Anupamaa the character - Page 3

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

Now what you are calling as run off with another woman. He did not run off with another woman.

Be that as it may, exactly why did he leave Kapadia Mansion?

Anuj did though, he followed Maaya and lived with Maaya and even did Kanyadhaan of Dimpy with Maaya as if Maaya was his wife. 

Originally posted by: prachetas2211

It is Anupama's blunder. Not Anuj's. Anuj was trying to install some sense into Anupama that Maaya is trying to break our wedding apart. Anuj acted sensibly but Anupama, that Mahaanta Ki Moorat and Bhashan Ki Devi choose to ignore her. Anupama committed that blunder.

I agree, Anupama is shown as the soft hearted one that brought Maaya into the household and also Malti Devi. Anuj might have warned Anupama but he fell for Maaya’s tricks anyway. So if it was Anupama’s fault introducing Maaya into the household, can we say since Anuj is the one who wanted to adopt Choti, he is the one that forced the entry of Choti’s birth mother into their lives? Maaya was playing tricks on the little kid, keeping Maaya under their nose and watching her was a good thing at that point. Anuj could have put his foot down and said “no Maaya in the house”, he didn’t. He went one step further and lived away from his wife for months with said woman, brought said woman back and gave her the position of his wife-in-status at his house, Maaya lorded over his house while Anupama languished at her mother’s, he added insult to injury, rubbed salt into his wife’s wounds and flaunted that woman at Dimpy’s wedding. Any wife in her right senses would have left him at that point. He is a nalaayak man, he does have an ego, he has been handed everything on a silver platter, including Anupama. She is the misguided one for acting like he is some God. 

Originally posted by: soapwatcher1

Anuj did though, he followed Maaya and lived with Maaya and even did Kanyadhaan of Dimpy with Maaya as if Maaya was his wife. 

Anuj did not follow Maaya. He followed his child. He did not even know where Maaya was. Which is why he was shown living on streets. He ran into Maaya's car in a distressed state.

Dimple ka Kanyadaan uski Maa jo apne gaaon se sabke khilaaf jakar aayi thi, usne kiya.

As for the Pooja, you mean just like Anupama sat with Vanraj as Mata-Pita?

As for living at Maaya's, Anupama, even after knowing that Vanraj was lusting on her, knowing Vanraj and Leela want her in their house, after Vanraj proposed to her, stayed at his place. Did Anuj know about it? If yes, so Anuj trusted Anupama enough to not be upset about her going and staying at Shahs? This situation was considered ok with ALL?

It is strange that everyone who comes in contact with or becomes a cheerleader of Anupama loses the ability to think and the power to take a stand to make decisions.

And anyone who does stand up against her, is either Phased out or made irrelevant or sometimes threatened with a playful act with a knife 🙄 

Starting with Kavya:

1. The lady did not want Malavika to stay at Shah House but Anupama announced that she would stay there. Kavya initially opposed to this but Samar retaliated that even she used to come to Shah House as Vanraj's friend and she had no right to now say no. (Wonder how the champions of feminism are ok with forgiving Vanraj for his infidelity but cannot see Kavya's non-acceptance at Shah House as a problem).

Kavya's decisions were never considered at Shah House because Anupama took them instead. Even after Anupama was married and Kavya was the sole regular earning member of the house (apart from Samar) and also during Paritosh's condition, she wanted to get a househelp, a nurse which was refused by Shahs because Leela did not like it and finally accepted when Anupama (who came to stay at Shah House much to the reluctance of everyone at Kapadias and left midway because she sensed danger to her importance at Kapadia Mansion) got a male nurse.

How can we forget Anupama beating Dimple because she was being badtameez with Leela? (Like her kids are agyakaari, sanskaari, never seen her raise a hand on them till date. A few episodes back she had herself said "hum bahuon ki izzat karte hain unki hazaar galati ho unpar haath nahin uthate" something on those lines because Pakhi was involved in the context).

She decided which room who should get, She declared Shah House ka bantwara, kitchen and room to be separated etc. In what capacity did she do that?

Continued........

Anuj:

The definition of akal ka andha on the show.

1. First he made her a partner despite not being sufficiently qualified and let her take important decisions. He even influenced Malavika to concede to Anupama's requests favouring Shahs going blind to the fact that Anupama hid the malicious intents of Vanraj. Anupama supported Anuj when he walked out leaving a vulnerable Malavika and the entire empire only to go behind his back to "talk to Malavika".

This was the start if his finish. He should have stopped Anupama right here but his 26 saal ka pyaar took over his ability to reason.

This slowly became a habit for Anupama and when anyone did not concede or tried to discuss, she would sulk till they did or Anuj would do the honous for his "Meri Anu".

2. Anuj did not retaliate, question or stop her when she, unilaterally, without consent or consultation started taking decisions to the point that his own family (Bhaiya and "Maa samaan" Bhabhi, parents samaan GK) were repeatedly humiliated.

a. She took ALL decisions, major and minor at Kapadia Mansion and Empire, unilaterally and left no stone unturned to show Ankush-Barkha (from the beginning) of her power and kept them on the edge but did not let them go (when Anuj wanted to give them a separate house).

b. She rejected Barkha's proposal for a premium fashion house citing middleclass people wouldnt be able to afford them.

c. She forced Barkha to accept Romil knowing well, she had no options.

d. Ankush, for everything was right as long as he became a "Yes" man. Both him and Adhik went through a screening and interview process at mid level jobs whereas Pakhi got a leadership role without interviews or experience. Anuj did nothing knowing Pakhi's presentations were done by Adhik.

3. Anuj had been ok with Anupama's actions as long as it was impacting others: Company, other family members (which in itself was WRONG on Anuj's part) Anuj's breaking point was when it came to his daughter. When Anupama's negligence and wrong decisions started impacting his daughter.

Anuj was wrong to Not stop, put his foot down and NOT agree to the decisions Anupama took unilaterally. (Even if it meant going against the pseudo feminist agenda.)

a. Anupamaa took the decision to bring in Maaya to Kapadia Mansion against Anuj's will. He wanted a verification and thorough background check on Maaya before Letting Choti Anu to interact with her but Anupama confirmed Maaya as the birth mother using her "Mamatha meter" much to his reluctance (she sulked till he gave in). She allowed Maaya to stay at Kapadia Mansion against everyone's will at Kapadia Mansion.

The legendary "Choti ke liye na sahi, Anuj ke liye hi sahi aa jaao" was proof that Anuj's opinion hardly mattered.

b. She bet on their child on a 15-day challenge without Anyone's knowledge or consultation. She left midway to stay at Shah House to tend to Paritosh (which too she left midway). She returned not because Choti Anu had a camp (she did not even know about it). Anupama returned because Anuj mentioned he was busy and could not talk to her. Her actions have only been motivated by threat.

c. She did not even give the real reason of Maaya taking away their daughter. When he could take the insensitivity no more, he was grieving and wanted to somehow meet his daughter, he was called "Pagal" by his wife. This left Anuj absolutely broken and shattered. Despite ALL this, she insisted on celebrating Holi with Shahs.

Hypothetical situation: Inputs requested:

Consider there was no Maaya in the picture.

Samar-Dimple wedding is on the cards.

1. How would the functions have been conducted?

2. Would Mata-Pita sit through the rituals together as they were shown? Or like the Daada-Daadi thing at Pari's welcoming and Naamkaran?

3. Would Anuj and Kavya sit on the sidelines as they did?

Bolo bolo, tell.

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

Anuj did not follow Maaya. He followed his child. He did not even know where Maaya was. Which is why he was shown living on streets. He ran into Maaya's car in a distressed state.

Dimple ka Kanyadaan uski Maa jo apne gaaon se sabke khilaaf jakar aayi thi, usne kiya.

As for the Pooja, you mean just like Anupama sat with Vanraj as Mata-Pita?

As for living at Maaya's, Anupama, even after knowing that Vanraj was lusting on her, knowing Vanraj and Leela want her in their house, after Vanraj proposed to her, stayed at his place. Did Anuj know about it? If yes, so Anuj trusted Anupama enough to not be upset about her going and staying at Shahs? This situation was considered ok with ALL?

Does not matter how or why Anuj lived with Maaya, it is still wrong. If Anuj followed his child who wanted to go with her birth mother, it is okay? But if Anupama wanted to go to her kids in their time of need, it is wrong? 

Also, whatever the reason Anuj lived with Maaya, he did live with her. He did not contact Anupama who was his legal wedded wife for months while he lived with Maaya. That’s okay? But not Anupama going to the house that was her home for 20+ years where her kids were? Every time Anuj lands with a woman in his home (like Shrew) or in the woman’s home (Maaya), he is bechara? 

Also, yes, kanyadhan is done by parents, whether they are divorced, living together or not.  Here in the U.S., divorced (and re-married to others) parents of all cultures do come together as “parents” of the bride or groom being married. Even amongst Indians here, I have attended a couple of weddings where the parents were divorced but sat together to do the marriage rituals with the bride and groom. The respective spouses of the divorced parents were on the dais but did not sit with the parents. So kanyadhaan or marriage rituals is done by the parents, parents maane mother and father who gave birth and raised the child, that parental relationship doesn’t change whether the father and mother are no longer together or are divorced. So yes, it is completely okay for Anupama to sit with Vanraj for their kids’ weddings. Their roles as co-parents to the children they birthed does not change just because their affections and loyalties to each other has changed.

Anuj had no such excuse. He did not birth Dimpy with Maaya, so to sit with her for the rituals was wrong, period, especially when he has a lawful wedded wife. 

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

Hypothetical situation: Inputs requested:

Consider there was no Maaya in the picture.

Samar-Dimple wedding is on the cards.

1. How would the functions have been conducted?

2. Would Mata-Pita sit through the rituals together as they were shown? Or like the Daada-Daadi thing at Pari's welcoming and Naamkaran?

3. Would Anuj and Kavya sit on the sidelines as they did?

Bolo bolo, tell.

Yes, Vanraj and Anupama would sit as “parents” of Samar whether there was a Maaya in the picture or not. Their roles as Samar’s parents does not change with their divorce. They remain parents to their jointly conceived and raised children.

As I wrote in my other post, I have personally attended weddings in the U.S. where divorced parents from other cultures put aside their differences and stand together to greet family and friends. Attended a wedding last May where the EXs danced in together when they were announced as parents of the groom. The mom’s new husband was there cheering and being happy. The bride, my relative, was Indian, the groom was not. 

I have also attended Indian Hindu weddings here, two of them where the divorced parents of the groom (both cases the boy’s parents were the ones divorced) sat together to perform all rituals together. One of the dads had remarried and his current wife was helping out but was not on the dais while the birth mother (who had remarried and re-divorced sat with her ex-husband, her son’s father ie) to perform all the rites. In the other instance, the dad had a non-Indian girl friend (the mother had not remarried) and the girl friend sat with the rest of us and watched the wedding ceremony.  

Originally posted by: soapwatcher1

Does not matter how or why Anuj lived with Maaya, it is still wrong. If Anuj followed his child who wanted to go with her birth mother, it is okay? But if Anupama wanted to go to her kids in their time of need, it is wrong?

Did Anuj know the reason why Maaya took his child? Did Choti Anu ho with Maaya willingly?

Did Anupama go to Shah House only for her children? Are we adding Kavya, Leela-Hansmukh, Vanraj to that category?

Were her "kids" underage like Choti Anu to not be able to take their own decisions or not live their life on their own terms or travel without a guardian? .

Also, whatever the reason Anuj lived with Maaya, he did live with her. He did not contact Anupama who was his legal wedded wife for months while he lived with Maaya. That’s okay? But not Anupama going to the house that was her home for 20+ years where her kids were? Every time Anuj lands with a woman in his home (like Shrew) or in the woman’s home (Maaya), he is bechara? 

How come the second part of discussion was conveniently ignored?

He asked her if they both did not matter to her tow which he was told, "Aap Pagal hain kya?" After the Holi fiasco.

Also, Anuj left Amdavad aimlessly, distressed, bare foot to Mumbai. How come Anupama never bothered checking on him especially given the state in which he left? He could have met with an accident, anything could have happened even.

She left Kapadia Mansion the following day, instead.

It was only Ankush who persistently looked out for him.

Besides, communication is a two way street, right?

And "20+ years are kids"?

Even after knowing that the man is lusting on her and his mother and he are consipiring to get her back in their home, was she right in going and staying there?

Also, yes, kanyadhan is done by parents, whether they are divorced, living together or not.  Here in the U.S., divorced (and re-married to others) parents of all cultures do come together as “parents” of the bride or groom being married. Even amongst Indians here, I have attended a couple of weddings where the parents were divorced but sat together to do the marriage rituals with the bride and groom. The respective spouses of the divorced parents were on the dais but did not sit with the parents. So kanyadhaan or marriage rituals is done by the parents, parents maane mother and father who gave birth and raised the child, that parental relationship doesn’t change whether the father and mother are no longer together or are divorced. So yes, it is completely okay for Anupama to sit with Vanraj for their kids’ weddings. Their roles as co-parents to the children they birthed does not change just because their affections and loyalties to each other has changed.

First of ALL, ALL Hindu rituals are done by married couples "Together". In this case, Vanraj and Kavya and Anuj and Anupama. Whatever is done wherever in the world, at best is for their own convenience. Like it is being told here.

It is simply NOT OK. in facts, it is a disrespect to the culture that it carries.

Anuj had no such excuse. He did not birth Dimpy with Maaya, so to sit with her for the rituals was wrong, period, especially when he has a lawful wedded wife. 

Comments inline.

Originally posted by: soapwatcher1

Yes, Vanraj and Anupama would sit as “parents” of Samar whether there was a Maaya in the picture or not. Their roles as Samar’s parents does not change with their divorce. They remain parents to their jointly conceived and raised children.

As I wrote in my other post, I have personally attended weddings in the U.S. where divorced parents from other cultures put aside their differences and stand together to greet family and friends. Attended a wedding last May where the EXs danced in together when they were announced as parents of the groom. The mom’s new husband was there cheering and being happy. The bride, my relative, was Indian, the groom was not. 

I have also attended Indian Hindu weddings here, two of them where the divorced parents of the groom (both cases the boy’s parents were the ones divorced) sat together to perform all rituals together. One of the dads had remarried and his current wife was helping out but was not on the dais while the birth mother (who had remarried and re-divorced sat with her ex-husband, her son’s father ie) to perform all the rites. In the other instance, the dad had a non-Indian girl friend (the mother had not remarried) and the girl friend sat with the rest of us and watched the wedding ceremony.  

I have mentioned in before, mention it again, the rituals are performed by married couples.

It is the respect that one gives to their spouse.

Also, in the past, there were discussions on Anuj not acting like a step parent etc. So, are we saying the step parent is supposed to provide for the step children while the step children neither give them the respect nor the right in their life.

Convenient, isn't it?