We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Even on Aaj Tak and News 18 Hindi they were asking her the same questions. ZERO respect for interest in her achievements, or trying to promote shooting as a sport. Just treating her as a pretty face who needs to be “married off” and “promised” by her mom. 😖
Insignificant standards of comparison have been utilised to state that Bhaker is better or far more talented than other female artists and athletes. Bhaker’s athletic abilities are not enough to signify how far she has come in her career as an athlete; her “cuteness” is a metric of success as well. Comments on several of her posts on Instagram say that she would have a flourishing career in Bollywood owing to what the general public has declared her “beautiful appearance.”
…
In the course of such discourse, another trend has emerged: Bhaker is “too pretty to be an athlete”. While the intention behind such comments may not be intentionally harmful, it certainly begs the question regarding the general perception of the performance of femininity and womanhood and its connection to athleticism – generally believed to be “masculine.” This can be analysed in relation to the contempt boxer Imane Khelif received.
…
Thus, while Bhaker and Khelif’s treatment seems to be at different ends of the spectrum, in reality, it has the same misogynistic roots. Both of these athletes do not seem to abide by accepted standards of femininity and sports, albeit in different ways. While the former is seen as far too feminine for a masculine sport, the latter is subject to harassment due to a lack of femininity and excellence in “manly” pursuits. Such is the ‘female/athlete paradox‘:
https://feminisminindia.com/2024/08/12/manu-bhaker-a-victory-marred-by-misogyny/
Like, she speaks to a guy for literally 10 seconds and not only are people getting them married but also OPPOSING the marriage on caste grounds, on the basis of some obscure sub caste nobody outside Haryana has even heard of! Also, how much publicity have we given to Sarabjot Singh, Swapnil Kusale and Aman Sehrawat? ZERO. Even the hockey team is getting less publicity than her! Also note how little publicity Sakshi Malik, Mirabai Chanu and Lovlina Borgohain got, for obvious reasons.
Someone who IS getting a lot of publicity and money, despite not conforming to our biased standards of beauty, is Vinesh Phogat. But that's only because of politics.
We are absolutely non-serious about sports: we are world-class specialists in patriarchy and politics, however.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JjR8OkVL5tI