[Reader-list] How Fake and How Hollow
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
shuddha at sarai.net
Tue Feb 27 15:22:13 IST 2007
Dear Rahul, Vedavati, Abhik (and everyone else on this list)
1. Every list member is free to express their views on this list. This
list does not have a policy of banning any member, or censoring content.
This is not going to change. I think that the value of the freedom of
expression on this list is far greater than the consequences of having
to deal occasionally with the excesses of some of our fellow members. If
we ban Vedavati for something that she may have said, then we will set
an unfortunate precedent by which people may keep calling for bans on
people they do not agree with, eventually, this will lead to the death
of debate and dissent on this list. I would not like things to come to
such a pass.
2. I have never suggested that Vedavati be banned, or that her posts be
censored, neither now, nor on earlier occasions. So, I do not quite see
how 'fake and hollow...the liberalism and tolerance' that I 'wear on
(my) sleeve is in the face of handling Vedavati's posts' actually is.
(as has been suggested by Rahul Asthana). If anyone else actually sees
how 'fake and hollow' it is, I would be grateful if they could enlighten
me, so that I can take measures to endow my liberality and tolerance
with authenticity and depth. I had suggested that spats of this nature
(as had occurred between Vedavati and Abhik) be ignored in the larger
interests of the discursive life of this list. To advise fellow list
members to ignore a provocation is not the same as asking for the
provocator to be banned. Until and unless it can be demonstrated that I
have asked for a gag order on Vedavati, it remains to be demonstrated as
to how fake and hollow my liberality and tolerance actually are. I am
willing to wait patiently for that to be demonstrated.
3. An aside : I find Sunandan's responses to 'Vedavatism' very
appropriate, and I think that hindutva apologists are best disarmed with
a refined sense of the absurd. Sunandan's response has a sophistication
that I find it possible to learn from.
4. I prefer visible to invisible biases. My biases have never been
invisible. I take special care to render them visible in everything I
write. I think this makes for transparent and open debate.
5. The responsibility of being a participant in a free and uncensored
list requires me occasionally to make my stand clear, in this case, I
have only stated that I disagree with neither the content of Vedavati's
interventions, nor the tenor of Abhik Samanta's response to those
interventions. Failing to do so, would make me complicit in endorsing
one or the other of these stances. I wish to do neither.
6. To fight what I think is secterian hatred with misogyny seems to me
to betray a poverty of discursive imagination. I hope that the list can
rise above this, and would welcome (if others so desire) a serious
debate on issues of religion, nationalism and identity on the list. It
would be preferable if such a debate could articulate a complex range of
issues without getting stuck in the rut of the vocabulary of reciprocal
abuse and name calling, so that we dont have to waste our time and
limited attention spans in clearing the air in the wake of particularly
offensive posts. At the risk of repetition, let me state that I would
personally welcome a serious intervention from Vedavati, or from any
person sympathetic to her positions, that can be debated seriously,
without anyone having to deal with the detritus of personal and ad
hominem attacks.
7. To do this, we (including Vedavati, or Abhik, or anyone else) do not
necessarily have to descend to the level of references to the
desirability of 'wrapping the bodies of muslim terrorists pigs' or to
references to a fellow list member's personal life (or lack of it).
8. If anyone chooses to do so, it can only be seen as evidence of their
propensity for grandstanding, their willingness to be trapped in a never
ending game of reciprocal abuse, and a profound lack of seriousnes.
9.Finally, I think everyone's point of view, no matter how objectionable
it may be to anyone else, deserves a fair hearing, but I also think that
this does mean that a person who sort of keeps grinding away at
monotonously offensive register riskes having themselves ignored by
others on the list. Eventually they may well find themselves isolated.
This list will never ban anyone, but a list that does not ban is also
very good at ignoring, isolating and cornering posters who deliberately,
and time and again make offensive postings. I would suggest that it be
understood that being ignored, isolated, cornered and exposed is a fate
far worse than being banned, because it does not come laden with the
promise of the potential glamour of being identified as someone who is
subject to censorship. Sometimes, to not be censored for what one says
is far more damaging to the self than to be censored for what one says.
I hope Vedavati and Abhik both understand this, because each callous
statement that they (or anyone else) make(s) only exposes them further
in the eyes of this entire discursive community.
Enough said, now I would like to get back to work and get on with my life,
thank you, and apologies in advance for any offence caused deliberately,
or inadvertently to anyone on this list by this post. I mean that seriously.
regards
Shuddha
Rahul Asthana wrote:
> Shuddha,
> For whatever its worth, I dont agree to your divisive
> "us" and "them" labelling and tactics of promoting
> exclusivity and discouraging dialogue;which is akin to
> what our politicians want so that they have their own
> constituenties of voters who vote on non issues
> Precisely for the reason that I dont agree with
> Vedavati, I hope she continues posting here and time
> permitting I will try and have a dialogue with her,as
> I have in the past.And your bias is clearly visible
> when you somehow seem to understand Aviks post.
> I personally dont give a damn who said what to
> whom..(people have abused me in the past) but perhaps
> some of you who wear your liberalism and tolerance on
> your sleeve would realise how fake and hollow it is in
> the face of handling Vedavati's posts.
> Regards
> Rahul
> --- Shuddhabrata Sengupta <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Dear All,
>>
>>Let me clarify at the very beginning that I find the
>>contents of the
>>exchange between Vedavati and Abhit (which we have
>>all been subjected to
>>because of Vedavati's forward, with comment, of
>>Abhik's off list email
>>to her) sad and deplorable. While Abhik's language
>>betrays an
>>unfortunate misogyny, Vedavati's postings and
>>responses are not exactly
>>exemplars of liberality and tolerance.
>>
>>This is not the first time that Vedavati Jogi has
>>posted material on
>>this list that many on this list will find
>>objectionable, just as there
>>are many others on this list who post material that
>>Vedavati, and
>>perhaps some others on this list might have found
>>objectionable. We have
>>had other instances such as this in the past with
>>others as well. The
>>history of a list such as this grows to accommodate
>>all manner of
>>eccentricities, and that is a sign of the health and
>>robustness of a
>>free and open electronic space. It is in the nature
>>of an unmoderated
>>(that is uncensored) list such as this, that some
>>people will use the
>>platform to post material that many of us will
>>consider reprehensible.
>>However, I would suggest that one way to respond to
>>such provocation is
>>also to not necessarily dignify every such
>>provocation with a response.
>>
>>Abhik Samanta has written in his private capacity to
>>Vedavati, and not
>>on the list. So his post (no matter how
>>objectionable and misogynist its
>>content may be, which I think it is, even though I
>>can understand his
>>outrage at Vedavati's clear act of hate speech) is
>>not technically a
>>breach of list etiquette.
>>
>>Vedavati's reply to Abhik which is addressed both to
>>Abhik and to the
>>list is however a clear case of someone dragging
>>what is essentially a
>>private exchange between two people on to the public
>>space of the list.
>>Doing so,without asking for the permission of the
>>concerned persons (and
>>there is no indication that she has asked Abhik) is
>>a clear breach of
>>list eitquette.
>>
>>As a list member, I would advise all other list
>>members (including
>>Vedavati, and Abhik) to try and refrain from blowing
>>this issue out of
>>proportion. I personally find the sentiments that
>>Vedavati is asking us
>>to consider (in the blog whose url she has
>>forwarded) pathetic.
>>
>>I personally think that the real power of
>>Hindutva-vadis lies in their
>>ability to hog public attention. Just ignore what is
>>said by
>>Hindutva-vaids , be amused, at best by the sad level
>>of the arguments
>>and the rhetoric that they put forward, and see how
>>powerful your
>>unwillingness to pay attention to their agenda can
>>be.
>>
>>I hope this puts an end to what might become an
>>otherwise unpleasant
>>distraction on this busy list.
>>
>>regards,
>>
>>Shuddha
>>
>>
>>
>>Vedavati Jogi wrote:
>>
>>>this shows your level mr. abhik!
>>>
>>>when you people curse hindutv forces especially
>>
>>rss & family, we should not
>>
>>>react
>>>but when we talk about muslim terrorism you can't
>>
>>tolerate moreover you use
>>
>>>such a dirty language ...is it democracy? is it
>>
>>secularism?is it liberalism?
>>
>>>vedavati
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>From: "Abhik Samanta" <abhikauliya at googlemail.com>
>>>>To: vedavati <vrjogi at hotmail.com>
>>>>Subject: Re: [Reader-list] vedavati thought you
>>
>>would like "wrap the body
>>
>>>>of muslim terrorist with pig skin"
>>>>Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:01:43 +0530
>>>>
>>>>depraved and poor deprived girl wats the use of
>>
>>wasting time thinkin shit
>>
>>>>dont u have anyone to fuck
>>>>
>>>>On 2/25/07, vedavati <vrjogi at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>vedavati wants you to check out "wrap the body of
>>
>>muslim terrorist with
>>
>>>>>pig skin", the latest post from "Scientific
>>
>>Analysis".
>>
>>>>>Scientific Analysis - Post:
>>
>>>>http://chritianitybreedspoverty.blogsource.com/post.mhtml?post_id=132180&hbx_camp=5
>>>>
>>>>----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>>........................
>>>>>
>>
>>>>----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Powered by Blogsource
>>>>>http://www.blogsource.com/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Note: The personal information used to send this
>>
>>email was not stored and
>>
>>>>>will be used for any other purpose.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>_________________________________________
>>>>>reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
>>
>>the city.
>>
>>>>>Critiques & Collaborations
>>>>>To subscribe: send an email to
>>
>>reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>>
>>>>>subscribe in the subject header.
>>>>>To unsubscribe:
>>
>>https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>>
>>>>>List archive:
>>
>><https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>
>>>
>>>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
>>>Crave for a healthier lifestyle? Ask an expert
>>>
>>
> http://content.msn.co.in/Lifestyle/AskExpert/Default07.htm
>
>>>_________________________________________
>>>reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
>>
>>the city.
>>
>>>Critiques & Collaborations
>>>To subscribe: send an email to
>>
>>reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the
>>subject header.
>>
>>>To unsubscribe:
>>
>>https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>>
>>>List archive:
>>
>><https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>
>>_________________________________________
>>reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
>>the city.
>>Critiques & Collaborations
>>To subscribe: send an email to
>>reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the
>>subject header.
>>To unsubscribe:
>>https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>>List archive:
>
> <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com. Try it now.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
More information about the reader-list
mailing list