Kajol has never been one to shy away from unconventional opinions, and her latest remark on 'Two Much With Kajol and Twinkle' has certainly stirred the pot. In an episode featuring Vicky Kaushal and Kriti Sanon, the actress suggested that marriages should come with an expiry date, followed by an option for renewal. Her statement instantly set social media buzzing, with many wondering: Is Kajol onto something radical and practical, or is the idea simply too wild for real life?
While the guests, Vicky Kaushal and Kriti Sanon and host Twinkle Khanna disagreed, Kajol stood firm on her reasoning. According to her, no one can be sure that they marry the right person at the right time. People evolve, personalities shift, and relationships change. An expiry date, she argued, could offer a structured checkpoint where both partners can decide whether they want to continue or walk away without prolonged suffering.
Kajol’s point essentially reframes marriage as a renewable contract not entirely permanent, but still meaningful. In her eyes, the renewal process could encourage couples to reflect, re-evaluate, and actively choose each other again rather than staying together out of societal pressure or habit.
Twinkle Khanna responded in her signature humour, quipping, “No, it’s marriage, not a washing machine.” The line instantly became the internet’s favourite reaction.
Her perspective echoed by Kriti and Vicky was simple: marriage is built on intention, not expiration dates. It’s meant to be a long-term commitment where problems are resolved through conversation, counselling, and mutual effort not through automatic resets. The guests seemed to believe that turning marriage into a time-bound contract could dilute its emotional depth and seriousness.
This is where the debate gets interesting. Kajol’s supporters argue that an expiry date could reduce stigma around separation, encourage healthier relationship choices, and help people avoid dragging dead marriages for years. It introduces a sense of agency- a “check-in point” — that many couples never consciously make time for.
However, critics counter that modern marriage already has built-in mechanisms for exit. If a relationship turns bitter, couples don’t wait for a deadline. They separate, file for divorce, or begin living independently. The legal system already allows people to walk away when things stop working.
So the real question becomes: Would a marriage renewal system offer any significant improvement over divorce, or would it only complicate relationships further?
Kajol’s idea aligns with the way many young people view modern relationships, flexible, evolving, and centred around personal growth. But it also challenges a deeply rooted cultural belief: that marriage is permanent unless irreparably broken.
While the concept of “renewable marriage contracts” is intriguing, it may also oversimplify the emotional, legal and practical complexities of real relationships.
Should marriage be treated like a time-bound agreement that gets renewed every few years? Or is the traditional idea; one commitment, built on intention, effort, and communication, still the better choice?
