Who's doing the dishes? Bollywood film and government data have the same answer
The protagonist, married to a gynaecologist, finds herself trapped in an endless cycle of cooking, cleaning and caregiving. Her dreams are sidelined not by force, but by relentless criticism and quiet coercion.
While the film, which is a remake of the hit Malayalam movie The Great Indian Kitchen, has sparked conversation - and pushback, especially from men on social media - its themes resonate with hard data.
A recent government survey reveals that Indian women spend over seven hours a day on unpaid domestic and caregiving work - more than twice the time men do. Data shows that women spend 289 minutes on unpaid domestic work and 137 minutes on unpaid caregiving, whereas men spend 88 minutes on chores and 75 minutes on care work.
They also spent less time than men doing paid work and engaging in self-care activities.
What's disappointing is that the last such survey which came out six years ago had similar results. Despite the government launching campaigns to empower women, the situation hasn't changed much.
India's Time Use Surveys (TUS) track how people spend their time across various activities. Surveyors gather data nationwide by asking individuals aged six to 59 how they spent the previous day. The first TUS was released in 2019, with the second published last week.
When the government released findings from the second Time Use Survey (TUS), it highlighted two key shifts: women aged 15 to 59 spent 10 minutes less on unpaid domestic work, while their participation in employment and related activities rose by just over three percentage points.
The survey concluded this marked a "shift from unpaid to paid activities" for women - a positive sign that they were spending less time on domestic chores and more time in paid employment.
However, economists argue this isn't necessarily true. Even if it is, the slight drop in domestic work suggests women are still juggling paid jobs with a heavier load of unpaid work than men.
Ashwini Deshpande, an economics professor at Ashoka University, says TUS data should be analysed alongside India's Female Labour Force Participation Rate (FLFPR) for a deeper understanding of how women spend their time. FLFPR measures the percentage of women aged 15 and above in the labour force.
According to government data, the FLFPR grew from about 23% in 2017-2018 to 37% in 2022-2023. Prof Deshpande says that this increase is not solely due to an increase in employment opportunities for women, but has also been spurred by economic distress.
"Women are not waiting for their time spent on domestic chores to reduce to take up jobs. Research shows that women want to work to supplement household incomes and so they end up working 'double-shifts', doing paid work outside the home and unpaid work inside," Prof Deshpande says.
Coronavirus: How India's lockdown sparked a debate over maids
Coronavirus in India: Did men do more housework during lockdown?
Indian women aren't alone in shouldering a disproportionate share of household and caregiving work - it's a global reality. However, the gap in time spent on domestic work is significantly wider in India.
Where globally women spend about 2.8 hours more than men on domestic and care work, for Indian women, this difference is closer to four hours.
Sociologists attribute this to India's deeply patriarchal society, which continues to enforce strict gender norms. Even among the educated elite, women remain confined by roles upheld and perpetuated not just by men, but also by women.
This rigid enforcement of gender roles doesn't just shape women's lives - it also shapes the way stories about them are received.
So, while Mrs struck a chord with many, it also faced sharp criticism - especially from men on social media.
A men's rights group accused it of "spreading toxicity" against traditional joint families, while others dismissed its premise altogether.
Kajol Srinivasan, a Mumbai-based comedian, says the film ruffled feathers because it held up an uncomfortable mirror to society.
She told the BBC how her father, who quit his job at 40 to take over household duties while her mother continued working, quickly realised that housework was no easy task.
"The first week he was excited; he cooked different dishes and deep-cleaned the house," she says.
The Great Indian Kitchen: Serving an unsavoury tale of sexism in home
Coronavirus in India: 'PM Modi, please make men share housework!'
But then he began to find the work tedious and couldn't continue beyond a week.
"My father realised that housework was not just about work, it was also an imbalance in power. The power always stays with the breadwinner; no matter how well you cook, there are no accolades," she says.
She believes that women are expected and raised to accept this lower rung of power.
"When Indian men talk about what they like about their wives and mothers, it often has a lot to do with how much they have sacrificed for them or how much they take care of them or the home," Ms Srinivasan says.
India's Time Use Survey shows that social change is slow, and it may take time before women spend less on domestic work.
In the meantime, films like Mrs spark conversations around everyday questions many prefer to avoid - like, who's doing the dishes?

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Buzz Feed
07-07-2025
- Buzz Feed
12 Women Share The Reality Of Marrying For Money
Recently, Charlie Kirk told a crowd of young women that they should reconsider pursuing an "MRS degree" when going to college — an outdated, sexist term popularized in the twentieth century to mock women who supposedly went to college just to find a husband. The thing is, in a society where women couldn't open bank accounts, buy homes, or build credit without a man's signature, in many ways, marriage was often the sole path to social and financial security. Even today, the gender pay gap persists, with women making on average just 84 cents to every dollar earned by men. And when women step away from the workforce to have children, they often return to lower salaries and limited opportunities — aka, the "motherhood penalty" — whereas when men become fathers, their wages increase, also the phenomenon known as the "fatherhood premium." In a culture that still rewards men as the default breadwinners and punishes women economically for doing the same work (or even tells them outright they should just pursue a MRS degree instead), it's not surprising that some view marriage as a financial safeguard. Not necessarily because they want to (despite the tired and often overused "golddigger" stereotype), but sometimes because they feel they have to. So, when someone on Reddit asked women who married "the rich one" for financial stability to share what life's been like now, it opened up a revealing and necessary conversation about the systemic pressures at play shaping women's choices. The answers highlight what happens when marriage becomes a form of economic survival — and, more often than not, just how often the tale unravels. Here's what they shared: "I'll speak for my mom. She thought she was marrying the rich one. My dad tried to talk her out of it. He even offered to pay her more than child support for her not to do it (not out of just who my dad is). That pissed her off and she married him anyway. I won't go into details about the stuff I went through, but he was not a safe person to be around. He was a big-time manipulator. He tied my mom up with 6 million dollars in debt. She had no idea until she wanted a divorce — that's when she found out he was putting his debt in her name for his failing businesses." "She ended up having to file for bankruptcy to leave him, but the divorce took years. He would constantly hire new lawyers just to keep the process going. She almost didn't make it out in one piece mentally. It's been a long road for her. She hasn't made the best decisions in relationships (I had to cut her out of my life for a while because of it), but after some very extensive therapy, she's doing much better."—Ok_Ad_5658 "My first husband was very wealthy. When we were dating, that was fun, and he loved to spoil me and treat me to awesome things. After we were married, he became very controlling and definitely used his wealth and money to control and assert his dominance over me. I became very anxious and cried all the time, went on antidepressants, and went to therapy." "I gave up my acting/directing career to be with an ex-partner, as I thought that I wouldn't succeed in my career, and I resigned myself to a life of normality. When I got dumped, the biggest thing that hurt was that I chose the safe path, and things still didn't work out. So the moral of the story is, don't give up your passions and career for a so-called 'normal life,' because when the worst happens, you're only left with yourself, and your previous skills and experience, and it can be hard to re-enter the workforce. I got lucky, and I'm much happier now pursuing the things I truly want." "I was engaged to the 'rich one' and got away. It was NOT WORTH IT. The abuse — physical, sexual, emotional, mental, etc. It was extremely lonely...I always remember being sad on vacation. I'm on an expensive vacation in a beautiful resort, where normal people would be thrilled. But instead I was miserable and alone and honestly pissed that our usual routines were on hold and therefore I was expected to be in his presence all day." "Do not do it. Life is too short for misery, and you deserve true love. Money is just money — it can come and go. Love and happiness are what life is about. People will say all day, 'Well, I don't pay any bills.' There isn't a bill in this world that costs more than my peace and happiness."—Born_Boysenberry4327 "A bit different. He became rich while we dated. We were both not working when we met. I was on leave from teaching after a death in my family. He had just moved to my city and was looking for work. He was a freelance graphic designer and landed a gig at a start-up company. This was around 2010, when mobile apps were just taking off, and things like Instagram were just coming out. Design after design, he won awards, and the company blew up because of him. Life was fun when there was money, parties, and award ceremonies. After a bit, drugs and drinking got in his way, he became more abusive, tried to kill me, and I left. He was fired and blacklisted." "I am highly educated and have a successful career of my own, but he had built wealth that was far beyond anything I'd ever make. We married young, when he was setting up his company. I encouraged him, and we had a close partnership for many years. Eventually, he wanted more and more control and wanted me to be more of a trophy wife, less of a partner." "My friend married a guy she did she was also looking for someone wealthy (she is also highly educated with a good job that could earn well). Honestly? I'm not sure how much of it was love for her or how much of it was wanting a kid before she got too old. I think she didn't really know ended up being very controlling. He wouldn't let her change anything about the house. She got pregnant and he was the least supportive partner you can imagine." "I met my ex in college. He was in a field that offered high incomes right after graduation, so while we were not rich we were very comfortable. He became very controlling and mean, and watched every penny I spent, getting upset if I bought an extra non-perishable grocery item because it was on sale. Mind you, he did not do any shopping or cooking. I waited probably too long to divorce him because I was worried about the big drop in income and stability. But I finally did it, and while it was tough financially for a long time, I was fine and so much happier without him." —YouMustDoEverything "My friend married the 'rich one' because he is rich and she is living out the 'If you marry for money, you earn every penny' phrase. There is also not an insignificant age difference, the in-laws are assholes, the husband is a tightwad, and the family business is in a somewhat volatile industry dynamic. But he's rich, so she doesn't have to work outside the home, so she sort of got what she wanted?" "This is not the same thing, but I didn't marry for love; I married my husband because we were good partners. He was financially stable enough that I could stay at home with our daughter, which I think we both wanted. I think we have a different kind of love for each other that has grown over time, but it's not a very romantic relationship, and I'm honestly happier than I was when I was deeply in love in the past." "It's worked out well. I didn't pick him just because he's rich, but I've been with men similar in habit and compatibility to him who didn't have as much money. It's nice not to have to worry about whether we have enough money to pay the bills. And we can vacation where we want because we want to, and not pick places just because they are budget-friendly. The kids can participate in the activities they want and won't have to pick a lower-tier college in the interest of saving us money or reducing their own student loan burden. I do work because I want to, but I don't have to work jobs I hate or hours that suck because we have the household financial security to weather the storm of temporary unemployment." And finally, "My husband isn't rich, but he makes good money, works really hard, is very responsible, and could afford to live on his own when we met. We got married for things other than money and love, but we do love each other. I was only 22 and I didn't go to college, so I wasn't financially stable in the same way. I worked and paid for everything I had and took care of my younger sister financially, but I lived with family and felt trapped. So it made sense getting married would help me, but the thing I wish I realized back then was not to become as financially dependent on him." "We had a rough patch, and I realized I didn't have anything or anywhere to go if we got divorced. I recently returned to school to get out of dead-end jobs and have financial independence/security. Overall, I think people should check both boxes by picking someone you enjoy being around and actually like, as well as them being financially stable."—corkblob Did you marry "the rich one" for financial stability? What was the reality, and what do you wish you'd known before saying "I do"? Share your story in the comments.
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Yahoo
Edinburgh filming for '90s classic movie remake takes over Portobello beach
Production for a Bollywood film has descended on the streets, and beaches, of Edinburgh. The movie, Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai, is a romantic comedy - and a remake of a classic '90s Bollywood film. It's set for release in April next year. Residents in the city have seen filming taking place in Victoria Street, outside the Royal Scottish Academy and down at Portobello beach. The films title comes from a Hindu saying, which roughly translates means that 'young people are bound to fall in love'. READ MORE: Neighbourhood Edinburgh pub to close for refurb as it prepares for 'new chapter' READ MORE: Edinburgh police 'in riot gear' swoop on quiet street in ongoing incident The project comes from director David Dhawan, and features his son Varun Dhawan, as well as Pooja Hegde and Mrunal Thakur. Cast and crew were seen filming scenes on Portobello beach on Monday. A casting call was released in early May, with extras wanted for a hospital scene who could play nurses and doctors in the background. The 30-day shoot in Scotland is understood to cover two songs, with key chase sequences and 'comedic scenes' for the film. A source told Pinkvilla, a top Bollywood news site: "A lot of combination scenes, leading to chaos on screen will be shot in Scotland. Sign up for Edinburgh Live newsletters for more headlines straight to your inbox "The conclusion of Scotland schedule will lead to a film wrap, not-with-standing a couple of songs and some patchwork sequences." The original film, from 1999, starred actors such as Anil Kapoor and Salman Khan, and many refer to it as Chunnari Chunnari - its popular main track. Join Edinburgh Live's Whatsapp Community here and get the latest news sent straight to your messages.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Yahoo
Justin Trudeau can't run away from embarrassing himself
Justin Trudeau isn't the prime minister of Canada anymore. He's not a Liberal MP. He stayed out of the fray during last month's federal election. He's been under the radar for months, and is reportedly renting a home in Ottawa. Other than a brief excursion to a Canadian tyre store, which led him to take a predictable selfie, he's largely disappeared from public life. Everything came to a crashing halt this week. Trudeau proved once again that he can't run away from embarrassing himself. Literally, in fact. Trudeau was one of three former prime ministers who attended King Charles III's throne speech to open the new session of parliament. He chatted a fair bit with Stephen Harper. He sat within proximity of Kim Campbell. He brought his mother, Margaret, to hear the speech – which was a nice touch. The TV cameras then panned down to his shoes, only to discover he was wearing trainers. You read this correctly. Trudeau's footwear was a pair of green Adidas sneakers. In the Senate of Canada. To hear a speech by King Charles to open a parliamentary session in the country Trudeau led for almost a decade. Some people may not perceive this to be a big deal. To those individuals, I pose one simple question: 'Was anyone else in attendance doing this?' The answer is a resounding 'no,' and it shouldn't be difficult to figure out why. This isn't the first time that Trudeau has embarrassed himself in this respect, either. Three older instances of Trudeau wearing blackface received domestic and international scorn and derision – and deservedly so. His obsession with colourful socks wasn't unique among world leaders, but he kept doing it inappropriately in the House of Commons and elsewhere. Trudeau and his family also wore traditional outfits to India during a February 2018 trip. They were torn apart by the media. 'He wore an elaborate and heavily worked sherwani, more in tune with what a bridegroom would a Bollywood film,' the BBC's Ayeshea Perera amusingly wrote. The Canadian publication Maclean's called him 'The Mr. Dressup prime minister,' using the moniker of the late children's entertainer, Ernie Coombs, who wore various costumes plucked from his tickle trunk. Maclean's also included photos of Trudeau in other ridiculous costumes. This ranged from a Superman outfit worn inside the House of Commons on Hallowe'en to another inappropriate traditional outfit worn during the Chinese New Year. With respect to King Charles's speech, why would Trudeau do something so disrespectful during this important moment in Canadian history? Was it yet another desperate plea for media attention? Was he trolling his haters, as the kids might say? While there were probably elements of this in his thinking, the answer is quite simple: Trudeau doesn't give a tinker's dam about tradition and decorum in politics. He may be a former head of government, but his attitude and outlook on life often resemble the lowest common denominator. And that's why most Canadians are glad he's gone. Michael Taube was a speechwriter for former Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.