On 3rd July 2015, it was reported that the female research student from St Stephen’s College, who raised molestation charges against her PhD guide, submitted audio clips to Delhi Police in which the principal of St Stephen’s College, Valson Thampu was allegedly heard asking her to “take back” the complaints.
In the audio clip posted by Hindustan Times, Thampu is heard saying, “Trust in God. You have to take that complaint back, If you don’t do it today itself there will be complication…”
The molestation complaint – first raised on 10 December 2014 – was published in in bits and pieces, but it never made a big story. This is not the first case of molestation in one of the premiere colleges of Delhi University. Many stories can be read on blogs and social media. However, such reports don’t make big news stories. In a contrast, the ban on Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle (APSC) in IIT Madras was run on prime-time as deeply concerning news. The elite cadre of media concluded that IITs don’t let the student grow on softer aspects, IITians need to remove their blinders and peep into the social and political realities of India. It is surprising that the elite alums of St Stephen’s College – steering national and international media houses – had strong opinions on education system and class divide inside IITs, but they remain silent on molestation cases inside posh colleges of Delhi University. Adding to the disgust, when a magazine was banned in the college, a few journalists, instead of questioning the set-up, tried hard to incoherently drag “Hindus and Hindutva”. The article which hardly talks about the real issue i.e., ban on publication is full of Hindu, Conversion, Slaughter and RSS.
Another interesting story which is drawing the attention of people across India is the appointment of Gajendra Chauhan as the chairman of Film and Television Institute of India (FTII). Chauhan has a very non-impressive career in Bollywood. In fact, Chauhan, in his 30+ years of stay in Bollywood, has not worked in a single movie which can even be called a mediocre piece of art. His appointment as the FTII chairman is a big disappointment in cinema fraternity. In his article, Vivek Agnihotri argues that FTII has already been facing stepmotherly treatment from the government. FTII requires someone who is naturally attached to the chords of FTII, and not just a manager. Sadly, the attacks on Chauhan have shifted from concerns on his artistic capability to his political choices. How many of us ever heard about political inclinations of previous chairmen of FTII or how many of us ever heard about chairmen of FTII or how many of ever heard about FTII. In an interview, Bhupendra Chaube, after preaching his fake ethos of freedom and choices, bluntly mocked his right-wing politics. The propaganda driven journalist, who was already exposed by us, demeans Chauhan by asking if he fits into the category of previous chairmen and then alleges that Chauhan is fixed in FTII with a vested agenda to effectively curb and control the freedom of speech, liberal values associated with the Indian cinema.
Media is quoting it as saffronization of an institute before Chauhan implemented any policy. If political choices and ideologies are really respected in the elite ecosystem, why are people demeaned for their choices? Not only that, many messiahs of who frequently outrage against look-based-hatred attacked him for his looks:
Ganjendra Chauhan (Yudhishthir) not only has no cred to head FTII, he was also the WORST in a cast of more than 500. Aaloo-bonda look-alike.
— वरुण (@varungrover) June 10, 2015
These hypocritical biases raise many concerns. The preamble of equality and humanity flagged by most of these elitists is actually shallow. Many of these people can preach social equality, but they can’t hide the class and ideology based discrimination deep-rooted within them.
Poet. Engineer. Story Teller. Social Media Observer.
Started Bhak Sala on facebook