Indian women are known to be the most unfriendly in the world, for the most short-sighted reasons. The way they look at men is too ridiculous. Each individual woman behaves as if she believes that she and she only has males as fathers, brothers and sons. As if other women do not have males as fathers, brothers and sons but only have female- chasers and chastity thieves. It is so obvious a problem of viewing the world around them, almost a ninety percent blindness caused by unwarranted and unfounded bias against men. There appears to be unrelenting competition to prove who is more chaste than the other by being nastier to men more than others. Going by the looks of most of the women, such a concern for them is totally unwarranted also based on the fact that men are influenced mainly by attractive looks. When most women do not qualify to be anywhere in this category, their extraordinary preoccupation with protection of their chastity appears to the entirely self-fuelled . Even the ugliest woman assumes without any evidence that the most attractive of men are chasing her and she has a need to look behind all the time. Well, it turns out that she will feel shattered if her need for someone to chase her does not get fulfilled. That explains why most women are a frustrated and morose lot, despite their pretensions being otherwise.It will be a great surprise eye-opener for them that going by their attractiveness and attitude even their husbands do not have any care about their chastity or otherwise, they just do not care. Only Indian women can be credited with this extraordinary ability to make such a big fuss around a matter which nobody cares. Have we Indians not heard of Draupadi and her five husbands,Krishna and his countless gopikas. Traditional culture of Indians from ancient days being female dominated and fun filled, from where and when this saddistic and snobbish culture infiltrated into Indian culture is a question to be traced, debated and erased for good to avoid each half of the population being a perennial source of unproductive tension to each other.If this aberration in culture is due to a failure in understanding, it needs to he rectified with utmost urgency.Most probably this can be traced to the enforced fancy over the Victorian morals which was a compulsory pretension to the British period officialdom, the vestiges of which should have vanished by this time. In contrast, as a paradox, it was allowed to grow like a monster eating into the most natural relationship of men and women. Men and women as species are biologically and emotionally made for each other and they are compatible and complementary to each other. They should live work and have fun together. On the other hand India is the only country, apart from the aboriginal cultures, where men and women are segregated like different races not be mixed together at any eventuality. Suddenly they come together at marriage and with their total lack of skill and understanding, they fail to be fruitful and enjoyable relationships and end up at best as legal minimum co-existence with accompanying bitterness and exasperation.We have schools and colleges for boys and girls separately and in all the imaginable social situations women are encouraged or rather forced to avoid men by other women more as a competition in deprivation. It is not surprising then that India must contain the largest number of lesbian women who can neither dare or care to reveal their sexual orientation brought about by their own self-imposed perpetual segregation from men.Politicians being the most irresponsible social abusers try to perpetuate and widen the divide so that women can be easily manipulated by promising female chauvinistic laws. While such laws are proposed and touted by the cunning politicians women must be vigilant and intelligent enough to realize that it is their fathers, brothers and sons who are going to be affected by such laws, which the politicians can take advantage of, by keeping the entire male population under constant doubt and insecurity about their interaction with womenIt is all the more smart of them if they realize certain basic differences in human natures which are applicable to men and women and liberate themselves out of the ‘Being chased’ obsession and the mentalities based on such eccentric obsession. Because,the truth is that men are as emotional and sensitive as women are, if not more, and they have no impulse or inclination to chase any woman howsoever attractive she may be. The perceived insult hurts him more than the perceived loss of her. The hurt of the insult is infinitely more powerful than the pull of the interest the woman,if at all, manages to create in him. And they don’t have to look faraway for evidence and proof, they only have to look at their own fathers, brothers and sons, who are going to be victims of other women’s snobbery and all the politicians’ entrapments. Why they should lend themselves to create such a mess in the society.The criminals and eccentrics who disturb women and reported in the news are very very insignificant in number,may be even less than one percent and it is not an intelligent society which forms its social norms based on eccentricities and applies them to the ninety nine percent of normal people.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Friday, January 25, 2008
Dress,Glamour,Attraction and the Attention
A prelude:This essay is about attraction and revealing dressing and instincts of nature.
If you are one who feel you should not be caught reading this,do not read further.
This post I wrote after the Gateway Molestation incident .
It went on to become a featured essay in the most popular Blog in India.
The story of molestation repeated this New Year eve also.
Again with another NRI girl.
And I felt the need to repost it again.
Women dress to attract .Attract whom,that they do not care.They hope to attract the attention and subsequent admiration if due,of only men and women of their taste.Depending upon the nature of dress,almost everyone they do not expect gets attracted and motivated to react.This brings them into conflict and makes news,like the Gateway incident.
Is dressing evocatively the lure they lay out for potentially suitable mates in the most basic instinctual way,as animals in Nature use various forms of lures?
What they perhaps intend is,that all and sundry should approach them and they have the right and pleasure of rejecting and snubbing sportively.This the mankind should take as occupational hazard and continue to practice this as a perpetual mating routine.Women find nothing wrong in that.After all men and women are intended by Nature to procreate and not to build bridges and planes. That is anyway secondary ,far inferior to the urge to procreate,which manifests as all the known and unknown human traits.Our entire genetic programming is to support this primordial activity of Nature and we do all we do,to satisfy this thirst of Nature.
The right to lure and choose is so fundamental to the womenkind,that it becomes the basis for their happiness,feeling of well-being and their dreams are made of the prerogative of performing this.That is why they reject to even consider the entreaties to dress to avoid attention.To them it appears to be a part of male stupidity, to be oblivious to the obvious.
Now it becomes a situation of choices.
There are men who can handle the approach-rejection bit.They approach routinely,get rejected and go on to other women routinely.They are the ideal species for women,they fit well in the scheme of things,as long as the material is not of too poor a quality,way below their perception of suitable suitors
There are men who approach once,get rejected and become dejected never to approach any more women.Women do not care about this type.They do not understand why it should be so.It is the man's problem.If he does not know how to handle it, he deserves to sit alone and brood.Let him go get a life.
There are men who do not care about all this nitty-gritty of approach and approval.They just take the ball in their own hands with the hope of playing the game in their own way.They do not care about time and place also.They start doing it wherever theyfind the ball to play with.If they cannot do it alone they gather friends for support and cheer.They build their life around being able to play the ball according to their own rules.
There are women who can handle such ball-grabbers.They can face them,fight them off and become winners.The best thing is they do not feel any need to feel bad about this.It is part of the game.In what other way it is supposed to be,they ask.For them,the game is heating up.All the more fun,all the more thrill and all the more strength,with every passing game,the man and the game.They confidently choose to dress evocatively and the way they want,in public,whatever happens to others in the news.Not that it only happens to others,it can happen to anyone,but the feeling bitter part is weird.What is there in Nature,will happen the way it is,who are we to think of doing anything about it to change it,and then feel bad about it.It is a needless mindset.One can do better in life without this 'controlling the Nature and the inevitable'mentality.
There are gangs of men who do not care about getting arrested,paraded and prosecuted.(every year about 67 lakh Indians get arrested for crimes,98% of them new,making almost every adult Indian male between 18 and 50 an arrested criminal,statistically)They are the natural equivalent of the natural women,who dress to kill,or to evoke at least,that too in public.The sense of public and private is a product of civilisation induced inhibition and the vast majority is not civilised in all the aspects.Completely civilised, in other words may also mean a completely and comprehensively tamed timid animal of a human kind of the 'castrated' gutless variety .They continue to handle attraction by 'handling' the object of attraction(women for men) and the target(men for women),the way animals would have done it and keep doing it.Whatever the laws may say.Laws are for tamed animals,not for animals of Nature,of the jungle.All the tactics animals instinctively adopt to handle hunger and competition are crimes in law,making all animals 'criminals'by default in law of the 'human'land.
Now girls who do not want to be in a situation handling animals of Nature have the choice of covering up extensively and they choose it.They choose apparent safety to the thrill of seductive luring and getting chased.They are the 'more inhibited by the demands of being civilised' kind.
It is just another matter that men intoxicated with too much of revelry choose to handle entirely covered up objects also.Well,that is a time-of -the-year-specific aberration,there are always exceptions to the rule.Or there are not enough number of rules to cover all situations,and hence sometimes there are more exceptions than inclusions.
And there are the pragmatic type who choose to dress attractively,(that is revealing or emphasizing attractions) in familiar surroundings where they expect their target audience of suitable suitors.In strange places,where the audience is uncontrolled,they choose to cover up.Being familiar with niche marketing they choose to forego the random audience.
It all is a matter of individual emotional profile and skill in making personal choices,to suit those profiles,that matters in life,as it does in investments.
It is the way things are.
If you are one who feel you should not be caught reading this,do not read further.
This post I wrote after the Gateway Molestation incident .
It went on to become a featured essay in the most popular Blog in India.
The story of molestation repeated this New Year eve also.
Again with another NRI girl.
And I felt the need to repost it again.
Women dress to attract .Attract whom,that they do not care.They hope to attract the attention and subsequent admiration if due,of only men and women of their taste.Depending upon the nature of dress,almost everyone they do not expect gets attracted and motivated to react.This brings them into conflict and makes news,like the Gateway incident.
Is dressing evocatively the lure they lay out for potentially suitable mates in the most basic instinctual way,as animals in Nature use various forms of lures?
What they perhaps intend is,that all and sundry should approach them and they have the right and pleasure of rejecting and snubbing sportively.This the mankind should take as occupational hazard and continue to practice this as a perpetual mating routine.Women find nothing wrong in that.After all men and women are intended by Nature to procreate and not to build bridges and planes. That is anyway secondary ,far inferior to the urge to procreate,which manifests as all the known and unknown human traits.Our entire genetic programming is to support this primordial activity of Nature and we do all we do,to satisfy this thirst of Nature.
The right to lure and choose is so fundamental to the womenkind,that it becomes the basis for their happiness,feeling of well-being and their dreams are made of the prerogative of performing this.That is why they reject to even consider the entreaties to dress to avoid attention.To them it appears to be a part of male stupidity, to be oblivious to the obvious.
Now it becomes a situation of choices.
There are men who can handle the approach-rejection bit.They approach routinely,get rejected and go on to other women routinely.They are the ideal species for women,they fit well in the scheme of things,as long as the material is not of too poor a quality,way below their perception of suitable suitors
There are men who approach once,get rejected and become dejected never to approach any more women.Women do not care about this type.They do not understand why it should be so.It is the man's problem.If he does not know how to handle it, he deserves to sit alone and brood.Let him go get a life.
There are men who do not care about all this nitty-gritty of approach and approval.They just take the ball in their own hands with the hope of playing the game in their own way.They do not care about time and place also.They start doing it wherever theyfind the ball to play with.If they cannot do it alone they gather friends for support and cheer.They build their life around being able to play the ball according to their own rules.
There are women who can handle such ball-grabbers.They can face them,fight them off and become winners.The best thing is they do not feel any need to feel bad about this.It is part of the game.In what other way it is supposed to be,they ask.For them,the game is heating up.All the more fun,all the more thrill and all the more strength,with every passing game,the man and the game.They confidently choose to dress evocatively and the way they want,in public,whatever happens to others in the news.Not that it only happens to others,it can happen to anyone,but the feeling bitter part is weird.What is there in Nature,will happen the way it is,who are we to think of doing anything about it to change it,and then feel bad about it.It is a needless mindset.One can do better in life without this 'controlling the Nature and the inevitable'mentality.
There are gangs of men who do not care about getting arrested,paraded and prosecuted.(every year about 67 lakh Indians get arrested for crimes,98% of them new,making almost every adult Indian male between 18 and 50 an arrested criminal,statistically)They are the natural equivalent of the natural women,who dress to kill,or to evoke at least,that too in public.The sense of public and private is a product of civilisation induced inhibition and the vast majority is not civilised in all the aspects.Completely civilised, in other words may also mean a completely and comprehensively tamed timid animal of a human kind of the 'castrated' gutless variety .They continue to handle attraction by 'handling' the object of attraction(women for men) and the target(men for women),the way animals would have done it and keep doing it.Whatever the laws may say.Laws are for tamed animals,not for animals of Nature,of the jungle.All the tactics animals instinctively adopt to handle hunger and competition are crimes in law,making all animals 'criminals'by default in law of the 'human'land.
Now girls who do not want to be in a situation handling animals of Nature have the choice of covering up extensively and they choose it.They choose apparent safety to the thrill of seductive luring and getting chased.They are the 'more inhibited by the demands of being civilised' kind.
It is just another matter that men intoxicated with too much of revelry choose to handle entirely covered up objects also.Well,that is a time-of -the-year-specific aberration,there are always exceptions to the rule.Or there are not enough number of rules to cover all situations,and hence sometimes there are more exceptions than inclusions.
And there are the pragmatic type who choose to dress attractively,(that is revealing or emphasizing attractions) in familiar surroundings where they expect their target audience of suitable suitors.In strange places,where the audience is uncontrolled,they choose to cover up.Being familiar with niche marketing they choose to forego the random audience.
It all is a matter of individual emotional profile and skill in making personal choices,to suit those profiles,that matters in life,as it does in investments.
It is the way things are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)