Who defines the ‘limits’ of your freedom?

Thank You Blogadda :)

Maqbool Fida Hussain might give up Indian citizenship.

The Sangh Parivar insists that Hussain has to apologize if he wants to return home. Why? Because “every freedom in democracy has a limit..”

They don’t mean everybody’s freedom though.

A chosen few in India seem to have unlimited freedom to reinterpret religion (including yours and mine), unlimited freedom to stop normal life with threats of violence, unlimited freedom to get away with violence, and until recently , unlimited freedom to demand apologies.

A chosen few must define these limits for the rest of the us.

Muthalik (now pink black faced), Meeta Jamal in Kanpur University, some students in Aligarh Muslim University , the RSS, and the Sanskrati Bachao Sangh in MP, and now (updated to add) rioters in Karnataka seem to believe they are amongst the chosen few.

Here are the kind of limits our street-censor-boards would approve of. This is more dangerous than even a ban on jeans or lingerie display because it subtly undoes a lot of hard work that time, technology and reformers have done.

Does this article disapprove of single parents, working mothers, birth control, premarital sex for girls (only girls), individual rights for girls, and equal rights for girls?

[Click to read the article.]

“Today girls are upfront in demanding their rights.Nothing can come in their way.Comments Dr Shayama Chona,an educationist for 44 years,They expect society to respect their equality with boys.They are bright,bold,beautiful,and want to drink,smoke,go for late night parties,but dont know how to handle it when trouble arises.”

Muthalik will love this comment. And I wish I could believe the first two lines.

Does the ‘trouble arise’ because they expect society to respect their ‘equality with boys’?

Those who demand equality also drink, smoke and stay out all night?

Those who get into ‘trouble’ are those who drink, smoke and demand equality?

How is drinking and smoking related to freedom, equality, or being bold, bright and beautiful? In fact smoking is bad for skin, and alcohol has calories that go against the average idea of beauty  today. Also does this mean boys and girls  who do not smoke or drink  do not think they are equal citizens?

Too much emphasis on individual rights can come in the way of nurturing good relationships.

How? Can somebody explain please?

Mostly those who suppress individual rights for the (what they consider) ‘welfare of society’ are talking about their personal ideas of what is good for the society (e.g. no gay rights, no lingerie display, no inter-religious marriages). There is a risk of their ideas being wrong  or biased- so personal choices are  best left to each equally intelligent  individual.

Individual rights ensure that a few individuals do not force an entire society to confirm to their ideas of right or wrong.

Says senior psychiatrist Dr Rajiv Anand, I,me,myself and to hell with others! This attitude is leading to emotional instability among girls.

If women do not suppress their dreams and desires it does not mean  they have an  ‘I,me,myself and to hell with others!’ attitude.

Its not ’emotionally unstable’ to want to grow, dream, have ambitions and hopes for oneself.

This one seems to be an  idea straight out of a Bollywood movie.

Add to this,the easy access to illegal substances,birth control methods,etc,which make these female brats believe they know it all.”

Illegal substances and birth control methods cannot be put in the same bracket. Birth Control is not an illegal substance. Birth Control ensures young girls do not have to go through what this teenager in Faridabad went through. (Click to read).

Access to ‘illegal substances’ is equally harmful for all genders and a lot more awareness and respect for one’s body and health is needed to discourage substance abuse.

Some people (women and men) are more prone to addiction than others – they need counselling, support and rehabilitation.

This kind of biased moralising  is harmful because it might make a young girl  suspect substance abuse can be compared to sex and that might make illegal substances look fine to them.

Those who object to premarital sex are rarely (never) thinking of the girls. Their only concern is their rigid idea of morality for women.

52 thoughts on “Who defines the ‘limits’ of your freedom?

  1. I’d really like to meet the people who put this article together.
    If birth control pills are in the same bracket as illegal substances, I’m sure condoms would also fall in that category.
    Which means the writers of this article, morally upright people never use either. Hence, they are (hopefully) diseased. Which shows.
    Excuse me but I will be candid; I think our society cannot handle emotionally, economically or sexually liberated women.
    Because for generations women have been treated as objects that make babies and satisfy the urge of a man who just got home from the bar(or equivalent).
    And life was going well, till the world discovered equal rights and the word reached India.

    Now, this is trouble.
    Because a lot of alpha males are going to realise they are beta performers.
    And soon, like the jungle and the way nature meant it to be, the female species will have the final call on who to mate and procreate with.

    Hence, religion, culture and other wonderfully profound sentiments are evoked.

    Me- I have heard of a theory that the concept of marriage was created to ensure that there was a woman for every male, so what you are saying seems to make sense. I feel birth control is feared because it frees women to work, be self reliant, raise happier, well planned children, be healthier, feel younger and fitter, be able to survive on her own without a man or without even children, and much more.

    I feel direct or indirect interference with personal lives of individuals is incorrect.

    Like

    • BTW- I have my own definition of the limit of freedom.
      Might not be right, might a bit lofty, but I definitely don’t care.
      Freedom is infinite.

      Just because as a society you don’t have the balls to sit and talk to your kids about the birds and the bees, you can’t go around putting the world at large under lock and key, branding things immoral at will.
      Do your job as a parent first. If your ‘culture’ and ‘religion’ are so elaborate as edifices of your being, your real victory is when your kids have access to everything but trust their own value judgments.
      And that will not come ‘when the time is right’. Because friends are media will only advertise access. Family is what inculcates judgement.

      Me- Brilliantly said Chakraviyuh!!! No words. Loved this the best… “your real victory is when your kids have access to everything but trust their own value judgments.”

      Like

  2. Let MF paint Mohammed or Allah and we will see if he can survive.

    And here is a topic that you will pretend to be ignorant of:
    http://taslimanasrin.com/OPINION.pdf

    Me – Of course he will have a fatwa against him. Fanatics have no religion except bullying.

    And Taslima Nasreen, who wrote a very sensible book, (Have you read it? I share her views) is threatened by religious fundamentalism. Not she, not MF Hussain, not a Danish cartoonist deserve to be threatened. There are legal procedures if one has objections, but how will free publicity be got if the fanatics and fundamentalists do not use the name of well known people.
    Will check your link now.

    Like

  3. I stopped reading when I encountered the word “Female brat”
    WTF?!! How can anyone, anyone in their right minds call women “female brats”?!!
    Ugh!
    There’s no way this can elicit such an awesome and clear post from me IHM!
    I truly admire the way in which you handle/answer back to such articles, comments and people!
    I would have wither hit the guy or te post would have included more profanities than actual words!!
    Seriously, WTF?!! Where do so-called educated people, a psychiatrist at that, come up with such rubbish?!!
    I’m stopping now.. I’m pissed off with teh article, the quotes and this mind set.
    This coming from the educated lot.

    Me – Pixie a criminal is a criminal, drunken driving is drunken driving – when did it become an issue of birth control or he-brats or she-brats??? I agree it’s more worrying because educationalists and psychiatrists are making such statements.

    Like

  4. Great Post – You should get some of these published – maybe not as a takedown, but as a standalone article. The other side shouldn’t be the only ones to sound off. Not to be ageist, but someone who is an educationist for 44 years is two-three generations away from the current teenagers, so I don’t see how they can define today’s realities. Even I don’t claim to understand everything that today’s teenagers think and I am not even 1 generation removed.
    “This kind of biased moralising is harmful because it might make a young girl suspect substance abuse can be compared to sex and that might make illegal substances look fine to them.”
    That IS the intention. Sex is illegal outside of marriage in these people’s minds, and why should the woman try to control sex in the marriage.

    Like

  5. Dear IHM, I have to agree to this line, quite passionately.

    “Too much emphasis on individual rights can come in the way of nurturing good relationships.”

    To understand my view, please take this line out of the context of the article for a moment.

    In relationships, especially in marriage, we call our partners ‘Ardhangini’, which means one thing among many things.

    And that is, you think with two brains. Left or right can be a discussion point, but one hemisphere of your brain has to be exchanged with your ‘ardhangini’. Which basically means reducing independence by half. This applies to both gender.

    If we dont understand this, and try to ‘think’, ‘take decisions’, ‘say things’ by using both your hemisphere selfishly, the relationship will surely go chaotic. We start thinking that relationship is all about compromise, sacrifice etc…

    See love/instinct and the initial best foot forward philosophy does not last too long. We tend to take each other for granted. There, this understanding of ‘Ardhangini’ can put some healthy perspective into the relationship.

    Hence, too much emphasis on individual rights can come in the way of nurturing a good relationship.

    Me- Durlov ‘individual rights’ means one can choose to work or not to work, dress in a particular way, follow a certain religion, love some kind of books, paintings, movies, games and TV programmes – any happy relationship would thrive if these are respected. My husband loves golf, I love Gym and exercise; there are other kind of things we both like to do together, like cooking or watching movies or taking care of stray animals – these we do together. We do not think we can force each other to do what we want- that is respect for individual rights and freedom. I don’t think this makes our relationship weaker, in fact this mutual respect for each others rights makes the relationship stronger.
    And the concept of the ‘ardhangani’ I think was created to teach men to value their wives – and ensure wives were allowed to participate in all rituals as equals (almost). Today men know their wives are their equals in every way.

    Like

    • Actually the truth is that if the relationship is “GOOD”, individual rights will never come in the way. Because in a good relationship, both parties love and accept each other for what they are. Because in a good relationship, both parties understand and respect each other’s space. And if there is a conflict, then understanding is reached through conversation, discussion and communication.

      Me- And this is so difficult for psychiatrists to understand!

      It is in a BAD relationship that a person (mostly the woman) is expected to give up individual freedom.

      Me- That is the only worry… awareness of her individual rights might make a woman expect her rights to be respected.😐

      Like

      • I would say that there are no good relationships. Both parties have to make it ‘good’ by accepting that conjugal independence or objective or life is much more important than individual independence, whims and fancies.

        Like

  6. “Good relationships” !! As usual the burden of bearing this responsibility has been chucked on the shoulders of girls/women.Of course, the proponents of ‘good relationships’ define it as one where there is unequal power. You know, if individual rights were protected and upheld, then they would NEVER come in the way of ‘good relationships’. Because the people in the relationship would have the good sense to negotiate their space and needs. That is what education, empowerment and enlightenment does. But these people clearly don’t know that. Pity.

    Like

  7. One might think that as a man, I have no stake in this issue. And indeed it doesn’t affect me directly. The problem though, is that dangerous lunatics like this are totally arbitrary in their exercise of moral judgment and tomorrow it might affect me!

    Someday they might randomly decide to take up a grudge against say – those who choose not to marry or against those who don’t speak the language of their state (like the Thakerays) – and then it’ll be my turn to cry.

    So I have a big stake in all this. Just like I have a similar stake in the gay rights movement though I’m not gay as such. All of us need to defend those groups unjustly targeted though we may not be in those groups. Someday when I’m at the receiving end, I’ll be glad to have outside support for my problems

    Me- I absolutely agree and I feel the same way Bhagwad. Your comment reminded me of this –
    https://indianhomemaker.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/theres-still-time-consider-yourself-warned/

    Like

  8. Well the goose and the gander both should have equal kind of sauces – to paraphrase a proverb. I am all for equality, I am all for freedom for every one, each and every one of us irrespective of sex, social status and financial status. If men can be brats, women should be accepted as she brats too! The only thing is that freedom comes with responsibility. The girls who fell in a drunken stupor in the pub could have got raped and robbed, or even beaten up. They should accept the fall out if that happens. The girl who killed the pavement dwellers will be prosecuted as per law. Vive La Freedom! Every one has a right to make mistakes – but should be ready to pay for them.

    Me- Phoenixritu that article is not about freedom and responsibility for all. I would have appreciated that.
    The article implies that anybody who parties, drinks and smokes is a feminist and demands equal rights. And is also likely to not understand how to handle so much freedom (how does the rest of the world handle so much freedom?) It’s no different from Makow’s article where he assumes every woman who is a feminists struts in a bikini. Also
    “Too much emphasis on individual rights can come in the way of nurturing good relationships.”

    Like

    • Yeah, that line set me off!!! This article is the sort one can expect out of the people who concur with the Ekta Kapoor world view! It irritates me no end. It is hypocrisy of the highest order – but as you pointed out – people like Muthalik and the Sangh Parivar have made a career out of this😦

      Like

  9. I agree with the first part of the post, namely certain individuals/organizations think their religious freedom is far more superior than anyone else’s individual rights. ( On a side not, you should read this wonderful article on religious freedom. Although it’s written in western context I think it completely applies to Indian context: http://sparkindarkness.livejournal.com/?skip=40#post-sparkindarkness-295712).

    However, the latter part of the post was a tad bit over the line for me. Don’t get me wrong. I am all over women’s rights and everything but the article you pointed to “The She Brats”, well I am not sure I found it particularly offensive. I agree, it was a very badly written article and all that but the author was emphasizing on a very specific class and not on the women’s right in general. The spoiled brats can be both, male and female, you know, the one’s who think that they can get away with anything (including murder). In their case we are not talking about their individual rights (again male or female) but their narcissism.

    For example, if you are told about a serial killer (I know its an extreme example) who brutally murdered several people, would it matter if that serial killer is female or male? You will condemn him or her equally. The point being: a bad quality is a bad quality. You can’t defend them just because they happen to be women. It takes all kinds of women to make this world too..

    I agree the author has picked up only on the “She-brats” here but he/she also talks abt the he-brats as well (and she has done a very bad job when he/she didn’t mention this particular category in the rest of the article but simply referred them as girls) .

    They both are obnoxious and narcissist. And they are not brats because they party or use birth pills but because: Nooria Haveliwala killed two people while driving under influence or two of them abused and hit out at whoever stepped onto the dance floor in a pub, or the brat who blackmail her parents with suicide whenever her demands are not met.

    The context of “I,me,myself and to hell with others”: again was referring to their narcissism and not the women’s right to think and decide.

    I understand how that article can be misquoted and used by misogynist against all women but it wasn’t really written to include all women in India.

    Again, it was a very badly written article.

    Me- I reread the article Richa. I did not like the lines I have qioted. Yes, it is a very badly written article.

    Like

    • I agree it is very badly written. And the style of writing is what makes it worse (in my opinion.) The writer talks about a trend seen first in boys (of a certain class) and now in girls; a part of this trend being a ‘me-only’ attitude.

      Now what irked me is that instead of concentrating on just this trend, the writer has brought in points like ‘asking for equality’ (this, related only to girls) in a way that makes it sound like something ‘bad’. While talking about a girl who ran over people sleeping on the pavement when she was drunk and driving, it also talks about ‘birth control’. Is she trying to equate drunken driving, asking for equality and the use of birth control?

      Instead of an objectively written article on a new trend, the writer almost seems to be moralising! And very subtly. Which makes it worse.

      Since the article concentrates on just She-Brats i really don’t think all those other points about ‘good relationships’ and ‘individual rights’ should have been brought in. It can confuse the reader, and give the writer a bad name (and some hate mail too!)

      Me – BlabberBlah I agree. You explained it so much better than I did. Thanks🙂

      Like

  10. oh, i read this one and was like.. kya bakwas likhte hain log aur vo chhap bhi jaata hai…no more thot than that…

    Me- Esha unfortunately the article was seen as an article about drunken driving.

    I think the article used a crime as an excuse to convey that if girls are not kept in their place they would all become drunken drivers, or create scenes on dance floors or use birth control.

    Like

  11. I can’t understand why a woman who drink and/or smokes is bad and has too much freedom? Too much freedom? Rubbish…How does it matter to others what another woman does? As I’ve commented before, men think feminists are trying to become men, which obviously is not true…They don’t appreciate the true nature of what women are trying to achieve…

    Me- They know there has been a shocking crime and now they can’t resist using that as an example to show how ‘too much freedom’ harms girls who “dont know how to handle it when trouble arises.””

    Like

    • How about too much freedom for men? When they drink and drive and crash, don’t they harm themselves and others? Or when they drink and rape a woman? Or when they needlessly harass women? Isn’t too much freedom too much for them? Oh, I forgot…It’s their right to do as they please, it’s just the women who can’t…

      Congratulations on the blogadda pick…

      Me- Thanks Sraboney🙂 Have you noticed how no opportunity is missed to remind women how dangerous can be the consequences of letting women have individual rights or freedom. This one is subtle, which makes it worse – they are preaching about young adults and substance abuse and then slip into putting in ‘a well intentioned word of concern’ about today’s girls and their dreams for equality.

      Like

  12. MF Hussain was given the Qatari passport. Art, according to me, should be above any limitations, it is but a free form of expression. If you cannot express yourself freely it ceases to be creative. I hate people who judge others with no thoughts on why it has been done so…
    And who are we to say what is right or wrong…!

    Me- I agree Sindhu! And who are we to say what is right or wrong!

    Like

  13. Oh do Times of India publish such trash regularly.May be it is time for every one of us to stop subscribing .What abt a twitter campaign against TOI? We can also email the regular advertisers to boycott TOI if such sexist articles are again published.

    Me- Charakan such articles are published on and off everywhere, and then there are some women’s magazines that only write such stuff. Then there are our favourite Saas-Bahu serials – each one of these do a serious job of reinforcing the idea that a ‘wesernised’ woman is a bad woman a sari-clad woman is traditional. Shobha De wears sarees a lot but they probably haven’t noticed.

    Like

  14. Pingback: Blogging community of India with best blog posts

  15. One thing seems obvious to me..that the people who think within these moribund rigid parenthesis have neither the ability nor the means to appreciate things in the bigger context.

    Are drugs,alcohol(ism) and the rest really good for anyone? I would say no. True, democracy doesn’t mean you can do whatever you want, there is something called responsibility. But responsibility is to enforced by those who give us our rights, i.e. the law.

    Our legal system faces a twin fold problem of illiteracy and lack of enforcers. First can be solved through education, which mildly put needs a lot of improvement in our country anyway. AS for the enforcers, they need good strong education too and yes good pay, so that they understand their role better.

    Why do large groups of youngsters take to joining these groups? Because they are ill informed and misguided. As someone belonging Gen.Y, according to me the blame is with Gen.X and the one preceding it.

    So if we do really give a damn about anything, get people who can teach. I have friends who party, smoke, drink blah blah..I don’t out of choice..now choice in itself is influenced by many things..And let us not forget that the government owns the alcohol shops(in TN) , earns a lot out of tobacco and yes doesn’t do enough to control drugs..Stop blaming guys/girls from my gen./ the people…all those idiots you mentioned above need to go knocking on their doors and not try to physically and mentally hurt others…

    And hmm..taking about equality, why the hell does no one give a damn about reservations?

    Like

  16. Freedom finds its limitations when its regarding to a controversial statement, art, movie, etc. and gets the attention from the fanatics group who needs such issues to highlight themselves.

    This is actually the time when we, the people need to show that the freedom that we sometimes take for granted needs to be proven so that our freedom is not infringed upon. Sadly the truth is that we are doing a poor job of protecting these rights. No wonder people like MF Hussain had to leave even when he committed no crime.

    I don’t agree with latter part of the post with regard to the article. They have been taken out of context. The article is aimed at spoiled women brats and don’t think they offend women’s rights as whole.

    Me- They have talked about birth control and ‘good relationships’ ruining because of ‘individual freedom’… it looked like this became an opportunity for the author to air her grievances against too much freedom for girls.

    Both genders, the male and female have their share of spoil brats. The quotes need to be looked from that aspect and not towards woman in general.

    Like

  17. goshhh is this still the era of cave men…
    how can birth control ever be illegal… ohh yes it is … in chennai … the land of maximum number of engineers … I will have to check if the ban is still there… it was there till the last year…
    …. a women can never have one right she desires most – the write to live for themselves… why do people have to make our life so miserable… keeping count of our each action… why can’t women just live in peace and in complete liberty…

    wrtitten something on similar lines here:
    http://destinychildosheen.blogspot.com/2010/03/perfect-indian-women.html

    Like

  18. nothing is dirty ,vulgar
    everything depends on how one sees it
    when mind is dirty, vulgar
    he will find everything dirty and vulgar.
    and these people should be send to mental treatments as they do not know what is human life and freedoms .

    Me –😆 They need some counselling at the very least🙂

    Like

  19. what is deeply disturbing is the realization that they target only girls as far as substance abuse or any of these so called ‘immoral conduct codes’ go. It always boils down to the same thing – self proclaimed custodians of morality, who think they are God`s gift to mankind..rather womankind! – they are the ones who always get away with trash like this. And what`s with the TOI really? I didnt know it publishes such garbage under the garb of news!

    Me- It was intersting how something like drunken driving is connected to equal rights and birth control and girls’ degrading morality🙄

    Like

  20. You claim to support Taslima. Now write a blog *exlusively* about taslima and her woes. Lets see how secular you are. I won’t be surprised if you conveniently ignore the incident. ‘Sular’ persons always follow a pattern.jumps at a chance to write about fundamentalism of hindu outfits and then wehn some muslims do the same give us lecture about how ‘peaceful’ they are.

    Me- There is nothing like Hindu or Muslim fundamentalist – same hoodlums – different name tags.
    I support not only Taslima Nasreen but also Arundhati Roy and Teesta Setalwad, and write about them on and off.

    I saw Shabnam Hashmi in CNN-IBN today. She is very vocal for all the sangh parivar fundamentalism, but today, she was like a fish out of water because she had to criticize the bigots from her religion. She (indirectly) said that the Hassan incident was perpetrated by the BJP. Seriously???

    I didn’t see this show. Bigots are bigots – all bigots from every religion get upset if their religion (they feel they ‘own’ it) is criticised.
    They also take offence at imagined slights. They look for excuses to justify whatever they believe is ordained by their god. They fear criticism of their ways/religion/god.
    It is not enough for them to follow their customs etc – it matters to them that their ways are compared to other ways and then their ways are proven better. I feel they are unsure of their beliefs.

    Are you guys really secular?

    Me- I believe in live and let live.

    It is this hypocrisy that prompt the hindus to go to the so called communal path.

    Me- We are all responsible for our own actions. Nobody’s hypocrisy or actions can make anybody ‘go on communal path’.

    Like

  21. The person who wrote this disgusting piece of article seems to be terribly screwed up in her head!! I can’t make heads or tails of what she is trying to say? A few drunken, rich and irresponsible women behaving like a lunatic does not portray the whole of womankind.

    Me- Since they start with criticising drunken driving, Sakshi, – the article is taken seriously at first. It takes a moment to understand that they are trying imply that equality or individual freedom is somehow related to responsible for substance abuse and drunken driving in this case.

    Like

  22. Since I am late here, I’ll start with a big Congrats for the Blogadda’s pick for the Tangy Tuesday !!!

    That comment by an educationist is indeed shocking – women being bold, beautiful, drinking and smoking is defined as equality with the men ??? Sad that we have ppl like him teaching others.

    And look at the jokers who define the freedom through their spears of religion !!!!

    Like

  23. cheers @ the blogadda pick. freedom is primairly guided by 2 respobilities-nationality & civilization. unless we shun both of these responsilities freedom ofcouse is not infinite. “too much” emphasis not on individual “rights” but freedom does come in the way of nurturing any relationship.negligence in parenthood(single or otherwise) does have its consequences, pre-mature(below the age of 18) not pre-marital sex is dangerous.and theres enough evidence on lapse of judgement by the youth. irrespective of age and gender birth control pills-devices,pregnancy tests,emergency birth control pills should be made available free of cost in gov hospitals.. etc for healthier living & it is high time for someone to start parenting classes in this country.:-) women do have to guard their rights when unjustly targetted. as for MF Hussain could any experts of modern art please explain his interpretation of “the” paintings. poor-man his dhak-dhak hasnt been answered🙂 how else would he express himself and look at the price tag his paintings fetch today🙂 unlike SRK he wasnt cunnning enough to tweet his way out of trouble🙂 *tackles IHM’s flying fist*🙂

    Like

  24. Is the times of India getting so retrogressive?? Unbelievable.. Being a brat has nothing to do with your gender !! I wish the author and the psychiatrist quoted in the article had taken this into consideration…
    A fulfilled individual has better relationships than a repressed one..so individuality never steps in the way of good relationships..
    Who are we to sit in judgement over women who choose to drink, smoke or party ?? Such inane articles that encourage moral policing really don’t serve any purpose. They clearly impinge upon an individual’s freedom and right to choose

    Like

  25. Some times I just smile on these alleged culture upholder.

    How do they misinterpret things and make fool of public is simply gr888.

    could they have done some thing futuristic-ally productive to society?

    Keep it up IHM.

    Like

  26. “Too much emphasis on individual rights can come in the way of nurturing good relationships.” Oh cool!!!! Tell me please that this is an unbiased observation and refers to both boys and girls??!! Someone has really woken up to facts and how it should be!
    No??
    Ohhh am I hoping for too much??!!
    Oh I get it now😦
    The other gender is free to emphasize individual freedom all they want and do with relationships what they like. We the women without putting too much emphasize on individual rights should pick up the pieces and ‘nurture’ those ‘good’ relations!!
    Ohh its the same old wine and its not even in a new bottle!!
    Hmmm… I knew there was a catch somewhere.

    Like

  27. That was the most biased piece I ever read, IHM! How can somebody equate illegal substances with contraception??? Just because women have the control in their hands, it is wrong? That is essentially what they are saying, isn’t it? Because we see/hear of countless incidents of men driving under influence and somehow, that does not seem to evoke such a response. Does it mean, that men are allowed to behave as they please and only women are supposed to uphold moral/cultural values? I am not supporting drunken driving or drinking or anything. But to equate all this with women wanting equal rights is ridiculous. Yes, of course, there are bad eggs amongst women just as there are Muthaliks/Senas amongst the men.

    And funny, how some people’s freedom needs limits while others have the freedom to beat others up, bully people and whatever else they may want to do, but yes, a painting is far worse!!!! Yes indeed!

    Like

  28. I am just too dazed to say anything. Asking your permission to send the link to my brother who works for TOI, Delhi.

    What crap! How can people be so biased and that too a woman writing this is a shame. No one questions the absolute unquestioned freedom men enjoy in our society and everyone including some women raise their eyebrows when it comes to individual freedom of women.

    “Too much emphasis on individual rights can come in the way of nurturing good relationships.”

    so what she mean is complete submission by the women . I have heard this one at home IHM. it hurts deep. My fight is about the right of freedom and dignity here at my inlaws place. I guess I must write about it now.

    congratulation for blogadda pick

    Me- Send it Tikuli. They should not publish such articles, because what they say is taken seriously by so many.

    Like

  29. Messrs MF Hussain and Co may have all the freedom in the world, but they are shrewd guys…
    Please try to understand this in a political and not religious perspective. These guys won’t even dare make a nude portrait of someone like Mrs Indira Gandhi or her son, since they know that this symbol belongs to a group which wields political clout. Ditto with Islam and Christanity.

    However, Hinduism is different. This particular group doesn’t have a single leader, per se. RSS notwithstanding, Hindus in India are not Hindus, but Dalits, OBCs , Thakurs etc etc.

    So the question of galvanizing Hindus doesn’t come. And of course, freedom is not just a right but a responsibility as well.

    Me- Our various groups from all religions need to understand that their freedom to take political mileage by taking offense has it’s responsibilities- mainly of ‘not taking the law in their hands’ and definitely not breaking any laws when their sentiments get hurt.
    For those who offend them – they can only be taken to court, not threatened with violence.

    Like

    • I never hesitate to condone what the so called champions of hindutva do, it is wrong and illegal. However, how does that fit into the argument og Hussain’s making nude paintings of Goddesses? We must accept the fact that Hindus consider Sarawati, Durga and Kali as their mother. Whatever Hussain might have been allright for the ‘liberals’, but he should have excercised good judgment and caution before embarking on this misadventure.

      Like

  30. Everything I wanted to say in reaction to the article has already been said…

    and yet I can’t stop reacting to the “illegal substance like birth control” bit! What logic-and it gets published in a national newspaper!

    and to think of it all of the “down with individuality, back to good old world be seen not heard” essence of the article is a reaction to one drunk woman driver!!!

    what about giving some “responsibility” talk to all the other drunk drivers/substance abusers

    or as you said at the beginning of the post the limit on freedom is defined differently for them…

    Me- Hypermom – What’s worse is it is subtle, they are ‘only’ talking about drunken driving and obviously nobody is going to object to that… and then they imply one girl threatening to kill herself if her demands are not met, means all Indian girls (and culture) are ‘going out of hand’.

    Like

  31. Pingback: Draw Mohammad Day:Two responses. « The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  32. Pingback: Are u ok if ur daughter smokes at 24yrs to express herself? Freedom of expression is quite quite difficult to practice. « The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  33. Pingback: Do you think insulting should be a punishable offense? | The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  34. Pingback: When a college principal refused to be a Taliban ally ;) | The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  35. Pingback: “Tell me will you ever think of putting any posts on facebook after this?” “No.” | The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  36. Pingback: How do you think would the ‘social order’ be impacted with this kind of parenting? | The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  37. Pingback: So we criticise Comedy Nights with Kapil. And we criticise political leaders who make misogynistic statements. | The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  38. Pingback: What do you find offensive enough to make you violent? | The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

  39. Pingback: So how will banning cabs make public transport safer for women? | The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s