Teej, Shringar and our dual character society

As Teej approaches, different scenes are seen on social media – on one hand, women dressed in colorful clothes, singing and dancing, and on the other, unheard of negative words directed at the same women in the comment box. There are many examples of how women who seek happiness during the festival are easily criticized as “wasteful” and “unintelligent”.

A supermarket incident a few days ago has further clarified this mentality. A woman bought lipstick from a supermarket for 1,100 rupees. She felt that its quality was poor. She made a video with the aim of making consumers aware that customers are being cheated, please buy carefully when buying goods.

The question arose, but who would listen to her voice? Did the management of the supermarket respond to the improvement or not? Did the consumer rights body take any notice or not? But that was not the case here. Instead, social media comments on the same woman came like this-

“Do you have to buy lipstick for 1,100 rupees? No intelligence.”

“A woman is not intelligent, she spends a lot of money.”

“A spoiled woman like this breaks up the family.”

So was the problem with the lipstick or our mentality?

We are often very good at distorting or deceiving the issue. Instead of discussing the quality of the product, we blame the woman’s makeup as the culprit.

We silence the voice of a woman who can raise questions about consumer rights, calling it “addiction to beauty items.”

If a man buys a mobile phone for thousands of rupees, it is called ‘wow stylish,’ ‘up-to-date with the times.’ But the lipstick bought by a woman for 1,000 is belittled as an “unnecessary expense.” This is the double-mindedness and character of our society.

Tee is also an example of the same. Yes. If a mother, sister, and brother try to be happy even if they are alone by dancing and having fun, it is a big fault; but it is normal for a man to have fun with his friends and drink liquor.

Women eat one day a year and Teej are also examples of this. Women are criticized for eating and having fun, while men party seven times a week are normal.

When women wear makeup, jewelry, and red sarees on Teej, some people associate it with culture, but they also criticize that makeup as “fake” and “wasteful”. Society also praises a woman’s face, body, and figure, and ridicules that hard work as “leisure work, no work.”

On the other hand, the responsibility of preserving religion and tradition is also imposed on women, and when women question the same tradition or try to be a little independent, society accuses them of “losing culture.” It is considered normal for men to spend money on alcohol, hotels, and restaurants throughout the year, but women Unusual behavior is observed when spending on food or makeup.

Such trends are also seen in the price of clothes, shoes or bags. For example, it is considered normal for a man to buy shoes worth 5-6 thousand, but when a woman buys a sari or bag of the same price, it is interpreted as “extravagant spending”. Here too, the question is not directed towards the quality, durability or market value of the item, but only towards the reason why women are spendthrifts.

The problem is not in Teej, nor in the price or makeup. The problem lies in the mentality. The tendency to make fun of women’s happiness, suppress their voices, and consider their preference for makeup bad is the real distortion.

Those who call Teej, which comes every year, “extravagant spending” need to ask themselves, are happiness and freedom also marketable goods that can be bought, and the price of which must always be paid by women?