Monday, January 02, 2006

Protest Against Protest

Do we have a right to protest?
And do we have a right to protest against the protest?
And may be also the right to further continue the series of protests...

May be this is confusing. Let me try to make it more clear.

An indian actress expressed her views about how the society is, how it should be. (Nothing about whether her views are right or wrong. It is about how far the right to express can go or should go.)

Her views not in tune with views of lots of people (hereafter this is 1st group) sparked protest against her as well as defamation charges. Then few more (2nd group) started protesting against the protest (aginst 1st group) saying that each has right to express so 1st group shouldnt protest against the actress. But doesnt that right to express exists for 1st group of people?They felt hurt and insulted so dont they have right to express their hurt, insult, etc? If not in views of 2nd group (thats why they started their protest) then how the actress got the right to express her views and 2nd group themselves expressed conern over protest by 1st group against actress?

We all are free to express likes and dislikes. But shouldnt there be some restrictions?If u have got the right to express opinions about others, about society, havent society got the same right about u? To express its opinions about u?

Nobody likes to have restrictions on behaviour or thinking. But is it not that often we ourselves speak of restrictions on others, on one section of society or other? But when it comes back to us we speak of individual liberty.It is easy to blame society (or a particular section) or express views about it becoz it is not directed, it is just thrown at. But doesnt it hurts some? (It does... but who cares?) It this is the case then why one should complain if society or a section seeks justice since u hurt it?After all it is hurt that counts... pain and sufferings versus peace and happiness.

I expect society to be like one way or the other. And same way society also expects me to be the way it likes becoz society is people like me who expects others to behave in some particualr manner. Then why should I be complaining if society complains against my behaviour since I also complain about behaviour of society. Am I not having double standards????.....

Sorry for such post at the beginning of year.
Wishing you and all ur near and dear ones a happy and prosperous year ahead.
And dont forget to drop in ur commnets. Thanks.

32 comments:

Tarun said...

Happy new year saoumya. Isn't this first group is same who created temple for same actress couple years back.

Rohit Talwar said...

Happy new year!!

"But when it comes back to us we speak of individual liberty."

How true!

Soumyadip said...

A Very Happy New Year to You!!

Was contemplating whether I should write a post protesting your post? ;)

Known Stranger said...

i believe you are talking about Mrs kushboo sundar's veiws on the cover story published in a leading magz.

hmm i could relate myself in acceptance with your post.

My only regret was - why have the 1st group didnt take up against the magazine ? was it because they wanted to fight against a woman to prove their strength. was it not politised.?

soumya said...

Third Eye: thanks... ya, i think it is the same...

Rohit Talwar: thanks...

Soumyadip: wow yar... i wud love that... plz go ahead... thanks in advance for ur post... :-)

Known Stranger: may be u r right... but my concern was for seeking justice against hurt... whether right to express makes us irresponsible...
thanks for ur comments...

RandomThoughts said...

U know what Soumya?
That somebody who was raised to the level of being worshipped could speak of an action as a natural action is her way of giving her approval & this they couldn't stomach & so the protest by the first group.
But what she said was perfect sense in view of the currrent happenings & so she was not out of context. So where was she wrong, is the arguement of the second group.

Both fully justified, one because their icon spoke of something which was indirectly giving her approval & the second group was aware that she spoke something that was rampant & so used her position to advise.

Now who do we criticise?

Rashmi.

Slice Of Life said...

EVERYTHING IN OUR COUNTRY HAS A POLITICAL ANGLE....THAT IS WHY WE HAVE GROUP 2.
NOW ABT PROTESTING ABT PROTEST ....THIS IS A DEMOCARCY....TOO MUCH OF IT LEADS TO CONFUSION
UMA

Gangadhar said...

Nice title for the post,Soumya..
"If this is the case then why one should complain if society or a section seeks justice since u hurt it?After all it is hurt that counts... pain and sufferings versus peace and happiness."...
Well said..
Btw happy new year to you!!

soumya said...

RandomThoughts: u r totally correct...i fully appreciate ur views but 2nd grp also said that 1st grp shudnt protest... this is where they seem baseless to me...

chennai pages: well said...
but where to draw the line to prevent too much puzzles me...

Gangadhar: thanks... :-)

claytonia vices said...

It's kinda late, but I still want to: wish you a happy new year! :-)

Akruti said...

How far can freedom of speech can go if we have any?
the icon if speaks of Polio vaccination or some coffee beans adv or a movie where she can wear skimpy clothes and dance no would oppose,But when plain without anyfrills attached lady of a certain stature gives her opinion there emerges a protest from her so called admirers? Why? the adulation she gets is fro her makeup and acting and nothing for being a women of substance? {If she is,i am no one to decide}
its so strange that we are driven by such a democratic movement in this country where everyone voices opinions on others words of wisdom but forgets that there are duties also to fulfill.
Court cases swappe,dharna staged,and what not? for what did they achieve? and by the way the lady had her last laugh becuase now after somuch of controversy everyone are thinking of what she said and how it should have been taken.
Hope this happens in many issues and i hope they dont get buried under such protests.
and i am not for or against of what she said,but only that opinions matter and that she had one and had every right to say it out.
"happy new year to you"

soumya said...

claytonia vices: thanks... :-)
same to u...

akruti: thanks for the comments... u said it all...
thanks for the wishes...

Known Stranger said...

i looked it in this aspect. - with out biasing and with no strings attached.

" one lady expressed her views"
another group oppossed it - they have their right to oppose when she has the right to express her views.

she could fight that or keep quite.

there need no sympathy in this case. or i dont find sympathy

( i am not discussing on the subject of what she expressed and why the other people opposses it) i am looking it in an aspect of freedom of speech when the issue of freedom of expression is raised.

as a democratic country some body - condemning her veiws - she has all thre rights to counter suit their stating why should not she say what she feels. - if superme court states that one should not say what she wants - let her challange the court with the constituency on the freedom of speech.

In fact i am not going to sympathys as well as wont say - the protestor should not protest.

let them protest and every one has the right to protest the protestor and it is their right and will.

what do you say ?

ramu said...

my views - quite sometime b4 during a serious talk show conducted by cho 1 college student got up a raised a q which stunned everybody 'how can anybody say rajnikant has black money when its a well known fact that he earned thru acting in films'. shows still many innocent ppl exist without knowing whats black money. the ppl in villages who had been watchin the show on tv might have seriously taken all that into ac cause when its frm media village ppl think its frm reliable source. they do not know ne industry in our country is corrupted in the struggle for survival due to our stupid free market policies which encourages competition. this being the case where we do not know who has half baked knowledge and who has full knowledge i w'd say we sh'd only protest against the laws which permits media to interview irrelevant stuff to nebody and everybody. only the ppl who have done research on that area sh'd be permitted to express views. but i will never agree with political organizations staging protests in front of the house for a reply which they feel is wrong. lets imagine a journalist frm 'the hindu' is asking me 'u consider gandhis work as good or bad?' if am permitted to say only 'good' to satisfy the max no. of ppl then y a q is asked to me. they c'd have chosen fitting reply by themselves. am not giving a reply to respect ppl views and satisfy them but to reveal what i feel and i guess thats the intention of question being posed to me. in most cases protestors do not know where the actual fault is. so they cannot be permitted to protest since they lack common sense. in this case they can only protest against the concerned magazine and not the person who was given the option of choosing good or bad. when no cases have been filed against the magazine which triggered this issue it shows entire issue is cheap politics taking advantage of ppls innocence. if these acts r encouraged t'row if a wife says 'i wanna divorce my husband since he is bad' or vice versa then a group of protestors will be attacking cause they have the right to protest. they w'd even say 'when max feel he is good u cannot tarnish his image by takin it to court'

nithyananda said...

I dont know ur feelingxx,but i think this is healthier than just one side casting its views on all of us like in VHP on valentine's day!!!
Besides i guess all is a system of balance. Unless they dont tilt the balance, im fine with it...

Rohit Talwar said...

hey, update time!

The Soul Doctor said...

Happy New Year Soumya......

Good Post.

One thought!!.....DO you seriously think,such a media hype, political drama and wastage of precious time of courts already overburdened with pending cases would have occured, had the same statement about virginity of tamil women was made by a college student or even a middle aged women on a TV road show or any other forum?

I dont think so.

Personally I think, Kushbu was correct. The protestors had no bussiness to protest against individual opinions. But they did. But at the end of it all, we must realise that virginity is all about lack of right oppurtunity. LOL

shobhna said...

restrictions!!! yes there are there will always be... but who decided where to draw the line...

Twilight Fairy said...

as long as freedom of speech is there, there would always be protests against protests against protests against protests.. (till infinity) :p :)

Neha said...

Interesting point made! Happy new year to u too!

Alka said...

Sorry for being off topic.You can see your views on this question Its up on my post Taslima Nasreen's Asylum

soumya said...

Known Stranger: same as u... :-)

ramu:
"only the ppl who have done research on that area sh'd be permitted to express views"...
it becomes undemocratic this way...unless ppl r free to express how cud we know what the truth is... there is always contradiction among experts... and on social issues everybody seems to be expert...

soumya said...

nithyananda: on V day also both sides express their views... though both sides r again at odds with each other...

Rohit Talwar: busy at office and home :-)... will do...

Karthik,The Soul Doctor: may be it wud have occured even then also... to protest against individual opinion is wrong or to protest against individual? if we dont protest it sometimes conveys that we all agree...

soumya said...

shobhna: conscience... parent's will... for me

Twilight Fairy: good...
nice to see ur comments...

neha: thanks...

alka: will do...

ramu said...

only 534 MPs choose the PM of india. does it mean that we lost democracy. similarly the person who has done research is not gonna express his own views. when i say 'research' it also means that he w'd have done a survey, checked with ppl views, analyzed it and delivered something based on that. cause thats his job. u might say thats what the magazine did. magazine doing a 2 day survey differs a lot from research which includes many more technical things. if u feel my views r undemocratic..ur right. check my last post u'll know i have a reason for favouring partial democracy

dreamz_verity said...

"Happy New Year".
Ya its true that we shud be ready accept wht others are saying abt us. But its very difficult esp now a days,the world has changed and evryone thinks wht one is doing is correct and everybody shud follow him,shud accept him.Its there in genx mindset ,i dont know the reason behind this.
Everyone is ready to give advice when it come to taking it a big no.Everyone is ready to make comments but a few words against them makes the volcano blasts.
This may be because now a days words like "I","My","Mine" become imp in one's life.

Rohit Talwar said...

Update alert!

Ajay said...

hey long time no c<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>???????waiting for ur post

Rohit Talwar said...

Seriously.. It's been LONG!!!

Barath said...

good one!

Long time since I dropped by...busy!

nyways happy new year!

"Nobody likes to have restrictions on behaviour or thinking"

true!

dfg said...

hi..
after long time....how are u...
anyway about the post...you should go to sri lanka and live for a week..
no words to explain......
prakash

Anonymous said...

That's a great story. Waiting for more. »