Saturday, March 08, 2008
because every dead blog deserves a surprise post to startle its readers :-)
...and now that you've read it, you may run back to your eventful lives :D
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Dear fans and avid readers!
The following is an excerpt from an online chat i had with a friend .
I feel it aptly documents the phenomenon of facebook in our modern times.
oof: i am not searchable on facebook, as your search will reveal
kk: ah.
why the elusiveness?
oof: it is far too public for my liking
kk: ah.
oof: more so than real life
kk: certainly.
.
oof:
and how many facebook friends do you have?
kk: currently, 68.
oof: wow
kk: is that an alarming number?
oof: yes certainly
68 close friends
68 people and the friends of 68 people being able to track your every social move
kk: some of whom aren't particularly close... people who i knew back in school but didn't speak too much to.
and stuff of the sort.
track my every social move, yes.
oof: doesnt that do things to your internal systems?
kk: um... not so far.
mercifully.
oof: hhhmmmm
again, wow
kk: it reflects a lack of social moving on my part.
oof: huh?
what?
explain that
kk: the fact that you say wow to my number of facebook friends, and the fact that you say wow to the lack of things being done to my internal system.
logically leads to the conclusion that my social movements are not particularly track-worthy.
oof: lol
but isnt that what facebook is about?
tracking each others social movements
kk: well, yes...
but you can also take colour blindness tests.
oof: 68 people think your social movements are trackworthy
kk: and flunk them.
oof: ah yes.
and also be assigned political identities
i am told
kk: yes, i have been told too.
oof: and also be assinged a best friend based on a similarly answered movie quiz
The following is an excerpt from an online chat i had with a friend .
I feel it aptly documents the phenomenon of facebook in our modern times.
oof: i am not searchable on facebook, as your search will reveal
kk: ah.
why the elusiveness?
oof: it is far too public for my liking
kk: ah.
oof: more so than real life
kk: certainly.
.
oof:
and how many facebook friends do you have?
kk: currently, 68.
oof: wow
kk: is that an alarming number?
oof: yes certainly
68 close friends
68 people and the friends of 68 people being able to track your every social move
kk: some of whom aren't particularly close... people who i knew back in school but didn't speak too much to.
and stuff of the sort.
track my every social move, yes.
oof: doesnt that do things to your internal systems?
kk: um... not so far.
mercifully.
oof: hhhmmmm
again, wow
kk: it reflects a lack of social moving on my part.
oof: huh?
what?
explain that
kk: the fact that you say wow to my number of facebook friends, and the fact that you say wow to the lack of things being done to my internal system.
logically leads to the conclusion that my social movements are not particularly track-worthy.
oof: lol
but isnt that what facebook is about?
tracking each others social movements
kk: well, yes...
but you can also take colour blindness tests.
oof: 68 people think your social movements are trackworthy
kk: and flunk them.
oof: ah yes.
and also be assigned political identities
i am told
kk: yes, i have been told too.
oof: and also be assinged a best friend based on a similarly answered movie quiz
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
CONTRARY TO YOUR OBSERVATIONS, THIS BLOG IS STILL ALIVE.
Dear fans and avid readers, (heh)
yes, it is true, this blog is still alive, and so am i. i had retreated briefly to the real world. but appear to be back, if only for a while.
i have made my first ever (second) movie. i have also lost said movie. huh.
in other news, i have befriended an asexual man.
please pray for me, and let us hope there is a god.
yes, it is true, this blog is still alive, and so am i. i had retreated briefly to the real world. but appear to be back, if only for a while.
i have made my first ever (second) movie. i have also lost said movie. huh.
in other news, i have befriended an asexual man.
please pray for me, and let us hope there is a god.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Delhi Rose
I swore that when I returned to this blog, my first post would be about her. So here it is.
I met her 3 years back. We became friends. Yes, it is true, her parents actually have named her that. Delhi Rose. As per all official documents.
When the time came for us to part, words failed me. People like her should be preserved. I mean, come on, how often do we run into human beings called "Delhi Rose"? And I might never get to see her again.
Hmmmmmmm. Sigh. Delhi Rose, I will miss you.
She left me her email address. Should I email her? I don't know. We shared the kind of relationship where if we met face to face, we were friends. A couple of smses here and there. But we were never phone friends. And we never hung out together on weekends for fun. Trouble is, I don't know what to say to her when she is not in front of me.
I love Delhi Rose. One of Earth's gems. Very sweet and extremely helpful. Many people don't know this about her, but she also has an amazing, loony sense of humor. I'm glad she shared it with me :-)
We also, made up a special hand-sign, just the two of us. I will remeber it always. Roughly, it looks like this
/\
V
I really hope our paths cross again.
Delhi Rose - I never told you about this blog. But I know that if you are reading, this, you will know who I am. Especially, since I put up our sign :D
I met her 3 years back. We became friends. Yes, it is true, her parents actually have named her that. Delhi Rose. As per all official documents.
When the time came for us to part, words failed me. People like her should be preserved. I mean, come on, how often do we run into human beings called "Delhi Rose"? And I might never get to see her again.
Hmmmmmmm. Sigh. Delhi Rose, I will miss you.
She left me her email address. Should I email her? I don't know. We shared the kind of relationship where if we met face to face, we were friends. A couple of smses here and there. But we were never phone friends. And we never hung out together on weekends for fun. Trouble is, I don't know what to say to her when she is not in front of me.
I love Delhi Rose. One of Earth's gems. Very sweet and extremely helpful. Many people don't know this about her, but she also has an amazing, loony sense of humor. I'm glad she shared it with me :-)
We also, made up a special hand-sign, just the two of us. I will remeber it always. Roughly, it looks like this
/\
V
I really hope our paths cross again.
Delhi Rose - I never told you about this blog. But I know that if you are reading, this, you will know who I am. Especially, since I put up our sign :D
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Saturday, December 23, 2006
subversion and the politics of power
If Men Could Menstruate
-- Gloria Steinem
A white minority of the world has spent centuries conning us into thinking that a white skin makes people superior - even though the only thing it really does is make the more subject to ultraviolet rays and to wrinkles. Male human beings have built whole cultures around the idea that penis envy is "natural" to women - though having such an unprotected organ might be said to make men vulnerable, and the power to give birth makes womb envy at least as logical. In short, the characteristics of the powerful, whatever they may be, are thought to be better than the characteristics of the powerless - and logic has nothing to do with it.What would happen, for instance, if suddenly, magically, men could menstruate and women could not?The answer is clear - menstruation would become an enviable, boast-worthy, masculine event:Men would brag about how long and how much.Boys would mark the onset of menses, that longed-for proof of manhood, with religious ritual and stag parties.Congress would fund a National Institute of Dysmenorrhea to help stamp out monthly discomforts.Sanitary supplies would be federally funded and free. (Of course, some men would still pay for the prestige of commercial brands such as John Wayne Tampons, Muhammad Ali's Rope-a-dope Pads, Joe Namath Jock Shields - "For Those Light Bachelor Days," and Robert "Baretta" Blake Maxi-Pads.) Military men, right-wing politicians, and religious fundamentalists would cite menstruation ("men-struation") as proof that only men could serve in the Army ("you have to give blood to take blood"), occupy political office ("can women be aggressive without that steadfast cycle governed by the planet Mars?"), be priest and ministers ("how could a woman give her blood for our sins?") or rabbis ("without the monthly loss of impurities, women remain unclean"). Male radicals, left-wing politicians, mystics, however, would insist that women are equal, just different, and that any woman could enter their ranks if she were willing to self-inflict a major wound every month ("you MUST give blood for the revolution"), recognize the preeminence of menstrual issues, or subordinate her selfness to all men in their Cycle of Enlightenment. Street guys would brag ("I'm a three pad man") or answer praise from a buddy ("Man, you lookin' good!") by giving fives and saying, "Yeah, man, I'm on the rag!" TV shows would treat the subject at length. ("Happy Days": Richie and Potsie try to convince Fonzie that he is still "The Fonz," though he has missed two periods in a row.) So would newspapers. (SHARK SCARE THREATENS MENSTRUATING MEN. JUDGE CITES MONTHLY STRESS IN PARDONING RAPIST.) And movies. (Newman and Redford in "Blood Brothers"!)Men would convince women that intercourse was more pleasurable at "that time of the month." Lesbians would be said to fear blood and therefore life itself - though probably only because they needed a good menstruating man. Of course, male intellectuals would offer the most moral and logical arguments. How could a woman master any discipline that demanded a sense of time, space, mathematics, or measurement, for instance, without that in-built gift for measuring the cycles of the moon and planets - and thus for measuring anything at all? In the rarefied fields of philosophy and religion, could women compensate for missing the rhythm of the universe? Or for their lack of symbolic death-and-resurrection every month? Liberal males in every field would try to be kind: the fact that "these people" have no gift for measuring life or connecting to the universe, the liberals would explain, should be punishment enough.And how would women be trained to react? One can imagine traditional women agreeing to all arguments with a staunch and smiling masochism. ("The ERA would force housewives to wound themselves every month": Phyllis Schlafly. "Your husband's blood is as sacred as that of Jesus - and so sexy, too!": Marabel Morgan.) Reformers and Queen Bees would try to imitate men, and pretend to have a monthly cycle. All feminists would explain endlessly that men, too, needed to be liberated from the false idea of Martian aggressiveness, just as women needed to escape the bonds of menses envy. Radical feminist would add that the oppression of the nonmenstrual was the pattern for all other oppressions ("Vampires were our first freedom fighters!") Cultural feminists would develop a bloodless imagery in art and literature. Socialist feminists would insist that only under capitalism would men be able to monopolize menstrual blood . . . . In fact, if men could menstruate, the power justifications could probably go on forever.If we let them.
This article originally appeared in the October 1978 issue of Ms. magazine and was included in one of Steinem's many books: Gloria Steinem, Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions.
[NY - NAL, 1986 (updated second edition by Owlet Books).]
-- Gloria Steinem
A white minority of the world has spent centuries conning us into thinking that a white skin makes people superior - even though the only thing it really does is make the more subject to ultraviolet rays and to wrinkles. Male human beings have built whole cultures around the idea that penis envy is "natural" to women - though having such an unprotected organ might be said to make men vulnerable, and the power to give birth makes womb envy at least as logical. In short, the characteristics of the powerful, whatever they may be, are thought to be better than the characteristics of the powerless - and logic has nothing to do with it.What would happen, for instance, if suddenly, magically, men could menstruate and women could not?The answer is clear - menstruation would become an enviable, boast-worthy, masculine event:Men would brag about how long and how much.Boys would mark the onset of menses, that longed-for proof of manhood, with religious ritual and stag parties.Congress would fund a National Institute of Dysmenorrhea to help stamp out monthly discomforts.Sanitary supplies would be federally funded and free. (Of course, some men would still pay for the prestige of commercial brands such as John Wayne Tampons, Muhammad Ali's Rope-a-dope Pads, Joe Namath Jock Shields - "For Those Light Bachelor Days," and Robert "Baretta" Blake Maxi-Pads.) Military men, right-wing politicians, and religious fundamentalists would cite menstruation ("men-struation") as proof that only men could serve in the Army ("you have to give blood to take blood"), occupy political office ("can women be aggressive without that steadfast cycle governed by the planet Mars?"), be priest and ministers ("how could a woman give her blood for our sins?") or rabbis ("without the monthly loss of impurities, women remain unclean"). Male radicals, left-wing politicians, mystics, however, would insist that women are equal, just different, and that any woman could enter their ranks if she were willing to self-inflict a major wound every month ("you MUST give blood for the revolution"), recognize the preeminence of menstrual issues, or subordinate her selfness to all men in their Cycle of Enlightenment. Street guys would brag ("I'm a three pad man") or answer praise from a buddy ("Man, you lookin' good!") by giving fives and saying, "Yeah, man, I'm on the rag!" TV shows would treat the subject at length. ("Happy Days": Richie and Potsie try to convince Fonzie that he is still "The Fonz," though he has missed two periods in a row.) So would newspapers. (SHARK SCARE THREATENS MENSTRUATING MEN. JUDGE CITES MONTHLY STRESS IN PARDONING RAPIST.) And movies. (Newman and Redford in "Blood Brothers"!)Men would convince women that intercourse was more pleasurable at "that time of the month." Lesbians would be said to fear blood and therefore life itself - though probably only because they needed a good menstruating man. Of course, male intellectuals would offer the most moral and logical arguments. How could a woman master any discipline that demanded a sense of time, space, mathematics, or measurement, for instance, without that in-built gift for measuring the cycles of the moon and planets - and thus for measuring anything at all? In the rarefied fields of philosophy and religion, could women compensate for missing the rhythm of the universe? Or for their lack of symbolic death-and-resurrection every month? Liberal males in every field would try to be kind: the fact that "these people" have no gift for measuring life or connecting to the universe, the liberals would explain, should be punishment enough.And how would women be trained to react? One can imagine traditional women agreeing to all arguments with a staunch and smiling masochism. ("The ERA would force housewives to wound themselves every month": Phyllis Schlafly. "Your husband's blood is as sacred as that of Jesus - and so sexy, too!": Marabel Morgan.) Reformers and Queen Bees would try to imitate men, and pretend to have a monthly cycle. All feminists would explain endlessly that men, too, needed to be liberated from the false idea of Martian aggressiveness, just as women needed to escape the bonds of menses envy. Radical feminist would add that the oppression of the nonmenstrual was the pattern for all other oppressions ("Vampires were our first freedom fighters!") Cultural feminists would develop a bloodless imagery in art and literature. Socialist feminists would insist that only under capitalism would men be able to monopolize menstrual blood . . . . In fact, if men could menstruate, the power justifications could probably go on forever.If we let them.
This article originally appeared in the October 1978 issue of Ms. magazine and was included in one of Steinem's many books: Gloria Steinem, Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions.
[NY - NAL, 1986 (updated second edition by Owlet Books).]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)