As the Haryana ‘Killer Mom’ case involving Poonam, who is accused of killing four children, shocks the nation, here is why we must not attribute it to vanity and ‘female jealousy’
Our newsfeeds in the past two weeks have been flooded with the shocking details of the recent ‘Killer Mom’ case. Poonam, a Haryana resident, allegedly killed four children — including her own son and three nieces — because she wanted to be, in a bizarre and tragic interpretation of folklore, the ‘most attractive of them all.’ Take a moment to process this horrendous human tragedy. Let the sheer implausibility of it sink in.
While the crime itself is horrific, the media response has been telling. A majority of news coverage has sensationalised the ‘female envy’ angle, attributing blinding jealousy and female vanity as the root cause. Phrases like 'Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned' — from William Congreve's 1697 play The Mourning Bride—are being thrown around recklessly to explain a tragedy that belies a far more complex social phenomenon.
Thirty-two-year-old Poonam has been cast as the modern incarnation of the Evil Queen from Snow White. The Panipat Superintendent of Police, Bhupendar Singh, told the media on record, ‘Jo sundar bachhiye hain unse inko nafrat si hai’ (She harboured hate for beautiful girls), clearly setting the tone for the reportage. If only it were that simple.
Since ancient times, women have been painted as the sole purveyors of jealousy, driven to unspeakable acts fuelled by sheer vanity. From the oeuvre of the Brothers Grimm to ancient mythology, we have ample examples. Cinderella’s stepsisters, who mutilated their own feet to steal a prince, immediately come to mind. Then there is the Greek goddess Aphrodite, who inflicted unbearable anguish on the mortal Psyche simply because men were driven to madness by her beauty. Closer to home, in the Ramayana, Surpanakha was driven by jealousy of Sita’s beauty to attack her, forcing Lakshman to intervene.
The privilege of depth
These examples might seem like throwbacks to a bygone era, or narratives found in history books alone, they unfortunately remain the lens through which we subconsciously view modern tragedies. We seem to believe that vanity is the only engine for female rage. Consequently, violence by women is often reduced to being ‘catty,’ cosmetic, and inherently shallow. Their dark instincts are assumed to be triggered by the mirror alone, not by the mind — ignoring the deep-seated insecurities that plague all humans.
Female psychology is treated as skin-deep, whereas, by contrast, men are granted the complexity of the entire spectrum of the seven sins. It is a gift of patriarchy that keeps on giving: the privilege of depth. Envy is often framed as a woman's domain, but history proves otherwise. In fact, men have been the most destructive practitioners of this emotion. Consider the story of Cain and Abel. Cain didn't care about beauty, yet he committed history's first murder for status and to curry divine favour.
Also read: How Badshah, set to headline London’s O2 Arena, became India’s superstar rapper
Then there is Duryodhana in the Mahabharata, whose burning jealousy of the Pandavas was feulled not by vanity, but by power — by their superior skills, virtuous nature, and legitimate claim to the throne. Even the tragedy of Narcissus is often misunderstood; it was not merely about a pretty face, but a self-obsession so consuming that it alienated him from the world entirely.
When the men of the world showcase these damaging tendencies, history glorifies them. Their envy-driven actions are labelled as ‘ambition’, or simply playing to the rivalry they were born into — a tiny flaw in the grandiose scheme of things. We excuse men with a noble reason; for women, we only hand them a gilded mirror. We rarely pause to ask: Why does Snow White’s stepmother obsess over her looks? Was she born with a genetic defect for vanity? Or was it because, for women, beauty was the only currency of worth available?
Capital management 101
Historically, women could not wage wars for kingdoms like Duryodhana, or vie for divine favour like Cain. Their survival and status depended entirely on being 'chosen' by a man of higher value. Beauty became the primary trading commodity. This is not ancient history; it is the current reality. Matrimonial ads today still proudly solicit 'fair, beautiful, and slim' brides. Fairness creams remain bestsellers, and the beauty and skincare sector is expected to reach a robust $200 billion by 2030.
Also read: How Aranya Sahay’s Humans in the Loop spotlights rural, invisible workers training AI
For centuries, we have perpetuated the myth that beauty is the sole criterion of female worth. Why, then, are we surprised when women protect that asset fiercely? It is, quite simply, capital management 101. Men would be expected to do so, at all costs. We obviously cannot undo centuries of patriarchy in a single stroke, we can change how we talk about it. We must consciously reject the lazy ‘beauty’ narrative. Jealousy is not the only emotion women are capable of feeling, and reducing a crime of this magnitude to petty envy is a disservice.
There is ample evidence that women are capable of the same dark impulses as men — greed, rage, psychosis, and existential despair. They are equally capable of acting on these impulses with the same gruesome intensity as their male counterparts. Let’s give women something to be proud of other than their reflection. Let’s value them for their intelligence, their blinding ambition, their empathy, and their leadership. Only when we expand the definition of female worth can the mirror of envy finally be shattered.
