In the wake of rising controversy around the ULLU reality show House Arrest, Muskaan Agarwal, who was a prominent participant in the show, has broken her silence. Known for its bold content, House Arrest drew criticism from sections of the public. However, Muskaan has come forward to assert that the outrage is misplaced and unfair.

Muskaan says, “Nothing unethical has been shown. Everyone knows ULLU is an 18+ app. The content displayed was well within that category. No body part was exposed, and participants, including myself, were clearly instructed to wear skin-coloured garments, tube bras where cleavage isn’t visible, skin coloured cycling shorts, silicone covers. Every contestant was informed and aware.”

On whether she felt the app’s decision to remove the show was justified, the actress was unequivocal, “I am not happy about the decision to remove it. The show was behind a paywall—people had to subscribe to watch it. It wasn’t free content floating around. Plus, everyone knows that it’s for an 18+ audience. If the show had been freely accessible, then maybe the concerns would be different. But in this case, it’s unwarranted. People are targeting this show while ignoring much more explicit content on other platforms.”

Muskaan didn’t hold back when drawing comparisons with other public figures and the content allowed in mainstream media, “If boldness is the issue, then what about actresses who wear revealing clothes at airports and call the paps for attention? Why is their public attire not questioned? Just because someone paid to get spotted, does that make it acceptable?”

When asked if she had personally faced judgment or criticism for her participation, Muskaan acknowledged the societal double standards. “There is judgment, of course. But why is boldness only an issue when it’s not glamorized? Actresses wear bikinis in movies, we’ve seen bold scenes in shows across major OTT platforms. When Tripti Dimri did intimate scenes in Animal, no one had a problem. Then why target a reality show that’s transparently 18+?”

Drawing attention to the consensual nature of the show’s format, she added, “Every contestant was told beforehand that the tasks might be bold. No one was forced. It was always a choice. Everyone wanted to win and chose to participate. Safety measures were followed. This wasn’t exploitation—it was reality television with guidelines in place.”

On the larger question of where to draw the line in such content, Muskaan believes intent and consent matter more than moral policing. “If the content is created responsibly, with adult consent, and on a platform that clearly defines its age restrictions—then what’s the problem? There are far worse things floating on social media for free. Even in real life, during games like truth or dare, people take up bold challenges. Where is the outrage then?”