code of conduct - Page 12

Originally posted by: surabhi01

sanya just one question tum law ki student ho

Originally posted by: SRKLuvr

so in your case, as long as you are ignorant when you commit a crime, its ok and you should not be punished. even though your actions are your responsibility and it is your responsibility to make sure of the law before taking a big life decision. Did gaga ever stop for a second to think that perhaps we should look into the legality to our marriage before tying the knot...ask someone? a lawyer maybe? no, they just assumed that it must be legal...wonder if they thought their parents must also be illegally married as they all probably had balvivah...

if i break the law, its my responsibility and i will be punished for it...simple as that...ignorance is not a defence...

moreover, she was more than happy lording her 'legal wife' status over anandi, but once she realized the truth, turned the tables and started sacha pyar gana...

Edited by jiya25 - 13 years ago

Originally posted by: mansimat

Hi, the meaning of the word 'mistress' is quoted as " A woman who has a continuing sexual relationship with a usually married man who is not her husband and from whom she generally receives material support". Let me underline one word here -"from whom she generally receives material support". That means it may not always be there, even without the material support, the woman is still a mistress.

Also, this ,meaning is a direct copy from the free online dictionary. This is not the correct meaning. According to the oxford dictionary, here is the meaning of a mistress: " A woman (other than the man's wife) having a sexual relationship with a married man". We are talking about a dictionary, as "historical" as possible. We are also talking about the dictionary which has supremacy over the English language.

Now that that's out of the way.

I don't understand why the word 'mistress' has bad or fearsome connotations. I really don't understand. It's just another English word which talks about a woman having sexual relations with a married man. If we are all truly progressive women as we usually claim to be, we should all accept the English language and its limitations. Also, learn to call a spade, a spade.

I also don't understand why we have to go into what historically the word has meant to be and what not! We know the meaning, we know the circumstances the character was in & call her exactly that. What's wrong with that! It's not a label, its simply the world's own way of calling an apple an apple, or a bat a bat or a cat a cat.

I am all for freedom of speech and having a dignified approach in writing for everyone. That's progressive & speaks of a higher intellect. So if people call out because of abuses or expletives I would agree. But I can't understand this hypocrisy where a word is concocted to be comparable to Hitler and abuses when it's simply a word. That's actually against democracy, freedom of expression and progression at the same time. I do not agree to it.

And on another note, in real life how many of us would be able to hold in our expletives, when a woman is in the role of Gauri and a lady dear to us, is in the role of Anandi. Then why to expect that a large portion of the forum audience, that can clearly identify with the character of Anandi would not want to call the other character for what she is. And the sad part is that we are not even talking expletives here.

On another note, is it not part of democracy? Or is the policing one sided?