Anupama didn't sell jewellery for her mom's operation - Page 2

Originally posted by: Lennie

She didnt sell her jewellery, didnt she get an exchange for it, what the price of her jewellery came to, she got another jewellery done....

And to be honest i do agree with Vanraj and Leela that for engagement ring there was no need to pay out and get that, a gold ring will last for years... just cos Toshu wanted it, doesnt mean it happens, in few years when Toshu starts earning he can gift his wife another ring.

Exactly! If he is not mature enough to understand the family's financial status, he is definitely not mature enough for marriage!

I get that from their pov that they think Kinjal wanted that ring but honestly they should of asked her directly too esp Toshu and he kind of should of known her likes and dislikes.

I think Kinjal would of been happy with a gold ring that last year and can be past down...

The writers are idiots

They have made Anu into a school child

Originally posted by: ThePhilosopher

The question is obviously of what is more important to Anupamaa being a daughter or a being a mother. Perhaps, for her, being a mother was more important to her than being a daughter.

And before everyone starts attacking this point of view, please remember that life is full of compromises. I personally feel like being a mother is something that only mothers can know. The pain of giving birth, carrying a child in their womb for almost a year and so on... there muSt be some peculiar phenomenology that no other duties are prima facie.

Unless we are all mothers, there is no real way of knowing....

Choosing between surgery for my mother vs indulging my overgrown spoilt child, I would definitely pick the first. The first is a duty I am beholden to do, the latter is just me trying to make a sullen child happy buying him toys he does not actually need. So if Anupama could have sold her jewelry to pay for her mother’s surgery, she should have done that before even contemplating selling her jewelry to buy a ring for her future daughter in law.

Originally posted by: soapwatcher1

Choosing between surgery for my mother vs indulging my overgrown spoilt child, I would definitely pick the first. The first is a duty I am beholden to do, the latter is just me trying to make a sullen child happy buying him toys he does not actually need. So if Anupama could have sold her jewelry to pay for her mother’s surgery, she should have done that before even contemplating selling her jewelry to buy a ring for her future daughter in law.

What is right for you or what you think is right is not necessarily right for others. We are all different people. Some daughters (who are also mothers) may think that their duty as a mother comes before their duty as a daughter. But that is for individuals to decide. You may not like this, but your point of view is not an objective fact. In other words, it is not true for all place and time.

On the other hand, while most of you see Anupamaa’s actions as directed to make her sulking child happy and for her future daughter-in-law, her actions can also be viewed as a selfish act. Even though the reason behind it is her child, she is doing it all for herself! The end goal is nothing but her contentment. She will be happy seeing her children happy. On the surface, consciously, it seems that she is doing it for Toshu and Kinjal. But we can paint her actions in Freudian terms and make all her actions and behaviour about herself only.

Even though our perception is limited in reality, our two eyes can only look at one particular thing in detail at a time, our consciousness does allow room to perceive the world in a light not apparent to us immediately. Our phenomenology make us all experience the same world differently. No being is the same, then why should they be expected to make similar decisions?

Originally posted by: ThePhilosopher

What is right for you or what you think is right is not necessarily right for others. We are all different people. Some daughters (who are also mothers) may think that their duty as a mother comes before their duty as a daughter. But that is for individuals to decide. You may not like this, but your point of view is not an objective fact. In other words, it is not true for all place and time.

On the other hand, while most of you see Anupamaa’s actions as directed to make her sulking child happy and for her future daughter-in-law, her actions can also be viewed as a selfish act. Even though the reason behind it is her child, she is doing it all for herself! The end goal is nothing but her contentment. She will be happy seeing her children happy. On the surface, consciously, it seems that she is doing it for Toshu and Kinjal. But we can paint her actions in Freudian terms and make all her actions and behaviour about herself only.

Even though our perception is limited in reality, our two eyes can only look at one particular thing in detail at a time, our consciousness does allow room to perceive the world in a light not apparent to us immediately. Our phenomenology make us all experience the same world differently. No being is the same, then why should they be expected to make similar decisions?

I understand perfectly what is right for me may not be right for others. I thought I made it very clear that this is what i would do if i were in Anupama’s place. I was only answering your implied question that we need to be mothers to answer your question.

And none of our perspectives are truly objective - we all see the show with a certain inherent bias, admitted or not, or glasses that are tinged with personal experience or beliefs. You see Anupama as selfish and doing all this to keep herself contented. I do not see it much differently from you, though I don’t perceive her as selfish. I think what she is doing is to satisfy the image she has of herself as good wife, good mother, however skewed that image might be.

Agreeing to disagree with others’ opinions or even giving others’ opinions some thought to see if we might have missed something ourselves in our take away from the show is not a bad thing. Case in point is the author that made this post, I had not thought of Anupama not selling her jewelry for her mother until I read this post by the author.

Happy watching and look forward to your analysis of future episodes.

Originally posted by: ThePhilosopher

What is right for you or what you think is right is not necessarily right for others. We are all different people. Some daughters (who are also mothers) may think that their duty as a mother comes before their duty as a daughter. But that is for individuals to decide. You may not like this, but your point of view is not an objective fact. In other words, it is not true for all place and time.

On the other hand, while most of you see Anupamaa’s actions as directed to make her sulking child happy and for her future daughter-in-law, her actions can also be viewed as a selfish act. Even though the reason behind it is her child, she is doing it all for herself! The end goal is nothing but her contentment. She will be happy seeing her children happy. On the surface, consciously, it seems that she is doing it for Toshu and Kinjal. But we can paint her actions in Freudian terms and make all her actions and behaviour about herself only.

Even though our perception is limited in reality, our two eyes can only look at one particular thing in detail at a time, our consciousness does allow room to perceive the world in a light not apparent to us immediately. Our phenomenology make us all experience the same world differently. No being is the same, then why should they be expected to make similar decisions?

Even though what is right for me need not necessarily be right for you, there are certain general terms and conditions of humanity which state that a medical emergency takes precedence over material possession, in this case jewellery. Just take a look at nationalised healthcare schemes across the world. Can you name one "nationalised jewellery possession scheme"? What governments across the world have arrived at through consensus and collective will of humanity, shouldn't seem unintelligible to you or Anupama. Although everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, one which is not humane and makes light of a crisis is absurd.