An opinion on the India's got latent controversy

Morality is a psychological framework that is a direct result of the norms of the day. A more fluid form thereof is propriety which depends on the audience we are addressing. To that extent, these things have a place in life but these stands do not represent the truth of who somebody is or can be in any given moment. On the level of individual development, if you're honest with yourself you burn through a current psychological reality not by moral dismissal or appraisal but by non judgemental observation.

Beyond norms of propriety, what if crassness in our/others' expressions were a symptom of "improperly" handled realities in the collective psyche? This idea of citing "this is not our culture" at every such instance is also a bit of an escape. If all that is, here and now, is a product of the same culture, then this is the reality of the culture that we hold so highly! Individuals make the collective so the responsibility of the "joke" lies with all that part took in it. As soil richness is a long term necessity and fertilisers are short term measures to tide over temporary deficiencies, external regulation is only a short term measure.

If our individual stands of morality meant anything, the viewership of the show would have been very niche to begin with, we as a nation wouldn't have been such a big consumer of porn and the general content we consume would show "healthier" fantasies. I'm saying all this is a reflection of our common reality, you gain less by antagonising an individual for showing the symptoms of the collective psyche than by addressing the root objectively. Then again, as part of the same line of reasoning, if this backlash is the catalyst he has to go through as a part of his individual journey, that is also an inevitable reality of the moment and the culture.

The "joke" he got in trouble for was probably from one of YeahMad's Truth or Drink videos on YouTube. The inherent tone in this video was that both options are unthinkable but if you had to pick, which would you pick. Nobody is literally considering doing either and that is what is supposed to make such a hypothetical scenario "fun". I do believe that we're very justified in condemning this kind of humour as crass but in the context of the general tone of the show, the content has always been as crass or "societally improper". The very fact that the show still grew in popularity shows that this is the kind of stuff a large number of people enjoy "behind closed doors".