Social media has allowed everyone to express their views and opinions and connect with the world. It can become a powerful medium for disseminating knowledge, science, literature, art, and social concerns on a wide scale. But the question is: what are we using this medium for? To understand scientific discoveries, to read literature, to reflect on national and global problems, or to search for body parts in others’ photos and make obscene comments? This question is not only about social media use, but also about our mindset, interests, and social priorities.
A woman complains that her photos repeatedly receive comments asking why she shows her backside in every photo. Such comments have appeared hundreds of times. This situation raises many questions. What is the perspective of the person commenting on the photo? Why do they focus on a particular part of a woman’s body instead of considering her entire image, her personality, her work, or her achievements? Has a woman’s presence on social media become simply a means of public comment on her body?
This woman’s response is sharp. She says that when some people are interested in such photos, she shows them those because their interest and understanding level doesn’t seem to go beyond that. Her response is full of sarcasm, anger, and even contempt for those who limit a woman’s photo to her body rather than her personality. However, the most important aspect of this entire incident is not the woman’s photo or her response, but the mentality that considers it normal to constantly objectify women and make obscene comments about their bodies.
A fundamental point needs to be understood here. What a woman chooses to portray in her photo is her personal decision. Some may like her photo, others may not. But likes and dislikes do not justify posting obscenity, making derogatory comments, or attacking someone’s character. Freedom of expression does not mean the right to trample on another person’s dignity. There is a clear distinction between expressing disagreement with someone’s photo and insulting them.
The other side of this issue is even more serious. When a post is shared about the achievements of Nobel Prize-winning scientists in chemistry, it often doesn’t receive the expected response. Not even a hundred people like the post, and not even fifty people express their opinion. Meanwhile, images that center the body seem to garner far more interest. If this is the experience of any social media user, it should be considered where our collective interests are headed.
However, the intellectual capacity of an entire society cannot be judged based on the likes and comments received on a single post. Social media algorithms, the timing of a post, its presentation, subject matter, and audience interest also influence its reach. Nevertheless, if we repeatedly find that entertainment and materialistic content garners greater response, while science, research, and critical thinking are ignored, it is a fitting opportunity to review our digital culture.
We want India to lead the world in science and technology. We want our scientists to make new discoveries, our universities to become world-class research centers, and our young generation to break new ground in medicine, space, artificial intelligence, and chemistry. We aspire to surpass the technological achievements of countries like the United States, China, and Israel. But is this possible only through slogans? Can we, while dreaming of becoming a world leader, shirk the responsibility of understanding the work of scientists, understanding research, and sharing knowledge?
A country’s scientific progress doesn’t happen solely in laboratories. It also requires a social environment where curiosity is respected, the habit of asking questions is cultivated, researchers are encouraged, and knowledge is respected. Only when young people discuss the achievements of scientists, understand the findings of research, and consider the social impact of new technology does scientific consciousness become part of society. If knowledge is considered boring and vulgar entertainment is considered the most attractive, then serious discussion on this trend is necessary.
It’s also true that entertainment and science aren’t mutually exclusive. Social media should also have a place for humor, beauty, fashion, and entertainment. Everyone can’t be expected to read serious articles all the time. The problem isn’t with entertainment, but rather when a woman’s photo is used to promote obscenity, insults, and misogyny, while efforts to cultivate interest in informative content are consistently ignored.
The double standards toward women are equally worrying. On the one hand, people view their photos, comment on them, and share in their popularity; on the other, they lecture those same women on morality. If you don’t like a woman’s photo, it’s not necessary to view or comment on it. However, using derogatory language about someone’s photo shows disrespect for that person’s dignity. Before questioning a woman’s freedom, one should also consider the responsible behavior of the person making the comment.
The question of popularity and revenue on social media is also linked to this debate. When a particular type of content attracts a large audience, some people turn it into a source of income. This is not surprising; audience interest on digital platforms often influences content dissemination and revenue. But it does raise the question of what type of content we are encouraging. If viewers consistently view, share, and respond to content, they contribute to its circulation, even if unknowingly.
Therefore, blaming only the content creators isn’t enough. Viewers also need to understand their role. The posts they respond to, the videos they rewatch, and the comments they forward shape the digital environment. If we want science, literature, education, and social concerns to find greater space on social media, we must also learn to read, share, and engage in meaningful discussion of such content.
Ultimately, the question isn’t about a woman’s clothing, her photographs, or her responses. It’s about a vision that reduces women to body parts rather than a complete human being. It’s also about a society that aspires to be a world leader but doesn’t make sufficient collective efforts to popularize knowledge and scientific achievements.
To become a world leader, it’s not enough to simply dream of technological progress; society must also cultivate respect for knowledge, dignity for women, and curiosity for ideas. It’s easy to make lewd comments after seeing someone’s photo, but understanding a scientist’s discovery, reading a book, and seriously considering a social problem requires effort. We must decide which direction we want to take our digital world—toward superficial attraction or toward knowledge, wisdom, and sensitivity. This choice will ultimately determine our social character.
