The fact that it would have been a lot more mature to constitute a committee with interested parties and stakeholders to view the documentary and report on it, is of course, totally lost in the midst of impulsive decisions and a mutual mudslinging frenzy.
Apparently the ban on the film has been enforced because India's image would be tarnished due to the views of a rapist. Tourism would be affected you see. Well, in that case...
- Wasn't India's image tarnished when a Japanese tourist was raped by a tour guide in Jaipur recently?
- Wasn't it tarnished when the French diplomat who abused his daughter was allowed to get away due to a manipulation of his forensic report?
- Isn't the image tarnished because a popular film actor has managed to evade justice even after 9 years of killing an endangered species of deer?
- Isn't it utterly shameful that the leader of a prominent political party of the country says that rapes occur because 'boys will be boys...they commit mistakes'? Isn't he as culpable as the rapist?
- Aren't we left red-faced when self-created holy men who promise nirvana to their foreign clients, instead indulge in sexual romps and cheap tricks?
- Why don't we also consider violating traffic rules, abusing fellow road users, spitting and urinating on roads as being detrimental to the country's image?
And here's the thing. Nirbhaya's parents themselves have willingly participated in the making of the film. And her father has said that everybody should watch the film.
Or at least, castrate them.