Deepika Padukone and Ranveer Singh’s decision to name their daughter Devi Padukone Singh has sparked a conversation that goes well beyond celebrity baby names. Influencer Simridhi Makhija has questioned whether giving children both parents’ surnames is a step towards feminism or merely a social media-friendly expression of empowerment, and her argument has divided the internet. In a video, Makhija argues that the debate around surnames risks overshadowing what she considers the more consequential battles for women’s rights, from inheritance laws to paternity leave and guaranteed postpartum care.
“I am going to be called a pick me and a victim of patriarchy for saying this But Deepika Padukone just named her daughter Devi Padukone Singh And I think
that’s the last thing feminism needed because think about it when Devi Padukone Singh grows up and falls in love with someone who also has two surnames, is their child going to have four surnames? And if the child who has four surnames grows up and falls in love with someone who also has four surnames, is their child going to have eight surnames.”
Her argument is that the number of surnames a child carries does not necessarily translate into greater equality between men and women. She goes on to question whether the public performance of empowerment has become more important than pursuing structural changes.
“These are just optics. It was never about the number of surnames It was about real issues, but sadly, this is what feminism has become today We want to look empowered on social media, but not in real life Things like who paid on the first date or I’m not going to do Karwa Chauth And in this rush to look empowered on social media We do not get empowered in real life because the real war is going to be waged in the court of law wherein we talk about Inheritance laws wherein we talk about paternity leave wherein we talk about guaranteed postpartum care for women But we do not take that up with the same excitement because we are more concerned with looking Empowered on social media than actually being empowered”
‘Let Them Be’: The Internet Pushes Back
While some viewers agreed with Makhija’s distinction between symbolic gestures and structural reform, others argued that a couple’s decision about their child’s name hardly warrants a larger verdict on feminism. One person commented: “Deep thinking & make it so simple to understand❤️…. How mature you are 🙏🙏❤️”
Another comment offered a practical solution to her hypothetical surname dilemma: “What if we keep two of the best sounding surnames for the next gen? That’s how DNA reshuffle works too.” Another viewer felt the criticism was unnecessary, writing, “Sometimes, having opinion in everything is also wrong, it was a beautiful decision made by them!”
A comment also pointed out that the sisters could choose how they identify themselves as adults, saying, “They chose what they had to chose; Devi and Dua can always make their names as Dua PS and Devi PS Respectively perspectives need to be respected is also important aspect of feminism! They be they!!”
Others questioned why people were already speculating about the surnames of children who have not even been born.
“Chill bruh! It was their mutual decision to name their child like that. Whenever their child grows up to become a mother, then she and her partner will mutually decide what shall be the surname of their baby! It may or may not contain surnames of both the parents or maybe no surname at all! It’s their life let them be! Why to assume the surname of their whole upcoming generations who haven’t even been born and we don’t even know if surname will even exist in the upcoming generation!”
/images/ppid_59c68470-image-179290752266750838.webp)
/images/ppid_59c68470-image-179269753066247852.webp)
