The Rules Of 'The Picture'

This post is applicable to Facebookers only.

An excellent way to track sexism is via pictures. Let's dwell on that thought for a while. Everyone strives to have the perfect picture face. You know, the one that's neither too fake nor too attention seeking. One doesn't want to piss off the facebook judgers. A big huge smile that radiates happiness can't work, as people around you will judge you and say: 'How fake'. A non-smiling face can't work, as people will say: 'What's the point of that?'. The perfect picture is one with a hint of a smile; with preferably 5-6 comments under it. For this, one must have sufficient skill in front of a camera-the art of holding a smile for a long time without it losing it's shine. Women are born with this talent, and this is the sexism i was referring to.

Apart from the nice smile pictures, one is also allowed bonuses like a special 'fruity' picture or one that shows a hint of intimacy. Just a hint. The fruity picture can't be too kinky, otherwise one will be judged yet again. One can't have too many fruity pictures too. The risk of being judged is too high.

There's always that minutely embarrasing picture that someone has put up that you hate. Hence, you feel but obliged to comment 'eeeeeeeew, take this picture off' about 2-3 times. This is nothing but a plea for attention, and them who fall for this trap are fuckers.

There are also the facebook daredevils, who put up semi-nude pictures of themselves alone; or highly intimate pictures of themselves with the partner; who is also the person they are 'in a relationship with'. The Picture PDA-ers, if you will. What an alliteration.

What people don't realize is that in the struggle not to get judged, they get judged.

If you're wondering what prompted me to write that, or even think all of that, check this out: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/08/20/annoying.facebook.updaters/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

PS: I dislike people who think and do everything. Like Rebecca, specifically.

PPS: I'm all for PDA. Really.

PPPS: Apologies for the copyright infringement. But really, noone reads this.

The Bias

Everyone knows what Malhar is. The biggest fucking festival that everyone loves to hate. EVERY participant complains, and EVERY volunteer justifies; and yet EVERY college tries its hardest to win, bad organization/attitude notwithstanding. It's Malhar, after all.

Malhar. With it's huge ass events and huge ass judges. Events like the band events, the dance events, the theater events etc etc all have renowned judges from all over. Renowned, UNBIASED judges. But anyway, let's look into that. What makes for a non-biased judge? How does the organizer foresee and prevent any objections that the contingents may have? Or at the very least ensure the judge's fairness evaluation?

Qualities of an Unbiased Judge:

1. They shouldn't know the name of the competing colleges (In case, they were ex-students or something like that).

2. They shouldn't BE in any competing colleges (For obvious reasons).

These, i think are the basic qualifications a judge at such a big festival should have.

Now, let's look at the acapella event. From what i hear ( i HOPE i'm wrong), a Third Year student (!) from Nirmala Niketan is the judge for the finals. He's not from a competing college, but still a STUDENT! More than that, an ex-Wilsonian student who's very vocal about his love for Wilson College. One can still argue that this doesn't mean he's biased, and that most judges are ex-students of some college or the other, and that there's no way he'd recognize the Wilson contingent anyway. Well here's this: he played in a band with Wilson CL's brother, and she calls him her 'rakhi brother'; and he is playing in a band with one of the acapella group members. And they BOTH know that he's gonna be the judge.

With all due respect to the judge, this may count for some sub-conscious bias, or at the very least it would play on his mind that he knows two of the singers in the Wilson group.

The same judge was there last year for the finals, too, and the same two people in the Wilson contingent were there last year too, and Wilson didn't even figure in the top 3. This can mean one of two things:

1. That Wilson simply weren't good enough, and the judge ruled fairly.

2. That the judge hates Wilson college, and hence deliberately low marks.

See, i know the judge, and he definitely won't be biased. At ALL. But that's not the point, is it? Any competing college, if they find out about this, can complain and bring this matter up, right? Malhar can always argue that he judged fairly last year, and so there shouldn't be a problem. But that doesn't matter to the college that raised the issue, right? The point is that there is enough evidence to show that he COULD be biased. End of story.

Personally, i don't care. It's probably better for Wilson that he's there. I should learn how to end blogs.

Food & Its Awesomeness

People judge. That, in my opinion, is the basic rule of existence in this world. You're going to be judged by all that you do and don't do, intentionally or unintentionally. One simply cannot do an action in the presence of others, or one that they know of without being judged for it. This, i think, is the one of the cons of being given the ability to choose what we want. Of course, once you're judged, it's very hard to negate it's effect on the way people treat you/talk to and about you from then on. Hence, first impressions matter a great deal. Personally, i love judging people, much as i hate being judged myself. One of my favourite tactics is: Food.

I see people eat all the time. At my canteen, outside my house, in my house, in my friends houses, wherever i go. Hence, i can say with a good deal of confidence that i can know a person by the way they eat, what they eat, and most importantly, why they think that they eat the way they eat. I will go so far as to myself a food connoisseur, if you will. I place a great deal of (somewhat unnecessary) emphasis on food, and being a diehard foodie (fuck you, judge me all you want), i feel this is justified.

First, let me tell you about my habits. I have two clear demarkations which define how i eat on a particular day. My money status ie Lots Of Money or No Money. Let's look at No Money first: On college days, i wake up and head straight to college, most probably with nothing in my stomach apart from milk or badaam. Then, no food in college, apart from maybe some biscuits or a small vada paav. Then, the next meal will be at home (lunch). After that, i'll go wherever i have to go, and probably grab some more vada paavs at the station. Dinner at home, again, and then nothing till breakfast. Now, let's look at the Lots Of Money scenario. Wake up in the morning and run to the sandwich wala. Grab a quick sandwich as an excuse to get change for the cab ride to college. Then, in my break, i grab a pepsi/chole puri or whatever. After lectures are done, i'll probably have a tri cone outside college at Shree Sai. Maybe even another maaza, or puri bhaji/misal paav. Then, the cab ride home. Just before reaching home, i'll grab a nimbu paani. A small lunch (just for the name) at home. Then off to the chinese waala with whoever i can drag along for some triple chicken. Then, some respite for the stomach till evening, when i'll either have paratha or bread butter. Then again, a small dinner, and sleep. Sounds great, does it not? It really is.

You know, i really see no point in telling you how i judge you when i see you eat, seeing that you're judging me right now. Seeing that you've JUDGED me now. So, yet again, i haven't accomplished what i set out to accomplish, but i do feel satisfied. So, yet again, i won't fulfil the aim of the post.

I WILL, however, give you one small example of my judgement methods. If i hear someone say, "I eat my food slowly as i like to enjoy every morsel", then all my respect for them is gone. One cannot enjoy food by eating it slowly. The aim of eating is to fill the stomach, and enjoy yourself in the process, not the other way around. Why prolong torture? Fill the stomach fast, and after that is accomplished, enjoy the food all you want. If you can't enjoy food on a full stomach, then you can't really call yourself a food-appreciator.

Little known trivia: There exist in the stomach, two separate compartments, clearly demarcated for food. One, is the starters and main course compartment; and the other is a dessert compartment. The two function completely independently of each other. One can be empty and craving food, and the other can be painstakingly full. They do NOT share food. When one eats, one must take into consideration both compartment's needs.