Kyunki Saas Bhi .. I started again in 2025. From curiosity, nostalgia and a preference for Smriti Irani I voted in the first episode. It was just as frightening as in the 2000s dramatic close-ups, long silence and the inevitable Saas Bahu conflicts.
But it was relaxed with a persistent question-and is women, especially women, especially for in-laws who are often framed because of power and control? Why do women who have similar forms of patriarchal oppression become rivals within the budget? Why does a mother -in -law need to dominate her daughter -in -law? Why does a jethani (older sister -in -law) have to claim the service about the Devrani (young sister -in -law) or a sister of the Nanand (husband) about the Bhabhi (wife of the brother)? It is even more important, why does this cycle just turn around over time instead of breaking?
Why does a SaaS have the need to dominate their Bahu? Why does a jethani have to claim the service about the Devrani or a nanand about the Bhabhi?
These questions are not just about personal resentment. It is about how women are socialized in a patriarchal society – one that forms them subtly but consistently to monitor each other.
It starts early
From childhood, girls become the assumption that women are fragile and flat. They state that female rooms are full of jealousy, competition and backbiving. This idea is reinforced in the house itself – when a grandmother mocks the mother on the paternal side, an aunt on the paternal side adds to the ridicule, and the mother is isolated as a “outsider”. Little girls learn from this: women are not together – they survive by undermining each other.
But why do women have to fight each other when they already have to do with so many visible and invisible controls? The answer is in the functioning of the patriarchy function: by spreading power unequal and then the least power to compete in order to compete.
It’s not personal, it’s structural
This power game between women is often confused with personality collities, but is essentially structural. It is not “natural” for women to be antagonistic – it is learned behavior. It is a survival strategy in a system that only offers them limited autonomy and respect.
In most Indian families, daughters/sisters – but are loved – are taught to obey their fathers and brothers. However, wives – although independent – will shift to husbands. As women, their value is often based on the extent to which they sacrifice for their male family members. In such a structure, the only “safe space” in which women receive authority is to other women – especially the younger or newly married.
Therefore, a mother -in -law claims control of her daughter -in -law because she is one of the safest domains in which she does without any restrictions or judgments. A jethani protects your business in Devrani to confirm your reputation. A nanand can claim your privileges via a Bhabhi because she has to expect it.
Women as the goalkeeper of the patriarchy
The most insidious success of the patriarchy is to make women the most efficient executors. The clothing of a woman, the work decisions or freedom of movement are often not directly monitored by men – there are other women in the family who do this. These restrictions are passed on like family heirs.
This dynamic enables the patriarchy to remain hidden in sight. It does not always require an open male dominance. It survives through the everyday, normalized, internalized actions of women who have been socialized to protect tradition, submissiveness and obedience.
And so women not only pass on trauma, but the control tools they gave them.
Loss of the ally
The result of this system is that women who see themselves as threats instead of combining solidarity. They compete for respect, love, validation, autonomy and decision -making. This rivalry creates a vicious circle in which every woman who receives a piece of authority uses to replicate the same hierarchy under which she once suffered.
We lose the potential for depth, transformative solidarity between the generations – especially in Indian households in which women live together from different age and background.
If you know that the problem is structural, it will of course not be easier to learn. A woman who has internalized the patriarchy for decades cannot simply “snap out”. It is unrealistic – and even unfair – to expect sudden changes without recognizing the pain and the story that led to it.
Where there is a will, there is a way
It starts with empathy. To be ready not to see yourself as threats, but as the survivor of the same system. It means determining limits without bitterness. Resistance to control without cruelty. It means that young women who question the idea that respect must be from the submission and re -evaluate older women whether their authority must be received at the expense of another.
A new culture of cooperation can grow in houses in which the decision -making process is more shared than handed over.
A young woman may not break down the patriarchy alone, but she can decide not to replicate it. She can choose to combat others and can expand empathy where she was refused.
If even a few women within a household start to decide the understanding of control – whether Saas or Bahu, Jethani or Devrani, Nanand or Bhabhi – the atmosphere changes. Children grow up and watch women who respect each other rather than fear. Families are reminded not because of their rivalries, but for their support systems.
The most revolutionary act in society today is simply the following: women who cooperate with each other instead of competing. Women are allies and more opponents, to each other. Women who choose empathy about hierarchy.
The revolution does not always start outside. Sometimes it starts at home.