Imran Khan slams Animal and Vanga - Page 6

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

So umm maa ka naam use nahi kar sakte? Also like this industry has always made people obfuscate their caste identities. He literally is his mother's child tho and him being nepo doesn't invalidate his opinions on the shitshow that was that film.

Kyon nahi kar sakte hain.....bilkul kar sakte hain.....if it is done because of respect for one's mother or because the Dad has wronged them for some reason......but IK's reason was to benefit from the last name Khan....to be closely associated with Mamu Aamir Khan......breaking the normal is not a bad thing.....unless it is for one's own benefit....

Originally posted by: DivineAngel

Padmavaat was a historical movie. Back then things like that used to happen. I have read such stories in history books, kings used to attack a kingdom just to get the beautiful princess.

No. That is the point tho. Any undergraduate level training teaches you to question such assertions. What is the source material? Who was the author? Who was their patron? What were their biases?

When you say you have read it in history books, you have to specify which book written by which historian and peer reviewed by whom. That is basic matter of academic accountability. I can write whatever I want but that won't be taught in schools and colleges na. Anyone can also make any film or any show on a historical theme but that doesn't make it academically or factually true. Saoirse's Mary Queen of Scots is a good example

I will give you an example, Ashoka and Karuvaki's supposed love story is attributed to the Kalinga war in popular culture but none of Mauryan era sources actually talk about it. Ashoka's edicts mention a genocide in Kalinga but nothing about Karuvaki being the reason behind it. He funnily never posted those edicts in Kalinga itself as to not incite a rebellion. Most historians of Ashoka hold Kalinga (I can give you names of people I have read) hold it to be an economically core region of the empire—hence the conquest. The love story comes from later folklores.

Now, is SRK's Ashoka a good movie? Sure. Is it history? No. Historians who have been trained by other historians write and rewrite history. That is basic critical thinking skills most academics adhere to.

I also am just curious about the scholarship people have read, I want to check them out.

Originally posted by: blue-ice.1

Kyon nahi kar sakte hain.....bilkul kar sakte hain.....if it is done because of respect for one's mother or because the Dad has wronged them for some reason......but IK's reason was to benefit from the last name Khan....to be closely associated with Mamu Aamir Khan......breaking the normal is not a bad thing.....unless it is for one's own benefit....

And? Lol. And it is still his name lol. Breaking the normal is always okay as far as it is not hurting or alienating anyone. Why is anyone obligated to stick to their father's name with so many caveats. Why can't adopting mom's name to gain benefits such a bad thing when last names in south asia have to do with caste and caste based networks anyway? Ranbir can benefit from his dad's lqstname but Imran shouldn't benefit from his mother's name? Both are nepo lol.

Bollywood making people drop their birth names to make them sound more acceptable is as old as the industry itself. Madhubala, Meena Kumari, Dharamendra, Dilip Kumar, the Ganguly brothers come to mind.

Weird thing to hold onto while trying to criticise his arguements about a different topic altogether.

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

Just curious, which history books have you read on the topic and when and where did the authors do their PhDs?

Upar se what was the peer review of those books? Don't take it as snark, I am just genuinely curious because these are the standard parameters we follow while reading non-fiction.

Swara has a masters' degree in sociology and whether she's a good student or not, i am sure she was trained to read academic books critically given how interdisciplinary socual sciences are.

Sociology alag hai history se. Muje nahi pata madam Swara ki kya qualifications hai, na hi mai koi PhD holder hu history mei, but itna zarur pata hai jo bhi uss movie mei dikhaya hai wo history ka part tha. Queens and women at that time used to commit Jauhar after their regions got invaded by the enemies and their husbands got killed in the war, tf was she going on about in that letter that women have a right to live even after getting r*ped, that she felt being reduced to just a vagina etc, why is she comparing a periodic film of the 14th century with today’s idea of feminism? Women at that time used to commit Jauhar because of their own choice, because they believed they would rather die in glory than surrender themselves to the enemy or become their s*x slaves for the rest of their lives, now I am no fan of Bhansali or his overdramatic movies, but usne bhi yai dikhaya hai movie mei I guess? Toh Swara madam ko kis baat se objection tha exactly samajh nee aya, Jauhar se? Uss time ke “feminism” se? History mei jo hua usse? Iske liye I am sure muje itni history books padhne ki zarurat toh nahi hai alag se.

Originally posted by: infinity101

Sociology alag hai history se. Muje nahi pata madam Swara ki kya qualifications hai, na hi mai koi PhD holder hu history mei, but itna zarur pata hai jo bhi uss movie mei dikhaya hai wo history ka part tha. Queens and women at that time used to commit Jauhar after their regions got invaded by the enemies and their husbands got killed in the war, tf was she going on about in that letter that women have a right to live even after getting r*ped, that she felt being reduced to just a vagina etc, why is she comparing a periodic film of the 14th century with today’s idea of feminism? Women at that time used to commit Jauhar because of their own choice, because they believed they would rather die in glory than surrender themselves to the enemy or become their s*x slaves for the rest of their lives, now I am no fan of Bhansali or his overdramatic movies, but usne bhi yai dikhaya hai movie mei I guess? Toh Swara madam ko kis baat se objection tha exactly samajh nee aya, Jauhar se? Uss time ke “feminism” se? History mei jo hua usse? Iske liye I am sure muje itni history books padhne ki zarurat toh nahi hai alag se.

Sure history and sociology are different but interdisciplinary. History students are trained to read a lot of economics, sociology, and political science and vice versa. Sanjay Subrahmanyam (Hon'ble MoE's brother) is an economist-turned-historian. Social sciences build on each other.

And you can definitely criticise Swara however you want. But you asking her to read a "little history" when you admittedly haven't read any either is hilarious. Literally give me one source or peer-reviewed historian who backs up your statements. I am not even contestimg you lol. I am just asking you to substantiate your claims about history. Anybody's long-held beliefs do not become history by default lol.

Muhammad Jayasi— a sufi theologian— wrote Padmavat centuries after Khalji died — a fact verfied by historians.

https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/prandium/article/view/21848

https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pR0LzVCpfw8C&oi=fnd&pg=PA63&dq=info:guAU7CsOkbIJ

Here's a good, well-researched article about the long history of Sati and Jauhar — all forms of violence being horrible—.a trigger warning is warranted for this article.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lakshmi-Vijayakumar/publication/7738905_Altruistic_Suicide_in_India/links/633c5134ff870c55cefe2f54/Altruistic-Suicide-in-India.pdf

Lata Mani also has a huge body of research into Sati.

Again I am not even contesting you in any way.

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

Sure history and sociology are different but interdisciplinary. History students are trained to read a lot of economics, sociology, and political science and vice versa. Sanjay Subrahmanyam (Hon'ble MoE's brother) is an economist-turned-historian. Social sciences build on each other.

And you can definitely criticise Swara however you want. But you asking her to read a "little history" when you admittedly haven't read any either is hilarious. Literally give me one source or peer-reviewed historian who backs up your statements. I am not even contestimg you lol. I am just asking you to substantiate your claims about history. Anybody's long-held beliefs do not become history by default lol.

Muhammad Jayasi— a sufi theologian— wrote Padmavat centuries after Khalji died — a fact verfied by historians.

https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/prandium/article/view/21848

https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pR0LzVCpfw8C&oi=fnd&pg=PA63&dq=info:guAU7CsOkbIJ

Here's a good, well-researched article about the long history of Sati and Jauhar — all forms of violence being horrible—.a trigger warning is warranted for this article.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lakshmi-Vijayakumar/publication/7738905_Altruistic_Suicide_in_India/links/633c5134ff870c55cefe2f54/Altruistic-Suicide-in-India.pdf

Lata Mani also has a huge body of research into Sati.

Again I am not even contesting you in any way.

What exactly is your point?For what are you asking me to “substantiate my claims” about history? Maine sirf itna hi likha tha ki Swara should have searched a little history before going on her rants about the movie which is set in the 14th century, iss baat se kya itni dikkat ho gai that you are asking me to prove my stance on history by giving proofs? I would read this article some other time since it’s too long. And what “beliefs” are you talking about? I am just talking about the things I have read about the age old practices of Sati Pratha and Jauhar, from whatever I have read, both were different in nature and intentions, while Sati Pratha was a regressive despicable act of a woman’s identity being reduced to the worth of her husband’s life, where in most cases she was forced to give up her life as well after her husband died, Jauhar was committed by women at that time of their own choice, for the reasons I have mentioned in the previous post. And Padmavat didn’t talk about Sati Pratha but the act of Jauhar, it’s like comparing apples with oranges? And if you know so much about history, please enlighten me what was shown wrong in that film? Last time I checked, you and I both were not born in that era or time, so your claims to know about history are as good or futile as mine.

Originally posted by: infinity101

What exactly is your point?For what are you asking me to “substantiate my claims” about history? Maine sirf itna hi likha tha ki Swara should have searched a little history before going on her rants about the movie which is set in the 14th century, iss baat se kya itni dikkat ho gai that you are asking me to prove my stance on history by giving proofs? I would read this article some other time since it’s too long. And what “beliefs” are you talking about? I am just talking about the things I have read about the age old practices of Sati Pratha and Jauhar, from whatever I have read, both were different in nature and intentions, while Sati Pratha was a regressive despicable act of a woman’s identity being reduced to the worth of her husband’s life, where in most cases she was forced to give up her life as well after her husband died, Jauhar was committed by women at that time of their own choice, for the reasons I have mentioned in the previous post. And Padmavat didn’t talk about Sati Pratha but the act of Jauhar, it’s like comparing apples with oranges? And if you know so much about history, please enlighten me what was shown wrong in that film? Last time I checked, you and I both were not born in that era or time, so your claims to know about history are as good or futile as mine.

Baba I was asking you to tell me about which historians of 14th century you have read in order to "search a little" like you expect Swara to do.

You have read about Sati Partha. Great! Tell me the name of the book(s) and historians. I'd love to read as well. We are talking of history no? Should we not talk about historians?

First evidence of royal women committing Sati comes from Eran Pillar inscription of Gupta age.

Here's DC Sircar's translation of it. You can verify his qualifications in talking about Sanskrit inscriptions. He was trained in it, has edited Epigraphica Indica for ASI and was peer-reviewed. He wasn't a random dude writing just about anything without any competency. That much accountability is public responsibility na.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/45436327

Sati, through historical research, we know goes back to Gupta age

I did give you an article about the evolution of Jauhar too. Baki apne jo padha hai woh aap bataoge toh I would like to update my knowledge on the topic, main bas itna hi bol rahi thi.

Vivaad ho gayaa.

Itni garmi hai. Aam khaayiye, Infinity.

Originally posted by: blue-ice.1

Kyon nahi kar sakte hain.....bilkul kar sakte hain.....if it is done because of respect for one's mother or because the Dad has wronged them for some reason......but IK's reason was to benefit from the last name Khan....to be closely associated with Mamu Aamir Khan......breaking the normal is not a bad thing.....unless it is for one's own benefit....

I think that, too...it had been quite importat to him to get associated to Aamir through being the son to Mansoor Khan's sister (cousin to Aamir).

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

Baba I was asking you to tell me about which historians of 14th century you have read in order to "search a little" like you expect Swara to do.

You have read about Sati Partha. Great! Tell me the name of the book(s) and historians. I'd love to read as well. We are talking of history no? Should we not talk about historians?

First evidence of royal women committing Sati comes from Eran Pillar inscription of Gupta age.

Here's DC Sircar's translation of it. You can verify his qualifications in talking about Sanskrit inscriptions. He was trained in it, has edited Epigraphica Indica for ASI and was peer-reviewed. He wasn't a random dude writing just about anything without any competency. That much accountability is public responsibility na.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/45436327

Sati, through historical research, we know goes back to Gupta age

I did give you an article about the evolution of Jauhar too. Baki apne jo padha hai woh aap bataoge toh I would like to update my knowledge on the topic, main bas itna hi bol rahi thi.

I have read about it in school history books when i was a kid.