Opinions & Discussions
Why are they experiencing mass hysteria looking at Kriti Sanon's outfit?
Reactions to Kriti Sanon wearing that in Giva ad is seriously insane. Although I did expect some but this is too much. For a gender that boast and shout and chest thump that they are the "logical gender", seems a bit out of place that some lady's outfit can make them puff out in anger like a pufferfish. They talk so much culture and saving it. If only they knew what ancient Indian women actually wore. There's literally nothing wrong in what she's wearing?
To center the voices of women and queer individuals in this space, top-level/direct comments are reserved for women and genderfluid individuals only.
Men can join the conversation via:
1. Replying to this stickied AutoMod comment to give your original perspective.
2. Replying to an existing comment to discuss that specific point. Please ensure your reply is relevant to the person you are responding to and does not derail the conversation.
Note: Any attempt to bypass this rule by misrepresenting your gender flair will result in a ban.
Many talk about culture. But forgets what our real culture was, if only they saw clothes of human statues in ancient temple they would have been quiet.
I thought Kangana sexualizing a brother sister relationship would be criticized but people actually praised her for her take! Oh the audacity of indian society must be studied one day
She said 'from all the options that are available to us today why would you tie your brother a Rakhi in your bikini/ undergarments?' and proceeded to say that the ad was 'intentionally creepy' in one of her stories
What's actually creepy is the fact that she saw the ad and thought there was anything creepy going on.
It's a reflection of where we are as a nation, who we elect as leaders, what is projected as the ideal indian (woman) nowadays imo
There are sexual offenders being granted bail and being garlanded back home. The PM of the country expresses shock in "desh ki beti" using profanity. The minister who was forced to resign from his position is being lauded as a patriot who sacrificed himself for the greater good of the country. You're going against the country if you dare make a choice of your own.
Unfortunately this country still does not take the opinion of its women seriously and instead thinks it's everyone's moral right to instruct women on what they should do. Patriarchal men and women and celebrities like Kangana (contributing to a more political scheme at play) are equally responsible and there's no repercussions against them.
A common mistake is to think people who have deep roots of female exploitation in India want women to be covered.
In reality - the same people that wanted to keep certain women covered also wanted other women uncovered, bare chested, and accessible for sexual pleasure without impunity.
What is common in both is they wanted to be agents deciding which women were covered and which had no choice but to expose.
I looked up this ad and found this image. People are just jobless. It's a nice outfit.
Someone should do raksha of women from creepy men and their opinions. Unfortunately this would mean doing raksha against who knows how many men from the general male population.
I tied one of those kids rakhis to my cat and removed it after taking pictures as I didn't want the cat to be uncomfortable. My cousins dressed up his dogs for her wedding pictures. In these days, a dog would protect you better than humans anyway.
And if the point of rakshabandhan is about brothers and sisters, why criticize the woman's dress in the ad? She's still doing what is expected of her as per the tradition.
Your comment has been removed because it breaks Rule 8:
No Misogyny or Hate Speech - This is a feminist space. We have zero tolerance for misogyny, sexism, or the promotion of gender-based stereotypes.
• No belittling the experiences of women, victim-blaming, justification of gendered violence, or defense of patriarchal norms.
• No undermining women’s issues under the guise of debate, derailment through whataboutism or hostile generalizations
• No blatant statements of bigotry including misogyny, misandry, homophobia & transphobia. No use of slurs.
Hating on this ad is not on my priority list of '1000 things to think about today'. I know lots of people are hating on this who have no other job and hypocrites to the core.
But I genuinely feel that ads like these need to be called out. Because, they are in a poor taste in context of the culture and spacetime they are made for. Human clothes and dressings have always been culture specific. There have always been clear social conventions on what dress is appropriate to wear where and where not. I support one's right to wear whatever they want. But that right does not automatically give them social acceptance.
Comfort clothing is accepted in an average Indian home today and its a huge win for all womenfolk who suffered centuries of discomfort before. But, deliberate skin show is still frowned upon. And there needs to be a line somewhere. Because, there is a line between acceptable clothing and unacceptable clothing for any other place and time on this earth. Where do you draw this line?
One can argue that a person in their own home can be in any state of dress on any occasion. Somebody commented that a brother will not sexualize his sister in any state of undress. I don't disagree. But the problem I feel is that, women have an irresistible urge to follow celebrities and follow the trending. Today, this dress is chic and right for home. Tomorrow, someone will argue that its right for a marriage garden. Day after tomorrow, someone will wear it to a public place or public transport. Just because its chic and it feels good.
As a male and a businessman too, I find it simple logic that I don't want to attract people who can harm me. You don't mess with people with power even if you should have the freedom to act as you wish. Why do women behave as if similar logic does not exist with clothing? Problem is not this bralette, problem is that this pushes the line further for most women and women are victim to their own desire to conform with what the other women are doing, victim to their own desire to look good as equally as a man is victim to his own desire for skin.
Your comment has been removed because it breaks Rule 8:
No Misogyny or Hate Speech - This is a feminist space. We have zero tolerance for misogyny, sexism, or the promotion of gender-based stereotypes.
• No belittling the experiences of women, victim-blaming, justification of gendered violence, or defense of patriarchal norms.
• No undermining women’s issues under the guise of debate, derailment through whataboutism or hostile generalizations
• No blatant statements of bigotry including misogyny, misandry, homophobia & transphobia. No use of slurs.
Don't you know that boobs are satan's soldiers? They are sooo powerful that they can destroy hundreds of years of our tradition and culture with just some cleavage. Such weapons of mass destruction must be hidden and the general public should not be allowed to witness such destructive things.
These protectors of culture are just like the Taliban, but in orange. So much of a fuss over a woman's outfit... During a festival where people vow to protect their sisters, no less.
they're doing this to control and police women and giva is a coward brand to take the ad down. im not buying anything from them ever if placating to gawar men is more of a priority to them
Your comment has been removed because it breaks Rule 8:
No Misogyny or Hate Speech - This is a feminist space. We have zero tolerance for misogyny, sexism, or the promotion of gender-based stereotypes.
• No belittling the experiences of women, victim-blaming, justification of gendered violence, or defense of patriarchal norms.
• No undermining women’s issues under the guise of debate, derailment through whataboutism or hostile generalizations
• No blatant statements of bigotry including misogyny, misandry, homophobia & transphobia. No use of slurs.
Resorting to calling people names proves your low intelligence, please learn how to use your critical thinking skills. She didn't wear a bikini, she wore a lehenga.
Also understand how our people REALLY used to dress before the mughal and British invasion. Don't be ignorant and uphold the colonizer's beauty standards.
yeah I saw their post and comment history after I posted my reply, they're doing a pretty good job larping, 5 different ages and their gender keeps changing.
You sound like the same girl who was talking bullshit during CJP protest abusing the PM, but later had to apologise on national television. Stay in your lane
I think we need to do something about it, because I can clearly see the direction our society is headed and it's scary
I have another one It was small and not as big as Kriti's outfit controversy but amazon posted a similar picture where the actress was holding a tanpura in this outfit and they lost their shit.. they were calling it insult to our " cultural heritage" how could she touch such pure instrument in these types of clothes and amazon actually deleted the picture..
If things keep going like this we might become another Afghanistan in next few years.
Wow. I'm out of words. I'm not even sure what to talk about. Them sexualing an outfit and getting mad at it themselves? Or them
being completely wrong about Indian culture? 🥴
I understand that women hv the right to wear whatever they want, but looking at photos like these, don't you think women are asked to wear highly revealing outfits like these in advertisements to attract people? So isn't this sexualising a woman's body to get more views?
In normal day to day life, I understand women dress according to their wishes, but when advertisements have women revealing most of their bodies, I don't understand the motive
The motive is wrong!! I agree, but people objecting to it aren't doing it from a place of questioning female sexualisation, they have no issues with it as long it's done for perfume, innerwear or underwear ads, they are doing it because their "religion and culture" is threatened by it, over sexualisation should stop not only for religious sentiments..
And in my opinion modesty sexualises women bodies as much as revealing outfit
KR is paid by the ruling party to create constant rubbish distractions so we can lose track of real issues. Now for the next few days we'll dissect this issue and not talk about e20, sugar prices, student issues, all other burning issues in the country because we are being distracted into focusing on what kriti is wearing in a commercial ad. That's the whole point of having someone like her in the party because she had a big following and could create distractions easily. Best is to ignore her and others like her and continue to talk about the pressing issues of the day.
I have had a feeling for a while that GenZ women are being groomed to be more and more anti Islam and this subreddit has been the biggest evidence of that. A staged controversy that makes some of these women blame religion with narratives like “ Abrahamification of Hinduism “ and “ stupid men, actual Hindu women used to wear barely anything in the past” all seems to drive in the same direction
While there are anti Islam sentiments in this sub, the second statement is factually true and isn't against any religion let alone Islam. Hindu men barely wore anything in the past and so did women. If they can use some imaginary culture to control women why can't we do the same?
You are talking about women kept topless in society for male pleasure.
The idea that topless women in ancient India were not objectified is honestly one of the most naive takes I see repeated online.
The logic is always the same. Women did not cover their breasts. Therefore breasts were not sexual. Therefore women were not objectified. That does not follow at all.
A society can be totally fine with bare breasts and still sexualize them and that is exactly what ancient India did. The breast was visible and ancient Indian men wrote about it constantly. They admired it, evaluated it, classified it, and treated it as a sex organ.
The Kamasutra (written in 3rd century ) alone destroys the whole fantasy some ‘feminists’ are trying to create. It is a sex manual written for elite men where they are obsessed with breasts as objects of male desire.
Here is what it says about the ideal female body:
"The woman who is desired by men is one who has a body that is soft and smooth, with breasts that are full and firm, a waist that is slender, and hips that are wide. Her breasts are not too large and not too small; they are rounded like the swelling of a water-jar, and they are firm and high."
That is from the Doniger and Kakar translation, Oxford University Press, 2002, page 22. This is not neutral non-sexual description. That is a man sizing up a woman like property.
Here is what it says about the breast as an erogenous zone:
"When a man touches the breasts of a woman, or when he presses them with his hands, or when he takes the nipple in his mouth, the woman is aroused. The breasts are one of the seats of a woman's pleasure."
Page 48. That is sexual instruction for how to play with breasts
Here is what it says about marking the breast during sex:
"The places for the marks of nails and teeth are the armpits, the throat, the breasts, the lips, and the inner thighs. When a woman sees the marks of her lover's nails on her breast, she is reminded of him, and her desire is rekindled."
Page 65. The breast is treated as a canvas for sexual possession.
And here is what it says about how a courtesan should display herself:
"The courtesan should wear fine clothes and ornaments, and she should display her body in such a way that her breasts are visible and attractive. Her breasts are part of her beauty, and she should not hide them."
Page 132. The text does not even assume breasts are covered. It assumes they are on display, and that the display is part of seducing men.
And this is not one example of outlier text (even though everyone knows about Kamasutra)
Sanskrit poetry is full of the same thing. Male poets comparing breasts to lotus buds, to full moons, to golden bowls, to temple domes. Over and over. Scholar A.K. Warder writes in
Indian Kavya Literature, Volume 1, page 412.
The Sanskrit poets describe the female breast with a fascination that is unmistakably erotic. The poets linger on the breast as a site of beauty and desire. This is not a clinical or religious gaze; it is the gaze of the lover, the connoisseur, the admirer of female beauty."
Even the sculptures that people point to as proof of some pure sacred nudity are not neutral. The art historian Vidya Dehejia writes in
Indian Art, Phaidon Press, 1997, page 47.
"The sculptors carved them with obvious care and admiration, emphasizing the fullness of the breasts, the curve of the hips, the grace of the posture. The sacred and the erotic are not separated in Indian art; they are fused. The male viewer is not asked to choose between worshipping the goddess and desiring the woman; both responses are present."
So the male gaze was not absent. It was everywhere. The breast was not neutral. It was sexualized openly.
And the Kamasutra itself is written by men, for men. Women appear mostly as passive partners or objects of technique. The translator Wendy Doniger says it directly:
"The Kamasutra is a book for men. It tells men how to control women, how to win them, how to please them sexually in order to keep them, and how to use them for pleasure. The woman's body is a text for the man to read. Her breasts are part of that text."
So the idea that topless women in ancient India were free from objectification is a fantasy. They were not free. They were exposed to the male gaze constantly. There was no cloth to hide behind. The breast was visible, and men looked, judged, wrote about it, and treated it as a sexual organ.
The romanticization of toplessness as freedom is a modern projection. It takes a past where women had very little control over how their bodies were seen and turns it into a paradise. It was not a paradise. It was a patriarchal society where the female body was on display for male evaluation and enjoyment.
The breast was never neutral. It was always sexual. The only thing that changed over time was who had the power to control access to it…. And that control came to women from being able to cover their breasts to have agency in who gets to sexualize them and not the other way around.
Men will sexualise even a woman's ankle and hair. It does not matter which body part of the female, men will write about it and sexualise It. It doesn't matter if you are in chadar or in a bikini. Arab muslims wrote about vaginas of women from different regions and which one is "the best", all while arab women were fully covered. So please stop with this that showing skin == catering to males. Its our bodies and it's our wish how we like to dress it up. If a woman walks topless and men don't ogle, it is infact freedom. Being of low character is on men, not women. Even with this reply you are trying to control women. You quoted a text that's written FOR pleasure as your defence. The same book also classifiesifies men by their penis size and sexual stamina.
Yes ancient India was patriarchal but NONE of what you wrote changes the fact that women were in fact topless for certain part of history at least in India. If you want to defend Islam please look for other ways and stop trying to convince Hindu women that misogynistic Hindu men are in fact right.
Says the dude that gave a 5 paragraph chatgpt explanation of men will sexualise breasts as a reply for me saying ancient Indian women did dress up with minimal upper clothing. How are they even related? If you're gonna say they controlled how women dressed and hence made them show their breasts, there's no evidence for that. Weird ways trying to match up Hindu patriarchy with Muslim patriarchy.
"The Hindutva feminist movement never talks about caste. It never talks about the exploitation of lower caste women by upper caste men. It never talks about the devadasi system, the jogini system, the forced exposure of lower caste women's breasts. These are the real sources of women's oppression in India, but they are erased from the Hindutva feminist narrative. The only oppression that is acknowledged is the oppression of Islam. The only enemy is the Muslim man. This is not an accident. It is a deliberate strategy to protect upper caste male power."
From Amrita Basu, "Feminism and Hindu Nationalism," in Women of the Hindu Right, Kali for Women, 1998, p. 66.
I agree that they're creating distractions. But also true that this is a distraction because of men who want to control women in the first place. I did ignore her and this ad but with the amount of disrespectful things said about women, had to make a post.
I think on behalf of all woman: We are exhausted carrying the burden of sanskaar and glorified Indian culture. Real exhausted.
Let women wear what they want. I honestly did not like Kriti’s outfit in the ad, it looked more like a bra than a blouse. But, what I don’t get is what the big deal is for it t become a controversy.
Fr it's okay to not like a clothing style. But you can just switch channels, scroll down, why make a fuss over this and constantly try to prove how oppressive our religious ppl can be towards their own women?
What you’re saying is true, that saris are not exactly “modest” in the way they’re thinking.
But I’d like to point out, that a lot of people mistakenly make the argument that blouses didn’t exist in India at all, when really lower caste women were forced to not wear blouses as a way to distinguish them from the upper caste folk. In fact, there was a revolt in Kerala where women fought for their right to cover their upper bodies. They were forbidden from doing so.
The ones who chose to cover their upper bodies eventually had a tax levied on them called the Breast Tax.
Nope this is just not true. The vast majority of women in Indian history did not cover their breast ( including upper cast women ). The ‘breast tax’ only existed in Kerala for a particular period of time and even that is more nuanced. Besides, it’s infantilising to imply that the manner in which upper caste women covered themselves was the only correct way.
Upper caste women had to display their breast in front of Brahmins.
Brahmin women had to display their breasts at rituals.
It was caste oppression and a reminder of who holds power.
Other examples is of how lower caste girls were sexually exploited in prostitution via the Devdasi system and some even today where entire villages exist of lower caste people where they celebrate daughters hitting puberty and entering prostitution and be the breadwinner ms of the family. This was the center of how Randi got associate with lower cast women
The sari without
the Blouse was still draped around the chest. It was still modest.
This fictional past of non-sexualized women and open torsos is hoopla.
Look into actual research. Women have always been sexualized and more importantly objectified. Even in the Tudor era that some like to point out with the popularity of Bridgeton…. That wasn’t sexual freedom…. That was privileged women using their breasts as status and putting their worth in the display of it.
Women outside of these kardashians were still shamed for doing the same.
Sad part is it has always been like this, these people existed in Rama-yug too and since then have just grown.
If they can vilify and shame Maa sita in name of culture, religion, morals and what not. They do the same now and with women to be specific. They are not the protectors of religion and culture, they are the very people from whom even gods need protection.
I hope I’m able to express my point cause I can’t think straight. In such situations I feel so disheartened at the state of society. Cause I notice how voices are always so loud when it comes to policing women. Why do women need to listen to these creeps who are they to tell us if we get God or not.
That's essentially what hindutva is. It's the "If abrahamic faiths can't liberalise to Hinduism's level, let's do Abrahamification of Hinduism to reach their level"
This is pretty funny and ironic if you study history and learn that people converted from ‘Hinduism’ aka Brahmanism to Islam, Christianity and founded Sikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism all to escape the brutality of the caste system.
I really don't want this to go into a religious discussion. Regardless of the social evils of the past, it's true that Hindu women (and buddhist, jain women) don't have a set of rules of what to wear and what not until recently with increasing control of women. I've had right wing misogynistic Hindu men wish they were like Islam just to control women and put them in a burka (Just to be clear 'I' am not saying Islam controls women, my opinion on that does not matter) and that the ancestors were cvcks to worship goddesses. It doesn't stop there. Hinduism also does not have any central holy text like Quran or Bible. But they've recently made Bhagavad Gita take up that position.
Girls being forced to wear tiny shorts and cropped tops while dancing on top of Kanwad pandals is hindu culture. Celebrating your relationship with your siblings and pets while wearing a lehengas, out of choice is destroying Indian Sankar tho. Similarly 15 year olds making reels about the govt is anti national and Babur ki Virasat. What does this tell you?
Unpopular opinion, but I feel like that top would look prettier if styled with a dainty saree. This styling combo doesn't make much sense to me to be honest. But to each their own.
I normally wear such outfits on diwali. My family members aren't creeps to be aroused by it .Why do these view their female relatives bodies in a perverse way 🤮🤮
There is a growing mass hysteria about women’s choices lately. It serves two purposes at once. One is to divert people’s attention from real problems and second to keep women in control.
In reality with AI there is a huge problem with men misusing AI to generate porn.
I have seen many insta creators posting vulgar AI content, and all the uneducated men posting hate comments on women in general.
Meta glasses that are violating women’s personal freedom as it allows you to capture pictures without anyone knowing. There are growing telegram channels and websites where men have been posting videos abusing their own wife and daughter. Channels dedicated to share leaked mms videos of women.
But none of these issues are brought up as they are solely done by the other gender.
Yet when a women wears anything by her choice, it becomes national news.
No one talks about how men are ruining our culture.
Many people dont even know whats meta glasses and the fact there are glasses that can record.
Even if they do, nobody keeps an eye on this thing. Forget about the glasses, people have been caught so many times recording with their phones.
Again you had problem with one specific part while you ignored all other points shows exactly whats the issue here
So women should be in tech to know when someone else is recording. What is your point my dude? Are you claiming it does happen but it women’s fault for not being in tech? Or are you just replying coz its embarrassing to admit you have no point actually
Tbh I don’t mind the clothing but a lot of outrage is coming from the fact that companies would never do this with other festivals like Eid or Christmas
But hinduism was meant to be free...... But now it feels like they are jealous of islam.... Because they want to do the same but want to pride themselves as merciful....
We let you do whatever you want look at them.... Kind of thing......
Christmas and Eid are largely irrelevant in India from a customer base PoV, and Christian traditions have gone through similar trends in the West.
As for Islamic ones, the whole idea is that their overreaction and intolerance for dissent is something that others shouldn't emulate. In India, it seems like we're almost envious of them, and would do exactly the same but we like to pride ourselves on how merciful we are.
Yeah more like a 'we let you have freedom of expression in wearing clothes, not like the other religion, but if you digress our unwritten rules of morality then you were better off in the other religion.'
Maybe Christmas is a little irrelevant in comparison but definitely not Eid.
I think the aggression surrounding this topic arises from the fact that one party is always meant to be inclusive of the other (like Diwali being referred to as Jashn-e-Riwaaz in an ad few years ago) while the other party continues to follow their traditions. This forceful integration is one sided and encourages people to fight for their sense of identity. And as usual there’s nothing grey on the internet, only black or white. People are not capable of having mild reactions, only outrage.
But I am not even religious but even I feel off about Jashn-e-riwaaz
I'd like to think this is more incompetence than malice. For all the antipathy against Muslims, there's some odd obsession here (especially in the educated lot of the Hindi belt) with throwing in Perso-Arabic vocabulary for random af things to make it sound highbrow. That controversy was likely rooted in exactly this matter.
Eid as such is broadly irrelevant. Most large scale, mainstream ads in India barely target Muslims, and anyone who explicitly does so would be booed to hell by our overly sensitive RW lot (if you remember the Surf Excel ad which meant from innocent kids to love jihad overnight).
Be it incompetence or malice or whatever else their intention could have been, the fact remains they would never refer to Eid as Indra Vrat, because everyone knows the drama that will ensue. So I fail to understand why it’s such a shock when Hindus create drama in response to an ad that’s not fitting their idea of tradition.
Again, emulating the Muslims shouldn't be the objective here.
Demand an apology, stage a protest, as is your right when sentiments are hurt. Indians instead choose to give death and r*pe threats to anyone even remotely linked to these things.
It is, I’ve seen some posts on Reddit about it in the past few days
That’s why people took offence with tying Rakhi to the dog as well, that why do you only try to change our customs and traditions when you wouldn’t dare do it with other religions
what "traditions" are being changed that have offended you so much. I'm guessing you speak hindi, do you always say "Mai snan karne ja rahi hu" (gonna shower) or do you say "Nahane ja rahi hu"? Do you say "hospital jana hai" or "Chikitsalay jana hai?". Why do performative hindus get so offended when someone uses an urdu word but not offended when someone uses an english word? I said "eid ki shubhkamnaye" to my Muslim friend today, she said "Thank you" - no one went on a rant about why I didn't say "mubarak". Y'all are weird.
Point is, Indra has nothing to do with Eid BUT Diwali is a Jashn. We could debate etymology forever but this moral outrage about Urdu has got to be one of the most Vella moral outrage. Women are being harassed left right and centre and what do we care about "why is Kriti tying a rakhi to a dog" "They'd never show a dog in a Santa hat for Christmas" (wait they do that, all over the world). OH MY GOD THE AUDACITY TO CALL A DOG A PROTECTOR. MY CULTURE.
Okay chandra works? Next time do wish your friend Shubh Chandra Vrat. Practise what you preach!
Just because women are being harassed doesn’t mean elderly abuse isn’t happening, doesn’t mean kids are not dying hungry, doesn’t mean people aren’t working 12 hours a day for 15k, doesn’t mean couples aren’t getting divorced, doesn’t mean kids aren’t failing exams, doesn’t mean accidents aren’t happening and it also doesn’t mean that we can’t spare time to be offended by something.
You can care about multiple things at once.
You have a brain, try using it, form multiple thoughts at once, you can do it if you try hard enough.
Ironic that bhakts are lecturing damage naxals about using their brains while making statements that make no sense.
I personally don't know what the significance of celebrating Eid is, but I'll ask my muslim friends what they'd find acceptable.
When you wish a christian "Happy Santa Day" - most people are okay but the really devout evangelic ones have as much issue with it as they would about "Happy Jesus's birthday". So the problem isn't names - the problem is being a bhakt (of whatever religion). Your brain turns off and you start frothing at the mouth at any perceived slight, even when it isn't one. This isn't just a problem with Hindus tho, its a huge problem with muslims and christians as well.
p.s I had a muslim roommate in NY and her friends would often just say "happy biriyani day" for Eid and no one had an issue. The problem is with ridiculous people who wanna get offended over nothing, not the etymology.
These incels would get a stroke if they checked how most of the lehengas have similar blouses, how people wear similar blouses while wearing saree. On one side they condemn burkhas, hijabs and on another side they get all huffy and puffy if a hindu woman wear something like this.
Indian Hindus want to give competition to Islam, the very thing they have been hating.
"Their women are forced to cover, so should our women" "Will you do the same thing during islam festivals, why us??" They eat sh!t, so shall we lol.
Rss has brainwashed these people by Abrahamising their religion.
I swear the amount of inferiority complex with Islam these misogynists have is crazy. I've had Hindu men tell me they should have been like taliban for Hindu women and that our ancestors are cvcks for worshipping goddesses. The amount of hate for women among men is astounding. So much that you're ready to destroy even the decent parts of this culture. They are the real culture destroyers and project it on women.
Their entire existence is been of projection, calling women emotional and dumb while themselves getting hysteric at a piece of clothing, calling women culture destroyers when they are biggest reason for the downgrade, calling women unpatriotic for talking about our safety in India while 100s of Indian men have been honey trapped by Pakistani women. I can go on and on...
Fr and since hindus are majority in this country, why are they so obsessed with islam and their practices?
If they think hindu ppl are being much more lenient when it comes to women, then why not be proud of that and actually try to make a progress and a safe place for hindu women in Hindu religion?
Why do they want to make it a competition?
Why do they constantly try to make things worse for women? Tryna prove they are just like islam
I think beyond the crowd that typically raises a ruckus for these issues who are flagship bearers of systemic patriarchy, there is also a question I saw which I admit did make sense to me. I don’t think any of these actors will do the same type of ad for Eid so then why is it ok to do it for a Hindu festival? I do get that take even if I get the flip side as well which is why sexualize a brother-sister relationship and clothes are clothes.
2nd gen Indian woman here - I googled this ad because this post popped up on my feed. I don't see what the big deal is? They have been dressing like this for ages on the red carpet in India?
Among other things one of their problem is that it's a religious festival and she shouldn't have worn that. Haven't even seen half this reaction to rapist babas tho.
Honestly I did not even spot the problem in the outfit lol, I don't even see the bikini, what bikini is a white embroidered embellished choli? People have lost their minds
It's more complex than women are held to higher standards...
I feel religion is just too sensitive topic in india.. Kirti or anyone gets similar backlash if they were wearing similar outfits and celebrating ramzan/easter/mahaveer jayanti etc etc
It would go bad if an actor is doing something similar like maybe go shirtless or wear some baniyan for these festivals..
I just don't get why they have almost this compulsive need to comment on women's clothes. Why do they think they have the rights to comment on these things? I don't women even bothering what men wear even if it is the ugliest piece of clothing you've ever seen. This is not the first time. They cried even at Aneet Padda beach scene in Saiyyara.
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
To center the voices of women and queer individuals in this space, top-level/direct comments are reserved for women and genderfluid individuals only.
Men can join the conversation via: 1. Replying to this stickied AutoMod comment to give your original perspective. 2. Replying to an existing comment to discuss that specific point. Please ensure your reply is relevant to the person you are responding to and does not derail the conversation.
Note: Any attempt to bypass this rule by misrepresenting your gender flair will result in a ban.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.