Why should only women...? - Page 2

Originally posted by: _Anonymous_

the whole point of this topic is that if women have to show they are married...so do men...and this goes for hindu women, muslim women, sikh women...etc etc

Sikh women don't have to show they're married. This in fact is a distinct quality of Sikhs. Sikh women don't wear a mangalsutra or sinndoor because there is no reason why they should wear such symbols and men shouldn't. The Sikh faith is actually very well known for being a religion that put women at a place equal to men, Guru Nanak was in fact the one who made sure that practices such as the satti was abolished because of the position it put women in. I could go into detail but I'd rather not so to boil it all down to one point, you made an error there with the Sikhs and as for why Hindu's portray women with symbols to show they're married, I think it is a part of their religion that should be respected. If shows go about trying to change that then there will be a lot of unnecessary backlash from religious groups and the majority of Hindus, who probably won't agree with it. Not many shows would have the guts to portray women differently but if they do and most viewers dont strongly agree against it, then its not a bad idea.

Anonymous, do you follow any religion? I am curious.
BTW, if you really wanna be technical, there is no such religion called Hinduism, technically all people of South Asia are Hindus. So even a muslim or Christian or or sikh or buddist from South Asia is a Hindu. The proper word instead of what you might referring as Hindu might be Vedant, the followers of Vedas.
In little study I did on various religions, I have rarely seen a society where they are truly following their religion, but when it comes to all their bad actions they blame it on their religion. Religion rarely has anything to do with the actions of the people, it has all to do with their greed for money and power.

Depending on the backgroud you came from...cast or culture. Men do ..do different things to signify their marriage. For example Brahman men wear a white thread around their body when they get married they add a second thread when they have children they add a third and so on and so forth. in some casts or cultures..the men wear rings...Besides it is not necessary for both man and woman to have the same symbol of marriage.

nazmul...i have studies religion a little bit as well..muslims and christians of south asian decent are muslims are christians they are not hindus. Hinduism is a religion established a long time ago. many many many generation ago hindu people converted to Islam and Christianity for whatever reasons but their decendants now practice that religion. it would be wrong to say otherwise. I understand some people believe hinduism is a way of live..and there are the vedas and upanishads that guide that way..which essentially makes it a religion. Vedant is in itself a philosophy practiced by individuals who are of the hindu religion. It is always possible that they denounce hindism and only practice being a vedant but none the less hinduism is very much a religion.

we do have some cultural aspects of our society that is clubed with the religion when it is culture rather than religion.

but this subject is a big and complicated one.

@illusion, when where did the word Hindu come from and what does it mean since its origin. I am sure you can enlighten us on that, cause they seem to have a wrong information on the origin of the word Hindu in wikipedia.org
BTW not all Muslims of Christians in South Asia a people of Hindu descent, many are people whose ancestors have migrated to South Asia Central Asia and Middle East. And many low caste Hindus converted to Islam Christianity and many Buddhists also converted to Islam and Christianity. I don't know about India, but in Bangladesh the first Muslims were Muslim missionaries from modern day Turkmenistan.

I am not sayin all christians and muslims in south asia coverted from hinduism. i m sorry if that is how it came out. just that some had converted ...and they are their own religion

Also there are many different opinions about the origins of hinduism. Some of its origins are from the indus valley civilization...people living in the area were know as the people of hindustan and the religion hinduism because at the time there was no other religions being practiced in the area. the word hindu comin from the sindhu river i think.

some people talk about the aryan invasion although some historians have disproved that. so i am not entirelly sure what is accurate and what is not. since its widely debated.

all of this information is from different sources and i cannot vouch for its accuracy. but this is a common belief i have come across in the literature i have read

Muslim women don't have to wear anything to show they are married.
I do like the fact that a lot of men and women from different cultures wear wedding rings, kinda makes them equal.
Although, I do understand your point about portraying women differently. All the shows on TV are centered around religion, with pujas going on all the time. I means that's okay but they should have a few shows with different, modern and realistic themes.
Can't a modern married woman who doesn't wear sindoor and mangalsutra, and doesn't do pujas at the drop of a hat, be a GOOD woman? Can't they have a show with such a protagonist, dealing with the realities of life?

@cool_isha, would such a modern women be a home maker or a career lady? Do you think religion is a hindrance to social and economic progress? What would you define as modern? Is being modern equal to following contemporary western culture? Do you think a person in Asia can keep his/her tradition and culture and still be modern?

P.S. I hope to have few more people participate in this dialog. It seems interesting to me.

There are lots of things about Indian serials that bother me, and this is just one of them. I think what Anonymous means is that women have some very obvious signs of being married and men have none. Please understand that I am talking only about TV, not real life--I am not from India so I don't know what the norm is among Hindu women--but I'm guessing that not all Hindu women wear these symbols and freak out if they have to go a day without wearing sindoor.

I sometimes feel as though these serials set India backwards by about 150 years. Sony actually has a lot of serials that are comparably modern, but they go off the air within just a few months of starting due to low TRPs. This tells me that the majority of Indians would rather watch the typical sacrificial lamb of a bahu than watch something fresh and different. Most religious people aren't as obsessive as those on these shows and have very simple, personal relationships with their religions.

I would simply like to see a very different woman in a lead role. Bani, Vidya, Saloni, etc. all have some subtle differences, but they are essentially all the same.

So many times they try to show "modern" or Western girls as being wild, corrupt, evil, and totally without any morals. That is downright insulting. Just because we were brought up in the UK or America does not make us animals. On Indian serials, you can bet that 99% of the time, the girl in the dress will be evil while the girl in the sari will be good. Divya wears frocks now, but that will surely change and I think that's a damn shame. Her character is so unique and has so much depth right now that to erase all the unique elements out of her is unfortunate and unrealistic. No one born and raised in London is going to give up their past so easily. It's one thing to assimilate, but another to completely lose your background, which is what I think they are going to do with Divya. She can wear Indian clothes for sure, but why can't she wear both? Why can't she be both a Londoner AND an Indian? I would hate to see her revert back to Vidya at this point, quite frankly, and I hope that's not the direction they take. In fact, it would be nice to see Divya as a kind of spokeswoman for change in India.