New Delhi: The social media takedown of Dalit writer Yashica Dutt happened swiftly, brutally, and unexpectedly.
She was discussed, deconstructed, dismissed. Different social groups lined up to take their shot. And it all happened over a TV show.
Dutt was working at her desk in her New York City apartment one August afternoon when she received a message from a college classmate: had she watched the Amazon Prime web series Made in Heaven yet? Because there’s a character on the show that might be loosely based on her.
Dutt put her work on hold, opened up Amazon Prime US on her laptop, and watched the second season’s fifth episode titled ‘The Heart Skipped a Beat’. There was brief confusion over what the episode could be about, as Tiger Baby Productions’ Made in Heaven is a show about wedding planners and Dutt herself is unmarried. But as she watched, it became clear to her.
“Why does this specific story — of a Bhangi woman who went to Columbia and has written a book — exist? Because I exist,” said Dutt. “This is a very singular situation, because my journey is singular, and I made it in the public eye. And I’m still paying dearly for it.”
The conversation, though largely restricted to the internet, is having a real time impact on Dutt’s life. Over the past month, Dutt has been subjected to relentless hate and negativity on social media, and is now “tired” of having to fight her corner. Every aspect of her identity — from her Dalitness to her queerness — has been peeled bare in the public eye. The last month has been a daze for her, spent fighting the urge to check her phone or scroll through posts on X (formerly Twitter) and channeling her frustration into her work.
The controversy is one big intersectional khichdi: identities fighting to take precedence, desi Dalits vs NRI Dalits, queer academics vs heterosexual academics. It also speaks to the online power of the Dalit community and the deep impact that activists have on shaping discourse and shining light on problems usually ignored by the savarna gaze. But in the middle of it all is the central question: what is the right way to tell a story, and who gets to tell it?
It’s now Dutt vs Made in Heaven team vs another Dalit academic who claims they first used the term “coming out” as a Dalit. Dutt might have flagged off the “cancel train”, but it circled back to run her over in its tracks. And she was hung out to dry by influential arbiters of public opinion — from film industry personalities to Dalit activists.
“My hope was to put out a statement and arrive at a solution that works for everybody,” said Dutt. “But that was on 14th August. Many things have happened since then. I’ve been subjected to an unprecedented hate campaign by people proclaiming to be anti-caste themselves.”
Also read: Why can’t Dalits just shut up and suffer in silence like they have for thousands of years?
He said, she said
Dutt is no stranger to online hate. Nor is she a stranger to her work inspiring fictional retellings.
But when she asked to be credited for her ideas on Made in Heaven, she wasn’t prepared for the circular firing squad that followed. She was called a fraud and a liar, and her accusations against the director, Neeraj Ghaywan, were turned against her too. She herself had stolen another person’s life work, they alleged.
What hurt Dutt the most was that the people who were meant to be on her side didn’t object to the denigration of her character by hugely influential savarna voices like Anurag Kashyap, who called her an opportunist in multiple interviews. The social media fallout shows the totem pole of caste, calling into question the idea of Dalit solidarity across the board.
Dutt says she happened to have a session with her therapist on the day she watched the episode. She narrated her conflicting feelings, and was asked the all-important question: how does this make you feel?
“It made me feel invisible,” she remembers responding.
Dutt’s identity is the cornerstone of this controversy. She is a Bhangi—one of the lowest Dalit castes called Valmiki—who spent years hiding her caste identity, second-guessing everything she did to pass as a dominant caste. She worked as a journalist in Delhi, before moving to the United States to study at Columbia University.
Her book, Coming Out as Dalit: A Memoir, chronicles her journey, including the ways in which her caste identity haunted her. Dutt says she spent years unlearning the shame behind her caste—which is why her book, published by Aleph, struck a chord with people when it came out in 2019. Her reclamation of her identity in the public eye mattered to others who shared her experience.
So, when audiences watched the character Pallavi Menke onscreen, many identified it as Dutt’s story. The show came out on 10 August, and Dutt was tagged over and over on social media while people raved over the episode, directed by Ghaywan, a Dalit director known for films like Masaan and shows like Sacred Games.
The episode’s Dalit character Menke—played by Radhika Apte—is eerily similar to Dutt herself: a Dalit academic who has risen through the ranks to claim her space in an Ivy League institution and written a book on her life.
The character’s storyline is fictional, but parts of it are rooted in reality. Menke talks about the challenge of “coming out” as a Dalit, and revealing her caste identity publicly. This is where the line between fiction and non-fiction becomes blurry: Dutt’s most well-known work is her 2019 book, Coming Out as Dalit.
She asked the Made in Heaven production team to formally credit her popularisation of the term. They denied her request. And thus ensued a mudslinging match.
Since then, Dutt has had to relentlessly explain herself, again and again. She has faced misogynist abuse denigrating her work, with targeted campaigns on X keeping her embroiled in late night and early morning conversations taking place in a different time zone in India.
Over the last month, she’s found herself waking up to an explosion of messages or posts on X — a mix of posts attacking her and loved ones asking her if she’s remembered to eat or rest. Even though she tries not to look at her phone first thing in the morning to protect her mental health, she can’t look away: “It’s very hard to not be constantly engaged in this. I’m online, our lives are online,” she said.
Dutt is currently working on a revised version of Coming Out as a Dalit, and as a writer who doesn’t work a 9-5 job, has the luxury to structure her day. But the last month has been difficult, all her days blurring together into one long ordeal. Friends and loved ones have corralled around her, with several statements released in her support.
And while she is grateful for the solid support system, she just wants the credit that is owed to her.
“I want people to remember this as an episode on how caste operates in our communities. Whether in India or the US, I want people to remember that a Dalit woman — no matter her accomplishments, or her global recognition — can be treated this way when she asks for what’s rightfully hers.”
Also read: Made in Heaven appropriated queer ‘coming out’ and so did Yashica Dutt, writes Sumit Baudh
The question of formal acknowledgement
There’s a universality in the experience of hiding one’s caste, but Dutt’s journey is singular—the narrative she says she is fighting to defend.
Dutt faced criticism after her book’s release, whether it was during her appearance at the Jaipur Literature Festival in 2020 or when she received the Sahitya Akademi Yuva Puraskar the same year. She also received accolades, even from within the film industry that now appears to be turning its back on her. Actor Konkana Sen Sharma openly praised her work, stating that she read Dutt’s book to prepare for her role in Ajeeb Dastan’s Geeli Pucchi (also directed by Ghaywan and produced by Netflix and Karan Johar), for which Sharma won Best Actress at both the Filmfare Awards and Asian Academy Creative Awards. It signalled a change in on-screen portrayals of Dalit lives.
However, things were different with Made in Heaven. Dutt finds inspiration in the fact that her story has made it to mainstream entertainment—a victory for the larger community struggle. It’s a moment she should celebrate, but it has come at a personal cost that she cannot ignore.
Ghaywan acknowledged Dutt’s work on Instagram a few days after the show’s release, saying, “Thanks to Yashica Dutt and her book (Coming Out as Dalit) which made the term “coming out” become part of the popular cultural lexicon for owning one’s Dalit identity. This inspired Pallavi’s interview section in the episode.”
But where was this acknowledgement on screen?
So, on August 14, after Ghaywan’s post, she turned to social media. “I immensely appreciate Neeraj Ghaywan’s public Instagram where he acknowledges my work and contribution to the show,” she wrote. “Now, when [we] are showing more Dalits on screen, let’s also duly acknowledge those of us who contributed to creating those ideas.”
She says she intended to start a conversation with love and goodwill, but the statement released in response did the opposite. It triggered an avalanche of hate, along with a direct denial that her story inspired the creators. Tiger Baby Productions’ statement echoed Ghaywan’s acknowledgement of her book but denied the claim that her work had been appropriated by them. Instead, they referenced Sumit Baudh, a queer Dalit academic who described their experience with coming out as a Dalit in a 2007 academic paper.
“This is a very complicated issue that’s been grey since day one,” said anti-caste writer and podcaster Anurag Minus Verma, adding that such moral debates on social media usually turn ugly, opening up several other dimensions.
“The sphere of cinema and activism have different vocabularies, so when they’re in conflict, these kinds of issues come out,” Anurag said. “Among many other apparent issues, this particular incident also tells us about capitalism and the ways in which it incorporates social justice themes so that a group of people can profit off of it. In this case, people from marginalised castes are pitted against each other whereas the production houses which profit from it face no accountability.”
Also read: ‘Made in Heaven’ made India curious about Buddhist weddings—This is how they happen
The novelty of Made in Heaven
The bitter fight for credit has inadvertently overshadowed the episode’s originality.
Made in Heaven boldly addresses subjects that many other filmmakers wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. When the first season premiered in 2019, it was the only show that addressed homosexuality in urban India and the challenges faced by queer people in a country without marriage equality. The show achieved remarkable success, even earning an Emmy nomination. It marked a breakthrough for the Indian entertainment industry, demonstrating that it could combine commercial success with thoughtful social commentary and still gain international recognition.
When the second season was announced, audiences eagerly anticipated what new social themes the show would explore. It didn’t disappoint. Each episode is a commentary on a different social issue, sometimes addressing multiple themes simultaneously. The season delves into polygamy, colourism, single parenthood, and commitment ceremonies for queer people — all through the lens of the weddings planned by its central characters.
The Ghaywan-directed fifth episode marks a significant milestone as it is perhaps the first time that a Dalit Buddhist wedding was depicted on screen, offering an intimate examination of power dynamics within India’s urban elite and how these dynamics shift when caste becomes part of the conversation — from Menke’s brother upbraiding her for embarrassing the family by wanting to display their caste identity to the change in attitudes of socially liberal and progressive people when caste is involved because log kya kahenge.
This isn’t lost on Yashica Dutt.
“I would still urge people to go watch this because it’s so valuable for the Dalit people — and it’s clear that Neeraj understands the value of this episode. When he says ‘Pallavi Menke is me,’ I can’t deny that,” said Dutt. “The nuances this episode captures is possible only through the sensitivity of someone who has lived through this experience. Capturing this emotion at this level is only possible because of Neeraj’s own life and research.”
The episode draws from Ghaywan’s own experiences: he “came out” as Dalit in a public interview, and has talked about the shame he felt when he disclosed his caste to his domestic worker and driver. He ended up exposing some of his relatives who hadn’t publicly acknowledged their caste. Ghaywan has even used caste-neutral surnames like Kumar in the past. Additionally, his sisters had Buddhist weddings — which lent itself to the episode.
“Pallavi Menke is a sum of all those who came before me and those who live in this time, grappling with their caste expression,” Ghaywan explained in an interview conducted two weeks after the show’s release. He emphasised that the character is not one person’s story to claim.
However, Dutt’s bone of contention lies in how much the character of Pallavi Menke is based on her. The labour of cleaning toilets and human waste is restricted to the Valmiki caste and its subcastes. So, when Menke talks about the generational humiliation and shame tied to such labour, she is not echoing the experiences of all Dalits.
“When the dominant caste makers of the show came together to craft a response to my demand, they didn’t think about what it means to discredit a Dalit woman’s work. This should have been handled better by people in power,” Dutt pointed out. She emphasised that she is not just a Dalit woman but a Valmiki woman.
“At this point for me, it’s beyond the theft of labour. It’s [about] the denigration of a Dalit female author’s work and the hate campaign I’ve faced and the damage it’s done to my mental health over the past one month,” Dutt added. “Their reaction and response created this negative reaction around this episode. Not my demand [for credit].”
The question of rights
The response from the Made in Heaven team did not sit well with Dutt.
Besides denying any inspiration from her for their character, the team pointed to another Dalit writer who had linked the term “coming out” to revealing their caste identity back in 2007.
The issue wasn’t about who came out first but whose story inspired the character.
Sumit Baudh was their red herring, according to Dutt, entering the conversation after the controversy emerged. They alleged that Dutt had not acknowledged Baudh’s article in her memoir, accusing her of appropriating their work as a queer Dalit academic.
The origins of the term “coming out” within the caste context were quickly excavated by anti-caste activists. The earliest usage was in Dalit writer Baburao Bagul’s 1963 short story, “When I Hid My Caste.” Baudh then wrote an academic paper in Tarshi in 2007. In 2019, Dutt’s biography was published.
“The parallels [between our works] start and end mostly at the title of Ms. Yashica Dutt’s memoir. Yet, the parallel is significant because of its prominent placement—in the title of the memoir. Meanwhile, in my essay of 2007, the idea of coming out as Dalit precedes and serves as an analogy to coming out as queer. It’s a starting premise, a foundational first-step into the complex intersections of caste, gender and sexuality. Coming out as Dalit is integral to and inseparable from my essay,” Baudh wrote in a recent statement.
“Reading this piece was relatable,” said Baudh over a phone call after this article was published. “I was also outed all over again by what happened after the Made in Heaven team when they issued their classificatory note.” Baudh added that while it may seem the sudden attention from Made in Heaven benefitted them, that’s not really the case. The issue is still important to them, but they’ve learned to talk about it differently today.
Dutt was criticised for not being aware of Baudh’s work and not accurately crediting it, even though this particular work was not well-cited in the mainstream. She was subjected to incessant trolling and hate, discrediting the work she has dedicated her life to. While she is fortunate to have a supportive community, many of her supporters have also been intimidated into silence.
Jyotsna Siddharth, a queer Dalit actor and artist, finds it “hypocritical” for Yashica to demand credit when she did not duly credit Baudh in her book. Jyotsna is intimately familiar with this battle: she founded Project Anti Caste Love, an Instagram page celebrating inter-caste, inter-faith, and queer love, and facilitating essential conversations on caste in intimate spaces, has accused India Love Project — run by journalists and writers Priya Ramani, Samar Halankar, and Niloufer Venkatraman that came up in 2020 — of plagiarising her work, which stems from her own academic work at the sociology department at Delhi School of Economics.
“As a country, we don’t have a creative commons and don’t understand intellectual proprietorship. A lot of upper-class or upper-caste people have taken our work from us right in front of our eyes,” said Jyotsna.
In this tug-of-war between Dutt and Made in Heaven, Jyotsna stands on Ghaywan’s side.
“As an actor, I understand the film landscape and how hard Neeraj has struggled to create a space for himself in an industry still learning about caste,” she said. “I stand in solidarity with Dalit women. I do not want to have to choose between Neeraj and Yashica, but if I have to, I’ll support what’s true.”
The conversation seems to have stopped after Dutt came out as queer, as she faced attacks for allegedly appropriating Baudh’s work as a heterosexual woman. When Chandrashekhar Azad publicly supported her, the chatter reduced significantly. Prakash Ambedkar, too, extended his support. Over 400 academics from around the world have signed a statement in support of her and her demands.
“In Yashica’s case, there’s been a lot of Twitter exchanges,” said Jyotsna, who Dutt accused of outing her. “Last month, she came out as queer to a person who accused her of appropriating LGBTQIA language and then shared with Dr Sumit Baudh that she is queer but does not want to come out. I was falsely accused of forcing her to come out when I didn’t even know she was queer. I’m an openly queer Dalit woman, and I do understand the dangers of this.
“If her public positioning is as a straight woman, I cannot assume she’s queer,” added Jyotsna.
The geopolitics of this situation
The book received both critical acclaim and commercial success in India, but Yashica Dutt is still striving to establish her niche in the US, where she lives and works. It took her three years to find a publisher, which only happened in January 2023.
The politics surrounding this issue is closely intertwined with its geographics. In the current climate, the US is becoming increasingly aware of caste-related issues as the Indian American population gains more social capital and visibility. The state of California, home to the largest Indian-American community, is on the verge of becoming the first American state to ban caste discrimination. While caste is occasionally viewed through the lens of racial politics, it has found its place in the national media.
It is in this sphere that Dutt is determined to defend her work. Made in Heaven is streaming on a global platform. While an Indian audience may recognise her onscreen because they are familiar with her work, Dutt seeks global recognition and wants the audience outside India to see her when they watch the Made in Heaven character.
“It would be extremely difficult to get away with this in the West, especially if they had a conversation with Yashica,” said S. Anand, who runs the anti-caste publishing house Navayana and endorsed the petition supporting Dutt. “Copyright is an inviolable right of the author, which can be licensed and leased,” he added, explaining that in the West, an agent would usually handle such matters under a standard operating protocol.
On 6 September, Suraj Yengde, another Dalit academic based in the US who has received critical and commercial acclaim, walked the red carpet at the Venice International Film Festival alongside Ava DuVernay for her latest film, Origin. He has been acknowledged for providing editorial input, even reportedly portraying himself in the film. It’s a story with a very different ending.
Moreover, Bollywood and Indian film and television have a history of appropriating and plagiarising works, including songs and screenplays. It’s only recently that Dalit narratives have started to appear on screen, and Dalit filmmakers and actors are gaining the space to tell their stories. While directors like Pa. Ranjith and Mari Selvaraj in Tamil cinema are known for portraying Dalit stories, Neeraj Ghaywan stands out in Bollywood. In the past decade, films like Article 15 and Masaan, along with television shows like Dahaad have featured Dalit characters.
“The wise and honourable thing to do would have been to pay Yashica for consulting her. If they could pay consultants for other shows like Dahaad, why didn’t they do that for Yashica?” asked Anand. “If they were able to do this to Yashica Dutt, imagine what they could do to any other non-English language Dalit author.”
The person vs the story
Like a high-stakes game of intersectional poker, each faction gradually escalated their demands.
Everyone thought they were doing the right thing. But what initially began as an invitation for change and awareness morphed into a competitive race for credit.
Unfortunately, Yashica Dutt was caught in the crossfire. It’s a confusing, cacophonous battle that has left many unsure of their sentiments. It also mirrors the liberal dilemma concerning identity politics and the challenge of choosing sides when multiple claimants assert oppression due to their identity.
“I don’t want this to become another debate of who is right and isn’t,” Jyotsna wrote on Instagram on September 9. “None of us can own the narrative of billions of Dalits around the world. We are the narrative.”
The statement signed by over 400 anti-caste, feminist allies and Dalit academics unequivocally demands compensation for Dutt, as well as formal credit. “In our view, Dutt is the victim of an ongoing caste atrocity, a virtual lynching unfolding in public view. We condemn the actions of the Made in Heaven producers and directors, and those participating in the hate campaign against Dutt. Her contribution to Dalit Literature through her book and by coining the phrase “Coming Out as Dalit” is irrefutable, as is her likeness to the character in the show,” the statement reads.
The irony lies in the Made in Heaven episode that started this fire. “The personal is political,” says Apte’s character, Pallavi Menke, with tears in her eyes. “The personal is political.”
“The story was good enough, but not the person?” asks Dutt. “Representation on screen can’t move on and leave Dalit people behind.”
This article was updated to include Dr. Sumit Baudh’s comments.
(Edited by Prashant)