If you are a professional in an emerging industry, like gaming, data science, cloud computing, digital marketing etc., that has promising career opportunities, this is your chance to be featured in #CareerKiPaathshaala. Fill up this form today!
The film tries to dismiss workplace sexual harassment cases as having secondary and undisclosed motives and does a disservice to women.
Section 375, starring Akshaye Khanna and Richa Chadha is a movie that brings up the complex issue of false rape accusations and opens a debate.
An entertaining film it is, with persuasive arguments though very disturbing. A film post wake of #MeToo highlights that law is not synonymous to justice. Perhaps this movie subtly says, how even with an existential rape law, yet it’s implication not promised. And when power and money are involved, proving rape is more challenging and difficult. Otherwise, the law is easier neck’s noose for common people.
The movie is based on Section 375 under which film director Rohan Khurana (enacted by Rahul Bhatt), is accused of rape by Anjali Dangle (played by Meera Chopra), and was found guilty and sentenced to 10 years of jail. After that, Khurana’s wife implores noted criminal lawyer Tarun Saluja (Akshaye Khanna) to take up the case in the High Court.
The film is prominently a courtroom drama with heavy dialogues, mainly from the defense side. The story would have been more convincing had the prosecution got a role equal and tough as the defense, in the fight of justice. Richa Chadda does well on an otherwise underwritten role, the character she played failed to apply any rigor while building the case.
For the most part, the movie will keep you confused as what could be a possible outcome of the case, and that is the only moral victory it can claim. But, the side appears to be hitherto chosen and it diluted the cause. The film could have been otherwise an unbiased presentation of a rape case.
Section 375, that is originally intended to highlight false accusations of rape and male victim-hood, ends showing up how failing to prove offense can make it a false rape accusation.
In the story, you will never get to know what exactly happened on the date of crime, in the place of abuse; but an event reconstructed as per the lawyers’ versions. Here, the director limits the movie.
The film tries to dismiss workplace sexual harassment cases as having secondary and undisclosed motives and does a disservice to women, who have recently mustered courage to bring forth the stories of their trauma and share with the world.
It is up to you, how you view the movie and decide. I was expecting a better movie, but it gives a weak prosecution and affirms that it is yet a long way to go for the judiciary to be more sensitive towards women’s living experiences.
Image is a still from the movie Section 375
Being born with Flower AND Fire; I belong to the league of women, both Feminine AND Fierce. Don't tell me how girls can be either this or that; I know how to wear both read more...
Women's Web is an open platform that publishes a diversity of views, individual posts do not necessarily represent the platform's views and opinions at all times.
Stay updated with our Weekly Newsletter or Daily Summary - or both!
Shows like Indian Matchmaking only further the argument that women must adhere to social norms without being allowed to follow their hearts.
When Netflix announced that Indian Matchmaking (2020-present) would be renewed for a second season, many of us hoped for the makers of the show to take all the criticism they faced seriously. That is definitely not the case because the show still continues to celebrate regressive patriarchal values.
Here are a few of the gendered notions that the show propagates.
A mediocre man can give himself a 9.5/10 and call himself ‘the world’s most eligible bachelor’, but an independent and successful woman must be happy with receiving just 60-70% of what she feels she deserves.
As long as teachers are competent in their job, and adhere to the workplace code of conduct, how does it matter what they do in their personal lives?
A 30 year old Associate Professor at a well-known University, according to an FIR filed by her, was forced to resign because the father of one of her students complained that he found his son looking at photographs of her, which according to him were “objectionable” and “bordering on nudity”.
There are two aspects to this case, which are equally disturbing, and which together make me question where we are heading as a society.
When the father of an 18 year old finds his son looking at photographs of a lady in a swimsuit, he can do many things. What this parent allegedly did was to dash off a letter to the University which states: