A confident production designer, sure of her work and the changing times, believes she is an equal collaborator in the making of a film. When Freddy, the producer, questions her, she feels rage — not because she was questioned, but because she was given no room to discuss.She was simply dismissed with an order to change the set’s colour. She tries to stand her ground, showing the producer her finger and telling him she quits, refusing to work with a man who doesn’t know how to talk to a woman. In the end, Freddy kicks her.AdvertisementWhen his assistant asks him, “How can you kick a woman?”, Freddy, replies, “Wo kya hain na, Jeejeebhoy, main aurton par hath nahi uthata (The thing is, Jeejeebhoy, I do not raise my hands on women).”‘Good character’ certificatesThis idea, ‘not raising hands on women’ is often presented as a moral compass in the patriarchal universe. In our society, we have seen it used to distribute ‘good character’ certificates to men.I started watching a recent series B***ds of Bollywood after reading several reviews assuring me that if one loves Bollywood masala and gossip, this was the series for me. Frankly, I liked it, as the maker was willing to take a dig at himself and his own kind.AdvertisementBut the scene mentioned above stayed with me long after. Was it cringeworthy? Does it depict something that happens often in the film industry? Why was the designer kept nameless? How should we read her self-awareness? Is this just about Freddy kicking a woman while taking the moral high ground?While many of these answers could only be gathered from the writers, I decided to use that scene as a metaphor and view our contemporary society through its lens.Gender equality and the contradictions surrounding it go hand in hand. A release by the Press Information Bureau (PIB) on October 13, 2025, states that the Female Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) increased from 23.3% in 2017-18 to 41.7% in 2023-24. The release cites legal safety nets, like the Maternity Benefit Act, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, and the Occupational Safety, Health, and Working Conditions Code as drivers of this rise.Here the question arises: can all the women contributing to this increased LFPR access these legal safety nets? The reality of women working in numerous unorganised sectors is undeniable. We see women approaching different forms of work, in both organised and unorganised sectors, very differently.For many, work is an opportunity that puts food on the table and might help the family move beyond a precarious life. It is a necessary, unavoidable churn that must be endured without question. We all know which marginalised communities constitute this underpaid, unorganised female workforce.The daily ‘silent kicks’On the other hand, for many women, work is also about aspirations, desires, a promise, an act of rebellion, and a demand for respect and dignity. Women are landing in various workspaces thinking, like that unnamed woman, that they are collaborators. They believe their opinions matter, that the world is changing, and that they are sure of themselves. They aspire to be acknowledged and respected, but they often face a different reality. For me, Freddy’s kick amplified the thousands of ‘silent kicks’ that women duck or absorb in their workplaces daily.Even when they have legal protections and an evolved vocabulary to describe harassment and discrimination, they are largely dismissed with the same rotting moral notion: that a society that ‘respects women’ can do them no wrong.The Kolkata professor who lost her job over her personal pictures and the unsaid ‘maternity penalty’ are just a few such examples. Still, we hear the hollow trumpet of ‘women’s upliftment’ being played by many, without a deeper thought as to what true upliftment means. Meeting rooms and forums often appear to be old boys’ clubs. This, combined with ‘new boys’ disgracefully overlooking their male privilege and some women propagating the ‘lean-in’ mantra, appears to be the reality of most workplaces. The ‘friendly’ suggestion from a colleague to just ‘buckle up and focus on work’ overlooking caregiving responsibilities or demeaning conditions are experiences that many women share.In organised sectors, where at least a few systems are in place, gender equality is a goal often talked about, planned, and ‘performed.’ But what still stands in the way? Frequent questions about their life decisions: Why marriage? Why not marriage? Why children? Why not children? Why so uptight? Why not so uptight? The expectation is to normalise behaviours like interrupting female colleagues or being thoughtless about demeaning acts that stem from male privilege, all while women are judged or sidelined for juggling their gender roles and their jobs. Gender-affirmative procedures are often mocked, and existing support systems are made difficult to access. The list is endless.As a society, we react to visible violence like Freddy’s kick but hardly pay attention to the silent violations, which are often passed off under the garb of ‘organisational needs.’Discourses on gender equality often become mud-slinging wars. If we break this scene down further, some might argue that the unnamed woman was ‘aggressive too,’ that ‘she also showed her middle finger’ or ‘punched him first.’ These arguments tend to attract the most attention. But the question we must ask is this: can raising one’s voice in anger after facing humiliation be seen as an equal violation to an assertion of power tied to one’s position?Violations of rights caused by structural inequalities and institutional apathy cannot be reduced to anecdotal incidents or the pitting of one example against another. Freddy’s kick gave me pause to reflect on the uncounted ‘kicks’ that women face daily. Freddy’s action could be dismissed as part of his rude, entitled character. This is often done in such cases: the perpetrator is shown as the problem, his anger, his background, his frustration.But Freddy’s dialogue, that he kicked her because he can’t raise his hands on women, resonates perfectly with the hollow promise of ‘upliftment’ offered to women workers. The ‘morality dividend’ of recruiting more women is not enough to cloak the patriarchal microaggressions practiced in countless workplaces.While the rising numbers should be celebrated, the true celebration is still miles away.The writer is a Tokyo-based independent researcher working on issues related to gender-based violence, public health and migrationNational Editor Shalini Langer curates the fortnightly ‘She Said’ column