Originally posted by: AreYaar
This exactly. She provides NO context for why people out of the blue are ok with bigamy or sharing a partner with someone else. She clearly has a fetish for polygamy that she tries to force fit into every story of hers but as you said, it always lacks context. She portrays human beings as robots who are always casual about polygamy, two-timing as if this is the natural order of things.....lol
Even in societies where people practiced this or still practice this, there is always a basis for the arrangement....it doesn't happen out of the blue casually as is shown normalized in Leena shows.
It is too much work for her to address emotions or show people having any self-respect....so she goes the easy route of not bothering with any context. Hence the reason why all her stories are about indecisive "confused" men or women with no self respect running after and clinging to men as if they have no identity without a man.
Wahi na ....Leena Gangopadhyay’s storytelling suffers from a deep moral and emotional laziness. It’s not merely that she glorifies polygamy or two-timing — it’s that she does so without the faintest attempt at emotional logic or psychological depth. Characters switch loyalties like changing outfits, and somehow, the audience is expected to accept it as “love’s complexity.”
But what Leena writes isn’t complexity — it’s emotional bankruptcy disguised as boldness.
She doesn’t explore the why behind her characters’ choices. There’s no internal conflict, no guilt, no exploration of societal reaction — just people moving from one relationship to another like mannequins on autopilot. That's why after a point her worlds feel soulless, stripped of dignity and emotional gravity.
And as you pointed out, even in cultures where polygamy has existed, it comes with cultural, social, and emotional contexts — things Leena completely ignores. Instead, she paints a world where women exist only to orbit around men, begging for crumbs of affection, as if self-worth is an alien concept...Man...as a woman it was embarrassing for me to see the way Jhanak kept associating herself with men one after the other..
The men, on the other hand, are perpetually confused — neither strong enough to commit nor courageous enough to let go — the ultimate representation of her inability to write emotionally coherent male leads.
What makes it infuriating for me is that she is presenting it to national audiences by using words like "empowering"“progressive” or “mature love,” when in truth, it’s a regression of ethics, emotion, and empowerment.
If Leena’s characters are mirrors of her worldview, then the reflection is a tragic one — where indecisiveness is romanticized, self-respect is optional, and moral accountability doesn’t exist.Her shows don’t depict love. They depict emotional decay, sanitized to look poetic and I am glad that majority of audience are not falling into the trap...
She is a shame in the name of "writer and storyteller"....
.
Edited by asmitamohanty - 43 minutes ago
Open two timing anyways is Leena ka fav genre. She always defaults to that 🥱😂
Debate Mansion
1.5k