* Caution...Satirical Adult content ahead. Please read at your own risk!
Okay firstly...what are condoms? Like an educated friend of mine once put it, it’s a helmet you put on to touch third base safely. Fantastic. So it’s like a helmet eh? Which is the safest helmet? The one that has a strap that buckles it up…right? Does your favourite condom have a strap? Further, the best helmet would have about a 5.5 mm polycarbonate retractable visor. This is to protect both eyes. Imagine, your condom does not have a visor and it has to protect the ONE eye!
Next, what is your regular condom made of? The material does matter dudes. In case we are still discussing about latex condoms (rubber), it’s the same material that tyres are made of. JK puts their tyres through the following tests: 75 degrees Centigrade temperature, 2.5 bar of pressure and the worst roads of the country. What test do you think your average condom is put under? Let’s face it; anything that can be blown into a balloon for a birthday party cannot be used to stop an eight pound baby. Can it? Also, the pressure, heat and rugged contours of your condom’s intended destination are far worse than those on Elgin road in Calcutta. By the way, if you are trying khadi condoms, you’d better start thinking of a name for your yet unborn child.
Did someone mention ribbed or dotted or banded? Boy…the makers really lack imagination. Any of you guys have taken biology lessons in school? You guys heard of a certain...ahem... arrest? Self explanatory and VERY, VERY embarrassing. Imagine a pipe with bands or ribs being put into a socket whose width is just as unpredictable as the depth increases. Yup…you get a pretty fair chance of getting arrested…
Flavoured maal eh? Is it like Bertie Bott’s Every Flavoured Beans (Harry Potter)? The flavours…banana flavoured protection (mosquitoes are highly attracted to bananas)…apple flavoured, cherry flavoured…the list goes on. How many of you have passed up a fruit salad? If you are not prepared to pass up your fruit salad, what makes you so confident that your girlfriend will? Imagine the scene- you’ve put the damn implement on crunch… Safe?
Condoms cannot help a certain percentage of people at all. The condom needs to put into its place at first. Many chaps are so overwhelmed that it’s all over even before the packet is opened…I mean…high tide! What in hell can a condom be used for in such a situation except as a balloon for the first child’s birthday party?
The above argument was entirely satirical and is not meant for meaningful consumption. All you guys should use whatever you get…I mean, whatever rubber you get. Play safe…
A condom a day keeps little engineers at bay!
Monday, March 27, 2006
Friday, January 06, 2006
The Wrong Side of 25
What does it feel like to be on the wrong side of 25? It’s a bloody good question…at least one that I was left pondering on the night of Jan the 4th. I’ll be true to you…it really scared the living daylights out of me. I’m normally not worried about aging per say. I mean…appearance-wise it does not concern me at all. However, I suddenly realized that I was closer to 30 than ever before and still far from what I would define as “successful”. 30 has always looked to be the halfway mark – the kind of age by when people are at the helm of their enterprises. The worst part about being 25 is not that you are not 20 anymore but that your countdown to 30 has just begun. It’s a dicey age…an age where you are expected to have the aggressive energy of a 20 year old and the mature perspective of a 30 year old. In fact, this is the only facet that I found endearing about being 25 – the challenge of being two people in one!
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Nature's Conundrum
Once upon a time very, very long ago, there lived a young naval captain. This captain had the favour of the king and was selected by him and his advisors to embark on an expedition to discover an ambiguous land form. Nothing was known about the land… just that it was an island and that there was a direction to follow. Evidently, the king wanted to establish a settlement on that land as it was rich in iron ore – something that his kingdom could do with. The young captain made the journey braving the various hazards of the rough sea. His being an amateur did not make the job any easier. After months at sea he reached the landform and after a day of exploration found that the land already had inhabitants.
He clearly recognized that the land could not be claimed forcefully as that would be only taking the soil and not the soul. Although he had the King’s men aboard the ship, he refrained from using their protection and went ahead to understand the ways of the land on his own. His boldness won the trust of the chieftain. However, the younger men of the tribe were less than enthusiastic about the captain’s visit. Out of the blue, an enormous spear almost claimed the life of the captain. The king’s men, on seeing this swung into action and, even against the pleas of the explorer, ran in to clash against the aborigines. Legend has it that the blood-red sunset saw 2,000 fallen aborigines before the king’s men finally left the island.
The land mass soon regained from its bloody state and went on to prosper and become a greatly industrious nation.
What happened to the explorer? Some say that he went on to discover the greatest land mass ever. Others argue that he left the King’s service to become a much feared pirate. Yet others say that he renounced the sea and took to a monastery.
Although it did seem so to the naked eye that all was finally well, there was a critical question left unanswered - Who was responsible for the events that took place?
Was it the captain who unwittingly stepped on property that was not meant to be? Was it the regalia that forced him into the mission? Was it the men who meant to protect their captain? Was it the aborigines who wanted to defend what was their own? Was it the island that stood back and watched as disaster struck…unable to indicate either an inclination or an affiliation? Or was it nature…in all its trueness – a two faced conundrum.
He clearly recognized that the land could not be claimed forcefully as that would be only taking the soil and not the soul. Although he had the King’s men aboard the ship, he refrained from using their protection and went ahead to understand the ways of the land on his own. His boldness won the trust of the chieftain. However, the younger men of the tribe were less than enthusiastic about the captain’s visit. Out of the blue, an enormous spear almost claimed the life of the captain. The king’s men, on seeing this swung into action and, even against the pleas of the explorer, ran in to clash against the aborigines. Legend has it that the blood-red sunset saw 2,000 fallen aborigines before the king’s men finally left the island.
The land mass soon regained from its bloody state and went on to prosper and become a greatly industrious nation.
What happened to the explorer? Some say that he went on to discover the greatest land mass ever. Others argue that he left the King’s service to become a much feared pirate. Yet others say that he renounced the sea and took to a monastery.
Although it did seem so to the naked eye that all was finally well, there was a critical question left unanswered - Who was responsible for the events that took place?
Was it the captain who unwittingly stepped on property that was not meant to be? Was it the regalia that forced him into the mission? Was it the men who meant to protect their captain? Was it the aborigines who wanted to defend what was their own? Was it the island that stood back and watched as disaster struck…unable to indicate either an inclination or an affiliation? Or was it nature…in all its trueness – a two faced conundrum.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Consumer Redressed
Last Sunday I left my flat with the aim of buying an immersion heater and a 100 Watt bulb because early morning bathing was getting increasingly painful and it was worse with teh light out :) . I walked into the first electrical shop and asked for an immersion rod. Like an empowered citizen of modern India, I checked for the ISI mark and approved of the product. The shopkeeper, a sardarji, promptly wrote out a bill for the same (without me asking for it) while telling me that I would have to get the light bulb from another store.
I put the bill in my pocket and trudged along the lane to another electrical shop. Here I asked for a 100 W light bulb. While the store-help was getting the same, I checked with the storekeeper about the price of an immersion rod. He saw the packed device in my hand and asked me why I needed another one. Before I could answer, he 'commanded' me to show him the bill of the last purchase. I don't know what overcame me...I just gave him the bill. He looked at the bill for a few seconds then took off his glasses while shaking his head.
Storekeeper: Are you literate sir?
Me: Eh?
Storekeeper: Do you know how to read sir?
Me: Eh?
Then he handed me the bill and said, “If you do know how to read, could you please read what is written in the item column?". That was the first time that I took a look at the bill. The item column had an entry – an undecipherable squiggle. I looked up sheepishly and found the storekeeper staring at my face.
Storekeeper: What?
Me: Naught!
Storekeeper: What?
Me: Naught!
Storekeeper: What?
Me: Naught! ...Nothing…Nothing is written on it.
Storekeeper: Do you watch television?
Me: yeah.
Storekeeper: Do you watch anything other than Fashion TV?
Me: Eh?
Storekeeper: If you do, don’t you know that the bill must be a clear document of purchase? Don’t you know that tax indications and clear product information must be mentioned on the bill?
By this time, I was already red (yes, if you look closely, you can make out the colour even on my face!). I hurriedly paid for the bulb and while mumbling something incomprehensible about the terrible weather, quickly moved out of the store.
Last Sunday a class 5 pass storekeeper taught me something valuable. He taught me the value of consumer rights and also of the duties that protect the rights…it is a lesson that I sure won’t forget in a jiffy.
I put the bill in my pocket and trudged along the lane to another electrical shop. Here I asked for a 100 W light bulb. While the store-help was getting the same, I checked with the storekeeper about the price of an immersion rod. He saw the packed device in my hand and asked me why I needed another one. Before I could answer, he 'commanded' me to show him the bill of the last purchase. I don't know what overcame me...I just gave him the bill. He looked at the bill for a few seconds then took off his glasses while shaking his head.
Storekeeper: Are you literate sir?
Me: Eh?
Storekeeper: Do you know how to read sir?
Me: Eh?
Then he handed me the bill and said, “If you do know how to read, could you please read what is written in the item column?". That was the first time that I took a look at the bill. The item column had an entry – an undecipherable squiggle. I looked up sheepishly and found the storekeeper staring at my face.
Storekeeper: What?
Me: Naught!
Storekeeper: What?
Me: Naught!
Storekeeper: What?
Me: Naught! ...Nothing…Nothing is written on it.
Storekeeper: Do you watch television?
Me: yeah.
Storekeeper: Do you watch anything other than Fashion TV?
Me: Eh?
Storekeeper: If you do, don’t you know that the bill must be a clear document of purchase? Don’t you know that tax indications and clear product information must be mentioned on the bill?
By this time, I was already red (yes, if you look closely, you can make out the colour even on my face!). I hurriedly paid for the bulb and while mumbling something incomprehensible about the terrible weather, quickly moved out of the store.
Last Sunday a class 5 pass storekeeper taught me something valuable. He taught me the value of consumer rights and also of the duties that protect the rights…it is a lesson that I sure won’t forget in a jiffy.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Its just 'cricket' - What can I say?
I tried very hard to ignore the issue (one of the billion others) currently plaguing Indian cricket. In fact, I would not have been writing this piece had it not been for my elder brother. He sent me his views on the entire issue and that’s when my self-imposed boycott of the subject was called off.
Before I begin, please let me make it very clear that assuming cricket to be a
religion (I’m an Indian…aren’t I?), Sourav Ganguly is my patron saint. He actions on and off the field always appeared to be rebellious. He never took the dominance of the white man lightly and never hesitated calling a spade by whatever name he felt like. He induced aggression, the likes of which were never seen before in Indian cricket. He also had an uncanny knack of getting out of sticky situations (Yes, Mr. Dalmiya?). If you noticed, I used the past tense…methinks that the might of the maharaja might have finally run into its match.
Gregory Stephen Chappell would, at this moment, contest every single point I mentioned above.
Cricketing history would give him the right to do so. He was one of the finest cricketers that Australia had produced (and she’s had quite a performance at that !). He was an adamant leader and a leader who wanted to win at any cost…any cost! He has a brilliant track record of having played 87 tests and 74 ODIs at averages of 53.86 and 40.18 respectively. What really speaks for him is his success rate as a captain in test cricket– 51%.
The coach alleges that the captain is a systematic saboteur, and I quote famously,
Before I begin, please let me make it very clear that assuming cricket to be a
religion (I’m an Indian…aren’t I?), Sourav Ganguly is my patron saint. He actions on and off the field always appeared to be rebellious. He never took the dominance of the white man lightly and never hesitated calling a spade by whatever name he felt like. He induced aggression, the likes of which were never seen before in Indian cricket. He also had an uncanny knack of getting out of sticky situations (Yes, Mr. Dalmiya?). If you noticed, I used the past tense…methinks that the might of the maharaja might have finally run into its match.Gregory Stephen Chappell would, at this moment, contest every single point I mentioned above.
Cricketing history would give him the right to do so. He was one of the finest cricketers that Australia had produced (and she’s had quite a performance at that !). He was an adamant leader and a leader who wanted to win at any cost…any cost! He has a brilliant track record of having played 87 tests and 74 ODIs at averages of 53.86 and 40.18 respectively. What really speaks for him is his success rate as a captain in test cricket– 51%.The coach alleges that the captain is a systematic saboteur, and I quote famously,
I can assure you sir that all my actions in this matter, and all others since my appointment, have been with the aim of improving the team performance toward developing a team that will represent India with distinctions in Test match and one-day cricket.
As I said to you during our meeting in Colombo, I have serious reservations about the attitude of some players and about Sourav and his ability to take this team to a new high, and none of the things he has done since his reappointment has caused me to change my view. In fact, it has only served to confirm that it is time for him to move on and let someone else build their team toward the 2007 World Cup.
This team has been made to be fearful and distrusting by the rumour mongering and deceit that is Sourav's modus operandi of divide and rule. Certain players have been treated with favour, all of them bowlers, while others have been shunted up and down the order or left out of the team to suit Sourav's whims. John Wright obviously allowed this to go on to the detriment of the team. I am not prepared to sit back and allow this to continue or we will get the same results we have been seeing for some time now. It is time that all players were treated with fairness and equity and that good behaviours and attitudes are rewarded at the selection table rather than punished.
I can assure you of my very best intentions.
In a single stroke the coach has augured that Sourav, John Wright and the bowlers had a nexus. Sourav was the ringmaster, John Wright was the clown, Pathan, Zaheer, Bhajji et al were acrobats and the chaps in the middle order were extras waiting for a casualty to happen.
Reprimanding a player for consistent non-performance is one thing but questioning the integrity of the Indian captain is very certainly another. The earlier pages of his ‘report’ paint a picture of a paranoid Ganguly causing schism in a 'unified team' and Mr. Chappell had better furnish proofs for those charges.
That being said, there is no excuse for Sourav’s inconsistent performance. He has no right to be eating into 9% of a full strength team ONLY because he was the prime architect of an almost successful ‘Team India’. In all probability he is beyond his prime. If that is true, he needs to exit gracefully without causing himself and the rest of the team any discomfort. A player of his legendary status should not be asked to ‘jump the wall’.
About the ‘review committee’, the lesser said the better. The committee, in its existence itself, is a farce. Come to think of it, the former captains sitting on the committee now look like idiots (no disrespect to their playing days). This is a committee that cannot implement anything. They can only ‘suggest’ remedies. Somebody please tell me, are we talking about a tummy ache here? There is no doubt left in my mind that all this deliberation would only lead to 'compromise'. There are further queries:
How can an ad hoc committee do anything of consequence in a situation like this?
Aren’t the selectors supposed to have their say in this?
Who the hell is Mr. Dalmiya to be on the board?
Whatever the outcome of this feud be, Indian cricket stands to lose. The captain’s integrity along with his physical and mental state has been questioned. The coach, in turn, has also been branded a liar by some of the bigwigs of Indian cricket. The board has, for the past year, looked absolutely despondent. With board, coach and captain losing credibility, whom do we believe?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)