Critics of Udhayanidhi Stalin argue that his arrest is a necessary step toward holding public figures accountable for the declining standards of political discourse in Tamil Nadu. The incident, where a public rally was used to make lewd, double-meaning remarks involving a woman, is seen as a new low in political conduct. Opponents, including members of the ruling TVK and other political observers, maintain that such language is not only disrespectful to the individual mentioned but also degrades the dignity of the political office he holds.
For those critical of the DMK leader, the argument that his speech was purely political does not excuse the use of misogynistic innuendo. They contend that leaders have a responsibility to maintain a level of decorum, regardless of the intensity of their political opposition. By failing to do so, Udhayanidhi has provided a clear example of the arrogance and lack of respect that critics claim has become characteristic of his party's leadership. The public outrage following the event reflects a broader societal demand for more respectful and issue-based political engagement.
Furthermore, critics emphasize that the legal complaint filed by the TVK women's wing is a legitimate response to behavior that violates social and legal norms regarding the treatment of women. They argue that the law must apply equally to everyone, including high-ranking politicians, and that the police were right to investigate the complaint. By framing the arrest as a political vendetta, the DMK is accused of avoiding responsibility for its leader's actions. For these critics, the incident serves as a reminder that political power does not grant immunity from the consequences of offensive and derogatory speech.