Ee Sabharwal Gola Lo...

[VizagRocks]

inka nuvvu cheppedhi kooda vinaali inkaa

 

nee trademark uppercaste & sambar  post lu veyyi , we miss them 

 

sarcasm is not such a good substitute for introspection :)

[Rebel890]

she hit the nail on the head, and I agree with her. Outlook must apologize for the horribly sexist joke. The joke was on women, not just on her. This is what I am trying to say here.

she's so well spoken too, and intelligent, definitely far more than the idiots that defended her online.

This same idiots will waste no time calling a girl a whorre here, if she as much as, disagrees with them.

Sexist joke,YES.but a well known fact,she looks beautiful in a saree .

[VizagRocks]

Sexist joke,YES.but a well known fact,she looks beautiful in a saree .

 

plenty of beautiful women. not such a big deal.

[sattipandu]

sarcasm is not such a good substitute for introspection :)

[donganaaK]

main point marichaaru.

 

oka gossip piece, adhi kooda perlu ekkada use cheyyani piece ki, ekkuva importance ichi, media ni hound cheyyatam. malli daaniki 'educated' public support.

 

inkoti entante.. oka 30mins aagi cheptha.

 

media ni appudappudu ilaa eskunta undaali le , nothing wrong in that ....

 

inko 1-2 hours aagi ostha appudu continue chedham ee topic :giggle:

[KeyserSoze]

lol. the point is simple. already cheppina. malli cheptha.

 

people ante evaramma? aalla constituency lo unnolla? leka aame gurinchi ekkado paper lo oka article eppudo chadivi, abhinaabhaava (I don't konw the meaning of this word, just vaaduthunna) sambandam penchukunna pichi p la?

 

sare point kooda adhi kaadu le.

 

point entante. aadadhaani meedha abhaandaalu vesthunnaru ani edavatam ee episode lo highlight. Edho India lo unnollu edusthunnarante anukovachu, kaani US ki ochi, years ga unnollu kooda ila pichi argument lu chesthunnarante, namma leka pothunna.

 

western point of view ekkada ee situation lo. It is clearly a case of sexist targeting. Nothing else.

 

But the arguments here, and on twitter from Telugus, mostly try to defend her showing her good work, which in this case is absolutely pointless.

 

So what if she used her charms to get where she is? Should the magazine target her for that, is the better and more enlightened argument.

I think people are defending her based on facts and not based on assumption of what if? people are not pretending to be intellectual(like you) to prove the article is in wrong taste. They are just quoting her past work and behaviour which proves that she not a kind of person who can use charms to get to CMOs office.

if a case arises where there is a definite evidence that a women used her charms to get a position of higher authority, then definitely your point of what if and sexist targenting can be questioned.

So, I dont understand your hate on people defending her and i m baffeled by your non understanding of peoples psyche in defending her.

 

[sattipandu]

I think people are defending her based on facts and not based on assumption of what if? people are not pretending to be intellectual(like you) to prove the article is in wrong taste. They are just quoting her past work and behaviour which proves that she not a kind of person who can use charms to get to CMOs office.

if a case arises where there is a definite evidence that a women used her charms to get a position of higher authority, then definitely your point of what if and sexist targenting can be questioned.

So, I dont understand your hate on people defending her and i m baffeled by your non understanding of peoples psyche in defending her.

You really shouldnt be trying to break it down to him.

 

 to everything you said though

[VizagRocks]

I think people are defending her based on facts and not based on assumption of what if? people are not pretending to be intellectual(like you) to prove the article is in wrong taste. They are just quoting her past work and behaviour which proves that she not a kind of person who can use charms to get to CMOs office.
if a case arises where there is a definite evidence that a women used her charms to get a position of higher authority, then definitely your point of what if and sexist targenting can be questioned.
So, I dont understand your hate on people defending her and i m baffeled by your non understanding of peoples psyche in defending her.

hehe.. agree.

I hate simple people. pretensions are better.

[VizagRocks]

You really shouldnt be trying to break it down to him.
 
 to everything you said though

he hasn't said anything that I don't know already. hold your excitement.

I'm happy he didn't go offtrack like he usually does.

[missionxp]

You really shouldnt be trying to break it down to him.

 

 to everything you said though

:giggle: potti gadni baga ardham chesukunnav

[god father]

Sabharwal case lo media di 100% thappu andam ga unte chaalu edi padithe adi writing these days !!!

[sattipandu]

he hasn't said anything that I don't know already. hold your excitement.

I'm happy he didn't go offtrack like he usually does.

yeah 

 

[tom bhayya]

he hasn't said anything that I don't know already. hold your excitement.

I'm happy he didn't go offtrack like he usually does.

ninnu complete ga ardham chesukunnadu andhuke response change ayyindhi :D

[Tiger_Nageswara_Rao]

aa gossip piece raasindhi nijame kaakapoyina kooda, enduku antha laa react avvaali?

 

oka aadadhi, thana charms ni use chesi life lo paikochindi ante antha chulakana aa aadadhaani meedha. lol.

 

in fact alaa chese aadolla meedha naaku special respect. inka vaallaki vere dhaari ledhu.

 

meerantha, aadadhaani meedha fake respect lu choopisthu, oka cultural prison lo pettaali anukovatam. malli adhedho great aynattu cheppukovatam. thu.

 

mari mee amma, chelli, bhaarya ila chesthe kooda garvanga feel avthaava ani adigithe, naa bhaarya tappa vaallevariki antha scene ledhu. kaani thanaki antha ambition ledhu. But I am not one to judge her decisions.

I hope you are aware that article was written by a women journalist. lol

[athletics]

how would you feel if your female family member or a friend got a job only because they were eye-candy inspite of their well rounded accomplishments? same thing happened in Smita's case as the article showed her in poor light.