Tuesday, July 22, 2014

No,I Shall Not Enjoy Raping You

“Why are women… so much more interesting to men than men are to women”? Wondered Virginia Woolf. 

That cannot be true, is not true. Indeed women are interesting to men like men are interesting to women. And the difference is only in the selection process of whom to be interested in. Women choose power and security, while men can be less discriminating. Perhaps they are not tethered to the attributes women get enamoured about.  Can you, a woman, deny that you are not interested in men and do not hallucinate about a Casanova, about the macho quintessential man – the Lawrence of Arabia? I can see your disapproving grimace, the moue. You are offended and outraged by what you may call my crudity. You do often see candour as outrageous. Don’t you?

But I resent your accusations and I ‘m also embarrassed and peeved by your comment that I’m lewd and that I disrobe you, rape you all the while without feeling your skin, your flesh. You say all men are hideous and licentious. You are right in feeling that I’m a rapist even if I have not violated your body by touch. Yes you are right I disrobe you; my eyes can scan the deepest secrets of your pulchritude, your body, the tantalizing beauty of your being that titillates me to no end.  I feel embarrassed when you notice my longing eyes, my skilful glances in the sly at the heave of your bosom, my eyes roving into the deep chasm in them; my gape at the fatal curve of your hip, the irresistibility of your rump; when the puckish gentleness of the breeze gently violates you- blowing aside the pallu of your sari, to feel the enchanting navel; the wheat tanned skin of your nape , and your back that you deftly display with the sartorial skill of your blouse; the low waist jean that clings at the partition of your rump, while you consciously expose the flesh below your navel and the naevus there about  ; the light weight skin thin short knitted top that enhances the contours of your torso, while you wantonly  gives me a peek to the straps of your bandeau and the wealth of your bosom; the contrived innocence in your lovely eyes that bewitches to no end and sometimes the lustful and ravishing glances that you throw at me.

Didn’t this confession satisfy you? Now tell me why wouldn’t I want you?
I was brought up to respect you, to not abuse you physically and by word of mouth. I have been truthful to my conditioning and what I believe in- not to violate women. Not to force a woman to yield to a wild amorous fantasy that may plow me. I fantasise you as you would me. Can you be honest here? 

I must say that your garb, your sex appeal is hard to resist. Often the empyrean beauty of your being is overshadowed by the voluptuousness of your robes that is aided by sartorial skill and the sparse use of the fig-leaf. Often you barely wear enough and flirtatiously expose. You hide behind the argument, it is your body and you have the sole right over it; you have the right to wear what your are comfortable in.Certainly!  You do that I know to impress, to attract me, to draw you to someone, potently and instantly.  I agree that you and I choose our robes, douse our flesh and skin with fragrances (that begrudges even the Gods) with skillful intent to impress, to appeal. You may be confident but your fig up that often is not in sync, is flirtatious and is universally aphrodisiacal.

I do not ask you to move about cocooned in black cloak, head to toe with tiny vents for your nostrils and your eyes, lest my amour becomes roguish and go berserk. I do not ask you to weave into   cocoon like a pupa. I assured you, I know not to violate a woman. But I refuse to be cowed by your statement that it is your body and you have the right to expose it as you wish. Yes you may. So do me. But when I’m what I’m there is always in the inappropriateness that you show that would make me want you, make me feel that you want to let out the beast in me. Choose your grab to suit the time and place. If you walk in the street square in a high hemmed negligee, that is very silky muslin like outlining your lingerie, sans buttons venting your voluptuous bosom you are only a temptress inviting any. Why do you tauntingly smile at me reclined in from the hoarding aloft the rise in the square tantalisngly  and wearing a casual tee that seems to be licentiously and purposefully pulled down at one shoulder revealing the ivory coloured straps of your brassiere?

You even walked about with in an  organised way as sluts in New Delhi. You called that a “Slut parade”. Didn’t you by using the term “slut” defile yourself and violate the many among you? There and then you told me, you confessed that you are aware that sluts and hussies are dressed in such way that would provoke the carnal beast in me.

You may brand me vile, satanic, and slobbering male chauvinistic squalor swine. Yes you may, but first make me convinced that my statements here are rubbish and are fulminations of a chauvinistic pig.

Believe me your beauty is given to you with unrestrained abundance by Nature and the many artificial gimmicks you borrow to enhance it, to take it to a level where you would succeed to entrance me, to provoke me- might stumble me , might unleash all restraint that I guarded with care. And that thinking you have is naïve, is perilous to you and me.

Believe me, I admire you, respect you but it is you who can make me crave lustfully and it is you who can make me behold you in awe,  in awe of Nature and her creation that is you.  


jijo moolayil said...

I don't find any necessary connection between "being provoked" by dressing style and rape. A simple case study would reveal that in none of the cases the victims' dressing was the reason for the attack. Many of them were poor village ladies (majority were dalits) fully clad, moderately dressed passengers or girls below the age of 10. We are still to find out the psychological reason behind it. Suppression of the male sexual energy giving vent in a violent form in the conservative cultures?!

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Jijo Moolayil,

Did I refer to the social evil we face because of the feudal mindset and the egregious views towards the female sex? I think, I did not intend to discuss that.
I was referring to the sexually suppressed rivalry that we see in the elite and middle class of the society. Where haute couture is taken to fanatic heights and in the name of liberated confidence.

It all boils down to attracting the opposite and when things go unpleasant the culture of blaming the male psyche and the argument of ones body and ones right to bare or cover.

Insignia said...

Anil, yes you got everything right! Its in the DNA. A female is wired to attract potential partners who can provide for her; give her offsprings and care for the offsprings.

If you hear any woman say that she dresses only for herself; DO NOT believe. We all dress up so that guys look at us. Now at what level is upto every women. Vulgar display of flesh has a clear intention - to be noticed. If we expect men to restrain their carnal thoughts; women! you better restrain your vulgar display of your flesh.

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Insignia,

I did not expect you to deride me for the position I took in the Post.

I got a call from C( my wife) yesterday and more in a tone of amusement and a little incredulity that I voiced so, she asked me how could I say that women hallucinate about Casanova and Lawrence of Arabia?

I could a only tell her that I have mentioned the reply to her poser in my Post itself. That women might accuse me of rudeness for saying so.
I wish that a blogger who was so outraged and incensed about an observation I gave to a comment in one of my post some time back reads this post and I wish she expresses the same sense of outrage. She since , stopped commenting my posts and last saw her commenting that I was an MCP. Ha !

Often, B none of us are pleased to be confronted with what we actually are, a lateral self. don't you think so so?
Your last sentence in the comment would infuriate the liberated ones for sure.

BK Chowla, said...

I can't believe this..People still think it is the dress that matters.
It never did..
It is bloody attitude of the studs who need to be tackled

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ BK Chowla,
I could not stop laughing after reading your comment about the "studs"

By the way, the Post was about the liberated socialite lass who thinks that displaying her assets is the best way to prove her point, her confidence and create misery for me ( ha).I did not intend to talk about dress that matters.
And who among men cannot be aroused by a voluptuous woman baring her assets ?

rudraprayaga said...

Women are interesting to men and men to women.The question is whether men can control their lust even if the look and looks of a female conquers their reason.Females remember that thorns falling on leaves as well as leaves falling on thorns hurt the them only.So almost all the females have that restraint.Of course that quality males also have,but not all.Then liquor and narcotics play villains.Apt topic for today's situation.

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ rudraprayag,

I'm not sure of the context in which
you mentioned " thorns... falling...and falling on thorns". I guess if it is the socially foisted "purity, chastity and virginity" , well it must apply in equal measure to men too. don't you think so?

I do not know if in the real world there are men who cannot be swayed by a female body decked up to provoke. Perhaps we have such men in the myth of lore. Wasn't Siva woken up by the nymph?

The fact is we dress and move about, even the swagger, the gait are meant to be appealing. The problem is when it goes overboard.No man is honest if he claims to be impervious to the attraction to a semi clad women.

rudraprayaga said...

Our society's texture is like that.
Women are branded as unchaste or whores, though without the involvement of a man a woman cannot lose her character.So In general females keep a LoC over their interaction with men.Women's Lib.or Sex-equality or whatever we speak about,women will be secluded from the kin even.

B Pradeep Nair said...

It's too difficult to disentangle the phyisio-emotional strands that make up human relationships.

Rape is violence. An assault on private parts has more serious emotional consequences unlike one on any other part of the body. The whys of it has been written and spoken about a lot. It's too complex. May be it's the DNA, may be it's the man's lack of fear, arrogance, misplaced sense of power, strange complexes, wrong upbringing...

And, as I have mentioned in my blog post, what we are seeing today has serious personal and social repercussions for a family, that are intangible.

We are actually a violent society. (We don't know to even protest peacefully.) Molestations and rapes are just another manifestation of the violent streak the people in this part of the world have.

It will take a long time for reformation to happen. I am an incurable optimist. I hope a change will happen sooner than later.

Insignia said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Insignia said...


Which of my lines made it look like a mockery of what you stated? I was only agreeing to what you stated. Maybe either the way I said it or its impossible for you to accept that I do agree with your views :-)

Liberated Anil? Guess there is a misunderstanding of what liberation means. Just ask any woman out there Anil. An honest response on why she choses to dress the way she chooses to dress.

I have seen naive girls who dress in a "more liberated" way but having outdated and narrows views. I have also seen women dress conservative and have bolder views on taboo subjects.

For one, men are wired to appreciate the beauty and crave for it and women are wired to encourage men. But rape is a totally off things among these discussions. Those are done by men who have lost their normal capacity of logic and reasoning and who see nothing but a piece of flesh. With such men, even a mannequin is in grave danger

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Insignia,

My apologies Bindu. I'm terribly sorry, that I did not read and check my reply to your comments before I posted it. It is a terrible question of a word being included which I honestly did not intend. I should have typed "I expected you to deride me..." Instead I missed to see the unwanted word "not" and wrote "I did not expect you to deride me..."
My apologise again. Hope this clears the matter. The fact is having seen you in the blogs I consider you as a very special person who is not timid, dull and banally puritanic as the many who profess great many ideas and rebellious philosophy but are crass and conservative. Even hypocritic. The statement I made in the post is sure to annoy majority of the women folk who may happen to stumble on it and though I did not expect you to be annoyed I chose to believe perhaps you may be annoyed too.

The word rape and the context of its use in my post are only meant as a signifier. Perhaps I failed to explain my point well and lost track!
The bottom line is physical attraction and wanting are common in male and female. Dress, attitude and gait can be encouraging, provocative and may be wanton or unintentional. Most of all often the haute couture dress code of the so called confident, modern, liberated lass is vulgar and they more often retaliate such opinion by saying, it is my body, my skin and I have the right to be what I want and wear what I want.
Though I cannot in my most foolish moments say that rape is always provoked by the attire women wear.

@ B.Pradeep Nair,

Rape is not the subject I intend to discuss.
However I agree with your statement that we live in violent societies. Man has been.
The strange psyche of man ( male) is the belief and feeling of over lordship over women and the feudal and social matters aid that.

But why do not we look into the way women maybe instrumental through her attitude inviting violence upon her?

Tracy Terry said...

Wow, a powerful and potentially incendiary piece of writing. Of course rape has nothing to do with dress or indeed what is worn/not worn and everything to do with power and control.

As for us women lusting after Casanova, Lawrence of Arabia or indeed the typical Adonis, I think the ever increasing abundance of books with covers featuring bare chested, muscle bound men is proof that some do.

Insignia said...

Take it easy Anil. I was really worried if my intention was not clear with my words. Its happened many times earlier. Sometimes people fail to understand my sarcasm; other times they dont believe I am in agreement.

Anyway; thanks a lot for appreciating my boldness. You know, not many like that character of mine :)

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Tracy Terry

Incendiary! I would not mind that T.
But the majority of those who read this post would prefer to rubbish it and categorise it as an offensive MC

@ Insignia,

Thanks B

Meera Sundararajan said...

I like the way you have gone about writing this. I think the issue is not about dress but the ability to stop when the word "no" is uttered. Rape occurs because men do not respect that word. A woman may dress in a way that can be described as tantalizing but that does not give him the right to proceed physically if she says "NO"

Musings said...

@ meerasundarjan,

Yes agree with you. But are men of self-restraint? As Bk Cholwa described in his comments the lot are stud bulls who can even eclipse the surge of the bull.
The moot question is besides the violation of women, which was not what I what I intended to discuss, it is the idea of modernity, fashion, so called identity, rights, liberty etc. of these women -the kind who talk about "my body, my right”, the kind of ones who dressed up measly and called their congregation "slut parade who are vilifying women’s rights and are the part of the problem.
Haven’t you too at some times felt seeing the way women display themselves as in bad taste and crude? They are not triggering eroticism but obscenity and vulgarity.

Ashwini C N said...

I really am not sure what to say, but just because something is tempting can we..?

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ C.Ashwini,

I agree with you. The post dose not endorse the alibi of provocation perse. But have we ever thought that we dress to attract?

Usha Menon said...

The dress of a woman is not the only cause of rape. Last December six boys raped a girl in a moving bus.Her boy friend was also with her. It is the mental make up of some men to sexually abuse women. Such people should be beaten in public.

Tracy Terry said...

To each their own, I prefer to think of it as thought provoking as all lots of your posts.

Shilpa Garg said...

The way a woman dresses still does not gives a licence to a man to rape her, physically or mentally! Majority of the women raped are/were dressed normally. It's all in the mind... the sick mind that pushes men to rape.

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Shilpa Garg,

It is not about rape, but more about the way women display often and the lofty rights that is used as an excuse to dress vulgar. And then to blame men is rather silly.

Happy Kitten said...

As usual I am late on this page where you have been very candid and I appreciate your honesty. But as one from the fairer sex, let me copy some quotes that I find appropriate for this post of yours.
A woman is supposed to have curves like an old Bentley, not like some old bike.

Real Women Have Curves.

The curves on a woman are there where nature intended them to be and no woman need to be ashamed of the same.

Now, as a man you may respond by saying that it is only natural for men to react to these curves.

Really? Do you mean to say that you have absolutely no control of yourself?
Do you really think that women should do everything in this world to cover those curves just so that men don't react? Why? Why?

If as you say, women need to put themselves in sacks won't you disrobe her in your minds?

Dont you men have the natural state of a woman in your minds?

Can it ever be replaced or taken away even if women are covered head to toe?

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Happy Kitten

Well, welcome back. I will regain some vitality on the blog that I missed with your absence for some time till now. This is what I feel about my regular blog commentators.
I like the metaphor of the Bentley and more of what you say below.
“The curves on a woman are there where nature intended them to be and no woman need to be ashamed of the same.”
When I come to the other points in your comments I feel that I missed out what I wanted to convey and most of the comments are after surmising that I intent to say men violate women because of the dress they wear.
The point I emphasise is that both men and women dress and embellish to attract , to feel confident, comfortable and be smarter than the rest. How they do it, to what extent they go decides the respect they may get from the fellow and opposite sex.
Indeed there are men who are so carnal, like there are women that they are provoked by the gait and the attire, “the curve” as you mentioned.
Why do women have low waist jean that shows the nether end of their spine and the partition of their rump? Why do we have the hoarding of Deepika Padukone sensually smiling from aloft , with the one sleeve of her t-shirt pulled down displaying her brassier? Leaving that aside, I have seen often women who are lustfully dressed that they display the heave and the deep cleavage of their D cup bosom , with a very low scoop neck tee , and more vivid than an xray pic. You may have come across similar dress sensibilities too. If any man dare say that he is impervious to such display, he is a rascal and a liar. Honestly I have craned my neck involuntarily seeing such exhibition until sense of propriety and decency reminds me to move on.
I did not say nor do I say now that women must be clothed head to toe. Good Lord deliver me if that happens.
The fact is all men are amorous and have raped women in their mind. Women too cannot be different but they may not be salacious like men.
All this story of freedom of dress, right over one’s body, one’s life etc etc. are simply nonsense. We dress to impress and feel good about. But don’t you agree that there is a sense of respectability and decency in the attire we wear and the attire that some wear to expose and display as much of flesh and skin as possible?

Happy Kitten said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Happy Kitten said...

Yes..men and women dress to feel good about themselves and many only to attract. And there is nothing wrong if a man or woman feels attracted since it is only natural to do so. But should one dictate how the other dress?
After living in the ME, a little bit of exposure wakes me up rudely at first but then later one gets used to it.
How do you feel seeing a sportsperson dressed so? Why is that your mind automatically adjusts to it? Or while at the beach?

Who can decide the level of modesty in dressing?

I think men need to keep their carnal feelings in check and never blame another if it goes out of control.

Musings said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Happykitten

Did I dictate dress code? Gosh am I confusing people?
Let me put it bluntly, I’m not saying that a two piece bikini must be avoided. They are fabulous and wonderful on a beach, or water front .But imagine someone wearing it to a party, at the bus station!!! Let me be candid here, yes a bikini clad women is arousing and attractive, be it at the beach or at the pool and provoking at the supermarket.
My whole argument is that men are attracted to beautiful or voluptuous women and the apparent deliberate attempt to expose under the guise of the freedom of choice to select one’s attire often what you called modesty and respectability is cast away. Then the attempt is simply to titillate.
Can you say no?
Much of our thoughts are camouflaged and cocooned by the conditioning and social etiquettes that we have been told and learned about. For someone to claim that he or she is impervious to the natural instincts and will not be swayed at least in the mind by acts and display of immodesty is untruth.

Happy Kitten said...

Yes..many men and women dress to kill.. as they say in advertisements. Deepika in the advt. is doing her job to attract, since the one who made the advt. knows well what will attract the client. Who wants it stopped? The menfolks?? Never! :)

But what I meant to say is who decides what level of exposure is right or wrong? How do you determine the same. For a person from the ME, even our dear old sari and a back cut blouse(need not be even low), the occasional glimpse of the naval can/may drive him into a frenzy? So, in the end who decides what is to be done with such feelings? Hence, a few in this world came up with the near to best solution they deemed appropriate to help these poor men folks who just cannot control their feelings in check: a clothing to cover the women from head to foot. Has it helped? NO!

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Happy Kitten,

Looks like we may never agree here. But I still feel that my take on this is not understood.
My contentions
1- Men and women dress to impress, embellish to feel good about them. Not many would walk about like a Gandhi or a Medha Pathhkar.
2- The natural urge of attraction is selective and guarded in women while men are ready at any time of the day and are easily enamoured.
3- Rape is not linked in any proportion to attire.
4- Rape perse was not the subject I wanted to discuss.
5- Sari is indeed a dress that is meant to be attractive as it blends to the symmetry of a woman.
No one needs to dictate dress code. What is required is a self-analysis of what is decent and what can be attractive and beholding than triggering ravenous lust.
6- Deepika Padukone’s story was just a figurative subject. Personally I would love to see her as such and I consider her one of the most viciously beautiful woman
Finally let me quote the male psyche as told by the late Kushwant Singh in an interview to a woman journalist couple of years before he died.
Interviewer- Have you had dirty thoughts?
Kushwant Singh- Yes I do very often
Interviewer- What kind of dirty feelings?
Kushwant Singh- Well, whenever I see a beautiful woman I would want to have sex with her
Interviewer- (Laughing) Really? No you are joking.
Kushwant Singh- I’m serious. I’m not making stories. If you want why don’t you ask your husband?

(Laughter all around)

Happy Kitten said...

"What is required is a self-analysis of what is decent and what can be attractive and beholding than triggering ravenous lust"

The above is where we don’t agree? Frankly speaking many including me don't know what triggers a man’s lust. For example, I wear jeans which many find inappropriate. Many in India too says it is indecent? What I find appropriate for me or my daughter may not look fine for another? And what I find inappropriate may just be fine for another.

Kushwant Singh could be right. But did he succumb to this urge is the right question here.

And hoping to end this never ending discussion, let me say that the whole problem is point number 2. And many men use this to justify their action.

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Happy Kitten.

Yes we can agree if you understood my post. But if I failed to convey what I wanted then it is my fault.
Lastly let me say-
I do not subscribe to the view that uncontrolled lust is excusable if women bare. I never said that.
I also wonder as to why women dress in a blatant manner and claim that it is their right and privilege to dress and bare what they want. Why do they bare in a wild manner? No answer yet. My take is to titillate men and be noted.

Kushwant Singh was using an anecdote of his feelings which is quite common with men. Who among men is not promiscuous in mind?

If we cannot find an answer that is convincing we should close the discussion here

The question that still remains unanswered is why do women bare?

Happy Kitten said...

and Deepika is in news for this same subject :)

What do you think? who went overboard? TOI or Deepika?

Anilkumar Kurup said...

@ Happykitten,

Ha, here,I would give credence to publicity gimmick and less about cleavage .

Honestly I would appreciate beauty cleavage or no cleavage and Deepika Padukone is a viciously beautiful woman.

Why she must display her beautiful physique is something she must tell.

To answer your question I would say if there were no men would women try to be attractive and viceversa?