Friday, May 26, 2006


There exists profound differences between the modi operandi in which the fairer and the unfairer sexes socialise and exchange thoughts between themselves.

The male method is simple, straightforward and robust. The process consists of the collective absorption of alcohol or caffeine or both, interspersed with a few infrequent, random views on the traffic, weather and the general well being of the substance being imbibed. There are times when highly animated conversations do throw up thorny and controversial comments regarding the comparative merits of different rock bands, the ailing form of a particular cricket team or the dodgy knee of a particular footballer, but such occasions are extremely rare. If one stumbles upon a normal version of such a session, one is expected to be greeted with warm, amicable silence.

The female method, in sharp contradistinction to the above explained racket, is one fraught with fervent vocal activity. The topics in the fray range from the Absolutely Nothing to the Utterly Insignificant. The frugal content of the exchange however, never translates into the paucity of volume. Large helpings of ideas are exchanged on the topic of linen and the colour combinations for various things. Voluminous exchange is also observed on other miasmic topics like literature, social trends and Oprah Winfrey, but I would not be able to comment on them and neither do I intend to draw the attention of the peruser towards that direction. The remarkable quality towards which I intend to draw the attention of my scant readership is the sheer volume of stuff that is actually exchanged during the whole affair. This trend is certainly admirable for the purpose of creating and nurturing the bonhomie thingy, but suffers from one serious flaw -- One runs out of things to say.

Whereas men are not encumbered by the superfluous desire to converse or talk for the maintenance of a relationship, women for some strange quirk of character deem it a necessity. This quirk combined with the exhaustion of topics (as already explained) to discuss between two girlfriends result in what could be termed as churning. Women flit from friend to friend after all mutual topics of interest have been discussed at length.

The astute reader, much accustomed to my informative posts at this juncture would raise extremely pointed questions regarding the general direction of this banter. Therefore, without much ado, I would now like to broach the core topic. As a result of the diligently described process of churning, the individual involved in a marriage thingy in the capacity of a husband is exposed to a rather variegated selection of friends-in-law. As a result I, in my capacity of dutiful husband coupled with the character of an intrepid researcher, have finally come up with a list of categories of friends-in-law. I would like to clarify that this research is far from exhaustive and can certainly be added upon.

Type: The Sappy Nitwit
Marked by the inexplicable tendency to hallucinate. Will find the strangest of things beautiful. Will startle one with unexpected and sudden ejaculations of oohs and aahs upon chancing upon any sort of animal (including buffaloes). The animals are generally not found to reciprocate the gesture. Will suggest the worst movies and holiday destinations to the wife.
Pros: None.
Cons: The wife at times will drag one to the suggested movies and holiday destinations. Also, sudden oohs and aahs tend to distract one when driving in heavy traffic.
Husband/Partner: The husband or partner of the sappy nitwit posseses the admirable trait of unleashing blank grins to accompany the perspicacious observations on the part of his loved one. Privately, this person is generally found gnashing his teeth.

Type: The Pseudo Women's Libber
Posseses a rather unexplicable malevolence for men in general and the bald ones in particular. Professes the equality of sexes but somehow holds the opinion that men are blots in the landscape of their angst ridden life. Strangely this variety gets unusually perturbed when not given any attention by these very men. Even the bald ones. I have found this contradiction a trifle mysterious.
Pros: Due to the utter disdain with which one will be treated in one's house, one may dispense with all social graces and merrily attach oneself to the television and the beer.
Cons:Being subjected to basiliskesque glances within the confines of one's own happy home gives me the heebie jeebies.
Husband/Partner: Nonexistent.

Type: The True Women's Libber
Brevity of expression marks this particular species. Realizes the redundant excrescence that one is. Keeps the interaction to the minimum. One never gets to know the traits of the person.
Pros: As already stated, one is treated very much like a piece of furniture. Rather perfect.
Cons: None.
Husband/Partner: The company of the husband or partner is never thrust upon one.

Type: The Shopper
Appearence cannot be discerned due to the fact that the subject shall be smothered by shopping bags most of the time. Will make frequent appearences to pick up the wife to go shopping.
Pros:Conspiciously agreeable by the absence.
Cons: Severly degrades the doubloon abundance in one's life.
Husband/Partner: Seen in shopping malls with a demeanour which may be termed as dazed. Generally very well dressed.

Thursday, May 04, 2006

Analyze This

Delhi, India: In an expected turn of events, the combined number of hours clocked by braindead cricket match and cricket player analysis programs on Indian television have surpassed the cumulative time for all the actual cricket shown on it. The momentous occasion came upon the unsuspecting world during 32nd minute of the immensely popular Match ka Joker Kaun ? post match analysis show which was being aired on Aaj Tak at 8:35 pm last Saturday. A large number of channels had been vying for this prestigious achievement but Aaj Tak pipped the rest of the competition by going in for a post-match analysis program without any actual match to analyze. Bald Monkey, our chief researcher has created the worms which describes the timeline for the whole process:

Although it has made no difference to the actual viewership, the [FILMY] channel has called for a rematch. "The post match analysis program in question cannot be deemed as official since there was no actual official match before or after the show. Aaj Tak is cheating !" was the official statement from the management of [FILMY]. The Aaj Tak channel has responded saying "Talking of official, we are not even sure as to whether the Eurasia Cup thingy that the [FILMY] channel has been covering (and analyzing) is even official or not. Also, that match between the movie stars and cricketers-from-the-geriatric ward which [FILMY] telecast and analysed was certainly not official. Official Shoffical ! Pah !" . Set Max, (the pioneer of meaningless post and pre match analysis) has for unknown reasons remained silent on the matter.

When Sharad Pawar, the president of the BCCI was approached, he informed us that the BCCI had been anticipating such an eventuality. "We in the recent past had drastically increased the number of irrelevant matches and tournaments but clearly our efforts have not been enough to thwart the problem" he said. The BCCI is now looking into ways in which it might grant official status to some of the analysis programming and in the process generate some revenue for itself. "We will put in place a board of selectors who will select a panel of experts to analyze the matches on television. For the rest of the flim flam on these programs, we will have a reality-show-talent-hunt with huge portions of melodrama." the president of the BCCI said.

Tags: , , ,