Mimi Chakraborty on Ranveer Singh’s nude photoshoot: ‘If this have been a girl?'
[ad_1]
Bengali actor and politician Mimi Chakraborty took to Twitter and shared her ideas on Ranveer Singh baring all of it in his latest photoshoot for a magazine. She reacted to the reception the actor's daring images garnered on social media, and questioned whether or not a girl posing in related footage would get the identical response. (Additionally learn: Ranveer Singh ‘breaks the web’ as he goes absolutely bare)
Mimi tweeted on Friday, “Web broke with Ranveer Singh's newest photoshoot and feedback have been (fireplace emojis) largely. Simply questioning if the appreciation would have been identical if this have been a girl. Or would you could have burned her home down, taken up morchas, given her a dying risk and slut shamed her.”
“We discuss equality, the place is that now??!!!! You realize proper, it is your perspective that may change one thing or destroy it completely. In his case let's broaden our perspective as a result of that physique comes with numerous sacrifice, belief me (no salt, no sugar, no carbs),” Mimi stated in a tweet. Responding to her tweet, an individual commented, “You possibly can break the glass ceiling.” One other one tweeted, “I get your level nevertheless it’s hypothetical… We had related photoshoots with Milind Soman and Madhu Sapre previously... There have been some sparks however largely individuals have been cool about it.”
In some images for Paper Journal's cowl shoot, Ranveer posed sporting nothing. In his interview within the journal, Ranveer opened up about his movies, his sartorial decisions and in addition his familiarity with nakedness basically. “It’s really easy for me to be bodily bare, however in a few of my performances, I’ve been rattling f**ing bare. You possibly can see my f**ing soul. How bare is that? That’s being really bare. I might be bare in entrance of a thousand individuals, I don’t give a s**t. It’s simply that they get uncomfortable,” he stated.
Trending Subjects to Comply with
[ad_2]
0 comments