghurama Rao Suswaram

1

Dharshana Karthikeyan There will be many women

Aparna Krishnan India's fine ma. I have worn only simple cotton sarees since I was in my twenties (after moving to my village), glass bangles, and kumkum. No one really botherd ever, village or city. I only react sometimes to an upper class circle which is more westernized whom I see around. But they are a minority, and hopefully an endangered minority ! But yes, there is a subtle attack on the Indian identity and our sense of self worth, and that we need to address. That battle has to be fought on this soil ma. And on our terms, otherwise the Hindutva carries it to another crazy plane.

1

Dharshana Karthikeyan I was not brought up in India Aunty, but that was a different problem though. But I 200% agree with what you say, feminism should be questioned and clarified

1

Aparna Krishnan There are many issues, right and wrong, which need to be faced. But we need to do that from our perspective, and not some borrowed western concepts. Thats all.

1

Raghurama Rao Suswaram In the same western world, there are scholars who are studying these issues with zero bias. The accepted assumption among the scholars of social psychology is that social science research should be beyond the biases of gender, race, region, morality, etc. and they make a deliberate attempt to overcome such biases. Branding all western approaches as one stereotype is incorrect and shows ignorance of the present state of scholarship.

1

Raghurama Rao Suswaram The usual way of thinking: Men versus Women. Only two players are introduced. There is a third and major player: the culture. Instead of thinking whether men exploit women (which undoubtedly they do, and often with great violence) or whether women expolit men (this also happens, not usually at physical level), the correct way of looking at is that of a social scientist: if and how cultures exploit both men and women, to be successfull against other cultures, and expolit the gender differences too, as the cultures have been competing against one another in the long time of human evolution. In other words, focusing on patriarchy is the wrong approach to understand the issue deep enough. Instead we should focus on the physical and psychological aspects of gender differences and what consequences resulted because of them in the long periods or cultural evolution. The new realization among social scientists is that culture is the humankind's biological strategy to further evolutionary goals.

If we take only the concept of patriarchy, the standard argument is that men are at the top of all social institutions and pervade them, comapred to women. What this focus misses is that men are also at the bottom of all social institutions and greatly outnumber women there too. Those who go to and die in battles, who fill up prisons, who do dirty and dangerous jobs & who end up losing limbs or life, who end up homeless and who end up in asylums are largely men. Cultures treat men as expendable. That is why we negotiare for women and children first in hostage crises. How many "Veer-Zhara" kind of stories did we know, with a female arrested in an enemy land? Cultures work using the concept of "trade-offs", not patriarchy or matriarchy.

Another important question is that of equality. The typical gender wars are over who is superior: men or women?. The point of view of the social scientist is the third alternative: different but equal. Cultures exploit men and women differently and cultures exploit gender differences too (using trade-offs) in their evolution. Those who understand evolution will know that if the (culutural) differences are unimportant, they would have disappeared over long times. Differences persist because they have been expolited by cultures in their evolution. When men and women prefer and do different things in cultures, it is because they are "motivated" differently, and motivation in turn is based on biological inclinations and is often the cultural modifications of "play of harmones". From this point of view, as an example out of many, if not many women are mathematicians, it is not because they can't but because they don't want, as the motivations are essentialy different. "Different but equal" for cultures is the right way of looking at it.

Sex drives are enromously different and this has very important cultural consequences. Look at the Animal Planet or National Geographic videos of animals for quite some time and you quickly get used to recognizing "alpha males dominating the whole groups", exploiting their power in the competetion to maximize their genes in the game of evolution. Since humans evolved from animals, this tendency is obviously there but in culturally modified forms. Every body knows the history of Genghis Khan whose DNA is substantially detected in large populations of a major geographic region in studies. No female equivalent of Gengis Khan is known in history. One should ask why. It took a long time for cultures to evolve into monogamic relationships based on laws but underlying struggles of males, whose biological tendencies are eternally at war with social compulsions, and their psychological consequences are not well-understood. The stabilities of societies (in avoiding children out of marriages) becomes paramount to cultures rather than the concerns of males to maximize their genes and concerns of the females to protect their young. This is one strong reason for the evolution of monogamy, among others. If one asks the question "what percentage of our ancestors are males?", the surprising answer, found based on DNA studies, is not 50%. Women outnumber men in our ancestors. That is because, in long periods of pre-history and history, most of the men did not have chance to reproduce. Virtually every women could reproduce, but mostly alpha-males and some other lucky ones could reproduce. Most other men were genetical dead-ends. The only chance for them to reproduce was to go on an adventure, hope to get rich, come back and marry to reproduce. This explains how cultures developed and since men created most of these cultures, men dominated. Look at any societal structure: you find a pyramid. One president, two vice-presidents, a handful of executives and a large number of powerless workers at the bottom. This neatly reflects the tendency of the alpha-male. Even after forming monogamic societies, we have not gotten rid of these pyramid stuructures in socities. Our minds still operate in old ways. The stiriving for greatness, domination and riches are all parts of the same game, though we don't realize it well enough. Male behaviour of insulting one another in offices too is explainable with this, as well as why men go to extremes in so many social aspects. This basic difference in motivation is bound to have tremendous consequences for the cultures. I just wanted to illustrate the basic argument. Read the rest of the enormous set of consequences, detailed analyses and illuminations with large insights in the book "Is there anything good about men?" by the leading social psychologist of our times, Roy F. Baumeister. If you want to read the book, send a message to me.

For once, shall we focus on the science instead of opinions?

Dharshana Karthikeyan Quite a large comment

😂, can you simplify it?

Raghurama Rao Suswaram That is an abstract of a thesis written in the form of a book. If I simplify it further, then I may be doing injustice to its contents. In fact, I suggest that you read the book to get the concepts right, as the author presents much more rigorously . If you want in a much simpler way, here is it: the gender differences are exploited by cultures in their evolution. So, the correct way of understanding is to look at how cultures exploit both men and women. That will be closer truth than looking from the point of view of patriarchy.

Dharshana Karthikeyan Was that an abstract of a thesis? Oh I always find it hard to read such things online. I get sick. Let me see whether I can get this book in the library or can buy online,

Dharshana Karthikeyan By the way coming to the point, when it comes to rape cases which needs the immediate attention of 'feminism' I think it is purely an act of patriarchy and culture did not have a pet on it. Is this a wrong perspective? Please correct me if it is

Raghurama Rao Suswaram Well! It was my paraphrasing of the book, not the author's abstract. My intention was to present the basic argument so that once you read the essence, you get motivated to read the book. It is a thesis in its most general sense, not a doctoral thesis. The author is a well-known social psychologist, now nearing his 7th decade of life!

Dharshana Karthikeyan Raghurama Rao Suswaram oh ok, then I will definitely read and come back. Thanks for the share

Write a reply...

Devika Jayakumari Dressing in a traditional way and observing karva chauth are not comparable. The latter is observed quite ostentatiously by urban elite women also, and is no doubt an affirmation of patriarchal values. Most patriarchal practices in India happen across urban rural divides, eg sex selective abortion. Aparna, with due respect to your convictions, let me see that I find this replay of stereotypes about feminism in India deeply offensive and damaging to all. Sneering and criticism are not the same, sure, but karva chauth surely is as brahminical as any other practice. And the ills of Indian villages are not just because of modernity but also brahminical culture, which is equally a bolster to capitalism there besides other things.

1

Hide 22 Replies

Aparna Krishnan 1. If it offends, best to unfollow me ma.2. I refer to those 'feminists' who feel superior in their choices 3. i see nothing wrong in a woman praying for her husbands well being. And vice versa.

2

Devika Jayakumari Vice versa hardly happens in this country, especially among those who live within the terms of brahminism. There is no festival in which a husband prays for his wife for her health and happiness in any dominant religion. Feminism in India is not singular anymore and it is a miniscule minority that identifies with uppity capitalist modernism (though we also don't subscribe to equally sneering-prone culturalism) ,so using the singular is offensive. In fact, usually a tactic of the right wing of all sorts.

1

Aparna Krishnan i believe in the family.

1

Aparna Krishnan i request that your questions be clearly stated without terminologies. i do not quite follow terminologies, and also i see clearly that that they often are a cover up for lack of basic clarity.

2

Devika Jayakumari In fact your 'simplicity' is what is covering up a very offensive stereotyping. There is no terminology to be explained here. From your earlier writing it is evident that you are well versed in English and words like capitalism, modernity and so on are widely used in public discourse as well as on fb.

Aparna Krishnan i have said i do not wish to hide behind terms. if you have specific questions i would be glad to respond. otherwise i suggest we dont waste each other's time.

Devika Jayakumari The idea that feminists are family breakers is a slur. Demanding democracy and fairness in the family is to ask for it to be recast , not broken. Just like demanding equality and democracy in India is not anti national. As for critique of patriarchy, it is not foreign to India, but goes as far back as the songs of the first Buddhist nuns.

1

Devika Jayakumari Well. I have no desire to waste your time but neither will I be passive when a slur is propagated however unintentionally or obliquely.

1

Aparna Krishnan " The idea that feminists are family breakers is a slur. " This was not said or implied. I have no time to respond to imagined slurs. I have lived in an SC village for 20 years to date, and have realtime issues to take on. Thank you, and i request you to continue further on your wall if you wish. I have other works.

Dharshana Karthikeyan I do not what Karva Chauth is all about, but if is something that is believed to be followed for the well being of my Husband, wow, I would like to learn and practise that

Aparna Krishnan Dharshana Karthikeyan young lady, i admire your courage to stand your ground !

Devika Jayakumari Yeah, i really appreciate that. But that gives you no moral high ground to denigrate the public work of others- feminists, in this case. Many of us have lived challenging lives questioning the elite mainstream and refusing privilege and incurring the wrath of authorities all the time. That is a choice one makes to live as a moral being and not to wield it as a stick to beat feminists or others who you don't care enough about to find out more about. That you ask this loaded question about feminists as if they were just one position that can be labeled so is bad enough

1

Raghurama Rao Suswaram Devika Jayakumari! If you would like to know the light thrown on gender differences by latest scholarship in psychology, I suggest the book "What are men good for?" by Roy F. Baumeister.

Aparna Krishnan Devika Jayakumari i an also tired of this flaunting of 'refusing privilege and incurring the wrath of authorities all the time.', and this great badge of suffering and sacrifice that is worn by these saviours. Chill, ma. Do what you want, and enjoy it. You want to see real suffering - come to my village. You cannot be having access to FB (like me) and moaning about all you have undergone. Give me a break !

Aparna Krishnan Anyway my thread ends here. If you wish to help sell bags the women are making in at attempt to counter drought , let us work together. Otherwise I have no more time for this. Thank you.

Devika Jayakumari As for young or old or any women who wish to practice karva chauth, that is their choice. Feminists of this generation may not want to prejudge individual motives of a woman worshipping her husband, and are even willing to point out that a woman aborting a female foetus is only exercising a choice forced on her by patriarchy.

1

Devika Jayakumari Oh that's just the kind of work that I help to do with a number of friends who are working with rural groups, beside being their loyal customer since years now. Please don't presume that the rest of us are somehow unconcerned and cocooned in comfort! A...See more

1

Devika Jayakumari BTW you played the Savior card first, not me, OK? I merely pointed it out to you and you attribute it to me!

Kishore Krishnamoorthy Capitalistic Modernist Feminist ideologies will first enslave you, use you, then, destroy you. Family will use you, provide for you, take care of you and ensure mutual and sustainable growth.

Devika Jayakumari Any evidence for your statement, Mr moorthy? Except your firm beliefs? Funny how the likes of you would want proof for everything else, and insist on information in making every other decision, but when it to gender not even a mountain of evidence would convince you!

Kishore Krishnamoorthy They induce, inculcate and fuel such thoughts of being refused of privilege by only reminding you of your rights and extending your list of demands beyond the fair level. They won't talk about duties.
When you begin demanding alone, you feel under privileged. This is a make you consume more, which is their prime motive.

2

Kishore Krishnamoorthy I could provide. But not with this tone of yours.

4

Write a reply...

Dharshana Karthikeyan Just like I do cooking and washing for my Husband which are part of my dharma as a wife (that's how I believe) I also would like to fast for a day for him with love,care and affection if it is believed to give good health and life for my Husband. Where does the caste come here? After all I am not going to die if I don't eat for a day

Devika Jayakumari Dharsana, I have no idea about your circumstances and have no wish to judge or comment on your choices in life. If you don't know where brahminism - and that is not just caste -comes in that only means that you have chosen to stay non self reflexive. Yes, we all learn by the choices we make, and as far as we don't insist that our choices are the only good ones and start judging others, we are all good!

2

Dharshana Karthikeyan Agreed. I accept it. Of course I cannot comment on what feminists have done so far because I do not hear anything. But being a Mother of a baby girl, I get so scared to read a news like this and it being unheard by feminists when many shouted for "happytobleed" issue. http://www.tamilnaducentral.com/.../dalit-girl-nandini.../Manage

Dalit girl Nandini gangrape and murder : Hindu Munnani secy Manikandan to be…

TAMILNADUCENTRAL.COM

ReplyRemove Preview51w

Dharshana Karthikeyan This is where I want to question feminism. Not to offend you. It hurts when these things are being unheard and not being resolved or prevented. This is my personal concern. It was so painful to read the 2nd sentence of the 3rd paragraph

Dharshana Karthikeyan Wasn't there any feminist NGOs or what ever they call themselves alive in tamil Nadu is my concern

Devika Jayakumari No, dharshana, I heard of this issue from feminist groups in T N, and destigmatizing menstruation is an important issue. The modern world is such that the traditional rest granted to menstruating women is denied while the stigma is retained. As for rape cases, just take a count - who are fighting such cases in India? Dalits and feminists for sure, in Kerala, Rajasthan, Haryana, Bengal, just go through the newspapers of a few years past?

Dharshana Karthikeyan Yes. Even here you are strongly defending the happy to bleed issue. But you are having more of a general statement on rape cases. So what does feminism really mean is something that I am always confused. When there are millions of women need support for their very very basic survival, why feminists are more concerned about poking and changing the traditional practices which existed for 1000s of years which majority of the women preferred to follow is something that bothered about me for a long time. So is feminism only for women who are living in a much secured environment and to come of out stereotype life style of their mothers? I am not arguing. But this is what the picture I get about feminists when I read news. Can you clarify on this?

1

Aparna Krishnan You nailed it.

Aparna Krishnan Their struggles are for 'choose to wear western', 'free to bleed', 'sexual freedom' and other such stuff. I wish they would all move to new york, and leave us alone. We will understand and define the needs of us women here.

Dharshana Karthikeyan Yes right

1

Write a reply...

Dharshana Karthikeyan And when it comes to Nandini's case, I didn't read in any news that a feminist group is working. All I hear is that Dalit people are fighting. That is more of a community issue than a feminism issue I think. Can you give me a reference that a feminist group is working on this?

Devika Jayakumari I heard of this from my feminist friends - Leena Manimekalai, and other Chennai based friends.

1

Devika Jayakumari There is no such thing as a purely feminist issue, given that patriarchy is always enmeshed in caste and community power. If dalit groups have started to take this up then feminists will probably work as a support and not as leaders.

Dharshana Karthikeyan Oh, really?then that's really good to hear. And if they can get her justice then I am quite happy about feminism. Let's wait and see. But you know my concern is, this issue is not a community issue at all, purely a feminism issue. So even before they start campaigning for this, I expected the feminists to address this and hit the news papers like they did for these so called happy to bleed and beep song Bla bla bla.

2

Aparna Krishnan The Modern Feminists seem to borrow their issues from New York, rather from the understandings of the ordinary women. That comes from their own essentially westernized backgrounds, which they never feel the need to unlearn. Darshana, best to leave them alone is what I am beginning to understand - to their wishes. We need to craft our own language and understanding or problems and responses.

1

Dharshana Karthikeyan So feminists work on things which are quite easy to address and not to make a huge change in the basic struggles a woman faces in her everyday life. I am sorry to say this Devika. But that's what it seem to me. Rape cases are so common in India which n...See more

Dharshana Karthikeyan That's all what I have to say on this

Write a reply...

Dharshana Karthikeyan This concern is what Aparna Krishnan is trying to ask if I am not wrong.

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

it's not the kumkum, festivals, idols or bangles. no, that's irrelavant. a feminist would only be concerned about how the woman is treated by the family and by society. it's women's dignity, physical safety and financial security that are prime concerns

1

Hide 26 Replies

Aparna Krishnan That makes sense. Tired of campaigns against rituals, campaigns for freedom to dress in abbreviated clothing, and other meaningless acts of rebellion !

1

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

what's sad is that most of the women that suffer are the ones who do wear bangles and kumkum which is only a reflection that the conventional society is in fact very patriarchial

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

but change doesn't mean lesser clothing. a deep change in the mindset is to be brought about

2

Aparna Krishnan i wear glass bangles. i love wearing them, as also sarees and kumkum. you want to come and show me how i am patriarchally oppressed. spare me ! the others in my village also love bangles. they need no urban women to 'prove' that bangles, shimmering, glittering, circles of light are patriarchal. spare them !

Aparna Krishnan anyway the village women understand their situation best. please spend some years there to understand.

1

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

Aparna Krishnan i am with you. i also like ethnic wear. and i didn't say all but most, so how can that include you? please don't take this personally. especially when we're on the same page! all i'm saying is our society is patriarchal

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

didn't you read earlier comment? reposting: but change doesn't mean lesser clothing. a deep change in the mindset is to be brought about

Aparna Krishnan most women in india love wearing bangles. and they dont call it ethnic wear ma. to assume they are 'forced' or 'brainwashed' in indicative of the failure of feministic foundations. in this country at least. it is also, if you see, deeply arrogant.

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

if they don't call it ethnic and i do, how does it matter? it's just a word, a label

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

i didn't say forced or brainwashed and i don't know who did! why judge feministic foundations based on what someone may have said?

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

and neither is feminism is about urban v/s village women!

Aparna Krishnan "most of the women that suffer are the ones who do wear bangles and kumkum which is only a reflection that the conventional society is in fact very patriarchial" - the connection implies that the 'most' are 'oppressed' into wearing bangles. not at all ! they love bangles. speaking from a village, an sc village, that has been home for 20 years.

Aparna Krishnan words matter. to call sarees ethnic is to make it a exotic item. it is simply daily wear for most of us in india.and if someone sees it as ethnic - they are once removed from india.

Aparna Krishnan and to remove that distance from india is the first step, before understanding or offering theories. i have had to do it. the first many years in my village went in unlearning perceptions, and then started the understanding.

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

i don't wear sarees. i'm indian!

Aparna Krishnan sure. but to get to the soul of india is a long journey for us who are born into the privileged, and thereby alienated sect.

Aparna Krishnan anyway never mind.

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

that implication..it's not there, nor did i mean it. i'm sure women aren't forced to wear bangles!

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

yes, i agree many in the city are alienated, but not all. it's possible to be indian, a soulful indian even without wearing sarees

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

going to either extreme is dangerous. criticizing the wearing of bangles and sarees as well as the criticizing of not wearing them!

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

i find you are being blindly critical, when u don't even know me or my jouney or my learnings and unlearnings

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

https://www.facebook.com/threet.../videos/10154879286815539/

Aparna Krishnan "as well as the criticizing of not wearing them" - that has not been done anywhere.

Aparna Krishnan There has been no personal criticism or judgement anywhere. You do not matter, nor do I. My comment was on Modern Feminism as it comes across many times.

1

Geeta Jhamb · 17 mutual friends

the criticizing is not direct but implied. i almost feel a pressure from you to wear saree! and go to villages. i didn't even claim that village women don't know their situation. when you go on criticizing my calling it an ethnic garment, you're boxing me into a category which would be ok in itself, for we're all different (which doesn't mean we can't be united) but then you add that this category is not indian enough or soulful enough or feminist enough. and that's how you criticized not wearing a sari. i appreciate you've been in rural india for long, i truly respect that. but i don't like the way you imply that that's the only way. and it's not like all women in city are empowered and fully liberated. there's much to do in cities too! (though i'm not involved in this kind of work at all except at a very personal level in my own life) yet here too i see it is the ones in the lower socio economic background that are suffering more. again the ones wearing sari and kumkum/ burquas

Aparna Krishnan You did not figure in my mind at all. If you felt defensive maybe it is a prior thought or defensiveness you had from earlier. The times are such that i have little interest in taking on anyone personally, there are deep systemic problems. There is a very very large problem of the English educated having lost touch with the essentialness India, and yet being in every place of power, and directing the course of a land they have ceased to understand. You could be in a very different space, but as I said indivisuals, you or i cease to matter.

1

Write a reply...

Arun Kombai Aparna often some feminist ask 'are women in villages who follow traditions are independent?' Your point on this...

Aparna Krishnan 1. i dont even understand the question, whats the connection ? 2. the clarity, positivity and strength i have seen in village women under the most wearing of situations, I have seen in no urban women i know to date. And the position of strength is held without the thunder and lightening i see in many Moden Feminists - that gets so tiring after a while.

1

Arun Kombai Thanks. I could survive in city because i learnt from such women from village. In fact i learnt the word feminism and so called independent only after i came to city. My mom and many women work, they manage their earning, in fact my mom manages my savings (which i couldnt do) The sad part is there is no clarity in many people (men and women) who say i am independent.

2

Aparna Krishnan The strength of India lies in the ordinary women and men of this land. And it is a vast sense and sensibility. The city educated are de-racinated. A few of them like me (I grew up in cities totally) seek their roots again, and are humbled by ll they learn there. Many, arrogant of their education, unconcerned about their lost roots, learn a few more western theories and terms, and set out to civilize the rest of the brownies !!

2

Arun Kombai Aparna the 'so called' are very dangerous

Aparna Krishnan 'so called' ?

Arun Kombai the so called feminists who insist on western theories (not ready to understand the roots but want to change)

2

Aparna Krishnan all modern English fluent people who are out to 'reform', are dangerous, unless they face their loss of roots, and act in humility and uncertianity from that understanding. Your roots are intact because your own family is in a village. I belong to the other world, because my upbringing was entirely urban, and so I understand the alienation that was mine, and the time it took to drop perceptions, and to learn to see a village in its essentialness. And I know many who never made that leap even though they spent time in villages.

2

Write a reply...

Prakash Thangavel Read somewhere.. Some famous psychologist used feminist thoughts to increase cigarette sales in women, with an attractive punchline too

2

Dharshana Karthikeyan

😂

Prakash Thangavel "Torches of freedom" it seems

1

Aparna Krishnan Drinking is also a sign of being progressive !

1

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)