சீனி அளவுக்கு நான் மதிக்கும் தோழி ஸ்ரீ. ஸ்ரீயின் ஏழெட்டு ஆங்கிலக் கவிதைகளை இங்கே நம் தளத்தில் வெளியிட்டிருக்கிறேன். சிறந்த தாம்பத்திய வாழ்வுக்கான கையேடு என்ற என் கட்டுரைக்கு ரூபாஸ்ரீ எழுதிய எதிர்வினையை முன்வைத்து ஒரு விவாதத்தைத் தொடங்குவதற்கான குறிப்புகள் இவை. இதை ஒரு ஐந்து பேராவது படிப்பீர்கள் என்று எதிர்பார்க்கிறேன். இந்தக் கட்டுரையை யாரேனும் தமிழில் மொழிபெயர்த்துக் கொடுத்தால் அதையும் வெளியிடலாம். ரூபாஸ்ரீயின் எதிர்வினையைப் படித்து விட்டு இதை வாசித்தால் நலம்.
ஓர் எதிர்வினை: ரூபா ஸ்ரீ – Charu Nivedita
Firstly, what is manipulation? Manipulation is like playing chess in real life, always thinking two steps ahead to get what you want. While it may be considered a skill, its morality hinges entirely on the context. What seems brilliant as a survival tactic may quickly turn unethical when viewed through a moral lens. Men, though, aren’t exactly masters of manipulation; their attempts often miss the mark. Women, however, have turned it into an art form honed through necessity. If manipulation were to wear a crown, history tells us it would sit firmly on a woman’s head. From royal courts to personal relationships, and even on deathbeds, women have left behind intricate legacies of strategic brilliance.
But let’s not forget the flipside. When it comes to authoritative men or women, their actions often shift into outright gaslighting, a more insidious form of control. Speaking from personal experience, I’ve endured gaslighting for years, left with no space to think, let alone escape or even attempt manipulation of my own. But the moment I learned manipulation,my only survival tool,peace finally entered my life.
Thanks to evolving dynamics, women have taken on the role of ‘Anniyan’ at home while playing ‘Ambi’ in public. Relationships have become a chaotic tug-of-war where both sides turn love into a battlefield. The swords swing both ways, with men now cutting off connections and countering independence in their own way. Life has become insufferably different for them.Consider men living in metropolitan centers, They’re basically living like glorified house pets: always on call and seeking approval for the tiniest decisions. Want to send a text? Better get it cleared. Planning an outing? Hope you have the permission slip signed. Aren’t women enjoying all these privileges? Honestly?
Men, in their quest to ditch outdated notions of what it means to be a man, have been softening up, trading egos for empathy, and even starting to adopt traits once stereotypically associated with women. Yet, if men can use a touch of manipulation as a tool for peace, why does it stir such discomfort? Maybe it’s time women loosened their grip on obsessive transparency and stopped running relationships like a tax audit. How about flipping the script? How about borrowing a page from men’s playbook: showing a little generosity and ease instead of turning love into a relentless inspection? After all, just like men, women deserve to prioritise their self-interests and pleasures. Fair game, isn’t it?
Transparency is an illusion. Even if you believe you’ve achieved it –absolute transparency–it’s only because you think it’s there. If you don’t believe it exists, then it doesn’t. Transparency is entirely subjective, shaped by your own perception and belief. Transparency shouldn’t be about assurance; it should be about comfort. This whole obsession with transparency is like chasing a unicorn ,sounds magical, but it’s completely unrealistic, nothing more than lamenting why trees are green and wishing they were pink.
What is transparency, really? If a woman is asked to define or list it, she will likely struggle, as it’s like trying to catch smoke with your hands. Transparency for her is more of an ever-shifting expectation than a fixed ideal, constantly changing to suit the moment.
Women often climb onto their pedestal, declaring, “I’m completely honest. I’ve never manipulated. I’ve bared my soul.” Spare me. Statements like these are the epitome of shining a cracked mirror. It’s like saying, “I’ve laid all my cards on the table,” while keeping an ace up their sleeve. They don’t spill the whole story; they toss a few crumbs and act like they’ve served the entire banquet. Why such glaring hypocrisy?Why all this fuss just to seem noble?
Not too long ago, women said men couldn’t be trusted. Now, the shoe is on the other foot. Women come in so many unpredictable flavors, it’s like trying to pick a candy from a jar of mysteries,you never know when or how they’ll switch gears. And yet, men are expected to roll out the red carpet of trust, share their lives transparently from day one, and surrender completely.
Women cling to pie-in-the-sky ideals, expecting relationships to be flawless and partners to tick every box of perfection. If women struggle emotionally, fine,let’s accept it. But they rarely extend the same understanding to men, who process life differently, at their own rhythm. The cinema world’s sugar-coated fantasies have women chasing rainbows in relationships, blind to the silver linings they already have.
For men, trusting women and sharing everything is like signing up for a lifetime subscription to trouble. It works in two ways;
The first type will dig up every past confession, replay it during arguments, and drag it into the present like skeletons from the closet, twisting it into dire predictions for the future.The second type keeps everything bottled up, silently carrying the weight of shared truths. As life evolves and challenges grow, they internalise every problem, amplifying their pain until they collapse under it, shattering their own sense of self.
Of course, there are exceptions. The above and below points do not apply to those exceptions.
What’s the endgame here? A balanced relationship or a power struggle disguised as virtue? And let’s be honest,when was the last time women sat down and gave themselves a good, hard reality check? Introspection? Not exactly their strong suit. It’s always, “Oh, I didn’t mean it that way,” or “It’s all out of love!” Sure, because love comes with an asterisk, right? Meanwhile, their words get “misunderstood,” their intentions get “twisted,” and somehow it’s always the other person’s fault. Self-reflection? Please, just sweep it all under the rug and call it emotional growth. And self-centeredness? Oh, that’s kind, that’s my kind of treat.
Why is love so misunderstood, so half-baked? Instead, countless literary characters have shown love as an intense, wild madness. Why not embrace that depth, instead of chasing an unclear, idealised version of transparency? Love isn’t meant to be neat, Isn’t it meant to be raw?
Men’s world operates on a different wavelength, shaped by practicality and directness. Women, insistent on transparency, often don’t attempt to fully step into this realm. And even if they did, would they truly understand the intricacies? Why tread this minefield? Are you women equipped emotionally, intellectually, and otherwise to handle the truth of his world? Men, for their part, struggle to navigate the emotional undercurrents of a woman’s world despite their efforts. Instead of crossing into these contrasting spaces and returning with frustration, isn’t it wiser to recognise and respect their differences?
I believe that one must accept the nature of things as they are.You can’t rewrite the rulebook of reality. Sure, people wax poetic about nature’s beauty, but let’s face it, it’s as cruel as it is breathtaking. And as for trying to change the fundamental nature of men or women? That’s like trying to squeeze water from a stone! Completely pointless and downright ridiculous.
If a woman thinks a man gets along with her because they deeply understand her, it’s pure foolishness. It’s more about men keeping the peace while women take control. That’s it.
There is a wonderful anti-war film, All Quiet on the Western Front, that beautifully captures the futility and underlying politics of conflict. In the final stages of World War I, the protagonist finds himself face-to-face with a young combatant during battle. For a fleeting moment, both are frozen, grappling with unspoken questions: What are we doing? Why must we kill each other? Should this moment end in death? In those few silent seconds, the absurdity of war is powerfully conveyed. But in the last instant before the ceasefire is announced, the protagonist is backstabbed by another combatant.
This scene shows that even in the heat of combat, humanity can break through the cracks. Yet, in relationships, where time is plentiful, people rarely pause to reflect. The struggle feels like fighting a war without knowing why—locked in a tug-of-war where transparency is used as a weapon, not a bridge. It fuels insecurities and turns relationships into battlegrounds for control.
Let’s consider this: both men and women often pour their lives into their partners. Admirable? Sure. Sustainable? Hardly. Life doesn’t stand still;it demands new priorities, fresh passions, and sometimes, space to breathe. Women, however, often take this dedication to the extreme, forgetting that relationships, like people, must evolve. What seems harmless today could easily spiral into tomorrow’s headline drama.
As women grow older and reflect, they often realise they’ve been prisoners of their own expectations, mistaking them for principles. By then, much of their vibrancy has faded, leaving them trapped in frustration and indifference, alienated from the life they once cherished. Many try to break free by walking away from relationships or challenging old patterns, but they often end up recreating the same cycle,projecting their expectations onto others and carrying the same burdens. And then, there are those who, when their desires remain unfulfilled, adopt a façade of “thinking philosophically,” using it as a convenient label for every action or event in their lives.
If one is lucky enough to have a good partner, it’s wise not to demand transparency ;it’s a Pandora’s Box. The best way to lead a fulfilling relationship is to maintain the illusion of transparency without actually enforcing it. Treat space as sacred,it’s a privilege. Forget the paperwork of transparency; invest in the poetry of intimacy,it’s far more meaningful.
Clinging to rigid ideologies is a surefire way to squander a relationship’s potential and invite ruin. No matter the cause, these ideals bring more pain than purpose. In the end, they’re just castles in the air. Well-known idealistic concepts like Communism and Radical Minimalism are fascinating in their vision. However, their impracticality and inevitable failure are evident. They collapse under their own weight because they ignore a fundamental truth about human nature: human beings are inherently driven by greed, the desire to possess, and the instinct to control.Women often claim to “share,” but deep down, it’s about possession and power. Rather than holding onto these restrictive ideologies in relationships, embracing a more liberating, philosophical approach is the true path to fulfillment.
There’s a book, ‘It Ends With Us’, that sold millions and was celebrated by both men and women. At first glance, it seemed like contemporary fiction was encouraging youngsters to finally grasp the realities of relationships: breaking cycles of physical and emotional abuse, social pressures disguised as love, and transparency. But no, it seems they’re just here for the juicy adultery drama. It looks like the deeper themes got lost in the sauce.
Casting off statements like “it’s better to live with an authoritative man than a manipulative one” is akin to turning a blind eye to history. It trivialises the scars of countless women who endured abuse and still endure it to this day. Such remarks are very disrespectful, nothing more than hubris.
A writer’s words, no matter how varied their perspectives or contrasting their opinions, cannot be confined to mere subjectivity. In a world devoid of absolute truths or universal solutions, their work defies simplistic labels. Writers do not aim to provide definitive answers; instead, they offer a lens to observe the complexities of life, presenting scenes from an elevated vantage point, setting the stage, and letting it unfold naturally. That’s all. The interpretations of common readers, shaped by their own personal contexts, may carry significance momentarily but rarely endure the passage of time. Such opinions, fleeting and deeply rooted in subjectivity, are mere ripples in the ocean of human experience.
Viewing life through the prism of philosophy illuminates the path to peace and wisdom. Conversely, ideology spirals into an interminable maze, culminating in disillusionment.