What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
So you talk to "ugly" Indians in real life, and they do not even know that you consider them inferior? That is neat.

BTW, how come you are so good looking and still wasting your time on a defense forum? ;)

We have to talk with Indians in real life at workplace for work purposes, now that you mentioned it..

What being good looking has anything to do with spending time at defence forum.. Minnesota is one of the coldest states... let the weather warm up.. and you will see me disappear from this forum like a butterfly (Although I have to admit this forum is kinda addicting :D)
 
. .
Ok anywayz, I have to say sorry to you too... I was pretty harsh with South Indians... but not even once you lost your temper... Thats really commendable... :coffee::partay:

I just wanted to make a simple change in your approach. Looks and skin color should not be the basis of disliking or considering someone inferior. And I am not a south Indian, I am a north Indian. Not a Punjabi, but still good looking, and I tell you for sure there are innumerable examples of good-looking non-Punjabis in India. You can come to India and see for yourself. At least, you can trust me so much when I say that?

P.S. Everything I said to you was more in a jocular manner, I hope you did not took any of my words to heart. :)

Be human, love human!
 
.
He is good looking but Akshay Kumar and Hrithik Roshan are more handsome and cuter .. (in my opinion) :agree: :D

That is your opinion, in my opinion he is way better than these two. Watch these:


 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Nice playing with words..anything else to contribute other than this mindless ramblings??

Shall we say, a taste of your own medicine, in any case looking at your futile rants with a female member, it's not difficult to conclude who is worth their salt. Anyways back to the topic my dear. :partay:
 
. .
Anywayz, going back to topic...

I am coming back from a party at one of my Kashmiri friend's house.. and I showed her this forum.. :rofl:

She was saying it is a pity how Indians and Pakistanis are fighting for Kashmir without even involving poor Kashmiris in this discussion. Most Kashmiris want independent Kashmir and they dont want to be either with India and Pakistan...

I wish someone would respect their opinion and let Kashmiris live in peace and let them determine their own future... ;)

Does not looks good to see you on topic. ;)

Your and your friend's sentiments or even the sentiments of Kashmiris cannot be the basis of compromising the territorial integrity of India. I hope you can understand the meaning of giving up a piece of land at the whim of an extremely small group of people.

What people having your kind of sentiments do not understand is that Kashmir belongs to India, not just to Kashmiris. That is correct, but kind of sentimental part - the main issue being that nations cannot afford to compromise territorial integrity, for that would indicate that its unity and integrity is in danger. Especially, India, if it has to keep intact the unity amongst multi-diversity, needs to protect the idea of India at all costs. Also land is equivalent to power - all nations have to retain their land if they wish to retain their power and respect. No sane person would deny that.

As far as Kashmiris are concerned, they are given every right to live their life the way they want in India under the same constitution (in fact they have more rights than Indians in other parts). And I am glad to tell you that the sentiments shared by you and your friend is not the sentiment of majority of Kashmiris. But even if some people are not happy to be here, they also have the freedom to leave the country. What else do they require? Also Independent Kashmir is a failed perception - such a state cannot be sustained.

P.S. Do you know the condition of Azad Kashmir? If not follow this link: DAWN.COM | Editorial | Azad Kashmir today
 
.
And please don't call me "hun". Some other Indian member "Tadka" was sending me kisses. eewwww. Got it darkie ?

The place where I live, study and work... that place is heavily dominated by South Indians... and I for once don't find them civilized. They don't have any table manners, they are cheap and suffer from inferiority complexes... Other than "hindi signs", "slightly darker skin tone", there are many other cultural clues that separate us from them.

I think you are talking about those South Indians who are born and raised in USA, and not the ones who are Freshies off the boats right ? :devil:

Yes, but Indians should really work on their English accent. It annoys lots of people. Indians shouldn't be allowed to take "customer service" jobs.

In August, my Dell computer got infected by a deadly virus "lsass.exe", and the customer service person was someone from India.. In the end it gave me severe headache. They charged my credit card and never sent me the required disks. In the end I filed a long complaint and promised never to buy from Dell again unless they change their customer service.

I bought my new computer from HP, and their customer service is outsourced to India too.

Thats what many Indian guyz told me in real life too.

Yes, but compared to other states Punjabis only make 3% of Indian Population.. and yet they dominate Bollywood...

I haven't started on Lollywood.. which is again dominated by Punjabis.. but then in Pakistan Punjabis make up the majority.. So no need to bring beautiful Pakistani actresses from 1940s, 1950s and 1960s in this discussion

Isn't it ironic that during partition... we sent all the good looking Hindu/Sikhs from Punjab

and NWFP to India and in return we got ugly looking Indian Muslims from U.P., Bihar etc...
.

I just wanted to make a simple change in your approach. Looks and skin color should not be the basis of disliking or considering someone inferior. And I am not a south Indian, I am a north Indian. Not a Punjabi, but still good looking, and I tell you for sure there are innumerable examples of good-looking non-Punjabis in India. You can come to India and see for yourself. At least, you can trust me so much when I say that?

P.S. Everything I said to you was more in a jocular manner, I hope you did not took any of my words to heart. :)

Be human, love human!


@Valiant_Soul :don't mess with her she is a raciest.don't create your opinion about pakistan by just reading her raciest view (Unfortunately these bread still exists on earth and so shamelessly.)

I have read her comments in another threads and already warned her.even AM deleted her most of the comment while she was discussing with one pastun guy.Mods have already given lot's of warnings too .some of her views was disgusting like this.

1. most of the pakistani can only bear some part of north indian but how can they bear south indian.

2.When one pashtun guy shut her mouth with the same medicin she is using right now then she had started bad words about afgan and pastuns.her comment was showing her real standard and also that how beutifull she is like this

"i have 5 afgan pashtun servent in my house and they are very obedient and fallow my every order without any questin."
.........
.....

She just have Punjabi superiority complex and she is very arogent and rude .most of the pakistani is not like her so my request to all indian just ignore her comment and don't think that pakistanis are like that.(Why should we insult other nice pakistani guys/Girls by comparing her. )



She does't have to talk any thing positive ir-respective of thread topic her comment will be full of.
1.religious superiority
2.ethinic superiority.
3.punjabi superiority
4.she is more beutifull than others...(Beautifull my foot:hitwall::hitwall:)
First let her to be a humun then we should discuss any think with her.
:blah::hitwall::hitwall:
 
Last edited:
.
@Valiant_Soul :don't mess with her she is a raciest.don't create your opinion about pakistan by just reading her raciest view (Unfortunately these bread still exists on earth and so shamelessly.)

I have read her comments in another threads and already warned her.even AM deleted her most of the comment while she was discussing with one pastun guy.Mods have already given lot's of warnings too .some of her views was disgusting like this.

1. most of the pakistani can only bear some part of north indian but but can they bear south indian their culture are not like us.

2.When one pashtun guy shut her mouth with the same medicin she is using right now then she have started bad words about afgan and pastuns.her comment was showing her real standard and also that how beutifull she has.like this

"i have 5 afgan pashtun servent in my house and they are very obedient and fallow my every order without any questin."
.........
.....

She just have Punjabi superiority complex and she is very arogent and rude .most of the pakistani is not like her so my request to all indian just ignore her comment don't think that pakistanis are like that.


First let her to be a humun then we should discuss any think with her.
:blah::hitwall::hitwall:

It is okay buddy, no need to take things to heart - these are non-issues. You may also find many Indians to be arrogant. That only means that they need to be educated through calm discussions, so they can feel the need to change. She is a good person, a bit arrogant, but I guess that is the benefit we must give to the girls. :)

Remember, returning hate for hate multiplies hate. Although, do not take this theory with you in case you are in a war. :)
 
.
Who is a citizen of India, who decides who is not?

Citizenship is a modern concept and a self-limiting notion. A detailed survey of a mix of Indian citizens, including Kashmiris, published by the Economic and Political Weekly (EPW) in its latest edition gives the discussion a more meaningful and complex character than it is traditionally granted. But before we take a look at its findings, it would be useful to bear in mind that references to a foreigner or a “pardesi” in popular idiom – such as folk songs and traditional poetry – are at variance with the issue of citizenship the survey puts under the scanner.


Much like the loose idiom that thus defines a foreigner vis-à-vis a native, Allama Iqbal too was responsible for causing confusion about the idea of India – which he called Hindustan – and about those inhabiting what he declaimed was a fabled region. After declaring in a popular eulogy that Hindustan was the best nation (or country or territory, he doesn’t define it) he simultaneously supported nascent Muslim separatism, which many Pakistanis see as an early endorsement of their nationhood.


“Pardesi” or its Persianised variant “Begaana”, which also refers to a stranger, forms the spine of popular romance across the Hindi/Urdu belt though by today’s standards the foreigner of yore would usually have belonged to a nearby village or precincts of a different but neighbouring principality. “Balam pardesi” or beloved foreigner could thus be referring to a neighbour by today’s perceptions of what constitutes a foreigner. I have been perplexed since as long as I can remember, however, as to why an Indian’s national sentiment, which comes with Indian citizenship, should require him to feel a greater bonding with a Naga from Nagaland, for example, but not with a Nepali whose language Indians understand better.


A popular word used by many Indians working in the Gulf states in the 1980s was “muluk”. And when they said they were off to their “muluk” (distinct from the more refined mulk) for a holiday, they usually meant a village or a qasbah though sometimes also a city or a town, but it seldom conveyed the sense of a country as the word is generally thought to mean.


The EPW survey on how Indians see or don’t see themselves as citizens of their country throws up some unexpected results. The number of Kashmiris who do not consider themselves as Indians is relatively higher than other regional groups except those from the far eastern Tripura state. However, in absolute terms a majority of Kashmiris still acknowledge their Indian citizenship. Similarly, the average of Indian Muslims who accept the parameters of citizenship is lower by four percentage points than the national average of 89 per cent.


A representative sample of 8,000 men and women were interviewed in their own languages by specially trained investigators. The respondents were asked in a neutral manner questions such as – “Some people think of themselves as Indian citizens, while some others do not think of themselves as citizens of India. Talking about yourself, do you consider yourself a citizen of India?”


Who then are the 89 per cent who claim the status of citizens and who are the non-citizens? Says Subrata Mitra who analysed the data for EPW: “In terms of their self-perception, citizens as well as non-citizens do not have any distinct social profile. The higher educated tend to have a slightly greater tendency to see themselves as citizens.”


Those surveyed were asked simple questions. For example did they agree or not that all citizens enjoyed equal rights. Only 44.7 per cent said they did. More than 11 per cent completely disagreed. Were people free to speak their minds without fear? About 39 per cent said they did and 13 per cent totally disagreed. Did people have the power to change the government they did not like? More than 45 per cent felt they did nearly 17 per cent disagreed. Most citizens had basic necessities like food, clothing shelter? As many as 33.4 per cent affirmed it while 12.6 per cent said it was not true.


In the survey, in terms of social characteristics, Mitra sees no clear social profile that would radically distinguish the self-perception as citizens from that of non-citizens. State averages showed a distinct swing though. “Clearly, context matters, for in Jammu and Kashmir, at 19.6 per cent, the average of non-citizens is almost three times that of the national average. In Tripura, it climbs even higher, reaching an astounding 27 per cent.”


The peculiar situation of Jammu and Kashmir marked a deviation from the national average in other ways. “First of all, let this be clear that 69 per cent of people interviewed in Jammu and Kashmir think of themselves as Indian citizens,” says Mitra. “Even among Muslims the percentage is 59 per cent. There is no clear relationship with education; and contrary to the national trend, urban residents are less inclined to count themselves as citizens.”


Mitra says that the national trend of a positive relationship with class does not hold in Kashmir, “with the rich and the very poor pulling level with regard to the probability of counting themselves as citizens of India.”


Within the framework of the findings, “the split between Jammu and the Kashmir Valley carries the shadow of the separatist movement”. In other words 83 per cent of the residents of Jammu count themselves as citizens of India compared to 53 per cent for the Kashmir Valley.”


In Jammu and Kashmir, according to Mitra, men perform better than women when it comes to the strength of citizenship. However, the rural respondents perform better than their urban counterparts. The upper castes of Jammu and Kashmir (most of them from Jammu region) perform better whereas the proportion of low citizenship is “alarmingly high” among Muslims.


In the big picture there are even more glaring differences in the way Kashmiris see themselves vis-à-vis India and how others approach the issue. The same scale that shows 43.6 per cent of the national sample to be in the category of ‘high’ citizenship reveals that in Jammu and Kashmir, only 20.2 per cent are at the highest level of citizenship.

The survey looks at a comparative data between Kashmiri Muslims and Muslims from the rest of India. “Strong citizenship among educated Muslims outside Jammu and Kashmir reaches 59.4 per cent, compared with to 54.2 per cent for all Indians with a comparable level of education. Equally surprising is the effect of age: young Muslims (up to 25 years) outside Jammu and Kashmir contain 52.3 per cent strong citizens compared to 44.6 per cent for Indians as a whole.”


It sounds like an interesting survey and probably needs to be followed up more scrupulously. Would it however make much difference to the way Muslims – Kashmiris and non-Kashmiris – are perceived in the paradigm of them and us. Or as the songs described the pardesis and the begaanas.

DAWN.COM | Columnists | Who is a citizen of India, who decides who is not?
 
.
Abhiras,
And as I said before there is no correlation between the number of models/miss worlds produced by a country to the general attractiveness of people of that country..

In India Punjabis represent only 3% of Indian population and are overly represented in Bollywood, while in Pakistan they are the dominant group. Many of the Punjabis and Pushtuns who are considered LEGENDS in Indian Film Industry have their roots in present day Pakistan.. Now let us make the list and you will see how many Punjabis are there in Bollywood...

1.You are contradicting your own statement.....if no.of actors and actress from particular region means they are good looking.....

then why not miss world crown..india is no.1 in getting those....

2. ((Though i myself is a punjabi)) i am strongly agaistst the claim that only punjabi south asian are good looking...
Every community watches its people good looking & thats is a good thing till the point it do not think other community bad looking...

3.i have visited many parts of india ....& the girl which i found attractive were Gujarati girls , Bengali girls , kashmiri girls , himachali girls and also our punjabi girls are not far behind...
 
.
Thank you for your support... some things remain subjective and some things are facts... and I can post facts on this forum.. right?

Fact - Bollywood have been always dominated by Punjabis and they are overly represented in Bollywood considering their 3% population...

Actually may be you only have good knowledge about Casts and races in Pakistan. Spend sometime to know about India and you might want to change your opinion later on. Bollywood is a big industry that does not ends at Hindi speaking cinemas. It has got thousands of actors and actresses working in bollywood movies that also involves movies in other languages.

You see you are only talking about Hindi bollywood actors. But what about Bengali, Marathi, Telugu, Malayalum, Tamil & Gujarati actors/actresses? whose first language is not Hindi? They are also very popular in India and are good looking too. Some of the actresses from South India has also performed in Hindi Bollywood Movies for example Aishwaria Rai, Ayesha Takia, Vidya Balan? are they not good looking? these are only 3 examples and all of them started their early career in marathi or tamil or other languages movies and not Hindi (in your words Bollywood)

I understand there is another industry called Tollywood for Tamil movies :rofl: but Bollywood in itself is too big and a lot bigger than your imagination
 
. .
Bollywood is a big industry that does not ends at Hindi speaking cinemas.

yeah absolutely agree ,,
bollywood is biggest film industry of the world ....beating hollywod in both no. of film & no. of viewers
 
.
Indeed, but i highly doubt that you will be in mood to talk then.;)

That then is destined to always be in future tense and never in present tense.. So you will never be able to see what kind of mood i will be in when (never) that will happen...
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom