Neetu: Ranbir is not Joru Ke Ghulam - Page 3

Completely disagree, when a girl gets married, she is asked to accept her husband and family whole heartedly. She is asked to always prioritize her husband and kids first. It should be the same rules for men too. They should be free to become joru ka ghulam without having to be made fun of. Husband wife relationship always takes priority over everything, it doesn’t mean they forgot their parents. It just means that they are starting a new life together, should be allowed to do so without any judgments or interference.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

A adult child is entitled to live his own life. Doesn't mean he should forget his parents. But if his wife makes the decisions in the house, it's not the mother's place to interfere as long as 2 consenting adults are involved.

Generation might be diff, but toxic is toxic. And its not about feminism though the anger gets directed to daughters in law. It's about parents needing to understand their control ends when the child becomes an adult.

And if a son is not paying attention to mom, it doesn't automatically follow that the daughter in law is keeping him prisoner and not letting him associate with his parents. Perhaps the son is thoughtless and irresponsible. Why blame the wife for an adult man's mistakes? He's responsible for it. It's not a woman's responsibility to fix her adult male partner's bad behavior.

(I get that Neetu said it's the man's fault. But she also uses JkG, which squarely places the blame on the daughter in law)

I am sure that by JKG she meant that the man is being pressurized by his wife to not to talk to or take care of the parents.......do you know technically who is an adult child....an 18 year old.....they are still a kid then...How many parents wash off their hands and kick out the child on their 18th birthday? How many?? Parents take care of their kids as long as they are not self sustainable...In USA an ADULT MAN or WOMAN can be in their parents' medical insurance till they are 26...why?? Shouldn't they be thrown off at 18?? So the children are accepting their parents taking care of them till they are 26 ...sometimes even more than that...and boom they get married and they should have no consideration for their parents?? That is not how it goes...not in a civilized world atleast where adults are responsible people.... the parents take care of their young ones and when they grow old the kids should do the same....How do u expect 85, 90 or sometimes even 100 yesr olds to survive ...in old age homes?? Is that where they belong??

I agree that parents should not interfere in their kid's married lives but then the spouse of the kid shouldn't interfere in the relationship between their spouse and their parents...it works both ways....it doesn't happen that parents marry their kids off and they don't want to see their kids anymore...or their love dies off...that emotional bond is always there....and Neetu is absolutely right when she talks about the balance....balance is everything in life.

Whenever I hear Indian parents and their “authority” over their children. Just want to say one thing, you chose to have kids , so kids don’t owe anything to you. It’s your responsibility as a parents and humans in civilized society to raise them right but when you ask for anything back in return, it’s not parenting, it becomes a transaction.

Originally posted by: blue-ice.1

I am sure that by JKG she meant that the man is being pressurized by his wife to not to talk to or take care of the parents.......do you know technically who is an adult child....an 18 year old.....they are still a kid then...How many parents wash off their hands and kick out the child on their 18th birthday? How many?? Parents take care of their kids as long as they are not self sustainable...In USA an ADULT MAN or WOMAN can be in their parents' medical insurance till they are 26...why?? Shouldn't they be thrown off at 18?? So the children are accepting their parents taking care of them till they are 26 ...sometimes even more than that...and boom they get married and they should have no consideration for their parents?? That is not how it goes...not in a civilized world atleast where adults are responsible people.... the parents take care of their young ones and when they grow old the kids should do the same....How do u expect 85, 90 or sometimes even 100 yesr olds to survive ...in old age homes?? Is that where they belong??

I agree that parents should not interfere in their kid's married lives but then the spouse of the kid shouldn't interfere in the relationship between their spouse and their parents...it works both ways....it doesn't happen that parents marry their kids off and they don't want to see their kids anymore...or their love dies off...that emotional bond is always there....and Neetu is absolutely right when she talks about the balance....balance is everything in life.

1. If son is old enought to get married, son is an adult.

If he's a child, then the woman he's marrying is equally a child.

She is not the only adult in the relationship and responsible for his bad actions.

2. Consideration for parents is the son's behavior when he is an adult.

Not only is the wife not responsible for another adult's behavior, that behavior depends at least partly on the values instilled by the parents and their relationship. So son's bad behavior toward his parents are his fault first, then his parents' fault.

If RK is not paying Neetu any mind, she should blame herself for bad parenting perhaps.

The one person whose fault it is not is the wife. Provided they are in a consensual relationship and have full rights.

Lemme see how many Indian marriages have the wife assuming authority rather than the husband and in laws ordering the wife with re her behavior with her own parents.

3. Emotional bond is one thing. Actual control of how son and wife deal with each other is another. Not a mother in law's place to make sure the son is the boss.

Neetu's statements make several things very clear. 1. Parents expect absolute authority as children are mere extensions of what the mom and dad want.

2. A son is considered a child while the same son's wife who is likely younger is an adult woman and expected to be responsible for everything while getting authority not even over her own life most times. That authority goes to parents.

2. Son's bad behavior or flouting of parental authority is excused as his wife's fault. Even when it's couched in terms of being his fault, it's really his fault in NOT KEEPING CONTROL OVER HIS WIFE. Aka Joru ka ghulam.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

1. If son is old enought to get married, son is an adult.

If he's a child, then the woman he's marrying is equally a child.

She is not the only adult in the relationship and responsible for his bad actions.

2. Consideration for parents is the son's behavior when he is an adult.

Not only is the wife not responsible for another adult's behavior, that behavior depends at least partly on the values instilled by the parents and their relationship. So son's bad behavior toward his parents are his fault first, then his parents' fault.

The one person whose fault it is not is the wife. Provided they are in a consensual relationship and have full rights.

Lemme see how many Indian marriages have the wife assuming authority rather than the husband and in laws ordering the wife with re her behavior with her own parents.

3. Emotional bond is one thing. Actual control of how son and wife deal with each other is another. Not a mother in law's place to make sure the son is the boss.

First of all ...I am not talking about FREAKING son...if you notice I used kid and spouse in my post...so my post is for both....and of course if Neetu is asked about Ranbir ...her answer is going to be in reference to a son...Why are these celebrities even asked personal questions??..Like I said I am not talking about controlling parents...I am talking about that emotional need of the parents to see their kids or grandkids....and its not cool if the kid is not able to do that because the spouse is too controlling......and to the dude who is giving gyaan about how it becomes transaction...no dude you are a 100% wrong...there is a difference between a financial transaction and being there for your old parents when they need you....to be emotionally supportive of them......there is no one who is ever going to love u like your parents do ...no one...not even your spouse...not your kids...not your grand kids.....no one...so stop giving ur illogical gyaan...

Originally posted by: hasini009

Saas -Bahu ki Honeymoon period over kya?😆

😆😆

Neetu and Alia are made for each other. They’ll never leave RK. 😆

Originally posted by: blue-ice.1

First of all ...I am not talking about FREAKING son...if you notice I used kid and spouse in my post...so my post is for both....and of course if Neetu is asked about Ranbir ...her answer is going to be in reference to a son...Why are these celebrities even asked personal questions??..Like I said I am not talking about controlling parents...I am talking about that emotional need of the parents to see their kids or grandkids....and its not cool if the kid is not able to do that because the spouse is too controlling......and to the dude who is giving gyaan about how it becomes transaction...no dude you are a 100% wrong...there is a difference between a financial transaction and being there for your old parents when they need you....to be emotionally supportive of them......there is no one who is ever going to love u like your parents do ...no one...not even your spouse...not your kids...not your grand kids.....no one...so stop giving ur illogical gyaan...

C'mon, BI. How many times have you heard anyone complaining about the married daughter not paying attention to her parents? In the Indian context, it is in fact expected that the woman is now the 'property' of the in laws. Paraya dhan and all that.

Neetu's answering about her son and not about her daughter because she's talking about her son. She is not some emancipated woman to merely have said 'son' when she actually meant her 'child.' Neetu has a daughter, right? She didn't mention her.

Forget the fact her boy is now in his late 30s. Even if he were 21, the youngest a man could be legally married in India, he's an adult. He's supposed to make his own way in life. Parents can help, but they are not supposed to control.

Far be it from me to support someone like Katrina, but it was supposed to be her who talked him into moving out of the family home. Good God! Children are supposed to leave the nest. They are not extensions of parents. He can take care of his parents without physically living under their control.

Secondly, the wife is usually younger than this supposed child-man who got married. Why is she being treated as an adult and blamed when he's not?

Thirdly, an adult's behavior is his own fault and the fault of the people who gave him those values. Not the wife's.

Fourthly, producing a child involves said spouse also. If she doesn't want to, not the parent's place to coerce her into it. In fact, emotional need of other people should not factor into such a huge decision! Both mom and dad to be actually have to want the child.

Originally posted by: blue-ice.1

I don't see anything wrong in what she said....First of all she did not say that Ranbir is not or is a Joru ka gulaam...she was talking in general....unless there is something more...I am basing off what you have posted.

I agree JKG is not a nice thing to say but then you have to remember she is from a different generation which is not as savvy or smart spoken as our current batch of actresses...or our feminists of today....when it comes to older actors and actresses....u will have to excuse their language.....😆Every generation has their own lingo to describe things....u might cringe at theirs's but trust me they might cringe at yours's

Hypothetically ...even if she was speaking about Ranbir because he is newly married these questions are asked....her answer was correct to the T.....a balance is necessary....whether its being Mama's boy or JKG😆

I disagree.

Being from a different era is a lousy excuse for being toxic and misogynistic. And yes, believing in the concept of Joru Ke Ghulam is misogynistic.

She doesn’t directly say Ranbir is or is not a JKG. But she is answering questions about MIL and DIL relationships, then goes into her talk about balance and not being JKG. Neetu loves Alia. Neetu thinks a JKG husband will cause problems with MIL/DIL. Neetu doesn’t have a problem with Alia. Ergo Neetu doesn’t think Ranbir is a JKG. Not that complicated.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

C'mon, BI. How many times have you heard anyone complaining about the married daughter not paying attention to her parents? In the Indian context, it is in fact expected that the woman is now the 'property' of the in laws. Paraya dhan and all that.

Neetu's answering about her son and not about her daughter because she's talking about her son. She is not some emancipated woman to merely have said 'son' when she actually meant her 'child.' Neetu has a daughter, right? She didn't mention her.

Forget the fact her boy is now in his late 30s. Even if he were 21, the youngest a man could be legally married in India, he's an adult. He's supposed to make his own way in life. Parents can help, but they are not supposed to control.

Far be it from me to support someone like Katrina, but it was supposed to be her who talked him into moving out of the family home. Good God! Children are supposed to leave the nest. They are not extensions of parents. He can take care of his parents without physically living under their control.

Secondly, the wife is usually younger than this supposed child-man who got married. Why is she being treated as an adult and blamed when he's not?

Thirdly, an adult's behavior is his own fault and the fault of the people who gave him those values. Not the wife's.

Fourthly, producing a child involves said spouse also. If she doesn't want to, not the parent's place to coerce her into it. In fact, emotional need of other people should not factor into such a huge decision! Both mom and dad to be actually have to want the child.

That is what I am saying...she was asked about Ranbir because he got married recently...why would she talk about her daughter when they are asking about the son??...

Yes the children can move out of their parent's home if that is their wish....what if the parents are not controlling and the kids don't want to move....what if the parent is old and sick....you want the kid to move out??leave the parent's at whose mercy?? Oh wait...old age homes are there....and what if they are very sick...hospices are there too....

I don't know why you are stuck on the controlling parents....I am talking about the normal ones.....who don't have any expectations from their kids.....but no one has control over age.....age spares no one.....so isn't the responsibility of a child to take care of their parents atleast when they need it.....I don't know.....it is just me maybe.....I am just not able to wrap my head around the idea of not taking care of ones parents.....

OK I am done with this debate.....it is actually giving me anxiety...I am not kidding...

Typical saas mentality... Hope i wonot be like this with my sons after 20 years 😆