A revealing dress and politics of bigotry

The Hindu Makkal Katchi on Tuesday voiced their protest against actress Shreya’s dress that she wore to the Sivaji jubilee celebrations. The party said the dress was offending for Tamils and Hindus.

The actress, not wanting to get into controversy after next like her colleague Kushboo, today tendered an apology. It’s perhaps a wise move by Shreya. This may not be a time to grow a backbone and put up a protest against the HMK. A lifetime can be spend opposing moral custodians, but nothing would be gained.

Shreya’s dress was admittedly provocative, but not more than the ones she wears in her movies thousands of Tamils and Hindus watch in their homes and in theatres. Also, it’s weird that HMK should see this as an insult only to Hindus and Tamils. Why should this not be an equal insult to Christians, Muslims and people speaking other languages? Doesn’t the HMK see them as people?

Also, in the country where issues of development need the attention of political parties and social organisations, why should a political party occupy itself solely to the job of moral policing?

Here’s the Wikepedia stub on HMK. It says that the party is a split group of the much better known Hindu Munnani. Wonder what HM leader Ramagopalan would have to say about his former compatriots?

Anyways, here’s a picture of the dress that made the HMK see red.


26 Comments so far

  1. Tamizhan (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 5:27 am

    I am both a Hindu and a Tamizhan. I dont remember my fellow hindus and/or fellow tamizhans appointing HMK as custodians / spokesperson / representatives of Hinduism or Tamizhans.

    This is the reason why muslims around the world are facing problems. Al Qaeda (like Hindu Makkal Katchi) projects itself as representatives of Muslims or Islam, but that is not the case.

    Here is my problem:

    S V Sridhar and Arjun Sampath (HMK Representatives) are perverts. They are preying on our minds by claiming Shriya’s dress offends us. This also means that we are perverts, which is what is offensive to me.

    Shriya is attractive to me, no matter how she dresses up though.

  2. Sriram (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 6:32 am

    Shriya doesnt seem to dress appropriately for the occasion. For an event that has the CM as the chief guest, sporting a cocktail party dress is a very bad choice. It is high time that someone imbibes her some dress sense.

  3. suppamani (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 7:12 am


  4. Parthasarathy (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 9:02 am

    Advertising, like hysteria, comes naturally to females.

    Correct, Ela?

  5. Kolaignar (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 9:52 am

    If the CM had been offended, he would have mentioned this long back. Or ensured that Kalaignar TV is decent ;) 2+2=4!

  6. Maheshwaran (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 4:08 pm

    She is not partying, yet in a function with Hon.chief minister of Tamilnadu, she should know how to dress. Her parents or good friends of her should be advising her. Guess she doesn’t deserve such good people.

    Good that there was “No wardrobe” malfunctioning ( the thickness, sorry the thinness of the supporting thread of her dress ) like the Lakme fashion show. ;-)

  7. rads (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 9:11 pm

    hmm.. I still don’t see what’s all the hoopla about. It isn’t revealing. The question is more – would it have been appropriate for the particular function.

    It’s more on the lines of “would a guy wear bermudas for an official dignitary convention, in say washington DC?” or even the more juicier “why would you wear figure-hugging jeans and a short top to the temple? ;-)

    Shritya’s an actress, grabbing attention comes naturally. The rest should all focus on other issues like celebrating Pongal for example.

    My 2 cents. :D

  8. guruprasad (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 9:19 pm

    Horny CM Mr. CareNoNidhi takes every opportunity to view Namita dance in any awards function. Kalaignar TV is fast becoming a soft-porn channel, with patronas like CareNoNidhi, M.K. STal(l)in(g), Harakiri aka Alagiri. I wonder what is the “karuthu” doing? Considering the soft-porn atmospheric ecosystem created by our Cheap Minister, Shreya could have thought it is alright be appropriately dressed for this evening.
    So HMK and PMK putting up a fight for being (Im)Moral Police? Interesting…

  9. Guru (unregistered) on January 15th, 2008 @ 10:14 pm

    You could check out my post about the same issue, Shreya Gets A Taste Of Moral Policing & DC Sucks.

    And about the issue, as someone said earlier, the dress isn’t bad. It just isn’t the right choice for that day. And she also seems to have a valid reason for turning up like that. So lets just let the pretty lady alone.

  10. Arun Sundar (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 2:02 am

    Shreya is Goddess. Ppl should not comment on Goddess’ Alangaram ;)

  11. Guru (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 7:52 am

    @Arun: ;-). Now if someone from the HMK sees that, there is going to be a protest against you for insulting the Hindu religion by comparing Shreya to a goddess.

  12. Giridhar (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 8:38 am

    wow… love her dress

  13. Dilip Muralidaran (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 12:22 pm

    Another instance of Male Chavinism. I can see things when these people wear thin veshti’s and walk in the sunlight on the road. Can i ban veshti’s ?? I can also see Hips, Boobs revealed by blouse of womenw when they wear saree, can we ban that too please?

    Shreya will attract attention even if she wears a hijab like a muslim. This whole episode is an atrocious joke.

  14. Parthasarathy (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 12:51 pm

    “Another instance of Male Chavinism”
    Breathtaking observation, Dilip!

    By extension, are you saying that feminist-vadis are demanding that females shed more of their dress – because of its weight, obviously? Is nt that taking things into the zone of incredulity?

    In related news, the Shiv Sena has decided to take on the bizarre Congressi feministvadis, who demand the right for females to drink and be ‘boisterous’ on the beaches on new years eve – without even being touched by the sexually starved males!

  15. VivekM (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 1:00 pm

    Why do I feel that this is just a publicity stunt by Hindu Makkal Katchi!?
    I had no idea that such a group existed. Now I know, just like so many others. Get my point ?

  16. Ela (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 7:23 pm

    I think it’s time for us to stop pretending, being confused and more important not being hypocrites anymore… As someone has pointed out earlier when thousands of people saw the movie in which her dress code was much more revaling than the one she wore at the function….what is the point now making a scene about it?

    I agree she is not smart enough like all the other actresses before who can dance around with skimpy clothes yet turn absolutely gorgeous and cultural in saree during the functions…..and we always had been happy not bothering whether it really reflected their real personality or not….that’s the problem….we don’t really care about the real truth/ self/personality of a person…..just superficial…..If she had turned up clad in a saree everyone would have lived happily ever after ….

    Isn’t why always in our movies(or atleast in most of them)when the hero sees his girl for the first time…there she stands like an angel, goddess….clad in a thavani or saree…so down to earth…so much drenched in indian culture….of course until only the hero decides to sing and dance with her….bling now she has to wear very revealing clothes….dance around and make him happy….. coming to think of it…..i have to agree with Dilip…Its all Male Chavinism…..

    Partha…thanks for asking my humble opinion….and thanks for answering my long time question as of why women should be in adds which is completley irrelevant…..As of to hysteria i bet that u had never come across a 100% real hysteric woman before…..

  17. Parthasarathy (unregistered) on January 16th, 2008 @ 9:18 pm

    Ela, ” Partha…thanks for answering my long time question as of why women should be in adds which is completley irrelevant…..As of to hysteria i bet that u had never come across a 100% real hysteric woman before….. ”


  18. Naren (unregistered) on January 17th, 2008 @ 7:53 am

    Why should they consider when she looks sexy outside when the same actress explodes in movies. Just look at her boobs every one wants to look her like that out side. This is a stupid political stunt.

  19. www.chennaipc.com (unregistered) on January 18th, 2008 @ 10:35 am

    helo friends ,,

    sherya is doing her job – yes she is the actor ,,

    whats wrong with HMK( first time hearing this katchi) , let HMK will induldge himself in the social upliftment ,, rather that seeing others dress..

  20. Dilip Muralidaran (unregistered) on January 21st, 2008 @ 12:28 pm

    Parthasarathy: When you dont complain a man can do it why do you complain when a woman does it? Don’t men walk around the road without shirts? Street workers, manual laboureres. I feel offended when i see a man work without a shirt or i see a sewer cleaning guy almost naked on the road.

    So when men can be justified being NAKED on the road, why not women wear skimpy clothes on a private beach or even a public beach and drink beer?

    “Shiv Sena has decided to take on the bizarre Congressi feministvadis, who demand the right for females to drink and be ‘boisterous’ on the beaches on new years eve – without even being touched by the sexually starved males!”

    See this is what i call Male Chauvinism, you want to fuck everything that walks or moves around and when you dont want someone to be touched you demand they dont exist there in the first place. How more male chauvinistic can people like you and shiv sena get? What about Hindu Gods that are topless in countless no. of occasions. I feel offended to see a statue of a woman topless, be it even karu maari amman or whatever god! Why aint we banning that kind of portrayal of women?

    If you can allow that then you can allow anything. Both of them are nude. If the all powerful female god can be topless, yet be loved, worshipped and respected then mere human beings can do so at their will but we find ourselves prosecuting the women when they look too attractive for us.

    Please check on your double standards gentlemen. Rules if you want to persist is for everybody, man and woman and god. You cant selectively police people according to your whims and will.

  21. Djangoreturns (unregistered) on January 22nd, 2008 @ 5:56 pm

    Hey Dilip,
    Hahaha I see you are back from the mental asylum, ironically your bad mouth and depressive psychosis have not changed a bit. Dai Chavinism nu solreye eppadida unna ellam enga oru authora vachitru irunthanga? Is it because of the thread you are wearing???
    Yarada generalize panre loose mavne – You asked “you want to fuck everything” the same qn can be pointed to you and the truth is you have been F*****ed out of here long time ago. Aren’t u done stereo typing yourself for already you got ur silly stinking, hairy, ass kicked out of the blog, you prick! You think you can use all kinds of words here is it?
    Hey tomorrow I am planning to come to your home please ensure the ladies at home are in similar costumes to Shreya is wearing. With your comments you trying to act asif u r empathizing for women you can get some dumb women for you shooting and you can post their pics in your personel blog. Anybody can say what a sick mind you have saying sick thinks in your blog about Jesus Christ, Muslims and the kind of articles and video you see. You wanna start a fight is it man you are fighting with yourself psycho pathetic man and the sad scene is u still are not sick and tired of being sick and tired you prick!

  22. stopabuse (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2008 @ 5:10 am

    Is there no moderator???

  23. Django (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2008 @ 2:19 pm

    Who is Stopabuse, none other than Dilip himself! Hehehehehehe! Caught you!

  24. nandhu (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2008 @ 6:59 pm

    the comments section is not moderated. it never has been. sometimes, this allows commentators to get away with abuses. that is disgusting, the fact that people get abusive and sometimes dont stick to what is relevant in the post.

    but we dont have the time or the energy to babysit the commentators and tell them what is abuse and what is not.

    if u want to have a relevant discussion, go ahead and have one.

    if u are content to throw mud at each other like commentators have on this post, then God help you.

  25. ram (unregistered) on January 24th, 2008 @ 4:22 am

    Sherya has no brains to pull of a stunt like that just shows you how stupid she is I think she is a really confused person. Have you seen her interviews she can barely put a sentence together. She needs to be taught how to dress apporiately.

  26. Parthasarathy (unregistered) on January 24th, 2008 @ 10:58 am


    Come on! Be practical! Do you really expect drunken and boisterous girls not to be TOUCHED by equally drunk and boisterous males on such a large scale?

    Please remember : these girls are not some conservative, sober girls out for a quiet walk. They are searching for risks and trouble.

    How natural is that in sexually starved India?
    Read it this way : Those who demand the right for females to drink and be ‘boisterous’ on the beaches on new years eve – without even being touched by the sexually starved males, are dangerous and bizarre Congressi feministvadis.

    Feminism is to male-hate, what nazism was to Jew-hate.

    Please do not confuse the Shreya dress episode. It has nothing to do with males. Personally, I would have preferred Shreya to have less on.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.