I am slightly conflicted about Mumbai. I like the city the best, especially visually, when it's a festival time: there are amazing lights all over the place, the energy in the city picks up but somehow radiates more ease making it less rat racy and more vibrant. However, the noises...oh gawd the noises! They will drive me batty.
Yesterday was Eid and there were no firecrackers at all. I don't want to get into a religious argument but as of now, Islam is winning over Hinduism in the celebration festival column.
I realized this week that I haven't left Mumbai since I've arrived here August 13th (which I believe would skew any reasonable person to irrate ideas). So in order to combat that issue I just booked a trip to Goa. I'm quite excited to get away for a few days.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
November Reading (a little early)
The HistorianThe best written descriptions of traveling the European countryside – ever -- her writing is exquisite. This book made me want to hop on a train and backpack. Unfortunately the mystery regarding Dracula and his heirs, while compelling in the beginning, dragged on and on and on and on and on. I’d like to tell you that it has a worthy ending….nope, can’t do it. I’ll be picking up Kostova’s next book cause she is such an awesome wordsmith albeit with major plot issues. Maybe she got a new editor for her new book.
Julia’s Chocolates by Cathy LambHands down the biggest piece of shit I’ve read in awhile. I’d like to give this a redeeming sort of footnote but I can’t find a way to do it.
Pride and Prejudice by Jane AustenMy first Jane Austen book! And it was free on Kindle! Free Kindle gets me to read all sorts of stuff. Now I'll know what people are talking about when they talk of Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley and Mr. Collins and that tramp Lydia. This is a rather fun book. I don’t really know if Jane Austen deserves quite the rep she has but I found reading the novel enjoyable, if a little hard to piece together the exact sentence structure Austen utilized. Whatever it was I’m pretty sure I was not taught that form in 3rd grade.
The Shadow of the Wind by Carlos Ruiz ZafonSuch a cool book. This thing grabs you on page one and doesn’t let you go. I loved the characters, found the writing magical (in part 1) and precise (in part 2), was entranced by the storyline, and found the entire package a satisfying way to spend a rainy weekend. Good read for any booklover.
Boneshaker by Charlie PriestGo GRRLLL sci-fi writers! Seattle! Steampunk! Zombies! Need I say more? Okay, I’ll say a little more. I wasn’t very involved with the characters until the second half. In fact, I probably would have put the thing down if I got it from the library. Fortunately for me, I paid for it and I’m a sucker for committing to my mistakes once I pay for them. But I’m glad I stuck it through, this was one hell of a ride. Priest is a good writer but she could work on her pacing a little; otherwise I enjoyed this after getting through the beginning. There is also, at my age, something endearing about a 35 year old female protagonist in steampunk gear.
American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House by Jon MeachamHere is my favorite quote from the book: "So it was that the former Secretary of War decided to kill the former Secretary of the Treasury." If that doesn’t get you to read it, then nothing will.
Friday, November 20, 2009
“Delhi Guys are Aggressive”
Says a guy from Delhi to me.
“Yeah, no shit.” I think. This thought came after having several opportunities to meet guys from Delhi. The word ‘opportunity’ is a misnomer - I should replace that with the word ‘experience,’ as in what you go through to learn from and become adept at either confronting head on or avoiding completely at a later time.
And while my experiences have manifest into a strangely coincidental occurrence of all culprits being from Delhi, (I’m just repeating what people in India say to me!) I would encourage these practices regardless of where people originate from.
Here are my pieces of advice for fellow single women travelers:
Do not sit alone by yourself
There is a reason my male friends in Mumbai (in retrospect I had no idea how lucky I was to meet right on the onset) informed me women in Mumbai do not go out without a guy friend with them. Because men are all OVER YOU. “What’s your number? What are you doing? Let’s get a drink! Let’s go right now. Let’s go back to my place.” Um, usually in america we exchange greetings and sometimes even a few words before we go there, buddy.
Do not carry any interesting paraphernalia which could be a potential icebreaker
Do you own a kindle or a blackberry? For the love of god leave that stuff at home.
Do not feign interest in their existence whatsoever
Trying to be nice? Trying to let them down easy? Trying to act civil while discouraging their lead? Stupid you (err stupid me). You gotta just shut that shit down pronto.
If you are from a bitchy country like the UK, France, or the USA use that to your advantage
Are your people known for their rudeness, distance, or lack of humanity? I’d suggest putting that cultural smugness into full affect if you are trying to rid yourself of unwanted attention. Condescension is always a romance killer.
If you sense someone staring at you, do NOT look up or stare them down, just ignore it.
I’ve learned by unfortunate circumstances that the stare down is apparently a female breeding call – where American men would be admonished, it appears to be an invitation for conversation and paying for dinner. Do your best to avoid.
I guess traveling without your boyfriend nets you on the “available” chart for most men. I’ve actually never been very good at telling guys to go away, mostly because I’ve rarely – if ever -- had a guy approach me out of the blue. I’m not good at being rude, nor do I want to be rude, but how can you politely ask guys to just stop bothering you?
“Yeah, no shit.” I think. This thought came after having several opportunities to meet guys from Delhi. The word ‘opportunity’ is a misnomer - I should replace that with the word ‘experience,’ as in what you go through to learn from and become adept at either confronting head on or avoiding completely at a later time.
And while my experiences have manifest into a strangely coincidental occurrence of all culprits being from Delhi, (I’m just repeating what people in India say to me!) I would encourage these practices regardless of where people originate from.
Here are my pieces of advice for fellow single women travelers:
Do not sit alone by yourself
There is a reason my male friends in Mumbai (in retrospect I had no idea how lucky I was to meet right on the onset) informed me women in Mumbai do not go out without a guy friend with them. Because men are all OVER YOU. “What’s your number? What are you doing? Let’s get a drink! Let’s go right now. Let’s go back to my place.” Um, usually in america we exchange greetings and sometimes even a few words before we go there, buddy.
Do not carry any interesting paraphernalia which could be a potential icebreaker
Do you own a kindle or a blackberry? For the love of god leave that stuff at home.
Do not feign interest in their existence whatsoever
Trying to be nice? Trying to let them down easy? Trying to act civil while discouraging their lead? Stupid you (err stupid me). You gotta just shut that shit down pronto.
If you are from a bitchy country like the UK, France, or the USA use that to your advantage
Are your people known for their rudeness, distance, or lack of humanity? I’d suggest putting that cultural smugness into full affect if you are trying to rid yourself of unwanted attention. Condescension is always a romance killer.
If you sense someone staring at you, do NOT look up or stare them down, just ignore it.
I’ve learned by unfortunate circumstances that the stare down is apparently a female breeding call – where American men would be admonished, it appears to be an invitation for conversation and paying for dinner. Do your best to avoid.
I guess traveling without your boyfriend nets you on the “available” chart for most men. I’ve actually never been very good at telling guys to go away, mostly because I’ve rarely – if ever -- had a guy approach me out of the blue. I’m not good at being rude, nor do I want to be rude, but how can you politely ask guys to just stop bothering you?
Monday, November 16, 2009
Signs of assimilation
1) I get upset at having to spend more than 300 Rupees (6 bucks) on a meal and drinks.
2) In odd times of temperature drops to 65 I think it quite cold and get annoyed
3) When someone wants to have a meeting at 9:30 I look at them incredulously and say, “in the morning???”
4) I catch myself singing along to commercial jingles
5) I wake up early on weekends to get a good internet connection and find it odd that people expect me to have a somewhat decent connection at all times, especially at night
6) I found a few Indian women following my lead across the street! (they must have been visitors to Mumbai)
2) In odd times of temperature drops to 65 I think it quite cold and get annoyed
3) When someone wants to have a meeting at 9:30 I look at them incredulously and say, “in the morning???”
4) I catch myself singing along to commercial jingles
5) I wake up early on weekends to get a good internet connection and find it odd that people expect me to have a somewhat decent connection at all times, especially at night
6) I found a few Indian women following my lead across the street! (they must have been visitors to Mumbai)
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Meghan McCain vs. Obama (Pt. 3)
The most common liberal argument about the McCain picture was that Meghan showed off her chest illiciting a reaction that was calculated and narcisisticallly driven. And as I have just pointed out, marketing oneself is key to how you are perceived and Meghan chose to market herself with a twitpic, thus opening her up for ridcule, right? Wrong.
She did not make money off that pic, she did not try to sell any addiitonal ideas or images of herself from it. It was a candid shot from a girl who is a complex person -- like we are all complex people.
Boobies illict all types of manly feelings, and apparently one of those is chauvainism. Here is the tail end of that convo:
Me: You are really telling me that posting a pic of your chest discredits you from talking politics?
Yes.
Me: Ok then I just got one thing to say to that.
In closing I had a lot more to close with but Stupak has deflated me. I'll get my energy back soon. For now, I'm hoping I've made some sort of point.
She did not make money off that pic, she did not try to sell any addiitonal ideas or images of herself from it. It was a candid shot from a girl who is a complex person -- like we are all complex people.
Boobies illict all types of manly feelings, and apparently one of those is chauvainism. Here is the tail end of that convo:
Me: You are really telling me that posting a pic of your chest discredits you from talking politics?
Yes.
Me: Ok then I just got one thing to say to that.
In closing I had a lot more to close with but Stupak has deflated me. I'll get my energy back soon. For now, I'm hoping I've made some sort of point.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Meghan McCain vs. Jessica Simpson (Part 2)
This is an important topic to roll into the twitpic controversy b/c I think it's directly linked to it. The issue is self marketing. A lot of people choose to put these two in the same category (beautiful blondes on TV) who get pummeled by the media re: body image.
It might surprise some people that I happen to believe that Jessica Simpson is open game on the weight issue. Meghan McCain defends her and says it's the sickness of the media (which I mean, everything can rightly be blamed on the media, right? Don't bother blaming the consumers) and while I tend to agree there is a sickness to it, I also happen to believe it's legit.
So why can Jessica be an object of ridicule on her body but Meghan cannot? Easy - because of how they chose to make their money and represent themselves.
To get an idea, do a quick Google search for both Jessica and Meghan. Click on images. You'll see the differences immediately. If you are too lazy, here is the most restrained Jessica pic and the most liberal Meghan pic:
Here's the thing. Jessica was a singer but she made a LOT of her money selling her IMAGE. People bought her records for whatever reason, but they also bought her calendars, her videos, and watched her TV show because of the way she looked. Sorry girlfriend, I know it sucks to gain weight and all and have everyone be all over you for it but it's hypocritical to get upset over it now and not be upset over people talking about your body when they say, "damn she's hot" while buying playboy with you in it. And yes, Britney deserves all the critique she gets on her weight -- these ladies sell a package of aesthetics. There is a reason why no one cares when Alicia Keyes gains 10lbs; because she didn't sell herself like that. To Jessica Simpson's credit, she does reply with class when her weight is attacked. I sympatize with her situation but I don't think it's unjustified.
And herein lies the double edged sword with Meghan. A child of a politican she was put into the spotlight at age 15 without anyone asking her. She could have stripped down, sold a few records, modeled. She's buxom and she's got the face for it. But that's not what she chose to do - she instead went to Columbia, writes political articles, is writing her own book (*cough* palin *cough*), and is a voice of the young GOP right. Her image is not for sale, and one little pic showing off less than a lot of people show off in a strapless does not modify that context. And let's be clear about Nepotism -- this would in fact be a valid point if Meghan was actually running for office. She's not. She's actually got as much right to be in political discussions as, say, Luke Russert. Where is the sceaming over him oh thee of the liberal blogging haters?
Nope, let's call it for what it was: a very pointed attack on a GOP female (not crazy) voice that scares a lot of the left and the right.
Next (and last) Meghan McCain vs. Obama
It might surprise some people that I happen to believe that Jessica Simpson is open game on the weight issue. Meghan McCain defends her and says it's the sickness of the media (which I mean, everything can rightly be blamed on the media, right? Don't bother blaming the consumers) and while I tend to agree there is a sickness to it, I also happen to believe it's legit.
So why can Jessica be an object of ridicule on her body but Meghan cannot? Easy - because of how they chose to make their money and represent themselves.
To get an idea, do a quick Google search for both Jessica and Meghan. Click on images. You'll see the differences immediately. If you are too lazy, here is the most restrained Jessica pic and the most liberal Meghan pic:
Here's the thing. Jessica was a singer but she made a LOT of her money selling her IMAGE. People bought her records for whatever reason, but they also bought her calendars, her videos, and watched her TV show because of the way she looked. Sorry girlfriend, I know it sucks to gain weight and all and have everyone be all over you for it but it's hypocritical to get upset over it now and not be upset over people talking about your body when they say, "damn she's hot" while buying playboy with you in it. And yes, Britney deserves all the critique she gets on her weight -- these ladies sell a package of aesthetics. There is a reason why no one cares when Alicia Keyes gains 10lbs; because she didn't sell herself like that. To Jessica Simpson's credit, she does reply with class when her weight is attacked. I sympatize with her situation but I don't think it's unjustified.
And herein lies the double edged sword with Meghan. A child of a politican she was put into the spotlight at age 15 without anyone asking her. She could have stripped down, sold a few records, modeled. She's buxom and she's got the face for it. But that's not what she chose to do - she instead went to Columbia, writes political articles, is writing her own book (*cough* palin *cough*), and is a voice of the young GOP right. Her image is not for sale, and one little pic showing off less than a lot of people show off in a strapless does not modify that context. And let's be clear about Nepotism -- this would in fact be a valid point if Meghan was actually running for office. She's not. She's actually got as much right to be in political discussions as, say, Luke Russert. Where is the sceaming over him oh thee of the liberal blogging haters?
Nope, let's call it for what it was: a very pointed attack on a GOP female (not crazy) voice that scares a lot of the left and the right.
Next (and last) Meghan McCain vs. Obama
Friday, November 6, 2009
Meghan McCain vs. the Twitpic (Part 1)
A friend recently reminded me of the Meghan McCain Controversy that occured when Meghan twittered a pic of herself with her night in, wearing pj pants, a tank top, and holding a book. The tank top wasn't sheer, but it didn't cover all of her mammery area, and intense uproar followed.
Why?
It's easy. Women who speak their mind and show off skin are all sluts. Duh.
Here are the rules, my female friends. If you want to be taken seriously, make sure you always cover any part of your body that could possibly be considered sexual. And if you open your shirt or wear a short skirt, for heaven's sake, don't talk politics! That's subject for "serious folk." Make like the taliban and COVER IT UP!
I happen to really like Meghan McCain. Personally I think she's the only sane republican I've ever heard speak in the past few years. Sure, she's young, her ideas are slightly naive, and she's got some confidence issues that being in a national public presence help highlight but I LIKE her ideas. She's a fiscal conservative, pro-gay marriage, re-energinzing the GOP by moderacy, bi-partisan, etc. She's a decent person and she speaks from her heart. The situation is further upsetting b/c Meghan always presents herself in a conservative manner dress wise. We aren't talking about a porn star(not that they too shouldn't be respected on their ideas), we are talking about someone who showed off about 50% clevage. I'm sure her ideas were partly why she was targeted by the pic but that's not an excuse, it only makes it much...much worse.
Regardless of how you feel about Meghan's ideas, how you feel about her, or how you feel about politics, allowing the scandal to be thought of as anything other than mysogonistic is total and utter cowardice and a detriment to the female gender.
Bottom line: Meghan is a full figured woman. They are called boobs, stop acting like virgins and get over it.
Next: Meghan McCain vs. Jessica Simpson
Why?
It's easy. Women who speak their mind and show off skin are all sluts. Duh.
Here are the rules, my female friends. If you want to be taken seriously, make sure you always cover any part of your body that could possibly be considered sexual. And if you open your shirt or wear a short skirt, for heaven's sake, don't talk politics! That's subject for "serious folk." Make like the taliban and COVER IT UP!
I happen to really like Meghan McCain. Personally I think she's the only sane republican I've ever heard speak in the past few years. Sure, she's young, her ideas are slightly naive, and she's got some confidence issues that being in a national public presence help highlight but I LIKE her ideas. She's a fiscal conservative, pro-gay marriage, re-energinzing the GOP by moderacy, bi-partisan, etc. She's a decent person and she speaks from her heart. The situation is further upsetting b/c Meghan always presents herself in a conservative manner dress wise. We aren't talking about a porn star(not that they too shouldn't be respected on their ideas), we are talking about someone who showed off about 50% clevage. I'm sure her ideas were partly why she was targeted by the pic but that's not an excuse, it only makes it much...much worse.
Regardless of how you feel about Meghan's ideas, how you feel about her, or how you feel about politics, allowing the scandal to be thought of as anything other than mysogonistic is total and utter cowardice and a detriment to the female gender.
Bottom line: Meghan is a full figured woman. They are called boobs, stop acting like virgins and get over it.
Next: Meghan McCain vs. Jessica Simpson
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Insomnia Cont’d: Top 5 Strangest Indian TV Commercials
1. The Indian Pied Piper: So the concept is obviously off nationality wise but there is something so interesting about an Indian guy with a flute dancing bollywood style, signs that become animated rodents and follow him out of the town being cheered on by townspeople in turbans and saris. The commercial completely captivates me every time it’s on.
2. Abortion Pills: It’s nice to see how a religiously conscious country not politically beholden to the word of any religion reacts to certain issues.
3. Skin Bleaching products: There are so many of these types of commercials it’s no longer even phasing me. The variety still continues to inspire though: Dark spots, body bleach, face whitener, streaky skin, etc.
4. Namco Cookies/Crackers: I suppose this would translate better if I understood Hindi but the ad contains a house on fire, a happy woman, a sad man, a set of cookies, and then the guy decides to throw the firecrackers at the woman’s feet making her scream and dance. This makes him happy.
5. Boy turns into dog: A boy walks home from school, finds mom sad on the porch and then proceeds to get on all fours and act like a dog for 20 seconds. At first I thought this was a commercial for animal food, etc. but then the logo for the state bank appears on the screen. Hence weird.
2. Abortion Pills: It’s nice to see how a religiously conscious country not politically beholden to the word of any religion reacts to certain issues.
3. Skin Bleaching products: There are so many of these types of commercials it’s no longer even phasing me. The variety still continues to inspire though: Dark spots, body bleach, face whitener, streaky skin, etc.
4. Namco Cookies/Crackers: I suppose this would translate better if I understood Hindi but the ad contains a house on fire, a happy woman, a sad man, a set of cookies, and then the guy decides to throw the firecrackers at the woman’s feet making her scream and dance. This makes him happy.
5. Boy turns into dog: A boy walks home from school, finds mom sad on the porch and then proceeds to get on all fours and act like a dog for 20 seconds. At first I thought this was a commercial for animal food, etc. but then the logo for the state bank appears on the screen. Hence weird.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Tables/Tops, Games, and India
The thing I’ve learned about myself is that it is actually possible for me to survive without D&D, albeit in a not as happy state. I haven’t done any sort of search for a gaming group in India and I don’t even think I’d want to play with people here, minus the initial cultural curiosity that would prompt me to see if they did in fact game the same way. And why doesn’t the word “curiosity” contain the letter ‘u?’ Does anyone else think that’s weird?
Doing some initial searches of gaming and the industry itself net pretty bleak results. “D&D Mumbai” search will give you a forum question and answer about the board game. “Gaming groups in mumbai” list no value results except a few deceptive leads that take you to forums where people speak about the Mumbai attacks. There does seem to be a few stores in Mumbai that at least sell the D&D core rulebook, which is pitiful. We are talking a city almost 3x’s the size of NYC – think about how many stores in NYC sell specialty Indian Books (20)! Tabletop gaming’s appeal is just not permeating the Indian youths. Of the entire country of 1 billion people, Bangalore appears to have the most forum results but that’s a college town and an IT town which together spell D&D but even those reults seem pallid and slim compared to what a town that size should be encompassing; I guess there is some comfort that at least somewhere around here people are doing a little tabletop.
“LARPing in Mumbai” nets such irrelevant results that I felt even more pathetic for typing it in google in the first place.
Do Indians just hate magical fantasy games? I don't buy it. The country that created chess has got to love complicated strategic games and it's obvious by the Knight, Bishop, and Rook that they are a sucker for a party based system (rogue, priest, warrior anyone?). I guess we'll be finding out soon - Blizzard just launched the first WoW server in India this summer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
