Anandi and the social conditioning argument

Page

tinoo

@tinoo

Rocker

Posted: 14 years ago

I have been involved in a heated discussion about whether or not anandi is a victim. The argument in favour of that is that anandi behaves the way she has because of social conditioning about her role as a beendhni and how dadisa and haveli ijjat is always prime. This is how all village girls would behave.

I disagreed with the fact that anandi is a victim. I believe that the day that she went to bapusa to send Jagya money...she stopped being a victim. People disagree with me saying that it is her conditioning...she has been conditioned never to hurt her inlaws and family...and since she is a victim she does not do anything to Jagya to file a case against him etc...and that she has been sending money because they subconsciously expect her to send money to him.

I really dont agree with this at all. I think it is a conscious choice anandi has made. she is not victimized.

I want us to hark back to Gullis child marriage ... where heth singh invited dadisa to the wedding. Dadisa invited the rest of the singh family to accompany her. When they went there, they saw that both het singh's son (the groom) and gulli (the bride) were underaged.

What did anandi do? Without a thought for dadisas ijjat, haveli ijjat or any kind of previous social conditioning she had received, she disrupted the wedding and called the police.

Did she think of dadisa's ijjat then or haveli ijaat? The whole wedding was destroyed, and the police came. Heth singh swore "saat janmo ka bair" with dadisa at that time. But the wedding was conveniently represented as thread ceremony of the boy. Because by that time, there was no evidence of the bride. By then, anandi took gulli and hid her in the haveli. Gullis parents and heth singh filed a kidnapping charge against Kalyanidevi. The police came to arrest Kalyani. At that time Kalyani had told anandi "maari ijjat maari kandho par bhaari padi thi. thank you for removing my ijjat and removing the burden"...

after that gullis parents refused to accept her back... so some arrangement has been made to keep Gulli in Jayetsar and Bhairon is funding her education.

If anandi were so socially conditioned, she would not have been able to go to any of these lengths, completely disregarding dadisa ijjat and haveli ijjat. (In addition, she was stupid - she thought that gulli's parents will accept her back... why would parents who wanted to get her married accept her back from anandi?)

All this was done by the ADULT Anandi.

Anandi is fully capable of causing a scene that strips dadisa of her ijjat whenever it is a cause she believes in. There is absolutely no conditioning there.

Consequently, in this case, she is a victim by choice. She was a victim of circumstances up to a point. But to say that she is the victim of social conditioning to send Jagya money and not file a case is not valid in my POV.

An argument has been made that I am not considering a village girl's POV...and have an urban point of view.

But does the very same village girl herself not demonstrate complete disregard for haveli ijjat, social conventions, dadisas ijjat and calling the police on her own dadisa as an accomplice when she feels that some wrong doing is happening?

If she were that socially conditioned, she would have accepted Gullis wedding as well.

Anandi does not prosecute Jagya and sends him money because she does not see what he is doing/his infedility as wrong. It is as simple as that.

Quote

Frequent Posters

Blukitten

@Blukitten

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 14 years ago

Anandi is capable of rebelling I agree she even rebelled for Phooli's cause also when she was boycotted by the panchayat so when there's a need she can go to any extreams.However there's a difference in Gulli as well as Phooli's case she was not the victim...she cant stand injustice on others.Some people might call this as Mahan but I think its kindness and selflessness.

In the present scenario she is herself the victim but has chosen not to punish jagya not because she considers infidility right she has given back answers to GAGA when required so she not taking all this just like tht.

The izzat issue is just a mask to hide her feelings.She has given up on Jagya and dosent expect him to come back so wats the use of going legal.It might give an impression tht she wants him back so she is punishing him.Her present actions give a clear message tht be happy wherever u are and dont come back.

At the same time she is still in love with him...its not easy to forget 16 years of love.It'll take years to completely get over him.Unlike Jagya her love is not selfish so she doesnt want to trouble him.If u love someone truly u would want him to remain happy it dosent matter if he/she is with u or without u.

I dont know why some people are saying Anandi is mahan as if its a bad thing...she is a very kind hearted person so wats bad in that ??

It doesnt matter if her character is real or not in this world where everybody is selfish I wish there were more people like Anandi.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

tinoo

@tinoo

Rocker

Posted: 14 years ago

Yes, but if it is her choice, she can hardly be called a victim.

Quote

Suchi-

@Suchi-

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 14 years ago

Thank you niharika.

Now the person who said that is ME. I have said that its Anandi's conditioning thats making her stop from doing many things that we wish she does.

like

a) Dragging Jagya to Court

b) Taking a stand against Jagya verbally and emotionally (eg. not sending money etc)

and other things

I have personally seen many women who due to their conditioning are unable to speak a word against any kind of abuse.

A relative of mine, married for 20 years of her life. Constant abuse from her husband, verbally and sometimes physically.

a) Where is this happening . U.S and India

b) Is she Dumb and uneducated ... NO. A working woman who supports her family and the family is running due to her earnings

c) Is she like that all the time. NO. raised her children Alone as a single mother when her husband was away for many years for work purposes. As an independent lady. bought houses and properties and also did fight for her rights when it came to people trying to rip of money or about education (for her children) etc etc.
A VERY VERY confident lady

BUT ...

When in front of her husband, turns like a meek person. Her husband can say anything ot her, about her family, hurl abuse at her, live off her earnings and get away.

A drunkard.

Then she decides to leave him one day with her children. Upon her children's persuasion. HEr children told her constantly to just go and find another house, live separately so they can escape this constant torture and rather have a life of peace. She was shocked, scared by that idea. Hesitant but her children (as they were grown up now) did not listen to her. And eventually went out of the house. and lived somewhere else.

BOLD STEP YES.

hmmm

NO... She came back to him after ONE DAY.

her children forced her NOT to go back to him. Then, they just waited outside of the door of their father's house.

The man then due to the humiliation he faced KICKED her out of the house at midnight. And her children took her away once and for all.

=====

many years pass by. my relative and her husband are still in contact as he comes and vists his children at their house. HIs children have family and they have children now. They let him see their family Once 2 months or so. They urged their mother to get a divorce but she refused.

But when ever she goes in front of her husband she goes numb and scared. Never to respond back.
And even today when ever he comes , I have heard him myself give stupid side remarks and my blood boils but my relative is quite and her children tolerate him that much because, their mother wanted to not cut off the relationship completely. She had begged them and they just let it go , so she can slowly let it go herself.

its been 8 years since then. She hasn't changed.

Still a working lady. Living in US. confident young vibrant woman. But lost all her property she owned in India because she had bought it in her husband's name and is afraid to ask it back saying its ok let him enjoy. Atleast he is happy.

Is she a victim or no?

I say yes.

victim of conditioning

I say yes.

HUsband is above everything. Conditioning.

there are women like her everywhere. So please do not disrespect such women by saying they are not victims and making up your own POVs about such situations. Because if you DO make your POV , its not always right and if you think its right keep it to yourselves as it can be hurtful to others who have actually seen such situations personally and feel their heart bleed when they see such cases.

I do not wish to get personal but this case is personal. and I stand by what I say.

Anandi is a victim of her conditioning.

just like the world's Anandis. And I pray for all of them that they get out of such situation. My relative was the lucky one for having such supportive children : (

Quote

642126

Hibernated

Posted: 14 years ago

Tinoo

Look Anandi not taking any action against him does not mean she thinks whatever he is doing is right.

It's one thing to take action against someone else. But it is another thing to take action against your own people!

I would have liked to see what Anandi would have done if DS had tried to get Nandu married - since he's also of marriageable age by BV standards!

She may deny it and she may say she has moved on. But she has not yet been able to kick out Jagya from her life! She is still attached to him!

Women are unable to do anything against their lovers or husbands. Women feel powerless even go against their sons or brothers! Look at Sugna, isn't she still collecting rakhis for her brother? Isn't she still crying? Sumitra is different. Otherwise women are irrationally attached to their sons. Sumitra also occasionally cries, keeps looking at her son's photo and thinks about her own faulty parenting. Even DS did not lash out at Jagya or come down on him like a ton of bricks for trying to sell family heirloom or for ruining her reputation by bringing a mistress! DS did tell Anandi to file a case against him. But she did not do it strongly. She said it reluctantly and she did not pressurise Anandi or take the issue further. She very readily and easily yielded and in fact felt happy that Anandi was not taking her grandson to court.

I wonder if her happiness was about having a great beendni like Anandi or relief at her grandson being spared!

For Anandi I can clearly say one thing. She is STILL attached to Jagya and is unable to do anything against him. She knows he has kicked her out of his life. But she is still stuck with image and memories of her old Jagya.

She is not going to her parents and her native village because she feels ostracism and ignominy. She is living with Singhs, feels indebted to them for their support to her and feels it will be a disservice to them if she drags their son to court.

They may say they no longer care about Jagya. But they have not actually disowned him. They try to call off celebrations too because of Jagya. Instead of not picking up his phone altogether, either someone herself calls him and informs him of family well-being or someone keeps the phone call on and lets him see what he has missed or lost. It's not like all communication has been CUT.

The CVs have kept all doors, gates and windows open for Jagya. Anandi could have taken a stand, but she is not doing so. Jagya is getting money, getting things his own way even in Mumbai. The story is about him and his family.

Quote

Anandi and the social conditioning argument

Related Topics

Explore Topics