Here's a very detailed, and reasoned, response from a major participant in the current debate, one of the signatories of the "statement": < https://kafila.online/2017/10/28/from-feminazi-to-savarna-rape-apologist-in-24-hours/ >. (And, here's the statement, for ready reference, so that one can oneself look for any "defence" - "vociferous" or otherwise, of any of the accused: < https://kafila.online/2017/10/24/statement-by-feminists-on-facebook-campaign-to-name-and-shame/ >.)
Worth a careful read. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a very significant intervention. The opinion that one forms and conveys is, of course, very much one's own prerogative. That goes even without saying. Sukla On 28 October 2017 at 23:50, Sukla Sen <[email protected]> wrote: > > A murky controversy getting murkier. > The (views of the) principal player at <https://www.facebook.com/ > RxyaSxrkar?fref=mentions>. > A major antagonist - a well-known LGBT activist, openly countering: < > https://www.facebook.com/ashley.tellis>. > > Other significant links: > <https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1686281001419245&id= > 100001120831895&fs=4&hc_location=ufi> > <https://www.buzzfeed.com/karthikshankar/why-i-published-a-list-of-sexual- > predators-in-academia?bffbdialogue&utm_term=.shGreMMJa#.sramk77Qb> > <https://kafila.online/2017/10/24/statement-by-feminists- > on-facebook-campaign-to-name-and-shame/> > <https://feminisminindia.com/2017/10/26/calculated-risks- > naming-and-shaming/> > <https://scroll.in/article/855399/its-like-blackening- > faces-why-i-am-uneasy-with-the-name-and-shame-list-of-sexual-harassers> > <https://www.facebook.com/ashley.tellis/posts/1593616980701308> > > There's obviously, a rather unresolvable, strong two-way tension. > On the one hand, the stark inadequacies of the "due process", on top of > the highly asymmetric power architecture, acknowledged across the whole > spectrum. Leading to "helplessness" of the accusers and thereby their > recourse to this action. > On the other, the issue of ethicality of a list (of "harassers" or worse), > with no context, no charge indiacted, let alone proved. Or the > complainants. And, of course, the version(s) of the "accused" - who must be > a "mixed" crowd, with widely varying degrees of of offenses committed and, > at least, in a few cases just none, nowhere captured. > > Additionaly, an element of "Savranas" vs. "Dalits" was subsequently added. > Specifically to counter the acknowledged feminists, given the "parity" in > terms of gender leading to a sort of "tie". Just to break it and regain the > initial "advantage" in the debate by bringing in the "oppressed caste" > element vis-a-vis the much reviled Savarna "elite". > (Tellis, btw, has, among other things, emphatically contested the claim > that Sarkar is a Dalit. > He has also highlighted the fact of his belonging to an oppressed "sexual > minority". > That makes the equation and match of "identity politics" rather > interesting.) > > The essential point that, however, remains is what purpose the whole > controversy is serving? > -- > Peace Is Doable > > > -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
