Toxic Masculinity In Kabir Singh: Pankaj Kapur Defends Shahid Kapoor And The Film’s Realistic Portrayal Of Society

By Prashant for PuneriPages.in

In recent conversations surrounding Bollywood’s representation of masculinity, the 2019 blockbuster Kabir Singh, directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga, has once again become the center of debate. The film, starring Shahid Kapoor and Kiara Advani, was both celebrated for its raw emotion and criticized for its portrayal of toxic masculinity. Now, veteran actor Pankaj Kapur, father of Shahid Kapoor, has come forward to defend his son and the film, suggesting that “toxic masculinity exists in society — the movie merely mirrors it.”

Pankaj Kapur’s Stand: A Defense Rooted in Realism

Pankaj Kapur, known for his nuanced acting and thoughtful perspective, recently shared his views on the ongoing discourse around Kabir Singh. He emphasized that art often reflects reality, not dictates it. According to Kapur, the film did not glorify the protagonist’s flawed behavior but showcased an unfiltered representation of a complex individual.

He stated that toxic masculinity isn’t born in cinema; it is a reflection of the emotional, psychological, and social patterns that already exist in our culture. By putting such characters on screen, films like Kabir Singh encourage conversations about what drives such behavior — not blind admiration of it.

“When you tell stories rooted in human emotions, you will meet all kinds of characters — good, bad, and grey,” said Kapur. “Kabir was not an ideal man. He was a product of his pain and ego. The film does not say be like Kabir, it says, this is what happens when love turns obsessive.”

The Debate Around Toxic Masculinity in Cinema

The term toxic masculinity refers to the societal pressure placed on men to conform to traditional male stereotypes — aggression, dominance, and emotional suppression. Critics of Kabir Singh argue that the film normalized these traits by portraying them as romantic passion.

However, others believe that cinema’s role is not to sanitize but to represent. Kabir Singh, in that sense, served as a mirror to real-world behaviors — forcing audiences to confront the dark sides of relationships and male ego.

In the context of Indian society, where patriarchal conditioning still runs deep, Kabir Singh may have triggered discomfort because it held up an uncomfortable truth. The protagonist’s insecurities, rage, and obsession were not unfamiliar traits, but ones often ignored or silenced in everyday life.

Pankaj Kapur’s Perspective on Artistic Expression

Pankaj Kapur’s defense of Kabir Singh stems from a broader philosophy — cinema should not be judged solely on moral grounds. Every film, he argues, has the right to explore the entire spectrum of human behavior. Suppressing such portrayals in the name of political correctness can dilute art’s power to provoke thought.

He further added that audiences must distinguish between depiction and endorsement. Just because a film portrays a flawed character doesn’t mean it supports his choices. Kabir Singh portrays the downfall of a man consumed by his own ego and emotions, which in itself is a critique of toxic behavior.

Audience Reaction and Cultural Divide

The audience response to Kabir Singh revealed a deep cultural divide. On one hand, it became one of the highest-grossing Hindi films of the year; on the other, it faced backlash from feminist groups, psychologists, and critics.

For many viewers, the film was a powerful emotional narrative about love and loss. For others, it reinforced harmful gender stereotypes. What made the debate more intense was the polarizing interpretation — while some saw Kabir as a cautionary tale, others saw him as a symbol of rebellion.

This duality reflects the complex relationship between cinema and society. Films not only shape perceptions but also expose the attitudes people already hold. In that sense, Kabir Singh succeeded in sparking nationwide dialogue about how masculinity is defined and displayed in modern India.

While defending his son, Pankaj Kapur also acknowledged that artists carry a certain responsibility. However, he clarified that responsibility does not mean censorship. The creative space must remain free to explore all aspects of human psychology — even the darker ones.

He believes that films like Kabir Singh should encourage self-reflection rather than condemnation. Instead of asking whether the film promotes toxic masculinity, we should ask why audiences relate to such a character. The answer often lies in the societal conditioning that glorifies strength and suppresses vulnerability among men.

The Broader Question: Is Society Ready to Confront Its Own Reflection?

The controversy surrounding Kabir Singh highlights a fundamental truth — we are often uncomfortable facing our own realities. Toxic masculinity exists not because of cinema, but because of unresolved cultural patterns that prioritize dominance over empathy.

Films, by their nature, expose these patterns. When audiences see a character like Kabir Singh, they may recognize parts of themselves or people around them — and that recognition can be unsettling. Yet, it is precisely this discomfort that leads to social progress.

Pankaj Kapur’s defense reminds us that art is meant to provoke, not please. By depicting flawed masculinity, cinema gives us a chance to talk, debate, and eventually change.

The Continuing Legacy of Kabir Singh

Five years since its release, Kabir Singh remains one of the most discussed films in Indian cinema. Despite its controversies, it redefined how audiences perceive grey characters. The film’s emotional intensity, strong performances, and raw storytelling have made it a reference point for discussions about gender, power, and emotional expression in relationships.

Whether one loves or hates the film, it undeniably opened a dialogue — one that continues to shape public opinion and critical discourse. And in that sense, both the film and its defenders, like Pankaj Kapur, have achieved something remarkable — they forced society to look in the mirror.

Conclusion: Understanding Beyond Judgment

The debate around Kabir Singh is not just about one film; it’s about how we choose to interpret art and human behavior. Pankaj Kapur’s defense offers a crucial reminder: representation is not endorsement. Cinema, like literature, thrives when it reflects the truth — even when that truth is uncomfortable.

By acknowledging the existence of toxic masculinity rather than denying it, Kabir Singh gives us the opportunity to confront it. And perhaps, that is what makes it one of the most significant — and misunderstood — films of its time.