Retribution decreed by God

It was distressing news that I read in a daily widely circulated in the middle east..

A woman, in Iran was put to death early yesterday dawn. She was convicted of stabbing to death the wife of her lover. She confessed ,or rather admitted guilty and was sentenced.

The irony is that having a paramour or a contract relationship outside wedlock per se is legal for men in that country that swears by Islamic laws. 

The poor woman was consigned to the gallows by the brother of the woman she killed. A divinely decreed act of principle and justice,” an eye for an eye”! Furthermore her lover (contractual lover) too was witness to the execution.

The hapless woman prayed before she was taken to the gallows, and later became frenzied and wailed, pleading for her life. The brother of the woman she killed aided the noose and he pushed the slide that dropped her down into the gallows and strangulating.

Quite graphic and gory!

I wonder, why, why, the original wife did not exercise similar assault on the paramour,.  Either way,  the practise and the legal approval given to men is lawful denigration of women and her status!

It reminds me of the sensational story that was around in the 1970’s, and the movie that was circulated clandestinely, “The death of a Princess”. The incident purportedly took place in the Whabian obscurantist Saudi Arabia, where a princess in her late teens was decapitated in public for her liaison with another man. The matter was hushed though, as the Saudis could exercise the power of oil over the world outside.

An archaic and tribal law- principle that is still being followed! "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. And then you swear by God. If God as people claim and state, is love and compassion the very dictum of “eye for an eye” is antediluvian and wrong. And I strongly feel that if any faith claims to hold this dictum as inviolable and as decreed by any god or messenger, then it tantamount to not a faith of compassion, forgiveness and peace, but it represents cannibalism and is barbaric.

The system of retributive justice or retaliation is one of the laws from the Torah and the ancient Jewish traditions, later picked up into Islamic coded laws.

“The origins of the retributive justice may have come about in the ancient times, and it developed as early civilizations grew and a less well-established system for retribution of wrongs, feuds and vendettas, threatened the social fabric”. But is it relevant today?

Laws that were coded in ancient times were perhaps done in relation to the social context of the times, as it is also done today. For instance it is noted in many writings on history that after the Crusades, women out numbered men by large numbers. Men in thousands were killed in the frenzy of the holy crusades. Law was then encoded so that a man could take more than one wife. This was one way meant to bring women under male protection, because the man- woman population ratio was adverse to men. And security of women folk was highly threatened. But the male hegemony over the society of certain faiths found the law quite suited to their malevolent designs and carnal pleasure. Women were regarded as an instrument for carnal use and serfdom. The law was suitable to subjugate the female sex, and is followed as Gods law. Does it commensurate with the values and ethos of societies? And giving it the sanctity of faith is belittling the faith and blasphemous

The poor women!

The Wailing after Rape

I happened to be near a group conversation between some travellers on the train. The subject matter of discussion was on the efficacy and moral strength of death penalty for crimes such as the one that shook Coimbatore when two little children were kidnapped, tortured, molested and murdered. From the lack of deterrence to virtual question of ethics the discussion on death penalty went quite animatedly.

Back home sitting alone I recalled the group and their subject of discussion. Death penalty or its deterrence of crime was a secondary matter as I felt the mangling that ensues mentally to the victim of rape and violation be it, physical, emotional, dispossession or in other forms will not fade away.

Could there be a life after for the victim? Who must be impaled, the perpetrator or the disaffected,deaf onlooker who thumps his nose sky ward with apathy?

What is more heinous and despicable, rape or deriving carnal and perverted pleasure watching the act and the misery of the victim through a key hole, while you had the entire wherewithal and prowess to stop the abhorrence from being enacted?

The word rape is used here in the wider context, a kind of macro level meaning. It necessarily not has to be a physical assault with sexual intent. It can be, besides physical violation, a emotional sodomy,a casual and cool acquiescence, attitude, act or the absence of it that does not interfere or prevent the mauling of another person   sexually,physically,mentally or  emotionally and deprive him of the dignity that is dear to any living being, man or beast.

And is it humanly possible for the victim of rape (again, see it in wider context), to sleep with the perpetrator and more so with the unashamed onlooker ? What if the onlooker is the  victim's own kin?An evangelical answer is not what is required here. Because evangelising to the victim of neglect, atrocity and gross apathy is a sermon that is crueller than the mauling that was inflicted?

In Praise of C - on a Sunday

It is time for some more fascinating utterances from C.

Ara, is here on a brief recess from college. He is twenty, and seems to have ceased growing vertical. I commented this fact the other night. He would be around 5’9 , that is almost  three inches shorter than I’m . In fact I and C thought all the while, he might shoot past the 6” mark. Well that doesn’t seem to be the case.

Ara was a bit annoyed that he has ceased growing tall physically. Hearing my comment he turned to his mother and said. “Amma this is because of you, your midget height” (incidentally C is 5”4). He continued, “I have taken after your height and that is why I do not grow taller physically than  atcha”. He expressed his frustration mildly. Adding to his little frustration  Radhu is growing vertically by the day, and her legs seem to be almost two thirds of her height. She is already 5’7 and is only 17.

Not to be left behind C jumped out with the statement denying her genetic responsibility in Ara not growing  tall than he is now. She said, “ Ara  you ceased to grow tall because you did not heed my advice to hang daily”.

Ara and I,almost in chorus shouted, “rather not put on height if only you would refrain from your fabulous observations in English”. Ara continued , "Amma you should say ‘pull- ups’, and not hanging, Funny a mother asking his son to hang daily ... ha h ha" . The cruelty of literal translation of mallu words and ideas to the Queens English!

I guess anything more of C’s will be too full for the Sunday!