As we wait for the Ayodhya verdict, I was trying to explain the issue to my 7 year old. I said, people couldn't decide whether there should be a temple or a mosque in Ayodhya, so they started fighting. Now the judges will tell them what there should be.
His reaction -- but they are both places of worship. So then why fight?
Indeed. Why?
Update: here's how I explained the judgment that came in. The judges said, stop fighting and build BOTH!
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
This is not Governance
The Supreme Court today saved us from having to hear the Ayodhya verdict tomorrow. India's civil society heaved a collective sigh of relief and prepared to get on with life until the next "date" for the verdict. I admire the way the SC handled the situation -- postpone the verdict a day before it is due, next hearing about when the verdict can be delivered two days before the judge delivering the verdict retires, thus paving the way for a lengthy re-trial.
On the other hand, I am completely appalled by the reaction of the Karnataka government.When faced with the possibility of a law and order situation following the verdict, the CM, instead of taking preventive measures by taking lumpen elements into custody and sending out a stern warning to hooligans, decided to ... impose curfew for students of all ages! All public and private schools and colleges were declared shut for two days.
This knee-jerk surrender to the lawless will just strengthen the hands of the lumpen elements of society who are always on the lookout for an excuse to cause trouble.
The *correct* response from a good government would have been to tell parents to send their children to school and take responsibility of their safety, while dealing strongly with potential troublemakers, thus sending a message that society cannot be held to ransom by those who flout the law.
Increasingly, it seems to me that law and order is becoming meaningless in India -- might is what prevails. Why then do we need governments at all, if at the time for governance, they helplessly throw up their hands and lock up the innocent?
On the other hand, I am completely appalled by the reaction of the Karnataka government.When faced with the possibility of a law and order situation following the verdict, the CM, instead of taking preventive measures by taking lumpen elements into custody and sending out a stern warning to hooligans, decided to ... impose curfew for students of all ages! All public and private schools and colleges were declared shut for two days.
This knee-jerk surrender to the lawless will just strengthen the hands of the lumpen elements of society who are always on the lookout for an excuse to cause trouble.
The *correct* response from a good government would have been to tell parents to send their children to school and take responsibility of their safety, while dealing strongly with potential troublemakers, thus sending a message that society cannot be held to ransom by those who flout the law.
Increasingly, it seems to me that law and order is becoming meaningless in India -- might is what prevails. Why then do we need governments at all, if at the time for governance, they helplessly throw up their hands and lock up the innocent?
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Children are Precious
As I was driving into the parking lot of my apartment complex this afternoon, I met three little children playing cricket in the driveway in front of my slot. They looked ages 6 and under were completely unchaperoned -- not even a babysitter in sight, let alone a parent. They saw my car approach and moved into another slot to wait while I parked.
Now, I always reverse and park, so I edged my car ahead of the slot and then turned to see if the children were safe so that I could back in. That's when one little boy decided that it was a good idea to play games with my car. He squatted behind my car in the driveway. I saw him do it and called out to him that was unsafe and he should move to the side. The little fellow stuck his fingers in his ears and pretended not to hear me. Of course, as I began slowly backing into my slot, he quickly moved away.
Being a mom myself, I was absolutely shocked to see children under 6 unchaperoned in, of all places, parking lots. One of the children then told me it was too hot to play in the play-area so they were hanging out in the parking lot. Of course it was too hot to be in an unshaded play-area in the middle of the afternoon!
That's when I understood what was going on. The children had been sent out of the house to the play-area in order to let people at home rest in peace without the noise of television, computer games or simply childish voices. The children, in their innocence, found the play-area too hot and relocated their game to the parking lot.
I don't blame the children. What about the caregivers?
When I was growing up, we weren't allowed to go out of the house in the afternoon, and we weren't allowed to play noisy games either. Afternoon was quiet time, adults rested and children were expected to keep ourselves occupied in quiet ways. If we couldn't think of *anything* to do, then sitting quietly getting bored was just fine. Of course, no child ever gets bored. Afternoons were spent reading books, drawing, and colouring pictures, among other things.
Which brings me to my point. Today, adults complain that children are rowdy, and not interested in "intellectual pursuits". Here's my question: have the caregivers ever tried to create an atmosphere that enables such pursuit? It is quite possible that the first time you ask a child who hasn't been told to stay home in the afternoon to do so quietly, the child will rebel. Calm, firm and PATIENT handling will eventually help create an atmosphere where the child will begin to gravitate towards "quiet" activities.
How many parents are ready to do this? I have heard moms say 'X doesn't listen to me' and take the easy way out of leaving the child unchaperoned in play areas, parking lots and even elevators.
It really makes me wonder. Of course parenting is a great joy, but isn't it an equally big responsibility? Don't our children have the right to our time -- to chaperone them, to set limits and boundaries, to firmly and calmly enforce them, to steer them towards activities that will stand them in good stead through life? Are we now so selfish that we are ready to gamble even on the safety of our children in order to enjoy our own life?
Childhood is fleeting and children are precious -- enjoy your child's childhood by cherishing parenting in all its glory -- a large part of which is responsibility to your child.
Now, I always reverse and park, so I edged my car ahead of the slot and then turned to see if the children were safe so that I could back in. That's when one little boy decided that it was a good idea to play games with my car. He squatted behind my car in the driveway. I saw him do it and called out to him that was unsafe and he should move to the side. The little fellow stuck his fingers in his ears and pretended not to hear me. Of course, as I began slowly backing into my slot, he quickly moved away.
Being a mom myself, I was absolutely shocked to see children under 6 unchaperoned in, of all places, parking lots. One of the children then told me it was too hot to play in the play-area so they were hanging out in the parking lot. Of course it was too hot to be in an unshaded play-area in the middle of the afternoon!
That's when I understood what was going on. The children had been sent out of the house to the play-area in order to let people at home rest in peace without the noise of television, computer games or simply childish voices. The children, in their innocence, found the play-area too hot and relocated their game to the parking lot.
I don't blame the children. What about the caregivers?
When I was growing up, we weren't allowed to go out of the house in the afternoon, and we weren't allowed to play noisy games either. Afternoon was quiet time, adults rested and children were expected to keep ourselves occupied in quiet ways. If we couldn't think of *anything* to do, then sitting quietly getting bored was just fine. Of course, no child ever gets bored. Afternoons were spent reading books, drawing, and colouring pictures, among other things.
Which brings me to my point. Today, adults complain that children are rowdy, and not interested in "intellectual pursuits". Here's my question: have the caregivers ever tried to create an atmosphere that enables such pursuit? It is quite possible that the first time you ask a child who hasn't been told to stay home in the afternoon to do so quietly, the child will rebel. Calm, firm and PATIENT handling will eventually help create an atmosphere where the child will begin to gravitate towards "quiet" activities.
How many parents are ready to do this? I have heard moms say 'X doesn't listen to me' and take the easy way out of leaving the child unchaperoned in play areas, parking lots and even elevators.
It really makes me wonder. Of course parenting is a great joy, but isn't it an equally big responsibility? Don't our children have the right to our time -- to chaperone them, to set limits and boundaries, to firmly and calmly enforce them, to steer them towards activities that will stand them in good stead through life? Are we now so selfish that we are ready to gamble even on the safety of our children in order to enjoy our own life?
Childhood is fleeting and children are precious -- enjoy your child's childhood by cherishing parenting in all its glory -- a large part of which is responsibility to your child.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Can we have some *Planning* please?
This is a blog post that has been a while in the making -- coming out of the copious amounts of driving that I have been doing in Namma Benguluru over the last few years.
Here is the typical trend: For months on end, roads either exist in name only or not even that way -- they are kachcha. Then, an election is announced and overnight roads get made and tarred. Not end-to-end, of course, because what's life without a few bumps and roller coaster rides. The ends, i.e., where the roads meet each other are left undone. Still, something is better than nothing think the hapless drivers who have been trashing their cars on mud roads or craters.
Within two weeks of the new road being tarred, along come the cable and pipe layers and *systematically* dig up the roads, 'working' on them for a few days and then just disappearing. The end result is that we are back to square one -- a road that either exists in name only or not at all.
Which brings me to my point. Private citizens don't dig public roads. All digging is done by some government agency (water, electricity, ...). How hard is it for the agencies to simply *talk* to each other so that the digging/road-laying sequence can be done right? At the very least, if the road laying agency publishes a schedule of estimated road-laying times, the other agencies can raise a red flag if they plan work under any of those in the near future, and negotiate time-lines.
A little bit of planning and coordination will go a long way in saving taxpayer money, improving service delivery and positively impacting the lives of citizens.
Here is the typical trend: For months on end, roads either exist in name only or not even that way -- they are kachcha. Then, an election is announced and overnight roads get made and tarred. Not end-to-end, of course, because what's life without a few bumps and roller coaster rides. The ends, i.e., where the roads meet each other are left undone. Still, something is better than nothing think the hapless drivers who have been trashing their cars on mud roads or craters.
Within two weeks of the new road being tarred, along come the cable and pipe layers and *systematically* dig up the roads, 'working' on them for a few days and then just disappearing. The end result is that we are back to square one -- a road that either exists in name only or not at all.
Which brings me to my point. Private citizens don't dig public roads. All digging is done by some government agency (water, electricity, ...). How hard is it for the agencies to simply *talk* to each other so that the digging/road-laying sequence can be done right? At the very least, if the road laying agency publishes a schedule of estimated road-laying times, the other agencies can raise a red flag if they plan work under any of those in the near future, and negotiate time-lines.
A little bit of planning and coordination will go a long way in saving taxpayer money, improving service delivery and positively impacting the lives of citizens.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
The Academics/Sports Balance
When I was growing up, academics was king, and children who weren't good at "studies" had a hard time, irrespective of any other talent they had. Children were ranked on marks they got in classroom tests in conventional subjects. Beyond the first few rankers, the others were routinely hauled over coals by teachers. School-life was pretty miserable for most children.
Over the years, educators started to realize the futility of their "academics-only" approach -- the impact it had on the psychology of the many (after all, only a few can be academic toppers). Education started to become more inclusive. Educators began to talk about "all-rounders" -- children who study and play and do art, or some combination of the three.
Now, it seems to me that the pendulum has swung too hard in the opposite direction. While academics are no longer overtly competitive, at least in primary schools, sport continues to be VERY competitive, separating losers from winners: publicly recognizing and rewarding the top 3 only. So how does this impact the psychology of the academically inclined, but not naturally sporty children? Their doing brilliantly at, say, math. is not really recognized because of the conscious toning down of focus on competition in the classroom. However, if they aren't into sport, this lack of "sportiness" comes into sharp focus because the sports field continues to be VERY competitive, even in school.
What happens to the self-esteem of a child who is, say, a whizkid at math. but misses hitting the target with his ball throws, and then has his classmates jeering about it? What is the message we are sending to him and his peers? It seems to me that the message is: even if you do badly in academics, you MUST do well in sports. Isn't this same message of the yesteryear with the words academics and sports interchanged?
IMO, what we need is a balance, and recognition of the fact that each child is truly unique. While we have stopped hauling a potential Tendulkar over coals for his math. grade, can we also stop pushing the future-Einsteins to train for professional cricket?
Over the years, educators started to realize the futility of their "academics-only" approach -- the impact it had on the psychology of the many (after all, only a few can be academic toppers). Education started to become more inclusive. Educators began to talk about "all-rounders" -- children who study and play and do art, or some combination of the three.
Now, it seems to me that the pendulum has swung too hard in the opposite direction. While academics are no longer overtly competitive, at least in primary schools, sport continues to be VERY competitive, separating losers from winners: publicly recognizing and rewarding the top 3 only. So how does this impact the psychology of the academically inclined, but not naturally sporty children? Their doing brilliantly at, say, math. is not really recognized because of the conscious toning down of focus on competition in the classroom. However, if they aren't into sport, this lack of "sportiness" comes into sharp focus because the sports field continues to be VERY competitive, even in school.
What happens to the self-esteem of a child who is, say, a whizkid at math. but misses hitting the target with his ball throws, and then has his classmates jeering about it? What is the message we are sending to him and his peers? It seems to me that the message is: even if you do badly in academics, you MUST do well in sports. Isn't this same message of the yesteryear with the words academics and sports interchanged?
IMO, what we need is a balance, and recognition of the fact that each child is truly unique. While we have stopped hauling a potential Tendulkar over coals for his math. grade, can we also stop pushing the future-Einsteins to train for professional cricket?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)