Sweta Keswani has defended Shahana Goswami following criticism of her comments about open relationships, saying women should not face personal attacks for speaking honestly about their choices.
In a conversation with Siddharth Kannan, Keswani questioned why people were so invested in judging someone else’s relationships. Her support centred on the freedom of the adults involved to make their own decisions when those decisions are understood and accepted by their partners.
“More power to her,” says Sweta Keswani
Keswani acknowledged that relationships can be emotionally demanding and expressed support for Goswami living in a way that suits her.
“If she enjoys it and wants to continue, more power to her,” she said.
She also challenged the attention directed at Goswami’s private life, suggesting that observers should focus on their own lives rather than scrutinising arrangements that do not involve them.
Keswani questions unequal treatment of women
A central part of Keswani’s argument concerned what she sees as a gender double standard.
She said women who discuss their sexuality and relationships openly can face criticism and name-calling, while men may receive less scrutiny for comparable behaviour. That assessment reflects Keswani’s opinion, rather than an established finding about every public response.
She argued that where the people involved accept their arrangement, outsiders should not dictate how they live.
What Shahana Goswami had actually shared
In an earlier interview with Kannan, reported in May 2026, Goswami described having several long-standing connections without identifying one person as a primary partner.
She stressed that those relationships were meaningful to her, rather than casual. Her explanation placed friendship, emotional connection and honest communication at the centre of how she understood them.
Goswami also said the people involved knew about her other relationships. These were her descriptions of her circumstances at the time of that interview; they should not be treated as a fresh update on her personal life.
Keeping consensual arrangements distinct from secrecy
Although Keswani also referred to public reactions to extramarital affairs, that comparison should not blur an important distinction.
An openly discussed arrangement between informed partners is different from a relationship that breaches an agreement or involves deception. Goswami’s account emphasised transparency, and the coverage cited here does not establish wrongdoing.
Her public comments also do not justify speculation about the identities or private lives of the people involved.
A discussion about autonomy and public judgement
Keswani’s response shifts the emphasis from the number of relationships someone has to how the people involved understand them.
Her position was that Goswami should be able to describe her own life without becoming the target of personal abuse. Readers may hold different views about relationships while still distinguishing disagreement from harassment and unverified assumptions.
