Role of cinema and mass media too! - Violence - Page 4

Originally posted by: annika20

@BHAVI1972

My topic is not just about DV. But also about the backward thinking and perceptions related to women, marriage and women's relations to men. The crux of Satyamev Jayate pointed out by Kamla Bhasin and Aamir in the show - about '''soch'' from where all problems arise in first place.

Dear this is one thing which has left today's society in 2 halves. The soch is the product of the basic instinct that people have due to years of male dominance. The root of all the evils is perception. I am not sure that even if the woman gets independence this will change since i know many women who have had some such incidence in her life although they are at the top of their career and are doing better than their male spouse. As long as the mothers do no stop giving importance to their male kid more than the female kid this is bound to happen.

Mass media promotes such regressive thoughts. And rather glorifies violence against women or projects women as inferior. It tells women to tolerate things. It reinforces stereotypes by and large.

Half of our so-called top serials are those in which a woman was married either by force or deception, to an illiterate man or even a mentally disturbed man. But the women in these shows never leave their husbands. Rather spend their whole lifetime trying to ''change'' them or waiting for them to change, adjust themselves and romance!🤢 Again media only shows what we want to see. the moto should be TRP ghatao desh bachao😉. As long as people bears this crap and then speaks about it the show makers are bound to show such non-sense sequence. Now leaving the husbands- are we not all taught from day 1 that you only marry once since we believe in not just ek janam ka saath but the 7 janam ka saath types.😆 The root of all the problem is not the show the basic which our culture taught us. If you go back in history women had more rights than male. They could select their own spouses and so on. But now a days in the name of culture we have stooped down.

We have films like SRK's Darr which almost ended up glorifying the stalker and tormentor in the end. They were supposed to be against the stalker. But they treated the character and story thus that audience was made to feel sympathy for the stalker at the end. -I never had a sympathy with SRK's character at the end. He was a villan and he was shown a loser.

And of course, we glorify Sarat Chandra's Devdas and Parineeta both in literature and cinema - wherein the male protagonist violently hitting and scarring his lover is a sign of love! 🤢 Just hate it how Paro in Devdas considers the wound given to her by Devdas as some ''nishaani''. 😡 - Will pass. These are age old classic shown at the new times.

Remember Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam? Salman handles Ash roughly in it, her bangle breaks and her wrist bleeds. And Ash instead of feeling bad, says ''Iss haath ne galti jo ki'' kind of blah blah and does not even let Salman repent his aggressive act! This is ''love'' you see! I have seen all these love stories but have always found them funny and thought that who on this earth does things like this😡. I am surprised that people do follow such stupid things. Now in that case all the romantic books shall be taken out the shelves since they show the same thing.
A question - would it be ok for you if they would have shown male pinning for female lead?

Then there was Baghban in which Hema Malini was telling her grand daughter - ''Beta aurat ke liye zamaana kabhi nahi badalta''! She was rather making her feel sorry for inviting rape attempt on her by wearing skimpy clothes! - But tell me one thing what wrong did she say? Isn't this still the state of the society. I have heard many mothers telling their daughters when daughters compare themselves with her brothers.🤢. I am glad and really thankful that my mom never did that to me.👏

Even when women are shown as breadwinners in some serial or film - the women are either widows, divorced or poor daughters unable to marry since they have to shoulder responsibilities at natal home!😡 Why can't a normal woman be a breadwinner? In shows they want to gain sympathy. Their ideal is more tears more TRP. Again the honor is on us viewers. We should boycott these shows and as i said earlier TRP ghatao desh bachao should be the moto.

I do not watch the daily soaps and the only reason i can not connect myself with them. Even movies i do not watch them until i read their review.

Originally posted by: annika20

See whether we admit it or not, women doing such acts does entice men and it does objectify women in general. Have you ever seen comments on Youtube on such songs or even scenes? They write such pathetic and perverse language that one feels like puking!

I always think that heroines must see those comments and see what kind of mentality they are fuelling and catering to by agreeing to perform to such dirty lyrics and songs.

Emran Hashmi's female fan recently reportedly bit his butt in public. Isn't that creepy and shameless? But as much as I feel for him as an individual whose privacy was violated and as much as I blame the girl who did such a foolish act - I also attribute Emran's OTT and overdose of sex in his films which lead to such stuff!

Guys need to understand what? Let's not kid ourselves. If people can emulate hero's dialogues or clothes or if a film (say a Rang De Basanti or Taare Zameen Par) can spring people into some debate or action in real life, then it explains for itself how deeply films reach the human psyche!

Audio-visual medium is very very powerful and it must be used very carefully.

Even research has documented how men get provoked to rape by watching po*n and even ''hot scenes'' or songs in films!

If there was nothing wrong in Sheila or Munni then actresses themselves wouldn't be rushing to cover themselves with black shawls every time the director said ''Cut!'' while shooting such songs.

Heroines are viewed in most perverted manner. And nowadays, increasingly heroes too. They must stop promoting teasing of the either sex.

@Bhavi

Maybe I was not able to make my points clear. But here I will respond to what you said, so that it's more clear on what I am trying to say:

- I now the thinking has developed from years of patriarchy and conditioning. But I am saying mass media (which includes cinema as well) has done a lot to reinforce stereotypes too. Not just in case of gender but even size (making fun of short or stout people), disability (disabled are either beggars, sympathy objects or even evil villains but never normal or achievers!), race/regional stereotypes (all white women are like prostitutes, who can sleep with anyone at any time or people from North east are chowkidaars, Nepali or Chinese! Or people from Punjab are violent and stupid, those from South are lovers of Rajnikanth and only eat Idli and listen to classical music only etc.).

I am saying cinema and TV are not playing positive role which they can and should, given the power they exert! Aamir's show talked about changing soch. That process has to be initiated by not just government or law making bodies or NGOs or just people - but also by those in cinema, mass media, literature, TV!

- I disagree that media shows us only what we want to see. Indians were rather conservative. But didn't media show SR scenes or kissing scenes in movies and daily soaps or extra marital affairs? And women in bikinis? They have broken rules when they wanted to.

Also, is it right to show or do only what public wants? Public feels nothing is wrong with domestic violence and that it's a chhoti moti baat which happens at every home. Aa jaata hai gussa kabhi kabhi. Does it mean media should not raise voice against it? Or show DV as sign of love and possessiveness? NO.

Majority is not always right and it should not always be catered to!

- Glorification of Sarat Chandra's works is not a passing fad. The very fact such books are classics or scenes from them are cited iconic shows our backward mentality as individuals!

- Male pining for female lead is different thing. I am talking of negative notions such as projecting violent behaviour as sign of love. Please take it in right context.

- Now why are you saying what wrong did Hema say? If many people say so, it does not mean this is right. This is the crooked thinking which has to be attacked and corrected. Media can play a positive role here instead of peddling notions like aurat ke liye zamaana nahi badalta or it is a woman who ''invites'' rape or violence upon her. At least not reinforce such notions further? To even the girls whose grannies didn't tell them this, Hema's dialogue was a subtle warning message to them!

- For TRP is an excuse. We earlier had shows like Rajni, Tara, Udaan, Shanti in which women were normal, working and successful. Those shows were immensely popular back then - with a generation older than ours. How can we claim only ultra-regressive shows are key to success?

Of course it is on viewers also to boycott such shows and films. But what do viewers do when they are being served worse rubbish all around? We called Kyunki..and Kahaani. regressive, but later got shows which were even more backward and had child brides?!

It's a fact that viewers usually lap up whatever that is shown or keeps bombarding them everywhere.

-I am NOT putting blame on media or responsibility on them. I am saying likes of STAR, Aamir & Co. and other filmy heroes and heroines in social campaigns have some responsibility too. Songs, serials, films, literature etc. bombard us all the time and affect our psyche, condition us both consciously and subconsciously. So they have some responsibility too! They can't shrug it all by giving message to people in a 1 hour show or 15 sec ad or put everything on government. They have to take positive steps in right direction too.

-Sorry, entertainment is NOT just ''sheer entertainment''. Films, literature, songs, dramas, TV shows, ads etc. all fall under media. Media is not just journalism. And even though we know how we emulate messages and symbols in so-called entertainment in real life, we can't pretend our mentality or actions are not affected by it or we simply watch it for fun and leave it. We don't.

We try to copy celebrations, we dream of having honeymoon like that, we use those songs to greet our relatives or express feelings, we use those songs to tease people, we dress like that - it impacts us whether we accept it or not.

Ads single handedly changed concept of celebrations. Nowadays consumers are made to believe weekend is about holidays at resorts or eating at KFC or McD's. Whereas earlier it was having home made pakoras in your backyard! All sorts of propaganda is used by media to influence people's psyche. If they can work to suit their business interests then why not try and be a little more conducive to society's interests?

So it's better if we as public stopped pretending that cinema or TV or literature does not affect or shape us or our mentality. And best if those in media also stopped pretending that they are in creative field and can do ''anything'' (anything here mostly means what suits their commercial interests, not exactly freedom to do anything, no wonder they chicken out when it comes to making films on communal riots or homosexuality!). Media wallahs do not wish to take any responsibility at all! And think one ad or one show is enough. What about years of irresponsible content you have been showing?!

They are not to teach public, but they are also expected to behave responsibly since they influence public a lot!

@Bhavi

About the clothes factor:

I clarified earlier also that I pointed at accompanying presentation of women in such clothes. The way the camera seems to scan and highlight each of their body parts, pandering to male gaze, the vulgar lyrics like aamiya se aam hui or angoori badan mera. Or equating women with eatables like jalebis. I hope you've read articles analysing how lyrics objectify women, promote their disrobing and present them as something to be consumed.

It this thing I am pointing at! Why do women not put their foot down and refuse to dance to or sing such songs? Why can't they raise a voice? Why agree to be objectified like this?

I don't object to women's skimpy clothes per se. But my point is that those vulgar images in media lead men to perceive even normal women in real life as objects - whether they are skimpily clad or not, or even looking at men or not!

As for clothes argument, well there was a time when no one wore anything and did not even use leaves to cover their privates. It does not mean one can wear anything or not wear anything.

I believe even before wearing something - question yourself whether you actually want to wear it, and are totally comfortable wearing it, or you are wearing it to be fashionable, trendy and ''fit in'' as per standards propagated by market and media? It applies both to skimpy clothes and full clothes! Do something because you want to do it. Not because of others.

I remember a girl was wearing low waist jeans and a top which only covered her chest. We used to go to a coaching class full of students in one small classroom, with no proper seats and many sitting on stools or even standing while taking notes. I would always reach there in advance only so that I could get a comfortable seat. That girl requested me to shift to a stool and let her sit on the chair I was sitting on. I asked why should I leave my seat when I have come in time to secure it? She whispered she was that top and jeans which exposed her back and she felt uncomfortable to sit on a stool, since the back was exposed and boys were sitting behind and she did not want to sit in front of them ''like that''. Sensing her discomfort I shifted to the stool without arguing further.

Now my point is that if she were so conscious then why did she wear such clothes in first place? Why did she fear any kind of reaction from boys in advance? She was yet to sit. Still she was conscious of what boys would do if she sat in front of them with her back exposed. They had not done anything yet, but she was afraid of what could happen!

I totally blame boys here - and I know that by no means a girl wearing revealing clothes should be whispered about or touched or teased. But I was also concerned about her discomfort with what she was wearing. She kept trying to adjust her top and jeans all the time!

So if she was uncomfortable, then she did not have to wear this in first place. What is the use of wearing such stuff if you are conscious of sitting somewhere and forever keep adjusting your dress whether when you're riding a scooter or sitting somewhere?

This is what I always wonder about - whether girls really want to wear something of their own choice? If it is your choice, then why not be comfortable with it? If not, then what is making you wear something which you always need to ''adjust''?

I noticed my 2 year old niece rolling up her shirt while she was watching Marjaani song from Billu on TV. She wanted her stomach to be shown like the heroine's! Now this shows impact of media images on people of both young and old age. Older ones openly express what kind of SR or honeymoon they would like to have - based on movies they see. What kind of clothes they want their partner to wear, what kind of actions they want their partner to do.

We can't dismiss things as entertainment only and say they do not affect our mentality or actions in real life. THEY DO!

@Bhavi

Maybe I was not able to make my points clear. But here I will respond to what you said, so that it's more clear on what I am trying to say: see below what i posted earlier.

- I now the thinking has developed from years of patriarchy and conditioning. But I am saying mass media (which includes cinema as well) has done a lot to reinforce stereotypes too. Not just in case of gender but even size (making fun of short or stout people), disability (disabled are either beggars, sympathy objects or even evil villains but never normal or achievers!), race/regional stereotypes (all white women are like prostitutes, who can sleep with anyone at any time or people from North east are chowkidaars, Nepali or Chinese! Or people from Punjab are violent and stupid, those from South are lovers of Rajnikanth and only eat Idli and listen to classical music only etc.).

I am saying cinema and TV are not playing positive role which they can and should, given the power they exert! Aamir's show talked about changing soch. That process has to be initiated by not just government or law making bodies or NGOs or just people - but also by those in cinema, mass media, literature, TV! I agree to your point.

- I disagree that media shows us only what we want to see. Indians were rather conservative. But didn't media show SR scenes or kissing scenes in movies and daily soaps or extra marital affairs? And women in bikinis? They have broken rules when they wanted to. I still do not agree with you. If we stop watching such movies/shows they will not make it. Will give you a prime example of a show called Parichay- Lately the story deviated from its original plot. The viewers made a huge hue and cry. They twitted, emailed, messaged on the facebook. The TRP went to all time low. The result the main lead of the show came to the public and said that they will show what viewers want to see. You can go and check Parichay forum. The video is still there.

Also, is it right to show or do only what public wants? Public feels nothing is wrong with domestic violence and that it's a chhoti moti baat which happens at every home. Aa jaata hai gussa kabhi kabhi. Does it mean media should not raise voice against it? Or show DV as sign of love and possessiveness? NO. Agree DV in any religion/culture/law is a no no. As long as the person's basic thinking is not changing nothing will change.

Majority is not always right and it should not always be catered to!

- Glorification of Sarat Chandra's works is not a passing fad. The very fact such books are classics or scenes from them are cited iconic shows our backward mentality as individuals!

I believe that we are still living in the backward society. All the shows depict that. I personally don't watch any. The EMA shown in those shows are doing no good to the society. Still people are watching them and enjoying them. Why can they not boycott these shows all out together?

- Male pining for female lead is different thing. I am talking of negative notions such as projecting violent behaviour as sign of love. Please take it in right context.

- Now why are you saying what wrong did Hema say? If many people say so, it does not mean this is right. This is the crooked thinking which has to be attacked and corrected. Media can play a positive role here instead of peddling notions like aurat ke liye zamaana nahi badalta or it is a woman who ''invites'' rape or violence upon her. At least not reinforce such notions further? To even the girls whose grannies didn't tell them this, Hema's dialogue was a subtle warning message to them! -@ bold I did not say what she said is correct. I just said that was a reflection of the society we live in. My applause was for my mom. @green not sure which part of world you are from? But this is unfortunately true in most part of India.

- For TRP is an excuse. We earlier had shows like Rajni, Tara, Udaan, Shanti in which women were normal, working and successful. Those shows were immensely popular back then - with a generation older than ours. How can we claim only ultra-regressive shows are key to success? -

Exactly those shows were so nice. TRP is not an excuse but is the reality. If we all stop watching crap they will not show crap. I just proved you above my point. There are many shows that stopped due to low TRP.

Of course it is on viewers also to boycott such shows and films. But what do viewers do when they are being served worse rubbish all around? We called Kyunki..and Kahaani. regressive, but later got shows which were even more backward and had child brides?!

It's a fact that viewers usually lap up whatever that is shown or keeps bombarding them everywhere.

Most of the prime time shows do not show our ethics and i agree with your point. I don't watch them and neither allow my kids to watch them. It is the family decision which every family has to take. Charity begins at home. I can not change the community if i can not change myself or my family.

-I am NOT putting blame on media or responsibility on them. I am saying likes of STAR, Aamir & Co. and other filmy heroes and heroines in social campaigns have some responsibility too. Songs, serials, films, literature etc. bombard us all the time and affect our psyche, condition us both consciously and subconsciously. So they have some responsibility too! They can't shrug it all by giving message to people in a 1 hour show or 15 sec ad or put everything on government. They have to take positive steps in right direction too.

Why again heroes and heroines. How are they different than us? Will give you a small real story:
In the region of Kutch water is scarce. there was a pump that was pumping water from the Narmada Canal and was leaking like crazy. Not a single person there put a bucket under that pump and the water was running like any thing. Everyone standing there was bickering about it but no one called the plumber or authority to fix it.
Similar story in my town here- There was stormwater pipe overflowing . There were 500 calls in the city to report that pipe overflow. All from the public,

See the difference- You can not always tell people to do their part. We have to do our part too.

-Sorry, entertainment is NOT just ''sheer entertainment''. Films, literature, songs, dramas, TV shows, ads etc. all fall under media. Media is not just journalism. And even though we know how we emulate messages and symbols in so-called entertainment in real life, we can't pretend our mentality or actions are not affected by it or we simply watch it for fun and leave it. We don't.

We try to copy celebrations, we dream of having honeymoon like that, we use those songs to greet our relatives or express feelings, we use those songs to tease people, we dress like that - it impacts us whether we accept it or not.

Ads single handedly changed concept of celebrations. Nowadays consumers are made to believe weekend is about holidays at resorts or eating at KFC or McD's. Whereas earlier it was having home made pakoras in your backyard! All sorts of propaganda is used by media to influence people's psyche. If they can work to suit their business interests then why not try and be a little more conducive to society's interests?

So it's better if we as public stopped pretending that cinema or TV or literature does not affect or shape us or our mentality. And best if those in media also stopped pretending that they are in creative field and can do ''anything'' (anything here mostly means what suits their commercial interests, not exactly freedom to do anything, no wonder they chicken out when it comes to making films on communal riots or homosexuality!). Media wallahs do not wish to take any responsibility at all! And think one ad or one show is enough. What about years of irresponsible content you have been showing?!

People have to be selective in what they watch and what they don't. TV is said as an IDIOT BOX. Hence if you sit in front of TV for 24 hours you tend to think what they show. There are so many things to do in life. Play sports, Read books, spend quality time with family and do constructive things in life. Life is too precious to be spent in front of TV or at movie theatres.

Make selection to whatever you do. The life has too many choices to chose from and according to me TV or movie is the last thing i am worried about.

They are not to teach public, but they are also expected to behave responsibly since they influence public a lot!

See below what i posted earlier:

Originally posted by: annika20

@Bhavi

About the clothes factor:

I clarified earlier also that I pointed at accompanying presentation of women in such clothes. The way the camera seems to scan and highlight each of their body parts, pandering to male gaze, the vulgar lyrics like aamiya se aam hui or angoori badan mera. Or equating women with eatables like jalebis. I hope you've read articles analysing how lyrics objectify women, promote their disrobing and present them as something to be consumed.

It this thing I am pointing at! Why do women not put their foot down and refuse to dance to or sing such songs? Why can't they raise a voice? Why agree to be objectified like this?

I don't object to women's skimpy clothes per se. But my point is that those vulgar images in media lead men to perceive even normal women in real life as objects - whether they are skimpily clad or not, or even looking at men or not!

As for clothes argument, well there was a time when no one wore anything and did not even use leaves to cover their privates. It does not mean one can wear anything or not wear anything.

I believe even before wearing something - question yourself whether you actually want to wear it, and are totally comfortable wearing it, or you are wearing it to be fashionable, trendy and ''fit in'' as per standards propagated by market and media? It applies both to skimpy clothes and full clothes! Do something because you want to do it. Not because of others.

I remember a girl was wearing low waist jeans and a top which only covered her chest. We used to go to a coaching class full of students in one small classroom, with no proper seats and many sitting on stools or even standing while taking notes. I would always reach there in advance only so that I could get a comfortable seat. That girl requested me to shift to a stool and let her sit on the chair I was sitting on. I asked why should I leave my seat when I have come in time to secure it? She whispered she was that top and jeans which exposed her back and she felt uncomfortable to sit on a stool, since the back was exposed and boys were sitting behind and she did not want to sit in front of them ''like that''. Sensing her discomfort I shifted to the stool without arguing further.

Now my point is that if she were so conscious then why did she wear such clothes in first place? Why did she fear any kind of reaction from boys in advance? She was yet to sit. Still she was conscious of what boys would do if she sat in front of them with her back exposed. They had not done anything yet, but she was afraid of what could happen!

I totally blame boys here - and I know that by no means a girl wearing revealing clothes should be whispered about or touched or teased. But I was also concerned about her discomfort with what she was wearing. She kept trying to adjust her top and jeans all the time!

So if she was uncomfortable, then she did not have to wear this in first place. What is the use of wearing such stuff if you are conscious of sitting somewhere and forever keep adjusting your dress whether when you're riding a scooter or sitting somewhere?

This is what I always wonder about - whether girls really want to wear something of their own choice? If it is your choice, then why not be comfortable with it? If not, then what is making you wear something which you always need to ''adjust''?

I noticed my 2 year old niece rolling up her shirt while she was watching Marjaani song from Billu on TV. She wanted her stomach to be shown like the heroine's! Now this shows impact of media images on people of both young and old age. Older ones openly express what kind of SR or honeymoon they would like to have - based on movies they see. What kind of clothes they want their partner to wear, what kind of actions they want their partner to do.

We can't dismiss things as entertainment only and say they do not affect our mentality or actions in real life. THEY DO!

Originally posted by: Chitrashi

What about SP's own no.1 show DABM or the current favs Saathiya and IPKKND - aren't they all rife examples of DV?

Easy to drool over the supposed romance between Khushi and Arnav - but for god's sake when will it get into the heads of the romance crazy junta that he married her out f spite and his treatment of her is shabby to say the least? Did anyone notice that she earns her own livelihood, despite being in a rich family? No romance for me there, I seriously want to knock sense into the heads of the droolers.

Abd DABM - con an IPS aspirant into getting married to an illiterate halwai in order to get hold of her share of property and the mad junta goes ecstatic about the beginning or "romance", Oh really? The atrocities that are visited upon her in the name of "sanskaar" make me want to slap the girl silly. Only thing I'm glad about is that wimp of creature did not study for the exams, else she would be advising future victims to go back to their abusive MILs.

Saathiya - He hasn't even looked at her in more than a year of marriage, rapes her once in a drunken condition and she is happy?

Not one of the fans would be ecstatic about the romance in all these serials if she was put into the same situation would she?