I want the freedom to draw cartoons
I want the freedom to make jokes
I want the freedom to be not harassed
I want the freedom to read
I want the freedom to be equal
I want the freedom to be not afraid
I want the freedom to live
I want the freedom to walk
I want the freedom to be born a woman
I want the freedom to love
I want the freedom to hope
I want the freedom to be…me
[Images courtesy Rediff, IBN, Hindustan Times, WSJ, Frontline]
The Greatbong Blog & Podcast 
I am not sure if “Freedom to be Born” is a valid freedom to demand. Looks like denying a mother (and father) the right to decide gender of child.
Rest all good.
As far as I know, gender determination is illegal in India. Of course it still happens.
Your post is not about what is legal or illegal, but about what freedoms the law _ought to_ guarantee. I am against foeticide too, but my stand is consistent because I am not a liberal – I believe in “reasonable restrictions” on liberty in the interest of the survival and progress of the society. It is not clear to me how one can believe in all classical liberal notions of liberty and still consistently oppose gender determination.
Is it? Why do you think the mother and the father have the right to decide the gender, and selectively eliminate females? Deciding not to have a child is a different thing. That is the prerogative of the parents. Selectively eliminating females is a blow on freedom. The root cause is, obviously, the society – which, till date, is yet to be a truly free one.
@Tathagata : If you believe that a woman has abortion-rights then *automatically* her right to gender-based-selective-abortion comes with it. It is that tautological.
OK, let me rephrase the comment. Lets assume that abortion rights (which I support) automatically gives the right to selective abortion. What I really meant was that selective abortion is plain wrong, irrespective of whether it is logical or legal. My argument is based more on gut feel than logic,( so please don’t haul me up on logic) but I feel that it is wrong not only wrong from the perspective of (so called) morality, but also from the perspective of the survival of the race.
Dear @Tathagata : I certainly agree with that sentiment, as I have written in another comment above. What you are supporting is more than just “gut feel”, since one can – I am sure you can – make a very coherent case using hard data that gender selective abortion hurts the survival and well being of the society. All I am calling for is a little bit of honesty in recognizing that blind “freedom sloganeering” internet-demagoguery usually leads to a mischaracterization of one’s own position in the interest of status-mongering (though in some cases a more charitable interpretation might involve viewing it as prioritizing instrumental rationality over epsitemic rationality [link])
Hundred years back, there was no way of determining the gender of a unborn child. So, humans since beginning of time has accepted the child that is born, regardless of gender. But you seem to suggest that this new technology developed for medical purposes, suddenly gives humans a right to decide gender of unborn child and a right to abortion mixed with that, makes it perfectly acceptable to kill the girl child (or maybe the boy child !) inside the womb. Lets see some similar logic applied to other fields —-
1. the discovery of internet gives you a right to hack into anybodies computer
2. the discovery of pressure cooker gives you a right to boil your grumpy cat
3. the discovery of video camera gives you a right to make “humshakals”
Invention …not discovery.
The argument is that medical science doesn’t give u right to abortion if it doesn’t give u right to selective abortion.
Selective abortion is more a Symptom of the larger disease of misogyny in our society, and an abject illustration of the difference in the status of sexes. Further, it perpetuates and possibly exacerbates ills befalling the females. Agitating against just the foeticide is pointless unless combined with a fiht against entrenched sexism, but highlighting the foeticide is one potent way to get attention to the problem of gender inequality.
Isis aar guilty four taektu confusing chilo.
Loved the first picture.
It is the demand of all the people in all the countries in the world. Can writer show the same spirit to publish such write up on all Independence days of all the countries of the world?
Why does this give me goosebumps?
No. 6 to me seems like a contradiction. Though it is despicable to show support for ISIS, the people in that picture certainly have the right to do so. Should they be made to feel afraid for doing so, because you do not want to feel a certain way? The choice of whether to be afraid or not is yours, irrespective of what the men in that picture choose to support.
If their support crosses the line into action, that would be a criminal act, which the state would have the responsibility to prevent. Is your picture a commentary about their support for ISIS, or the state?
Excellent, well thought piece.
Freedom can be achieved by being strong, wise, just and united.
not sure why ISIS picture is here. The picture means they are already enjoying the freedom to show their support. So, you are referring to a hypothetical situation where they might have felt threatened for showing their support. Not sure why you need to imagine such a situation and dramatize it in this post. On a different note, I don’t see how people can support ISIS in the first place. A genocidal lot, a lot from the medieval era suddenly bursting into the modern 21st century. Can’t imagine even a single person with half a brain who will support this organization.
The interpretation of the isis picture appeared pretty straightforward to me. I, not they, need the freedom to not be afraid. The blokes in the picture are obviously not afraid but for sure are giving others the heeby-jeebies.
I see your point of view @Booze. And I went back to the post again to see how I didn’t read it that way. I realized that subject “I” for some of the images is the reader and in other cases is the person in the image. This made me read it in one way and you in another way. I am now sure GB wanted it to be the way you read it.
On an unrelated note, GB, I have followed your writing since 2004 or thereabouts, making this my (probably) tenth anniversary of loyally lurking on this blog.
so…wasn’t there a 4th guy in the delhi-g-r? He was minority (religion) and also minor…..