It's been a few days since Syed Noor's latest Chain Aye Na hit the big screen.
Following its release the film was slammed by various mainstream media outlets for glorifying stalking, harassment and violence against women.
Despite this, Chain Aye Na's stars have continued to promote the film. Shahroz Sabzwari, in particular, has gone on a social media posting spree, defending the film aggressively by justifying its content to critics.
In the course of making his case for Chain Aye Na Sabzwari has made a number of disturbing statements. Here's why they're problematic, and here's why the young star should think twice.
He said "deewangi aur love mai bauhat kuch hota hai" and that "ek innocent se larkay ne jazbaat mai aa ker [ye] kaam kia jiska usko result acha nai mila." We beg to differ. Being in love doesn't ever justify violence.
Shahroz's statements to Images seem to suggest that in love, anything goes. In another interview, he says the same: "In obsession, many lovers end up doing so many things. We’ve all been there!"
Unfortunately, this is the exact same mentality that encourages rampant practices like honour killing and acid attacks.
Is this really the message we want to send to the Pakistani public?
In South Asia perpetrators of crimes like acid attacks will often cite 'love' or 'honour' as justifications for violence, and if they see the same behaviour being mirrored in a popular film, they might internalise the message that what they're doing is correct.
This is the very reason why many critics have startedspeaking out against Bollywood for romanticising stalking — because no, we haven't all 'been there' and even if we have it's no justification for continued abuse.
We're disappointed because this was a great opportunity for Shahroz to decisively condemn the abuse of women, yet instead he chose to implicitly defend abusive relationships by equating love with violent behaviour.
He implied the "people's verdict" is the only correct verdict. But that's not true
On Twitter the actor implied that Chain Aye Na was a creatively successful project just because people were going to watch the film.
We're not denying that the opinion of the public matters. That being said, ticket sales are not the only standard by which a film's success is judged.
To put things in perspective, think of it this way: we live in a country that is ripe with examples of heinous practices that have the support of a large percentage of the public. From honour killing to mob violence to girls being traded for marriage by jirgas, we can cite a long list of behaviors that are common but ought to be criticised anyway.
The same goes for film. Just because a portion of the population goes to watch a film doesn't mean its message deserves to be defended. As educated people with a platform, actors and filmmakers are expected to be responsible in their portrayal of society. When you put violence against women up on a silver screen, you're normalising it further.
If we don't critique this, things will never change.
He said people don't condemn onscreen violence in Hollywood and only criticise local films. That's not true either