Visakhapatnam: On December 22, while promoting the film Dhandoraa, senior Telugu actor Sivaji turned a speech on morals into an attack on the industry’s women. He used words like saamanlu (slang for body parts) and daridrapu munda (a slur). Sivaji called this “brotherly concern” and blamed women’s clothes for public harassment.Actor Anasuya Bharadwaj and singer Chinmayi Sripada confronted him. Sivaji threatened Bharadwaj: “I hope I get the opportunity to pay back this debt (runam) to her very soon.”More than 100 women professionals complained. The Telangana State Commission for Women issued suo motu summons. On December 26, Sivaji appeared before the commission and formally apologised.But the women The Wire spoke to say the apology is cosmetic. They argue it addresses his “choice of words” rather than the “Mangapathi” ideology or the culture of impunity. The Sivaji controversy did not happen in a vacuum. It followed two violent incidents against women in the industry over the fortnight. On December 17, a crowd manhandled actress Nidhhi Agerwal during a song launch at Lulu Mall; police took action against the organisers. Four days later, a mob swarmed Samantha Ruth Prabhu at a store launch in Jubilee Hills. Critics noted the irony: Samantha wore a silk saree yet suffered the same violation as Nidhhi. These incidents dismantle the “modesty” defence and reveal a systemic failure of civic sense and progressive thinking.Regional disparity meets a broad institutional shift in South Indian cinema. Hindi and Bhojpuri films often use regressive rhetoric without professional or political consequence – partly because they lack dedicated watchdogs. But the South has set a different precedent. The landmark Justice Hema Committee report in Kerala and the veteran advocates of the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC) anchor this change.In Hyderabad, the new Voice of Women (VOW) draws inspiration from these models to push the industry to enforce Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs). The situation in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, however, is different. Unlike high-literacy Kerala or Tamil Nadu, the January 2025 Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) shows foundational learning gaps in the Telugu states. Tollywood is a unique battleground. Fledgling collectives are trying to start structural reforms in a society where critical literacy is still catching up.To analyse this, The Wire spoke to Jhansi Laxmi, a senior actor and leader of the VOW; Anasuya, an actor and host targeted by online trolling; Chinmayi, a singer and activist who led the MeToo movement in South India; and Madhuri Keta, a businesswoman, author and critic who examines how movie tropes often fuel real-world harassment. The language of the objectDeconstructing ‘samaan’ (goods), ‘saraku’ (commodity), and the myth of “good intent”.Pavan: A specific vocabulary has emerged from this controversy – words like samaan and saraku. Jhansi, you mentioned this is about more than “unparliamentary” words. Jhansi: View this as a single incident in a local region, but one that is not the first and certainly not the last. People have abused women’s bodies with misogynistic language for a long time. My issue begins after his “apology” – at the press meet where he built a convenient narrative. He said, “If I hurt you with my comments and those two unparliamentary words, I am sorry for those two, but I stand right in my opinion.”That is the problem. My issue isn’t just the initial comments; it is the patriarchal narrative he promoted against a woman’s body and her right to expression. He had the audacity to go back on stage, promote his film, and push his ideology. The apology is void.Chinmayi: I didn’t know what samaan referred to until someone pointed it out. Telugu is not my first language, but in Tamil, they say porul. It means the same thing: porul means object; samaan means object. I question if people even 10 or 20 years ago spoke like this about co-professionals sharing a stage.Sivaji is 54. He blames Gen Z for everything, but he uses language even kids wouldn’t use in public. He said he was “distressed” by the reaction Nidhhi Agerwal received, but then he said, “Ah, nuvvu itla vasthava… nuvvu illa untava… ani pandaga cheskuntaru” [Oh, you’ll come like this? You’ll look like this? They’ll celebrate]. It is a call to action. He reinforces that men will behave like this, and then concludes, “Yes, all men.”Anasuya: He staged a press meet to promote a film, but it was hate speech in disguise. It was provocative and intimidated the audience. He knows the pulse of the Telugu audience – how naively they worship cinema figures. I fell for it initially. I feel embarrassed that I tried to explain that I’ve played female leads. I was seeking validation, and I take it back.When he said, “Ninnevaru emanaru Anasuya garu, nenu heroines ni annanu” [Who said anything to you Anasuya? I spoke about heroines], he was being strategic. He told me, “You don’t have the stature of a heroine, so don’t respond.”We need to talk about civic sense. Consider an open kitchen. A dish is visible; it’s right there in front of you. Does that give you the right to grab it like an animal because you can’t afford it? No. You respect the boundaries your civic sense dictates. I am not comparing a woman to food, but a woman’s presence in public is not an invitation for a “grab-and-go” mentality. Accessibility is not consent.Madhuri: It was crass and lacked decorum. It was clearly victim-blaming. Practically, yes, security matters. Samantha was mobbed while wearing a sari; Jyothika was molested regardless of what she wore. For him to say, “If you go like this, they will do that,” clearly signals that he thinks the problem lies with the woman, not the people around her.Pavan: This brings us to the irony of the song ‘Oo Antava’ from Pushpa. It was marketed as a feminist take on the male gaze, yet the audience seems to have consumed the “item song” without the message.Madhuri: Absolutely. The audience consumed the product but missed the message. Ironically, Sivaji and others place the onus on the women. Even male actors are mobbed and manhandled, yet no one lectures them on their clothing.Chinmayi: There was a reel of Sivaji speaking alongside the [Nirbhaya rapist]. They speak the exact same language. The only difference is that the rapist participated in a heinous gang rape; Sivaji is an actor. The mindset is identical.The Mangapathi archetypeBlurring reel vs. real life and weaponising the “protector” persona.Pavan: The character ‘Mangapathi’ from the movie Court recurs in your responses. Madhuri, you analysed this character in a POCSO context. How does the fiction mirror Sivaji’s real-world rhetoric?Madhuri: In court, Mangapathi plays the maternal uncle of a girl in a POCSO case. He opposes the girl’s freedom. He believes, “Aada pillalu ante control lo undali” [Girls must be under control]. He thinks fear prevents them from “doing these kinds of things.” It is a “Khap Panchayat” mentality.Even after the movie, Sivaji asked the audience, “Don’t you think you should have a guy like Mangapathi in your family?” He needs that validation. He believes that without Mangapathis, girls will roam recklessly. He views himself as the family “anchor.”Anasuya: I don’t follow Bigg Boss, but people noted his history after these comments. In snippets from that show, he said, “Yenti ammailu character leni ammailu, maa intlo ila unte nenu meda meeda thokkuthanu” [What are these girls without character? If it was like this in my house, I would stomp on their necks].Is this not alarming? Society glorifies a person like this. Casting him as this character validates who he is. Did you notice the singer Aditi Bhavaraju that day on stage? She said, “Meeru vasthunnarani nenu manchi battalu vesukocchanu” [Because you are coming, I wore good clothes]. The conditioning is shaking.Jhansi: You hit on a key fact. This reminds me of the Amrutha and Pranay case, where a father killed a lower-caste boy for marrying his daughter. People held rallies saying, “There should be fathers like Amrut Rao.” It shows where our society stands.Sivaji wanted to relive the Mangapathi persona and cash in on that fame. It was a gimmick. He used Dhandoraa as a promotional stunt and it backfired. At that press meet, he was thigh-slapping, twirling his moustache, and saying, “This is me!” He wants us to be scared. He positions himself as a “tiger roaming amongst us.”Chinmayi: I saw the clips. He openly shamed the girls and received support. If someone said this in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, or Karnataka, people would be up in arms. Why does the audience here resonate with it?In Tamil Nadu, an 18-year-old boy made a reel saying girls should wear a dupatta because they are their boyfriend’s samaan. Social media and television ripped him apart. People called it a rape culture mindset. Here, it is the opposite. They perpetuate and support rape culture.Pavan: Anasuya, you mentioned his comment about “paying back a debt.” How did that feel personally?Anasuya: He said, “Ha naaku devudu avakasam thvaralo ivvali mee runam theerchukune avakasam” [God should give me an opportunity soon to pay back your debt]. He provoked the mob to “trouble this lady” at her next public appearance, adding, “I will come and stand in support.”My lawyer sees no criminal intimidation yet. But I go out in public often, and this guy has a nasty background, politically and personally. My husband said, “Kuch nahi kar sakta wo” [He can’t do anything], which gave me strength. But the impunity to threaten me on live TV? We gave him that memory – the press included – by not calling him out immediately.The ‘Madonna-Whore’ binary & moral policingWeaponising nostalgia (Savitri/Soundarya), the “mother” shield, and the clothing paradox.Pavan: Sivaji invoked actresses like Savitri and Soundarya as benchmarks of “virtue.” He also framed his concern as women being “adi parashakti” or “mothers and sisters.” How do you view this stereotype?Madhuri: When caught, every idiot’s (sannasi) first response is, “I respect women.” You don’t, man. Because you don’t, you are in this mess. He referenced Soundarya, but she played glamorous roles with Chiranjeevi and Nagarjuna. People ignore that because her debut was Ammoru [Goddess]. Even Peda Rayudu featured a song with crass lyrics and visuals.As for Savitri garu, her aura didn’t require clothing experiments in her era. But to say, “She was like that, so you must be…” – no. If all heroines dressed like Savitri, who would come to the theatres? Including his movies.Anasuya: T’is the Madonna-Whore complex playing out. I am the “whore” now – me and Chinmayi – and the other women are “Madonnas.” I’ve faced this before. If unmarried women wear something, it’s fine; if I, a married woman, wear it, I am wrong. I’ve been slut-shamed even when appearing with my husband.It is pure hypocrisy. A T-shirt and denim cover a woman completely, but a sari highlights her form more. Yet they call the sari “traditional” and the other “vulgar.” Do men have so little self-control that they must control us?Chinmayi: In an interview, Soundarya said she is comfortable wearing jeans. Also, AI and deepfakes have created vulgar images of Soundarya – a deceased woman. Has his “respect” changed anything?He mentions Sai Pallavi, but swimsuit deepfakes targeted her. She says she dresses that way because she realises everyone here is a creep. He mentions Anushka [Shetty], asking if anyone “touched” her. Anushka was harassed at a public event and said she couldn’t sleep for days. He claims Kerala women cover up, but I posted a reel of a woman in a full sari being harassed on public transport.This “culture” argument is a historical fallacy. If we want to discuss Indian culture, let’s be accurate. The blouse is a Victorian imposition. My grandmother didn’t wear one. Jnanadanandini Devi [wife of Satyendranath Tagore] introduced the garment to Bengali society specifically to navigate British social spaces horrified by the “uncovered” Indian woman. Our indigenous culture did not sexualise the body this way; we imported that prudishness. When these men tell us to “cover up” for tradition, they defend colonial standards, not Indian ones.Jhansi: He uses “respect” as a shield. He says, “I will see her like a mother… our male children are small children, if you provoke them by showing skin, they will go mad.” While calling her Devi [Goddess], he essentially calls his men dogs. Are they small children? If you show them something, will they get excited and touch?Pavan: Anasuya, you mentioned the contradiction: being hired for “glamour” but policed for it. How do young women navigate this?Anasuya: We are passively forced into it. One “glamorous” song often recovers a movie’s budget. I was never personally forced, but I grew wiser. Today, I would put my foot down. But for young women, the part will go to someone else who will wear it.The patriarchal hypocrisy is worse now than 10 or 20 years ago. We think we are progressing, but a “disguising patriarchy” exists. Movies like Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo depict confident, modern women as “bad” or aggressive. In Arjun Reddy, the “virtuous” girl wears churdidars throughout. They are conditioning the audience.The infrastructure of silenceInstitutional negligence, the role of women producers, and the silence of the superstars.Pavan: Jhansi, as a ‘Voice of Women’ (VOW) leader, you reached out to industry bodies. How did the Movie Artistes’ Association (MAA) respond?Jhansi: The silence is systemic. We wrote to MAA, and they questioned our agency: “Who are you to question us?” They released a statement merely saying they received an apology and the case is closed. We didn’t ask for an apology; we asked for an action plan under Section 509.When we wrote about the Balakrishna/Urvashi Rautela controversy, our mail went into the dustbin. That is power politics.This isn’t about one man; it is a pattern of unaccountability. We saw director Trinadha Rao make lewd comments about an actress’s [Anshu] body and walk away with a mere apology. We saw producer Naga Vamsi make similar comments regarding a song in DJ Tillu without being questioned. When Balakrishna involved Urvashi Rautela in that stage incident, the industry bodies stayed silent. Sivaji is “low-hanging fruit,” but he exists because powerful figures set a precedent: you can objectify women on a public mic and remain in the elite circle. This culture of impunity emboldens Sivaji. He knows there are no consequences.Madhuri: The professional hierarchy views women as replaceable “dolls.” If something happens to you, they don’t care; tomorrow another “doll” arrives. The silver lining is women with power in film families: Supriya Yarlagadda (Akkineni family), Swapna Dutt (Ashwini Dutt’s daughter), and Manchu Lakshmi (Vishnu’s sister). It is good they are talking; otherwise, this would never see the light of day. We need more women producers and directors to call out this hypocrisy. Otherwise, you make movies like Mahanati with one hand and victim-blame with the other.Pavan: Chinmayi, why do male leads here respond so differently compared to other industries?Chinmayi: In Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, or Kerala, civil society would revolt. Karnataka has vocal men like Prakash Raj and Chetan Ahimsa who tell these people to “shut up and sit down.” Here, critical thinking is zero.Young male leads here won’t antagonise their fans because the majority share this mindset. And the big stars – Allu Arjun, Mahesh Babu – are bigger than cinema. I don’t think they’d lose 5% of their fans if they spoke up.Pavan: There is a famous story about Mahesh Babu’s family regarding this, right?Chinmayi: Yes. A gynaecologist told me – you can verify this – that Mahesh Babu’s sister wanted to act, but fans held a dharna to prevent it. His father, Krishna garu, had to convince her not to act. How is there one rule for the man and another for the woman? Almost every girl from a famous family here has a tragic story because the system is so misogynistic.Anasuya: I can’t speak for the “big people,” but many actresses call me to appreciate my outspokenness, yet they fear losing work. These big actors fear losing their following. It is extremely selfish behaviour.Meeru evaraithe perle theesaro [Whoever names you mentioned], inter-family wars exist within the industry. You see a choreographer [Jani Master] get sidelined by one big hero, yet another big hero from the same family gives him a song like ‘Chikiri’. Outside, we are fools; we don’t know the truth.[Interviewer’s note]: The popular song ‘Chikiri’ has the following line: “Saruku Saamaanu Soosi, Meesammelesi Aise Keeka” – Seeing your “assets,” my pride (moustache) rises and lets out a shout.Jhansi: Navdeep was the only actor on stage who felt uncomfortable. He turned his face away and walked off. But the guest, director Anil Ravipudi, said, “I don’t have the courage to speak.” Is courage the response? Our men understand these issues poorly.Madhuri: Actors today rely on social media admins and influencers for promotions. Producers likely have contracts forbidding “controversial statements.” Allu Arjun has the luxury to speak out because his father is a producer, but few have that courage.Anasuya: Imagine if Prabhas garu, Ram Charan garu, or deputy chief minister Pawan Kalyan garu stood on a pre-release stage and said, “This is wrong.” It would have a massive impact. They are scared their following will diminish. But it won’t. I am not a “big shot,” I have no political background – my truth is my only strength.Comparative regressions and the sociological divideThe ASER 2025 Report, the lack of a reformist movement, and the “cyber-bloodbath”.Pavan: Chinmayi, you questioned why “incel culture” thrives in the Telugu states compared to Tamil Nadu or Kerala. You cited literacy and cultural history.Chinmayi: The ASER report from January 2025 lists the five worst states for literacy and education: Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Rajasthan, and Bihar. Sivaji resonates for a reason. Politicians from Bihar and UP speak like this; the Nirbhaya rapists spoke like this.In Tamil Nadu, figures like Periyar dismantled these systems. In Kerala, when the ONV Kurup award went to Vairamuthu, civil society – not just women – protested until the government backed down. Here, the abuser finds widespread agreement.A standard response I get on Telugu social media is lanja munda [slut/whore]. I called out one of the most powerful lyricists in Tamil Nadu, and the DMK IT wing abused me, but they never wished death on my children. In this space, people say, “Meelanti aadavallaki pillalu puttakudadu, pudithe ventane chachipovali” [Women like you shouldn’t have children; if they are born, they should die immediately]. It is a bloodbath.Jhansi: It is Hindutva propaganda. Sivaji was part of the BJP for a long time; he speaks that language. It is more dangerous than just a few words. He resonated because he entered a zone of “culture protection.” Even my mother, a progressive woman who headed the Women’s Wing of All India Radio, initially felt she couldn’t question his “intent.” This cultural misogyny cuts through even the most rational minds.Anasuya: We must “re-parent” this mob. When I say we should wear what we want, I don’t mean everyone should dress like me. I am an MBA graduate; cinema is just part of my life. But “culture protectors” like Karate Kalyani go on TV and ask, “Why didn’t you wear a bikini to your son’s thread ceremony?” It is a twisted argument designed to derail individual autonomy.Madhuri: The hypocrisy is simple: those dictating “how women should dress” are the same ones paying to watch half-nude women on screen. They don’t watch cinema as cinema; they watch it as a harassment manual.The Telugu industry’s failure is best seen in how it handles “progressive” themes. Take Vakeel Saab – the remake of Pink. The original Pink was a quiet story about consent. Vakeel Saab stripped away that nuance and became a vehicle for male heroism where the lawyer kicks desks and beats up goons. They took a film meant to educate men on “no means no” and turned it into a manual on “how to be a saviour.” In the race for box-office records, they didn’t just lose the feminist point – they deleted it.Chinmayi: Women and children become casualties when men decide a woman they dislike deserves rape. When the veterinarian was gang-raped in Hyderabad, people asked what she was wearing and identified her caste to say she “deserved it.” This reflects the violence where women are prisoners of war in their own society.The burden of agencyOn the complicity of capital and the future of resistance.Pavan: Is the Telugu film industry capable of reform, or is the weight of its patriarchal capital too heavy to shift?Jhansi: We must move beyond the farce of the “non-apology.” For ‘Voice of Women,’ our path is now legal and institutional. We are no longer waiting for a “change of heart” from men who twirl their moustaches on stage while issuing threats. We are engaging the State Women’s Commission and the Cyber Cell because we must enforce accountability, not request it. If the Movie Artistes’ Association (MAA) chooses to remain a “boys’ club” protecting its own, we will build our own infrastructure of safety.Chinmayi: As long as the “superstars” remain silent to protect their 5-10 per cent fan-base margin, the social media bloodbath will continue. We see a digital pushback designed to deaden women – to make the “headache” of public life so painful that we retreat into the domestic sphere. That is the goal of the lanja munda comments and the death threats against children. They want to exhaust us into silence. But they forget that we have held this industry together with our labour for decades.Madhuri: The industry’s economic growth into a “pan-India” powerhouse has outpaced its social conscience. You cannot have 200-crore budgets and 1920s mindsets. The ‘Mangapathi’ archetype is a ghost haunting every film set in Hyderabad. Until the audience stops seeing cinema as a manual for control, and until directors stop writing “good girl/bad girl” binaries into their scripts, we remain in this cycle.Anasuya: I am a mother; I am a professional. I refuse to be “re-parented” by a man with a mic who thinks his “intent” excuses his malice. My strength is my truth. The industry is not as “organised” as it claims; it is a fragile ecosystem built on worshipping a few men. If we women refuse the “doll” status, the hierarchy collapses. We aren’t just “coming in between” a matter; we are the matter.Jhansi: The silence of the men is their answer. The courage of the women is our future. We are waiting to see what action the State Women’s Commission takes on this ‘Mangapathi’ character. Tomorrow is the summons. The case is no longer “laid to rest.”PostscriptThe four hours of testimony in these conversations expose more than a promotional stunt gone wrong. They reveal the inertia of an industry that treats gender progress as an optional “marketing gimmick” rather than a professional necessity.Most striking is not the vulgarity, but the complicity of capital. Production houses stay silent to protect a film’s opening day. A-list “superstars” outsource their morality to PR teams. The message is clear: in Tollywood, a woman’s dignity is a negotiable transaction.These women demand more than an apology; they demand a forensic dismantling of the ‘Mangapathi’ mindset. The “debt” Sivaji spoke of paying back may indeed be collected – not by a mob, but by a collective of women who decided the price of their silence is too high.