Meena Kandasamy writes a letter to Tehelka’s editor:
I WAS SHOCKED to see your magazine carry the abusive word “pariah” on the cover. Though it is common knowledge that the word passed into English from Tamil, it would have been better if you remembered that it is the name of a Tamil Dalit caste. Only because Dalit caste names have been degraded into cuss words, the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act makes provision for punishing anybody who seeks to insult a Dalit using his caste identity. I understand that TEHELKA is not alone in using this word, but shouldn’t you lead by example?
And goes back 99 years to discover that Iyothee Thassar, Dalit scholar, had expressed similar views on the media:
Linked by kuffir. Join Blogbharti facebook group.A glaring incident of the untouchability practiced by the Indian media came to light when these regional newspapers carried reports of the Viceroy’s dog being bitten by a stray dog. The English Standard (12 May, 1909) merely reported that the Lord and Lady Minto were under pasteur treatment since the Viceroy’s dog was bitten by a ‘rabid animal’ (that they referred to as a ‘strange dog’.) On the other hand, when the same news item was reported in the nationalist, ‘upper’ caste Tamil magazines such as Tamil Vijaya (13 May 1909) and the much-touted Swadesamitran (12 May 1909), the rabid dog was conveniently referred to as a ‘pariah’ dog.
The argument is exaggerated. I do not know nor have we been told by the article here that if the word pariah on Tehelka is used as a. term of abuse. B. as to discriminate a person/group unreasonably. If it is such then , regardless of where the word appears Tehelka should be condemned.
If it is just used as a word for its meaning, which I suspect is the case then the argument is a product of hopeless fantasy. Pariah means outcast alone. If someone doesn’t go to parties it is reasonable to say he is a party pariah. There is no further presumed implication.
Meena’s issue might be with etymology but that is something Tehelka cant help. If we want to go on being careful not to offend all the people in the world then we could be left with only the articles a, the and an. I can think a twenty odd such words from the top off my head which can be deemed as hurting: chevalier ( lowest ranking French nobleman), Taliban (Islamic student ), assassin ( Arabic hashish users) to name a few examples.
Confusing use and the meaning of the term with its etymology would be funny if not boring. A classical example is Thassar’s misreading of the newspaper headlines.
Stray dog is a stray dog. The word Rabid has a meaning and pariah dog is a accepted breed of dogs. They are not mutually exclusive. There is nothing in the article to suggest that a stray barking mad dog of the pariah breed wasn’t involved in the incident. If one or other isn’t true then its just false and hence the use of those words wrong. Period.
To argue that some upper caste chap used the word just to hurt the sentiments of people he plainly ludicrous.
As i can recall now there is a movie and videogame called Pariah. Media did not create those language. Holding it responsible for using it for what it means is preposterous.
And yes, Dogs have breeds, like cows and plants.
Cheers