1
Jashkumar Jain
Gender and Culture in Bollywood Cinema
Do the movies FSHW and Koi Mil Gaya depict that a toxic idea of masculinity is
hegemonically imposed in society and that leads to violence?
Michael Kimmel in hisbook Manhood in America observes:
“Manhood is less about the drive for domination and more about the fear of others
dominating us, having power or control over us. Throughout American history men have been
afraid that others will see us as less than manly, as weak, timid, frightened.”
Kimmel here is describing the social pressures that force adoption of a version of manhood that
is physically imposing, macho and aggressive. Toxic male homosocial groups give impetus to
the adoption of this toxic aggressive version of manhood and this version is hegemonically
imposed on the society. Although Kimmel’s observations can be seen in India as well. This
tendency of men makes them susceptible to perpetrating and validating violence or the victims of
it. My paper, through the films Father, Son and Holy War and Koi...Mil Gaya argues that the
described toxic idea of masculinity is hegemonically imposed and, in the case of the former film,
makes men susceptible to inflicting violence, and in the case of the latter, makes men inflict
violence or be its victims if they do not adhere to the said idea of manhood.
I have chosen the film Father, Son and Holy War because one of the things the movie
focuses on is documenting toxic male homosocial groups and how their engagement with
political oration, which is often enmeshed with religious propaganda, makes males positively
respond to the aggressive appeals of the communalists. The second choice movie Koi...Mil Gaya
is rather non-political, however, the sci-fi drama depicts how the idea of toxic masculinity is
hegemonic and not adhering to it invites violence upon oneself. The movie, to further accentuate
the dominance of toxic manhood, portrays the main character physically beat up his foes once his
manhood becomes compliant with the dominant idea of it. My analysis is restricted to instances
of the depiction of manhood, the male homosocial dynamics, male engagement with political
rhetoric and violence and the interlinkage of these. It further examines how the said hegemony
and the verbal, physical and sexual violence that follows manifests.
