Kangana Ranaut, a BJP MP and Bollywood actress, who is known for controversial statements, recently appeared The male feminist podcast. The interview included politics, the film industry and its personal views on contemporary social issues, including marriage, living relationships and non-negotiated non-negotiations in a relationship. When the conversation turned to dating apps, Ranaut did not hold back. It called the dating apps “dismantling”, the “lowest category, almost like a gutter”. She claimed that people in these apps are usually unsure or unsuccessful that love cannot be found by going out every evening to find someone and that “real love” is best discovered by college, work, family or friends, while these apps turn a deeper personal failure. She continued and offered a “scientific explanation” that had little to do with the rest of her argument in her words that meeting with strangers through apps only spreads these traces of many people.
Ranaut’s remarks went viral On social media, not just because of their hardness, but because they repeat something familiar. Behind the language of science and dignity is a cultural script that Indians know too well: the ideal of the “good woman”, where the sexuality of women must be modest, passive and with the honor of the family. In this script, a woman who looks on the right looks “neech”, low, desperate or dishonest, while the woman, who was selected by an arranged marriage, is regarded as virtuous.
Arranged marriages, marriages and dating apps
The “good woman” in society does not see a woman as a person with her own identity, thoughts or opinions, but as a body on which the reputation of an entire family rests. That is why premature sex, inter-caste relationships or even with a friend can be discovered quickly into the gossip in the neighborhood and, in the worst case, provoke punishment and violence.
Illusion: Ritika Banerjee
Murders of honor are an extreme but meaningful example of this logic in which girls are murdered because they ashamed their families just because they have decided to pave their own way in life. Against this background, Ranaut’s idea that dating apps are “neech” is not surprising. It reflects the long -term idea that women who show the desire instead of waiting to be selected are viewed as “too much”, ambitious, excessive and ultimately shameful.
The “good woman” in society does not see a woman as a person with her own identity, thoughts or opinions, but as a body on which the reputation of an entire family rests. That is why premature sex, inter-caste relationships or even with a friend can be discovered quickly into the gossip in the neighborhood and, in the worst case, provoke punishment and violence.
For generations marriages in India had been Family that is primarily with caste, community and lessons have priority over the personal attraction. Modern marriage websites such as Shaadi.com or Jevansathi revolutionize this system, but only Reproduce it on-line. Your slim interfaces may look modern, but you still stop the same old filters: caste, religion, income, education and family background. In many cases, the real choice is still with the parents, sometimes even to the extent of Create Bewage profiles of their children without their knowledge.
Dated apps, on the other hand, give the steering wheel of individuals. Wipe women, fit and agree with their own conditions. This displacement of parental mastery for self -description is radical in a culture that equal to perspectiveness with passivity. Of course, dating apps are non -immune To the hierarchy; Relationships of people still shape religion, income and ideology. However, the decisive difference is that these filters are imposed themselves rather than externally enforced. With dating apps, women are not just waiting to be selected. You choose.
The hypocrisy of respectability
For women, dating apps put on the surface A long -term contradiction about how the desire is assessed. When she spends herself out there, she risks as “cheap”, “available” or “desperate”, while the striving for a man is treated as natural, almost as common as his existence.
This double standard has deep roots. As Simone de Beauvoir argued, societies construct women as sexual objects that are to be checked, while the sexuality of men is recognized as natural and inconspicuous. In India, this takes place with additional layers of box and family awards. So if a woman wipes properly, it’s not just a personal act. Around centuries of rules about purity and shame are read. And that’s why Ranaut’s “Gutter” metaphor stinks. It increases the idea that women who take the initiative are less, while those who are quietly waiting for family -member marriages remain respectable.
Who uses dating apps and why?
Despite the stigmas, dating apps in India, with millions of swipes take place every day. bumblebee reported 4 million users in 2020, and women make the first step 15 million times. However, the gender-specific gap between the dating apps remains strong: estimates suggest that 75-90% of users are men and a relatively small group of women are disproportionate attention. The appeal also varies depending on the location. Urban youth uses them freely, but in smaller cities, women Worries About the detection of neighbors or moral police work. Many young women only create if they study or work away from home.
A common criticism is that these apps are unsure for women. Harmer, cat fishing and stalking are real concerns. However, the danger is not just for apps. Women are harassed in public, jobs and even within arranged marriages. If you say women to avoid apps, they are not sure. It only limits your options. What actually helps is design and accountability.
Apart from the heterosexual dating, these apps for groups with even fewer offline options are lifelong. Queer women, for example, often leave On Tinder or gay dating platforms such as Grindr, given the fact that safe spaces are scarce for non-heterosexual relationships in India. Divorced women also turn to apps to step back into the dating world and push themselves against the stigma that surrounds them.
Are dating apps really insecure?
A common criticism is that these apps are unsure for women. Harmer, cat fishing and stalking are real concerns. However, the danger is not just for apps. Women are harassed in public, jobs and even within arranged marriages. If you say women to avoid apps, they are not sure. It only limits your options. What actually helps is design and accountability. Apps like Bumble make women start talks and block unwanted progress. Tinder has added security functions such as photo check and reporting requests. These tools are anything but perfect, but they put more control into the hands of women than a marriage that is arranged by families in which abuse often remains hidden.
Interestingly, Ranaut was also based on a pseudo -scientific claim: this DNA from intimacy in the body and the memory “scattering” over several partners. This is just not true. Forensic studies show This DNA fades from a kiss within minutes. The idea of permanent prints is a moral panic, not science. And although this has little to do with dating apps themselves, persistence of such myths tells us something: they are modern versions of older purity tests, from hymen controls to virginity rituals that should control the bodies of women. If science is misused in this way, it is less about biology than the discipline of the desire.
Would choose!
The assertion that dating apps reduce relationships assumes that family-oriented matches are somehow more dignified. But what exactly makes a union worthy? Is it the participation of box filters and parental review? Or is it the presence of real compatibility and mutual approval?
Dating apps enable people to prioritize common values, humor or interest factors, which are often rejected in arranged setups. They expand the pool and not only cross box or community boundaries, but also the limits of what is considered “acceptable”. Above all, they let women set limits, indicate their needs and discover more about themselves. Studies show The fact that many app users report that they become clearer in relationships. That sounds like growth, not after worsening. The problem is not the act of wiping; It is the stigma that framed women’s wish as dishonest. When Ranaut Dating apps calls a gutter, she not only criticizes a technology. It strengthens the old purity logic that women have always held away from owning their decisions.
Ultimately, dating apps are neither rescuers nor scourge. They are tools that are shaped by the company that it uses. In India, this means that they wear the weight of the caste, class and patriarchy, but they also offer the chance to drive against these limits. Women do not become “neech” by wiping properly. They become visible as agents of their own life. This view can now unsettle traditional standards, but it is not humiliating. What is really humiliating insists that a woman’s value is to be selected, not for herself.
Mahi Agrawal is a BA LL.B. (Hons.) Student at Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur.