A Quote by Malaika Arora Khan

I would say that, of course, it is wrong to objectify women. But at the same time, entertainment should not be inter-mingled with commodification. — © Malaika Arora Khan
I would say that, of course, it is wrong to objectify women. But at the same time, entertainment should not be inter-mingled with commodification.
We do objectify women in our culture. We're starting to objectify men a little bit more. And there is nothing wrong with that. Objectify maybe is the wrong word. Celebrate their bodies and use beautiful men, beautiful women as a tool to get your attention and to sell things. But no-one - we're very, very uncomfortable in our culture with looking at a naked man. You know, naked women are everywhere, selling everything. And again, this is quite sexist. But naked men make us nervous.
It's all well and good having a women's Tour de France - which I think we need and I think we should have. But I think we should slowly build it in and not just go 'Bam!' with three weeks over the same course and same length of time as the men's.
If we're going to objectify women, why not objectify men? Not that I'm saying that it's right. It's not right on either front. You can't look at it and take it so seriously.You have to laugh about it.
I have four daughters. A lot of the time, I don't allow myself to be in projects that objectify women.
Did I say that she was beautiful? I was wrong. Beauty is too tame a notion; it evokes only faces in magazines. A lovely eloquence, a calming symmetry; none of that describes this woman’s face. So perhaps I should assume I cannot do it justice with words. Suffice it to say that it would break your heart to see her; and it would mend what was broken in the same moment; and you would be twice what you’d been before.
I believe that should is one of the most damaging words in our language. Every time we use it, we are, in effect, saying that we are wrong, or we were wrong, or we're going to be wrong. I would like to take the word should out of our vocabulary forever and replace it with the word could. This word gives us a choice, and we're never wrong.
I do think, of course, that women and men should be paid the same.
We're not all the same. A common liberal refrain is that differences between individuals are statistically more significant than those between cultural, ethnic, and racial groups. I don't see why the fact of inter-individual differences would nullify inter-group variance. That's liberal logic for you.
Women and men look at their life, and women say, 'What do I need? Do I need more money, or do I need more time?' And women are intelligent enough to say, 'I need more time.' And so, women lead balanced lives; men should be learning from women.
Women and men look at their life, and women say, What do I need? Do I need more money, or do I need more time? And women are intelligent enough to say, I need more time. And so, women lead balanced lives; men should be learning from women.
Women saying "I'm not a feminist" is my greatest pet peeve. Do you believe that women should be paid the same for doing the same jobs? Do you believe that women should be allowed to leave the house? Do you think that women and men both deserve equal rights? Great, then you're a feminist.
Why is it that a large majority of Hindus do not inter-dine and do not inter-marry? Why is it that your cause is not popular? There can be only one answer to this question, and it is that inter-dining and inter-marriage are repugnant to the beliefs and dogmas which the Hindus regard as sacred.
So that would be a classic mixed message to young women: you should look a certain way that's going to destroy your reproductive system and your sexual appetite, but at the same time, you should be interested in sex!
Of course there should be women empowerment, women should get every right. They need to fight for it because the society doesn't look at women equally, and that's not fair.
I'm not suited to Bolton or Blackburn, I would be more suited to Inter or Real Madrid. It wouldn't be a problem to me to go and manage those clubs because I would win the double or the league every time. Give me Manchester United or Chelsea and I would do the same, it wouldn't be a problem.
Is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course; but we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!