The Delhi government apparently feels that women are rather thick in the head. Considering that it is headed by a lady, we must now take this as a conclusive fact. I am reacting to the continued insistence of the government in making helmets for two wheeler riders compulsory for men , but optional for women.
This piece of news was too good to resist. Regular readers are familiar with this blogger's tendency to rib the fairer sex once in a while. Realisation has dawned that there has been some tardiness in this matter over the past many months. Time to rectify the situation. Sunday posts are an excuse for unbridled frivolity rather unbecoming of a "serious" business blog. So here goes.
Why else must the government make the differentiation ? There is no evidence to suggest that Romeos are more likely to fall from two wheelers than Juliets. Yes, Romeo's concentration on the bike can easily, and often, be distracted by a passing Juliet, but that's equally true of Juliet too - its just that the human emotions that are triggered by such a sight varies from admiration to envy ! It certainly cannot be anything to do with display of the hairdo to please the eye . Indian ladies have a mighty preference for long hair, but considering that Rajalakshmi is far too lazy to tend to it properly, it can be argued that it is best hidden under the helmet.
It can perhaps be on the grounds of women empowerment, but then India is not pro choice country (American far right, please note)! Perhaps it is a consequence of the tendency of the ladies in this country to ride side saddle - Research indicates that a fall might more likely result in a landing on a rather more substantial part of the anatomy.
We have too look for clues elsewhere. There is yet another group in this worthy city which is exempted from wearing a helmet. Members of a certain religious group who sport rather substantial and cushioning headgear are not required to wear a helmet either. But considering the popular perception that under that elaborate adornment, there is a certain sparseness of matter, especially as we approach midday, we cannot draw a parallel to the feminine of the species ! For the record, the said insinuation is an abominable untruth.
Certain masculine members of my audience might respond as to what was new in the question posed in the title. Any category of the population which is fixated with the saas-bahu serials (soaps for ye non Indians) must obviously have to be somewhat thick in the head. Evidence mounts in this direction considering the obvious feminine dispensation towards a pedicure (see here for a learned exposition on this subject.
The Transport Minister in the Delhi Government who is leading the fight against women equality is the fantastically named Arvinder Singh Lovely ! But then being a member of the group which is exempt from wearing helmets for reasons outlined a couple of paragraphs above, we cannot take his arguments too highly !!
Motion is hereby moved that the fair sex is indeed rather well defended in the highest part of the anatomy. Spirited defence against the motion is invited. Those in support of the motion might consider tactical restraint as a means of saving their lives.
Posts
20 comments:
Now to live with my reputation, i must post a repartee, but i request Deepa, Hema to join me here for woman power :-)
Ok, here goes my reasoning.
> The female species by nature is known to be discplined and law obeying and hence doesnt need rules to govern behaviour, unlike the male species who need rules, enforcements, punishments etc to learn
> Rajalakshmi is more sane headed and cautious as you can see from the many sane things that you have praised her for in your posts (to the extent that people read her as your second girl friend), but ramarathinams are unreasonable, non thinking and insane, and need to be closely handheld and guided. So they need such rules.
> A few women who dont comply do this consciously to bring some color to the otherwise dull lives of ramarathinams
> Male horses are largely used for racing and are generally tacked up more tightly, because you dont believe they can go where they want to go on their own, and tend to get diverted. maybe a parallel is drawn from there.
and lastly and maybe also the least one being is that these rules are written by Ramarathinam and possibly thats why the miss (whether his sur name is lovely or otherwise). had rajalakshmi written the rules, you could have expected them to be better.
Here I'm struggling to get a 2 wheeler license. 6 Months as a Learner (nothing above 250cc), 3 courses on handling, defensive driving and driving in hazardous road conditions before I get a restricted license (no riding between 10pm and 6am, no pillion, nothing above 500cc) three more driving courses and 60 minute driving test and possibly 6-9 months before I get a full license. Needless to say all kinds of protective gear including flourescent jackets are a must. The Hyosung Aquila 250 cc is a baby bike which could pass off a road cruiser of considerable standing in India. The aim is of course a 1100cc cruiser in abot 15-18 months from now. So much premium on biker saftey and I shudder to think of even contemplating riding without a helmet!!!
Ramesh - I am already ducking for a cover so much so that I decide to speak nothing on the matter :) all the best to you! ;) and kudos to your courage considering you have majority of readers who would be interested to post a repartee. Would be interesting! :)
Tendency to rib the.. I am definitely tempted to ask many questions but will control myself as it is public ;)
Indian Ladies Long hair hmmm Saar, Please do let me know when we can catch up again more esp in EA or if you dare in Sathyam.
@Sandhya - Good try, but you rather spoiled it by taking a sporting analogy. Always risky to do so with a sports nut !! Both colts and fillies are raced and only a few are blinkered. Fillies have a weight allowance in classic races like the Derby and yet its mostly the colts that win. Alas, they are not "diverted" :):)
@Kiwi - Why on earth would you want to drive a 1100 cc monster, dressed like an eskimo in frigid kiwiland ??
Yeah - I despair of the idiocy on Indian roads. Despite it being the largest killer than in the world - more than the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan .....
@Vishal - Chicken, Chicken :):)
@Zeno - Another chicken chicken :):)
What unbeatable logic! Quite reminds me of the example of a study that correlates high crime and number of policeman and concludes that the police cause the crime. In any case, since I cant beat you on logic, I will have to join you. When I was in India last time it appeared that all women on 2-wheelers had taken to covering every square inch of their face and hands like a ninja warrior costume but no helmets. I appears that they were very keen on protecting their skin. So given that I believe that most people behave rationally, I not only agree with your conclusion that women must be thick-headed but must add a new conclusion that they must be very thin-skinned. So make your jokes at your own peril :)
What??!!
Ok..well..I think there is no arguement here at all.
Firstly, ladies tend to fool others by acting thickheaded but are not which the actually loggerheaded species of the other gender does not understand.
I second Sandhya here.Ladies are much more resposible and whether a rule is there or not they wear all the necessary gears to protect thmeselves, be it their head filled with lots of grey matter (which tends to make it thick, btw) or to protect any other 'substantial part of the anatomy'!
Rules are applicable only for those irresponsible dunces who think that they need not protect their heads just because it is empty inside!
hahaha only u can make such a subject sound so businessy :) had a good laugh over rajalakshmi debate here :)
@J - Brilliant comment. Evidence that you should start writing regularly - your style makes me say Touche every time !
Skincare does indeed override safety any day. What a pity.
@Hema - That argument won't cut much eyes. Read J's comment on the height of responsibility of the segment you are ably trying to defend !!
@Sri - Hey lovely to see you here. Anything for a laugh .....
You are too kind or just relieved that you can use my comment as a shield to deflect the brickbats:) Just for the record, I think it is brilliant idea to cover oneself AND wear a helmet. You see, I wouldn't want to get Rajalakshmi too angry :)
BOLD really bold! A jab at two demographics. The first rebuttal is for the 'certain religious group'. Well that headgear is the most functional headgear compared to all other fancy but useless ones around the country. Its tailor made to fit snug on each unique head (a helmet wearer would appreciate this feature immensely). The cushioning is ample. I would rather have my head in one of those if it were to make a contact with anything on the Indian roads, than the 'dubious ISO' marked helmets. The fact that they came up with that, long before Sher Shah Suri built the GT road, shows a foresight which deserves that glorious headgear for protection.
Anyways, coming to the 'ladies'. Any woman with smallest of concerns for her life would know how dangerous it is to be on a two-wheeler on a road in Delhi, even on a pillion. So the ladies who would like to own a ride prefer the 4 wheeler instead of 2. The ones who are relegated to the pillion feel the life is no longer worth living as they bagged a guy who could not afford a 4 wheeler and is putting her through this living hell. Either ways they do not spend too much time mulling over the quixotic law that the Mr. Lovely came up with, who appears to be an exception to the glorious group I just mentioned above.
Come to Pune, the city with the highest count of female two-wheeler riders. Not only do we do helmets, we do the Ninja look too. The last time I checked, they wore the helmet over the ninja mask! Now thats your woman, skin and head both protected. The legendary female brain!!
Hi, I didnt intend to sound so rude while commenting actually. I just over reacted in the joy of an open invitaiton to rebuttle.:)
Honestly, it is stupid to relax the rules for the ladies.
I would put another perspective on this to the PM.Does she think the lives of the fairer sex any less important than the others? Hopefully not. Then it brings us to a totally different topic and it would trigger a different trail of thoughts.
But there is no doubt that women are definetly more responsible and would protect their heads, eyes and skin well, law or no law.
Anyways, I rest my case, without any further argument.
namma oorla most women are already at the helm..so helmet thania thevai illainu vitrupanga :) and looking at d reaction from the guys and at the attack from ladies..no wonder guys need helmet more than them..thala..u maybe need body armour too for protection from rajaluxmees:D
@J - Noted for record :)
@Deepa - I wonder what is behind the spirited defence of the worthy religious men ....
That's a unique defence of the ladies. Its all the man's fault that he can't afford a four wheeler . Wow !!! Plizzz to publish photo of thee with a helmet and the ninja look. Surely would be less scary than the pythons you are favouring us with currently :):)
@Hema - You weren't rude at all. In fact far too polite. See, I was so surprised by the politeness that inadvertently "ice" changed to "eyes" in my original response :):)
@Gils - Oye Gilsu; typically unique comment re helm, et al . No No, no body armour. See; the ladies are all far too kind ...
Grew up very closely with them, and no one stood up for them! :)
@Deepa. Awww. So sweet. But they are such sports that they don't mind the ribbing they get.
I can't joke on this one - dad was wearing a helmet and mom was not so she got badly injured :(. They should have helmets mandatory for front as well as back riders!
@Shachi - Alas, it is so. Hope mom is recovering fast.
My one and only take....both riders and pillion riders[M & F goes without question] MUST wear helmets. Life is too precious:-).
A few recent experiences have made me unable to joke on this matter but I enjoyed the post and the comments...;-))
And I knw this is off topic but children must be made to sit in the back seat of cars....with seatbelts on if possible. Since most vehicles in India drive below 50km/hr it's ok but it pays to be safe:-).
@Reflections - Totally totally right. The risks that some of us take on the road are totally insane. Helmets, seat belts, are such small things - wonder why anybody would want to take a chance with life by discarding those. Totally support your comment on kids and seatbelts. You can get killed even at a 50kmph drive. Seat belts don't hurt and they are there - so I can't understand why anybody wouldn't want to wear it.
I would extend your point on kids to babies in baby seats too.
Post a Comment