The 90s songs

Image source: Google search

Two days ago, I made my second playlist on Amazon music. This one mostly consists of all those 90s English songs that I so used to love during my teenage. I have been listening to them since then and I have mixed thoughts about them.

• Some I wonder now how I could be so stupid to love something as bad as that. Bad and sometimes dumb!! I can’t stand a few of those songs any more. An example could be Britney Spears suddenly sounding hoarse and her voice so harsh now. The songs simply seem to be missing any melody.
• Most songs are still enjoyable though more of bubblegum pop and if I wouldn’t be driving while listening, I probably would even groove a bit to them. All the Backstreet Boys and Westlife they remind me of the sweet moments and how they used to be all pure fun. All of us girls in school were just all into it.
• Some are pure rock and party songs and remind me of our school Christmas Parties. They take me back to how we would tire ourselves out that one day in school dancing to these songs. If it’s “We will rock you”, we will all shout and scream and move to the beat. But dare the DJ play something that wasn’t welcome. Boos and shaking hands telling him that this is not acceptable is all he would get.
• Some songs were our school assembly favourites and are just pretty big on reminding me of those days when we would skip studies and practice all day for the assembly. The fights, the non-stop chatters and the friendships. And then we would all croon “Heal the world”, “We are the world” and “Seasons in the Sun”.
• Last but not least, some are still pure romance and just simply touch my heart even today. How does one even get over Celine Dion’s “Because you loved me”, Bryan Adam’s “Everything I do” and Ronan Keating’s “Words”.

I have been away from English music for years… Even decades. And now I sometimes listen to (actually more like forced to listen to) the songs chosen by my daughter. Some are nice but most don’t stand a chance in front of these melodies.

Simple Joys of Life

Simple things bring joy to our everyday life. A piece of chocolate shared with you by your child is the sweetest. The smell of petrichor in the morning after a rain soaked night is the most uplifting. A combo of a book and a blanket is unbeatable in winters. A cup of coffee and meaningless chatter with your colleague during fifteen minutes stolen from your working hours are the highlight of your day. Finding a Rs. 500 banknote in your jeans pocket which had been completely forgotten since the last time you wore it makes you suddenly feel rich. Making a brief eye contact with someone of the opposite sex, even a stranger, in a way that seems to communicate a subtle curiosity at the other end makes you feel the most attractive person on the earth. Blazing through the yellow light you glance in your rear-view to see all the cars behind you stopping at the red light suddenly makes you feel victorious. Seeing a friend trip and stumble around momentarily before regaining his/her footing, then swiftly attempting to play it off like nothing happened can be the most hilarious sight if the moment is right. Finding a parking lot right in front of the store you want to visit makes you believe that it’s your lucky day. Spreading out on fresh clean bed-sheets makes you feel relaxed all of a sudden. Reminiscing about old times with your closest friends makes you feel like a child all over again. Receiving an unexpected compliment can suddenly make your day a whole lot better. Finishing up something that had kept you busy for days feels like a sense of accomplishment. And then nothing ever beats hearing the right song at the right moment. It simply lifts your spirits immediately.

Simple joys of life… Sometimes we need to take time out and appreciate them too.

And the men we SHOULDN'T love!

In continuation with the list of romantic literary heroes that I shared the day before, I also want to list down a few which feature time and again in the articles about most loved male protagonists in literature but which for some reason are NOT my favourites. But to maintain parity with the previous article, I would stick to the most loved characters written by female authors: 

1. Howard Roark – The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand

Without any reference to the debate surrounding hypocrisy in Ayn Rand’s writing, Howard Roark from The Fountainhead, her most famous and most loved character, is an amalgamation of contrasts. To call him polarizing is the understatement of the century. Most people credit him with having a boatload of artistic talent, but he could be as much of a sinister dirtbag as he could be an enigmatic charmer. Roark is fiercely independent. He believes in the merit of his revolutionary designs and has the courage to stand for them in the face of an antagonistic society. He is presented as the author's version of an ideal man. Roark is the antithesis of contemporary belief that an individual is molded by social forces. He is not the product of his upbringing, his economic class, his family, his religious training, or his social background. He is a product of the choices he has made. Roark is an example of free will — the theory that an individual has the power, by virtue of the choices he makes, to control the outcome of his own life. A man's thinking and values are not controlled by God or the fates or society or any external factor — but solely by his own choice. Others (like Keating) may choose to submit, but Roark will not. He is his own man. And all this sounds so foolishly attractive when he is portrayed as the perfect man – strong, bold, and confident and someone with a very high sense of integrity. But one cannot deny that Roark is a selfish man. He is true to his values, to his convictions, to his thinking, to his mind, to his self – and only to himself. He is an individualist and someone essentially born into the role of explosives-wielding freethinker. But even if all this is acceptable, there is one big flaw in his character that will never allow me to succumb to his charms. He forcibly enters Dominique’s room and rapes her. Whatever way it was projected in the book, at the end of the day, he is a RAPIST. Period. 

2. Mr. Rochester – Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë 

Image source: Google search

Mr. Rochester in “Jane Eyre” is a stern-featured, heavy-browed, craggy-faced, rude, abrupt, horny man always on the edge of violence who likes to order people around and keeps his wife locked in the attic. In fact, he is a character closest to the Beast in “Beauty and the Beast” and yet he is far worse than the Beast. Unlike Beast, who had a soft heart inside, Mr. Rochester is a typical Byronic hero, moody, arrogant, cynical and jaded, and like all Byronic heros he is attracted by Jane's innocence, her chastity. But he is also clinically mad, a manic depressive, living in an unreal world, understandably perhaps, he cannot deal with the reality of his own situation. It is undeniable that he seduces and seeks to deceive Jane by effectively making Jane his mistress. He is the opposite of Jane. She is easily deceived because she is incredibly naïve and innocent, and alone, she has no one to turn to for advice, Mrs Fairfax herself admits to finding Rochester an enigma and so would offer little help. He is the first of the opposite sex, unmarried (as Jane believes) to look on Jane kindly, to smile, to talk to her as an equal (when in fact Rochester knows full well that he is taking advantage of her position and character, abusing his position as her employee). In fact in today’s terms he is grooming Jane for sexual conquest. Byronic heroes are sexual predators, 'mad, bad and dangerous to know'. Particularly, chaste, married, or otherwise 'unavailable', women are regarded as a challenge, as legitimate targets to be seduced and then left. 

3. Henry DeTamble – The Time Traveler’s Wife by Audrey Niffenegger

In various passages in “The Times Traveler's Wife”, Henry explains that the inevitable cause of his time travels is stress. He has zero tolerance for stress. And, boy, Henry is stressed out by a lot: by watching TV, by loud noises, by blinding lights, by drinking too much, by getting married, by having kids, by conflict… He only relaxes during sex. So the big question here is, are Henry’s disappearing acts actually a male conspiracy to have an excuse to leave marital responsibilities behind and just go out womanizing, drinking, getting high, causing trouble – living the bachelor life. Because that's pretty much what Henry does with his time away from Clare. Also interesting is that right after he meets Clare in the present – unmarried, no children, and no responsibilities – Clare remarks to Henry that he hasn't been traveling much which is kind of suspicious. And then there's the whole "I need more sex to stay in the present" thing. So maybe “The Times” is right. Maybe Henry is just a big flake. A coward who can't handle life and so keeps slipping through its cracks. What an unreliable jerk! 

4. Heathcliff – Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë

Forget most of the romantic nonsense you have heard about Heathcliff from “Wuthering Heights”. Sure he's in love with Catherine, and you can't question his loyalty, but he has a serious mean streak. To put it bluntly: he acts like a sociopath. Traditionally, romance novel heroes appear dangerous, brooding, and cold at first, only later to emerge as fiercely devoted and loving. One hundred years before Emily Brontë wrote Wuthering Heights, the notion that “a reformed rake makes the best husband” was already a cliché of romantic literature, and romance novels center around the same cliché to this day. However, Heathcliff does not reform, and his malevolence proves so great and long-lasting that it cannot be adequately explained even as a desire for revenge against Hindley, Catherine, Edgar, etc. As he himself points out, his abuse of Isabella is purely sadistic, as he amuses himself by seeing how much abuse she can take and still come cringing back for more. Heathcliff can be a real beast, which comes across through his numerous threats, violent acts, and symbolic association with that unruly pack of dogs. A powerful, fierce, and often cruel man, Heathcliff often falls back on violence as a means of expression, both of love and hate. Having been abused by Hindley for most of his childhood, Heathcliff is the classic victim-turned-perpetrator. His rage is tied to the revenge he so passionately seeks, but he also undertakes small "extracurricular" acts of violence, like hanging Isabella Linton's dog. These lines in the book pretty much sum up his attitude: "I have no pity! I have no pity! The more the worms writhe, the more I yearn to crush out their entrails! It is a moral teething; and I grind with greater energy in proportion to the increase of pain."

And to think of it, these disdainful characters were also written by women and despite their serious flaws are also unequivocally loved by women across the world even to this day. If only women knew their own worth better!

The Men We Love!

I was recently reading an article online where the writer had shared how some of the literary male protagonists had ruined her romantic life because they are “Oh, so perfect!” The article was fun and so I googled more on the topic where favourite male characters from novels were shared. There were some names that were appearing more commonly as against others. A prime example was Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy from the Pride and Prejudice who was not only part of every single list but was almost always occupying the No. 1 spot. And then there were others who appeared more than often. Here when I listed them down, there was a very interesting observation that cropped up. But, first let me share the ones that I am talking about:

1. Mr. Darcy – Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen

Image source: Google Search

The quintessential and undoubtedly most loved male character ever from a novel is Mr. Darcy from the “Pride and Prejudice”. Mr. Darcy exhibits all the good and bad qualities of the ideal English aristocrat — snobbish and arrogant, he is also completely honest and sure of himself. Initially described as someone vain and too proud for our dear Elizabeth Bennet, he backs off when she rejects him and yet is mature and good-natured enough to help her out where he can without any expectations in return. When Elizabeth flatly turns down his marriage proposal and tells him that it was ungentlemanly, Darcy is startled into realizing just how arrogant and assuming he had been. He accepts his folly and goes all out to correct what he had done wrong. Darcy's humbling makes him more sensitive to what other people feel. If he wins our dear Lizzy’s heart in the process, it’s all too obvious. The fact that he is extremely handsome and rich is just icing on the cake.

2. Captain Wentworth – Persuasion by Jane Austen

Much on the lines of Mr. Darcy, Jane Austen also wrote the character of the good-looking Captain Wentworth in “Persuasion”. Although he could never reach the desirability quotient of Mr. Darcy, he wasn’t much behind either, heralding very similar qualities as Mr. Darcy. Again, choosing to walk away when rejected by Anne and yet holding an undying love for her in his heart for years; he doesn’t impose himself or his feelings on her unless he himself is sure of her own feelings. In fact, he felt responsible for Louisa's condition, having pursued her to make Anne jealous and would have taken her as his wife. However, when Louisa turned her affections to James Benwick, he let her go without making it an ego issue. Eventually, getting similar undying love from Anne could only have been the best reward possible.

3. Atticus Finch – To kill a mockingbird by Harper Lee 

Bold, heroic, noble, honourable, confident and optimistic, Atticus Finch from “To kill a mockingbird” is a vision of idealised masculinity. He is a true role model in every sense of the word. A man holding forth a fight for justice against all odds; and yet a very even-keeled type of guy who does not get too worked up about stressful situations. He is not affected by what other people say or think. He is consistent and rooted in his beliefs. A man of great wisdom and character; he is a good single parent too trying to fill his kids with a sense of righteousness.

4. Gilbert Blythe – Anne of Green Gables by Lucy Maud Montgomery

Gilbert Blythe from “Anne of Green Gables” is literally literature’s most beloved boy-next-door. He lets Anne be Anne, a wonderful mess of imagination, goof-ups, temper, drive, and dreams – and Gilbert loves all of that about her. He never tries to make her something she isn’t. Also, he doesn’t let obstacles throw him and he pursues excellence. He works hard for what he has and isn’t showy about his successes. And boy! Is he patient? He fell in love with Anne long before the thought ever occurred to her that he could. And he waited. And waited. He waited until Anne herself was ready and all this while without even being imposing. Like all romantic male protagonists, he loved Anne and they both supported each other throughout the series. All the while, Gilbert was never threatened when Anne succeeded. He was secure in who he was and happily rejoiced in Anne’s success even if he was the one who had lost out to her.

5. Rhett Butler – Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

On the surface, Rhett Butler from “Gone with the Wind” is a textbook example of the charming rogue. His dark, good looks and supposedly wild behavior are the source of considerable gossip among the ladies. However, he is loved not for his Casanova image but for his undaunting love for Scarlett. Rhett has no dearth of physical courage which can be seen in the fact that he starts off the war as a blockade runner (which takes some courage, even if he insists it doesn't), but at the siege of Atlanta he decides to go off and join the army. Moreover, he helps Scarlett escape from Atlanta during the siege and after he murders a black man, he faces his sentence of death by hanging with seeming equanimity. And yet some call Rhett a coward because he's afraid to tell his own wife that he loves her. Rhett's afraid of Scarlett; deathly afraid, shamefully afraid. Even though he declares his love for her when he is about to leave Scarlett to go into the army and perhaps die, she misunderstands him because he had never really expressed his sentiments till then. He just lets her be herself and gave her all the space she needed while remaining by her side as the anchor she may hook herself on. He is also an excellent father to Bonnie; never once entangled by the gender roles in the said period and taking upon himself the parental duties as he must. The one flaw that holds out as a sore eye is Rhett Butler putting the blame of every flaw in him (his act of indifference or his sleeping with Belle) on Scarlett and he eventually comes across as someone willing to cheat on her and lie to her and treat her as a punching bag for his own insecurities. A bit of put downer there. 

Having listed down the most loved male characters across the world in the English novels, there is one thing noteworthy about the list… One common factor that runs across all these characters is the trait that they are utterly and unwittingly feminist in their conduct. They do not impose on the women they love; give them space to be themselves; and support them in their pursuits. Is it a surprise? Well, not if you see the reason why. 

ALL THESE CHARACTERS WERE CREATED AND WRITTEN BY WOMEN.

I don't have an attitude problem... I have an attitude and you have a problem!

I was once told that I have an attitude problem. I did not retaliate because by giving back to that person, I would have proved him right. The thing is that I do not have an attitude problem. I have an attitude and that person has a problem with my attitude. And honestly, that is not my problem.

I have a (maybe bad) habit of voicing my opinion and calling a spade a spade. I do this every single time without fail and without caring about the reactions of other people. The approach I follow is simple and democratic. I say what I think and what I feel is right but then I do not fight back to uphold my opinion. I let others speak and express whatever they think is right. "To each his own" is my philosophy. Many times people have expressed 'different' or 'contradicting' views. Often I have been rudely condemned and have faced people's ire for that too (thankfully restricted to social media). But I have never retaliated. People can think about it whatever they want. They can assume that I am not fighting back because I am scared of them or that I am weak. They can happily regale in their assumption that they put me down and that I failed to overpower them. Again... To each his own. I just do not feel the need of getting everyone to agree with me.

Just last week something similar happened. I spoke up about something I felt strongly about (and I always try to maintain a polite language and try not to put anyone down). Still, a person whom I considered a good friend (and about whom I had recognized long back that she has a very different way of thinking than me), got a bit worked up because she did not agree with me. Within minutes I had lost a friend for voicing an opinion different to hers. I was surprised a bit that people are not mature enough to accept others feeling differently about the same issue and they find it difficult to co-exist peacefully with - leave alone respect - others having a different point of view. But then, I still do not regret saying what I felt.

Then today, a colleague chatting with another colleague of mine suddenly fell silent as I approached his table in the cafeteria. When I asked what happened and he could not suddenly make up something for me, he admitted that he had been talking about men's rights activism and how he felt about women using the laws in their favour to harass men. I smiled and told him that I agree to what he has said and that there have been cases, a couple about whom I know personally too, where this has been a case. Yet, those are still few in number and the most number of cases are genuinely where women have faced harassment. He started arguing that those are the thing of the past and that the laws are archaic and need to be changed. I did not then challenge back or justify my views. He was all into debate mood by then and kept on repeating his argument again and again. I just sat there, smiled and drank my tea. He tried hard to instigate a reaction. When he couldn't get one, he very stoutly said, "See, even you are convinced that I am right." I smiled and said, "Not yet but unlike you, I am not trying to convince you that I am right." He was taken aback a bit. I then very calmly told him that irrespective of what I think, he still has a right to have a different opinion and speak it up in front of me and I would do the same in front of him. I will not belittle him or judge him for having an opinion different than mine and I hope he would not judge me either. To be honest, even if he does judge me for having views different than his own, I will make sure that it will not impact me at all or for long. Thankfully, we parted the tea party in a joyful mood happily bidding each other a nice day. 

Image source: Google search

I was not always like that. There was a time when people's opinion about me mattered to me. I just wanted to be in everybody's good books. I would not speak out my views clear cut lest I might offend someone. And it all would bottle up inside me and mess with my head. I was - and still am - a person who had an opinion of her own, sometimes different than the opinion of people around me. I also realized the need of speaking out my opinion clear and loud but I wouldn't because of the fear of condemnation. It has taken me years of struggle, self-analysis and self-discovery to develop the nonchalant attitude towards what people may think of me for speaking out. I am now more confident than ever in the knowledge that I do not need other people's acceptance to be a nice person and what people think about me is irrelevant to my existence. This 'devil-may-care-attitude' which may not go down well with some people is actually a well thought out decision. And now, giving up this attitude for the fear of losing out on 'friends' is actually too big a price for me to keep people around me. I will not stifle my voice just to be with others who cannot respect me for having an opinion, even if it is different than theirs. And one thing is sure... I do not intend to change for anybody's acceptance.

Handloom Sarees: Revival vs. Innovation

Sarees are currently one of my loves and those who know me also know how I have taken to them in the last three years. Since two of these three years, I have also been on a journey of discovery of various handlooms of India all the while collecting many types myself – certainly more than what my family would like me to. In this journey, I have come across many saree enthusiasts, saree experts and of course saree vendors and resellers (and a couple of actual artists and artisans too). I have also understood how this sudden movement to revive sarees and specifically handlooms is being misused, even as many weavers are benefitting from this as well. 

Kunbi Saree (said to be revived)

© Nishtha Khurana

(photo of personal saree)

Not even a week ago, the famous painter and saree aficionado, Alka Raghuvanshi, wrote in her column in the Asian Age how some individuals or groups have been claiming that they have revived certain weaving styles and sarees that fell into disuse. Alka was pretty direct in calling them out and was barely short of taking names. But the people on these closed saree groups / circles already know who she was talking about.

It was a debatable post and one would have liked to see more discussions around what actually would qualify as revival and what wouldn’t. Unfortunately, her article soon turned more controversial than debatable due to people’s attention instead being grabbed by one word in the article (‘dowdy’). Suddenly, more people were taking offense to this word than actually trying to understand the true intent of the article, which was how some people are manipulating their posts on social media to make money. They are charging exorbitant prices for stuff that has always been around and worn by common folks by calling them revived and making them sound something exclusive and rare. 

Kanchi cotton with Bomkai motifs

© Nishtha Khurana (photo of personal saree)

Let me first explore what ‘revival’ actually means. According to the Cambridge Dictionary, “revival” is “the process of becoming more active or popular again” with synonyms being “comeback” and “resurrection” among others. So, going by the literal meaning, revival of something happens when it remains at the same place and it is essentially the same thing (in this case it should mean that the saree should be woven at the place of its origin and the essence of the weaving style should remain the same). This in most cases, as Alka rightly pointed out, is not the case. Most of the Odisha weaves which are being sold as ‘revival’ (and if not ‘revival’, ‘tribal’) sarees, for instance, Habaspuri, Bomkai, Dongaria, Siminoi, are now being woven in non-tribal areas of Naupatna and Sonepur. It is a known fact that there is no weaving happening in these villages anymore. However, I am not an expert on weaving styles and hence would refrain from commenting on it. Similarly, from what I understand, the Kunbi that has been supposedly revived has also been woven outside the Konkan region. (The Kunbi I purchased – per my best guess – is woven somewhere in Karnataka as it was delivered to me wrapped in a vernacular Kannada newspaper). Then again, Bodo and Mismi tribes do not wear sarees. But there are sarees being sold with similar weaves. There is a sudden popularity of Santhal sarees and they are generally more elaborate than the original Santhal sarees. Much like Kotpad and Dongaria tribes, Santhal weavers also weaved shawls or shorter versions of sarees instead of the six-yards that are being sold nowadays. How can we still call it revived? In my limited understanding, it is a new product altogether which has drawn inspiration from an existing product which is no longer in production. 

Dongaria in bright red

© Nishtha Khurana (photo of personal saree)

Then, does it mean that they shouldn’t be sold or probably sold with any other name? I personally believe that as long as they have the weaving essence intact, they should be continued to be sold with or without the same name even if there is a slight design intervention. Why deny the people who are interested in these weaves the joy of wearing them? As long as even a single weaver is benefitted, we should weave them and buy them. Many a times preservation and continued future existence of something demands moving it to a different, more ideal location. There is nothing really wrong with that, even if it does not fall under the classic definition of revival. The debate should actually not be whether these sarees should be woven and sold, the debate should be whether the saree vendors are right in charging exorbitant prices by calling a saree a revival when it has been in existence all along but has maybe become less popular over time and is now becoming popular again? 

Arani silk saree with Siminoi motifs
Source: CoOptex

That brings me to another great idea… Innovation. Can these sarees then be called ‘innovative’ sarees? (I hope I am not giving any ideas to resellers to start terming their sarees innovative and charge a bomb again for them.) But this is something that is very near to my heart. The traditional weave in some non-traditional colour attracts me, e.g. Telia Rumals in colours other than red, white and black; or Dongarias in colours like red, teal, pink. When there is some new design intervention, it really beholds my interest, e.g. Batik sarees with non-traditional motifs like Tulips; Korvai Kanjeevarams with the ‘plus’ signs. When two arts are amalgamated, it ensnares me, e.g. Kalamkari on Kasavu sarees; Sozni or Suf embroidery on Venkatgiri sarees. And when a traditional weave adapts designs from another traditional weave, it creates a thing of beauty that I feel is unparalleled, e.g. Kanchi Cotton sarees with motifs inspired by Bomkai sarees; Arani silk sarees with Siminoi saree motifs. 

Korvai Kanjeevaram with '+' motifs
Source: Cooptex

Many of these examples that I have quoted are from experiments by CoOptex, the weavers’ cooperative supported by the Tamil Nadu government. I have tremendous respect for Mr. Venkatesh Narsimhan, the MD of CoOptex, because he is very invested in upskilling the weavers and helping them innovate and come up with new designs and colours in existing designs. These sarees are not reviving anything. They are just giving the wearers a new experience while retaining the essence of their original weave intact. Will I buy them? Of course. I have bought a few and I would love to buy more at a reasonable price. 

So, politics, mud-slinging, ego bashing aside; I am happy that more and more handloom sarees are being woven and becoming popular. Much as we can’t help individual people minting money on this wave, I hope the benefits reap down to the weavers as much as they can. And I also pray that as many traditional weaves are woven as new designs are invented and the saree lovers like me continue to enjoy the six yards in innumerable ways.

Disclaimer: Whatever is stated above is my limited knowledge about handlooms and weaves. There is no claim to authenticity whatsoever. If you know something mentioned is incorrect, please feel free to enlighten me.

Is it really the easy way out?

A few days back, a lady approached me for some advice. She had been separated from her husband since about an year and a half. She had a small kid and had recently filed for divorce. She claims that the person is a narcissist. Apart from the emotional and mental torture, her husband had apparently cheated on her twice. After the first time, he had apologized and made her believe that since she had been away from him for a few months, he went astray. He admitted it to be a moment of weakness which escalated into a full blown extra-marital affair. But he said sorry and promised not to make the same mistake again, so she put everything behind her and reconciled. A year and a half later, she finds herself in the same situation. He again puts it on her saying that she has brought about a lull in the relationship because of the baby and there was a lack of excitement and so he went astray. This time, the lady took a bold step and moved out. She had since been living with her parents. There had been no reconciliation attempts from either side and a divorce case had been filed by her. Now, as is the norm in divorce cases, the couple was referred for mediation. During mediation, the husband had once again apologized. He was promising not to make the same mistake again and requesting her to come back. She had messaged me to ask what she should do? She admitted that there was no surety at all that he would keep the promise (in fact, by now she had understood that he would not keep the promise he was making and that they were just worthless words). She also understood now that although he always made her feel guilty by making her believe everything was her fault, it was in fact he who was in the wrong here. But she was still contemplating reuniting with her husband for her child's sake.

If anyone asks for my advice, I never tell them what to do, especially in cases of marriage and divorce. If I have gone through similar situation, I usually tell them what I had done and why. If I had never gone through such a situation myself, I clearly tell them so. In latter scenario, I often tell them what, in my opinion, were the pros and cons of the choices the person had in front of them. Anyway, this post is not about what I told her or what she eventually decided to do (which honestly I am not even aware of as of now). This post is about what I felt was driving her to consider the option of reuniting with her husband knowing that the promise was fake. They call it "for the child's sake", but it actually means "societal pressure".

It wasn't like she was not able to care for her kid. She had been raising her kid without her husband's support for about 2 years now. She was working and was doing decently in her profession. So, even the finances where her kid was concerned were not really a problem (she was doing fine, as she explained to me and in any case her application for child support was pending in court). Her parents had supported her all this time. But suddenly, they and her friends and her relatives were of the opinion that she should give her husband "one chance to come around" for "her child's sake". (I fail to understand why everyone had ignored the fact that she had already given him "one chance to come around" and that this would in fact be his "second chance to come around").

She is actually not the only one who has been in this dilemma. In fact, every single woman who had opted for divorce, with a kid or not, has gone through this dilemma - whether she should give her marriage one more chance.* Many of them already knew deep inside that this is not going to work and yet they thought and sometimes decided to give the marriage a second chance. I did that too and I had thought back then, "At least, it would clear my conscience and I would not feel that I did not try." Similarly, everyone feels that they should not feel or someone should not tell them that they did not try or that they took the easy way out.

After all, the society believes that making a marriage work is a difficult job and divorce is the "easy way out". If only the people knew what one has to go through to reach the end of a divorce, they would never say such a stupid thing. Choosing divorce over reconciliation is not an easy way out. For the divorce process would be the hardest battle that a woman would ever fight in her whole life. 

* I would like to hope that every man also goes through the same confusion but I have not been privy to many men discussing their marriage and divorce stories with me so I am not so sure about that.

Divorce rates are rising everywhere... And that's a good thing!

It is no surprise that the divorce rates have shot up over the last 60 years ever since the Hindu Code Bill was passed in the 1950s. The latest census statistics, which allow the people to select one of the options, namely, never married, separated, divorced, widowed, married; tell us that the number of divorced people have grown exponentially in the said period. Moreover, there are even a higher number of people who have chosen their status as separated. This status can be attributed to people in the middle of divorce proceedings (considering the time taken in litigation in the slow-moving Indian courts) or to the people living separately but not opting for divorce because of the stigma associated with same. This is taking into account that some people may not even report separation or divorce because the society still looks down at such marital statuses.

Image source: Google search

Yes, that's true. The society looks down at the divorced status (even more than the separated status). There are always discussions and arguments like how our grandparents and parents "worked through" their problems and did not simply opt for divorce. And the good old Indian morals come into the picture where our own dear country is concerned. Our upholders of 'sanskaar' and the older generations in our families claimed that the divorce rates in India are low because of our great family values and morals. And now they rue that the divorce rates are increasing because there is a conspicuous decline in these values.

A lot of people act like higher divorce rates are actually indicative of a loss of morality, ethics and a sense of commitment and responsibility. The people proclaiming our great values and ethics lament and blame the phenomenon on 'westernization'. They claim that families are breaking down because people have no patience to give their marriages a chance. But the truth, in my opinion, is entirely something else.

The truth in my opinion is that in the older generation, people "worked through" their problems in private because women just continued to "adjust" and bear with what was metted to them. The women hand no financial and social security; no incomes and assets; and hence did not have any option or choice but to 'work it out'. Add to it the social stigma attached to the status of divorce. So, they simply chose to continue living in abusive and unhealthy relationships for the lack of options, for the sake of their children, or to stay away from the social stigma of divorce. It was actually all about keeping up appearances. Honestly, how is it possible to have a healthy marriage if someone feels disrespected or insulted by their partners more often than not?

But the rising divorce rates in my opinion is actually a sign of social and economic progress of women and greater autonomy now enjoyed by women. It means that fewer women are dependent on men and can decide for themselves what they want their life to be. With education and awareness to back them, women are now breaking free of the rule that told them to stay quiet in front of a man. More and more women are becoming financially independent and don't rely on their husbands, or anyone else, for survival. Even if kids are involved, women are now able to earn and take care of them, if required. With this financial independence comes a stronger sense of self-confidence and the ability to walk out of a bad marriage. Higher divorce rates actually mean that women are leaving abusive and unhealthy relationships at higher rates. It means that women are finally standing up for themselves because now they can. How can that be a bad thing really?

The stigma won't go away overnight, but the least we can do is stop pretending that Indian values, morality, ethics and our culture are being threatened by an increasing divorce rate.

I am sick of Women's Day!!

Yet another "Women's Day" has gone past and by the end of the day, I was just so sick of all the "Happy Women's Day" posts and WhatsApp messages. (I sometimes also feel the same after reading the Mother's Day posts.) I had totally ignored the newspapers yesterday as I did not want to go through all those articles about how great women are. "Oh, women are just so compassionate." "Women are the nurturers." "They are beautiful creatures of nature." "They are so intuitive." I just wanted to stay away from all these stereotypes just as much as I wanted to avoid looking (and getting angry over) all the advertisements of Women's Day offers, the spa and beauty packages, the jewelry gift ideas, and discounts. Despite that I still stumbled upon a saree shop giving discount equal to half the age of their women customer, and it irked me no end. All these messages, posts and advertisements are irritating to me.

One of the messages, which I received from multiple people yesterday went like this: "You're one half of the world and the reason for the other half." Excuse me? It's not like women reproduce on their own? Yes, they bear children. But that is because at least one of the two sexes has to bear the offspring after the two together reproduce. And nature / biology, granted that physiology to the female sex. That's it. Period.

I hate all these messages. They all are like, "Let's celebrate women because women are this and women are that." I myself just forwarded one simple "Happy Women's Day" message because the others which were going all gaga about how great we women are were just stupid. They were just so against the whole idea and the whole spirit of International Women's Day.

The whole idea of International Women's Day is about gender equality, not telling the world how special women are. We should be arguing that we are not very different from the other half of the population and hence we should be treated as their equals. What we actually do is the exact opposite. We tell them, "Oh, we are so different from you all. We are special. So, please give us special treatment." That's just plain revolting! We are not special. We are not extraordinary. We are just like you. Biologically, we and you have different functions and just like our jobs, we fulfill those functions. That doesn't make us different and that definitely doesn't make us special. We do not need this chivalry really. This day which had a lot of meaning initially has been reduced to a marketing gimmick.

P.S. (added as an afterthought) A friend of mine today wrote about "benevolent sexism". The way we celebrate Women's Day nowadays is a perfect example of "benevolent sexism". Please Google it and read about it. And please learn to differentiate. It is actually more harmful to the goal of feminism that hostile sexism is.

Please also read my previous linked post here.

I was never a big Sridevi fan… Here’s why!

This has been on my mind for some time; basically, ever since Sridevi passed away. I have been seeing people’s post about how sad they were and how they were devastated by her death. I felt none of that. Of course, I was shocked when I woke up to the news on 25th February, but that was mostly because I had been seeing her pictures at Mohit Marwah’s wedding just a day before. She looked all gorgeous and decked up and one could not have imagined that she would be no more in few hours at the most. But the thing that I am trying to say is that, I was not a fan and somehow there wasn’t much respect for her in me almost throughout.

Image Source: Google Image Search

It is true that I have enjoyed many of her movies like Mr. India, Chaalbaaz, Lamhe, Gumrah and off late English Vinglish, which I totally loved as a movie. I do think that she was a very accomplished actress and celebrated as deserved. She also lived her life on her own terms and I must give her credit for that too. But for me to be a fan of a person, be it an actor or a sportsperson, I think it’s very important for me to relate to their public persona. And one thing I could never relate to are people who get involved with other people who are married. That applies to both men and women. I would not call Sridevi a home breaker because I consider Boney Kapoor equally responsible, if not more, for breaking up his marriage to Mona Kapoor by getting involved with Sridevi. Calling Sridevi a home breaker kind of absolves Boney Kapoor of his responsibility which is wrong. 

Now, don’t get me wrong. I am not the person who believes that a marriage once solemnized should become your whole life’s bondage. A marriage should be happy and should make you a better person. If not, it’s better to call it quits. But, one should give it a proper closure before allowing another person in your life. That is only fair to the one person you had once vowed to stand by in good and bad times. I would have revered Sridevi and Boney Kapoor differently if Boney had first called it quits with his first wife and then gotten involved with Sridevi and if Sridevi would have gotten involved with him only after he ended his first relationship. There are many other examples in the film industry and sports world of such people; Lara Dutta – Mahesh Bhupathi; Shilpa Shetty – Raj Kundra; Aamir Khan – Kiran Rao; Dharmender – Hema Malini; Jennifer Lopez – Ben Affleck; Madonna – Alex Rodriguez; Brad Pitt – Angelina Jolie; and many more. They are all happily married (some are separated again) now but at least one of them was committed to another person when they formed a bond.

While it is easy to say that they had the guts to follow their heart, do give a minute to think about the person who probably trusted them and continued investing in a relationship that was already a lost cause. They deserved better. Their kids deserved better. They deserved a proper closure without the feeling of being deceived. Infidelity, even if it may result in happy legal relationships later, can never earn my respect.

Life is...

Image Source: Google search

Life is like a song,
Sing it with all your heart.
It doesn’t matter who is listening,
You just need to play your part.

Life is like a dance,
Just sway to the music and beat.
It doesn’t matter who is watching,
As long as there’s excitement in your feet.

Life is like a book,
That you write for yourself.
Others may not even read it,
Just put your story on the shelf.

Learn to live for yourself,
Do what makes you happy.
Just ignore what others have to say,
Their job is just to make you feel crappy.

But once you put on your earplugs,
And sing or dance or write.
Everything wrong in the world,
Just sets itself right.

© Nishtha Khurana, 2018. All rights reserved.

The Padmaavat debate is going in the wrong direction

I haven’t seen the movie Padmaavat yet, but after what I have heard and read in reviews I am confused whether I should even go and watch it, especially since even my 11 year old daughter is interested in it. I don't have a problem with the war scenes and I think I can explain to her the scenes showing a ruthless Alauddin Khilji. What I do have a problem with is the romanticization of Jauhar. Apparently, all they discuss related to Jauhar and why Rani Padmavati chose to do it is about her faithfulness to her husband (she asks his permission to commit Jauhar) and the Rajputi pride, honour and ‘usool’. There is no mention at all of the brutal consequences that Rani Padmavati would have faced if she would have been captured alive by Khilji.

There are a few debates going around this movie. The first one and the more well-known one involves Karni Sena. Honestly, I am lost here because I do not even understand what problem they have with the movie. From what I understand, the movie is solely about the grandeur and opulence of the Rajput kingdoms and about their valour, honour and pride. Now, my question is that does Karni Sena, which claims to protect and hail exactly the same, does not want the country and the world to witness their culture, heritage and everything else? I really do not understand why else would they protest against this movie. And so I will not venture into this further. I will also not comment on what is the real history because, in my personal opinion, it is but a documentation of legends that had fallen down from various generations. Some incidents may have different interpretations as communicated by different people to further generations. Everything should be accepted, yet with a pinch of salt.

The painting of Maharani Padmavati 

performing Jauhar as displayed in the

Maharana Pratap Memorial in Udaipur

(Source: Google search)

Then there are some thoughts shared by Swara Bhaskar in an amazingly worded open letter to Sanjay Leela Bhansali. One of my friends, Radhika, expressed similar thoughts on her blog. Though I agree to every word of what they said, I will refrain from commenting whether Rani Padmavati was right in committing Jauhar or not. What Swara and Radhika say are pertinent and true for the current age and times. But Rani Padmavati lived in a different age and a different era. The customs, sentiments and principles of that age were different. Human race evolves over time. New sentiments and new principles evolve and are accepted and it should be so. Jauhar and Sati were regressive and sexist practices and have been rightly done away so. What is important is that it should have been made clear in the movie that they were old age archaic practices and have been rightly done away with. The movie instead glorifies Jauhar and that is where I have an issue. When you showcase a part of history on the screen, at least put the right facts there. Those ladies did not commit Jauhar because they wanted to prove their valour. They did not commit Jauhar because they were too proud to face defeat for their community. And they definitely did not commit Jauhar because they did not want to live without their husbands. They committed Jauhar because they did not want to face what they knew were a determined fate in the face of their army’s loss – rape, torture and the brutality of Khilji and his army.

I don't understand why people are even discussing rape here. It's not about rape; and yes I do believe that rape is not the end of the world for a woman and life is much more precious. The discussion here should be more about sex slavery vs. death. To set the record straight, I am also not saying that it was better to choose death over sex slavery. I am saying that there is a difference between rape and sex slavery. I am saying that the Rajput women including Rani Padmavati made a choice and chose death over sex slavery. But that choice aspect and the other option if not death, should have been brought out clearly in the movie, which I have heard has not been done. The fact is that Padmavati's Jauhar did take place and she chose death. Obviously when you are presenting a historical fact (irrespective of creative liberties), you will not present that Rani Padmavati chose life or chose to fight (which some debaters allege that she should have done). But her decision should have been presented in the right perspective - that she chose death over sex slavery or inclusion into Khilji's harem. It shouldn't have been presented as something that she did out of love for her husband or because she was a brave 'pativrata stree'.

In reality, Padmavati's Jauhar has more deep rooted relevance than just honour and pride. It’s more to do with war plunder and how the ruthless winning armies take to brutalizing women in a show of power. The women captured were raped, enslaved and brutally treated as a mark of humiliation and for gross display of power and conquests. For some reason, devastation of cities and loot of wealth is never enough for the wining armies to show their dominance over the losing side. They make the humiliation more personal by ravaging their women and making them sex slaves. This is the deepest mark of patriarchy where they demonstrate their dominance over the women. After all, they want to prove to the men over whom they won that now we control what you have controlled all this while… your subjectives (read women). It’s like saying, “You were their ‘protectors’ once but now see what we will do to them.” And it's not just true for history. It's happening right now too in various parts of the world. It had happened in India-Pakistan during Partition, in the World Wars, in Vietnam, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and loads of other wars… every war. Even today, ISIS is a real example. I have read horrifying stories of Yazidi women who have escaped the clutches of ISIS. Girls as young as 9 years old are raped and sexually abused by multiple partners. They are tortured and sold like cattle. The details are horrific beyond imagination. True, they did not commit Jauhar and probably they did not even have a choice to do so even when they feel like giving up. True, that they have hope against hope that someday they will escape the clutches of their captors. Some have been lucky too. But, no one would deny that it is a horrific state to be in. And your fault? As Swara and Radhika would put it… They have a Vagina.

If only Sanjay Leela Bhansali would have had the guts to bring this out instead of trying to appease the Rajputs and the Karni Sena with his glorious representation of Rajput pride.

Gratitude for teaching me humility

All my friends know that I did the #100sareepact in 2015. I did not repeat it but I did join many sarees related Facebook groups to help me gain knowledge of the country's vast handloom heritage. One of the Facebook groups, called Kai Thari (now its settings have been changed to a "secret group") with about 12,000 members had an ex-admin doing a wonderful job to revive the extinct Goan Handloom weave of Kunbi sarees. It was a crowd funded initiative where ladies paid for the saree upfront and then she worked with about 6 weavers to get the orders fulfilled. I was one of the participants but, to be honest, my experience wasn't exactly great. That is so because despite the good intentions, humility is not a virtue that this lady possessed. So I decided to quit the group and this is my goodbye post. 

------------------------------------------------------------

Hi fellow Kai Tharians,

I finally received my Kunbi saree and I am overjoyed. But it also means that now it is time to bid goodbye to this group. Initially when I joined here, it did seem quite fun. I have come in touch with many wonderful ladies through this group only and for that I will be eternally grateful. However, gradually I have realized that this group is one of the most commercialized groups I have ever seen, run very smoothly and yet very shrewdly by a cartel of women. What is more disturbing is that it runs on the principle of monopoly. So as long as you are publicizing anything related to Spoorthi or Spandana, you are welcome with open arms but everything else is prohibited and can get you barred. I realized that over time. But by then I was stuck with my Kunbi order already placed. Yes, I was waiting for my Kunbi, sometimes maybe not as patiently as the others in this group. But before I leave, I would like to clarify my position here and justify being referred to as a "detractor". I, along with some other women who followed up on their Kunbi orders, have been attacked on this very open forum and I feel it is justified to get one opportunity to put my side of the story. 

1. I don't mind paying for sarees in advance and getting them made on order, I have done that before and will continue to do so even in the future. But then one should be realistic with the timelines and state them properly upfront. When you say 8-12 weeks and then don't even bother to share any updates for months, it's not polite and it definitely is not professional (you may argue that you are not a business person but then honestly you were behaving exactly like one). The best you could have done is state upfront at the time of taking orders that the sarees will take about 6-8 months before delivery. You recently mentioned that you keep your word or else let the other person know. Then maybe I am an exception because I never got a concrete answer. 

2. When someone's order is delayed, it is natural for them to follow up on the status. Which is exactly what I and some other people you refer to as your detractors were doing. The least you can do is be polite, apologize for the delay and give them a realistic and practical revised delivery date. However, instead of doing any of that, you were as near to the point of being rude as possible. After all, how could anyone even question you regarding such a noble work that you are doing? Right?

3. Your update posts can be neutral generic and simplistic posts explaining the delay. However, your posts were exactly not like these. They were sob stories of how much effort you are putting in and how you are tracking lost packages and handling lacs of money in your account and explaining to tax authorities and so on and so forth. People who do good work for the sake of goodness, do not make sob stories and gather sympathies. You have no idea what charitable initiatives others are running too. But they can easily make out the excuses because they have dealt with all these issues though not cried publicly. We appreciate all the good work you are doing but for the sake of the weavers at least, try not to turn it into a sob story. 

4. Some people have less patience than others. If you commit on 8 - 12 weeks and if after 6 months they have not received their product, they have every right to ask for a refund. (Wait... Just to set the record straight for other people reading this, I wasn't one of those people who had asked for a refund but I do understand their mindset.) And if you are agreeing to give them a refund, you are not doing them any favor. Also, please don't say that you are offering them a refund OUT OF YOUR OWN POCKET, because these people have already trusted your pocket with their full payment in advance. They are asking for THEIR OWN money and not yours.

5. It's nice to know that Management schools are asking you to share your experience about the crowd funded initiative. It's also nice that government bodies are coming to you to get Kunbi bags. It's great for the initiative and the weavers to get that kind of exposure. I have always admired your marketing skills and the latest example were your own recent posts with blue Kunbi prepping up customers for your next batch of orders. I only hope there would have been a more two way exchange at the management school and that they would have shared with you not just how to attract customers but also how to retain them by treating them with respect. 

6. If someone discusses the status of their delayed orders among their trusted friends (who unfortunately were not so trustworthy because they feel better gossiping the words said right into your ears) and say that they are not happy about it, they are not BITCHING. They have every right to say that they are unhappy about their delayed order. But somehow this word is a favourite among our Superwoman here and her admin buddies and is freely used. Let me tell you loud and clear that THE WORD REEKS OF SEXISM and is not appreciated by many ladies here. So, please mind your tongue.

7. You have every right to think that the people who are not happy with delayed orders are your detractors. Please feel free to boost your ego with the thoughts that you have followers and you have dissenters. You might as well have named them instead of saying "you know who you are" and then putting a big picture of their packages in full display. But you had no right to put their address and phone numbers on full display in those pics WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION. I didn't say anything then because luckily for me only my name was visible but there were others whose address and phone numbers were visible too and they did point out and you were requested to take down the pic. Despite the request, you boosted your own ego by continuing with the pic after blackening out the address and phone number. Nevertheless, just so that you know, this is a clear case of cyber crime, invasion of privacy, reportable under IT Act, 2000 for category - insecure electronic transmissions whereby uniquely identifiable data relating to a person is collected and stored, in digital form and shared with or without permission. Hope you are a little more thoughtful next time in taking out your uncalled for vengeance.

8. I work for a NBFC and one of our entities is involved in P2P financing. The only difference between P2P financing and crowd funding is that the in case of former, the projects go through due diligence and customers through underwriting whereas latter is totally based on trust on both sides. For everything else they are the same. Let me tell you also that we allow customers to have grievances and even allow them to take their money out if they are not satisfied with the performance of the project. And we certainly do not crucify them publicly for asking questions. Nobody here had criticized you publicly. Yes, people had private conversations but I and other people were not bad mouthing you or the initiative in any forum whatsoever. On the contrary, you were the only one venting out venom on KT. And despite that we continued to maintain a dignified silence. Please go through the forum or any of your post and tell me a single comment that pointed fingers at you. It's only the people who have been worshiping you who commented and not your so called detractors. 

Having said that, many thanks for your gratitude post. Trust me I reciprocate it equally to you. You have taught me some very valuable lessons about how a humble person should not behave and how you must not treat people who have trusted you. 

There have been a few other issues also here but for now, I will restrict myself to the above mentioned points. Also, I am aware that this post of mine will probably not see the day at least in the Kai Thari group or will be taken down soon enough if I even manage to post it. But it's okay. There are other places where I can get my voice across.

And despite all this I would still wish you and all your blind worshipers, who have relegated you to this God-like status and filled you with this fruitless pride, all the best. Nevertheless, I do hope that one day you step back on earth and start treating the lesser mortals like us as equal fellow humans and gives us some well deserved respect. We are anyways in minority in this group and I have always failed to understand why you even bothered about us at all.

As for me, I am still going to cherish my Kunbi and revel in its coming back to the mainstream through your and a few other hardworking people's appreciable efforts. 

Adieu!! Sayonara!! Good Bye!!