It’s the right day in the year to ask this uncomfortable question: why does every important women’s movement go to such ridiculous extremes that it ultimately backfires on them?

Before self-crowned feminists start spitting fire, let me explain.

Take for instance that important social comment Taapsee Pannu and co. wanted to make: that “it’s only a slap” is not a thought which should ever dominate any conversation about what a woman should accept in a relationship.

But doesn’t a strong social comment require a convincing story and screenplay to make its point resonate with the largest possible audience? There’s an annoying Kabir Singh vs Thappad discussion going on. It concludes that the Indian audience would rather support a misogynistic hero who slam-bangs women than cheer a woman who walks out on a marriage after an inadvertent slap from her husband.

The powwow adds the postscript that 2020 has so far shown a tendency to be socially regressive as three women-eccentric films — Chhapaak, Panga and Thappad — have been soundly rejected.

In the case of Chhapaak, both testosterone and turbulent politics were offered as reasons for the failure of the Deepika Padukone film because Ajay Devgn’s Tanhaji, released on the same day, was a super hit.

Let’s first dismiss the argument that political leanings have anything to do with box-office rejection. If indeed Deepika Padukone’s support for the anti-CAA protestors of JNU contributed to the dismal performance of her film as against saffron-oriented Devgn’s Maratha war cry, and Taapsee Pannu and director Anubhav Sinha’s vocal anti-government views were a major reason for the brush-off from the box office, then why did renowned “nationalist” and Modi supporter Kangana Ranaut’s Panga fail so miserably? In the same vein, why was Anubhav’s Article 15 a success less than a year ago?

The QED here is that the politics of a filmmaker or lead actor does not govern the box office.

To look at the second part of the discussion that the audience boos women-based films, why was Pink such a huge hit? Why was Raazi (with Alia Bhatt the sole known face) so heartily accepted? Answer: they were beautifully written and powerfully directed.

The sad fact is that Thappad flopped because this time Anubhav had only a social comment to make, without a convincing story to convey it.

It was a ridiculous screenplay which has an educated woman exercising her choice to be a housewife and then waking up to question everybodyfor subjugating her desires. It was a dishonest screenplay where the husband tells his wife to slap him and make it quits but for some strangely convenient reason will not utter the word “sorry” till the last scene. It was a confused screenplay where a husband’s inadvertent slap is unforgivable (it is) but a female lawyer sleeping guilt-free with another man and hating her husband’s touch is be sympathised with. In order to avenge gender injustices of the past, Anubhav went to the other extreme of bashing men and upholding women however unreasonable, unconvincing or unethical they were. As a renowned producer put it, “Thappad was not a film, it was revenge for Kabir Singh.” What Thappad turned out to be was a slap on Anubhav’s wrist for rushing to make a comment without pausing to tell a plausible story.

Going to the extreme, thereby spoiling the message, has also been the leitmotif of the #MeToo movement where every woman who wakes up and makes a charge has been treated like Harishchandra, one who’d never lie, never mind the collateral damage to the stray innocent man. An important societal need to end casting couch misdemeanours in any field has thus been lost in the legally wobbly one-sidedness of it all.

Currently, there’s whisper that a director who made headline-hitting 20-year-old charges against an actor has sought the help of Mumbai cops to get the man to quietly withdraw his suit against her and let it die down naturally.

I rest my case about going to extremes and killing an important societal correction.

Bharathi S. Pradhan is a senior journalist and author