Seldom are we aware of the section that is a part of our constitution - the 49-O. This gives the citizen the right to decide and VOTE FOR NOBODY. By registering the fact that he does not want to vote with the Election Officer the following things can be acheived:
1) He ensures that his vote is not mis-used.
2) If the number of 49-O's is greater than the number of votes cast then it would force a re-election.
3) The political parties would have to assign new candidates for the region since they have already given their decision regarding the present candidates who are contesting the elections.
This is the power that Indians have as responsible citizens of the country. We have the ultimate power to choose the kind of leaders that he have... but do we? Is'nt the lack of knowledge of such things just harming us.
For more information you can read this article and/or visit the homepage of the Election Commission of India
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Ban on Child Labor
On October 10, 2006 the ban on child labor came into effect. There is a lot to cheer about. Right? ..... No, wrong.
My reasons for saying so is based on the certain facts that none of us will be able to contradict nor ignore. Firstly, the law is restricted to only children working in places like dhabas and homes. Children working on farms are exempted from this law. One wonders why? Are'nt they children or are'nt they entitled to the same priviliges as other children?
Maybe some people would try to justify this kind of a restriction by saying that children working in the farms help in fulfilling the basic necessties that life demands. Without them it would be impossible to keep some families above the poverty line. The age old reasoning .. more hands means more work and more work means better income.
As I see it, its a vicious circle. There is no gaurantee on the minimum wages that the adults in the family can earn. This leads to mass exploitation... economical, social, sexual. And the children are also brought into the mess. And it is much easier to exploit children. Plus, according to Maslow's theory of needs, until and unless the basic needs of food, clothes and shelter are not met the family does not think about its other needs. And the child's right to education and a playful childhood is higher up in the pyramid provided by Maslow.
It is difficult to convince a family that is struggling to gather together the basic necessities in life that educating their children will elevate their social and financial conditions beacuse the child will be equipped to get a better paying job. But the point remains that the family will only get returns 15-20 years down the line. Immediate affects of providing a child with a childhood that he deserves will not be visible to the family. Therefore, it is so difficult to convince them.
But inspite of all this the question still remains ... how right is it to exclude the farm child labor from the purview of this law. Should'nt the goverment really do something about them too?
The second reason why I dont think that the law will bring cheer is that the society has invented another proverb based on the proverb 'Where there is a will there is a way' - 'Where there is a law there is a workaround around it'. As long as the menatlity of the people who actively employ child laborers still remain intact fighting for a child's rights is really fruitless. There is a strong need to change their point of view and that would take some very bold and very drastic steps.
And I would probably choke this blog site if I start writing about the law and child sex workers. So I will simply point out that they are also on my mind when I say that this law is not something to cheer about.
It is great that the government is considering the issues ... but the laws were there and are still pending implementation. So if a strong group of people really come foward and enforce the implementation of the law then it really would be something to cheer about. Maybe.... just maybe then it can be extended to the other type of child laborers.
My reasons for saying so is based on the certain facts that none of us will be able to contradict nor ignore. Firstly, the law is restricted to only children working in places like dhabas and homes. Children working on farms are exempted from this law. One wonders why? Are'nt they children or are'nt they entitled to the same priviliges as other children?
Maybe some people would try to justify this kind of a restriction by saying that children working in the farms help in fulfilling the basic necessties that life demands. Without them it would be impossible to keep some families above the poverty line. The age old reasoning .. more hands means more work and more work means better income.
As I see it, its a vicious circle. There is no gaurantee on the minimum wages that the adults in the family can earn. This leads to mass exploitation... economical, social, sexual. And the children are also brought into the mess. And it is much easier to exploit children. Plus, according to Maslow's theory of needs, until and unless the basic needs of food, clothes and shelter are not met the family does not think about its other needs. And the child's right to education and a playful childhood is higher up in the pyramid provided by Maslow.
It is difficult to convince a family that is struggling to gather together the basic necessities in life that educating their children will elevate their social and financial conditions beacuse the child will be equipped to get a better paying job. But the point remains that the family will only get returns 15-20 years down the line. Immediate affects of providing a child with a childhood that he deserves will not be visible to the family. Therefore, it is so difficult to convince them.
But inspite of all this the question still remains ... how right is it to exclude the farm child labor from the purview of this law. Should'nt the goverment really do something about them too?
The second reason why I dont think that the law will bring cheer is that the society has invented another proverb based on the proverb 'Where there is a will there is a way' - 'Where there is a law there is a workaround around it'. As long as the menatlity of the people who actively employ child laborers still remain intact fighting for a child's rights is really fruitless. There is a strong need to change their point of view and that would take some very bold and very drastic steps.
And I would probably choke this blog site if I start writing about the law and child sex workers. So I will simply point out that they are also on my mind when I say that this law is not something to cheer about.
It is great that the government is considering the issues ... but the laws were there and are still pending implementation. So if a strong group of people really come foward and enforce the implementation of the law then it really would be something to cheer about. Maybe.... just maybe then it can be extended to the other type of child laborers.
Guys and Gays
One of the things that is dictated by nature is that people grow and evolve - physiologically and socially. As we grow physiologically then we become aware of the choices that society places before us. In today's society, exercising your choice of a life partner has become very acceptable. I would now like to raise a question - will the society also be liberal if I want to make a choice about the 'gender' of my life partner? Probably not.
Lets ponder on this. Love takes many shapes and forms. Some people say that love is one of the purest form of emotion. But I am going to narrow down my vision for the sake of this article to the 'girl-guy' type of love. The society accepts and cherishes this kind of love. This kind of love (or should I say love relationships) would culminate in extending the existance of the home sapiens on this earth. This truth is as old as Adam and Eve.
The definations of 'girl-guy' love has evolved over time to incude 'girl-girl' love and 'guy-guy' love. If you want historical evidence of the existance of such love then let me wisper the names of Alexander, the great and Hitler. Two very famous men...but did your viewpoint about them change when I told you that they were gays. Probably yes...you would have definately got a little 'start' if you were not aware of this fact already.
We are all aware of Kamasutra and the temples and paintings like Ajanta and Ellora. These things give us Indian historical evidence that 'girl-girl' and 'guy-guy' relationship had existed and was accepted in ancient times too.
On a more contemporary note, Karan Johar is fabled to be a gay too. It was amusing to the reaction of some people when he comes on the screen - their voices drop to a wisper and attitude is snikering when they mention this rumor to their friends. Vikram Seth, a writer, is heterosexual - he enjoyed a 10 year relationship with another guy. Deepa Mehta's film 'Fire' drew people into drawing room discussions on these facts. Fire is a very toned down version. The movie, Philadelphia deals with this topic to its fullest extent.
Why can not we accept gayism or lesbianism? Why do we attatch social stigma to this kind of love - its another form of human emotion after all? Are we aware of the fact that our non-acceptance of these people make them prone to diseases like AIDS?
In India, the situation is worse. There is a law againstat people who will depict such behaviour, IPC 377. In his interview, Vikram Seth said that he did not want to come back to India to be jailed. Statistics say that there are more gays and lesbians in the Indian society than are recorded. We are a very tolerant society. We tolerate rape, extra-marital affairs, even shoot-outs. But we have difficulty in coming to terms with the broadining or should I say already broadened horizons of love.
Live and let live? Can we join our hands together to help fight Vikram Seth in his crusade to modify the attitude of people and also modify the IPC 377? Can we stand up and stand together?
PS: Guys and Gays have a rhyming quality to it. Girls and Lesbians, Gays and Lesbians hardly have the same thing. I choose it simply because I wanted it to be catchy. If any of you have any objections about the title, please mention it wth your comments on the article.
Lets ponder on this. Love takes many shapes and forms. Some people say that love is one of the purest form of emotion. But I am going to narrow down my vision for the sake of this article to the 'girl-guy' type of love. The society accepts and cherishes this kind of love. This kind of love (or should I say love relationships) would culminate in extending the existance of the home sapiens on this earth. This truth is as old as Adam and Eve.
The definations of 'girl-guy' love has evolved over time to incude 'girl-girl' love and 'guy-guy' love. If you want historical evidence of the existance of such love then let me wisper the names of Alexander, the great and Hitler. Two very famous men...but did your viewpoint about them change when I told you that they were gays. Probably yes...you would have definately got a little 'start' if you were not aware of this fact already.
We are all aware of Kamasutra and the temples and paintings like Ajanta and Ellora. These things give us Indian historical evidence that 'girl-girl' and 'guy-guy' relationship had existed and was accepted in ancient times too.
On a more contemporary note, Karan Johar is fabled to be a gay too. It was amusing to the reaction of some people when he comes on the screen - their voices drop to a wisper and attitude is snikering when they mention this rumor to their friends. Vikram Seth, a writer, is heterosexual - he enjoyed a 10 year relationship with another guy. Deepa Mehta's film 'Fire' drew people into drawing room discussions on these facts. Fire is a very toned down version. The movie, Philadelphia deals with this topic to its fullest extent.
Why can not we accept gayism or lesbianism? Why do we attatch social stigma to this kind of love - its another form of human emotion after all? Are we aware of the fact that our non-acceptance of these people make them prone to diseases like AIDS?
In India, the situation is worse. There is a law againstat people who will depict such behaviour, IPC 377. In his interview, Vikram Seth said that he did not want to come back to India to be jailed. Statistics say that there are more gays and lesbians in the Indian society than are recorded. We are a very tolerant society. We tolerate rape, extra-marital affairs, even shoot-outs. But we have difficulty in coming to terms with the broadining or should I say already broadened horizons of love.
Live and let live? Can we join our hands together to help fight Vikram Seth in his crusade to modify the attitude of people and also modify the IPC 377? Can we stand up and stand together?
PS: Guys and Gays have a rhyming quality to it. Girls and Lesbians, Gays and Lesbians hardly have the same thing. I choose it simply because I wanted it to be catchy. If any of you have any objections about the title, please mention it wth your comments on the article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
