Friday, February 28, 2014

God of greed, God of fear

God of greed, God of fear

“If you fear your own sins, one can only imagine how lowly your actions must have been!”

You are a coward!

Yes you!

You are scared of dying!

And that’s why you want to believe death will not be the end of this life, but life will rather continue beyond death for eternity, “without the fear of death anymore!”

You are a coward who is scared of the life that you believe exists beyond your death. You are scared that someone immensely powerful, someone whose existence you are unaware of today, might punish you for all the crimes you have committed in this life.

And that’s why you want to believe in God, with a hope that God will save you from that punishment. That is why you pray to him in different ways, and under different names.

You are greedy!

Yes you!

You want to enjoy everything that you cannot or don’t have in this life, in the next life that you hope exists beyond your death.

And that is another reason why you believe in and pray to God, so he may provide them to you.

Your God is of convenience; your convenience!

But the first two things that I can say are:
a)    If you are scared of your own actions, I can only imagine how lowly and disgraceful they must have been.
b)   If your desires are still unfulfilled when you are still alive to enjoy this world, I can only imagine how selfish and how desperate you are.

And the next thing I would like to point out is, how religions (all of them) have exploited your greed and fear, to subjugate you to the whims of the intelligent few, those who knew how to rule your fathers and forefathers, without having to raise so much as a hand, leave alone a sword.

Every time a religion tells you that you should pray to God for he will forgive your sins and lead you to heaven, where you will get to enjoy all the riches, foods, wine and mates (both sexual and otherwise), it is playing with your lust and greed. It is trying to entice you into its fold by bribing you with an offer to provide you what you have always desired to enjoy in this life.

Every time a religion tells you that if you will deny God and his powers, he will make you suffer for your sins, it is abusing your fears against you, to subdue your ego and esteem, and force you into accepting the supremacy of the religion, and those who preach it.

I know what I am saying is hard to accept, when all your life you’ve been taught not to question your religion, its texts or proponents. Therefore, I am suggesting you a very simple solution whenever you find yourself caught in doubt:

“As long as your actions will benefit the society, or will leave something good behind for the future generations to come, you will only be doing good deeds. And good deeds will lead you only to heaven!”

As far as I am concerned; death is the freedom that will liberate me from this life in which I am a slave to the whims of my physical form and emotional relationships. There is nothing after death, and the moment I will die, all my worries will end alongside me.

Anyway, I am already free!

I am free of all superstition!

Fatal Urge Carefree Kiss “Amanpreet Singh Rai”


Thursday, February 27, 2014

The gay in my nightmare, the nightmare in my desire


The gay in my nightmare, the nightmare in my desire

Content Warning: Contains sexual references for educational purposes. Article is meant for parents, teachers, social/political/spiritual leaders and individuals, so as to help them better understand the dynamics behind sexual relationship between individuals of the same sex. This will help them in formulating educational and social policies for the better future of the society.

“Neither we have sex with everyone we love, nor we love everyone we have sex with.”

There is no God!

So there are no souls and thus, no woman trapped in a man’s body, or a man trapped in a woman’s body. Get over your superstitions, and convenient generalizations, or kill yourselves and prove to me there is a soul, then God, heaven and hell. Or bring to me those who are dead and can come back to confirm if all we have been told since ages, by those who thought earth was flat, at the centre of the universe, who knew nothing about galaxies, evolution, cells, atoms, electrons and protons, was indeed true. Funny how no one can know if there is God, heaven and hell unless until they die. And funny enough, no one dead ever returns, or has returned, to tell tales.

So how is this linked to this article about sex? It is not, as long as no one presents the argument of one sex soul trapped in another sex body. There are however much more important and relevant issues to be discussed in this current piece. So read on!

PDAs or “Public display of affection”; physical actions people do with their partners in public, to display their love to each other, and more so to the rest of the world. Showing off does come naturally to human beings. But what happens when the two lovers are from the same sex? What do we see in movies? How many of you have watched “Brokeback Mountain”? I haven’t! I am a straight person and the thought of watching two men having sex with each other is revolting to me. That’s the way I am programmed naturally. But does this mean I am homophobic?

Let me delve on something I’ve already written about sex in a previous article on the same subject. Perhaps this time I’ll touch upon it a bit differently. After that, I will explain why and how much I support homosexual equality, and where I think a line needs to be drawn, all with good my-reason (your-reason could be different, but I wouldn’t know until you will share it with me, just like no one will know what I said if you won’t share this with them).

Sexual satisfaction has two components: the physio-chemical, and the psychological. The former constitutes the physical aspect of pleasure derived from the act. At the culmination of the sexual act, human body releases chemicals, the hormones oxytocin in females and dopamine in males, into the blood stream. These hormones create the physical feeling of pleasure and relaxation that is characteristic of the sexual act. This feeling is much more intense and relaxing than a similar feeling resulting from any other form of bodily excitation. Hence, sex is one of the three strongest drives in an organism. However the tricky part is, these hormones are only released at the culmination of the sexual act, not in between. So if I was having sex with a female and was to withdraw from the act midway before ejaculating, I will derive no physical pleasure out of the act, or satisfaction. Similarly, if the girl was to withdraw before her orgasm, she would derive no pleasure or satisfaction either. On the contrary, both girl and I could derive the same pleasure by self excitation techniques, simply if we let such excitation lead to a culmination, and hence release of these hormones. The only thing missing will be satisfaction, to varying degrees.

The psychological aspect of sexual act involves the chain of thoughts that are actively formulated inside a human brain when the person is involved in a sexual act. If the thoughts experienced are what make their involvement in the sexual activity a desired act, they lead to satisfaction better in comparison to thoughts which disconnect them from the act (like rape) or are not as interesting (paid sex, depressing personal circumstances, lack of interest in the sexual partner etc). This is where sexual fetishes come in.

Sexual fetishes stimulate thoughts that enhance the involvement of a person in the sexual act, thus escalating the satisfaction they derive from the act. Lets’ for example say I like girls in high heels, or a fit tall girl in gym gear with a smooth six pack than an anorexic skeleton. Having sex with a girl fulfilling either of the two situations would be much more satisfying to me than with say a beautiful girl in another situation that does not catch my fancy. Being homosexual is a similar fetish condition, where the person derives better satisfaction only from having sex with a person of the same sex. It is neither a medical condition (sexual excitation will lead to hormone release), nor a psychological problem (for everyone has a fetish or two, as that’s the way our brains work), and least of all a religious issue (ask the paedophile priest). It is just that they have programmed their brain in a way that gets them sexually satisfied only when a certain condition is met; that is, when they have a same sex partner. Habits can be changed indeed, but never by force, and not the least when the person is not responsive or willing to change. Any force under such circumstances, any reasoning will always only be counterproductive, and possibly catastrophic. Personal habits only change when the person self-motivates a change. Others can only wait!

So where does this lead us as a society? The answer is complicated for the issue is complicated.

Sexual fetishes are a very personal matter, and as a free citizen, I have no interest in the sexual fetishes of my neighbours, classmates, friends etc. There are many people we love in our life; our parents, siblings, friends and relatives. But the basis of our interaction with neither of them is sex. Their sexual lives have no consequences upon our dealings with them. Thus love, as well as social life is independent of sexual fetishes. As such, any form of discrimination against any person just because they have a peculiar sexual orientation is both morally, as well as legally wrong. I stand for equal work, welfare, education, opportunity and freedom for each and every member of the homosexual community.

Marriage is another institution where the questions are of love and commitment, and not sexual fetishes, which once again are a personal matter between the to-be couple. If a person wants to commit and remain loyal to a person of the same sex, they should have the right to do so, for we don’t peep into the bedrooms of our neighbours, nor we would appreciate any of them peeping into ours. Marriage equality is thus a natural right.

Adopting children is the first issue where it starts getting complicated. Since same sex couples cannot have their own babies biologically in real sense, the questions of morality and legality arise. While legal issues are beyond the scope of the present text, about the moral issues I have one simple argument; if kids of straight parents can be homosexual, there is no reason why kids raised by homosexual parents cannot or will not be straight. Being homosexual is a personal choice, a personal fetish. As much as anyone can develop it, anyone may never develop it. Straight people have been known to turn bisexual or homosexual, and vice-versa. It is all about brain conditioning, as I mentioned above. Another argument in favour of homosexual parents would be that since they belong to an oft discriminated against minority group, they will more than likely raise more tolerant kids. But does this mean their homosexual lifestyle would influence their child? Well, are they the only homosexuals in town? Whose lifestyle influenced their own lifestyle if they were born to straight parents?

Having answered these question previously as well, the last and the most important question that remains is; is the world ready to accept a public display of homosexual affection, more so on screen? The question here is not about equal work opportunity for the homosexual community, but rather about equal share of limelight. And this is the most complex aspect of the situation.

Sexual fetishes are a form of private behaviour, and as such, should remain in private. Everything would be easy if it were to be the case, but alas! What about straight sex? Isn’t that an integral part of the mainstream media? If straight sex can be openly promoted in contemporary media, why not the homosexual sex too?

I didn’t watch “Brokeback Mountain” because I would have felt uncomfortable with the scenario of a man sleeping with a man. Same is the situation with the majority of the population. But the question here is not of the comfort or discomfort of the majority, but rather the issue is of propaganda. Showing a woman having sex with a man is showing a natural act. Showing a homosexual act is a depiction of a fetish, which not only constitutes pornography, but also soliciting unreasonable behaviour by misinformation. The misinformation is that the same sex sexual behaviour is normal. And this perception will be conceived by young impressionable minds for they tend to blindly follow the media. Take the example of any extended fan families of film or TV stars.

Homosexuality is a special condition, and hence, any portrayal which depicts homosexuality as natural constitutes propaganda, or false advertising. Hence a line needs to be drawn as to what the limits of sexual depiction are.

A fetish cannot be the basis of discrimination, but a fetish is a personal choice. It should remain so! Rest is for pornographic publications and recordings which are non-mainstream, hence beyond the scope of present discussion. What however I would like to point out is:
a)    Does a homosexual footballer tackling a same sex footballer constitute a sexual assault? If a person of opposite sex did it, it would be called so. And can the footballers of the same sex raise this issue?
b)   Does this mean we will need two additional teams for each sports, other than the men’s and women’s team; namely, mixed men, mixed women? In fact, the number could be four more; two for each sex!
c)    Should a reputed institute like army, which is so important for a nation’s defence, have a similar separation based upon sexual orientation, to preserve the culture and integrity of the organisation?
Think about all these points carefully, for what is at stake is not just your society’s future, but your own future in some instances as well. If you want to follow your fetishes to the end of your life, it is your life you are deciding about. I am happy with mine, and I want you to be happy with yours. And no, it is not wrong to follow your fetishes. Just remember though; fetishes are always personal, and should remain so!

Fatal Urge Carefree Kiss “Amanpreet Singh Rai”


From monotone to mainstream


From monotone to mainstream

“A colour without shades and a sound without varying loudness are monotone.”

Thanks to social media I’ve come across some very talented singers, who enjoy the services of some very talented musicians. Good commercial voices and backed by good commercial music, yet success seems to be overlooking their hard work! And I cannot help them for even if I promoted their work via my word of mouth, it won’t travel too far. But that is not the complete picture of the problem they actually face!

Entertainment industry is a thankless business where no one shares their secrets with the dude across the table. And this in spite the fact that there is enough in the market for every businessman to earn his pie with butter, and then take home a basket full. Jealousy sees no friends! What I am doing right now writing this article, I am doing it well aware of the fact that no one is going to come to me and say even a word of thanks. But anyway, let’s get on with the topic.

So what is monotone singing?

Simply put; monotone singing is characterised by the lack of variation in the loudness of the sound, as opposed to the lack of fluctuation in the tone (that is scale; do, re, mi, fa, so, la, ti, do). Anyone who knows the alphabets and the sounds their combinations make, they can very well sing in multiple tones. What however determines whether the singing is colourful or monotonous (or monotone), is their ability to vary the loudness of their voice within a sung phrase; that is, from pianissimo to fortissimo, or anything in between or beyond.

There are two distinct characters to a mainstream vocalist’s work that differentiates them from an upcoming or struggling artist’s works:
a)    Dynamics of their vocals.
b)   Their lyrics allow breathing space for the phrases to be extended beyond their written alphabets.
Notice the two characteristics at play in this very beautiful melody by David Guetta, which features Kelly Rowland on vocals:

Notice how Kelly starts every phrase making up a verse at a mezzo-piano level, but then raises the loudness of her voice towards the end of it, to a forte level. And then, as the verse progresses towards the penultimate phrase, the starts of the phrases get louder to mezzo-forte level, while they end at a fortissimo level. The final phrase however mellows the verse down to a mezzo-forte level, as if climaxing the rise. This vocal dynamics make the singing engrossing, lively and colourful.

Also notice how every phrase, after covering a bar or two normally, finishes in a stretched and lingering way, giving Kelly the freedom to display her repertoire as a top-notch performer. These two tricks take her singing, and thus the song, to an altogether different level. This expertise makes up an accomplished singer.

Now how a singer structures their phrase delivery is part determined by the music (which beat is accented) and part by the experience the singer has (if the music is to be developed subsequent to the lyrics). You may not be a master at singing, but if you work hard on your song, you can easily develop a better vocal delivery for the same after sufficient number of trials. Remember; what you lack in talent or experience can indeed be covered by hard-work.

For your homework, try listening to Bruno Mars’ song “I think I wanna marry you” or Katy Perry’s “Firework” etc.

For more tips however, find yourselves a terrorist or a drug dealer. They are generally more famous than me.

Fatal Urge Carefree Kiss “Amanpreet Singh Rai”