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???

Helping the POOR 2

It's been a trend recently; 'helping the poor'. People do start organizations, post or share videos on the same in social networks, thousands like them praise those 'god sent kind people', who help them. And both parties, who help and whom are being helped are happy; the spectators too!

Are we happy because we make the poor’s life a better one?

- It can't be! because food for a day or 10,000 rupee doesn't make their  life a better one.

Or if money was the only problem why don't we steal money making machine from reserve bank of India and just print as much as we want. Will it solve the problem?

-Nope! Because if everyone has enough money; they will try to achieve more and more facilities. This high demand can shift the price of those facilities a bit up, ultimately causing inflation and recession!

Apart from the mentioned two approaches we do have several charity organizations working for them providing shelters, economic and educational support and healthcare etc. The number of such organization never decline...

Still we have 295,873,856 individuals in absolute poverty (whereas China has 84,971,992 in number though it is populated than us).^[1]

If it was the problem of isolated individuals, it could’ve been solved by the initiation of a few people (say blood donation -which can be solved completely if we get a single individual to donate blood -), and we wouldn’t have had ~24% (~6% in china) absolute poor people!

If it is not a problem of individual and there are crores suffer from this particular condition –namely ‘poverty’- why don’t we -the citizen- call it as a social issue?

No individual or organization is responsible to look after them. Still we volunteer to help them and nothing changes in the end… Still we are happy!!!

Why are we happy on helping 'the poor’? May be it make us feel good, providing an impression ‘kind man!’ in the society.

(On the other hand it is a social issue, Govt are responsible to take policy for their betterment. For my wonder our Govt ask us to help them say via 'give it up'!)

Ref:
1. http://ourworldindata.org/data/growth-and-distribution-of-prosperity/world-poverty/ 

          http://thusharaav.blogspot.in/2015/06/helping-poor.html

Undercover marketing and Exposure

Recently I was talking to a ten year old child. We started with a game in which he was amused by the 'inertia of object'. But when I failed to repeat it (due to some technical reason) he laughed at me. Well, as he got bored we changed the topic. He became talkative; movies- that was the topic-. He was enthusiastic about several Malayalam,Tamil movies. He asked me if I have watched so and so movies... for most of them the answer was 'no'.

Then after a little pause he exclaimed -as if he forgot something that must have mentioned earlier- "Have you seen 'Premam' ?" -a Malayalam movie released in 2015-
I asked 'what's about it?'
'It's a fantastic one. You should see it if you haven't. I saw it 5 times.'
'Oh! really? I'll watch it. What is the story?'
'....mmm...mmm... First he will fall in love with Malar'
Then he jumped to some other topics -video games-.

Those who have seen the movie, you know what the story really is...

will a 10 years old child be able to understand the 'emotions' of the hero? The child doesn't even recall 'Mary'. Without understanding/feeling the mentioned facts/emotions how did he enjoy the film?

He said the movie was fantastic. What made him say so? what made him to watch the movie 5 times without understanding the story? (In fact children are excellent observers that they do explain the story-including pin point details- of a cartoon that they see!).

Have you heard of a term 'Undercover Marketing' ?
It's a strategy used to advertise products. In which the consumers do not realize that they are being marketed to. The campaign employ actors to interact with the public, who uses tricks that will convey the consumers how impressive and useful the product is.
For example Sony T68i.
In which around 60 actors were sent to major cities as tourists. They asked strangers (the learners) to help them take a photo. They handed them camera-phone (Sony Ericsson) and talked enthusiastically about it's features and taught those strangers how to use it. And it was one of the best selling phone of the year!

We must have been come across such situations... A labeling 'best seller' is more than enough to make the item a demanded one. ^{[1] [2]}

Several factors play role in it. The risk taking nature, following the mob, learning behavior etc.

But a wide exposure could alter the situation.

Assume what would've happen if the 'learners' were exposed not only to Sony T68i but to some other brands too, in the same manner. They get more options now... Probabilistically, Sony will not get as much consumer as in the experimented case.

A few lines on learning behavior;
It's an experiment by Cook and Mineka- 'whether the fear could be socially learned'.
They had lab-reared monkeys that weren't afraid of snakes . Then they were exposed to the response of wild-reared monkeys to snakes. After this exposure, they exhibited fear response. "The lab-reared monkey socially learned to be afraid of snakes"!!! ^[3]

Let us go back to the 10 years old child. A thought experiment, what would've been the response of the child to the same movie, if he wasn't exposed to the media/youth who celebrated the movie? What could've been the measures that he will use to evaluate the movie? Will he be saying the same dialogue 'It's a fantastic movie!'? What the word 'fantastic' would mean to the child?


Ref:
1.  http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1028069195715597440
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGMUs97VZV4
3. https://animalcogblog.wordpress.com/2014/01/29/the-monkey-and-the-snake/

Who is the villain - part 2

We do have romantic movies quite a lot. More precisely most of the movies contain a ‘love story’ as mainstream or as a parallel story (I have considered Indian movies), in which we have seen different features of love!

Sometime the story will be aggressive; the couple will always be threatened by their parents or some other society members or else the so called ‘villains’, and then he will argue with them expressing his ‘true love’ for her or despite every protest he will ‘forcefully’ take her with him.

Sometimes hero will fight against the ‘villain’, who chase and ‘disturb’ her for her love and will rescue her later will become her the one with open hands and mind just for her.

On the contrary

Sometimes our hero will be chasing ‘the heroine’ for days, years… and in the end heroine will fall for him.

Sometime there will be innumerable nights awaiting the beloved one.

Sometimes they will risk their life to death; suicidal attempt of either hero or heroine to force the other party to love him/her.

Sometimes hero and his friends will roam about ‘her’ house just to see ‘her’.

Sometimes hero exchanges different signs of love… may be a romantic glance, a letter, or a wink regardless of the fact that whether she likes him or not.

Sometimes hero will stand with his friends on the way heroine used to travel and will comment on her.

Sometimes just a flower or a confession would make her fall in love with him

We enjoy the movies; we always support the hero; we pray for them to get together lifelong. We never like the ‘villain’, who tries to split them apart standing against the couples or who try to annoy the heroine by chasing her for her love… When hero does tricks to please her laugh at it and say ‘that’s funny!’.

Now,

Why do we –the same ‘we’ who enjoyed all these movies- have laws to punish those people who do the same that our heroes do in movies? Is it because the Govt. doesn’t want us to be heroes?

Is it because ‘what one does’ doesn’t make him a hero but something else is being added to make him a hero??? What is that ‘something’? Why it influences us a lot such that the movies becomes ‘box office hits’?????

http://thusharaav.blogspot.in/2015/06/who-is-villain-part-1.html

Public transportation and Road network

It’s a story of a village.

A very beautiful village; no worries no sorrow… They didn’t have money; they didn’t have education, still everyone was happy with what they had; it was free from the so called urban evils… They were hard workers… They were very affectionate with each other such that they used to walk for kilometers, spending hours and days simply to meet their relatives or friends. They used to look after patients, in their home itself. They worked together in fields…

Oh, wait!

That was an old version of the story; let me tell you the new one.

That was an isolated place; in terms of development. Not even primary facilities like hospital, school or equipment that were necessary for a better farming. You won’t even find a well-established transport system in that place. And hence natives were forced to walk very long distance to meet their needs. The lack of hospitals forced them to take care of patients in their home itself. They don’t even get a primary education to increase the productivity in fields according to their population growth, especially when there is a collective attack by insects in fields. Because of this low efficiency they were forced to work together despite everything.

Everyone hopes for a better future (regardless of the worry that ‘will it happen?’ ;and we all know that is the reason for all kinds of change).

In our story, there was a young person who wanted to change things as possible. The plan was this; they need a connection between their village and the nearest city so that goods and other facilities can be transported to and fro. Everyone agreed to the idea.

They need money for the implementation! They found a solution; contribute whatever they had. After a few years they gathered enough money to build a road. The young person traveled to the nearest city with the money to implement their dream…

With not much delay the road was built.

As they expected goods were transported to and fro. Several varieties of products started arriving the village. Crops were transported to other places. The good carrying vehicle arrived at the field reducing their burden to carry the goods to distant place; the vehicle had to travel long distance for that. And hence they pay cheap for the crops. Though there were shops with fancy items none of the villagers buy a thing, because they didn’t have enough money to buy things. A bit of starvation too, since they exported crops… They continue to look after the patient in home itself, because they didn’t own a vehicle. Unfortunately they do not have enough money to buy such a thing.

They began to think…

Why didn’t the road ease the suffering?

Is it because all profit flow to the young person who took initiative?

Is it because they didn’t have money?

Is it because they didn’t own a vehicle to travel all the places and get the facilities?

Is development good if it makes life more miserable?

Or can it even be called as development?

We say something is development when we -the society- benefit from it… If it doesn’t benefit us, then how do we call it as development!!!

So, are you saying building road is not development?

Not at all! We are supposed to serve what they ‘need’. If it was a village of rich people who own vehicle, it would’ve been a best idea-to build a road-. So they can go anywhere they want and get any services… In our story we had a different situation!

Think about a scenario, the young person came up with an idea of public transportation instead of building road (well, it includes road, since it’s an ingredient of public transportation)…

Still the villagers are poor- in terms of money-.

Yes, but they won't remain poor as in the earlier case; they get means of transportation; goods’ or individual’s-without the presence of a dealers-. Hence by spending not much money they get a vehicle to travel. They can go to the city market and can sell their goods without getting deceived (you can find similar unscientific development examples in the book everybody loves a good drought by  P. Sainath ). It reduces wastage of working time -which can be converted into money after all; which in turn contribute a lot to their economy as well as the GDP of nation-. Say, we do not have to spend time on the maintenance of private vehicles, preparation of appropriate vehicle for goods or for individuals etc. Do you see the economic impacts of the idea public transportation on individual as well as on nation?^[1]

Why did the young person choose the development of road over development of public transportation? Is it because the young person wanted to open a crop market at low cost (that it will benefit him) or due to the ignorance -that 'what development is'- ?...

Ref:

[1] http://www.camsys.com/pubs/publictransp_nationseconomy.pdf

1st Culprit

There was no one to fight with her...

In that (dystopian)country people only thought about themselves. Whenever they saw people fail in life they said 'it's their incapacity to win others'. They didn't know it was a 'right'; right to live. They thought breaking the law was braveness and they wanted to be brave. Also they thought the law enforcement was the duty of only police dept. So whenever a law was broken they collectively yelled at police dept. and the Govt that ruled the nation... they said 'it's the incapacity of Govt in enforcing laws'. It was established to be a democratic country after getting freedom from a foreign invasion and they had a beautiful constitution too in which everything was done merely based on the response of citizen.

Probably there was no proper education system which would've made them aware of what freedom means or what does a democratic country means... So they made up definitions that would allow them to do whatever they want. They said the Govt is corrupted and they build 10 storied building with a label 'below poverty line'. The college students ticked 'present' for their friends in attendance sheet who were sleeping in hostel. No one stood against it, because everyone 'knew' it's just helping friends...

Well, in that dystopian country she was different. She was a school student who used to go school by some private transport service. School students had ticket concession in there too as any other nation. But the student population made a decline in the entry of travelers who paid full ticket and hence bus workers hated the students. On that day she was scolded a lot for sitting on the bus seat. She was forcefully pulled off the seat for someone pays full ticket; where that 'someone' stood beside the seat as if the 'someone' had the right to do so.

She was a child and hence weaker than the bus worker. She tried to argue with him. He walked away. Everyone else in the bus laughed at her, because she didn't win...

She observed everyone silently...
She believed in the power of the constitution.
She took a paper and started writing a complaint addressing the law enforcement dept of her nation
besides the problem she wrote
1st culprit - Co-travelers in bus - for promoting crimes
2nd culprit - the bus workers - for disobeying law

The Power Of Democracy Is Asleep...

It’s from my experience; there were a group of private bus transportation workers who collectively were disobeying rules, whenever I talked about it I was scolded by them and teased by the travelers (note: no other travelers EVER talked against the practice  of disobeying law). Then I thought of moving along with police dept. But I should submit petition with proof, for the dept. to take any action. I did and within hours the dept. took action. That was a surprise, from what I have heard about police dept. from my surrounding. And as a part of follow up I got call from the dept. nearly after two months and now gladly it’s been strictly implemented by the dept. So, if you will give a request action will be taken…

No! Let’s see how far it will work. It is corrupted everywhere. No one will be able to change it.

But you could try at the least. I’ve done and it worked. Why don’t you try?

I’m afraid. What if things get against me or people isolate me?

Ok, give details to me. I’ll report.

No. I’m taking favors from the bus conductor, because he knows me for almost one year. And I shouldn’t report against him at the police dept.

The Power Of Democracy Is Asleep…

A democratic country is ruled merely based on the response of a citizen to an event or a law. Instead of blabbering he/she could use their power to call back a corrupted minister. They could pass a bill in the parliament.

It is equivalent to say ‘We want a corrupted society’ unless we use the power of democracy constructively

Why doesn’t an Indian child speak Japanese?

Are you from India, native? Does your child speak Japanese? Korean? French? Russian?

Of course NO! because they haven’t seen a single person who speak those languages here in India. We call Keralite a Malayalee, but a Thiruvananthapuram child does not speak the Kannur Malayalam, because he/she doesn’t see such slang

Then why do you expect your child to behave as someone else apart from what they see or perceive from society?!

Shouldn’t movies have a considerable influence in a society; in shaping trends, culture, ideologies about ethics, concepts about behavior etc???

Whenever I point out this ‘fact’, I was always been asked ‘ha ha! Have you ever heard of people committed crimes seeing movies??? Or is there anyone at your fingertip who became a noble person seeing good movies?’

And now,

We do see the ‘Premam’ effect in Kerala; released on May 29 2015. Quite a lot of students grow beard in my institute, and they plan to wear similar costumes from the same movie for Onam celebration! The vocabulary of the youngsters has been extended only because of certain ‘hit’ movies…

Also, you must have seen statutory warning in movies whenever someone smokes or drinks alcohol, isn’t it? But, there is no warning if someone drives with no helmet or seatbelt or if someone drops waste on public place or molests someone

I don’t want to make this article lengthy by putting such scenes. You will find it a common movie; it’s guaranteed. Most of the time our ‘hero’ disobeys rules (only because he is hero and he may do whatever he wants to do)

In brief there is no warning whenever someone violates a LAW or some unethical practice happen!

Children imitates a lot… when I was a child of age around 5, I climbed over a small papaya tree; it got cut off halfway and I fell down along with the tree (hero used to climb up areca palm tree in a movie I saw on that day, and for me all that available was a small papaya tree ).

I have seen several news in which children of age less than ten used to rape, seeing blue films or porn movies…

India has first place in producing movies, twice as that of Hollywood. In a year, nearly 2000 movies are being released in India; one of the biggest industry.

Well, it is certain that movies are not of priority than food, shelter, money or education. Why can’t we just cut short the number of movies and make the censor board even stricter? Or else you can’t expect your child to be a ‘good’ citizen and hence the development of a nation!