Over 2,000 fewer farmers every day - The Hindu

Over 2,000 fewer farmers every day - The Hindu

Freedom that must have limits

(Originally published in The Hindu, 29 April, 2013)

Pornography degrades, subjugates and reinforces negative stereotypes about women which is why access to it must be made tougher

“Freedom without limits is just a word”

Terry Pratchett
 

Kamlesh Vaswani’s PIL seeking to ban the viewing of pornography and make it a non-bailable offence has raised eyebrows. Columnists and social media commentators have greeted the idea with shock, raising issues such as social liberty, sexual freedom, and the fact that the mere banning of pornography might not bring down the incidence of rape. On the surface of it, this sounds politically correct but the reality is much more complex.

Take two facts. First, the two men arrested for raping the five-year-old in Delhi were watching porn before they stepped out and abducted the girl. Second, Google Trends shows that in 2012, New Delhi recorded the highest percentage worldwide for the number of times the word ‘porn’ was searched online. And National Crime Records Bureau data for the same year show that 706 rapes were reported in Delhi, the highest in the last decade and more than double the number for 2002.
 

In the West
Too simplistic a correlation? Perhaps. But does that mean we can afford to ignore the parallel? The world over, governments and sociologists are struggling with the issue of untrammelled access to pornography and the alarming rise in incidents of violent rape and child abuse. In London, Prime Minister David Cameron is set to announce a government-backed code of conduct that will block pornography in public spaces such as cafes and railway stations where children are likely to be present.

Liberal Iceland’s existing laws banning pornography are similar to India’s — vague and rarely enforced. The government there is drafting a law, much to the horror of some of its wired and freethinking citizens, that seeks to ban pornography altogether to protect children from violent sexual imagery. A Guardian report quotes an Icelandic Interior Ministry spokesperson: “When a 12-year-old types ‘porn’ into Google, he or she is not going to find photos of naked women out on a country field, but very hardcore and brutal violence.”

The problem with pornography is just that. It is not so much about erotica, as its advocates will have us believe, as it is about extreme violence, degradation and subjugation of women, and the violation of children and teenagers. It extols rape, defilement and mutilation. Most dangerously, it mainstreams all of this and packages it as the “normal.” This is lethal in a place like India, where large numbers of people leapfrog from a state of total ignorance about even ordinary sex to direct exposure to vicious abuse.
 

Documenting abuse

As the pornography industry thrives by getting more extreme each day, sociologists have correspondingly begun to note that gang rapes have risen, the age of the rapists has fallen, and the violence is much more brutal today. One report quotes U.S. Department of Justice statistics that show the percentage of rapes involving two or more offenders increasing from seven per cent in 1994-1998 to 10 per cent in 2005-2010.

In last year’s Steubenville High School rape in Ohio, U.S., when a high schoolgirl was doped and repeatedly violated by her schoolmates, two other appalling facts emerged. One, the rapists uploaded photos of the acts on social media where it went viral; and second, students who witnessed the acts said they did not recognise the acts as rape. In the last few months, two teenagers, Rehtaeh Parsons and Audrey Potts, in the U.S. and Canada, respectively, have committed suicide after being gang-raped by 16- and 17-year-old boys who then posted the photos online. Let us not forget our own MMS scandals involving schoolchildren.
 

Blurring lines

This trend of online documentation of abuse follows closely on the footsteps of porn websites that actively encourage the posting of real-life pictures of girls caught unawares or of pictures taken of them with hidden cameras. In other words, the lines are already blurring between pornographic websites and social network websites. What was once an explicit image on a clandestine website could today be a picture of a classmate on Facebook.

It might be statistically impossible to directly link the viewing of pornography to rape, but it is undeniable that its mainstreaming is actively encouraging and endorsing a culture of abuse of women and children. Recent news reports, in fact, have quoted counsellors who say that obsessive porn viewing is today a leading cause of marital abuse and divorce in India.

The link between violence in films and the increased rate of violence in society is equally unverifiable, but it’s interesting that this medium has always been filtered by some form of certification. How then is a medium that is inherently much more dangerous left so unregulated?

The existing IT Act, which stipulates three years’ imprisonment for publishing and transmitting obscene material electronically, is followed more in the breach. Following the PIL, the Supreme Court has asked the Ministries of Information Technology, Information and Broadcasting, and Home Affairs to come up with some answers by April 29. Whether it is stricter policing and stiffer (and implemented) punishments, or some sort of technologically feasible filters, or steep levies on the viewing of such content, some adequate response is required, something that makes it more difficult to access porn than ticking a box that asks if you are 18.

Yes, freedoms are precious and worth fighting for, but just because some of our men are not mature enough to enjoy these freedoms responsibly, should our children and women be made to pay the price?

How to Destroy a University

(The Essay is by Jayati Ghose and was published in The Hindu on April29, 2013)

 

Source: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/how-to-destroy-a-university/article4663684.ece?homepage=true

 

 

India’s premier institution of higher education is rushing to change its undergraduate degree without adequate wider consultations The University of Delhi is perhaps one of the few in the country whose undergraduate degrees still command respect within and outside the country. But all this may change quite rapidly. This enormous institution of nearly half-a-million people is being forced through cataclysmic changes that may have significant impact on its academic credibility. The main change is this: from July this year (just a few months away), the undergraduate programme will shift from a three-year degree programme to a four-year one, with no more B.A.s or B.Sc.s. Instead, multiple degrees will be offered within a single stream: Associate Baccalaureate (after 2 years), Baccalaureate (3 years), and Baccalaureate with Honours (4 years).

 

11 foundation courses

 

Regardless of their previous training or choice of subject, all students will be forced to take 11 foundation courses, which will occupy most of their time in the first two years. These include two courses on “Language, Literature and Creativity” (one in English and the other in Hindi or another Modern Indian Language), “Information Technology,” “Business, Entrepreneurship and Management,” “Governance and Citizenship,” “Psychology, Communication and Life Skills,” “Geographic and Socio-economic Diversity,” “Science and Life,” “History, Culture and Civilisation,” “Building Mathematical Ability” and “Environment and Public Health.” Obviously, these courses will have to be pitched at a level that can be understood by anyone with a basic school qualification. So the course on, say, “Building Mathematical Ability,” must be comprehensible to a student who has not done Mathematics at the Plus Two level, which would make it too basic to retain the interest of students who have already done it in school. What is the rationale for forcing these relatively basic courses on all students? And who will teach them, given that even the outlines of these courses have still not been made public and are unknown to the college teachers themselves? After two years, students who have done mostly these courses and five others in some disciplines can leave with an “Associate Baccalaureate” degree. Who will recognise this degree? What kinds of jobs would be suitable? And even after three years (during which students will also be exposed to two non-credit courses on “Integrating Mind, Body and Heart” that will be spread over a full academic year) what would be the worth of the Baccalaureate degree that contains just a few courses specialising in any discipline? The full four-year programme contains 20 courses in a “major” discipline, six courses in a “minor” discipline, five courses in “Application” (which are supposed to be “skill-based courses that enable employability for students,” with no further details provided) and six courses devoted to “Cultural Activities.” The only choice for students is in terms of major and minor disciplines: thereafter, everything is given. So, contrary to claims, the proposals actually dumb down the programme and reduce the choice of students. How did the decision for such a momentous change get taken? Throughout most of last year, there was little in the form of discussion, apart from a few stray public statements from the Vice-Chancellor that a four-year undergraduate programme would replace the current three-year course from 2013. No concept papers were circulated by the administration and no feedback was formally sought from any segment of the University. The consultations with “stakeholders” that have been subsequently publicised include an “Academic Congress” in November 2012 that involved around 10,000 specially invited students, teachers and parents in a big jamboree. Obviously no serious discussion was possible there and, in any case, the four-year course was not part of the listed agenda.

 

Extraordinary meeting

 

Then, during the university vacations of December 2012, an Extraordinary Meeting of the Academic Council was convened to discuss this — with three days’ notice, and without sending any prior details on the structure of the programme to the Committees of Courses at the Faculties or Departments, or to the Staff Councils of Colleges. Despite low attendance and some dissent, the changes were passed, and the Executive Council passed the scheme on the next working day! Even then, teachers who would be responsible for handling this programme were still completely in the dark about everything, including the most basic information on what would be its structure. The course structure was announced (without giving any details) in February, but there is still no public document explaining its rationale or providing any kind of elaboration. On March 5, orders were issued to departments to prepare syllabi for the newly announced courses within two weeks — a deadline then extended by another month, but still a ridiculously short time. On April 20, the Faculty of Social Sciences officially “approved” the new courses for Economics and Political Science, even though the courses were not circulated before the meeting and most of the attendees had left the meeting earlier because they were assured that the university had decided not to consider the courses until April 27. The Registrar’s Press Note making the announcement stated complacently that “the Faculty of Science shall hold its meeting on April 22, where all courses related to the four year programme for the entire gamut of science departments are expected to be granted approval” — and indeed this is what happened. Anyone who deals in higher education will know that such speed and lack of real discussion seriously undermine even the most minimal academic standards. Incredibly, these massive changes are being forced through without planning for the required additional physical infrastructure or faculty for teaching four cohort years of students rather than three, or even filling up the existing glaring gaps in the system. Currently, around 4,000 teaching posts are vacant, with the work actually being done by ad hoc or “guest” lecturers. The increase in the cost to students and society of funding an extra year of undergraduate studies has not been dwelt upon, nor has it been weighed against the supposed benefits.

 

Teachers sidelined

 

It is no wonder that so many faculty members of departments and colleges are up in arms. But those who have raised questions and protested are being threatened and victimised in various ways. Letters by Heads of Departments and even Deans of Faculties expressing concerns are simply ignored. The Teachers’ Association, DUTA, has been sidelined and repressed. Individual faculty members who publicise their views find their life made difficult in various ways, with blatant attempts to threaten or cajole them into silence. Instead, the university website displays prominently a letter from some senior professors that claims that “for almost two years, thousands of teachers, students and parents have been engagingly consulted in meaningful ways to help in the design and evolution of the proposal for the new undergraduate system of study”. (Clearly this is a group that would benefit from the proposed new course on English language ...). As a parent who meets many students and teachers of this university, I can vouch that this is simply not true! What is perhaps hardest to understand is the rigid determination and reckless speed with which these drastic changes are sought to be made. Even if the four-year course is to be implemented, why not wait until 2014 to give enough time to develop a proper programme? Even if some collective madness has overtaken those at the helm of affairs in the University of Delhi, can saner voices not prevail? What about the checks and balances in the system that could prevent such extreme measures from being taken with such unseemly haste? The matter is now urgent. Going about things in this way would make a mockery of undergraduate education in one of the few public universities in India where the degree is still held in some regard. So it seems that the fate of Delhi University is too important to be left to those who currently seem to control it. Anyone who cares about higher education in this country should see what can be done to prevent the reckless destruction of such a significant institution.

 

(Jayati Ghosh is a professor of economics at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi)

How to destroy a university - The Hindu

"The City of Djinns" Turns 100!

The Central Vista (Photo by the Author)

2011 is the hundredth year of Delhi as a post-Mughal capital city . The once capital city of Mughals and that of legendary Pandavas (Indraprastha), Delhi became the capital city of British rule once again in 1911, when King George V announced the shift of capital from Calcutta to Delhi on December 12, in the coronation ground. It was a necessary step to take the attention of the people away from the partition of Calcutta in 1905 though the partition was rescinded the same year Delhi was declared the new capital.
Since the time of Mahabharata Delhi has witnessed violence, agitations and riots- 1857 Mutiny against British Raj, 1947 partition massacre and riots after assassination of Mrs. Gandhi 1984. Despite these bad memories, Delhi has a charm and a lot to offer. Every day thousands of people come to the city searching for something. And the city has something for everyone to offer. The minute old migrant has a dream in his/her eyes and the older migrants have the smiles, satisfaction on their faces- smile/satisfaction of getting something. The city has never let anyone down. It makes you feel good. With its greenery and the constantly changing landscape, which is very unlikely in cities like Mumbai with a homogeneous and hence boring landscape, the city never lets the smile on your face go away. It does not let you go astray.
Let’s celebrate the city this year for what it has given us and also for what it has taken from all of us in return. Let’s not forget that what we have got or are still getting in the city outweighs the loss. Let’s celebrate the hundredth year of Delhi as a capital city, as a modern city!