Anyone else feel this time ||DT NOTE P. 14|| - Page 12

Originally posted by: kiransgirl

Can you explain why we can't bash characters. I understand not bashing the actors who play the characters. However, we are reacting to the ACTIONS of characters. Are we not allowed to call Rajiv a bigamist or r@pist? That is what his character is doing on our screens. I am confused about what is considered bashing and what is considered discussing the actions of the characters in the show. Are some still allowed to call Neeti an attempted murderer or Pari a doormat with no spine. I honestly find the don't bash the characters very confusing.

My thoughts exactly! 

Edited by Aurora_77 - 6 months ago

Originally posted by: kiransgirl

Yes. I do believe you have requested and it should be respected. You asked many times nicely too. Not me. I would ask once then my response would get me banned

I don't understand why some of them bother replying to posts that they don't agree with. It ll only instigate fights between the two fandoms. 

Each one of us shares different opinions and that needs to be respected. 

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

There will be no allowances given for the use of nicknames, unless it is a nickname that is already being used in the show.  Regardless of whether the term being used is as a form of entertainment or abuse, it will not be allowed. The use of nicknames/fun names is very much subjective and what one member considered a name to be fair use may not be taken in the same manner by others.  

We are trying to uphold guidelines that are fair for all people and those that are inclusive, while promoting respectful language towards all fellow members. The language that you use on the forum plays a huge role in this.

 

Each of us is unique and what one of us may feel about a particular situation / character may not apply to everyone else.  Which is why we have made a blanket rule to disallow any kind of labelling/nicknames towards characters (in addition to real people) in order to avoid bringing in negativity &/or being unknowingly triggering for someone in the forum/ discussions.

This applies to name-calling or labelling a character as well. 

That is not to say you cannot bash/ criticize or call out a character's actions.

For eg. If I mess up somewhere and say "I am stupid" - that is labelling myself based on my one-time action of messing up. But if I say, "I did such a stupid thing," that is calling out my action and not labelling me as 'stupid' for eternity.  

 What I'm trying to say is - focus on the actions and not the character.

When you call Rajeev a bigamist or rapist, you are focusing on the person and not his action of bigamy or adultery.

Instead you can say something like: 

Rajeev has committed bigamy/ adultery which is a punishable offense according to Indian Penal Code. He should be in jail. 

 

Remember, shows are all about interpretation. What you may interpret something as may not necessarily be true for someone else. I'm not saying this applies for this particular example, but just pointing out there could be other ambiguous scenarios that could sway opinions one way or the other and polarize the verdict.

Additionally, labelling not just causes negativity against a character but also sets expectations on their future behaviour and that leads to stereotyping and imagined scenarios which can further sour the mood in the forum for people who are attached to the show &/or the character/s.

All we are doing is trying to be inclusive and to make this a safe space for everyone to express their opinions without feeling judged/ shamed or belittled. 

That being said, calling out fan groups for supporting a character you hate is absolutely not okay.

I hope that makes things somewhat clear.

I must say your response has created more questions than given clarification. So, we are not supposed to focus on the character but on their action. So, according to you, we can't say that Rajiv is a bigamist even though he is engaged in the act of bigamy. We are now supposed to construct long, unwieldy sentences that say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy; in fact, bigamy is a description of the action of what the character is doing. Meanwhile, since he is continuing bigamy, we also must add "Rajiv, who has committed and continue to commit bigamy." wow.

According to this explanation, we can no longer say that Rakesh is a rapist, even though that is what we saw him attempt to do on our screens; we are now supposed to say Rakesh, that guy who once attempted to touch Pari inappropriately. It literally stifles our discussion and is not a true representation of what we are seeing on tv.

Are we allowed to call Pari a mother or is she now "that  woman who has birthed another being"; frankly, since Neeti can't have children  or there may be some viewers unable to do so, the word mother will be offensive. 

I did not realize that this forum is a safe space. Do Indians even adhere to this comment about safe space? The problem may be that persons not representative of the culture are imposing rules that are not appropriate for a forum called Indian forum.

No offense, bigamy is illegal in India and it is detrimental to women. I find it personally offensive that I am no longer allowed to label a character, who has engaged in bigamy from the beginning of the show, to the present and foreseeable future, as a bigamist. It is especially offensive because it waters down exactly the implication of bigamy, which is a serious crime in India and frankly, the majority of countries world wide.

By forcing us to say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy and is continuing bigamy, you have basically arbitrarily stifled any real discussion.

Frankly, this is also a board about a fictional show, with fictional characters.  No one is bashing living actors but to dictate that we can't genuinely express ourselves and must now adhere to these arbitrary rules, you are stifling our speech.

I don't know how others feel but I have spoken up and I hope others do as well.

Originally posted by: kiransgirl

I must say your response has created more questions than given clarification. So, we are not supposed to focus on the character but on their action. So, according to you, we can't say that Rajiv is a bigamist even though he is engaged in the act of bigamy. We are now supposed to construct long, unwieldy sentences that say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy; in fact, bigamy is a description of the action of what the character is doing. Meanwhile, since he is continuing bigamy, we also must add "Rajiv, who has committed and continue to commit bigamy." wow.

According to this explanation, we can no longer say that Rakesh is a rapist, even though that is what we saw him attempt to do on our screens; we are now supposed to say Rakesh, that guy who once attempted to touch Pari inappropriately. It literally stifles our discussion and is not a true representation of what we are seeing on tv.

Are we allowed to call Pari a mother or is she now "that  woman who has birthed another being"; frankly, since Neeti can't have children  or there may be some viewers unable to do so, the word mother will be offensive. 

I did not realize that this forum is a safe space. Do Indians even adhere to this comment about safe space? The problem may be that persons not representative of the culture are imposing rules that are not appropriate for a forum called Indian forum.

No offense, bigamy is illegal in India and it is detrimental to women. I find it personally offensive that I am no longer allowed to label a character, who has engaged in bigamy from the beginning of the show, to the present and foreseeable future, as a bigamist. It is especially offensive because it waters down exactly the implication of bigamy, which is a serious crime in India and frankly, the majority of countries world wide.

By forcing us to say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy and is continuing bigamy, you have basically arbitrarily stifled any real discussion.

Frankly, this is also a board about a fictional show, with fictional characters.  No one is bashing living actors but to dictate that we can't genuinely express ourselves and must now adhere to these arbitrary rules, you are stifling our speech.

I don't know how others feel but I have spoken up and I hope others do as well.

Very well said 

A person who gives birth to a child is a mother.

A person who robs a bank is a robber. 

A person who commits rape is a rapist.

Man is defined by his actions. I don't even see the logic behind not using the word bigamist for a man who has committed bigamy. And this is just a fictional character we are discussing about. 

At first, we were told not to name call the characters. Even though I found it a bit weird, we stopped using it. 

And now we have another rule about not bashing the characters and the explanation given is just absurd in my honest opinion.

Edited by Aurora_77 - 6 months ago

Originally posted by: kiransgirl

I must say your response has created more questions than given clarification. So, we are not supposed to focus on the character but on their action. So, according to you, we can't say that Rajiv is a bigamist even though he is engaged in the act of bigamy. We are now supposed to construct long, unwieldy sentences that say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy; in fact, bigamy is a description of the action of what the character is doing. Meanwhile, since he is continuing bigamy, we also must add "Rajiv, who has committed and continue to commit bigamy." wow.

According to this explanation, we can no longer say that Rakesh is a rapist, even though that is what we saw him attempt to do on our screens; we are now supposed to say Rakesh, that guy who once attempted to touch Pari inappropriately. It literally stifles our discussion and is not a true representation of what we are seeing on tv.

Are we allowed to call Pari a mother or is she now "that  woman who has birthed another being"; frankly, since Neeti can't have children  or there may be some viewers unable to do so, the word mother will be offensive. 

I did not realize that this forum is a safe space. Do Indians even adhere to this comment about safe space? The problem may be that persons not representative of the culture are imposing rules that are not appropriate for a forum called Indian forum.

No offense, bigamy is illegal in India and it is detrimental to women. I find it personally offensive that I am no longer allowed to label a character, who has engaged in bigamy from the beginning of the show, to the present and foreseeable future, as a bigamist. It is especially offensive because it waters down exactly the implication of bigamy, which is a serious crime in India and frankly, the majority of countries world wide.

By forcing us to say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy and is continuing bigamy, you have basically arbitrarily stifled any real discussion.

Frankly, this is also a board about a fictional show, with fictional characters.  No one is bashing living actors but to dictate that we can't genuinely express ourselves and must now adhere to these arbitrary rules, you are stifling our speech.

I don't know how others feel but I have spoken up and I hope others do as well.

 

Now, a mother can be called a mother.. I think you're stretching it a bit too much.

I mean to indicate this only for ambiguous scenarios that are up to varying interpretations. You seemed to have missed the part of the post where I talked about 'interpretations'. Or the part where I said this may not apply to in this instance. 

 A rapist or a bigamist that have unequivocally been seen as committing said acts with no room for a different interpretation can be called that provided they're not used as slurs. 

You seem to have misinterpreted my post. Let me clarify.. It’s like calling someone 'gaanju' or 'moron' or 'Padi' or even 'bigamist' or 'rapist' repeatedly instead of their actual names on the show. 

Saying 'Rajeev is a bigamist' is different from saying 'Bigamist has no shame', 'Bigamist showed his face again today'.  Repeatedly using ‘bigamist’ in place of Rajeev's actual name amounts to name-calling.

We're not intending to stifle speech here just making it okay for people to express their opinions without being moral policed.

I was given to understand there was ambiguity in the context the name/s were being used. You asked me a question related to the use of the words - bigamist and rapist and I responded keeping those in mind as examples. 

However, I can see this has created confusion.

Rules are never arbitrary but they are laid out to make the forum a safe space. I’m sorry you feel it isn’t. 

We do our best, but it's everyone's co-operation that can ensure it.

Edited by LizzieBennet - 6 months ago

Originally posted by: kiransgirl

I must say your response has created more questions than given clarification. So, we are not supposed to focus on the character but on their action. So, according to you, we can't say that Rajiv is a bigamist even though he is engaged in the act of bigamy. We are now supposed to construct long, unwieldy sentences that say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy; in fact, bigamy is a description of the action of what the character is doing. Meanwhile, since he is continuing bigamy, we also must add "Rajiv, who has committed and continue to commit bigamy." wow.

According to this explanation, we can no longer say that Rakesh is a rapist, even though that is what we saw him attempt to do on our screens; we are now supposed to say Rakesh, that guy who once attempted to touch Pari inappropriately. It literally stifles our discussion and is not a true representation of what we are seeing on tv.

Are we allowed to call Pari a mother or is she now "that  woman who has birthed another being"; frankly, since Neeti can't have children  or there may be some viewers unable to do so, the word mother will be offensive. 

I did not realize that this forum is a safe space. Do Indians even adhere to this comment about safe space? The problem may be that persons not representative of the culture are imposing rules that are not appropriate for a forum called Indian forum.

No offense, bigamy is illegal in India and it is detrimental to women. I find it personally offensive that I am no longer allowed to label a character, who has engaged in bigamy from the beginning of the show, to the present and foreseeable future, as a bigamist. It is especially offensive because it waters down exactly the implication of bigamy, which is a serious crime in India and frankly, the majority of countries world wide.

By forcing us to say Rajiv, who has committed bigamy and is continuing bigamy, you have basically arbitrarily stifled any real discussion.

Frankly, this is also a board about a fictional show, with fictional characters.  No one is bashing living actors but to dictate that we can't genuinely express ourselves and must now adhere to these arbitrary rules, you are stifling our speech.

I don't know how others feel but I have spoken up and I hope others do as well.

Even i have texted lizzie yesterday about the religion problem.

I think u will understand my pov

through previous posts it seems like there are non hindu people...or people from another religions

where bigamy is accepted and is carried out.

It is clear from the drama that how we people think some situations acc to real life

that rajeev would be a rapist and bigamist in real life.

that pari would be a fraudster and an accomplice to bigamy and rape in real life.

that neeti would be criminal (who wanted to take lives )in real life.

Some people don't consider him as rapist and bigamist and not even consider pari as fraudster and an accomplice to bigamy and rape.

Some are referring to rajeev casually that its fine to have feelings/love outside marriage.

so its pretty much clear some people are from different religions as india forums have (people outside india and not from hindu dharma) where bigamy is accepted

and a man can have feelings for anyone outside marriage.

And i respect those people who have another religion and reacting accordingly.

and we will react and judge a show..how we see things as per our hindu dharma and indian laws.

so lizzie told me to do 3 things and it think we should do it 

If other people support something you are fiercely against or you feel is morally or legally wrong, either

- engage in a healthy debate with them without mocking them/ name-calling them telling them why you feel the way you feel

- ignore them 

- if you feel they have crossed a line, report the post and we mods will look into it.

at the end they are moderators..they have to maintain a decorum.

we will keep our views to ourself and make threads accordingly and other party supporting bigamy can make their another thread.

but if again and again reporting is done without any reason..

then we will stand together 

Edited by mysteriousdoll - 6 months ago

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

 

Now, a mother can be called a mother.. I think you're stretching it a bit too much.

I mean to indicate this only for ambiguous scenarios that are up to varying interpretations. You seemed to have missed the part of the post where I talked about 'interpretations'. Or the part where I said this may not apply to in this instance. 

 A rapist or a bigamist that have unequivocally been seen as committing said acts with no room for a different interpretation can be called that provided they're not used as slurs. 

You seem to have misinterpreted my post. Let me clarify.. It’s like calling someone 'gaanju' or 'moron' or 'Padi' or even 'bigamist' or 'rapist' repeatedly instead of their actual names on the show. 

Saying 'Rajeev is a bigamist' is different from saying 'Bigamist has no shame', 'Bigamist showed his face again today'.  Repeatedly using ‘bigamist’ in place of Rajeev's actual name amounts to name-calling.

We're not intending to stifle speech here just making it okay for people to express their opinions without being moral policed.

I was given to understand there was ambiguity in the context the name/s were being used. You asked me a question related to the use of the words - bigamist and rapist and I responded keeping those in mind as examples. 

However, I can see this has created confusion.

Rules are never arbitrary but they are laid out to make the forum a safe space. I’m sorry you feel it isn’t. 

We do our best, but it's everyone's co-operation that can ensure it.

we have  stopped using these nicknames padi, gaanju, now. Didn't know that now we can't call him bigamist also

Am really confused after reading all these posts.

I just saw in another thread someone posted 'dharti pe bojh akkal se paidal' for a character. 

Kya yahi character bashing hai? Did the person who posted it got a warning or something?? Or is character bashing allowed for some characters & not allowed for others?

Originally posted by: mysteriousdoll

Even i have texted lizzie yesterday about the religion problem.

I think u will understand my pov

through previous posts it seems like there are non hindu people...or people from another religions

where bigamy is accepted and is carried out.

It is clear from the drama that how we people think some situations acc to real life

that rajeev would be a rapist and bigamist in real life.

that pari would be a fraudster and an accomplice to bigamy and rape in real life.

that neeti would be criminal (who wanted to take lives )in real life.

Some people don't consider him as rapist and bigamist and not even consider pari as fraudster and an accomplice to bigamy and rape.

Some are referring to rajeev casually that its fine to have feelings/love outside marriage.

so its pretty much clear some people are from different religions as india forums have (people outside india and not from hindu dharma) where bigamy is accepted

and a man can have feelings for anyone outside marriage.

And i respect those people who have another religion and reacting accordingly.

and we will react and judge a show..how we see things as per our hindu dharma and indian laws.

so lizzie told me to do 3 things and it think we should do it 

If other people support something you are fiercely against or you feel is morally or legally wrong, either

- engage in a healthy debate with them without mocking them/ name-calling them telling them why you feel the way you feel

- ignore them 

- if you feel they have crossed a line, report the post and we mods will look into it.

at the end they are moderators..they have to maintain a decorum.

we will keep our views to ourself and make threads accordingly and other party supporting bigamy can make their another thread.

but if again and again reporting is done without any reason..

then we will stand together 

The thing is though I am not calling Sanju/Rajiv a bigamist based on my religion, though  I, too, am a follower of Sanatan dharm. However, I am calling the character this because this is what he is doing on screen. We know the writers believe he is engaged in a crime because everyone on the show hid the matter and they themselves have expressed shame or have gone to lengths to cover it.

My usage of the term is not based on religious beliefs. A better argument is that it is based on India's law. In India, a person cannot be married legally to more than one person; such action is criminal and bigamy. The fact that some religion does not see it as a crime is not relevant. In India it is a crime. By the moderators now privileging religious beliefs over law, it further constrains those who are not religious.

Does this mean from now on there will be consistency where we privilege religion over the country's laws in other scenarios. Well, then Neeti can't be called  criminal because there is such a thing as just killing in most religious systems. It can be argued it is just to kill a woman who is interfering with your marriage since marriage is sacrosanct; too bad about that pesky thing called law, that says it is a crime.

Seriously, there is no reason why we should not be allowed to call Sanju/Rajiv a bigamist because that is what he is doing on our screen. I think the rule is arbitrary.

Most importantly, in addition to the legal argument, Rajiv is portrayed as a Hindu not another religion. In Hinduism, bigamy is not allowed. If others following another religion disagree, it does not apply. This is a Hindu character and Hindu laws apply.

There are other boards on this site that are literally dead. You go there and the last thread is a month ago. This is an active board because people can discuss the show and the characters freely.

I don't know how this will pan out now.

However, I have clearly stated my objection and I am not the moderator.

Edited by kiransgirl - 6 months ago

Originally posted by: kiransgirl

The thing is though I am not calling Sanju/Rajiv a bigamist based on my religion, though  I, too, am a follower of Sanatan dharm. However, I am calling the character this because this is what he is doing on screen. We know the writers believe he is engaged in a crime because everyone on the show hid the matter and they themselves have expressed shame or have gone to lengths to cover it.

My usage of the term is not based on religious beliefs. A better argument is that it is based on India's law. In India, a person cannot be married legally to more than one person; such action is criminal and bigamy. The fact that some religion does not see it as a crime is not relevant. In India it is a crime. By the moderators now privileging religious beliefs over law, it further constrains those who are not religious.

Does this mean from now on there will be consistency where we privilege religion over the country's laws in other scenarios. Well, then Neeti can't be called  criminal because there is such a thing as just killing in most religious systems. It can be argued it is just to kill a woman who is interfering with your marriage since marriage is sacrosanct; too bad about that pesky thing called law, that says it is a crime.

Seriously, there is no reason why we should not be allowed to call Sanju/Rajiv a bigamist because that is what he is doing on our screen. I think the rule is arbitrary.

Most importantly, in addition to the legal argument, Rajiv is portrayed as a Hindu not another religion. In Hinduism, bigamy is not allowed. If others following another religion disagree, it does not apply. This is a Hindu character and Hindu laws apply.

There are other boards on this site that are literally dead. You go there and the last thread is a month ago. This is an active board because people can discuss the show and the characters freely.

I don't know how this will pan out now.

However, I have clearly stated my objection and I am not the moderator.

i think she means that we can't use bigamist word in place of his name. For example, we can't write 'today bigamist shouted on neeti' but we can write 'today bigamist sanju shouted on neeti'. That's what i understood