The world is a strange place and it grows stranger with each passing day. All that was sacred about women, marriage and consensual sex are being dragged down to earth and being made passé... but it also reveals how casual things have become and how shallow we truly are (despite futile pretences otherwise).
Sanctity of Women: Judging on looks?
Those who have been paying attention to the news of late MUST know of the newly installed Pakistani foreign minister who is currently in India for a meeting with her Indian counterpart.
And she is not a topic of hot discussion, because she is a woman or that she is 34 years of age but more because she is quite the looker. An asset that has apparently won her instant fans in India. Otherwise sober newspapers have provided tabloid-like headlines with their story of the foreign minister's visit and some have even resorted to commenting on her dress sense.
“Pak puts on its best face,” screams out India's best selling english language newspaper The Times of India; the Mumbai Mirror tabloid chose to play good humour and headlined its story “Pak bomb lands in India”; The mass circulating Hindi paper Navbharat Times came out and said that India was “sweating over the model-like minister.”
The popular media, amidst general sentiments that the meeting of the two foreign ministers was “historic” and echoing the rhetoric and the usual promises made by either side that “the peace process must go on,” comments from both sides stressing that “dialogue was important,” and public statements on “renewed co-operation against terrorism,” were also able to interject that the Pak foreign minister “was spotted at the Delhi airport in a monotone outfit of blue – the colour of the season.”!
So much so that, in my mind, 'strictly' news reports on the visit looked like too deliberate an attempt to be professional when the writer would rather make a at least one more reference to the Pak foreign minister's looks, dress or dupatta style.
Some papers have already pointed out her choice of Roberto Cavalli sunglasses, Hermes handbag and her other “tasteful” fashion accessories!
Question is are people really taking her seriously and whether the youthful Pak minister can rise above the patronisation and prove her political acumen and insight is as sound as her fashion sense?
And speaking of gender pains...
Sanctity of Marriage: Gender pains?
Traditionally marriage has been an institution between a man and woman... as the times change, however, same sex partner marriages are becoming more open, especially in countries that now allow the practice.
Of course there are countries that do not do so, even though they have not outlawed homosexuality.
It appears that a groom in a recent wedding in Jakarta, Indonesia was actually a woman. The bride's same sex lover had posed as a man for her hand in marriage.
Incidentally the ruse was discovered at the marriage ceremony itself. Suspicions of the actual identity (but not the sex) of the groom began to first arise when 'Rio' arrived at the ceremony without any relatives and failed to show any documents – but the game was finally up when the groom's heavy voice suddenly changed into a feminine one.
Embarrassment (and face) in front of family and guests, gathered to read the Koran at the Islamic marriage ceremony, was averted by having the bride's former boyfriend, Kimon, sit-in for the 'not-so-groom' and marry her.
Questions is (actually, questions ARE) what sort of fool ex-boyfriend goes to a former girl-friend's wedding, to say nothing about what kind of marriage he can honestly expect if the bride is not into boys? (After all he did consent to the marriage.)
And speaking of consent...
Sanctity of Consensual Sex: What entitlements?
As consenting adults a man and a woman (not inebriated or out of their senses by anything other love or lust) may consummate their 'relationship' in any motel room – there is nothing to question or judge it really.
(Assuming, of course, that both consenting individuals are of age and single... any variation on these two criteria make things more complicated and open for harsher judgement.)
A twist on this is that an Australian civil servant is actually suing her employer for compensation for injuries sustained during a sex romp while on a business trip.
Now from what I understand they were two consenting adults who chose to engage in some hanky-panky in their motel room in the later evenings. Possibly some rough hanky-panky as one of the parties was injured in the act.
It should be noted that the injuries sustained were not from chains or whips, as might be initially imagined, but from a glass light fitting that came away from the wall!
Her solicitor has argued in court that “a woman injured while having sex in a motel room paid for by her employer deserves the same treatment as someone who had slipped in the shower or been bashed.”
She has claimed an entitlement to compensation because her injuries were caused "during the course of her employment", as she had been sent to a country town to stay the night ahead of a meeting early the next day.
Her counsel submitted that “lawful sexual activity was considered reasonable behaviour for a motel room.”
Needless to say she did not win, because the state reasoned that “having sex was not a "necessary activity" for a motel room, in the same way that "showering, bathing or sleeping" is.”
I guess there are some sacred truths that remain intact after all.
Sanctity of Women: Judging on looks?
 |
| Hina Rabbani Khar |
And she is not a topic of hot discussion, because she is a woman or that she is 34 years of age but more because she is quite the looker. An asset that has apparently won her instant fans in India. Otherwise sober newspapers have provided tabloid-like headlines with their story of the foreign minister's visit and some have even resorted to commenting on her dress sense.
“Pak puts on its best face,” screams out India's best selling english language newspaper The Times of India; the Mumbai Mirror tabloid chose to play good humour and headlined its story “Pak bomb lands in India”; The mass circulating Hindi paper Navbharat Times came out and said that India was “sweating over the model-like minister.”
The popular media, amidst general sentiments that the meeting of the two foreign ministers was “historic” and echoing the rhetoric and the usual promises made by either side that “the peace process must go on,” comments from both sides stressing that “dialogue was important,” and public statements on “renewed co-operation against terrorism,” were also able to interject that the Pak foreign minister “was spotted at the Delhi airport in a monotone outfit of blue – the colour of the season.”!
So much so that, in my mind, 'strictly' news reports on the visit looked like too deliberate an attempt to be professional when the writer would rather make a at least one more reference to the Pak foreign minister's looks, dress or dupatta style.
Some papers have already pointed out her choice of Roberto Cavalli sunglasses, Hermes handbag and her other “tasteful” fashion accessories!
Question is are people really taking her seriously and whether the youthful Pak minister can rise above the patronisation and prove her political acumen and insight is as sound as her fashion sense?
And speaking of gender pains...
Sanctity of Marriage: Gender pains?
Traditionally marriage has been an institution between a man and woman... as the times change, however, same sex partner marriages are becoming more open, especially in countries that now allow the practice.
Of course there are countries that do not do so, even though they have not outlawed homosexuality.
Incidentally the ruse was discovered at the marriage ceremony itself. Suspicions of the actual identity (but not the sex) of the groom began to first arise when 'Rio' arrived at the ceremony without any relatives and failed to show any documents – but the game was finally up when the groom's heavy voice suddenly changed into a feminine one.
Embarrassment (and face) in front of family and guests, gathered to read the Koran at the Islamic marriage ceremony, was averted by having the bride's former boyfriend, Kimon, sit-in for the 'not-so-groom' and marry her.
Questions is (actually, questions ARE) what sort of fool ex-boyfriend goes to a former girl-friend's wedding, to say nothing about what kind of marriage he can honestly expect if the bride is not into boys? (After all he did consent to the marriage.)
And speaking of consent...
Sanctity of Consensual Sex: What entitlements?
(Assuming, of course, that both consenting individuals are of age and single... any variation on these two criteria make things more complicated and open for harsher judgement.)
A twist on this is that an Australian civil servant is actually suing her employer for compensation for injuries sustained during a sex romp while on a business trip.
Now from what I understand they were two consenting adults who chose to engage in some hanky-panky in their motel room in the later evenings. Possibly some rough hanky-panky as one of the parties was injured in the act.
It should be noted that the injuries sustained were not from chains or whips, as might be initially imagined, but from a glass light fitting that came away from the wall!
Her solicitor has argued in court that “a woman injured while having sex in a motel room paid for by her employer deserves the same treatment as someone who had slipped in the shower or been bashed.”
She has claimed an entitlement to compensation because her injuries were caused "during the course of her employment", as she had been sent to a country town to stay the night ahead of a meeting early the next day.
Her counsel submitted that “lawful sexual activity was considered reasonable behaviour for a motel room.”
Needless to say she did not win, because the state reasoned that “having sex was not a "necessary activity" for a motel room, in the same way that "showering, bathing or sleeping" is.”
I guess there are some sacred truths that remain intact after all.
No comments:
Post a Comment