It is true that dominant social environment shapes our values and attitudes to issues. I think this supports the post modernist view that there is no absolute reality 'out there' and each one's reality is shaped by his culture / social conditioning etc. The taste of chillies is universally unpleasant to all animals; but it is possible for us to enjoy this taste !. This is an example of how social conditioning can change biological process.
Jhansi Rani and her contemporaries saw nothing out of the way in marrying her off at such a young age. Slavery was considered as a normal thing for centuries, even by great social and religious reformers.
In the present social cultural context, it is not fair to touch another person in a sexual manner without consent. Law has even fixed legal age limits for giving this consent. Violating this law is a crime. Justifying such actions citing historical events is not correct. Would you argue 'Why can't people submit themselves to being slaves ? Was it not tolerated by our forefathers for many centuries !'. Obviously this is not the case.
Whether this is scientific or not is not important in this context. Scientifically a girl can have sex as soon as she is physically mature for this. But legal limit is not in accordance with this. I think we should also consider psychological maturation in this context.
ഇന്ത്യ
2 weeks ago
1 comment:
Molestation/offence..continuation....
The question in the passage was not to praise the practice that existed 150 years back...but to highlight the scope for dramatic changes in public attitude in a short span of time by quoting one well known event from our recent history.
At any point of time the establishment will be happy with then existing rules of the land and their experts are supposed to advice the public to behave as 'normal' as posssible.The general tendency will be to preserve status quo.So during slavary ( to become happy)people will try to become the best slave than questioning the irrationality or the basis of the system.
I used to imagine all the possible changes in public attitude that will be brought by next 100 years!and I read human history to understand human mind and it's power to change with time( As psychology student you also will be doing the same) !Defenitly you will agree that to the coming generations ,our present attitude towards morality will be felt more funnier than the one existed during Jhansi Rani's period,just 150 years ago.
My original question in the blog was who or what will bring that essential changes to our society/country..I admit that unfortunatly we dont see powerful thinkers or people with intellectual calibre as popular leaders in the present polity of our country.
I believe the change in the attitude during the past 150 years was initiated mainly by the influence of Europeans and indigenous contribution was negligible.Sadly, the pride of our old civilisation make us to waste our energy in resisting any form of changes.
From the dark era of physical slavery to the 21st century's democratic society of human beings,a definite but gradual recognition of " individual freedom" is perceptible.
What I actually wanted to discuss is how far the concept ,individual freedom has matured (without compromising his fellow beings freedom )in the existing rules and regulations of the country/public attitude..
I think this is not the right place to discuss these type issues as this blog wanted to focuss specifically on mind and related topics.
Harish ,We will continue this discussion in net as I dont want to discontinue this debate ,as your inputs are valuable and keep me alive!You have a live mind!
Post a Comment