Reflections - christuniversity.in Socio... · They are a group of aquatic, flightless birds living...
Transcript of Reflections - christuniversity.in Socio... · They are a group of aquatic, flightless birds living...
Reflections The Sociology Newsletter
Department of Sociology
Contents
1. Kinship recognition among Penguins
2. Change, really?
3. Modernity, a socially contextualized idea
4. The depiction of divine kinship in Minakshi Temple,
Madurai
5. Corruption
6. Equality of gender?
7. The Role of Stereotypes
8. Is Capital Punishment Justified?
Kinship recognition among Penguins
It is less known that Animals do live in social groups, colonies and they also share a sense of
kinship. Animals might not share the podium for cognitive excellence, but they do finish close to
humans in the emotional aspect. The element of kinship emerged in animals as a result of their
basic cognitive ability to recognize. Kin recognition plays a pivotal role in Animal kinship.
Kin recognition (kin detection) refers to an Animal’s innate ability to distinguish between close
genetic kin and non-kin. In evolutionary biology and in psychology, such capabilities are
presumed to have evolved to serve the adaptive function of inbreeding avoidance.
Penguins are found to be apt with certain features to supplement kin recognition studies.
Penguins belong to order Sphenisciformes, family spheniscidae. They are a group of aquatic,
flightless birds living almost exclusively in the southern hemisphere, especially in Antarctica.
Penguins usually live in large colonies mostly because of the territorial and geographical
constraints. Here the evolutionary aspect comes into help. In the process it becomes a
necessity for Penguins to identify their kin and avoid inter-breeding.
Even though proximate level mechanisms are not well documented, kin recognition a
behavioral adaptation is found largely in penguins. Recent studies have startling revelations
that kin recognition can result from a multitude of sensory inputs. Researchers present 3
important sensory gateways that are prominent for Kin recognition.
First, production of unique phenotypic labels.
Second, perception of these labels with a recognition template, and finally
Third, the recognition of the phenotypes should lead to the action taken by the animal
to identify its kin.
These 3 components allow for several possible complex mechanism of kin recognition. Sensory
information gathered from visual, olfactory and auditory stimuli are the most helpful cues. It’s
also observed that there are varieties of scents arising from the dorsal and oral secretions due
to genetic combinations. Auditory distinctions have been noted among avian species. But we
fail to realize even Penguins belong to the avian family, long tailed Penguins are capable of
discriminating kin and non-kin based on contact calls. Distinguishing calls are the premier
lessons taught by parents to offspring’s during the nestling period.
Also there arises a great need to discriminate between familiar and unfamiliar odors (using
prior association) and between unfamiliar kin and non-kin odors (using phenotype matching).
These recognitions are associated as nest mates and colony mates. The sniff tests conducted in
the Brookfield Zoo outside Chicago proves that Penguins could recognize relatives and non-
relatives even if they weren’t personally familiar with the scent owners.
Parent- off spring relation is focused largely in the study of kin recognition, as there seems to be
rich socialization in this type of kin recognition. Penguins are found to use odors during social
and familial interactions and possibly for mate choice too.
To put this idea to test, Researchers set up tests of odor discrimination for captivated zoo
Penguins, especially those which are known to have had significant past contact with each
other or not. Oily glandular secretions that the Penguins use to pre-feathers provided the
odors, and researchers smeared samples on to plastic dog kennels. Birds were allowed a short
session of exploring an observation room, with a pair of the plastic kennels, each newly
perfumed with a different bird’s preening secretion.
Initially, researchers tested the bird’s ability to discriminate scents by comparing kennels
scented with a familiar, nonrelated bird with that of an unrelated stranger. The birds spent
about six times as long inside the familiar smelling kennels. The researchers added kinship to
the mix. In a test of 12 Penguins, birds spent more than twice as long inside kennels scented
with unfamiliar, unrelated birds than in kennels smelling of unfamiliar kin, the researchers
noted.
Working with a small colony of 22 birds and no more than 12 penguins for any given test,
researchers acknowledge that some results indicate only trends and more work are needed.
Kinship interactions are very intriguing when closely observed among penguins. Emperor
penguins males will incubate their eggs for two months in the winter without eating while the
females are at sea. During that time, they live off their fat reserves and may lose fat from their
body weight. When the females’ returns slowly after the chicks hatch, they switch parental
duties and the females fast and the males go to sea to replenish their fat stores.
Thus, I would like to conclude by saying that kinship emerged the very second two humans or
animals set their feet on earth. Amoeba, insects, birds or animals all share a form of social bond
and a sense of kinship. The level of kinship among the penguins might be primitive, but an area
for further research. This will improve our understanding of kinship behavior and elevate the
standard of living among all organisms.
Prajwal N
II PSEco
Change, really?
I was surfing through the internet on significant socio-economic changes in India over the last
few decades. I found some obvious results – Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization. I
also tried my hand at finding out what people in India were and are doing to bring in “change.” I
was surprised to find a certain website called “How to Change India”, guiding young minds as if
it were the golden mantra for the same. If one were to read through it for the tips it offered,
there is no doubt in saying that it is highly optimistic encouraging one to use their strengths in
taking charge and planting seeds of change.
Here’s my bone of contention. Firstly, LPG was a tied-trio reform that was bound to happen to
India so it could enter the monetary scene. Secondly, “change” needs to be defined. Or does it?
After much thought, I cannot seem to even attempt it. In a country where corrupt power
structures stink right from the root of its society, can one with a humble intention survive when
their peers restrict them with show of monetary and manual power, sometimes even moral
obligations decided by the unknown? Can I, an educated son or daughter of a farmer willing to
educate my people on legalities of loans, continue so when the wealthy village head sends his
macho son and his party workers to destroy my ability to speak or cut my throat? Can I, a
committed political science student who struggled a decade to make a small mark in the politics
of my country; even hope to change the ideology of one constituency in my lifetime? Can I, a
poor mother of three and a ration card-holder, rightfully claim a kilogram of rice that was not
delivered to me the previous month in this one? Will I be asked to stay mute at their leisure?
Finally, Can I empathize strongly with a rape victim, perform a peaceful protest against the
brutal act and expect not to be dragged into the police station for being a violent activist?
Who is witness to these realities? I would like to take the liberty to put words into the mouths
of my people, because it is more than safe to do so- All of us. We know the plight of our country
and that change is a distant dream. It is only wise, in response to the website mentioned, to be
highly aware of the threats by anti-social elements, to take charge by wit and to understand
shortcomings of corrupt practitioners. For at least a few decades, one must work their way
around things to get into the centre of it. And once we are part of the system, once we have the
right to decide for our country, the bigger threat is that we may be caught in the cycle of the
same corrupt practices. You never know what power does to you. Ask yourself and others: Why
is the world the way it is without power-structures operating it?
G. ANJU RAO
II JPEng
Modernity, a socially contextualized idea
Modernity as a concept has been heralded in all fields alike. Political Scientists, Sociologists,
Social Workers, Economists, Agriculturists have done their bit in emphasizing this in their
respective fields. Politicians have walked an extra mile and have taken upon themselves the
moral duty to bring about the so called modernity into all aspects of life as it is assumed to be
the symbol of development.
However, we understand that modernity has become an important criterion for any established
organization. At this point of time we need to ask ourselves, as to who decided these
parameters for any system? What is that, that determines or measures anything as developed
and something else as under-developed? If so who defines development? Or if at all, is there a
concept called development which is universal? Compared to whom? If compared to any, based
on what dimensions? And who determines those dimensions?
These series of questions throw light upon the ramification of this very concept.
If we trace back the notion of modernity (which apparently quantifies development) it has
always been in comparison to something that has taken place before or something that has
been practiced till then by the natives and mainly in comparison with something external. This
is problematic.
The western world saw its highest level of development with the industrial revolution,
intellectual boom during the renaissance and after that with a waves of movements one after
the other. With colonization of countries it was seen that the western world considered their
culture superior, when compared to the cultures of the colonised. This sense of belief system
created hierarchy among cultural systems. Phrases such as “the white man’s burden”, hint at
the ideological conditioning that one colour is superior to the other, one cultural system is
more civilised than the other. Again who determines these parameters?
The modernity that one speaks of in India or any of the so called developing countries is based
on the comparative gap between the parameters of the colonial master and the colonised or
the west and the east or the civilised and the barbaric.
But the question is should it be so? Should we have our development based on something that
is foreign to us, which comes with its own ramification as did colonial rule or should we be our
own true masters?
Modernity is therefore a hegemonic construction and development is an ideological construct.
Both are in comparison to something or someone, with oneself (even if at all by oneself its
identity comes from the existence or other in turn comparison). Imposed ideas of modernity
and development have made one’s who follows them a potential target and a market of the
imposer. The apt conclusion would be that modernity and development are interlinked and this
link is inevitable, but the definition of modernity and in turn development is construction based
on hierarchy. India being a strong victim of this has a long way to go before it calls itself a
Developed Modern Nation-State.
Chinnappa B.G.
II JPEng
The depiction of divine kinship in Minakshi Temple, Madurai
In the myths and rituals of South Indian Hindu temples dedicated to the great God Shiva and his
consort Devi, the Goddess, the marital relationship between them is a central theme. In many
temples too, the wedding of the God and Goddess is a highlight of the annual festival cycle and
nowhere is this more evident than in the city of Madurai in Tamil Nadu, where the temple is
dedicated to Goddess Minakshi and her husband Sundareshwara, a form of Shiva. In the
Minakshi temple, the climax of its principle annual festival – the Chittirai festival is the
celebration of the Divine couple’s wedding. Witnessing the Chittirai festival is an experience on
its own – lakhs of people thronging around the procession of the beautiful idols of Minakshi and
Sundareshwara, everyone eager to get a glimpse of this aura despite the sweltering heat.
The wedding of Minakshi and
Sundareshwara attracts the
temple’s largest crowd of the
year. In its main features, the
Divine wedding is identical to a
Tamil Brahmin marriage
ceremony, adapted to take
account of the bride and
groom’s representation by
images and actors. The crucial
feature of the wedding ritual is
the Tairaivarttal, which evokes
the action of Vishnu giving
Minakshi away to
Sundareshwara and thereby becoming his brother in law. This appears to dramatise the affinal
relationship between in the brothers in law who are ideally cross cousins in the south Indian
Dravidian kinship system.
Let us now turn to the relationship between Shiva and Vishnu as it is represented inside the
Minakshi temple. The famous sculptured image of Kalyanasundara in the Minakshi temple
again depicts Vishnu giving Minakshi in marriage to Sundareshwara. The original image carved
on a pillar is a popular focus for devotion. Despite the prominence of Vishnu in the
Kalyanasundara image what is striking is the affinal relationship between him and
Sundareshwara is not given any ritualistic importance. Nor is any attention paid to the sibling
tie between Minakshi and Vishnu and although brother sister relationships among Tamil
Brahmins are conventionally more formally distant after a woman marriage than among most
other south Indians, they are not as completely accentuated as Minakshi’s tie with her brother
appears to be.
Instead, on almost all important occasions when Minakshi and Sundareshwara are represented
together as a couple, their parental relationship with Subramanya is most prominently
displayed. Thus the emphasis on Minakshi and Sundareshwara’s parenthood is expressed in the
composition and arrangement of their festival images. Thus, it is the filiations, not affinity that
is repeatedly emphasized as the concomitant of the marital bond, in spite of the importance of
marriage alliance in the Dravidian kinship system.
In this respect, there is a
parallel with the analysis of
the ‘kin nucleus’ in Tamil
folklore, in which there is a
similar emphasis on
relationships among
immediate family members
and hardly any emphasis
on larger consanguinal and
affinal groups. In the kin
nucleus, a woman occupies
the centre surrounded and constrained by her father, brother, husband and son, but she is also
the ‘material or source of energy on which the kinship system is built. Thus, among the Deities,
the Goddess at the centre is linked to Brahma (her proto father), Vishnu (her brother), Shiva
(her husband) and Ganesh and Murugan (her sons). Thus this folkloric representation provides
an alternative, predominately female perspective of kinship that counterbalances the male
oriented kinship system structured by larger groups.
Thus, Minakshi’s and Sundareshwara’s devotees are not presented with an ideal model of
kinship system but instead they are given a depiction of antagonisms between close relatives as
well as the means to imagine how marriage, the family and their own personal lives might be if
they could be liberated from social reality.
Anusha Sribhasyam
II PSEco
Corruption
A shadow unfolds from the deepening darkness
Black as the night, oozing from nothingness
Sticky as tar and vile as poison
It advances to taint the offices of power
Once clean in the past, clean of greed
The pastoral life never fed its need
Long ago, people were content with life
And those that looked over them worked for them alone
But as wealth slowly began to pour in
The spark of decency began to wither
An unsullied lotus began to decay
As the darkness and filth began to clog its life
Honest souls were stained most subtly
Infected so as to lose their innocence
As the hungry World began to lose its morals
To satisfy a new God, one of gold
Apostles of justice and purity that now remain
Fight lonely battles against a growing tide
Yet they are doomed to fail, crumble away to non-existence
For their upholders now undermine their once strong foundations
And so, the monster advances, a relentless force
As the light grows faint, pleading for re-ignition.
Tarun Surya
II JPEng
Equality of gender?
In this world of growing technology and globalization, social change has become the norm of
the day. With massive growth in the arena of communication, the transfer of ideas all across
the world has been on the rise, working towards transforming the globe into one enormous
melting pot of cultures.
Perhaps one such idea or concept that has been gaining increasing prominence over the past
few decades is the idea of feminism and women’s empowerment. Inequality of the sexes in
almost every arena is the current situation, and there have been innumerous efforts on the part
of a large number of organizations, parties and so on, to change the situation. And while I,
being a woman myself, am all for the equality of the sexes, I have a slightly different take on the
approach and concepts that go behind all the efforts.
My perspective, as a woman, is that if equality needs to be attained, then we must do away
with the term ‘women empowerment’. In my mind, only those who are oppressed and inferior
require empowerment. The slaves required empowerment, because they were considered
inferior, both by society as well as themselves. The lower-castes required empowerment,
because they, too, were considered lesser by, both, society as well as themselves. While I do
not deny that women are treated unfairly and unequally in most places, the plea for
empowerment in itself shows an attitude of accepted inferiority.
We have been perpetrating the helplessness of our plight by attaching to all that is traditionally
male, an air of superiority and desirability. Strength, power, control, aggression, dominance –
all characteristics associated with the male sex. What feminist movements attempt to do is
establish these characteristics as associable with women as well. Women can also govern the
corporate field. Women can also lead unmarried lives. Women can also smoke, drink and
socialize the way men do.
If this is the manner in which women aim to attain a status of equality, then we are in actuality
in agreement with the myth that women are an inferior sex. One cannot deny that there are
certain biological differences between man and woman – instead of trying the bridge the
differences, however, why not accept the differences without attaching any value to either set?
The job of a home-maker, of a woman who chooses to give up her career and stay at home to
raise a family, is no less important than that of her husband, who earns them their daily bread.
In today’s changing global setting, there has been a huge inter-changing, crossover of
traditional gender roles and stereotypes. However, in my perception, the tags of a ‘working
woman’, or a ‘stay-at-home husband’ seem borrowed and uncomfortable – as if one sex has
‘borrowed’ the roles meant to be played out by the other, and is trying to prove that they, too,
can do it as well. While this definitely seems to be one way to go about the attainment of
equality, by breaking gender stereotypes, perhaps there is another way. Being a woman, and
one who fully aims to establish a successful career in my field-of-choosing, I do not mean to say
that one must stick to traditional roles alone. I do, however, say that perhaps we could begin by
equating both the ‘duties’ of men and women as of the same importance and degree. If only we
could break free of our conditioned attitudes towards gender roles and duties, we would see
that ‘women’s empowerment’ is as big of a myth as that of the inequality of women, and that
both fall along a continuum of the same spectrum.
Without the idea of ‘women’s empowerment’, there exists no inferiority, or the idea of a
‘weaker sex’. Men and women are different, but these differences need have no negative
values attached to them. Men and women may perform different tasks, but these tasks need
have no greater or lesser importance attached to them. Once this mental concept is conquered
and digested, then perhaps we will all see that the idea of feminism is as unnecessary as that of
chauvinism – equality has always existed everywhere except in human minds.
Sree Lakshmi
The Role of Stereotypes
Stereotypes have always been an inevitable factor in an individual’s life. Their role in the
functioning of society is vital and hence gain the attention of all thinkers alike. An activity along
these lines was conducted in II BA PSEco. The debate held was on the topic- The Role of
Stereotypes, one team proposing and the other opposing the motion.
Those speaking for the motion put forth their argument first. The debaters emphasized on the
role of positive stereotypes. They cited the example of parents frightening their children to stay
away from colorful insects, as many of them are harmful. This creates a stereotype in the child’s
mind about the colorful insects, and lasts for a long time, probably forever. Yet another
argument was that stereotypes are, often, used for safety and in this case it is thoroughly
justified.
Making a counter argument against the above statement, the opposition team claimed that
stereotypes reinforced ideas that are hard to break out of, using the example of the defamation
of the Muslims, due a certain sect of them involved in terrorism operations. Hence, all Muslims
have been stereotyped to be ‘terrorists’, leading to the bad press on Islam as a whole. Also they
stated that stereotypes build barriers around the mind, restricting our point of view.
The discussion was followed by the audience voicing their opinions. An interesting point put
forth was that stereotypes never needed to exist and hence there would never have been any
need to break away from it.
This was followed by a series of rebuttals from different members of the class. The activity soon
kicked into life when member of the audience engaged themselves in the discussion, making it
an enterprising and enlightening activity hour for the class on a whole.
Overall, it was an excellent activity, and judicious use of the time allotted to the hour.
II PSEco
Is Capital Punishment Justified?
With a series of executions in our country, the question of whether capital punishment is
just has to be debated. The first year BA Sociology students took up this mindboggling
issue.
The argument suggesting that capital punishment is justified was narrated by using a story.
The story goes as follows: Albert Fish from USA who in 1928 had murdered a 13 year old
girl Grace Bager and many more girls, whom he raped, cooked and ate. Inspite of such
atrocities, he continued to trouble the parent’s everyday by telling them what he did to
their daughters. So like Albert should be given capital punishment as there is no scope for
improvement. There were many ways to deal with such kind of people before who were
decapitated, boiled and killed in order to make them feel guilty. Of course now there
aren’t any such lethal punishments given but just a lethal injection or hanging to death
which is not that painful. The latent argument was that with changing times the judicial
systems in the country should adopt methods to ensure complete welfare of its citizens.
Another argument advocating capital punishment was that if only these kinds of people
die, there will be more people alive on earth.
However, the arguments against the use of capital punishment were stronger. They argued
that India being a welfare society, the act of crime must be stopped and not the criminal
itself. Every individual has a right to live and so by giving them capital punishment we are
violating that individual’s fundamental right. The example of Kasab’s case, the accused in
26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, was cited here. They suggested that it was unjust on the
part of government and such punishments should not be encouraged. Yet another
argument against capital punishment was that no society is ideal and deviants are a part of
all societies. They deserve a second chance is what these debaters argued.
These arguments triggered the audience and gave them food for thought. Though a
consensus could not be arrived upon, the debate presented two sides of a coin, widening
perspectives. All in all it was a fruitful and an enterprising session.
I PSEng