Are You 'Orthodox'?

The term 'orthodox' is defined as 'Following or conforming to the traditional or generally accepted rules or beliefs of a religion, philosophy, or practice' - Oxford Dictionary

People used to say nothing will work in this bureaucratic system if you don't bribe the officials... In fact we have laws to take action against them, who misuse their official power. From IPC 1860 and prevention of corruption act 1988 up to Right to information act 2005...

Nowadays there are even notices in almost all Govt. offices mentioning helpline phone numbers and asking us to contact, if anyone happen to force us for bribing.

In old days people were uneducated and ignorant about their rights and laws that would stand by them. Hence they did whatever the officials asked them to do. But the era has changed, people do at least know there are laws to help them. They can get help from someone who is educated. Let us take Kerala as example, where the majority are educated comparing to any other states in India.

Yet we have a lot of bribing stories... Why is it so???

If it happens due to the ignorance of the victim, I presume that we -the public- are so selfish that we won't even care about our friends. Are you selfish?

If it happens because the victim wants things to happen within a short time period and the bureaucratic dysfunction stands against it, I presume that our development is slow and we are irresponsible about it. Are you irresponsible?

If it happens because we think 'things won't work in this nation without bribing', I presume we -the public- are ORTHODOX because regardless of our education and awareness of our wonderful Indian penal code we follow the old age practice; that people used to do when they were ignorant-namely bribing Govt. officials-. Are you orthodox?

Credit for the terminology 'orthodox' in the context of bribing- Arya Mohan

Ref:

1.http://www.mcrhrdi.gov.in/Group12012/Anti-Corruption%20Laws%20in%20India.pdf

2.http://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/bareacts/indianpenalcode/index.php?Title=Indian%20Penal%20Code,%201860

3.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Penal_Code

Cat Trapped in a Room and Education System!

That was a terrible scream, by my roommates around midnight. As I saw them sitting on their bed I imagined someone with a knife like weapon, about to attack us. I said 'Shhh... be quiet...', that merely was a reflex! within a few microseconds I became conscious and I thought 'what happened?...'. It was an uninvited guest, a cat! who entered into our room and was sleeping with one of my roommate. But it hid somewhere. I got up, switched on the light and opened the door.

We were so cautious since the cat must have been scared by our response and hence it would probably run around and it's claws would hurt us. After searching for a while, the cat was found beneath a table around a corner of our room. The next task was to get it out of the room. We started thinking of frightening it, but it's a bit risky since it's claws...

Then we called on of our batch mate Miss X, who is a cat lover and know how to deal with them. She came and tried to tame the cat. I was counting each second wishing for the cat to come out. A few minutes elapsed, the cat changed it's position; underneath a bed. Miss X kept on calling it. Then with a little bit skeptic steps it moved towards Miss X and made comfortable itself within her hands. She patted and rubbed the cat and it became her friend!

Then while we talking she kept it down on the floor. It's behavior grabbed my attention.

That cat, who was scared a while ago started playing with one of my roommate's school bag! We then dispersed back to sleep. I couldn't sleep for hours, I kept on thinking about it's behavior...

This is not merely a story about a cat intruding into our room instead a chain of thoughts regarding the way of educating a child.

Let us go back to the cat story;

1. We wanted the cat to move out of our room without attacking us.

2. We lacked the knowledge, how to make it behave the way we wanted.

3. The only plan we had was to 'frighten' it, so that it would go out (exploiting the fly or fight 

     mechanism of all living being except plants or trees!). But what if the cat fights back?!

4. Alternative idea; get the help of an expert, who knows how to handle them wisely.

5. 'That intelligence', how to handle a cat wisely made our life easy. Neither the cat made 

     unfair movement nor we hurt it. And everything went as we -including the cat 

     probably- wished.

Now let us consider our children. We -the public- used to say 'we must punish the children in order to make them disciplined, well behaved, to respect elders, to STUDY, to obey etc '

Are we uncivilized human being to think in such a manner that to make the children do something, as we plough with cattle; by physical forces???

When the education board ask us not to hit children we laugh at them thinking 'how fool are they, enforcing stupid laws not knowing how to handle children! Children must be punished hard to make them disciplined...' 

The old school thoughts, old enough that of a caveman...

No one would achieve what hesher wish to, via a system merely based on punishments.

We need to get up from our ignorance and to make our children comfortable as the cat within Miss X's hands, to be well behaved , to be educated and for being much more efficient... For that what we need is a society with a wise parenting techniques, or else none of the innovative education system would help in developing a child.

Will You Donate Hair for this 'Cute' Girl?

Marketing is always wonderful!

'She lost her hair due to chemotherapy. Donate your hair to make wig for her.'
-the obvious content of any article with a title similar to this article!

It's a stereotype of girl or a 'beautiful girl'.

In fact it has a few evolutionary interests that the relation between thickness and length of hair of a female and her health, and hence the male preference.

Well, we claim that we are 'intelligent' and 'rational' beings so we should be able to replace those traits with rationalism.

You talk so rude!

why?

Because you do not have empathy for her feelings.

What kind of feelings?

In brief, the difficulty for them to face the world after losing hair.

Have you ever think that, where did SHE (not 'HE'!) get it? or why would she feel so? What's there in losing hair?

there comes the marketing! 

We do not think unless we are forced to think somehow... We accept and follow what the rest of the world do. So if someone appears before you and say 'gdhajtjhdkfrhg  is morality and you should do so' we will definitely do so (provided we think rest of the world do so).

Isn't it much more important to boost her self esteem than, to cover her real face with a mask that society think is beautiful, to encourage her to live the way she is, to accept her for who she is???

Why do we degrade her by donating wig as if, in the absence of such a thing she is not 'beautiful'?

Like any other charitable organization they also ask us to donate hair to help them. If one have that much empathy for the cancer patients why doesn't hesher (he/she) shave hiser (his/her) head?
(Oh! we never cut off our legs when someone loses their legs; also we don't ask them if they need any leg replacement from someone's body   -people do donate their various body parts; I hope you'd know it-)

There even exist chemo child photography with copyright; you will get photos at any size!!!

http://www.123rf.com/photo_9159113_a-young-caucasian-child-suffering-hair-loss-due-to-the-effects-of-chemotherapy-used-to-fight-cancer.html

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-images-chemo-child-young-cancer-hair-loss-image34623089

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-76481824/stock-photo-profile-of-a-caucasian-child-showing-hair-loss-due-to-chemotherapy-treatment-for-cancer.html

some will even 'style' your short hair when you donate.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1199609

it is stated in this article that; "When we started off, we did not get a positive response and some people were critical of the practice because there is a prevalent belief that hair donation is unacceptable in religion," Fahad tells Dawn.com, "Nevertheless, there are also many of those who are passionate about the cause and never fail to disappoint. We have provided wigs free of cost to about 25 people, most of whom are women above 30 as well as girls under 12."

"Fahad then searched for neighbouring countries that would assist him and found a company in Chennai that agreed to make it for Rs1000 per wig. “It was all going well till the customs started charging us an exorbitant amount on each wig and started stopping our deliveries."

"I feel this is the best way to help someone because we are healthy beings and we need to feel their pain too,” said Shahid."

At e-bay.in, the cost ranges from Rupee 6000/- to 15,000/-

http://www.ebay.in/sch/i.html?_odkw=chemo+wigs&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR1.TRC0.A0.H0.Xcancer+wigs.TRS0&_nkw=cancer+wigs&_sacat=0

At some place on earth a businessman might be saying 'Thanks for chemotherapy for making me rich with the wig marketing...'

He was born and died within days...

He was born and died within days...Mr. Kanthapuram...
.
.

He has been on earth for 76 years with his ideologies or principles... No one cared him; his opinion, what he had to comment on certain events...
.
He has his own wiki since 2007 and several webpage writings; implying anyone could've found him and his point of views from anywhere on earth.
eg:http://www.jihadwatch.org/…/india-muslim-cleric-says-women-… ---------- in 2013
in which he states,

"Islam has not changed its decrees regarding the life of women. Among them are these: The Qur’an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: “Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will” (2:223)."

http://hdvideospk.com/-…/kanthapuram-usthad-in-kashmeer.html ------------ in 2010
___________________

Why do the medias (or/and the society) give so much projection to his comments/ opinions 'NOW'?

within days it's been covered with Chennai flood...

Are we extremely ignorant to the trick of the media that how they creates illusory riots in society; which would've died along with Mr. Kanthapuram... his opinions and ideologies...

Instead media and the society -including us- repeats his ideologies without realizing the Goebbelsian Propaganda that if you repeat a lie thousand times, it will become the truth....

with which Goebbels hypnotized whole Germany that Hitler's regime was best for Germany

If you happen to criticize the upcoming generation for their culture/morality or whatever, you must recall that you've created such a society by repeating something that may or may not be the truth!

Blue for Girls and Pink for Boys

Is there anything wrong with the heading?
Nope! why do you think so?
It's the other way; isn't it?
Really? who told you that?
I do see by myself.
How?




a google search would give you enough data...see the following!

Oh! I should've mentioned the era. It's during 1920's.

-For example, a June 1918 article from the trade publication Earnshaw's Infants' Department said, “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.”- [1] [4]

 so, google tells you that there is a gender biasing in choice... If it is a property of males and females, it should've been there all the time; don't you think so?

I don't know

Well, how about the following? there is no color specification. Not even gender specification in costume. It's from 1980's

I know this; it's a unisex fashion!

Not really, you may call it as uniformity with a masculine inclination... and man never wore any feminine garments; what the market says feminine.

What do you mean by 'what the market says feminine'? What does the market has to do with it?

Well, let me ask you then; why don't men wear high heels?

It's been made only for women and not for men.

But no one is restricting them from wearing it.

People will call him insane then!

Why would they call so?

Because it's not socially accepted...

Where did the society get such an idea that men must not wear such chappals or shoes?

look at the followings... it's Louis XIV from 1700's

and, this is from 1980's.

They are not women certainly, are they? Moreover Louis XIV was a king of France. And they were very well accepted in the society; disproving your claim that 'it's not socially accepted' ! Let's modify your claim including the fact, 'It's dependent on the era they lived in'.

Also, high heels were considered as a symbol of status as well as masculinity . Women adopted heels to masculinise themselves. Until the end of 17th century European Upper class men followed this fashion. [2] [3]

So?

So, who made us think that it is not socially accepted?

From where do we get ideas of what a girl/ boy must wear?

Why don't boys wear necklaces as that of girls do, or as the given below old man from Kenya does ?

Why do girls tend to wear similar stuffs?

Why does movies make the girls' room pink in color; did they forgot the older analogy that pink is stronger color. Or was it a fallacy?

Moreover,

Provided there exists a gender biased fashion in all disciplines how are we supposed to think that we could build gender equality in society?

Or on what basis we criticize the new generation? when, they are being biased from their early age itself!

They don't even get a gender independent toy to play with...

We really need to think how to control the influence of market and trend in daily life, or else we don't even have the right to speak against gender discrimination.

Ref:

1. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/when-did-girls-start-wearing-pink-1370097/?no-ist

2. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21151350

3. http://qz.com/409254/why-did-men-stop-wearing-high-heels-anyway/

4.http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/04/when-unisex-was-the-new-black/390168/

'I'm Gonna Tell God Everything...'

The last thing a 3 year old Syrian said before he died;

"I'm gonna tell god everything"

It has been a very sensational news again on social media; projecting the dreadfulness of terrorism...

Various personalities around the world had marked their condolence for being killed at this small age, their solace that 'every child go to God's kingdom', some are angry such that they want to kill the terrorists who kill such 'cute', 'innocent' 'children' !!

One of the comment goes as follows [1].

" I CANNOT get my head around the fact that this is the world we live in. Where CHILDREN AND BABIES are abused and/or killed. I WOULD KILL EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THIS WORLD THAT HAS MALICIOUS INTENT TOWARD CHILDREN IF I COULD. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. GLADLY!!!!! I DON'T CARE IF THOSE NUMBERS WERE IN THE MILLIONS!!!! There is NOTHING worse than hurting a child. NOTHING. I am very forgiving - but for that I will show you no mercy."
-and it has got 1029 likes-

why don't we call him a terrorist; the one who commented as above?! why does he get thousands of likes?

Some have said that 'god will punish the terrorists'

Assuming their feeling is intense,

Would they be saying the same if they are provided with a powerful gun and they happen to meet terrorists with bare hands? or will they kill the terrorists?

Will the 3 years old child be saying the same if he is self sufficient to 'fight against' the terrorists; who is not matured to think 'rationally' as the adults claim that they do...

By saying such a statement, the 3 year old child expressed his disagreement and rage towards the act/event that happened to 'HIM'. Of course a child wouldn't be able to think further that terrorism is not good for a world to sustain...

We had fights as children... whenever we failed in it we would say 'I'll tell this to mother/father'.

When a child say that he will tell this to god what I see is the depth of his belief in God and nothing else.

I wouldn't wonder if such a child, in future, fight against the world for 'his' God, the God who saved him throughout his life.

I wouldn't wonder if he kills everyone who stand against his God, as the person who wanted to kill the terrorists for killing 'children' in the above mentioned comment.

and I wouldn't wonder if he gets thousands of followers as the 1029 likes

Everyone would fight against them, who stand against their rights, their beliefs, their needs; IF they think, things are to be done 'right' or 'morally'.

Unfortunately there is no ultimate 'right' or 'morality'. For some, fighting for god is moral. For some, fighting against them who kill children is moral. 

No one would say Bhagat Singh was a bad person since he was a terrorist!

When atom bombs hit Japan we never considered America to be terrorist!

Who decides and how decides what is moral and hence terrorism?

Whenever we fight against terrorism we never consider the root causes of terrorism. (Or should I presume we are not mature enough to identify it; like the terrorists or the person who wanted to kill the terrorists???). What is/are the root cause/s of it?
Or
What are the backgrounds that make one terrorist?

As 'they' are being eliminated and isolated from the society in terms of infrastructures and rights no one can expect the terrorism to vanish at anytime. (Or are we eliminating a few from the society and label them as terrorists???)

Have you ever seen any terrorist who do not belong to any minority group of a society??? (or is majority the real terrorist and they assign the minority to be terrorists... as happened in Gujarat; the Islams were proclaimed to be the terrorist whereas Hindus lead the riots everywhere in 2002)

Ref:

1)..https://www.facebook.com/tyrese/photos/a.210952398932364.60528.199633956730875/877522965608634/

Plague, Noble Gases and Religious Riots

Plague:

We all know what Plague is; a deadly disease! Which once struck in Europe and took one third of the population. We know that the bacteria named Yersinia Pestis is the one behind it. Once it enter into your body, regardless the age, gender, education or economic status you would die; if you are not taking antibiotics. By taking precautions say quarantining the infected individuals, hygiene etc you could prevent it to an extend.


Noble Gases:

We have studied in school that Noble gases do not react. Well, until 1933 scientists believed so. Then, in 1933 Linus Pauling predicted the reaction of heavier noble gases with elements like Oxygen and Fluorine. Yet it took almost 30 years to experimentally establish it; in 1962.
Now we say that Noble gases react under extreme conditions like very high pressure and very low temperature. On changing the condition you can make your noble gas to be reactive or unreactive.


Religious Riots:

Nowadays everyone is screaming about 'religious issues' that we witness in India. 'Secularism', 'Intolerance', and 'Hindutva' etc can be found in everyday newspapers and other social medias; whenever some discussion starts on 'religious riot'.

If the problem was 'religious belief' we must find the same problem everywhere and in all disciplines in India; as in the case of plague -regardless the landscape, weather, age, education and economic status-.

But in fact we don't find such religious riots everywhere. We don't find writers being involved in such riots and killing each other. None of the scientists quarreled to death on their beliefs, while they launch rocket to space. None of the film stars said s/he will not do a role that is not of her/his religious belief. No businessman ever screamed his/her religious belief asks him/her to be satisfied with what they have.
So, its not like Plague!

We do find such riots in a very specific group, a group of deprived- who are suffering from the lack of basic facilities like food, water, shelter, education, healthcare, and money etc

Very strictly we do not find such riots among individuals with good standard of living, including economy; even though they also possess the very same beliefs...

Doesn't it dependent on the socio-economic background of an individual then? like the reaction of noble gas under certain conditions...

Should we narrow the problem of Secularism, and Intolerance of religion to merely religious beliefs???
Shouldn't it be treated as a social issue that arises from the socio-economic background of an individual or society???