Pity

Anamika #91

O.K. next time I will try to write in Urdu.

There is an 18-yo recent immgrant to the US who is going through some serious identity crises,and (I think) is need of some cultural lifelines and emotional support as she deals with some scary issues. She is from the Jackson Heights area. If anyone knows where she could find such help, pleae email me postmatser@yahoo.com.

Thanks,

P.M.

krashid #90

``I read the joke of hapless Pakistani. And I enjoyed it.``

???

Please write in english next time. Me speak no urdu.

Anamika #86

I read the joke of hapless Pakistani. And I enjoyed it.

Pakistan may be hapless not Pakistanis.

As India may be not hapless. but Indians are. At least Indian posters on this forum are.

And I was sad to read that you frequent this site occasionally.

And that is why you said the same thing as mine thinking that you are saying opposite of mine. Period. (Remeber or if your memory is short go back to your post)

As far as you being RAW agent. I don`t think their standard is so reduced. You are not fit even to be a RAW agent. period.

correction.... I meant I second temporal`s sentiments; not `assertion`

amber:

I second temp`s assertion in #87. That was indeed well put (your #83, I mean).

regards,

PM

amber #83

[...but when it is a devotion of the soul, a lifetime seems transient and momentary for true expression. when love learns to accept and grow with time, it never encounters hatred and misery...]

Great observation and a nice poem. Enjoyed it.

love.

t

#84 krashid

``And your 5 billion is a news to me. Because it makes the argument useless. Particularly one of your compatriot with a Hindu name from your highly productive country (and you kept quiet there just because of that) who was boasting about human assets of India.``

Now this is a gem. How do you know if I even read what you`re refering to? I visit Chowk and interact when the fancy strikes me. I am here for a few days and then go away for weeks before returning. I maybe read a fraction of what`s posted during my visit. Asking someone why they kept quiet before is silly. Maybe they weren`t following every syllable by everyone. Or maybe they didn`t care. I write when I feel like I can add to something or when I feel wicked. In your case, it`s mostly the latter that moves me.

#84 krashid

Comprehension problems again? Paranoia too?

The bit about 5b (rising to maybe 9b by 2050) was in response to what you said.

The second part was with respect to the interminable arguments over homosexuality. I was registering my opinion. If you have problems with other interactors, take it up with them. I don`t speak for them, nor they for me, and we have not been sent here by RAW to attack the hapless Pakistanis. Chill out! (The last expression means calm down, not that it is cold outside, which it is, but that`s beside the point..)

Anamika #76

Did I say a different thing.

I said it is a choice. And you say it is the choice of homosexuals.

Does your brain get activated to spew rubbish after seeing names of Pakistanis. Or using a different wording for same meaning makes it authentic.

And your 5 billion is a news to me. Because it makes the argument useless. Particularly one of your compatriot with a Hindu name from your highly productive country (and you kept quiet there just because of that) who was boasting about human assets of India.

Just FYI: By the most liberal of estimates (look up the Kinsey Report), gays comprise 10% of the general population (More recent studies have put it at more like 5%).

As you can see, gays indeed do threaten the survival of the human race.

Anyone got any figures on the percentage of never-married adults or childless females?

Brat

Good one :)

Urstruly:
I think what you want to ask is whether the monkey was female or male!
Brat ;)

Urstruly:
I think what you want to ask is whether the monkey was female or male!
Brat ;)

PM & Brat

One of the mystery and dilema about AIDS is its origin as attributed towards monkeys. I have always wondered whether the monkey was an active partner or a passive one. Would you like to throw some light on this issue for a blind.

PM:
Thank you, your advice is well-received, and just in time for my exams ;)
Brat

PM:
Thank you, your advice is well-received, and just in time for my exams ;)
Brat

Dear Brat (re. #69)

With all due respect, you are wasting your time and breath. Ever heard of the ``Readiness theory`` of learning??

Why bother with long-worded arguments and research papers etc.? The truth is on the tongue of the neighbourhood barber. And don`t you know that any conflicting research studies means both are completely useless?

Save your breath, my friend, go out and enjoy your life... don`t bother with those who `have eyes but will not see` (well.. as long as their not social policy makers :))

regards,

PM

#73 krashid

``Aside from that homosexuality can be justified only on one ground

i.e. right to choose. Otherwise for the survival of species which is

one of the most important task of living being it is not the way.``

Huh? What survival of species? There`s more than 5b humans. Survival of all species demands that this be reduced (to, say, 1b).

Homosexuality is justified for homosexuals. Period.

re. Urstruly:

``Heterosexuality contributes to the preservation of the basic unit of a society i.e. a family-through a natural process of pro-creation. Homosexuality thus is an anti-social, anti-family, anti-human behavior.``

By extention: Celibacy ``thus is an anti-social, anti-family, anti-human behavior.`` Down with all them Christian priests and nuns, Buddhist monks and Hindu

``I dont think that AIDS is now a Gay phenomenon any more. But Gay phenomenon is sole contributor for extending it into a heterosexual normal society. Though monkeys are also blamed for it also.``

BY same token: I dont think that Syphyllis, gonorreah and other VDs are now Heterosexual phenomena any more. But Heterosexual ``phenomenon`` is the sole contributor for extending it into a Gay society. Though monkeys are also blamed for it also (sic).

Urstruly #71

Kia Tum Ne Bachchon Ko Bachon Ke Khel Pe Lagaya Hua Hai. Homosexuality. Hunh.

So-Gund Ki Sogund Jo Maza Bachcha Fist-ing Mein Hai Woh Bes-tiality Main Bhi Nahin.

Scout #66

The epimedic of AIDS spread by blood and secretions.

The people who were at high risk for AIDS were homosexual, Heroin Addicts and Hemophiliacs in the whole of 80`s. This is a statistical fact.

But once this epidemic got out of control, regarding its mode of transmission, it is now more common in heterosexuals. Although one of my professor (and very good) still believes that some form of homosexuality is still involved.

Aside from that homosexuality can be justified only on one ground i.e. right to choose. Otherwise for the survival of species which is one of the most important task of living being it is not the way. Also from Islamic perspective where family is primary importance and basic unit of society it is not allowed.

Let`s take this to Chowk Poll space.
Brat

Let`s take this to Chowk Poll space.
Brat

Brat # 69

I do not believe in ``studies`` or ``statistics``. I keep my eyes open and try to learn from the street and at barber shops. What can you say about the studies done on eggs. We were told that an egg is a killer capsule with enough cholestrol to kill a human being and when the same study was funded by egg farmers association we were told that an egg a day keeps the doctor away. Another study told us that liquor melts your liver away and when same study was done after funding from vineries and liquor guys association we were told that it saves your heart.

A father and a mother is necessary for natural, healthy, and happy growth of a child. Even a step mother or step father cant do the job no matter how hard they try. It leaves child with complexes, which last for the rest of his life. Now what do you expect from two dads and two moms who are considered degenerates in the society anyway. It does not matter how many gay sitcoms start playing on TV and it doesn’t matter how many diversity courses are offered at schools or at work Gays will not be accepted-they will be tolerated but not accepted. A normal heterosexual relationship requires a lot of courage, sacrifice, and patience whereas homosexuality gives an easy way out to promiscuous.

well preety good article, and scout by the way from where did u get that ``chumay chumay nahi chalain gay``. pretty gfunnsy i must say.

love,

k2

Urstruly:

You make me laugh. Please tell us the year of your studies so we know where the humor is coming from!

What else can I say about homosexuality and its contribution to society! Anti-human, because homosexuals can`t procreate. I agree that if homosexuality was forced as a law or something we would have no kids. But allow me to spin your head more.

What about artificial insemination and homosexual couples raising babies. BTW this is being done and researched...I don`t think so far any of the kids have shown any symptoms of the disease or other social abnormalities.

What do you think is more important to a child? A loving family? or a homosexual parent who stays in a heterosexual relationship but is unhappy with themselves? I know that homosexual families are far from gaining acceptance and support from the society. But who gave us the right to choose what a homosexual person can and cannot do?

Have you ever heard of theories that all humans have the potential to be bisexual?

Being a homosexual is about sexual preference, (in my own naive opinion - please feel free to correct it) and who gets to decide what`s correct as a preference and what`s not?

And as far as AIDS originating from homosexuals and maybe, just maybe monkeys ;) I`ll let that remark be. You`re amazing.

with loads of regards and utmost respect for your studies.
Brat

PS: More seriously, to other Chowkwallhas please don`t take myths at their face value. If you search the net, you`ll find out just how baseless the myths are. Isn`t keeping an open mind and heart a part of being ``educated`` ?

``I`m Straight but not Narrow`` Here`s a site of an ally I found, by doing a search. http://members.tripod.com/

Urstruly:

You make me laugh. Please tell us the year of your studies so we know where the humor is coming from!

What else can I say about homosexuality and its contribution to society! Anti-human, because homosexuals can`t procreate. I agree that if homosexuality was forced as a law or something we would have no kids. But allow me to spin your head more.

What about artificial insemination and homosexual couples raising babies. BTW this is being done and researched...I don`t think so far any of the kids have shown any symptoms of the disease or other social abnormalities.

What do you think is more important to a child? A loving family? or a homosexual parent who stays in a heterosexual relationship but is unhappy with themselves? I know that homosexual families are far from gaining acceptance and support from the society. But who gave us the right to choose what a homosexual person can and cannot do?

Have you ever heard of theories that all humans have the potential to be bisexual?

Being a homosexual is about sexual preference, (in my own naive opinion - please feel free to correct it) and who gets to decide what`s correct as a preference and what`s not?

And as far as AIDS originating from homosexuals and maybe, just maybe monkeys ;) I`ll let that remark be. You`re amazing.

with loads of regards and utmost respect for your studies.
Brat

PS: More seriously, to other Chowkwallhas please don`t take myths at their face value. If you search the net, you`ll find out just how baseless the myths are. Isn`t keeping an open mind and heart a part of being ``educated`` ?

``I`m Straight but not Narrow`` Here`s a site of an ally I found, by doing a search. http://members.tripod.com/

Scout # 66

Heterosexuality contributes to the preservation of the basic unit of a society i.e. a family-through a natural process of pro-creation. Homosexuality thus is an anti-social, anti-family, anti-human behavior.

I dont think that AIDS is now a Gay phenomenon any more. But Gay phenomenon is sole contributor for extending it into a heterosexual normal society. Though monkeys are also blamed for it also.

Anthropology!!

I don`t believe it. Even an introductory course in anthropology should open one`s mind a little.

Urstruly #65, ``I was talking about the contribution of the homosexuality to the society in general.``

?

Do we ever question the contribution of heterosexuality to the society in general?

By the way, you mentioned AIDS and diseases as a contribution of homosexuality to society.

So then why do most AIDS epidemics hit hard in poor areas of the world such as India and parts of Africa? Are you telling me all those people are homosexuals?

Scout

The people you have menioned are individuals-successful no doubt. But you should think hard whether their success is because of their homosexuality or hardwork.

I was talking about the contribution of the homosexuality to the society in general.

Urstruly #54, ``Homosexuality has delivered nothing to the society other than disease, decline of moral values, breakdown of family structure and breakdown of social fabric. Its contribution to the society is next to none.``

I beg to differ! You might not like them, but where would we be without Elton John, George Michael, Melissa Etheridge, to name a few....

And who knows who`s homosexual in the Pakistani community (I think Junaid Jamshed is)....

:)

Paritosh:
Great story, I loved the ending too. The ending leaves the door ajar for all these discussions that have been taking place! And the discussions so far have stayed around the same topic! Kudos to you!!

PM:
Thanks for putting across the points so much more clearly in your various posts about homosexuality and bisexuality etc.

The monogamous bit is where I myself falter. Is it important, natural etc....or are we all different shades, with different needs. Why should all men/women have the same biological basis for their behavior? To satisfy science?

Love. true or otherwise is causing me some cynicism, and I am too young for it too. But there might be hope.
The song from Sweet November -- by Enya --
Who can say
where the road goes
when the day flows
- only time.
And who can say
If your love grows
as your heart chose
- only time.

Who can say
why your heart sighs
as your love flies
- only time
And who can say
why your heart cries
when your love lies
- only time.

I guess the cynicism fades away with time, and you begin to treasure whatever `eternal` moment it was.
regards
Brat

Paritosh:
Great story, I loved the ending too. The ending leaves the door ajar for all these discussions that have been taking place! And the discussions so far have stayed around the same topic! Kudos to you!!

PM:
Thanks for putting across the points so much more clearly in your various posts about homosexuality and bisexuality etc.

The monogamous bit is where I myself falter. Is it important, natural etc....or are we all different shades, with different needs. Why should all men/women have the same biological basis for their behavior? To satisfy science?

Love. true or otherwise is causing me some cynicism, and I am too young for it too. But there might be hope.
The song from Sweet November -- by Enya --
Who can say
where the road goes
when the day flows
- only time.
And who can say
If your love grows
as your heart chose
- only time.

Who can say
why your heart sighs
as your love flies
- only time
And who can say
why your heart cries
when your love lies
- only time.

I guess the cynicism fades away with time, and you begin to treasure whatever `eternal` moment it was.
regards
Brat

Brat #59

I seem to have somehow overlooked the most inane part of Urstruly`s #54. He states:

[Homosexuality definitely has its roots in child molestation and abuse.]

Thanks for highlighting that gem for me! Mr. Urstruly obviously cannot seem to make up his mind. First it is a genetic disease, then later, a psychological one.

rgds,

PM

re. Urstruly #54:

``Anthropology is not an exact science. Every new theory may be considered as ``dogmatic`` as any other religion. These theories only reflect on our perception and to some extent reality. Whereas religion reflects on the reality while being a big modifier to our perception. ``

I think I agree with you. Except.... some parts of the `reality` (of life) in which a religion originated might not be so real or valid anymore. True, human nature hasn`t changed that much even in 1500 years, but many of the `realities` addressed by Religion, especially Islam (because it is so `complete`) have less to to with human nature than human convention. When conventions change, as they often do, the religious edicts addressing them may not be ``relections of reality`` at all-- in fact, just the opposite. Examples will be provided on demand. It`s 12:50 a.m. and I`m sleepy.

``Homosexuality:I think it is a natural process. It probably is in our genes. But again then diabetes and cancer are in our genes too. Homosexuality has delivered nothing to the society other than disease, decline of moral values, breakdown of family structure and breakdown of social fabric. Its contribution to the society is next to none. So in my opinion HS must be treated as a genetic disorder-just like schizophrenia, diabetes, and Alzhiemers. ``

I thought of not dignifying this drivel with a response, but since there might be other well meaning but well-indocrinated (in homophobia) readers out there, I will attempt a rebuttal:

``Homosexuality has delivered nothing to the society...``

Yeah, if you discount the legacy of the Greek to our entire philosphical lanscape; the contibutons of a majority of poets and playwrights, artists and sculptors, I guess you`re absolutely right.... those with expressed homosexual tendencies have delivereed NOTHING to society.

``... other than disease``

Oh really? What disease? Oh yes! the dimwitted HS-started-AIDS argument. Never mind that in Southern Africa (from where HIV originated) the infection rate is 25% of the general population --- which is vastly predominantly heterosexual!!

Never mind that homosexuality has a a recorded and colorful past as old as history itself, and that any number venereal diseasses were always associated with heterosexuality, not homosexuality. Of course, back then heterosexuality wasn`t to blame; promiscuity was. BUt now that there is an association of HIV-spread with promiscuous homosexuality, it is homosexuality, not promiscuity that is to blame. Prejudice rearing its ugly head.

``...decline of moral values,``

If your moral values dictate that homosexuality is bad, you`re simply engaging in circular argumentation. I thought you were smarter.

``breakdown of family structure``

Ah yes! The homosexual instinct, not the (admittedly overplayed) demand for equal rights by those with these `instincts` are to blame. And of course, we all know that most marriages are on the rocks because one or both of the spouses is/are suddenly attraced to someone of the SAME sex.

``...and breakdown of social fabric``. Yes, and while you`re at it, why not throw in the nuclear race escalation, global environmeant pollution, and all manner of political injustice too!

Godot:

Right Mindfulness: One of the eight noble paths of Buddhism/Zen.

Thank you for ``getting to the bottom`` of things. That was very impressive intellectually.

Urstruly #54

First off I want to apologise if my remarks are out of sync with the rest of the discussion, I haven`t been around much but the studiousness of a student provoked me to respond!

This post is to all those whose views are similar to those stated by Urstruly.

[I am just a student of anthropology.]
I believe, that the first requirement of being a `student` of anything is to keep an open mind and to learn. Your post unfortunately doesn`t show proof of openness.

[Homosexuality:
I think it is a natural process...
...has delivered nothing to the society other than disease, decline of moral values, breakdown of family structure and breakdown of social fabric.]

Ahem ahem, and what was this social fabric, family structure etc?

[Its contribution to the society is next to none.]

What has been your (a perfectly disease free heterosexual -- but not a white -- male )contribution to anything? Any original ideas in your studies so far? What has been the contribution of people like you? Shall I quote the geniuses from History who have been homosexuals and who *have * contributed to the so called society?

Homosexuality may scare the daylights out of you -- but sorry to disappoint you - it`s not a disease by any standards (If you doubt this research it).

Why does it threaten you in any way? Is it contagious like a cold? Did you ever catch it? I can bet you that you must have met a homosexual more than once in your life -- whether or not you knew it at the time.

Do you think stereotypes define things? What`s a stereotype that is normally applied to `people of your kind`? Does it fit you? All the things you quote about homosexuality are so outdated.

All what I talk about is what I`ve seen in a society which is unlike ours, where sexuality of any kind is suppressed. Guys have sex and prove varying degrees of supremacy? Women are needed but that`s about it, right? BTW I`d be curious to hear your comments on female orgasms and the likes. Do they exist, is it a disease? if so is it contagious etc.

[Homosexuality definitely has its roots in child molestation and abuse.]

Aha. And you know this for a fact because..?

If no one else here has the courage to talk about this openly, I shall have to plague this forum (apologies to the author) with researched info about people who are so scary to you. Eventually all of us grow up and stop being afraid of the dark.

God forbid your (the generic you - to all of you out there) kids turn out to be homosexuals, transsexual (yes there are variations to the disease) or in any way queer, you`ll cease to see them as humans, and send them to institutions, where different tactics can be used to `cure` them, and if nothing works, put them away -- in kindness -- the kind we show to animals.

I wish I could be more articulate about these issues, but oh well.

with regards
Brat

Urstruly #54

First off I want to apologise if my remarks are out of sync with the rest of the discussion, I haven`t been around much but the studiousness of a student provoked me to respond!

This post is to all those whose views are similar to those stated by Urstruly.

[I am just a student of anthropology.]
I believe, that the first requirement of being a `student` of anything is to keep an open mind and to learn. Your post unfortunately doesn`t show proof of openness.

[Homosexuality:
I think it is a natural process...
...has delivered nothing to the society other than disease, decline of moral values, breakdown of family structure and breakdown of social fabric.]

Ahem ahem, and what was this social fabric, family structure etc?

[Its contribution to the society is next to none.]

What has been your (a perfectly disease free heterosexual -- but not a white -- male )contribution to anything? Any original ideas in your studies so far? What has been the contribution of people like you? Shall I quote the geniuses from History who have been homosexuals and who *have * contributed to the so called society?

Homosexuality may scare the daylights out of you -- but sorry to disappoint you - it`s not a disease by any standards (If you doubt this research it).

Why does it threaten you in any way? Is it contagious like a cold? Did you ever catch it? I can bet you that you must have met a homosexual more than once in your life -- whether or not you knew it at the time.

Do you think stereotypes define things? What`s a stereotype that is normally applied to `people of your kind`? Does it fit you? All the things you quote about homosexuality are so outdated.

All what I talk about is what I`ve seen in a society which is unlike ours, where sexuality of any kind is suppressed. Guys have sex and prove varying degrees of supremacy? Women are needed but that`s about it, right? BTW I`d be curious to hear your comments on female orgasms and the likes. Do they exist, is it a disease? if so is it contagious etc.

[Homosexuality definitely has its roots in child molestation and abuse.]

Aha. And you know this for a fact because..?

If no one else here has the courage to talk about this openly, I shall have to plague this forum (apologies to the author) with researched info about people who are so scary to you. Eventually all of us grow up and stop being afraid of the dark.

God forbid your (the generic you - to all of you out there) kids turn out to be homosexuals, transsexual (yes there are variations to the disease) or in any way queer, you`ll cease to see them as humans, and send them to institutions, where different tactics can be used to `cure` them, and if nothing works, put them away -- in kindness -- the kind we show to animals.

I wish I could be more articulate about these issues, but oh well.

with regards
Brat

Scout #50

Hurray.

I will support your fight for your rights till end.:-)

It is stated in Hadith that prophet received many revelations during his last times as his condition was like in receiving revelation. But whether true or not only God knows.

The last words on his lips were take care of women and slaves.

So Urstruly is not only giving the Danda of Islam to people in general, but women in particular.

And recent revelation of his study of anthropology is shocking and un-Islamic because I was confused that he is in some Engineering field in Michigan more Islamic in current century than say 3 centuries ago.

re. scout #51

``That`s pretty sad if you ask me. There`s one thing in being a man and loving men only, but this business of bisexuality is too shady. I don`t believe in it, I don`t agree with it.``

Spoken like a true late-twentiteth century American, ma`am! Everything must be nicely categorized, ordered, unambiguous. Only, life doesn`t work that way. Nature doesn`t. Over 400 species of larger mammals have been noted to engage in same-sex sex-play (not exclusive, though).. so much for the arguments about it being `unnatural`! :)

Maybe there is something in women that makes them naturally abhor the idea of sleeping with a man who sleeps with another... but then, you`re even concerned about men who LOVE both ways. Could it be that you`re not able to really fathom the love a man might feel for another man?

``Ummm, I really did not have to know the details of your web surfing. :)``

heheheh... Couldn`t resist that one, now could ya? :)

love,

P

#46 sac:

``urstruly:

Kindly enlighten us as to how many decades have passed since

your last encounter(platonic or otherwise) with a member of the

fairer sex. Please discount any cyberspace encounters.``

A 15-year old offered him her body for money once. We don`t really know what happened next. She was a kid but of the fairer sex nonetheless. But then, for all we know, it could have been a virtual encounter.

Re: PM, #53

``It is a little disingenuous of you to cut and paste phrases-not even sentences-- in this way! It reflects a certain -- shal we say, `wrong mindulfulness`, if you get my drift.``

No, I don`t get your drift. You are too subtle for me. Moreover, I cannot tell right from wrong ``mindulfulness``.

Patrick, I know how to get to the bottom of it all fairly quickly, shall (notice two lls) we say. I find your post #45 to be disoriented and incoherent. Lost? Yes. Confused? Yes.

``I`ll thank you for the prior compliment and leave it at that.``

I second that.

Scout & PM

There are several ways to look at the human beings. The science of anthropology is one of them. Human beings are too complicated to be analyzed with the tools of just one science. Sometimes I marvel at the religion`s understanding of human nature and its effects on us to shape our destiny. This is a perfect system, which defines the role and responsibility of each species by recognizing the difference in them. That is the key to understand the role of religion in our lives. Anthropology is not an exact science. Every new theory may be considered as ``dogmatic`` as any other religion. These theories only reflect on our perception and to some extent reality. Whereas religion reflects on the reality while being a big modifier to our perception (I have no comments whether it is good or bad).

Multiple Spouses:

I don`t think that in liberated societies the issue of women having multiple spouses is really a moral issue anymore. The issue however is its implementation-the big hurdles being new tax structures, modification of laws of inheritance, and the ownership of the property and the custody of children. A good number of population is, as a matter fact, polygamous (both men and women). The adultery has become less of a moral issue and more of a technical issue-again the taxes, property and custody etc. My personal position on this issue is based on my religion, which you are well aware of. I believe, accept and trust the dogmatic nature of it. May be women having multiple spouses is best for society, who knows, this is as dogmatic as the religion is, isn’t it? But a good indicator is the happenings in the liberated societies. It is a lose-lose situation in all respects.

Homosexuality:
I think it is a natural process. It probably is in our genes. But again then diabetes and cancer are in our genes too. Homosexuality has delivered nothing to the society other than disease, decline of moral values, breakdown of family structure and breakdown of social fabric. Its contribution to the society is next to none. So in my opinion HS must be treated as a genetic disorder-just like schizophrenia, diabetes, and Alzhiemers. I might sound harsh but that`s the way things are. Homosexuality definitely has its roots in child molestation and abuse. Pederasty is not an accepted norm in the liberated societies yet but it will definitely lead to this end. There was even a club (first one) in (Massachusetts probably) which was shut down a few months ago, which was setup on the pattern of Big Brother associations but where parents were willingly sending their boys to be ``trained and educated`` on the ``Greek Pattern``. If the establishment of a ``Greek`` society is the ultimate goal (unannounced yet) of Homosexuals then it is a genetic disorder.

SAC
Please direct your inquiries to the renowned anthropologists Mr. I.P. Freely and Mr. Seymour Butts. I am just a student of anthropology.

re. Godot #49:

Sir, you reproduce bits of my post thus:

[Re: PM, #45

``I`m lost here...I`m really confused``]

and respond:

``I thought you would be. Your post reflects that.``

It is a little disingenuous of you to cut and paste phrases-- not even sentences-- in this way! It reflects a certain -- shal we say, `wrong mindulfulness`, if you get my drift.

``Patrick M, you`re a nice person, mainly because you know the word koan. You`re too innocent, though. It`s a tough world out there. Watch out.``

Godot, if, after all my efforts to explain why I think there`s nothing wrong with satire that is not demeaning, you are still convinced that I am merely `too innocent`, well, I`ll thank you for the prior compliment and leave it at that.

....And what do you mean ``mainly because you know the word koan``?? (second Q.mark just for good measure :)) --- we lit candles before the portait of Capra back in the Theosophical Library on M.A Jinnah road, Karachi. :)

rgds,

PM

..... And all because two teenagers were writing a special moment in their lives !! Haven`t we all? maybe not on the beach like them,but in love synonymous to temporal`s love .... his stolen moment in the carribean !!

Oh what is this world coming too?

What would we do with our free time , if there was no daily Baithak at ChowK ?!! any suggestions // anyone ??

Regards,

Shirin

PM #44, `` All men of nobility were required to - shall we say `nurture` - adolescents of promise--

while still performing their procreative duties with women.``

That`s pretty sad if you ask me. There`s one thing in being a man and loving men only, but this business of bisexuality is too shady. I don`t believe in it, I don`t agree with it. I`ve heard that the same type of ``nurturing`` of adolescent boys happens in some Pathan groups? Now I`ve always wondered if that was really true, or just a social stigma?

``In fact, if gay porn sites are anything to go by, it`s almost all about unuaduterated :)lust.``

Ummm, I really did not have to know the details of your web surfing. :)

Urstruly #43, ``The problem arose when women became non-dependent of men.``

WRONG, it wasn`t a problem, it was a solution to hundreds of years of being doormats.

``The new liberated women now associate sex with their past dependence on men, which pains them.``

WRONG again, women don`t think with their gonads as men do, thus sex isn`t the driving force behind their ``liberation.`` It is men`s supression and his need for woman`s submission that motivates women towards liberation.

``The delima thus is that women want ``love`` but they do not want to obey the other clause of the contract i.e. they have to satisfy the lust.``

what? (delima = dilemma by the way)

``This argument may be extended to include the new woman`s insistence on monogamous relationships on part of men.``

And what`s wrong with the insistence on monogamous relationships? The age of the hen chasing, procreation driven rooster is gone. STOP using that outdated, biological explanation for men`s wandering desires.

What if a woman demanded polygamous relationships? Would her spouse/lover happily agree to that? I think not. What is the point of marriage or of having a serious relationship with a person of the opposite gender anyway?

``Men and women must recognize the fact that they are two different species.``

Nope, they are one species, two types. Both have libidos, both have brains to control them. Both have a responsibility to this world and to their children. That doesn`t mean that they both like wearing lipstick, but who cares about such measly differences. Save for the special maternal role of woman, we`re essentially the same.

``Therefore, they cannot be ``equal.``

I suggest you study the Yin and Yang sign deeply.

Look at it, evaluate it, and come up with an answer. Men and women are complementary, equal in what matters the most, unequal in what matters the least.

Re: PM, #45

``I`m lost here...I`m really confused``

I thought you would be. Your post reflects that.

Patrick M, you`re a nice person, mainly because you know the word koan. You`re too innocent, though. It`s a tough world out there. Watch out.

Re: Your Post #47

``which do [you] enjoy more-- the righteousnes or the indignation??``

With two question marks? Both and neither!!

urstruly:

Kindly enlighten us as to how many decades have passed since your last encounter(platonic or otherwise) with a member of the fairer sex. Please discount any cyberspace encounters.

Thanks

-sac

re. #43

Urstruly, your post made good sense, especially (and at least insofar as by `women` you mean the most feminist among them) ...

``The [dilemma] thus is that women want ``love`` but they do not want to obey the other clause of the contract i.e. they have to satisfy the lust.``

Fine. But then you go and throw in this curve ball just to forward your apologetics again:

``... This argument may be extended to include the new woman`s insistence on monogamous relationships on part of men.``

If indeed woman should relent on the monogamy demand, why should the new contract not allow for extramarital ralationships instead of polygyny, esp. given that there are actually more women than men on this earth? I asked u this question earlier on another board, but you declined a reply.

rgds,

PM

Godot:

In my infinite naviete, I came up with this idea: Those unburdened by the weight of guilty consciences will happily bandy these ultimately innocuous jokes, while other unfortunates will have their guard up so high that the mere mention of certain unPC words will inspire in them bouts of righteous indignation.

Now, which do enjoy more-- the righteousnes or the indignation??

re. Godot #42

``So, you are suggesting that, since non-desis are highly unlikely to visit this forum, it`s fine to throw gross and tasteless jokes at them. Who is being politically correct here, me or you?``

I`m lost here. How would my suggesting the above constitute political correctness? Last time I checked, it wasn`t PC to say unPC things behind backs either. BUt what I`m really confused(flcker, flicke :)) is how you construe the jokes as being ``thrown at them``.

First, I did not suggest that it was ONLY because non-desis are highly unlikely to visit that these jokes were kosher. I said especially. But mainly, I argued that most blacks would be quite willing to laugh along, especially because the joke did not attack their race, their heritage, their nothin` :). In fact, nothing was ``attacked``. Trust me, I`ve got genuiune (acutally, 50%) Black Americans for cousins, so I know!

``Don`t flatter yourself. You are as far away from Tao as the earth from the milky way``

Now, since the earth is part of the milky way, I can only imagine you`re throwing me a koan there. Thanks.

And please, lighten up. Try to consider that an action may be wrong or right depending solely on its RESULTS. Send PC on vacation. It`s a liberating experience, really!

rgds,

PM

re. scout #41

``... the only thing changed in a homosexual man (as compared to a heterosexual man) is the object of his sexual desire, not his libido itself. So if the testosterone driven desire/lust remains, how can you (or the Greeks) say that what a gay man feels for his partner is based on sheer love as opposed to sheer lust?``

Good point. Quite right. And no, I was not pushng the Greek spin, not because I think they had it wrong, but because I`m aware of how different the conceptual landscape is two and a half millenia later. First, the Greeks (Athenians, acually) didn`t have a word, an identity, to describe exlusive homosexuality. All men of nobility were required to - shall we say `nurture` - adolescents of promise-- while still performing their procreative duties with women.

While there might have been an element of lust operating even in those relationships, it cerainly wasn`t the driving force behind them. (But who knows-- what with the complexity of mixed motivations!!)

In the present age of politicized sexual identity, you`re quite right in questioning that ``what a gay man feels for his partner is based on sheer love as opposed to sheer lust``

In fact, if gay porn sites are anything to go by, it`s almost all about unuaduterated :)lust.

(Of course, I`m not suggesting that these sites are representative of all gay folks` mindsets)

I guess you shot down Urstruly`s unwitting gay-friendly theory there! :)

THE CONTRACT

Further to my post # 29

...while still living in the caves and having those mutually dependent ``loving`` relationships, mankind finally was able to recognize the fact that `men are from mars and women are from venus`. In other words, they finally figured it out that they were two different species, who do not think alike; they have different needs; and yet they can`t live without each other. Thus they felt a need for a social contract to exist peacefully and with mutual respect. The social contract came with the `religions`. Almost all religions in the world attempt to define a relationship between men and women. This was begining of a new era-the era of love without guilt (of being dependent) for women and and era of being lusty without guilt (since love was being bartered for lust) for men.

As long as mankind kept on obeying different clauses of the contract there was peace and love in the society (b/w men and women). The problem arose when women became non-dependent of men. The new liberated women now associate sex with their past dependence on men, which pains them. The delima thus is that women want ``love`` but they do not want to obey the other clause of the contract i.e. they have to satisfy the lust. This argument may be extended to include the new woman`s insistence on monogamous relationships on part of men.

This upset in the status quo has brought chaos in the society. Men and women are returning back to their post-ape past where love and lust were still undefined-but they were good for a short term barter. Hence we see the decline in family values,lack of relationships and lack of love in ``liberated`` societies.

THe point: Men and women must recognize the fact that they are two different species. Therefore, they cannot be ``equal`` (Please do not take the word `equal`in the narrow sense). If they want to maintain peace and order in the society they must recognize that there is need for a new contract again or we may revert to tried and tested ones.

Re: PM, #40

Congratulations for figuring out my gender! Only took another reading for a genius like you!

``I AM indeed (egregriously) naive...``

Yes, you are. The ``innocent`` joke you posted validates that.

``I *am * known to be an absolute tubelight on occassion. :)``

You are one, and not only on this occasion.

``...(ESPECIALLY in a forum unvisited by those who, for reasons of insecurity and/or history, might actually be offended).``

So, you are suggesting that, since non-desis are highly unlikely to visit this forum, it`s fine to throw gross and tasteless jokes at them. Who is being politically correct here, me or you?

Don`t flatter yourself. You are as far away from Tao as the earth from the milky way

PM #39, ``the Greeks long ago taught that the purest love was only possible between two males, not so much because females were inferior (which they *were * deemed) but because the love between males (presumably) transcended the `baseness` of biological imperative.``

HMMMMMMMMM.... this thought makes sense at first, but if you truly think about it, the only thing changed in a homosexual man (as compared to a heterosexual man) is the object of his sexual desire, not his libido itself. So if the testosterone driven desire/lust remains, how can you (or the Greeks) say that what a gay man feels for his partner is based on sheer love as opposed to sheer lust?

re. Godot #38

[``Found none``!!! You missed the entire point of that ``joke``!!!]

Sir, (now that I`ve looked up your ID :)), perhaps I AM indeed (egregriously) naive in thinking that there is nothing offensive in temporal`s satire on ``Black`` languauge (ESPECIALLY in a forum unvisited by those who, for reasons of insecurity and/or history, might actually be offended). Frankly, methinks you have been overschooled in Political Correctness.

If indeed I have still not got the `entire point`, please do point it out to me. I *am * known to be an absolute tubelight on occassion. :)

For my part, I have laughed with my Black friends over such matters (and `worse`). I am a little disturbed by your suggesting that blacks are so insecure as to take offence to such jokes. And a little amused at your highly abstract morality in this case.

Incidentally, I`ve found that self-respecting African-Americans don`t mind being referred to as ``blacks``, though the more colour-conscious desis usually think they would.

``After reading `My Identity` and interacting over that with me, you still cannot tell if I`m a Sir or a Madam!!! Brilliant!!!``

Sir, it might just mean that ``[Your] Identidy`` was not lacking in the element of forgettability. :)

BTW, I `m curious to know if you`d react the same way if I were to joke about the (premoninantly White) Southern pronunciation of ``fifty``, of which, as an AL resident, I`m sure you`re aware. Would that be in bad taste too?

And how about this innocent one:

Q: How do you get five black rapists off their victim?

A: Throw them a basketball.

?

Thanks for the Taoist quote, though

``Beautiful words are not true/True words are not beautiful``

Why, those words are sublimely ... beautiful!!

rgds,

PM

re. Urstruly:

``Love is not in man`s genes it is a learned behavior which was taught to him by women. Over the centuries it might have caused some genetic abberation in some of of the men-quite possibly in poets and gays``

This is interesting, though you know you`re not the first to suggest it, right? I think it was suggested in that 1994 Time magazine review of the book ``Is Infidelity in our Genes?``-- or something such. Your contentions in your post are almost completely consistent with that theory. That last bit (the second sentence I`ve quoted) doesn`t quite wash, though... How would ``it`` be capable of causing genetic aberrations?

Don`t get me wrong... I`d love to believe that part, for it suggests that (a) `love` has begotten gayness in whatever measure, and (b) that only gay men (and poets) are capable of true, feminie-like, love.

Just FYI, the Greeks long ago taught that the purest love was only possible between two males, not so much because females were inferior (which they *were * deemed) but because the love between males (presumably) transcended the `baseness` of biological imperative.

Then again, maybe Plato and his cronies were all just self-serving philosophic perverts. :)



temp,

Thanks for sharing your `agape` experiences with us. That was ... lovely!

rgds,

P

Re: PM, #34

``Found none. I see no `racism` operating in joking about the improper use of language``.

Found none!!! You missed the entire point of that ``joke``!!!

``Sir/Madam, I really think you`re overreacting.``

After reading `My Identity` and interacting over that with me, you still cannot tell if I`m a Sir or a Madam!!! Brilliant!!!

Now I know why you didn`t get that ``joke``!!! If you weren`t an adult, your naivete would be quite charming!!!

Re: temporal, #29

``Godot, yaar lighten up. You are mistaken, I am not the one who has claimed piety. Or prophethood! :)``

Does that mean it`s okay for you to post a racist joke? Or is it only the pious and the prophets who are not blatantly racists?

Don`t worry, temporal. I never saw you even close to someone who`s enlightened. Your ``joke`` only confirmed my view of you that your Inner Man is completely different than your Outer Man.

By the way, re your view of ``love`` in your post, along with your other similar verbose and meaningless posts:

Beautiful words are not true

True words are not beautiful

(the Tao)

{{Love is not in man`s genes it is a learned behavior which was taught to him by women. Over the centuries it might have caused some genetic abberation in some of of the men-quite possibly in poets and gays.}}

Sigh..testesterone strikes again..

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

SameerJB

I hope your mother gets well soon. I will pray for her recovery and good health and also for your peace of mind.

Godot, re. #26

I visited the `Dinner Guest board to see the incriminating evidence. Found none. Sir/Madam, I really think you`re overreacting. I see no `racism` operating in joking about the improper use of language (as associated with a race).

Or perhaps you are not aware of the biblical significance of the ``I am Who I am`` assertion?

Btw, temporal miaN, it`s WHO, not WHAT.

...though I`d rather have WHAT! :)

rgds,

PM

Sameer,

I`ll pen a reply to you post later, time permitting.

The beginning was absolutely beautiful but i really hate it when people who are bitter want others to be just as bitter . Whatever the couple has is special even if it might only be for a short time and most people would treasure this time regardless of the outcome .

Urstruly# whatever......

``Love is not in man`s genes it is a learned behavior which was taught to him by women. Over the centuries it might have caused some genetic abberation in some of of the men-quite possibly in poets and gays.``

ha ha ha ha ha!

regards

Harpreet

Dear Urstruly,

I appreciate the honesty in your post.Much more than ``Decent guys doing noble causes``.I may even tend to agree with you!The genetic modification between the two sexes however true it may be ,sadly does have an element of a feeling of loss in it !

Take care ,

Shirin

Urstruly, #27

What gibberish! Who let you out of the cave?

PM #22:

[....hmmpphh! So where is that temporal guy anyway when we really would like to hear from him???...]



THUS SPEAKETH
THE VICTIM:

PARTIALLY
ON LOVE

(Thank you Pat. As a life long student of the aberrant behaviour of the Devi I can share many a insight. This is a wide canvas. Need to narrow it down.)

If I were to take all available descriptions of Love, personify it, and arbitrarily divide that person at the waist into two, this is what we may find in the top half.

I love my car. Takes me to the gas station. She loves gasoline. Once filled, she takes me where I want to go. And back so I can indulge in other loves.

I love words. Look for them in books written with love and passion or hatred and fury by authors who have experienced the various manifestations of love.

I love moderation in excess and hate hatred, also in excess. And I find the latter-- hatred --- not excess rather troubling at times.

I love peace. Peace and tranquillity enable me to reflect on other things I love. Nature and its mysteries. Why there is so much hatred overflowing in us desis. To twist an old dictum -- where there is hate there is love? Only here it seems we are mostly awash in Hatred not Love. But I keep probing for the elusive love here. And often, and unexpectedly I succeed in finding it here.

I love friends in the narrowest sense of the word. Am lucky in that I do have a few of them. Could not dream of living without their loyalty, concern, affection, thoughtfulness and support. Could not thank them enough. Thank you M! Thank you others. You know who you are. I depend on you.

I love plants. They exude pleasure and peace of a different kind. They are serene and unobtrusive, undemanding and uncomplaining. They give off oxygen. And they depend on me.

I love my neon tetra. She has an attention span of fifteen seconds. It intrigues me to think about what she may be thinking as she swims in the aquarium from end to end. Perhaps it makes sense that she has short attention span. Or existence may be unbearable for her. I also wonder if she is capable of loving me back. Or of thinking.

Allow me to share a secret with you. Sometimes I love being left alone. Mainly so I can indulge in a lifelong nurtured passion of doing nothing. As if I have this innate urge to be called a lazy bum. Sometimes I steal a moment or two on a secluded beach in the Caribbean from Mother Nature and usually gloat over those stolen moments for a long time after returning to the frigid North.

Pat, these are some hurried observations of the Love I have felt and experienced from the waist up in the allegory.

As for ‘hmmpphh!’ can I associate this with a certain horizontal noise made by animate and inanimate objects? This kind of love, intrinsically but not totally experienced from the waist down, has intrigued me since early teen years. (Oh, don’t be alarmed. Experts tell me it is normal!) And have been personally collecting lustful and climactic experiences, observations and impressions for the past many years:) In this never-ending quest I have come to certain conclusions that modesty prevents me from properly and adequately sharing here.

Nashaa pyar ka
kabhi kabhi
nafrat kay nashay say
baRRh kur talkh hota hay.

Pyar aur nafrat
paat haiN ik hee chuckki kay
pistay haiN jub is chuckki maiN
tou mohabbat-e-asli ka pata patay haiN.

Aa’mayzish hay yeh mohabbat
---sahara, saa’ya, saath,
qurbat, chahat, zaroorat,
garmi, beemari,
yakta, milaap, andaisha, lam’s
mooskurahat, shar’m, soorkhi...
lakh roop haiN iskay
aur zindagi?
Ek hay woh!

regards,

temporal

PS: Godot, yaar lighten up. You are mistaken, I am not the one who has claimed piety. Or prophethood! :)

PS: And a warm welcome to you Paritosh, please keep writing.

Does Dayakar have anything better to do than to check out other people, and then agonize over it? Why should the couple listen to Dayakar? Did they ask for his advice? Can`t he mind his own business? This piece sounds like a plot for an Indian movie!

The story started out promisingly, with the wind and the sand imagery. Then, starting with the second paragraph, whoooosh, like fast air out of a balloon, it died pretty quick. Pity.

Shirin # 25

I agree that lust and love are two different things. But as far as male species are concerned lust is the main driving force behind love. In other words the lust uses a vehicle of love, respect, and understanding (and all such nice things) basically to fulfill its need. Love, respect, and understanding are just means to that end.

I also think that the ideas of love, respect, and understanding (b/w men and women) are an ``invention`` of the female species. As it is said that necessity is the mother of invention; The necessity at the time when notion of love was ``invented``, was that female species needed someone to take care of them while they themselves couldnt. I think those times were around pregnancy and childbirth. Off course I am talking about the time when we started living in caves.

All of the above makes sense when you observe the behavior of female species now when they are ``independent``. Those who are most independent consider sex as rape even if it is with their own spouses. Usually that is number one item on any Woman Activist group`s agenda. It is also intersting to note that (I am using the word independence in the sense of non-dependence) women`s independence almost always comes at the cost of love. But what is more intesting is that they blame it on men whereas man was not capable of loving in the first place. Love is not in man`s genes it is a learned behavior which was taught to him by women. Over the centuries it might have caused some genetic abberation in some of of the men-quite possibly in poets and gays.

Re: PM, #22

He`s recovering from that racist joke of his that he posted in Kaneez Rehman`s ``The Dinner Guest.`` That ``joke`` of his gives an insight into his mind that hides behind the facade of an enlightened being he puts up. What a Pity!

Urstruly # 17

I feel love is a twin word for caring,sharing , respecting each other.The finality of how one telescopes into it varies individually.

If love and sex are inseparable as you feel, is it love or is it lust ?

I would love to read your tumour story too !!

Thank you for relating to some of my thoughts though :)

regards ,

Shirin

Studebaker # 13,

``It would be great injustice to the decent guys who despite Not having those infatuations or love since childhood do those good things , mary a girl with multiple sclerosis [ a girl ur name sake shirin in chicago ] or a nurse paraplegic wife without abandonment , with love happening AFTER marriage ``

... Clearly there are a few things to be recognised in the discussion here .

Well to go and marry a physically challenged girl, is a very noble thing to do. However it should not be out of pity , but love for that person, a care for that person and a desire to make her happy .If all this is possible in marrying her before falling in love with her, I salute the intention, and the underlying sincereity in the act. Realistically speaking how many guys would actually do that ?

``adolescent crush infatuation are normal but to attribute such nobel actions to it , is a bit too much ``.

Kindly elucidate !

Regards ,

Shirin

Patrick: Interesting discussion about love, pure or unconditional. In general, I would agree with what most have been saying about love. Obviously, the love between boy and girl is not as blind as you might think. Both parties involved actually subconsiously measure and analyze several factors before falling in love. Sometime these steps take few seconds and sometime very long. Procreation, without a doubt, is main instinct. Have you ever wonder why most love affairs will not involve disabled, paralyzed, not considered pretty and, of course, usually not across cultural boundaries.

There is a grave downside to love which most people do not think of. That is, how does it effect others-not directly involved. Take for example the true motherly or fatherly love for their child. In places like Pakistan, parents would like their child to be admitted to the best school they can afford. The number of students that can be admitted are often limited. Out of love, they might trample at the right of another more deserving one. Love here leads to corruption. Another parents eould like to feed their children best, hamburgers, chicken or steak. Basically more love parents have for their children, more animals will be killed because afterall life eats life. I wish there was a way to ask all the goats and sheep a simple question: what do they think of Abraham`s love for his God and his boys Issac or Ishmael? A simple love story has been responsible for yearly holocaust of couple of particular species of animals. Not just animals, humanity has also paid price many times for blind crazy love for nation/ race etc. (Hitler was crazy (in love) about his nation).

Here is a true recent story from my family, I thought you might enjoy. My brother is very comitted Muslim and prays five times a day. He also has a 2 1/2 year old son who is very attached to his dad. Somehow this child has realized that when daddy turns his head right and then left; it is the end of prayer and he can play with his dad again. Many times when my brother has not finished his prayer yet, my nephew comes behind my brother and tries to turn his dad`s head right or left because child can not wait for his dad to finish his love for God. Which love is more important? For God or for son. I know so many cases where love for God comes at the expense of loved ones. Many middle class families has tough time meeting the demands of their children and various excuses are used. But same parent go out and try to buy a healthy goat/ sheep for Eid-love of God.

Only acceptable true love must be absolutely harmless to others and that is speculative love. All practical loves will step on somebody, somewhere, somehow. The object of love in speculative is imaginery as in meditation. It is for self satisfaction and unlike boy-girl love, the object of love is not involved because it is imaginery.

Here is another example. I truly love my mother. She has recently suffered a stroke and currently hospitalized. My love for her is meaningless to her right now. I am here in US and she is in Islamabad. For my own satisfaction in this love relationship, her condition is effecting all my activities including writing replies at chowk. I have not listened to any music or turned my TV on for 4-5 days now. But all my actions do absolutely no good for her. This is self imposed and in a way similar to speculative love.

urstruly.. can`t wait for your story.

Paritosh:

Very well written. Loved the ending. Write more.

later

-sac

hmmpphh! So where isthat temporal guy anyway when we really would like to hear from him???

Paritosh, I enjoyed reading this simple, ironic piece. Quite beautiful. And inadvertantly (?) funny, or was that intentional?

#17 Urstruly

I think you need a break from Chowk for a while. You sound very disoriented.

I have a ``tumor-story`` to share with you guys but I think I will write it as an article. Tumor-love is real and true, I can testify that. I can also testify that the love between a man and woman can be as selfless as the parental love.BUT sex usually gets in the way. I think extra/pre-marital sex degrades love down to the satisfaction of a basal instinct only. Love is a psychological need (which I think is a learnrd behavior and not instinctive) that cannot be satisfied with sex alone. However, I truly beleive that in all cases sex is the prime mover.

Anamika #14

``Parental love, on the other hand CAN BE selfless,and sacrificial.It is love that expects nothing in return .It simply is ``.

I am not refuting this by any measure.Thinking why it is so ? the answer is obvious like they say ``Apney khoon ka rishta ``.Biology has its stronghold in shaping this love to the way it is .

In the other kind which is depicted in the article , it can vary anywhere from pure, unspoilt, true, ... lust and heat of the moment.That is where the test stands .It is , and it can be unselfish too.To truly love someone and want them ,beyond just mere passion or a sensous desire is i think not being selfish in the least .What other way can two hearts meet? ... if there is a certain want in that, i dont thing it is objectionable.It would be very unnatural infact if it were not there .

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#13 Shirin

If pure love is the same as unconditional love, then it is rare to nonexistent in romance. The selfishness part is where one covets the other. Parental love, on the other hand, CAN BE selfless and sacrificial. It is love that expects nothing in return. It simply is.

All said, nice story, well narrated.

Asim Hayat # 5

Asim , i was not writing, as if i was encaptured in a love sick kind of a mood , esp. the kind after reading one of those fairy tale love stories .The reason what i wrote was based on personal experiences, where i have been a witness to teen age or younger innocent love bloom, in its purest form , to maturity and adulthood . I have before me a few incidences in our family, which i will relate .It is these incidents which perhaps made me look at the love of the two young hearts in a different perspective .

A cousin of mine , used to join sometimes with her brothers in a game of cricket[ a neighbourhood affair ].If any one of the boys would feel thirsty , they would all come over to my cousin`s place for a drink of water .This age bracket , which i am referring to was [8-12]years apr. My cousin was the 8 yr. old only girl amongst the group.Amongst the guys was a very sweet young boy, then probably 10 or 11 yrs. He was very fond of my cousin, and whenever she would give him a glass of water he would say to her `` when i grow up, i am going to marry you ``.It was all taken as a joke, but known by all the adults .

It so happened that my cousin and their family got posted out of town, and somehow lost touch.Many years passed by , the boy and my cousin grew up. The boy went to college , university, and my cousin got married and went to canada .The wedding was arranged in a big hurry, as the boy was also a relative so really there were not the ``investigation procedures ``, to be done as the case usually is if it is someone unknown. The poor girl landed into misery. Her married life was anything but bliss .With a lot of difficulty , she managed[ after a few years ]to get a divorce .Meanwhile the little boy, now a dental surgeon in Pakistan , had not forgotten his love all this while .He was heartbroken when he had heard the news of my cousin`s marriage and refused to get married after that. As soon as he heard of the divorce , he was ectatic, the boy and girl met , and got married , and are now living ``Happily ever After Mashallah ``, in canada , and blessed with a lovely young son.

Similarly another one of my cousin`s loved this girl in her class. It was purely the playground love , as both were in the ear