Soniaji ki Second Shaadi

While fretting over some stupid business since a fortnight, I grossly neglected significant issues of national importance. The current one apparently is made up of headlines with Modi and Tharoor’s names and a voluptuous model’s pin-ups. I am yet to catch up with that, but an acquaintance this afternoon summarized briefly the current concluding issue about apnI deSkI bETIkI shAdI.

As the acquaintance so subtly put it, “<long beep>, isko IndiasE nikAldenA hain”. People joined both sides and a lukewarm debate ensued, and even though I never benefited from her forehand strokes I took to her defence. I have offended some people during the debate, and as always it gave me immense pleasure.

Here is a biased MOM briefly describing a few points discussed:

1. She’s what she is because of India.
A. Is it? Because India apparently paid for her success and fortune, at least after she won the 2003 Wimbledon Championships Girl’s Doubles title? Keep it aside for a moment. Take yourself, a person who somehow found a decent job. Your company pays your salary, which is most of the money or fortune you make, which is the means of your (and maybe your family’s) prosperity. It also occasionally pays for your “career development”. Are you what you are because of your company, and even if you were does it give your company to dictate your choices? What she and “India” have is mostly a business relationship, which has so far been acceptable for both parties.

2. Couldn’t she find one deserving man from all of India?
A. People in love, people who get married, etc. don’t do an exhaustive search of the universal set. They come across a person, hopefully find that person interesting (depending on factors like money, looks, sensitivity, sense of humor, intelligence, cup sizes, penile lengths and other strengths), tell themselves and anybody who listens to them that they have found the person they have been looking for, and get together. It doesn’t mean that they have done an exhaustive search, which is unrealistic and something most people wouldn’t want to do. It doesn’t mean that the rest of the population is undeserving, and for that matter the word “deserving” here is meaningless on the grounds that it is undefinable or at least remains undefined. It also doesn’t mean that they have found the person they have been looking for, but I’m digressing.

3. It’s okay with anybody except a Pakistani.
A. Oh! you are the one to decide who all it is “okay” with for someone you haven’t met nor have any interest beyond her short skirts and navel rings? And imagine injecting that clause “except a Pakistani” into a villain’s dialogue in a movie of national integration. How have you felt then? It may be nothing more than a movie, and you are nothing more than an Indian Pakistani-hating stereotype. I read a definition this morning. One-shot case study, n.: The scientific equivalent of the four-leaf clover, from which it is concluded that all clovers possess four leaves and are sometimes green.

4. It is not her individual preference because she’s a celebrity.
A. On the contrary, being a celebrity gives a person more strength to exercise individual preference, at the cost of some sacrifices. What is the use of gaining that power if one doesn’t exercise it? Celebrity or not, which hole a person lives in and which hole a person plugs his or her tools into is nobody’s business except the person’s and the hole’s owner’s. On the other hand, a celebrity running over pedestrians may be an individual preference but as it violates the pedestrians’ preference it is to be condemned, at least discouraged.

5. India needs a sports icon. What if she gets pressurised from his side to start playing for Pakistan?
A. a) I don’t understand the need for sports icons, and recommend you to read this counterpoint. b) See image below and also try the exercise by yourself. I’m glad that wiki is at least ranked 7th among the search suggestions, and I hope you see the point about the nature of people’s interest in that sports icon. I speculate that more Indians may have downloaded her wallpapers than have watched her Tennis matches.

6. If she were from Pakistan and he from India, the Pakistanis would have massacred both families.
A. I read a definition this morning, and I already mentioned it above. Also, somebody doing something irrational doesn’t mean that you should join them. Nevertheless, I understand the temptation.

7. India gives so many benefits to its citizens.
A. Pray tell, what exactly are those benefits? And how do they compare with other countries? There is nothing wrong for a person to move to a country which appears more beneficial. It is not very different from people shifting houses.

8. Tell me anything but my conscience just cannot accept it.
A. You will get over it. You may continue to live irrationally, but a lot of people including yours truly live that way, and die largely of natural causes.

9. What about the woman who got cheated and divorced?
A. One valid question, for the whole issue doesn’t seem to me of national importance but more of an alleged fraud. You tell me. I know nothing about the case. If she got cheated, it appears that it isn’t the celebrity in question but her husband who may have cheated her. If there has been a divorce, I am guessing there was some settlement. Whatever, I sincerely hope that the fat lady got justice.

show