wish – 2live

Someday soon, I want to be able to walk right up to some man I admire and say to him, “Shudhi, bless me with a child!”

I should be free to marry when I will. At age fifty-two, if that is when I find a man I wish to serve and share and spend my whole life with. Didn’t mention love here because that is obvious. You dont want to serve people you do not love, do you? Well I don’t.

I should be free to marry who I will.

I should be free to use my womb as I will and should not be forced into an arranged marriage with a gay man just because they think he has to be hidden under ‘cover’ of a ‘normal’ marriage, and then together with him, suffer the ignominy of either being unloved or be a ‘divorcee’ for no fault of ours.

Someday soon I should be able to enjoy all the individual rights my predecessors had thousands of years ago, as I am as competent, as intelligent, as sensitive and in every way as capable as any of them. And also because I live in times that we are made to believe have ‘progressed’…

If Kunti could have had IVF babies from four different able men she had chosen herself, if Madri could have had two, living in the twenty first century, I should be able to have atleast one from the man I want it from?

I harbour such dreams because I am true to the culture and ethos of my country, I have the courage and conviction to nurture such a wish especially since I am an Indian? But I rue the fact that my dreams would continue to be dreams for another – well, how many fifty years still, till we are really freed?

If you care to know more, please refer to the great Indian novel, The Mahabharata, our myths and legends and you would see what I mean. (to post links later)



“…while the distinction between blogger and journalist (if it ever really existed) has slowly dissolved, all the infrastructure around recognizing who a journalist is — from press credentials to legal protections has changed very little. So whether I really am a blogger, a journalist or a blogger/journalist might not matter to me, but it will matter when I’m trying to get a press pass or if a judge wants to ferret out my anonymous sources.

What do you think? Does it matter what my identity is, or how people view me? If you’re a blogger/journalist, how do you deal with these issues? Share your thoughts in the comments below.”

Mark Glaser of MediaShift/PBS examines the issue in this manner.

Greg Hankins, editor of Sevenlakestimes of Carolina, US said : Folk who decide to keep a diary — or contemplate their navel — on the web may be journalists, but they aren’t reporters and what they write is not news. Folk who write the news, whatever their medium, are reporters.

By Greg’s definition am a journalist, a web-logger who keeps an online log of stuff that is important to me. To answer the question Mark raised, I feel that the author’s identity as writer does link with ‘how he/she sources information’ and as such important to me, as reader.

As for how people ‘view’ an author, that matters too if am a new reader, a history of credibility reassures me.

The question of earning and keeping the reader’s trust ought to be an important concern, when am the writer. I  agree with Edward Itor’s view there:…since we are anonymous, we have to take great care that the information that we present is accurate, and if we do interject our opinions, we try to do so in a way that our readers can easily tell our opinions from our facts.


an interesting letter n the muse

  Naomi Wolfe makes the case that porn has subverted the traditional power of the woman which is sex.From a cynical male’s point of view, Wolfe appears to be lamenting the good old days when men were at the mercy of women for sexual gratification. It sounds nicer when she says it, though she cannot help but draw the same economic analogies that I will. Because it is a market,  and the issue is supply and demand.

That is why it is good for Wolfe, that “When [she] came of age…There were more young men who wanted to e with naked women than there were naked women on the market.”

But here she makes explicit her model of sex: an economic transaction, replete with buyer and seller. (Implicitly throughout the article, men are buyers, women the sellers).
Wolfe herself speaks in marxist terms about the vagina – and not merely to make sense of today’s hypersexualized dystopia: according to her, vaginas have always had an exchange value. My question : why the scare quotes? I think the gist of the article is summed by one sentence: For the first time in human history, the images’ power and allure have supplanted the [the power and allure] of real naked women.”
Sorry, Wolf, but I agree with you. Today, it is a buyers’ market. But the solution is not a regression to a romantic middle eastern cabin, set with candles and draped with embroideries, a “pre-market” sexual space: such a space has never existed.” By masonk on 03/04/2008 at 9:00 am
I agree with Masonk here that it isn’t a matter of regressing to the romantic and that such a space probably never existed, what then is the ‘solution’? So what next then and how? I wonder…