Viraj janvi raghav love triangle ? Note on page 17 - Page 9

It's not fair...in my opinion...to compare walking out of an abusive realtionship to walking out of a regular relationship...where people have just grown apart.

Another thing, I don't think the show has lost its plot either. They are showing whatever they had planned on from the beginning. The only difference is that they may have dragged it out here and there, and executed differently (Raghav's filminess, for example).

@Krrish

I understand what you are saying about Viraj, but I'm sorry I don't agree with them.

You know how you say that it's not Viraj's fault that he is the way he is, well it isn't Jhanvi's fault the way she is either. She didn't decide to be a shy vulnerable girl, that's just the way she is, so you can't expect her to fight Viraj, she tried but how much can any human being take?

In the world today there are shy vulnerable women, brave women, strong women, weak women, mordern women, traditional women etc. And these women would all react differently if they were in Jhanvi's situation, but I think it is unfair to expect that all women would stand up against someone like Viraj and take action against him. There are people who are too weak to do something, I mean if this was a father son situation, would you expect a small kid to try and stand up to his dad? No right, because they would know they will get nowhere, and I think the same applies to Jhanvi.
And what's worse is that Viraj weakened Jhanvi mentally with his constant torture and emotional blackmail. If Viraj is an abusive and mentally unstable person due to his upbringing, then Jhanvi is weak due to his treatment of her.

And if you are saying due to his upbringing and psychological issues we shouldn't blame him for his behaviour, then we shouldn't blame Jhanvi for her behaviour either. If his mental state can used as a defence for his actions, why doesn't the same apply for Jhanvi? It's like saying he is allowed to abuse her, but she is not allowed to leave him, instead it's termed as running away. Saving ones life, and protecting yourself from someone you believe could kill you, is not something to be ashamed of. In fact that day when Jhanvi finally found the courage to get in the car and drive away, I was proud of her, I know she's just a fictional character, but still I felt so proud. Besides other than a a legal marriage, would relationship did they have? It was like one of master and obeyer.

What more was she meant to do? He rejected help, he manipulated her into thinking he wanted to change. Was she meant to just kill him? I mean honestly what more did you want this woman to do?

At the end of the day I think people find it easy to say that Jhanvi should've stayed. But I doubt even you or anyone else would be able to bare the pain of getting beaten almost everyday. If someone was to whip me once I would probably cry out in pain, do you think you'd stay with someone who does it often? People only understand how painful something is when it happens to them. Just because Viraj needs help doesn't mean Jhanvi should've stayed with him. If he wanted help he would get it but he is more interested in finding and inflicting pain on another Jhanvi. You said right he was scared of losing Jhanvi that's why he did a lot things, but what about the pain he inflicts on others?

If one day you have kids, and god forbid they are in the same position as Jhanvi, would you tell them to stay with that man and try to change them, even though they've already tried that and it failed? Would you tell them to stay with a man who even though has become better, might change back again, and beat them black and blue, and might even end up killing them.Wouldn't you be happier that they left him and are safe and sound, or would you be happier that they stay in danger, and stand up to him, knowing that he might lash out at them? When one's one child, sister or mother's life is in danger would it still matter more to you that they aren't 'running away' as you say, or would their safety matter more?

I don't think any mother or father in their right mind would allow their child to stay with someone who inflicts so much pain on them.

Physical wounds heal, yes but mental, never..

Originally posted by: -Nakshatra-

So we are not sure we live in a society where the mentally retarded are ignored or their issues totally ignored. We look for a solution in every situation so treat them first then you can punish them.

Viraj should be treated subsequently punished for his actions.

^^Don't send a wrong message. I talk for Genuine cases treat them first then proceed with the trial. My reservations about involving mental illness with domestic violence is proved right. So in the process of doing justice to one you fail in the other.

A little quibble on the treatment of mental disorders (especially, personality disorders) in this thread.

Many people tend to forget that mental disorders are not cut and dry truths. Mental disorders are simply a set of classifications that science makes which are helpful for us currently. Psychiatry is also highly malleable to politics and culture; more so than say, physics or geology. Case in point: the classification of homosexuality as mental deviance not so long ago.

For example: As we know there are extremely sadistic people in the world; most people in the world are not extremely sadistic; it is not in the normal or average range of human behaviour to be highly sadistic; and it is common intuition to state these people are "inhumane" and "evil" and "deeply wrong" in some way. So this is a mental abnormality and we make criteria and then, upon peer-approval, a classification: Sadistic Personality Disorder. We put it into practice and find people who fit this diagnosis and recruit them for studies, to find overall similarities and patterns so to possibly understand if there are any recognisable causes and influences on these traits (be it through genes or neurobiology or environment, etc.), so we can try and prevent further cases and possibly try and treat or at least help such a cohort manage their symptoms.

One can diagnose most serial killers and rapists under SPD. Does that liberate them from any wrong-doing? There is nearly always a debate when making psychiatric classifications, because it is a worry that criminals will plead insanity and get off. (I forgot to add: In fact, the very disorder I quote is an apt example. It is now excluded by the DSM-IV, and is not considered a valid diagnosis in practice by many in the psychiatric community.) But this point always stands: people have choices. One can want to do horrible things, but cannot justify doing them.

I am being petty mentioning this, but so much posted in the defence of Viraj sounds like this to me: "Hey, I'm a jackass and I want to do horrible things to you. But I cannot help it; so you must tolerate me!" Viraj is conscious and aware of his actions and surroundings; not under any delusion(s) or hallucination(s); so there's nothing to me that can pardon him for his actions.

Originally posted by: Araniya

A little quibble on the treatment of mental disorders (especially, personality disorders) in this thread.

Many people tend to forget that mental disorders are not cut and dry truths. Mental disorders are simply a set of classifications that science makes which are helpful for us currently. Psychiatry is also highly malleable to politics and culture; more so than say, physics or geology. Case in point: the classification of homosexuality as mental deviance not so long ago.

For example: As we know there are extremely sadistic people in the world; most people in the world are not extremely sadistic; it is not in the normal or average range of human behaviour to be highly sadistic; and it is common intuition to state these people are "inhumane" and "evil" and "deeply wrong" in some way. So this is a mental abnormality and we make criteria and then, upon peer-approval, a classification: Sadistic Personality Disorder. We put it into practice and find people who fit this diagnosis and recruit them for studies, to find overall similarities and patterns so to possibly understand if there are any recognisable causes and influences on these traits (be it through genes or neurobiology or environment, etc.), so we can try and prevent further cases and possibly try and treat or at least help such a cohort manage their symptoms.

One can diagnose most serial killers and rapists under SPD. Does that liberate them from any wrong-doing? There is nearly always a debate when making psychiatric classifications, because it is a worry that criminals will plead insanity and get off. But this point always stands: people have choices. One can want to do horrible things, but cannot justify doing them.

I am being petty mentioning this, but so much posted in the defence of Viraj sounds like this to me: "Hey, I'm a jackass and I want to do horrible things to you. But I cannot help it; so you must tolerate me!" Viraj is conscious and aware of his actions and surroundings; not under any delusion(s) or hallucination(s); so there's nothing to me that can pardon him for his actions.