Alia Bhatt's New Bridal Wear Ad Sparks Controversy - Page 18

Originally posted by: PranPriye

Where did I mention that women are cows? Kindly prove where have I equated women with cows. I fave an example that EARLIER WEALTH WAS NOT CONFINED TO NON LIVING THINGS ONLY. FOR EXAMPLE, COWS WERE CONSIDERED WEALTH AND THEY WERE LIVING. HOPE THE LARGER FONT HELPS YOU TO READ BETTER. NOTHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT YOUR POOR UNDERSTANDING OR YOUR CHOICE TO PURPOSEFULLY MISUNDERSTAND AND ATTACK.

Your atrocity to believe that I am comparing any human (regardless of gender) with livestock is remarkable & amazing and I applaud it.👏

I disagree. It is in the modern times that wealth has been reduced to expensive objects only. Wealth earlier consisted of living beings as well like cows.

This is what you commented, so tell me why are you talking about cows when this thread is about women and how they haven’t been mistreated through religion and tradition?? What the f were you trying to say with this comment?? Let’s say for one minute being considered “wealth” like livestock is a good thing, why aren’t men considered “wealth”

I didn’t attack you or anyone else, I hoped and still hope women would stop agreeing and defending things men came up to demean them. You’re attacking all women everywhere by implying they are indeed wealth and not humans. (They can’t be both)

You is the one with poor understanding of your own kind and the struggle women go through. You’re the who’s happy and defending to be considered and object. You is the one sitting here trying so hard to make others agree to be considered “wealth” I’m not wealth, I’m a living breathing human being and none of your nonsense can make me believe otherwise.

Originally posted by: CherryMe

You have lost the plot long ago, my dear!

There is nothing more to see ir hear from you. Your bias , religious agenda and fundamentism are all out in open for all to see. No point quoting you anymore.

Have fun trash talking hinduism with chilli and cutejodikangal. I am done with you for now😆

😆 Yup, still not asking for citations. Still trying to deflect.

Originally posted by: Heisenberg17_

I see, another changing of the goalpost, so we went from "women are not regarded as property in Islam and Christianity", to "you did not quote from the Bible", to "these quotes are not from the gospels". 😆 Those quotes are from the Old Testament, which is part of the Christian Bible, and as far as I remember, Jesus never denounced/criticised/dismissed the Old Testament, in fact he completely supported it, which is even mentioned in the gospels,, after all, he was a Jew, and died as a Jew.

😆 Show me one quote where I said women aren't regarded as property in Christianity. You can't. In fact, I said the opposite.

But you took A and presented it as B.

And neatly avoided mentioning the books.

I just pointed it out

Nope, Jesus said he came to uphold the law (of God) and summarized it in 2 sentences. 😆

Before you claim something else, I call Krishna the feminist deity too. With one notable exception, he was 100% supportive of women's rights. His followers, not so much. The same for Christ

Originally posted by: Beautyful_Mess

You can scream and write in caps all you want but it doesn’t change what you “implied”

I disagree. It is in the modern times that wealth has been reduced to expensive objects only. Wealth earlier consisted of living beings as well like cows.

This is what you commented, so tell me why are you talking about cows when this thread is about women and how they haven’t been mistreated through religion and tradition?? What the f were you trying to say with this comment?? Let’s say for one minute being considered “wealth” like livestock is a good thing, why aren’t men considered “wealth”

I didn’t attack you or anyone else, I hoped and still hope women would stop agreeing and defending things men came up to demean them. You’re attacking all women everywhere by implying they are indeed wealth and not humans. (They can’t be both)

You is the one with poor understanding of your own kind and the struggle women go through. You’re the who’s happy and defending to be considered and object. You is the one sitting here trying so hard to make others agree to be considered “wealth” I’m not wealth, I’m a living breathing human being and none of your nonsense can make me believe otherwise.

Cows and daughters both were considered wealth. How can one even compare a cow to a woman? They are not even of the same species? I am talking about the modern concept of wealth being confined to non living things only ( though like I mentioned before its common quote now that The greatest wealth a man possesses is relationships. That isn't meaning to say that your relationships are objects ) versus the old concept of wealth including living beings as well. Kanya Daan is the giving away of the greatest wealth,I.e., the daughter. That's because the bride goes to the husband's family and if it were in the reverse (as some member has pointed out in some families in TN), I would agree for Kanya Daan to be replaced with Putra Daan.

You are really crossing the line here by stating that I am happy to be treated as an object, attacking women everywhere and so on. If you consider yourself to be a feminist in any way, please know from me that you don't even have the basic compassion to respond properly, forget about understanding the plight of women.

Lol. the derailing of the discussion on this thread is so predictable. The moment women ask for equal rights or put their foot down about what they don’t like, the so called upholders of the religion will snub them bringing religion into it. Since when is questioning Kanyadaan or any ritual for that matter is equivalent to trashing a religion altogether? People severely lack in objectivity either that or they are just pretending to be obtuse so that they can escape from having to acknowledge that there indeed was a systematic degradation of women in the pretense of upholding the religion.

Originally posted by: CherryMe

Beutiful_mess ke aage bhagwad nahi padha karte, meri jaan😆

Telling me that I am attacking women everywhere and all the other things in the post & then talking about atrocity. Anyway, now I am simply going to report posts which are going to label & call me things like that. If you have logic on your side you don't need to resort to this.

Admire your tenacity , Cherry Me. I am done responding here.

Originally posted by: CherryMe

As monu said you started out just fine and then it went down hill when you connected girls educatiin with kanyadaan. Ever since you are ranting about why not putradaan in every post like a disgruntled feminist(...reminded me of RTH.).it was still bearable.

But you hit rock bottom here, especially the bolded part where you eqate girls being called laxmi to physical assets and property to be owned by men whose virginity is meant to be donated to/by them.

I know now why abrahmics are so interested in reading vedas and shastras....this is an example how they interpret and pass it on as scholarly knowledge to us who are hardly interested in learning about our own ancient knowlege.

Many people fell for your first post when you talked about discarding the ritual. If this is how you interpret a well meant well intended ritual like kanyadaan during which a bride and groom gets treated like god and goddess with all pooja path then i have to say you have questionable intentions.

You have to attend a hindu wedding to know how it's performed actually

It's completely different from other wedding ceremonies where

a priest asks the man : you wanna fcuk her ?

Man : yes, i do

He asks the girl the same question and she answers: yes, i do too

Then he asks them to immediately start kissing right there n then while people watching their make out sessions.

I don't see how sealing a deal between a boy and girl by kissing in front of a bunch of relatives is more progressive than a kanyadaan.

Just an example of how it is in other cultures as compared to our regressive traditions.

Anyhow, you have made your views about hinduism pretty clear especially with this post that it has always been regressive since vedic era and women were always treated less than humans.

There is nothing more to see here.

Classic whataboutery and wrong assumptions.

I am not abrahmic a practicing Hindu Samavedi actually to be precise.

So don't bother to lecture me about Hinduism.

Kanyaadaan is regressive. Hinduism was always patriarchal. All organized religions are. Formed by men and officiated by men.

When men make the rules women are forgotten.

That is why there is no female Pope or Imams or female Shankaracharya and Muttadheesh.

Before talking about Vedas atleast read them once. They a philosophical treatises and prayers to deities

They don't have marriage rituals in them. Marriage rituals are taken from Grihyasutra. Always.

These rituals were social ceremonies that need to change as societies change. Grihyasutra themselves mention different types of marriage ceremonies.

There is egalitarian marriage ceremony in Hinduism called Prajapatya marriage, in which there is no Kanyaadaan instead the ritual asking the groom in front of family and relatives that Does he promise in front of Gods and family that from this day on he accepts the bride as his life partner in good and bad times as his dharmapatni. And groom says he accepts. The remaining rituals preceding and afterwards this invocation remain the same.

If only Hindus bothered to read their own scriptures and accept the good and bad in it to improve it.

Instead of blindly supporting rituals that must be discarded.

If Hindus want to support hinduism, instead of getting defensive about ads they should start reading the scriptures. They are easily available even in English all indian language translations if people don't know Sanskrit

Originally posted by: CherryMe

Beutiful_mess ke aage bhagwad nahi padha karte, meri jaan😆

Samza karo inka grasping power phir waise baat karo .aiwayi kyu apna sir khapa rahi ho tum bhi😆

Originally posted by: cutejodikangal

Lol. the derailing of the discussion on this thread is so predictable. The moment women ask for equal rights or put their foot down about what they don’t like, the so called upholders of the religion will snub them bringing religion into it. Since when is questioning Kanyadaan or any ritual for that matter is equivalent to trashing a religion altogether? People severely lack in objectivity either that or they are just pretending to be obtuse so that they can escape from having to acknowledge that there indeed was a systematic degradation of women in the pretense of upholding the religion.

THIS!

The minute women talk about their rights, religion will be dragged into it to derail the discussion.

Originally posted by: PranPriye

Cows and daughters both were considered wealth. How can one even compare a cow to a woman? They are not even of the same species? I am talking about the modern concept of wealth being confined to non living things only ( though like I mentioned before its common quote now that The greatest wealth a man possesses is relationships. That isn't meaning to say that your relationships are objects ) versus the old concept of wealth including living beings as well. Kanya Daan is the giving away of the greatest wealth,I.e., the daughter. That's because the bride goes to the husband's family and if it were in the reverse (as some member has pointed out in some families in TN), I would agree for Kanya Daan to be replaced with Putra Daan.

You are really crossing the line here by stating that I am happy to be treated as an object, attacking women everywhere and so on. If you consider yourself to be a feminist in any way, please know from me that you don't even have the basic compassion to respond properly, forget about understanding the plight of women.