"Anupamaa is the face of women empowerment!' - Page 4

Originally posted by: Time_to_move_on

Why are we even wasting our time analysing an itv show and digressing to topics like women in abusive relationships, patriarchy, and gender pay parity etc...At the end of the day, it is just a stupid show that can neither inspire a homemaker nor a woman holding a coveted position in the corporate.

The story is simply an assorted collection of silly itv tracks tweaked as per the whims and fantasies of the makers. No logic. No social message. No women empowerment.

For now, Anupama is consistently ranking among the top 3 shows of the country minting lots of money for the channel and the makers! Hence, it will not go off air anytime soon and bring in more garbage tracks in the future! Not watching it on TV is the only thing we can do at an individual level if we do not want such shows to thrive!

@bold:

You said it!

TRPs are a function of Television viewership at the said time.

Hence any online viewing, streaming platform do Not contribute to it.

What is the lowest TRP of a Sitara Show?

Pretty sure that is ,higher than the highestTRP of another channel.

Reason? Reach of the channel gathered over a period of time🤷🏻‍♀️.

Hold on!!

Tagging all abused women women who are unable to get out of abusive relationships has never been my intention. There are a huge number of women who genuinely want to get out and only lack resources.

I have just tried to explain why Anupamaa works for our audience.

You cannot deny the fact that there is a very specific sect of women who support, promote and propagate patriarchal values and ONLY cry when they are just "unlucky" to happen to get verbally or physically abusive families as in-laws. Just because they are abused, doesn't make them good people, because they will probably abuse others when handed over the baton.

A show like Anupamaa works because it suits the narrative of such women. How many people talked about promoting adoption when CA was brought in and turned out to be exceptionally understanding?And how many said that serves Anupamaa right for adoption because "Khoon to apna hi apna hota hai" when CA just asked for her attention, even though her own kids had been worse? Why do you think was that? Simply because it validated a thinking they already had, instead of making them change a regressive notion. Here the audience was already problematic, the show only said what they liked and hence got attention.

Except for not tolerating cheating, what other patriarchal value did Anupamaa let go of? She started careers which she abandoned for family, villianized Kavya and Kinjal for not prioritizing house work over officework, villianized and even hit Dimple for speaking against verbal abuse, didn't let her leave because she inherently thinks her child "rightfully" belongs to Shahs more than Dimple (exactly how she didn't let Samar accompany her), villianizing all other female characters with full-time careers using one reason or another while implying time and again that she would have never left if she wouldn't have been cheated upon.

The aspect of abused women villianizing "career women" irrespective of how awful their own life is, is a major real life stereotype. You can give them all resources you want to and they will still back out. Making them understand that they need to leave makes them look at you like a villain. And a show like Anupamaa validates it for them.

Now she has a career, but in COOKING. And she keeps adding MAA references to give herself credit for that, as if those who aren't mothers can't cook. Why couldn't they have done the green screen drama for a dance career? Because it doesn't suit the mindset of the viewers. Don't judge me, I cook really well and also have a decent career that's NOT cooking.

Think from a flip narrative, a movie like Animal was a huge hit because it worked well for people with a thinking of a real life Vanraj, which are plenty in our society. Respecting the idea of a father more than the father himself (kicked his mother out for insulting his father but never listens to the father himself), thinks men can cheat but women shouldn't even consider moving on, strong notion of blood, lineage and inheritance, and resorts to violence for everything. Almost all points tick.

Originally posted by: NiharikaMishra

Hold on!!

Tagging all abused women women who are unable to get out of abusive relationships has never been my intention. There are a huge number of women who genuinely want to get out and only lack resources.

I have just tried to explain why Anupamaa works for our audience.

You cannot deny the fact that there is a very specific sect of women who support, promote and propagate patriarchal values and ONLY cry when they are just "unlucky" to happen to get verbally or physically abusive families as in-laws. Just because they are abused, doesn't make them good people, because they will probably abuse others when handed over the baton.

This is so true and happening from generations. One of my known friend was born a girl her parents both are doctors. her grandparents also highly educated. But they hated the fact that girl is born both girls. Imagine the doctor couple hate their daughters. what is use of education if you discriminate on daughters and want only son? Even after being qualified doctor working in big city you hate a daughter a girl only want boys? Further i know many where daughters have to do house work while sons only study or play in school or college because he has to focus on career hes ghar ka chirag. But daughter has to help at home do all house work and than stuy or do home work. Same way daughters are not sent for coaching only sons are in many house holds as its waste of money. This i am talking of big metro cities like delhi, mumbai, bangalore not small town or village. All these are educated parents working as doctor, teacher, engineers etc only whoo do all this not some uneducated. Yes 30-40% may be modern thinking but not remaining 60%. Even in US you see same attitude by indian families, girls must go to school help in dishes and cooking and taking care of younger siblings. But boys need not cook, sweep, mop as they are boys.

A show like Anupamaa works because it suits the narrative of such women. How many people talked about promoting adoption when CA was brought in and turned out to be exceptionally understanding?And how many said that serves Anupamaa right for adoption because "Khoon to apna hi apna hota hai" when CA just asked for her attention, even though her own kids had been worse? Why do you think was that? Simply because it validated a thinking they already had, instead of making them change a regressive notion. Here the audience was already problematic, the show only said what they liked and hence got attention.

Adoption is blasphemy in indian society. Very few people adopt and relatives and neighbours treat that child like outcast. They do not treat like CA was treated by kapadiyas at all but like Shahs. Also they prefer adopting a relative child than a real orphan as property and name will go to that child. If child is adopted than they have children than that kid becomes second class at home like anupama treats CA same will happen ignore her only think of blood kids.

Except for not tolerating cheating, what other patriarchal value did Anupamaa let go of? She started careers which she abandoned for family, villianized Kavya and Kinjal for not prioritizing house work over officework, villianized and even hit Dimple for speaking against verbal abuse, didn't let her leave because she inherently thinks her child "rightfully" belongs to Shahs more than Dimple (exactly how she didn't let Samar accompany her), villianizing all other female characters with full-time careers using one reason or another while implying time and again that she would have never left if she wouldn't have been cheated upon

Anupama is more regressive and supports partricahy like Baa and Hasmukh and Toshu and vanraj only. Now Kinjal, Dimpy too has become like Anupama supporting abusive Toshu and worshipping Baa and vanraj.

The aspect of abused women villianizing "career women" irrespective of how awful their own life is, is a major real life stereotype. You can give them all resources you want to and they will still back out. Making them understand that they need to leave makes them look at you like a villain. And a show like Anupamaa validates it for them.

Now she has a career, but in COOKING. And she keeps adding MAA references to give herself credit for that, as if those who aren't mothers can't cook. Why couldn't they have done the green screen drama for a dance career? Because it doesn't suit the mindset of the viewers. Don't judge me, I cook really well and also have a decent career that's NOT cooking.

Think from a flip narrative, a movie like Animal was a huge hit because it worked well for people with a thinking of a real life Vanraj, which are plenty in our society. Respecting the idea of a father more than the father himself (kicked his mother out for insulting his father but never listens to the father himself), thinks men can cheat but women shouldn't even consider moving on, strong notion of blood, lineage and inheritance, and resorts to violence for everything. Almost all points tick.

Yes Ranbir Kapoor was a real villan in animal than bobby deol. Bobby deol atleast was taking revenge and outright shown as one. But Ranbir was real villan as look at his mindset so horrible. Abrar had 3 wives but Ranbir had one wife one side kick in Tripti. Abrar raped his new wife Ranbir made her lick his boots etc. I mean he looked worst than SRK in anjaam actually but is hero. Where as in anjaam SRK was shown as villan not glorified like Ranbir was glorified

Word Count: 1

Originally posted by: NiharikaMishra

Hold on!!

Tagging all abused women women who are unable to get out of abusive relationships has never been my intention. There are a huge number of women who genuinely want to get out and only lack resources.

I have just tried to explain why Anupamaa works for our audience.

You cannot deny the fact that there is a very specific sect of women who support, promote and propagate patriarchal values and ONLY cry when they are just "unlucky" to happen to get verbally or physically abusive families as in-laws. Just because they are abused, doesn't make them good people, because they will probably abuse others when handed over the baton.

A show like Anupamaa works because it suits the narrative of such women. How many people talked about promoting adoption when CA was brought in and turned out to be exceptionally understanding?And how many said that serves Anupamaa right for adoption because "Khoon to apna hi apna hota hai" when CA just asked for her attention, even though her own kids had been worse? Why do you think was that? Simply because it validated a thinking they already had, instead of making them change a regressive notion. Here the audience was already problematic, the show only said what they liked and hence got attention.

Except for not tolerating cheating, what other patriarchal value did Anupamaa let go of? She started careers which she abandoned for family, villianized Kavya and Kinjal for not prioritizing house work over officework, villianized and even hit Dimple for speaking against verbal abuse, didn't let her leave because she inherently thinks her child "rightfully" belongs to Shahs more than Dimple (exactly how she didn't let Samar accompany her), villianizing all other female characters with full-time careers using one reason or another while implying time and again that she would have never left if she wouldn't have been cheated upon.

The aspect of abused women villianizing "career women" irrespective of how awful their own life is, is a major real life stereotype. You can give them all resources you want to and they will still back out. Making them understand that they need to leave makes them look at you like a villain. And a show like Anupamaa validates it for them.

Now she has a career, but in COOKING. And she keeps adding MAA references to give herself credit for that, as if those who aren't mothers can't cook. Why couldn't they have done the green screen drama for a dance career? Because it doesn't suit the mindset of the viewers. Don't judge me, I cook really well and also have a decent career that's NOT cooking.

Think from a flip narrative, a movie like Animal was a huge hit because it worked well for people with a thinking of a real life Vanraj, which are plenty in our society. Respecting the idea of a father more than the father himself (kicked his mother out for insulting his father but never listens to the father himself), thinks men can cheat but women shouldn't even consider moving on, strong notion of blood, lineage and inheritance, and resorts to violence for everything. Almost all points tick.

You know patriarchal women are patriarchal because they are born, raised, and survive in patriarchal system that favours only men and the only way women have any power is by towing the line or actively being complicit in the system????

One of the women in my distant family was married off as a teenager to a man in his thirties. When she got pregnant a year or two after the marriage, the in-laws told her "beta leke wapas aana warna mat aana" when she got into labour. Her in-laws were not actively violent or abusive; her husband isn't like Vanraj, but she was reminded what can be done to her even in benevolent patriarchal families and what benefits her.

So, patriarchal women might not be good people but that doesn't justify victim-shaming them for actions of their abusers lol.

For me, a PoS like Leela getting abused by her son or husband would equally be deserving of justice and empowerment as much as Upma, Kavya, Dimpy, Kinjal deserve justice against her abuse. Because that is how justice works.

It's the system that pits women against women. Individual actions mean very very little. All feminist movements that have succeeded are also collective movements.

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

You know patriarchal women are patriarchal because they are born, raised, and survive in patriarchal system that favours only men and the only way women have any power is by towing the line or actively being complicit in the system????

One of the women in my distant family was married off as a teenager to a man in his thirties. When she got pregnant a year or two after the marriage, the in-laws told her "beta leke wapas aana warna mat aana" when she got into labour. Her in-laws were not actively violent or abusive; her husband isn't like Vanraj, but she was reminded what can be done to her even in benevolent patriarchal families and what benefits her.

So, patriarchal women might not be good people but that doesn't justify victim-shaming them for actions of their abusers lol.

For me, a PoS like Leela getting abused by her son or husband would equally be deserving of justice and empowerment as much as Upma, Kavya, Dimpy, Kinjal deserve justice against her abuse. Because that is how justice works.

It's the system that pits women against women. Individual actions mean very very little. All feminist movements that have succeeded are also collective movements.

Of all logic now women like Leela are also victims who need saving!!

Oh wow! And how do you HELP a woman who uses your help to escape a mess when their families are abusive but shuns you when the same in-laws ask her to choose between you and them?

Force her? Gaslight her? Like the inlaws do?

And what about the time when such women come back and make life difficult for modern women like me by using their high moral grounds? My journey has not just been fighting against chauvinist men but also these women.

And NOTE that My points have always been about the kind of women who like the show Anupamaa which is why it's a big hit and the fact that they already think like that, a mere show cannot be blamed for changing them.

This forum is not a rights protection arena and I have not shown any interest in actually exploring the psychology of such women in real life.

Also, I really don't need these accusations of being blamed for shaming women who keep the sham of being traditional but do not shy away from taking help from modern women only to be able to conveniently go back to being traditional and shame that same modern woman for her strong stand.

End of discussion here!

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

You know patriarchal women are patriarchal because they are born, raised, and survive in patriarchal system that favours only men and the only way women have any power is by towing the line or actively being complicit in the system????

One of the women in my distant family was married off as a teenager to a man in his thirties. When she got pregnant a year or two after the marriage, the in-laws told her "beta leke wapas aana warna mat aana" when she got into labour. Her in-laws were not actively violent or abusive; her husband isn't like Vanraj, but she was reminded what can be done to her even in benevolent patriarchal families and what benefits her.

So, patriarchal women might not be good people but that doesn't justify victim-shaming them for actions of their abusers lol.

For me, a PoS like Leela getting abused by her son or husband would equally be deserving of justice and empowerment as much as Upma, Kavya, Dimpy, Kinjal deserve justice against her abuse. Because that is how justice works.

It's the system that pits women against women. Individual actions mean very very little. All feminist movements that have succeeded are also collective movements.

I do not agree

If a woman of last generation has been supressed and opressed she must be more kind to her own daughters and grand daughter or next 2 gens and help them to lead better life than her life

Thats what most parents do, if they could only study 10th std because of poverty they help their kids to degree or masters and move up in life ladder at any cost and work hard for that

Anupama faced patriarchy and abuse and EMA, she should have stopped Malvika, Kinjal and Dimpy and CA abuse at hands of vanraj and shahs

Instead she allowed vanraj to cheat and do EMA on Malvika and never even let anuj know whats happening

Anupama forced kinjal to stay with cheater EMA toshu saying its mental disease depression. No one does EMA for mental disease or depression okkk

Anupama slapped Dimpy when she stood up to abusive Baaaaaaaa

Anupama allowed little CA abuse at hands of all Shahs

So anupama is equally abusive and hand in gloves with vanraj, hasmukh, Baa, toshu in abuse and supressing women of next 2 generation

Any other woman would stand up to these 4 women rights and stop them being abused not support abusers saying they are elder, they are mother, vanraj is grand father etc

If you observe anupama only galres and stands up if its Pakhi rights against adhik, barkha etc because shes her blood child

rest all women or girl kids she stands against them and forces them to bend to EMA., patriarchy, abuse

No system whether biggest IT company of USA or india or home in india or USA will say a woman do not support another woman rights, you can but there is a cost to pay. Anupama is not willing to pay that pice that is to look not good in eyes of abusive shahs family and vanraj and Baa. She is ok if dimpy, kinjal, malvika, CA all suffer but her image and relation with vanraj, baa, hasmukh, toshu and pakhi should not spoil at any cost. Even if anuj or CA or Mlavika suffer its ok, even if dimpy and kinjal life spoiled its okkk

But rome or women rights was not fought by women like anupama. Its fought by women who risked everything and their lives like the first Rose Park or by Rani Lakshmmi Bai or Razia Sultan or Indira Gandhi or Lydia taffte who went and voted in US election in 17h century. Did they not all fight patriarchy and risk to life and family opposing them etc of course they did. Their own relatives and family betrayed them left them etc but they stood up for their own and other women rights. Someone has to stand up first right?

Honestly my mom had much better life than my grand mom, i had much better life than my mom, i will give much better life to my daughter in future my daughter will give even better life than herself to my grand daughter thats how it works

Originally posted by: myviewprem

I do not agree

If a woman of last generation has been supressed and opressed she must be more kind to her own daughters and grand daughter or next 2 gens and help them to lead better life than her life

Thats what most parents do, if they could only study 10th std because of poverty they help their kids to degree or masters and move up in life ladder at any cost and work hard for that

Anupama faced patriarchy and abuse and EMA, she should have stopped Malvika, Kinjal and Dimpy and CA abuse at hands of vanraj and shahs

Instead she allowed vanraj to cheat and do EMA on Malvika and never even let anuj know whats happening

Anupama forced kinjal to stay with cheater EMA toshu saying its mental disease depression. No one does EMA for mental disease or depression okkk

Anupama slapped Dimpy when she stood up to abusive Baaaaaaaa

Anupama allowed little CA abuse at hands of all Shahs

So anupama is equally abusive and hand in gloves with vanraj, hasmukh, Baa, toshu in abuse and supressing women of next 2 generation

Any other woman would stand up to these 4 women rights and stop them being abused not support abusers saying they are elder, they are mother, vanraj is grand father etc

If you observe anupama only galres and stands up if its Pakhi rights against adhik, barkha etc because shes her blood child

rest all women or girl kids she stands against them and forces them to bend to EMA., patriarchy, abuse

I did not justify patriarchal women's complicity but clearly spelled out that even they do not deserve to be abused or victim-shamed lol. Lot of feminist theory is there on complicity of women in patriarchal system; it is because some feel complicity is only way to gain power and survive. Is it shitty? Sure. Is it systemic rather than individual? Also big effing yes.

You talk of individual actions in an oppressive system. So if an illiterate woman wants her daughter to educated but her in-laws do not support that, her husband doesn't support that, there is no institutional or financial access for female education in that area, what does she do? What if after all this fight, she marries off her daughter after college to a man despite her being queer? Will her fight for her daughter's education be patriarchal or feminist?

Interesting how you put the onus on women to stand up for orher women when they are scarmbling for power and survial and not men who are already privileged and secure.

If your allyship to women's right to justice against abuse is conditioned by whether they supported in you in an arguement about men's cooking, then that is your personal choice. It isn't doing anything to smash patriarchy on a systemic level either.

Anupamaa continued and enabled the cycle of abuse. She is an abuser, but she is not worthy of victim-shaming for what her ex and in-laws did to her.

It is not rocket science. X can be an abuser to Y and Z can be an abuser to X. In both cases, the abuser is the only one worth the blame.

If your romantic, professional and platonic relationships are mediated by caste and class, you are benifitting from and complicit in those oppressive systems too.

Resistance and opression are not black and white. Everyone and every politics benefits fron self-reflection.

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

I did not justify patriarchal women's complicity but clearly spelled out that even they do not deserve to be abused or victim-shamed lol. Lot of feminist theory ia their on complicity of patriarchal system; it is because some feel complicity is only way to gain power and survive. Is it shitty? Sure. Is it systemic rather than individual? Also big effing yes.

If your allyship to women's right to justice against abuse is conditioned by whether they supported in you in an arguement about men's cooking, then that is your personal choice. It isn't doing anything to smash patriarchy on a systemic level either.

Anupamaa continued and enabled the cycle of abuse. She is an abuser, but she is not worthy of victim-shaming for what her ex and in-laws did to her.

It is not rocket since. X can be an abuser to Y and Z can be an abuser to X. In both cases, the abuser is the only one worth the blame.

If your romantic, professional and platonic relationships are mediated by caste and class, you are benifitting from and complicit in those oppressive systems too.

Resistance and opression are not black and white. Everyone and every politics benefits fron self-reflection.

All i am saying is anupama faced abuse and EMA

She should not have allowed dimpy, kinjal, malvika, CA to be abused or supportedc EMA aganst them nby her ex hubby and own son

Thats a true woman empowerer

In india not only gender but religion, caste, creed, color, class all plays a part in how women are treated at home and in office and public

Originally posted by: myviewprem

All i am saying is anupama faced abuse and EMA

She should not have allowed dimpy, kinjal, malvika, CA to be abused or supportedc EMA aganst them nby her ex hubby and own son

Thats a true woman empowerer

In india not only gender but religion, caste, creed, color, class all plays a part in how women are treated at home and in office and public

When did I deny that lol? I clearly said she's an abuser and enabler? The conversation started when one of the commentators stated that real women like this show because it validates their position that they have no fault in their victimhood. That is blatantly tone deaf and privileged.

No one is at fault for their own victimisation in an oppressive system. Oppression and fight against it are intersectional lol.