That big O

“Shhhhhhh… not so loud” was the immediate response from my girlfriend to whom I dared to ask, “Have you ever had an orgasm” during our fifth date. Call me naïve; I always believed that women knew more than men when it comes to matters south of the border. This belief came from the fact that most schools have sessions for young women at puberty- preparing them for the changes ahead. “What did I say?” was my response. I was watching her cheeks flush and her eyes giving me the “how dare you” look. I agree it was a bit bold of me to ask this question to a girl I have barely known for a week but I was not trying to get into her pants, I truly wanted to know what the word meant.

Dictionary describes orgasm as ‘sudden muscle contractions experienced by sudden release of sexual tension’ but I feel this is lame. For me, orgasm must be like God. Each one has experienced it differently and has different words to describe the feeling; while it exists in theory, in reality many have not seen or experienced it. Without further blasphemy, let me get to the point. Sex is such taboo in our society that nobody, let alone our parents, tells us that it could be pleasurable. The only “talk” that most of us receive from our parents is on the eve of our wedding day when they let us know “what goes where” to prepare us for our wedding night. Sex is a “duty” to be performed by the couple to bring in another generation – this was how my grand uncle described it to my cousin getting married. I can imagine his shock at the lack of knowledge of the grand uncle. The point being, if we hardly get to hear about ‘sex’ how would we know it could be pleasurable too? This brings me back to the question I asked my girlfriend – “Have you ever had an orgasm?”

When I talk to my friends I get various responses on the subject. While the guys describe it crudely as ‘the fleeting moment between ah and aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh’, the girls are even more confused at the question. Research on this subject – that’s right, there are people who research it, shows that most women only experience orgasm when they ‘take matters into their own hands’ and in majority cases orgasm is an utopian dream that never happens. Prudes be damned! These were not the older generation women who could mostly blame a bad partner, these were liberal women who have been around the block and are not afraid to ask what they want from their partners.  Yet, the O word seems to elude women all around.  What could have been the reason that men so easily achieve and women find difficult to achieve or have given up on.

The reason could be that for men, sex lies in between their legs and for women, it lies in between their ears. It’s all in the mind stupid! If you are not in the moment or the mood, the physical activity will not be pleasurable. As one of my girlfriends put it “Men don’t get it. Women are like elevators, you can keep hitting the buttons repeatedly, it wont make us come faster”. How true.  The facts is, men cant figure a woman’s erogenous zones and feel that anything could be grabbed and pressed for pleasure. I don’t blame them; that’s how most men get their pleasure and it never occurs to them that, women are not mere service providers they need the pleasure too. Consequently, men go about their business and women fake it to boost the male ego and partly because they don’t want to look incapable of having orgasms.

Of the many women who participated in the survey, 8 out 10 agreed that they fake it each time just so their partner does not feel inadequate. They shared that they later ‘finish’ in the shower. Many women did not even know what an orgasm feels like and most of them assumed it to a tingling sensation that one feels while getting intimate. The reason this never gets discussed is because each women feels there is something wrong with her and that is why she cannot feel it.  It is embarrassing to admit it while she sees the porn star climax in couple of strokes. If only women take the time to educate their partners about “how they like it”, they might be able to enjoy a fundamental experience and it will not seem so much like a chore anymore.

So long.....

They need your time

I have said this before and I will sure say it again, the most important gift you can give to the person you love is your time. Very often we mistake physical proximity as emotional closeness and the fact that we live under the same roof means “giving time to family”.  Clearly, the concept of emotions comes to us as second language. It is not a boy-girl thing here; we are all alike in this department. The problem is we are so wrapped around the tiny world that revolves around us that very often we don’t see the telling signs of a loved one in trouble or a family member hit hard times. In a few cases, they try sharing a problem with us and we are so prompt is giving our perspective that we barely listen to the problem leave alone the depth of its manifestations. As a result, when you actually realize that you have been overlooking a serious problem, it would have already caused irreparable damage.

Chuck is a successful lawyer working for a big firm in central London. Life is going good. He is married to a beautiful woman, Jill and having two kids. He is a hardworking guy who brought many prestigious accounts to the firm and was the “go-to” guy in firefighting situations. He was recently made senior partner and there wasn’t a thing he would want to change about his life. There is a saying – “if everything seems to be coming your way, you are possibly in the wrong side of a one- way”, it proved to be true in his case. One day all of sudden, Jill starts showing signs of nerve damage as her hands get into involuntary spasms during driving the car and she crashes into a tree. Though she is unhurt from the accident, it becomes a major suspense to doctors to explain the spasm as there is nothing physically wrong with her.  After undergoing all possible medical tests, doctors’ advise her to consult a psychiatrist. Chuck scoffs at the doctors and tells them that they are trying to cover up their incompetence by implying there was something mentally wrong with his wife. He takes Jill home and advises her to relax as this could be a mental fatigue. Chuck has a younger brother, Adam who works as an office clerk in a bank at Manchester. Adam is not as successful as Chuck nor has a bright career as him. He is more of person who has always lived in his elder brother’s shadow. Adam is not married and lives in a tiny apartment. The one thing that keeps him going is the fact that he has an elder brother who expects him to succeed in life. 

Adam is like the forgotten / unwanted relative to Chuck who drops by every Christmas and spends those 10 days with his family. Chuck has his own circle of friends and he would ensure that he does not take his family or his brother to his office parties during Christmas. It was not because he kept his personal life separate from his work life; it was mostly because his family weighs him down. Chuck was the hot shot, high flying lawyer of the firm and he felt that showing up with a family would make him look like any normal person. It would rob him of his sheen. With Adam, Chuck was even worse. Chuck felt ashamed of moderate successes of Adam’s life and would never let anyone at work know that he had a brother. He had carefully built this enigmatic approach to his private life. One day, Adam gets fired from his job and is so overcome by emotions that he calls his brothers office to find some solace and support. After many tries, he cannot get through to his brother who is caught up in meetings all day. The next day, he shows up at Chuck’s office to have lunch with his brother and talk about his problems. Chuck is furious at Adam for having shown up unannounced and refuses to talk to him in the office. Not wanting to create a scene, he asks Adam to wait in the cafeteria till he finishes his meetings and then they could have lunch together. Adam is happy to wait and is proud of his brother who always could be depended on.

At lunch, Chuck shows up with a frown and admonishes Adam for coming to his office and creating an embarrassing situation. When Adam tries to tell him that he wanted to talk about his problem and that he tried calling but could not reach, Chuck makes a big speech about how important his time is and success does not come easy or by asking people for help but comes from working hard to achieve it. In the end, Chuck writes a 1000 pound cheque to Adam and asks him to leave without embarrassing him further. When Adam says, he doesn’t need the money, Chuck gives him a hard look and tells Adam that he has always been a disappointment to him and the money was just to help him cover costs till he got another job. Then he walks away, leaving Adam with a cheque and lots of hurt feelings. Back home, Jill’s muscle spasms were getting worse and hampering her from doing basic tasks. Chuck tells her that he would not mind taking her to a psychiatrist if she stops behaving so neurotic that she has to fake problems to seek attention. Jill is put under psycho analysis to get to the root of the problem that is acting out in form of muscle spasms. After months and months of psycho analysis, the psychiatrist is unable to make any headway and one day invites Chuck to inform him that Jill is trying to actively block him from helping her out. He also informs Chuck that there is some deep routed anger or insecurity that is causing her to behave this way and advises him to talk to her about it since that was the main symptom to be treated if she has to get better.

Chuck plans a holiday with his family and decides to have the talk with Jill on the holiday and in a relaxed atmosphere. Couple of days prior to the holidays, Chuck’s firm lands a huge account and Chuck is advised by his managing partner to entertain the client during the long weekend. Chuck informs his wife about the change of plans and she flies off the handle as she was looking forward to the holiday. Chuck tells her that the holiday could be re-planned but the client was important to the firm. A week later he receives a call from the psychiatrist that he has finally understood the problem with Jill. Jill used to be a much sought after model, working for an expensive brand when she met Chuck and they got married. After marriage she moved to London to be with him. She had to give up her career and all the perks that came along because she wanted to give her time to the man she loved. Initially it all looked good, but she soon realized that she was not a priority for Chuck. Chuck had a feeling that being the man he had to provide for his family and grow in his career, he expected his family to understand this and adapt. Jill could not adapt to being second priority and would constantly make plans with Chuck which he cancelled more often than not to cater to the pressing demands of work. Jill could not explain to him how much she yearned for his attention and constantly felt guilty for seeking his time. The problem was simple; she needed his attention and time while he didn’t have the time to give. Being unable to communicate this and him unwilling to pick on the hints manifested the problem to such an extent that her mind was playing sick to seek attention. The psychiatrist advised Chuck to make Jill feel wanted again if he ever wishes to see her get well. The disease was in the mind and the solution was simple.

That evening, Chuck received a package marked “private and confidential”. Upon opening, he found a note from Adam – “I am sending you the good things and taking away the bad thing”. Enclosed were all the childhood photos and small gifts given by Chuck over the years. He was surprised that they were so carefully stored by Adam. At the bottom of the box was the cheque – which was written by Chuck a few weeks ago on the back of it were these words –“I just wanted to talk to my brother…..”  Chuck was suddenly overcome with emotions; he had always neglected his family and given precedence to his work. He owed his family and Adam an apology and to try to make up for the lost time. When he tried to reach his brother at his residence, he was informed by the landlord that Adam had committed suicide 4 weeks ago and while cleaning out the apartment; he had found a package marked to Chuck which he sent out couple of days ago. Chuck was trembling, overcome with guilt and emotions about how he treated his brother whose only fault was seeking time to talk to his elder brother about his problems. Chuck did not even get a chance to say a good bye to his brother Adam who always looked up to him.

Credits: Few events mentioned in the post have been picked out from the series “Mad men”

So long…..

The clique

Pollsters and opinion makers be damned! India is going through a strange phase where anything you say or do makes you a Sanghi or a Congi (derisive for RSS affiliate and Congress affiliate). Social media and main stream media (electronic and print) space for independent opinions is shrinking, and how! People have stopped voicing their opinions for the fear of being targeting or attacked personally. To be fair, the voices of the “sanghis” are more prominent as they have stolen a march over the “congis” in media management, I hope then when “Congis” play a catch up they don’t forget the words of their VP “keep the debate dignified and stick to facts”. One cannot have both sides barking at each other and most debates taking a turn south.



To make a good case, first convince yourself that you are a true son of motherland, and then convince yourself that the whole world is out to get you and you have to fight the whole world to achieve greatness. Also convince yourself that nothing about you is worth changing because – let’s face it- you were the last perfect creation of the maker. Now you have a potent and lethal combination of delusional and crazy – somewhat effective – but largely authoritarian politician. Let’s name him Modi. This man once believed that states should be allowed to make own laws as state legislatures are evolved enough and don’t need a ‘big brother center’ to make decisions on its behalf. Yet for some strange reasons, he does not believe that individual local bodies are smart enough to look after their interests and need the state government taking all the decisions. Contradiction? Hell- no!!! If you listen to him, you would see the logic and probably he would convince you that all these are necessary contradictions in a country like India. You see, the man can sell you anything. For long he convinced most of us that the Sun rises and sets due to his good governance model. It is a necessary quality in a politician to be able to sell ideas, but going to extremes makes the citizen feel foolish. The man has to know limitations. Some humility can go a long way in the making of a good leader.


On opposite end, we have a likeable, soft, visibly pampered and mostly untested politician. Let’s call him Rahul – ‘naam to suna hoga!’. Now, Rahul believes that he alone cannot make everything happen, it’s a rare admission of limitation by any politician. He also openly says that a country as large as India cannot be governed from Delhi; it needs to be decentralized to its villages and town local bodies – which make him a believer in federalism. He says, India is so uniquely divergent that the only way it can grow is by not trying to look for a “one size fits all” solution and rather give each region the power to decide what is best for it. Except for currency, armed forces and national flag nothing is supposed to be common within all constituents of India. He is neither all powerful nor claiming credit for all that goes good. He believes that career politicians are meant to win elections and technocrats are meant to run the Government efficiently. He is as un-Modi as anyone could possibly be.


If you look at the followers – or clique of both these personalities, they are largely similar. They feel their leader is the best (that’s a given). They believe the opponent is evil (duh!!) and they spend a large time talking derisively about the opponent than taking about their own achievements. Like I said, largely similar; however, the similarities end here. Modi followers are loud mouth, brash and invective. You see they have bought in the fact that the universe is conspiring against their leader and it becomes their job to fight the universe. So heightened is their sense of belonging that they more often attack their own party men who are trying to talk some sense into them. Rahul followers are exactly the opposite; they are polished elite with sound command over language and facts and are condescending to the opponents. You see, to them their leader is born with divine right to rule and they find it absurd and laughable that anyone could hope to take away that right. They are not loud or call others names but would make your head spin when they use minimal words to make maximum damage to opponent’s reputation. The fight among these cliques is worth watching, Modi followers forever froth near the mouth and making angry intonations and Rahul followers smiling and hitting the opponents hard with erudite ease. Another common element between these seemingly different people is the absence to tolerating independent voice. While anyone critiquing Modi becomes a “Congi dog or pig” almost immediately; anyone poking holes in Rahul’s theories immediately becomes a “sanghi terrorist”. It’s amazing how independent voices are being silenced by making personal attacks and abuse hurled just because that person managed to get his/her opinion about the opposing theories of governing India. Latest casualty was noted author and Nobel laureate – Dr. Amartya Sen – his personal life was abrasively discussed and a noted editor recommended that his Bharat Ratna (highest civilian award in India) be taken away. All because he said, in an interview that Modi is not his choice for being the Prime Minister of India. So much, for having freedom of speech enshrined in our constitution.


Post script: We have heard Rahul talk sense to his followers on many occasions to keep the engagement civil but we are yet to hear Modi tame his followers. In fact he eggs them on many times by using his speeches to make personal attacks himself.


So long…..

Food for thought

July 2013 – 65 years after her Independence, India finally enacted an ordinance (decree promulgated by the President upon advice from his council of ministers) to provide food as a matter of right to all her citizen. This is in tandem with the rights based approach that the present Government has been trying to enforce. Consequently, Food Security Bill (FSB) can be spoken in the same breath as MNREGA – aka right to employment and RTE – right to education to all children below the age of 14. Needless to say, we have market economists estimating the amount of money gone in the drain in a bid to make India hunger free in next 3 years. We have figures from a conservative 1.2 lakh crore to a much ambitious 6 lakh crore being touted as the “real cost” of this ambitious project. Then we have every person who has an opinion asking “can we afford this” with the fiscal deficit and all. Then we also have politicians terming this as “feel good” before the general elections to the Parliament of India scheduled in May 2014.



Each of these stories have a certain merit and we may want to delve into that in a bit, but can we deny that the FSB was need of the hour in a country like India where the top three reasons for mortality is hunger, lack of health care and malnutrition (not necessary in that order). As we are discussing the pro / cons of this bill we have so many women undergoing miscarriage / so many kids malnourished beyond repair / so many people dying on streets due to hunger. Access to nourishment should have been obvious choice to all citizens but we are starting with access to grains – yet most of us feel that these are doles and it won’t help anyone. Most of the intellectuals throw “teach a man to fish” argument to make their point. I am using this space to make a case for the FSB and why even the 6 lakh crore would be money well invested / spent – based on your bent of mind.


First, we have to address the costs argument. India has one of the largest public distribution system (PDS) and it has been in place for around 5 decades now. We often hear that there is rampant pilferage and re-routing of the food meant for distribution to local brewery or retail market and having just second and third quality grains made available in fair price shops for the consumption. Make no mistake; the main reason for having these fair price shops in the first place was to make nutrition available to the masses who could not afford retail purchase. When we re-route grains meant for fair price shops, we are actually staling from the poorest of the poor and providing them second / third quality grains – in a bid to make them realize that they are living on charity. In each of the 29 states on India, there is massive corruption in the PDS and crores of rupees meant to nourish the masses are siphoned away by few individuals both within the administration and outside and the end consumer is left high and dry. It would be a fit case to abandon PDS long ago, but for various considerations the PDS system continues. Maybe there are too many livelihoods dependent on pilferage and siphoning. It has become a mafia of its own and successive state governments either actively participates in the plunder or at best look the other way while this is happening. Yet, we have never heard any politician say a word against the PDS or dismantling this creaking system – mainly because in some form or shape its touching lives of millions and we could always improve to plug the leaks. I must say that in the past 10 years, around 10 -12 states were using the PDS exceedingly well and implementing the schemes in letter and spirit. So there is a light at the end of this 5 decade long tunnel. I am arguing a case that it should be mandatory to cost the bills and show revenue streams to cover the costs – we are presently opaque in this regard. However, the costs should not be an argument to scuttle bills that touch millions of lives for basic necessity like food.


The FSB will use the existing PDS system to provide a fixed amount of grains at a fixed price per person / month. This would be a right – meaning administration will have to beg / borrow or steal but cannot refuse grains to people demanding it. It would, in a way, force the administration to keep a tab on the pilferage and siphoning. You can no longer hide behind the argument that we have grains shortage or bad storage. It’s a right and if you don’t have grains, you will have to reimburse costs for the purchase. Unless the Government wants to plunder, it will be forced to keep a check on the facilities. Not only grains, FSB ensures lactating mothers and children under 14 cooked meals as form of nourishment. This would mean bundling existing schemes – which are run separately and delivering it to the benefit of common man. It would not be fool proof but it could be improved upon gradually and we need close monitoring and regular audits.


Let me take up the argument of FSB being a vote catcher or fiscally poor bill. Sure, any bill that ensures food or jobs or healthcare or homes would be a vote catcher and this would be the case anywhere in the world. The question would be, would we make a positive impact or just get votes? On that, my considered opinion would be to err on the side on benefitting the masses. It is not a dole; it’s a right and should be considered as one. No longer would we depend on the charity of fair price shop owners. About being fiscally unsound, any expense made by Government is called fiscally unsound so long as it would not get a return on investment. But again, Governments are not limited company running behind profits- they are societal trust meant to redistribute wealth earned in form of taxes to benefit the masses - the good of the majority. In any given year Government forgoes revenues worth upward of 4 lakh crore in form of many various incentives – be it free electricity, free land , tax holidays etc. given to corporate India and yet every day we hear new scams that involves these very same people who are trying to get out of turn benefits from same Government. Meaning, there is no end to corporate greed and yet we don’t seem to talk about it a lot. We count it as a necessary evil and offset it to the employment / revenues generated by these corporates. These are also sunk costs to the Government and have a per-capita impact on economy. Our economists enjoy counting every cent spent on the poorest and give a go by to the million showered on the richest. If we can sustain revenues forgone to corporates, we can always sustain the costs of FSB which is a basic need, especially when we have poor performance on nutrition indices. So long as we have even one person dying on the road due to hunger, we need a FSB that provides them a right to life – basic right ensured in our constitution.


So long……


PS: Author is not against corporate India and does not imply that all of them are corrupt. Instances are used to make a case for food security bill.