The video ‘My Choice’ starring Deepika Padukone has gone viral on YouTube, but its slick and fluffy content makes one wonder if it does more harm than good to women’s struggle for empowerment

In 2014, Lena Dunham, who stars in the TV series ‘Girls’, applauded by critics for its realistic portrayal of women, disappointed her fans when she appeared on the cover of the magazine Vogue. The actress, who has lashed out often at society’s unattainable standards of beauty and has even published a book Not That Kind of a Girl on, among other things, her battles as a young girl with body image, appeared on the glossy cover, a carbon copy of every other Vogue woman: stylised, blemishless and airbrushed. Fans complained that she looked nothing like herself.

When a magazine such as Vogue that has been endorsing the same standards of beauty over decades, and has even managed to convince a Dunham to bend her beliefs for them, comes out with a video that seeks to empower women, it is indeed ironic. ‘My choice’, directed by Homi Adajania and starring Deepika Padukone and 98 other women from different walks of life, seeks to send out a powerful image. What it does instead is to misunderstand the term empowerment, speak of women’s choices within the personal domain rather than the public, and package feminism in a seductive manner causing more harm to the movement than good. What could have been a promising video on the right of women to make their own choices becomes a wasted opportunity.

The black and white video urges women to make certain choices. Wear clothes that you like “even as your spirit roams naked,” says Ms Padukone. “Be a size zero or a size 15”, choose “to marry or not to marry”, “to have sex before marriage, to have sex outside of marriage, to not have sex at all”, “to love a man or a woman or both”, “to have a baby or not,” “to come home whenever you want.” Choose to be different, she sums up. If only it were that simple.

Making feminism a brand



To analyse the content, let’s examine the people Mr. Adajania has chosen to cast. Besides the stunning looking Ms. Padukone, there is film critic Anupama Chopra, director Zoya Akhtar, and a host of other women from the glamour industry — all brought together to question the notions that they embody. This is not to say that women from upper middle class families or those in Bollywood have no right to be speaking of feminism or women’s choices. But if they had spoken of the problems within their own professions — of, say, a Padukone turning down a film because it paid her less than it paid a male actor — it could have been a great point to drive home. But these are not the choices the film speaks of — financial independence, of going to work, of speaking out against abuse, rape, everyday sexism or domestic violence. It instead speaks of choices that are in the domain of the personal rather than the public. This is a pity since feminists in India have fought for years to enable women to make their own choices in the economic and political spheres.

An unfortunate outcome of the video is also that feminism itself has been packaged in a slick, glamorous way — much like Vogue’s models — in a manner that could be damaging to the movement itself. Using celebrities to brand products is common, but to brand feminism by using a handful of privileged women — will it further the movement or defeat its purpose to a large extent?

Making Ms. Padukone the face of feminism probably makes it ‘cool’ for young people and for those who don’t understand what feminism is all about. It makes it more appealing when a famous actor rather than an activist is in the frame, but in the process, the message is lost. Many people may claim to be feminists without even understanding what the term encompasses. It is essential that the kind of feminism presented by celebrities does not overshadow the actual, hard work of women on the ground or give us an excuse to avoid dealing with the difficult and less glamorous issues. Celebrity feminism may be in vogue but what it is doing for feminism itself needs to be scrutinised.

Making it a bad word



It is unfortunate but true that feminism has, over the years, become an unpopular term in India just as it has over many parts of the world. Most people are wary of feminists, ignorant of what their intentions are, and believe that they are just people who want to indulge in some male bashing. Mr. Adajania’s video does everything to reinforce that misconception. Ms. Padukone claims that it is her choice to “have sex outside of marriage or to not have sex at all”. When did making choices in a marriage, including adultery, suddenly become the choice of the woman alone? In a marriage, the consent of both individuals in making any choice is crucial. By suddenly declaring that it is the woman’s choice to do whatever she pleases isn't a feminist idea, it’s a sure way of damaging relationships.

Which leads us to the question: has the fight for equal rights and opportunities, which is the crux of feminism, become so difficult to grasp that we need celebrities to promote feminism in a glitzy manner? When did feminism suddenly come to be understood as a fight for women’s rights without men anywhere in the picture? What is the point of a feminism that sidelines men, claiming that women can do whatever they wish but without apparently extending that right to men?

To get any message across to a wide audience, it is also important to use lucid, simple language. Mr. Adajania in his quest for style compromises on substance by infusing poetry into the narrative. Ms. Padukone asks women to be like “the tree and not the forest”, “the snowflake and not the snowfall”, and tells women that they are “the universe”. Simply put, they are not. Such poetic metaphors do little for the message. Instead, they only succeed in fogging over the real ideas by romantic words, something that happens to the few common women in the video as well. They are fleeting images, quickly overtaken by Ms. Padukone and the other celebrities. They are the real women though, from different backgrounds and social milieus, with different obstacles and with very different life choices to make. Mr. Adajania’s intentions may have been well-meaning but his film baffles rather than educates.

radhika.s@thehindu.co.in