Rakhi, Necklines & Jewellery
Updated: 6 days ago
Namya Aggarwal
A runner, Writer and student (12th Class)
Can a jewellery advertisement challenge tradition without hurting cultural sentiments? Through the debate surrounding Giva’s Raksha Bandhan campaign, Namya explores the delicate intersection of marketing, feminism and Indian values, inviting readers to question how brands balance cultural sensitivity with changing social perspectives.
Reading opinions of the recent Giva advertisement has put me in a dilemma. As someone at a critical stage to build views about important topics such as these, I struggle to pick just one side.
India is still a country rooted in ancient Vedic principles and one that holds certain ideas about how men and women must behave in a society.
The traditions and festivals of this land continue to hold great spiritual and emotional significance for the majority of the population.
Therefore, advertisements featuring cultural themes must be dealt with very carefully.
The message of the marketers- which is promoting their product- must be conveyed to the viewers while making the advertisement appealing to them as well- a goal as delicate as it is difficult.
Ad-making for India should take into consideration the nation’s traditional culture. I feel that the marketers did not give enough consideration to the target market.
It promoted its products using the upcoming festival of Raksha Bandhan. Rakhi, or Raksha Bandhan, is a Hindu festival that celebrates the bond between a sister and brother.
Hindu festivals, by default, ask for ethnic dressing that, ideally, doesn’t include revealing garments. Kriti Sanon wearing a bralette without any drape or chunni was seen as a disrespectful act.
India is developing, and so is its youth. However, orthodox practices and beliefs can’t simply be ignored.
Marketers must realise that in a culturistic society such as India, it is best to take a more diplomatic and conservative approach, especially if its for a product or service being associated with families, festivals, heritage, traditions, etc.
Some part of my first argument can be summarised by what Kangana Ranaut- a popular Indian actor and a Member of Lok Sabha- said,
“It is a wonderful time to be a woman, our closets are full of variety of clothes… From all the options that are available to us today why would you tie your brother a Rakhi in your bikini/under garments? Where are all your styling options? The advert looks intentionally creepy,”
However, I came across another very valid argument.
Here is what Kriti Sanon has to say-
“Culture and traditions are in a woman’s heart, not in her neckline!”
“Why does it matter what a woman wears?”
Why, in the big 2026, is what a woman wears still a matter of discussion?
It is an advertisement focused on how Giva offers jewellery for not just humans but also pets, and its main focus is the beautiful relationship between a sister and her brother.
However, and unfortunately, the above question signals not only a feminist but also an individualistic mindset, one which isn’t best suited for a country like India where sentiments of everyone are taken into consideration.
Is this system of always taking into account views of others problematic?
Of course! It is another topic of discussion as to how women must always accommodate their behaviour and attitudes to make others comfortable.
To do away with what has always been the norm is a fairly difficult task and a daring one at that.
Activism and a progressive mindset are a fairly controversial take in a place where previous generations still look down upon liberal acts.
India is still composed of multiple conservative generations that hold old-school values of women covering up.
A change, especially a bold one like this, is seen as an attack and hurts the sentiments of the masses.
I personally think it is less of an issue and more a problem of disregarding Indian culture than one of feminism and asking women to change themselves.
What Sanon wore is probably fine for a wedding, but on a festival such as Raksha Bandhan? Probably not.
And the reactions of the internet weren’t rooted in deep-seated patriarchy and orthodox principles, but showcased their continued concerns and respect for Indian traditions and culture.
Okay... I have a slightly different dimension to this.
I don't think marketers are unaware of these basic principles. Which makes me wonder whether this was really a mistake in the first place.
I don't think marketing can always be neatly classified as “good” or “bad.” The more important question is what the marketing achieves for the brand. Does it create attention? Does it make people talk about the brand? Does it increase recall? And ultimately, does the attention translate into consideration or purchase?
My feeling is that Giva may be deliberately targeting a younger audience. For the older generation, the advertisement may feel completely disrespectful. Even for the younger generation, some may find it distasteful. But something interesting happens…