anupama treating anuj like option - Page 2

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

Sorry but saying that a husband will throw his wife out the house if "she dares" to support anyone else is making a conjuction and about a very inequal relationship. You weren't talking of Anuj and Anupamaa needing to help each orher establish boundaries; you were talking of how marriages in general work— and this is not how they work. Nobody can throw out a woman out of her marital house irl because legally that falls under domestic violence. Vanraj is a nonety to me so I ain't falling in that debate. "Correct spouse" kya hota hai? Bacchi hai kya ki bolo isse milna band kardo nahi toh tv privileges band kar denge tumhara... Partners either work together or separate. Anyone who punishes their partner is an abuser.

Even previously, you had talked of him being a "hen-pecked husband" who "bends to his wife and in-laws" ans how men like him do not tolerate bending to their wives and in-laws irl. Are men "like him" doing a favour by marrying women? No.

Anuj and Anupamaa can be million shades of wrong and codependency. But nothing actually is wrong with being a husband who is soft towards his wife, listens to her, and caters to her family because every girl is socialised to do so for him and his family as part of her 'wifely duties'— as if marriage were a naukri.

I do not think husband and wife are diff man and woman

Vanraj Shah and Shahs are not anuj wife family

I do not mind anuj helping kanta and bhavesh at al indeed i will be happiest if he helps them bonds with them calls for functions gives them jobs or money

But yes i have problems if anuj helps anupama ex family bec they are not anupama family just because anupama calls them mayka

Is she vanraj sister that shahs become her mayka? Whom are anupama nad shahs fooling? May be anuj not me or most viewers

Anupama is not bothered about kanta and bhavesh neither is anuj they have abandoned them like GK and Malvika

And when you want husband to help wife family wife should also help but never has anupama ever helped malvika or GK kaka or ankush bhaiya ever

In my city wife is not expected to look after in laws be it mother in law, father in law or sister in law etc all live individual family only husband and kids in last and this gen too (last 40 years)

So i am not sure what wifely duties or husband duties you are talking off

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

Sorry but saying that a husband will throw his wife out the house if "she dares" to support anyone else is making a conjuction and about a very inequal relationship. You weren't talking of Anuj and Anupamaa needing to help each orher establish boundaries; you were talking of how marriages in general work— and this is not how they work. Nobody can throw out a woman out of her marital house irl because legally that falls under domestic violence. Vanraj is a nonety to me so I ain't falling in that debate. "Correct spouse" kya hota hai? Bacchi hai kya ki bolo isse milna band kardo nahi toh tv privileges band kar denge tumhara... Partners either work together or separate. Anyone who punishes their partner is an abuser.

Even previously, you had talked of him being a "hen-pecked husband" who "bends to his wife and in-laws" ans how men like him do not tolerate bending to their wives and in-laws irl. Are men "like him" doing a favour by marrying women? No.

Anuj and Anupamaa can be million shades of wrong and codependency. But nothing actually is wrong with being a husband who is soft towards his wife, listens to her, and caters to her family because every girl is socialised to do so for him and his family as part of her 'wifely duties'— as if marriage were a naukri.

Emotional cheating and neglect to current spouse go way way way beyond supporting "others" and is grounds for divorce without alimony under Indian laws. And cheating with ex husband is the entire thing here, you cannot skirt around the Vanraj issue because that is the main issue, he is not a non entity to Anupama but is more important to her than her current husband.

Also ex in laws are not family, her family and Anuj in laws are ONLY Anupama's mom and brother (who she is neglecting) and her kids. Her ex mom in law and ex husband are not family. Why do people keep calling Shahs Anuj's in laws? No husband or wife in the world is expected to "bend to" their spouse's ex. Nor are they expected to be ok to see their spouse emotionally cheating with their ex particularly when its clear the ex is still lusting after them.

I think things like these is what gives equality movement and feminism a bad name, people dont understand when and where to pick their battles. Defending a neglecting cheating wife only because she is a woman gives the entire cause of equality a bad name. Its a fairly black and white issue and Anupama is clearly in the wrong both legally and morally.

Originally posted by: Harish111

Emotional cheating and neglect go way way way beyond supporting "others" and is grounds for divorce without alimony under Indian laws. And cheating with ex husband is the entire thing here, you cannot skirt around the Vanraj issue because that is the main issue, he is not a non entity to Anupama.

Also ex in laws are not family, her family and Anuj in laws are ONLY Anupama's mom and brother (who she is neglecting) and her kids. Her ex mom in law and ex husband are not family. Why do people keep calling Shahs Anuj's in laws? No husband or wife in the world is expected to "bend to" their spouse's ex. Nor are they expected to be ok to see their spouse's emotionally cheating with their ex particularly when its clear the ex is still lusting after them.

I think things like these is what gives women and feminism a bad name, people dont understand when and where to pick their battles. Defending a neglecting cheating wife only because she is a woman gives the entire cause of equality a bad name. Its a fairly black and white issue and Anupama is clearly in the wrong both legally and morally.

Firstly, I wasn't talking about whether Anuj and Anupamaa should get divorced. I wasn't responding to the OP's comments on Maan. That wasn't the point. I was commenting on their generic statement about what husbands and wives do. I don't like either characters in the show so you don't need to divert the conversation with "Anupamaa is bad so it justifies talking in misogynistic terms and normalising sexist tropes like hen-pecked husband and whatnot." Misogyny against bad women is still misogyny.

An adult can choose to support whoever they want because they have a mind of their own and free will. If that doesn't sit right with their partner, they can choose to separate. To say that a husband will throw a wife out of the house if she "dares" to support someone else implies that marriage is an inequal relationship where the husband has the power bring socioeconomic harm to the woman if she, an adult, dares to not tow his line. The only time a Hindu married woman relinquishes her rights on marital property is when the marriage is legally dissolved. To compel a woman leave her marital home before a divorce settlement is reached is an act of domestic violence. People honestly wish a woman to let go of her own grief and assuage het husband when her son just died!

Lastly, it is hilarious to make Anuj a bechara victim of emotional cheating when he blamed her for the decisions he took before marrying her, abandoned her, plunged her into depression, and then went ahead to live with a woman who had openly proclaimed to love him for the sake of the child he hadn't yet legally adopted. Then, do not get me started when Maan had mutually agreed to get divorced so that he could take care of Maya while he claimed to dil se consider only meri Anu as his wife. Then, it was justified because of Anuj's trauma of losing his very-alive daughter but now, it is why is this evil woman neglecting or doubting Anuj when her son died? Pativrata nariyon ki yeh duties nahi hai!

Legally speaking, adultery as a ground for divorce in India has been defined under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as the act of having voluntary sexual intercourse with a person who is not the spouse of the respondent. So your take on who is and isn't a cheater on this show. Also, if emotional adultery is a ground for divorce, then the cheater man is obligated to pay his wife alimony. I think Maan will break our judicial system with their mutual emotional cheating

Feminism ko yeh show bad name deta hai— iske protagonist couple feminism ko bad name deta hai par khair chhodo.

Originally posted by: myviewprem

I do not think husband and wife are diff man and woman

Vanraj Shah and Shahs are not anuj wife family

I do not mind anuj helping kanta and bhavesh at al indeed i will be happiest if he helps them bonds with them calls for functions gives them jobs or money

But yes i have problems if anuj helps anupama ex family bec they are not anupama family just because anupama calls them mayka

Is she vanraj sister that shahs become her mayka? Whom are anupama nad shahs fooling? May be anuj not me or most viewers

Anupama is not bothered about kanta and bhavesh neither is anuj they have abandoned them like GK and Malvika

And when you want husband to help wife family wife should also help but never has anupama ever helped malvika or GK kaka or ankush bhaiya ever

In my city wife is not expected to look after in laws be it mother in law, father in law or sister in law etc all live individual family only husband and kids in last and this gen too (last 40 years)

So i am not sure what wifely duties or husband duties you are talking off

Lol, Shahs are no one but her abusers. But her kids and their families are her family. She chooses to be codependent on them and as a husband he has never established boundaries with her. Not just for his own peace but also for her own mental health. Her friend has called the Shahs out but not him. My comments were and are still not about these characters. They are pathetic characters. Not because Anuj is "hen-pecked husband" and Anupamaa is an emotional cheater. But because they are both hypocritical enablers. AND, Anupamaa is an abuser too.

Your post begins with an injunction to wifely duties and to quote your own words :

What is wife duty? To stand by husband when full world abandon him or accuses him

[ This is a generic statement about how a woman should act and not about this show].

Even court will say a family need not give witness in court opp a family member.

[A spouse is not obliged to testify against her husband because she has a conflict of interest. Not because it is her duty to support her husband blindly or trust him blindly. Again not a statement about the show].

Which husband will tolerate his wife supporting ex husband or ex in laws over him ever. They would just throw wife out of house if she dares support anyone else

[ An adult human being doesn't need to be scared of her husband that she doesn't dare go against him in any way. Say, if Anuj's car hit Vanraj on purpose or by mistake, and he died. Would Anupamaa be wrong to report it to the police? Because the deceased person is her ex and the perpetrator is her husband? But that is besides the point. This is again a generic statement about how women shoud act irl.]

In one of your previous posts, you had stated :

Hes rich powerful highly qualified USA guy - such ppl have high self respect and ego and will not bend to anyone easily forget wife or in laws (as i have observed)

[YOU DEEM SHAHS TO BE ANUJ's IN-LAWS HERE not me. But besides the point, are NRI, highly educated men gods that they will/should not "bend to their wives or in-laws" if they are in the right? Paradoxically, should wives just bend to their husband's will to cater to their "self-respect and egos?]

Its not like anupama is bill gates daughter from whom he will get 100 billion dollars inheritance later (even than his kind of education guys will not bend to wife or in laws) or shahs are tatas super rich that he has to bend so much to please them.

[I mean, just wow].

I am not able to understand that why are people comparing CA leaving and Samar death.

There Anuj was sad and needed a shoulder to cry and some time to overcome that but Anupama didn’t give her any. She didn’t give him shoulder to cry or time to overcome it. She just wanted him to overnight it ASAP.

Anuj didn’t left because of CA. He left because Anupama made him feel that CA doesn’t matter to her. She was happily dancing and celebrating Holi with her ex in laws.

Now Anupama is sad because of Samar death. Anuj is also sad. He is ready to give her shoulder to cry and give time to overcome it. He is not asking her to forget him and celebrate festivals with him.

Anupama is not talking to him for days. She is trusting Vanraj words that anuj is responsible for Samar death. Where is the trust that she had for Vanraj when Anuj fells down from clip.

Why can’t she say some simple words that I trust you that you can’t do that. Why is silent treatment for nothing.

How Anuj is wrong in saving the girl when Anupama herself would do the same. She done it in Dimpy’s case too. Why she is not ready to talk.

There is no problem if she stays in shah house for time being but the silent treatment is wrong.

She can say to Anuj that I don’t think you are responsible for Samar death but you have to stay away from Shah House because Vanraj don’t want you there.

Originally posted by: Snowdrrop

I am not able to understand that why are people comparing CA leaving and Samar death.

There Anuj was sad and needed a shoulder to cry and some time to overcome that but Anupama didn’t give her any. She didn’t give him shoulder to cry or time to overcome it. She just wanted him to overnight it ASAP.

Anuj didn’t left because of CA. He left because Anupama made him feel that CA doesn’t matter to her. She was happily dancing and celebrating Holi with her ex in laws.

Now Anupama is sad because of Samar death. Anuj is also sad. He is ready to give her shoulder to cry and give time to overcome it. He is not asking her to forget him and celebrate festivals with him.

Anupama is not talking to him for days. She is trusting Vanraj words that anuj is responsible for Samar death. Where is the trust that she had for Vanraj when Anuj fells down from clip.

Why can’t she say some simple words that I trust you that you can’t do that. Why is silent treatment for nothing.

How Anuj is wrong in saving the girl when Anupama herself would do the same. She done it in Dimpy’s case too. Why she is not ready to talk.

There is no problem if she stays in shah house for time being but the silent treatment is wrong.

She can say to Anuj that I don’t think you are responsible for Samar death but you have to stay away from Shah House because Vanraj don’t want you there.

Again you are making it about Anuj and Anupamaa when I have stated half-a-dozen times that it isn't about them. Anupamaa is a bad mother, an abusive MIL and an enabler in general. But using her as a way to justidy misogyny doesn't sit right with me.

(This forum is filled with posts about how she is neglecting CA; when her son has just died and they haven't shown CA at all. And even if she was celebrating a festival and trying to include him in it when Anuj was sad, that justifies him blaming her for not having kids of his own, abandoning her, living with the woman who he knew was romantically interested in him for months, and willing to divorce his wife to take care of the biological mother of the child he hadn't yet legally adopted? I mean, you have to be sad because I am sad is some take.)

In all my posts above, I have clarified that my issue is with the casual misogyny and nothing else, and I have even provided instances to justify my position. So yeah. This is it from my side

Anuj was sad, that justifies him blaming her for not having kids of his own

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

When did he blamed anupama for not having kid of his own i don't remember that ???

Originally posted by: Historia

Anuj was sad, that justifies him blaming her for not having kids of his own

When did he blamed anupama for not having kid of his own i don't remember that ???

E868, it shows that not only Anupamaa didn't exclude CA from her family but that Anuj got pissed seeing her trying to move on and be happy in a function where his own family memebers were also present and trying to be happy. He excludes her from his family and accuses her of being happy when he is sad (a red flag if I ever saw one). Also, Anupamaa did not force him to celebrate Holi, but his friend brought him to the party.

"Mere ansu bhi nahi sukhe hain aur tum yahan apne parivaar ke saath khishiyan mana rahi ho." Everyone talks of Upmaa prioritising her own kids over CA but this dude excluded her and her kids from his family in a heartbeat.

"Tumhara toh pura khandaan hai tumhare saath, tumhare bacche tumhare saath hai par akela toh mein pad gaya... Tumhe toh bahut khushi ho rahi hogi ki meri chhoti ki responsibility se tumhe mukti mil gayi."

Even then she defends him in front of Samar.

I mean, Anupamaa literally did not ask him to stay obssessed with a married teenage crush for two decades and not starting a family of his own.

But anyhow.

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

Again you are making it about Anuj and Anupamaa when I have stated half-a-dozen times that it isn't about them. Anupamaa is a bad mother, an abusive MIL and an enabler in general. But using her as a way to justidy misogyny doesn't sit right with me.

(This forum is filled with posts about how she is neglecting CA; when her son has just died and they haven't shown CA at all. And even if she was celebrating a festival and trying to include him in it when Anuj was sad, that justifies him blaming her for not having kids of his own, abandoning her, living with the woman who he knew was romantically interested in him for months, and willing to divorce his wife to take care of the biological mother of the child he hadn't yet legally adopted? I mean, you have to be sad because I am sad is some take.)

In all my posts above, I have clarified that my issue is with the casual misogyny and nothing else, and I have even provided instances to justify my position. So yeah. This is it from my side

Is asking for some boundaries from ex in laws is misogyny?

Shah members were so dependent on Anupama that kinjal can leave her daughter behind and say mummy hai. Vanraj and Kavya were ready to shift Delhi. who are going to look after baa and Babuji. They were not Anupama’s responsibility. Only that time anuj asked to draw boundaries.

Now also he is not asking her to come back. He is just looking for some assurance that she didn’t think what vanraj said. Here few words are enough from her.

Here people says that he should throw her out I am not with them but I seriously thinks that they need to sit down and talk.

When they sits now they always talks about others problems but they need to talk about themselves.

There relationship is not healthy. They only pretend to trust each other. They pretend to be a happy couple. They need to work on there marriage.

Originally posted by: Snowdrrop

You are saying that it’s not about Anuj & Anupama but calling Anuj misogyny. Where did he showed these characteristics.

Is asking for some boundaries from ex in laws is misogyny?

Shah members were so dependent on Anupama that kinjal can leave her daughter behind and say mummy hai. Vanraj and Kavya were ready to shift Delhi. who are going to look after baa and Babuji. They were not Anupama’s responsibility. Only that time anuj asked to draw boundaries.

Now also he is not asking her to come back. He is just looking for some assurance that she didn’t think what vanraj said. Here few words are enough from her.

Here people says that he should throw her out I am not with them but I seriously thinks that they need to sit down and talk.

When they sits now they always talks about others problems but they need to talk about themselves.

There relationship is not healthy. They only pretend to trust each other. They pretend to be a happy couple. They need to work on there marriage.

Where have I called Anuj misogynistic? I am precisely saying that call him a "hen-pecked husband" and "puppy" are just a matter of using fictional characters to justify misogyny.

Anupamaa is a toxic, abusive character, and Anuj is only marginally better. Irl, Dimpy should have sued Anupamaa for hitting her, and these two should have been either in counselling or divorced for their own good.

But to say that Anupamaa is not Bill Gates' daughter, people like Anuj would not bend to her will irl or that girls half his age would be willing marry him and have his kids (all the things I have read on this forum) is the height of misogyny.

Bad women can be called out for their actions without resorting to such sexism