Undermining woman empowerment through anupama

Recently after covid many people have lost their spouses and are looking out to marry again. Recently i heard an conversation between few women actually.

I heard one such person parent say they do not want any divorcee/widow with ex hubby or kids of ex hubby as baggage and when her friend asked her why she was giving various reasons. Than another woman in group interjected and took anupam name and said do you not watch TV and anupama, look if your son marry a widow or divorcee with ex hubby or kids he will suffer like anuj kapadiya. I never realized that serials have started having impact on the mind of ppl so much that they are influenced by characters behavior.

Initially we thougth that anupama serial will empower woman - people will take this serial a inspiration and marry divrocee and widows or those above 40

Because as a society india and asia s very backward - even 45 year old man with kids will only prefer to marry a 25 year old unmarried woman than his same age woman with kids or whose widow or divorcee etc

We thought anupama will change this backward thinking in society

Also regarding adoption - seeing anuj kapadiya an adopted son more family will come forward to adopt kids from orhanages who have no kids

But honestly if someone watches anupaa ulta will happen (as per convo i heard)

Nether any man will be ready to marry a 40 plus woman divorce or widow or with kids after seeing anupama

Nor will couples with kids be ready to adopt kids from orphanages if they watch anuj kapadiya character

Anyways in a patriarchal society like india and asia its so tough for woman single divorcee widows to start life again

Also domestic voilence and abuse has been institutionalized. Even police do not easily put case if woman go and complaint.

Now look at anupama only can anyone believe for 26 years she was abused and tortured by vanraj and baa and his family? No because shes having normal more than normal relation with them after diorce.. o which human will believe she was abused by ex and his family ever.

Instead of helping society change mindset towards divorcee after 40 years this serial has completely damaged any chance of society viewing divorcee woman or above 40 as marriage eligible or even giving them a second chance ever again

And anupama as serial is very famous and many people watch it especially above 40 years old who are mostly decision makers regarding marriage etc at their homes. Because in india majority marriage are arranged by aged relatives or women. If they all watch a serial like anupama and assume the woman who remarries behaves like anupama, imagine the damage done to women empowerment

When we compare asia and india to US/europe women especially single/divorcee/widow are treated like 18th century still in these highly patriarchal society.

Instead of changing this mindset of society what is happening is people who watch anupama will get more rigid and refuse to marry their son grandsons to woman who are middle aged or with kids etc or who are divorce or widows

People say that TV and movies have no impact in society. But in a largely uneducated rigid patrichial society like india and asia where no other mode of entertainment and education there TV and movies do influence ppl behaviour

I know many ppl now go to school college in city and villages. But the education ppl get in schools or colleges does not change their rigid patriarchal mindsets actually. A person character is shaped by what his family and relatives and neighbours he grows up with think and believe. It does not change with education like its generally believed.

Otherwise Kabir Singh kind of movie would never become hit

Oh I completely agree with everything you said! This show has taken all socially important topics and created a scenario where the old-school ideas and practices are proven to be correct. Just an example, in any socially progressive scene, Baa is seen to be the voice of patriarchy, she says things that are backward in ideology. But after a few weeks, they’ll show exactly what Baa was saying. Be it remarriage or adoption or helping another woman, every scenario was twisted to revalidate that patriarchy is absolutely right and all attempts to change to new ideas doesn’t work at all.

Sorry, but I would really like to differ on the point of the condition of the society here.

Firstly, agree with the blantant and unapologetic misrepresentation of sensitive issues like re-marriage, Adoption, Legal process of victims of heinous crimes among many others.

About society at large, globally, we are a patriarchal society.

About representation of women, condition of women in society, the sheer population of Indians, a general perception due to travellers, invasions the nation has endured over centuries have been a contribution to how India's image appears even after centuries.

Imagine there are countries that waited centuries to give equal voting rights to the female population which was not even a point of contention considering our country always hailed fearless and able rulers notwithstanding their gender.

Media representation of society:

I wholeheartedly agree that media plays a vital role in correct representation of the society of today, in grooming society and bringing about a positive change.

There has been subtle stereotyping and perceptions that media (ALL forms) has done over the decades based on regions, language, culture, traditions, etc.

For some reason, there is this stubbornness against breaking against these stereotypes and perceptions.

The India is not how it is shown in "Slumdog Millionaire" nor is it as shown in "Dharma Productions".

The real India is somewhere in between and is ever evolving. The sheer diversity across the length and breadth of the country contributes to differences which has further had to endure centuries of turmoil.

That is definitely Not to say, there are NO darker chapters to the story of India. That is NOT to say, its ALL good here. It is just to say, the we are a more discussed society as against others.

Many practices were perhaps as a solution for the challenges at the time. Perhaps, we never retrospected this.

Shows such as these, could have better represented the society of today and provided a more solution based, sensitive, pragmatic and realistic approach that is representative of and portrays the society of today which is totally lacking here.

The show was supposed to be about empowerment, coming out of an abusive household & a beautiful journey of second chances.I never defended anuj Or anupama in their wrong doings but felt pity for both of them at various stages in show. But now i just don't feel pity for anupama because she lost the identify of women empowerment as she is all words and no actions.It must have taken lots of shamelessness to find 'faults' in Anuj's 26 years of love when it's Anupama who failed to fulfill even basic responsibilities of second marriage and even after 23456 Udaans , she is still obsessed with ex-sasural :) + After second marriage, anupama keeps on running to SH to fulfill their every whims let them destroy her new life, took away all peace and happiness of Anuj's life but still she has zero realization

Lessons learnt from Anupamaa,

Pre-MaAn marriage

1. Don't treat your in-laws as your own parents because they will only use you to suck out any energy in you that they can still exploit

2. Rule for sons "Do Thappad maar de par ghar se mat nikaal"

3. Never marry beneath you especially if you are a woman because they will make you do chores without hiring a maid on the pretext of thrifty self-respect but will also make your family pay to get you out of big messes.

4. Only your biological mother will take care of you (Anupaa's top priority were always her own kids and it was only Rakhi who has actually helped Kinjal in real messes)

5. Only landing a man can help fix your problems

6. A man and a woman can never be friends.

Post MaAn marriage,

1. Don't marry a woman with baggage because she will make you carry it while keeping you second place all your life.

2. A mature child is ignored more than pesky adults.

3. Karma never works

4. The underlying cause of Cheating is mental health.

5. Cheating can be forgotten if you can postpone moving out indefinitely again and again.

6. The underlying cause of Tantrums and violent behavior is mental health.

7. Domestic violence against women is disgusting but domestic violence against men is just childishness. (Both are disgusting but Anupaa teaches us otherwise)

8. Don't help victims of tragedies because they will turn villainous just to make you look bechari.

9. Money will never be a problem if you marry rich. Just keep putting up shams of scolding your kids for superfluous purchases which not matter much but passive aggressively ask for big amounts in pretext of "loans" while showing off your self-respect.

I don't think you understood the context or my position on the topic.

Infact, I am here drawing a clear distinction of sweeping statements and comparisons.

When we say we are a good, bad society, it is in comparison to something. It is relative in nature.

Every society globally has been a patriarchal society. Every society has had issues especially dealing with women's rights.

Every society evolves over time and it is dependent on the socio-economic and geopolitical conditions.

We spoke of our history, but do we know about the comtemporary history about other countries? What is the basis of the comparison we make to say "A" is better than "B"?

Furthermore, we cannot compare apples to oranges.

Our perceptions, our decision making are driven by the social fabric we grow in and the fabric we witness through our experiences.

Tbh I don't think it is right to put the entire burden of transforming society on a TV serial least of all an Indian TV serial. This show had a beautiful premise of second chances in life. The fact that it got a huge acceptance and the highest TRPs during the divorce track and Anuj's entry, actually shows that its audience accepted marriage and restart of a career at a later age in life. The fact that they derailed from the topic only shows the creators backstabbed the target audience, which 'did give' these topics a chance. Should that not tell something about society? Many times people continue watching these shows out of habit. That's where possibly the audience can be wrong. But then even my friend regularly watches this show. That doesn't mean she has backward thinking or she is learning something from it. Moreover, unlike us who discuss these characters in these forums, regular people don't. They just like Anupama's Bhushan and move on because most of the time her speeches are not wrong, her actions are, which are forgotten in the routine of life.

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

I don't think you understood the context or my position on the topic.

Infact, I am here drawing a clear distinction of sweeping statements and comparisons.

When we say we are a good, bad society, it is in comparison to something. It is relative in nature.

Every society globally has been a patriarchal society. Every society has had issues especially dealing with women's rights.

Every society evolves over time and it is dependent on the socio-economic and geopolitical conditions.

We spoke of our history, but do we know about the comtemporary history about other countries? What is the basis of the comparison we make to say "A" is better than "B"?

Furthermore, we cannot compare apples to oranges.

Our perceptions, our decision making are driven by the social fabric we grow in and the fabric we witness through our experiences.

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

condition of women in society, the sheer population of Indians, a general perception due to travellers, invasions the nation has endured over centuries have been a contribution to how India's image appears even after centuries.

This is a sweeping statement. Condition of women when and where? In Satavahana's reign? In Harappan period? In Palas' reign? In Chola period or Cherya period or during Akbar's reign or during Shivaji's? In 1850s or 1940? Or 2020s? In 300 BCE or 1300 AD?

What invaders? Ashoka's invasion of Orissa or Alexander's failed attempt at invading North India? Or, the Hunnas Or, the Portugese in Kerala and Goa? Or the Arab invasion of Punjab?

Condition of which women are you talking about? Elite women of royal households? Buddhist nuns? Courtesans? Poor women? Nautch girls? Malayali women on whom the Britishers forced the angavashtra? Parsi women? Gond women? Who exactly? Their conditions throughout history were different from each other.

What image? Appears to whom? Who constructed these images? Are those images completely fabricated?

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

That is definitely Not to say, there are NO darker chapters to the story of India. That is NOT to say, its ALL good here. It is just to say, the we are a more discussed society as against others.

Many practices were perhaps as a solution for the challenges at the time. Perhaps, we never retrospected this.

Again, a sweeping statement. Where is the data that we are a more discussed society than others? Are there more international news articles written on India annually than, say, America? Or, France? Or more books written? Or more films made? How many films were made by non-Indian directors on India in 2022-23? Are they necessarily orientalist? Were there more films made on India than on, say, Africa?

Which practices were made in response to which challenges? Is that something you retroactively feel or is there historical evidence to back up these claims? And even if these unspecified challenges did exist in the past and triggered unspecified practices, does it mean we have to care about what happened in seventh century BC, seventh century AD and seventeenth century AD today?

Completely confused what you mean here and what does it have to do with media representations. Especially in Anupamaa.

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

Imagine there are countries that waited centuries to give equal voting rights to the female population which was not even a point of contention considering our country always hailed fearless and able rulers notwithstanding their gender.

You brought a comparative analogy here. Not me.

What did you mean by our country always hailed fearless rulers notwithstanding their gender? How many women/nonbinary rulers as opposed to male rulers did we have, pre-1900? Did these rulers have legitimate power or de facto power? Were they disposed or gladly accepted by their respective subjects/ministers? Heck, how many women/nonbinary people have been prime ministers or presidents since independence? Three.

Is there anything to suggest that our Consituent Assembly wasn't influenced by the said suffregette movements in other countries to institute universal adult franchise?

It is great to be proud of our country.There are many things to be proud of our country : we recognise maternity leave. Our abortion laws are some of the most expansive in the world. Our medicine industry makes medicines comparatively affordable. And I guess, every person in the world is proud of their respective country. That is only human.

But there is absolutely no need to misappropriate history to explain away or justify the issues of the present. We adjudge the codition of a country today by a number of parametres set by the UN of which India is a proud member. Apart from these we have indices set up by non-partisan institutes. These include HDI,Gender Inequality Index etc. Many Indian scholars have helped to devise these parametres. It has nothing to do with what happened (1)500 years ago.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_Inequality_Index

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_Development_Index

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

Also, our country also exists and has always existed in a wider world. It has influenced and has got influenced by other societies and cultures throughout history. That was my only point.

Anyhow.

Again, I stand by the statement, we are a more spread out society and hence we are a more discussed society.

If one is naming a society as conservative or modern, forward or backward, it means it is conservative or backward compared to something and based on some parameters. And such comparisons are based on ones own conditioning and social fabric.

The world order keeps changing and is heavily influenced by the geopolitical prowess.

Glad you mentioned the various periods in history, when we say, that we have been a conservative society over decades, what is our source of how the society was in others parts of the world at the same time?

If anything, the sweeping statements are being done by yourself.

I am sure you have Not read the articles completely (you have quoted yourself). The articles rank obvious flaws, but anyway.

Like I said, perceptions trump.

I had mentioned in the very beginning that there were certain excerpts of the original thread that i do Not agree with.

Again, you are not understanding the point I am trying to drive and looking at the tone of the reply, I do NOT intend on explaining any further.