Reflections The Sociology Newsletter

Department of Sociology

Contents

1. Kinship recognition among Penguins

2. Change, really?

3. Modernity, a socially contextualized idea

4. The depiction of divine kinship in Minakshi Temple,

Madurai

5. Corruption

6. Equality of gender?

7. The Role of Stereotypes

8. Is Capital Punishment Justified?

Kinship recognition among Penguins

It is less known that Animals do live in social groups, colonies and they also share a sense of

kinship. Animals might not share the podium for cognitive excellence, but they do finish close to

humans in the emotional aspect. The element of kinship emerged in animals as a result of their

basic cognitive ability to recognize. Kin recognition plays a pivotal role in Animal kinship.

Kin recognition (kin detection) refers to an Animal’s innate ability to distinguish between close

genetic kin and non-kin. In evolutionary biology and in psychology, such capabilities are

presumed to have evolved to serve the adaptive function of inbreeding avoidance.

Penguins are found to be apt with certain features to supplement kin recognition studies.

Penguins belong to order Sphenisciformes, family spheniscidae. They are a group of aquatic,

flightless birds living almost exclusively in the southern hemisphere, especially in Antarctica.

Penguins usually live in large colonies mostly because of the territorial and geographical

constraints. Here the evolutionary aspect comes into help. In the process it becomes a

necessity for Penguins to identify their kin and avoid inter-breeding.

Even though proximate level mechanisms are not well documented, kin recognition a

behavioral adaptation is found largely in penguins. Recent studies have startling revelations

that kin recognition can result from a multitude of sensory inputs. Researchers present 3

important sensory gateways that are prominent for Kin recognition.

First, production of unique phenotypic labels.

Second, perception of these labels with a recognition template, and finally

Third, the recognition of the phenotypes should lead to the action taken by the animal

to identify its kin.

These 3 components allow for several possible complex mechanism of kin recognition. Sensory

information gathered from visual, olfactory and auditory stimuli are the most helpful cues. It’s

also observed that there are varieties of scents arising from the dorsal and oral secretions due

to genetic combinations. Auditory distinctions have been noted among avian species. But we

fail to realize even Penguins belong to the avian family, long tailed Penguins are capable of

discriminating kin and non-kin based on contact calls. Distinguishing calls are the premier

lessons taught by parents to offspring’s during the nestling period.

Also there arises a great need to discriminate between familiar and unfamiliar odors (using

prior association) and between unfamiliar kin and non-kin odors (using phenotype matching).

These recognitions are associated as nest mates and colony mates. The sniff tests conducted in

the Brookfield Zoo outside Chicago proves that Penguins could recognize relatives and non-

relatives even if they weren’t personally familiar with the scent owners.

Parent- off spring relation is focused largely in the study of kin recognition, as there seems to be

rich socialization in this type of kin recognition. Penguins are found to use odors during social

and familial interactions and possibly for mate choice too.

To put this idea to test, Researchers set up tests of odor discrimination for captivated zoo

Penguins, especially those which are known to have had significant past contact with each

other or not. Oily glandular secretions that the Penguins use to pre-feathers provided the

odors, and researchers smeared samples on to plastic dog kennels. Birds were allowed a short

session of exploring an observation room, with a pair of the plastic kennels, each newly

perfumed with a different bird’s preening secretion.

Initially, researchers tested the bird’s ability to discriminate scents by comparing kennels

scented with a familiar, nonrelated bird with that of an unrelated stranger. The birds spent

about six times as long inside the familiar smelling kennels. The researchers added kinship to

the mix. In a test of 12 Penguins, birds spent more than twice as long inside kennels scented

with unfamiliar, unrelated birds than in kennels smelling of unfamiliar kin, the researchers

noted.

Working with a small colony of 22 birds and no more than 12 penguins for any given test,

researchers acknowledge that some results indicate only trends and more work are needed.

Kinship interactions are very intriguing when closely observed among penguins. Emperor

penguins males will incubate their eggs for two months in the winter without eating while the

females are at sea. During that time, they live off their fat reserves and may lose fat from their

body weight. When the females’ returns slowly after the chicks hatch, they switch parental

duties and the females fast and the males go to sea to replenish their fat stores.

Thus, I would like to conclude by saying that kinship emerged the very second two humans or

animals set their feet on earth. Amoeba, insects, birds or animals all share a form of social bond

and a sense of kinship. The level of kinship among the penguins might be primitive, but an area

for further research. This will improve our understanding of kinship behavior and elevate the

standard of living among all organisms.

Prajwal N

II PSEco

Change, really?

I was surfing through the internet on significant socio-economic changes in India over the last

few decades. I found some obvious results – Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization. I

also tried my hand at finding out what people in India were and are doing to bring in “change.” I

was surprised to find a certain website called “How to Change India”, guiding young minds as if

it were the golden mantra for the same. If one were to read through it for the tips it offered,

there is no doubt in saying that it is highly optimistic encouraging one to use their strengths in

taking charge and planting seeds of change.

Here’s my bone of contention. Firstly, LPG was a tied-trio reform that was bound to happen to

India so it could enter the monetary scene. Secondly, “change” needs to be defined. Or does it?

After much thought, I cannot seem to even attempt it. In a country where corrupt power

structures stink right from the root of its society, can one with a humble intention survive when

their peers restrict them with show of monetary and manual power, sometimes even moral

obligations decided by the unknown? Can I, an educated son or daughter of a farmer willing to

educate my people on legalities of loans, continue so when the wealthy village head sends his

macho son and his party workers to destroy my ability to speak or cut my throat? Can I, a

committed political science student who struggled a decade to make a small mark in the politics

of my country; even hope to change the ideology of one constituency in my lifetime? Can I, a

poor mother of three and a ration card-holder, rightfully claim a kilogram of rice that was not

delivered to me the previous month in this one? Will I be asked to stay mute at their leisure?

Finally, Can I empathize strongly with a rape victim, perform a peaceful protest against the

brutal act and expect not to be dragged into the police station for being a violent activist?

Who is witness to these realities? I would like to take the liberty to put words into the mouths

of my people, because it is more than safe to do so- All of us. We know the plight of our country

and that change is a distant dream. It is only wise, in response to the website mentioned, to be

highly aware of the threats by anti-social elements, to take charge by wit and to understand

shortcomings of corrupt practitioners. For at least a few decades, one must work their way

around things to get into the centre of it. And once we are part of the system, once we have the

right to decide for our country, the bigger threat is that we may be caught in the cycle of the

same corrupt practices. You never know what power does to you. Ask yourself and others: Why

is the world the way it is without power-structures operating it?

G. ANJU RAO

II JPEng

Modernity, a socially contextualized idea

Modernity as a concept has been heralded in all fields alike. Political Scientists, Sociologists,

Social Workers, Economists, Agriculturists have done their bit in emphasizing this in their

respective fields. Politicians have walked an extra mile and have taken upon themselves the

moral duty to bring about the so called modernity into all aspects of life as it is assumed to be

the symbol of development.

However, we understand that modernity has become an important criterion for any established

organization. At this point of time we need to ask ourselves, as to who decided these

parameters for any system? What is that, that determines or measures anything as developed

and something else as under-developed? If so who defines development? Or if at all, is there a

concept called development which is universal? Compared to whom? If compared to any, based

on what dimensions? And who determines those dimensions?

These series of questions throw light upon the ramification of this very concept.

If we trace back the notion of modernity (which apparently quantifies development) it has

always been in comparison to something that has taken place before or something that has

been practiced till then by the natives and mainly in comparison with something external. This

is problematic.

The western world saw its highest level of development with the industrial revolution,

intellectual boom during the renaissance and after that with a waves of movements one after

the other. With colonization of countries it was seen that the western world considered their

culture superior, when compared to the cultures of the colonised. This sense of belief system

created hierarchy among cultural systems. Phrases such as “the white man’s burden”, hint at

the ideological conditioning that one colour is superior to the other, one cultural system is

more civilised than the other. Again who determines these parameters?

The modernity that one speaks of in India or any of the so called developing countries is based

on the comparative gap between the parameters of the colonial master and the colonised or

the west and the east or the civilised and the barbaric.

But the question is should it be so? Should we have our development based on something that

is foreign to us, which comes with its own ramification as did colonial rule or should we be our

own true masters?

Modernity is therefore a hegemonic construction and development is an ideological construct.

Both are in comparison to something or someone, with oneself (even if at all by oneself its

identity comes from the existence or other in turn comparison). Imposed ideas of modernity

and development have made one’s who follows them a potential target and a market of the

imposer. The apt conclusion would be that modernity and development are interlinked and this

link is inevitable, but the definition of modernity and in turn development is construction based

on hierarchy. India being a strong victim of this has a long way to go before it calls itself a

Developed Modern Nation-State.

Chinnappa B.G.

II JPEng

The depiction of divine kinship in Minakshi Temple, Madurai

In the myths and rituals of South Indian Hindu temples dedicated to the great God Shiva and his

consort Devi, the Goddess, the marital relationship between them is a central theme. In many

temples too, the wedding of the God and Goddess is a highlight of the annual festival cycle and

nowhere is this more evident than in the city of Madurai in Tamil Nadu, where the temple is

dedicated to Goddess Minakshi and her husband Sundareshwara, a form of Shiva. In the

Minakshi temple, the climax of its principle annual festival – the Chittirai festival is the

celebration of the Divine couple’s wedding. Witnessing the Chittirai festival is an experience on

its own – lakhs of people thronging around the procession of the beautiful idols of Minakshi and

Sundareshwara, everyone eager to get a glimpse of this aura despite the sweltering heat.

The wedding of Minakshi and

Sundareshwara attracts the

temple’s largest crowd of the

year. In its main features, the

Divine wedding is identical to a

Tamil Brahmin marriage

ceremony, adapted to take

account of the bride and

groom’s representation by

images and actors. The crucial

feature of the wedding ritual is

the Tairaivarttal, which evokes

the action of Vishnu giving

Minakshi away to

Sundareshwara and thereby becoming his brother in law. This appears to dramatise the affinal

relationship between in the brothers in law who are ideally cross cousins in the south Indian

Dravidian kinship system.

Let us now turn to the relationship between Shiva and Vishnu as it is represented inside the

Minakshi temple. The famous sculptured image of Kalyanasundara in the Minakshi temple

again depicts Vishnu giving Minakshi in marriage to Sundareshwara. The original image carved

on a pillar is a popular focus for devotion. Despite the prominence of Vishnu in the

Kalyanasundara image what is striking is the affinal relationship between him and

Sundareshwara is not given any ritualistic importance. Nor is any attention paid to the sibling

tie between Minakshi and Vishnu and although brother sister relationships among Tamil

Brahmins are conventionally more formally distant after a woman marriage than among most

other south Indians, they are not as completely accentuated as Minakshi’s tie with her brother

appears to be.

Instead, on almost all important occasions when Minakshi and Sundareshwara are represented

together as a couple, their parental relationship with Subramanya is most prominently

displayed. Thus the emphasis on Minakshi and Sundareshwara’s parenthood is expressed in the

composition and arrangement of their festival images. Thus, it is the filiations, not affinity that

is repeatedly emphasized as the concomitant of the marital bond, in spite of the importance of

marriage alliance in the Dravidian kinship system.

In this respect, there is a

parallel with the analysis of

the ‘kin nucleus’ in Tamil

folklore, in which there is a

similar emphasis on

relationships among

immediate family members

and hardly any emphasis

on larger consanguinal and

affinal groups. In the kin

nucleus, a woman occupies

the centre surrounded and constrained by her father, brother, husband and son, but she is also

the ‘material or source of energy on which the kinship system is built. Thus, among the Deities,

the Goddess at the centre is linked to Brahma (her proto father), Vishnu (her brother), Shiva

(her husband) and Ganesh and Murugan (her sons). Thus this folkloric representation provides

an alternative, predominately female perspective of kinship that counterbalances the male

oriented kinship system structured by larger groups.

Thus, Minakshi’s and Sundareshwara’s devotees are not presented with an ideal model of

kinship system but instead they are given a depiction of antagonisms between close relatives as

well as the means to imagine how marriage, the family and their own personal lives might be if

they could be liberated from social reality.

Anusha Sribhasyam

II PSEco

Corruption

A shadow unfolds from the deepening darkness

Black as the night, oozing from nothingness

Sticky as tar and vile as poison

It advances to taint the offices of power

Once clean in the past, clean of greed

The pastoral life never fed its need

Long ago, people were content with life

And those that looked over them worked for them alone

But as wealth slowly began to pour in

The spark of decency began to wither

An unsullied lotus began to decay

As the darkness and filth began to clog its life

Honest souls were stained most subtly

Infected so as to lose their innocence

As the hungry World began to lose its morals

To satisfy a new God, one of gold

Apostles of justice and purity that now remain

Fight lonely battles against a growing tide

Yet they are doomed to fail, crumble away to non-existence

For their upholders now undermine their once strong foundations

And so, the monster advances, a relentless force

As the light grows faint, pleading for re-ignition.

Tarun Surya

II JPEng

Equality of gender?

In this world of growing technology and globalization, social change has become the norm of

the day. With massive growth in the arena of communication, the transfer of ideas all across

the world has been on the rise, working towards transforming the globe into one enormous

melting pot of cultures.

Perhaps one such idea or concept that has been gaining increasing prominence over the past

few decades is the idea of feminism and women’s empowerment. Inequality of the sexes in

almost every arena is the current situation, and there have been innumerous efforts on the part

of a large number of organizations, parties and so on, to change the situation. And while I,

being a woman myself, am all for the equality of the sexes, I have a slightly different take on the

approach and concepts that go behind all the efforts.

My perspective, as a woman, is that if equality needs to be attained, then we must do away

with the term ‘women empowerment’. In my mind, only those who are oppressed and inferior

require empowerment. The slaves required empowerment, because they were considered

inferior, both by society as well as themselves. The lower-castes required empowerment,

because they, too, were considered lesser by, both, society as well as themselves. While I do

not deny that women are treated unfairly and unequally in most places, the plea for

empowerment in itself shows an attitude of accepted inferiority.

We have been perpetrating the helplessness of our plight by attaching to all that is traditionally

male, an air of superiority and desirability. Strength, power, control, aggression, dominance –

all characteristics associated with the male sex. What feminist movements attempt to do is

establish these characteristics as associable with women as well. Women can also govern the

corporate field. Women can also lead unmarried lives. Women can also smoke, drink and

socialize the way men do.

If this is the manner in which women aim to attain a status of equality, then we are in actuality

in agreement with the myth that women are an inferior sex. One cannot deny that there are

certain biological differences between man and woman – instead of trying the bridge the

differences, however, why not accept the differences without attaching any value to either set?

The job of a home-maker, of a woman who chooses to give up her career and stay at home to

raise a family, is no less important than that of her husband, who earns them their daily bread.

In today’s changing global setting, there has been a huge inter-changing, crossover of

traditional gender roles and stereotypes. However, in my perception, the tags of a ‘working

woman’, or a ‘stay-at-home husband’ seem borrowed and uncomfortable – as if one sex has

‘borrowed’ the roles meant to be played out by the other, and is trying to prove that they, too,

can do it as well. While this definitely seems to be one way to go about the attainment of

equality, by breaking gender stereotypes, perhaps there is another way. Being a woman, and

one who fully aims to establish a successful career in my field-of-choosing, I do not mean to say

that one must stick to traditional roles alone. I do, however, say that perhaps we could begin by

equating both the ‘duties’ of men and women as of the same importance and degree. If only we

could break free of our conditioned attitudes towards gender roles and duties, we would see

that ‘women’s empowerment’ is as big of a myth as that of the inequality of women, and that

both fall along a continuum of the same spectrum.

Without the idea of ‘women’s empowerment’, there exists no inferiority, or the idea of a

‘weaker sex’. Men and women are different, but these differences need have no negative

values attached to them. Men and women may perform different tasks, but these tasks need

have no greater or lesser importance attached to them. Once this mental concept is conquered

and digested, then perhaps we will all see that the idea of feminism is as unnecessary as that of

chauvinism – equality has always existed everywhere except in human minds.

Sree Lakshmi

The Role of Stereotypes

Stereotypes have always been an inevitable factor in an individual’s life. Their role in the

functioning of society is vital and hence gain the attention of all thinkers alike. An activity along

these lines was conducted in II BA PSEco. The debate held was on the topic- The Role of

Stereotypes, one team proposing and the other opposing the motion.

Those speaking for the motion put forth their argument first. The debaters emphasized on the

role of positive stereotypes. They cited the example of parents frightening their children to stay

away from colorful insects, as many of them are harmful. This creates a stereotype in the child’s

mind about the colorful insects, and lasts for a long time, probably forever. Yet another

argument was that stereotypes are, often, used for safety and in this case it is thoroughly

justified.

Making a counter argument against the above statement, the opposition team claimed that

stereotypes reinforced ideas that are hard to break out of, using the example of the defamation

of the Muslims, due a certain sect of them involved in terrorism operations. Hence, all Muslims

have been stereotyped to be ‘terrorists’, leading to the bad press on Islam as a whole. Also they

stated that stereotypes build barriers around the mind, restricting our point of view.

The discussion was followed by the audience voicing their opinions. An interesting point put

forth was that stereotypes never needed to exist and hence there would never have been any

need to break away from it.

This was followed by a series of rebuttals from different members of the class. The activity soon

kicked into life when member of the audience engaged themselves in the discussion, making it

an enterprising and enlightening activity hour for the class on a whole.

Overall, it was an excellent activity, and judicious use of the time allotted to the hour.

II PSEco

Is Capital Punishment Justified?

With a series of executions in our country, the question of whether capital punishment is

just has to be debated. The first year BA Sociology students took up this mindboggling

issue.

The argument suggesting that capital punishment is justified was narrated by using a story.

The story goes as follows: Albert Fish from USA who in 1928 had murdered a 13 year old

girl Grace Bager and many more girls, whom he raped, cooked and ate. Inspite of such

atrocities, he continued to trouble the parent’s everyday by telling them what he did to

their daughters. So like Albert should be given capital punishment as there is no scope for

improvement. There were many ways to deal with such kind of people before who were

decapitated, boiled and killed in order to make them feel guilty. Of course now there

aren’t any such lethal punishments given but just a lethal injection or hanging to death

which is not that painful. The latent argument was that with changing times the judicial

systems in the country should adopt methods to ensure complete welfare of its citizens.

Another argument advocating capital punishment was that if only these kinds of people

die, there will be more people alive on earth.

However, the arguments against the use of capital punishment were stronger. They argued

that India being a welfare society, the act of crime must be stopped and not the criminal

itself. Every individual has a right to live and so by giving them capital punishment we are

violating that individual’s fundamental right. The example of Kasab’s case, the accused in

26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, was cited here. They suggested that it was unjust on the

part of government and such punishments should not be encouraged. Yet another

argument against capital punishment was that no society is ideal and deviants are a part of

all societies. They deserve a second chance is what these debaters argued.

These arguments triggered the audience and gave them food for thought. Though a

consensus could not be arrived upon, the debate presented two sides of a coin, widening

perspectives. All in all it was a fruitful and an enterprising session.

I PSEng