WHAT IS WRONG WITH US?

Tuesday, 24 July 2007

Is unbridled sex, every which way, really as good as we are told?
Mood:

surprised
Now Playing: WHY DOES THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PICTURE DIFFICULT TO SEE?
What struck me as incontrovertible evidence against unbridled sex is the fact that all religions consider sex to be dirty, highly objectionable act. Even Mahatma. Gandhi was a big proponent of abstinence from sex. That became a butt of intemperate jokes for many, and even mainstream movies have made fun of Gandhi on that issue. Which is actually sad, as Gandhi had made it clear that abstinence can give you the power of control on your emotions. Wonder, how many tried it if his philosophy was true before damning the Mahatma.

That is also why the movie Lage Raho Munnabhai was a travesty of truth. The movie showed the Mahatma actually helping Munnabhai court a girl, take her in a 'kissing car' and take sex to logical conclusion. The grandson of the Mahatma who otherwise gets hyper over misrepresentation of Gandhian philosophy kept silent. Or else, the underworld friends of Sanjay Dutt would have did him in. So much for Gandhigiri.

Mahatma Gandhi is known to have given up sex at the age of 40 and even kept away from his wife. Can't believe how can a Sanjay Dutt who is over 50 years get the Mahatma's support in such licentiousness. The way we Indians prove our stupidity is hardly believeable.

One holy book which explicitly restrains its followers from sexual misdemeanours is the Holy Koran. It has said that people are not supposed to even look at the toes of a girl as males can get sexually aroused by that. Second, Islam explicitly states you are not supposed to watch your sex partners private parts even while having sex. The couple should have sex only on the bed and not in the barn, the kitchen, the bathroom or the basement. And fourth, sex should be only at midnight and not during any other hour of the day. Don't you think the intention is to curb not just sex but even control sexual activity between married couples?

When it comes to Hinduism, secularists would quote the Kamasutra and the Kajoraho caves to prove that Hindus should never talk about morality. I could never understand from when on the caves or Vatsyayana's ramblings became religious texts. I have never seen Kamasutra being qouted during poojas or Hindu ceremonies. Nor have I ever seen pictures of godess Sarsawati in the nude as a mark of sexuality. The murals in Kajoraho caves are only sexual postures and by no measure represents gods in coital position.

And now we have a raging controversy over a Sikh sect called Dera offending the Sikhs. The issue is that the Dera chief wore the dress of Guru Gobind Singh, the original historical leader of Sikhism. He also was shown on TV as making and offering Amrut to people like the Guru. First, now do you know why talking disparagingly of Shivaji is a near-crime in Maharashtra? All the while we thought it is all plain necromancy. How could Laine get away with writing about Shivaji as if the Maratha king was a bastard?

The fact remains no one has the right to offend another's religious figure or leader. And look at the manufactured outrage over protest against Laine. And I don't see any secularist giving a lecture to the Sikhs or the Muslim on artistic freedom.

Coming back to the point of debate here, that is: is sex a bad thing after all? During my college days we boys went on a hike to Bhimashankar hills near Karjat, some 70 kms from Mumbai. The conversation, as always amongst college kids, veered around sex. One friend who had a carefully built athletic body told is about how sports medicine practitioners would insist on sexual abstinence to enhance performance on the field. Though media has always written against it that practice is still followed by sportsmen around the world during all major sports events, especially by the winning teams.

Recently there was this report on the link between oral sex and oral cancer which gained wide currency. The joke which also floated on millions of Orkut user sites was about Monica Lewenski saying, "oral cancer has many causes. It depends on what you smoke!" Read this BBC report: "writing in New Scientist magazine, US researchers said the human papilloma virus (HPV), which causes most cervical cancers, may also cause oral tumours. The HPV link could help explain why some young adults develop the disease. It is estimated that up to a fifth of women aged 18 to 22 in the UK carry a variety of HPV".

Only a decade ago the report on how kissing can exchange maximum number deadly bacteria took the world by storm. It was even reported that every kiss could shorten a man life span by about a few days. So if you calculate the number of times a man kisses in his life you could actually come to a conclusion that kissing could reduce his life span by a few years.

A few weeks ago in a Mumbai newspaper, a sexologist advised a girl to desist from anal sex as she had complained of anal 'leak'. According to the doctor, anal sex can damage the anal lining as well as the penal tissue permanently and both sex partners could suffer serious injuries to their private parts. He even gave an example of a patient who had to wear incontinence pads because of irreparable injury to her anus.

But the problem with the media the worldover is that freedom has become synonimous with unbridled sexual activity. This idea that you can have sex with anyone, anywhere, anytime in any position has become a measure to gauge a country's freedom. No one now-a-days talks of natural sex. Everyone talks of sex of a new kind. Sex may not be for procreation alone, it is recreation too. But to mislead people into believing that kinky sex is harmless is stretching things too far. In another blog we will discuss why sex should be only in traditional way, not kinky. Not even Kamasutra has prescribed anal sex, oral sex or kissing. Amen.

*******

Posted by Anil Nair at 8:15 AM

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Sunday, 22 July 2007

In India customer is not the king, he is the courtesan
Mood:

vegas lucky
Now Playing: SHORT CHANGING CUSTOMERS IS CONSIDERED SMART
Topic: INDIANS HAVE MILES TO GO

One day I bought two Airtel refil cards for Rs 455 each. This is just about a year ago. In those days I had a prepaid number which was so easy to recharge and was hassale-free as their ad says. About four years ago I had an Orange post-paid number. There was nothing called customer service with Orange in those days. I wonder how much has it changed since it got converted to Hutch. I was rudely stopped from using Orange services one day because they would not recognise the fact that I had paid my bills to their designated bank -- Punjab National Bank near my house. Though, I had been paying my bills at that bank branch for years. Even when I had faxed them the bill copy I had paid, and even agreed to send them photo copies of the bills Orange service center man rudely told me that the connection will be cut within 24 hours if the Rs 2,600 bill was not paid again.

I didn't wait. I immediately got a prepaid Airtel card because I heard from many of my friends that the service provider gets less opportunity to fleece you than with a postpaid card where you are beholden to the service provider. I also somehow suspect that because I had a very sought-after, easy to memorise phone number Orange was keen to sell that number to someone who would pay them well for it.

Well, with the pre-paid Airtel number things did work out as easy as their ads claim. It was hassle-free inasmuch as using the phone. And I really didn't care if I was being overbilled because the monthly outgo was affordable to me. It never was Rs 2,600. When you don't have any human contact, services in India always look good. Only when you have to deal with the service provider officials things go sour. And I realised that when I bought the two Rs 455 refil cards.

I had bought the cards from a small four square feet shop which sells CDs and wrist watches near Mulund station. I took the two cards home and tried to refil my phone charge. A 'network problem' message flashed persistently. Then I waited till the next day to check if the network had eased to help me recharge. But to no avail. Finally I called up the service call center for lodging a complaint. The lady at the other end without holding her breath told me there is congestion problems since last two days and it will be resolved in about 20 minutes.

I knew she was lying so I took a reference number for the complaint. Expectedly, two days later the problem had not resolved. So I called up again. This time it was a male on the other end. I narrated my saga to him. He again gave me the congestion fiddlesticks. I growled at him and I gave him my earlier complaint reference number. He put me on music for nearly 15 minutes and finally came back to tell me that there was a 'unique' problem. The two refil cards of Rs 455 are not valid on my phone as I was their most favoured lifetime customer! Strange but it is true, as Freddie Mercury said.

So what do I do now, I asked him. He politely told me to go the nearest Airtel service center and give back the cards for reimbursement. I loved that attitude. So I trooped to the service center near Mulund station next morning. The lady (I guess companies employ girls for their glorified indifference to customers) as usual gave me the you-stupid-jerk look while she explained that they are not mandated to make any reimbursements to customers and that the call center guy is unlikely to have said so. Which essentially meant that I was lying.

She suggested that I go back to the dealer from whom I bought the card for reimbursement. I thought that was a stupid idea. It was already three days since I bought the refil cards, so the dealer would have forgotten any such customer. I did not have any bill to prove that I bought the two cards from him. And I suspected even he does not know about Rs 455 refills not working in lifetime numbers. Well, in any event I thought I will give it a try.

The dealer was non-comittal and made all the appropriate sympathetic noises for me. His logic was that once the cards are scratched it is impossible to sell them to another customer. I thought selling the same cards to another customer, that too with numbers exposed, is sacrilege. I presumed the dealer could give the two cards back to the company as they we're still unused and Airtel could check their veracity. The exchanges between us after that point are unprintable.

So I went back to Airtel service center for an explanation. What really riled me up was the fact that the refil cards never mentioned that it was not valid for lifetime customers. I asked the girl at the service centre the same question. She only had a disdainful shrug. To prove her point she called up the call centre 9892098920. After she ascertained if it was the policy to reimburse the money from exposed cards mistakenly sold to lifetime customers she gave me the phone. The girl at the other end exasperatedly told me: "how can you even think of reimbursement from an exposed card?!" Hmmm... I didn't have the heart to tell her I am the courtesan not the customer.

**********

Posted by Anil Nair at 6:05 PM

Updated: Sunday, 22 July 2007 6:38 PM

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Arrogance is machismo
Mood:

suave
Now Playing: Customers are courtesans in India
Topic: CUSTOMER RELATIONS
Have you ever realised why stress levels are high amongst us Indians? Because arrogance is macho in India. When I went to London for two weeks I never heard a single expletive in public place either in their conversation or while dealing with customers. They simply don't think rude behaviour as a sign of machismo.

Everyday, I am witness to ugly, intemperate exchanges between bus conductors and customers. And I keep asking myself:do the conductors have a right to shout at customers? Only yesterday I was witness to verbal duel between passengers, the bus conductor and a young boy who was late in reaching the door to get down from the bus. By the time the boy reached the doorway to alight at Churchgate station the crowd outside had barged in. After a scuffle and a few punches the boy finally managed to get down. First, I don't understand why bus conductors try to make the bus ride look like a 400 metre steeple chase. If the bus conductor and the driver are in such a hurry to reach their destination to keep to time why can't they start on time.

Also, if the people had been a little accommodating in letting the boy getting down there would have less stress, no bad blood and general cheer around. The conductor could have assured the boy that the bus would leave only after he gets down and he could have said that with a smile. That is the way it should be. But we Indians love to bring people down to their knees, we get sadistic pleasure in making others feel miserable and we love to misuse our position to throw our weight around. This, in spite of our bleating about great Indian culture, our family values, our manners in public places, calling elders with a Ji and all that bunkum. See the way bigger vehicles push around smaller vehicles on the road for no reason than arrogance.

I am struck by Indian insolence and could quote hundreds of examples. If you have not noticed this earlier it will surprise you that even in case of premium products like Rs 10+ lakh car, foreign bank savings account or a BlackBerry, the official who is dealing with customers never knows the edict of customer relation that you are not supposed to shout at your customer, under ANY circumstances. Long ago when I was in school my aunt in the US told me that she, a front desk customer relations personnel, has standing orders not to even sound sarcastic when she is dealing with a customer who is lying. She was working for a small time insurance company. Why can't we Indians learn from the Americans, Japanese and the West Europeans.

The Indian culture which runs in our veins has taught us that arrogant behaviour is fashionable. We never learnt that customers have to be treated with respect, politely and as the raison d' eter of our business. We never learn to say please, thank you or sorry. While the westerners would not only say those words far too often but even earnestly feel for the customer.

Why do you need a Mahatma to tell you that customer is god, and he should be treated as god. I have seen that particular Gandhi's saying put up in many post offices. Is that not as plain as day.

Posted by Anil Nair at 5:58 PM

Updated: Sunday, 22 July 2007 6:54 PM

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Thursday, 24 May 2007

Encountering Modi
Mood:

hungry
Now Playing: Can Modi be held culpable for fake encounters?
Topic: The politics of encounter
When the plea for CBI investigation into the fake encounter case in Gujarat was dismissed by the Supreme Court on Thursday several records were set straight. First, politicising the issue does not help matters. When you listen to the political pundits, mostly who are avowed secularists, you start wondering why in all the other states where there are rampant police excesses no one finds the chief minister of the respective states culpable. Have you heard the names of the Maharashtra chief ministers or the Punjab chief ministers, even in the passing, when fake encounters are brought to light?

And in states like Kerala where police's mainstay remains elimination of political adversaries of the Left, some even from the affiliated organisations who don't toe the party line, it is best left to discussions at the village tea shop. It is like comparing Gujarat riots with Marad killings. As the joke in Ahmedabad is that even the earthquake and the cyclone in Gujarat have been promptly attributed to Narendra Modi. But beyond the humour, there is another image that is being created by the Congress and the Left. That all this terrorist threat to Modi is bunkum. Can one even comprehend the security enhancements which have taken place in the US and the UK after September 11, especially for the political class.

The logic behind high security given to politicians in power is that they have to take tough decisions in relation to national security which increases security threats against them, hence it is incumbent to protect them. One former election commissioner in India has been naïve enough to be qouted as saying people who want security cover should refrain from pursuing political career. That is to suggest that only people who have suicidal tendencies must join politics. Thankfully the public opinion in this country has not been so unsophisticated to buy that argument. People don't cavil the security provided to politicians like Bal Thackeray, Modi or even Mayawati as their role in politics has been to call a spade a spade, just as take stringent measures to curb terrorism.

Another strange fact that keep bobbing up is that another shoot-out and killing of terrorists in Mumbai by Gujarat police is now being given a colour of fake encounter. This refers to Israt Jahaan, a college student and resident of Mumbra, some 50 km away from Mumbai. Though it was conclusively proved that Jahaan was an accomplise to her terrorist boy-friend, the secular parties are busy working on giving the pack of four terrorists who were planning to eliminate Modi, a resurrection.

Posted by Anil Nair at 8:49 AM

Updated: Sunday, 22 July 2007 6:56 PM

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Sunday, 13 May 2007

Hindus in Islamic countries
Now Playing: Happily married Hindu man, Muslim wife separated by authorities on religious incompatibility
Topic: SHARIAT LAW
First, let us tell you tell a story of a couple who has been happily married for 21 years. On April 2 this year the Islamic authority of the country where they live ruled that they cannot stay together as the woman was Muslim and her husband is Hindu. You must be thinking this must be Saudi Arabia. Well, this happened in a country which is considered modern, rich and in the company of the Asian tigers. It has a high per capita income, dazzling cities, most modern technology infrastructure and prides itself as 'truly Asia' -- Malaysia. But it is an Islamic country where laws tend to be more Shariat-like than modern.

On May 3 the high court then ruled that the husband, though being Hindu, can have custody of the children. Small mercies. But again, the rider is that as the mother is Muslim the children will necessarily be Muslim and follow Islam. If you are shaken by the incredulity of the goings-on in a First World country braze yourself. The fateful Tuesday's ruling has been acclaimed as historic for freedom and minority rights in that ultra-modern country. But neither the media nor the human rights organisations are questioning the original verdict of separating a happily married couple on grounds of Islamic tenets. And look at the noise the human rights organisations would make if this had happened in India where there is so much public resentment to Muslim boys and their families beguiling and converting Hindu girls for marriage. The sauce for the goose is never the sauce for the gander.

According to a foreign news agency report, the ruling over the custody of children was given by the high court which was attended by the couple. The Hindu husband Marimuthu Periasamy and the Muslim woman Raimah Bibi Noordin were emotional and intense in their appeals. Both are working in rubber estates as tapers where they had met two decades ago and fallen in love. They have seven children aged between four and 14. The crux of the issue is that Marimuthu did not agree to get converted to Islam when he got married to Raimah. Revenge came 21 years later.

If one scans the newspapers or the Internet you will not come across even one strongly worded rebuke from the international watchdogs of human freedom. Hindus, Buddhists and Christians are the most prominent minorities in Malaysia. Indian secularism has caught the world's imagination. What has made ordinary Hindus in Malaysia seeth in anger is that the couple lived together for 21 years and only in these days of rising aggressive Islam the authorities got into the act of parting them asunder.

Muslim countries can have sobering effect on people who make so much of a deal of freedom and personal choice. But unlike India, freedom is at a premium in these countries. Eateries and restaurants, howsoever plush they may look, in most of Islamic South Asia have strange protocols. Muslim and non-Muslim customers are segregated at the dining tables though some restaurants make a liberal concession of only separating the plates of Muslims and non-Muslims.

Even in the role-model city-state of Singapore, the main university called the National University of Singapore (NUS), the sprawling canteen for students practices this racist measure. It is akin to the apartheid in South Africa. The ostensible reason for such a practice in Muslim countries is that the people or the plates of pork-eaters, or to put it in other words -- the kafirs, should not be mixed with those of the pious followers of Islam. But some people argue that though eating pork is sacrilege in Islam and most Muslim countries have banned it, it is at least available freely in countries like Singapore. And only a few months ago during the municipal elections in Mumbai the NCP led by our agriculture minister Sharad Pawar who is a partner in the UPA, widely advertised his dream of turning Mumbai into a Singapore if they are voted to power. No one mentioned if we are going to have the same protocols in all the restaurants in Mumbai. But then all the manufactured outrage seemingly disappears into thin air in a Muslim country.

Posted by Anil Nair at 9:24 AM

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older

«	July 2007					»

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31