Rashmika Mandanna and Vijay Deverakonda recently appeared on a chat show, sparking intense social media debate about their relationship. Fans analysed every gesture, prompting Rashmika to post on Instagram about the unsolicited advice. Vijay later shared a post calling her his wife and best friend, showing their bond remains strong.
Rashmika Mandanna and Vijay Deverakonda recently appeared on a chat show
In recent days, social media has found itself embroiled in a familiar debate: do Vijay Deverakonda and Rashmika Mandanna embody the kind of couple everyone wants to see? Their appearance on a chat show has once again prompted netizens to scrutinise a celebrity relationship, analysing gestures, expressions and the perceived imbalance between one partner’s affection and the other’s response.
It is hardly the first time a celebrity couple has found itself under this microscope. From Ranbir Kapoor and Alia Bhatt to Deepika Padukone and Ranveer Singh, and Virat Kohli and Anushka Sharma, public fascination with famous relationships has often extended far beyond admiration. We want to know who is more invested, who makes the grander gestures and, ultimately, who loves whom more.
Are we merely curious, or have we appointed ourselves the unofficial relationship auditors of the celebrity world? In our eagerness to identify the alpha, the green flag and the red flag, are we too quick to pass judgement on couples who may simply be figuring out how to balance their public personas, professional lives and private commitments?
BUT ARE NETIZENS ENTIRELY TO BLAME?
The answer may be more complicated than it appears.
Rashmika Mandanna’s heartfelt response to the online chatter was not a fleeting remark or a carefully worded sentence. In a lengthy Instagram post titled “My little 2 cents on this whole issue concerning me and Vijju,” she addressed the criticism surrounding the couple’s public interactions.
She pushed back against what she perceived as unsolicited advice disguised as concern, questioning why strangers felt entitled to interpret her relationship and pronounce judgement on it. Her response also raised an uncomfortable possibility: that the advice we dispense about other people’s relationships may sometimes reveal more about our own expectations, disappointments and romantic ideals than about the couple in question.
The debate, after all, was not simply about who proposed first, who took longer to say yes or who appeared more affectionate on camera. It was about reciprocity: the expectation that love must be visibly demonstrated, acknowledged and returned in ways that an audience can recognise.
Vijay Deverakonda, Rashmika Mandanna
Vijay’s subsequent Instagram post, in which he described Rashmika as his wife, best friend and woman, offered a glimpse of their bond on their own terms. But it also invites a question: had he expressed those sentiments more openly during the chat show, would the internet have spared him a lecture on how to be a loving husband?
Perhaps. Or perhaps the goalposts would simply have moved.
The larger point is that a relationship cannot be fairly judged by a handful of televised moments or carefully curated social media posts. Affection does not always arrive in the form of grand gestures, public declarations or camera-ready intimacy. Nor does a partner’s quieter demeanour necessarily indicate emotional indifference.
AJAY, VIJAY, SAIF AND RANVEER: THE MANY FACES OF MASCULINITY
There is an interesting contradiction in the way we consume celebrity romance.
On one side are men whose understated demeanour is interpreted as emotional distance. On the other are men whose expressive, demonstrative affection is celebrated as the gold standard of modern masculinity. Depending on the moment, the same audience can demand that a man be more emotionally available while also romanticising the supposedly effortless cool of the man who reveals very little.
Consider the contrasting reactions to Vijay Deverakonda’s perceived reserve and Saif Ali Khan’s more expressive persona during a chat-show appearance. While one couple became the subject of online lessons about red flags and green flags, the other inspired admiration for a man comfortable enough to articulate his affection.
Yet even such admiration can come with qualifications. Discussions about Saif and Kareena Kapoor Khan, for instance, can quickly veer towards his previous marriage to Amrita Singh, with people speculating about how his romantic behaviour may have differed across relationships.
The irony is striking. We celebrate vulnerability but rarely resist the temptation to turn it into a comparative exercise. We want men to express their feelings, but we also judge those expressions against a standard that no individual can consistently meet.
Perhaps what women want is not one universally acceptable model of masculinity. Perhaps they want the freedom to decide what works for them (a partner who is expressive or reserved, demonstrative or understated) without having their preferences dictated by an online consensus.
There is no single performance of love that can satisfy everyone. And there should not have to be one.
ROMANCING ON SCREEN, BUT WHAT ABOUT REAL LIFE?
One distinction often gets lost in these conversations: actors are professionals whose work frequently requires them to perform romance.
They are trained to convey longing, tenderness, heartbreak and desire, sometimes with extraordinary conviction. They may deliver sweeping declarations of love on screen, hold a co-star with cinematic tenderness or make a grand romantic gesture look effortless. But acting convincingly in love is not the same as expressing love in everyday life.
The camera rewards drama. Real relationships do not always require it.
Some couples are naturally demonstrative; others reserve their most intimate moments for private spaces. Some express affection through words, while others do so through practical acts of care, loyalty, companionship or simply being present when it matters. A person who appears awkward at a public declaration may be deeply attentive in private. Conversely, a spectacular display of affection offers no guarantee of a healthy relationship.
Of course, celebrities are not exempt from criticism merely because they are famous, and public behaviour can reasonably invite discussion. But there is a difference between commenting on what we see and pretending that what we see tells us everything.
When we confuse an actor’s screen persona with their real-life personality, or a fleeting public interaction with the entire emotional history of a marriage, we risk judging reality by the standards of fiction.
Love is not a scene that must be performed to an audience’s satisfaction.
LOVE IN THE POST-PANDEMIC AGE
The pandemic changed the way many people thought about intimacy, companionship and emotional well-being. In the years since, conversations about relationships have increasingly drawn on the language of boundaries, emotional availability, attachment styles and red flags. These discussions can be valuable, particularly when they help people recognise unhealthy patterns and articulate their needs.
But social media has also turned this vocabulary into a remarkably efficient system of instant verdicts. A short video becomes evidence. A facial expression becomes a diagnosis. A moment of silence becomes a character flaw. Within minutes, a stranger’s marriage can be dissected, categorised and declared either aspirational or doomed.
Celebrities, meanwhile, are no longer distant figures whose public images are shaped solely by film promotions and magazine interviews. Social media brings them into our daily lives, making their celebrations, disagreements and declarations of affection feel strangely personal. The familiarity can create an illusion of intimacy: because we see fragments of their lives so frequently, we begin to believe we understand the whole.
For actors, this scrutiny can have consequences beyond hurt feelings. Public perception can influence their personal brands, audience relationships and professional standing. Yet the expectation that they should simply develop a thicker skin ignores the fact that constant speculation can be exhausting, even for people accustomed to public attention.
There is another side to this cultural shift, too. Younger generations continue to believe in love, even as they witness relationships being mocked, marriages being questioned and every romantic gesture being measured against an ideal. They want emotional security, mutual respect and visible affection and there is nothing unreasonable about those aspirations.
The problem begins when a legitimate desire for a loving relationship hardens into a rigid template for everyone else.
PERHAPS THE QUESTION IS NOT WHAT WOMEN WANT
Perhaps the more useful question is why we are so determined to decide what women or men, for that matter should want.
A woman can be openly affectionate without being submissive. A man can be emotionally reserved without necessarily being uncaring. A couple can be deeply in love without constantly reassuring an audience of their devotion. Equally, a declaration of love should not automatically shield anyone from scrutiny when there are genuine reasons for concern.
The distinction lies in respecting individual agency. Rashmika is entitled to describe her relationship in her own words, just as other women are entitled to expect a different kind of partnership. Her defence of her relationship does not need to become a universal argument for accepting every behaviour in the name of love. It can simply be a reminder that the person living a relationship has access to dimensions of it that spectators do not.
Perhaps we should stop asking whether Vijay and Rashmika meet our definition of couple goals and start asking why their relationship needs to meet it at all.
Vijay Deverakonda and Rashmika Mandanna tied the knot in February 2026
We can admire a romantic gesture without demanding that every man replicate it. We can discuss troubling behaviour without diagnosing an entire marriage from a clip. And we can champion women’s right to expect tenderness, respect and reciprocity without assuming that every woman must desire the same expression of them.
The internet may continue to rank couples, decode glances and issue unsolicited relationship report cards. That is the nature of a culture in which private lives have become public entertainment.
Perhaps what women want is not a perfect man, a flawless marriage or a relationship that looks convincing on camera. Perhaps they want the freedom to define love for themselves and to be trusted when they say they have found it.
Latest News
Rajeshwari Kashyap author
Rajeshwari Kashyap is a Research Analyst at Times Now with a keen focus on international affairs, climate and sustainability, culture, and politics. S... View More