Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
About two months ago, Prachi Nigam scored an impressive 98.5% in Class 10 Uttar Pradesh board exams for which she should have been celebrated as a beacon of academic inspiration. Instead, she faced a barrage of online trolling over something as natural as facial hair, which unjustly eclipsed her remarkable achievements.
Our societal fixation on beauty, treated almost as a virtue, perpetuates such cycles of bullying and superficial judgments due to non-compliance to the arbitrary standards of beauty. This extends to public figures and everyday individuals too who face the inevitable effects of aging and other changes. As long as society celebrates superficial standards of beauty — a mere lottery of genetics — we perpetuate a cycle where achievements can be overshadowed by appearance.
While many rallied to support Prachi, demonstrating a collective disdain for such baseless judgments, the situation underscores a broader issue. This incident reveals more than just the toxicity of internet anonymity; it exposes a deep-seated societal bias that prioritizes appearance. More worrisome to me is the deep impact of this incident on the minds of several other young girls who heard of it or saw this in news. This entire episode also raises two central concerns discussed below.
Firstly, the problem begins with what we teach—or fail to teach—about diversity and respect. Traditional education and elderly guidance often emphasize the importance of ‘not saying rude things,’ which is a passive approach that merely trains children to suppress inappropriate/offensive thoughts rather than understand why those thoughts might be hurtful or wrong. This approach is superficial and unsustainable, as it does not address the underlying biases that fuel such thoughts. There is a widespread illusion of understanding these issues, while in reality, these correct notions have merely been ingrained as rules to follow, and many individuals don’t truly engage with the concepts at all.
The term “latent sexism,” akin to the concept of “latent racism” or any other “latent –ism,” refers to underlying attitudes that remain dormant until triggered by specific contexts or cues. This parallels to a thought experiment where noticing skin color first in a diverse crowd might indicate underlying racial biases. Some might argue that our instinctive noting of differences isn’t inherently wrong; however, it is problematic when these observations lead to prejudiced behavior or comments. This scenario is a microcosm of broader societal attitudes where differences are not just noticed but unduly emphasized. It reveals a conditioned bias. Such conditioning can lead to derogatory comments or discrimination when filters fail or social inhibitions are lowered.
Secondly, Prachi Nigam’s story also offers a crucial teaching moment. The backlash against her trolls, while supportive, also highlights the fact that we react to manifestations of discrimination more often than we address its roots. It’s akin to treating the symptoms of a disease without addressing the underlying infection. To combat “latent –ism” effectively, there must be a proactive effort to value struggle and achievements. Thus, redefining educational values and societal norms is essential for fostering a more inclusive, respectful, and empathetic society.
Educational theorists like John Dewey (1859-1952) had advocated for an education system that does more than impart knowledge—it should also challenge societal norms and encourage broad-mindedness. Dewey’s emphasis on the role of education in fostering democratic citizenship can be extended to argue that schools should combat latent biases by fostering right environments. Michel Foucault’s (1926-84) theories on power and knowledge suggest that societal norms and discourses shape what we see as normal or acceptable, and how they are enforced and internalized. This argument is supported by modern psychological research on implicit bias, which indicates that several of our prejudices operate subconsciously. Contemporary thinker Martha Nussbaum’s approach may also suggest that education should not merely discourage negative behavior but actively teach the values of inclusivity and respect. This would minimize harm and maximize well-being by reducing conflicts born out of ignorance and bias.
To truly combat superficiality, we need to move beyond simple ‘training’ to suppress prejudiced thoughts or refrain from expressing them. Educational strategies should involve more than the rote learning of politically correct language; they should involve immersive experiences and curricula rich in global cultures, histories, and philosophies that celebrate rather than merely tolerate differences. Only then can we shift from passive non-discrimination (i.e. simply not engaging in such behavior) to changing the underlying attitudes that perpetuate discrimination.
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.