Thursday, June 11, 2020

Am I overreacting to the threat from coronavirus? [COMPACTIDEA]

As the various curfews / lockdowns are ending, I - sometimes - feel a bit of a doubt on the unchanged continuation of my strict protection / safety measures from coronavirus. Wearing a mask always, regular sanitization of hands, distancing, not letting anyone into my office, and many more. In contrast, people elsewhere seem to be starting to mix and meet others now. Some of my friends have even done some sort of meetups / get-togethers, but I refused for now. Am I being unnecessarily strict? Am I harming myself by this religious continuation preventive practices? Is it already time for some relaxations? I don't know, but it's important to express the self-doubt that has started to occur at times.


Thursday, March 5, 2020

New trend in India - A-grade actresses shamelessly exposing their bodies right in front of their fathers, brothers, etc.

Surprising that they don't feel any sort of lajja / shame / sharam while exposing their bodies in front of their fathers, brothers, etc. So much for Westernization! No value that you're the daughter of that man? Or a sister of your brother? Will this shamelessness ever end? Do these Westernized actresses have no shame left? Bikinis while with your father / brother? How much more can you possibly expose when you're with your boyfriend / husband, compared to what some actresses are currently doing with their fathers / brothers? Further, the discourse environment that has currently been manufactured in the Indian society is such that if you point out or criticize this shamelessness, you're yourself targeted and attacked as regressive, ancient, sexist, dirty-minded and what not [and immediately labeled a "troll"]. No space for unbiased consideration of the criticism.

Saturday, January 25, 2020

Females publicly sharing their near-nude pregnancy photos feels like exhibitionism and narcissism to me [COMPACTIDEA]

The 'usual' exhibitionism can be called out as such, but in the case of 'pregnancy', since it's considered a unique and divine experience, it's difficult to call out exhibitionism as exhibitionism. But just because the situation makes it difficult to call something out doesn't in itself mean or imply that it isn't the same negative thing that it was before the current special situation. Basic point being, keeping aside sweet language - females get some kind of excitement/kick in sharing exposing photos of themselves during pregnancy. Whether it's the hormones or whether it's usual stuff, who knows.

SEARCH TAGS= pregnant, childbirth

Friday, June 7, 2019

My presence making him uncomfortable

My father isn't coming to the bed to sleep because I'm around. We are in Ghaziabad to attend a family function, and just the two of us have come here. Now we're back to the hotel, and he isn't sleeping on the bed but is sitting on the sofa, despite me requesting him twice to come to the bed and sleep. My feeling is that his dislike and hatred for me is so high that he doesn't want to sleep next to me. If this is so, why did he take me along to Ghaziabad at all, I wonder? I am feeling so hurt and devalued at his behavior towards me that I'm feeling like buying a new, separate room for myself so that as soon as I leave, he can comfortably sit on the bed, and I can come out of this nonstop insult and sleep as well. He's not even making any effort to not let it be visible to me that he's trying to avoid sitting next to me on the same bed. It's sad and bad but then I cannot let anyone hurt and abuse me on a continual basis, even if that's because that person happens to have a weird kind of personality, bordering a mild illness.

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

I now feel that there might be some kind of God in this Universe [COMPACTIDEA]

I've always / traditionally rejected the presence of God based on the absence of any tangible / visible evidence [although I did at times wonder about the creator / meaning / purpose of our Universe if there's no God after all].

Lately, however, as I've come across some photos that show the sheer vastness of our Universe and that our own Earth is almost zero in comparison, I've felt humbled. I've started to wonder far more deeply about who might have created this Universe, its galaxies, the stars, the planets, the laws that govern all of these bodies, the nature of time, the nature of human intelligence, and so on.

In particular, when I recently looked at the photos of Uranus and Neptune [embedded below], I almost felt for a moment that there must be some kind of God somewhere. It just shouldn't be that such vastness, such enormous amounts of matter and energies, such distances, such "long" time periods, and so on, exist without any creator. Very difficult to understand.

Update [9-May-19]: Looking at the unbelievable vastness of a tiny portion of the Universe in this Hubble video, I feel even more strongly that there could/should be a sort of God somewhere.

Monday, December 10, 2018

Lesser-known and offbeat places can be better than popular and usual travel destinations [COMPACTIDEA]

The point here is that most people, when they travel, travel to same popular destinations to which most other people travel. Travel agencies push these usual places, and most in the public buy tour packages for only these "fast food" destinations. Most people are unaware that tourism can at least sometimes be more enjoyable by doing places and experiences that are less-known, less explored, more untouched, less crowded, offbeat and overall more exotic. A rare village here, a serene trek there. A remote island here, a scenic valley there. A Greenland here, a Siberia there. And so on.

And not just the usual Dubai, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore, London, Hong Kong, Paris, etc.

One should consciously try - as much as possible - to do a mix of usual, popular tourist places and also sometimes explore stuff that's rare and exotic.

Thursday, September 20, 2018

American politics, and more generally America itself, is so weird, ruined and rotten [COMPACTIDEA]

It can probably happen only in today's USA that a prostitute/porn actress [Stormy Daniels] openly commented - in detail - on the shape / structure of the US President's genitals in a book she wrote. It wouldn't have been that bad if things had stopped here. After all, she's a call girl [or an "adult star" - little fundamental difference between the two actually, irrespective of what people will say], so obviously she'll say shitty things that are standard in her trade, and one shouldn't look too much into it. What is weird, however, is how America's mainstream news media outlets reported her words verbatim. That was a low. No respect for the post of your own President. Petty domestic politics and quarrels above national dignity. Quite rotten America itself has gotten lately, I must say. And to claim that such clickbait reporting by American newspapers is a reflection of the presence of "free press" in America is shitty and doesn't have legs.

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Correcting historical wrongs or a crime against Whites - forced land seizures from White farmers in South Africa - is this the right thing to do?

It isn't easy to answer the question raised in the title of this post, but just because it's difficult to answer this doesn't mean that there isn't an answer. And the answer is that yes, seizing the land "belonging to" White farmers in South Africa and giving it to Black farmers is overall the right thing to do. The counter argument that these White farmers whose land is being seized today aren't those White men who forcibly took these lands from SA's native Black farmers [perhaps centuries ago] doesn't have legs. These White men of today are the descendants of those evil Whites who forcibly annexed lands from SA's native peoples, and by being their direct descendants, these Whites of today are in a way directly though wrongly enjoying the fruits of the inhumane crimes committed by their forefathers on the Blacks, reflected in the elevated financial positions and relatively luxurious lifestyles of SA's Whites of today [in stark contrast to the poverty and misery continually being suffered by the Blacks, on average]. To right these historical wrongs, there's no practical way left but to take these lands forcibly, and give them to their real owners [if not to the same men, at least to their descendants]. Besides, if SA doesn't seize lands from White folks, what's the solution to the asymmetrical land distribution in SA then? Is there any other solution to give the lands originally belonging to the Blacks to Blacks again? If not, then seizing has to be done. The Whites - all over the world - will obviously make much hue and cry when these seizures happen, because they've gotten used to always being on the perpetrator end [for centuries now] and they can't see "fellow" White folks being mistreated the way they mistreated Blacks. Let them create furor. Let Australia beat its chest and bark like a dog. These Australians - much like other White nations - are compulsive racists who can only see and react to injustices against Whites - they don't see or feel any crimes at all when they bomb to death innocent Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians or Yemenis. Seizures are overall the just and right thing to do.

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Even a little dabbling in a field gets you a title to flaunt around for life, at least on Wikipedia - but did you really earn it, and did you really deserve it

Two examples here. Is it right to call Priyanka Chopra a singer? It is not. She isn't a singer. No way. Just because she has "sung" a few songs doesn't mean that she deserves the coveted title of a "singer". You earn this title. You shouldn't be awarded this title just for quickly assembling a song by hiding your own voice behind modern technological features such as autotune [or Auto-Tune], by resorting to nudity/sexualization [she starts to pour this right in the first five seconds] and other distractions or "riders" in order to shift the main focus of the song from its melody/tune towards its racy visuals, by selling yourself to a top star so that you can convince him to participate in your song in order to give credibility to the song which you alone cannot [but after his massive contribution you still get to collect and flaunt the undeserved title of a "singer"], and by making a song such that only a small proportion of its length is comprised of your voice while much of it is simply instrumentals or the voice of that top star whom you desperately rented by selling yourself.

Let's look at these two sentences.

"Priyanka Chopra... is an Indian actress, singer, film producer, philanthropist, and the..." [link]

"Udit Narayan... is an Indian playback singer... of Nepalese descent..." [link]

Both these sentences use the same word - singer. But is the so-called singing of Priyanka Chopra comparable to the lifetime singing career of Udit Narayan? Not at all. The way the words have been used imply an equivalence - but this is anything but equivalence. If both Udit Narayan and Priyanka Chopra are singers, and the latter is also an actress, a film producer and a philanthropist, then she must be a sort of polymath, right? Not at all. At least this title - singer - has been given to her but neither does she deserve it, nor has she earned it.

This actually also highlights two major issues with Wikipedia itself:

  1. As far as Wikipedia's perspective is concerned, it doesn't have any perspective of its own. Whatever is published elsewhere is Wikipedia's perspective, with two noteworthy points. The first being that Wikipedia uses this extremely vague term called "reliable sources", from which facts/information can and should be picked. But what's credible/reliable for one person might be propaganda for others [think of The New York Times knowingly spreading anti-Iraq and anti-Saddam propaganda in 2002 and 2003 in order to prepare the world opinion for an American invasion of Iraq]. The second being that the "volunteers" who write and edit Wikipedia - their personal biases and opinions can never be separated from them and these will definitely percolate into what gets written on Wikipedia.
    1. In the case of Priyanka Chopra, if news media outlets call her a singer, then Wikipedia will automatically start to call her a singer. It doesn't matter what the "real truth" is. Whatever is reported is automatically "the truth". This is kind of like according to Wikipedia, Crimea was annexed by Russia - because the entire Western news media said so and continues to repeat so on a daily basis. Wikipedia doesn't have any judgment or morality or perspective of its own. It'll never raise the fundamental question of whether the secession of Crimea was really an "annexation", especially considering the pro-secession results of the referendum held there and even the subsequent confirmation of these results as correct by West's own polling in Crimea?
  2. There isn't a proper way on Wikipedia - or more broadly in the English language - to differentiate between different "levels" of a title. A random, low-level newbie singer is also a singer. And a legend like Mohammed Rafi is also simply a singer.