Simmy Chandran, an independent woman brought up in a family of two daughters, says the actor is unaware of the import of his comments that reinforce harmful stereotypes. Her views:
Recently, at an event, actor-politician Chiranjeevi made a disparaging remark where he likened his role at home to that of a “warden in a ladies hostel” referring to the women in his house. He also suggested that his son, Ram Charan, should have a son to continue the family legacy. While his comments were probably made in jest, they reveal a troubling undercurrent of patriarchy that continues to influence societal attitudes.
At the heart of Chiranjeevi’s statement is the belief that male offspring are necessary to carry on the family lineage—a perspective that, despite his celebrity status, reflects deeply ingrained cultural norms. These comments subtly reinforce the idea that patriarchy is not only acceptable but required, perpetuating the outdated notion that a son’s role in society is more valuable than that of a daughter.
I take pride in being a daughter to my parents because they never made me or my sister feel any different. They have always been happy with their two daughters. They never differentiated between the gender of their children, and it wouldn’t have mattered to them what gender their children were. I feel blessed to have parents who value us for who we are, not for our gender. The love, joy, and fulfilment we bring to the family matter more than anything else.
ALSO READ: ‘Many Of Our Movies Legitimise Misogyny, Violence’
While Chiranjeevi may not have intended harm, his words could have a lasting impact on his audience, particularly those from more conservative backgrounds. They reinforce harmful stereotypes. For many fans, especially those raised in traditional settings, such remarks validate the belief that male children are more desirable than female children. This mindset undermines gender equality, reducing the value of daughters to mere caregivers or supporters of male family members.
Such comments, even when made lightheartedly, have far-reaching consequences. They normalise gender-based discrimination and perpetuate a harmful narrative that devalues the contributions of women. This can lead to more serious social issues like female foeticide, neglect, and the internalisation of gender bias. Women who look up to celebrities like Chiranjeevi may begin to internalise the belief that their worth is secondary to that of a male child. They may subconsciously perpetuate these biases in future generations, believing they are somehow inadequate if they don’t fulfill the societal expectation of having a son.
Celebrities and influencers hold a significant responsibility when it comes to the impact of their words. While they are not expected to be flawless, their platforms have the power to shape public opinion and influence societal norms. In this case, Chiranjeevi’s words, though possibly unintended, have the potential to reinforce traditional gender roles that harm progress toward gender equality.
As a society, we must reconsider what we find acceptable in humour and what we tolerate in the name of entertainment. Perhaps it’s time to stop laughing at jokes that perpetuate gender stereotypes and start challenging the generational patriarchy that they represent. The onus is on us to stop elevating celebrities to god-like status and recognise that, like the rest of us, they are imperfect individuals with views that may not always align with our values. We must learn to hold them accountable, not just for their roles onscreen, but for the messages they convey in real life.
As told to Mamta Sharma
