This is the way I see the jallikattu* issue.
You have a child that you rear with care. One day every year, it is the tradition of your ancestors to dress the child in rags and make her beg on the streets, whether she wants to or not. She might get hurt all alone on the streets- someone could slap her, or push her around. Suddenly, an organization appears opposing this practice. You are furious. How dare they! They're not doing this out of concern for the little girl, they hope to profit eventually by getting all these girls to contribute to the sex trade they're secretly building up. So they're wrong. They shouldn't stop your tradition.
All I have to ask is- what does the child want? What does she consent to? Does she enjoy this tradition that puts her in danger? Obviously not. So stop it. If the organization that is lobbying for it to stop has dark motives, then stopping them is step 2.
Of course, this analogy makes sense only for those to whom a bull and a girl child are equal souls. Otherwise, everything I said is crap. I think that's where the problem lies.
As to 'tradition', I cannot stop myself from making a rude noise. Sati was tradition. Child marriage was tradition. Polygamy was tradition.
If a man in India wants to display his courage, I suggest he file a corruption case against an official who asks him for a bribe. That would be so much more respectable.