Pritam's Blog
Jallikattu - Choosing The Lesser Of Two Evils… For The Sake Of Indigenous Breeds Of Cattle
The recent debates on the Jallikattu ban have seen an outburst of opinions and justifications, both for and against the ban. The activists who are supporting the ban are doing so on grounds that the bull-baiting sport of Jallikattu is cruelty to animals and it is also a dangerous sport.
The pro-Jallikattu protestors, on the other hand, are taking it as an attack on the Tamil culture and tradition, saying that Jallikattu doesn’t cause cruelty to animals; in fact, it prevents extinction of indigenous breeds, and non-Tamilians, urban elites, who are disconnected with rural India shouldn’t have any opinion on this. The condemning of Jallikattu by those who eat meat was also referred to as an act of hypocrisy by pro-Jallikattu protestors. At the same time, when BJP, the party infamous for its policies criminalizing slaughtering of cow and imposing a beef-ban, stood in support of the protestors, it showed the other side of hypocrisy. The debate and protests escalated from a student movement for Jallikattu- the sport, to a matter of Tamil pride, and then to identity politics, in no time.
Jallikattu is an ancient bull-taming sport in which a bull is released into a crowd through an entrance. The participants, then, attempt to grab the hump on the bull’s back in order to stop it or slow it down as the bull attempts to escape. The participants hold the hump of the bull with both arms and hang on to it as long as possible.
There have been reports of extreme cruelty to bulls participating in the sport, which include prodding the bull with sharp sticks, extreme bending and biting of the bull’s tail by participants while trying to control it, which can fracture the vertebrae. There are also reports of the bulls being forced to drink alcohol or chili peppers being rubbed in their eyes. Apart from that, according to an investigation by the Animal Welfare Board of India, because of the way the sport is played, Jallikattu is inherently cruel to animals. Because of all these reports and investigations, the Supreme Court of India banned Jallikattu. The recent debate and protests that erupted on 8th January, 2017 at Marina Beach, Chennai, was in opposition to the Supreme Court ruling.
There is no denying the fact that traditions and culture need to be preserved, but at the same time a line should be drawn as well. What if a particular traditional practice results in, in this context, cruelty to animals? Is it then a tradition worth preserving and continuing? The Tamil pride becomes a redundant logic when it comes to Jallikattu, for reports and investigations by various organizations clearly prove that Jallikattu indeed is cruel to animals, that too en masse. And going by this logic, not just Jallikattu, but other social, cultural, or even religious practices, be it Bakrid or any Hindu festival in which animals are sacrificed in mass, should be banned.
But Jallikattu is not that simple. It has other aspects as well, apart from the cultural one. It has social, economic, humanistic and above all, scientific aspect as well.
However, this doesn’t mean policies like the beef-ban should be entertained, especially when India still stands first in exporting beef even after criminalizing slaughtering of cow and putting ban on trading and consumption of beef in certain states. Here, the question is not about culture, but about the economic and social impacts of beef-ban. For example, beef is a cheap source of protein that is consumed by a major population of India (irrespective of the religion they belong to) who are still economically backward. The beef-ban, thus, is a direct attack on the economically deprived people. Apart from that, beef is a food-habit, and since there is no other substitute for food, a basic need, without sacrificing living-beings, putting a ban on beef, or as a matter of fact, any other meat, isn’t as same as banning a traditional practice of animal cruelty.
So, preservation and continuation of Jallikattu or any other traditional practices on grounds of it being a part of culture is not rational and humane.
But Jallikattu is not that simple. It has other aspects as well, apart from the cultural one. It has social, economic, humanistic and above all, scientific aspect as well.
There were more than a hundred native cattle breeds in India, but at present there are only 37. The extinction of the native breeds was accelerated by the growth of commercial dairies which survive and thrive on foreign breeds, and are of better quality than the native breeds. This has resulted in indigenous breeds of cattle being ignored, especially the male ones, whose only utility is in agricultural practices, and so they are sent to the slaughter house, which ultimately results in their extinction. But at the same time, these indigenous breeds are an integral part of the lives of traditional livestock keepers; they serve multiple purposes for small and marginal farmers. Extinction of these native breeds, thus, impact the financial condition of these small farmers who cannot afford the foreign breeds.
It is for these reasons Jallikattu, even if it is cruel to the bulls, matters. Bulls reared for Jallikattu are used for servicing the cows during the reproductive period. This needs them to be virile, and Jallikattu helps it. This in turn helps in prevention of extinction of the indigenous breeds.
Jallikattu is cruel to the bulls of the particular breeds which are used for the sport. And it is also dangerous for the common public: the participants and audience to the sport. According to a report in The Hindu, more than 34 persons were injured in the Jallikattu held at Pugaiyilaipatti on February 15 ().
At the same time, there is no other alternative way to prevent the indigenous breeds from getting extinct.
The government should, thus, come up with better and more efficient regulatory bodies to keep an eye on the way Jallikattu is practiced, to minimize the cruelty to the bulls participating in the sport, and to ensure the lives of the common people are not endangered. It should also come up with policies to ensure the preservation of the indigenous breeds of cattle.
Until then, banning Jallikattu wouldn’t do any good to the cattle.
Jallikattu is evil. But banning this sport is more evil, for it will result in extinction of these breeds.
So, putting a ban on this cruel, bull-taming game is not an option. Jaallikattu should survive until we come up with an alternative way to prevent extinction of these native breeds of cattle.
Jallikattu is the lesser of the two evils.