So we criticise Comedy Nights with Kapil. And we criticise political leaders who make misogynistic statements.

So we criticise Comedy Nights with Kapil [link]. And we criticise (or strongly condemn) political leaders who make misogynistic statements.

I think there is a difference (Please correct me if I am wrong) – Comedy Nights with Kapil is not paid to represent us or our interests, it’s a commercial enterprise, we are free to disapprove and stop watching the show.

I don’t think we can or should attempt to silence misogynistic voices, one, because they have the right to voice their opinions (however offensive we find them), and two because there are probably many others who hold the same views and perhaps it would be much better to start a conversation about why the ideas are so offensive to us.

Silencing will not change misogynistic views – talking about them would ensure that the other more rational view is heard.

Silencing is not a good idea anyway. When the Silencing of Voices begins – it always begins with silencing of the unpopular voices first. Obviously.

There are countries where feminists (or Liberal views) are not allowed a Voice. That makes it very easy for feminists to be made unpopular, and since they are allowed no voice they have no opportunity to become ‘popular’. And unpopular voices are amongst the first to be silenced.

So if we want our own voices to be heard, we have no choice but to allow others the have their say too. Would some of us rather hear what we like to hear at the risk of being denied the Truth?

There can be no Freedom, Equality and Justice without the right to speech. And those who have the most power and most responsibility should be accountable to those they serve.

For example, what if we could not blog about these two cases?

‘The liberties that are guaranteed to our citizens, cannot be stretched beyond limits nor can such freedom be made weapons to destroy our fundamental values or social establishments like families’

Parents should choose the boy for a girl aged below 21, as it is they who bear the brunt of an unsuccessful marriage – Karnataka HC

Women have been denied the right to speech (or Freedom of Expression) for centuries and it lead to women being the least valued in the society, seen and valued only as future wives and daughters in law.

I think the only speech that should be censored is the one that directly leads to violence to others (Hate speech).

But this is only when equal citizens are in disagreement.

What about when we criticise political leaders who make misogynistic statements? (or say anything else we disagree with/disapprove of?) Unlike Comedy Nights we do pay them to represent us, and we have authorised them to make laws to ensure that our Fundamental Rights are protected.

I think we have more right to challenge political leaders who make statements that indicate that they are disrespectful of our Fundamental Rights – including the right to have a Voice and the rights to Justice and Equality.

Do you agree?

Related Posts:

“Tell me will you ever think of putting any posts on facebook after this?” “No.”

Is Democracy possible without a chance for everyone to argue about issues that matter to them?

So who said these words, and do you disagree?

What is it that you would never blog about?

Why do we hear concerned voices about ‘misuse of freedom’ the moment we talk about Freedom?

Are u ok if ur daughter smokes at 24yrs to express herself? Freedom of expression is quite quite difficult to practice.

Who defines the ‘limits’ of your freedom?

Advertisements

What is it that you would never blog about?

What is it that you would never blog about? Even though you think you should be able to. Something you feel strongly about and you feel should be discussed and something you are well within your legal rights to discuss, but you self censor and don’t write about it. What stops you? Do you think blogging about it would help you or somebody else? Does not-blogging about it benefit you or anybody else?

Some bloggers seemed to be censored by their immediate families – they may not write against religion, tradition, sexual orientation etc. Does your family read your blog? How much influence does their reading or not reading makes to the way you blog?

Some bloggers are ‘censored’ by the comments that disagree too strongly – this seems to happen mostly if your political ideology supports tolerance and secularism.

Bloggers who write about women’s issues also face criticism and troll attacks, (it is generally assumed they are women).

If you did not self censor what do you think would you like to blog about? What do you think should never be discussed on blogs or at least you would not discuss, even though that’s what you blog about.

Would you criticize something if you are not sure it would help the cause – just to convey your own views on the subject?

This is my second post for Make Blog Not War – A Freedom of Expression Training for Bloggers.