The Devil’s Advocate, serving you a cocktail of humour, wit and sarcasm
The Netflix Indian film Mrs is yet another male-bashing spectacle with an agenda, joining the growing list of films that vilify men and aggressively criticise India’s “patriarchal” system.
Mrs, is facing criticism for its one-sided blinkered focus on women’s issues while overlooking the struggles of other vulnerable groups, including children, men, and senior citizens, in its portrayal.
The “patriarchy” narrative persists, driven by rabid feminists spewing venom in their online blogs and articles despite the undeniable progress and empowerment of women in the country. India’s highest constitutional position is held by a woman, the nation’s economy is managed by a female finance minister, and one of the longest-serving prime minister was a woman, at whose feet grown-up men groveled. Additionally, there are government acts specifically designed to protect women, reserved seats for women in Parliament, and initiatives like Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao. Political parties continue to offer exclusive benefits to women, including free money, ration, and reserved bus rides.
The recent Indian government budget allocated a record ₹4.49 lakh crore for women’s welfare—a 37.25% increase from the previous year—while the Ministry of Women and Child Development directed 81.79% of its budget toward gender-focused programs. Meanwhile, critical issues affecting men, such as mental health, rising suicide rates and facing false allegations of rape/sexual harassment etc., are totally ignored. This is patriarchy in action!!
It’s ironic that so much women’s empowerment is taking place within what feminists label a “patriarchal system.” If patriarchy were truly as oppressive as they claim, how could women rise to the highest positions in governance, receive exclusive benefits, and have entire ministries dedicated to their welfare? The reality is far more nuanced—Indian society has continuously adapted to uplift women while still preserving cultural traditions. Yet, feminists selectively ignore these advancements, choosing instead to push a victimhood narrative that disregards the considerable progress made within this so-called “patriarchal” framework.
The ideology-driven feminists strategically shift between victimhood and empowerment based on the situation to suit their convenience.
Not satisfied with the current situation, their critiques extend beyond modern times, reaching back thousands of years to challenge the core of Indian cultural traditions. They label customs like Karva Chauth and Raksha Bandhan as patriarchal and push for their abolition. Given the sheer volume of their “patriarchal” articles and blogs on the internet, one might even speculate that they receive funding from USAID. LOL!
The popular topic for the modern “educated” feminists to whip is the Ramayana, labeling it a tale of women’s subjugation and male oppression rather than recognizing its deeper themes of dharma, duty, and devotion while conveniently ignoring the toxic behaviors of women in Ramayana, without which Ramayana would not have taken place!
A closer look at the Ramayana reveals that much of the narrative is driven by the actions of three toxic women. with the men largely reacting to the women’s decisions. Kaikeyi’s manipulation, fueled by Manthara’s scheming, leads to Rama’s exile. Shurpanakha’s lust and vengefulness set the stage for Sita’s abduction and the subsequent war. While the male characters, including Rama, Dasharatha, and Ravan, make significant choices, their actions are often responses to the instigation of these women, shaping the epic’s course.
Yet, raucous feminists conveniently ignore these aspects and focus solely on portraying the Ramayana as a tale of male domination. They overlook how key events in the epic are driven by the actions of women—Kaikeyi’s manipulation, Manthara’s scheming & Shurpanakha’s provocation while selectively highlighting instances that fit their narrative of female oppression. Instead of acknowledging the complexity of the story, they reduce it to a one-dimensional critique of patriarchy,
Manthara plays a crucial role in the Ramayana as the catalyst for Rama’s exile. She is the hunchbacked maidservant of Queen Kaikeyi and is known for her cunning and manipulative nature. When King Dasharatha announces Rama’s coronation as the next king of Ayodhya, Manthara, driven by jealousy and fear of losing influence, poisons Kaikeyi’s mind against Rama. She reminds Kaikeyi of an old promise made by Dasharatha, convincing her to demand two boons: one to exile Rama for 14 years and the other to make Bharata the king. Her scheming not only brings sorrow to the royal family but also sets the stage for the epic’s central conflict, leading to Rama’s exile & Sita’s abduction. Manthara represents the power of manipulation and how a single act of deceit can alter the course of destiny and is the epitome of female toxicity.
Shurpanakha plays a pivotal role in the Ramayana as the instigator of the conflict between Rama and Ravan. She is the sister of Ravan, known for her arrogance, lust, and vengeful nature. When she encounters Rama in the forest, she becomes infatuated with him and proposes marriage. Rama, devoted to Sita, rejects her advances, and directs her to his brother, Lakshmana, who also refuses. Humiliated and enraged, she attacks Sita, prompting Lakshmana to retaliate by cutting off her nose and ears. Of course, seeking consent & “no means no” were not in vogue in those days!! LOL
Seeking revenge, Shurpanakha flees to Lanka and incites Ravan by describing Sita’s beauty, fueling his desire to possess her. It is her provocation that leads Ravan to abduct Sita, setting in motion the great war between Rama and Ravan. Shurpanakha’s role in the epic highlights how uncontrolled desire, humiliation, and vengeance can trigger catastrophic consequences.
Feminists heap scorn on Sita for being an “obedient” wife to Rama and practically for being a doormat. Even Sita’s choices made a significant impact on the course of the Ramayan lore. Firstly, Sita accused Lakshmana of secretly wanting Rama to die so he could claim her for himself, when Lakshmana refused to leave her alone to go in search of Rama. Deeply hurt by this harsh accusation, Lakshmana reluctantly left to search for Rama, leaving Sita vulnerable to Ravan’s trap. Secondly, her decision to cross the Lakshman Rekha set by Lakshman led to her abduction by Ravan. This is unusual for an “obedient” woman! Thirdly, when Hanuman found Sita in captivity in Lanka, he offered to carry Sita away from Lanka and safely reunite her with Rama. Sita refused bluntly, wanting Rama to come get her and wage war with Ravan which resulted in thousands of deaths and the destruction of Lanka. Another instance of a woman standing her ground and not being “obedient”. The incident of the dhobi’s (washerman’s) wife’s extra-marital affair & infidelity served as a crucial turning point in the Ramayana climax. Despite the Ramayana being led and driven by the actions of several influential women, the epic is still branded as a patriarchal tale by the feminists.
While the feminists criticize patriarchy, men have been burdened with greater responsibilities, whether in times of war or disaster. Ukraine’s policy of keeping men behind to fight and die while allowing women to flee is a clear example of gendered privilege. Similarly, the Titanic tragedy followed the “women and children first” principle, reinforcing the idea that men must sacrifice themselves for the protection of others. If equality is truly the goal, then fairness should apply in all circumstances; not just when it benefits one side. Hoping to see the feminists at the end of the rescue line in the next Titanic event! LOL
A Bollywood movie titled Mr. could indeed offer a much-needed counter-narrative, exploring the burdens placed on men in society rather than repeating the same worn-out narrative of male dominance.
While balanced storytelling is crucial and the “other side” of gender dynamics certainly deserves representation, that remains wishful thinking. The narrative of slaying the “patriarchy dragon” consistently proves to be a box-office hit and a favorite at film festivals, whereas a film addressing the tragic case of Atul Subhash’s suicide—a story now consigned to distant memory—is unlikely ever to be produced.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.
Support independent community journalism. Support The Indian Sun.
Follow The Indian Sun on X | Instagram | Facebook
🎭 Bhushan Salunke dissects #Mrs & the #feminist narrative, questioning #patriarchy’s existence in modern India. 💬 Does selective storytelling ignore men’s struggles? 🤔 What’s your take on this debate? 📢 Drop your thoughts below! 💭 #TheIndianSunhttps://t.co/IJ55UaBiDR
— The Indian Sun (@The_Indian_Sun) March 4, 2025
Donate To The Indian Sun
Dear Reader,The Indian Sun is an independent organisation committed to community journalism. We have, through the years, been able to reach a wide audience especially with the growth of social media, where we also have a strong presence. With platforms such as YouTube videos, we have been able to engage in different forms of storytelling. However, the past few years, like many media organisations around the world, it has not been an easy path. We have a greater challenge. We believe community journalism is very important for a multicultural country like Australia. We’re not able to do everything, but we aim for some of the most interesting stories and journalism of quality. We call upon readers like you to support us and make any contribution. Do make a DONATION NOW so we can continue with the volume and quality journalism that we are able to practice.
Thank you for your support.
Best wishes,
Team The Indian Sun
