Spoiler Alert.
The raging reviews have died down. Kabir Singh has received a lot of criticism and negative reviews, but the fact that people still defend what the movie, and the character, stands for is astounding. There are so many problematic aspects to the movie, the ‘protagonist’ slapping his girlfriend being one of them, and director Sandeep Reddy Vanga’s defense is beyond regressive.
I want to start by talking about the level of aggression in the movie. At a time when we are aware of the kinds of violence women face, we are still subject to protagonists who are violent, aggressive and yet, celebrated. Kabir Singh belongs to a privileged section of society, and is always used to having his way. His grandmother narrates an incident of a young Kabir, who lost his doll and refuses to let go. Laughter ensues at this ‘boys-will-be-boys’ behavior. This is supposed to explain and justify the actions of a grown-up man who fixates on a girl the moment he sees her.
We have all had college crushes, but would it not be disturbing if you were to go about warning every second guy that this person you just met is yours? A passing glance does not pass for consent. This college topper, along with his friends, go around looking for the girl, referring to the colour of her clothes, because who even knows her name?
Sandeep, in the distasteful interview, says that for him, “when you’re deeply in love, deeply connected with a woman and vice versa, there’s a lot of honesty in it. And if you don’t have that physical demonstration of…if you don’t have the liberty of slapping each other, then I don’t see anything there…“.
Sir, a woman is not a ‘doll’. She has the right to speak up and not be assaulted in the name of ‘love’. Your portrayal of Preeti’s character clearly outlines what your idea of a woman is. Your movie could be a commercial success, but it has touched a new low with the portrayal of a woman, who is can’t say no, can’t fight back, can’t rebel and can’t live life on her terms. Thank you for the blatant sexism.
Cinema, as an art form, is a source of inspiration for many, and in different ways. We look up to actors and their portrayals. We learn from them. But I have noticed how there is a certain level of fascination with morally ambiguous and negative characters.
As I said, people draw inspiration from what they watch. Easily impressionable youngsters, or those with no access to material on gender-based violence, will not have any problem watching and imbibing characteristics of their ‘favorite actor’ and the character he plays. I feel that an actor is responsible for the consequences of portrayals of different characters because people look up to them.
At a time when (especially) women have been coming out in large numbers to narrate horrific stories of assault because the #MeToo movement has gained momentum, and efforts to talk about consent, about gaslighting and domestic abuse is being pushed for, a film celebrating the negation of consent and succeeding at the box office is a shame.
Kabir Singh kisses Preeti Sikka without her consent and we see that she goes along with it. One can argue that she might have fallen for him too, did she consent to it? Is his character supposed to have psychic abilities, and was he supposed to know about her feelings for him before he kissed her?
Kabir Singh’s behavior with Preeti can be traumatic and triggering for many who are survivors of abuse, but why would Sandeep Reddy vanga care? Do people not see the privilege that comes with being a man in this world? Do people know the trauma that people live with, after being assaulted in their own homes? But people choose to glorify a man who displays unhealthy behavior towards his love interest, and can slap her because he ‘loves’ her.
Why is physical abuse being equated with love? We live in a world where women put up with domestic violence and all kinds of abuse because of the culture of shame that is associated with leaving a toxic partner, and also because she might be dependent on her abuser. Research says that only around 2 percent of women approach the police. Data shows that only “one in four women have ever sought help to try to end the violence they have experienced. Two out of three women have not only never sought help, but have also never told anyone about the violence.”
If this wasn’t enough, it seems like the film glorifies, or at least justifies Kabir Singh’s drug use. The end of a relationship is never easy to handle, but can we let the protagonist get away for going down a path filled with drugs and so much anger? Here is a guy who chases his domestic help for breaking glasses, behaves in a terrible manner with his girlfriend and other women around him, dabbles in drugs but gets away with all of it. Why?
Does heart-break allow a person to become self-destructive? Kabir loses his medical license, and shoots up morphine, but does he lose anything else? He doesn’t. He could drink and drug himself into falling unconscious, but people will still excuse his behavior. Oh, and he will ‘get’ the girl at the end. It felt like there was no moral to this story.
The message, I felt, the movie gave was that you can be anything you want, and get away with it if you are a man. I can imagine the outrage that would have broken the internet if the protagonist would have been a woman.
Actually, I remember when Veere Di Wedding was criticised for its portrayal of women. Sexism much?
Kabir Singh is a movie about a man who refuses to take responsibility for his actions. The movie is an ode to one man’s privilege, and too many red flags to go unnoticed.