Stela Dey is Senior Assistant Editor, Opinion and Ground Reports, at ThePrint. She joined the organisation in 2025 and is part of the Opinion and Ground Reports team. Stela can be reached at stela.dey@theprint.in
If your “Views are Personal”, you should rather be posting such blogs on your X account or Instagram, not on the shoulder’s of The Print. – An Avid Newspaper reader
Leave it to the Print to always play defence for Babus and Bureaucrats.
The debate around this wedding isn’t about its customs -no one cared, no one gives a f.
It’s about the obscene ammount of wealth on display; wealth which could not be possible the be achieved by honest public servants – Mercedes, Imported Sunglasses costing 2.6 L.
But the Print and the entire pro-Babu lobby rather than discuss and analyse that, the Print is writing about some made up outrage on customs, which no one truly cares about.
Now if some third party will read this article, he will think the outrage was about misunderstanding of customs rather that what the outrage was truly about – origin of the obscene ammount of money spent.
The woke Bong feminist got offended and took umbrage.
“Then there was the ghunghat. After the shy-and-demure bride ceiling was shattered by a carefree, laughing Deepika Padukone and a bold, confident Priyanka Chopra, the partially veiled face of an IPS officer—be it for custom—felt like a regression.
While a ghunghat is often defended as tradition, it is resisted and discarded by women for what it represents: control, constraint, modesty, and a negotiation of choice. When a young IPS officer is seen donning it with dozens of other women at the wedding, it does not remain a personal preference. It travels to homes where such “choices” are rarely free of pressure. It gives controlling people an easy script: “If an IPS officer can follow this, why can’t you?”” – is that so? If that indeed is the case, why don’t you preach to other communities too? Christian brides, howsoever ‘powerful’, don’t have a veil during their wedding ceremony at the church? Muslim brides, howsoever ‘progressive’, don’t have the veil during nikaah ceremony?
If your “Views are Personal”, you should rather be posting such blogs on your X account or Instagram, not on the shoulder’s of The Print. – An Avid Newspaper reader
Leave it to the Print to always play defence for Babus and Bureaucrats.
The debate around this wedding isn’t about its customs -no one cared, no one gives a f.
It’s about the obscene ammount of wealth on display; wealth which could not be possible the be achieved by honest public servants – Mercedes, Imported Sunglasses costing 2.6 L.
But the Print and the entire pro-Babu lobby rather than discuss and analyse that, the Print is writing about some made up outrage on customs, which no one truly cares about.
Now if some third party will read this article, he will think the outrage was about misunderstanding of customs rather that what the outrage was truly about – origin of the obscene ammount of money spent.
The woke Bong feminist got offended and took umbrage.
“Then there was the ghunghat. After the shy-and-demure bride ceiling was shattered by a carefree, laughing Deepika Padukone and a bold, confident Priyanka Chopra, the partially veiled face of an IPS officer—be it for custom—felt like a regression.
While a ghunghat is often defended as tradition, it is resisted and discarded by women for what it represents: control, constraint, modesty, and a negotiation of choice. When a young IPS officer is seen donning it with dozens of other women at the wedding, it does not remain a personal preference. It travels to homes where such “choices” are rarely free of pressure. It gives controlling people an easy script: “If an IPS officer can follow this, why can’t you?”” – is that so? If that indeed is the case, why don’t you preach to other communities too? Christian brides, howsoever ‘powerful’, don’t have a veil during their wedding ceremony at the church? Muslim brides, howsoever ‘progressive’, don’t have the veil during nikaah ceremony?