Game of Words : View Vs Counter View 1.16

Should comedians be allowed to make fun of personal issues?

View-

In a society which promotes freedom of speech, comedians have a right, and often, an expectation to be controversial. Audiences are as entitled to be offended by a joke as they are to find it funny. The offense, when taken from a joke's lack of sensitivity, is perfectly understandable. However, one person being offended may not necessarily mean someone else will be offended too. This is the subjective nature of comedy, and debating on whether it should be censored is a debate which will rage on in a continuous storm of competing ideologies. But tragic events since the start of the year have made the debate on comedy’s relationship with societal norms debateable.

Joking at the expense of something is disempowering, at all levels of society, and is more likely to cause offense. Even the most clever, well-written jokes will be interpreted differently. If you are offended by something which you are not willing to try and understand from a different perspective then perhaps the best reaction is to ignore it and change the channel.   But comedy exists within a bubble, with the freedom to say things on a public platform which politicians, journalists, and other public figures cannot. That is something worth celebrating, not censoring.

Thoughtful comedy on any subject can be a powerful tool, with a purpose to educate as well as entertain. However, comedians should be cautious, on where to draw the line.

                                                   

                                                                                             -  Vedanth Bharpilania

                                                                          1 BBA B

Counterview-

A few months ago, a video was put up on YouTube by comedian Nicole Arbour that caused a massive outcry on social media. The video, which was highly offensive talked about how she does not believe that "fat shaming" is even a "thing" anymore. The video caused such an outcry that YouTube was forced to ban it. The repercussions were so bad that she even lost a few movie roles.  This whole controversy raised an even bigger question of where to draw the line in rules pertaining to comedy.

The conversation about offensive comedy has been having been brought up by many comedians. In today's world where everything has to be politically correct one has to wonder about what can be talked about and what can't be. This, however, doesn't make what Nicole Arbour said acceptable. What Arbour talked about in her video was mean and cruel to a group of people who already face societal pressure. There is a massive stigma against people who are overweight and to make a video that denies this truth is in very poor taste. Even if she is joking, the way she delivered her video was just downright mean.

The thing about comedy is that it give a few people the right to poke fun at our society. To find humor in the most trivial things in our society. I do not believe that comedy should be censored so heavily because we do live in a country where freedom of speech is one of our God given rights, but we have to remember that there is a line for what is acceptable to joke about and what is not.

As our country grows more politically correct and censorship finds its way into more light-hearted issues, you have to wonder where the line will be drawn.

                    

                                                         Pranav Kinger

                                   I BBA B

Game Of Words : View Vs Counter View 1.15

Should gay marriage be legalized?

VIEW:

The most common argument against allowing gays to marry seems to be that we need to protect the institution of marriage. This argument is ridiculous for many reasons. While the main reason people in the India seem to get married is out of love, it is by no means the only reason.

There are people who marry for money, non-sexual companionship, even health insurance, do these reasons also threaten the institution of marriage? Furthermore, we have to look at marriage historically. For many years a wife was considered the property of her husband. For generations, royal families would marry their children off for diplomatic reasons, even "lower class" families would marry their daughters off to wealthy and/or powerful families so that they may reap the benefits. Many countries still have arranged marriages. To me, it appears that marriage is not exactly as "sacred" an institution as some would like to think.

Another argument against same-sex marriage is that we need to "protect" our children. Are we worried that letting homosexual people get married will, in turn, convert their children? If we are talking about the children of a gay couple whether through adoption (that is a whole other issue), artificial insemination, surrogacy, or the old-fashioned way; then would it not be more beneficial for these children to have a married couple as parents, particularly for legal reasons? Some may say that the "ideal" situation for children to be raised in is a loving mother and father. While this may not be wrong, it is not reality. It would be great if everyone had a loving mother and father, but how many children are being raised by single parents because one parent took off, or have a mother and father but are neglected or abused? It seems absurd to even suggest that it would be more beneficial for a child to be raised in an abusive home over that of a loving same-sex couple.

Practically all of the arguments against gay marriage come back to the issue of religion. Many extremely religious conservatives like to remind us that there is freedom of religion in this country, but some do not seem to understand that freedom of religion does not mean everybody conforming to your own personal religious beliefs. Some will say that since gay marriage is against their religious beliefs it is a violation of their freedom of religion.

The same argument can be made for homosexuals, though. We are all entitled to our own beliefs, but we should not expect everybody else to conform to them. Same sex marriage has no logical impact on the everyday lives of religious conservatives, but religious conservatives denying same-sex couples the right to marry does have a direct impact on the everyday lives of homosexuals.

The whole argument really comes down to letting consenting adults do as they wish, provided they are not hurting anybody, and keeping our beliefs out of the lives of others, just as we expect for ourselves. Homosexuals getting married really has no effect on anybody but themselves. 

• Avish Crasta

            1BBA ‘A’

COUNTER VIEW:

As the world's oldest democracy legalizes gay marriage nationwide, it is time for the world's largest democracy to perform some much-needed introspection - are we, as a people, society, and country ready to legalize gay marriage?

Unfortunately, the answer is no.

The problem isn't the Indian judiciary. I personally believe that, barring a few decisions (including Section 377), the Indian judiciary is, by far, India's most forward-looking institution, easily beating even Narendra Modi in terms of progressiveness and liberalism

There are several points to prove my thoughts right.

It is a well-known fact that the same – sex couples will not be able to reproduce their own kids and this would bring down their family generation. Having a kid of your own is an integral part of the marriage systems and the society.

A child needs both a mother as well as a father. Children who are raised without a mother are deprived of the emotional safety. Children who are raised by same – sex parents face more difficulties rather than the normal kids.

According to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom, marriage is not a right but a privilege. The society should oppose the people marrying from the same sex. Marriage is a traditional concept which takes place between a man and a woman.

The same – sex marriages weaken the institution of marriage. India is a country where the traditions are followed since time immemorial. In India, the institution of marriage is defined as a process which takes place between a man and woman.

The same-sex marriages are considered to be immoral in most parts of the world including India. Around 50% of the people who have undertaken the activity of homosexuality, know that what they are doing is immoral and unnatural. Marriage is considered to be pure and homosexual people tend to break that concept. The majority of the people in North America consider same – sex marriages as a sin.

Few religious texts like Quran also go against the concept of same – sex marriage. Quran has a saying that when a man mounts another man, the throne of the God shakes. The scriptures also consider the lesbian intercourse as an unlawful intercourse. No ideologies have been created which deletes the concept of a man marrying a woman.

With Ireland legalizing the concept of same – sex marriage, we hope that few other countries would also join this ideology. There are still many orthodox countries which shut their door to the idea of same – sex relations. Apart from legal, there are many moral and social aspects of same-sex relationships. In the near future, India might support the concept of same – sex marriages.

• Anto Sajosh Poovelikunnel

1 BBA ‘A’

Game Of Words : View Vs Counter View 1.14

Once bad at math, a person will always be bad at math.

View-            

Modern sciences challenge our basic assumptions about various subjects, some of which have discouraged a lot of students from sticking with it.

The most popular and damaging of these assumptions has been that some people can do math and others just can’t. Advances in neuroscience are revolutionizing our approach to education, and they have various implications for the way we teach math. Parents believe it, most teachers believe it, and soon enough, the students believe it too. There has been a recent study which stated that if a student did not have a good math teacher during the fifth and sixth grade, there is a high possibility that the student would not be able to cope up with the difficulty of the subject in higher grades. Math is a subject in which a person can’t do well if he/she is not well-versed with the basics and therefore a student must have good guidance right from the elementary level.

Every child can’t do well in math .

The simple answer is that we don’t approach the subject in the right way, conceptually or philosophically. Schools continue to single out who is good at math — and who is not — at a very young age. That has to change.

Another myth I think is important to confront is this notion of a “wall” in math. According to this popular idea, you can take all the math classes you like until you hit your personal wall, and then you can’t go any further. Approximately half the people in the U.S. have a fixed mindset, and the other half have a growth mindset. More people have a fixed mindset about math than any other subject. It has been found that kids with growth mindsets achieve more. They do so because a growth mindset goes along with certain behaviors — they are more persistent and more willing to learn from mistakes.

• Gurleen Singh  1BBA-B

Counter-view:

Math uses made-up rules to create models and relationships. Textbooks rarely focus on understanding; it's mostly solving problems with fixed formulas. It saddens me that beautiful ideas get such a rote treatment. Research proves that Math is a way of thinking, and it's important to see how that thinking developed rather than only showing the result. Psychological studies point out that mindset is key to learning. Factual learning is not understanding, we must keep an open mind and delve deep into the true meaning of things and not just look at the superficial coating applied unintentionally by our mind. It's often seen that applying theories to real world phenomena helps understand the theories much better. We must realize we are capable of learning a lot more than we think we can. We must not give up easily, a characteristic quite common in humans. Therefore, a person can get better at math if he/she wants to because at the end of the day it's the mindset of the person that sets his/her limitations. Math skills are increasingly important for getting good jobs these days, so believing you can’t learn math is especially self-destructive. But, I also believe that math is a great mental monster for an unconfident individual. If we can convince you that anyone can learn math, it should be a short step to convincing you that you can learn just about anything, if you work hard enough.

While schools tend to focus on math problems around third grade, and math learning disabilities often are diagnosed by fifth 
A study found the ability to work with numbers may be something that is entirely choice-based. If you want to, you can.

• Anuj Talera

            1BBA-B