A saree for Kareena from Sainiks
Please don’t turn saree in to a chador! Do these people even know that the “indian culture” included “not wearing a blouse” till very recently? Blouse was never a part of the saree wearing tradition. Saree might cover the breasts, but the back would always be bare – no different than the picture above.
Indian culture is not about showing or hiding skin – it is about respecting women and empowering them and making sure that women half, the better half, plays an important role in our society!
If you want to save the Indian Culture, join the “save the girl child” campaign; don’t get hung up on a little piece of fabric.
Just a reminder for Shiv Sainik – ratio of girl birth to boy child birth in Mumbai is dismal 898, i.e., there are only 898 girl child born for every 1000 boys (950 girls to 1000 boys is conisered average). Find out who is killing 52+ girls for every 1000 girl born rather than worrying about who is wearing what in a movie!
Shiv Sena workers on Friday tied a saree around a poster of Kareena Kapoor from the film ‘Kurbaan’, expressing indignation over the still flashing her bare back. Women Shiv Sena members tied a saree around the poster of Kareena in Juhu, who is shown holding a bare-chested Saif Ali Khan, in the image.
The sainiks had visited Kareena’s residence to present her a saree. However, the police deployed around her house saw to that such action are prevented. Some sources from the Sena group stated,”We objected to the posters as they showed the actress semi-nude and we found to be in very bad taste. It violates our Indian culture.”
The movie, starring Saif Ali Khan, Kareena Kapoor and Vivek Oberoi, is slated for release later this month. It is directed by Rensil D’Silva and is a romance set against the backdrop of terrorism.
The film, which is already in news for a steamy love scene between Kareena and Saif was previously titled ‘Jehad’.
9 Responses to “A saree for Kareena from Sainiks”
Leave a Reply
About US
Sunny is a designer in Los Angeles. He loves the fluidity and fluency of a saree and believes that when a woman wears a saree, she not only adorns her body but she also adorns her soul. His design ethos is that “simplicity never goes out of style.”
Rupa Gupta: A writer, editor and journalist, Rupa has been in the media for more than two decades. She has worked as Editor with major publications, both in India and abroad. a keen eye for fashion and current trends. Her sense of aesthetics transcends the hype and always finds the true beauty.
Liza Varma is a former Femina Miss India and well known model in Delhi. Today, she is a leading Fashion Choreographer with over 1000 shows to her credit in India and abroad. She is also a member of the Fashion Design Council of India and a Consultant with Shoot Talent Management. Her client list is the who’s who of Indian fashion industry.
Misty is a student in London and has her fingers on the pulse of London fashion industry.
Abhi is a student in San Francisco and showcases sensuous saree pictures.
Kamini is a model in Los Angeles and loves to accentuate the best a saree has to offer.
Think it should be but the back would always be *bare* and not bear.
Why no shirt from the Shiv Sena for Mr. Khan?!
I hope they tied the sarees around their faces; Kareena Kapoor and Saif Ali Whathisface are homley as a mule’s ass, nevermind the nudity!
What’s with this “Girl” person? They’re bitchy as a mule’s ass hair, nevermind the anonymity!
Every time I see a post, it’s about how Indians are ugly or fat, or how sarongs aren’t real sarees. Well, honey, get a clue. India is great in that it holds up all kinds of body sizes as beautiful, which is how it should be. (Of course, if they could work on realizing that all skin colors are beautiful, too…) And sarongs? Sarongs are wrap-around skirt type things. Sarees worn just below the waist are usually pleated. In some parts of India, that’s how sarees were worn for the longest time…until the British came along and mandated that the bare chest be covered with a blouse and pallu.
- Adrian
What’s with this Adrian twat? He seems to spend too much time contemplating the very nature of a mule’s ass (and the hairs therein *shudders*). Perhaps if you stayed away from mules, their asses (and the hairs therein *shudders*), you’d find them more hospitable, my zoophile friend?
“Every time I see a post, it’s about how Indians are ugly or fat, or how sarongs aren’t real sarees.” Aside, from occasional guest contributors, the only poster on this site is Sunny, the proprietor, and hardly have I read post where he refers to Indians as ‘ugly or fat’, though I think even he could point out the difference between a saree and a sarong (provided you don’t continue to call him ‘honey’; not sure how that’ll go down with the big guy…).
And I know it should be comprehensible to even the simplest of cretins (i.e: you), but if the closest you can get to defining the sarong is that “Sarongs are wrap-around skirt type things”, I’m really not surprised that you can’t discern between one and a saree. Now, if you’d substituted the words ‘dhoti’ or ‘lungi’ for saree, I’d have wholeheartedly concurred (but that assertion would require knowledge you don’t seem to possess). Assuming you can wrap your addled brains around it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sari
BTW: thanks for the revisionist history lesson about the “blouse and pallu”; the choli itself (or blouse, as you call it) predates the arrival of the British, to at least the Mughal Empire and the pallu (obviously) is even older even than that, dating back to the advent of the sari, regardless of how much “bare chest” was ultimately covered (y’know, before the “British came along and mandated” it be covered).
Along with the Mughal choli and the Indian pallu, did the British also come along and grant you your Firangi-ass name (which was derived from the Latin ‘Hadrian’- y’know: until those dastardly “British came along and mandated” it be Anglicized, lol)?
Cheap publicity for destined-to-flop movie. It’s all a fake controversy to draw attention.
Girl, I am amused at your apparently bottomless stockpile of angst. I would normally not reply to such a juvenile post, but you did raise some good points, and here are my replies.
Oh, and in the future, could you keep the sixth grade insults to a minimum? I think they’re funny, but they make you look like an angry cretin.
1. “Every time I see a post, it’s about how Indians are ugly or fat, or how sarongs aren’t real sarees.” – I was referring to your comment posts, not the blog posts, which I enjoy thoroughly.
2. Dhoti and lungi are not the same things. BUT…at some point in our past, the lines between dhoti and lungi and saree were not clear. These were also not gendered in such a stringent way as their modern manifestations. It is believed by historians that men and women both wore dhotis until the 14th century.
3. The Mughal empire did not reach into the far south. There, the blouse was not mandated until the British, which is evidenced by pre-British South Indian and Sri Lankan paintings. Even today, in some rural South Indian and Sri Lankan villages, women do not wear a blouse (and yes, leave the bosom bare).
4. I prefer not to call the blouse a “choli” because that is an Sanskrit-derived word. And as you should know since you’re such a historian, languages spoken in South India are not derived from Sanskrit, and in fact bear no resemblance to any languages spoken outside of that region. Thus calling it a “choli” erases to me the valuable and important fact that the South was often not influenced in the same ways culturally and linguistically as the rest of India and as a result we should not paint India with a broad brush. Btw, “saree” itself is from Sanskrit and has completely different names in the South. But because it has become an almost universal term (unlike choli, which is still not used in South India), I used it.
5. Adrian is not my real name. Obviously. I take it that Girl, oh so Indian as it is, is not yours?
agreed completely!! indians should stop worrying about “scandalous” things like this poster and figure out what on earth is happening to those missing girls.
visit this campaign: http://50millionmissing.wordpress.com/
“Girl, I am amused at your apparently bottomless stockpile of angst.”
Thanks! I’m still amused that your dumb ass keeps coming back and checking up on it, day-in, day-out. If only I had the energy or concern to check the post as often.
By the way, it’s ‘bile’ not ‘angst’, sweety! Don’t get me wrong: I’m very flattered; apparently I’ve become almost as interesting to you as a mule’s ass (though still not quite as accessible, I presume?).
“I think they’re funny, but they make you look like an angry cretin.”
I think your comments are funny too, even though they make you sound like an angry, xenophobic, zoophile who’s never been laid, so I guess we’ll call it even.
“Dhoti and lungi are not the same things. BUT…at some point in our past, the lines between dhoti and lungi and saree were not clear. These were also not gendered in such a stringent way as their modern manifestations. It is believed by historians that men and women both wore dhotis until the 14th century.”
*Sigh* Since you’re still not clear about things, I guess I’ll to explain it all. AGAIN. Saree: 6-9 yards of (traditionally) unstitched fabric, the loose end of which is considered pallu, no matter how you choose to drape it. Worn primarily by women and hijras (which one are you, btw?) Lungi: tubular skirt-like wrapping, sold both stitched (closed) and unstitched (open), worn by members of both sexes. Doti: Approximately 5 yards of unstitched fabric, worn primarily by men (much to the chagrin of their adolescent children). I suppose I should just be pleased that you no longer confuse sarees with sarongs.
“I prefer not to call the blouse a “choli” because that is an Sanskrit-derived word. And as you should know since you’re such a historian, languages spoken in South India are not derived from Sanskrit, and in fact bear no resemblance to any languages spoken outside of that region. Thus calling it a “choli” erases to me the valuable and important fact that the South was often not influenced in the same ways culturally and linguistically as the rest of India and as a result we should not paint India with a broad brush. Btw, “saree” itself is from Sanskrit and has completely different names in the South. But because it has become an almost universal term (unlike choli, which is still not used in South India), I used it.”
Where should I begin? Considering your animosity towards the British (and their dastardly fashion sense), I’m surprised you’d want to use a word like ‘blouse’ (‘oh so Indian as it is’!) instead of the word ‘choli’, which actually IS Indian in origin. Oh yes, that’s right: you don’t use ‘choli’ because it’s a cop-out to those dastardly Sanskrit-wielding North Indians (choli wearing bastards that they are!), but you also don’t use non-Sanskrit words like ‘ravika’, preferring instead the English ‘blouse’. So you dislike Sanskrit loanwords because of their association with those dastardly Northerners (though you’ll happily use ‘saree’ since, in your own tiny mind, it’s more ‘universal’) and dislike saree ‘blouses’ because (unlike the Mughals, apparently) the dastardly English came down South and forced them on you (though you’ll still use the English term for the garment: ‘blouse’)? I used to think that you’re a xenophobic asshole, but now I see your just regular, run-of-the-mill asshole. Attack the English, attack the North Indians, attack me, it doesn’t really matter, so long as your misanthropic ass has someone to attack, right?
“Adrian is not my real name. Obviously. I take it that Girl, oh so Indian as it is, is not yours?”
True. That said, I believe that (in India, as in elsewhere) a sizable portion of the population could still be defined as girls. Conversely, I wonder what portion of the Indian populous could be defined as ‘Adrians’? The creepy, misanthropic, zoophile contingent?
Hey, I’ve got an idea: since you can’t tell the difference anyway, why don’t you do everyone a favor and go f*ck off to ‘Dhoti Dreams’, ‘Lungi Nightmares’, ‘Sarong Suenos’ or whatever else you haunt when you’re not buggering mules or spreading your hate on this site?
I am really happy that kurban flopped. It proved that only cheap nudity and hot scenes dont make a movie work.N thanks to this ‘always show ur skin’attitude of Kareena, not a single movie of hers has done well post Jab We Met..be it tashaan or Kambakht ishq. When will kareena madam understand that movies require a good script n solid performances to do well and not only nudity and size zero..??I do not want to hurt any Kareena fans at all..m sorry if i hv..i myself loved her immensely in JWM,but after that, she has literally disgraced hersef…and i think this is wat majority of the ppl think..