It's summer. Not summer like the way it is in Mumbai, where its fashionable to bitch about how hot it is. No. I'm talking about a real summer here.
Summer like 45 degrees C and 4% humidity.
Summer in the way that water supply is limited to once in two days.
Summer in the way that people pray for the safe return of those who venture out during the day.
Summer in the way that you wish that God would throw a planet sized bucket of water on the Sun and douse its anger even if just for an instant.
This is Bhopal, and when most of Bhopal's population is vacationing somewhere saner, I've decided to head here. However, my trip here is not some miscalculated holiday. I'm here because, as a wise man once said, I need a job.
[
Why in Bhopal?
Here's why:
I often mock people who stay stuck in Mumbai all their lives. I laugh at them for being closed to the experiences that other places offer. I rubbish their claim that Mumbai is the best place in the country because most of them have never lived outside it (I have, btw). I breezily dismiss their contention that they manage to get a feel of other places simply by visiting them. I often preach to these folks that they need to stay in a place at least for a few months to really experience it.
So when I got a chance to practice what I so vehemently preach, I jumped at it. That's how I find myself in Bhopal. That's also how I realise that in 5 days outside it, I miss Mumbai just as much as any of these people .In fact, I can't wait to get back there.
]
My welcome to Bhopal was eventful. The pick up car developed a flat a few seconds after take off. The driver treated this like your average everyday event and went about fixing it on his own. It took half an hour to get started again. That's when the air conditioning hit the wall and I was treated to 17 kms of dust storms early in the morning.
The following day I went to work, which is about 30kms in the direction of even hotter. Our transport was, of course, not air conditioned. I got through the day with the usual first day ritual. You know, medical tests, laptop allocation, email setup etc etc.
On the way back there was a group of 3 gentlemen sitting in the back. In the paralysing heat, with dust blowing in every visible direction and with a 30 km journey just beginning, I felt like my end was near. These guys, however, looked like they couldn't care less. They were having a deeply philosophical conversation. One of them was quoting freely from the Ramayana, Gita, Mahabharata, whatever. He would quote, then pause to explain and then ask for doubts. The others were infinitely curious and they kept quizzing him on the rehasya of what he was quoting.
All this was in perfect Hindi, not a word of anything else. No Hinglish, no Urdu dilution.
At first I was pissed. I mean it's the hottest place on Earth, the least they could do was shut up. But then I started listening, and very soon I was captivated. I got lost in the what they spoke and how they said it. I guess there's something magical when a language is spoken the way it was meant to be. Something magical when people speak of things written millennia ago but with each thought still as fresh today as it was when it was first thought. When the accents of the people are so in harmony with the region that their conversation is intriguing even when the sun is furious and the land is on fire.
Thirty minutes later, I'd completely forgotten the heat and the dust. In fact, I would've stayed in that vehicle a lot longer had I not reached my stop. It was only my first day, and I'd already managed to get a taste of India. The kind of taste that Mumbai can never offer. Maybe this place wasn't going to be that bad after all.
My dad always tells me that "you don't get nothing worthwhile without a sacrifice, and if you do you won't like it". On Day 2 I was asked to make my first sacrifice. I was being issued my safety boots and respirator when suddenly a gentleman came up to me with a smile on his face. It was the kind of smile that clearly says, "I may be smiling, but this is going to be fun only for me".
He said, "Sir mujhe ek baat kehni hai......yeh jo ....matlab..... aap apnee daadi udwaa lo" (Sir, there's something I have to say......your beard has to go). Aghast I looked at him unbelievingly. My beard??!! Why in God's name??
He continued, "Sir woh jo respirator hai usmein suffocation ho sakta hai, french cut se bhi..." (The beard can cause suffocation in the respirator, even if it's a french beard).
"French!....French!!!!!", I thought. This was no French beard! It was my very own self styled little crop. How dare he call it French!
Collecting myself, I realised that singed as I was about what he called it, the fact that he wanted me to get rid of it was probably a bigger issue. I stuttered all over the place, "Par...par ...par aap logon kee toh sabki moonche hain!" (But all of you have mosutaches).
He replied without the slightest change in his smiley expression, "Haan Sir moonch chalti hai". (Sure, a moustache is permitted).
Then he went on to politely tell me that even being unkempt (except for the moustache, of course) was "red-line behaviour" and all that could befall me if I were to behave in a "red-line" manner. The smile never faded, by the way.
Now here's the thing about my beard. The last time I was seen without it was years back. I'd had it shaved as an experiment. The experiment had caused me to face much ridicule (pun intended), lose half my friends (they disowned me) and not be able to go out with my family (they didn't want to be seen with me in public). Back then I'd decided that the beard and I would never part again. As Suddu put it, "Dude, I think a naked upper lip is just not your thing".
But who would explain all this to this heartless gentleman. So casually he asked me to snip it off, like it was no big deal.
Sigh! I knew I had to do it. The next morning, my chin saw the light of day after years in waiting. I didn't get rid of the moustache though, I thought it was best to hold on to whatever I could.
That was the sacrifice. The first of many, I assume.
Ahh, such are the times and such is life, the things I'll do for a job!!
Friday, May 8, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Who do I vote for?
Having become a registered voter, who to vote for suddenly becomes a real question. Not a question as in hey-lets-debate-who-to-vote-for, but as in who to vote for next week. Real in the way that you've spent all your life so far talking about democracy and freedom of choice and representative government and blah blah...... but well, here's the chance to actually give it a shot.
Then the realisation hits home that despite the infinite fundae I distribute to people on governance (for free, no-less), I have no idea who to vote for.
Yes. Who do I vote for?
What do I base my decision on? What's the crux-factor, so to speak?
Everything gained seems to be at the at the cost of something even more important.
I mean, they tell me the following are the questions I have to answer:
Should I vote for a good MP from my area (so work happens in my constituency) or should I try and influence the right government coming to power at the centre?
Do I regard path-breaking progress such as the nuclear deal more important than homeland security?
Do I want a progressive economy or a stable one?
etc etc....
More realistically, my options often read:
Should I opt for the regionalism of the MNS or the moral policing of the Shiv Sena?
Should I choose rampant minority appeasement or blatant saffronisation?
Should I choose riots in Gujarat or genocide in Orissa?
Should I choose a government that doesn't value good international relations or one that sits impotent in the face of 16 major terror strikes?
Do I opt for a government that has real economic thinkers within it but has allies who claim they will get rid of mechanised farming and computers?
Do I choose a government that's losing grip over Kashmir or one that fuels communal disharmony?
Needless to say, the responsibility attached to my vote has hit home.
As for who to vote for, I still don't know.
Any ideas (fast!)?
Then the realisation hits home that despite the infinite fundae I distribute to people on governance (for free, no-less), I have no idea who to vote for.
Yes. Who do I vote for?
What do I base my decision on? What's the crux-factor, so to speak?
Everything gained seems to be at the at the cost of something even more important.
I mean, they tell me the following are the questions I have to answer:
Should I vote for a good MP from my area (so work happens in my constituency) or should I try and influence the right government coming to power at the centre?
Do I regard path-breaking progress such as the nuclear deal more important than homeland security?
Do I want a progressive economy or a stable one?
etc etc....
More realistically, my options often read:
Should I opt for the regionalism of the MNS or the moral policing of the Shiv Sena?
Should I choose rampant minority appeasement or blatant saffronisation?
Should I choose riots in Gujarat or genocide in Orissa?
Should I choose a government that doesn't value good international relations or one that sits impotent in the face of 16 major terror strikes?
Do I opt for a government that has real economic thinkers within it but has allies who claim they will get rid of mechanised farming and computers?
Do I choose a government that's losing grip over Kashmir or one that fuels communal disharmony?
Needless to say, the responsibility attached to my vote has hit home.
As for who to vote for, I still don't know.
Any ideas (fast!)?
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Are We Ready For Women's Equality?
There is no dispute that women in India were given less than their due for most of the last millennium. There is no dispute that this inequality needed to be straightened out in Independent India. Again, there is no contention to the fact that the issue was social as much as legal.
In India, the status quo stayed simple for most of the last millennium: Women would be given virtually no regard in public life. At home they were given respect as masters of the home domain and the bearers of children.
Then came the British and ingrained ideas of "ladies-first" and chivalry into our social fabric.
Today, with women undoubtedly far ahead of where they stood in pre-Independence India, we arrive at two inevitable predicaments: 1. Equality vs. Chivalry 2. Discrimination vs. Reverse Discrimination.
On the first predicament:We're used to treating women with special respect and dignity. It's the gentlemanly thing to do. To let the ladies walk through first while you hold the door open for them, to wait while the ladies sit down first, to serve them first at dinner, to have a special queue for them at rail reservation counters etc etc. However when women are to be regarded as equal, all this is a confusing contradiction. Equality is essentially first-come-first-serve, not ladies-first. It entails an even platform for all the equal parties, in this case, men and women.
On the second predicament. We as a society are now well aware of the taboo that is discrimination against women. Not only that, we’re extremely wary of it. Woe betide anyone who says, does or feels anything that may be even remotely regarded as sexist. So great is our fear of being branded chauvinist that now we don't mind discriminating against men just so everyone is clear that we're on the politically correct side. A simple case of reverse discrimination.
Not convinced? This entry will now go on to explore a few scenarios where the above issues come starkly into view.
Consider now the issue of women's reservation. The overwhelming claim, from women everywhere is that they're equal and should be treated as much. That our laws and people should recognise the strength of the Indian woman and let her compete on an equal footing with her fellow male. Fair enough, but then on what grounds can we justify 33% reservation for women in educational institutes, jobs and government? Reservation by definition identifies a particular group as weaker/less developed and caters to help them out. It is, in its very concept, an unequal idea. Equality entails competing fairly with the rules of the game same for everyone. Reservation involves making things unequally easy for one group at the expense of another.
If we are to go ahead with reservation for women (which it seems we will), we brand them as unequal for all eternity. Not only that, other kinds of reservation have shown us that when we set reservation for women at 33% we will ensure that their participation in the reserved spheres will never go beyond 33% . That our idealistic figure of an equal 50-50 will never be achieved. Yet, statistics have it that a majority of women are in favour of reservation. Why? Is the demand for equality or special treatment?
Let’s now go on to infidelity laws in our country. As of now, a woman in India cannot be criminally charged with infidelity/adultery. Not even as an accomplice to the crime! In all cases of infidelity the woman is regarded as a victim and a victim only (Am I the only one who finds this outrageous?). So recently some good soul decided this was unequal and pushed for making the law more equal, such that even women who committed adultery could be subjected to criminal proceedings. What happened next? Women's rights groups all over the country were suddenly up in arms against the proposed change. Their contention was that this wouldn't solve the issue of infidelity and extra-marital affairs.
Firstly, I don't see how a law against infidelity will not serve to deter offenders. Secondly, even if it doesn't, how about we go through we go ahead with it because it's the fair and equal thing to do. Equality, isn't that why these women's rights groups exist in the first place anyway?
Let's come to the issue of equal employment opportunity now. At my college we recently had placements and internship selections. One of my friends applied to a global oil giant for an internship. A little background: The institute we study in has a 5% female population. The oil major who was selecting students apparently has a "very healthy male-female ratio". During the selections, my friend (an excellent debater) took charge of his group discussion session and gave it direction, meaning and coherence. The only other person who spoke during the entire GD session was another guy. At the end of it all, it turned out my friend didn't make it. Two ladies who were also part of the group however, made the cut. Like I said before, these ladies spoke nothing. Confused, my friend approached the interviewers. Which is when he was told about the "very healthy male-female ratio" and how it was essential to the company to maintain this to avoid coming off as "unequal".
Now let's analyse what really happened here, despite the blatant claim of equality made by this oil giant.
The college has 5% women and 95% men. Let's assume the applicants were in a similar ratio. Now the oil giant wants an "equal" number of men and women. So let's say for every hundred applicants they select 2. One male and one female. Since 95 of these hundred are guys, 1 guy gets selected out of 95. That makes his selection probability 1.05%. In the women's category however, 1 woman gets selected out of the 5. So the selection probability for a woman is 20%. This, apparently, is equality. It doesn't take much to see the very plain reverse discrimination here. Forgive the men for feeling just a little discriminated against.
Now let's analyse what is perhaps more important than any of the issues above. The matter of general attitudes towards women. Most of us are comfortable with the idea that men will take care of women. That they need taking care of. This manifests itself in daily life all the time. For example, it is customary for the guy to pay if a couple is out on a date. As another, we allow a separate queue for women at reservation counters.We have seating reserved for women on buses. All very gentlemanly, all very polite. Yet it is this very presumption of the "inherent weakness of women" that causes us so much grief. When society agrees that women must be taken care of by men, then it automatically implies that women will hardly be allowed to compete equally with them. That they may receive the love and affection a child gets, but never the mutual respect of an equal. In a much worse scenario, each time a woman is abused/molested/raped, it is a reflection of society's feeling that women are somehow less than men. Do we really want this to continue despite our urgent desire for equality?
When we talk of any equality, we have to accept that it cannot co-exist with special treatment. Moreover, what everyone needs to understand is that if we hope to achieve real equality, we have to oppose inequality at each instance, even when it favours us.
In summary, India has to make a choice. The choice between giving women a special place in society and letting them remain unequal or letting them become equal and removing many of the privileges that they currently enjoy. Essentially, we need to ask ourselves if we're really ready for real equality for women, and men.
In India, the status quo stayed simple for most of the last millennium: Women would be given virtually no regard in public life. At home they were given respect as masters of the home domain and the bearers of children.
Then came the British and ingrained ideas of "ladies-first" and chivalry into our social fabric.
Today, with women undoubtedly far ahead of where they stood in pre-Independence India, we arrive at two inevitable predicaments: 1. Equality vs. Chivalry 2. Discrimination vs. Reverse Discrimination.
On the first predicament:We're used to treating women with special respect and dignity. It's the gentlemanly thing to do. To let the ladies walk through first while you hold the door open for them, to wait while the ladies sit down first, to serve them first at dinner, to have a special queue for them at rail reservation counters etc etc. However when women are to be regarded as equal, all this is a confusing contradiction. Equality is essentially first-come-first-serve, not ladies-first. It entails an even platform for all the equal parties, in this case, men and women.
On the second predicament. We as a society are now well aware of the taboo that is discrimination against women. Not only that, we’re extremely wary of it. Woe betide anyone who says, does or feels anything that may be even remotely regarded as sexist. So great is our fear of being branded chauvinist that now we don't mind discriminating against men just so everyone is clear that we're on the politically correct side. A simple case of reverse discrimination.
Not convinced? This entry will now go on to explore a few scenarios where the above issues come starkly into view.
Consider now the issue of women's reservation. The overwhelming claim, from women everywhere is that they're equal and should be treated as much. That our laws and people should recognise the strength of the Indian woman and let her compete on an equal footing with her fellow male. Fair enough, but then on what grounds can we justify 33% reservation for women in educational institutes, jobs and government? Reservation by definition identifies a particular group as weaker/less developed and caters to help them out. It is, in its very concept, an unequal idea. Equality entails competing fairly with the rules of the game same for everyone. Reservation involves making things unequally easy for one group at the expense of another.
If we are to go ahead with reservation for women (which it seems we will), we brand them as unequal for all eternity. Not only that, other kinds of reservation have shown us that when we set reservation for women at 33% we will ensure that their participation in the reserved spheres will never go beyond 33% . That our idealistic figure of an equal 50-50 will never be achieved. Yet, statistics have it that a majority of women are in favour of reservation. Why? Is the demand for equality or special treatment?
Let’s now go on to infidelity laws in our country. As of now, a woman in India cannot be criminally charged with infidelity/adultery. Not even as an accomplice to the crime! In all cases of infidelity the woman is regarded as a victim and a victim only (Am I the only one who finds this outrageous?). So recently some good soul decided this was unequal and pushed for making the law more equal, such that even women who committed adultery could be subjected to criminal proceedings. What happened next? Women's rights groups all over the country were suddenly up in arms against the proposed change. Their contention was that this wouldn't solve the issue of infidelity and extra-marital affairs.
Firstly, I don't see how a law against infidelity will not serve to deter offenders. Secondly, even if it doesn't, how about we go through we go ahead with it because it's the fair and equal thing to do. Equality, isn't that why these women's rights groups exist in the first place anyway?
Let's come to the issue of equal employment opportunity now. At my college we recently had placements and internship selections. One of my friends applied to a global oil giant for an internship. A little background: The institute we study in has a 5% female population. The oil major who was selecting students apparently has a "very healthy male-female ratio". During the selections, my friend (an excellent debater) took charge of his group discussion session and gave it direction, meaning and coherence. The only other person who spoke during the entire GD session was another guy. At the end of it all, it turned out my friend didn't make it. Two ladies who were also part of the group however, made the cut. Like I said before, these ladies spoke nothing. Confused, my friend approached the interviewers. Which is when he was told about the "very healthy male-female ratio" and how it was essential to the company to maintain this to avoid coming off as "unequal".
Now let's analyse what really happened here, despite the blatant claim of equality made by this oil giant.
The college has 5% women and 95% men. Let's assume the applicants were in a similar ratio. Now the oil giant wants an "equal" number of men and women. So let's say for every hundred applicants they select 2. One male and one female. Since 95 of these hundred are guys, 1 guy gets selected out of 95. That makes his selection probability 1.05%. In the women's category however, 1 woman gets selected out of the 5. So the selection probability for a woman is 20%. This, apparently, is equality. It doesn't take much to see the very plain reverse discrimination here. Forgive the men for feeling just a little discriminated against.
Now let's analyse what is perhaps more important than any of the issues above. The matter of general attitudes towards women. Most of us are comfortable with the idea that men will take care of women. That they need taking care of. This manifests itself in daily life all the time. For example, it is customary for the guy to pay if a couple is out on a date. As another, we allow a separate queue for women at reservation counters.We have seating reserved for women on buses. All very gentlemanly, all very polite. Yet it is this very presumption of the "inherent weakness of women" that causes us so much grief. When society agrees that women must be taken care of by men, then it automatically implies that women will hardly be allowed to compete equally with them. That they may receive the love and affection a child gets, but never the mutual respect of an equal. In a much worse scenario, each time a woman is abused/molested/raped, it is a reflection of society's feeling that women are somehow less than men. Do we really want this to continue despite our urgent desire for equality?
When we talk of any equality, we have to accept that it cannot co-exist with special treatment. Moreover, what everyone needs to understand is that if we hope to achieve real equality, we have to oppose inequality at each instance, even when it favours us.
In summary, India has to make a choice. The choice between giving women a special place in society and letting them remain unequal or letting them become equal and removing many of the privileges that they currently enjoy. Essentially, we need to ask ourselves if we're really ready for real equality for women, and men.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Germania and the Germanians
(This post is a little old. It lay unpublished in the drafts for a while)
In almost two months amongst the Germanians, in Germania, what strikes me as most remarkable is that I still don't know a single complete sentence in Deutsch. Evidently, it's not really a language you can pick up by listening to people.
Does that mean much to me?
Well, I've reached the stage where I'm so used to people saying things I don't remotely understand, that I find it hard to notice when someone is addressing me even in English. So I would say that it does.
What's far more interesting than the Germans' Deutsch however, is their English, or Dinglish as many call it.
I understand that all Germanfolk learn English in school. At a level such that about all of them, can communicate at least in rudimentary English (except the ones who will later go on to work at travel desks, it seems). Most do better.
However, given their relative unfamiliarity with the English of regular use, the scope for unintended puns and unforeseen innuendo is boundless. This entry is about just a few such jewels.
Funnily enough, the colloquial word for "Goodbye" has "Choos" as its German equivalent. To add to this, the local Schwabish dialect has "ley" as a frequently used suffix. So in short, it was common for people to tell me to "choos ley" while parting. (In the hope that my blog may someday have an international readership, "choos ley" = suck it, in Hindi). In time I began to derive a sick sort of pleasure by responding in kind.
Take the case of the young hulk I happened to meet at the gym. I noticed he was lifting weights equal to a small truck. However he was using a lot of ten and twenty pound weights instead of a few heavier ones. Being in need of some light weights, i dragged a couple of heavier ones to where he was and asked him if he'd switch four tens each for my two forties.
Before anything else, his eyes went wide and popped outwards slightly. I wasn't alarmed. I'd seen that look before. It was the look of someone who was thrown into the world of Deutsch -English translation without warning. Regaining his composure he told me (accompanied by numerous meaningless hand gestures), "No no!! No....I'm climaxing!". Needless to say, he had no clue why I spent the next couple of minutes rolling on the floor.
This other time I wanted to put me a chair on my balcony and rest my tired workingboy legs in the fresh air. The balcony being a shared one, I casually asked the girl next door of she'd mind me putting out some furniture. Thrusting her head and neck backwards inexpleciably, she told me in a flurry of words "Because not, because not!!". A little confused, I decided it was probably best to abandon the idea altogether. Five minutes later there was a hurried knocking on my balcony door and from outside I could hear her screaming in explanation, "I mean 'of course not', not 'because not', I mean 'of course not'".
Apparently the potential for such unknown gaffes is not limited to the average German speaking person. It extends even to those who are in-charge of writing notices or printing signboards. At the laboratory where I worked, there hung a seemingly nondescript board over us all. On it were these words of profound wisdom: "Drawers may unclasp if rack is tilted". Every morning when I walked in there it took a lot on my part to resist the urge to scribble a little "Amen to that!" underneath it.
In a similar incident at the mall, an area was marked as "ränd central". No comment there really.
All in all, if you're one for language tourism, then Germany's the place to be.
In almost two months amongst the Germanians, in Germania, what strikes me as most remarkable is that I still don't know a single complete sentence in Deutsch. Evidently, it's not really a language you can pick up by listening to people.
Does that mean much to me?
Well, I've reached the stage where I'm so used to people saying things I don't remotely understand, that I find it hard to notice when someone is addressing me even in English. So I would say that it does.
What's far more interesting than the Germans' Deutsch however, is their English, or Dinglish as many call it.
I understand that all Germanfolk learn English in school. At a level such that about all of them, can communicate at least in rudimentary English (except the ones who will later go on to work at travel desks, it seems). Most do better.
However, given their relative unfamiliarity with the English of regular use, the scope for unintended puns and unforeseen innuendo is boundless. This entry is about just a few such jewels.
Funnily enough, the colloquial word for "Goodbye" has "Choos" as its German equivalent. To add to this, the local Schwabish dialect has "ley" as a frequently used suffix. So in short, it was common for people to tell me to "choos ley" while parting. (In the hope that my blog may someday have an international readership, "choos ley" = suck it, in Hindi). In time I began to derive a sick sort of pleasure by responding in kind.
Take the case of the young hulk I happened to meet at the gym. I noticed he was lifting weights equal to a small truck. However he was using a lot of ten and twenty pound weights instead of a few heavier ones. Being in need of some light weights, i dragged a couple of heavier ones to where he was and asked him if he'd switch four tens each for my two forties.
Before anything else, his eyes went wide and popped outwards slightly. I wasn't alarmed. I'd seen that look before. It was the look of someone who was thrown into the world of Deutsch -English translation without warning. Regaining his composure he told me (accompanied by numerous meaningless hand gestures), "No no!! No....I'm climaxing!". Needless to say, he had no clue why I spent the next couple of minutes rolling on the floor.
This other time I wanted to put me a chair on my balcony and rest my tired workingboy legs in the fresh air. The balcony being a shared one, I casually asked the girl next door of she'd mind me putting out some furniture. Thrusting her head and neck backwards inexpleciably, she told me in a flurry of words "Because not, because not!!". A little confused, I decided it was probably best to abandon the idea altogether. Five minutes later there was a hurried knocking on my balcony door and from outside I could hear her screaming in explanation, "I mean 'of course not', not 'because not', I mean 'of course not'".
Apparently the potential for such unknown gaffes is not limited to the average German speaking person. It extends even to those who are in-charge of writing notices or printing signboards. At the laboratory where I worked, there hung a seemingly nondescript board over us all. On it were these words of profound wisdom: "Drawers may unclasp if rack is tilted". Every morning when I walked in there it took a lot on my part to resist the urge to scribble a little "Amen to that!" underneath it.
In a similar incident at the mall, an area was marked as "ränd central". No comment there really.
All in all, if you're one for language tourism, then Germany's the place to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)