Why don't we?
Amidst the unfortunate incident of death due to brutal gang rape of a young girl in Delhi, I am left to wonder that though निर्भया is no more, the भय very much remains. Though दामिनी is no more, the demons are still out at large. Not just in Delhi but almost everywhere.
I am not even venturing on the futile naming of the girl by the media or her being referred to as "India's daughter", "Braveheart" etc. I am sure, had she had her way, she would rather have lived a life in fear than die fearless. She would rather have been a coward than become a braveheart. And she'd rather live as her parents' daughter than die as India's daughter.
The connected issues which have been once again brought to light by this unfortunate incident like "lack of safety and safe environment for women in India", "sick mentality of a section of men", "need for stricter laws" etc. are already being pondered over by the nation.
What I am concerned with here is that why don't we, being the educated lot as we are, object to the objectification of women in mass media, especially our much loved Bollywood and now seeping down to Television as well?
The censor board feels tobacco kills, cigarette smoking is injurious to health. But they don't realise that allowing Katrina gyrate to "Sheila ki Jawani" and "Chikni Chameli", Malaika to "Munni Badnam Hui" not once but twice, Kareena to "Halkat Jawani" and "Fevicol se", Bipasha to "Beedi jalaile", Rani to (disgusting) "Aiyya" songs is doing much more harm to the society than the entire tobacco smoking lot is.
Smoking tobacco is harming individuals, allowing the objectification of women is affecting the larger segment of society.
The censor board, comprising of "educated", "accomplished" individuals has no inhibitions in seeing the minimally clad "elite"(?) category heroines titillate the audience. But they have a problem if someone knowingly ruins his lungs and they want the world to see the ruin too.
Well, if we are subjected to watching ruined lungs of foolish people, maybe we should also be shown other "social crimes" on screens during intermission, we should also be shown videos of crowds whistling at Katrina and Kareena and others in their "item song" avatars. Aren't these social malaises as well? I feel they are. And of the worst kind.
Bollywood has a wide audience base. A wide reach to the masses. If Amitabh Bacchan's polio campaign can eradicate polio from India, we can well imagine the influence Bollywood exerts.
I don't know which is worse. The censor board allowing such objectification or the women themselves agreeing to be objectified to please/seduce/satiate the male audience? The script definitely can do away with the 'need for an item song'. And if it cannot, the society can make do without such shoddy, vulgar scripts.
Do these actresses even realise what they're portraying themselves on screen? I hope not. It rather be in ignorance than otherwise.
"Chikni Chameli" (Katrina) has been brought to please (seduce) the stoic Viju (Hrithik). Ditto or worse for other item girls. They are hot. Fair enough. They wear what they like. Fairer still. That's where the fairness ends.
The looks, the pouts they give while dancing. And then the "educated lot" condemns prostitution. Atleast the latter is someone's reality but the former is millions' fantasy.
A trailer on TV from some recent random flick is still etched in my mind. Not for any good reasons, I assure you. One half of the screen shows the "lead actor" Sonu Sood, a top cop going about gunning the goondas down. While the other half shows the "item girl" (lead actress) (don't know who) gyrating and doing pelvic thrusts alongside wearing extremely skimpy clothes. Well, visibly, for what each's worth. Seriously!?
Another disgusting visual on TV is of an ad where Akshay Kumar passes a cheap comment on a lady, "Madam, shirt ka button khula hai". What does that depict? The masculinity of the male?
Either the "shirt ka khula button" is accepted in the society or not. If it is, then why such a cheap shot in that ad? If it is not, then why show it in the first place and highlight to the masses.
If objectification and willingly being objectified is the norm, I was atleast happy that if Priyanka Chopra's swimsuit in Dostana or Shilpa's "Bounce" song were much hyped, then so was John's swimwear and physique. Similarly, the new Bhatt girl in Student of the Year was outshone by the Hunky men and their glistening abs. Thankfully.
However, the point is not who outshines whom. The only point that should matter is "Why don't we object to objectification?"
I am not even venturing on the futile naming of the girl by the media or her being referred to as "India's daughter", "Braveheart" etc. I am sure, had she had her way, she would rather have lived a life in fear than die fearless. She would rather have been a coward than become a braveheart. And she'd rather live as her parents' daughter than die as India's daughter.
The connected issues which have been once again brought to light by this unfortunate incident like "lack of safety and safe environment for women in India", "sick mentality of a section of men", "need for stricter laws" etc. are already being pondered over by the nation.
What I am concerned with here is that why don't we, being the educated lot as we are, object to the objectification of women in mass media, especially our much loved Bollywood and now seeping down to Television as well?
The censor board feels tobacco kills, cigarette smoking is injurious to health. But they don't realise that allowing Katrina gyrate to "Sheila ki Jawani" and "Chikni Chameli", Malaika to "Munni Badnam Hui" not once but twice, Kareena to "Halkat Jawani" and "Fevicol se", Bipasha to "Beedi jalaile", Rani to (disgusting) "Aiyya" songs is doing much more harm to the society than the entire tobacco smoking lot is.
Smoking tobacco is harming individuals, allowing the objectification of women is affecting the larger segment of society.
The censor board, comprising of "educated", "accomplished" individuals has no inhibitions in seeing the minimally clad "elite"(?) category heroines titillate the audience. But they have a problem if someone knowingly ruins his lungs and they want the world to see the ruin too.
Well, if we are subjected to watching ruined lungs of foolish people, maybe we should also be shown other "social crimes" on screens during intermission, we should also be shown videos of crowds whistling at Katrina and Kareena and others in their "item song" avatars. Aren't these social malaises as well? I feel they are. And of the worst kind.
Bollywood has a wide audience base. A wide reach to the masses. If Amitabh Bacchan's polio campaign can eradicate polio from India, we can well imagine the influence Bollywood exerts.
I don't know which is worse. The censor board allowing such objectification or the women themselves agreeing to be objectified to please/seduce/satiate the male audience? The script definitely can do away with the 'need for an item song'. And if it cannot, the society can make do without such shoddy, vulgar scripts.
Do these actresses even realise what they're portraying themselves on screen? I hope not. It rather be in ignorance than otherwise.
"Chikni Chameli" (Katrina) has been brought to please (seduce) the stoic Viju (Hrithik). Ditto or worse for other item girls. They are hot. Fair enough. They wear what they like. Fairer still. That's where the fairness ends.
The looks, the pouts they give while dancing. And then the "educated lot" condemns prostitution. Atleast the latter is someone's reality but the former is millions' fantasy.
A trailer on TV from some recent random flick is still etched in my mind. Not for any good reasons, I assure you. One half of the screen shows the "lead actor" Sonu Sood, a top cop going about gunning the goondas down. While the other half shows the "item girl" (lead actress) (don't know who) gyrating and doing pelvic thrusts alongside wearing extremely skimpy clothes. Well, visibly, for what each's worth. Seriously!?
Another disgusting visual on TV is of an ad where Akshay Kumar passes a cheap comment on a lady, "Madam, shirt ka button khula hai". What does that depict? The masculinity of the male?
Either the "shirt ka khula button" is accepted in the society or not. If it is, then why such a cheap shot in that ad? If it is not, then why show it in the first place and highlight to the masses.
If objectification and willingly being objectified is the norm, I was atleast happy that if Priyanka Chopra's swimsuit in Dostana or Shilpa's "Bounce" song were much hyped, then so was John's swimwear and physique. Similarly, the new Bhatt girl in Student of the Year was outshone by the Hunky men and their glistening abs. Thankfully.
However, the point is not who outshines whom. The only point that should matter is "Why don't we object to objectification?"
Comments