Netflix’s Indian Matchmaking: ‘Sima aunty’ raises eyebrows – again

Indian Matchmaking – the “cringeworthy” Netflix show that developed huge buzz in India and many parts of the globe two years back – is back using a second season. They have once again renewed the debate about if the show is regressive or if it holds up a mirror to community.

The eight-part reality TV show : included in the list of the particular 50 most influential television shows of all time by Period magazine – once more follows elite Indian matchmaker Sima Taparia as she tries to find suitable matches for her wealthy clients in India as well as the US.

Here, everything happens for a reason – and that is to find a bride or perhaps a groom because, because Ms Taparia points out at the outset, “first is usually marriage, then love” and “everything will get adjusted after marriage”.

The new season consists of some of her previous clients from time of year one and a variety of new faces, hoping that Ms Taparia, who claims to become “Mumbai’s top matchmaker”, will help them discover “The One”.

To numerous, the faith these rich and profitable millennials put in the matchmaker – popularly known as “Sima aunty” – may seem doubtful, considering none of the girl matches from the prior season worked out.

But that’s not the one thing questionable about Sima aunty – or maybe the show.

Despite its immense recognition, season one had been called out for in-your-face misogyny, casteism plus colourism and triggered much outrage, numerous describing it since regressive.

In the new season, the particular matchmaker’s edges are softened a bit and he or she seems to be holding the girl tongue sometimes – possibly because of the backlash – but the show is still riddled with sexism and gender biases. She’s still better to men : they are “good boys” while women are usually “inflexible” or “difficult” or even “superficial”.

Therefore Akshay, a male client who calls himself the “world’s most eligible bachelor”, is allowed to contact women “chicks” and the female clients are routinely told in order to temper their goals. “You won’t get 100%, ” the girl keeps reminding them, adding that “60-70%” is a reasonable requirement.

The show has also made headlines within India over Ms Taparia’s controversial comment on age difference : she tells a lady client that her relationship with a guy who is seven yrs younger is not an excellent match, “just like that of Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas”.

Critics also accuse the series of advertising stereotypes and say it makes no hard work at diversity.

“It represents just one kind of people, inch says Shailaja Bajpayee, editorial adviser towards the Print website. “They are all rich, upper-caste and fair-skinned people. There are no reduced castes or religious minorities, except for a single Sikh, and I are unable to remember seeing anyone who has darker skin colour. ”

Regardless of the criticism, the series was among the five shows in India for two weeks considering that its launch upon 10 August. It had been also among the top 10 in 13 nations, including in the US, Europe and South Africa, in the first week of its release and continued to be on the list within seven countries for another week.

Thousands took to social media to talk about their impressions of the show. And it has recently been renewed for period three which will focus on matchmaking in the UK.

Movie and trade expert Komal Nahata says the interest in the display is because season one was “a huge and roaring achievement – not just among Indians but also in america and several other countries”.

“For people in the West, where most go to Tinder and Bumble and other websites to find matches, the particular show had shock value. This type of dating that we have in India is very unique plus Westerners couldn’t believe that it actually happens like this, ” he told the BBC.

In India as well – where 90% of all marriages are still arranged — there’s growing desire for professional matchmaking, a minimum of in cities plus towns.

“Gone are the times when uncles and aunts and other relatives would suggest a go with, ” Mr Nahata says. “Because from the growing number of splitting of marriages, relatives – and even parents – never want to get involved, so they don’t get blamed in case a marriage doesn’t work out there. So , matchmakers have proliferated, they are just about everywhere. ”

Ms Bajpayee says that people go to matchmakers “because not necessarily easy to find a fit, and sometimes you need a bit of help”, yet adds that there are a lot of problems with the show as “it’s nevertheless not critiquing regressive ideas” and “just propagates known biases”.

“What I found many odd was that all these women in the US – who are educated plus independent and are free to marry whoever they wish to – still seek out someone like Microsoft Taparia. And they’re most looking for matches from the same background as with caste and religious beliefs. You have one girl saying she does not just want a Gujarati match, but that he also must talk Gujarati.

“It made me depressing to think that all these types of women have learnt nothing from residing all these years in the us, ” she adds.

In an interview with Variety last week , Smriti Mundhra, the particular show’s creator, agreed that “some of the show is cringey”.

“Some from the things we perform and say plus believe and have internalised over generations are usually cringey. It’s difficult to face those subjects of conversations; it’s actual difficult to see that reflected back at you. ”

But , the lady added, that by raising difficult topics, the series offered families an opportunity to have “tough conversations”.

But Sreemoyee Piu Kundu, author and creator of Status Individual, India’s first and only community for city single women, queries the rationale behind marketing a show on wedding ceremonies in India “where women are evaluated all the time for not getting married”.

“Indians have a national obsession with marriage, and it’s a very unhealthy infatuation. And this show is really a hard-sell of a patriarchal construct – that will marriage is a be-all and end-all. ”

It’s especially dangerous, she says, in the country where thousands of brides are murdered every year over insufficient dowry, marital rape is not criminalised and thousands of housewives are usually driven to suicide every year.

“I want to ask Netflix why are you putting your cash into a show that propagates mass misogyny? Why not have a show on single females? ” she requires, adding that “marriage is not the benchmark for our lives. inch