Last week, I wrote a post about ABC’s Notes From the Underbelly (which, btw, is on tonight at 9:30) and most of the comment thread was as fun and fluffy as I expected it to be. In light of that, I am half-willing to apologize for my bromidic attempt at virtually playing the right and left sides of the audience off each other, like it was an old skool rap concert or a pep rally, but most of you resisted my super-smack talk about Sunkrish vs Sendhil so all’s well that ends well…or is it?
One of the last comments on my post was left on Thursday, and it has bothered me since:
Punjabi Sikh kudis prefer clean-shaven men sans turban. They are quite vocal about that on all the Sikh dating and matrimonial sites. It has reached a crisis level in Canada and US with many Sikh men having to go to Desh to find a woman willing to take them with beard, turban and all. [link]
The handle this person chose (Broken Hearted Munda Looking for Kudi) made me extra sad. One of my closest friends is in this exact situation. He’s brilliant, hilarious, considerate and one of the sweetest people I have ever met—and he’s still single. And in his mid/late 30s. What would “normally†make a non-trivial number of girls gasp or pick out curtains— i.e. every attribute I listed in the last sentence PLUS two ivy degrees— seems to come second to the fact that he is a rather Orthodox Sikh. I don’t think the issue is his tee totaling/clean living; I think it’s his turban and beard.
Today, we received another pained comment, from a different person (Munda Still Looking for Kudi), on the same thread:
These women also cite 9/11 and subsequent discrimination against turbanned men as an excuse to avoid us like the plague. They say they don’t want to attract unneccessary attention and inconvenience and do not want to see their men and future children placed in possibly dangerous situations. Is this a cop out? [link]
Oh, 9/11. You changed everything. Now you consistently inspire nightmares like last week’s violence against an innocent Sikh cabdriver in Seattle, who was just trying to help an inebriated person get home, per the police’s request:
Trying to escape the attack, the 48-year-old victim stopped in a car pool lane Saturday night on Interstate 5, near Columbian Way, and scrambled out, state troopers said. His attacker had punched, choked and bitten him, calling him an “Iraqi terrorist,” according to police reports…
The suspect knocked off the victim’s turban and tore out clumps of his hair, according to reports. The beating continued as the victim fell onto the road. The victim briefly was hospitalized at Harborview Medical Center for injuries that included a concussion and bite marks on his head, according to police and acquaintances.
State troopers were called about 8 p.m. A Metro bus stopped next to the cab to block traffic after seeing the suspect attacking the victim in the road. Witnesses aboard the bus made dozens of calls to 911, Merrill said. [MSNBC]
The only comfort I take from that story is that the bus stopped while its riders frantically called 911…to report a crime which was inspired by those very numbers.I must say, I can’t see any of my Sikh female friends “copping†to the reason which Munda Still Looking for Kudi cites; while plenty of them will bashfully admit that they want a clean-shaven mate, it’s not because of “inconvenience†or fears over discrimination. My friends are fierce, and take exhortations to be brave seriously; don’t go looking for a fight or commit some injustice in front of them, they’ll get righteously medieval on your kundis. (See: SM kudi Camille). But these women are also human. The heart wants what it wants and that’s demoralizing for people like my friend, with the stellar professional and emotional resume.
I know Sikh men who were born and raised here, who have gone to India for a bride and I know Sikh men who were born and raised here, who can’t conceive of such an undertaking. In three years of mutinying, I’ve heard from hundreds of you about how some of you don’t think your vesternized-selves could marry someone from the other side of the world– and yes, before a few of you angrily flame, we’ve also heard from those who are more than happy to find love thither. Why should wearing a turban or not shaving alter such feelings of apprehension regarding one of the most important decisions you’ll ever make?
What I want to know is, what do you think of these two comments and by extension, this issue? Do those of you who wear a turban plan on raising your sons to wear them? Are we heading to a future where little boys don’t run around in patkas, whether for their own safety or their future success with the kudis? I’m sure this already has been discussed on Sikh-centric sites, but I can sense that some of you want to raise your concerns here. Well, I heard you– and now I’d love to read what you have to say.
I think Lafuzada should definitely be banned. He’s full of hate for Sikhs, but you can bet that one day if he’s in trouble and if there’s a turbanned Sikh in his vicinity, that’s the first person he’ll ask for help.
Frankly, I think there should be more banning on this site, not less. The rudeness of certain commenters here is one reason I lurk more and comment less on SM these days.
I was about to delete it, then I realized that it has to do with what we are discussing– this perception of a turban as something undesirable and ugly, which leads to situations exactly like those which inspired my post. Language alters perception and then preferences; those who do choose to keep their hair are less wanted for it. “Diaper”? That’s abusive and not allowed under our clearly-stated policies.
They weren’t banned right away, I actually really struggled with the decision. Though a few of you wish to derail this thread with criticism about my lack of skill/care as a moderator, I do take my responsibilities at SM very seriously.
This isn’t a first. In the past, when someone was genuinely trying to express themselves and NOT trying to offend, they’ve reached out to us accordingly and we’ve apologized/ made things right. No one’s perfect at expressing themselves, but if you’re immediately called out on hate speech and you don’t respond, then it indicates trollery, not poor communication skills.
As for “no second chances in my world”, that’s poetic, but incorrect. I’m a volunteer on this site and I try my best to maintain the mutinousness. There are second, third and even eighth chances in my world. Have some proof with your lunch: HMF has been banned before and he’s still here.
This is a private site. That’s a fact. No need to type it like it’s a bad thing. If anyone has further questions about this, please email me. I’d like to get back on topic now, because it’s been a wonderful discussion so far.
Anna, you took exactly 16-minutes from the time of Lafuzada’s post to pronounce he/she was banned. That is not an agonizing “struggle” to decide whether someone should be banned.
You do admit the opinion and content of the post are relevant to the subject… Good for you.
You find the word “diaper” offensive…. As a balanced moderator step in and say so… But delete or ban – no way.
Those of you ready to ban, reflect on how often you’ve commented at the lack of diverse opinion in George Bush’s administration. I can see the value of warning, deleting and banning posts that are personal attacks or racial denigrations. This qualified as none of those.
My Punjabi SO who grew up in the USA also doesn’t like facial hair. I have found that to be a common theme among American women in general… outside of those old-timers who had a thing for Magnum PI. This reminds of a line from Pulp Fiction where Bruce Willis’ girlfriend make a comment regarding pot-bellies… perhaps not visibly attractive but interesting to the touch.
Fair enough Anna, just expressing my opinion. While we are on expression, see something related.
Tell me, how many minutes of my day do I owe a troll, this blog or you, someone who doesn’t seem to have the compassion to give me the benefit of your doubt? Would 32 minutes have met your approval? 64? Perhaps I emote more than others do, in a quarter-hour.
You are not interested in understanding me or my intentions; now that I have blown my lunch editing and moderating, I’m not interested in sliding further behind with my day job to convince you that I take these things seriously. You actually checked the time stamps to try and make an unproductive point, after I asked you to email me privately vs continue to derail the thread. Then again, you think our moderating the way we have done consistently, for years, which has made this site worth your time and not a cesspool, THAT merits a comparison to Dubya’s badministration, so perhaps you and I will never see the other’s view.
If all people want to discuss is the decision which an august commenter even agreed with, then I’ll close the thread. On topic or on to a different conversation, you decide.
285 · Rahul said:
That sounds like a job for a priest, not a chef, but it just reinforces my belief that marriage is for the birds.
Not liking facial hair? I don’t know who you’re talking about – but Americans come in all sizes, shapes, and tastes. Maybe you’re sampling a small particular group of American women. This American woman likes hot men – regardless of facial hair. I’ve liked men with it and men without it. And I’m hardly an “old-timer”. Saying that most American women don’t like facial hair is overgeneralizing a bit, isn’t it?
I agree. Just to extend on that argument, facial hair is trendy in some parts too. Like Brooklyn? Or half the indie rock bands out there? We’re talking about some coveted folks. You just can’t make a generalization about these things, in one area of the world things might be a dud in the other it might be the best thing ever. It’s like Malcom Gladwell’s discussion of the trend of hush puppies in The Tipping Point. People assumed they were dead, but a bunch of beatnick kids resurrected them decades after their prime. Evaluating people’s thoughts on issues and their likes is much harder than we think. Trust me, as a PR professional, it can be infuriating! Just to build on that, I highly suggest you read Mark Penn’s Microtrends, where he discusses how an influential group of a population only needs to equal 1 percent, and how there are more of those microgroups in America than ever before.
You should start a blog – and when you do, you can moderate it how you’d like.
VV: I have found that to be a common theme among American women in general…
Fuerza: Not liking facial hair? I don’t know who you’re talking about –
If there’s a common thread in American beauty preferences…it’s about removing hair. Each day I am bombarded on TV, mail, radio and Internet with hair-removing Salons, close-shavers, ultra-violet destroyers, lasers, Nair-type potions, hair-bleachers, back-hair removal, upper-lip cleaners, tweezers, shavers and all manner of hair-destroying techniques. Ask a European — Americans are the world’s pre-eminent experts in hair removal and odor-covering devices. Look around you at the percentage of men with beards, mustaches and goatees in the US versus India. Yes, Virginia, Americans by in large do not prefer men with facial. This especially true after the terrorist-scare that’s been fed to the general populace.
Listen, it takes enough time to write the posts, and even more time to police the comments. We’re not going to spend more time defending our actions. If you like what we do, we’re happy. If you don’t, you’re probably right in your criticisms of us and we thank you for your time. We’re simply not going to debate this further, especially when somebody is calling on us to do something even more time consuming than we already do.
Even so, aren’t those products/services generally targeted at women?
If people have strong feelings about anything, it’s usually just moustaches and beards. After all, for those lucky types who have pale features and thus, don’t evoke terrorism with their facial “expressions”, shows like that Growing Up Gotti crap have demonstrated that there’s so much more than the standard goatee or Apollo Ono’s annoying soul patch to aspire to! Nala sometimes links to a picture of what I’m talking about, but I find looking at it traumatic, so I won’t inflict it upon you. That’s love, yo. 😉
I think this is a super interesting point– if you see a pale-skinned, red-haired man rocking a full beard, you think “oooh, non-conformist” or “hmmm, rustic” or perhaps even “there’s a bet– and an irritated girlfriend– involved with that somehow”. 😉
When the general public sees an olive-skinned/brown/vaguely ethnic looking man with a black beard, it skews completely differently.
Ms. Fuerza Dulce,
Why don’t you do a simple experiment. Step out where ever you are, count 100 random men – and see how many of them have facial hair in America. Please keep a numerical tab, will you.
Now, I do not know you visit India, and other parts of the world – like Palestine, Jordan, Africa, Mexico, South America.
When ever you visit those places, like India, Mexico, Palestine, and see how does that number compare to US of A. In Palestine, forget devout muslims for a moment, some facial hair is a sign of masculinity like in India and even parts of South America.
Look, this is something, not only a Palestinian women told me but from women from other parts of the world too is significant decrease in facial hair in America when compared to other parts of the world
In fact, my ex-PhD advisor, a white American who had facial hair, had a very lively discussion at one of our group lunches 10 years ago how America has moved away from men’s facial in last 100 odd years – from its frontier days, and he went into history of it too. Be it Gillette conspiracy, or Village gay people stereotype or what you make out of it.
I do not think such an experiment is that difficult. Could please let me know, it might take an year or so, for coverage.
i recall a study demonstrating that women prefer clean-shaven men most of the time. But when they are most fertile, their attention turns to the hairy, including other characteristics associated with masculinity.
Compare facial hair in 1970s USA, to even 1990s USA, there is a significant decrease, especially after post-Vietnam era.
It is end of hippie movement.
Yeah, I want Fabienne. Thass why I grown a lot of hair on my pot belly.
Not only America is moving away from men’s facial hair, even the torso.
Again, a simple experiment, use beaches in America, and then in South America or Europe.
Interesting link
the hairier the rambutan, the sweeter the juice.
I thought the Brazilians held that title.
In any case, I think some of you are trying to generalize the current mainstream fashion moment into some kind of ongoing trend that is progressively gaining more and more adherents who are progressively removing more and more hair, as if someday all American men are going to shave their eyebrows. This is not the case. First of all, there are many AMERICAN subcultures that celebrate body hair, and here on the left coast even some women don’t feel the societal imperative to remove hair from wherever it chooses to sprout. (My female honky partner has a slight hairlip. The Sikh women in my family are impressed that she doesn’t always wax it. They wish they had her sass and confidence.)
Also, if you want to talk about these trends, don’t talk about them as if they are happening organically in a vacuum. The forces of marketing are at work here. They prey on people’s insecurities.
Please, fellas, my little mags from Urban Outfiterz and such are loaded with hirsute indy types. And…I see guys walking around (at my local university campus) in ironed, trendy clothes while sporting unkempt beards, they keep fine company, it seems the ladies likey likey – fertile ladies I’m guessing.
Let’s not look at facial hair of the ’70s please. I’m reminded of my dad’s attempts to grow a ‘stache. He had to use eyeliner to smudge into the gaps. The man is a little too Native Am to grow facial hair.
It’s true that facial hair, right now in mainstream U.S. culture, is not touted. That said, I do think there’s a strong argument for facial hair among subcultures, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it makes a comeback in a while. This has not always been the case in the U.S., of course — there are clear times in history when facial hair was seen as more en vogue. I don’t think Sikhi or the Sikh uniform should be confined by the vagaries of the American beauty industry. Maybe I really am out of touch, but are people legitimately arguing that because the kids on MTV’s Real World are clean-shaven Sikh keshdari men should adopt that standard? No thank you.
319 · brown said:
Yeah, I always consult a focus group before I try on an identity.
No, it is Sachin Tendulkar, Hrithik Roshan, Amitabh Bachchan, and Shah Rukh Khan. None of these people could really be described as kids, but Amitabh in his roach-like ubiquity might have shown up on Real World, I don’t know.
Harbeer,
I am not sure what you are getting at here, people before my comment were talking about women’s preference for men of certain facial description hence the link, your rage is misplaced here.
My friend Brown, I was afraid you might think that was directed at you. It wasn’t. It was directed at the person who, on the page that you linked to, wrote:
In any case, that is not rage. That’s sarcasm. But that’s not directed at you, either. (And there’s no way I can avoid sounding sarcastic in this imperfect medium…just believe me yaar.)
I wasn’t sure that is why I asked, thank you for being gracious enough to explain.
yeah right.
VVV: As a balanced moderator step in and say so… But delete or ban – no way.
Fuerta:
You should start a blog – and when you do, you can moderate it how you’d like.
—
Ahh, yes, I remember this line of reasoning from 3rd grade: If you don’t like this country, you can leave.
Is there merit to Christopher Hitchen’s central thesis: “If you believe in religion, you might as well believe in astrology?” I’m inclined to think each religion has its own neurotic set of demands.
A blog’s quite different from a country. And I didn’t implicitly or explicitly say anything about you leaving SM. All I’m saying is that the SM Bloggers collectively figured out how they’d like to run their blog, and do so accordingly. You can moderate your own blog as openly or conservatively or under as random of a criteria as you’d like. That’s all.
Nothing gets past you, does it, Captain Obvious?
Harbeer:
Nothing gets past you, does it, Captain Obvious?
—
Good to know you are happy, sexually confident, proud and resplendent with your hirsute state. Apparently you’ve also done the pop-psychoanalysis on the mega/micro trend analysis of American follicle preferences. Sometimes, those of us with lesser knowledge make statements that you’ve analyzed deeply and long since discarded, forgive us, blessed Father.
Let’s look at facial hair from a slightly different angle…
My personal opinion is that head-hair, eyes, nose and jaw-line are the key characterstics that make humans look unique. If you look at neanderthals’ faces (in pictures) – it is quite hard to distinguish one from the other because they had the same headhair and facial hair. Their eyes were all scared and their noses similiar in shape. They probably distinguished each other by scent. Over time, humans have evolved to be more pronounced in their facial characterstics and their sense of smell has correspondingly diminished.
Among those four, eyes and jaw-line also give away our intentions and emotions, so they are more important to a person who may be interested in us.
Facial hair covers the jaw-line and strips the male’s identity to conform with those who have the same facial hair as himself. It also makes spotting emotions tougher: Did he like my paneer? Does he hate my dress? A person with facial hair and dark glasses is impenetrable emotionally.
Having a turban or a hijab strips a person’s identity even more since they now confirm to everyone who has a turban or hijab. Yes – you can have different colors, but there are only so many colors.
Considering that the religion was founded in troubled times where every able-bodied male was expected to fight in wars, the founders wanted conformity in their men and wanted to reduce their identity to that of a soldier (Soldiers in most modern armies have to be clean-shaven and cropped hair). Hence the insistence on turban/facial hair.
The question is: Is that all relevant today?
M. Nam
facial hair = natural botox?
VV Varaiya-
See: MoorNam for an example of dissent which doesn’t scream hatred. No asterisks, no outrageous “Sikh people are my friends!”-ass covering, no gratuitous citing of Sikhs whom he admires. Just a few thoughts and then an invitation for dialogue.
You said that you “can see the value of warning, deleting and banning posts that are personal attacks or racial denigrations”. That’s what I did. To quote you again, “This qualified as none of those.” 🙂
::
If you had told me that there would ever come a day when I’d be lovin’ me some MoorNam… 😉
You forgot handsome, Handsome. :-p Welcome to teh interwebs.
I remember reading somewhere that Alexander the Great ordered his soldiers to be clean shaven so that their beards could not be gripped or caught by the enemy soldiers in close combat situations.
MoorNam makes an interesting point. The Gurus’ absolute motivation in creating the covenants is an unsettled historical debate. From a military angle, it would appear to be an identification rather than an obscuration (i.e. a multi-year beard growth can’t easily be faked). Thus a Sikh soldier is easily identified.
Again, I don’t defend the use of the word “diaper”. It’s more along the line of Patrick Henry (a bit overly dramatic), “Sir, I disagree with your words, but will defend your right to say them to the death.” Lafuzada wrote an indiscriminately worded opinion, which MoorNam put in a more cerebral terms with an interesting hypothesis.
MoorNam, I would disagree with your assessment of the turban as stripping away identity and building soldier-oriented conformity. The concept of a Sikh uniform does indeed have a “soldierly” angle to it; however, given that it is the only faith that requires that one keep their kes (and by extension, the turban), it invokes a common religious identity. This does not eliminate or undermine identity unless it is unwillingly adopted or forced upon someone. Further, there is an intentional and beneficial justification behind enshrining one’s “uniform” in items that are shared across the community. Sikhs are a religious community — our “identity” is not wrapped up in racial or ethnic markers. Effectively, as a community, one of our goals is to build community and support across difference; one’s prime identity is that of a Sikh and a member of a larger human community. It is similar in Islam (where religious affiliation, in theory, supercedes class/caste, race/ethnicity, etc.). Is the turban, then, much different from the uniforms adopted by other faith traditions, and is this inherently a bad thing? I would argue no on both counts.
I say this again and again, but the decision on whether or not to keep kes within the practice of the faith is a decision that should ultimately be made by the Sikh panth / Sarbat Khalsa. It does not seem like there is a lack of positive affirmation for the faith among those who practice conscientiously. While others will always speculate, the increasing questioning from outside the Sikh community is ultimately irrelevant and oftentimes seen as disrespectful, despite the best intentions of those commenting.
I think it depends on their actual beard. Stubble might hurt. I’d rather have a man with a full beard or no beard at all than one that’s stubbly (when it comes to the above mentioned topic). But skill-wise, they just need to learn how to do it well with or without the beard. (And they need to do it period.)
Nothing ‘cerebral’ about it but it was entirely civil–that’s what gets people to respond in kind.
Nothing ‘cerebral’ about it but it was entirely civil–that’s what gets people to respond in kind.
—
My inferred point which was missed: we may have not gotten to MoorNam’s post if Lafuzada hadn’t opined. Banning should be a last resort, especially in the face of controversy.
VV, I disagree. I’m fairly confident MoorNam would have made his point regardless of lafuzada’s “contribution.” Really why are we belaboring this? Let’s all move on.
We have strayed far from the central topic of this thread…how to get Puli a date.
Good point. I do like the direction that Fuerza Dulce has taken.
completely wrong. Go through all of MoorNam’s previous postings on SM–his ideological bias is fairly predictable and he would have said essentially the same thing at some point in the discussion. I’ll just chalk your observation up to SM inexperience. But please, stop flogging this broken-down nag so people can move forward.
Apparently there’s no dearth of hairy Sikh men to draw on. (Where’s that Lone Brown Crayon when you need it?)
BELIEVE me, we would’ve gotten to MoorNam’s point. 😉 He isn’t shy.
Look. Though it may not read like it, I do grasp what you have been trying to say and I feel honored that you cared enough to stay on one of my threads to say it.
We have guidelines for very good reasons, and the comment which started this kerfuffle was a violation of it. That’s where I’m coming from.
well miss Anna is either receiving money from Pakistan or Hindu outfits to tarnish other religon image .i am proud hindu name saahil sharma and brahmin too but i thanks sikhs i am hindu bcoz of u.now guys who want to know why just study history.why nothing is mentioned about hindu girl running away with muslim guys.i was in uk for studies and i have seen lot of this thing.Now i respect sikhs bcoz even if have a problem in uk or india these so called gujus ,mallus ,marathis ,even hindu will run away but my sikh friend always stood by me.These king of post just show the shallow mentality of indian living abroad who are always looking for an opportunity to insult other religon..FOR MY SIKH FRIEND DON’T GET CARRIED AWAY BY THIS KIND OF PEOPLE UR RELIGION IS BLOOMING IN THE HEAT OF CHRISTIANITY IE AMERICA JUST CHQ THE YOUTUBE LINK AND LOOK AT THESE WHITE SIKHS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73LBZAHK5mo. REGARDING SIKH GIRLS WELL THEY EASILY GET CARRIED AWAY BY GROUP EFFECT WHERE THERE EVERY DECISION IS INFLUENCED BY OTHER PEOPLE.SIKH GIRLS USUALLY ARE LESS EDUCATED HAVE AND GIVE LOOKS THE MORE WEIGHT AGE THAN QUALITIES OF INDIVIDUAL.NOW FOR GUYS WHO ARE CRYING THAT THEY ARE UNABLE TO FIND GIRLS ONLY ONE ADVICE FOR THEM GROW UP AND HAVE SOME CONFIDENCE IN YOURSELF.C MON GUYS I HAVE SEEN IN UK ITSELF SARDAR BANGING WHITE AND BROWN MOMS EVERY DAY AND SINDHIS AND MALLLUS IN DELHI..I AM NOT JOKING I WAS WITNESS OF ALL SUCH INCIDENT HAPPENING IN MY ROOM.I MUST SAY I JUST SPENT 3 YEARS IN UK FOR EDUCATION BUT THESE GUYS ARE MY BEST FRIEND ,THERE IS GIRL CALL CHETNA ON THIS FORUM LOOKING FOR KIRPAN AMENDMENT GIRLS JUST GREW UP DONT SPREAD UR GHATIGIRI IN USA TOO.WE ARE HERE BCOZ OF THAT SAME KIRPAN.YOU SOUND LIKE PURE GHATI WHO CAAN DIGEST OTHER COMMOUNITY PROGRESS.YOU MARATHIS CALL YOURSELF MARATHA BY BEATING INNOCENT LABORER WORKER FROM UP AND BIHAR SHAME ON U WHAT IF PEOPLE IN AMERICA START TREATING U GUYS LIKE BHAYYA OF.WELL TO ALL MY SIKH FRIEND IN UK AND INDIA WHENVER U READ THIS POST JUST WANT TO SAY I MISS U GUYS AND FOR SIKH GIRLS JUST RESPECT UR RELIGION BCOZ I AM OUTSIDER BUT AGAIN A GOOD WELL WISHER FOR YOUR COMMUNITY. ANY ONE WHO DOUBTS ABOUT MY IDENTITY I HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED MY NAME AND EMAIL .AND TO MISS ANNA WHO HAS STARTED THIS THREAD GIRL I THINK U HAVE LOTS OF FREETIME MAY BE YOUR HUSBAND IS GAY CALL ME I WILL SEND SOME SARDARS FOR UR PLEASURE BUT THEY LOVE ANAL SO GET READY WITH LUBRICANT AND STOP ACTING LIKE BLOODY POLITICIANS OF INDIA .
Thanks. Putting aside the issue of turbans and beards aside – Even if a potential life-mate has a turban, I’m more concerned with making sure my potential engages in certain “activities”. New thread idea!!
I swear, sometimes we need a Sepia 101 or a wiki or something…
“MoorNam is usually a contrarian and always adamantine; he tells us what he thinks whether we want him to or not. He is powerful enough to have inspired a satire mutineer, something no other commenter has managed to achieve.
Camille is quite possible the smartest of those who mutiny frequently and despite what some assume from her name, she is 100% brown.
Manju and Rob can be counted on to chime in consistently, especially on topics regarding new york restaurants, women, money, women and money or spending money on women in new york restaurants. Both are often irreverent…
…though not as irreverent as Rahul, pingpong and another Tamizzhrrl I am forgetting right now.
Puli is our chamathu kid/resident paavam, whom we should set up with a nice girl already and get it over with; though most of us have never met him, many of us profess an uncontrollable desire to chuck him under the chin and or pinch his cheek, while sighing, “Awww”.
Anna is excessively emotional, highly hypersensitive and infamous for constantly whining about how no one appreciates the 2,857 hours per week she spends on this site, despite her exhausting real job and attemtps at an actual life.”
etc, etc 😉