Read the full article on Film Companion, here: https://www.filmcompanion.in/five-ways-to-ensure-the-kamal-haasan-rekha-punnagai-mannan-incident-never-happens-again/
While improvisation in acting — doing things in the heat of the moment — is important, it cannot come at the cost of consent.
Spoilers ahead…
There’s a tense restaurant scene in Kramer vs. Kramer between Ted and Joanna, the characters played by Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep. This is the arc of the latter part of the scene. Ted wants to rattle Joanna, who walked out on the family unit but now wants her son back. He knows her as a meek woman, so he decides to get all caveman on her. He explodes. Being a student of the Method, Hoffman cared about performance — not just his, but also his coactor’s — to an insane degree, so this is what he did, as reported in a 2016 Vanity Fair article by Michael Schulman.
Continued at the link above.
Copyright ©2020 Film Companion.
Baradwaj Rangan 
MANK
February 26, 2020
What one-time Tamil filmmakers did to extract tears from their leading ladies was wrong. (They used to slap them.)
William Friedkin did the same to the guy playing the priest in The Exorcist.He slapped him to get the correct emotion out of him
Dustin Hoffman is the epitome of what i call a method dick. His process is sometimes laughable, read William Goldman’s book about his altercations with the actor or Elmore Leonard’ s experience with him while trying to make a movie out of La Brava (the movie was never made). Leonard was so angry with his antics that he wrote Get Shorty where the short movie actor Martin Weir is actually a caricature of Hoffman.
I believe Hoffman himself was going through a divorce at the time, and was abusing drugs and he took it out all on Meryl. Meryl later said that she didn’t want to make a big issue about it because she knew what Hoffman was going through at the time.
Regarding Kamal, i have always wondered how he used to convince his heroines for those kisses and sexy maneuveres in his films, especially in those orthodox times. Urvasi joked about it at Kamal 50 celebration that she was afraid that he would kiss him at every given opportunity and was scared to act with him. i do know that for Hey Ram he had extensively briefed Rani Mukherjee about the sex scenes and she had agreed to do them.
This is a complicated issue; some of the greatest moments in movies are on account of improvisations: “You talki’n to me” and so on , but as you said “Cinema is not greater than consent” or rather art is not above humanity and if art is less richer because the artists chose to be more human, then so be it.
LikeLiked by 8 people
Naren
February 26, 2020
Method acting and spur of the moment decisions are not always the case. Remember the scene in Terminator 2 around 16 minutes? The orderly has to subdue Sarah Conner to force medication on her. Apparently, the actor Ken Gibbel wouldn’t hit Linda Hamilton as intended. Hence there were several re-takes and she had to fall on her knees over and over and she was not happy about that. In a later scene where she is escaping the institution, she hits the orderly in his face with a night stick baton. Apparently, Linda Hamilton took her revenge by delivering a real blow to the actor’s face.
The shoot of “The Abyss” has infamy written all over it. Neither of the leads were happy throughout the filming. Apparently, Ed Harris punched Cameron because he kept filming as Ed Harris was actually drowning. Cameron himself was actually drowning when his assistant failed to warn him to refill oxygen in his scuba gear. He later ditched the gear and swam up as fast as he could. The Defibrillation scene had several re-takes which apparently took a lot out of Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio and hence she lashed out at Cameron too. The culmination of the strenuous shoot eventually made the leads go home crying.
Whether it’s an actor or a director . . . is it the intense passion? or stress of the shoot? or lack of co-operation from co-actors when most needed? or is it ego? or some other reason? I simply don’t know how to categorise such events let alone be dichotomous about them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Spandana Vaidyula
February 26, 2020
Your suggestions, if implemented professionally would be a great start. In addition to that, I remember Kalki Koechlin said a while ago that intimate scenes (just like fight scenes) should be choreographed and rehearsed before filming. That seems sensible to me. Comedian John Oliver once said on his show “Sex is like boxing. If both parties don’t agree to it, one of them is committing a crime.” He said that referring to rape, but I find it relevant here. Extensive care and preparation goes before filming action sequences, similar consideration should be given to prepare actors for intimate scenes.
LikeLiked by 4 people
krishikari
February 26, 2020
Aren’t prop wine glasses in films are made of sugar? When I lived in Toronto, they shot a lot of Hollywood movies there and I did some gigs as an extra, all glasses were made of sugar so they wouldn’t hurt people if they shattered, so the first story is puzzling though no doubt Dustin was a dick. I read somewhere he would grope co-actors in stage plays just before they made their entrance on stage.
LikeLike
H. Prasanna
February 26, 2020
@BR I think as we all have certain privilege, we are not acknowledging how difficult (to the point of being unrealistic) this suggested process is. The actual takeaway from this is that women like Rekha, Maria Schneider, Meryl Streep, and Chinmayi are empowered to come forward with their stories. The first step we need to take is to listen, as men. The actual issue is that because women are systemically oppressed they will lose opportunities to work if they speak out. And whatever system of consent/contract you are talking about should be formed after we listen to them and support them in a space where they feel safe to voice these issues without losing their jobs. I wish you had asked a woman to write this. There are so many legal professionals/social workers in this field who understand the different effects/intersectionality of these issues. Please ask a person who actually experiences/works with these things and works toward female empowerment at the workplace to write on this.
P.S. Chinmayi takes part in workshops and speaks widely. I am sure she will oblige if you ask her.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Alex John
February 26, 2020
There is no doubt this insensible ‘improvisation’ bullying has deep roots in class and/or gender discrimination. We can see that either women or actors of lesser star value almost always get to be at the receiving end of the stick. Guess what would happen if a female actor employs a feminine version of the ‘slapping technique’ (kicking where it hurts could be a good start) in the name of improvisation when she works with a male star.The earth would fall apart if something of that sort happens.I think this could all be traced back to the doctrines of male and upper-class dominance that we shamelessly nurture even in these days, one way or the other(Karthika, before Rekha, has complained about the inhuman method acting shenanigans of the universal star).
LikeLiked by 5 people
brangan
February 26, 2020
H. Prasanna: The actual issue is that because women are systemically oppressed they will lose opportunities to work if they speak out.
I get that. Which is why this article is addressed to “filmmakers and actors“
I wish you had asked a woman to write this.
I dont see why. This is solely from the film industry POV. I wanted to showcase this issue through cinematic history and acting history. It is not from a gender POV but a cinema POV.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Rad Mahalikudi
February 26, 2020
@Naren: Another news I read (in print media) about Abyss in the nineties is that Director didn’t provide even bio-breaks to the actors. Couldn’t locate the same in google.
Related to Abyss: https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/the-abyss-turns-30-how-james-cameron-pushed-boundaries-and-almost-killed-his-actors
LikeLiked by 1 person
H. Prasanna
February 26, 2020
@BR Thank you for replying.
As your title says, what we want is for this to never happen again. Reconciliation and establishment of a better system starts with listening to the survivors and doing what is best for them.
You are well within your area of expertise writing this article. However, the topic you are discussing, safer workplaces (cinema industry) for all genders, has experts who are within your reach. And establishing binding contractual obligations to protect the rights of a marginalized group in a workplace is outside your area of expertise. I am not saying you didn’t research it well; it was as usual a well fleshed out article. But you surely didn’t research it as much as a woman who is going through it in cinema now. Just as you interview experts when talking about screen writing, camera, and music, maybe you could do an interview on this where we can hear from an expert (like a masterclass on how to safeguard yourself in a cinema workspace and thrive in the industry).
Maria Schneider said that she didn’t know she wasn’t contractually obligated to do the scene and she could stop it from happening. So, there is a gender history angle in this that is worth exploring. Also, it needs much more than just cinema POV when someone is blacklisted for speaking out. I agree that you could write it as much as a woman could; but the machinations of the industry are complex, and I just felt that women represent and empower their allies better. We want the same outcome, no matter what our approach is.
Having said all this, it is commendable you are approaching this constructively and put this out for everyone, filmmakers and actors. I am sure it will rub off on the actors and filmmakers you converse with and it will have a positive effect on the industry.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
February 26, 2020
“The actual issue is that because women are systemically oppressed they will lose opportunities to work if they speak out. ” – This needs to be repeated again and again because people are often quick to conclude that women who chose to put up silently with the shenanigans of industry big egos were asking it. Well, but the ones who either speak up and/or refuse pay a heavy price for doing so, so were they asking for THAT too? If so, what are women supposed to do in films?
I think a lot of responsibility finally rests with the viewers. If we take the stance that we as viewers are dumb and completely manipulatable and will therefore lap up anything movie makers show us, things will never change. Unless we start saying out loud that such exploitation is not fair and that we will not support the projects of such filmmakers or actors, nothing will change. Yes, I know this violates the dictum of separating art from artist but there are circumstances where we have to question that dictum as well. If Polanski is innocent, he should face the music and not be a fugitive. When we purchase his films, we help the companies that produced his films (and in turn himself) profit. We may or may not intend this but this is the outcome.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Naren
February 26, 2020
@Rad: Yes and when insisted by the actors they were asked to relieve themselves inside their wet suits that they were wearing for the movie. BTS events that don’t reflect on the final cut somehow seem to take a backseat to the ones that do.
Contractual clauses are an ever-expanding coverage as there are inordinate number of things that could go wrong or would be unacceptable/uncomfortable for someone. But maybe covering the most prominent ones to a good extent might serve as a good start in the right direction.
LikeLike
Ravi K
February 26, 2020
In Hollywood, the role of an “intimacy coordinator” is relatively new and growing. They choreograph romantically intimate scenes (whether it is a kiss or a sex scene or a rape scene) for movies and TV shows in a way that is safe and comfortable for the actors. This person should be considered indispensable, like a stunt coordinator is for fight scenes.
Actors are professionals. If an actor has to portray some negative emotion like fear or anger, they can ACT. No need for the director or co-actors to purposefully provoke those emotions without the actor’s consent. Sometimes things happen in the heat of the moment during a take or a rehearsal, but conspiring beforehand to surprise an actor like that is wrong.
WRT method acting (or what that term is construed to mean today), Robert Pattinson summed it up well. “I always say about people who do method acting, you only ever see people do the method when they’re playing an assholes. You never see someone being lovely to everyone while they’re really deep in character.”
LikeLiked by 5 people
Anu Warrier
February 26, 2020
Re: Hoffman – there’s a (possibly apocryphal) story about how Hoffman stayed up for 72 hours so as to better exhibit the emotional verisimilitude of his sleepless character in Marathon Man. When Sir Laurence Olivier, his co-star heard about it, the great man is said to have looked quizzically at him and quipped, ‘My dear boy, why don’t you just try acting?’
Closer home, ‘method’ acting nearly sent Dilip Kumar spiralling into depression.
I remember in Notting Hill Julia Roberts’ character tells Hugh Grant how contracts in Hollywood work – right up to which body part and just how much skin can be shown. But that’s after you reach the top of the heap (which, also she mentions). Until then, if you are seen as ‘demanding’, you aren’t getting anywhere near the top of the heap. Or any work at all.
In any case, this article is a timely – and welcome – one. If only…
LikeLiked by 1 person
rsylviana
February 27, 2020
@Ravi K – Now that Robert Pattison mentions it , I am thinking about why the opposite doesn’t seem to have happened? You know an actor who is an asshole in real life suddenly becoming kind and generous ,at least until he is playing a nice character, because of him taking the method acting route. Or maybe they don’t/wouldn’t get reported ?
@BR – Great suggestions . However since there seem to be quite a number of directors in Kollywood who go to the shooting stage without a bound script in place, I feel these practices would take years to become commonplace if that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Apu
February 27, 2020
rsylviana: “You know an actor who is an asshole in real life suddenly becoming kind and generous ,at least until he is playing a nice character, because of him taking the method acting route. ”
Alok Nath comes to mind. Or wait, Salman Khan in many movies? 🙂 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
H. Prasanna
February 27, 2020
Thank you @Madan. As for separating the art from the artist and the way you talk about it, I think you might like this perspective:
https://www.rogerebert.com/far-flung-correspondents/why-i-stopped-watching-woody-allen-movies
LikeLiked by 2 people
Enna Koduka Sir Pera
February 27, 2020
Great article BR. Have you ever thought of also writing in Tamil or getting your articles translated in Tamil, so that you can also publish in Tamil magazines like Vikatan, Kalki? For these ideas to really reach the grassroots level (where a lot of future technicians, actors in cinema will come from), these articles need to go in those magazines. The English-reading online crowd may be already woke to these things and they may not constitute a large fraction of the target population where these ideas need to penetrate…
LikeLike
Naren
February 27, 2020
Continuing my talk about plurality of BTS issues, I think it’s reductive and more importantly unfair to just cover issues of women and the sexual component. Here’s why . . .
Linda Fiorentino, after her retirement, complained about how women are being unfairly used for nudity and sexual scenes. It’s not like she wasn’t informed well before about the scenes she was going to do. She did consent and she complained too. Not that her complain is wrong but it’s a different discussion with a broader scope and yet it’s grouped under the umbrella of exploitation of women in films . . . murky waters.
It’s shouldn’t be just about women being exploited or used in this subject matter. What about Nicole Kidman sharing a bathtub with Cameron Bright who was then a kid? It was in the movie “Birth” back in 2004. I’m sure they were all well informed and that there was some adult representing the boy and yet it’s considered a highly controversial scene.
What about the movie “The Innocents” from way back in 1961? The 40-year old Deborah Kerr shares an on-screen kiss with the 11-year old actor Martin Stephens. They were all informed a day before about the upcoming scenes. They all consented and yet it’s another highly controversial scene.
Kramer vs Kramer being referenced here frequently, what about the scene where JoBeth Williams being stark naked in front of the 7-year old actor Justin Henry?
Not one of these scenes was in a parental/motherly context. Had this been an older male actor and a female child actor, we all know how the mere proposition of the very idea would be treated. In real life, adults, more specifically parents, try their best to shield children from pre-mature exposure to the sexual components of life. But a mere consent/contractual agreement and/or an adult representation on behalf of the young actors makes it ok in movies?
Here are a whole different set of problems that only add more complexity to contractual agreements . . .
The infamous tirade perpetrated by Christian Bale on the sets of Terminator Salvation as a reaction to an unfortunately-timed interruption by a crew member, during his performance. Can this disproportionality be covered in clauses and in whose contract?
Robert Downey Jr. was apparently obnoxiously late for shooting during the making of “U.S. Marshalls”. Not just late but also came in high on some drug and exhibited nothing but indifference towards the rest of the cast and crew regarding his behaviour. Warrant a couple of more clauses in the contracts, don’t they?
Had Kamal Hassan been exploitative in movies then we should’ve heard or should be hearing similar complaints from Sukanya (Mahanadi), Abirami (Virumaandi), maybe even Gouthami (Kuruthipunal). The mere mentioning of the words “women”, “sex”, “unfair”, “exploitation” in a sentence gets people to become overtly emotional and sanctimonious. But they were kids as opposed to the adult Meryl Streep, Maria Schneider, Rekha (comparitively) or any other actor in this context. I can go on and on but my point is that though being well-intended, consents and contractual agreements should not be another expression/outlet of already skewed societal sentiments/preconceptions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
V
February 27, 2020
This particular scene from Punnagai Mannan was covered extensively by the tamil magazines before and during the film’s release. I remember Rekha expressing her disapproval even then about the way it was shot, whereas the Director (KB) kept showering praises on Kamal for the improvisation. Both the viewpoints were covered, but since the film had generated other sensational news too, this issue got played down. (Eg: Srilankan tamil issue, Revathy refusing to dub after her marriage, the claim that it was a computer that generated the music & not Ilayaraja, the tragic ending which Kamal fans couldnt accept & the rumour that the film had different endings in different centers)
Though I was (and still am) a Kamal fan, I remember I couldn’t accept this whole “kadhaiku thevayana emotion” logic back then. Same with Barathiraja’s infamous “slaps” to his heroines – until Suganya (I think) told him off.
Ive read about a few other such incidents:
Amala Paul getting kicked in the stomach for the Mynaa climax. (She seems to be quite professional in her approach – with Sindu Samaveli or Aadai, she probably knew about the story before signing up.)
Bala beating up Atharva for Paradesi
Varun Dhawan doing the impromptu smooch with Parineeti in the Janeman song from Dishoom
Nadiya getting the flak for refusing to do a bathing scene with a towel in Irandil Ondru (I think) – this river-thundu bathing scene was something even an otherwise strict Revathy couldnt refuse.
Suganya walking out of Ulle Veliye after she was miffed with the infamous poster of her wearing skin color tights.
Simbu Nayan Vallavan poster – even though Nayan was dating Simbu, the raunchy poster was something she did not bargain for, causing a crack in their relationship.
Reema Sen for Vallavan – criticizing Simbu for butchering the script to favour his new found lady-love Nayanthara & reducing the other two heroines to dummy roles.
Visaranai – Dinesh. However, this could be a willing submission too.
The strong-willed ladies, like Nadiya, Amala Paul, Sukanya have voiced out their grievances appapo, however, with little impact. Infact they were labelled difficult to work with. Even Rekha had to accept a role in Guna, with Kamal – not saying she shouldnt have or she was wrong in doing so – but unlike a Nayantara who could say No even to Shankar-Kamal for Indian 2 or Ileana, who refused to do films even with Vijay owing to her bitter first experience in Tamil, these mid-range actresses had/have little say in the proceedings & are mostly treated as props in films.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 27, 2020
Wanted to add this. The last five points were more with the hope that young filmmakers and actors would consider this. There are huge numbers of younger directors and actors who are sensitive about these matters, and this was to give something for them to chew on — apart from, of course, putting this particular incident in a historical continuum.
LikeLike
Tina
February 27, 2020
This just reminded me of a piece from your book :
[That was the first scene we shot. The boy was scared of being pushed into deep waters, you should do it – literally or otherwise. It works for the film.]
I am SO sure parental consent would have been obtained. This makes the conundrum even more magnified. Child may not be comfortable, but parent consents, so where do we draw the line?
Women, children or men – the lines are so blur. Hopefully, the way people feel about certain things is given respect as films get made.
LikeLike
rsylviana
February 27, 2020
*Had Kamal Hassan been exploitative in movies then we should’ve heard or should be hearing similar complaints from Sukanya (Mahanadi), Abirami (Virumaandi), maybe even Gouthami (Kuruthipunal). *
@Naren – Not sure about the rest but Sukanya did say that the Mahanadi kiss was done spontaneously by Kamal , didn’t she ?
@Apu – Salman Khan haha… Good one !
LikeLike
H. Prasanna
February 27, 2020
@Naren and others: Please remember that the survivor has to say whether exploitation/harassment has happened and how it affected them. Not the perpetrators or you or me. It does not matter whether it is a child or adult, even informed consent does not absolve a perpetrator if the survivor feels harassed/exploited. This is why it is important that there is a space for them to express themselves safely.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Naren
February 27, 2020
@rsylviana: If she did then I’m not aware of it. Just declaring spontaneity doesn’t mean exploitative. It’s the reception that says it all. If she felt exploited then she should express that clearly.
@H. Prasanna: Both Jamie Foxx and Tom Cruise are high profile actors. But a car accident during the making of “Collateral” made the crew along with the director to run to Tom Cruise’s aid over Jamie Foxx as the former is the higher profile actor among the two. In Terminator Salvation, the survivor being a mid-level crew member and the perpetrator being a high-profile lead . . . there are some ground realities to be considered too. Apparently, McG, the director didn’t do much about it either.
The safe space for expression comes in various forms like explicit contractual agreements, social workers etc. which would act as preventative measures rather than cures. But even so, these things can only go so far. Award functions have seen some cringeworthy remarks, jokes, “spontaneous” on-stage kisses, passive-agressive badgering in the form of satire etc. Whether we like it or not, producers/bankrollers might be bankrupted from legal costs alone, if they try to bring everything under a legal purview. Rigorous education on socio-cultural attitudes and behaviour would help to a great extent. People spend time and money on being trained on how to put up “media” personalities, on-camera charm, award function etiquettes etc. so why not this?
LikeLike
blueberry
February 27, 2020
Hi BR. “This is solely from the film industry POV. I wanted to showcase this issue through cinematic history and acting history. It is not from a gender POV but a cinema POV.”
Issues of gender in cinema are automatically looked at from the POV of gender. Belief that cinematic (or any) history is relevant without the lens of gender is problematic– it erases marginalised perspectives.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
February 27, 2020
I was going to add something, but I’ll just say, “What Prasanna said!” and leave it at that. 🙂
Good points, Madan re: Polanski – just want to add that this is where ‘The art is separate from the artist” argument fails for me. (Same for Woody Allen.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 27, 2020
blueberry:What I meant by ”It is not from a gender POV but a cinema POV” in response to Prasanna is this:
He wanted a woman to write this. But to me, this piece is about actors and directors getting away with non-consensual behaviour — and not just wrt women. Hence the line… ”so that the actress (it could be an actor, too, but it’s mostly women who end up shortchanged in such situations) knows what she is in for. ”
I wanted this piece to be about cinema — not just women. I wanted take off on the PUNNAGAI MANNAN issue and address non-consent wrt men OR women.
Which is why I quoted that bit about Meryl Streep saying she has probably hurt people, too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amit Joki
February 27, 2020
All very fine points. Especially H Prasanna’s.
But I have a query with this,
So where does it stop if we take this route? If something has been consented to, how can a person then complain it was uncomfortable? Doesn’t this almost always put those who drafted the contract sincerely and got the consent too, in a bad light? Like the person has asked you if you’re okay with it and you said you’re okay with it, but then years later, your byte of “I felt uncomfortable” will forever taint the person who arranged for the contract.
Aziz Ansari’s unfortunate incident comes to mind.
I just want to know how we could solve this. This “feelings” is getting out of hand. There was this guy who raped a teenage girl and he later “came out” as a “woman”, so the crime he committed was as a “woman” and it was applauded, like WTF.
LikeLike
brangan
February 27, 2020
What I mean by “art is separate from the artist” is this:
Take this analogy:
The artist is the cow. Art is milk.
Till one point, we all love milk (or cheese or ghee or whatever).
But one day, we discover that cows are being treated badly. Some of us turn vegan and stop consuming milk.
Now, this is a CHOICE.
It doesn’t change the nature of the milk itself.
It just means you are no longer going to contribute your money to a system that profits from such exploitation.
But the milk is still separate from the cow.
This is how I see it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Varsha Ganesh
February 27, 2020
“Nannete” by Hannah Gatsby talks about the art/artist separation very well. When we worship the art even while disregarding the artist, the artist still feels a sense of ego or importance to have created something that people revere. This goes on to reinforcing in his head that what he creates gives an excuse for how he behaves. It is not our intention as the consumer, but that`s the impact. We unintentionally show that the victim’s horrific experience is less important compared to OUR experience of the art.
There is a lot of good/great art available in this world, if only we bother searching a bit to look for it. More art will be created by people if we give them opportunities. Disregarding tainted art (however wonderful we think it is) is not a bigger loss than disregarding a fellow human`s suffering.
LikeLiked by 6 people
brangan
February 27, 2020
Varsha Ganesh: Absolutely. I have never said that the dictum is sacrosanct. I just say it’s what I believe in.
LikeLiked by 2 people
H. Prasanna
February 27, 2020
Thank you @Anu.
Thank you for the reply @ Naren. Yes, I agree with you and BR that making contractual obligations helps dealing with these issues and that some people embrace facing harassment as part of their brand. Contracts and other methods do apply to the instances you mentioned and the broader cinema POV BR talked about.
However, the nature of harassment/exploitation, especially with the marginalized genders, is complicated in that the power is concentrated with men who do not want to give it up. And much of these suggested methods involve so much work to be done by these very same men. This power dynamic gains more weight with the fact that harassment itself is essentially my version versus your version. Even legally, we are in a tricky zone. This is why I wanted to hear from a expert.
More than contractual obligations, we can make more immediate changes by listening to women speak and providing them a safe platform to do so. This essentially flips the power balance and tells them we want to listen to what they have to say, and that is why wanted a woman to talk about this.
Trigger warning: I am going to talk about harassment in some detail to make my point.
For example, when I agree to do something with someone and I don’t feel the way I thought I would feel going in, I am immediately double checking what I am feeling. And I have to deal with it in whichever way possible, so that I can go back to my old self and do the job I am there to do. Unfortunately, my body and my mind do not wait to deal with it (it is like you are out of your body) until a third party validates my feelings, the law says it is harassment, and my contract kicks in. So, essentially, unlike most other crimes or breaches of contract, if I “feel” harassed, I “am” harassed (as in I am going to have to deal with it). Here is where having a safe space to support people who are harassed goes a long way. Sharing the story helps a lot with our thought process during these times and brings forth allies and a sense of validation in the community. Interest in deducing a system in which this “never happens again” begins with listening to them. And like you and many have said, we can tell how much of the story is to support an image, if we hear them out and if they feel safe speaking there. You can walk away if you feel it is fake, but unlike men, for other genders speaking out itself is complicated.
In conclusion, I do agree with part of your and BR’s approach. I would just like to add one thing first. We have to listen to the women and talk to the men.
LikeLiked by 2 people
shaviswa
February 27, 2020
The industry is still full of misogynist creeps. I do not think there will be any clamour to make Kamal apologise for what he did or for that matter bring in any process to prevent future incidents. We all know how the industry treats Chinmayi was her me-too moment on Vairamuthu. A Radha Ravi is able to get away with banishing her from dubbing in Tamil movies. No questions raised, not even a murmur.
LikeLike
brangan
February 27, 2020
Prasanna: And I’m saying that the power structures are slowly changing. Or at least, the newer lot of directors in Tamil are a lot more sensitive and aware, and there are a lot more women in the crews…
I’m not saying it’s already Utopia. But I’m eally doubt if it will go back those days again!
PS: But yes, regarding the old guard, nothing will happen or change, no matter how many people protest.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ItsVerySimple
February 27, 2020
I guess we definitely need to make sure this never happens again on the set – because, if it does happen – it will become whispers Art.
If it becomes Art, then it’s above everything. Like, e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g. Then we will have dissection of the holy art – like yours about Last Tango In Paris – linking full videos of the actual sexual assault that happened on the set and turned into art – and declaring – “It is up to each individual to decide whether they can live with the art created by a man such as Bertolucci or not.” It will become extremely easy to separate the artist from the rapist or the sexual offender once the assault becomes art or the assault happens behind the scenes of the art. And for some strange reason, it becomes extremely difficult to take a stand and say, art be damned.
So, yeah, let’s make sure it doesn’t happen in the sets.
LikeLiked by 1 person
H. Prasanna
February 28, 2020
@Amit Thank you.
“Forever tainted of being the accused” is not unique to sexual harassment. It actually follows any accusation of breach of contractual obligations. So, we need to ask why this question pops up everytime someone is accused of sexual harassment. As I explained in my reply to Naren, sexual harassment is a unique crime/breach. Here, the accused can deny that it happened, apologize that the survivor felt bad but say he thought it was consensual, or say it didn’t happen the way survivor says it happened. All of these question whether the crime/breach happened at all. This is unlike other breaches where you can show damages to prove some breach did take place. So the word of the survivor is the only thing that can accuse the perpetrator and also absolve him.
Trigger warning: I am going to talked about sexual harrasment in detail to make my point.
For example, when someone touches me without my consent, the first thing I feel is that I have lost control over my body/self. And there is no way I can get back my self before the harassment. No amount of compensation, putting a perpetrator in jail will help take back control until I deal with it; and even after it, I am only able to control my triggers better. This is where talking about it greatly helps: talking with professionals, allies and in forums. When you feel that people listen to you and your feelings are valid, it helps you move forward. And we have to make this listening space safe so that they can explore what they are going through fully. And all the other doors are closed: legal action and social shaming only work so much for the survivors. Just saying out loud that he did this and I felt this way helps the survivor, even if the perpetrator thinks and can prove he is well within his rights to do what he did. Ultimately, we are talking so much about this because we want to support the survivors. The best way to start that is by listening to them even if it paints us in shades of gray.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 28, 2020
Have you seen this video, Prasanna? I spoke to Shruti Hariharan about (and around) the Arjun incident.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 28, 2020
LikeLiked by 1 person
ItsVerySimple
February 28, 2020
@Naren
Had Kamal Hassan been exploitative in movies then we should’ve heard or should be hearing similar complaints from Sukanya (Mahanadi), Abirami (Virumaandi), maybe even Gouthami (Kuruthipunal).
That’s a good point but I am afraid it is not adequate. Research and experts say,
there is no weight in an accusation of exploitation made by 1 woman (Rekha) against 1 man (Do not want unfairly name Kamal here);
not even 3 women (Sukanya, Abirami, may be even Gouthami) making the same accusation of exploitation against the same man is good enough;
but only when a dead woman who has been dead for at least five years could come back and provide a testimony that she saw it happen in front of years, the accusation could be attached any merit.
(1 woman exploited + 3 more exploited in the same way + 1 dead ghost woman who saw it all happen = a tiny uncomfortable question on a man’s behavior).
So please add S.N.Lakhsmi (Mahanadi, MMKR, Virumaandi) to your list, and sit down and wait.
LikeLiked by 2 people
ItsVerySimple
February 28, 2020
Oh boy. I just… I just read the cow, milk, vegan analogy. Instant classic.
LikeLike
sai16vicky
February 28, 2020
@Amit Joki:
This is my problem with many of the sexual harassment allegations. Unless the accused sits at the top of the power equation, it is extremely difficult for him/her to save their career and reputation. This is independent of whether the allegation is proved (think Kevin Spacey), which is really unfair to the accused.
One way forward I see is to have a separate legal structure for handling these contracts (like family courts for instance). I really wish the accused in these allegations are given a benefit of doubt (and a fair trial) instead of blatant name calling. But given the times we are in, I honestly don’t have much hope.
LikeLike
Naren
February 28, 2020
As much as we ought to separate the art from the artist, we ought to separate monetary values from humanitarian values too. The principal reason why the “influential” people in the industry suppress accusations against high profile actors is due to the monetary gains from those actors. I don’t know if they mean strictly business or gratitude or greed or expedience or plain sleaziness but the monster lurking behind is absolutely monetary. The most popular but ill-advised practice in which they wallow is “shaming the women (probable victims)”. Bringing a monetary balance by either reducing the salaries of the male actors or increasing the salaries of the female actors to bring it to an even keel would force them to assign equal weightage to all those involved. Equal pay entails not just better treatment of people but would also force the creators to provide much better screen time, better roles etc. thereby improving the quality of the movies.
I cringe like hell when these industry people churn out their prepared statements as a way of fielding tough questions during interviews. One such statement is “this is what the audience expect”. I’m sure that’s true to a certain extent but the relentless prolonging of this is just beyond ridiculous. I mean, using such statements to justify their preachy attitude in movies like how women should dress, behave, perform duties and what goes for men etc. hence generalising and standardising human behaviour, this is where many creators and producers thrive. This is the attitude that makes producers always choose trashy projects over and over and over. It all boils down to the understanding of forces that drive the market . . . audience or the industry. If this is their attitude in movies, I think we can all imagine what it would be like in the real world and more specifically in the working environment.
I’ve heard Jothika say in an interview that the audience is open to many different things but it’s the industry people who are restricting and confining themselves. Gautham Menon, when asked what kind of “messages” he would like to say through his movies, responded asking why he should be saying any message at all and that how he knows any better to preach anything. But ironically, the producers, reserve this latitude only for experienced people who have made a lot of money for them. To them, monetary values and humanitarian values are correlated and this attitude severely curtails the efforts of younger and newer creators from bringing in anything better.
The reason I’ve been referencing incidents from the western movie industry is because we are slow and gut-wrenchingly obtuse but nevertheless we are catching up. People here make it a status symbol to say hollywood this, hollywood that and thereby inevitably falling in line and making the same mistakes and carrying forward the same attitude that hollywood is gradually purging. Apparently, being in a fledgling industry means to be petrified and crippled with fear of branching out and creating our own identity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Naren
February 28, 2020
@BR: It’d b nice and more importantly educational if you could start a youtube segment solely focused on such incidents, issues etc by sitting down with actors, directors, crew members, social workers whoever you deem to be appropriate and willing. You could name it something like “BTS with BR” or “AfterShoot Special” etc. This could be the safe space that H. Prasanna was talking about. This is just a suggestion and is in no way meant to be presumptuous.
LikeLiked by 1 person
H. Prasanna
February 28, 2020
@BR No, I had not seen this interview.
You bring out the context of all of it so beautifully by talking about the work and the workplace; and you essentially embody the concept of safe space by talking about the bystander intervention and social shaming in an open-ended way based on facts you have gathered. But also you are not overtly trying to be “safe”; you are essentially trying to do the best interview you can on the subject. And your definition of an interview and the larger context in which you place it feeds into this.
I can assume you asked or tried to ask male filmmakers to speak on this (and possibly those accused). I didn’t see (may have missed) any interview in which the men in power take this head on like Shruthi Hariharan did. Generally, women want to talk about this in this space, and men hate to. This means you and your team have suffered some of the fallout as well by providing this space for her. You are culpable by association and might lose their business.
What you consider important in cinema and how you draw the reader/listener to it is fascinating. How you contextualize your efforts and how much you want the readers to understand the context always amazes me. It must take great effort from you and your team to consistently achieve this. Coming from you, the very title “five ways to ensure … this never happens again” led me to believe you saw things changing among the recent lot. You thought you could talk to them and they would be open to a system like the one you proposed. So, thank you for all that and this conversation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 28, 2020
Naren: Suggestion taken. That’s really what this Shruti Hariharan interview was about. I asked her if she would be okay talking not just about the incident but the stuff around it — and she graciously agreed. And spoke about the effect on her family, etc.
The only problem with this is getting people to speak. In Hindi cinema, I can easily imagine a Taapsee — say — who’d speak up. Here, it’s a bit more difficult. There have been times I have asked people to speak (not just about this issue but about other potentially controversy-causing ones), and they’ll speak. And then, a day later, they’ll call and say “Can you delete that bit”?
Even this piece, which like every piece, I wanted to be a conversation starter, was not shared by a lot of industry people who usually share my stuff. I got private messages from some.
Maybe the Kamal name made them not want to share? I don’t know.
But yes, suggestion taken. Will keep at it.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Eswar
February 28, 2020
Nice one BR.
This article is a good starting point, but it seem to have limited itself with the symptom (lack of consent) and the outcome or the feedback (what the actors felt) and then jumps straight to solutionizing it.
What is lacking in the article is the understanding of the actual problem. I see ‘Lack of consent’ as a symptom rather than a problem. That which makes people act on others without their consent is the problem. And there are likely to be many reasons for this behaviour.
I understand that in a short article it is difficult to get into details. But when it lack deeper analysis, different perspectives, contrasting the attitude in this industry with other industries and the society at large. It becomes easier to dismiss the solution as lacking nuance and not understanding reality.
It would be great to see an in-depth, longer piece like your Vikram’s profile for Caravan.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Naren
February 28, 2020
@BR: Maybe it’s just a matter of “starting trouble”. If the Hindi industry people start talking then maybe people here would come forward too. Taapsee would be a good start. Anyway, your persistent efforts are much appreciated.
LikeLike
blueberry
February 28, 2020
@BR: I hear you. It is now an urgent responsibility for anyone who has a platform to share it with those who don’t have one. I had not seen that interview; if your intention is to move in this direction, it makes you an even more valuable and impact-ful cinema historian. Good vibes to you.
But BR, I think there is some deep digging to be done around your analogy with the cow-milk-choices vis a vis art vs artist. Varsha Ganesh had articulated this wonderfully. I am adding a few thoughts.
‘What I mean by “art is separate from the artist” is this:
Take this analogy:
The artist is the cow. Art is milk.’
The issue with this is– the cow is not using milk as her ‘art’ to gain power/money/popularity. She is trying to live her life and feed her children. Humans extract milk from cows.
We abandon industrial complexes that exploit cows to take away their power to continue the exploitation– we do not shun cows for using their ability to produce milk to try to rule over us!
Artists who abuse the power that they have gained by the popularity of/acclaim for their art need to have that power taken away from them. This means we must take their work off the pedestals that we place them upon. With the fall of their work is the fall of their power to abuse.
This comment is not intended to disparage your beliefs. It is because there are people who emulate your thought process– we saw one on this thread, even. And I am not saying you are responsible for everything that people do based on your views. It’s just something to think about 🙂
LikeLiked by 4 people
Amit Joki
February 28, 2020
Sai Vicky: Yes, this whole “woke” culture is too toxic to begin with. People’s court is the law of the land in such cases and we had an excellent “Section 375” which shed some light of how dangerous this could be.
H Prasanna: My points are only related to contractual consent given and then giving out statements which contradict the consent. If the contractee were to consent on oath in court, and if they were to suggest they didn’t mean it, that’d be a punishable offence no? Lying under oath?
So, why should it be any different? I say, in the contract, there should be a legal clause that if after the consent, the actor feels uncomfortable, the contract can be terminated and the reason for dropping the project be a sealed report. I’d further add, from the actor’s POV that if the word got out in any way as to why an actor dropped out, the other party should be held liable for all the opporunties lost due to the actor being considered “difficult to work with”.
Blindly taking the supposed victim’s words is just grossly unfair. Especially since you say the crime isn’t visible, which is true.
Maybe we should just have a legal witness everytime such things happen and for every five minutes interval they should ask, “Do you still consent?”
Also, these kinds of cases are too gender oriented. Ever heard of Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp? Will Amber Heard be ever put in jail for all the hurt she caused and lost opportunities and the money that comes with it, not counting the irreperable damage it did to his reputation.
LikeLike
Ravi K
February 28, 2020
Naren wrote: “Had Kamal Hassan been exploitative in movies then we should’ve heard or should be hearing similar complaints from Sukanya (Mahanadi), Abirami (Virumaandi), maybe even Gouthami (Kuruthipunal).”
The “we would have heard about it” argument doesn’t work. Women receive such vitriolic backlash when they come out with such accusations (especially against the big stars) that it’s easier for them to stay silent than to risk their careers being ruined. I’m not claiming that Kamal is a serial offender, or that he did anything inappropriate to the aforementioned women. But if he did, he could have easily gotten away with it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Eswar
February 29, 2020
Art is not sacrosanct. But that doesn’t necessarily make the Art and the Artist inseparable. An Artist’s ego does grow from his work. But the work can also speak for itself. This is not necessarily the way to perceive art. But this is also a way to perceive art. To dismiss an art for its creator also means to appreciate one for its creator. A praise for the most benevolent artist’s unbearable art.
The consumption of the product irrespective of the nature of the producer or the production is not specific to Art. The gadget that is displaying this, the toy that the kid is playing, the dress that is protecting, the platform that is steaming and that tasty meal from Saravana Bhavan. All bear something not so humane about the producer or the production.
The most fascinating separation of the art and the artist, the producer and the consumer is Religion. Man creates religion. On that pedestal he instills a God, created in his image and attributes every creation to Him including himself. One may curse the creator, the man, for all his vices. But still believes in his creation for all His worth.
Art and the Artist. Same yet different.
LikeLike
H. Prasanna
February 29, 2020
@Amit Thank you for listening to me. This ensuing argument of mine probably regresses badly, and maybe plainly wrong. But still, if it sells you on listening, it works for me. This is because I hope and trust listening will enable you to see the effects on the survivor like it did for me. Maybe I can make a better case in the future, but this is the best I can do now. P.S. this is why I wanted a legal expert who works with women to write this; she can definitely make a better argument than mine.
But, you are stuck with me and here it goes:
Even in the circumstances and examples you have mentioned, the only way in which the accused can be absolved is by the word of the survivor. JK Rowling, after employing Johnny Depp, said she was doing what Heard and Depp said they wanted, in a joint statement released the past year after their divorce was finalised: letting them “get on with their lives”.
What saved Johnny from the Deepp and got back his opportunity was JK’s interpretation of Amber Heard’s words. I don’t see another way the accused can get his opportunity to work back, do you? And the survivors will only speak if it is safe for them to speak and if it helps them in moving on. So, it is imperative we listen to them and foster/embody such a safe space in every workplace and community even if it is because we just want the accused to get back/keep his job opportunities. So, yes, we have to listen, contradicting contractual statements and all, until they finish because they are going through it and it is not over until they say it is over.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
February 29, 2020
The Amber Heard-Johnny Depp case seems to be a case of mutual abuse. Depp is no innocent as the latest salvo (accidentally shared by his previous lawyers) indicates.
And in our country, men who have been accused of sexual harassment have merrily continued in their jobs. The kerfuffle was limited to when #MeToo was news. They continue to act in films, work in corporates, as journalists, as producers and directors. The women who spoke out, on the other hand, have faced enormous loss – both personally and professionally.
Let’s not hasten to paint the woke culture as toxic.
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
February 29, 2020
Anu Warrier: Let’s not hasten to paint the woke culture as toxic.
The term “woke culture” is itself toxic to me. It evokes armchair activists on twitter, seated on a VERY high horse, “calling out” things simply because they want to be seen as “woke”.
What I find distressing is the utter lack or nuance in these stances, the utter unwillingness to engage with the underlying complexities of an issue (whatever it is).
For instance, when we argued about KABIR SINGH (or about many other films), it was a genuine discussion. You put forth arguments. You explained your POV. We went back and forth. Other commenters joined in.
I’m not saying we changed the world, but it was a collective “discussion”.
That is what is needed. I would not call you “woke”. I would call you concerned, someone who is trying, someone who is willing to TALK about an issue.
The wokes, on the other hand, are an entirely different breed and the ridiculous black-and-white stances they take would be hilarious if not so sad.
LikeLike
Naren
February 29, 2020
Anu Warrier: It’s not just our country where guilty men come off not just unscathed but continued to be celebrated. Amidst protests from several activists, Roman Polanski just won a César award for best director and there were a lot of walkouts from the show including Adèle Haenel. There’s a video of this incident.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Amit Joki
February 29, 2020
Woke culture is supporting a gender orientation to look good. Woke culture is without reason. Woke culture is Maisel from The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel saying, “First of all, my roommate Petra was friendly and fat, which was perfect. I’ll have someone to eat with who won’t steal my boyfriend” is completely acceptable while Arjun Reddy calling someone a “fat chick” will cause such an outrage while Maisel can go on and be marvelous.
Woke culture is hailing a rapist because he came out as a woman. If this not toxic, I don’t know what is. Woke culture is raising children as “they”. Woke culture is a bandwagon everyone is trying to get into to look good and get internet brownie points.
And Johnny-Amber was mutual? Please, it is at least 20:80. Amber mutilating him and Johnny ranting about doing things is on different celestial levels. What Johnny did is how all those not powerful react – whine about doing something without doing something because they’re not capable.
Woke culture is considering even if in your words, it was mutual, which is for me, suggests a 50-50 abuse which definitely isn’t the case, Amber Heard laughably continues to be a Human Rights Ambassador, while Depp has been shunned. If it was “mutual” should not the effects and outrage be similar too, I don’t see that being the case.
Vairamuthu has been shunned. Chinmayi is getting to sing the same amount of songs she has been singing before coming out – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinmayi_discography.
If all those “alleged” predators aren’t put in jail without law taking its due course, it is a good thing. The name has been tainted permanently. It will not go away, but for putting them in jail and taking everything away from them, let’s fast track this or not, but law should take its due course and if convicted, be that as it may.
Woke culture is Amber telling, “Tell the world, Johnny, tell them: I Johnny Depp, a man, I’m a victim too of domestic violence…” and getting away with people supporting her saying it was mutual. Hell it is.
Woke culture is Amber Heard not being boycotted from any film but James Gunn being fired over something far less harmful, just to appease the woke people and to not let it affect business and we are talking about Disney here. Woke culture is the definition of toxic.
LikeLike
Eswar
February 29, 2020
Amit: Just curious. How do you say Vairamuthu is shunned?
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
February 29, 2020
Amit Joki: Woke culture is supporting a gender orientation to look good.
I was talking about wokes in general – not just gender-specific. I mean, even those who weigh in on social stuff.
Like there’s this film with Johnny Depp, MINAMATA, which I saw in Berlin and wrote about. It’s about an American photographer for LIFE magazine who went to a Japanese village and documented industrial pollution that was causing grave illnesses. His photos exposed the story to the world.
As soon as the film was over, the crowd streaming out was dismissing it as yet another ‘white saviour’ narrative.
Now, true. He is a ‘white saviour’. But the story is REAL. And the context matters. At that point, America WAS the window to the world. So unless the story broke there, it might not have been taken seriously. And besides, how would poor Japanese fisherpeople have taken this story to the world?
Dismiss the film all you want. I didn’t care for it myself. But this is not the problematic ‘white saviour’ trope from regular Hollywood films. You cannot take terms and randomly bung them into a review. Each case is very specific.
This is what I meant by lack of nuance and context.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Amit Joki
February 29, 2020
brangan: My comment was to explain as to why I said woke culture was toxic. It just so happened that my comment came after yours. I agree with your comment.
The woke people have a new hierarchy, as far as gender is concerned – LGBTQ > Women > Men. In issues surrounding LGBTQ and Women, they support LGBTQ (women not wanting trans people using same toilets, sports etc… where LGBTQ is unconditionally supported over women) and when it comes to men and women, women tend to get the support from people who don’t even know what the issue is (eg: Amber getting more leeway than a man can imagine).
Also there’s another hierarchy Oversized People > Black People > Race other than White > White. The Mayor of London had banned white models in their swimsuits saying it causes unrealistic body expectations.
But now, drumrolls it is allowed, and guess why? Because the women are now oversized (or how some woke people would like them to refer to as – curvy) covered in lingerie of their skin color and this was all over the place in huge billboards and this ad apparently won the “Inclusion of the year” or some kind of shitty award. WTF?
All the above is fine if the arguments have merits. The new hierarchy is welcome because it has been inverted for soo long. But problem begins when woke culture promotes taking sides with those on the higher level of the aforementioned hierarchy without having an iota of knowledge of what the issue is.
Every damn year, there’s been a growing trend in Twitter as I have to come to see when the Oscars time comes. There’s soo much furore over the lack of female representation from the woke people some even asking the criteria to be tweaked so more women can get in.
We should just have categories to everything. Categorize the hell out of them. Best Female Director. Best Trans Director. Best Man Director. Best Black Director. Best Asian Director and so on. May be, may be then, this bullshit will stop.
Eswar: He was initially part of Ponniyan Selvan and was part of the posters too. Later after #Vairamuthu trended, he was dropped and as far as my knowledge goes he hasn’t been part of films much after the accusations.
LikeLike
Eswar
February 29, 2020
Amit: I wasn’t aware he got dropped after tending. I thought he was fading away in the lyric world even before the controversy. Also I noticed Vairamuthu’s recent speeches regularly appearing in my YouTube feed, so didn’t think he was affected by the whole incident. I just felt he is presenting himself in a different platform.
Btw, that Ad you had mentioned I did see it here. Didn’t realise it had such a popularity.
LikeLike
Srinivas R
February 29, 2020
@Amit – dont know much about Woke culture, but it is factually incorrect to say Vairamuthu is shunned and Chinmayee hasnt had proffessional impact. She was barred from dubbing and except Govind Vasantha, no one would offer her songs. Things took a turn because Vetrimaran and Mithran decided to stick with her, at least for her talent.
Vairamuthu meanwhile has faced 0 legal action, gets to attend events with Rajini, Kamal, Surya et all. He is also offered platform by media to talk about all sorts of social issues.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 29, 2020
Interesting story, relevant to this discussion:
https://variety.com/2020/film/actors/russian-press-open-letter-dau-natasha-berlinale-ilya-khrzhanovsky-1203519822/
LikeLike
Amit Joki
February 29, 2020
Srinivas R: I am not saying Chinmayee didn’t take any hit, just that she’s been getting the same amount of songs she’s been getting prior to the accusations. Just that her singing output hasn’t been affected, which is a good thing. But Vairamuthu is reportedly dropped from Ponniyin Selvan. That’s some repercussion.
As far the legal action, I don’t know, she’s already filed with NCW, couldn’t do so with dubbing union. When there’s a pattern established by multiple women, that person should be shunned and be held guilty by the court of people.
There’s large support for MJ Akbar accuser and Chinmayee at least on Twitter and there’s hate on MJ Akbar and Vairamuthu on the same platform, so that’s heartening.
Vairamuthu did only few films in 2019 which I think were signed previous to the accusations, but he hasn’t been featured in 2020 with any biggies. Mani Ratnam would do good to keep him off his project. He is getting desperate and posting videos in Twitter where he’s being ridiculed. That is some sort of shunning imo.
Lyricists are active even upto 70s and 80s so I don’t think Vairamuthu is slowing down or anything. If he gets a big project with a top hero, I’ll rethink if he is really shunned within the industry.
LikeLike
Naren
February 29, 2020
BR: Here are the possibilities that I see regarding the “Dau Natasha” controversy . . .
Ilya Khrzhanovsky and Jekaterina Oertel did infact subject the actors to those physical and psychological hardships hoping that they would get the best possible output but they were still unsatisfied with the outcome. They can’t admit it as they would be punished and ostracised.
Lines blurred between filmmaking and exercising their Soviet-era fantasies.
Overreaction by the media all over the “first world” countries.
BTW, I don’t get that bit about “non-professional” actors being subjected to such conditions. It’s not like you throw a person in the middle of Siberia, film that person’s survival attempts from a distance using a telephoto lens and that person is going to feel like they’re in a 5-Star beach resort just because they’re professional.
It’d be hypocritical to isolate this movie on grounds of unsimulated sex acts. Some of the existent ones are as follows –
Ai no korida [In the Realm of the Senses] [1976]
Caligula [1979]
Le Pornographe [The Pornographer] [2001]
Intimacy [2001]
The Brown Bunny [2003]
9 Songs [2004]
Lie With Me [2005]
Antichrist [2009]
There are many more and nothing was done to curtail any of those. “Deep Throat” can also be included in the list but I think it’s a slightly different card to be dealt here. “Dau Natasha” should be no more exploitative than any of these. The subject of consent wasn’t mentioned or even implied in the article but I could be wrong. What do you think?
LikeLike
Ram
March 1, 2020
BR, on a similar note, interested to know what would be your opinion about vulgarity in lyrics, in this context. Two songs that easily come to my mind are Anbe Anbe from Jeans (‘satre nimirnden thalai sutthi ponen’) and another one on a bit extreme side (manga manga song with Prabhu Deva and Kushboo). I guess it’s safe to assume neither Aishwarya Rai nor Kushboo knew what the lyrics meant when they were shot. Even if they did, there are innumerable other songs that have lyrics that go about describing the song female lead’s physical attributes and in some cases a double entendre implying what the male lead intends to do with her in a crass manner. The songs themselves would be choreographed differently sometimes with the poor non-Tamil female lead unaware about the crass content of the song that either describes her appearance or contains innuendos of sex.
LikeLike
Enigma
March 2, 2020
@Amit, to add to the hierarchy in woke culture, in relation to religion: Islam > Christianity > Buddhism > Sikhism > all other religion > Hinduism/Judaism. The woke people are the modern day equivalent of the caviar commies of the past. These idiots have to be ignored for the sake of our sanity.
LikeLike
Eswar
March 2, 2020
Was there a time ever in the history where there was “=“ among these groups i.e Men, women, transgender, blacks, whites etc? If the imbalance among these groups has always been the normality in History, then the current description of woke culture described here seems to be perfectly normal and expected right? Then why so much anger?
Is it because now the tables are turned and the balance is titled towards the other side? If the concern is that this woke culture is not working towards an equal society, then please be aware that
some of these groups are fighting for their freedom, individuality and respect for the first time. One can’t expect everyone in the group to start off with a balanced view straight away.
This does not mean that these movements should be devoid of criticism. Criticise, but try to be just and introspect one’s own position, privilege and history. Otherwise even a just anger and criticism against this culture will be exploited by people with their own agenda. Just like, as BR had commented earlier, how the concern for equality and respect is taken over by groups which makes everything black and white and do not want to engage with meaningful conversations.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Uma
March 2, 2020
BR, I would compare the artist to buffalo bill and the art akin to the skin dress. If the art arises from a certain perversion — though not visible directly sometimes in the work of art — there is still something that transforms the inherent nature of that art and cannot be separated from the artist’s transgressions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 2, 2020
I would like to separate the woke set of India from where the conversation is in say West Coast America.
By and large, do Indian women really raise superficial issues? Sorry, I am not at all convinced of that and there is a lot that men have to do to provide a safe environment for women. This does not mean ‘all men’ are horrible to the core but there is a problem and railing out defensively then at wokeness is a bad look. Should I talk about an ex senior at a storeyed and fabled company (a doyen of India Inc etc) who absolutely loved shaking hands with women? To the point when he offered a lift on a late working day to my colleague, she excused herself out of it? This when he was 60 plus already by the way. I am talking about something that is still ‘harmless’ (the way a Gen Xer female senior in the org described him, by the way) on the spectrum compared to how far the shit goes. If you want to stand by and not do anything about it, don’t fret when women embrace more radical solutions. Because they don’t have the luxury of waiting that you as a man enjoy.
Now if you talk about America, yes at times the conversation would appear to have progressed to fringe issues. So much so that the once trigger happy Natalie Wynn (better known by her YouTube handle Contrapoints) herself lashed out at cancel culture.
But again, when you contrast these goings on with the horrible news that has come out about Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer or Roger Ailes, even over there, there is much that remains to be done at a very basic level. Don’t extrapolate a general irrelevance from the fringe noise. It is of course a very comfortable position for men to take but that doesn’t make it an honest one, unfortunately.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Amit Joki
March 2, 2020
Madan:
What are these “radical” solutions that we’re fretting about? I for one have been vocal in this thread that whenever questionable actions are taking place, we should have specialists who’ll make sure everything is consentful at all point of time. Where is the fretting?
When has anyone suggested otherwise in this thread?
This has nothing to do with woke culture. You couldn’t be more wrong. If you had cared to read my sooooo many examples of high profile nature, you’d know what we are talking about. Let’s take Transgender using toilets. TWO views – From the binary – “We don’t want them sharing it with us, we feel uncomfortable sharing toilet with someone who was once a X for most of their life”, the other view – “I am now a Y and I can’t be discriminated on the usage of Y toilets.”
What I am saying – Let’s discuss each on its own merits. What woke culture tends to do – embracing the latter argument and disregarding the former POV and will even go as far as to label them transphobic and these will be from people who may have never used a public toilet, ever, in their lives but hey, I look cool on the internet, so why not?
We are talking about irrelevant people trying to win the brownie points. People wanting to look cool with serious issues, is bad. People supporting a narrative because it is cool is bad. People using irrelevant fancy words in their film reviews so there’ll be a discussion and more eyeballs + gaining brownie points is bad.
No one is telling anything about the actual stakeholders/concerned parties regarding the issues. Woke culture practioners make it about themselves and how holier than thou they’re for supporting something.
I support the issues and arguments on its own merit. What I don’t support is people hijacking narratives to look cool and disregard arguments without even hearing it out.
Eswar & Madan (this should really make it crystal clear):
I am happy for them. I have no qualms whatsoever with the genuinly concerned. But there’s also a larger section who are just trying to use these for their own interests, hijacking the entire narrative and that’s what I am referring to.
For eg: Black People who benefitted from the banning of white people ad and supporting the black people ad < Sadiq Khan who got the the precious brownie points for doing it. Elon Musk trended for saying he’ll raise his child as “they”. Many celebrities gained popularity for saying so. What in the world’s business is ours to know how they raise their child? Nobody asked them, but they come out of blue and say it, look ma, this is how “woke” I am. This is wrong.
LikeLike
Madan
March 2, 2020
“This has nothing to do with woke culture. You couldn’t be more wrong. If you had cared to read my sooooo many examples of high profile nature, you’d know what we are talking about” – Actually I did carefully read and that is why I spotted that before you embarked on your rant, you introduced the phrase woke culture in reference to sai vicky’s comment about the accused not getting benefit of doubt. And you, whether or not you intended to, ended up conflating the issue of sexual harassment with woke culture. And this is what typically happens in these discussions and then you or others who use the term woke culture will say, oh, that’s not what I meant by the term. Well then what exactly did you mean by it? You are just citing a few examples by the way which don’t necessarily fit into a pattern. What can be DEFINED as woke culture. Nobody knows other than that on the one side, the self-proclaimed wokes swear by it and use their wokeness to beat up others not living up to their exalted standards of behaviour and on the other those who dislike wokeness club all behaviours they find irritating as woke culture. But now, coming to sexual harassment….
If you really think sexual harassment can be litigated in the same way as other types of crime like murder or theft, you are very much mistaken. There is a reason why women demand that a number of them saying that a person indulged in sexual harassment should be believed. Now whether a number of them necessarily amount to credible allegations or a conspiracy against the person can only be decided by looking at the details of each case. But again, to then bring up the term woke culture and rant against MeToo is to ignore why it came about in the first place. Organisations had decades to actually live by the workplace harassment redressal systems they had put in place. They did not. They persistently protected powerful people and threw their female employees under the bus. This is the backlash to the long standing duplicity of powerful men who posed as feminists on the outside and were predators to those who REALLY worked with them. Debating whether this is right or wrong is pointless because these men, when they had the chance to do the right thing, chose otherwise. And that is what I meant by radical solutions. This is one example of a radical solution. Evidently, it makes men deeply uncomfortable. And there will be collateral damage. Who knows, maybe one day you or I will be that collateral damage too. Is it right? No. But this really isn’t about right or wrong because this is about women saying they’ve had enough of being patient.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Anu Warrier
March 2, 2020
One point about the White People ad/Black People ad: In primarily Western societies, there’s a popular perception of beauty (as indeed, there’s in India) – you have to be Caucasian, blonde, stick thin with big assets, especially for swimsuit ads. Sadiq Khan banned those ads based on the well-studied and documented fact that these sort of beauty expectations were responsible for body dysmorphia among adolescent girls.
The reason that another ad – this time with brown and black bodies, in far heavier/curvier figures, was lauded was simply because a mainstream ad showed that beauty could be found in many shades and many sizes.
And that’s the reason why it won an award for inclusion (without quotes).
I have no truck with Elon Musk, but for a man (or any other celebrity) of his privilege to say that he will raise his child as non-binary, It’s not a question of being ‘woke’; it is using your power and privilege to give voice to countless others who are voiceless and bullied. It is giving them a public identity, a validation that they count.
No, we don’t need to know how celebrities raise their children. But if that will mean one more child feels they are not alone, that they are ‘normal’ (whatever ‘normal’ means today), then more power to them for speaking out.
l also don’t need to know other people’s sexual orientation, but then I’m heterosexual. Ask any LGBTQ and they will tell you that having a celebrity come out of the closet as proudly LGBTQ means the world to them. In a heteronormative, heterosexual society, these people find a person(s) willing to amplify their often-lone voices. That’s not being ‘woke’. That’s common humanity.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Eswar
March 2, 2020
What I don’t support is people hijacking narratives to look cool and disregard arguments without even hearing it out…
But there’s also a larger section who are just trying to use these for their own interests, hijacking the entire narrative and that’s what I am referring to.
Amit: I can see your point. Do you have a realistic way of criticising the people who are taking advantages of this movement and at the same time support those voices that need to be heard? Do you think people on the other side, who genuinely want to be heard, be able to understand the differences you point out and not mistake you for someone wanting to maintain the status quo? If they misunderstood you, whom are they going to take sides with? With you or the other group who are gaining brownie points from the whole situation?
What would you do if you are one of those voices that needs to be heard? Would you in principle reject the people taking advantage of the movement and there by risk not being heard? Or would you just take sides with them hoping that you could get your voice along the way staying with them.
In my view this is a part of any movement that is trying to stand up on their feet. I don’t see this as a special character to this particular culture.
Have you wondered if people arguing from this side could potentially be doing things in order to score brownie points? Project themselves as warriors working for a just society but all they really care is to maintain their position in the strata? Or just want to feel satisfied about having “intellectual” and “responsible” discussions? Take this thread for example. Unless people talking about this here go out and do something practically that would help those affected groups, are we not mere arm chair critics arguing upon our ideologies and positions without adding no real value to the affected people? Aren’t we doing only what Elon Musk is doing but at a scale that we are capable of?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Madan
March 3, 2020
Anu Warrier : As per the usual, I am in the middle when it comes to the white people ads.
First of all, I don’t think banning such ads changes anything other than enraging an already bigoted white right and providing them another lever in the culture war. I would much rather you insist on diversity in the ads themselves.
Secondly, I would rather ban size zero for all races and ethnicities in such ads. After all the problem affects white women too. I heard from a friend who lives in SF that the new thing among young women is to aspire to have a figure akin to anorexic/bulimic people and he wondered if Fiona Apple was an icon for such people. Lordie can’t imagine anybody wanting to look like Fiona in her current state but there it is. So yes, a push towards curvy women is good.
Also, I think it’s time to put some of the less desirable aspects of the women’s liberation wave of the 70s back in the bottle and acknowledge that they have served to accelerate objectification of women in popular culture. To that end, I think it should at least be made very difficult to feature skimpy clad models in flirtatious poses in ads. It is not necessary to have THAT to sell your product so stop. No, I am not asking for a return to Victorian gowns. And if somebody walks around in public in a skimpy dress, that is her choice. I am addressing the same point that you have made that such ads only put pressure on women to aspire to a certain image of the ideal woman that is thoroughly sexualised. Have attractive women in ads by all means but stop sexualising their presentation. Not just the poses but the weird camera angles that zoom in from the floor etc. Remember there was a time when this didn’t happen on TV. Yeah, so we can do it again.
LikeLike
Badri
March 3, 2020
If a non-consensual kiss is not a sexual assault, i dont know what esle is. KB and Kamal planned an executed this assault under broad daylight on a minor. Period.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Naren
March 3, 2020
All u SJWs, here’s an example of an extremely prejudicial capitalistic exploitation of the current social plight. This caused a furore which made the likes of Piers Morgan denounce the product. Thoughts . . .
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
March 3, 2020
@Naren – I’m not a ‘social justice warrior’ in the pejorative sense the word is used today. But yes, if the label means that I’ll stand for what I believe in, I’ll wear that label with pride.
Coming to the ad: Gillette is not the first company to get into the culture wars. It won’t be the last. I’d like to see what the work culture is in the company before I think of this as exploitative or hypocritical. Because, honestly, in today’s polarising climate, Gillette is more likely to lose market share for pointing out that the time has come for toxic masculinity to end. And as such, it’s a brave effort to begin a discussion.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
March 3, 2020
@Madan – your stance regarding the ads: No arguments there, brother! I endorse every single one of your points.
Just one point regarding the ad itself, the ad wasn’t banned because there was no diversity. It was the banned because of the impossible ideal of beauty that it sold.
LikeLike
sridharraman
March 3, 2020
The post and the comments seem to be diverging in opposite directions. As I kept scrolling down some of the comments, I was wondering, “hmm, wonder when this is going to turn into a MRA thread” and it did with a “supposed hierarchy” where MEN are in the bottom! (such an oppressed species they are!)
The “Vairamuthu and Chinmayi” equivalence takes the cake for the daftest thing I have read! Yikes!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 3, 2020
@Naren That ad is nothing more and nothing less than a long in the tooth MNC feeling lost in today’s world and clumsily seeking relevance by hopping onto a current topic rather than standing by its brand boldly. Given that razors and shaving cream have a specific target market, that ad is terribly misdirected. That’s it. The fact that Morgan chooses to vent over it says more about him than some imagined global conspiracy or whatever against men. There’s nothing out there, snap out of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amit Joki
March 3, 2020
Let’s see the brownie points of this blog – the likes. I have received none. But the opposing views that have acted as a retort to my comments have gotten nearly 10+ likes. Make of it what you will.
I know my POV is not the popular opinion (like how yours is, and we can say popular based on the very small sample size of whose comments were liked or not), People will judge me for my views and probably will ignore me in this blog for not having the same POV as yours. I don’t gain to stand anything by this and people will probably resent me.
It has been tiring for me to explain time and again that the people benefiting from pretending to sit on a high horse are far greater than the concerned groups and instead of discussing how they should not be allowed to hijack the narratives, you guys are painting as if I am against the people who are actually part of this movement, whose lives depend on it.
This is the exploitation of the situation. This is acting as a smokescreen. Believe me they are a negative advertisement to the whole actual movement. I have seen people dismissing the movement (as opposed to dismiss the exploiters) as a result of this.
If you cannot see the problem in this, God help us.
4.
EXCELLENT. This was what I had hoped the discussions would be on. But no, let the exploitation run. When everything that can be milked from it is milked, when there will be a next movement, and believe me, there will be one, the actual bunch of people who the movement should have all been about will be left with dicks in their hands.
Anu Warrier:
WHAT YOU’RE DOING IS INFLUENCING THEM TO BECOME SOMETHING, WHICH IS BASICALLY FORCING SOMEONE WHO DOESN’T HAVE AN AGENCY.
WOULD YOU BE SO SUPPORTIVE OF INDIAN PARENTS RAISING THEIR GIRL CHILD TO BE MEEK AND BOY CHILD TO BE A MACHOMAN?
IF THE GIRL DECIDES ON HER OWN TO BE MEEK OR NOT IS HER CHOICE AND SHE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO MAKE THAT DECISION HERSELF. WHEN THE PARENTS INFLICT IT, IT WILL BECOME THEIR NATURE.
SAME GOES FOR THE BOYS.
LET ANYONE BE ANYTHING BUT LET THEM MAKE THAT DAMN CHOICE AND DON’T PUSH IT DOWN THEIR THROAT BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN, EVEN IF IT IS UNINTENTIONAL.
CELEBRITIES COMING OUT IS FANTASTIC AND I HAVEN’T SAID A WORD AGAINST THEM. AND FOR GOD’S SAKE, KNOW, THAT THEY ARE THE ONES WHO WILL ACTUALLY “give voice to countless others who are voiceless and bullied.” and not some fake woke attention monger ELON MUSK.
Oh Anu. You have some talent for this! WHEN DID I EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT CELEBRITIES COMING OUT. OR DO YOU NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE OF WHAT “COMING OUT” MEANS AND “BEING WOKE FOR WOKE’S SAKE AND TELLING THE WORLD THEY’LL RAISE THEIR CHILD AS ‘THEY’? LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR, IT IS NOT.
I AM TYPING MY RESPONSE IN ALL CAPS SO YOU’LL HAVE A BETTER READING AND WON’T FURTHER TWIST MY WORDS TO PAINT ME BAD AND TO MAKE YOUR POINT. THAT’S COMMON HUMANITY.
Madan:
Here’s my comment:
There are several cases where there has not been a pattern, a first case of wrongfully using the law to frame someone they might not like.
The Section 375 movie showed how craving for someone’s blood en masse without listenting to the arguments, will always end up in a bad way.
Also, there’s small feature called “FIND IN PAGE”. YOU CAN PRESS CTRL+F and search for, “PATTERN ESTABLISHED” but since it might be too inconvenient for you, let me put it right here,
READ THAT SLOWLY.
ALSO LET ME SAY THIS:
IN CASE OF THE ACCUSED BEING FIRST-TIME OFFENDER, WHEN THERE’S NOT A PATTERN ESTABLISHED, I DON’T ASK THAT THEY BE GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT.
That’s what Sai Vicky said. Here’s what I have to say, THE ACCUSED SHOULDN’T BE BIASED AGAINST FROM THE WORD GO. DON’T GIVE HIM THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT. JUST LET THE MAN MAKE HIS ARGUMENTS WITHOUT A MILLION PEOPLE CRAVING FOR HIS BLOOD AS WAS THE CASE IN SECTION 375 AND SO MANY SUCH CASES.
Also, if you read my immediate comment, and in all my further comments, I have never talked about sexual harassment at all.
Woke culture in my definition is about joining a movement to look cool. Do I need to remind of people who put BLACK DPs in their WhatsApp and be their misogynistc self the very next day?
The one time I did refer to woke culture was in terms of not having a en masse reaction to a guy who was wrongly framed but he didn’t get the justice because everyone joined the bandwagon and influenced the judgement AND THIS CONTEXT WAS IN THE NEXT IMMEDIATE SENTENCE.
KAMAL WILL GET AWAY AND WONT ROT IN JAIL BECAUSE HIS POPULARITY WILL MATCH THE CROWD BAYING FOR HIS BLOOD, KAMAL WON’T HAVE ANY MATERIAL DAMAGE. NO REPUTATION SMEARED. In the worst case, HE’LL HAVE A FAIR-TRIAL.
But if it was an unknown actor in the 80s, he’d probably end up in jail largely due to the overpowering influence of people baying for his blood and he defintiely won’t get a fair trial. THIS IS WHEN THERE ISN’T A PATTERN ESTABLISHED AND IS THE FIRST TIME THE ACCUSED IS EVER BEING ACCUSED OF SUCH CRIME. Don’t waddle in your next comment that “I SUPPORT ME TOO PERPETRATORS”. I DO NOT.
I have talked about how we should have contracts that protect women from losing opportunities and to be able to get out of doing uncomfortable things without being termed “difficult to work with”.
I have spoken about having specialists to be on set when questionable things are being done to ensure every party is consentful the whole time.
This all seems to have gone over your head. Conveniently so because it doesn’t suit your narrative.
SHOW ME ONE INSTANCE WHERE I HAVE DISCOURAGED THE VICTIM. SHOW ME ONE INSTANCE WHERE I HAVE DISREGARDED THE MeToo movement.
Again, I’ll quote myself just so this doesn’t go over your head:
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 3, 2020
How low can one’s reading comprehension get, Yikes!
Woke people for the sake of being woke are a very very small percentage, even negligible, of the world population but still very large compared to the actual people who the movement should be about. I said these follow the “supposed” heirarchy when taking a stand.
Take a dictionary and read slowly what “supposed” means. Men are pretty much still at the top of the heirarchy, no doubts about that.
And regarding Vairamuthu and Chinmayee. I am happy Vairamuthu is being ignored (better would be if he was convicted and jailed) and Chinmayee, though surely having suffered lost of opporunities isn’t exactly boycotted, WHICH IS A GOOD THING. I am not discounting the lost opportunities, simply stating there are opporunties still, which is a good thing because few decades ago, she might have been completely boycotted as “difficult to work with”. I agree this is a low standard, but society is evovling.
Ideally, there shouldn’t have been a loss of opportunities at all, but we will get there, slowly but surely.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Badri
March 3, 2020
I’m surprised neither BR nor others on this blog have come down heavily on what would be called a molestation. Is it because of KB and Kamal? What if lesser mortals were involved. To say that “the kiss was wrong” is to put it very mildly. The kiss was a sexual crime committed on a girl. It’s that simple.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Eswar
March 4, 2020
Amit: Sure, the number of ‘likes’ is one way to look at it. Another way is to understand ‘How one feels about the argument they make’. It is unlikely for one to feel despicable about their own argument and still make a case for it. If you agree with this line of thought, then it is probably true that we make a case for something only when we feel right about it or at the least good about it. Either of these can be very self satisfying. To feel satisfied about one’s own action is a great brownie point in itself even if it is not received from others.
Similarly, even when one doesn’t garner enough likes after making a comment or receive a lot of push back, they can still feel satisfied by perceiving that they are fighting against something big from a minority position. David vs Goliath. This emotion again can be a great motivation to pursue one’s argument even when the majority is against it.
On the other hand when one’s argument aligns with the majority, they can feel motivated and satisfied about how they are appreciated by the majority.
So there is at the least an emotional benefit by participating in these arguments, irrespective of what our stance is. Consider this thread for example. Most people participating in a discussion like this are usually clear about their own stance. Any self doubt is a rarity. Assuming this is true, then what motivates someone to participate here? What is that one gets out of it? Is it to persuade others? Is it to win arguments? Is it to point out how somebody has got it wrong? Or is it merely to show off one’s own stance?
I know, for me, at least a part of the reason, is the number of ‘likes’,. But there is always more to it 🙂.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anu Warrier
March 4, 2020
WHAT YOU’RE DOING IS INFLUENCING THEM TO BECOME SOMETHING, WHICH IS BASICALLY FORCING SOMEONE WHO DOESN’T HAVE AN AGENCY.
Actually, it isn’t. Raising a child to be non- binary is actually giving them the choice to decide their gender for themselves. It is saying that he won’t decide for his child whether they are boy or girl. They get to decide for themselves whether their biological sex and their gender are one and the same.
WOULD YOU BE SO SUPPORTIVE OF INDIAN PARENTS RAISING THEIR GIRL CHILD TO BE MEEK AND BOY CHILD TO BE A MACHOMAN?
It is not the same. In these cases, you’re deciding your child’s nature; you’re not giving your child the choice to be who they are.
LET ANYONE BE ANYTHING BUT LET THEM MAKE THAT DAMN CHOICE AND DON’T PUSH IT DOWN THEIR THROAT BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN, EVEN IF IT IS UNINTENTIONAL.
But that’s exactly what Musk is saying he will do – give his kid the opportunity to make that choice for themselves. That’s what you don’t seem to understand. Raising the child as ‘they’ means he’s not deciding his kid’s gender for them. They get to decide.
Oh Anu. You have some talent for this! WHEN DID I EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT CELEBRITIES COMING OUT. OR DO YOU NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE OF WHAT “COMING OUT” MEANS AND “BEING WOKE FOR WOKE’S SAKE AND TELLING THE WORLD THEY’LL RAISE THEIR CHILD AS ‘THEY’? LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR, IT IS NOT.
It’s my turn to ask a rhetorical question. When did I say you said anything about celebrities coming out of the closet? I made an ‘I’ statement; it was an analogy.
The same way that you don’t want to know how anyone is raising their kid, I don’t want to know anyone’s sexual orientation. But these are not announcements addressed to you or me. The same way an LGBTQ person will feel validated by having their voice amplified, so will a non- binary person, or rather, parents of a non- binary child who are struggling with their child’s gender identity. So where’s the ‘wokeness’ in this?
I AM TYPING MY RESPONSE IN ALL CAPS SO YOU’LL HAVE A BETTER READING AND WON’T FURTHER TWIST MY WORDS TO PAINT ME BAD AND TO MAKE YOUR POINT. THAT’S COMMON HUMANITY.
Once again, that sentence was an analogy. I wasn’t saying that you said it. I’m not missing you or twisting your words or trying to paint you anything – why should I? You have a definite viewpoint which I disagreed with – and I stated my reasons why. That’s all.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Madan
March 4, 2020
Amit Joki : Are you aware that Weinstein has been convicted of rape on that very ground – multiple cases with same pattern? Again, do you really think rape or molestation crimes leave a trail of evidence the way murder or theft do? And if there is no evidence, the assaulter should therefore get away scot free, is that what you’re saying? If that is not what you’re saying, what indeed are you saying? Oh by the way, sorry but if you said something else too in there, it was lost in that mountain of text. If you really want a response, try not to club what all you are saying to EVERYONE into one super long post.
Moving on, so, no, the standard Eswar mentioned there has nothing to do with woke culture. This is how sexual harassment claims are actually litigated and if the behaviour is found to be criminal, punishment accordingly applies. This doesn’t mean the accused has no voice. He can put up evidence that does indicate the activity to be consensual to contradict such claims. In the Weinstein, his refusal to personally testify in court was seen as damning evidence of guilt.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
March 4, 2020
Wow Amit Joki, you use as much ALL CAPS as the boy who lived did in the Order of the Phoenix.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Madan
March 4, 2020
Badri : speaking for myself, I am simply weary now and don’t expect much out of a society that forms MRA or meninist groups while still exploiting women. I have been hearing of Ulaganayagan’s,um, exploits for a long time so this is no surprise. But nothing will come out of it all. We as a people have assumed that stars, cricketers and politicians are above the legal system. Nay, we even justify this position.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rahul
March 4, 2020
Seems like all of Amit Joki’s rant is because of not understanding the meaning of raising as non binary.
LikeLike
nikkie1602
March 4, 2020
@amit joki: Elon musk is going to raise his kid gender neutral, not non-binary. There is a world of difference between the two. Gender neutral means not anything specific on the gender spectrum. Non binary is a gender in itself. So, the ‘they’ here is to not prescribe a gender to his child, it is not to raise them non-binary. Please look up gender spectrum.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj
March 4, 2020
I have been hearing of Ulaganayagan’s,um, exploits for a long time so this is no surprise.
Umm, same here.
Apparently, Kamal wanted to chop the scene off the film – anticipating trouble from the censor board – but KB went ahead with it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anu Warrier
March 4, 2020
Nikkie, I sit corrected. Thanks.
A
LikeLiked by 1 person
shaviswa
March 4, 2020
A century thread after a long time. Will it be this thread?
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 4, 2020
Okay, my reading of raising children as “they” has been where the parents force their children to not confirm to the gender stereotypes, like, forcing a boy to play with dolls or forcing pink color on boys and blue color on girls and tomboyish attires to conform to the parent’s ideal without heeding the child’s interest.
I read more about “gender-neutral” raising and there are parents who take the extreme way, but they are not the microcosm of what raising the gender-neutral kids is. But still, there have been opposing POVs which ask what will be the phsychological impact, the potential bullying and since we are probably the first generation who’ll be raising gender-neutral kids, at least some of them, we don’t have any data of the above metrics until 20 or 30 years from now.
So, my reading after researching is, allow the kid to be whatever it wants to. The parents shouldn’t be forcing their gender stereotypes, i.e. a boy should be allowed to play with dolls if he so wishes, he can wear pink if he so wishes and so on for a girl too.
But what I find extreme is forcing a pronoun. A boy liking pink color and dolls can still be a boy. a “He”. Let him decide when he becomes an adult whether he still wants to be a “he” or does he see himself more of a “she”.
So, I’ll take back the Elon Musk example. But that alone.
Madan:
The context of my usage of “woke” in reference to Sai Vicky’s comment was the above and I did give the context by referring to cases like one portrayed in Section 375.
Here’s what I had to say about MeToo:
You say you didn’t read my comment because of the loads of text. Sorry, sincerely. But don’t be such a tool and put words in my mouth. The least you could have done is, “Too long didn’t read” or something to that effect instead of playing such fantasies of what I might have said in your head and repeating that here.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Enigma
March 5, 2020
‘Elon musk is going to raise his kid gender neutral.’
Oh my God, the world is going crazy. You raise a kid either as a boy or a girl. What exactly is gender neutral parenting? Don’t send them to boy’s or girl’s schools? Fund their sex-change operation?
LikeLike
Madan
March 5, 2020
Amit Joki : Well, if you don’t want your words to be ‘twisted’, first make it so people can read your comments by breaking them up and second don’t take personal affront when a general comment is made. I didn’t quote you nor tagged you in the first comment on woke culture from me but you chose to reply as if it was directed at you. Please understand that once you do this, the other person will conclude 9 times out of 10 that you indulge in the behaviours described therein, even if you really don’t.
Now having said all this, I still don’t see the link between woke culture and sexual harassment claims. Has any big shot actually been arrested without due process after the advent of MeToo? I love this alternative universe where big shots are somehow magically devoid of influence or power in the face of a small noisy social media crowd. Doesn’t work that way. You also cannot conflate bad publicity fears with criminal action. The two things are different. There is no change in the legal process and FYI even before MeToo, some men got wrongly framed and went to prison for it. And before you hyperventilate about it, this is exactly what happens in every other kind of crime, including murder. This is why civil rights advocates want the death penalty abolished, not because they are woke but because that might save the lives of people wrongly held guilty for a crime they never committed.
Now coming to the case that seems to be your sole point of interest, I checked and Vairamuthu had been doing no more than two or three films a year already for the last few years, at least going back to 2015, even before the Chinmayi allegations. So there is no merit to your argument that he got sidelined by MeToo. OTOH the Dubbing Artist Association refused to support Chinmayi (may have blacklisted her at one point, don’t recall exactly). Neither Rahman nor Ilayaraja chose to speak up for her. I can understand Rahman’s reluctance but Raja hasn’t even worked with Vairamuthu for a long time so what would he have lost in at least offering support for Chinmayi? The entire industry closed ranks behind Vairamuthu, as they have done in almost every sexual harassment claim.
This again is the problem with following American developments and superimposing the terminology on India. Our society is curious in that it accepts women as political and business leaders more easily than the US but at the every day level, patriarchy reigns supreme. There is no woke culture movement destroying ‘helpless’ powerful men. For all of Sandeep Reddy’s whining, his film did hugely well at the BO. OTOH Shikara and Chaapak could not survive the onslaught of angry BJP supporters and sank without a trace. Let’s get real now, at worst the woke crowd is a nuisance and not our real problem at this point of time. Elected leaders telling people to drink gaumutra to cure anything and everything, including corona virus, are.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
March 5, 2020
@Enigma Americans or rather Americans following a leftist pov use the word gender differently from how we do. Gender simply means gender roles. Eg Boys plays with Lego toys and girls play with dolls. Gender neutral parenting as I understand it would simply mean letting a boy play with dolls if he wants to. If Musk and his wife propose not to tell the child what its gender is, though, that could be much more problematic. Akin to a behavioural experiment. This is one thing that has never been satisfactorily accounted for in all the discussions I have had – what if the child honestly does not have gender dysphoria at all? This is not unusual. The vast majority of people do grow up without gender confusion. Therefore, I find the idea of making cispeople go through this confusion to figure out they are cis after all to be a strange thought experiment at best. I would much rather this way – assign the gender based on the sexual organs but allow the child to experiment with non conforming behaviours and THEN let it decide, if it doesn’t, that he is not a he but a she or a they as applicable. But if Musk wants to raise his child without assigning a gender to it, I hope there is some science that tells him this is going to work out fine. It’s his prerogative but I am not convinced about it at all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anu Warrier
March 5, 2020
So, my reading after researching is, allow the kid to be whatever it wants to. The parents shouldn’t be forcing their gender stereotypes, i.e. a boy should be allowed to play with dolls if he so wishes, he can wear pink if he so wishes and so on for a girl too.
Amit, ‘Not conforming to gender stereotypes’ only means that they will not force the kid to like pink or play with dolls (if the child is a girl) or like blue and play only rough sports (if it is a boy). Those are the stereotypes, no?
Just to clarify (lest you think I’m pouncing on you again): Raising a kid to be gender neutral means that there is no ‘boy toys’ or ‘girl toys’; no ‘boy colours’ or ‘girl colours’. There is no gender anywhere. They are free to wear pink or blue or purple with yellow polka dots; free to play with trucks or cooking pots or both at the same time… you get the drift. There are no gender stereotypes because they aren’t assigning gender to their children.
But what I find extreme is forcing a pronoun. A boy liking pink color and dolls can still be a boy. a “He”. Let him decide when he becomes an adult whether he still wants to be a “he” or does he see himself more of a “she”.
They are not ‘forcing’ a pronourn. The male child (I’m referring to the sex the child is born with, not their gender) may decide for themselves whether they want to be referred to as ‘he’ or ‘she’ irrespective of what they like to play with or the colours they choose to wear. But until the child is old enough to know and choose a pronoun they are comfortable with, the parents will go with a gender neutral pronoun. It isn’t even a new one, is it? ‘They’? We use it all the time to refer to men or women or a combination of both.
So, in a nutshell, if a child identifies as a male (in both gender and sex) and opts to be referred to as ‘he’, the parents will conform to that. If the child chooses to be ‘they’, then the parents will conform to that as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Enigma
March 5, 2020
@ Madan, thanks. If gender neutral parenting would mean merely letting your son/daughter play with dolls/lego etc. then that I think is fine. I don’t think that anyone would have any objection to that. But it will be really weird if it goes beyond that, like encouraging kids to cross-dress. As you say, kids should be left to grow up naturally and then be allowed to decide for themselves. I am wondering about the psychological impact such gender neutral parenting will have on children.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 5, 2020
Enigma : Cross dressing up to a point is fine. Remember girls already cross dress, in a manner of speaking, all the time, even after they have grown up to be women and are undoubtedly cis gender. I am talking about shirt /trouser or T shirt /jeans. It’s only for men to go the other way, dress up in skirts. Men used to in medieval times so even that is not as much of a leap as we might think. Ranveer Singh has dabbled in man skirts already.
It is however leaving the child in doubt of its gender in a world where it will be surrounded by children who know or at least appear to know their gender as if it were the most natural thing, it is that which I find problematic. Let’s see how people work through this but I share your apprehensions. I think social justice and other concerns should start with the people themselves putting their money where the mouth is rather than experimenting on children.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ItsVerySimple
March 5, 2020
@Amit Jogi,
If a trans man/trans woman wants to use the men’s/women’s restroom, whose your “support” for? Are they “woke people” for asking it? What’s “conditional” support to a right as basic as accessing the restroom?
if an “oversized” man or woman tells you that they don’t want to be referred as “oversized”, are they being “woke people” and will you address them as they wish?
The only genuine concern in your rant but you casually conflated “blind support for a trans woman rapist” with other human-rights issues such as trans-rights to access restrooms and sports. What’s wrong with you, dude? How sick is that?
WTF does this even mean? Where did you establish that “woke people” are “without an iota of knowledge” about trans rights to restroom access or other such “etc” LGBTQ+ issues before shitting all over them and their support for LGBTQ+/”oversized” people/black people?
If your problem with “woke people” is that they lack knowledge of issues, then state it so instead of mentioning a list of LGBTQ+ issues and calling out “woke people”‘s “unconditional” support. If you frame your arguments against “woke people” by conflating it with “unconditional” support for LGBTQ+ rights, you aren’t being anti-woke, you are being something else.
There is a possibility that all the woke people robbed you off your likes. But I also i think it is entirely possible that your verbal-diarrhea of a rant deserved none.
I am not even going here. Vairamuthu has been shunned, my ass.
LikeLiked by 3 people
nikkie1602
March 6, 2020
@madan:
It is however leaving the child in doubt of its gender in a world where it will be surrounded by children who know or at least appear to know their gender as if it were the most natural thing, it is that which I find problematic
Actually studies have shown that children develop an innate sense of their gender at as early as 3 years of age. And they are perceptive to gender, they observe the behaviour of people around them and also linguistic cues i.e. gendered language.
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 6, 2020
ItsVerySimple:
I said between the viewpoints of trans people and the cis people, the irrelevant people will support the former POV over the latter. I fucking did not mention about the actual parties, that’s the cis/trans people themselves, but rather the general public who wouldn’t have even used public toilets in their lives will weigh on the latter dismissing the former POV. Get it right through your thick skull.
I just merely used that term to be politically correct lest someone takes offence at using the word “oversized”. As far as the question goes, no, they are not the ‘woke people’. They are just normal people. Being woke isn’t bad. There’s a distinction. A woke person will be politically correct in their day-to-day lives without offending anyone, taking others feelings into consideration. That’s good.
“Woke culture” is a phenomenon wherein it has become fashionable to support the wokeness which is toxic. Woke individuals don’t come under this phenomenon. People trying to “look” woke cause it is fashionable do.
Consider this for example: The Office series came around a time when LGBTQ wasn’t still considered a serious issue in America to the extent the awareness and acceptance it has now.
Even then, Michael Scott wanted to look cool, wanted to look woke, by supporting that Oscar. He wasn’t actually emphathetic with Oscar and hence is very awkward with him but he carries on to have the image of being cool by rubbing it in the guy’s face. Michael Scott is not a woke person. He is part of the woke culture. Being a woke person (individual) is not bad. Trying to have an image of wokeness since it is fashionable is.
I am sick to the extent that though I have made several examples of what I consider to be the result of wanting to look woke, nobody gave a fuck on this example because it wasn’t the part of the narrative that would suit their comments.
I am sick to the extent that there have been justifications about why an ad was removed and another was put on, but nobody thought of discussing that point which if I remember, I made twice, but people still missed it conveniently and attacked on my other weaker points. I am that sick.
As to your other points, where do you think I got the examples I have thus stated? I am 20. I don’t search for these topics. These examples, trend on Twitter and thus comes to my notice. And there, people are getting smacked right and left with, if I remember it right, some black people even commenting it was embarrassing with the ads.
Also, doesn’t anyone find it interesting that all these negative advertisements trended and reached some guy sitting in India, but not the good advertisements? Heck, I don’t even follow such accounts. I use Twitter to find the latest updates from Dhanush. Also, for something to trend, it has to be massively supported to some extent, which validates my point that people trying to be fashionable are hurting the actual concerned groups.
Give this thread a read – https://twitter.com/ClaudiaCeramics/status/1235339012979728385?s=09 and WAKE THE HELL UP. This was again done with some movement in mind. READ THE REPLIES. Come out of the bubble and know what the normal people think of these things and they’re not helping the actual movement.
Every one of my examples have a similar nature with lots of actual concerned people disagreeing to these fashionable exercises of replacing ads and what not.
As far as Vairamuthu being shunned, suck it up. He’s being ridiculed by people in Twitter/Facebook/Youtube. That’s the biggest plus. He is dropped by Mani Ratnam whose greatest hits have been with Vairamuthu. This is how far the shunning goes. Deal with it. I wish the degree of the shunning be as you might have wanted, but it is what it is. The society hasn’t evolved to shun people to the extent we’d hope for.
P.S.
I don’t feel comfortable you calling my arguments, a verbal-diarrhea. I am sure there are people suffering from diarrhea who’ll be offended by you using their suffering to make a point. You also hurt my feelings by calling my arguments with such name. I’d request you to not call my arguments verbal-diarrhea anymore. I request at worst, you call my arguments, “ill-formed”. That’ll be the least offensive to me. Hope you’ll consider my feelings and address my arguments as I have requested if we are to engage in further conversations.
Thank you.
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 6, 2020
Your opinion is an entitled prick. (I am not name calling you. Just calling your opinion an entitled prick). Eswar suggested what we are doing here is also sort of fashionably putting statements to look good.
I merely pointed that I know it won’t go down well with the set of people in this blog. That I stand to gain nothing from this whilst standing to lose everything – people not respecting my voice anymore since I don’t align with their POV.
So, shove down that opinion whence it came from because I am not in this for likes.
Also, if this blog were not a saturation of like minded people, if people who had opposing POVs did not leave so frequently, if this blog had as much representation of the general POV as is visible from the Twitter threads I view, this discussion wouldn’t be this one sided.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sai16vicky
March 6, 2020
@Madan:
I am not sure I fully agree with this line of thought but I don’t think that should come in the way of appreciating it. Bravo — especially the last line is killer! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
March 6, 2020
I am sick to the extent that there have been justifications about why an ad was removed and another was put on, but nobody thought of discussing that point which if I remember, I made twice, but people still missed it conveniently and attacked on my other weaker points. I am that sick. [Emphasis mine.]
Really? I adddressed the ad issue twice or thrice – the last one being to Madan. In fact, in my very first response, I addressed the Elon Musk issue first, and then the ad issue. I went on to address the Musk issue in more detail because you misinterpreted an analogy that I made in my initial response as some sort of an attack on you. So you decided to rant at me instead.
Madan addressed the ad issue as well. So don’t come on here and say no one addressed that issue.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anu Warrier
March 6, 2020
And from that link you posted, Amit – the very first response I read today is from the poster who posted the original ad.
Claudia Clare
@ClaudiaCeramics
·
8h
Replying to
@ClaudiaCeramics
Stop press: confirmed by TFL it’s NOT official. It’s (very posh) flyposting. Or well heeled vandalism. Either way it’s a crime- and not just for the content- and they’re removing it asap.
So before you believe everything you read on Twitter, double check it. Google can be your friend. It’s easy to think Sadiq Khan was being hypocritical or had double standards. But the proof is right there for the asking.
LikeLike
H. Prasanna
March 6, 2020
@Amit “I merely pointed that I know it won’t go down well with the set of people in this blog. That I stand to gain nothing from this whilst standing to lose everything – people not respecting my voice anymore since I don’t align with their POV.”
Although you have got the nod from BR himself regarding your views on woke culture, I understand why you feel this way. We have gone after your examples when your core idea has not wavered, and you are right, it has not aligned with others’ POV.
While we need opposing viewpoints, we also need people speaking what they believe is true, not merely to conform or deny. I have a feeling that people do speak their mind in this blog, as BR said about the Arjun Reddy thread. Conversations will certainly be deterred or voices will become polarized if people feel their voices will not be respected.
So, thank you for listening, and doing the tough thing: speaking what you believe is true. And I hope you continue speaking your mind.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Madan
March 6, 2020
Amit Joki : More lies, albeit trivial this time. A large chunk of Mani’s work – from Mouna Ragam to Dhalapathi – were with Vaali. So, no, Mani’s greatest hits were not with Vairam, not exclusively. And he or rather Rahman has already been using Madhan Karky a lot in recent years. Vairam’s slide into irrelevance began quite some time before MeToo.
LikeLike
Madan
March 6, 2020
H Prasanna : Agreed and from my side too, there is no hierarchial gradation of views based on a wokeness quotient. So, Amit, however much our arguments may become, er, intense, there is no intent on my part to throttle your views. No, please post them because the last thing I want is for this space too to turn into an echo chamber. But please remember an engagement of ideas, when presenting opposing views, will go to intense places so don’t expect a pat on the back either. And lastly pl don’t worry about number of likes. I know it is harder for your generation because mine was the last that attained adulthood before the advent of social media. But let me tell you that while my political views may often get likes on this blog, I was pretty much a loner in school days. If I wasn’t in college, it was only because I was overloaded with CA padippu and didn’t waste time bringing out my inner Jack Nicholson (the character he plays in Cuckoo’s Nest) and burning bridges. So I understand very well what it feels like for your viewpoint to not be popular. But don’t seek popularity. Those who have changed their stand 180 degrees in recent years seeking popularity from either side of the ideological divide will sink into ignominy in the pages of history decades down the line. Stick to your convictions but listen to the other side with an open mind as well.
LikeLiked by 3 people
H. Prasanna
March 6, 2020
@Madan Yes, about the likes. A like hardly means you are not a loner anymore though it is good to have validation. People may just like your content for what you said when you want them to like it for how you said it, and vice versa. So, you may get a lot a likes for a lot of wrong reasons.
And likeability is hard to measure, and a like button is definitely inadequate. But when someone makes an opposing viewpoint, that may mean more to us because they chose to engage in conversation with us than clicking dislike/unsubscribe. Because it means much more when someone gets us than when someone agrees with/likes us.
Ironically, it is those who oppose us that usually get us. We may think they don’t get our point/opinion, whereas they have picked up something very particular in the spirit of our opinion that creates dialogue. This self/other-exploration through conversation is much better than popularity (unless you need to be popular as a job requirement). And yes, the conversation does get so lost with what we oppose and agree about, that we lose the point that this person/opposing viewpoints gets something in us.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Honest Raj
March 6, 2020
A large chunk of Mani’s work – from Mouna Ragam to Dhalapathi – were with Vaali. So, no, Mani’s greatest hits were not with Vairam, not exclusively. And he or rather Rahman has already been using Madhan Karky a lot in recent years.
@Madan: VM was the sole lyricist for all of MR’s films from Roja to Raavanan (Vaali was still among the most sought after during this phase). The two have worked together in every single film upto CCV. Madhan Karky just seems to be an ‘add-on’ (in fact, he was the only other lyricist apart from his father) in MR’s recent films. It’s hard to believe that MR has decided to part ways with VM (and that too while working on a film like Ponniyin Selvan) for any other reason. VM’s career really seems to have a taken a knock after the MeToo allegation.
As for Rahman, he himself is a spent force. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
March 6, 2020
Honest Raj: I checked and I agree. In Kadal they both have the same number of songs so I assumed this was the pattern for the subsequent films. But it wasn’t, in fact CCV had only Vairam lyrics. So yes, it was MeToo then.
Regarding Rahman, don’t know whether he IS a spent force or he is just operating in an orbit that doesn’t interest me (or you). I mean the shape of current pop music is terrible (imo) and Rahman takes his cues from the international scene so…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Eswar
March 6, 2020
So who is replacing Vairamuthu in Ponniyin Selvan?
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 6, 2020
Anu Warrier: Is it just me or is it getting crazy here? I am not talking about the ad or the Elon Musk example. If you care to read ItsVerySimple’s latest comment very very slowly, you’ll realize the most problematic example, the strongest of the examples haven’t even been touched.
Let me put it, for the third time.
A teenage girl was raped by a man. He then came out as a woman. He was APPLAUDED for coming out inspite of everyone knowing the crime he committed. IMAGINE THAT. Now his crimes will not be seen as a male raping a female but a transwoman raping a female.
So, the aforementioned issues is the one I was referring to, when I used the term “that”. Not the ad issue.
Also regarding the latest thread. Of course, Sadiq Khan isn’t stupid enough to leave it after getting the instant negative criticisms. When he first banned the bikini ad, people weren’t too invested. It was about not having exalted body standards. You couldn’t really speak anything against it. It was a good move.
But when he put the black ad up, people were pretty miffed but still, you wouln’t go as far as to ask the ad to be taken down. People just were annoyed at his double standards and expressed it too.
And if you’re honest to yourself, you’ll know that this particular ad too would have been in its full glory if not for the instant backlash it received.
Honest Raj: Finally some honesty.
Madan: You have been sprouting lies, misinterpreting my simple request for a fair-trial when it is a first-time accused with no pattern, as dismissing the MeToo movement when I have been clear in saying if a pattern is established that person is guilty until proven otherwise.
And I took up your words on Vairamuthu. I hadn’t the reason to doubt you. But Honest Raj’s comment tells me otherwise and the CCV’s most famous song was penned by Vairamuthu. So who’s lying?
LikeLike
rsylviana
March 6, 2020
Are we sure Vairamuthu has indeed been dropped from Ponniyin Selvan ? For all these alleged rumours that he has been dropped from the project post #MeToo, we still don’t know who then is penning the lyrics for the movie. I’m skeptical about MR dropping VM from his magnum opus considering their history and MR’s well-known obsession with Ponniyin Selvan, not to mention that in all of recent MR’s films the posters had clearly mentioned the lyricist and PS’s poster not containing the lyricist name only affirms my doubts that it is just a PR exercise to drop VM’s name from the poster hoping that the anti-VM furore would subside by the time the movie is up for release. I’d be happy to be proved wrong though.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
March 6, 2020
Amit Joki : Sorry which lies other than what I said about Madhan Karky which was a mistake and I corrected myself after Honest Raj pointed it out? OTOH Mani did five straight films with Raja-Vaali and all of them are considered among the greatest hits of both Raja and Mani. So no, it’s not Vairamuthu alone who has given Mani his greatest hits, that’s just media propoganda. Now between three lacklustre soundtracks in the last few years and five films of which all soundtracks were blockbusters, there is a huge difference, don’t you think?
LikeLike
Honest Raj
March 7, 2020
@Amit Joki: En kadamaiya dhana senjen. 🙂
@Madan: I cannot comment on his ‘creative genius’. 🙂 While he might still be India’s most popular and highest-paid film composer, his days – atleast in the Tamil film world – are over.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
March 7, 2020
@rsylviana & Eswar: Of course, my observation is purely based on the rumours floating around. VM has literally been a part of every single production of Aalayam/MT except for its latest release, Vaanam Kottattum. Given the milieu/backdrop of the script, he could’ve well been a part of the the film, no?
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
March 7, 2020
And if you’re honest to yourself, you’ll know that this particular ad too would have been in its full glory if not for the instant backlash it received.
Did you see the comment posted by the original person herself on the Twitter thread acknowledging that this was vandalism and not a real advertisement?
A teenage girl was raped by a man. He then came out as a woman. He was APPLAUDED for coming out inspite of everyone knowing the crime he committed. IMAGINE THAT. Now his crimes will not be seen as a male raping a female but a transwoman raping a female.
Okay. Sorry – I didn’t address that because I know nothing about it. I cannot imagine anyone who claims to be ‘woke’ minimising rape. But it that were true, that’s insane. Rape is rape, no matter the gender of the perpetrator.
Care to share a link? Thanks.
Adding my voice to Prasanna and Madan – don’t stop posting because of the likes or lack thereof. I might disagree with you – and vehemently so – but I don’t do that to shut you out of the discussion. You are perfectly welcome to disagree vehemently back as well.
(And since I don’t have a WordPress account, I cannot ‘Like’ anyone’s post, which is why you usually see me quoting and posting my ‘Like’ to people.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Eswar
March 7, 2020
Honest Raj: Someone else also mentioned in an earlier comment that Vairamuthu was dropped. So it’s not just you 🙂.
It is probably true that he is dropped. But it is also be likely what rsylviana said. It could also be that Mani Ratnam hasn’t made up his mind if this movie needs songs.
With respect to Vaanam Kottattum, your point is quite reasonable. But it could also be just to reduce the costs. Are there any high profile technicians at all in the movie?
So until Ponniyin Selvan gets released, its difficult to know if VM-MR combination has severed.
—
On a general note I am not sure how much it matters whether VM gets shunned or not. If one believes boycotting VM is a form of justice, it should start from oneself, right? Disassociate from everything about VM and then expect someone others to do the same. Even then the comparison is not in balance because me boycotting VM’s works has no monetary loss for me. But it’s not the same for people working with him. So a even better step would be to take a stance on something that incur a financial loss and then measure others with the same standard. This is when one could realise the challenges in taking a stance with a cost.
I am not saying there area n’t people who stand for something at a huge cost. But my guess is they are very few and far. The rest usually want somebody else to pay for their stance. My pet example is usually Saravana Bhavan. What happened between Jeeva Jyothi and Rajagoplan, the founder, is a common news. But that hasn’t stopped people going to Saravana Bhavan. I try not to judge these people, not necessarily because I am one of them, but because this is one of the intricacies in being a human. We may be able to untangled it only slowly and by not judging too quickly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amit Joki
March 7, 2020
Anu Warrier: I don’t seem to find it on Twitter but here’s the link I got from searching for it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8012193/Labour-trans-rights-row-Lisa-Nandy-says-rapists-transition-sent-womens-prisons.html
The guy was apparently applauded for coming out.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
March 8, 2020
@Eswar: Perhaps, that could be a reason. Looks like Sid-Sriram is the only ‘high-profile’ technician in the movie. 🙂
If one believes boycotting VM is a form of justice, it should start from oneself, right? Disassociate from everything about VM and then expect someone others to do the same. Even then the comparison is not in balance because me boycotting VM’s works has no monetary loss for me. But it’s not the same for people working with him. So a even better step would be to take a stance on something that incur a financial loss and then measure others with the same standard.
Couldn’t agree more. Take the case of Chinmayi herself. I just went through her discography page and it seems she has sung quite a few songs for VM after 2010-11 – she was at her peak around this time. Not that I’m judging her, but anybody of her stature could’ve politely declined an offer whenever one came her way. It’s understandable if her options were limited, but the fact that she has collaborated with other prolific lyricists (Thamarai, Na. Muthukumar and Karky to name a few) over the years says otherwise.
About the Saravana Bhavan issue, connect these two proverbs – “கோழி குருடா இருந்தாலும் குழம்பு ருசியா இருக்குதான்றது தான் முக்கியம்” and “நாய் விற்ற காசு குரைக்குமா?”. That’s how most societies work – we are no exception.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj
March 8, 2020
Looks like she’s recorded a song for the upcoming Priyadarshan-Mohanlal film. Interestingly, Arjun is also a part of the film.
LikeLike
Madan
March 8, 2020
“Not that I’m judging her, but anybody of her stature could’ve politely declined an offer whenever one came her way. It’s understandable if her options were limited, but the fact that she has collaborated with other prolific lyricists (Thamarai, Na. Muthukumar and Karky to name a few) over the years says otherwise.” – I will part ways there. I will not put the onus on the woman to disassociate herself from Vairamuthu. Say if it was an org and the CEO was harassing a female employee, would she have the option to dissociate herself from him? It’s not like she has a say in who the director and the music director decide as the lyricist. If she refuses to sing songs with VM, she will swiftly earn a reputation as being ‘difficult to work with’. She did the right thing by calling him out and putting the onus on producers and directors instead. They have the right to choose a lyricist who has some unsavoury allegations to his name. But they have to then make that choice and own it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Eswar
March 8, 2020
Madan: … would she have the option to dissociate herself from him? It’s not like she has a say in who the director and the music director decide as the lyricist. If she refuses to sing songs with VM, she will swiftly earn a reputation as being ‘difficult to work with’ She did the right thing by calling him out and putting the onus on producers and directors instead.
There is a recent comment in BR’s post about lyricist Thamarai where it mentions how she managed to make a name for herself without compromising to write lyrics with vulgarity and/or mixing with English. Thamarai, likely would have other options to make things easier for her but how she writes probably mattered to her more than how often she writes or what others think about her style of working.
Sure Thamarai and Chinmayi are different persons and what is priority for one is not necessarily important for the other. And I don’t know what Chinmayi’s options were. May be what she did is the best of all her options. But then I would also apply that standard to others who still collaborate with VM. The directors and music directors could just shift the responsibility to somebody else. A pious man like Rahman could say it is not for him to judge people and let his God to do it for him. Someone who believes in judiciary could shift the onus to the judges instead of they taking a stance themselves. All these people probably have other motives behind shifting their responsibilities. But if I am going to respect Chinmayi’s choices, then I will also have to respect the choices these people make.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
March 9, 2020
@Madan: I’m not sure your analogy is accurate here. Let’s take the case between IR and VM. Even today, the cause behind the rift between the two is unclear. IR was hardly affected by the issue but VM was virtually out of the industry for six years. Sure, Chinmayi does not have the stature of IR of the 80s, but it’s far less reasonable to assume that she would’ve ended up like VM. She has been an established singer for over a decade now (not just in Tamil but in Telugu as well). And, the TFM has never been monopolised by any lyricist.
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 9, 2020
“Climate justice is an issue of gender justice too. The climate emergency affects women and girls more than anyone else.”
Sadiq Khan https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/1236693679605243912?s=20
LikeLike
Madan
March 9, 2020
Eswar: Oh but I agree with THAT. Rahman does not have the option of saying he is so woke and all and still working with vairam.
Either:
(a) Own it and say these allegations don’t bother you.
(b) Say you do not wish to work with VM until his name is cleared.
(c) Say you respect due process and would continue working with VM until his guilt is established.
But take a stand. Silence is liable to be construed as acquiesence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 9, 2020
@ Honest Raj: Seeing as there are fewer lyricists than singers, I would say she has much less power than VM, not even close. The only reason VM got fucked in the 80s was IR was unusually dominant. Had there been three or four composers, VM would have continued to work for the others after losing Raja. See, the dynamic is the music director chooses the lyricist. And the music director also chooses the singer. Any attempt by the singer to dictate who the lyricist should be will amount to interference. Instead Chinmay appealed to morals and won.
LikeLike
Eswar
March 9, 2020
Madan: It is likely Rahman and/or Mani Ratnam has taken a stance and hopefully discussed with Chinmayi and/or VM. But they don’t have any obligation to explain their stance to the general public right? If there is anyone who is expected to know their stance, in this case, that is Chinmayi.
Btw I would have thought it’s the director/ producer who decides the lyricist. At least for Rahman, in the last few years, the decision appears to be from the director. Worked with VM for MR Movies and in Kochadaiyan. Rest with Vivek, Kharky etc. Just remembered that VM and ARR had their own tussle many years back.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
March 9, 2020
Seeing as there are fewer lyricists than singers, I would say she has much less power than VM, not even close.
All I’m saying is VM was never ‘dominant’ at any point in time. Chinmayi (or any other singer for that matter) doesn’t have to go through the same debacle (as VM did) because the singers are hardly dependent upon the lyricists. And it’s usually upto the directors to decide upon the lyricists.
Any attempt by the singer to dictate who the lyricist should be will amount to interference
‘Dictate’ is too strong a word. One doesn’t even have to be choosy.
LikeLike
Honest Raj
March 9, 2020
@Eswar: Kandukondein Kandukondein right? 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 9, 2020
Eswar: I agree that neither Rahman nor Mani are obliged to spell it out if and why they have decided to dissociate from VM. But if they don’t make it public, then public is free to speculate about what really happened too. This is why those who do remove people from positions for sexual harassment claims say so either unambiguously or obliquely (at XYZ we stand against gender discrimination etc).
Regarding who appoints the lyricist, I think it is both director and music director. In the specific case of VM, it may be Mani who wanted VM and Rahman went along with it. But often times a director may ask the composer who he wants as lyricist. Balki said he had asked Raja who to appoint for Cheeni Kum and he had suggested Sameer. Shamitabh OTOH bore Balki’s stamp when it came to lyricists. But most likely Raja would have said you go ahead and choose since I don’t work in Hindi.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Srinivas R
March 9, 2020
In Chinmayi’s case, she also lost the membership of the dubbing union thanks to calling out Radha Ravi. She last dubbed for Trisha in 96 and till GV Prakash and Vetrimaran came along, didn’t have songs or dubbing assignments n Tamil for a year. After Vetrimaran, Director Mithran forced his way to have her dub for the female lead in Hero. Fair to say Chinmayi lost a fair bit of opportunities for calling out VM.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
March 9, 2020
@Amit – thanks for that link. I haven’t followed the case; in fact, this is the first I’ve even heard of it. I don’t mind the support for his coming out, and that’s all the article spoke about. But if they were using his ‘coming out’ as reason to put him into a women’s prison, that just seems @–!@ as all hell.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 9, 2020
“Chinmayi (or any other singer for that matter) doesn’t have to go through the same debacle (as VM did) because the singers are hardly dependent upon the lyricists. And it’s usually upto the directors to decide upon the lyricists.” – The point is if Chinmay says she doesn’t want to sing songs written by VM and the director wants VM, he can simply ask the music director to find another singer. So it’s not just that the singer is hardly dependent upon the lyricist. The lyricist too doesn’t depend on her.
“‘Dictate’ is too strong a word. One doesn’t even have to be choosy.” – But why should the onus be on her to make a career sacrifice because of his bad behaviour? That doesn’t make sense. It’s one thing if say VM happens to use abusive language against people of both genders and she happens to be one singer who can’t handle it and opts out. Ideally, you want to tell a hothead to calm down. But sexual harassment is specifically directed – in this case – at women. Why should they pay the price? If indeed Mani has dropped VM, I would bet it isn’t only Chinmay’s complaint but that others too would have complained in private.
LikeLiked by 4 people
ItsVerySimple
March 11, 2020
@Amit Jogi,
To quote you verbatim, “The woke people …In issues surrounding LGBTQ and Women, they support LGBTQ (women not wanting trans people using same toilets, sports etc… where LGBTQ is unconditionally supported over women)”. Where did you mention this is about people “who wouldn’t have even used public toilets in this lives”? To quote you back, you “fucking did not mention”. “Irrelevant people” is the latest in your ever-changing definitions of “woke people” now? Things you don’t write or say won’t get into any skull, thick or thin.
Pray I may ask : Why are you reducing trans rights to access restrooms as “public toilets”? Transmen and women would use restrooms at their workplace, I suppose? What category of office/work people would you carve out in that scenario and conveniently label them as “woke people” to defend the terrible take you wrote?
You began with,
When you use Amber’s example in this argument, you consciously framed “THE woke people” as the ones who (wrongly) supported Amber. And now you go,
“Being woke isn’t bad. There’s a distinction. A woke person will be politically correct in their day-to-day lives without offending anyone, taking others feelings into consideration. ”
And.. we are the ones who aren’t understanding your point?
You frame “woke people” as the ones who (wrongly) support Amber and also call label them as “unconditionally supporting LGBTQ+” and – you go full on caps when people mention supporting LGBTQ+ is neither wrong or not woke? WE are the people, who aren’t getting it?
You are welcome go in these torturous circles about being woke, woke culture, toxic woke, performative woke, toxic woke culture – without making any distinction between these as long as you want. I am not participating anymore, and am not quoting these contradictions anymore.
I am asking you a specific question about why are you clubbing someone who supports a rapist and someone who supports LGBTQ+ rights in the same bucket as “woke people” or “woke culture”. And your response is.. people didn’t address your point about a rapist getting support? I had stated it as a “genuine concern” – because I really think so – and that’s why it was terrible – let me go caps here – TERRIBLE – to read them in the same lines as the others. You are obviously welcome to not answer my question and go on and on about an AD that I didn’t even talk about. It’s totally your choice of response, of course.
I am completely being snarky and mean here and I am not sorry – this is rather rich coming from someone who had no idea what gender neutral or non binary is and proceeded to write huge ass takes.
I don’t know what you mean here. I stated it as “a genuine concern” of yours. I wrote my response only because I agreed with that ‘strongest” example and how it paints all other “weaker points” in a terrible color. I don’t see them as strong, weak – it was simply wrong to me.
You chose to write a bumbling mess of a take.You chose to club non-issues like using the word “curvy”, human rights issues like access to restrooms, totally unrelated issues – and genuine – issues like supporting a rapist and gleefully bulldozed all over the place. And you are wondering – “but people still missed it conveniently and attacked on my other weaker points”? No shit, sherlock. Having reading others’ comments – none of them look like they would support a rapist or wrote a take that remotely sounded like they will. That you feel they are “conveniently” missing it is.. sigh. No words.
AFAIK, the chronology after MeToo : Vairamuthu self-declared he is on board; an official poster released without naming any lyricist; A R Rahman on the record said this needs to be addressed by the production house and it’s for them to decide. Suhasini – not alluding that she is responsible for the production or decisions of hiring – on the record said the issue between Chinmayi and Vairamuthu is between them. In a glowing piece on TOI this week, Vairamuthu while being asked about how he is coping up after MeToo said he is secure in the knowledge that respected people like Suhasini and curiously – the dead – Srividya are his friends. That’s the current status in this tug of war – with all of these on record.
(And, there is a report in SilverScreen that Mani Ratnam is “reportedly” pissed off that the press is behind him about this and he is “reportedly” mulling over taking legal action).
So – I am not going to suck it up because Amit Jogi on the internet said “He is dropped by Mani Ratnam”. I am not going to suck it up even and if and when that officially happens; even if the film is released without his contribution; even if Maniratnam continues to avoid him till death. I have heard horrific stories about him outside the film circle that cannot be measured on the scale of high profile film. I will forever stay angry that he got away.
This is desperately silly to prove things have balanced out and I don’t even understand why. Bhuvana Sheshan on the record has stated she lost her career because of him. A R Reihana confirmed that it is common knowledge in the industry about Vairamuthu in an interview (in which she spent more time talking about how Chinmayi and her mother are unprofessional).
A R Reihana has also said her brother doesn’t know about this. I am not assuming A R Rahman knew or Mani Ratnam knew. I am not calling Vairamuthu a rapist.
But I have my doubts that a lot of people who “shun” Vairamuthu now were already aware of this and are “shunning” him now because “it makes them look good” to get “brownie points”- the sort of “performative woke” that you are trying to explain in one bad take after another.
I am absolutely not suggesting you will support such rapists – you know the rapists who will fall at the bottom of your “woke people” hierarchy – not the LGBTQ ones, not the black people, not the oversized people. But – If I suggest that you will support such rapists because you are against “woke people” – I will come close to writing a take as terrible as yours.
I am not saying you shouldn’t respond to this. Just that, I am done.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Anu Warrier
March 12, 2020
@ItsVerySimple – here’s my ‘Like’ since I don’t have a WordPress account and can’t just click on it. Thanks for taking one for the team.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sridharraman
March 12, 2020
This. This. This. So very true! After all the institutionalised stories of abuse by him (women’s hostels, etc.) the scores are level with Chinmayi because he didn’t get one fricking movie with Mani Rathnam??? This staggering level of ridiculous equivalence was the clincher.
Thanks for this comment, @ItsVerySimple!
LikeLiked by 2 people
ItsVerySimple
March 13, 2020
@Anu Warrier – Like the popular dialogue goes : ithellAm kadama. (Something to the effect of : part of a team, then it’s my duty). Thank you for patiently engaging and making many valuable points.
@sridharraman – “women’s hostels..” Yeah, the same. I ruined my perfectly fine Friday morning by landing on a celebratory piece about him in this week’s Ananda Vikatan with no forewarning. Things will never change.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amit Joki
March 20, 2020
https://summit.news/2020/03/20/italian-virologist-says-concerns-over-racism-crippled-italys-coronavirus-response/
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 26, 2020
LikeLike