Cold SnapDragon

09 March 2018  If we are to act against abuse (including SH), perhaps we should focus not on abusers but on those who create environments in which they thrive, the mechanisms they employ, & how they can be leashed. Abusers generally do not abuse others because they must but because they can. Quite apart from holding abusers accountable, we also need to hold abuse-enablers to account. And recognise that access to law & access to justice are not synonymous esp when "law" is determined by abusers and their supporters, & its processes ― due process ― controlled by them. Worth asking why responses to abuse are structured the way the are, whose story is (not) told, & who benefits. Confidentiality of findings? The truly victimised, the falsely accused don't benefit; perhaps institutional/family reputation can? What priories underlie responses? Who determines which channels through which to complain of abuse are legitimate? Who controls proceedings through suppo...

A light read by me about the person who became India's first woman lawyer over at  dailyo.in : Cornelia Sorabji is, of course, best-known as India’s first woman lawyer, after having been the first woman graduate of Bombay University and the first woman to study law at Oxford University. It is easy to co-opt her into the role of a committed feminist who changed women’s lives but to do so would likely be to essentialise her life, flatten the many layers of her personality, and possibly to impose on her philosophies which she would not immediately have claimed as her own. Read more. 2017 tweets: India's first woman lawyer, Cornelia Sorabji, born #otd 1866, didn't have an easy start despite being privileged but that didn't stop her.  She managed to begin practising not as a lawyer permitted to but as a "person for the defence", thus exploiting a legal loophole. pic.twitter.com/iSQ6S61Zdf — Nandita Saikia (@nsaikia) November 15, 2017 Unsurpris...

The real villain of the piece (Re books being withdrawn or self-censored) is content law which hasn't been amended even though it's been becoming increasingly clear as time goes by that Indian content law needs amendment. (Tweets on the subject below, unfortunately complete with their typos.) Sans any comment on the Doniger book—perhaps before going off the deep end Re others not standing up for FoE, put yourselves on their shoes. — Nandita Saikia (@nsaikia) February 11, 2014 IMO, it's unfair to be unreservedly critical of people for 'not standing up for FoE'. For one thing, it's rarely ever that black and white. — Nandita Saikia (@nsaikia) February 11, 2014 Many content laws are criminal. Having money to hire good lawyers is not guaranteed to keep you out of jail for a content law violation. — Nandita Saikia (@nsaikia) February 11, 2014 The worst case scenario Re content law violations is jail not monetary damages. Given that, how enthu would you be to 'st...