One has to be incredibly credulous to buy BJP spin masters’ argument that the government got rid of Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar for harmonious relationship with the judiciary.
Mini deal will likely see no cut in 10% baseline tariff on Indian exports announced by Trump on 2 April, it is learnt, but additional 26% tariffs are set to be reduced.
Capable of being fired in plain and high-altitude areas, it has day-and-night capability and two-way data link to support post-launch target, aim-point update.
As Narendra Modi becomes India’s second-longest consecutively serving Prime Minister, we look at how he compares with Indira Gandhi across four key dimensions.
Shekhar Gupta often boasts about his team being very young and about 80 percent of them being women. No wonder the lack of experience and diversity clearly shows in the opinion pieces. Devoid of logic, they sound more like rants.
As a Bengali the author surely knows that none is convinced that Mamata is really injured. she is trying to gain sympathy votes and so repeatedly thrusting out her leg in viewers’ faces.
Delusional out of touch cosmopolitan feminist wouldn’t be elected to run a colony society, forget real power.
Why is it that Modi ran away from suits and Chidambaram wears lungis? You say its patriarchy then why is Sonia Gandhi’s party and Mahua whats-her-face crying suit-boot sarkar for one instance where the PM of India wore a suit they disapproved of?
Only the extremely dim witted would ignore how appearances make or brake politics in India. Why humility and simplicity are seen as virtues and ostentatious vulgarity looked down upon as unbecoming. A woman’s power and respect in India come from her social station as wife/mother or sister, not as objects of beauty or sex which have low social currency in Indian society.
A dullard asking Indian politicians to be more like US politicians under some mistaken delusion that fashionable politicians or vanity has political currency in the US are just projecting their own fantasies of how politics works elsewhere. This is far from reality and even in America, fashion detracts from substance. Remember Sarah Palin.
I urge some of the commentators here to use the Grammarly app or at least do a spell check before they post their comments. You don’t want to lose the potency of your argument because of shoddy grammar and poor spelling.
This article is totally rubbish – a waste of time.
The author is saying Kamala Harris (a Democrat – closer to Indian Leftists) is the gold standard of what women should aspire to become. The author has forgotten that India elected and re-elected a woman as its PM in the 60s, 70s and 80s – Indira Gandhi and kept another one in power for 10 MMS years. While US is yet to elect a woman President. In politics, it is about power not attire.
But the author’s thinking is so superficial that she has chosen to focus on attire. Because, I think she wants to use that to continue spreading fake-feminism in India by combining all Indian customs she dislikes into Patriarchy. Typical Leftist, Fake-feminist. You can fool me no longer. Thank God!
Be Chill. No Need for Feminism in wearing of any attire. Travel out into the vast hinterlands of this Nation. See how the average dress and again rewrite this article
The context is misplaced in this article. It goes much beyond gender here. Historically the ‘fashion’ in Indian politics has remained Gandhian. Most politicians have been wearing traditional dress, including men. The reason why Modi was ridiculed as ‘Suit Boot ki Sarkar’ for wearing a suit. American politicians have an entirely different dress code.
The despicable behavior of Dilip Ghosh is another matter. I think the article mixes things up.
Ms. Das comes across as a wannabe rebel, albeit a lost one. This article, just like her previous one, is mostly a pointless rant.
In India, when one joins politics, he/she is expected to be in de-glamourised and plain attire. Its applicable not just for women but also for men. No one turns out in the Legislative Assemblies or the Parliament in jeans and tees. Neither the men nor the women.
However, this is not to condone the sexist remarks of several male politicians. That is totally uncalled for.
But at the same time, wannabe politicians, especially those from the film industry, must appreciate the fact that the Parliament is not a fashion show. An unwritten dress code is adhered to by everyone and they would be better off observing and complying with it.
Let me start by saying no one should dictate what a woman should or should not wear.
But I don’t understand this infatuation of comparing Kamala Harris high heels to an Indian sarees.
Both the countries have their own dress culture. Will Kamala Harris wear a chappal and live in a small house like Mamta Banerjee does?
Tina das mentioned Mimi Chakraborty and Nusrat Jahan being criticized for wearing western outfits. But at the same time let me remind you Nusrat was criticized and abused for wearing a saree, a sindoor and doing a puja during Durga Ashtami by the Islamist.
All the examples mentioned in the article were of TMC female legislatures being criticized. But Tina has very conveniently has forgotten about the name calling that Smriti Irani, Mayawati, Shazia Ilmi and many more from various parties had to face.
Lastly I think Tina has raised an important point but lets not be baised in highlighting genuine women issues.
Note to ThePrint: Posting the readers comments after 2-3 days on the article doesn’t do justice.
In the 2-3 days the article has been removed from the front page. Readers miss out on the
chances of debating with the author or amongst themselves
Also who has the patience to wait for 3 days to see his comments. I surely don’t.
Shekhar Gupta often boasts about his team being very young and about 80 percent of them being women. No wonder the lack of experience and diversity clearly shows in the opinion pieces. Devoid of logic, they sound more like rants.
As a Bengali the author surely knows that none is convinced that Mamata is really injured. she is trying to gain sympathy votes and so repeatedly thrusting out her leg in viewers’ faces.
Delusional out of touch cosmopolitan feminist wouldn’t be elected to run a colony society, forget real power.
Why is it that Modi ran away from suits and Chidambaram wears lungis? You say its patriarchy then why is Sonia Gandhi’s party and Mahua whats-her-face crying suit-boot sarkar for one instance where the PM of India wore a suit they disapproved of?
Only the extremely dim witted would ignore how appearances make or brake politics in India. Why humility and simplicity are seen as virtues and ostentatious vulgarity looked down upon as unbecoming. A woman’s power and respect in India come from her social station as wife/mother or sister, not as objects of beauty or sex which have low social currency in Indian society.
A dullard asking Indian politicians to be more like US politicians under some mistaken delusion that fashionable politicians or vanity has political currency in the US are just projecting their own fantasies of how politics works elsewhere. This is far from reality and even in America, fashion detracts from substance. Remember Sarah Palin.
I urge some of the commentators here to use the Grammarly app or at least do a spell check before they post their comments. You don’t want to lose the potency of your argument because of shoddy grammar and poor spelling.
This article is totally rubbish – a waste of time.
The author is saying Kamala Harris (a Democrat – closer to Indian Leftists) is the gold standard of what women should aspire to become. The author has forgotten that India elected and re-elected a woman as its PM in the 60s, 70s and 80s – Indira Gandhi and kept another one in power for 10 MMS years. While US is yet to elect a woman President. In politics, it is about power not attire.
But the author’s thinking is so superficial that she has chosen to focus on attire. Because, I think she wants to use that to continue spreading fake-feminism in India by combining all Indian customs she dislikes into Patriarchy. Typical Leftist, Fake-feminist. You can fool me no longer. Thank God!
Be Chill. No Need for Feminism in wearing of any attire. Travel out into the vast hinterlands of this Nation. See how the average dress and again rewrite this article
The context is misplaced in this article. It goes much beyond gender here. Historically the ‘fashion’ in Indian politics has remained Gandhian. Most politicians have been wearing traditional dress, including men. The reason why Modi was ridiculed as ‘Suit Boot ki Sarkar’ for wearing a suit. American politicians have an entirely different dress code.
The despicable behavior of Dilip Ghosh is another matter. I think the article mixes things up.
Ms. Das comes across as a wannabe rebel, albeit a lost one. This article, just like her previous one, is mostly a pointless rant.
In India, when one joins politics, he/she is expected to be in de-glamourised and plain attire. Its applicable not just for women but also for men. No one turns out in the Legislative Assemblies or the Parliament in jeans and tees. Neither the men nor the women.
However, this is not to condone the sexist remarks of several male politicians. That is totally uncalled for.
But at the same time, wannabe politicians, especially those from the film industry, must appreciate the fact that the Parliament is not a fashion show. An unwritten dress code is adhered to by everyone and they would be better off observing and complying with it.
Let me start by saying no one should dictate what a woman should or should not wear.
But I don’t understand this infatuation of comparing Kamala Harris high heels to an Indian sarees.
Both the countries have their own dress culture. Will Kamala Harris wear a chappal and live in a small house like Mamta Banerjee does?
Tina das mentioned Mimi Chakraborty and Nusrat Jahan being criticized for wearing western outfits. But at the same time let me remind you Nusrat was criticized and abused for wearing a saree, a sindoor and doing a puja during Durga Ashtami by the Islamist.
All the examples mentioned in the article were of TMC female legislatures being criticized. But Tina has very conveniently has forgotten about the name calling that Smriti Irani, Mayawati, Shazia Ilmi and many more from various parties had to face.
Lastly I think Tina has raised an important point but lets not be baised in highlighting genuine women issues.
Note to ThePrint: Posting the readers comments after 2-3 days on the article doesn’t do justice.
In the 2-3 days the article has been removed from the front page. Readers miss out on the
chances of debating with the author or amongst themselves
Also who has the patience to wait for 3 days to see his comments. I surely don’t.
Almost all writings of this author covers useless stuffs
Nonsensical meaningless space filling article.
Don’t waste your time reading this rubbish.
Agreed