Friday, January 31, 2014

Man in the mirror

I am a little puzzled with one video that went viral recently. You may have seen it and you may agree that it makes a good point, do not stare.  And yet the instances did not go along with the message, at least for me.

Let us take for the discussion the tattoo. People have many reasons for a tattoo but somewhere down the line there is exhibitionism and where would exhibitionism be without voyeurism? Surely a man / woman would not always be mentally challenged like Sanjay Ramaswamy to remind himself of his wife / husband? Then the tattoo of the name of a loved one conveys the same message to an observer as a wedding band or a thali. Art work on the bodies have many explanations but all of them would be defeated if the tattoo was not visible. So what is the point of getting offended by someone staring at a tattoo?

I remember reading somewhere that men are wired to look and stare at a woman and it is something that cannot be wished away. It can however be managed by good upbringing and also by growing up with women especially in a co-educational institution for instance. Exhibitionism and voyeurism are two sides of a coin and both go together. So can voyeurism go away if exhibitionism stops? Maybe only to a degree and that is obvious when you see the last segment where only the face of the woman was visible and the man looked at her face.

I would like to think that men stare (I will assume that women do not) when they see something that is not usual like:

  • when among a crowd of normal good looking women there is one unusually gorgeous woman walking along
  • when among a group of young women wearing salwars there is one girl wearing a half saree
  • when in a crowd of long plaits, there is one page boy cut or vice versa
  • when the average height in a crowd is five feet or so there is someone who is five ten or more

So if someone does not stand out maybe the chances of that person being stared at is lesser…

As they say normal is boring.

P.S. I have made a double take for some unusual cases and I have got THE stare from the better half for it.

P.P.S I do not approve of staring too

P.P.P.S Simple solutions like mirrors is wishful thinking

P.P.P.P.S If you are done with that video, watch this, it does make sense

Friday, January 24, 2014

Time to get your words right...

I think it is time folks got their F’s and B’s right. You know the F’s and B’s that is commonly thrown around and if you watch Hollywood movies contribute to a significant share of the dialogues especially for world saving hunks where talking is the least option. Probably if you are watching on TV here you may have missed them because our helpful censors cut them out along with other everyday terms that are replaced with crap, witch etc.

The point of this post however is to the F’s and B’s and maybe a little more. It is about the use and often the thoughtless use that ends up completely missing the point of the usage. You use it to abuse someone or at least piss them off considerably, usually resulting in a retort. But in reality it appears different. Let us see a few instances:

Instance 1: “The big F with a You” This I would assume is to tick someone off or simply abuse someone. Probably intended to be a harsher equivalent of let us say “ugly moronic buffalo” or something similar (no offense intended to the bovine). But if you look at the meaning it is way off the mark
When we use the imperative it is usually to give an order and so the subject and the object are omitted.
Example: “You give me the book” in the imperative can be expressed with greater impact as simply “give me the book” and to re-emphasize it can be reduced to “give me” or even “give”. The other person will get the picture.
Now let us go back to the instance when X tells Y “F@#$ You”, we understand the subject has been omitted the object in this case if there are two people, can be the speaker also. So is it a telling off or promiscuity?

Instance2: “The big F with an Off”, this I would assume is telling someone to go away, but by substituting the verb “go” with a verb of physical intimacy, is that offensive or a suggestion to the other party to do it? Again with the omission of the object, it can be understood as self-help or with the help of someone else, so it really a bad thing? Are you actually offending the other and why should the other person take offense? Puzzling.

Instance3: “The big B”, this is a grave mistake. It is a mistake because to call someone a love child effectively means condoning the parents. What is the child’s part in his / her birth? And why bring parenthood into the picture? When such words are used the reactions of the other person will appear reasonable.

Instance4: “The other big B”, this is a curious one. Girls call each other that “affectionately” and yet take offense when others call them in anger. Somewhere down the ages female dogs have come to represent the moral standing of women. If you are a dog lover, you will know that this is grossly unfair, female dogs are very loving and affectionate to their owners and temperamentally better off than males.

Instance5: “Oh God!” off late people call on their Gods and even call on other people’s Gods for expressions of dismay, anger, ecstasy  among others. This seems to have been inspired by Hollywood again where verbally challenged world savers call on the Lord in between their one liners. If you must call on God, do call on the God you believe, else the conversation will change context completely.

I am sure there are more instances where what was intended to be said and what was said and the reactions they resulted in are far removed from the actual. So maybe it is time to revisit the F’s and B’s?