The question of relation between the self and the surroundings can be a nightmarish one. Existentialists like Kierkegaard and Nietzsche have noted the tensions between an individual’s mind and the world at large. Much like Ralph Waldo Emerson’s quote, in the process of individuation a person cannot remember the sources “...even so they have made him,” but the role of social positioning of the individual cannot be downplayed. These ideas are as much political, as personally affecting. Consequently, the issues of body, masculinity, and religion (society) always had a form of control over me, be it through the global media I consumed, or the traditions passed through the family. This necessitated the study of unease between an individual and the society which does exist, even if we take the implicit or explicit self-esteem concept in the view (Spalding and Hardin, 1999, p. 1). In today’s globalized world, combined with the prowess of information technology, the challenge that looms, is the integrity of oneself from the outer world of wonders, and understanding the political aspect working alongside it.
I
was one of the lucky ones in India, born in the start of 1990s, when the
economic borders were just opened for foreign investment by the then finance
minister Dr. Manmohan Singh. Television just picked up pace from the earlier
influence of Socialist USSR to more open, capital advertising, intensive
Disney, Sony, and other networks. Lesser government intervention to maintain social
paradigms, and more body mindful cartoons, and shows started playing on television.
The acceptability of the earlier explicit was trickled to a new normal, where
western culture influenced the local, and the fear of the unknown started
dissipating from the new middle class. Likewise, one of the new data for the
people of India was that of fitness, economic freedom, and choice.
In
coming to terms with oneself, one’s body plays a huge role, as outward
appearances take precedent over the internal for many in the world. It is not
only the shape, or size, but also the birth physical traits and
characteristics. As discussed before, this was not the case before the
international media and market that came to India in late 20th
century, and people (at least the Punjabis) would not consciously differentiate
between body types with over-emphasis (Abbi, 2020). My exposure to content like
GI Joe, Discovery channel, Scholastic books, alongside now financial upliftment
of our family, found me a global content consuming, secure and a bit chubby
kid. The stereotype was set then of an ideal, where someone’s body and
personality were used to judge the worth of them. As I grew older, I found
myself easily losing and gaining weight, thanks to my maternal side, through
primary to college and could relate to the different biases one can experience just
from one’s body. This evolved my perception of what an ideal is, and how it has
nothing to do with the physical outline of a person.
Similarly,
body has always been a part of political issue. Like Renee Taylor explains in
her Ted talk, (Taylor,2017) Bodies as Resistance, political activism is not
only protests, hunger strikes, or self-immolation, it can be the simple act of
maintaining oneself in contradiction, or in a subtle deviation from the accepted,
political (rather, stereotypical) norm. It can be women of hirsutism maintaining
a full beard as a show of self-acceptance, a person prejudiced-against landing
one of the most coveted roles of Tyrion Lannister i.e., Peter Dinklage, and/or
someone being body positive without any ill-will towards the conventional
stereotypically fit people. Taylor’s statement that “Radical self-love is not
independent,” its interdependent, and it is one’s show of acceptance that rubs
down on others and changes their mindset. Our relationship with our and others’
bodies is how we look for justice in totality.
Secondly,
one’s ideal image of being, as perceived by others is a big deciding factor on the
definition of self; in this case we will discuss masculinity, which is an
integral part of my upbringing. I was the elder of the two boys, grew up in a
loving family, which was nuclear but kept many aspects of joint family, as
relatives and friends were remarkably close, in point of view of the wider
world, and were in an hour distance most of the life. So, in spite of being
introverted, I got satisfactorily socially capable. Spending formative years in
grade school in a boarding school, and most of the teenage and early 20s in
different cities of India, I built a mindset of self-sufficiency. This was intensified
by older role models, mostly male and stoic in nature. The feminine were always
the supporting and driving force. But finding balance between the two has been
an ongoing battle for as long as I remember. My observations through the years,
and places has shed light on this issue not only being my personal issue, but
something that has political implications as follows.
The
literature on the critical studies of men and masculinities (CSMM) clearly
depicts the political side of masculinity. Sam de Boise discusses about the contemporary
arguments, over masculinity in white, straight, and middle-class men, which
always cannot be progressive whether they be in support of the hiding of
emotions to maintain power or be the ‘softening masculinity’ that is used to
support various forms of misogyny and racism. For example, instead of the
stereotypical manly behaviour to demean women and other sections of society,
use of discourses such as collective masculinist rage, nice-guy trope, and boundary-drawing
tendencies such as intersectionality; like prevalent thought of white men being
more caring than coloured men, has given rise to Cartesianism that has been a
justification for barbaric acts in the act of 'civilizing’ populations (de
Boise, 2018).
Nevertheless,
all this was under the aegis of religion, which was an important part of the family
traditions and my culture. It stood out to me distinctively all my life; now
thinking back it is like a completely different process of thinking which I
have come out of, rather I can think out of, a lot more abstract and a quite
different world altogether. One’s culture has a lot to do with the thought
patterns that one develops, and the view one has towards the world at large. My
schooling in sciences, along with my culture’s studies has given me better
understanding of the anthropological point of view. Not going into too much
detail, religion on whole has a huge effect on most of the population of the
world, where everyone seems to know all about their own religion, and sometimes
about others’ as well.
One’s
religion or principles is the guiding light which must be taken into
consideration as one goes through life, looking for sustenance and/or knowledge.
Moreover, this is well established by evidence that individual differences in
implicit self-esteem are associated with behavioral outcomes which is a direct result
to the self, and both the implicit and explicit self-esteems have independent
consequences (Spalding and Hardin, 1999). Thus, the behavior, let us say
free-will is not as self-controlled as we would want. What one does have
control over is the present action and thought one towards shaping the concept
of self as clarified by Beebe et al (Beebe et al, 2011, p. 38). Otherwise,
until this step is reached one is mostly the consequence of the social
situations and surroundings, and typically culture.
Also,
religion as viewed by us is more of ritualistic kind, where people do some redundant
acts that are thought to give benefits in afterlife or other merits. Or it is
something that soothes the anxieties of people taking the Higher Power’s protection.
Whereas, individually, it is more personal, it is the way of life, the
principles are not written in the stone, these are more life-like, with multiple
gray areas, and are used as guide through the journey, that is life. In my
opinion, it is the view that one takes towards any of these thoughts, if looked
at from a bird’s eye view, or from the outside, which is completely different
when lived in. Other analogy that comes to mind is that of families; families
of the same race look the same from the outside, members are stereotypically the
same as well, but the minute differences that seem so from the outside, turn
into such huge personality traits as one begins interacting with the members.
Brenda Bartelink does a wonderful job by studying rapidly growing Pentecostalism,
where flexibility of gender norms in regard to pastoral ordination is seen, and
individual and family conduct is a crucial building block towards governance
(Bartelink, 2020).
Similarly,
M. K. Gandhi brought forth confluence between politics, social responsibility,
and religion during the matters of Indian independence from British Raj in
early 20th century. In post-independent India we even see reversion
to indigenous models of collaboration between political and religious fields,
as contemporary Hindu religious leaders have prominent roles to play in public
sector, rejecting the western ideal of privatizing the religion aspect which is
thought as an essential component of modernity. This does threaten the secular
character and diverse citizenry of India (Singh, 2019). Further, modernization
theory considers that development process decreases individual religiosity and
weakens the hold of institutions over public life (Buckley, 2015). That in a
sense is true to what we see, as the religious bodies are most often not apt at
facing the new needs. But here is where an individual’s role comes into play,
where the “mutual transaction” between interpersonal relationships helps the
individual influence his own surroundings through communication. We have along
the ages seen people of distinct cultures reinvigorating their own cultures and
sometimes even the connected communities. Likewise, religious communities have
the farthest reach from the simplest of people to the elites, and the
communication among them forms a strand of organization within the society.
On
the contrary, the view that personal is political can bring anxiety to the
individual, it is one of the taboos in my view, that is, to compare each action
as what affects oneself does to the community at large. This brings, what
people call “analysis paralysis,” and one loses touch with what is at hand. On
the other hand, one cannot deny that being political or not, still defines
one’s political stand. Politics effects everyone, irrespective of one’s age, gender,
and opinion, all must endure the forces of their surroundings, therefore should
participate in what and how things should be.
In
focus, many of the aspects in one’s life like body, sexuality and religion are
not merely personal, but have a political impression as well. The characteristics
one contends with through the life are in fact things that many people have
problems with, and one should be the voice if others cannot. The intersection
between one’s physique and politics is something that women have had to contend
with through the different ages, also the roles that one plays in society have
an effect in political realm as this is something that helps in choice of the
leaders of society, moreover, religion and politics have been intertwined since
millennia whether it be Avicenna, or Leonardo DiCaprio’s personal pursuits, or
the affect they had on political ideologies. In conclusion, it is clear that
one should not view oneself a separate and a sole entity in the world, but a
bead in this thread of society, otherwise one can end up being an island than a
whole, as per the saying.
References
Taylor, S. R. (2017). Bodies as Resistance:
Claiming the political act of being oneself. TEDx Talks. Accessed on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWI9AZkuPVg
de Boise, S. (2018). The personal is
political ... just not always progressive: affective interruptions and their promise for CSMM. Norma:
International Journal for Masculinity Studies, 13(3-4), 158–174.
https://doi.org/10.1080/18902138.2017.1325098
David T. Buckley. (2015). Beyond the
Secularism Trap: Religion, Political Institutions, and Democratic Commitments. Comparative Politics,
47(4), 439–458. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041515816103257
Singh, P. (2019). How Avoiding the
Religion–Politics Divide Plays out in Sikh Politics. Religions (Basel, Switzerland), 10(5), 296–.
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10050296
Abbi, K. (2020). The visibility and
arrival of the transnational new Sikh middle class in the cinematic experience of the turbaned hero
Diljit Dosanjh: Its implication for emerging Sikh identity politics. Sikh Formations, 16(3), 308–342.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17448727.2019.1611165
Bartelink, B. (2020). The Personal
is Political: Pentecostal Approaches to Governance and Security. The Review of Faith & International
Affairs, 18(3), 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2020.1795399
Leah R. Spalding, & Curtis D.
Hardin. (1999). Unconscious Unease and Self-Handicapping: Behavioral Consequences of Individual
Differences in Implicit and Explicit Self-Esteem. Psychological Science, 10(6), 535–539.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00202
Comments
Post a Comment