Barrister Babu/ DT Note pg 5. - Page 5

Originally posted by: ..RiMi..

@Bold - What makes you say that and in what way are they promoting child marriage? Just by the promos you cannot tell what they are showing in the show right? 😊

I have no idea about PPK because I never watched it. I am here just to comment on Barrister Babu. I don't think it even makes sense to compare these two shows.

So, when we watch a mythological drama, or a historical show, we see many traits of the Indian society which were wrong that time... do we question such shows then? 😆Absolutely not! Why are people making numerous remakes of historical events which not only depicts child marriage, but also brutality with women, violence, cruelty and what not?

You will find numerous series and films based on World War 1 & 2 where you will find stories that would wrench you heart. Why are they still making these shows/films when we know those things were wrong and now we do not want to follow that ? are they doing it to promote negativity and all those things that happened in the past? No!

That's because if a show is depicting events which took place in past does not mean they are trying to promote it.

Promoting something mean glorifying the same thing on television and showing the viewers that this thing is right.

But what did the show Basrrister Babu do?

• They showed that an 8 year old girl was being tricked into marrying a 90 year old man. Does this mean glorifying child marriage?
• They showed that when the 90 year old man died even before completing the rituals, that little 8 year old girl was forced to perform Sati. Is that glorifying Sati pratha?
• After being married to the lead at such a tender age, she had to face wrath of the family due to her bed wetting problem. Does that "glorify" child marriage? Does that in any way show child marriages are good? Doesn't it actually depict how wrong it was?
• There was a track where the lead out rightly rejected attending a child marriage which was taking place. He clearly mentioned that it is wrong and he himself had to do marry Bondita only to stop a bigger mishap. Is this glorifying child marriage?
• Was it okay if the lead had not stopped Sati pratha and let that kid die? He married her to save her life, does this mean child marriage is being glorified?

The lead of the show tried to STOP not just the child marriage but also the Sati Pratha. When no one was ready to take the girl's responsibility, then the Lead had to marry her just to give her a place in the society as he promised to give her a life which she deserved.Is this glorifying child marriage? Was it okay if he had just taken her home with himself without marrying her? What ugly names would people have given in that case ? Even in 2021 it is a big deal, let alone 1920.

The Lead of the show himself is young and he strongly despises injustice with women. Since day 1 he is only shown fighting for Women rights. He is a man who is going against the society to not only educate that girl but also make her self sufficient and an independent woman. (Not just Bondita, he has done so much for other girls as well and even untouchables, which proves he is not only fighting for Women right but for Human rights on the whole)

Why are we not pointing out to such amazing things which this show is depicting? That guy left western culture to come back to his country and bring a change in society. Why are we not appreciating that?

You have never seen the show then Please listen to some of Anirudh's monologues on women, and then tell me what you feel they are glorifying ? I have personally never seen any ML say such apt and supportive things for women rights, and Anirudh not just says these things, he follows it as well.

So Bondita being married to Anirudh is just a way of telling the story and it is just a part of the show. The show is not about Anirudh and Bondita's "Love" story in any way and you will understand that very well if you watch the show. The Indian audience are sensible enough to understand that the events are taking place in the past.

Also, about promoting things, what about the reality/fictional TV shows that are showing violence, abuse, ladai jhhagda, planning and plotting all day? Is that not called promoting wrong things ?

I think it is high time we should support such bold ITV shows like Barrister Babu which are trying to do something different at least 👍🏼

Well said Rimi👏❤️

Originally posted by: BettyA1

Bold - Not true at all

That was very common too... Many great men have did it and non great men...

Rabindranath Tagore was 23 and his wife 11 when they got married.

Originally posted by: Anjalika01

Well that is pretty shocking !

Though what the Guru said does suggest it wasn't the most common thing ever tbf

Our most Revered Guru was against such marriages, and had actually got many widows remarried during the time (those were terrible times all over the world). It's not like it was always happened but it wasn't something that was unheard of either. It was legally and socially acceptable.

Girls in their preteens getting married to men in 20s or older was common in the west too.

In Pride and Prejudice, Mrs. Bennet was delighted to see her daughter married at 15. Wickham was in his twenties atleast. The mindset of people including women was such, they would have found it better to be married young then being married late or remaining unmarried at the time.

In 1533, 17-year-old Princess Emilia of Saxony was wed to George the Pious, Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach, then aged 48 years. Early marriages have been common in historical times, including in Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_child_brides

Many women lost their lives in childbirth too. Its hard to actually imagine mindset of the people in those days. It was a different world.

Originally posted by: ..RiMi..

@Bold - that is incorrect.

@UL - So you think Bondita was sent to her sasural just to have children? Does any girl ever go to sasural just to bear children? 😆 As much as you know about the fact that the girl Bondita is a kid, her Sasural and Husband know that as well 👍🏼

my great grand mother was 11 when she was married to my great grandfather who was 21 😊 she was sent to sasural right after marriage and she had children only when she was 19 😊 my great grand father taught her while she was young and she was very well educated. I am not supporting child marriage here (because age gaps should never be an issue in marriages so i am only bothered about the child marriage bit) . I am just explaining that what they are showing in the show is NOT inaccurate and it is not wrong.

Now whether it is creepy or not is a matter of personal opinion, mine won't change yours and yours won't change mine! 👍🏼

First of all, I want to say that I found your geat-grandparents' story very touching...

And as for the show's accuracy that was a genuine mistake on my part, as I was speaking for my community, where marriages with very big age gaps were extremely unusual traditionally... and when child marriages happened, both families always waited till both the boy and the girl had matured a bit before the girl would go to her in-laws' place...

At the bold bit- As far as I understand, is that not what marriage was all about in those days (and even nowadays for many people tbh)? A legally and religiously sanctioned way to get a partner to start a family (i.e. have children) with? And once in her in-law's house/sasural it was (and still is in many places) considered as a girl's responsibility to do here share (and sometimes more than it) of cooking, cleaning, sewing, and basically all housework along with having children and taking care of them...

Leaving aside the obvious moral questions around all child marriages in general, I can't imagine why any family in those days would want to bring home a bahu who could neither have children, nor contribute much to household work...

So far I'm only hearing of rich families doing this, so I'm assuming the girl's ability to do housework didn't really matter to them... our family wasn't rich like that so that was a huge factor, hence the practice of gaunah I guess...

And when it comes to whether it's creepy or not, I guess it's not that bad if they don't show the adult hero romancing Bandita in her current age (like that other show that got took down lol)!

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

Our most Revered Guru was against such marriages, and had actually got many widows remarried during the time (those were terrible times all over the world). It's not like it was always happened but it wasn't something that was unheard of either. It was legally and socially acceptable.

Girls in their preteens getting married to men in 20s or older was common in the west too.

In Pride and Prejudice, Mrs. Bennet was delighted to see her daughter married at 15. Wickham was in his twenties atleast. The mindset of people including women was such, they would have found it better to be married young then being married late or remaining unmarried at the time.

In 1533, 17-year-old Princess Emilia of Saxony was wed to George the Pious, Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach, then aged 48 years.

Early marriages have been common in historical times, including in Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_child_brides

Many women lost their lives in childbirth too. Its hard to actually imagine mindset of the people in those days. It was a different world.

Bold - Maybe among nobility for property reasons and family alliance but contrary to popular belief girls were not married off so young, the average age of marriage for Western men and women during the Middle Ages was quite old - in the mid twenties...

Data taken from birthdates of women and marriage certificates during Elizabethan and Jacobean eras reveals mean marriage ages to have been as follows:

1566-1619 - 27.0 years
1647-1719 - 29.6 years
1719-1779 - 26.8 years
1770-1837 - 25.1 years

In 1890, when the U.S. Census Bureau started collecting marriage data, it was recorded that the average age of a first marriage for American men was 26 years, and the average age of marriage for women was 22 years.

Actually the US Census Bureau does not count child marriages in their data, here is more detailed article. It is actually more common in the west than you may think.

https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/child-marriage-common-in-the-past-persists-today/

Yes Minors were allowed to marry in the past and still allowed to marry now (with parental consent) in America

Originally posted by: BettyA1

Yes Minors were allowed to marry in the past and still allowed to marry now (with parental consent) in America

Yup you are right.. I myself have seen such minor marriage (saw them in front of the church) of Mexican kids in TX

Originally posted by: BettyA1

Bold - Maybe among nobility for property reasons and family alliance but contrary to popular belief girls were not married off so young, the average age of marriage for Western men and women during the Middle Ages was quite old - in the mid twenties...

Data taken from birthdates of women and marriage certificates during Elizabethan and Jacobean eras reveals mean marriage ages to have been as follows:

1566-1619 - 27.0 years
1647-1719 - 29.6 years
1719-1779 - 26.8 years
1770-1837 - 25.1 years

In 1890, when the U.S. Census Bureau started collecting marriage data, it was recorded that the average age of a first marriage for American men was 26 years, and the average age of marriage for women was 22 years.

Are you talking about US or Europe.

In India too, the rich high caste elite women had a worse life then the lower caste women. In terms of the the traditions etc they were made to follow. 1890s is a bit late IMO for the west. Try going much backward in time. May be not too common among all classes but it wasn’t illegitimate or illegal.

Originally posted by: BettyA1

Yes Minors were allowed to marry in the past and still allowed to marry now (with parental consent) in America

I saw a documentary once, 14 and looking for a husband.. it was a US based. Quite weird tbh.

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

Are you talking about US or Europe.

In India too, the rich high caste elite women had a worse life then the lower caste women. In terms of the the traditions etc they were made to follow. 1890s is a bit late IMO for the west. Try going much backward in time. May be not too common among all classes but it wasn’t illegitimate or illegal.

The first half of my post was about Europe during 1500-1800s