World as I Think

I used to wonder why smooching is not a common scene in India in our common lives, after all males/females irrespective of spatial differences must have the inherent nature to express their love. Somehow we have the knack of attributing it to the so called "Indian Culture”. If at all somebody kinda does that in public, the prejudice has vocal manifestations,” Don’t those people have decency, why can’t they avoid these thing in public places?", as if they are inhumane actions. How can a country with a high level of AIDS afford such moral hegemony?

Does that mean that people in the western world are a bunch of hooligans who have no ethics?. Westerners could give a snare, if such statements are put forth. They would counter "Don't you think, it is indecent to intrude in to one's personal space or action, You have all the right to follow what you feel is right and no monarchy over what should be followed by somebody else or pass a ruthless judgment, when particularly it has nothing to do with you".

I was trying to construct the plausible reason why people in the western world started French kissing, i could think of only the climatic variables as the reason, it kinda cold as we move close to higher latitudes, the heat need to be conserved and parts of the body cannot be exposed, that should precisely be the reason why people smooch rather than kissing on chins (ways of expressing love) which is commonly observed in tropical or equatorial regions. People in the latter regions feel uncomfortable hugging as there is this sweat element or high levels of humidity. At the end of things, it is just a convenience to express oneself which became rigid rules during the course of time, where is the case of moral judgment/ethics here?

So now that we have air conditioned places and the temperatures have moderated with climatic changes, why can't people smooch in public? I used to wonder why newly married women were sent to their parent’s home during "Aadi"(Mid- July to August), the copulation was forbidden because a pregnancy could result in a child during the summer month of April. It is quite understandable as infant mortality was higher during those ages and the probability of mortality was even higher due to extreme conditions leading to dehydration. It is completely irrelevant now, people now know to use a "rubber", can take maternal care in air conditioned rooms and of course avail a cesarean child in complex cases. Where is the case of "Aadi”? The relevance of the action ceases to exist once the limitations are no longer valid.

If you search for trends for the keyword "sex" in Google trends, you can find that the Indian metropolitans top the ranks, out casting the so called "sexually suggestive" westerners. Indian society is such a sexually deprived one, the more they hide, and the more is the case for oppression in other ways. I don’t know, how our grand fathers could afford 8 or 9 children and abused their partners when they didn’t even cross their mid-teens (and these people talk about decency or civilization, don't tell me that forcing one's partner to sex in their teens is symbol of evolved civilization).Our grand fathers must have been deprived of sex, they forced the partner to pregnancy, deprive themselves of sex for the next 10 months, build frustrations and start the cycle again once the baby was delivered, they could have at least used the 14 day cycle to prevent pregnancy’s.I can't stop shouting as to who were masochist?, which society was more prone to such abuses?. The westerns would rather ask "How is that your country which is conservative, produced Kama sutra?".

Now to this thing called virginity and the over duly importance it is given in Indian society, Virginity is seen as a moral tool to differentiate, Does that mean that men/women in the western world are morally inferior?. I am just thinking of reasons again. When is a rule imposed? Only when they had cases of it’s unduly overruling in the precedent past? It suggests that pre-marital or post marital was quite common in the past; we should look at our epics (especially Mahabharata) to know how prevalent it was? It is an off late phenomenon, Women were never not given their freedom, men slaved then (signs of a highly evolved civilized society), and they were pseudo servants in the name of house wives. Nobody can live without self esteem, they need something to uphold, a metric by which they can justify and judge their lives, preferably something which does not hurt the men, for they could easily strip it. Men could sleep with many women but never would women.If women were morally superior, then whom did these men sleep with? They would even go to the extent of accepting their husbands in any form but they would proclaim themselves to be morally sacrosanct, because they had nothing else to judge others.