What Do You Say...???

[neels]

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.

[kabir]

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.

Who's the author? Not Darwin, I am sure, to pass on a judgement on evolution. Sounds more of a misogynist though.

[neels]

Who's the author? Not Darwin, I am sure, to pass on a judgement on evolution.
Of course Not Darwin, btw autor is Nayantara Sahgal.

Sounds more of a misogynist though.



Whatever.... But Whts ur say ???

[raj_rathee]

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.


I think as its worded its a bit too extreme a statement. However,
there is probably an element of truth to it.

[harvindermalik]

jo bhi author hai shayana lagai sai....kafi had tak sahi hi lika hai...vaise jo RAMCHARITR MANAS k author nai likhya tha wo bhi sahi hi tha...........

[navingulia]

since time im-memorial, man has wanted to possess women(thats changing now) as property and one means used, was to force all idealism on women.
Define a good woman, a good wife, a good sister, a good daughter, a good mother. Rules and behavior patterns are well defined for them.
Imagine, (this intrigues me) in case of rape, it is propagated that the woman has lost everything and the man has lost nothing. Where as it should be other way round.
If 1000yrs down the line women still stay husband hunters(khushwant singh's statement) and need men who can command them. only women wont be to blame.
Having said that, my observation feels that in the modern, scientifically educated society, women are breaking the conventional definitions but in orthodox societies, it would need a rebellion or renaissance to bring about a needed change.
To me it appears that the 1000yr statement has been made more to shake the women awake by hurting their self respect.

[ritu]

jisne bhi likha hai vo koi purush hi hoga koi kayar purush .vaise aajkal hissab ulta hi hai sabko pata hai ki raj ghar me mastarni ka hi chalta hai aur commander in chief mommy hi hoti hai kisi bhi balak se pooch lo.

ha neel lekin agr aapne jhuuthe purushtav ka vaham rakhne waale kuch log agar aurat ko ek janwar ki trah samjhate hai to kami unme hi hai.kyunki command aur owner jaise shabad to janwar aur malik ke rishte me hi prayog kiyye jaate hai.

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.

[ritu]

harvinder jis tulsidaas ki tum baat kar raahe ho na aur jis shalok ki vo tulsidaas ek aurat ke taadne se hi itna mahan bana tha.agar ek auraat osko na taadti to na to ramcharitmanas hoti er na koi shalok er na koi tulsi daas.
tulsidaas ka vo doha ye tha
dhol gawar shudr pashu aur naari ye sab taadan ke adhikari
jo bhi author hai shayana lagai sai....kafi had tak sahi hi lika hai...vaise jo RAMCHARITR MANAS k author nai likhya tha wo bhi sahi hi tha...........

[ritu]

doha to maithili sharan gupt ne bhi likha tha
abla jeevan teri yahi kahnai
aanchal me hai doodh aankho me paani

sachaai to is dohe me thi.

[devdahiya]

I think it is more in reading between the lines than what some one has written on the subject.Men-women relation is a natural bonding automated by the principle of existence of human beings.As we evolved[still doing] women chose or made to choose[whatever] a confined environment which was percieved to be a safer one with minimal risk to her honour and physical being.This way a particular role was bench marked for her[and it was accepted as such and was practiced for a long long times]


While men thought[and as well did] that they are better suited and equipped for outwardly dangers and troubles of the world.This way a much more larger role got assigned to men where in his interaction with the world was far more larger and significant.This brought in the feelings of a superior creature in man and as such he started dictating things as per his convinience.This went on for thousands of years and this feeling of superiority not only got into the psych of Men but Women also accepted it as a gopel's truth and hence the men started possessing women at his whim and fancy.In this situation women at large started flattering men for better attention as there was no place for assertiveness.This made men more arrogant and larger than what they are suppose to be.This gave rise to the dominance of women by men at will.This infact lead to women getting posseessed and being mastered[infact they started liking it in absence of a choice]


Times have changed and women have started asserting for their rights and are making place for themselves but the percentage of such liberated women is very insignificat.In villages women are still being mastered at will and are bearing/liking it in the ansence of an alternative.So the author can be right in his assessment of things that the practice in force might continue a little longer than expected.

[sunitahooda]

I don't know others(male) have understodd the statement posted by Neels, i guess what the author wants to convey is that even after 1000 yrs women will be dominated by Men but women will regard that dominance as women will be more careful about WHO TO LET DOMINATE THEM and more over if women will feel the guy isn't suitable enough to be chosen as a HUSBAND who can COMMAND her SHE WOULD PREFER TO BE ALONE? I mean there's no harm if a man dominated ONLY IF HE DESERVES TO DOMINATE....I would love to be dominated by a man who IN RETURN gets dominated by ME when i need to DOMINATE:D:) I mean its OK if he is a HITLER sometimes BUT i also would want to be BLOODY MARY sometimes:p baaki har koye apney aap nai sher samjh ley hai aurat ke saamney chahe dil chuhe ka ho....that phenomenon will disappear LONG BEFORE 1000YEARS;)

[Maniisha]

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.


As per my views woman is just one half of the nature which is always incomplete without the other half. Woman can only fulfill her role of daughter, sister, lover, wife and grandmother only when there is man on the other side. Women always want men to fulfill her identity. Similarly man is also incomplete without women. Women always like men who command them out of love and respect. Women is only complete when she starts associating herself with the men in her life. As Sunita ji told its entirely choice of the women to determine whom she wants to be dominated throughout her life. Although we are living in the era where women liberation movements have bore fruits. Women is out of the clutches of the superstitions and social feudalism but still she loves to associate it with name of her protector i.e Name of father before her marriage, name of husband after marriage....:)

[dkumars]

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.


Damn stupid lines...
i hate dominance whether it is by men over women or vice versa... i never applaud dominance.
Its is 50 50 life share ... men women shud share their life and emotions but shudn give space to dominance... althoug i sometimes feel possession is ok but no dominance... and even i wud like evryone to feel free even no possesion... juss enjoy being in limits
women r not animals who need some master to drive... they can do each and evry thing a guy can do and they r proving themselves... so this comparision is absolutely wrong...

And Neels i appreciate ur wits that u started a new thread to talk rather than writing some craps in some other stupid thread.

[vikasgulia]

These man-woman relations are always the most trickiest topics to comment upon....
You just cant take a stand on these!!...the history of this relation is as old and as myriad as the origin-ascent of
mankind...so every comment becomes a circumstantial one..never a thing is a gospel..global..
I'll say that whatever name or form we give to this relation, the sense of humanity of either stakeholder should be respected irrespective who has an upper or lower hand.
So the form, name and nature of the relation be best left to the consenting individuals without encroaching each others basic human rights.:):)

[crsnadar]

I don't think there would be existance of this trend for longer.

Aajakal to trend change ho raha hai...:)

Men seek a Master who can direct them to win their battle.
&
Women seek a Partner to support in winning their battle.

Battle bole to Journey of Life...aisa bolte hai log...:)


so

Men seek Direction
Women seek Support

[Samarkadian]

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.

Women flock love Romeo and Juliet, a saga of romance yet play conveys opposite to it.Sorry Ladies.It is Romeo's lack of being a man that causes the tragedy in the play.

Samar is bragging again..Oh! Lets look at what Shakespeare says-

"Alas poor Romeo! he is already dead; stabbed with a
white wench's black eye; shot through the ear with a
love-song; the very pin of his heart cleft with the
blind bow-boy's butt-shaft: and is he a man to
encounter Tybalt"

The tragedy in Romeo and Juliet is not the love denied. It is Romeo refusing to be a Man. He kills himself at his first chance and so kills Juliet.
:) Its very natural deepest feeling of a woman quoted above to crave for a Man she respects.I feel in those line a woman wholly expressing her sexuality, her nature, her biological hormones.She wants to submit to dominant Man..Now riddle - What is this? A Man who has fully embraced his sexuality, not a male just because he is born with some genetelia.A Man who is fully proud of his testosterone will embrace woman and will keep her.Someone has seen Gladiator.The Character of Maximus.Magnetic.Even after 1000 years Women would crave for Man.Later.

[shailendra]

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".


...'Generalization' is never a good thing! And that is the vortex in which that above statement (or anything else that some have been responding with so far, and/or even what I may write) has the danger of falling into....

But having said that; this topic has a lot of food for thought and points of healthy discussion (without getting all hell bent out of shape) that one can rather focus on.

and let me respond first with another statement that is oft spoken-
"It is a 'Man's' world!"...

Now both these statement's though worded quite differently, and even having some very different obvious intensities (the one from the book 'Storm in Chandigarh' being very heavy-handed and derogatory almost, of course) still have a lot to say about the oft agreed upon and factual ground realities that still exist, no matter what the individual view point!

[Now I truly believe that the statement from the book you are reading should only be considered in the context of the 'storyline' or maybe as personal viewpoint of the author to drive a point home about something or someone in the book... and maybe nothing else.]

But then since it brings up a deliciously arguable theory....and to dissect the point behind it (at the risk of generalizing again), one would have to agree that while both the sexes are the balance of nature, with total and complete inter-dependency, THEY ARE STILL MILES DIFFERENT from each other ON SO MANY LEVELS!
For example if you were to not consider just the civilized world alone and start to observe the research on various other species too... then even in the animal kingdom the dynamics point towards mostly a male dominance and female dependency.
It wouldn't be far fetched to say that at the same time it's mostly and purely on the physical level that this dominance is restricted to... take that out and the field is almost level; even more to the fact that on a more emotional and tolerance levels the male of all species lags much far behind the female...

Now, what does that all mean in a nutshell?
Well, you can either take what you can from all the responses or simply resign to the fact that God simply did not make them equal at so many levels and the balance is always swinging one way or the other depending on what the area of concern is being considered at..................

Hope my two cents help bump back up this very interesting and intriguing discussion. (Good one Dr. Neelam)... and it would be even more valuable to see some more views here from the other members still missing from the discussion.......

[amanjaat]

well i think we can take a lesson or two from animal kingdom in this regard.

even statistically speaking
women tend to be more submissive towards her companion that the male,
and with it come lots of expectations and counter-expectations, like earning, raising children blah blah.

[shweta123]

I read these lines in a book I was reading last days - "Storm in Chandigarh"- and wondered Is it so...???
Here's the quote -

" A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect".

It would be intersting and learning to know what all the worthy members- Gentlemen as well as Ladies- ve to say about the quote.

Let me try completing this line to make it meaningful ...... “A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect and a man will still need a mother to make him fortunate enough to even think this way ! He will still want and need a woman to make him feel complete and strong – and that’s the woman he’ll try to protect from every malevolence and the spark of this protected female will be his only strength” ...... And now in my opinion the sentence has attained a balance ! Well, as Shailendra ji rightly mentioned “male dominance and female dominancy” is the key towards balance. No woman wants to live without a man of wits, character and intellect and no man can imagine a life without a shoulder full of warmth, care and intimacy and that’s the magnificence of this world of that potent Almighty.

[asuhag]

While I haven't read the book & not aware of the context ... the quote in general is quite of substance if wandered upon on with "theory of evolution".

Evolution of all natural & living, Adapation, Survival of the fittest, etc have all played part in the development of man & woman. The roles each played, how they lived & survived went on to baseline & further define the wirings of the brain & further evolution. This wasn't because of any discrimination but the way nature & biology saw it and these individual sexes chose to survive with.
This created a balance of sorts - Man being physically stronger, with hunting instincts became the food gatherer and woman with peripheral & home maker instincts took on the dwelling tasks.

Even today, opposite sexes attract to mate with an underlying conscious/subconcious to create the healthiest match for the survival of the progeny. The female would look for the strongest male, while the male in general prefered to pass on his genes to as many females as possible. These are pure survival instincts.
It is now known that some species (esp in the water kingdom, evolved quite oppositely where the females were hunters like man and males home dwellers and offspring bearers like females)... It is all how you evolved and a balance was struck with nature.

While all this existed, it didnt mean there were no social respect or inequality amongst the sexes. At least that wasn't the nature's way. All this is a creation of man/women... maybe under the pretext of civilization but largely due to prejudice or insecurities.

In the modern world, the liberalization of sexes movement was started to free the sexes from the hardlined discrimination previously created, however as not all things go well when concerned with humans, its probably been taken a little too far and roles if not being reversed are definitely being changed. This is whats creating imbalance in the nature and underlies as the root cause of many a disharmony.

While i respect both the sexes & call for equality, I quite appreciate the explaination above (by so many scientists).

This topic requires a lot of maturity & thought to understand. I'm not being an MCP or a sexist while i say this. I am all for women's liberalization and their respect. But this debate is about understanding the nature & our existence.

To sum it up, the quote is nothing but the most general of man + women's brain wiring over evolution. The female would prefer the strongest male to command her - mate - and improve the chances of survival of their progeny - themselves/their genes.

[mamtadg]

:)Hi all ,visiting after long,but very interesting to begin with such mind churning topic. view are asked on for the same front .so i have always believed world is male dominated .and yes females(me specially) will only allow dominance if she feels person of opposite gender is mentally and positively more brainy.so weather it is matter of year or 1000 criteria remains same .:)

[vijay]

Traits always dominate the admirers.... whether Man or Woman !

Just keep it simple and straight ....... wit and courage rules every heart they want to.... time is the least factor..... and sex doesn't matter ( since Lord Krishna to Angelina Jolie )

[vijay]

“A thousand years from now a woman will still want and need a master, the man who will own and command her - and that's the man she'll respect and a man will still need a mother to make him fortunate enough to even think this way ! He will still want and need a woman to make him feel complete and strong – and that’s the woman he’ll try to protect from every malevolence and the spark of this protected female will be his only strength”

Thanks for completing it ..... otherwise people were too eager to fire without knowing at what they should fire.

We must learn how to quote :)

[Samarkadian]

Folks, time to put some science in mate-selection, kudos to chemical locha.

Have a look at this beautifully crafted article over centuries old riddle.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1704355-1,00.html