Fighting the system?

Lipstick Under My Burkha (2016)

Director: Alankrita Shrivastava

This is one of those movies which could not be screened at a film festival in India because the censors could not clear it for public screening. I was later accused of being too 'female-centric' and pornographic in its audio and visual narration. After a few cuts, it was passed for viewing.

The fact of the matter is that they cannot be too kosher when the theme of the story is about female sexuality and its suppression thereof. To be frank, this 2016 film is mild compared to what people in 2023 can access on their streamed platforms in their dialogue and boldness in showing skin.

On the subject matter, one cannot help but compare it to 2023'sAmazon Prime's 'Four More Shots'. Both may appear to be talking about women's empowerment or feminism. At deep scrutiny, one will realise that the emphasis is different, poles apart. It also shows how the women's movement had evolved from one demanding their deserved rights to equal opportunities to one which wanted to dominate the other.

'Lipstick Under The Burkha' shows how ladies of a time screamed discrimination and yearned not to be pushed down from doing their own thing. It tells the story of four ladies who want to escape social oppression. A teenage girl from a conservative Muslim family dreams of a carefree life where she dresses up like her pop idol, Miley Cyrus - dressed sexily, with makeup and accessories that go with it. Forced to don a hijab and spend time in the family business of tailoring, she wants to participate in a band, wear sexy clothes and join the popular clique of students. To sustain her secret lifestyle, she goes shoplifting.

Next, a hijab-clad housewife is living a fearful life with a hostile husband who wants sex on demand and refuses contraception. The husband hardly brings home money but rejects the idea of his wife going to work. The wife, on the sly, works as a door-to-door salesgirl and a very good one at that. She even wins the best employee award. One day, she spots her husband in the romantic company of a young lady.

The small-time beauty parlour artist wants to be able to see the world. She desires to escape the rat hole she lives in. She lost her father at a young age, and her mother worked hard to sustain life. Her mother wants to get married as marriage assures her a respectable place in society. She knows because she went through hell trying to earn some money. The mother tries to matchmaker a groom. The groom wants to make her a full-time housewife, but the girl has a sizzling affair with a photographer who is only interested in her body. They plan to elope.

The final character is a 55-year-old spinster who is a respectable figure in her colony. She plays a matriarchal figure in handling day-to-day issues. Her secret indulgence is reading trashy romance novels. While babysitting some children at a pool, she is tricked into jumping into the pool. The children's swimming instructor offers her swimming lessons because she cannot swim. She develops a crush and starts stalking the instructor, engaging in phone sex. The instructor has soft spots for another girl and assumes the caller is the girl he fancies.

All the clandestine activities finally come out into the open - the shoplifting, the part-time job, the plan to elope and the double life of the 55-year-old spinster. The ending is not pleasant, highlighting the double standards of society. It is predominantly patriarchal and cultural as well as religious teaching just gives an authoritative seal of approval for it to continue. 

On the other hand, 'Four More Shots Please!' (FMSP) gives the vibe that its message could be anti-establishment, anti-patriarchal or downright anarchical. The four ladies again, seen in FMSP, range from a divorcee, one in the marriage market for a suitable match, a free-spirited bisexual, to a lawyer who all share a common bond. They enjoy meeting up in a drinking joint, overindulging and pouring out their hearts' discontent about life with no restraint. It is said to be India's answer to the U.S.' Sex in the City' (SITC). LUMB and SITC try to educate their viewers about an entity called female sexuality or the lack of its awareness in India (in the case of LUMB). In my view, FMSP portrays all males as shallow and evil. They paint a picture of Indian ladies swimming in a cesspool of male toxicity. To be able to stay afloat, they need to fight the patriarchal society, the system and fellow members who are immersed in the system.

Hindu temple in Lahore

Even under slavery or apartheid, people were not in unison supporting the status quo. Pockets of dissent were heard from people who were victims as well as those who benefitted or were not involved in it. One should assume that if the other party is not one of them, they must be against them. Jews would not have escaped Germany. Pakistani Hindus are still able to fulfil their Vedic requirements despite the presence of an intensely hostile environment against idolatry there! It is the system, not the people. But then, people make the system and can be herded to change their thinking, which could change the status quo.

N.B. Why is the lipstick generally red? It is postulated that sexual arousal increases blood perfusion to the lips. In fair-skinned females, lips assume a redder hue. Hence, the application of red lipstick entices the observer to see what is in store!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Make or break!

Gauri

There it was, another family celebration and another tête-à-tête with my favourite uncle. Whilst the rest were immersed in their revelry, we were pretty engaged in our own private discourse - with him looking for someone to impart his 85-year old life experiences, and I, just listening and sometimes trying to tease more out of him. This time around, we discussed the role of the significant other in the family, among many things. This post is what transpired out of that.

They say that behind every man's success, there is a woman. Many are quick to quip that behind their every fall, there is another, the other woman. Women have the uncanny ability to create as well as to destroy.

With the biological assets that they are endowed with, they can create, nurture and sustain life with their tenacity and ever-embracing progestogenic demeanour, like a mother hen, able to hide her chicklings under my wings away from the prancing eagle. And they will protect their little ones with the last scratch of their claw from hissing predator snake.

Mahishasura Mardini.

They can choose what they want. They can be Gauri, the epitome of peace and happiness comparable to the bosom of a mother, the all-embracing embodiment of calmness and purity, depicted by the all-white attire and an equally composed vehicle, the saintly cow. As Gauri, she plays the role of peacemaker, a rock of hope and anchor to hold an institution steady to traverse the uncertainties of life.

When the situation warrants, she needs to assume the role of Mahishasura Mardini, the slayer of the buffalo demon, Mahishasura, who, with the boon of indestructibility, terrorised the Universe. She took this fiercest form of Durga, with the Trident of Siva, to bring equilibrium to the system.

It may appear that the illustrative embodiment of shakti, female power, can act unilaterally with no control without the need for its counterpart, the male energy, Shiva. Not really. Harmony is achieved with the inclusion of both powers. Notice that Shiva's representation appears in both Gauri and Durga form of the female divinity - Trident, to protect and attack. Unbridled power, it seems, is also counterproductive.

Kaali

Remember the instance of Kaali, intoxicated with the taste of blood and energy of invincibility, she was on a rampage. Only Shiva could pacify her. His prostration in her path subdued her. In embarrassment, she let her tongue out, more of an admission of mistake rather than an intimidating posture. This tongue-letting image is often depicted as that of fearsome Kaali. In reality, it is not.

It takes two to tango. Both parties have to nimble and agile to produce an eye-soothing display of this Spanish light-spirited variety of flamenco.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

What's your reason?

Limitless (2017)
(Netflix, Documentary)


My parents never ran. I do not remember them running over or running away from anything. They practically expected others to run around doing things for them. In fact, nobody in their generation ran. It seemed running, and activities that required exertion is for the young. Older adults simply do not do those things which broke too much sweat. Things surely have changed over the years.

Members of the fairer sex also never had it so good. From a time not too long ago, 1967 actually, runners like Bobbi Gibb and Katherine Switzer had to run disguised, now, in most international marathons, the male to female ratio of participants of the full marathon is almost one to one.

Why do people run?

This made-in-India documentary looks at the lives of eight ladies and why they took up running. Despite the constant staring, cat-calling and security concerns, these lady runners seem to be empowered. Every extra half-hour that they manage to run without stopping, they get a renewed zest in life. The running events that they complete equip them with a higher level of confidence. 

Some run to numb the pains of their personal lives. It may be a broken marriage or even exodus from homeland like the runner from Kashmir who calls herself a Delhi-ite these days after being chased out from her ancestral home in Srinagar by religious zealots.

When the worldly duties are done, your offspring do not want you meddling with their affairs, but you are still teeming with energy, what do you do? Like Fauja Singh or Forrest Gump, you run, of course. Once you are locked into the routine, nothing can stop you - rain, shine, snow or fracture!

Runners make friends quickly, are more grounded and are a kind lot, looking out for each other and showing a high level of camaraderie. You hardly find a grumpy runner, do you? 

There is no good enough reason not to run. Run before you are prescribed running to save your life. If you do not have a quality sleep, run; feeling down, run; hit a wall at work, run; you got bad genes that make you susceptible to lifestyle diseases, run. 

If you cannot run, walk. Then alternate the walk with a run, and before you know it, you would be running for your life. What further motivation do you need? When you run, you are fighting the same inner demons that bog you down, dragging you with all the failures of life. Unchain the shackles.

In this documentary, a lady, hit by childhood paralysis, poverty and hard knocks of life runs for the money. The lure of the prize money brings her places. Her misery is no longer an excuse not to train.

Done with finesse, this 1-hour documentary is told seamless infusing many elements that are quintessentially Indian, the decorations, outdoors, and a peek into their places where they hangout. Humanity component is not forgotten as well. Exercise and running also help physically challenged individuals.

Katherine Switzer Bib 261 was the first registered female runner

to complete the Boston Marathon at 4:21 in 1967. A year earlier

Roberta 'Bobbi' Gibb, ran without a number.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Choices and Confusions

Fleabag (Comedy, Miniseries, 2016 -2019)
Created, Directed and Starred: Phoebe Waller-Bridge

Fleabag is a dark comedy about a 30-something single lady who is trying to make it her life mission to fall in love and settle down. But it is not easy. In the background are the memories of her business partner who committed suicide (or is it an accident?), her high achieving neurotic sister, her alcoholic brother-in-law, her widowed father who is sort of arm-twisted to remarry with a conniving and eccentric painter and the plethora of suitors who are equally clueless about their purpose in life.

Society has evolved over the generations to educate the fairer sex to give an equal place in the sun. Sometimes we wonder if this empowerment makes things more difficult for them to decide what is best for them. Entitlement, not wanting to be shortchanged in their choices of life partners, brings them to the brink of insanity. The options are too many, and nothing satisfies them any more. So why bother with the formalities when the sweet nectar of the fruit can be savoured without purchasing?

People are so lost on the purpose of life that they meander aimlessly oblivious of their intentions, just looking around for the unattainable using pleasure as their yardstick to success. That is why generations before us thought that it would be prudent to invest in the cookbook of life, which would make it easy for the unthinking Man to manoeuvre the boat of life. 

Long ago, chastity was given a sacred status. It was protected with the women's life until a responsible suitor is found. It, however, also subjugated women to submission to laws of society.

A better understanding of human biology and equality to both sexes turned the table. Sex is no longer looked upon as a mysterious divine gift but a mere social contact, much like a handshake or a bear hug. Women, now in better financial conditions, able to stand independently, sometimes in better bargaining positions, hold the chips and call the shots. They are in a position to pick and choose their partners and decide when they wish to be a gravid container for continuity of their progeny. Can this be the right way to do things? 

Making decisions listening to the heart and using happiness as a gauge had never been found to be the right way.

Masam Masam Manis (1965)

The main character regularly breaks the fourth wall (the imaginary wall that separates the actors and the audience) to explain her decision to the audience and in a way to get approval to her mischiefs. It reminded me of 'Garry Shandling Show' and P Ramlee in 'Masam-Masam Manis'. Interestingly, in this show, the Catholic priest who is the protagonist's love interest realises her interactions through the fourth wall. It is as though the pastor has the ability to look into another dimension- much like how the miracles and acts of divinity happen in another plane.

(thanks SK for introduction and input)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The Return of the Amazons

Last Tango in Halifax (2012-present, S1E1-S4E2)

After fifty years of bra burning and empowerment of women, this is what you get. After enduring the second-class treatment and the cold shoulder treatment from the general public to show their prowess all these while, they have developed into strong willed individuals who are well prepared to handle the hurdles that come their way. This is exactly what you see in this movie.

All the female characters dominate the show all the way. They decide, they control, they insist, they do, and they get away with anything they deem fit. It is indeed a matriarchal world. They rule the world, run the household and its daily chores, manage the farm, balance the accounts and go out to work. They choose whom they want to live with, stay married to and choice of gender of their man. Maternity is at their disposal. They are master of the fertility and feminity. No man is going to tell them what to do.

Men, on the other hand, are depicted as weak, indecisive, wimps, imbeciles, drunks and mere followers. They quickly toe the line as their perception of life is simple, to just go with the flow. There is no need to get uptight about something that may not happen. Nothing a good chill beer and a good night's sleep cannot cure. Somehow, everything looks clearer the next morning.

Women, by nature, maybe remnants of the traits of their cavewomen ancestors who safeguarded the caves and children from ravaging beasts when the men were out hunting, still retain their proactive and forward thinking strategies. Hence, they plan many steps in advance to avert catastrophes. This invokes ire the male species. They accuse women of creating a mountain out of a molehill, putting the cart before the wheel and looking for problems when there is none.

These enigmas are not just mere first-world problems as we can these changes develop in the newly emerging economies. With affluence and availability of educational opportunities, the fairer sex has made significant strides even surpassing the masculine gender who still live under the delusion that they are the chosen one to lead the human race. They hide under the cloak of tradition and religion to keep the already dimming ember burning!

This ongoing BBC mini-series tells of a couple of septuagenarians who are re-introduced to each after leaving their school kids puppy loves at school. After leading their lives with their own sob stories of blood and tears, they rekindle their old flame. They discover that through some errors of circumstances, their teenage love affair was nipped in the bud. Their passion gets a second life. They marry to the persons that they had loved all these while and inherit with it the trials and tribulations of each other's family. On the man's side, he has a daughter who is a farmer and a widow with a teenage son who fathered a kid. The daughter has her own problems in love and is haunted by the death of her abusive husband.

On the woman's side, she has a daughter who is going through an unhappy marriage with a writer with a drinking problem and philandering eyes. The girl, with two school going sons,  also re-discovers her life-long suppressed lesbian tendencies. Her lesbian, on the other hand, long for a baby as her biological clock keeps ticking away.

With all these masalas, there is no short of episodes with issues over issues to ponder.

Love will keep us together?

Wonder Woman (2017)

With dialogues like 'everyone has to fight his own wars', one can be forgiven to think that it is a feminist movie, highlighting the female species' struggle and the minorities. Furthermore, the male characters are most laughable and imperfect in every conceivable way. Men are needed only for procreation, not for emotional support, says one of the dialogues. Hey, were not women the objects of reproduction only in archaic societies?

Maybe the storyteller is trying to tell us in her own way (the director is a lady) how much the world has changed since the first World War. And a real paradise appears in the form of an all-Women mythical land of Amazon where women are sorceresses and men are non-existent.

Wonder Women's story starts with Princess Diana growing up in a guarded environment, forbidden to indulge with physical fighting. The society, the Land of Amazon, is reeling to build its defences after a war with the God of War himself, Ares. Ares had disappeared and is rumoured to return anytime. Diana, being the offspring of Zeus himself could not be restrained.

One day, an Allied spy infiltrates their 'force-protected' cocoon as he was ambushed by the German Navy. Thinking that it is Ares' dirty work, Diana leaves her paradise to defeat Ares. In her mind, she believes that peace can be attained by just beating the War God, that is all. Slowly she realises that life is not so straight forward.

Peace on Earth is not a simple matter. There is no one single hero and the other being the villain. It is not the question of one perpetrator and one victim. Sometimes one wonders whether mankind is inherently evil? They seem to be their own enemy. They orchestrate their own downfall. It is not the Gods that let catastrophe befall upon them, but it is their own doings.

Yes, people harm their kind and want to exert power over his neighbours, all the things forbidden by belief systems of the world. Every once in a while, despite all the nihilism that surrounds us, we do see a glimmer of hope. On the one hand, we fight, but on the contrary, we feel that Man has that one redeeming feature. We can love, they say.

The problem is 'love' that is shown is only directed towards their own kin, race, nationhood and of the same religions. Love stops short at the sight of someone who does not share our values or simply appear different. Without love extending to all of Nature's creations, animals, plants, landscape and all, peace on Earth will only remain a pipe dream.

It isn't over till it is over!

Hidden Figures (2016)

When you are born into the less sunny side of the city, there must be more than one way to enjoy the sun! There surely must be more than one way to uproot oneself to the clutches of poverty and tune of hopelessness. One can be a card-carrying, placard-carrying opposer of the system and rant all about it in social avenues. Or they can brood all they can, hoping for self-pity and immersing themselves in intoxicants to forget their miseries and be the problem instead of solving it!

Alternatively, one can be part of the system and try to improve himself by using his God-given faculties and the Man-made facilities to his advantage. It is easy to throw in the towel and wail, claiming injustices by the fate, birth, sins of forefathers but it takes tenacity and character to give a good fight against tyranny. And it need not be violent in action but can be equally brutal!

It is 1960s USA and the space race is on. The leader of the capitalistic wants to win this two-sided race, especially after Yuri Gagarin leads by becoming the first man to fly in space. Against this background and highly segregated American society, three black ladies are competing in NASA to serve their nation. These three women, Katherine G Johnson, a mathematician, Mary Johnson, an engineer and Dorothy Vaughn, a mathematician and supervisor, fought against a system biased against the coloured and the female gender to prove their worthiness through sheer hard work and working within the system.

Even though the film plot was highly predictable and did not score high on the awe or suspense factor, it is nevertheless empowering to the underprivileged or those who think that they had hit a brick wall. It isn't over till it is over!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Rosalind Franklin: Biography & Discovery of DNA Structure

Rosalind Franklin: Biography & Discovery of DNA Structure

Rosalind Franklin: Biography & Discovery of DNA Structure
By Mary Bagley, LiveScience Contributor | September 19, 2013

Rosalind FranklinCredit: National Institute of Health.

Many people recall that the structure of the DNA molecule has the shape of a double helix. Some may even recall the names of the scientists who won the 1962 Nobel Prize in Medicine for modeling the structure of the molecule, and explaining how the shape lends itself to replication. James Watson and Francis Crick shared the Nobel Prize with Maurice Wilkins, but many people feel that much of the credit for this world-shaking achievement should rightfully go to someone who was absent from that stage, a woman named Rosalind Franklin.

Rosalind Franklin was born July 25, 1920, and grew up in a well-known Jewish family in pre-World War II London, and was known in the family for being very clever and outspoken. Her parents sent her to St. Paul’s Girls’ School, a private school known for rigorous academics, including physics and chemistry. In an interview for PBS’ NOVA television episode titled "The Secret of Photo 51," two of her friends recalled memories of Franklin’s school days.

“She was best in science, best at maths, best in everything. She expected that if she undertook to do something, she would be in charge of it.” By the age of 15, over objections from her father, who thought she should go into social work; Franklin decided to become a scientist.

Franklin graduated from Newnham College at Cambridge in 1938 and took a job with the British Coal Utilization Research Association. She was determined to make a contribution to the war effort, and published several papers on the structures and uses of coal and graphite. Her work was used in development of the gas masks that helped keep British soldiers safer. Her work earned her a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry awarded by Cambridge University in 1945.

In 1947, Franklin moved to Paris to take up a job at the Laboratoire Central working with Jacques Mering on perfecting the science of X-ray chromatography. By all accounts, she was very happy in Paris, easily earning the respect of her colleagues. She was known to enjoy doing the meticulous mathematical equations necessary to interpret data about atomic structure that was being revealed by the X-ray techniques. However, in 1951, she reluctantly decided it was necessary to move back to London to advance her scientific career.

Skirting a leftover bomb crater to enter the lab at King’s College in London, Franklin found she was expected to work with antiquated equipment in the basement of the building. She took charge of the lab with her customary efficiency, directing the graduate student, Raymond Gosling, in making needed refinements to the X-ray equipment.

She was annoyed when she discovered that she was expected to interrupt her work and leave the building for lunch every day. Women were not allowed in the College cafeteria. Nevertheless, she and Gosling were making progress in studying DNA when Maurice Wilkins, another senior scientist, returned from his vacation.

Wilkins was upset to learn that the female “assistant,” who he had expected would be working for him, was instead a formidable researcher in her own right. In this tense atmosphere, Franklin continued working to refine her X-ray images, using finer DNA fibers and arranging them differently for her chromatography, but she began to fear she had made a mistake in leaving Paris. Wilkins, also uncomfortable, began to spend more time at nearby Cavendish Laboratory with his friend Francis Crick. Crick and his partner, James Watson, were working on a model-based approach to trying to discover the structure of the DNA molecule.

Around this time, Franklin and Gosling made a startling discovery. There were two forms of DNA shown in the X-ray images, a dry “A” form and a wetter “B” form. Because each X-ray chromatograph had to be exposed for over 100 hours to form an image, and the drier “A” form seemed likelier to produce images in more detail, Franklin set aside the “B” form to study later. She noted that the “B” form images appeared to show a definite helical structure and that there were two clear strands visible in the image she labeled Photo 51 before she filed it away.

Around this time, Franklin attended a conference given at Cavendish to observe an early DNA model being proposed by Watson and Crick. She was quite critical of their work, feeling that they were basing their model solely on conjecture whereas her own work was based on solid evidence.

Her treatment of his friends widened the gap between her and Wilkins, leading to an even more strained relationship at King’s College. Franklin was so unhappy that people in the lab began to talk behind her back calling her the “Dark Lady.” In 1953, she decided to move to Birkbeck College to escape King’s. Somehow, during the move, Wilkins came to be in possession of Franklin’s notes and the files containing Photo 51. Wilkins removed the photo from her records without her knowledge or permission and took it to show his friends at Cavendish. [Related: 'Lost' Letters Reveal Twists in Discovery of Double Helix]

“My mouth fell open and my pulse began to race,” wrote Watson in his famous book, "The Double Helix." It was the one bit of information that he and Crick needed to complete an accurate model of the structure of DNA. Photo 51 was proof that DNA’s helical structure had two strands attached in the middle by the phosphate bases. They hurried to publish their findings in the journal Nature. The same issue of the journal published much shorter articles by Wilkins and Franklin, but placed them after the longer article by James Watson, seeming to imply that their work merely served to confirm the important discovery made by Watson and Crick rather than being integral to it.

Franklin, meanwhile, had moved on to Birkbeck. Part of the arrangement that allowed her to leave King’s was that she would not pursue any research on DNA, so she turned her talents to studying virus particles. Between 1953 and 1958, she made important discoveries about the tobacco mosaic virus and polio. The work done by Franklin and the other scientists at Birkbeck during this time laid the foundation of modern virology.

Franklin died on April 16, 1958, of ovarian cancer, possibly caused by her extensive exposure to radiation while doing X-ray crystallography work. Because the Nobel Prize can only be shared among three living scientists, Franklin’s work was barely mentioned when it was awarded to Watson, Crick and Wilkins in 1962. By the time "The Double Helix" was written in 1968, Franklin was portrayed almost as a villain in the book. Watson describes her as a “belligerent, emotional woman unable to interpret her own data.”

It is only in the past decade that Franklin’s contribution has been acknowledged and honored. Today there are many new facilities, scholarships and research grants especially those for women, being named in her honor.

Aging with Grace...

Look at me,

My mane my crowning glory,

Is wiry silvery tufty.

The charm the dimple,

Has lost its wrinkle, no twinkle.

The eyes which sparkled,

Is cataractic and arched.

The neck so supple,

Used to be so nimble.

The breasts so springy and proud,

Shows its parturient sag.

The female chest so proud,

Kyphotic and osteoporotic.

The naval midriff to exhibit,

Left with striae, protuberant and scarred over. 

Posterior an asset to pride,

Is adiposed with deposition by the side. 

The thigh the thunder,

Is flabby without tone no wonder. 

The feet so petit,

Shoe size big fit.

They say it’s worth it,

To see one in your own mould.

To share, to care,

I shudder to disagree.

My mind is no more mind,

As I lost in rearing my kind. 
Tme has not been kind

As I count my time,

In the old folks home.

Just look at me!-- 

FG.

We don't dress the women! The media does.

There was a discussion over a podcast recently.  Ladies from the world over were calling in to relate their experiences with jogging around their neighbourhood. Callers from Asia and Africa invariably complained that it was a great challenge. They had to endure all the stares, heckling, uncouth remarks and the visual undressing to complete their feat. The discussion hovered on about overcoming this hurdle. Unfortunately, it looks like the mindset of the people of that need to be changed, not the activity.

Back home, I was indulged in a solemn discussion with a bevy of young lassies regarding how their way of dressing would be determined by other people's expectations or rules. Invariably all of them, the selection group being from the educated urban young adult ladies, agreed that it is their prerogative how they should dress. They quoted the weather, the milieu of the intended occasion, appropriateness to their own judgement and, of course, fashion sense. They reiterated that dressing is an individual's unique way of expression and a human right too. So, other people's expectations do not count, it is their own. Nobody owes anybody anything. 

Well, it is fine and dandy if everyone are quite all right when everybody respects each other and agrees that they could be more than one way to skin a cat. Problems arise when one sets their own values as the only yardstick upon which others should toe the line to. And the Neanderthal quantities of Man are left to roam with a free rein!

The silver screen, especially from Bollywood have not it made simpler over the years. The depiction of the main heroine galavanting around the countryside in the skimpiest of attires gyrating their bodies provocatively to ear-catching leg-thumping tunes, responding positively so easily to masculine advances objectifies the female species as showpieces without a mind of their own. On one hand, the culture pressures one to be dressed in a particular way whilst the other expects one to act in another.

As long as this mindset is not changed, the incidences of honour killing, elders sanctioned revenge rape and unfair justice to the fairer sex will remain at status quo. 

I want it all!

Her (2013)

Even though this film may appear quirky to some, I thought this 2013 entree to the Oscars deserved the holy grail. It is a social satire that poke funs at human behaviour and how it is destroying the very fibre of society. We, who are forever seeking for instant gratification, may end feeling miserable instead. We are forever seeking that elusive happiness that we crave for. We are blinded by our self centred reference of life rather than having a give-and-take attitude for the good of everyone.
We are made to believe that this is a science fiction but most of the technology, lingo and the cavalier attitude seen here are already happening as we speak. People are easily bored with everything they do. It is easy to go in out of a relationship.
Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix)is a lonely man who lead a lonely life wearing a perpetual frown on his face as if like he is holding the world's problem on his shoulders. He works as a professional greetings writer for people who finds it difficult to express themselves and he is darn good at it. He is undergoing a bitter divorce from his wife whom he grew together but over time grew apart.
He goes home to an empty flat to have his cold dinner, gazing at his holographic 3D TV to play his computer games. For entertainment, he calls for sex chat!
In this film, a common sight of people on the street is of them talking, forever talking. They are not talking to each other but they are talking on their blue tooth, yakking and giving instructions to the computer. Voice recognition is quite advanced. Typing is obsolete.

Theodore's only friend, a couple, Charles and Amy try to get Theodore to meet some girls in view of a relationship but in vain as he is reluctant to commit himself.
He buys a new OS with AI(Operating System). The OS adapts and evolves to satisfy the users need. It gives itself the name 'Samantha' and becomes a close to Theodore. They communicate and slowly their relationship becomes intimate! To feel the physical touch, Samantha arranges for a sex surrogate  (a female to act out on Samantha's command!)
To cut the story short, Samantha matures and develops her own idea of things. She becomes 'more intellectual' and 'more demanding' as she communicates with other OS's. The relationship also meets another premature death.
The problem with modern society is that everybody thinks they know what is best for them. And they do not take a no for an answer. There is no surrender and no compromise. They want it all and they want it NOW!