That Abhishek Manu Singhvi, the Congress Party's spokesman was shown in an alleged sex-tape with a female lawyer possibly, as the rumors ripe each second, asking for a helping hand in the judgeship. The shrewd minister, known for his quick wit and intelligence has desperately tried all he could--from Court's injunction against media showing, discussing and inviting panels on the issue of the tape--to put curbs on the dissemination of the video. But the internet forums, particularly the Youtube, has proven to be too subtle and nubile to defeat the minister on his own turf by defying all the legal injunctions.
Several versions of video have gone viral and removed after many hits only to be uploaded again somewhere else---the bosom of internet allowing all the accoutrement for it to be done. I am sure that Mr. Singhvi has never had worst bursts of sleeplessness all his years including that of the heavy responsibility of preparing the mammoth 'Lokpal' bill.
Coming to the larger question: Should a person be allowed to do such escapades? There is no obligation of any kind that might have barred him for doing so and he, being a lawyer, should have known it better. But the issue is not just what was acceptable and rightfully confined to any individual in his private space. Even if the girl was a harlot, Singhvi would have blabbered the arguments of 'mutual consent.' Here is the drift: Should a politician be allowed that?--and there is no easy affirmative for this. Because a politician has to be seen with an image that he might have drawn from along the people and then build upon that. It is a commonplace thing for politicians to appeal to the emotions of the people. India, largely a conservative society, expect its politicians to behave being a part of social mores which form a social fabric that is generally accepted by all and sundry. Adultery and such sexcapades are sure to bring bad light and is tantamount to play with the sensibilities of people. Manu Singhvi, himself has made similar arguments in several debates he had participated in--about the BJP members watching porn in assembly to begin with. (The scenario would come over its heels in Singhvi's case for he is alleged to indulge in sexual gratifications inside the chambers of Supreme Court which is an institution touted more than any other)
The argument of hypocrisy cripples Manu Sighvi and the Congress even more. It was observed by some of the writers that Congress had not overly reacted to BJP MLAs watching porn because it had always known the likeminds which Congress itself could never afford to unhave totally. There was always a looming fear that some Congressmen might be caught in similar objectionable conduct soon enough if shouted more and that is exactly what has happened. (a Tweet was so much to say that it is a revenge of BJP upon Congress and the game may either discontinue in the wake of mutual loss or may advance in case one party is more to gain than the other) This is also corroborative of the claim made by the uploader of the video that there might be more such confiding and disclosure to follow.
It would be interesting to see how media--largely being pro-Congress--would react once the issue is raddled enough to be discussed on the panels of the television. I can't say much about the new sex-perks coming up, but there is little or no doubt about the following: It is Mr. Singhvi and not any concocted baldy bobbing his head wantonly, that media has again showed that it is biased enough to let the consumer not to be undoubtful and lastly the fact that all politicians would lose their presumptive moral points, if any such points had been there. The statement of Om Puri in his next dissertation from pulpits might be: "Ye Sare Neta Ladki-baaz hai, Sale."
No comments:
Post a Comment