Opinion (idk if it’s popular or unpopular)
@allegoriesinmediasres so it’s 2AM and I just read through your entire anti uttar kand tag and my brain made some thoughts. I’d love to know what you think. To be clear, this is not Sita’s-banishment-apologist and I would very much prefer if uttar kand never happened, but here’s some analysis anyway.
I really don’t think what we’re supposed to get from Uttar Kanda is that Rama is purushottama and that what he did was right. Literally everyone stood against this decision, including Bharata, whom Rama considers more noble and dharmic than himself, and Hanuman, who’s advice he relies on without question. We are not meant to choose Rama over them.
I do feel like the Ramayana teaches how to deal with different relationships: the ideal brother, ideal servant, ideal friend, ideal wife, etc. The ideal person not being Rama himself (because how do we learn from someone who is already perfect), but those who relate to him in these ways. Rama, being god, is the sounding board for the people around him to grow in their relationship to him and come to embody the ideal (like Sugriva becoming a better friend, etc.)
Now with Sita, we see the evolution of a strong woman role model that is useful in Kaliyuga; someone who actually come to embody a lot of feminist ideals. First, she defies the idea that women are “too weak for the forest life” and demands to go with her husband. She survives captivity and makes a supportive female friend (Trijata) who helps her talk through her emotions and validates them, giving her hope. We see her get angry at her captor and that is not only valid and justified, but also extremely brave.
She is upset when Rama asks for the Agni pariksha, but does it anyway to prove that a woman’s worth is not degraded by the men she lives with. When they go back to Ayodhya, one version I watched has Rama gesturing her to the throne to take a seat before he does, explaining that his time to lead her has ended, and her time to lead him has begun (referring to the 7 vows of marriage, where the man leads the first 4 rounds around the fire, and the woman the last 3). It is only after this that their children are conceived, which to me symbolizes the importance of her consent in sex (contrasting Ravana’s actions earlier, but again idk how canon that TV bit is).
But sometimes, in real life, husbands screw up and mistreat their wives. With Mandodari in Lanka, we don’t see a woman fighting back, we see a wife supporting her husband regardless. To the best of my knowledge, something similar could be said about Tara and Bali’s relationship. When Rama banishes Sita (which to me echos Dasharatha’s banishment of Rama; the exile upsets everyone involved but Rama has to do it for “dharma”), they, for lack of canonically-appropriate words, “break up.” Or at least, decide to live separately.
Here’s where it gets more interesting. Sita reaches an ashram where she is helped through her pregnancy, provided a stable life, and treated with great respect, something that single mothers in today’s society don’t often experience. In my head, this is Sita’s way of telling future generations that single mothers deserve this respect, regardless of what people think of their past. She raises two kids by herself, which is no small deal and, in a way, is kind of inspirational; she’s a ray of hope for women with past trauma in similar situations. Most importantly, her children are raised feminist, hearing the story and coming to the conclusion King Rama was wrong, even swearing to avenge Sita if they ever meet her (they don’t know yet). She never corrects them just because he’s her husband. They straight up fight Rama and all his brothers when the horse comes around for the Ashwamedha, and demand to the King himself that he explain his actions.
Finally, when Sita goes back to Ayodhya, and Rama, again choosing purity in the public eye over Sita, asks her to do another Agni-pariksha, she refuses. She draws the line. You only take so much bs from your husband, even if you do love him very much and understand why he’s doing what he’s doing. She chooses instead to leave said husband and “go home.” Which, in my understanding, is exactly what an ideal wife would do in this situation.
This is how I’ve made my peace with Uttar Kanda at the moment. I’ve long since stopped justifying that Rama was right; I just feel that, in the same way that Rama’s exile taught men about how to face adversity, make friends, etc., Sita’s exile shows women that a good wife doesn’t mean just taking whatever your husband throws at you and giving up. Relationships are a two-sided affair, and if your partner isn’t doing their part, you can leave.
Tagging more people for their opinions (if we haven’t talked yet, hi! I'm new in this fandom, nice to meet you <3): @avani008 @medhasree @incurablescribbler @mayavanavihariniharini @ambitiousandcunning @jigyask @1nsaankahanhai-bkr @situational-ethics @anyone who has an opinion and wants to share
