The Supreme Court threw its weight behind live-in relationships on Tuesday, observing that for a man and a woman in love, to live together is part of the right to life, and not a “criminal offence”.

The Supreme Court of India decriminalized homosexuality last year. Now they've approved pre-marital sex between a man and a woman. What next? Pre-marital sex between gays. Whatever happened to our moral fabric?

Update: A friend asked what was up with me. Of course, satire doesn't come to me naturally. I thought the label 'Oddballs' would give it away.

Whoa!

From Andrew Sullivan, on a retired U.S General's testimony before Congress:

SHEEHAN: The case in point that I’m referring to was when the Dutch were required to defend Sbrenecia against the Serbs, the battalion was understrength, poorly led. And the Serbs came into town, handcuffed the soldiers to the telephone polls, marched the Muslims off and executed them. That was the largest massacre in Europe since World War II.

LEVIN: And did the Dutch leaders tell you it was because there were gay soldiers there?

SHEEHAN: It was a combination –

LEVIN: Did they tell you that?

SHEEHAN: Yes.

Markets & Models

This is bad reporting. I'm not expecting NewYoker's level of depth from every daily or weekly, but I read the whole piece (surprisingly through Slatest) and felt bah at the end. On top of conveying nothing, it's plain vanilla stupid. This is the capsule: Filippa Hamilton, a model for Ralph Lauren (RL) was fired because she's fat. She said "They fired me because they said I was overweight and I couldn't fit in their clothes anymore". Hamilton's photo was published after digitally doctoring making her look unbelievably slim. "I think they owe American women an apology, a big apology," she said. "I'm very proud of what I look like, and I think a role model should look healthy." And this becomes news? Rolling-eyeballs, scratching-head, plug in your favorite cliche, but wasn't she getting paid for her figure, skin texture, bust size, etc?

I'm not a fan of models. They look anemic and there's no life in their eyes. Though I find some of them beautiful their expressionless ramp walk makes them all look like cold-hearted robots. But that's just me. The market's requirements are different. Cultural conditioning goes a long way in defining beauty. And it is such culture codes embedded unconsciously that dictates RL to hire or fire models. Men in west dream of slim, smooth skinned and sharp featured women which makes women want to have those attributes. Jared Diamond once wrote in an essay that men in Papua New Guinea thought western women were sexually unattractive, "look at their pale skin, small breasts and weak arms, they're not fit for raising a family" they would say. (Had it been Papau New Guinea she would have been fired for not being plump enough).

Hamilton's second statement can be interpreted as opportunistic if only it weren't so moronic. She has had a contract with RL since 2002 and all the while she must have passed their metric test. Now that she's put on some flesh she's suddenly proud of her looks and demands an apology - not to her - but American women. Her implication is ludicrous. Any advertisement for a personal adornment feeds to a dream. Somehow their product makes you feel good, improves your productivity, adds class. Even a silly deodorizer transforms you from a office geek to a babe magnet. Women's clothing being such a big market and RL being such a premier they have high standards of the dream they want their customers to experience.

PS: I was very reluctant on writing this post because what I have to say seems so obvious. But I had to persuade myself into posting this because it must not be obvious to a few who think it's news worthy (NY Daily, Slate).

This is probably the best genetic disorder out there - fountain of youth, did you say?

WTF?

I was browsing various Indian-name databases for my soon to be born girl. Guess what I found -- 'Kate Winslet'. Kate, I can understand. Since when did Kate Winslet become a modern Indian name?

Intellectual Compartmentalization

A.C.Grayling writes in Edge:

We have a problem at the moment, which is that too few people go on from school to study science at university. The point here is not about making more scientists necessarily, but making more people who are competent to observe what's happening in science, to be interested in reading about it, to keep abreast of developments, to be excited by what is happening in science.

He's concerned that there aren't enough people who are educated and/or interested enough to observe what's going on in our laboratories today. But wait, compare that with ISRO rocket scientists who invoke the blessings of Tirupati god before a space flight. Talk of intellectual compartmentalization; these guys are on top.

The Joys of Senseless Regulations

From a NYT opinion piece:

A man who says he desperately needed to use an airplane bathroom after eating something bad in Honduras faces a felony charge after being accused of twisting a flight attendant’s arm to get to the lavatory, the F.B.I. said.

Joao Correa, 43, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution he had a bathroom emergency 30 minutes into a March 28 Delta Air Lines flight from San Pedro Sula to Atlanta but found the single coach aisle on the Boeing 737 blocked by a beverage cart. He said he asked whether he could use the lavatory in business class but was told no.

When the cart wasn’t moved after a few minutes, Mr. Correa said, he ran for the business-class lavatory. He said the flight attendant put up her arm to block him and he grabbed it to keep his balance.

Felony charge? Yes, technically a passenger tried to overpower an airplane crew. But what were the circumstances? I know that the lawyers are quite pumped up on caffeine in the U.S - anybody forget the Korean laundry owner who was sued $54 million over a lost pant? But not many know that the poor guy spent $100000 on fighting the law suit which eventually left him, obviously, poor, and drove him out of business. The law makers in the name of beefing up security can't disengage their common senses. Laws & rules help regulate the society. But their enforcements should be based on practical judgments.

Oddly Enough

From Reuters:

A Russian karate expert has been charged with beating to death a 61-year-old woman and her son, whom he accused of infecting his wife with lice, an investigator said Friday.

The drunk 26-year-old burst into a neighboring room in his hostel Tuesday and used karate moves to kill the pair, state investigator Eduard Abdullin said...

I know it's cruel to lighten up such a sad incident. But I wonder what the wife of the karate 'expert' said to him when he came to his room after killing them.

PS: I have the word expert in quotes because he can't be one. Karate and loads of other martial arts heavily insist on self-control and defense before you begin an assault. In fact, one of my schoolmates said that his karate master asked his students to run fast as they can if they find themselves in a confrontation / unfriendly situation.

It Isn't Your Day Dear

Sometime in 2001, in LA, a couple of muggers tried to stick a gun into a touring van and asked them to get out so that they could drive it away. The van had a bunch of guys who were in town for a Judo convention. Very promptly, the muggers' arms were broken and handed over to the police. Well, at least these guys had a plan and it made an interesting story. Now, read this story about a guy trying to rob a bank:

But as terrified cashiers prepared to hand over a bundle of notes, Mr Stewart calmly walked up to the robber and said: "It's April the 1st isn't it mate? It's April Fool's Day".

When Davidson said to him "I've got a gun I will shoot you", Andrew replied "go on then shoot me" and grabbed the bag from his hands.

He opened it in front of staff and after seeing it was empty sat down and carried on reading his paper, Exeter Crown Court heard.

Davison fled the scene but was later arrested and has now pleaded guilty to affray.