I think I need a fling or two before I go back home to get married; y'know for the sake of any future marriage I may have (see here).
I'm thinking a nice wholesome Hindu or Sikh girl (without being racist white girls are so last decade and I feel that as an Asian I should stick to and promote our own fantastic girls). Someone with standards, who doesn't just date anyone and even possibly someone who is also looking for a fling before their own arranged marriage.
Of course I should be careful to find someone who's NOT willing to convert, otherwise I might find myself in the sticky situation of actually having to marry them. Oh, and I won't tell them how they're just acting as a facilitator, because, well, it won't be an important factor in our relationship.
So? What do you all think? Unusually proactive, I know, but it's a sound plan of action I think...
Sunday, July 31
Plan Of Action
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
shak & a no strings attached relationship - I just can't see it happening
ReplyDeletewhy not with a muslim girl? you can fuck her up the ass but then she'll still be a virgin right?
ReplyDeletep.s. no offence- i guess hypocrites shouldn't be offended anyways.
the sad thing about it is, i do feel guilty and sorry and ashamed about making such a comment. i apologise for making it, nevertheless, i am sure it puts the point across quite plainly- freedom of speech is fair- gratuitous and pointed denigration of particular faiths/beliefs be it in jest/as a parody, is pathetic and quite thick. i agree wholeheartedly with kunal's comment- education and intelligence really have no correlation in this particular case.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletei think rohit and kuni may have missed the fact that shakil is satiring muslim guys who have one last fling with a non-muslim girl before they get married to a good little muslim girl from back home
ReplyDelete>>why not with a muslim girl? you can fuck her up the ass but then she'll still be a virgin right?
ReplyDeleteI am quite surprised you stooped so low Roey..
okey cokey..
ReplyDeletechalo koi baat nahin. moqa tho phir ayega..joking.
ReplyDeletea parody that was written insensitively at best... for me this is how distant/impersonal one way communication can easily offend - a bit like the media constantly telling us theyre not Terrorists, they're Islamic Terrorists, and Bush isnt a Christian mass murderer, he's a defender of his nation.
ReplyDelete@turtlebrain - i hope everyone must have got that, the offence might not have been intended, but was insensitive to something maybe many muslims have been almost forced to become desensetised to.
ReplyDelete>>a bit like the media constantly telling us theyre not Terrorists, they're Islamic Terrorists, and Bush isnt a Christian mass murderer, he's a defender of his nation.
ReplyDelete*woooosh*
My point was that the way things are written or said often clearly implies (deliberately or subconsciously) more than what the simple facts of the matter.
ReplyDelete>>My point was that the way things are written or said often clearly implies (deliberately or subconsciously) more than what the simple facts of the matter.
ReplyDeleteare you referring to this blog in question or in general?
You have my blessings.. =P
ReplyDelete>>I am quite surprised you stooped so low Roey..
ReplyDeletei'm unsurprised you don't get the point. the fact of the matter is, what was written was insensitive and poorly satirised and pretty much denigrated and cheapened hindu and sikh women. i s'pose things only seem to matter when they apply to you.
as for stooping low- i think the blog is far lower in nature but it'd be too "whoosh" for your mind.
>>hmm, not entirely sure that it did.
ReplyDeletewell, i'm looking at it from a hindu person's perspective and my other hindu friends seem to think so as well. oh dear osama...you might just be wrong.
>> well turtlebrain seems to have got it.
ReplyDeletei think everyone else did as well- it's not the fact that this is a parody- it's the expression used therein and the context and the content that makes it insulting.
>>although rohit did apologise right away. yet the fact remains that if LSD's comment applies to shak, then it also applies to rohit
err...the whole reasoning behind the comment was to make the point that if i said something in the same sarcastic way about muslim women, it'd have the same effect on muslims as shak's comment has on hindus/sikhs. the fact of the matter is, my comment was just as sarcastic as the blog- the difference being, i apologised post-ecrit.
>>what he HAS denigrated is the attitudes of some.
without doubt you're not wrong- nevertheless the whole point was the mode/tone/manner of expression osama. have you missed the point here?
> at least one of the comments on here should be subject to the same criticism from everyone who criticised shak.
ReplyDelete>as for stooping low- i think the blog is far lower in nature but it'd be too "whoosh" for your mind.
most definitely, and it applies to that comment from Ro too, more so for its crassness, the end doesnt always (ever? ill avoid the tangent...) justify the means.
> By the way, LSD, what did you mean by "but was insensitive to something maybe many muslims have been almost forced to become desensetised to."?
writing things about muslims in a negative context is pretty common - so much so that i tend to get a bit annoyed and then move on - or write an email/fax to the author if its particularly offensive
rohit i think you maybe need to take a step back, calm down and put things into perspective.
ReplyDeletei don't blame you for misreading the blog. although shakil intended it as a satire of muslim guys who do that, it wasn't actually clear that that's what it was. i have to admit that even i almost raised an eyebrow when i read it, but because i know shakil i knew that there would have been more to it than it's face value. given that you've known shakil a lot longer than i have, i would have thought you may have thought to ask him what what he meant first before jumping down his throat. and fair enough even if you did jump to the wrong conclusion and lost your temper (we've all done it), at least once it was made clear to you what he had meant, the reasonable thing to do would be to draw a line under the whole affair as an understandable misunderstanding.
at best shakil deserves a heckling off stage for a badly executed satire
watchu say?
ReplyDeletesalaam
ReplyDeleteO that was a lengthy deconstruction of separate sentences! The point of view shak was putting across, leaving whether it had an element of his own thoughts or was entirely a parody of others' aside, included implications that Hindu/Sikh girls are a target, that theres a good excuse to toss em and not 'having to marry them'. It wasn't really clear to me in this post that shak doesn't agree with this or think its small minded - only by knowing him I would have estimated that to be at least partly the case, that cant be taken for granted on a public blog. My feeling is if this was just to a friend 1-2-1 (incl MSN i guess) is wouldnt be a problem.
> other muslims writing things about muslims in a negative context, or just anyone writing things about muslims in a negative context is pretty common?
both. tune into many media and have a count if you prefer taking the temperature statistically, though im pretty sure people have done that already
anyways - seeing as the two parties arent contributing here shall we call it a day? i think a mistake has been made, and understood as such.
>> seeing as the two parties arent contributing here shall we call it a day? i think a mistake has been made, and understood as such.
ReplyDeletesome pretty valid points have been made here and the debate should be allowed to continue, Harry...
osama, the fact of the matter is, knowing shakil is pointless, but it did take a cheap shot at women. at least one hindu woman thought it was ok to write that- you're comparing one to about 10 or 12 other hindu people who read that and reacted extremely badly. moreover, i think that satire, if poorly expressed can lead to this- initial resentment, misunderstanding and anger.
ReplyDeleteMoreover Osama to have gone through and deconstructed the blog as such fails to underline the tonal value of the written word. Everything has a mode of expression; I sincerely believe you have missed the point that I made- that writing even in satire has limits.
You ask me if I should ask Shak why he wrote it blah blah- I ask you back why didn't he ask me before writing it? You say, his blog he writes what he wants- I say, well, he and I are friends and friends care about each other's sensitivities. He has subsequently accepted that this thing pissed me off and has apologised and I have done in kind for any out of order comments I made- I do believe that the issue here between him and I is closed.
>>Tell me, would you have had the same problems with a post that said "american or australian"..."who is looking for a fling before they head back home to settle down"..."who's not willing to move here permanently"...?
i agree- and this is why i believe you have missed the point that i made- people will only be sensitive to what's sensitive to them- obvious as hell no? if i'd said that about a muslim girl, i'm sure the reaction would have been bad a la sofi. so we have to cater for the audience's sensitivities.
i spose from my side- issue closed.
>>if i'd said that about a muslim girl, i'm sure the reaction would have been bad a la sofi.
ReplyDeletepresumptious roey!
>>you're comparing one to about 10 or 12 other hindu people who read that and reacted extremely badly
ReplyDeletewhich 10 or 12? the ones you showed it to? they obviously didn't react badly enough to post a comment
>>i spose from my side- issue closed
oh no way! really??? i was hoping for a fight :-/
you're such a drama queen rohit
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteBj, I just want you to know that there are people around..who are desperately waiting for more advice/tips/pointers etc from your good self.
ReplyDeleteim sure there are plenty around. you just write way.
ReplyDelete