Editor,
Apropos the letter by Joycee Lyngdoh captioned “Why Glamorize Matriliny” (ST Jan, 29, 2021), I would like to ask as to why one should not be proud of or glamourise one’s culture and identity. What so wrong with it? Every society has certain loopholes but that does not mean that we should forgo our uniqueness and the feeling of being special from the rest of the people of our country. Thank you for the invitation but I certainly do not need to visit my home town. Not being physically present in Shillong does not mean I have forgone my roots nor am I oblivious of the ground realities in Meghalaya. On the other hand being away from home makes me more conscious of not only matters that affect my State but also issues that concern other states of India.
Maternal, child mortality rate, single motherhood, rape cases and several other challenges that women go through all across the globe does concern each one of us but, that should not deter us from being proud of our culture. By simply not talking or highlighting about our culture is not the solution to improving the living standards, health and condition of women.
The true sense of being unique in itself means that we are different. In my understanding anything that is unique needs to be highlighted for the benefit of those who care to know about our society. I, for one take pride in the fact that I belong to this unique society that has given me the opportunity to share about my society, culture and tradition. What I fail to understand is why the educated lot as mentioned in the letter, namely the wives and children of IAS|IPS|IFS should find it so difficult to explain our matrilineal system to those who follow the patriarchal/patrilineal system?
Our ancestors had laid down strict rules and regulations with regards to marriage ( Ka Shong-Kha Shong-Man) so as to steer clear from inter-clan marriage which is considered a sin/ taboo ( Shong-Sang). If the choice is given to individuals to choose between a father’s or mothers’ clan name, I’m afraid, four generations down the line there will come a time when there will be inter-clan marriages, because the original mother’s surname will be forgotten. For example, a woman has three children and if two of the children choose to take their father’s surname and their children too follow the same lineage then the family would have a mixture of numerous surnames under one roof. In that way it will no longer be a home but a place where different clans/surnames dine and lodge under one roof.
To conclude, I would like to ask Joycee Lyngdoh to clearly specify the “glaring ills” in our tradition as mentioned in her letter. I also wish to affirm that our society is not “finicky” as mentioned by Lyngdoh; rather ours, is a society that still follows the footsteps of our ancestors that stand tall in “Ka Tip-Kur Tip Kha, Tip Briew Tip-Blei”. This subject is a very vast one and it needs a better platform to be debated upon so as to have a clearer understanding of the same.
Yours etc.,
Leezandra Dkhar,
New Delhi -31
Journalism for a healthy democracy
Editor,
One’s character is usually measured by one’s integrity. We essentially put our all efforts to keep our integrity unshaken. But, the recent episode of one of the most senior journalists – Rajdeep Sardesai, has put the integrity of journalism at stake. India Today’s journalist Rajdeep Sardesai had harped on Twitter that the President of India unveiled the portrait of a movie artist Prosenjit Chatterjee instead of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. Having been offended by the comments of the journalist, Rashtrapati Bhavan has promptly written a letter of displeasure addressed to the Editor in Chief of India Today Group.
The Chairman of the media house Aroon Purie has already expressed his regret and taken the anchor off the air for two weeks. Rajdeep’s misdemeanour also did not go down well with large sections of twitterati resulting in huge outpouring of anger on social media.
It is worth mentioning here that Rajdeep Sardesai was also once given a dressing down by none other than the former President of India, Pranab Mukherjee when the journalist used the language of disrespect while interviewing the Head of the Constitution. Irresponsible behaviour by any person of high stature, particularly in a public forum, is not desirable. This only goes to damage one’s credibility in the long run. Meanwhile, Rajdeep Sardesai has also been pulled up by the UP police for allegedly spreading fake news with regards to the Delhi tractor march on Republic Day which ended up in unprecedented fury and violence leaving many police personnel injured. Irrespective of whether the spread of the news relating to the death of a farmer due to police firing and the riot incitement amounting to sedition can be established or not, it is never good if one’s credibility is seen with suspicion in the public domain. Public opinion really matters in a democracy. The people are no less smart these days. One feels the fourth pillar of democracy should not be shaken by some self-righteous ambition and hurtful acts of a few media people. Democracy can only breathe in healthy air with the support of “healthy” journalism. Let the TRUTH be upheld that is in the interest of the public. Please note, even the “sweet lies” leave a bitter taste in the mouth.
Yours etc.,
Salil Gewali,
Shillong