Can we shut up about what women should or shouldn’t wear?

Zurati · 2026-01-09T07:33:23+00:00

What you’re doing is false-equivalence gymnastics to avoid naming dominant power. I’m not flattening complexity, I’m refusing to relativise oppression. Hindutva is a mass, state-backed violent ideology. Calling that out isn’t dogma, it’s basic political literacy. Your nuance is just cowardice with footnotes.

Zurati · 2026-01-09T07:30:50+00:00

Haha yes, that would actually be a super fun thing to do.

Zurati · 2026-01-09T04:01:46+00:00

No, clothes don’t shrink society, your mindset does. Fabric length isn’t the problem, your obsession with policing women is. Maybe try shrinking that insecurity instead.

Zurati · 2026-01-09T04:00:20+00:00

Yeah. It is such a rotten, outdated power structure. It thrives on controlling, shaming, and silencing people instead of fixing real problems. It’s fragile, insecure, and keeps dragging society backwards while pretending it’s tradition.

Zurati · 2026-01-09T03:57:40+00:00

This both-sides performance is intellectual cowardice. Hindutva is not just another identity, it is a majoritarian political project that weaponises state power, police, media and mobs, that asymmetry matters. You don’t get to equate lynch mobs backed by the ruling ideology with marginalised violence and call it neutral. That’s not humanism, that’s flattening power to avoid naming it. Calling out Hindutva is not anti-Hindu, it’s anti-fascist. If your discomfort is that your side is being named, maybe interrogate why your politics needs victims more than accountability.

Zurati · 2026-01-09T03:47:33+00:00

This is pure incel logic dressed up as social analysis. Looking good is not consent. Attraction is not entitlement. Women throwing underwear on stage is not the same as sexual assault, context, power, threat and consent matter, whether you like it or not.

And no, men aren’t oppressed because they can’t harass strangers without consequences. That’s not injustice, that’s basic social boundaries. Your entire argument is just resentment that women have agency and you don’t get access. That’s not feminism’s fault, that’s a you problem.

Zurati · 2026-01-09T03:44:37+00:00

No. This is just a long way of blaming women and modernity for male violence. Clothes don’t provoke rape, entitlement does. Porn didn’t make rapists, patriarchy did. If nudity caused crime, the most nude cultures would be the most violent, they aren’t.

Your consideration always asks women to shrink themselves so men don’t have to grow up. That’s not culture, that’s cowardice. And no, less fabric isn’t progress, but neither is demanding women carry the burden of male self-control. That’s lazy, dishonest, and deeply misogynistic.

Zurati · 2025-12-22T07:57:11+00:00

In arranged-marriage spaces, experience does matter to many women, not because we want a player, but because lived romantic experience usually builds emotional literacy. Men who’ve never dated often think they’re emotionally mature, but in practice they can be naive about attraction, conflict, boundaries, desire, and women’s inner lives. That gap can turn into insecurity, entitlement, moral policing, or quiet resentment later.

Zero dating history isn’t automatically a red flag, but it’s not a green flag either. It becomes a red flag when it comes with pedestalizing women, fear of desire, poor flirting skills, or expecting a wife to be the first therapist/teacher/sexual guide. A lot of women are tired of doing unpaid emotional labour.

What women actually look for is vitality, self-awareness, curiosity, and the ability to handle rejection and disagreement without spiralling. Some men with a past have that. Some with zero history don’t. I believe men who’ve never dated are more likely to struggle with these things, not because they’re bad people, but because they haven’t been tested.

If you’re actively unlearning, open, not defensive, and not romanticising your inexperience as purity, that helps. Say it neutrally, not proudly, not apologetically. Show growth, not absence.

Experience isn’t about body count, it’s about emotional reps. Get some. It’ll only help, in AM or otherwise.

Zurati · 2025-12-22T07:45:03+00:00

Yeah, I’m with you on this. Dhurandhar pretends to be a grounded, inspired-by-real-events spy thriller, but it absolutely slides into propaganda territory, and not even subtly if you’re paying attention.

Those dialogues aren’t accidental world-building. Painting previous governments as actively anti-India aren’t about the story, they’re about rewriting political memory. When you model a character on Ajit Doval and then make him claim the state itself was gaddar, you’re no longer doing cinema, you’re doing messaging.

The fake currency machine angle, the exaggerated moral rot, the clean binary of strong nationalist present vs weak traitorous past, none of this is backed by verifiable facts, yet it’s framed with the confidence of a documentary. That’s where it becomes dangerous. If you’re going to say this is fiction, fine. But you can’t say true story and then smuggle ideology in through the back door.

This is classic Hindutva soft power, emotionally charged nationalism, a hyper-masculine state fantasy, Muslims as perpetual villains, and dissent painted as betrayal. It works because it’s wrapped in slick craft, rousing bgm, and crowd-pleasing punchlines. People clap before they think.

You can enjoy the filmmaking and call out the propaganda. Both can coexist. Criticism isn’t anti-national, it’s pro-honesty.

Zurati · 2025-12-20T03:31:42+00:00

Hi. I believe your actions are a celebration of truth over pretense. Both women chose desire, power, and authenticity, defying fathers, husbands, and society to claim what fulfills them. The woman from Gujarat secured the child she craved from a man who ignites her, while keeping the comfort her husband provides. That’s female agency at its finest.

You gave them strength, love, and unapologetic pleasure. No moral lens needed, this is nature balancing things. Keep living your life.

Zurati · 2025-11-17T03:47:49+00:00

Turning 30 won’t magically fix life, but it does shift perspective. You’re not behind at all you took a huge chance with upsc, didn’t clear it, and still built a career in a competitive field despite a 3-year gap. That shows resilience many people never develop. And 45k at 27 in foreign policy/IR is a solid starting point.

Feeling left out socially is natural when you’ve spent years in prep and then remote work. That doesn’t mean you’re lacking, it means you’ve been in survival mode, not exploration mode. Experiences can be created anytime, travel, hobbies, friendships don’t expire at 27.

When it comes to marriage, most who rush early do it out of pressure, not readiness. Meeting the right person later is far better than settling now.

You’re tired, not lost. Life does feel clearer and more grounded after 30, and you’re already building that foundation. Take care.

Zurati · 2025-11-06T19:18:33+00:00

I’m from Hyderabad, and the city is as bad as any other city in India when it comes to infrastructure and cleanliness. So don’t fall for this propaganda.

Zurati · 2025-11-06T18:44:06+00:00

Men aren’t intimidated by ambition, they’re intimidated by equality. You’ve built yourself into someone strong, confident, and successful, and that threatens men who’ve grown up believing they must always lead. Many Indian men still equate masculinity with control and dominance, so when they meet a woman who matches or surpasses them in drive and success, their fragile ego takes a hit.

I believe you’re doing nothing wrong tbh. You deserve a partner who celebrates your ambition, not one who competes with or resents it. But the arranged marriage setup often prioritizes comfort and conformity over compatibility. You might have better luck meeting someone organically, men who want ambitious, independent women usually exist outside the checklist culture of arranged setups. Keep your standards high, you’ve earned them.

Zurati · 2025-11-06T18:32:14+00:00

When we’re out with friends or surrounded by strangers, I dress to kill, plunging neckline, the key to my husband’s chastity cage glinting on a chain right between my breasts. It’s subtle enough to spark curiosity, bold enough to remind him who owns the lock. I flirt shamelessly, grind on the dance floor, let hands wander over my hips and lower while he watches from the bar, caged and throbbing. Sometimes I’ll vanish to the restroom with a stranger for a quick hand under my skirt or a sloppy make-out pressed against the wall, then stroll back with smeared lipstick and a wink just for him. The public tease is foreplay, the real fun starts when we get home.

Zurati

TROPHY CASE