Thanx!!! Again an obvious shame!!!
Printable View
Thanx!!! Again an obvious shame!!!
Regarding about the exposure of one's body...let us remember that humans have changed their mindset and made themselves seem so civilised that showing one's body would be deemed as total indeceny. But from time immemorial perhaps the time of Krishna...women used to smear kumkum and tilak over their chest and did not always wore clothes. Perhaps our minds have become so modernised that we see this as a disgrace but maybe if our mindsets were still devoid of thoughts of sexuality we may not really see this as a shame.
When i say exposure i mean when the clothes are quite "wild". Not naked or half naked...that if done in this age where sexuality and the minds of human are totally civilised is a upheaval of reality that has been appearing since the years of kaliyuga.
Not a bad argument, hulk.....but if I might give my 2 cents....Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulkster
As u urself mentioned, therz an "if" coming here, wich indicates only a possibility...& w. the way society is going today, the likelihood of such mindsets as u mentioned is unlikely to come.....:)
And yea u maybe right tat in the ancient times women wer less-clothed, but note tat was the case most likely bcos it HAPPENED to be tat way......in times of Ramayana/M'bharata etc. even men wernt clothed above the waist, but for sum shawl/loose upper cloth.....also this was a time much b4 the concept of stitched clothes existed! (I once read sumwhere tat tailoring of clothes wasnt allowed in Hinduism originally as those wer considered "impure" but am not sure of tat....), so it was NOT done w/ the same intention as is being done today in many cases courtesy of the fashion scenario aided by the pro-cosmo. media in the name of "modernism"!
If its the mindsets tat r to be changed, then how come being less-clothed isnt being encouraged in case of men as well as much as it is in case of women? On the contrary, officially (or in many cases even otherwise), its the men who r considered respectable/dignified if fully-clothed (eg. as in a suit/formal wear)! :roll:
Tat sure tells us sumthing, doesnt it? :wink:
It wudnt do to jus criticize the mindsets of today's society vs. the ancient ones, the circumstances hav changed over the ages so has the concept of decency reg. dressing.....I repeat, in the ancient times, it jus wudnt hav occurd to ppl. in most early societies of the world then, to be fully/more clothed....hence they followed tat way of dressing....:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulkster
Your arguments are of no use in this so called civilised/modernised world right? In this world where people are searching/showing sexuality in the dresses that others/they wear where does this mindsets,disgrace comes? Justify!
It also depends on which part of the world you are. And I dont mean this only in sense of culture but also climate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Sridhar
You see, the people of the tropics are more easily excited than the people of the temperates. A nude or semi nude image would cause more tittilation amongst say Indians than among Scandinavians!
In countries like Germany, Norway, Sweden etc, they even have common unisex saunas where people are completely nude and at ease. There is not the slightest hint of sexual tension! Imagine the same in India!!!
Indian culture deems nudity as taboo precisely because of the hot tempered nature of Indians. It is almost as though the heat of the region infuses into the blood, making it hot!!!
Of course, not so much physiologically as psychologically.
Which is why, a scantily clad person in the Western countries does not produce the same response as in an Eastern or mid-Eastern countries.
Ultimately, one comes to realize that these "cultural restrictions" are aimed at ensuring a fair amount of morality in society
Vaango sridhar :D....In those days..i mean around the age of Krishna...Humans used to view purity in the sense of heart and act rather than clothes...roman times also had woman in half naked clothes..there are even statues of our gods depicted in half nudity at times. But as time went by men and women thought that nudity should be only allowed to ones own privacy and also to their life partners. As generations and generations went by their mindset changed to view humans as full clothed and morality(civilised behaviour) also got instilled in them. So if a woman or man is half naked in the sense of the way their clothes are dressed...the opposite sex will feel very distracted and to others who are quite strict on such things...they will feel disgraced and angry. But if they had retained the old mindset of not viewing the person by his nudity or dress sense...then it would be quite different.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Sridhar
Lamby good points...that is a more elaborate translation fo what i had just said..:D.
BTW a question to all of you all...lets say our mindset was like in those roman times...we did not view nudity as indecency and rather judged a persons decency with the way they presented themselves in their character and talk....how would we feel if we were to see a member of the opposite sex walking with "wild" clothes?
Well said, badri! :clap:
Level-headed thinking to be maintained so that our happiness & dignity will not be swept away from under our feet by the waves of globalisation.
As I said, it makes a lot of differnce from reality wen the "IF" or "lets say" factor comes into the pic. here, hulk! :wink: :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulkster
Here is something to add a touch of humour to serious discussions:
From today's "The Times of India, Mumbai":
Do you need training to woo a woman?
A New York-based school trains men to charm women! So, what do our 'desi' dudes have to say?
"Do we really need to 'learn' how to sweep a woman off her feet?" Most self-respecting guys would scoff at the suggestion of learning to woo a lady of their dreams. But a New York-based 'charm school' would have us believe otherwise. The school prides itself on making any man better at meeting and dating women, by just spending a weekend at a school!
....How would such a school go down with our very own 'desi' dudes?
"More than anything, I think that such an idea is hilarious for words. May be it works in a country like America where people probably think that they need to be taught such things. But India is the land of the Kamasutra and Kajuraho. we already know it all - in fact we knew it 3000 years ago!" says 21-year-old MBA student Prateek radia with a smirk.
"Wooing a girl is something that cannot be taught and I wouldn't be caught dead in a place like a charm school. I am imagining some weird love guru-like person belting out instructions to a bunch of helpless guys, listening intently to his every word," guffaws a 27-year-old flight attendant.
"Giving us a woman's point of view, Kajal Lalkaka says that she'd rather be wooed by the heart rather than by the book. " They make the entire act of wooing sound so clinical by having a course on it," grimaces the 19 year-old student. "I think that it is quite a turn off to know that the guy has mugged all those charming lines rather than spouting them from the heart."
Charm school or not one thing about us Indians is clear, we prefer the act of wooing and being wooed, direct 'dil se'!
:roll: :huh:Quote:
Originally Posted by pavalamani pragasam