Caramelisation: Us v Them? ‘Honour’ Based Violence

Caramelisation: Us v Them? ‘Honour’ Based Violence
By Nazmin Akthar, Associate Editor and Correspondent for Cultural Affairs Memoirs of a very confusing lawyer

Confusion Part 3[1]:
Caramelisation: Us v Them[2]

I am going amateur psychologist in this article and I want to reiterate once more that the views and experiences are my own and it does not mean that I represent the views and experiences of others or of any particular group or community.

Best behaviour

A friend once asked me whether my mum knew every Asian in the city; she doesn’t but I am sure she comes close. My Asian friends in other cities say the same about their mothers but I think they’re exaggerating simply on the basis that Newcastle has less Asians than their cities do therefore it is more likely that my mum knows a higher percentage of Asians in our city than their mothers know in their respective cities. Just saying (I need to do something about this competitive streak of mine!).

Irrespective of how popular our darling mothers are (our fathers popularity is irrelevant for reasons unknown to me) every Asian will have at least one Aunty-Jee in their life. Actually let me correct myself – EVERYONE has an Aunty-Jee in their life.
You know that term “honour” that keeps being thrown about in the media that is so important in ethnic minority communities that it results in forced marriages and honour killings? The actual word is “izzat”[3]. This is where it gets tricky because honour is not a literal translation of “izzat” and neither, I submit, is it restricted to ethnic minority communities.

“Honour (izzat) has multiple connotations and overlapping meanings relating to respect, esteem, dignity, reputation and virtue… the specific acts that are deemed to increase or erode izzat are subject to constant contestation and change…”[4]

I don’t like criticism and forgive me for making an assumption but I bet you don’t. Neither will our parents. Cast your minds back to when you were growing up. Did your parents tell

you to say please and thank you? Did they ask you to brush your hair properly and wear your best dress in front of Aunt Jane? Did they ask you to always try your best at school and get the best grades possible? Now please don’t think I am doubting our parents intentions; of course all such matters were for our benefit. But human psychology also has a part to play. If your parents’ weren’t like this I am sure you will know of someone’s parents that were. You will know of a parent that would brag about their child’s achievements with pride and another who would wish their child would give them something to brag about. And Aunt Jane? Your mum’s dear friend who comes over with fresh cupcakes which she just happened to whip up an hour before, who must compare your fine china to hers, whose husband got a promotion and whose children have the sun shining out of their… errr… yeah, I think you know what I mean.

We all have Aunty Jane in our lives. British Asians like me just happen to add the “Jee” when referring to them[5] – it does nothing more than give respect by formalising the greeting, just as the French have the difference between “tu” and “vous”. We all also have “izzat”. I mean the everyday aspect of “izzat”: Respect. Our parents want to present us in the best possible way to the outside world because they know that the alternative is criticism. Your mum doesn’t want to look like a bad mother in front of Aunty Jane; She wants to be respected. Not so foreign now is it? So what turns it into an honour issue?
Aunty Jees

Some time ago a friend commented on how concerned she was that 16-18 year old British Asian girls today are coming out with archaic and patriarchal views that we had assumed would have disappeared with the last two generations. I responded with “they suffer from caramel nose syndrome” and I am now about to explain what I meant by that.
There are three ways you can deal with Aunty Jees:
1.    Ignorance: Self-explanatory; Ignore them and do your own thing irrespective of how much they will gossip about you.
2.    Pretentious silence: Again quite self-explanatory; Be on best behaviour when they arrive and then go back to your lives once they leave.
3.    Caramelisation: Caramel nose syndrome is the first limb whilst caramel hands syndrome is the second.
Fairness of skin is given a lot of importance in South Asian communities[6] and many will be striving to be as fair as possible. Generally those who give importance to colour in this way tend to be the caramel nose and caramel hand syndrome sufferers. I have chosen caramel for a reason too. You see there are some who are desperate to move themselves away from being dark but who unfortunately (for them) cannot pretend that they are fair. They will therefore call themselves an in-between colour which in Bengali is known as “Shemla” which I equate to caramel. It probably isn’t caramel but the darling Aunty-Jees call me “shemla” out of affection and my foundation says I am caramel so I decided one is the other. Incidentally my cousin says “shemla” is beige because her foundation says so. And incidentally her shade is always too dark for me. Make up is confusing.

Caramelisation

Caramel nose syndrome is akin to brown-nosing but with a twist: imitation. In a bid to acquire approval from these Aunty-Jees who essentially measure and decide upon our “izzat”, whether this is respect, esteem or honour or whatever else, caramel nose syndrome sufferers imitate them. Dr Gill states it as such: “Consent to the patriarchal norms of religion, culture and class is strongly encouraged, and the degree to which each woman conforms to the value systems embedded in these institutions is reflected in the way she is perceived by her marital and blood families”[7]. I am taking this one step further and stating that in a bid to gain approval from Aunty-Jees many are incorporating the values of the previous generation and making it their own. Again this isn’t as foreign a concept as you think. It is how society works; a majority decide on the good and bad and measure accordingly. For some, Aunty-Jees are the majority. Caramel hands syndrome is where in a similar bid to gain approval a distancing exercise is undertaken whereby you push away and disassociate yourself from anything that could lead to you losing face in front of others. This isn’t a foreign concept either. What could be better examples of the Us v Them phenomenon, of the distancing exercise, than the headlines surrounding the Rochdale case?[8] The media went into overdrive highlighting the race and religion of the perpetrators. It is “them” doing this, not “us”. And then there is Shafilea Ahmed who highlights the imitation exercise[9]. She would normally be one of “them” but she became one of “us” and was therefore killed by “them”.

Us v Them

Has anyone ever thought to wonder what this Us v Them approach does? Whilst you become “us”, they form their own “us” and you become their “them”. The Rochdale gang disgusted me but so have those who have turned it into a race and religion matter instead of concentrating on the victims. Instead of everyone working together we have finger pointing and distancing. The Bangladeshis point fingers at the Pakistanis stating it is them not us. The Hindus point fingers at the Muslims saying it is them not us. The “English”, for want of a better description, point fingers at them all because, well, irrespective of whether you think you’re caramel, ultimately you’re all brown.
And no one looks at the plight of poor Shafilea.

Prosecution described her as a “thoroughly westernised”[10] girl. I have to admit I do not actually know what westernised means especially as I do not believe in labels, to me people are just people, but I am about to tell you what westernised can mean to some people. Note: ‘some’ people. I have to make it clear however that I have not met these people; the definition I am about to discuss is something I came across on Facebook and Twitter and more importantly I accept that I am putting forward my own interpretation and even then a very minimalistic version of my interpretation. In other words, I am putting forward my interpretation in its most simplified form and it may in fact be the case that the authors of such views did not mean what I am about to say they mean.
There is a view, according to my interpretation, that the term “westernised” is another way of saying “whore”. Before you get offended it is not race specific. In other words you can have Asian westernised women, and English not-westernised women. My English best friend who does not drink was once told she might as well be Asian. You may wish to read Dr Rita Pal’s account as an Indian westernised woman for further commentary on this[11]. For ease of reference, even though I have never heard this term before I will call not-being- westernised as “easternised”.

In anticipation of misinterpretation, I would like to make it clear that I do not think “westernised” women, if that is how you label yourself, are whores. In fact, I do not think there is any such thing as a whore. I absolutely abhor the term. I feel it is redundant in this day and age just as the term bastard is. No one has a right to judge an individual. Yet look at the plight of prostitute women in UK; they are treated like second class citizens who should be punished because they deviate from the so-called norms of society. (My LLM dissertation focused on this so if you do not believe me have a read). Look at this week’s “Silk” programme. A character assassination occurred because the woman was wearing a short skirt and the top three buttons of her blouse were undone. There is an obsession with conjuring up “good” and “bad” women; the way the Yorkshire Ripper’s case was handled is an example of that. It’s another Us v Them phenomenon. Sexism in this way is not culture- specific; it’s universal. Yet again, not so foreign now is it?
Why do I say the term “westernised” can be referenced to behaving like a “whore”? People in glass houses do not throw stones: it is a popular hindi saying. There has been an obsession with painting the “other” culture in a barbaric way; ethnic minority and Muslim women are shown as vulnerable, oppressed and repressed. Incorrect of course but then you should understand why incorrect “stones” are thrown back. If you are going to look at the extreme cases of “easternised” women being completely oppressed then someone else is going to look at the extreme case of “westernised” women being completely free. This is where my interpretation has kicked in; I submit that being completely free is another way of saying whore. And apparently, according to both the West and the East, it is not ok to be a whore.

I hope you will now understand my annoyance at Shafilea being described as “thoroughly westernised”. I know why she was; it will help the Jury relate to her. In other words, it will allow them to morph into Aunty-Jees and adopt her as one of “us”, akin to the imitation exercise, but you are also turning her into “them”.

Shafilea was an individual who wanted to live her life her way. There is nothing wrong with that. But you are making it sound wrong by turning it into an Us v Them issue. I am not saying that someone will condone her parents’ actions but they may condemn with a qualifier; for example, the killing was wrong but the frustration her parents’ experienced when faced with a westernised daughter is understandable.

That “but” has a very powerful effect especially given how broadly westernised can be interpreted, as I have clearly already shown, as well as how different views can be regarding “preventative measures”; because God forbid your child turn into one of “them”(note the sarcasm). And then if you take into account caramel nose syndrome, then you have young people adopting such views. This latter issue also has the further disadvantage of creating a further Us v Them, that of “good” children who acquire the approval of Aunty-jees and “bad” children who deserve reproach; if they can do it then why can’t you. It is these “bad” children that then become victims like

Shafilea. In other words, instead of stamping out the problem this Us v Them approach is fuelling it.

People have asked me why Elliot Turner’s case was not considered an honour killing. According to reports, Elliot Turner was a possessive boyfriend who became “furious when he met Emily and saw she was dressed in very short shorts, a leopard print bra and small waistcoat. He told her she was dressed like a whore”[12]. Emily and Shafilea were both victims of controlling perpetrators and to some Elliot’s fury could be equated to Emily being too westernised. This is what I mean by the fact that being westernised is not race-specific and moreover why I do not really understand what westernised means. Shafilea was killed because she could not live up to cultural expectations set by her parents but Emily similarly was killed because she allegedly breached the cultural expectations of her boyfriend. Was an element of honour not involved in Elliot Turner feeling as if his girlfriend was not behaving as she should? It is not my intention to state that Emily and Shafilea were both honour killing victims or that neither were. I am trying to say that they are both examples of violence against women. I am also blaming this on universal sexism, and I include sexist racism and racist sexism in its midst. I am also trying to say that this Us v Them approach that is revered by the media is not helping but rather, it is making it worse.

“In vulnerable and racialised communities there are tensions between protecting men from the racism of state agencies and negative media representation on the one hand, and the need to raise the issue of gendered violence and protect women’s rights in these communities on the other… there is a fear amongst some that putting honour crimes on the public agenda might cause a dangerous backlash in the immigration debate and heighten xenophobic sentiments…”[13]

If you do not want a repeat of the Rochdale case or that of Shafilea Ahmed then please take note.

© Nazmin Akthar, 2012
[1] I was supposed to be writing about being British and trying to understand multi- culturalism but it turns out that I opened Pandora’s Box in asking such questions; as a result it will require a lot more time and effort as well as much more writing space to do so. Thus I will be dedicating subsequent articles to the subject which will be available on StretLaw in the foreseeable future.
[2] Many thanks to Miss Aisha Aslam, Mr Sehb Hundal & Miss M. Chowdhury for their input and support. It is greatly appreciated.
[3] This is used in Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Indian communities.
[4]Aisha Gill, “Reconfiguring honour based violence as a form of gendered violence”; Mohammad Mazher Idriss & Tahir Abbas (Edited), Honour, Violence, Women & Islam, Routledge: Oxford; 2011; Page 229
[5] I must clarify however that I do not in fact add the “Jee” at the end; I think it is family specific.
[6] I have only come across this phenomenon in Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Indian communities so I cannot comment on others. This is not to be taken as an indication that this is not prevalent in other communities as well.
[7] Aisha Gill, “Reconfiguring honour based violence as a form of gendered violence”; Mohammad Mazher Idriss & Tahir Abbas (Edited), Honour, Violence, Women & Islam, Routledge: Oxford; 2011; Page 221
[8] Rochdale-child-sex-trial-Police-hunt-40-suspects-promise-arrests.html
[9]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/honour-killing-trial-i-saw-my-parents-
murder-shafilea-says-sister-7771335.html
[10] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/honour-killing-trial-i-saw-my-parents-murder-shafilea-says-sister-7771335.html
[11] http://naman-astitva.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/stepping-stone-effect.html
[12] http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/21/bournemouth-man-convicted-of-strangling- girlfriend?cat=uk&type=article
[13] Veena Meetoo & Heidi Safia Mirza, “There is nothing honourable in honour killings”; Mohammad Mazher Idriss & Tahir Abbas (Edited), Honour, Violence, Women & Islam, Routledge: Oxford; 2011

Reality Check: Bollywood, Muslims, Feminists and 9/11

Reality Check: Bollywood, Muslims, Feminists and 9/11 Memoirs of a very confusing lawyer: Confusion Part 1 By Nazmin Akthar
“My name is…”[1]

*Looks around circle of people, gets up from chair nervously and starts to speak* “My name is Nazmin….and I am addicted to Bollywood films”. If this scene was being enacted for one of Star Plus[2]’ soaps, or serials as they are called (Make whatever you will of the soap v serial business because I have no idea why the alternative is used), then this scene would be accompanied with thunder and lightning sound effects and a lot of close ups of shocked faces.

I personally think unemployment can be reduced if only soaps in the West would follow the Star Plus trend. I mean they need about 10 characters for each scene and about 10 cameras positioned on different angles per person: that’s 110 jobs right there! And do not even get me started on the amount of make-up artists that will be required. Seriously, does ANYONE go to SLEEP wearing a saree, make up and all their jewellery?
Bollywood films are a different game altogether although possibly because, unlike the serials which can carry on for decades and still not consider it necessary to end a storyline (which usually consists of trying to prove that another woman is trying to steal the main lead’s husband), films have to finish within two hours. To me, Indian cinema has everything in it. Plot, characters, tension, drama, laughter, sadness… and of course a lot of songs placed here, there and everywhere. A lot of progression has been made as well. For example, previously a song would be filmed randomly in a field with the happy couple dancing around trees which was slightly strange when you had literally just seen them in the kitchen a second ago. Now they make a bit more sense with actors getting up to sing and dance because they are at a club, albeit the awkwardness returns when they start to sing “It’s the time to disco” when they’re not actually at a disco[3]. Having said that Indian cinema has also gone to the other extreme and you will see the happy couple who were just staring at each other in Chandni Chowk in Delhi all of a sudden running towards the pyramids in Egypt[4]. Still, it is still very entertaining and you can’t help but love it.

The tide changed however one dark, cold, lonely night. Well not really but I am trying to make this dramatic. The Bollywood addict who always watched the latest releases as soon

as they came out had to resort to watching a new film once every two months and even then only in the hope that perhaps this new film may be the one that takes Bollywood back to its glory….or at least doesn’t cause nausea. I don’t really know what happened. I just know that one day I sat down with popcorn and Emran Hashmi[5] appeared on my screen with a t-shirt that said “Serial Kisser”[6]. *Shudders at memory*. I blame the fact that Bollywood films are now expected to be two hours long. They used to be three hours and that extra hour HAS made a difference. The quality has gone. The plot has gone. The characters have gone. It is just not the same. I want that hour back in my life. Let’s Occupy Bollywood?

I admit that Bollywood films are not exactly one to be realistic and never have been; it is not exactly possible that a grieving woman mourning over the death of her lover leaves India to go to Australia only to be greeted by her lover’s look-a-like who drives past on a bike as she sits waiting at the traffic lights[7]. And how many times can you come across an evil look-a- like who turns out to be your long lost twin or in fact, not related to you at all? (I am actually wondering how many films have used the double role storyline!) However, I would much rather watch that than what is produced now.

However, sometimes I do get rewarded for putting up with the rubbish. “My name is Khan”[8] was one such reward. The story concerns a Muslim man named Rizwan Khan who suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome, something he struggled with all his life but which only came to light after he moved from India to San Francisco to live with his brother and sister- in-law after the death of his mother. He meets Mandira, a Hindu single mother and despite their religious and personal differences they fall in love and get married. They are happy together. That is, until 9/11 occurs. The hostility towards Muslims as a result of the 9/11 attacks affects Rizwan Khan and his family. Mandira’s son is fatally attacked by fellow school children purely because his step-father is Muslim and he bears the Muslim surname “Khan”.

Shocking as this sounds I know that this is one Bollywood film where there has been no exaggeration (well apart from perhaps the boy dying by being kicked in the ribs with a football but I am no medical expert so I don’t know whether this may in fact be possible). The anger that was felt towards the 9/11 attackers was directed towards all Muslims no matter how unjustified that was. You wouldn’t think it would be so difficult to understand that the acts of some Muslims do not represent Islam as a whole. I mean Geordie Shore does not represent Newcastle in the slightest and I like to think Nick Clegg does not represent all the Lib-Dems; it is generally accepted that everyone has their own individuality. Not all men are the same, not all Londoners are the same, not all footballers are the same; yet when it came to Muslims, everyone was considered the same and this sameness was always a negative sameness.

Rizwan Khan becomes upset about this. His wife blames him for the death of his step-son; had he not been Muslim and her son not taken on the “Khan” surname, he would not have been killed. Rizwan does not understand what to do. He asks Mandira what to do especially given that she had told him she no longer wants to be with him, and in a fit of anger she tells him to go tell the President that his name is Khan and he is not a terrorist.

So off he goes on a mission. His mission: To go to the President of the United States and tell him “My name is Khan and I am not a terrorist”. In other words, he wanted to make it clear that just because someone is Muslim does not mean it is alright to stereotype them, to automatically treat them suspiciously, show hostility towards them or hurt them. Being Islamophobic is not alright. The rest of the film follows his journey to meet the President and it really is heart moving what Rizwan encounters along the way. The film certainly achieves its aim in showing that just because someone is a Muslim does not give you the right to treat them in this way; the irony of course was that in the film Rizwan Khan had to suffer an ordeal at the airport because everyone eyed him suspiciously and then security personnel searched and interrogated him purely because he was a Muslim and the actor Shah Rukh Khan who plays Rizwan and is Muslim himself has to go through precisely such a search and interrogation![9]

I mentioned this film for a reason, and this reason may make me unreasonably or perhaps even reasonably hated but I have a reason for that reason and I hope that you try to understand that reason before you start to reason with me as to whether my reason was reasonable or unreasonable. Yes I know I mentioned the word reason a lot of times just then. It was intentional.

I am a Muslim by birth and a Muslim by choice. I actually want to vomit now for having just said this because I really cannot stand it when I am asked such questions. “So are you a Muslim by birth?” “No I am a girl by birth” “So you’re a Muslim by choice then?” “No I hate you by choice”. To me you are either Muslim or you’re not and I really do not care what “kind of Muslim” you are. In fact I would like to make it clear that I do not think “My name is Khan” is a film about good and bad Muslims. It is about good and bad people. The person who killed Mandira’s son for being associated with Islam is bad just like the 9/11 attackers. The film is about bad things: stereotyping, scapegoating, racism, Islamophobia.

The reason I have stated that I am a Muslim by birth and a Muslim by choice is so that what I say is not responded to with a “Well you were born Muslim so you must have been indoctrinated”. Trust me I have faced that response a number of times. The awkward part was when someone at University hadn’t realised I was Muslim until nearer the end of the course and it was only at that point that he decided I was no longer an independent, self- assured woman. I was born into a Muslim household and grew up with Muslim teachings but at the same time I was given sufficient space to understand the religion myself.
In my opinion, Islam is constantly portrayed negatively whether this is by the media or by politicians. It is portrayed as being against human rights that it discriminates against women etc. It is not Islam that does this. It is those applying Islam incorrectly that do so. I can recount various examples of how religion and culture are confused to suit the needs of those causing the confusion. If Islam was applied correctly there would not be any oppression of women. Contrary to incorrect belief, Muslim women do have the right to own property and they are not ‘owned’ by their husbands. They are allowed to study[10] and work. Et cetera. Et Cetera[11].
The quotation below is from an essay written by a very bright and sensible Criminology student (who incidentally I think will make an excellent solicitor so she is one to watch law

firms!); I felt that she had explained a point of mine perfectly and has kindly given me permission to use it in this article:

Many people talk about how Muslim men changed history and I’m not going to deny that, of course they did! But also many Muslim women changed history too as they break all stereotypes of the veil and so on. For example, Aisha (Radhiyallahu-Anha) has inspired Muslim women for centuries. She was a scholar, a poet, a jurist, a politician and a military commander who led armies. Masha’Allah, how many women do you currently know who do this? Another Muslim woman who was influential is Khadijah (Radhiyallahu-Anha). She was the first Muslim woman to convert to Islam and was its strongest supporter. Moreover, she was a wealthy businesswoman and eventually proposed to Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) for marriage. There were many more powerful women in Islam including Rabia Al-Basri, Nur Jahan etc.[12]

All this is ignored by the media; it is not highlighted by politicians. Only negativity is shown and moreover it is shown without much investigation into whether the religious aspect was even relevant or not.

This is why I call myself a Muslim Feminist at times, albeit I do not think my definition of a Muslim Feminist is the same as others. Moreover I rarely introduce myself as a Muslim Feminist. I believe many call themselves Muslim Feminists as if it is a new concept but in fact I consider all Muslims to be feminists because equality for women has always been an important Islamic principle.

I said I call myself a Muslim Feminist ‘at times’. Let me clarify. I actually just call myself Nazmin. Being British, being Asian and being Muslim is just part of who Nazmin is. And Nazmin is also a feminist. Although that should be obvious because Nazmin is a Muslim. Unfortunately many Muslims themselves are not intellectual enough to understand just what Islam is about; how can I expect non-Muslims too? Hence when I consider it necessary I add Muslim and Feminist together. Just as I add British and Asian together.
I know many Muslims will find this offensive but my intentions are pure. I do this to make others aware that Islam and feminism are not diametrically opposite. I have already written in my first article about my encounter with a solicitor during University. To explain it a bit further what had occurred was that he had first of all commented that I seem to be “a bit of a feminist” to which I said I was and then he questioned why I wasn’t drinking alcohol and I told him I was Muslim. That was when he decided I could not exist because a Muslim could not be a feminist. Feminism itself is a very broad ideology. It encompasses radical feminists, liberal feminists, cultural feminists etc. all of whom have different aims and perspectives. Many times it is hard to fit someone into a particular strand.

To me, if you are against patriarchy and oppression of women then you are a feminist. My best friend with her make- up and designer bags is a feminist because she believes she should be able to wear whatever she wants without being judged and it is her choice. I use feminism in a broad sense. I call myself a feminist but I am not quite sure which kind of feminist I am (I tend to stick to the term anti-essentialist but on a bad day, which is basically when I am in London travelling on the Northern Line and a man decides to push tiny me off the tube train so he

can get on I certainly sway to the radical side for a few hours!). I don’t really care. Like I don’t care what kind of a Muslim someone is. Therefore to me, Islam is entirely compatible with feminism because both religion and ideology oppose oppression of women.

I am not juxtaposing feminist ideology into Islam; rather I wish to bring out the feminism within Islam and show it to the world. I want to show that Islam gives women equality. It gives us dignity and respect. Just as Rizwan Khan was on a mission to show that not all Muslims are terrorists I want to show that all Muslims are feminists[13]. Insha Allah one day I will be able to call myself a Muslim without someone thinking I am a terrorist or an oppressed women. Insha Allah one day I can just call myself a Muslim and it will be immediately recognised that I am a feminist without me having to say so. Insha Allah that one day happens soon. Until then I will carry on trying to clear the misconceptions. Many say you should just ignore those who hold such misconceptions; but how far can you ignore it? Fictional as it is, Rizwan’s step-son was killed due to misconceptions.
May Allah SWT forgive me if I have said or done anything wrong. Ameen[14].

One final note: I wrote this article a while ago and kept it aside. In the meantime one day whilst in a bad mood I began tweeting about how Bollywood films are full of lies and completely removed from reality. I was surprised at how easily I had managed to portray one of my favourite films in a completely negative light. It was a phase which passed and the film is back on my list of favourites. However, it reminded me just how easy it is to be negative and view something negatively when you are determined to do so. I think it is quite clear what message I am trying to give.
© Nazmin Akthar, 2012
[1] I would like to thank Miss Marzana Islam, Mr Sehb Hundal, Miss Aisha Aslam and last but not least Mr Gary Walters for their continuous support and particularly in relation to this article. Without their encouragement I would not have been able to write this article.
[2] Star Plus is an Indian Channel on Sky; Channel number 784. I personally recommend watching “Diya Aur Bati Hum” at 9pm because I have been told the character Sandhya reminds people of me and I think so too!
[3] Film “Kal Ho Na Ho”; Starring Shah Rukh Khan, Saif Ali Khan & Preity Zinta; Directed by Nikhil Advani; Produced by Yash Johar; Release Date: November 2003
[4] Film “Kabhi Kushi Kabhi Gham”; Starring Shah Rukh Khan, Kajol, Amitabh Bachchan, Jaya Bachchan, Hrithik Roshan and Kareena Kapoor; Directed by Karan Johar; Produced by Yash Johar; Release Date: December 2001
[5] Indian Actor
[6] Film “Jawani Diwani – A Youthful Joyride”; Starring Emran Hashmi, Celina Jaitley &
Hrishitaa Bhatt; Directed by Manish Sharma

[7][7]Film “Kaho Na Pyar Hain”; Starring Hrithik Roshan and Amisha Patel; Directed and produced by Rakesh Roshan; Release Date: January 2000
[8] Shah Rukh Khan plays Rizwan Khan; Kajol plays Mandira; Yuvaan Makaar plays the young son Sameer; Directed by Karan Johar; Produced by Hiroo Johar and Gauri Khan; Release Date: February 2010
[9] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/6040296/Bollywood-star-Shah-Rukh- Khan-detained-at-US-airport.html
[10] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16201961 [11] Emphasis intentional
[12] Written by Miss M. Chowdhury, Second year Criminology Student at University of Coventry; I am very grateful to her for allowing me to read her truly insightful and well- written essay and for allowing me to use it.
[13] Again, just to clarify, I use the term feminist loosely to equate to being against oppression of and promoting equality for women.
[14] Prayer.