Trisha’s stand in Vijay controversy is refusal to become a political weapon of patriarchy
When Tamil Nadu BJP chief Nainar Nagendran took Trisha’s name to defame Vijay, he inadvertently sparked a larger conversation about women’s agency in the public discourse. His prompt and dignified response drew a strong line between political rivalry and personal dignity.
February 16 was another day for Tamil Nadu. But, not for Trisha. In the afternoon, actress Trisha, who has over 20 years of experience in the Tamil industry, issued a statement condemning a top politician who indirectly embarrassed her by linking her with her co-star Thalapathy Vijay, whose Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam (TVK) will be contesting the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections for the first time this year.
At times, public discussion has seen attempts to indirectly target a man by drawing women into his circle, subjecting them to emotional and psychological scrutiny.
Tamil Nadu BJP chief Nainar Nagendran intended to target Vijay. Instead, the episode highlighted how women are often included in the political crossfire. However, Trisha was not going to tolerate it. We are in 2026.
Reacting to Vijay’s February 15 announcement that TVK would emerge as a major challenger in the upcoming elections, Nagendran, 65, mocked the actor-politician with a comment that moved away from politics.
Taking a personal dig, the state BJP chief said, “Poor guy, he is completely inexperienced. First of all, he needs to come out of his house. First come out of Trisha’s house, then something can happen.”
Now, read that again. A senior politician, in an attempt to discredit a rival, reached not for policy differences but for a woman’s name.
Such episodes illustrate how public attacks extend beyond the lead man, with women in his orbit – partners, friends, even acquaintances – being pulled into the line of fire and turned into tools in battles they did not choose.
Trisha’s reaction was swift and measured. In a statement issued through her lawyer Nithish Nataraj, the 42-year-old actor indicated that she would not let this comment pass her by. “He never expected that such distasteful and inappropriate remarks would be made by a person holding a high stature in the political arena of the state”, he said without naming Nainar Nagendran, adding that it appears to be a deliberate move.
What Nagendran said was clearly more than an accidental omission. Rather, it reflects a mindset that views women merely as extensions of men, not as autonomous individuals.
Trisha is not Vijay’s representative, spokesperson, political ally or accountability partner. She is her own person, her own career, reputation and dignity – none of which should be collateral damage in someone else’s political battle.
And whatever relationship she has with Vijay, it is personal. However, in politics, the personal often becomes the political. Yet Trisha drew boundaries – loud and clear. An excerpt from his statement read, “It is a common adage that personal life should never be made the subject of public comment or discourse, and it is expected that persons in high positions maintain responsibility and equality in public discussion.”
This shows what happens when a woman’s name is used to target a man. It implies a personal relationship to generate gossip, attempts to embarrass both the man and the woman by creating an affair, and completely ignores the woman’s agency in the process – three different harms in the same act.
Nagendran eventually apologized, calling it an “inadvertent comment”. Yet, such comments often reflect deeper patterns – the persistence of patriarchal and misogynistic attitudes. They also highlight how some men in power still see women as status symbols, as leverage, as tools to target others at their convenience.
Trisha’s refusal to quietly internalize this is a timely reminder that women shouldn’t be collateral damage in battles that aren’t theirs. They will speak. They will push back. And as Trisha said – disrespect will always be exposed.