“In righteous anger, even blood might play a role, but tears never will,” veteran actor Kamal Haasan had said to a woman contestant on November 5, while hosting an episode of Bigg Boss Tamil 6. The contestant, Dhanalakshmi, had just told Kamal that she often ended up crying when angry, as she did not know how to properly express the emotion. According to the actor, however, real righteous anger can only manifest in certain ways — like in the case of fifth century BC Greek philosopher Socrates, who had approached his own unjust death without tears or fear.
As the host of the reality show, Kamal is within his rights to question Dhanalakshmi on her behaviour. But just because she cried when she was angry and Socrates didn’t when he took the hemlock, can he completely invalidate her anger as false? Kamal’s take on ‘righteous anger’ is, in fact, unlikely to feel relatable to many; especially so when it comes to women whose anger is often accompanied by tears, owing to feelings of frustration and powerlessness. What Kamal doesn’t seem to realise is that not everyone is Socrates. Emotions are experienced differently by people, and one’s social positioning — class, caste, and gender — play major roles in determining how they are expressed.
Dhanalakshmi, a 22-year-old TikToker, and Azeem, a TV serial actor in his early thirties, can easily be identified as the two hot-tempered contestants on whom the show is banking for target rating points (TRP). Their sudden bursts of anger mid conversation, explosive quarrels with each other and other contestants, and their frequent brawls during various physical tasks have been major talking points for the show’s viewers. Their anger is usually prompted by what they consider to be disrespectful and biassed behaviour from others, and when their opinions and ideas are rejected.
But while both Dhanalakshmi and Azeem have been called out on their anger by other contestants as well as the host, there is an obvious disparity in the way their behaviour is perceived. During the episodes telecast on October 26 and 27, Azeem had exhibited inexcusable anger over a falsely-created scenario, which led to him disrespecting and abusing a woman. But this only seems to have won him a strong fanbase. The audience sees him as a ‘real’ man who doesn’t fake his emotions. His fans never hold him accountable for his anger, instead laying the blame on other housemates and claiming that they intentionally provoked him. The audience have also consistently rewarded him with votes, making sure he is saved from eviction by a large vote margin during the past three weeks.
At the other end of the spectrum is Dhanalakshmi, who is derogatorily referred to as ‘bajari’ (roughly translated to ‘rowdy’) by a section of the audience who wants her to be evicted for her anger. The very emotion that seems to add to Azeem’s charm has acted as a repellent in Dhanalakshmi’s case.
A lot of comments on YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter claim that even Dhanalakshmi’s face is “irritating” and “annoying”, with memes about her “pitiable” future husband making their rounds on social media. Besides gender, no other visible cause can be cited for this difference in society’s approach towards the contestants. Both of them have come across as rude and stubborn on a number of occasions, and gotten angry for the silliest of reasons. Yet, only Dhanalakshmi seems to bear the brunt.
As natural as the emotion of anger may be, it is also extremely gendered. It is considered a masculine trait by default, and is condemned when seen in women. When men express their anger, it adds to their power, respect, and strength. But at the slightest exhibition of anger from a woman, she is quick to be termed as ‘hysterical’ and the world gets ready to dismiss her.
Tamil popular culture in itself has historically acted as a platform to discourage women’s expression of anger. Characters like Neelambari from Padayappa are treated as aberrations and are used to teach women ‘moral’ lessons about anger. In cinema, a bold, confident woman who can think for herself and is fearless to go after what she wants has to eventually meet a tragic end ‘brought upon by her own actions’, just to prove that “alavukku adhigama kova patta pombala nalla vaazhndhadha sarithramae kedaiyadhu” ('history has never seen an angry woman lead a good life').
If this woman wants a happy ending, her anger has to be ‘tamed’ by the hero. Otherwise, illegal firearms would provide her with an ideal end. In his career spanning more than four decades, Rajinikanth has frequently taken it upon himself to teach ‘adakkam’ (subservience) to women. Sumathi (Madhavi) in Thambikku Entha Ooru, Shanthi (Vijayshanti) in Mannan, and Ranganayaki (Meena) in Muthu are a few among the several angry heroines he has ‘tamed’ over the years.
Tamil cinema heroes have often gone overboard in their didacticism, lecturing not only their lovers but also their angry (to-be-) mothers and sisters-in-law on good feminine behaviour. Gemini Ganesan tutors Varalakshmi in Poova Thalaiya, Vijay trains Kushboo in Minsara Kanna, and Dhanush teaches Manisha Koirala good behaviour in Mappillai. No male villain, however evil he is, can ever reach the antagonistic stature of Sorna Akka (Dhool) and Easwari (Thimiru) in Tamil minds.
It is interesting that this very culture that condemns female rage also celebrates Cilappatikaram’s Kannagi. However, it also begs the question: will Kannagi be revered the same way if she had burned down the city with her disloyal husband in it after finding out about his infidelity? A woman’s anger is deemed acceptable when it fulfils her traditional patriarchal roles. A mother, sister, wife, and daughter can be enraged on behalf of/for her son, brother, husband, and father. Her anger is also justified when it is to protect the patriarchal values of chastity and purity. Rather, it is considered problematic only when she places her own interests, including her self-respect and human dignity, on the forefront. Essentially, any woman who is assertive, bold, stubborn, and angry for her own self, and for a reason that doesn’t directly or indirectly benefit male interests, is demonised and vilified by the society.
Dhanalakshmi’s anger at being body-shamed and called a ‘dog’ by her fellow housemates is deemed unnecessary by many. Since her anger serves her own self, doesn’t have any altruistic purpose, and is expressed in a (tearful) manner different from that of men, the patriarchal society disapproves of her.
The decision to support Azeem because he is a man and hate on Dhanalakshmi because she is a woman need not be conscious or deliberate. But it is undoubtedly a result of societal conditioning, as a majority of us tend to see and experience the world through a patriarchal lens. It is because of gender that Dhanalakshmi continues to be picked on for her anger, while ADK, another contestant, goes scot-free for his angry, misogynistic, and violent remark against her. ADK had said that “only a slap on her face can make Dhanalakshmi learn her lesson”. Though Kamal Haasan condemned the comment in a different context during the episode telecast on November 12, the audience's thunderous applause in approval of the comment prior to the condemnation was — for the lack of a better word — disgusting. And also, truly scary. The Orwellian nightmare of a show keeps proving how overwhelmingly ‘male’ the world is.
Anger is usually construed as a negative emotion, which impacts the balance of a person and affects their peace and quiet. Hence, people are usually taught how to ‘manage’ and ‘control’ their anger. Contrary to this popular approach, however, another contestant on the show, Vikraman, had offered his take on anger from a societal perspective. He highlighted how necessary and vital righteous anger (which doesn’t degrade the equality and dignity of others) is in an unequal society to facilitate social change. He said people must feel enraged for oneself and also on behalf of others, and use their anger to voice out and resist the society’s efforts in subduing them and converting them into apathetic people. It was quite surprising to hear someone say this on a mainstream entertainment show.
#Vikraman’s words to #Dhana ~
— Raja (@whyrajawhy) November 2, 2022
This society is not equal to everyone. Every1 face injustice here.
Namakkaaga mattum illama pirarukkagavum neenga kova padanum..
This society will make you NUMB so don’t lose this quality.
#BiggBossTamil #BiggBossTamil6 pic.twitter.com/V8pA4Pgk0y
The importance of anger is being increasingly realised in subaltern politics now, as women and minorities around the world are claiming and asserting their right to rage. Righteous wrath is seen as essential in driving people to fight against an unjust and unfair society and secure their equal rights.
Structures of power recognise the threat that anger poses to their effective functioning, and hence deny the oppressed their right to rage. Women’s anger can challenge and destabilise men’s authority, which is why patriarchy penalises women for their anger. It becomes imperative of any society that wishes for a social change to validate the anger of the marginalised. Besides, it is all the more necessary that the dominant and the privileged do not get to dictate the right and wrong ways of expressing it. That is why despite causing great destruction, Kannagi is held as the symbol of marginalised rage. She had the courage to unleash her wrath upon an all-powerful king.
Aazhi is a research scholar in the Department of English at Stella Maris College, Chennai.