How stupid can this get?:Mod note pg19 - Page 10

Originally posted by: rayadallie

The discussion here is very enlightening, I must say. I enjoyed reading all the views but I am still somewhat shocked at some views that go all out to damage a woman character and to shine that of the other woman. Are we really serious when we talk about morals?

Had purvi taken an abortion after the ONS would she have been ridiculed for what happened between she and arjun? I doubt it. But because she decided to keep that child from that immoral act, she is being ridiculed and spat upon. My God, it seems better to commit the sin of murder than premarital sex.

In ovi's case it does not matter how you get married, as long as you are married and wears mangalsutra all is fine. you can commit how many mistakes, it is all good.

Wow, My point of view

Originally posted by: Kalapi

😆😆

And Arjun is also Canadian educated that emphasizes on Sex education...well, what more can be said, it seems that these 2 young ppl engaging in premarital sex, weren't even ready for the possible consequences...

I dnt knw wtx wrong with the cvs of this show, they are hell bent on showing us crap

Originally posted by: sashashyam

For the first, dear Pallavi, I did say I was a dinosaur out of touch with the New Age morality, did I not?

For me such behaviour is wrong. Even immoral. Period. I too was young once, and when such a situation arose with my fiance, I said, loud and clear, NO!!!. That got home. So, I am a tad suprised to see anyone asking What should she have done? Why, exactly the same as I did. Purvi never lacked for the guts to raise her voice, and one firm No from her would have stopped Arjun cold in his tracks. She controls him totally now and it was the same then. So what was the problem?

They might have been going to get married the next day, but to me, jumping the gun in such a situation would have been a betrayal of all that my mother had taught me, and thus non-sanskaari. If it is ok with you and the younger generation, you are of course free to have your take on it, but I do not change my stand. No way. And yes, for me all that Aradhana type stuff is disgusting, and I do not see any need to apologise for that and say it is 'my POV absolutely'. Whose else would it be, anyway?

I do not buy these Ishq par zor nahin maxims, especially since, when things go badly wrong, it is always the woman who is left to carry the can. That is invariably shown clearly in all these films, the Mala Sihna specialities, to drive the point home to those young women in the audience who might, even in those days, have had boyfriends who got 'hot and heavy'. None of them were shown sashaying thru the whole unscathed like apni Purvi, thanks of the cavalier who rescued her, whom she now takes for granted as a repository for all her umpteen problems.

To revert, Arjun might have died that evening in a car crash, whereupon Purvi would have joined the Dhool ka Phool brigade. How stupid would that be? She would never be able to live it down, nor would her child. And that would be, to me, the worst of all. People have no right to create these kinds of situations for the children involved.

Finally, I did not say that the Arjun-Purvi rain scene was contrived; it was that roll on the dirty boards in that wet, grungy shack that was contrived. It was not at all like her, or in fact even like him

Pallavi, please write me off as a has been derelict from the previous century, and do not waste your time arguing any more with me on this point, for it will be time and effort wasted.

Ah yes, the 'bhool'. Not just Arjun, but Purvi too says exactly the same thing several times, to Arjun, and to the whole crowd at that party. That is because it was a mistake and given her upbringing (see, I am not bringing up the sanskaars!😉), she must be very sorry it ever happened. It is not something to be proud of. But that does not make it 'dirty'.

As for Pari, if Onir had not materialised out of the blue and played the knight errant, she would have been branded naajaayaz by the Kolkata chawlvaasis, seeing that her mother never bothered about that aspect and thought she could tackle it on her own. It is not at all easyfor a single woman to bring up a child with no declared father, even in a 2013 metro in India.

Shyamala Di


[

Originally posted by: Kalapi

My dear dear Janhvi, I must confess that I come from the era of dinosaurs and to me the mangla sutra gives the respectability of engaging in sex and having legit babes.

So, in short to me and to the societies I am born and right now work in (which are the Conservative Eastern culture and also forward Western outlook) Pari is an illegitimate baby born of a unwed single mom who had a ONS.

And if a baby is born of Ovi and Arjun, will be a legit baby born of parents tied in holy matrimony'

So, you see I am very prudish and conservative in my views and am very unapologetic about it too. Now, I have a question for you. Now, you might agree with me that about 90% of Indians go for arranged marriages and most are preggo within a year of their marriage. So, it is fair to conclude that they got preggo within the first couple of months, right? So, do you think all these marriages develop love and trust that quickly and if not, will you consider these babies to be illegitimate (according to your POV for the marriages are San those essential prerequisites) and should be considered illegitimate?? I haven't seen that happen, but could be willing to say that should be the latest world order. that no marriage is Ok, only love and trust needs to be scored for making babies??

Originally posted by: pallavi25

Exactly! Arjun was Canada educated and had sex education in school. Purvi was India educated where sex-ed is non-existent other than school friends sharing info abt the birds and the bees. Purvi was an innocent virgin, Arjun had more knowledge abt those things. Why the hell didnt he use protection? 😆 Its entirely Arjun's fault! And now he admits it too...

Originally posted by: Kalapi

Well, it isn't just Arjun fault,,,it is both their faults. I mean I grew up in India, I couldn't say that I was so innocent that I didn't realize the ulterior motives that might be present in the prying eyes or thoses unwanted hands in places not to be. And at the end, as Shyala and many put it (including me), it is the woman who is saddled with a preganacy, the men can just fly off...so, the onus falls much more of the girl than on the boy. Even here, I am much more careful if/where my girl child is concern...

Pallavi, I believe Purvi and Ovi are of the same age, Archana adopted a one year old, her babies were a year old when Manav took them away from her. Some epis showed Purvi calling Teju as older sister so safe to assume that all 3 girls are around 21. A year old when the twins left to Canada + 18 years plus one year pre marriage and one post, give or take, the math points to 21?

Dear Pallavi,

Abortion is her choice and if she feels ok with it, that is it. I would not condemn her at all.

I frankly do not see where artificial insemination comes into this debate. It seems to me completely off track.

I too have seen maidservants as single mothers.In that class, there are not so many problems, including with common law marriages and common law divorces. They used to throw the thali (the mangalsutra) in the man's face and walk out, and as they could work and were economically self-sufficient in a bare bones kind of way, they could go back to their parents or live by themselves with their kids.

Similarly, at the top end of the social scale, divorce, remarriage et al are relatively easy, but even there, an child born out of wedlock would be a problem. But not as much as for a middle class woman, and especially one from the lower middle class, chawl resident category to which Purvi belongs. There, the pressure of public opinion, the iron hold of family discipline and the demands of 'family honour' are very hard to resist, and then she has to live in the same environment.

Finally, did your mother really approve of the Aradhana kind of goings on? I somehow doubt it, but you would know better. I am much younger than she must be, but my mother must be about a decade older, and she used to condemn it unreservedly. Personally, I do not consider approval of pre-marital intimacy as a pre-requisite for being modern.

Moreover, it is one thing to be broadminded about a fictional depiction on screen, and quite another to have to cope with the results of such broadmindedness at first hand. I doubt very much if even very liberal women would be accepting and welcoming if women from their own family went the Sharmila Tagore way. That is when the real test comes, and very, very few will pass it when it comes too close to them for comfort,

There is also the question of the child. One might declare that it should be "a woman's personal choice. Every woman must choose her own destiny where motherhood is concerned", but no one asked the kid whether it wanted to be born without a proper legitimate framework. It is very selfish to choose to have a child out of wedlock and expose it to a lifetime of social problems. Purvi of course did not choose it, she blundered into it, but the end result would have been the same but for Onir.

Finally, my dear Pallavi, I remember telling you categorically that I was an unregenerate holdover from the 20th century, not at all in sync with the brave new world you all espouse. As I also said, good for you, but by the same token, I do not want to argue endlessly and pointlessly about this topic. So please write finis to this and let us agree to disagree. There is no meeting ground between us at all, and actually I never intended to write this response either, but old habits die hard! Having done so, I at least am declaring closure to this unproductive exercise.

Shyamala Di

Originally posted by: pallavi25

That night, even Purvi wasnt thinking with her head but with her heart. So she succumbed to Arjun's seduction. New age Morality? But Aradhana, Andaaz etc were released 40 yrs ago and I dont remember anyone from my mother's generation criticizing Sharmila or Hema for giving in to Rajesh Khanna's hot looks! 😆 Does that mean their generation was more modern than our generation?

And what do u call single mothers who give birth by artificial insemination? Are they unsanskari too? What if they never met a man who loved them or wanted to marry them? There are many single women here in the west and some in India too who get pregnant that way so they can have a child without the added bonus of a wedding ring or mangalsutra!

Are they all great sinners or just women who want to be mothers without the sanctity of marriage?

Personally I feel that its a woman's personal choice. Every woman must choose her own destiny where motherhood is concerned.

Single women do bring up babies alone, even in chawls. My mother has employed maid servants in Kolkata, many of whom are single mothers, because either their husbands deserted them or a lover betrayed them. They are working hard as housemaids and bringing up their kids alone with whatever education they can afford. I admire such women and their strength and dont judge them at all! Not everyone is born lucky or rich, a Princess like Ovi who can buy a husband by bargaining.

BTW ... What would you say if Purvi had aborted the baby? Would everything be kosher then? Or would she be unsanskari for killing a fetus?

Regarding Dhool ka Phool and Mala Sinha syndrome, thats exactly what these shows want to tell us...they are like morality plays, showing that a girl who strays from moral path has to pay for the consequences. Purvi is also paying for her "sins", she isnt exactly living on a bed of roses!

Originally posted by: sashashyam

For the first, dear Pallavi, I did say I was a dinosaur out of touch with the New Age morality, did I not?

For me such behaviour is wrong. Even immoral. Period. I too was young once, and when such a situation arose with my fiance, I said, loud and clear, NO!!!. That got home. So, I am a tad suprised to see anyone asking What should she have done? Why, exactly the same as I did. Purvi never lacked for the guts to raise her voice, and one firm No from her would have stopped Arjun cold in his tracks. She controls him totally now and it was the same then. So what was the problem?

They might have been going to get married the next day, but to me, jumping the gun in such a situation would have been a betrayal of all that my mother had taught me, and thus non-sanskaari. If it is ok with you and the younger generation, you are of course free to have your take on it, but I do not change my stand. No way. And yes, for me all that Aradhana type stuff is disgusting, and I do not see any need to apologise for that and say it is 'my POV absolutely'. Whose else would it be, anyway?

I do not buy these Ishq par zor nahin maxims, especially since, when things go badly wrong, it is always the woman who is left to carry the can. That is invariably shown clearly in all these films, the Mala Sihna specialities, to drive the point home to those young women in the audience who might, even in those days, have had boyfriends who got 'hot and heavy'. None of them were shown sashaying thru the whole unscathed like apni Purvi, thanks of the cavalier who rescued her, whom she now takes for granted as a repository for all her umpteen problems.

To revert, Arjun might have died that evening in a car crash, whereupon Purvi would have joined the Dhool ka Phool brigade. How stupid would that be? She would never be able to live it down, nor would her child. And that would be, to me, the worst of all. People have no right to create these kinds of situations for the children involved.

Finally, I did not say that the Arjun-Purvi rain scene was contrived; it was that roll on the dirty boards in that wet, grungy shack that was contrived. It was not at all like her, or in fact even like him

Pallavi, please write me off as a has been derelict from the previous century, and do not waste your time arguing any more with me on this point, for it will be time and effort wasted.

Ah yes, the 'bhool'. Not just Arjun, but Purvi too says exactly the same thing several times, to Arjun, and to the whole crowd at that party. That is because it was a mistake and given her upbringing (see, I am not bringing up the sanskaars!😉), she must be very sorry it ever happened. It is not something to be proud of. But that does not make it 'dirty'.

As for Pari, if Onir had not materialised out of the blue and played the knight errant, she would have been branded naajaayaz by the Kolkata chawlvaasis, seeing that her mother never bothered about that aspect and thought she could tackle it on her own. It is not at all easyfor a single woman to bring up a child with no declared father, even in a 2013 metro in India.

Shyamala Di


[