Editor,
This refers to your eye-catching report “Over 400 rape cases pending in courts” (ST- Sept 25, 2017). Not a single day passes without a report on rape incidents. According to the law, rape of a woman carries a punishment which varies from seven years in jail or life imprisonment while for Police and other officials the proposed punishment is 10 years plus a fine. Under section 498 A (IPC) both physical and mental cruelty are punishable crimes but the authorities do not take action. According to the Government’s statistics twenty five rapes are committed in the country everyday but the unofficial record is in very large numbers. Rape is a sexual as well as cultural attack which has become a great social problem today. The negative social attitude towards the victims of such cases creates serious psychological problems and people look down upon a victim of rape, whereas a woman who has gone through such a traumatic experience needs social and emotional support. Moreover the rape victim has to undergo a process which is not pleasant for her in life. Thinking of our society has to be changed as there are many instances where the society advises the rape victim to forget the matter in spite of spending expenses in filing case. Law must demonstrate that it will come down with a heavy hand on offenders. There are many rape cases which have become the headlines of the leading newspapers but timely action is not taken. One should see that by giving a deterrent punishment to the rapist the evil of rape would not be solved. Once it is proved that the person is guilty of rape he should be hanged.
Yours etc.,
Vinod C. Dixit
Ahmedabad-15
Whither media freedom
Editor,
Your editorial, “Journalists’ life on the line” (ST, Sep 23, 2017), is right in pointing out – “The gory death of Santanu Bhowmik a journalist with a local television channel in Tripura should set the alarm bells ringing.” As a matter of fact, India has slipped three places from 133rd in 2016 to 136th this year in World Press Freedom Ranking Index, which is released by the international free speech advocate Reporters Without Borders. In a political IPL match between the ruling and opposition parties, the media cannot take the role of cheerleader of any one team in a democracy. Indeed, the fourth estate must be the third umpire to help the umpires on the field. It is not cricket if the third umpire is to work under a reign of terror.
Yours etc.,
Sujit De,
Kolkata
Suicide: Different perspectives
Editor,
I would like to express my gratitude to Dr Sandi Syiem for pointing out in his letter “Understanding suicide” (ST September 26th, 2017) that I had mercilessly castigated people through my article, “Life, death and suicide in the Khasi thought” (Sept. 20th, 2017). It could have really appeared that I had done so judging from a particular point of view. The peculiar thing is that we human beings understand only about 30 per cent of each other’s thoughts and feelings (my own estimate), but we can still go on together for thousands of years, and thank God for that. Let us roughly estimate that man can express through his words or writings only 50 per cent of what he really thinks and feels deep in his mind and heart, and those who hear or read his words shall understand them in various ways according to their own viewpoints. But on the whole they shall understand only 50 per cent of what the words really mean as understood by the speaker or writer. Human language through words, only dimly portrays the speaker’s real thoughts and feelings. Words are useful for the practical and utilitarian side of things, but when it comes to emotions and sentiments, as someone has sung: “You say it best when you say nothing at all.”
But to the comments of a person like Dr Sandi Syiem, whom I highly respect, I feel obliged to respond, for by saying nothing at all would amount to silent contempt. I am grateful as his letter has indirectly reinforced my belief that no one can be so transcendental as to be able to view things and see the truth from a universal point of view. Our particular points of view are conditioned by many factors, such the profession we are occupied with, the religious beliefs we are in, the experiences we have encountered in life, the situations of the immediate surroundings in which we live every day, etc.
I agree with Dr Sandi that it is against human instincts to take one’s own life, and that suicide is caused by an insensitive and unfeeling society and the psychological distress that is unbearable. In my article I had also written that the society has lost its character of a physical, mental and spiritual refuge for the individual members. The peculiarity is that today’s insensitive and unfeeling society seems to be made up of hypersensitive individuals. As individuals, we tend to become highly sensitive, but as a collective we become miserably insensitive. I leave it to others to argue, whether it is individuals’ hypersensitivity and egoism that creates an insensitive society, or it is an insensitive society that breeds hypersensitive individuals. Whatever may be the case, my article intended to say that the society must be more responsive to problems of the individuals, and at the same time to discourage the evolution of social practices that encourage or push individuals to suicide. There are many living ‘Ka Likai’ who need love and attention right now while they are still alive, but the society would probably shed tears with sympathy only when they are dead. Though developments in the field of psychology had immensely contributed in understanding the nature of the human mind and in solving many social problems, but I believe that religions still have a big role to play because psychology alone does not hold the key to all human existential problems, as the person lurking deep inside the unconscious mind is not only a mental person but much more of a spiritual being who is ultimately endowed with freedom in spite of the numerous mental chains binding him.
Yours etc.,
Fabian Lyngdoh
Via email