In this blog, I wrestle with the cultural dissonance surrounding rape discourse in India and urge a more compassionate, contextual view of men’s seemingly problematic responses. I explore how deeply ingrained instincts and broken social lenses—warped sudden modernity and unfiltered Western influence—are shaping the moral confusion of a generation. Rather than dismiss these men as villains, I see them as unprepared citizens in a rapidly transforming world, reacting to signals their culture never equipped them to interpret. I call for nuance, modesty, and a cultural reclamation that honors both biology and dignity.
A young man I know—bright, curious, and deeply concerned about justice—recently shared a street interview video. In it, random average Indian men are asked about rape. Their answers? From a western-oriented perspective, they are confused, tone-deaf, and in many cases, deeply problematic. They spoke of modesty, of women dressing provocatively, of how Hollywood has ruined culture. To many modern ears, especially those shaped by Western liberal values, these comments sound like rape apology. Like complicity.
But I urged this young man to look again. I don’t believe those men were condoning such savagery. In fact, I believe the opposite. I believe they are probably decent men—brothers, fathers, sons—trying to make sense of something horrific through a cultural lens that has never equipped them to understand this kind of violence.
That lens is cracked, yes. It confuses biology with morality, modesty with virtue, and provocation with blame. But it is not without some reason. It’s the product of a society undergoing a violent and confusing transformation—a society that has taken in the worst of the West without the context, scaffolding, or soul to absorb it properly.
We have to hold two things in our heads at once:
-
Rape is unequivocally evil.
-
The men responding in those videos are likely not.
This is not a defense of their views. It’s a defense of context. Just as in the West, where Trump supporters were demonized as racist, sexist, and ignorant without ever listening to their actual fears and pain, here too we risk flattening people into symbols. If we want real change, we have to dig deeper.
Sexual Signaling and Social Instincts
Let’s talk plainly. Men are biologically wired to respond to sexual cues. This isn’t ideology; it’s biology. A woman dressed in lingerie or skimpy clothing signals sexual availability in a way that stirs unconscious male instincts—especially in men raised without a cultural framework for how to process or regulate such cues.
Now enter Hollywood. Pop culture. Social media. All of them exporting hyper-sexualized imagery and values into cultures that have no internal immune system against it. No filters. No safeguards. Just a flood of half-naked pop stars, movies, and advertising campaigns teaching young girls that liberation equals exposure—and teaching young boys that exposure equals invitation.
It’s a cultural cocktail for chaos.
Imagine this thought experiment: what if rich men went around pretending to be providers? Flaunting homes, security, emotional intimacy—all the things that signal commitment to women—but gave nothing. Would we not cry foul? Would we not say women were misled, exploited, or manipulated?
That’s exactly what’s happening to men—only in reverse. Today’s young man is bombarded by images of sexual availability, only to be told that there is no availability at all. It’s biological bait with no reward. It’s a lie. It’s a form of cruelty. And yet, no one speaks of it. Instead, we tell men to just “deal with it.” To suppress instinct. To be ashamed of their arousal, their desire, their confusion. All while labeling them toxic for the very feelings the system itself is deliberately provoking.
This isn’t progress. It’s perversion masquerading as progress.
What Should Be Done?
We need to run the pornographers out of town. Not just the literal ones, but the cultural ones—the ad agencies, film producers, fashion brands, and social engineers who have profited off the mass sexualization of women while pretending it’s empowerment. Empowerment is not nudity. Freedom is not chaos. And cultural evolution is not about copying the West’s worst ideas and calling it modernity.
We need a renaissance of modesty. A rediscovery of boundaries. Beautiful, talented women should be on stage in long dresses, commanding attention with grace—not gyrating in lingerie. That’s not art. That’s degradation. And as for those who scream, “My body, my choice,” I say this: choice without consequence is not freedom. It’s delusion. Society is not obliged to approve of every choice. Especially not when those choices tear at the fabric of dignity, culture, and peace.
Final Thought
The liberal default is always the same: there is something wrong with men. But I don’t believe that. I believe men are under siege—biologically, psychologically, spiritually—and no one is defending them. Not even themselves.
So let me say it clearly: women bear equal responsibility in the cultural unraveling we are witnessing. In some cases, more. But the real blame belongs to the architects of this decay—the profiteers, the pornographers, the cultural engineers who peddled this false freedom in place of order. If we want to heal, we must stop shaming men for responding naturally to an unnatural world. We must build a better one. Together.
…