Paradox of Sex , Biological Instincts , Double Standards & What is Right and Not !

Many a times our transformation from the Apes to Civility is punctuated by times of creation of cultural confluence & uprising of rebellious animal instincts were being human is being uncivil , uncouth ed , illegal and barbaric !

Hunger , Shelter , Survival , Predatory , Instincts , Progeny , and the varied other Biological Needs of which Sex is a key element life !... is many a times codified in a Civil Doctrine which is porous at best when put to test with the strength of the nature of biological instincts.

The Opposite Sexes are at the forefront for being in biological relationships to propagate life and courting , mating et al are bound in marital bounds which allows dating before mating & Living together with in the binds of the rule of marriage thereafter with in a civil code ordained and accepted in parts as way of life by cultures ; societies and governments of nations which have erected as silos principles of living standards which in part are rebelled by few who's connect with the wild is more vivid than the civil.

Such rebellions hits headlines often and the guilty pleasured mainstream media laps up the scandal and controversy with a barrage of moral parole unleashed on the offender and the offence leaving the accused to bare the arc lights and the ignominy of public fall from the grace more so if he was at the high pedestal of power.

Monogamy & Bigamy have been at the bed rock of debate across various cultures ; and a few like the Islamic traditions ostensibly propagate bigamy with in the binds of nikha and a few cultures have the ferocity to defend their pitch on morality of being a One Woman Man WOW men.

Some where in the me lee some of the brightest potential get executed in the altar of fungible moral code civil society , sweeping aside the various other aspects that the accused may have been exemplars of ...are we being unjust to a Tiger Woods , Bill Clinton , Berlesconi , Dominic Kahn , Pheneesh Murthy ; Sarkosy ; ND Towari or have some societies been liberal and some overtly conservative ...either of those is plausible..but double standards is in my view certainly not ..here is where i feel the American double standards sticking out as sore eye ..in what may be to meet their notions of fitting marital fidelity as a measure of trustworthy by suppressing a more potent biological calling ... For now it seems to be going the way the conservatives ordain ..until another Rajneesh upraises to propagate the need to meet the cravings of an Ape Man in the Woods..

Personally ; Consensual Engagement is a much more acceptable moderation of moral civility with condemn for using indiscreet means to take advantage of power ; over the weak resulting in harassment. The above need be only yard stick of the good from the bad. Debatable yet a point to ponder upon


The following Article borrowed from the Economist attempts to put cultural context in pretext ; lets examine the same before we nurture stereo typing of perceptions of men who have unzipped with indiscretion ( as they calling it )





Decoding DSK
What his fall says about transatlantic differences in attitudes to sex, power and the law


“I DID warn him!” These were the words supposedly uttered by France’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy, when he heard that Dominique Strauss-Kahn had been arrested in New York on charges of attempting to rape a hotel maid. When “DSK” moved to Washington, DC, in 2007 to take up his duties as the boss of the IMF, Mr Sarkozy is said to have told him to check his passions: he was going to a country that had come close to hounding Bill Clinton out of office for having an affair with a White House intern.

In matters of sex, as of war, Europeans are from Venus. They mock Americans’ puritanism about the sex lives of public figures. For a politician to cheat on his wife in America is a sign of dishonesty. Witness the opprobrium heaped on Arnold Schwarzenegger over the new revelation that he had fathered a child out of wedlock. In much of Europe, affairs can be a badge of virility. That is the insinuation of an interview given by none other than Mr Strauss-Kahn’s wife, Anne Sinclair. Asked in 2006 whether she minded her husband’s reputation, she replied: “No, I’m rather proud of it! It’s important for a politician to seduce. As long as he seduces me and I seduce him, that’s enough for me.”

Nowhere is the politician’s entitlement to sex more tolerated than, perhaps, in Italy. For Silvio Berlusconi, the country’s longest-serving prime minister in modern times, sexual appetite is a matter of pride, not of shame. He is on trial, charged with paying for sex with an underage prostitute. (He also faces a range of corruption charges.) But there are no handcuffs for Il Cavaliere. “I love life and I love women,” he declares cheerily.

Related topics
Nicolas Sarkozy
International Monetary Fund (IMF)
United States
Europe
France
Americans (and, it is true, many Europeans) are mystified by Mr Berlusconi’s ability to survive the tales of his lurid “bunga-bunga” parties. Europeans are bemused by the uptightness of American public life, in which a blow job in the White House can lead to the impeachment of a president. But the case of Mr Strauss-Kahn is about more than sex. Dig deeper and you uncover a number of telling differences in transatlantic attitudes.

One question is: how much privacy should public figures enjoy? American intrusiveness may seem distasteful to Europeans. For their part, Americans do not understand how prominent personalities in Britain can obtain “super-injunctions” preventing journalists from reporting some peccadillo or even the existence of the injunction.

European tolerance of cavorting politicians carries the risk of creating a culture of silence and immunity that too easily blurs the lines between a consensual affair, harassment and outright assault. Henry Kissinger may have thought that power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. But power can also be a means of extorting sexual and other favours. If state and media conspire to keep quiet about the debauchery of politicians, might it not be easier to hide other misdeeds, such as corruption?

When Mr Strauss-Kahn was up for the IMF job, Jean Quatremer, a correspondent for Libération, a French newspaper, was one of the few voices expressing concern about his libertine ways. His attitude towards women, blogged Mr Quatremer, was “too insistent, often brushing close to harassment. A trait known to the media, but about which nobody speaks (we are in France).” Mr Quatremer warned that the IMF was infused with “Anglo-Saxon mores” and that France could not afford a scandal.

With hindsight it looked complacently eager to avoid one. In 2007 Tristane Banon, a young writer, gave a televised account of what she claimed was an attack on her by Mr Strauss-Kahn when she interviewed him for a book in 2002. The programme attracted no attention when first screened, in part because it appeared on an obscure cable channel. But it now makes for compelling viewing. DSK’s name was bleeped out as Ms Banon described him to a table of dining companions as “a rutting chimpanzee” and recounted fighting him off on the floor. Later, she said, DSK would send her creepy texts asking: “Do I frighten you?” She thought about pressing charges but did not want to be known “until the end of my days as the girl who had had a problem with a politician”. Ms Banon’s account would not make her the first female journalist to be harassed by a powerful man. But what is intriguing about this tale is that Mr Strauss-Kahn’s name did not leak, as it surely would have done in America or Britain.

Walk of shame

Perhaps inevitably, given the fame of Mr Strauss-Kahn and the anonymity of the chambermaid, more attention has been paid to the tribulations of the former IMF chief than to the plight of his alleged victim. Indeed, the images of Mr Strauss-Kahn in handcuffs during his “perp walk” are regarded by many in France as an assault on the defendant’s dignity, part of a flawed system of justice that places too much emphasis on retribution at the expense of the rights of the accused.

In France parading suspects in public is banned. In Britain, once a defendant is charged, until a trial is concluded only court proceedings may be reported. The aim is to avoid prejudicing jurors. Justice in these countries tends to be a sober affair, insulated as far as possible from external tumult. In America it is more theatrical, with lawyers fighting their case over the airwaves and cameras filming battles in the courtroom. To Americans this is all evidence of great openness.

Beyond such differences in legal cultures, one fact is inescapable. In America a modest African immigrant has obtained a swift response from the police to her complaint of sexual assault. Mr Strauss-Kahn’s innocence or guilt will be determined in court. But New York’s authorities have not shirked from arresting the head of one of the world’s leading international bodies, nor from demanding that he be kept in jail on remand. It is worth asking: would this have happened in Paris or Rome?

Arre Deekh Bhai Lalu ! Yeh Chalu Nahi Hai Aalu !

Very Versed lines those that follow penned by Rajdeep Sardesai in the next para..But I guess Lalu nahi hai Aalu ..In the theater of Indian politics he will continue to hold his fort..when the dice of polls get recast he will be in the apex group fighting anti incumbency factor..He is the man with a mangoose bat when it comes to IPL league of vote bank politics !

____________________________________________________________________________________

Lalu Prasad is the Pied Piper of Patna. One of the more special moments in journalism was travelling with the RJD chief to Pakistan in 2003. Indo-Pak relations were at a low, a series of terror attacks had brought the two countries to the brink of war. In this unnerving environment, the charismatic Lalu was transformed into a peace ambassador. Wherever he went, the cameras inevitably followed. At Lahore's Anarkali Bazaar, the shopkeepers queued up to greet him; when we went to Islamabad's Sunday market, he was again the star attraction. In the heart of the marketplace, he picked up a potato and exclaimed, "Bihar mein Lalu, aur Pakistan mein aloo!" The picture of Lalu buying vegetables made the front pages of most Pakistani newspapers.

Seven years later, the Lalu charisma is fading. He still comes up with the occasional witty 'Laluism' and his persona remains delightfully endearing, but as the high drama in Parliament during the Women's Reservation Bill has shown, Lalu's bark is now greater than his bite. While he may rightfully scream that the Bill was passed through an act of 'political dacoity', the fact is that no one really takes Lalu's threats of bringing down the UPA government seriously. In a sense, Lalu and his Yadav soulmates - Mulayam and Sharad - represent the past tense of Indian politics, a politics where identity mattered more than issues.

When Lalu first burst on to the national political scene in the early 90s, he was an instant hit. The arrest of L.K. Advani at Samastipur in October 1990 during the Ram Rath Yatra catapulted him into the national limelight. That single act transformed him into the messiah of the Muslims, the politician who had dared to touch the Hindutva icon. Lalu dined out for the next decade on that one single moment of political bravado, his Muslim-Yadav combine forming the base for three successive victories in the Bihar elections.

The ascent of Lalu also coincided with the rise of private news TV. Lalu was, without a doubt, Indian politics' first TV star. The first time I interviewed Lalu for TV was in 1995 on the back of a remarkable victory in the Bihar elections. He insisted that the interview be conducted in his cowshed, the cows providing the visual backdrop to enhance Lalu's rustic image. That was perhaps the first glimpse of Lalu, the consummate communicator, on national TV. In the years that followed, Lalu on TV guaranteed eyeballs in a manner that no politician before or since has been able to match.

But like a saas-bahu serial that finally begins to lose ratings, Lalu's appeal too has begun to wear thin. The rhetoric, that was once both amusing and incisive, now seems tired and repetitive. Where did the decline begin? In his excellent book, The Making of Lalu Yadav, journalist Sankarshan Thakur writes, "Lalu Yadav lost his magic the day he said he was going to cling on to the chief ministership even if he were to be chargesheeted in the fodder scandal. That was the day Lalu Yadav, Bihar's great rosy-cheeked hope, exposed himself. He wasn't there to deliver power to the people, he was there to keep it for himself."

Unfortunately, Lalu allowed himself to become a prisoner of the caricature that he had created of himself. There was always more to Lalu than the court jester image; he was, and is, perhaps one of the most astute politicians in the country. But because political life for him was a manufactured myth, the very image that he had created eventually devoured him. The backwards and the Muslims began to desert him the moment they realised the wide gap between Lalu the folk hero and Lalu the politician.

Which is why the women's reservation bill has perhaps provided Lalu with a last stab at reviving his faltering political career. By raising the pitch over reservations for OBC and Muslim women, Lalu is making a desperate attempt to recapture his original constituency. The aim isn't to bring down the UPA government, but to create a new focal point for the Mandal forces who have been badly splintered in recent years. In the process, he has joined hands with one-time enemies - Mulayam Singh and Sharad Yadav - in the hope that a political realignment in the Hindi heartland can be achieved.

Where the Yadav troika may have got their calculations wrong though is in their belief that their Muslim-OBC support base is intact, and merely needs to be galvanised into action through emotive slogans. The last two decades have seen a dramatic shift in aspiration levels across the country, and to believe that UP and Bihar would be untouched by the winds of change is to remain frozen in time. How many Muslim women, for example, will truly believe that the Yadavs stand for political empowerment of the minorities when the fact is that none of the Mandal parties have made a serious effort to raise bread and butter issues of jobs and education for Muslims? When the Yadavs, after having enriched their families, claim to stand against elitism, how many people will trust them?

Which is why the anti-woman reservationists, despite the genuine deficiencies in the legislation, may struggle to get their campaign off the ground. The credibility crisis confronting the Yadavs may well rub off on their determined effort to become symbols of opposition to women's reservation. When Rabri Devi and Dimple Yadav are your women 'leaders', who will trust the claims being made to represent womanhood and gender justice?

People,Passion,Politics and the INDIAN

Lies, Damn Lies and Leftists.


We are living in interesting times and times which were never ever before been so dynamic. The entire world order changes once every century.

It seems so evident that an era of the monarchs faded not very easily, yet eased them selves in the history books with a passage of time as victims of a changing world. The imperialistic rules in many countries for centuries seem to serve the purpose of an era that used to exist then.

Change in many ways brought down the iron curtains of communist rule in some of the most significant empires in history.

At one point in time the entire globe was threatened by the possibility of a World War in the current era when the dreaded cold war between the democratic giants USA and communist giants Russian held world attention and polarized every other nation to aligning their loyalties

Country after another moderated their communist stand with an injection of democratic fervor and caught the rapid train to progress. And then the famed Berlin Wall cracked to unify the Germany of today when communist East Germany ceded its existence. Look at Russia then and Russia now. They are one of the two erstwhile communist old blocks now reformed pseudo communist nations with a flavor of capitalism in BRIC countries along side China on the progress express speeding into the next millennium.


Closer to home such a moderation of communist agenda was explored by a brave heart in Buddha Deb in the recent times. It took a TATA to lend support to the initiative. How did we react? Revolt is the right word. An avalanche of leftists came down so heavily that was screaming in the face “I don’t want progress here squeal”. Every pro urbanization thrust in India has been resisted by the leftists as anti agrarian movements. This is far from the truth.

At the center the leftist never had it so good for a while in terms of being a visible voice in a ruling party government. Though there is tremendous merit in the comrade’s secular agenda but they seem to be the only stumbling block in the path of reform process and holding back the country to single digit economic growth rate.

They were time before their present partnership with UPA the stints with NDA were they could lend outside support to the government. The case in point is did they at all contribute to the common mans cause or the economic cause aside the strong pitch on secularism?

When they had the going so good, what did they do? Shackle a team of proven reformists who revived the fortune of an India. India in the early 90’s had to pledge it gold reserves to generate cash to run the economy?

The Team of Reformists being Dr.Manmohan Singh, P Chidambaram and Motek Singh Ahuluwalia.

Look at were we were as a nation being acknowledged as one of the strongest contenders to being the SuperPower today defining new world order through economic leadership.

Off course the India shining period during the NDA rule combined with outstanding reforms process set the charge by TDP in Hyderabad with 8 years sustained reforms and change management and SM Krishna contributions , lent a great deal of thrust to the momentum set by the troika of 90’s reformists.

I must also add aside the misgivings which are unpardonable from a humanitarian view point on the Godhra riots , the Modi government super charged 360 % development process for economic and social process only rivaled by Chandrababu’s effort at Andhra Pradesh.

Irrespective of the political climate Mumbai and Chennai have steadfastly grown their contribution to the Gross Domestic Product of the India today. That is they never shackled the development and growth agenda with their limiting ideologies.

This to me is a track record and a pedigree of political leadership praise worthy to be enabling societies - all in a span of a decade and a half of discontinuous rule.

Now a look at one of the states which has the longest political patronage in terms of longevity. Calcutta was one of the richest states in the pre independence era as well as a major metro in the post independence era. Calcutta one of the cities in India renowned for rich literary pool and strong distinctive culture. Fortuitously they had one of India’s tallest political leaders in Jyoti Basu in a left governed state enjoy the time of three decades in public office.

a. One would imagine that that would have succeeded in creating the single most important growth engine for India. Or better Calcutta or let me put it correctly West Bengal should have been a state with maximum citizen welfare and standards of living highest in the country. Where the gap between the rich and the poor is at the most minimum negligible.

b. A state where they intelligentsia , youth and the working class need not have looked beyond the borders of West Bengal for employment opportunities.

c. Better still West Bengal as a state should have built resilient healthcare systems, a world class education system with top class varsities. It should have been a state where unemployment should be the lowest. Per Capita Income the highest and literacy levels on par with the best in the country.

d. Urban and Agrarian infrastructure setting the bench mark for the country. A Welfare state where distribution of wealth and amenities for common man to be evenly spread across social classes. Over all an equitable distribution of wealth in the society. May I add social security for the working class as well?

e. A state where 90 % of the products are desi products and MNC products sell the least.

If you are wondering why I was listing the values of a model society in my previous paragraphs it is due to the constant bickering by the Leftists on any ruling parties. This is the vision that they say should be a standard across all state in India.

And I quite agree with them.

Aside the credible produce of record food grain. A department where the West Bengal State over took the other rice bowls of India like Andhra Pradesh and Punjab, there have been very limited achievements that the government in West Bengal manage to achieve in the 3 plus decades of unflinching mandates they
Have been winning year after year.

May we seek to understand the legitimacy of the Lefts claim to be the guardian of protecting the interests of the common man in a cohilition lead government where they have as a party miserably failed to meet all of the point made in a,b,c,d & e and of the many basic need of the electorate in Bengal.

In fact on several counts of urban development, job creation, GDP contribution to the nation, average per capita income and health of the state economies, several smaller states upstage the once rich city of joy “Kolkatta”

Consider this, A state which was one of the richest, and at times bigger and more vibrant then a city like Mumbai is now tottering to be alive , leave alone meet standards of living compared to smaller towns like Vizag, Trichy , Pune.

Why then should we consider Left as a Party of significance to build, manage and run the Indian state? If not for the deplorable state of Indian democracy where cohilition politics provide for fragmented party to come together for devious shortsighted goals, the Lefts would have been Left Far Behind.

At least after the recent withdrawal from the UPA government they have drilled the final nail in their own coffin.

And what did they do the man who served them so well in moderating communist view for more than two decades. A man who stood for the respect of the Speakers Post in the parliament by not deserting then it needed him the most. They expel him ?

It took a combative Lalu Prasad to sight a synonym. The comrades cut the very branch of the tree on which they were sitting on. We know who fell on the eve of 22nd July. Even if it was the darkest day of Indian politics the people of India will cherish the fact that very few days are left in the left party’s life span in Indian politics.

Not after they mortgaged they only point as savior for their political existence. A party standing for secular interests of the nation was washed down the drain when they voted along with BJP.

Share you views and voice your opinions on the above. As the conduct of debate is one of the last legacies of the left , left in out societies.