update 3rd sept 2010 - Page 8

Originally posted by: anu rulz

poet stockholm syndrome se zyada to yahan sado-masochism hai..stockholm to technically sia par laagu hota hai,bein in love wid raghav after everything he had done to her and her family..😆

and sheela chachi,definitly..her "love" for her "jeeji" is nauseating at times..😕

i know!!!tht foot massage tht she does is particularly annoying..i was😲 when i saw it the first time!!WTF?? any other syndrome???let me think..i will get back after sum research!!am telling u,tv shows se meri psychiatry ki padhai ka bahut revision ho jata hai!!😍

I swear Anu, I am becoming such an expert.

Harsha-have u ever heard of things or disputes that are resolved only by force or violence.I dont think so.actually in most of the wars the common feature we do see is destruction of all kinds.so amba realised this is all i can say .she knew that she can bring about changes by force but in the longer run would only leave destruction.so the changes she brought about would never be able sustain itself and she chose sia because she was educated of the lot with required patience for the further development.she saw the spark of rebellion in sia .this is not belittle amba's contribution but what happened after she left ,all of us know.I agree avater and chanda's reunion happened because of amba but think if chanda was not pregnant then after amba left she would have to go back to her servant's status because rangeeli was faking pregnancy.

I seriously dont understand why sia's contribution or atleast attempts to correct things without anybody's support has never been appreciated.winning or changing an old thought process in a place like veerpur is very difficult.atleast sia did attempt and she couldnt win is in no way a reflection of her attempts.somehow i couldnt agree with u're principle that everything exists in black or white like winning or losing.there are grey areas in life i think u should attempt to look at.so tell me something if one is not winning,does it mean they are losers.they are the most courageous of the lot because they try even after their failure.if u see everything in black or white,then the full ff team are a bunch of losers.what they do is basically skim through the surface of the problem,ask for god's help without helping themselves ,never stand in the line of fire and so no have right whatsoever to point fingers at sia,if sheela chachi thought sia was her daughter and not like her daughter then she would have never ever cursed.i am mother -a mother can never ever curse her daughter that too a pregnant one.so the words "she is like my daughter" is totally false and she has viewed sia as raghav's wife and most selfishly looked at her as the saviour of all her troubles.

thanks adinats,i read all the posts that have been written on the curse and people trying to portray sia as a loser.if jhoomer was the sarpanch and something like this happened to sia, would SC have cursed jhoomer the same way she cursed sia.i dont think so.i think she would have gone and asked jhoomer why she did that and tried to justify all her actions before her family members.somebody kept telling me that chachi helped sia in her times of trouble.i agree she did give her emotional support and on the sly instigated raghav to save rasia's marriage but that gives her no moral right to curse the other person

Good one Shreya.

adinats,tiny15,and shreya ...👏..sahi jawab diya hai

sang_hari -

adinats.poet,shilpa-thanks a lot.I just dont how some people are able to justify the character's fault just to prove their POV right.people always want to win it seems and that is a big problem ,u know.people like that will not be able to take defeat or failure easily so become dejected and depressed.sia in that sense is somebody with hope even in the bleakest of the situations and the way she tries to stand up after her defeat speaks volume of her positive nature.she may be not aggressive but compensates that with her grit and determination.
shilpa-i get u're drift on the person with Stockholm syndrome