Kabir SIngh's success dismantles our false illusions of wokeness - Page 4

Originally posted by: ZackKnightRocks

This is true. If anything, he wasn't exactly misogynistic because a misogynist would never want to be with a woman who has a kid from another guy. A misogynist will talk about how she's no longer 'pure' to him or something like that. He says how the baby is still "her flesh and blood" when he didn't know the kid is his, so he was just an aggressive person but his heart was in the right place. Like when he got angry at an old man who came to him for treatment in a song sequence and then he goes to say sorry to him.

This is a very incorrect and narrow definition of misogyny. Misogyny is prejudice, mistreatment, and contempt for women that can manifest in many ways. There is no one single way people are or aren't misogynistic.

A man may marry a woman who was previously married and with a child. That act itself does not absolve him of misogyny. He can still turn out to be verbally and/or physically abusive. He can still cut her off from friends and social circles. He can still believe a woman's place is in the kitchen. Actually many abusive men intentionally target women coming out of breakups/divorces or unwed mothers and guilt them into staying in an abusive relationship because they saved them/gave them a second chance/took care of them when they were discarded by other men or family.

Even ordinary well-meaning men can unintentionally engage in acts that are misogynistic. Women including women who believe themselves to be feminists can engage in acts that are misogynistic too.

Kabir Singh's misogyny
- he sees a girl and stakes claim on her. There is no second thought given to her preferences and opinion. Her opportunity to meet people and organically seek out a relationship of her choice is completely eliminated.
- he completely takes claim on her time and space. He barges into classes and takes her for personal lessons. He never asks her if this is OK with her, if she is comfortable with it, he never considers if she would rather go through college with her peers
- he makes statements like pretty girls should be friends with larger women
- he never really tries to get to know Preeti as a person or asks her opinion on anything
- he doesn't even know why he is with Preeti and cannot elaborate what he likes about her
- he literally has a scene where he is forcing a woman to disrobe at knifepoint
- his maid is terrified of his physical violence and he actually chases her for breaking a glass

^^ the maid scene isn’t misogynistic. It would have been the same if there was a male ramu kaka imo

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

This is a very incorrect and narrow definition of misogyny. Misogyny is prejudice, mistreatment, and contempt for women that can manifest in many ways. There is no one single way people are or aren't misogynistic.

A man may marry a woman who was previously married and with a child. That act itself does not absolve him of misogyny. He can still turn out to be verbally and/or physically abusive. He can still cut her off from friends and social circles. He can still believe a woman's place is in the kitchen. Actually many abusive men intentionally target women coming out of breakups/divorces or unwed mothers and guilt them into staying in an abusive relationship because they saved them/gave them a second chance/took care of them when they were discarded by other men or family.

Even ordinary well-meaning men can unintentionally engage in acts that are misogynistic. Women including women who believe themselves to be feminists can engage in acts that are misogynistic too.

Kabir Singh's misogyny
- he sees a girl and stakes claim on her. There is no second thought given to her preferences and opinion. Her opportunity to meet people and organically seek out a relationship of her choice is completely eliminated.
- he completely takes claim on her time and space. He barges into classes and takes her for personal lessons. He never asks her if this is OK with her, if she is comfortable with it, he never considers if she would rather go through college with her peers
- he makes statements like pretty girls should be friends with larger women
- he never really tries to get to know Preeti as a person or asks her opinion on anything
- he doesn't even know why he is with Preeti and cannot elaborate what he likes about her
- he literally has a scene where he is forcing a woman to disrobe at knifepoint
- his maid is terrified of his physical violence and he actually chases her for breaking a glass

For example in Gully Boy Safeena does violent toxic things that are put there only to make people laugh. Idk, she doesn't seem inherently any 'ist' either they both seem like people with anger issues. I could be wrong though and yeah you're right that there's many ways people can be misogynistic, but when I commented that I meant that he didn't seem like a very literal misogynist to me. Like that's not his defining factor to me, the defining factor to me about him would be an obsessive person with alcoholism and anger management issues.

There's definitely traces of misogyny in him but honestly at this point I've given up because even men I've met who are self proclaimed feminists said and do some misogynistic things and that behaviour needs to be rightfully called out, but misogynist is such a dirty huge word to me that I only reserve it for people who really are completely horrible in that regard.

In other cases I would say they have traces of misogyny that needs work. But honestly, most people need work in that. I've seen girls themselves shame other women for their looks, age, weight and whatnot. We grow up in such a society where misogyny is normalised that everyone needs to actively keep working against those sexist impulses and correct that behaviour. So Kabir didn't seem like his life motto is to attack women and make their life hell and treat them like shit, he just seemed like an obsessive angry person to me more than other stuff.

But again, I could be wrong. I was moreso speaking from my experience since I had a guy friend who was a feminist but he would say shitty misogynistic things sometimes but he wasn't inherently misogynistic and whenever I called him out on it he'd try to listen so I couldn't exactly label him as a misogynist.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Kabir Singh's misogyny
- he sees a girl and stakes claim on her. There is no second thought given to her preferences and opinion. Her opportunity to meet people and organically seek out a relationship of her choice is completely eliminated.

I think this is one of the most misunderstood scenes in the movie and pointed out by so many people. I would've called this out if I had never studied in a college in Delhi. Not saying what he did was right, but that is literally how it's going to be in a college campus in Delhi, especially engineering or medical colleges. The sex ratio is so skewed that boys are quite literally obsessed with the girls that enter the college and it is very believable that a senior will try to warn the others away from a girl he likes. And I wouldn't really call it misogynistic. It's not a healthy environment for organic relationships and the dynamics are very different from the outside world. What he did isn't right but it's not misogynistic, it's pretty realistic.

- he completely takes claim on her time and space. He barges into classes and takes her for personal lessons. He never asks her if this is OK with her, if she is comfortable with it, he never considers if she would rather go through college with her peers

Yes, he does act controlling over there. By the end of it, I felt like it was more because he knew he is the senior and she will listen to him somewhat for that reason and also because of their natures, assertive vs compliant. Not because he was the guy and she was the girl. He never asks if she was okay but we are never shown her being uncomfortable either. We don't know what he would've done if she said no, and for that reason, this point does not prove him to be a misogynist.

- he makes statements like pretty girls should be friends with larger women

That was him acting oversmart, like he has in the whole movie. Like he knows everything. But yes it is a misogynistic statement. But like you said in your post, it's not by a single act that somebody can be absolved of misogyny and so the same way, a single problematic statement doesn't make a person misogynistic. They just made a misogynistic statement.

- he never really tries to get to know Preeti as a person or asks her opinion on anything

No one is to say what is the right way to fall for a person. Or what a good relationship should be like. It is for the two people to decide. Is it wrong for two people to want to be together if only because they're physically attracted? I think that's being judgemental. Also, we're never shown Preeti asking for his opinion. It's just he gives it on his own otherwise she does whatever she wants to too. He's a know-it-all and she's unassuming. It's not implied anywhere that it's a gender thing. Just because he is a he and she is a she, doesn't mean it's supposed to be problematic.

- he doesn't even know why he is with Preeti and cannot elaborate what he likes about her

Nope. He was being romantic in his mind obviously. That dialogue is supposed to be one of the main dialogues in the movie. It's pretty intentional. And even if he didn't, doesn't make him a misogynist? It's like the focus is too much on their genders and their actions are being judged from that perspective even though nowhere in the movie is it explicitly said that they behave like that because of their genders. It could very well have been the reverse with Preeti saying she likes the way he breathes and nobody would bat an eyelash. Feels like you've already made up your mind about his misogyny and are just looking for incidents from the movie to support that argument instead of reaching that conclusion because of these incidents.

- he literally has a scene where he is forcing a woman to disrobe at knifepoint

Yeah that was totally wrong and one of the few places I thought they went overboard with trying to show his impulsiveness and selfishness. Since that scene was in the beginning, I thought the character is going to be misogynistic and disgusting but after having watched the movie, I feel like that was more of an out of character scene and I think it shouldn't have been in the movie, both for creative and moral reasons.

- his maid is terrified of his physical violence and he actually chases her for breaking a glass

Again, just because he's a guy and the maid's a woman? There is nothing else in that scene to suggest that their respective genders had anything to do with his actions.

This is my gripe with most people about this movie. People have already made up their minds and are watching this film through that lens and just piling up examples to support their preconceived notions. If you watch it without prejudice, his reasons for most of the stuff that is being considered problematic are right there for you to see. And they are not related to his or anyone's gender.

Comments inline in blue.

^^Also in the beginning of the movie when he's on the bike with her he keeps speaking and she's silent. And then after sometime of their relationship it's shown that she's speaking on the bike and he's silent. In both the instances their dialogues are muted and a song is playing, so they were perhaps equals in the sense that at first he used to take the initiative but later she started talking too. She also gets adamant that he has to kiss her or else she won't go inside. So it's like she wanted to be with him just as much.

Originally posted by: ffkhan

That's the problem of the people who are burning, they are labelling those people as misogynistic who have been either liking the movie or praising Shahid's acting. We can clearly see whether "nobody cares" or not. Undoubtedly Shahid was phenomenal in delivering his performance. So if he gets much more recognition and fanbase, then surely he deserves it. You don't have to mock the audience for that. Remember, an actor is not the character. In fact Shahid Kapoor himself told that "Don't be a Kabir Singh."

He has always been a very good actor. I even think he did better job than Ranveer in Padmavat. But he chose this role for stardom. Even Ranveer rejected to do this kind of role which cud be the biggest bad influence.

Originally posted by: DragonBoy49

Ya got people saying watching a movie means you endorse this, that and the other ? 😆

Sometimes it’s just a movie 😆

You might think it is, but the public approval shows it is ok with the movie it watches and that is what is frightening.

Originally posted by: TeenRose1

You might think it is, but the public approval shows it is ok with the movie it watches and that is what is frightening.

Yaar its just a movie 🤣🤣

Yeh deep insight im not the one 😆

Had it been done by Ranveer, he would have gotten the most hue over him doing such film and being irresponsible. Bcos it is Shahid everyone is ok.

Originally posted by: lunza

So, Is Kabir Singh a scene-by-scene remake of Arjun Reddy . ?

I haven't seen KS but have watched AR.

Reg. KS, my "issue" isn't with the fact that it has become a big hit or that people have liked it. It is that criticism about the movie has somehow morphed into feminism vs pseudo feminism debate.

Those who are now using criticism against KS to accuse people of being pseudo feminists are doing the same thing that they used to criticise the pseudos of in the first place - Of not being able to separate the people from their opinions, of appropriating labels to people for their opinions , and of counting their version of ground-reality as the only valid one.

I have seen pro-Modi media and pages somehow making the negative reviews into some anti-Right Wing agenda.

I am not saying the reviewers dont let their political leanings affect their opinions (we don't need to look any further than Tashkent Files for proof), but I really don't think that was the case for KS.

A lot of the articles brought up Padmavat and Khilji as an example of the reviewers and critic's hypocrisy, but I don't remember anyone being under any illusion about who or what Khilji was supposed to be. The movie also showed no intent of him being portrayed as "redeemable" or Padmavati reciprocating his "love" . He was a "villain" as per the characterization. Ratan Singh and Padmavati were the good ones .

Sure, the general public drooled over Ranveer and his portrayal of Khilji but I don't remember anyone idolizing Khilji himself.

So what hypocrisy are they talking about?

There is a difference between showing an "as-is" reality of a section of people's lives and glorifying the toxicity of it as something to emulate (or being a "forgivable sin" ) through the film's messaging.

The directors and producers are at a liberty to put out the movie - which they have without any protests or censorship issues. The critics have used their usual yardsticks - of consent, misogyny, glorifying undesirable personality flaws, - to criticise the film.

I wish all the "right wingers" and critics of the "pseudo -ists" , pause a bit instead of "criticizing the critics" just because

Don't compare both scenarios. No one idolized Khilji, they are doing it for Kabir, they did for Arjun.