Sonali Kulkarni's "Lazy Women" jibe: Controversy or Facts? - Page 3

Posted: 1 years ago
Originally posted by devashree_h


Women who take care of a house, just cannot be called lazy. That is a lot of work. We are still in a phase where primary responsibility of kids fall on women. Taking care of a demanding job and taking care of kids is too much to do together. Lot of Women get tired and choose to focus on their families. They should not be shamed.


It should be left to the woman, whether they want to work or they want to care of their families.


I don't think she meant it for homemakers. I feel like she was trying to communicate that there are girls today who want the man to give everything in a relationship, while they bring nothing in a relationship. They want basically a financial and emotional blanket, but don't want to give anything in return.


Then she went on to stress that everyone should be financially independent - this statement I think she meant homemakers as well, where I agree with you.

Posted: 1 years ago

It’s well and good to encourage women to be financially independent and self-sustaining but then one must also acknowledge the social and cultural ramifications of that.
For the purpose of survival and child-rearing, men and women took on two different roles in an Indian household. Men were traditionally the breadwinners and women the homemakers and child-rearers.

The reason this model created well functioning and stable adults is because as children they had in their mothers and fathers, a masculine model who lead them and a feminine model who nurtured them. The ying and yang were perfectly balanced in the household.

 When women were encouraged to enter the workplace by avant-garde activists who are capable of thinking only in terms of power balances, the ying yang balance was gone. Children started consuming more unhealthy take away food and gaining weight because their working mothers no longer have time to cook healthy meals for them. Fathers lost their authority because they are no longer the sole breadwinner. Children started becoming directionless and mentally ill. In fact, mental illness is continually rising, and people are increasingly unhappy. Why?

The only people who benefitted from this are the government and corporations who now collect double the tax and pay reduced wages because more people are applying for the same jobs. 

Human relationships are fragile and the best way to organise them is based on objective and immutable principles, not on mutable and destructive concepts like power and money. 

The word ‘self-sufficient’ has no basis in reality. Unless one lives in a self-constructed dwelling in the Himalayas or the rainforest and collects their own water, creates their own food, hunts and maintains their own dwelling, one isn’t self-sufficient. This is the reason we created society, so that each person can contribute based on their expertise and everyone doesn’t have to do waste huge amount of time on mere survival. A financially self-sufficient person still relies on the farmer, truck driver, merchant, possibly a cook and a whole host of other people in between to get food on their table, for example. 


Instead of pushing nonsensical concepts like ‘self-sufficiency’ on women, women should be allowed to pursue their own goals. If a woman wants to be a homemaker, then let her be a homemaker without judgment. If a woman wants to be a career woman, let her think about the sacrifices she must make to achieve that and then pursue it. Above all, people mustn’t allow the destructive metaphysic of power or activist busybodies to direct their relationships.


Edit - typos

Edited by Krantikari - 1 years ago
Posted: 1 years ago
Originally posted by MinionBoss



I don't think she meant it for homemakers. I feel like she was trying to communicate that there are girls today who want the man to give everything in a relationship, while they bring nothing in a relationship. They want basically a financial and emotional blanket, but don't want to give anything in return.


Then she went on to stress that everyone should be financially independent - this statement I think she meant homemakers as well, where I agree with you.

Makes sense. I've seen that a lot. Some girls/women do really live on their partner,'s money without doing any work. 


Thanks for listening and sharing this! 👍🏼 too lazy to listen to the entire interview 😆 

Posted: 1 years ago

You are arguing as if traditional Indian households ever consisted of only one heterosexual couple raising their own offspring.


Isn't there far more evidence of joint families throughout Indian history? Children had plenty of male and female influences even when they grew up without one parent or the other. These influences included women who practised medicine (not just midwifery), performed rituals, and earned income in other ways ... and lazy men too!


When girls were married before puberty and teenage husbands were sent to them for garbhādhāna at menarche, what choice did women have to educate themselves and pursue careers of choice when they were constantly bearing and nursing children? It wasn't conducive to mental health or survival; it was just what women endured until they either died in childbirth or aged out of the childbearing years.


As for children needing a father and a mother, children actually do better with lesbian parents than heterosexual parents, and equally well with gay male parents.

Edited by BrhannadaArmour - 1 years ago
Posted: a year ago
Originally posted by BrhannadaArmour


You are arguing as if traditional Indian households ever consisted of only one heterosexual couple raising their own offspring.


Isn't there far more evidence of joint families throughout Indian history? Children had plenty of male and female influences even when they grew up without one parent or the other. These influences included women who practised medicine (not just midwifery), performed rituals, and earned income in other ways ... and lazy men too!


When girls were married before puberty and teenage husbands were sent to them for garbhādhāna at menarche, what choice did women have to educate themselves and pursue careers of choice when they were constantly bearing and nursing children? It wasn't conducive to mental health or survival; it was just what women endured until they either died in childbirth or aged out of the childbearing years.


As for children needing a father and a mother, children actually do better with lesbian parents than heterosexual parents, and equally well with gay male parents.

Your argument is a strawman and thus, isn't worth addressing.


You should also post some evidence for your final statement, because without evidence it looks more ideologically geared rather than having a factual basis. Which I suspect your whole argument is anyway.😆

Posted: a year ago

You give two interesting examples on two different women. But I don't think homemakers can be entirely left out of the context Sonali had spoken in.

I think the soon-to-be married woman, who plans to rely on her partner for financial support, will be a homemaker tomorrow in her family (that includes her future kids), and the homemakers we see today were once married off by their families to a financially stable man. Maybe she was not working, or maybe she was working before marriage and she consciously made the decision of giving up her financial independence to be there for her family (and her future kids) full time.

Personally I am a strong advocate for financial independence for women. But it's not right to judge a woman as 'lazy' if she gives up her independence in an already male-dominated world. From the outside, we only see her depending on her partner's finances, but never consider what might have led her to that decision.

In a world where a woman gives up her job to be with her husband in a different city/country, the same is not expected from a man, even if she is earning more than him. A woman will be called 'lazy' for depending on her partner's finances and 'selfish' for being career driven. But will a working man be called 'lazy' for not sharing responsibilities inside house? No. Will he be called 'selfish' for leaving his sick kid to his partner (who might also be working) because he has something equally urgent at work? No.

We live in an unequal world which doesn't respect a woman for the choices she makes. And not many women have a family supportive enough where the woman can have a highly demanding career with her partner supporting her no matter what (including not blaming her for leaving behind their sick kid for an urgent work commitment).

I just think the usage of the word 'lazy' was a bit harsh. Yes, every women should definitely be independent, although sometimes circumstances are not always favorable for her to assert her independence.

Edited by tournesol - a year ago
Posted: a year ago

Honestly, women have always been more hardworking and working restlessly inside and outside the house. 


But unfortunately nowadays some women are actually trying to be dependent 


I as a law student want to tell me views.


There are women who have been working her whole life but quits it bcoz her husband earns a lot of money and she thinks now she can live aaram se let me tell you she is no housewife or anything just goes shopping and goes to kitty parties. 


Even in Dilvorce cases women leave their jobs so that they can get a lot of alimony. 


But then again women who are hardworking ate lot more in our country. 

Edited by Palak2812 - a year ago
Posted: a year ago

Irrespective what she says i urge all girls to have a back up for income as life is very uncertain. And once you loose your touch on your skills it would be very difficult to get that confidence back. 

I have seen people who faced multiple divorces but they were confident due to the fact that they were financially independent. 

I have seen ppl who seperate from spouse within 1 year of marriage. 

I have seen ppl who lost her husband and only source of income too. 

I have seen ppl whose husband got laid off during lay off seasons. 

Earlier relationships were stable now it's not stable as before.Inorder to ensure that you and your child gets all the things that it needs during uncertain situation better to have a backe up. Even if it is small buisness or freelancing or anything keep yourself motivated and upto date 😊

Posted: a year ago

Is the earth lazy? Which never boasts its role in life's sustainability , which is the primary cause of all the life in this world? The Earth never shows its' relentless rotation, silently rotates around the scorching sun and provides you with a source of life. It softly transforms a seed into a sapling and feeds it until it grows into a gigantic tree. Is the Mother Earth lazy? 

Is the sky a lazy being?, giving you the conditions for development, growth, and captivate you every night, [ yes, used this phrase with a different meaning] bringing you dreams and giving you enchanted happiness? 

The same way, women are as lazy as all these elements! 

When you compare men and women with comparable educations at the beginning of their careers, working full-time in the same occupation and sector, the gender gap in work and earnings has largely nonexistent. 

Priorities will shift after children are born, and women will be more focused on their obligations than men! Is Breastfeeding the baby, arranging a congenial atmosphere at home, is it called laziness?? 

While their children are small, women frequently decide to transition to part-time work or to leave a career  trajectory in order to have more time for mothering and childcare. Is it called as Laziness??? 

Maintaining a home and raising children involves a considerable lot of work. That already exists. And women perform a disproportionate amount of this work globally. And it's not being paid, note it! 

Who is capable of, by the way, is able to compensate a woman for having to endure labour pains and postpartum discomforts? Is taking a break while carrying out her assigned tasks considered being lazy?

What kind of claim/ comment is this, and how much of it is true in stating that you are comfortable at home and benefit from your husband's income?

When an actress described women as “lazy” because a few choose not to have careers and insist on only considering prospective grooms who earn a lot, many jumped to her defense in social media.

A few said-- “If she is used to so much luxury, she should earn enough to support herself. Why should she be a parasite and expect her husband to earn for her”, was their argument

If she chooses not to have a professional career, it is not because of laziness; it is because she knows that her family needs her as a caregiver, not a career oriented woman at a certain period.

Gender inequality, comparisons of roles  requires rigorous research to help the society to tackle with it. 

Yes....Women are just as lazy as the sky and the earth, which never reveal their contribution in supporting life to the naked eye!

Edited by Viswasruti - a year ago
Posted: a year ago

Don't get this,  first she claims Indian women (some) are lazy because they're goldiggers on a hunt for a hotshot statue boyfriend who maybe even sweats and pukes luxury

Then she mocks a woman for "shopping" for a financially stable husband and who doesn't want meddling in-laws (note that the woman's expectation here is 6 lpa, not Sabhyasachi wedding gown, weekly LV bags and Thai massages), 

Then she's feeling sorry for her husband because he started earning from an early age and brothers over societal pressure of providing their family with stability and she somehow assumes there is no pressure on women (some) because they are not cornered enough to provide for their families. Why does she feel women (some)  are not cornered is because these women (some)  are going to parlors, I am assuming run by a woman (some)  or a man (some) instead of going to an office and earning.  

Some how solution to all this is woman (all)  should pay half the price for refrigerator the couple buys, I'm assuming she doesn't want everyone including his parents or  their children in the house to pay🤔 (I get the example on the deeper level guys, don't worry!)  and finally she gives a conclusion that women (some)  should not abuse their priviligies and stand up for themselves(?) What priviligies are we exactly talking about here?  I know atleast 5 women who have terrible period cramps but don't want menstrual leave to be a bill, because they fear discrimination and that it may actually demotivate employers from hiring them....  Maybe she's talking about Government reservations and some pro women acts? 

Gimme a break Mrs Kulkarni.... One point at a time please... 

I don't really see how men's societal pressure problems equates to women abusing priviligies(?) given by law, maybe it has something to do with societal conditioning(?)🤓 There is way to put forward these points without dragging one gender down. Why is this Men Pressure problem mostly brought up in context of women priviligies abuse?.... 

Someone should have asked her what her "some not all" meant and would she have taken the same husband if he was a chapri road side active smoking corporate romeo, with no regard of providing for his parents and was complimenting her sleeveless blouses/tight jeans by looking at it for like 30 seconds extra!? I can't believe she actually made that comment about women targeting males because they are being extra cautious🤬, No offence taken! 

Someone who was going to take the table and smash it on their head....  After you're done pass it to me phulezzz 😳 Gold digging and lazy she says smiley39

Edited by Sanskruthi - a year ago

Related Topics

doc-text Topics pencil Author stackexchange Replies eye Views clock Last Post Reply
Why Men are better than Women

pencil PardesiBabu   stackexchange 88   eye 8021

PardesiBabu 88 8021 4 months ago firewings_diya

Topic Info

29 Participants 54 Replies 4887Views

Topic started by Armu4eva

Last replied by NimbuMirchi

loader
loader
up-open TOP