A public dispute has emerged between singer Sunitha Upadrasta and singer Chinmayi Sripaada following comments made by Upadrasta regarding the nature of feminist struggle and bodily autonomy.

在 Upadrasta 就女性主義鬥爭性質與身體自主權發表言論後，歌手 Sunitha Upadrasta 與歌手 Chinmayi Sripaada 之間爆發了一場公開爭論。

The controversy commenced following an interview with Gulte, wherein Sunitha Upadrasta posited that contemporary interpretations of feminism have been erroneously reduced to behavioral choices, such as smoking or attire. Upadrasta asserted that true equality resides in the valuation of a woman's opinions rather than in external liberties. Specifically, in response to the slogan 'my body, my right,' Upadrasta suggested that if such a premise is accepted, a corresponding 'his eyes, his right' logic applies, arguing that it is more pragmatic for women to adhere to cultural norms for safety than to attempt to alter male perception.

這場爭議始於一次與 Gulte 的訪談，Sunitha Upadrasta 在訪談中認為，現代對女性主義的詮釋被錯誤地簡化為行為選擇，例如抽菸或穿著。Upadrasta 主張真正的平等在於重視女性的觀點，而非外部的自由。特別是在回應「我的身體，我的權利」這句口號時，Upadrasta 建議如果接受此前提，則會適用對應的「他的眼睛，他的權利」邏輯，認為女性為了安全而遵守文化規範，比嘗試改變男性的看法更為務實。

This perspective elicited significant criticism from social media users and singer Chinmayi Sripaada. Sripaada contended that Upadrasta's rhetoric facilitates the subjugation of women and undermines the fundamental objective of bodily autonomy, which encompasses reproductive rights and protection from systemic violence. To illustrate the potential danger of Upadrasta's logic, Sripaada highlighted instances of extreme violence and reported a social media user who utilized a similar linguistic structure to threaten a woman with acid, thereby requesting police intervention.

這一觀點引起了社交媒體用戶與歌手 Chinmayi Sripaada 的強烈批評。Sripaada 主張 Upadrasta 的言論助長了對女性的壓制，並削弱了身體自主權這一基本目標，而身體自主權涵蓋了生育權及免受系統性暴力的保護。為了說明 Upadrasta 邏輯中潛在的危險，Sripaada 舉出極端暴力的實例，並舉報了一名使用類似語言結構以硫酸恐嚇女性的社交媒體用戶，請求警方介入。

In subsequent communications via Instagram, Upadrasta attempted a rapprochement by clarifying her position. She stated that her initial remarks were born of frustration regarding the behavior of 'lecherous men' and were not intended to normalize exploitation. While she maintained her respect for Sripaada's activism, Upadrasta clarified that she does not condone physical aggression or the violation of women's autonomy, asserting that she would personally oppose any physical assault against women.

在隨後透過 Instagram 的溝通中，Upadrasta 嘗試澄清立場以達成和解。她表示，最初的言論是出於對「好色男人」行為的挫折感，而非意圖將剝削正常化。雖然她維持對 Sripaada 社會行動主義的尊重，但 Upadrasta 澄清她並不認同肢體攻擊或侵犯女性自主權，並強調她個人會反對任何對女性的肢體暴力。

The situation remains a point of contention regarding the intersection of cultural tradition and the conceptual framework of feminist autonomy.

目前的局面仍是一個爭論焦點，涉及文化傳統與女性主義自主概念框架之間的交集。