Sure-footed Single Mom !

I am not sure if wearing a worn-out jean and cotton gurtha on top is kind of fashion for all young human-right activists. (Older women wear cotton saree). I never know Arudhati Roy and Medha Patkar can be fashion icons too. That’s how she was dressed and talking to a man sitting on a wheel-chair.

I was sitting on the steps of the Town-Hall Bangalore holding a chart written, "Free Binayak Sen" in a rally organized by People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL).

She has a very attractive smile... to be precise a confident smile!

She was holding a chart in one hand and holding a young girl maybe 4 years old in other hand and shouting “Binayak Sen vidudalae maadi”

After the protest got over by 7 pm, I was walking towards my car in the parking area. I saw her standing in front of my car and whirling the shawl around her neck. Kid was sitting on front bonnet of my car. I approached my car and stood near the car so that she can complete what she was doing.

Kid was asking the question, “Mommy! why people were holding different flags? It’s not our National flag”. The lady smiled and before answering it, she turned back looked at me said, “Sorry! It’s your car?”

“Yep. Its ok”, I replied and started answering kid's question, “people from different organization had come to participate and they were carrying their organization’s flag”

She intervened and said, “Yeah. That’s correct”, facing her child and then turned towards me, “It’s very unfortunate that people want to politicize everything. It could have been avoided”

I said, “At least I am happy that from people from all communities and sections have come forward to register their protest”

“That’s true. But it also had some religious groups which were talking more against the BJP government than actual issue itself. I believe we should seriously fight against religion too...Oh sorry! If I offended you”

You too don’t believe god. Thats nice!

“No issues. I too don’t believe in God either”

“I am not an atheist. You can call me Pantheist”

“Oh... sexed up Atheist huh?”

She smiled and continued, “You belong to that Richard Dawkin's gang huh?”

“Haha! Yes”

By this time the kid was just getting curious to know what’s that we were talking and she was trying to get the attention of her mom.

“Science can only be a guiding factor and cannot be a deciding factor. We can’t do everything our gene says. For instance government cannot take a policy based on science alone. Moreover science cannot answer all our questions”

“I agree with you! Science has told us little, but science is a quest. It will explore and expand more. Even if we know little from science, that’s all we have and we have to depend only on it for anymore questions”

Finally the kid got her mom's attention. Kid was asking, “Mummy we will go to grandma's house”

She was talking kanada to her kid. I believe she explained something to her why she can’t take her to grandma's house.

“Having a kid and attending these kind of events is very difficult”

“Yeah! You could have left her home or with her dad”

“I am a single-mom”, she said with a pass out smile.

Did I hear that? Single-Mom?

“Oh…I am sorry”

“What is there to be sorry about it? I have chosen it myself. Before my love resulted in a marriage, I decided not to go for it and settled with a kid", she said pampering her child.

Oh! This girl is born without marriage. Shut-up...don’t ask such questions to her

She continued, “After all women expects Respect and Freedom. If marriage doesn’t guarantee that, then what’s the point? Particularly in India marriages make woman suffer”

“Hmmm...I can understand your frustration. I too agree that binding two people in the name of marriage for life is too much. But as an institution marriage is fairly successful for years and I don’t know what could be the alternative”

“Maybe...”, after a pause looking away she said, “I was not eligible for it”

I was silent for a moment. Don’t know really what to say.

Life is not fair to everyone...how such a woman is allowed to suffer...maybe that’s what makes her different from others

Breaking the silence I said, “Maybe our society needs more time to understand it”

“It’s not about time. We are one of the oldest civilizations in the world. If time is the factor, we should have grown in every sense by this time. There is something fundamentally wrong with our system and culture. Unfortunately we haven't really tried to change it for long”

Yes. She has a point. Why we haven’t changed for so long? What’s special about our culture? Really we haven’t progressed in many ways.

She continued, “Now by looking at other countries and scientific developments we started learning. That is also being held back by right-wing extremists in the name Nationalism. Their lowest common denominator is Religion"

“Yes. In the name of nationalism they deny free speech. Anyone who talks against the State were called anti-nationals or seditionist”

“Exactly! If this can happen for Binayak, I don’t know how many innocents are suffering in jail. As Arundati Roy says this is not democracy, it’s 'Demon-Crazy'”

Now the little girl lost her patience and started screaming to her mom to take her home. The lady said something in kanada to her daughter and lifted her from my car.

“She is not going to stop till I take her home. Sorry I have to go! Nice meeting you”

“It was pleasure meeting you! Have a wonderful evening”

“You too... Bye!". She started walking away carrying her kid.

She made it impossible for me not to look her again.

Objection my Lord!!!

In recent times our Judicial System/Judges seems to be very active in giving ‘Statements’ and Judgments. Particularly there were many judgments/proceedings this year which will have wider impacts. Ayodhya verdict, 2G scam, CVC appointment, Live-in relationship, same-sex marriages…

Equivocally I too agree that Judiciary should play an important role in a country and its one of the pillars of democracy. But it doesn’t mean that judges are empowered to comment or give judgments beyond what they are expected to do.

For instance take Ayodhya verdict by Allahabad High-Court. The court/judges should only act only on the evidences and facts. But in this case judges have taken the faith of the people into consideration rather than evidence. Maybe first time in history of Indian judicial system it had happened. Almost all judges have agreed that below the centre dome of Babri masjid is where Lord Ram was born. How can judges be so sure about it without any evidence? How can they conclude only with the belief of the Hindus?
If it’s just an entitlement issue of the disputed land, only Sunni waqf-board has some documents to claim that land. How that land can be divided based on faith?

Similarly the same Apex court has asked to consider some alternate route for Sethu Samutharam project even after NASA confirmed that the chain of small islets connecting India and Sri Lanka are real geographical features that have been mapped for centuries. Chains of islands form a variety of natural geological processes and their occurrence is not evidence of any human activity.

In this year Supreme-Court asked the Central Government to distribute free food grains to families below the poverty line (BPL). For which Manmohan Singh categorically said, "I respectfully submit that the Supreme Court should not go into the realm of policy formulation"
I am wondering how court can decide on government policies? Maybe court can question why those food grains have not been stored safely. How it can ask the government to distribute it freely.

Think of the recent 2G scam issue. How judges can decide what should be the policy of 2G auction? If they say first-come-first-serve or selling the spectrum at the 2001 rate in 2007 is wrong, how they can decide it? All they can probe is if all the process has been followed or not for the spectrum allocation. I don’t know how they can really question the 'intent' of any decision of the government.

Recently it questioned the Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) chief PJ Thomas ‘Integrity’ and appointment. Anyone charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Why can’t this apply to PJ Thomas? How it can question the government on his appointment? Does Supreme Court want to decide all appointments made by government?

If judiciary wants to cleanup the failures of government, it should first cleanup its own house.
After having overwhelming evidence against then Karnataka High-Court judge P D Dinakaran, they were not able to impeach him. All they were able to do is just transfer him as Chief-Justice of Sikkim high-court.

Only recently Justice Soumitra Sen got impeached for his corruption. Despite being indicted many times for corruption, the judge has comfortably managed to exploit the loopholes in the system. Excluding allowances and perks for fuel, attendants, house rent, phone and medical bills, Justice Sen's salary today stands at Rs. 80,000 per month. They also say that Sen has not done any work for the last four years but drawn full salary and perks. Is it a paid holiday for him? Why tax payer’s money was spent on him? Does it mean judges are above the law?
On contrary judges are worried about people in BPL.

Courts being too powerful and going out of their way to make statements and judgments are not good for democracy. After all it’s run by few individuals. They are not accountable for anyone. In democracy Parliament and Legislative-Assemblies are the highest body of policy making. If it has been approved by parliament, I don’t think court should interfere in it. That too courts taking a decision based on faith is extremely dangerous.

If courts/judges are running this country, it means its being run by few un-accountable individuals which is NOT good for democracy.

Manifest Der Kommunistischen Partei

'As a force for change, its influence has been surpassed only by the bible. As a piece of writing, it is a masterpiece' - Guardian.

I would say it has even surpassed the bible in its influence throughout the world. Its influence is still felt in many parts of the world in different forms. Yes, ‘Manifesto of the Communist Party’ written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels is the most influential thought/theory/philosophy ever written.

Last week I read this book (from Vitage classics, only 70 pages).

I was amazed by Marx’s understanding of Capitalism and also what it can bring to the society at large. He also acknowledged that Capitalism has bought some good changes to the society. He not only talks about the problem, he gives a very convincing argument why State has to own production.

I thought its worth sharing few excerpts of his thoughts.

The bourgeoisie has subjected the country to the rule of the towns. It has created enormous cities, has greatly increased the urban population as compared with the rural, and has thus rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life. Just as it has made the country dependent on the towns, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilised ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.

The lower strata of the middle class — the small tradespeople, shopkeepers, and retired tradesmen generally, the handicraftsmen and peasants — all these sink gradually into the proletariat, partly because their diminutive capital does not suffice for the scale on which Modern Industry is carried on, and is swamped in the competition with the large capitalists, partly because their specialized skill is rendered worthless by new methods of production. Thus the proletariat is recruited from all classes of the population.

The bourgeoisie finds itself involved in a constant battle. At first with the aristocracy; later on, with those portions of the bourgeoisie itself, whose interests have become antagonistic to the progress of industry; at all time with the bourgeoisie of foreign countries. In all these battles, it sees itself compelled to appeal to the proletariat, to ask for help, and thus, to drag it into the political arena. The bourgeoisie itself, therefore, supplies the proletariat with its own elements of political and general education, in other words, it furnishes the proletariat with weapons for fighting the bourgeoisie.

To be a capitalist, is to have not only a purely personal, but a social status in production. Capital is a collective product, and only by the united action of many members, nay, in the last resort, only by the united action of all members of society, can it be set in motion.

Capital is therefore not only personal; it is a social power.

When, therefore, capital is converted into common property, into the property of all members of society, personal property is not thereby transformed into social property. It is only the social character of the property that is changed. It loses its class character.

In proportion as the exploitation of one individual by another will also be put an end to, the exploitation of one nation by another will also be put an end to. In proportion as the antagonism between classes within the nation vanishes, the hostility of one nation to another will come to an end.

Does it require deep intuition to comprehend that man’s ideas, views, and conception, in one word, man’s consciousness, changes with every change in the conditions of his material existence, in his social relations and in his social life?

What else does the history of ideas prove, than that intellectual production changes its character in proportion as material production is changed? The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class.

When people speak of the ideas that revolutionise society, they do but express that fact that within the old society the elements of a new one have been created, and that the dissolution of the old ideas keeps even pace with the dissolution of the old conditions of existence.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

There were many theories for why Communism has failed and Capitalism has succeeded. Maybe as Fareed Zakaria points out in 'The Future of Freedom', Capitalism succeeded because it looks more Democratic. Undoubtedly Capitalism gives more freedom and liberty to people. As Ayn Rand said, Communism may treat man as mindless-robos.

But I believe Communism failed because it’s against our human nature and in the current state of evolution we were not prepared for it. As Richard Dawkins said in 'The Selfish Gene', “Let us try to teach generosity and altruism, because we are born selfish”

I am against the Communism as a political policy and very much agree that Democratic rule is a better way. But Communism as a principle should be realized by every individual with their Liberal and Democratic thoughts.

Nationalism, Patriotism – Radical Dogma?

When Indian born scientist and nobel-laureate visited India last year, one of the Indian media person asked him, “Are you proud to be an Indian?” He smiled and said, "I don’t attach myself to a nation. I work with people from many countries and I love and respect people"

This may be a very casual reply from the nobel- laureate for a question which is quite often asked by the immature Indian media to any successful NRI.

I am wondering why this Nationalism, Patriotism etc.., is being talked very passionately by the countries and its leaders around the world and particularly in country like India. I am not against someone loving their country. I too want my country to prosper; I too want my country to participate in FIFA world-cup…

But I question Nationalism when it takes priority at the cost of humanity. I question it when a country exploits other country for its benefit. Almost people in every country are fine with such exploitation if they are getting benefited.

Many incidents happening around the world with the National-Interest had made Nationalism-Patriotism look more like a radical dogma.

    United States has been ruining this entire world for the past few decades for their National-Interest
    India voted against Iran in UN for its National-Interest
    India supported Rajapakse and endorsed his Genocide for its National-Interest
    India played a role in toppling the Maoist government in Nepal for its National-Interest
    Israel attacks the aid-ships and put a blockade to West-Bank for its National-Interest
    India spends billions of dollars on Afghanistan for its National-Interest
    Every country spends billions of dollars every year in making new weapons in their  National-Interest
    Russia bombarded Georgia for its National-Interest
    Many countries supported the latest sanction on Iran for their National-Interest
    …..
    …..

I wonder why someone has to be fanatically passionate about the country they born? Ironically, if everyone is given a chance to choose their birth country, almost 80% would choose different country than they born. But why anyone should think of only the prosperity of his country alone? As a civilized society cant we care for people in other countries too?

Why we have to take some decision which will benefit only us at the cost of others?

Why every country wants to be global-power? To manipulate and exploit other countries for their National-Interest?

Think of the horror that have been inflicted by George Bush and Tony Blair on Iraq. They misguided the entire world that Saddam had a WMD and that’s the reason they were invading Iraq. But now they are saying even if Saddam did not possess any WMD, still they would have invaded Iraq.

Why the civilized countries not questioning these two leaders? Why they were not tried in the International Court of Justice for misguiding the world and illegally occupying Iraq. These two leaders did that for their National-Interest best known to them only.

But other countries also keeping quite on them for their National Interest

We are perfectly fine if anything is done at the National Interest, even if it’s a genocide in the neighboring country.

Particularly we Indians are completely hypocritical on this. If people like Bal-Thackery or Lalu Prasad or Mamata talks in their States-Interest, we say they are bad.

If anything in the name of National-Interest is justifiable, why not the State-Interest?

Or why not Linguistic-Interest? Or why not Caste-Interest?

Corruptibility of nationalism is an issue, since it is not even-handed. Hatred of one group can lead to hatred of others, no matter how far such feeling may be from the minds of large-hearted nationalist leaders.

Gandhi defended Nationalism and he said that one must go through nationalism to reach internationalism. But I believe in Tagore's Nationalism which was Inclusive and Objective. Tagore said, “Patriotism cannot be our final spiritual shelter; my refuge is humanity. I will not buy a glass for the price of diamonds, and I will never allow patriotism to triumph over humanity as long as I live”

Tagore believed in being champion of the people and not of the nation.

In my opinion, Nationalism, Patriotism are being used by everyone for their interest.

If you wish to live as one country you should also know how to live as a single-world!

War Against Naxals - For Peace?

Few popular sentiments:

‘Naxalites are nothing but cold-blooded criminals’

‘Naxalites are irrational people causing damage to life and property without any reason’

‘Naxalites are planning to bring down the Indian government and take over the country’

‘Naxalites are the biggest threat to our internal security’

Who are they actually?

Naxal movement is not something new. The armed revolt started in independent India very long back and it did not got popular because it didn’t got people's support.

For various reasons like exploitation of the poor (particularly the tribal communities by local landlords and corrupt politicians) the small section of armed men and women were fighting against it in various parts of the country. In Andhra it was called the PWG, Bihar it was CPI-ML, Orissa and West-Bengal it was naxals. Few years back many of these groups got merged and started to fight together. Naxals are operating in the affected areas where the socially and economically backward tribes are living.

Tribal communities have been living in the mineral heartland of our country for years. They are the poorest of the poor in our country. They were living without any of the basic facilities like education, health-care, employment opportunities, and pathetic social infrastructure. Infant mortality rate to be at 47 percent in these regions of the country. Over three lakh villages have no road connectivity.

They are indigenous people of those areas and they too have every rights like every one of us in our country. But have been ignored for all these years.

The so called economic boom did reach the tribes, but differently. They were thrown out of their homes in the name of development; denying proper compensation and whoever revolts against it were silenced by naming them traitors or naxals. There were many fake encounters of killing the poor innocent tribes in the name of naxals. All these issues had made more and more tribes joining the naxal movement.

Naxal movement is getting stronger as the time passes.

How our Indian government fought till now?

Its the systemic governance failure of successive governments of independent India had made the naxal movement stronger. Without reaching-out those affected people Indian government have been fighting naxals in different way and it has failed miserably.

State and Central governments used Police, CRPF, Salwa-Judums to fight these naxals. Who are these Salwa-Judums? They are nothing but the same tribes who were given the gun by the government to fight against their own people whom government identifies as naxals. Now the fight between police and naxals has been transformed into fight between tribal communities itself. I can’t imagine how a civilized government can give guns to few sections of people to fight against their own people? Along with Police, Salwa-judums also staretd killing many of the innocent tribes in the fake encounters.

We all know how much corrupt our police department is! Along with that CRPF also joined and did lot of atrocities against the tribes like rape of women and girls, and silencing any opposition or dissent by murder, killing many innocents and many other violence. Recently government also started the Operation Green-hunt to hunt the naxals.

I strongly believe if one innocent is killed, at least it will make 3 innocents to join naxals. So, every atrocity of Police, Salwa-Judums and CRPF will create more and more naxals.

Can we use Army?

Our Home Minister has been asking for a larger mandate that is to use the military power to eliminate the naxals. Already our defense minister and also military commanders made it very clear that using army is not a viable solution.

In my opinion considering the military option is the most senseless argument. If Police and CRPF can create so much of horror and human-rights violations, think of how an army will be? We already witnessed enough of its human rights violations in Jammu-Kashmir itself. We can’t blame military for that, because that’s how they were trained to act.

There is an argument made by few sections of people that, lets eliminate naxals using army as the Srilankan government did for LTTE. What Srilankan government did was a complete violation of human-rights, genocide and it was condemned by nations like US, UK and also in UN. (Because Indian government was supporting the current Srilanka government for our own reasons the case was not pressed against the Srilankan government). Are we suggesting annihilating our own people? Because they are not supporting/accepting to our so called development, industrialization and market-based economy, are we suggesting to genocide few thousand people?

Who are we to dictate how they have to live?

What could be done?

As my sympathy is with naxals and tribes who were fighting for their rights, I did not condone their violence against innocent people. I too unequivocally condemn their attacks on innocent people.

But we should also try to understand that in the past they were not killing innocent people and only recently they have stared it. Does our government is pushing them to do so?

I believe the solution to this problem should not be found on violence.

IMHO, the following can be done to solve this issue in the longer run:

• Stop the Operation Green-hunt immediately. Also ask the naxals to stop their violence

• Dismantle the Salwa-Judums and relocate all the displaced tribes to their homes

• With the help of naxal sympathizers, start the talks with the naxals to understand their demand (even though the Maoists agenda says they don’t believe in Indian democracy, I believe they also will not deny development. At least it will have positive impact on tribes). Do not have conditions for talks like asking them to drop their weapons, which I think is unreasonable. (Is it ok to talk with the naxals? Yes. We had peace talks with much more dangerous terrorist groups in the past in kashmir. So nothing wrong in talking to our own people)

• List down the development activities that need to be taken care with clear timeline

• Form a Panel with members from all political parties, tribes, NGOs, Human-right activists and naxals

• Let the government allocate funds immediately to those projects and let the Panel monitors its development and give the report to Prime-Minister directly and regularly

• Let’s involve the locals and tribes for the developmental activities

Once development reaches the tribes, they will return to their normal life and naxals will be weakened. We can ask the remaining naxals to drop their weapons and join the political system. We all know Nepal had witnessed one of the worst Maoist attacks in the past decade. But later they too joined the main stream political system and fought the election.

I am sure that can be done with naxals too.

I echo the sentiment of Holly in P.S I Love You by Cecelia Ahern, "Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity"

Camp at Pegasus

Now the situation in IT industry seems to be improving and every company started their team building activities. My company is not an exception and decided to take us to Pegasus. I haven’t heard about this institute earlier, but it seems our group has gone to this place few times earlier. This time they planned it in the weekday so that they can avoid many absconders.

I was expecting a resort kind of a place where we can go and play some small games and then swim in the pool for rest of the day. But the guys who traveled already said it’s like a military camp and no swimming pool and all. Because its mandatory I have no choice -:(

First Day

On first-day evening, 27 of us started around 4:30 pm from Cisco campus in 3 vans. Why 3 vans? Can’t be one bus? No! Bus cannot go into that narrow roads… added some excitement!!! In between we all stopped for a coffee/tea in the road-side shop near Yelahanka. We finally reached the Pegasus after 3 hours 30 minutes journey (for 60 kms) and also10km roller-coaster ride in the end.

Place had a military look in everything... very serene, lot of tress, and all plants trimmed… including guys in the place. We were guided to our Tents... Yes! We have to stay in the tent only (8 beds in a tent)... so we occupied 4 tents. After refreshment we met the Pegasus coordinator and who set some ground rules for us for the next 2 days.

We had a dinner with camp fire (food is a highlight of this place. very tasty!) started with our introduction…each one of us has to introduce the other person. Someone started talking about my blog and it went on to the discussion of how I came up with that formula! I also got some interesting questions like 'how do you justify the love at first sight with your formula?'

Around 10.30 we went to our camp, and outside the camp we gathered to play the game Mafia (this game seems to famous game in top universities in US), but I was playing the first time. The rule is simple few mafia guys would have entered the village and start killing the villager. Villagers have to eliminate those mafias. In a group of people there will be 30% mafias and rest will be villagers. During the night time mafias gather and will kill one villager (so mafia knows who are the other mafias) and during the daytime they will act as a villager. In the daytime villagers has to gather and kill one person who they suspect as mafia. Villagers don’t know who are villagers or mafia.

If villagers they decide to kill someone, the person identified to be killed can justify why he is not a mafia.

We played 3 games, and in all 3 games I was a villager and in first 2 games I was killed in the beginning itself by the mafias... and mafias and villagers have one game each.

Third game was interesting one. In the end only 3 people are there in the game; me and two more guys. Now among this 3, there is one mafia and we have to identify and kill him. By mistake if we kill villager, then mafia will win the game.

Both the guys are pointing to me as a mafia and recommending me to be killed. Now I have to make an argument that why I am not Mafia and why the other person whom I suspect as mafia. I got a doubt with one person and I need the support of the other guy to kill that mafia. I made a very convincing speech for 5 mins explaining why I am not mafia and why the other person is a mafia and asked the support of the villager to kill the mafia person. Now mafia guy also made is argument and he accused me of being a mafia. Again I made a counter argument for all his arguments.

Finally the other villager accepted my argument and decided to kill mafia! There was huge uproar from the entire gang that villagers had won the game.

It was a very exciting argument! We all enjoyed and congratulating each other for winning. We hit on our bed at 1 am.

Second Day

The bell rang to wake us at 6am. Few of us woke up and had a tea and went for a morning walk to the nearby lake. After breakfast we met at 8:30am to start our Actions. 

Each action will have different teams, but all the teams should complete it within the given time and team can take help from other teams also. After each game there will be a analysis and learnings will be discussed (post-mortem.... i hate it -:(). Each one of us were given a number and mine is 27.

First action is to climb the rock. We should touch the rock only beyond certain height. Few of us lifted the guys and helped them in climbing and also while coming down. We were given 30mins to complete this task, and we completed in little over 15mins.

 

Second action is to carry the marbles and put it into the bottle in the other end. We were given a broken pipe pieces to carry the marbles and also many rules which made it very difficult to carry it. It was very much challenging for the physical ability. 2 teams finished it within 30mins and one team struggled and helped by the other team.

Third action was crossing the island with the given tools like stick and ropes. This was extremely challenging for our fitness and also the strategy...after 15mins only we figured-out that we can’t cross the island until all the groups unite and use the tools... within 45 mins all the guys were not able to cross the other side...but we enjoyed every moment of it.

Fourth action is an Australian walker... team of 7 has to walk on the plank of wood without touching the ground and move the plank along with u and walk. There will be lot of land-mines in the path and we have to carefully walk. If we hit the mine, we have to start from the beginning... this is the test for our physical fitness and our team coordination... I was leading from the front for one of the team and we did not hit the mine in our entire walk and completed 3/4 of the path in the given time... after this everyone is exhausted and it’s already 6 pm!!!

Few started playing cricket and I along with few played football.

After 6:30, all of us were tired and few of us took bath and got ready for the night trek in the mountain. Only 6 of us were ready for that and rest all said they can’t walk. But Pegasus folks said they need more people as this is a team building activity. At last we 20 people walked to the top of the small mountain in the pitch dark... along with me few guys sang a nice tamil songs.

 

Third Day

I woke up 5:45 itself and rang the bell to wake up others... few people were asking why bell rang before 6 itself -:)

The first action we had for the day is to cross the mine without touching the ground, along the poles and other structures. Rope, Plank etc.., were given as tools but which is not sufficient to cross until you use it intelligently... again this has to do with lot of strategy and physical fitness. We made lot of strategy and able to cross only halfway. But we thoroughly enjoyed it.

Last action is our favorite... building a raft and rowing it in the lake. We were taken to the lake nearby and each team has to design their raft first. Only after raft design is approved we will get the material to build the raft. Finally we got the approval and all the teams’ started building the raft. After completion the raft was inspected by the Pegasus team. All the rafts got approved after the quality check and we took the raft into the water and started rafting... oh man!!! What a amazing experience...we all enjoyed it to the core. After reaching back the shore we started swimming and playing in the water for another 30mins.

Around 4:30 pm we started back after a farewell tea. I am looking forward to visit that place again!!!

Demystifying Romantic Love!

Note of Advice:

If your love is less than 18 months or been thinking of your lover/partner more than 90% of your awake time, better not read this further. You can read it after 18 months.

What is Love?

“Love is a craving like hunger or thirst”

“Love is blyind”

“Love is God”

“Love is a feeling, emotion”

“Love is friendship set on fire”

“Complexity, thy name is Love”

….

There are multiple definitions for this Romantic Love and everyone feels comfortable to choose what they feel more appropriate to them; nothing is wrong.

Love is very powerful – love reduces appetite, people kill for love, commit suicide for love and what not

The Anthropologist, Helen Fisher in ‘Why we Love’ have shown that being in love is accompanied by unique brain states, including the presence of neurally active chemicals (in effect, natural drugs) that are highly specific and characteristic of the state.

For example the people who are in initial state of Love will have the Dopamine hormone secretion more.

Let’s not go into too much technical part of it… it will really demeans the Romance in Love.

I believe,

      Love is a choice. 

      Love is nothing more than the decision you make. 

      It’s not something that happened to you without your knowledge. You opted for it.

I agree that when you are in Love, rational thought process in your brain will be overshadowed by your romance.

It is completely weird when a man in love says woman of his acquaintance is hundred times more lovable than her nearest competitor. How it’s possible? I can’t think of anything better to explain the insanity of the romantic love.

But that’s how we live and maybe nature had made us that way so as to remain loyal to our partner for our gene propagation.

If Love is a decision or choice, then what we consider to make a decision?

I believe these are the following major factors which are considered for making our decision (not necessary all factors are applicable to everyone):

L = f(l) + f(c) + f(C) + f(m) + f(F),  always  f(L) ≥ RL

L – Love

l – Lust

c – Compatibility

C – Comfortableness

m - Money

F – Family

RL – Minimum of Love

Why each constituent has to be a function? Because each of this in itself is subtle and abstract; varies a lot for each person.

Lust - f(l):

Lust is a strong sexual desire towards your lover/partner

Why Lust is f(l)? – Each one gets turned-on by different aspects from their partner. Some gets turned-on by looks, some men turned by the long and cascading hair of their partner, some woman seeing the bald men, some with good height, some with intelligent etc..,

Men can easily feel the lust when they see some erotic movies or even when they see some sexy models/actress in tv of their liking. That lust will not last for long and he can perfectly get the same attraction with the other woman next minute.

It’s not only the physical attraction but also how good the partner on bed may also play some role. In western countries pre-marital sex is very common and hence they can choose their partner based on how good he/she in bed.

Lust is obviously subject to change over the period of time. Chemistry of attachment can dampen Lust. This is probably why men and women in long stable marriages tend to spend less time in bedroom making love.

Lust and Romantic Love are not the same. Lust alone cannot make the Love complete.

Hence,

                 f(l) always < RL

Compatibility - f(c):

Compatibility - Capability of existing or performing in harmonious

This is about the like-mindedness of the people. Same Interests, thought process etc..,

You can feel the vibe between both of you. 

Why Compatibility is f(c)? – Each one of us have different interests and thinking of likes and dislikes. Some people like philanthropic nature in their partners; some likes political views of others, science, knowledge, etc..,

But why this compatibility has to change by time? It may not be always. But there may be cases; someone was an Atheist becomes more religious and spiritual for some reason which may not be liked by the other. Or there can be more compatibility if both of them become more religious or atheist.

How a person handles the personal tragedy or emotion also can be found only later point of time. Even highly rational person can analyze the relationship emotionally which can lead to differences.

Does compatibility and like-mindedness can fill in their life with Love? I would say No. It needs more than just compatibility.

Hence,

                 f(c) always < RL

Comfortableness - f(C):

Comfortableness - A state of being relaxed and feeling no pain

If you have compatibility can’t we get comfortableness? Not necessary.  

Its very likely that couple with same attitude and thought process can end up fighting with each other always. I don’t know if two highly dynamic characters can have a sustained relationship.

Many times its more comfortable to have opposite point of view than someone with same views for a sustained love and relationship. For example if one of the partners is very much interested in career and other person takes care of the family, then they can have comfortness in their family life, which can increase their love.

This too can vary on time as the expectations keeps on varying with time. Comfortableness can sustain the marriage but not love. It needs other factors too.

Hence,

                 f(C) always < RL

Money - f(m):

When I say money it includes the fame along with the materialistic aspects.

It is very likely that the person maybe rich in initial stages of love and not later. Also when in love he would have been more popular star and later become a flopper. Also the expectation on wealth also can change over the time. The things that money can buy can make a person more demanding and hence love can be lost. On other side more money can sustain the love and relationship.

This may be one of the reasons why most of the celebrity marriages end up in divorce.

As scientists say, “Men look for sex objects and women look for success objects”

As you know money and fame alone cannot sustain the love.

Hence,

                 f(C) always < RL

Family - f(F):

This has 2 parts in it; your father’s family and your family.

When you make decision of falling in Love with someone, you may consider how good he/she can fit into your father’s family. This is applicable at least on the Indian context.

Even if you haven’t considered your father’s family, after marriage your family will play a role in sustaining your love. Your kids will play a major role in it.

Scientists say two brain chemicals Vasopressin and Oxytocin creates attachment for male-female relationships, which can be seen in happy long relationships.

In Why we Love, Helen Fisher points, “As a man becomes more and more attached to his family, levels of testosterone can decline. In fact, at the birth of a child, expectant fathers experience a significant decline in levels of testosterone. Even when a man holds a baby, levels of testosterone decrease”

Family can sustain the marriage as it is in many Indian marriages. But it cannot sustain the romantic love between the partners.

Hence,

                 f(C) always < RL                                               

If love can change with time, the above formula will be a derivative of time:

            d( f(l))             d(f(c))                d( f(C))                d(f(m))               d( f(f))        

L   =    ----------     +     ----------     +     --------     +        --------     +      ---------

                    dt                      dt                        dt                         dt                       dt

At any point of time, L should always be ≥ RL

“Romantic love can stimulate you to sustain a loving partnership or drive you to fall in love with a new person and initiate divorce”, says Helen Fisher in Why we Love

Psychologists say on an average every person fall in love 7 times in their life time.

So, if you have lost a love, don’t worry you can fall in love with someone soon.

If Love changes over time, how to sustain it and make life happier?

           “Let there be spaces in your togetherness”, advised Kahlil Gibran in The Prophet

            You should understand that expectation from your partner will change with time

            Understand the changes in your partner

            Look for a good friend and companion in your partner than mere husband-wife expectations

            Revive your love with your partner time and again. Nothing wrong in flirting and falling in love with your partner again and again