Why we're not impressed with Ayushmann Khurrana fasting for his wife, or the other way around

Harvey Specter unbuttoned his suit, leaned over the table and said, “You can’t have it both ways.”

But we just don’t get it, do we? And when it comes to religion, all the more.

On Saturday, October 27, Ayushmann Khurrana tweeted that he was fasting for his wife, Tahira Kashyap, for Karva Chauth. On his Insta story, the Badhaai Ho actor divulged more details when he wrote, "She can't fast this time but I will. For her good health and long life."

A little bit of context here is imperative. Tahira recently underwent treatment after being diagnosed with pre-cancerous malignant cells in her breast. “The result, I have become a half-Indian version of Angelina Jolie (since only one breast was involved)! I told my doctor now is the time to give some competition to the Kardashians since Pamela is passe. But no one listened to me, so now I have a portion of my back tissue in my breast," she had written in a long, inspiring, painfully funny Instagram post in September.

This year, therefore, Tahira opted out of Karva Chauth, fasting and the whole circus. That’s when Ayushmann stepped in.

“Fasting for you is fun,” he tweeted with an adorable picture of the two of them. Of course, his move was instantly identified as the ultimate sign of wokeness. What a man, Twitter said collectively.

The thought that propelled Ayushmann is cute. Why can’t a man fast for his wife? If a long and healthy life is the ultimate aim of this day-long abstinence, deprivation or prayers, whatever one might want to think of this as, then why should the life of a wife be any less than the man?

But then, how is it helping obliterate the original regressive thought?

Ayushmann is not the only man fasting for his wife and slowing us down in the race to equality. Abhishek Bachchan is guilty of the same crime. “#KarvaChauth, good luck ladies.... And the dutiful husbands who should also be fasting with their wives! I do,” tweeted Abhishek in what could only be termed as a command directed towards other husbands who were reaching for that bag of chips as they parked themselves on the couch.

But how can we blame them if Bollywood does nothing but romanticise this over and over again? Simran, though not married yet, has to fast for Raj because, love. Raj has to empathise. And then, they have to eat from the same thali, taking turns to feed one another.

Because if you haven’t loved thus, have you really loved?

How many decades is it going to take us to realise that Karva Chauth is not romantic? You cannot really bring a dying man alive, like Veervati allegedly did. In fact, there’s no Yamraja, just like there is no Santa Clause. Then, why on earth are we trying to add purpose to this redundant idea by making men do it too?

Would you rather have widowers jump onto the funeral pyres after the death of their wives, instead of abolishing Sati Pratha?

What’s so woke about being gender-inclusive in superstition?

Also read: Why I believe in Karva Chauth