Originally posted by: amidstthehues
A common response to all that, done with quoting. 🥱
---
Domestic sensibilities or insensible but majorly supported conclusion, anything or everything basically ensures and stems from the comfort of majority here. Compromises are expected from minority. If minority doesn't willingly agree, the compromise is forced upon it as a law. Very immature way of handling things in a country this diverse. Even after having such diverse mindsets, all we could do or afford is a forced compromise. We really have a small comfort zone, going by that. What's the use of this rich variety and complexity then, if everything has to come down to a simple, majorly accepted conclusion? Restriction shouldn't be the ultimate solution to ensure social harmony. Going by diversity, we should be physically and mentally equipped enough to amend social conducts to promote growth as well. Comfort zone is a nice place to be at, but forever. If law is passed this once keeping discomfort of majority in mind, the said majority will get armed enough to form or solidify new discomforts and demand new laws against that. It's kissing now, passing smiles would be banned tomorrow. Even girls can be banned from wearing the clothes they like, going by majority's comfort. All this is going towards more rigidity, not liberty and definitely not growth.
Yes..going by the majority is not always justified..and in some cases its too obvious that the law is biased, judgmental & unjustified..however, coming to the current issue of obscene PDAs , i do not believe it falls in that category..and i believe i had already pointed out the difference between the current issue & other major humanitarian issues..this isnt about freedom of choice but more about few people wanting to impose on others..nobody has asked people to refrain from their sex-life , just that they keep their private life private & not make it difficult for others..is that too much to ask ?..& people who maintain a stand that 'others should just deal with it !' are just being selfish..and in this case, its obvious that people asking for the right to erotic romps in public with total disregard to public's comfort are the ones who are being selfish & not the other way round...
Let's have a look on how our society responds to different things -
1. Sex noises in private room at late night - Not okay to unrelated neighbors in adjacent room. Disturbing their sleep, bring law.
2. Parents who can't control kids in public - Change the place, it's a kid. Kids make noises. Be mature, instead. No charges against parental failure to control their product. What's the need when we can change the place and mind our own business, instead.
3. Sex noises in public - Not okay, disgusts us. Law, law, where art thou?
4. Mata Ka Jagrata at sane hours in public lane making loud noises - How devotional. Let's attend.
5. Mata Ka Jagrata after 12 at night - Ignore and sleep, instead. (let's not forget this one's louder than sex noises)
6. Married couple doing PDA - Turn around, it's their private moment. - do they smooch in public or make any other spectacle of their sex-life in public & make others uncomfortable ?..🤔..i doubt that..🤔
7. Unmarried couple's PDA - Look at their nerves. Immoral creatures, polluting the space. LAW, HERE.
8. Person pees in public - Turn around. Not okay to watch. None of our business, either, unless the said wall is ours.
9. Sex talks in public - Disturbing and immoral.
10. Other loud talks, say business related, in public - Only disturbing. We can deal with that much. Not a prob.
So basically, it's not noise or untidiness in general that repels society. It's sex that's alarming in a country as populated as ours, talk of irony.
Intresting observations ! ⭐️.. though i dont agree with few of the comparisons made here ( as was explicitly pointed out in my previous posts) , still it was a good read ..😃
---
With liberty comes responsibility and here it's couple's responsibility to handle the consequences of their actions.
If a couple chooses to display affection in public, it loses rights to demand absolute privacy there. If public wants to watch, it will watch. If it would rather mind its own business, its own choice. Like staring a group of friends taking duck faced selfies or choosing to mind your own business, that choice rests with public. But if public physically interferes against couple's will , the couple should be allowed to take action. If it doesn't, it'd be equivalant to making eve or male teasing legal. Here couple provokes public, there, say, clothes do. And that'd really deteriorate the standards and situation. Watching selfie moment is fine, photo bombing ain't. And on grounds of privacy, I see no difference in taking selfies or making out.
I am not sure if u read the posts that werent directed towards you but had some really intersting discussion going on..i myself quoted a real-life example illustrating how 'irresponsible PDAs' can be intolerable..'a man displaying his loud romantic PDA whilst talking over phone in a public transport'..going by the above logic wouldnt this insensitive man gain an upper hand over public's sensibilities since it supports PDA..but common sense & logic demands that the said man should behave himself in the public..and the same goes for other obscene PDAs as well..
This one's about kids in public places and how it's inappropriate for them to get such a view. I'll copy paste the response I gave before to bring it to notice to respond to the query put up in against.
In India, kids are morally restricted from talking about sex and intimacy. It is such a taboo the kid is never comfortable enough to put forth his/her curious questions and doubts to people he should be approaching. There are no sex related talks in a family gathering or discussion. Channels showing such scenes are changed and not watched in a family together. So, even when the kid gets late exposure to intimacy physically, he is preoccupied by it mentally. And he grows up with a mentality that tells him how big of a deal sex is. This restriction ain't healthy, it rather piles up the symptoms, which manifests as disease in late years of that kid's age. It only delays and makes the whole issue more chronic. We have sexually frustrated adults, eve or male teasers, rapists, pedophiles, abusers. If we've had such healthy morals since ages, why haven't we been able to uproot these immoral issues which are also illegal.
So what are you suggesting here ?.. that kids coming across couples in obscene situation is actually good for their mental & sexual health ?.. i am not sure if that is the best approach..i believe whats required is keeping communication open , getting over hang ups about talking about sex when kids start to get curious..overall proper sex education should do the trick.. & proper sex education does not equate to live po*nography shown to kids..though many sex education techniques do employ visual tools but that too isnt equal to treating the kids with a couple enjoying in public..i think it will just mess them up..over-exposure at tender age is just as bad as (or may be more ) over-restriction at any age...a fine line needs to be drawn between the two..
EDIT : If kid views such things, he can be guided in right direction, at least. But problem here is not kid's exposure, he gets it during his growing years, anyways. Sex is out there in text books, gossips, internet yada yada. The problem is people themselves feel ashamed of discussing sex with their kids. Kids are refuge taken to house and justify one's discomfort, instead.
comment:
p_commentcount