The part-documentary, part-reality TV show follows the efforts of Sima Taparia of Mumbai as she sets up clients around the world, often with families in tow, into arranged marriages. There's Aparna, who needs her future husband to know Bolivia has salt flats; Vyasar, who carries a secret about his father trying to kill his third wife; and Pradhyuman, who concocts elaborate recipes such as peri-peri foxnuts with liquid nitrogen.

These Indian singles, they're not just like us. But Sima Auntie, as she is known, is in the business of marrying them off anyway, guided by a "biodata" page of likes, dislikes, educational background and a photo.

That's hardly the most offensive part. Despite trending on every social platform and the streaming service all week, the series has been criticized for perpetuating harmful stereotypes, colorism, sexism, elitism, heteronormativity, the caste system and the shallow, transactional nature of Indians looking for a life partner.

I'm ready to wade into the debate. (Hang on, muting my mentions on Twitter...) As someone who has spent her whole life as an Indian, much of her career chronicling the country and its diaspora, and written two books on global Indians, I think the criticism is misplaced.

Sima Auntie is not the problem. We are the problem.

I fear that the art of nuance and subtlety has been lost on critics. They want a deeper discussion of the rampant colorism on display here (the word "fair" to refer to skin tone is used over and over, without second thought.). They want acknowledgment of entrenched and intentional endogamy that maintains Indian power structures, rooted in caste and wealth. They want mothers and mothers-in-law to stop meddling and enforcing impossible-to-meet standards.

But this is us. The critics are not wrong but their target is. That the show was filmed before George Floyd died but released after makes this reality even more poignant. Unilever announced last month that it is removing the word "fair" from its Fair & Lovely line of skin-whitening products. The company now says it chooses to emphasize "glow, even tone, skin clarity and radiance."

As Americans know all too well, corporate policy is one matter; changing the hearts and minds of family and society is much harder. Herein lies the genius of "Indian Matchmaking." Maybe an Oscar-nominated director like Smriti Mundhra knows exactly what she is doing; just look at her narrative pacing, music selection and cutaway moments with adorable, elderly couples. Her decisions are intentional and calculated and intended to effect change. That's the role and power of media. She's not redeeming the cavalier manner in which families perpetuate inequality and outdated thinking. She's exposing it.

The mirror is being held up and it's impossible to look away.

Those who are offended by it often prove "Indian Matchmaking's" point. We mock Aparna for her snobbish, exacting ways as she says not hating someone makes for a successful date. Yet even this criticism is