Originally posted by kitkataha
Those Muslims who cry when the jihadis are shown in a bad light is due of fear. They fear because people who may choose to view the medium, may then perceive that all Muslims are "terrorists".
They are afraid of being stereotyped. Films, ads, campaigns are heavily influenced and opinionated and no matter how good the intent, there's always the chance of labeling groups. However, of course, that should not be a basis of limiting anyone's vision (in this case, the film maker's). The film makers do have the creative liberty, and if a group finds it offensive then they have the right to peacefully protest as well. I am assuming both are part of India's constitution (Which I really doubt anyone takes seriously, due to the recent turn of events). Anyhow, Muslims that fuss when jihadis are shown in a bad light do so because they are misinformed, delusional, or are afraid that they may be unfairly subjugated as well. That's not right. JMHO.
But then all groups do. Wasn't Kurban's poster banned and burnt because Kareena was bareback? Shiv Sena is racist and misinformed, and they thought that the bold gesture suggested by the poster was offensive...so their followers protested...and vandalized along the way. The similar scenario happened with MNIK. Freedom of expression is fine and needed, until it subjugates or unfairly targets another individual/group. But in India it seems like freedom of expression all together is banned. You get arrested for liking comments via FB...f**k.
I don't think the film increases the stereotype in this sense. The target audience is probably very well aware of the jihadis, there are stories in the newspapers everyday. So where does the stereotype come in or the fear of it..? It's a fact that all jihadis are Muslims but i am sure people don't think all Muslims are jihadis; the film isn't introducing any new stereotype.
IMO, this whole ban is a bunch of bull anyways, people using it to further their useless agendas; get their two minutes of fame.