u/geezgee07

​

I have been thinking about this after seeing all those memes about the pilot(been a bit busy so couldnt make this post when this news came out) who saved everyone on his flight despite being stabbed. People were talking about how much men go through to protect their families, how men are expected to be strong, selfless, and heroic. And obviously, what that pilot did was incredibly brave.

But something about the way we romanticize male sacrifice bothers me.

Because I have seen women around me do extraordinary things every single day, and nobody calls them heroic.

There was a domestic worker where I used to live. She had two daughters and a husband who was an alcoholic. He abused her, beat her, accused her of sleeping with other men, did not earn money, and eventually became paralysed. She was the one working in seven or eight houses, seven days a week, while also taking care of him, her children, the household, and his medical expenses.

She herself had kidney stones and was physically weak. She came from a marginalized community and had very little social or financial support. Her own parents kept telling her to stay with her husband despite everything he did to her and her children. Her MIL verbally abused her too.

And yet, she kept going.

What struck me most was that despite everything she had been through, she was incredibly progressive. She would always tell us, "Do not get married until you feel you have done everything you want to do in life. Do not marry just because you have to."

I still think about her.

And she is not some extraordinary exception. I have met other women with alcoholic, unemployed or abusive husbands who work, raise their children, run households and somehow keep everything together.

Yet I constantly hear men say, "I have seen men take care of women who don't work, but I've never seen a woman take care of a man who doesn't work."

I genuinely do not understand how we can be surrounded by women doing exactly that and still not see it.

Maybe that is the problem. Women's suffering is so normalized that we don't even recognize it as sacrifice anymore.

A man protects his family , he is a hero.

A woman works all day, comes home, cooks, cleans, raises children, cares for a sick husband, tolerates abuse and somehow keeps the family functioning - that's just "what women do."

I'm not saying men don't suffer. They absolutely do, and their struggles deserve empathy too.

I'm saying I wish we could stop turning male suffering into something profound while treating women's suffering as ordinary.

Because there are so many women quietly carrying entire families on their backs, and nobody is making memes about them.

And honestly, that makes me angry.

Just figured that sonali kulkarni who played nani's mother's character in The paradise is 51 yo while nani is 40yo.

then we saw surya who is again 51 yo who played as a bachelor while his love interest being a 22 yo in VAS.

there is also BKU with around a similar age gap.

while i really enjoyed BKU, this question hasn't left my mind ever since, would the audience accept a 51 yo woman having a 22 yo man as her love interest? would we ever be okay if we cast a 51 yo man as a father to a 40 yo woman?? it's high time we stop this bs and cast people accordingly. this is getting out of hand(although it has always been this way since balayya's time💀)

I come from a remote area somewhere near the capital city of Andhra Pradesh, and there is one thing I have observed and personally experienced recently while using the free bus service that has been implemented in the Telugu states.

Ever since this service was introduced, the number of buses travelling to and from Amaravati to Vijayawada seems to have significantly reduced. Later, I realised that this appears to be the case in many other places as well.

I am not someone who regularly uses public transport, especially buses, so this issue had never really struck me until very recently, when I had to commute by bus. What shocked me was the attitude of some of the bus drivers. They have become so arrogant and disrespectful towards women that, in some cases, when they see a woman waiting at a bus stop, they don't even stop the bus.

They are rude, drive recklessly, and make dismissive comments towards women who board these buses. I have personally heard comments like "you are travelling for free anyway, what do you expect?"

But no woman asked for this service to be used as an excuse to disrespect her.

I agree that this scheme can be extremely helpful to working women. While travelling on one of these buses, I saw several women vendors carrying their equipment like poola buttalu or other items they need for their work. For women who depend on public transport for their daily livelihood, a free bus service can genuinely make a difference.

But if that assistance comes at the cost of a woman's dignity and basic respect, how can we call it a better service?

What is the point of providing free transportation if drivers refuse to stop when they see a woman? when buses don't arrive on time?? drivers behave rudely and disrespectfully towards passengers? Drivers drive either recklessly or unnecessarily slowly? There is no proper monitoring of how the scheme is actually being implemented?

I have spoken to a few of my friends who also use these buses, and they have shared similar experiences. In fact, on the very day I decided to commute by bus, the driver saw me waiting at my stop and simply didn't stop. He just drove past, even speeding up.

My sister experienced something similar. When she questioned a driver about his reckless driving, he responded by slowing the bus down so much that even the bikes on the road were moving faster than the bus. She had to take a picture of the bus and the driver and tell him that she would raise a complaint, just to get him to drive at a reasonable speed.

These are buses being used by employed people who have to reach their workplaces on time. If the service is this unreliable, how are they supposed to depend on it for their daily commute?

The intention behind this scheme may be to make public transportation more accessible and meaningful for working women. And yes, it clearly has the potential to help many women.

But a policy is not just about implementing, it is also about monitoring it.

If buses are being reduced, routes are becoming unreliable, drivers are disrespecting the very women the scheme is supposed to support, and there is little to no accountability for how the service is being implemented, then how far are we helping these women?? how is it benefitting us?

if a service comes at the cost of someone's respect, i do not think we would want it.

sorry for the early morning rant.

i havent seen any reviews talking about VAS from this pov. so here's my honest take.

i have mixed feelings about this movie. i had really high expectations for the movie bc of surya, but what can i expect from a mid ass telugu director who wants to shove a typical commercial film down our throats? in big 2026, we are still being fed these 'damsel in distress' plots. like im so tired atp. and why is extra marital affairs so normalized and considered funny just bc a man does it? i felt so weird when they were all laughing at naazar's 'bangkok trip' joke. the difference b/w how a married man's affair is treated and a woman being called a mistress when she goes behind a married man is very clearly shown in the movie and nothing is done to fix that behaviour, apart from the male lead punching down some 50 gundas to show how macho and powerful he is

and mamita's character, man, wtf was that? always romanticizing a woman's character when she lowers her standards by choosing a man who is twice her age, to the point she is okay to let go of her passion until this 40 smth yo man tells her that she isnt sane. no individuality, her life is fully centered towards a man. dont cast a female lead when you are not going to bring in any kind of value to that character. such typical goofy girl, who doesnt know how to behave, like bro, im 22 and i dont behave that way. cut us some slack from this bs. it feels like a wholesome movie but it's a nicely wrapped stupid movie which romanticises women's sacrifices through surrogacy, motherhood, being a mistress dealing with people's bullcrap.

also another ep take in this movie is: this guy is fucking billionaire and he is also very kind to the poor, like that was so crazy for me. these people dont know rat shit about labour politics, there is no ethical billionaire, if this guy is genuinely as good as he is portrayed, he wouldnt be a billionaire now lmao. it is a narcissistic dickride for surya. and this movie is misogynist's mass dream. id go on for whole day to make fun of how amateur venky's writing is ffs.

but somehow, idk if it's mamita's charm or this love for vintage surya, i kept smiling throughout the movie. no wonder the audience loved the movie.

BJP has become such a criminal party, and the mindset of many of its supporters is genuinely disturbing. It is just so sad to see the state of affairs right now.

I recently watched a podcast where a man openly admitted that, during the Ram Mandir protest, he cracked the skull of a 60-year-old man. He even said that the man should have died. The victim was hospitalized and received 60 stitches for the injury to his head. Yet, according to this man himself, the police never dared to arrest him because he was backed by politicians.

ref vid : https://www.instagram.com/reel/Dc2JTk\_B3TK/?

These were the exact words he uttered on the podcast. And I genuinely dont understand why there has been no action, why this man is being protected, or why people are okay with someone openly admitting to such violence and continuing to walk around freely.

And this isnt an isolated incident. We’ve seen so many such instances that, at this point, are we even surprised? Criminals are literally part of the political system itself.

And then we have a Prime Minister who seems completely indifferent to the suffering of ordinary people. A Prime Minister who goes around talking about how 'ladkiyon ne gaali de diya' and placing women on a supposed moral pedestal, while men continue to abuse, kill, rape, and molest women in this country, often without seeing anything close to the same outrage.

We recently saw a 16-year-old girl being raped(hate to mention the victim rather than the abuser), yet that barely generated the outrage that followed when a 15-year-old abused the Prime Minister.

This is the kind of country we live in , a criminalized political system where accountability seems to disappear depending on who you are and who you are backed by. And honestly, it is terrifying to feel like there is no way out.

​

I think we're conflating "domestic work is often exploitative" with "people shouldn't hire domestic workers"

I understand the point being made here. Domestic workers in India are absolutely underpaid, denied leave, expected to work every day, and treated very differently from workers in formal workplaces. And I actually agree with the larger principle that if you're going to demand workplace rights for yourself, you should be able to recognize those rights in the person working in your home too.

But I don't understand the leap from "domestic workers deserve proper employment conditions" to "i judge every family that hires domestic workers, just do your own chores."

Those are two completely different arguments.

If someone is being paid X to clean four houses because that's how she supports her family, telling her that domestic work shouldn't exist doesn't solve the poverty that pushed her into that work. It just removes one source of income.

And yes, ideally she should have reasonable working hours, weekly holidays, adequate wages, and dignity at work. That's exactly the point. The answer to exploitation isn't necessarily eliminating the job. It's improving the conditions under which the job is performed.

The "technically she's unemployed" argument also doesn't really make sense to me. If a woman works in four households and gets paid by those households for her labour, she is obviously economically employed. What she may lack is formal employment protections, which is a completely different issue.

And I found the "40 hour work week plus livable wage" comment particularly interesting because… isn't that literally what we're arguing for?

If your position is:

I want domestic workers to have a 40-hour week, reasonable wages and proper labour protections.

Then we're not actually disagreeing that much.

But if your position is:

Nobody should hire domestic workers, and everyone should do their own chores.

then you're proposing to eliminate the source of income before providing an alternative to the person who currently depends on it.

That's where I think the argument becomes detached from the socioeconomic reality of India.

Also, "just do your own chores" assumes that every household has the same circumstances.

Some people absolutely can and should divide household work among family members. And yes, men refusing to contribute at home while women are expected to do everything is a huge problem.

But there are also elderly people, people with disabilities or chronic physical limitations, dual-income households, single parents, families with young children, people working extremely long hours, etc. There isn't one universal reason why someone hires domestic help.

And I don't think hiring someone to perform a service is inherently exploitative.

We pay plumbers because we don't want to fix our own plumbing. (someone made this brilliant point)

So why is domestic labour uniquely treated as morally questionable simply because it is traditionally associated with women's unpaid labour and class inequality?

The issue isn't that someone is being paid to clean your house. The issue is whether you're exploiting the person doing it.

If you're paying fairly, respecting their time, giving them agreed holidays, allowing them to take leave when they're sick, not humiliating them, not making them work unreasonable hours, and treating them as a worker rather than 'the help' I don't see why hiring them is inherently immoral.

In fact, I'd argue that refusing to hire them doesn't automatically make you more ethical either.

If I stop hiring a domestic worker tomorrow because I believe her occupation is beneath her dignity, but she loses ₹X of income that she uses to feed her family, what exactly have I accomplished?

I've made myself feel morally cleaner without necessarily improving her economic situation.

The more useful question is therefore not:

Why can't you do your own chores?

It's:

If you're hiring someone to do your chores, are you willing to recognize that person as a worker who deserves fair compensation, reasonable working conditions and dignity?

And honestly, I think that's where the feminism discussion becomes much more interesting.

Because yes, it's hypocritical for someone to demand menstrual leave, weekends, reasonable working hours and workplace dignity for themselves while expecting a poorer woman to work seven days a week without those same considerations.

But the solution isn't necessarily don't hire her.

It can be "hire her, but don't exploit her"

"Everyone should just do their own chores" is a lifestyle choice. It isn't an economic policy

Today i was talking to my domestic worker, she helps us with washing dishes and cleaning the house. when we first hired her we asked her not to come on sundays and when she is sick(this also includes periods) at 1st my mom didnot agree to it, she said 'we already pay her enough and that she must come everyday, or else who is going to do the chores'. i work in the IT, i asked her how she would feel if i had told her that i have to work with 0 holidays in a year. it was hard to get her to look at it from this perspective but we tried and it worked out.

cut to today, that akka told me how she has to go visit her sick father who lives in a different village, who was hospitalized a few days ago. she mentioned how she has to go only in the afternoon and get back by evening, i asked her 'why not take a day off and visit ur father aaram se' she told me how 'she is not allowed to take a leave and is expected to work 7 days a week' unless she is extremely sick. it pissed me off so much. even daily wage labors get a day off but these domestic workers dont. this works closely with 'house wives not getting any break'.

another scenario which i have observed in tier 1 city at my aunt's house is she expects the maid to be present everyday in a week but also demands 2 days off plus menstrual leave from her workplace in corporate.

are we really fighting for feminism when your feminism is only limited to advocating for workplace rights in the corporate while taking advantage of marginalized women who are vulnerable and can't escape the poverty? I'm not asking for a huge change within this system which runs on cheap labor( i am but gradually) but at least these acts of micro feminism would go a really long way.

i almost didn't even think it was a huge thing to let these domestic workers have a day off until someone pointed it out to me and appreciated. it made me sad how bare minimum is made a big deal out of.

I'm a layman when it comes to LGBTQ+ rights and everything that revolves around it. Although im completely against the idea of "trans inclusivity in women's sports" im still confused if it's okay for trans women to use women's toilets. i recently read a substack article which talks about the betrayal of modern feminism in the context of trans women and been wondering about this ever since. so pls help this amateur.

edit : after seeing few comments around trans women's exclusivity in sports, i have done my own research and realised the mainstream media's scapegoating around physiological advantages of trans women. i would like to mention that i now have done a lil research from my end and have different perspective around it.

used 4 pads in a day on 1st day of my periods. always reminds me of the dialogue ranbir kapoor says in animal about how we use 4 pads a month and complain about. no sir, i actually use those in a day, jokes on you. reminder that a very famous director belittled women's pain and menstruation(which btw is the reason for his birth) in his very famous 900 cr box office colection movie. wish people didnt take this movie seriously. but hey apparently he is vangod. eew.

I recently came across a post that said:

"you are not a true feminist if you are not a vegan"

It made me wonder why feminism, more than almost any other movement, is constantly subjected to these purity tests.

Why does believing women deserve equal rights suddenly require passing every other moral benchmark? At what point did advocating for gender equality become contingent on having the correct position on every ethical issue?

Personally, I grew up in a household full of traditions where eating meat was never an option. But looking back, I don't think it was because we were taught to value animal life in a conscious ethical sense. It was presented as tradition, purity, and something 'people like us' simply don't do. That's very different from arriving at veganism through a belief in animal rights.

Even today, I can't comfortably eat meat not because I've made an ethical commitment against it, but because I wasn't raised with it and now it's almost like alien food to me.

And that is why I find conversations around veganism complicated.

For many people, especially in urban middle class spaces, veganism is a genuine ethical choice. But for others, food is determined by affordability, nutrition, availability, culture, or simply survival.

This isn't an argument against veganism. If someone chooses veganism out of concern for animals, I respect that.

It's an argument against turning every social justice movement into a moral purity contest.

A feminist doesn't have to be vegan to believe women deserve equality.

A person doesn't have to be morally perfect before they're allowed to advocate for a just cause.

We should absolutely have conversations about animal welfare, food systems, and ethics. But reducing feminism to 'you're only a real feminist if you're vegan' doesn't strengthen the movement, it narrows it into an exclusive club where only those with the privilege to satisfy every ethical expectation get to belong.

In a country where millions of people still struggle every day to put food on the table, it is unfair to turn food choices into a measure of moral worth.

People who are fighting hunger, poverty, rising food prices, or limited access to nutritious meals should not be subjected to moral judgments for what they eat. Ethics don't exist in a vacuum, they're shaped by circumstances, privilege, culture, and access.

Compassion should extend not only to animals, but also to people navigating unequal social and economic conditions.

The whole narrative of 'pick better men' 'women always fall for bad men' is funny to me because why are we not holding men accountable for their actions?

When a man cheats or abuses or manipulates their partner women are rather blamed for picking the wrong man. HE is responsible for his actions. saying 'you could have picked a better man' shifts the blame onto women's choices rather than the man's behaviour itself.

instead of asking why women pick bad men , are we not supposed to look at it from the ground level and ask real questions like 'why can't men be nice to women?' 'why cant they stop being jerks to their partner?'

all of my girlfriends blamed themselves when they found out that their partner cheated on them or when they were abused by men saying 'i was so naive, idk what i saw in them' . babe it is not ur fault that he was nice to you and gaslit you into believing that he was the nicest guy.

the problem is not encouraging people to choose healthier partners, it is when that advice is used to minimize or deflect responsibility from the person who acted badly.

The country is a mess. we must keep talking. we must speak up. watch this video. share it as much. Do not let anyone silence you. pls do not stop talking. We can't let this all go into vain.

for the 1st time ever, the students of this country have come up with a protest. we are healing.we are heading towards something positive. let's keep this going.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbD10QbvIEp/?

came across this video where this bjp politician mentions about the 1st thing they'd do once they win in telangana.

i hope he included boys too when he meant 'vidhyardhulu andaritho bottu, gajulu veyistham'

im jus so done with this party shoving hinduism down everybody's throats. i cant believe people will go on and still vote to politicians like this. isnt it about time we get a left leaning party in india. we need progressive, feminist political party which actually care about social and gender issues? but i dont see any such a thing happening any sooner.

they come up with such lame things to talk about to deviate us from the actual issues that are happening. no media coverage about sonam wangchuk's hunger strike so far. by the time it reaches general population, we will have something new to talk about and as usual, people forget and move on with their lives bc there is smth more to talk about. dont tell me social media isnt the key tool for politicians to toy us. it pisses me off so much.

how long will bjp fool people into believing that it is a hindutva party? if it really is, why did no bjp politician talk about ram mandir chori? do people not realise that this party is using hinduism to get them to vote for them? when will people open their eyes? when will they start questioning the government without accusing anyone an anti nationalist for doing that?

just watched an instagram reel of rida tharana where she participated in meta glasses campaign. a lot of people called her out for promoting those glasses. she then made a video defending how these glasses are good for her from a content creator perspective and how she forgot to mention the negative side of this, which is : men misusing it.

what she forgot to realize is the fundamental use of these meta glasses. these glasses are known for recording non consensual videos and data privacy concerns were raised long ago. first, kylie jenner, now, rida.

yet, she went on blaming men and taking zero accountability for her actions. it is so hard to accept that all these fashion influencers are so performative and only talk about feminism until it fits their narrative and as long as something fills up their wallet, they donot care how much it affects other women. pathetic behaviour.

i have attached the video link for reference for anyone who wants to watch that reel