Raksha Bandhan is a festival many families grow up with. The rakhi, the time spent with brothers and sisters, family gatherings and the small traditions followed at home, with deep happiness and emotions, can mean something very personal to the people who celebrate it.
For many, it is not only about a small festival and the exchange of a rakhi or gifts. It is also about family, memories and customs that are often passed from parents to children and then carried into the next generation.
This year, however, a Raksha Bandhan advertisement featuring actor Kriti Sanon has started a wider discussion about personal choice, cultural sensitivity and how traditional festivals are presented in public campaigns.
The advertisement was released by jewellery brand GIVA on August 17, ahead of Raksha Bandhan. The 35-second campaign, titled “Furever Sibling: The Pawfect Bond, Crafted in Silver”, promotes the brand’s pet-rakhi collection. It shows Sanon celebrating Raksha Bandhan with her brother and later tying a rakhi to her pet dog.
The campaign was clearly built around a modern idea of family, where pets are also treated as an important part of the household. For some viewers, that was a fresh and relatable way of looking at the festival. For others, it felt like a departure from the traditional way they understand Raksha Bandhan.
The campaign soon drew criticism, particularly over Sanon’s outfit. She appears in an ivory bralette-style blouse with a cape and a draped skirt. Some viewers said the styling did not suit the traditional setting of Raksha Bandhan. Others questioned the decision to include a dog in the rakhi ceremony.
The criticism became more prominent after actor and BJP MP Kangana Ranaut commented on the campaign, and actress Suzanne Bernert also questioned the way the festival was presented, saying the advertisement was far removed from the sentiment she associates with Raksha Bandhan.
Sanon responded on August 25 through an Instagram Story. She questioned why women are still judged by what they wear and argued that culture and tradition come from the emotions people carry, not from a woman’s neckline. She also explained that she and her sister tie rakhis to each other and extend the same feeling of protection to their dogs because they consider them family.
Her point about personal freedom is straightforward. A woman should be able to decide what she wears in her personal life. Her clothes should not be used to judge her character or her respect for her culture.
That is an important point, and it should not be lost in the controversy.
But this controversy is not only about a woman’s personal choice.
There is a difference between what someone chooses to wear in their personal life and how a cultural or religious festival is presented in a public advertising campaign. One is an individual decision. The other is a tradition that is passed from generation to generation.
This was a commercial campaign created specifically around Raksha Bandhan. Once a brand and a public figure use a religious or cultural festival in an advertisement, the way that festival is presented becomes part of the public conversation.
That is where cultural sensitivity matters.
Raksha Bandhan has been celebrated across generations as a festival centred on the bond between siblings. The rakhi, family gatherings and traditional customs have deep meaning and carry emotional significance for many Hindu families.
For many households, these customs are not something they think about only once a year. They are part of family life and memories. Parents teach children how the festival is observed, and those children often carry the same traditions into their own families, generation to generation.
So when people say they felt hurt or uncomfortable with the advertisement, that feeling should not simply be dismissed as an attempt to control what women wear.
At the same time, the criticism should remain focused on the advertisement and its representation of the festival, rather than becoming a personal attack on Sanon.
There is nothing wrong with giving a festival a modern look. Indian traditions have always evolved, and people celebrate festivals differently today. New generations naturally bring their own ways of celebrating, and that change is part of society.
But modern does not have to mean disconnected from tradition.
A campaign can be contemporary while still understanding the meaning behind the occasion it is using. It can introduce a new idea without making people who follow older traditions feel that their way of celebrating has been ignored.
When a company creates a public campaign around a religious festival, it has a responsibility to understand the history, emotions and customs connected with that occasion and the people who celebrate it.
This applies not only to Raksha Bandhan. The same consideration matters when brands create campaigns around Diwali, Holi, Eid, Christmas or other festivals that carry deep meaning for particular communities.
These festivals are not simply themes that can be picked for an advertising calendar. For millions of people, they are connected with faith, family, childhood memories and traditions that have been followed for generations.
People are free to celebrate their festivals in their own way. Brands and public figures are also free to experiment with new ideas.
But when those ideas are presented to millions of people through a public campaign, there will naturally be a response from the communities whose traditions are being represented.
That response does not always mean that people oppose modernisation. Sometimes, it simply means they want the tradition they recognise to be treated with a certain level of understanding and respect.
The GIVA advertisement has shown why that responsibility matters.
The issue is not whether Kriti Sanon should be allowed to wear a particular outfit.
The question is whether a commercial campaign built around a tradition followed by generations should take enough care to understand what that tradition means to the people who celebrate it.
There is room for personal freedom. There is also room for cultural sensitivity.
One does not have to cancel out the other.
That is a conversation worth having without attacking anyone and without ignoring the feelings of the community either.
