Deepika spotted at slb's office again - Page 5

Originally posted by: jhopadpatti

This woman has negative self-respect, after Bhansali so publicly disowns her work and contribution, she still goes back like a chipkali 🤢🤢

https://twitter.com/bhansali_produc/status/1188300979420028928

and this is not lobbying, this is begging, aur phir bhi milne wala hain thenga 😈

Oh my God! This was such a blatant snub 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Her roles were completely ignored 🤣🤣🤣

Originally posted by: Kamala05

I am not justifying Karna's action, all I am saying is since Yudhishtira Pawned his wife, certainly, he consider her as an object, those days wife is considered to be the wealth of husband. If she opted to forgive her husband, can't a writer imagine the character forgiving the molesters? We should remember that Draupadi married Arjun and it was Kunti's announcement to divide the Bhiksha equally among the five brothers led to the marriage with the other four. If this can happen, why can't a writer imagine the character falling in love with the abandoned son of Kunti ?

Look at you do you eveb reliaze what are you saying??

Yudhishtra pawed his brothers too he considered them objects too and because yudhishtra pawed his wife it gave right to karan and co to molest her ??? Seriously !??? Seriously ?????

And drapaudi did reminded them about dice hall time and again during the entire vanvas period constantly she never forgot and never let any of them forgot

Drapaudi forgiving her husbands and a writer linking her to molester is not the same thing. She was never never in love with that molestor and people should stop humiliating her. The molester s fan can go on and glorify him as much as they want but please spare drapaudi

Linking drapaudi to karna/duryodhan/dushashan is same as linking any of today s victim to her offenders

Saying that it is ok to link drapaudi to her molester because her husband pawed her or because she was married to 5 man is same as the saying that a girl was molested because she wore short clothes

Please spare me this "abondoned" son of kunti sympathy drama at the end of the day that man was a molestor who got the fate he deserved.

Originally posted by: Kamala05

I am not justifying Karna's action, all I am saying is since Yudhishtira Pawned his wife, certainly, he consider her as an object, those days wife is considered to be the wealth of husband. If she opted to forgive her husband, can't a writer imagine the character forgiving the molesters? We should remember that Draupadi married Arjun and it was Kunti's announcement to divide the Bhiksha equally among the five brothers led to the marriage with the other four. If this can happen, why can't a writer imagine the character falling in love with the abandoned son of Kunti ?

Ignoring tha factual inaccuracies in what you just said here (No. It wasn't Kunti's statement which led to Arjuna handing Panchali to Yudhishtira. It was Vyasa who asked them to do it as per actual epic. Also, Arjuna never married at the swayamvar.), let's simply give you your assertions.

Let's acknowledge Yudhishtira was an incompetent nincompoop and a piss poor husband.

Let's assume Kunti was a mother-in-law from hell.

Does any of that make Karna not a molester?

Another exercise: try substituting Panchali/Draupadi in what you said with Nirbhaya. Let me know how it is not horrific to link her romantically with one of the assaulters.

I generally never wish ill on people. Mainly because it has an impact only on the psyche on of the person doing the ill wishing. But if DP does this thing, I hope she loses every last penny of her investment. I hope Chitra Divakaruni's name gets dragged from one corner of the globe to the other. What they're trying to do is not simply a crime against a historical figure, it's a slap on the face of every woman who has survived a sexual assault.

Originally posted by: MahanalayakKarn

Ignoring tha factual inaccuracies in what you just said here (No. It wasn't Kunti's statement which led to Arjuna handing Panchali to Yudhishtira. It was Vyasa who asked them to do it as per actual epic. Also, Arjuna never married at the swayamvar.), let's simply give you your assertions.

Let's acknowledge Yudhishtira was an incompetent nincompoop and a piss poor husband.

Let's assume Kunti was a mother-in-law from hell.

Does any of that make Karna not a molester?

Another exercise: try substituting Panchali/Draupadi in what you said with Nirbhaya. Let me know how it is not horrific.

Maybe few years down the line we can have writers writing about romantic angle between nirbhaya and her rapist. God even writing this makes me want to puke

Originally posted by: MahanalayakKarn

Ignoring tha factual inaccuracies in what you just said here (No. It wasn't Kunti's statement which led to Arjuna handing Panchali to Yudhishtira. It was Vyasa who asked them to do it as per actual epic. Also, Arjuna never married at the swayamvar.), let's simply give you your assertions.

Let's acknowledge Yudhishtira was an incompetent nincompoop and a piss poor husband.

Let's assume Kunti was a mother-in-law from hell.

Does any of that make Karna not a molester?

Another exercise: try substituting Panchali/Draupadi in what you said with Nirbhaya. Let me know how it is not horrific to link her romantically with one of the assaulters.

I generally never wish ill on people. Mainly because it has an impact only on the psyche on of the person doing the ill wishing. But if DP does this thing, I hope she loses every last penny of her investment. I hope Chitra Divakaruni's name gets dragged from one corner of the globe to the other. What they're trying to do is not simply a crime against a historical figure, it's a slap on the face of every woman who has survived a sexual assault.

Kunti was instrumental to this.

Oh please yaar, don't bring Nirbaya here. We are living in a civilized society now, it was not the scenario then. When we compare that, we should also check whether any girl would agree to marry 5 brothers just because of someone's instruction. When we compare it with today's scenario if Karna was a molester, the husband who pawned the wife would be an equal culprit.

Originally posted by: Kamala05

Kunti was instrumental to this.

Oh please yaar, don't bring Nirbaya here. We are living in a civilized society now, it was not the scenario then. When we compare that, we should also check whether any girl would agree to marry 5 brothers just because of someone's instruction. When we compare it with today's scenario if Karna was a molester, the husband who pawned the wife would be an equal culprit.

The husband were culprits dure still how don't see how it gives any right to the writers (karna fans) to link drapaudi to her molester and humiliate her

Ofcourse kunti s orders was the reason for molestation

Yudhishtra was the reason for molestation

Drapaudi s marriage to five pandavas was the reason for molestation

Even vyasa was. And this gave karna and co right to invade her personal space

Just like today girl s short clothes is the reason

Girl roaming late in night is the reason

And thus it ok link drapaudi to her molester and few down the line it will be ok to link today s victim to their offenders

Originally posted by: Kamala05

Kunti was instrumental to this.

Oh please yaar, don't bring Nirbaya here. We are living in a civilized society now, it was not the scenario then. When we compare that, we should also check whether any girl would agree to marry 5 brothers just because of someone's instruction. When we compare it with today's scenario if Karna was a molester, the husband who pawned the wife would be an equal culprit.

Nope. Read the epic again. Vyasa went to Pandavas before they even heard of swayamvar and told them what to do. It had nothing to do with Kunti. If that scene actually happened, it was a drama enacted for Panchali's sake since all 5 Panadvas already knew what Vyasa wanted.

Funny thing about molestation/sexual assault/rape: it was considered a crime THEN and NOW. If you have a hard time believing it, do read what Krishna says to Shishupal. Read what Panchali says to Krishna several times about the assault. Read what Vidura says. Read what Kunti says. Read what Bheema says.

Karna was a Class I criminal. Not only the dice hall incident, his kingdom, Anga, was the epicenter of child sex trafficking in Aryavarta according to his own conversation with Shalya.

So yeah, this romantic angle was as criminal then as now.

All Panchali says about Karna is he needs to be killed. That badass woman called the criminal a small man. KRISHNA reads off a list of Karna's crimes at the moment of his death - 2 of them had to do with the assault on Panchali. So yeah, Krishna, who is revered as God, considered it a crime worthy of death sentence.

Nope. Read the epic again. Vyasa went to Pandavas before they even heard of swayamvar and told them what to do. It had nothing to do with Kunti. If that scene actually happened, it was a drama enacted for Panchali's sake since all 5 Panadvas already knew what Vyasa wanted.

Funny thing about molestation/sexual assault/rape: it was considered a crime THEN and NOW. If you have a hard time believing it, do read what Krishna says to Shishupal. Read what Panchali says to Krishna several times about the assault. Read what Vidura says. Read what Kunti says. Read what Bheema says.

Karna was a Class I criminal. Not only the dice hall incident, his kingdom, Anga, was the epicenter of child sex trafficking in Aryavarta according to his own conversation with Shalya.

So yeah, this romantic angle was as criminal then as now.

All Panchali says about Karna is he needs to be killed. That badass woman called the criminal a small man. KRISHNA reads off a list of Karna's crimes at the moment of his death - 2 of them had to do with the assault on Panchali. So yeah, Krishna, who is revered as God, considered it a crime worthy of death sentence.

[/QUOTE

It is clearly written in the Epic that Kunti made the announcement and she couldn't revoke because of the custom.

I never belittled Karna's crime but when people call Karna a criminal ,they should not trivialise the actions of pandavas .

Originally posted by: Kamala05

It is clearly written in the Epic that Kunti made the announcement and she couldn't revoke because of the custom.

I never belittled Karna's crime but when people call Karna a criminal ,they should not trivialise the actions of pandavas .

Actually, https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01172.htm

precedes https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01194.htm

by several sections. Arjuna went to swayavar on Vyasa's instructions precisely to win Panchali for Yudhishtira. Therefore, the Kunti scene is either 1) interpolation or 2) a drama enacted for Panchal household's benefit.

Re; Pandavas' crimes. No one posting about this minimized Pandava crimes. The posts were clear that it is a huge problem when authors/actors decide to put a woman with the criminal who instigated an assault. No matter what crimes Pandavas committed, Karna's crime cannot be whitewashed. Chitra Divakaruni made a romantic hero out of a wannabe rapist.

One more thing occured to me re: this those were the days argument.

Forget the fact the likes of Krishna, Panchali, Vidura, Bheema, etc called Karna's attempted sexual assault a crime. Forget the fact Satyaki actually calls the evil threesome assassins.

Vyasa never put Panchali with the wannabe rapists in spite of his being from "those days."

Chitra Divakaruni and Deepika Padukone are not from "those days." They're from the supposedly civilized today. They're the ones who are trying to link Panchali with the sex criminal. What does that say about these women? What does that say about anyone who fantasizes about the pairing?