It seems the I & B ministry doesn’t like chocolate. Specifically it doesn’t like women nibbling the posterior of a chocolate covered man. The new ‘Dark Temptations’ Axe deodorant ad has been recently banned by the ministry for being indecent, vulgar and suggestive and thus violating Rule 7 (8) of the Advertising Code prescribed under the Cable Television Act, which says, ” Indecent, vulgar, suggestive, repulsive or offensive themes or treatment shall be avoided in all advertisements.”
Personally I can take chocolate or leave it….
“Indecent”, “vulgar”, “repulsive” and “offensive” I understand as ideas, at least notionally. It’s the “suggestive” I don’t get.
Continue reading Yeh To Bada Toing Hai!
I want to go off on a bit of a tangent here. Just to open a different discussion in the spirit of thinking, and muddling along together. It seems to me that one of the axis on which the debate has turned is on the question of desire and its representation. Who is the desiring subject, towards whom is this desire directed, who represents this desire in what way, what are the slippages therein, who has the right to speak about whom.
I was wondering if we can approach this from a slightly different angle by taking this question of desire beyond the individual subject (variously defined). And in fact nameless did gesture to this in one of her responses where she raised the question of the appropriation of what she termed subaltern practices by elite intellectuals where certain practices and forms, in this case autos, are made to stand in for certain values – in this case progressive, ‘left” etc – which says more about the locations of the intellectuals and their insensitivity to their own class-caste positions, in a move which is patronizing at best and exploitative at worst. I think inherent in this critique is the shadow of a kind of objectification of a certain experience, so that a symbol becomes alienated from the actual life practices in which it is located to circulate as some empty signifier, to be appropriately filled as per requirement.
Continue reading A Tangential Addition to the Great Auto Debate
In yet another shocking incident reflective of the declining standards of morality and respect for property rights amongst the young, a 13 year old boy was accused of stealing money from a shop.
However this story is special for the amazing presence of mind displayed by the boutique owner Pinki. With that special sixth-sense that only mothers are gifted with, Pinki intuitively realised that the boy had nothing to do with the stolen money whatsoever and immediately proceeded to beat him up. Not one to leave a job half done she then shaved his head, stripped him naked and as a final touch (reminiscent of her attention to detail as a fashion designer) inscribed “I am a Thief” on his stomach and back. The boy was then paraded naked in the market place.
Continue reading Boutique Owner Brutally Tortures 13 Year Old Boy: (Don’t Worry, She’s Fine)