Thursday, 22 December 2011

Selective Beyghairati

Isn’t Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto an oxymoron? Bhutto is Pakistan’s most revered democrat and Zulfiqar was a product of the Ayub Khan dictatorship. He is also the biggest champion of the people here, or what’s left of “here” but he didn’t listen to the people over there, or what’s now “there”.

Bhutto lost the elections in 1970. The massive rallies, the enthralling speeches and the diehard jiyalas came to nought as Sheik Mujeeb-ur-Rehman routed him, winning a simple majority in Pakistan.

What followed was an utter disgrace of a stance by Shaheed Bhutto as he refused to accept the result of the election. An election held under the Yahya administration that hated Mujeeb and despised the Bengals right from the start.

Bhutto wouldn’t let a session of the National Assembly be called and told anyone who wanted to participate in the democratic process that he would “break their legs”. This gave Yahya the opportunity to launch a military crackdown against the “traitorous” Bengalis while ZAB tore apart a UN cease fire resolution to rapturous applause.

Over the last week or so, everyone would have read about shameful acts our military carried out in what is now Bangladesh, but not many wrote to point out the role Bhutto played in that fiasco.

Why is that?

People do know this happened. There’s plenty of inflammatory Bhutto rhetoric against the Bengalis out on the web. If you go to East Pakistan go on a one way ticket, anyone? Oh, I “lost” the Hamoodur Rahman Report!

So why didn’t our many outspoken critics take him to task? Surely the press has enough guts to take on Bhutto if they can take on the mighty army? Didn’t they owe Bengalis the complete truth on the 40th anniversary of what we did to them?

The thing is, our media scene today is dominated by liberals or leftists or whatever. I don’t know how the labels work, but these folk are basically a reactionary entity to the high handedness of our esteemed military establishment, and they don’t take lightly to religious extremism or rightist tendencies.

That’s all well and good. However, in their attempts to offset the damage done by the Ghairat Brigade, the Beyghairats are fast becoming, or have become, what they set out to oppose.

Today the perspective they put forward is often biased, and almost never highlights the complete truth. Just as the Ghairat Brigade plays up rhetoric that suits their agenda, the beyghairats ignore anything that might compromise theirs.

The lesson learnt from the East Pakistan tragedy was that using our military against our own people is the worst possible course of action. Therefore, we are today engaged in two military campaigns, one in Balochistan and another in Khyber Pakhtunkhuwa.

The Ghairat lot gives some muffled justifications for the use of force in Balochistan, while the Beyghairats will hunt you down if you appose war in Afghanistan, or our tribal areas.

Lennon said “Give peace a chance”, we say “Give peace a chance, just not in this case”.

I am all for beyghairati, but if we are to be beyghairat we should do it wholeheartedly. When you pick and chose things to be beyghairat about, you end up being ghairati half the time. Make sense?

How about telling the whole story and letting people draw a conclusion on their own?

Friday, 9 December 2011

To Nadeem F. Paracha, for Sindh

Dear Nadeem F. Paracha,

Yes, it is me again, your devoted follower. I want to shower you with praises once more, and this time I am really enthusiastic. You blow my mind man, you really do. It was so obvious, yet I and other brain dead folk like me couldn’t see it. The memogate scandal is about Sindh – It always has been.

Asif Ali Zardari is being victimized here and that obviously means the military is out to wreak havoc in Sindh again. After all, he is a “top political leader from the Sindh province”, who couldn’t even win a district council seat in Nawabshah before a certain wedding ceremony. His political life though screams of struggle for Sindh. Among his many, many accomplishments is marrying Benazir Bhutto and being safely tucked away abroad while she was assassinated in Pakistan. A true political leader if I ever saw one.

Sindhis really love the man. His tenure as President has brought untold happiness to Sindh. Zardari, the Sindhi patriot from Balochistan that he is, showed his real love for the people when the terrible floods hit. He just couldn’t bear the sight of devastation in Sindh and therefore went away to pray in a remote makeshift tent somewhere in France! Possibly without food and water!

Is it any wonder then that the filthy Punjabi establishment hate him so much? However, no one in our sell-out media could see this coming. Their judgment is probably clouded by the facts, but you suffer no such disadvantages. You saw through the smokescreen to uncover the real agenda here, a Sindhi democrat under threat by the Punjabi military men.

They have had it in for him right from the start haven’t they? I bet Gen Musharraf and Gen Kayani had this in mind when they thrashed out the NRO and gave him complete immunity for all crimes committed – The establishment was just luring him in. Kayani also tricked Zardari into giving him the 3-year extension so that he could strike when the time was right.

The naïve among us still believe that Kayani and Zardari are fighting after failing to backstab each other. Don’t be angry at them though Mr. Paracha, they have been raised on a false education.

They don’t know the history of the Punjab – Destroying one Sindhi leader after the other. Zardari is not the first; his ‘spiritual father’ suffered the same fate because he was a Sindhi. You see, “daddy” Gen Ayub Khan didn’t really love Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. He made him his foreign minister, but kept all the best toys for the other ministers.

When Bhutto finally realized this, he denounced dictatorships and decided that democracy really would be the best revenge, at once launching his struggle against the wretched Punjabi establishment.

He swept into power riding the support of the masses from, among other places, Lahore and Punjab, but they were actually just deceiving him, as was the military. See, Gen Yahya Khan was in on it as well. The establishment hated the Sindhi Bhutto, but still supported him against Mujeeb-ur-Rehman even at the cost of breaking up Pakistan, obviously with ulterior motives in mind.

Their ploy ran deep. Just when Bhutto started trusting the military and appointed an out of turn, ill-deserving and possibly disturbed Gen Zia ul Haq as Chief of the Army Staff, tragedy struck. Bhutto bypassed Lt. Gens Muhammad Shariff, Muhammed Akbar Khan, Aftab Ahmed Khan, Azmat Baksh Awan, Agha Ibrahim Akram, Abdul Majeed Malik and Ghulam Jilani Khan in choosing Zia as the COAS, and how did that Punjabi reward him?

The complete military establishment is to blame for what an incompetent, 8th choice General did – He was Punjabi too! The plot thickens indeed.

It is also irrelevant that the number of military coups against governments of Nawaz Sharif, Iskander Mirza and Zulfiqar Bhutto, all from different provincial backgrounds, is the same, i.e. ONE.

What’s relevant is that Zardari has somehow managed to become the President of Pakistan, he didn't benefit from the establishment sponsored NRO, he wears a Sindhi topi when under pressure and there must not be any grounds for a remote-controlled tsunami, yes, I do know what you mean. *wink wink*.

Speaking of remote-controlled, Sana Bucha really fancies Mr. Nawaz Sharif. With the Americans backing Sharif to be our next ruler you have to water down your already watered down references to him being an old military stooge and current military pawn. Or else Fasi Zaka won’t speak to you for a week – Serious!

Not to worry, we will deal with these matters when the time comes. Let us rejoice in the now, for you have attained the intellectual astuteness of the one and only Dr. Babar Awan, the only other guy on TV who keeps playing the Sindh card. I seriously don’t think you can go any higher than that, but I know you have a tendency to surprise us all.

So let Zardari be, everyone – Sindh loves him. He stops target killing in Karachi at least twice a day!


Hoping to hear from you soon,

Devoted mind-blown-ed follower.

Saturday, 3 December 2011

An open letter to Nadeem F. Paracha

Dear Nadeem F. Paracha,

I am writing to you today because Imran Khan and his stupid rants on TV, coupled with the fact that I am from the “swords and sorcery-meets-lets-be positive” generation, have made me become just another “walking talking contradiction”.

It’s a horrible condition to be in, leading to near unspeakable consequences. Off the top of my head, I log on to facebook quite often and use that medium to express what I believe in. Also, I oppose all US operated drones, including Sana Bucha.

Hopeless, I know, but this isn’t about me, this is about you. You remember October 30th? The day Imran used dark sorcery to draw hordes of mindless zombies – The educated urbanites – to Iqbal Park, Lahore.

Yes, that dark, dark day is where it all started. See, I had been a lost cause long before, but from that day on I thought I would look up outside of my delusional facebook world where every stupid person has an equal voice to the larger news media, where only intellectuals such as thy are allowed to speak. I wanted to see if others have fallen victim to that heinous Mullah Omar in disguise’s deceitful rhetoric.

I have read a few of your pieces since then, and I am extremely impressed. While most in the news media are valiantly fighting the crusade against PTI’s barbaric trolls, no one does it quite like you.

You have it all man. Funny, witty and you do it with such exotic cynicism. So, I decided to learn what makes you tick, what is it that you believe to be right and how I can transform into something close to you.

What I have grasped so far is a little lean to the left, contempt against religious extremists and a disdain for the establishment. I can relate with every bit of that and a few weeks ago I started following you religiously, or atheistically, whatever rocks your boat.

However there have been some trends in your articles that have left me a little confused. Not because you said anything contradictory, God forbid, but because my mind has been corrupted no end by the vicious propaganda out on the web.

You see, because I was brainwashed by the PTI, I have developed an innate repulsion mechanism for Mr. Mian Nawaz Sharif and his party. The fact that most of our learned minds, and many of your dear friends, have been leaning towards MNS recently gave me an indication as to what was going to come from you, so I braced myself for some PML-N love.

Like clockwork, the wheels turned in perfect symmetry and you fell for Mr. Sharif when he fluttered his eye lashes and temptingly held out his hand. I have tried to follow suit, but something doesn’t fit.

You see, I trained myself to think as you do, and that is why I now hate Imran. There were flags of an extremist religious outfit at one of his rallies man, so what if he doesn’t control who gets in to the rally, flags speak louder than actions. Thing is, someone told me that Rana Sanullah sahib toured Jhang with the same extremist banned group.

I shot back, because you have trained me well. I told them at least the PML-N is not a stooge of the establishment. I took great pains in explaining to the infidels that the Punjab government setting Raymond Davis free and transporting him to Chaklala Garrison before the break of dawn so the villainous army men could send him away was NOT at all an example of colluding with the agencies. Naïve idiots. That was just a one off, it happened, let it go already.

Nonetheless, you know these PTI lot, they don’t shut up. Amongst their stupid blabbering I heard something about Chaudary Nisar and Shahbaz Sharif meeting the ISI Chief “chup chup ke” but I simply ignored it, just as you have.

Instead, I fell back on you, Nadeem F. Paracha, and told them, just as you had written, that it is all the hawks in PML-N that are bad. Nawaz Sharif is the only good person and he is against the establishment and against military dictators and religious bigots etc. That ought to shut them up.

No luck. The PTI hounds showed me a fake video where Nawaz Sharif is praising our common enemy, Gen Zia, a man who represents everything you and I hate; religious extremism and military adventurism.

With the shocking video sapping my will to fight back, I came home. Logging on to twitter, another weapon of the PTI jihadis, I saw that you too were using it to spread your latest article, the one on Benazir Bhutto.

My blood boiled as I read about the atrocities you and your colleagues had faced at the hands of Zia in the 80s. Those truly were dark times and I am thankful that my generation hasn’t had to face such vile victimization.

While I was cursing Zia, an elder member of my family told me that Nawaz Sharif was his Chief Minister at that time. If some PTI wannabe had said it, I would have given him an earful and told him to shut the hell up, but please forgive me for not talking back to an elderly person.

Not to worry though, that doesn’t mean that I believed him. I know that the only reliable source of information in the world is Nadeem F. Paracha. So I ask you, was MNS really hand in glove with Zia and all the atrocities committed against you, your fellow students and countless others who died on the streets? And if he was, is it all now forgiven because you have a grudge against Imran and MNS has a grudge against Musharraf?

Awaiting your reply,

Devoted follower.

Sunday, 20 November 2011

Bravo Mr. Zaka – Down with Immy K

I read a Fasi Zaka piece recently, the crux of which was that a vote for Imran Khan is a vote for Zardari.

I would like to congratulate him on such a brilliant and original point of view. It’s a point of view that has not been expressed vehemently over all media outlets by the PML-N, whose leader Mr. Zaka incidentally views as the “most progressive leader of late”.

Zaka has apparently been very impressed by Nawaz Sharif for saying “some extraordinary things for some time now”. Isn’t it wonderful how our so-called analysts love a politician bashing the military? Even though, the mentioned politician was raised by the military under Zia and re-launched by the military in the IJI.

Therefore, the writer astutely pointed out that it is not Nawaz, but Imran who is likely to promote an agenda of the establishment. It doesn’t matter that he rejected their advances during the Musharraf era, there is just something about the Khan that doesn’t fit in for our learned analysts.

The Americans have called him the only Pakistani politician outside their influence, so how can Zaka mark a tick on the box next to foreign policy for Imran? The former cricket captain is also an ally of the Taliban, whom the PML-N and PPP actively supported during the 1990s. Imran would have done so too, little jihadi devil that he is, but he was a Jewish agent back then so it wouldn’t have made sense.

I personally got a little uncomfortable with the sympathy for Zardari – Perhaps I am just biased. After all, during his tenure Pakistan has reached new heights of development in all fields imaginable. We have so much electricity we can export it, we have money to burn, people are happy, suicides are coming down, crime is non-existent, target killing is unheard of and it isn’t like he has billions in looted wealth tucked away somewhere in Switzerland.

Fasi points out the reason for my bias; it’s because our dear President had to deal with a hostile establishment. Yes, nothing says bad relations with the establishment than giving three year extensions to the COAS and his spy master – The ISI chief.

The point though, was driven home at the start. Shrewd as he is, Fasi drew parallels with politics in America to put Imran in his place. No, Imran’s not like the populist Barrack Obama who came to power by promising change in the last elections – That would be silly. He is Ralph Nader, the man who spoiled the party for Al Gore aka Nawaz Sharif and inadvertently helped George W Bush aka Zardari.

It’s a battle between the right and the left you see. We have an unemotional and educated electorate who vote on ideology. They don’t vote because of cult love for Bhutto, or because of sympathy after Benazir’s assassination. I can also testify that there was not one man who voted for Nawaz Sharif because of dislike for Musharraf – Not a single one.

No matter the situation in the country, no matter the popular sentiment, people will vote as they are supposed to and everyone knows that it has been written down for us to vote only for the two parties currently entrenched in power. We just don’t have any say in the matter – It’s not like free will exists!

To the burger boys that turned up at Minto Park in Lahore and keep telling us that we have a third option – you guys can shut up already! Don’t you know that Mr. Zaka has decided who everyone is going to vote for?

And his dear Mian Sahab has already waited an awful while to get his turn.


P.S: If you didn't get the sarcasm; don't have kids.

Thursday, 14 April 2011

The living Legend that is Paul Scholes

Tribute to Paul Scholes .



Micah Richards : "He's always in the right position, always seems to be at the end of the box when the ball drops in. The complete midfielder - when he's fit, he's the best. Some go missing but he's in the right place at the right time. He's my favourite player of all-time, unbelievable. If you give him a chance it's a goal, isn't it?"



Glenn Hoddle : "There isn't a player of his mould anywhere else in the world."



Terry Venables : "He's the best one- or two-touch passer in the country. He sees the game unlike any other player."



Alan Shearer : "If you ask footballers to pick out the player they most admire, so many of them will pick Paul Scholes. He can tackle, and his passing and shooting is of the highest level. He's the most consistent and naturally gifted player we've had for a long, long time."



Eidur Gudjohnsen : "I'm more an admirer of Paul Scholes than I am of Ronaldo. Ronaldo is a fantastic player, but he has 10 other great players around him every week...Scholes is one of the most complete footballers I've ever seen. His one-touch play is phenomenal. Whenever I have played against him, I never felt I could get close to him."



Edgar Davids : ""Every one of us (midfielders) is just trying to become as good as him. Everyone can learn from Paul Scholes."



Edgar Davids : "I'm not the best, Paul Scholes is."



Tony Adams : "I really rate Paul Scholes, because he hasn't got the high profile of many of the Manchester United players, he doesn't get too much attention, but he is one very good player. He is an intelligent player, he works hard and he scores some great goals. He is not flamboyant and is a quiet lad off the pitch but he is a tremendous asset to Manchester United and to England. He has already got my vote as player of the year."



Cesc Fabregas : "He is the one whose level I aspire to. He is the best player in the Premier League."



Patrick Vieira : "The player in the Premiership I admire most? Easy - Scholes."



Thierry Henry : "I can't understand why Scholes has never won the player of the year award. He should have won it long ago. Maybe it's because he doesn't seek the limelight like some of the other 'stars'."



Zinedine Zidane : "My toughest opponent? Scholes of Manchester. He is the complete midfielder."



Zinedine Zidane : "Scholes is undoubtedly the best midfielder of his generation."



Sam Allardyce : "There is not a better midfield player in the world."



Kevin Keegan : "What United have got that Chelsea haven't is Paul Scholes. I think he is different to anything else in English football."



Marcello Lippi : "Paul Scholes would have been one of my first choices for putting together a great team - that goes to show how highly I have always rated him. Scholes is a player I have always liked, because he combines great talent and technical ability with mobility, determination and a superb shot. He is an all-round midfielder who possesses character and quality in abundance. In my opinion, he's been one of the most important players for United under Sir Alex."



Ray Wilkins : "I'm saddened because I think we as spectators, not only in this country but right through out Europe and the rest of the World, will be missing one hell of a footballer."



Gordon Strachan : "Paul Scholes has been the best England midfield player for 30-odd years. You'd probably have to go back to Bobby Charlton to find someone who could do as much as Scholes. When the ball arrives at his feet he could tell you where every player on that pitch is at that moment. His awareness is superb."



Veron while at Chelsea being asked in an interview who's the best english player : "Paul Scholes."



Peter Schmeichel : "People say he is a great player, but you have to define what a great player is, For me, it is a player who has a bottom level that means his worst performance is not noticed.If he is having a bad game, a team-mate might feel Paul Scholes is not quite on his game, but a spectator wouldn't notice. Scholes, of all the players I have played with, has the highest bottom level. His reading of the game is unsurpassed.He has an eye for a pass, for what the play or the game needs at that precise moment, that I have never seen anyone else have. He controls and distributes the play and the game better than anyone I have ever seen."



Laurent Blanc : "Scholes is the best English player. Intelligence, technique, strength... all the attributes are there. At Manchester United I saw what he could do on the training field. Phew!"



Laurent Blanc :"I tell anyone who asks me - Scholes is the best English player."



David Beckham said that, among his teammates at Real Madrid, which included Zinedine Zidane, Raúl, Ronaldo, Luís Figo and Roberto Carlos, Scholes was the most admired opponent : "He's always one of those people others talk about. Even playing at Real Madrid, the players always say to me 'what's he like'? They respect him as a footballer, and to have that respect from some of those players is great." 



"I have no hesitation in putting a name to the embodiment of all that I think is best about football," said Sir Bobby Charlton. "It's Paul Scholes.

"Many great players have worn the shirt of Manchester United. Players I worshipped, then lost with my youth in Munich.

"Players like Denis Law and George Best who I enjoyed so much as team-mates and now, finally, players I have watched closely in the Alex Ferguson era. And in so many ways Scholes is my favourite. I love his nous and conviction that he will find a way to win, to make the killer pass or produce the decisive volley.

"When a game reaches a vital phase, these qualities seem to comeout of his every pore. He's always on the ball, always turning on goal.

"He's always looking to bring other people into the action and if he loses possession you think he must be ill."



Zidane :

"It's only natural to want to select your best players and there is no doubt for me that Paul Scholes is still in a class of his own,"

"He's almost untouchable in what he does. I never tire of watching him play. You rarely come across the complete footballer, but Scholes is as close to it as you can get.

"One of my regrets is that the opportunity to play alongside him never presented itself during my career."

"He was an extremely tough opponent to play against. You didn't get any time on the ball when he was around. He would close you down and make your life terribly uncomfortable.

"He is the type of player you want on your side, not in opposition because he could do so much damage.

"He is very gifted. He makes the game look easy because he's so much natural ability."



Michael Carrick : "Paul Scholes is just fantastic. When you play alongside him, you realise what a special talent he is."



Michael Carrick
: "He is a legend and he's going to be remembered for a long time. Just to play alongside him and learn from him has been an absolute pleasure. I think he is a footballer's footballer; he has been at this level for so long. As long as he is part of us we always feel we have a chance. We appreciate the way he goes about his business. I have never met a character like Scholesy; certainly not someone who is that good."



Park Ji Sung when asked by the club's official home page which United player he would like to see in the red shirt of the Taeguk Warriors : "It has to be Paul Scholes."



Brian Kidd : "Paul Scholes had the best football brain I'd ever seen in a kid. Let's face it. Paul Scholes is in a class of its own."



Rio Ferdinand : "I can honestly say Paul is the best player in the England squad. For me he is the complete player."



Rio Ferdinand : "For me, it's Paul Scholes. He'll do ridiculous things in training like say, "You see that tree over there?" - it'll be 40 yards away - "I'm going to hit it". And he'll do it. Everyone at the club considers him the best."



Phil Neville : "Paul, for me, is the best player in the England team. It worries teams. Speak to any other international team and they will single Paul out as England's key player. For me, he doesn't get the full credit that he deserves. He is a world-class player and deserves to be up there with the likes of Zidane and Figo."



Gary Neville : "I wouldn't swap Paul Scholes for anybody. He is quite simply the most complete footballer I have ever played with. He is the best."



Gary Neville : "Paul Scholes is the best player I've ever played with. There's talent in every part of his game."



Steve Bruce : "He's the best player in Britain in my opinion and he has to get himself fit just before we are due to play at Old Trafford. I cannot pay Paul a bigger compliment than to say that he's the most complete footballer in the country. The best bar none."



Roy Keane : "An amazingly gifted player who remained an unaffected human being."



George Best : "To be honest I think England have lost their best player. Certainly he's the most consistent and naturally gifted player we've had for a long, long time."



Sir Bobby Charlton
: "I am sorry for England because they don't have any player like him. You can talk about others but there is no one else like him. He is the best technical player England has without any question. He could have had a lot more caps if he had carried on. And if I was the manager he would have ended up with more than I did – easy"



Sir Bobby Charlton : "He's always so in control and pinpoint accurate with his passing – a beautiful player to watch."



Sir Bobby Charlton : "Paul Scholes is my favourite player. He epitomises the spirit of Manchester United and everything that is good about football."



Sir Alex Ferguson : "Very few players can do that, but Scholes is one of them - and I knew he was one of them. That's why, without question, I think Paul Scholes is the best player in England. He's got the best skills, the best brain. No one can match him."



Sir Alex Ferguson : "He has an awareness of what's happening around him on the edge of the box which is better than most players. As a kid he always had a knack of arriving in the penalty area just at the right time, but he's proving just as effective from outside the box because he's using his experience in the right way. It doesn't matter who I am thinking about bringing into my midfield, Paul Scholes will be included, as he would in any side in the world."



Sir Alex Ferguson : Sir Alex Ferguson gave evidence in court on behalf of one of his former trainees and listened to the prosecution barrister's list of United's top players.

"You've missed Paul Scholes - and he's my best player," Ferguson chided her.



Van Nistelrooy :"You have a special chemistry with certain players," explains the Dutchman, "and with me, at Manchester United, it's with Wayne Rooney and Paul Scholes. Things just seem to click. What I like most about Paul, though, is that he is the epitome of a professional footballer, He comes to training, then goes home and spends his time with his family. He doesn't like all the hoo-ha outside the football, the interviews with papers and on TV. He prefers to just live his own life and he refuses to be a media object or a public figure. I have nothing but admiration for him."


Arsene Wenger : "Paul Scholes was, and still is, one of the greatest football players in England. His contribution to the success of Manchester United is huge. The regret I have personally is that he was not always the fairest player.He d...id not get completely what [credit] he deserves as a football player, because he is not someone who runs after the media to be in the papers, and I respect that a lot. There is a little bit of a darker side in him, that he sometimes did things which I did not like. I would have liked him here. Who would not want Paul Scholes? He is a fantastic player.When he has the ball at his feet and you are a central defender, you have to be on your toes because he can still today find anybody in the box."


Xavi : "In the last 15 to 20 years the best central midfielder that I have seen — the most complete — is Scholes. I have spoken with Xabi Alonso about this many times. Scholes is a spectacular player who has everything.He can play the final pass, he can score, he is strong, he never gets knocked off the ball and he doesn’t give possession away. If he had been Spanish then maybe he would have been valued more."

Tuesday, 12 April 2011

Good Post

I am writing this because I am annoyed and fed up. And because some people just don't get it.
Here goes

Like all things in life, this was about money, 20,000 money.

Short Film contest at Annual University Event. Make short film, win 20,000. Seemed simple. Its not.
I could not find a camera, actually I did, but the owners didn’t find it in their heart to lend it to me.
However, before I would look for the camera, I had to have a story. So I thought and just like that I came up with a stunningly typical story. My arsehole friends rejected it outright. I thought again and came up with another pretty lame ass story. However, if made well, it could have turned out to be entertaining. All this happened within an hour or so.

It was supposed to be about a typical guy; he cleans up a little and burgerizes himself, i.e. puts on glasses, talks with a weird accent and turns into a complete sissy, to get a girl. Girls seem to dig that. However, the girl turns out to be pretty annoying, the guy goes broke taking her out all the time and doesn’t get any “action”, if you know what I mean. Being a typical guy, he decides it’s not worth the hassle and turns back to his old self and old friends.

I thought this could be done in a funny way. I had not thought about what message it would send out to the audience. As I said, this was about money. If anything it’s a critical comment on the guy for being shallow and the girl for being, well, a girl.


Enter my friend, for convenience and because I want to live until this season's Champion's League Final ( Its in Wembly ), I will not disclose her name. We shall call her 'X'. So, one happy, expecting to be showered with praise, me, casually told my grand story with all its subplots and twists and what not to 'X'. What followed was unasked for.


'X' thought it was such a wrong message and it was demeaning to women and I was a horrible person for treating women like that and all guys are sick and it’s just pathetic that the girl is being shown in a bad light for not making out with the guy and on and on and on. I tried to say that that’s not the message I am sending, that I am just not the message sending type, but all I managed to say was, nothing really. What can you say when an angry woman is on a roll.

You see I had, unknowingly and very, very, unwittingly, incited the rage of a scorned woman. The tirade took another direction with me foolishly trying to justify my story and 'X' going into the whole dynamics of guys ditching girls for no reason and their lies and stuff like that. It ended with her shouting at me about the hard to believe, but with a slight chance of being true, fact that I once had a relationship, I like to call it an affair, with a girl!! We will call her 'B' for no apparent reason.

The story goes that I was really casual about my relationship with 'B' and seemingly 'B' wasn’t exactly in the Juliet category herself. We had some fun, she even bought me some stuff, I didn’t really reciprocate, because I didn't want to. Time passed and I decided to end the thing when she got a serious marriage proposal. As we were of the same age, I wasn’t earning and she needed to be Wed. It was logical. She dragged her feet, but in the end she didn’t have any other option. That seems an ok story to me. Short, to the point.

Now our dear 'X' has a friend, called ‘Y’, who had a similar experience. Only, she went bezerk on being said goodbye and hasn’t forgiven the boy for the “betrayal”. ‘X’ has taken her friends pain to heart. Therefore she painted me as the monster that had "used the poor 'B', gotten all sorta gifts, had your fun and then dumped her”.

I have long pretended that I was wrong and I should take blame over that chain of events. I don’t want to pretend any longer. I have had it with these angry stupid women. I wasn’t the only one having “fun” in the relationship. I did nothing wrong, nothing more than what the girl did, and in the end I absolutely, positively 100%, did the right thing by telling the young lady to buzz off, and although it pains me to say this, so did the boy who used to date 'Y'.

Let me now explain why.
When the guy and the girl/the other guy, not judging, are of the same age, in out part of the world, 90 % of the time it will not fucking happen ! It won’t. People with ultra rich and/or ultra lib parents would disagree but I would kindly ask them to shut the fuck up. This is not about you. This is about normal people.

By the time girls get a complete set of teeth in the sub-continent, their parents start worrying about getting them married. Even if they don’t, society does. So when they finish their studies they have to be married. “Completion of studies” varies from Matric/O-level to Bachelors. Now girls should understand, although I know it’s hard for them, that their respective beau's are not responsible for this.

They were born into this world, just like the girls. They did not cause this situation to arise, so please, please don’t blame them for being young and not earning. Girls have to be married ASAP and to a wealthy "khud ka kamata hai, with property here or job abroad” type. And they don’t come this side of 26. Now here's the tricky part , the boy that you are dating, from your college, university, tuition class or school bus( happens) is almost the same age as you are and in the same situation, i.e. , studying !

You see, that often is an issue overlooked by many of our top of the class, smart, confident girls out there. If you have a head, and if there is a working brain in said head, do not date guys your age. Do not decide the name of your 3rd child, who has to be a girl because you already have 2 boys, within a month of starting the relationship. It is that simple.
Girls following this advice, which, if they have a head with working brain as mentioned above, shouldn’t have to be given to them, have reported a far lower percentage of the “ Bastard left me” syndrome.

Now we come to the question that what should be done when the situation arises of same age couples, and what goes wrong. Mad angry women, who were all probably once mad happy women, often point to the cowardice of the ex-boyses. They argue that if they were "ready to face the world" than the boy should have stood by them.

A noble and heroic thought, born out of mislead self confidence and denial/ignorance of the realities of the world they live in for some, while for most its the bollywoodistic belief that their Amresh Puri Father/Father In-Law would let their hands go just in time for them to catch the train with their own Shah Rukh Khan.

What the dumb fucks fail to realize, is that their life is not a movie, that closing your eyes won’t make your problems disappear and your best laid plans coming together is much more likely not to happen than to happen. And what then?

Now ours is a most beautiful and respectful culture. Once the whole affair is out in the open and the ever wise elders have sent you to your fucking room, or the boy has shown no common sense at all alongside balls of steel and agreed to elope/court marry, I say agreed because the girls, God bless them, usually come up with the idea, people start to talk about all this. People might be nice one at a time, together they have quite the potty mouth. Well, not for the guys. The Guys really don’t have a tough time. There transgressions are forgotten almost immediately, they get a sympathetic pat on the shoulder and often receive admiring “Jawaan larka hai bhai" type glances. What is far more interesting is what happens with the girls.

I have always been a supporter of girl-girl love. By that I mean women kind coming together and supporting each other in tough times, also, some good girl on girl action. So you will understand my frustration because I have yet to see either.

In the pre-mentioned scenario, while the boys are let off scot free, the girls are crucified. Particularly by their own kind. The lovely neighborhood aunties pretty much call them Whore/Slut/Tramp/Bitch etc depending on the severity of the offense, their localities perceived outrage at it and the aunties’ own personal standard. If they don’t do it out in the open they do it behind closed doors. But they all do it. Actually, there are some good women as well; they only strongly imply that the girl involved is a Whore/Slut/Tramp/Bitch etc.

The father of the bride weighs up killing himself over killing the girl if she has eloped. If it’s just that affair has gone public, he just goes into depression or turns into angry tyrant type. The girl has also set such a horrible example for the rest of the children. The house is tense and the mother cries as often as she can.

All this really is unnecessary and the risk should never ever be taken. But women are too thick to see it. They would face it all rather than bear the pain of a love lost. Bla bla. Now before some emotional type stands up to say that a low life like me could never know their pain, they should know that I have been hit on the crotch. It’s a killer.

However, there is one thing that kills a person more than any other, guilt. And that’s what a normal good boy in a normal relationship faces. Girls are idiots. They cannot think. They only know how to be dramatic and how to cry. They would do anything and everything when in a relationship. I repeat: anything and everything. Their mind goes numb and nothing fazes them. And if there is a chance of all the above mentioned shit happening, and there is always much more chance of that than you riding into the sunset together, then the guy is the one putting the ugly crying machine through all of it. It’s his fault and it’s his guilt. For anyone, let alone a person who cares/pretends to care about the girl, it is just not right to stand by and watch these events unfold, and the only way to avoid it is to stop it before it reaches this point, i.e. dump her.

Make it cruel, let her shed her tears and act cold and unconcerned. Also, don’t ever come back, because she will be ready to rekindle the romance.

If you are a decent human being, and find someone who is him/herself a decent human being and it’s his/her first real relationship that they seem genuinely committed to, the right thing to do is to end it. Making fun of their feelings always adds a nice touch.

Find some new chick who’s been through all this before. They are awesome. They understand that one gets bored of the constant texting. It’s the first timers who fuck your brain.

I can’t really argue about the morality of all this in too much detail. I have just stated how things are and what the best way to deal with them is. I did not make them like this and I did not wish for them to be like this. If there is somebody who won’t shut up about the rights and wrongs in all of this, I would like to point out that nobody can judge nobody. You don’t know their side of the story and even if you did, you are still no one to decide what’s right or wrong. That issue really is irrelevant because everyone who’s ever been in a relationship is wrong from the start. The final word on morality rests with religion and most religions say pre-marital relationships are a no go area. So please don’t tell me that it was right and pure when you did it because, basically, you really wanted it to happen or you would have seen it through.

That would be all.

For the naysayers, here’s a real life story, I had a very dear friend, called ‘C’ ( real name!). She was the good old lovy dovy type. Got a boy, he two timed her and dumped her when she moved to another city. She didn’t let go, kept in touch one way or another. When she was moving back to his city, the boy became interested again. Her parents, friends and random people off the street told her to stay away from the lover boy, however ‘C’ thought “ to hell with them, he obviously loves me soo much and I love him and no one understands “ . If she were too ask me I would have said he sees you as his meat ticket. No one listens to me btw. So she went back and I saw her completely submit to the guy, I saw her go past the lines she had once preached, to the always immoral, me, never to cross. She went against her family, against her friends, she was forbidden to talk to any guys, so I didn’t have any contact for around 3 years.

The guy was older and had a job, I think, but his parents had said no, but the blind in love girl would not hear reason, and you can’t really blame her, as I have elaborated above, girls are not capable of putting 2 and 2 together. If it had been a bad guy the likes of girls hate and tell sad stories about, he would have let her go then and there. But he wasn’t a bad guy. He was a good boy, the sort that girls want. He kept at it for years, treating her like shit, ’C’ would hate me forever for saying this, but she was pretty much like his personal slave, “wear this, go there, talk to him, don’t talk to them, do this , do that” and she was happy with it, even though she confesses herself that he used to hit her. It finally came to a head with the families having a heated confrontation. The guy had an altercation with her father as well.

It ended, after a few months of him harassing and hounding her. She’s much better now, but she isn’t the same person. There’s bitterness and hate in her, you can’t really talk about anything from the last 5 years with her and she still doesn’t blame him. That’s what men are capable of, that is what women give them the power to do.

So please, if you are heartbroken, be thankful.
There was an error in this gadget