Trigger warning: transphobia
Another name for romance is Bollywood. For centuries, Bollywood has portrayed love through romantic songs, scenes and dialogues. Like any other Hindi rom-com film, in “Chandigarh Kare Aashiqui”, there is an aashiq (lover) Manu. He is a bodybuilder who falls in love with Manvi, a Zumba instructor.
After which, like every Hindi film, breaking the bonds of society, family issues, and lots of tangles, the two lovers finally meet. Simple? Not really! The film portrays very different bonds, misconceptions, stereotypes, and failures of society.
What Was The NALSA Judgment About?
It has been almost eight years since the NALSA (National Legal Services Authority versus Union of India) judgment was passed on April 15, 2014.
The Supreme Court (SC), under a two-a judge bench composed of judges KS Panicker Radhakrishnan and Arjan Kumar Sikri, directed the central and state governments to grant legal recognition to trans people, by making way for a “third gender” category.
The SC also asked to extend reservations to trans people, in educational institutions and for public appointments. It also asked the government to take steps to create public awareness, to better integrate transgender people into the mainstream society.
But, we still see ourselves in the same position: MISUNDERSTOOD, MISGUIDED and MISREPRESENTED!
Who Is Representing Whom?
Bollywood has this homogenised idea of love and romance. Although the notion around friendship and love has changed, and thus, Bollywood has also started promoting stories of non-normative identities, their romantic lives and so on, one needs to question who is representing whom?
The problem with this new era of Bollywood is that when they came to be progressive and modern, they are still stuck at cis people playing the roles of trans people.
For instance, Maharani in Mahesh Bhatt’s “Sadak”, Lajja Shankar Pandey in Tanuja Chandra’s “Sangharsh”, Shivani Bhatnagar in Abir Sengupta’s web series “Pati, Patni Aur Panga”, or Akshay Kumar playing Laxmii in Raghava Lawrence’s film by the same name.
Every single time, it’s the same issue, of who is representing whom?
The Film Is Ripe With Problematic Details
When the film shows Manvi’s parents being supportive, it looked like a dream to many of us. The makers of the film weren’t concerned with highlighting “class privileges”, or the hierarchies that exist in India, in which the welfare state failed to give medical aid to people who want to access surgeries and other procedures.
The word “normal” is repeated so many times. Towards the end, Manu talks about how his life is not normal, and therefore, this (the relationship with a transwoman) is not something that will be difficult for him. This was also problematic, according to me.
Some other dialogues, which haven’t been talked about too much, are also important to highlight.
For instance, the discussion between Manu’s twin friends about Zumba classes and girls—where the “preconceived notion” about girls and women being the only ones who like Zumba, was clearly visible.
Good Sex Versus Bad Sex
Another instance from the film has Manu’s sisters talking to him about marriage. They ask him: “Tujhe koi problem toh nahi hai na? Ladkiyon mein interest hai na?” (You don’t have a problem, right? You are interested in girls?)
This shows how we see non-normative identities as unnatural and as something that can be looked at as a disease which can be cured.
As Michael Foucault says in “The History Of Sexuality”, a division is created between the so-called good, normal, natural sex, and bad, abnormal, unnatural sex.
Another interesting scene is when Manvi hesitates while choosing her gender identity. The social boycott that trans people face was also highlighted in the film through her not being invited to a wedding.
The Journey Towards Acceptance
In a conversation between Manu and his friends, they encourage him saying that there is no problem if he is interested in men, without possessing any knowledge about the same.
The movie attempts to highlight the misconception regarding thinking that heterosexual trans women and gay, cis men are the same. They are not.
The movie uses hyper masculine spaces to show how transphobia and homophobia still exists in the society. Manu is a macho, rough-and-tough guy, who studied in a government school. He is unable to digest non-binary identities and his intimacy with a trans woman.
His journey from not understanding trans women to acceptance and awareness, is what I liked about the film. We also realise how the heterosexual system of schooling works.
The curriculum never bothers to talk about non-normative identities. Neither are there any discussions, nor are there any sensitisation sessions about such topics and people.
“Cringe” Content Creators On TikTok
Dialogues like “Andar se, bahar se, thi ya tha, ladke ke saath sex, tu toh ladka bhi nahi hai! Tu hai kya, ladka ya ladki? Tu munda hai, Manvi? Ab Munjal house mein ek kinnar bahu ban ke aayega?! Dekhne mein ek dum kudi hai, dekh kar koi nahi keh sakta ae chhakka hai! Ghar mein Ram, gully mein Raseena!”, and so on and so forth, reflect the stereotypes prevalent in society.
Abhishek Kapoor, the director of the movie said that, “We take gender for granted. It is not easy for someone to transition. Only when people accept a trans woman the way she is, will there be normalcy.”
There was no discussion on the representation of transwomen in the film. Platforms like TikTok have shown us that there are queer people around us who are extremely talented, but we still see them as “cringe”.
Although the movie tried it’s best to come up with a new perspective on romance, love and friendship, but it became limited to just that. It wasn’t able to extend it towards the the representation of non-binary and non-normative lives.
It has created a fear in me of Ayushmann Khurrana becoming the new Akshay Kumar of the Hindi film industry. With his recent Instagram post about showing gender fluidity with mere nail paint, it becomes a matter of further concern.