teaching etiquette - its high time !!!

The Delhi government has initiated a movement to teach its people the common etiquette and manners. New brochures and leaflets have been printed telling the public not to spit or throw rubbish on the road and also not to pee on the road. The blatant message for the people is :-``Do not become Su Su Kumar or Thu Thu Kumar''.

Good move! It's high time people, not only in Delhi but in the rest of the country as well, must learn to regard their nation and respect their surroundings. A mere statement that `Mera Bharat Mahaan' is not enough to convey our love or respect for the nation. It is much more than that - respecting our surroundings, our neighbourhood, our cities and our country in true sense.

All of us have witnessed these gross sights - spits all over the road and paan -stained corners in each and every government building and public place and revellers throwing rubbish at any place of their choices. The streets are used as open urinals where men can be spotted shamelessly standing with their pants down. The sight of a bottle or an empty can of cold drink or a packet of crisps flying out of a speeding car is not rare sight on Indian streets.

One of my friends (an educated one) once confessed to me that he doesn't mind throwing rubbish out on the road - when driving but he concsiously does not do the same when in some other country. There was a lengthy argument which followed between him and me. I tried convincing him that we should follow the right pattern of behaviour when it comes to etiquette rather than chosen behaviour at given situations. His argument was : ``Do in Rome as Romans do - here everyone throws rubbish on the road, me alone restraining would not make any difference''.

I totally disagree with him. I never throw rubbish on the road or spit on the road whether in India or any other country. I have taught my children also to follow the same pattern of behaviour. We often end up bringing the rubbish home and then throwing it in our bin. It has to start from somewhere and from someone. Why not me? If everyone starts thinking like my friend, the country would soon become a big garbage bin and an open public urinal. But if all of us resolve to behave - the way we should be behaving - we can definitely make a difference.

Similar argument I had once with one of my old colleagues. He objected to my criticism of Indians who did not behave. He said he loves his country and felt hurt if someone says anything against India or Indians.

I questioned him - Is simply being an Indian enough to be proud of our nation or do we need to do something for the nation to make us feel proud of it ?

He had no answer. I had one - before claiming to be Indian and being proud of the fact, make sure that you respect India. It start from our homes and reaches as far as our neighbourhood, our city, our work places, our other cities and eventually our country as a whole.

Kudos to Delhi government which has at least taken this initiative to change the age-old behaviour pattern in its people. I wish them success and hope some sense would prevails in the minds of Indians and they stop littering their own roads and dirtying their own surroundings.

After spending billions on memorials, Maya orders a check on ``unproductive expenditure''

After being rebuked by the Apex court of India for wasting the tax payers’ money – to the tune of Rs 260 Billion – on memorials and statues, the Indian queen of Dalits (lowest of all castes)– Mayawati has ordered her officials to observe austerity measures or to spend judiciously. Mayawati is also the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh – the most populous and backward state of India.

The orders of the Chief Minister are to curtail ``unproductive expenditure’’ and maintain ``financial discipline’’. Therefore, ``no seminars and trainings for her officials, unless necessary’’.

This raised a question in my head – were these officials in the past, going for trainings and seminars which were unnecessary? The question can best be answered either by the authorities that gave their sanctions for the seminars and trainings or by the officials who had been attending such events.

The list of ``don’ts’’ issued by the Chief Minister’s office to stop ``unproductive expenditure’’ and for maintaining ``financial discipline’’ is exahaustive.

• No new guest houses by any department, public enterprise or state owned autonomous institutions.
• No new office/residential building at any division or district except in new districts.
• No new vehicle purchase except for security reasons.
• Official tours for important and necessary government works should be minimized.
• No official lunch and inners in five star hotels.
• Blanket ban on advertisement and publicity by government departments
• No greetings, calendars or diaries on government expenditure on New year.

A closer look at the government functioning in consideration to above-mentioned austerity measures and it is revealed that...

• It is the Chief Minister who is constructing guest houses/residences in the name of her favourite
• It is the Chief Minister’s cavalcade that has maximum number of vehicles.
• It is the Chief Minister’s office whose officials make the maximum number of tours
• It is the Chief Minister whose hoardings can be seen anywhere and everywhere in the state capital – in each newspapers and every news channels. The Uttar Pradesh government has spent about Rs 5 crore on making films on the Mayawati government.

Nevertheless, the government claims that despite limited financial resources it is running several welfare programmes for poor, Dalits, girls and slum-dwellers, who have remained deprived since India became independent. Several projects were being implemented by this government for the development of resources in rural and urban areas, says the official spokesperson.

However, the fact is that what one can see in Uttar Pradesh today, is memorials and statues in Lucknow & NOIDA and acute poverty and illiteracy in the rest of the state.

Mayawati came to power in this state in 2007 when her party - Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) won a majority in the State Assembly elections. No sooner she came to power, construction work started on massive scale in places like Lucknow – which is the capital of Uttar Pradesh and also in NOIDA (New Okhla Industrial Development Area) – which is the industrial showcase of this otherwise backward state. Incidentally, the construction was only memorials in the name of Dalit leaders of the past. Each memorial adorns huge gigantic statues of these leaders of yesteryears along with statues of Mayawati as well.

Unfortunately, it is not only construction in which the government is indulging – it is construction and demolition and construction and demolition – which seems to be the BSP way of building things.

The issues has reached the extent that even the Supreme Court of India issued an ultimatum to the government, ordering a complete halt for all construction activities with immediate effect. The court had also questioned how with a mere 2 percent GDP growth, a state like Uttar Pradesh could incur such a “colossal expenditure” on construction of memorials.

The court observations were strict -- “It is not as simple so please do not try to over simplify the matter. It needs to be examined whether such huge public expenditure can be made for memorials! Suppose 80 percent of the budget is diverted for building memorials, isn’t it call for a review by the court?

So much so for unproductive expenditure.......

Khamoshi ki Awaaz....

Tumhare saath reh ker maine jana

ki khamoshi kya hai.

Iski bhi apni ek bhasha hai

Sun sakti hai ye atma ki awaaz

Samajh sakti hai yeh ankhon ki boli

Kehti hai un-ginat afsaane

Kholti hai na jaane kitne raaz

Kyonki....

Humne khud sune hain

sannaton me meethe geet

Do atmaon ke milan ke

Banaye hain un-ginat raag

Samaa ker ek doosre mein

tab... jab.....

Baj uthti hain shahnaian anek

Baj uthte hain saikro sitar

Aise meethe sannate ko

kaun nahi sun-na chahega

baar baar...

Ab.... har wakht..

Sun-na chahti hoon us khamoshi ko

baate kerna chahti hoon us sannate se

Kyonki.....

Sunai parti hai usme tumhari awaaz

Goonjta hai jisme hamara pyar

Tumhare saath reh ker maine jana

ki khamoshi kya hai...

can medicines ever take over love?

Is medical treatment alone enough to ensure a healthy and happy life to people who have been diagnosed as HIV Positive?


Probably the answer would be yes if the question is thrown to health officials. They would list the numbers of Integrated Voluntary Counselling and Testing Centres, Anti Retro-Viral Therapy Centres, Community Care Centres and so on to highlight the kind of medical and health services available for the Positive people.


This is perhaps one reason why this issue is generally not raised in any of the conferences, seminars and workshops held on HIV/AIDS.


But the story of Vidya would force everyone to start talking about the emotional needs of people living with HIV and AIDS, along with their other medical and material needs - the former in fact shape the future course of a positive person’s life while shattering all dreams.


Sitting quietly in a corner and staring in oblivion, this young girl Vidya caught my eyes during an informal interaction with children infected and affected with HIV/AIDS. The event was held recently at Varanasi - the oldest living city of the world – as a joint effort of UNICEF and Media Nest, a welfare organisation formed by journalists and for journalists in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh.


Vidya –an unassuming girl in her late twenties did her Masters in Zoology. Good in studies, her dream was to become a science teacher but today she works as a Project Coordinator with Banaras (Varanasi) Network of Positive People (BNP+).


Devoid of any emotional support or affection at home by her parents or siblings, Vidya developed Schizophrenia and started having hallucinations. ``I looked at my parents with suspicion as I wasn’t sure if they were my real parents’’, Vidya started narrating her story with an expressionless face. The voices on radio scared Vidya, she thought people were scheming against her and there were people who were talking about her.


In her state of delirium and hallucination often Vidya used to leave the safe surroundings of her home to take a walk. That aimless walk had no destination but it was a wandering to nowhere. ``I had no idea where I was going and whom I was talking to’’. If the closest family did not understand Vidya’s problem how could the cruel world be sympathetic to a lonely girl? Men tried and succeeded in taking advantage of her vulnerability. ``I did not know the meaning of sexual relationship. When men raped me I did not feel anything. I didn’t know what was happening to me’’.


All clear-cut indications of Schizophrenia.


But at home no one took Vidya seriously. If mother was indifferent to her fears, father thought their daughter was playing pranks. The disease grew serious and Vidya started talking to imaginary voices in her head, which coaxed her to talk to them. Since no one could hear those voices, the brothers thought she was behaving crazily.


``My brother started beating me. He said either you stop this rambling or I will throw you out of my room’’, Vidya recalls those days with a faint and painful smile on her face. The brother and sister shared the room and the brother found it difficult to study when Vidya continuously talked loudly.``But how could I stop? They (the imaginary voices) were talking to me and how could I not respond to them?’’ she innocently put her point forward. ``So I kept talking’’.


Eventually, on brother’s insistence, the family took the poor girl to a doctor who instantly diagnosed Vidya with Schizophrenia. Listening to the history of Vidya’s activities, the doctor suggested an HIV test on her, which turned out to be positive.


For last over five years Vidya is taking medicines for Schizophrenia along with Anti-Retro-viral Therapy (ART). Today she goes to BNP+ office alone and works the whole day. The family members too, treat her better in comparison to what they did in the past. But there is something missing in Vidya’s life. Her sad face tells many tales.


``I miss a special someone who could have been close to me. My parents are not very sensitive. Their affection is limited to taking care like fulfilling the basic requirements. They can’t think beyond that’’, Vidya says with loneliness and longing to be with someone, swimming in her eyes.
She misses that caring touch, she longs for that soothing hug and she craves for those comforting words, which make a person’s life complete. What Vidya misses is a man-woman relationship.
But she has lost all hopes of finding a man. ``Who will marry me now after what all I have gone through’’?Why? Anyone could marry you. You are beautiful, intelligent and above all a loving person’’.The words apparently comforted her as this time her smile touched her eyes. But a sudden realisation failed in retaining the smile. ``But now because of drugs my memory has gone weak. I don’t remember anything. I have also become very slow worker’’.
Helpless, I exchange phone numbers with her with a promise to keep in touch.


What an apparently healthy Vidya needs today is love and affection. It is not Vidya alone but so many Vidyas all across the globe – who have been diagnosed Positive – need love and affection along with medical treatment. What sometimes medicine alone cannot do, love can do. It can give the Positive people courage to face the world and most of all it can make them feel that they are needed by someone, which can work as the biggest motive for a person to keep him/herself healthy and happy.


I pray this Vidya and all the other Vidyas find their love in this lifetime. Amen!

what's an offence ?

"A mother-in-law kicking the daughter-in-law with her leg and telling her that her mother is a liar is not a punishable offence under Section 498A of IPC''. This is the perception of our Supreme Court -the Apex court of India.

First let's see what exactly this Section 498A of IPC (Indian Penal Code) says --
498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.
Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.Explanation-For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means-
(a) Any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health whether mental or physical) of the woman; or(b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her meet such demand.]

The court has very quietly overlooked the words ``grave injury whether mental or physical health''.

In a country where there are over 250 women organisations fighting for women's rights and making all efforts to get the fairer sex a dignified place and equal opportunity in the society, the Supreme Court does not mind a woman kicking another woman.

The UPA government led by Sonia Gandhi is trying hard to get the Women Reservation Bill passed by the parliament to ensure 33 percent reservation to women everywhere so that women are no more a weaker sex.

The UPA government has also passed the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDV Act). There are many organisations which are working to ensure its implementation in letter and spirit.

The efforts have started showing also - the country's President is a woman, the ruling party of the nation - Congress - which is also the oldest party of the country - is headed by a woman. The Parliament Speaker's chair is held by a woman who has tamed all the 500 odd members of the House. Even the biggest state Uttar Pradesh is headed by a woman and the biggest private bank too is managed by a woman.

There is no field where woman have not registered their presence.

In such a country the Supreme Court observes that a woman kicking a woman is not a big deal. The court obviously feels that kicking does not cause any grave injury to a woman's mental or physical health, and therefore it cannot be kept under the purview of section 498A of IPC.

Then what is a punishable offence? What causes grave mental or physical injury? Is only killing someone is an offence? Is murdering someone's honour not a crime? Where are the Human Rights activists? Where are the women activists? Why no one has so far spoken a word against this lopsided observation?

The observation explains that the honourable court has either little or no clue what violence against woman means. And also that mental health has no meaning for legal experts.

A person kicks when he/she resorts to violence. This small step which the Supreme Court perceives ``not a punishable offence'', if not more than often leads to divorce, suicides and bride burning.

To go deep into violence against women, it often starts with mental humiliation and insult, which - if not protested - turns into slaps, kicks and fists and eventually results into a bruised soul and bruised body.

As we advocate for all bad things - nip in the bud - such actions should be punished in the beginning. There is a need for some compassionate thinking here. Why encourage such actions which lead to such gruesome end and which have a very harsh end and which most of all cause severe damage to mental health of a woman. Instead, if the first slap or first kick or the first fist is countered legally, there would not be so many suicides, bride burnings and marriage break ups.

The Supreme Court also observed that ``if a mother in law gives second hand clothes to her daughter-in-law and gives perpetual sermons to her, that too is not a punishable offence.

Here is a question for all those who have made the law and who support this law and who practice this law -- Will they accept this behaviour if it takes place with their own daughters? Second hand clothes, kicks and slaps are far fetched moves, such people will react violently even if the mothers in law dare to speak in a raised voice with the daughters of these law makers and enforcers.

A woman is first a woman - then someone's daughter, and then sister, wife, mother and lastly the daughter in law.

I think we need to look into the law with a fresh perception. The law is needed to protect the integrity, dignity and respect of a woman irrespective of her relation to others in worldly perspective. Same goes for men.

The world would be a better place if we start looking at people as humans rather than judging them with the eyes of relations. A man or a woman is a human first and his or her dignity and respect should be maintained at every cost.

my mother

My friend GS says that the topic of Euthanasia needs more debate. I totally agree with him.

Off late I am seeing my mother suffering. She had been a very independent, hard working and energetic woman throughout her life. While I was growing up I saw her as an `indispensable person' in any festival or function anywhere in my big family. A good cook and a beautiful manager she was in great demand and she subserviently was present everywhere taking over all burdens and freeing others of all responsibilities. No marriage was complete without her.

The best part was - which I think others admired the most - was that she was never seen or heard working - she was so quiet. May be that was the reason she was liked by everyone.

Even at home I don't remember doing any household chore as she let us be free to study and play, and grow as children. Her theory was : every girl has to manage her home one day or the other so let her feel like a princess till the time she is in her parents' home. And she was right in her thinking.

I also took the clue and never asked my daughter for any work and always treated her like a princess. Just like my mother attended to all my tantrums (being the youngest of the three I did have my time) and pampered us to no limit, I also try to pamper my children and make effort to attend to their tantrums, albeit I am not good at it.

But my mother maintained a balance and the result was that we were most close to her but at the same time most scared of her. Today I find her helpless, fragile, and in pain. She is dependent on others for all her needs.

I normally don't talk about my personal life on my blog thinking why should I bother others with my worries or waste their time in sharing my achievements. But the issue is not MY mother, it can be any one's mother, father or any one who is dearly loved.

Her condition and a simple comment by GS has forced me to transfer my thoughts on these pages.

It might sound cruel but sometimes when I look at my mother I want to put her to an eternal rest. Wouldn't Euthanasia be the best solution for her problems? Anyone who has lived with the pride not to ask anyone for anything (today that person has to ask everyone for everything), would like to die the same way. Why should we let her go through the mental trauma of depending on others along with her physical ailments.

If she had read the news of Suicide Clinic - or if I tell her about that - I am sure her last wish would be to visit Switzerland - not to see the alps but to die a dignified death.

I stand solidly for Euthanasia.

dying in suicide clinics

Couples in love - anywhere all across the globe swear to live and die together, for each other, but how many actually die with their partner... rarely any....!!

But here is this British couple Edward Downes and his wife Joan, after completing 54 years of partnership, recently ended their lives in an assisted Suicide Clinic in Zurich (Switzerland).

Sir Edward Downes - a celebrated Opera Conductor - was 85 and his wife Joan was 74. Sir Donwes - who was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 1991 - had become almost blind and also deaf. Wife Joan - who used to be a dancer, choreographer and television producer and assisted her partner in his work - was diagnosed Cancer, according to reports in British newspaper.

``They decided to end their lives together instead of cointinuing to struggle with serious health problems which become an integral part of old age'', said the Downes children.

This small news item printed in one obscure corner of a newspaper, caught my eye and forced me to think of Euthanasia, which had raked huge controvesies some time back. Of course, the news neither sizzled enough and was also not juicy enough to get the scribes salivating for it and therefore it did not find any place in any of the editorials. Majority of the newspapers even overlooked the news.

Nevertheless, it made me think all over again about this death by choice, which I feel is the most vital decision of life. It sounds paradoxical - but its true. Every Human being at some point of time or the other always thinks of his/her death. Some are scared of death and some want to fulfil their series of wishes before they die. But death is important and inevitable for every living being.

Just sit back and think, if there is illness we wish to die, if a loved one leaves the world, we pray that we too should die. If there is financial crisis we talk of ending our lives or if someone has humiliated and played with our dignity, we want to die.

The newspaper in India are full of reports where a woman has jumped off the train with her two children because she could not feed them, or a man poisoned his wife, children and himself as he could not work due to his illness, or some educated man shot himself because he could not pay back the loan he had taken from the bank or a girl jumps off the fourth floor of a shopping mall as her boyfriend had ruined her life, or a young boy or a girl has jumped into the river because he/she could not get marks desired by his/her parents.

There are hundreds of simple reasons with each person for which he/she wants to end his/her life - however ridiculous these reasons might appear to others. But there are not so simple means to end one's life. Jumping in front of the train or into the river, or jumping off the moving train are crude ways to commit suicide, which in my view do not give a dignified death to a human. In such environment, if we too have a dignified and peaceful way to end life, wouldn't it be good?

As far as judicious use of suicide clinics is concerned - every facility or law has two ways to it - it can be used or abused. It is duty of the law enforcers to ensure that it is not abused. The fear of abuse has made Euthanasia (a medical practice) see maxium number of protestors. This shows that since we fail to enforce law judiciously, and we see the chances of abuse and misuse of a particular law are high and for which strict enforcement is a pre-requisite - we surrender and start opposing it.

PS: Some interesting facts about Suicide Clinics run by group of Dignitas (Source:Wikipedia)

Dignitas was founded in 1998 by Ludwig Minelli, a Swiss lawyer. In one of her interviews in March 2008, she had stated that Dignitas assisted 840 people, of which 60 per cent were Germans.

As of October 2008, approximately 100 British citizens had travelled to Switzerland from the UK to die at one of Dignitas' rented apartments in Zurich.

EXIT is another Swiss organization providing assisted suicides. In 2008, it had 50,000 members. However, EXIT strictly denies suicide assistance for people from abroad

The BBC has produced a film titled `A Short Stay' in Switzerland. The flm tells the story of Dr Anne Turner, who made the journey to the Dignitas assisted suicide clinic, on 24 January 2006 she ended her life, the day before her 67th birthday. The film was shown on BBC1 on January 25, 2009.

virginity test ! what ?

Recently, in Madhya Pradesh, a few young girls had to go through the trauma of getting their virginity tested before their marriage. They were also tested for any probable pregnancy. This was done to girls whose marriage was fixed under a government scheme - Mukhya Mantri Kanya Daan Yojna (Chief Minister Girls' Marriage Scheme). In such schemes, carrying on in some states of India with an aim to help poor families, the government gives a certain amount of money to the girls' families to get them married and sometimes this money is given to the couple to set up their homes.

The news was obviously shocking, at least to me. I pinched myself to know which century I am living in. Is it 21st century? Is it the new millennium? In this age when we, instead of preaching single partner norm to the next generation, tell them about safe sex, the grooms are going for virginity tests of their prospective brides!!! It's shocking!!!!

The issue which bothered me and concerned me was not the virginity test but was more serious as to why the virginity test of only girls. Why not same procedure for boys? Who has ever questioned the virginity of a boy? If not, why raise a question on the virgnity of a girl?

There is an age-old theory goes behind this shameful practice; physically, it does not affect the boys if they have sex before marriage but it does leave an impact on a girl's physiology. Fine, accepted. But the question is; when a girl accepts a boy without knowing or raising doubts over his virginity who has given the right to anyone to question a girl's virginity? It is not only insulting but utterly humiliating for a girl to go through virginity test because some one else is curious to know if she had sex before her marriage.

Unfortuntaley, in India the practice goes on even in educated families - not so blatantly though.

My point of view is; in this era and in this society (I am talking of Indian society) where late marriage is a common phenomenon, homosexuality is getting acceptance, a large number of young boys and girls opt to remain single by choice and awareness regarding HIV/AIDS is increasing, we should not see sex as something out of this planet. It is a physical need and we should not assume that our young growing kids would abstain from it just because they are not married.

Youth is the age which is most curious to know all aspects of sex and wants to experience it the most. But this is also the age when most youngsters are either studying or pursuing their careers and they don't want to get entangled in familial responsibilities. So, should they forget about their biological needs? It is simply and practically not possible! They will explore this aspect of life whether the parents accept it or deny it, or remain oblivious to visible needs of their children.

Instead of feigning ignorance of this logical behaviour of our children, I think, each parent should grab this moment as an opportunity to educate his/her child about safe sex in context to diseases, infections, unwanted pregnancies and over all reproductive health.

Let's educate our children on how to safeguard themselves from getting infected with HIV or from contacting STDs. While doing this, we can also check the growing population of the nation by telling them to live like responsible citizens, instead of creating an unnecessary brouhaha over virginity of a girl.

it is basic courtesy, which lacks in us....

Now the government of India will educate people of this country about ``mobile phone etiquette''. Interesting! The country has largest number of mobile subscribers and sadly enough, majority of them have no clue if there are some etiquette to be followed in its use.

It is basic courtesy - like keeping the mobile on silent during meetings, or in a cinema hall or at a restaurant, or keeping the ring tone so low as not to disturb others - the same goes for voice while talking on phone - etc etc. As the number of mobile users grow - the government too, I suspect, started noticing the social hazards of cell phone and decided to teach people some common etiquette.

Soon, a person buying a mobile phone will be given a hand bill full of instructions - like - ``keep your mobile on silent or turn it off when in hospital or school as it might disturb the patients or the students'' or ``talk softly on mobile phone so that you do not annoy others with your personal conversation'', or during movies keep your phone silent so that others who have come to enjoy the movie do not get disturbed.

I welcome the move which is much needed for us Indians, who often care less for others' convenience.

I recall my two former colleagues who used to keep their mobile ring tones at the highest level. When they left their phones on their tables and that time if by chance someone called them up - the whole office used to be full of those annoying sounds. It was like a small orchestra band playing for some kitty party. Their phone rang in the meeting also drawing every one's attention to the sound. People joked about them, gave them advice and also showed displeasure - but neither these colleagues changed nor the volume of their mobile ring tones.

During my visit to England last year, I came to know that the British government along with smoking, had banned use of mobile phones at certain places like pubs, cafeteria, restaurant etc. Although in the western world I found people in comparison quite considerate - it is not only mobile but their etiquette was visible even on the road. No one flashed high beam at night, vehicles stopped and slowed down for cyclists, they gave way to pedestrians, also gave way to vehicles reversing or turning. Not only this, majority of the drivers waved their hands in a gesture of thanks when the other one gave them way.

It was such a pleasant sight unlike India where the driver of a SUV tweets behind a fragile rickshaw puller asking him to get away and let the bigger and more powerful vehicle pass. These big vehicle owners reflect an attitude as if the road belongs to only the powerful vehicles and the pedestrians or cyclists have no right to walk on the road. The drivers , I think, have no clue what the low beam switch is for in a car. Almost everyday I see a big car honking behind a cart full of 500 tonnes of iron rods, being dragged with difficulty by a frail old man. People generally do not know what road manners or road courtesy means.

Alas! to such men the government is planning to teach manners for the use of mobile phone.

I wish this education bring some sense onto them to use their phone with consideration to others' convenience, as expecting them to behave and be courteous on the road would be too much to ask.

Nonetheless, I feel that courtesy and consideration comes from within and cannot be taught. We inculcate these values in our children from the day they are born. Still, we can only hope that the handbill which the government will give to mobile users will imbibe some etiquette in people which they might replicate on the road as well. Amen!!

Hippocrates or Hypocrites

Over half a dozen people have died so far in last four days in Uttar Pradesh. It hardly makes any news in such a vast and populous state where hundreds die in road accidents or due to hunger or because of some disease and multiple of it are born at the same time. But what has made these deaths worth mentioning is the fact that these people lost their lives because of the apathy of the doctors.

The junior doctors of prominent government medical colleges in different cities, including Lucknow and Kanpur, have put down their stethoscopes and are demanding the government to increase their pay and other facilities.. All their demands are pertaining to money and pay. The patients have been left on the mercy of the Gods. The hospitals in this state are mostly run by the junior doctors and interns as there is dearth of senior doctors. Consequently, while these junior doctors are striking work the poor and needy are dying untimely deaths.

The most unfortunate thing is that it is not happening for the first time. The doctors of the state have adopted this as a routine tactic - just like a spoilt brat, every time they want something from the government, they resort to strike.

Everyone needs money - no doubts. But we do not start playing with lives of people as there are some ethics which we must follow as humans and more so as professionals.

This goes strongly in case of doctors who before starting their practice go through the age old Hippocratic oath -- ``I swear by Apollo............. If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot."

Hippocrates was a Greek physician born in 460 BC to become to be known as the founder of medicine and was regarded as the greatest physician of his time. While teaching medicine, he developed an Oath of Medical Ethics for physicians to follow. This Oath is taken by physicians today as they begin their medical practice.

The oath was simplied in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, which is now being used all across the globe by passing out doctors. A part of this oath reads --
``I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick. I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm. If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help''.

Over the years this oath has lost its meaning and its gravity. They are mere words for young graduates. The doctors of today are marching forward leaving the values of Hippocrates behind to adopt the values of 21st century and becoming Hypocrites.

Isn't it the time for them to introspect. It is their right to demand and hold protests - but at what cost? Certainly not at the cost of the patients!

Evolve other ways to show your anger and put forward your demands. But in no case you should put down your stethoscope and deny your services to those who depend on you, whose lives depend on you. Think about their economic crisis, think about their children or parents, think about those families, which consider you not next to God but God !!!

what's wrong with those wearing khaki in India?

THE police in Lucknow - the capital of the most populous Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, which is claimed highly for its tameez and tehzeeb (super-refined etiquettes and culture) - torturs a woman and tries to molest her two teenaged daughters. There was no provocation and no complaint by the woman to have forced the cop to come to her house.

Over thousand miles away from Lucknow, the police in Lonavala town - close to the economic capital of India Mumbai - arrests over two dozen youths - who were celebrating the birthday party of one of their friends. No provocation again! There was no scuffle, no drunken brawl, no rape and no murder.

Both the incidences are strange. In the first one, this policeman simply walks into a house where this woman is alone with her two young daughters. He thrashes the woman, crushes her feet with his boots to the extent that she passes out. Then he tries to molest the teenagers who after much struggle lock themselves in a room to save themselves from this beast in khaki uniform. Not yet satisfied, the policeman flashes a stick at the woman in full public view, threatening her of dire consequences, when she after regaining concsiousness tries to fight back, and walks away.

In the other incident in Lonavala where a few youngsters were having a party with music and drinks, which is a normal activity in any civilised society, the police barges in and arrests over 27 boys and girls - all from good families. These youngsters are locked up at the police station along with hard core criminals. The police justification for the arrest is; the boys and girls were doing obscene activities and were having alcohol without licence.

In India drinks parties are common and no one requires a licence to serve liquor unless it is for commercial reasons. There are alcohol shops - selling both country made and exported liquor - at every nook and corner of each city, and there is no prohibition in force, barring a few states like Gujarat.

Now, the question arises as to what compels these policemen to behave in this derogatory manner with people - especially who are educated and who come from good social and economic backgrounds? Why the police is so rude to people - the tax payers - whose hard earned money goes towards the salaries of the whole force.

In Uttar Pradesh it is common to see lower level cops using insulting demeanor when they stop the traffic to clear the way for the entourage of the VVIPs (Very Very Important Persons). It is always a rude ``hep, hep, ruk ruk'' (hey you, stop, stop) or something more humiliating, which is difficult to be literally translated into queen's language.

One might wonder - if it is pressure, why the cops in the west are polite? They too have the pressure of ensuring security of their VVIPs, they too are supposed to maintain law and order. Then how they manage to be so calm and respectful towards the public and use words like ``please'', or address people with respectul prefixes like ``M'am'' or ``Sir'', even if they find the person violating the law.

Do the Indian policemen lack in etiquette training or they take out their frustration on public! The senior bosses of the police department seriously need to probe this issue and take it to a logical conclusion. They need to teach the lower rank officers to respect every citizen - if they want respect in return.

Another more grave issue, which emerges from these two recent situations - is whether the police force is there to check these petty matters and harass the comon public or they supposed to play a bigger role in the society maintain law and order and check big crimes, like murders, rapes, thefts, burgalaries etc. ``Five minors were raped in the state in 24 hours'' - this was a newspaper headline today. News like this put the whole country to shame.

In India it has become a general perception that ``a man can get away even with murder if he has the right connections or right money to grease the palm of law makers as well as its enforcers''.

Isn't it a time to change the perception of people? Isn't it a time to teach values like compassion, empathy and politeness to people in Khaki uniforms? Isn't already late enough to tell the cops to respect the public and also earn some respect for themselves?

Isn't it the need of the hour to chase the bigger fish of the criminal world - the Abu Salems, the Kasabs, the Mukhtar Ansaris or the Gaolis - Arun Gaoli and punish them for their deeds. This will not only set examples for other hard core criminals it would also earn some dignity to the men in Khaki as well.

moral police, once again becomes active

Moral police is once again on the prowl. ``Girls cannot wear jeans and no sleeveless dresses for them.'' This was a recent diktat for college going girls of the industrial capital of Uttar Pradesh - Kanpur. The reason these college principals gave for passing the diktat was; tight jeans and sleeveless dresses provoke men and force them to eve tease and therefore, to check cases of eve teasing, girls should start dressing in more `decent' attires.

Interesting... if men are not able to control their desires, it's women or the way they dress, should be blamed. So women should not dress in a ``provocative'' way so that to excite the opposite sex.

The episode makes me think of all those rapes and molestations of either minors and rural women, which are frequently taking place in our society. A question : If revealing or sexy dresses ignite the desire in a man, why there are rapes of minors and why the rural women are molested and why is there incest?
Does a five or six year old innocent girl in a frock incite sexual desires in a man? Does a rural woman covered from head to toe in a sari awakens a carnal longing in a man? What is it that forces a man to turn into an animal? It is certainly not the attire of the woman. In fact it has nothing to do with looks or dress of a woman.
The answer lies within a man. What makes a man become an animal and resort to this wild animal like behaviour? Has any court anywhere all across the globe tried to analyse what goes into a man's mind when he molests a child playing in the park or when he rapes a woman working in the field. It is not her dress or her looks but it is the brainless beast within the man, which prowls on its prey in a fit of hunger, with no thinking involved. Probably sex for such men is hunger for body. If hungry such men can eat any food, anywhere and in the same way if hungry for body, they can consume any body anywhere.
Think of it ; why do women not behave in the same way? Why are there no stories of women rapists and molesters? Do they not have sexual urges or do they not feel turned on by a man's body? Or do they not feel hungry for body?
May be not. In my view, sex for women is not hunger or desire - it is a form of expression of her love for her man. When words fail to tell the beloved how strongly the woman feels for him, she surrenders her complete self before her man. No hesitations, no boundaries, no words. The language of touch starts, skins whisper and silently the bodies do the talking and this communication is called - lovemaking.
That is also a reason why a woman generally does not feel hungry to devour ``any'' man but she relishes ``her'' man - every bit of him when in love. For her excitement comes when the man whispers something nice into her ears. She gets turned on when the man runs his fingers in her locks. Then it is nothing to do with looks or attire.
Why cannot these men - who get excited just by the look of a butt in a tight jeans or feel turned on by the sight of flesh in a sleeveless dress - think and rise beyond body.
Try touching a soul and guaranteed you will feel the biggest O.

obscenity

It's been long since I have visited my own space here. A news that appeared yesterday forced me to be here and pour my heart. The Supreme Court in India refused to observe kissing in public as an `obscene act'. It was shocking for me but full of joy. Finally, some sense prevailed on the judiciary at least.

Living in this most backward state of the country known as Uttar Pradesh, I had almost lost all hopes of people ever acknowledging kissing or holding hands as an expression of love. it was always ``insult to our culture and influence of western culture''. The horrifying vision of police thrashing the young girls and boys who sat in parks to spend some quiet loving moments on Valentine's Day, is fresh in my memory. Things like a senior politicain banning the beauty paegants was accepted in this state.

I could never hold the hand of my Irish partner in public fearing criticism. I went through the ordeal of changing from my favourite jeans to a loose salwar kameez in case I was going to a government office.

In such circumstance, the Supreme Court observing kissing as an expression of love came as a whiff of fresh air. However, what left me puzzled was a joinder by the court which stressed on the pointthat the couple though claimed that they were married , the police still arrested them.

Now the question is -- what if they were not married? Arn't two adults allowed to kiss in public?

Fine! Kissing falls under obscenity if the kissing couple is not married.

Now I have a question for Supreme Court ----

What about those men who unzip their trousers anywhere at the side of the road, take out their willie and pee - with the whole world watching them? Isnt it obscenity? How many times a man has been thrashed or arrested for showing his bits to the public? Why doesnt the police react to this exhibitioniosm? The police constables too can be spotted anywhere on the road with their pants down shown. Isnt it obscenity?