Subscribe To My Podcast

Apr 29, 2005

Aargh Diaries - When women ask for "IT"

Back at the office after arguing against the suspension, based on this
heard Mr.C say women who wear scanty clothes are asking for "it", as he opened his tiffin box during lunchtime.

I quickly walked over to him and grabbed some of the contents of his tiffin box in my hand and as he opened his mouth to protest, stuffed it in his mouth.

And calmly returned to my seat.

In a rage, he ran over to the sink, spat the contents out and demanded an explanation from me.

I replied sweetly "Why Mr.C, the contents of the tiffin box were in front of you, you were probably in your mind asking for it. Why bother if its hot or if you enjoy only if you are feeded lovingly by someone you like. If you cant tolerate even a mouthful of, food you like, made by a person you like, at a time when you want to eat, and chew it, what makes you so sure of what women want in their vagina "

Aargh !!
Not always that a way to a man's heart is through his stomach

Now to deal with irritated folks at my office, I am busy writing to political parties and the media, that if people have their food in front of them, they are asking for it to be stuffed in their mouth, never mind when or by whom.

Any support?

Aargh !! Gayathri is Not Aargh.Aargh Diaries Series is a fictional account of Aargh, an annonymous character whoose gender and other details are supposed to be unknown.


  1. you can count me on your side pardner!

    This is again leading to what we have discussed in your last post.

    And some people definitely need to see the pain their thoughts & ideologies force on other lives..

    And to think of it, all this because we have freedom of expression.

  2. well said gaya!!!
    lol :)

  3. though this post seems to be a repetition of the previous post theme,
    i had posted the previous post only in blogspot and in o3(to get Indiatimes attention and to retain a copy since indiatimes has in the past deleted blogs without givin reasons).
    This is a post which will be posted on all my blogs on dress of a woman and rape. So please bear with me:D

  4. @$#!$#, Kalpesh :D
    and thanks:)

  5. what u did was absolutely cool, and u have a very valid point. Hope ur letters to political parties are understood and brings atleast a little bit of sense to such people.

  6. Well said gaya,i am with u

  7. Another person who's with you on this :)

    Such people should be stuffed not with food, but with cloth and beaten black and blue. Grrrrrr...

  8. Good one!! Wish all women could be like that.... many of these men are actually quite timid, and if someone stands firm, they will run away with their 'tail' tucked in between their legs.

  9. sorry to say gaya,but what u did with that guy (stuffing the thing in his mouth) was all wrong.
    Two wrongs don't make a right....if Mr C was wrong so were u.
    U being a female got away with ur behaviour .....but if the same had been done by a male to a female, probably he would have been thrashed and thrown out of his job for showing indecent behaviour.

    Short clothes...u women feel u have become liberated enough to wear anything .well u may do whatever u want ...but the fact remains no guy would ever like to visualize his mother/wife/sister in such dresses. U may call me MCP or anything but that remains the fact.There is a threshhold of decency which shouldnot be crossed...blindly aping the west shows our hollowness ...we talk so much about our culture but does our culture reflect that?... now one more clarification.... I am not totally against women wearing western outfits.....wear jeans trousers.etc but the threshhold is what can be considered decent and what is indecent.

    Just as u won't like ur male collegue sitting in a just a chaddi by ur side, because that is indecent ..similarly women should also maintain certain decorum.

  10. So what does Mr C need to say : "All women ought to come to office in their bare minimals so that men may have an "interesting time" figuring out the vital stats." I guess that would please all the "liberated" women out there.

    Reply me just one thing...WHY DO WOMEN HAVE TO BE SEMI NUDE IN PUBLIC?

    Don't give me the crap of being liberated and freedom of expression....
    Its all a generation lost in the chaos of a lost identity....wanna being a westerner while u r still being an Indian.

    If yes.......i guess the time has come to say goodbye to clothes and return to the dark ages when we all roamed about stark nude.

  11. just a sec comments don't hold any reference to the infamous Mumbai rape incident .i read that post after posting my comments...

    What the policeman did was wrong and he deserves pinishment.

    Women getting dressed in any manner doesnn't give any man right to physically violate her.


  12. a clarification which i had mentioned in my homepage.
    Aargh is a fictional character, whoose gender is supposed to be unknown and aargh's action need not be mine.

    and just for the record i have not stuffed anything in anyone's mouth:D, just a story to drive home a point:)

    moment, neelima, deeps, & sray thanks:)

    angelzfear, each one their opinion on whats decent apparel. i personally think its possible to display vulgarity even by wearing a sari.its how a person carries off the attire, not just the attire.
    and well guys do wear shorts and bermudas,and women too dont roam around in their panties :D

    i have never said liberated means wearing a mini skirt (u can chk previous aargh diary )

    what u wear and how u dress is individual choice and discretion.

    And agree with u angelzfear, whatever a man or a woman wear, nothing gives another person the right to rape molest or sexually harrass them.

  13. very true cannot justify rape by saying that the reason was that the lady was wearing (ahem) "less" clothes..or whatever..

    and one small observation i'd like to pakistan...most of the women in the villages wear burqas...and still there are few reported & multiple unreported incidences of rape. The only complete dress better than the burqa is an egyptian mummy!

    come on guys..accept it that you(rather we) are the ones weak at self-control. I know that even women might be having such thoughts when they see handsome men, but they don't go to the extent to which some men tend to go...

    see a beautiful thing, admire it as god 's great creation...but don't desecrate it!!!

  14. good point aargh!! A better lesson for people like Mr C. (does it stand for chauvinist ? :D) to be raped by some homosexual , while they r strolling in their shorts..:)

  15. "see a beautiful thing, admire it as god 's great creation...but don't desecrate it!!! "
    :)) what else can i say !

    spark,actually thats an arguement i did think of, but the i thought some might say just for the sake of arguement,that sexual preference is different and i dont mind being raped by a woman and unless the rape victim is a lesbian,she might enjoy it.

    i just wanted to emphasize that what matters is just not whether u like it or not, but there are other factors too..

  16. It is all about self-determination, or choice.

  17. absolutely agree with u sray :)

  18. Well there would be some who are not comfortable seeing their family and friends in skimpy attire, yet wont mind reading porn.

    Angelz fear
    Why should there be a reason for dressing in a certain manner. Generally given freedom, people dress in a particular style because they feel good.
    Why the need, to add more theory?

    Now according to me whats worse is reading porn, but while there would be theories on why some wear skimpy clothes, if i ask the same question on why porn , i will get the look "How stupid can u get"

  19. hi aargh,
    I made my comments on ur post a post at o3. I just don't understand why women wear skimpy clothes in publc and hence i came up with that post...please gimme one good reason why women should wear skimpy clothes ( other than attracting male attention) ..u didn't answer that in ur i m asking that again.

  20. The question is not of "why". If women want to wear such clothes, it is their prerogative. Sure, some women want to attract men by wearing such clothes. But there are others who want to wear to assert their freedom, to feel good about themselves, or just because they like it so.

    Who are men to dictate what the women can or cannot wear, or judge why they wear it?

  21. angelz fear
    i think sray has understood and conveyed the essense of what i would have said.
    re.ur post.
    on 19th april had mentioned in ur post that "the comment is in my aargh diaries series post.
    aargh is a fictional character as mentioned in"

    and today again had clarified in all my post contents itself that aargh is fictional. yet i find no clarification of it in ur post.

    i am not the president of the mini skirt association, and if the posts and comments till now cant help you comprehend why girls need not give u a reason for wearing clothes of their choice, then dont think further comments on anyone's part can.

    re.disabling of comments in o3, i am not the only one to do it in o3, and obviously if o3 gives that feature, there is nothing wrong in my using it and i dont think i owe an explanation or ellaboration on it.

  22. concerning aargh,
    well what u r trying to say makes aargh a figure which is not required to give any replies to any doubts.....well if that is the case....then sorry for disturbing u...but i thought since u csme up with that post..u would clear my doubts.....and anyways aargh was not the central theme of my post....its theme was was do women feel they need to expose to assert their independence.... I guess there are much better ways to assert freedom and express their independence than over exposing their skin... neways

    the very pertinant points i raised ---Is it not showing our cultural hollowness and is it not blind aping of west in the name of self assertion has been missed by everyone.

  23. ERRATA,
    its theme was "WHY" do women feel they need to expose to assert their independence.... I guess there are much better ways to assert freedom and express their independence than over exposing their skin... neways

    the very pertinant points i raised ---Is it not showing our cultural hollowness and is it not blind aping of west in the name of self assertion has been missed by everyone.

    roaming about in skimpy clothes is not a very healthy way to assert frredom .....and if it... then i guess time has come to say good bye to clothes... and very soon you would have to be content with people roaming the streets nude in the name of freedom ....

    This is not healthy for society at large which also comprises kids who are not as mature as u.

    and by same logic of freedom of assertion, movies must stop having that A certificates and all censorship must be removed.

    and gaya,
    same freedom may be used to argue the case of making porn legal and freely available

    U MISS THE POINT FREEDOM IS NOT ABSOLUTE..your freedom must not infringe on the feelings of others...and since INDIAN CULTURE portrays men and women in certain manner ....any person whether male or female trying to change that in the name his freedom is certainly not done.

  24. and why did u attribute the comments part of ur reply to me .

    rage against mad dogs made that comment , not me.I never asked u to enable comments part or asked u for any clarification.

  25. to summarise so that there wont me misunderstandings i wear mini skirts
    no. i believe that to convey you are modern, you have to wear skimpy clothes
    no. i believe that those who wear skimpy clothes are askin for sex and therefore can be raped molested or sexually harrassed
    no. i think i have the right to tell others (male/female) what they should wear

    5.just because a guy today wears bermudas instead of a dhothi, do i believe he is betraying Indian culture
    no. i believe sexuality of a person is alien to our culture?
    no. if u consider the konark temples, the kamasutra and the meaning of one of the sacred texts written by adi sankara - soundaryalahiri where even the private parts of the Goddess are praised quite blatantly (the translation from reliable Ramakrishna mission publication)
    Sexuality of women has never been a taboo in our culture but perhaps it was in Victorian culture.

    Before we go defending culture, lets examine which culture we are talking about.

    Sexuality of women is NOT the same as the objectification of women, where woman is not viewed as a human being but as an object existing for pleasure of the male.

    Well I am comfortable with female sexuality expression, i am against female objectification.

    7.Are all men uncomfortable with their sisters in skimpy clothes
    no. obvious from comments i have received across other blogsites too.

    8.And why do women wear skimpy clothes
    sray has already mentioned.
    Angelzfear, how many times and to how many people have you explained why you dress the way you do.
    i think
    sometimes its to get attention, sometimes to make a statement, sometimes just because its there, sometimes its because ur friends wear it,
    sometimes just because u like it, sometimes just because ur comfortable,
    sometimes just because u feel good,
    all of above, some of above or perhaps someother thing.

    if you are worried about culture, and dont want Indian women going after "western skimpy attires" how about wearing a dothi or whatever your great grandfather would have worn and leading by example.

    Btw for those who say that while men may not show their thighs in formal wear (shorts though worn, is not worn perhaps in formal circumstance as compared to a short skirt) the biology of both are different, men arenot required to wear bras either and in informal occassions, may go bare chested, while the same dress code is unacceptable in women.

    so while the evolved dress code at the moment seems to say its ok for men to expose their entire chest, it doesnt say the same for women and vice versa for the thighs.

    just because i am a veggie and would prefer others to be veggie, doesnt mean others should become a veggie.

    you were well aware since i had specifically mentioned in ur blog that aargh is fictional, yet even without clarifyin with me , you potrayed aaargh as real and said i was wrong to have stuffed etc... in a blog post and even after my mentioning it , didnt change the post.

    i dont see any reason why you should single out my blog since the topic we both are discussing is different and since we both seem to be agreeing that dress is no excuse for rape.

    and especially since u r well aware of my relations with o3.

    have a wonderful weekend:)

  26. and angelz fear i believe you have still not read the monday morning mystery post where i had pointed out in a symbolic manner, that freedom of expression, includes the right to wear purdah

  27. the reference to comments enabling was due to the initial comments in ur blog.
    and i dont recollect you saying that its within gaya's right to disable comments either:)

  28. what a woman wears doesnt give anyone a right to molest or rape her..
    what abt kids getting raped? how does one explain that? what if Constable sunil more's wife/daughter has to go to a male gynaec? will it be okay if the doctor rapes/molests her while he is making a physical examintaion?

  29. phew!!!!!!!
    what a long reply....

    sorry for singling u out..

    but i guess aargh is the most powerful blogger out there...can just say anything and yet escape responsibility cause it has no gender,form or existance..

    Point 6:
    u miss the subtle difference between sexuality and nudity ... I m against nudity .all nudity don't have a sexual connotation....and having kamasutra, saundaryalahiri, konark andb khajuraho doesn't mean we roam about in skimpy clothes.Hope u atleast agree on this point.

    point 7:
    i bet 90%of males are comfortable with "other" women wearing skimpy clothes and not "their" women.

    neways .... no more troubling u on this point... but just a parting shot ... if the same trend continues it won't be long before parents would have to answer some very uncomfortable questions by tiny toddlers just because some women think its in their right to wear "any or no" attire..... and the false ego makes them say that men or for that matter any body cannot tell them how to dress how so ever inappropraitely dress.

    BUT since u r not not President of skimpy clothed women assosciation ..u need not reply to the comment.

    regarding dhoti: If u read my comments carefully u would find that I have clearly said i m not against western attire..I am against skimpy attire ...hope that u agree that all western attire is not skimpy......and i have analogously disapproved of men wearing just a chaddi in public places... so i don't say that men can roam about in skimpy clothes ( remember the Jockey ad??? if men were to reciprocate the dresses of young girls especailly as seen in today's cinema would be wearing something like that.

    and since both urs and mine comments are getting longer than the post itself .and since we both seeem to be rigid with our stands....I agree to disagree with u.
    I was never for forcing a dress code on women...all i want is that they use their wisdom to figure out what is appropraite and what inappropraite for PUBLIC dressing.

    And finally...i someone make a reply which is directed towards you....doesn't mean that ..that comment can be attributed to me.

    PHEW!! PHEW!!! typing and scolling karte karte thak gaya .......didn't this blogspot designer have the common sense to have the "Leave your comment " section just after the last comment rather than at the top.

    BBYE AARGH ...oh aargh cannot reply...bbye gayathri....:-S but why bye gayathri?? (sorry sorry .don't get angry... but ur comments sometimes leave me thus confused )

  30. i have deleted references to aargh on my post....lemme know if u need any furthur editing

    bbye and have a gr8 time !!:-)

  31. 1.Why women can wear clothes which makes them appear semi-nude.
    I have replied

    2.What Mr.C should have said.
    Mr.C, Aargh etc are characters in my Aargh series. Already I had clarified last month, that Aargh is fiction and I need NOT subscribe to all things Aargh does.
    Dont like the character Aargh, criticise aargh. Not sure if gayathri agrees with aargh, ask her.

    If there is a blog post on murder, and if the author of that post had made it clear that the characters would be fictional, I think its distasteful if someone writes a post in a blogsite accusing the author of murder, not immediately provide the link, to let the author clarify and even after receiving the clarification Again, not remove the accusation, and thus damage the reputation of the blogger. And not offer even an apology for it.
    But though its distasteful, I dont care to dignify them with my protests.
    and dont care to suggest changes to your post contents.

    When it comes to my stance on women or men who appear "semi-nude"in public, my attitude goes along the lines of "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. "
    ATTRIBUTION: Voltaire [Fran├žois Marie Arouet] (1694–1778), French philosopher, author.

    And dont believe in telling anyone to expose if they wear a purdah or to cover up if they wear a mini skirt.

    And yeah as Sangeeta said, thankfully men who think women shouldnt go around seminude are not gynaecologists.

  32. 2 other bloggers,
    my reference to mr.c was in reference to the blog in o3, which makes a reference to this.

    you too have a fantastic weekend:)

  33. just a sec,
    I first gave the link to ur blog and then the links to my comments in my original post so that it was for all to see what the original post was and what i had commented.I had clearly mentioned that it was in reference to aargh's post.So it was for the world to see the context and comment.

    I once again say aargh was not the central character of my post....

    When u didn't visit the post i commented on Sat Apr 30, 04:24:48 PM 2005 on ur blog that I have made my comments a separate blog....perhaps it was my mistake to have assumed u would come across my blog.

    And if u read my Sat Apr 30, 04:24:48 PM 2005 comment u would again find out that aargh was not the central theme of my post.

    And i don't know how I damaged ur reputation.If u think critism damages damages a person's reputation, well i would not criticise any of ur posts in future.( if u so wish).

    And i don't think i owe an appology because I hid no details from the other bloggers...the context ...the comments...all were there for others to see and make their own judgement.

    And since aargh's brainwaves are yours...any criticism of aargh would have to directed against you.(if not....please tell me whom).Just as wisedonkey happyily takes the allocades for aargh's successes wisedonkey should be game enough to take critism in her stride. (sorry for the last part of the comment... perhaps i m overstreching my self).

  34. u commented on april 29th and you mentioned that in your post on april 29th.
    "sorry to say gaya,but what u did with that guy (stuffing the thing in his mouth) was all wrong."U being a female got away with ur behaviour .....but if the same had been done by a male to a female, probably he would have been thrashed and thrown out of his job for showing indecent behaviour."

    there is a vast difference between saying the above and saying
    "gaya i think aargh was wrong ..."
    and that too inspite of my clarifying on 19th april to you, in your blog that aargh is fictional.

    and you made a mention of ur blog only on 30th evening.
    (i think now u acknowledge it as a mistake)
    and even after my clarification, again on 30th i had to protest a lot to have u change the post contents which made it appear that aargh is gayathri, even though u updated it quite frequently in between and you changed it only today.

    oh please !! the post was the copy paste of your 29th april 2 comments and not just aargh. gaya as aargh was the central theme of your post.
    aargh character's gender is unknown, since thats my style of writing.

    (I am a professional writer for some websites. And the characters in my stories never have names, and if possible remain as annon as possible. there is nothin to suggest aargh is a female, yet since you not only implied in your post that aargh is gaya and that she is female. the debate turned out on what women can do to men in ur blog example remarks by Dr.Saurab and champion.)

    btw just for the record, i thought you DISAGREED with the character Mr.C who said that women who wore scanty clothes deserved to be raped. So I fail to comprehend you dragging my post again in your post (that doesnt mean you cant drag) and say "perhaps mr.c should have said "women should wear revealing clothes...""

    you are perhaps new to o3, and if u care to check with those who had blogged in o3 earlier with me, i am hardest and harshest on those who flatter me (like the blogger wizard alone) and am open to criticism.

    but support for fair justice is not the same as support for kangaroo courts, where judgements are passed even without the basic courtesy of asking for clarification.

    Angelz I am not demanding an apology from you. But if i had been in your position, I would have apologised.

    I have a responsibility for a post. and when i explain the posts in comments i reply not as aargh but as wise donkey. and i have not shyed away from the topic. but instead of using that, and when i have specified earlier that aargh is not me and that i need not agree with aargh, it is pointless to write in ur post that i had done something which i had not done.

    seems by your logic every director who writes a murder mystery should be hanged.

    There has been a real incident of rape and there has been a fictional incident of an employee whoose gender is unknown, who stuffed some food in a colleague's mouth who said women who wear scanty clothes ask for "it". for you the later might be more serious and require a post and arguements, but other than explainin what i have done till now, i dont think i need to more towards this post.

    angelzfear, even though i disagree with you, it doesnt mean i dont respect you. you are welcome to criticise me through any means you choose. and that will not affect my attitude towards your posts.
    just because u compliment me doesnt mean i will visit your blog and praise your posts
    and just because u criticise me doesnt mean i will hold it against ur other post contents.

    just because you wrote that women should not wear short dresses etc, doesnt mean that i think you go around molesting women who dont wear them.

    ultimately we both would like to see a reduction in incidents like rape molestation etc even though we have different views on causes of it.
    And as a passing thought would like not just you but other bloggers who read this post to ask themselves if Sita had worn a mini skirt for Ravan to have desired her . and if Ram would have desired Surpanaka if she had been a beautiful woman in a mini skirt.

  35. ok ok ok.
    I didn't know that i was up against a professional writer. I thought u were just another "normal" blogger who wrote his/her piece of mind.

    a few final clarifications....

    ur 29th april aargh blog held no reference to the previous rape incident I interpreted Mr C's statement as .....women wearing skimpy clothes are inviting trouble in office context ( like adverse comments) where did it cross my mind that it refered to Mumbai incident ( also inviting trouble doesn't justify rape but is just a referene to some pervert mentality)...ur post was in office context....and what I modified Mr C 's comment was also in office context .

    Later when i read ur posts on occured to me that may be the post was in context to Mumbai incident the disclaimer at Fri Apr 29, 04:35:59 PM 2005 as a comment on ur post here.

    Yes the post was copy paste and it had been mentioned on the post .... but the central theme was women wearing skimpy clothes....(atleast after my Sat Apr 30, 04:24:48 PM 2005 comment where i told u I have made it a post....i have clearly said that I just don't understand why women wear skimpy clothes and hence i have made it a post).....ab itne clarifications ke baad to plz don't accuse me of ahving aargh and u as the central theme.aargh brought about the post but the essence behind the post were not aargh and u.

    After reading ur protest on o3 and here on 30th, I didnot update the post until today when I edited the post.....yes it was updated on 29th and 30th ..but on 30th only till i had not read ur comments.

    baap re .....i didn't know that my post wud anger u so much ...

    But i guess things have been cleared now....:-)

  36. whoa....
    guess I missed out a lot of action over the weekend!!!


  37. I have posted that blog in 6 blogsites other than o3.
    Two bloggers in Sulekha did think it as real and protested. And I clarified to them. Certainly didnt get angry with them.

    But when I had personally clarified in your blog before this post , that Aargh is fictional and when i had clarified in the 29th apr, 05 comment "This is a post which will be posted on all my blogs on dress of a woman and rape. " i dont see how u could overlook these and think
    ".....women wearing skimpy clothes are inviting trouble in office context ( like adverse comments)....." and think I am Aargh (The title everywhere mentions Aargh Diaries not Gayathri Diaries or Wise Donkey diaries).
    But well you were probably busy and overlooked, happens, no probs:)

    I had mentioned the background simply to illustrate my style, and i still consider myself as a normal blogger:D

    hope you have a wonderful week ahead:)

  38. @$#!$# :D
    well u can read them over, and its over at the moment:)

    and the other post action on female driving, with Triplex is also over, Triplex has modified his blog

  39. really refreshing to see some changes happening least in mindsets..

    way to go, WD

  40. @$#!$# :)
    well to be honest, not sure how much of mindset change, but i will take whatever i get:)

  41. Here's another one...

    a girl saved herself...
    see :

  42. wise donkey,
    to carry on the discussion after the fight :-p

    ma'am u din't reply to the point of influenc of indecent public clothing on the minds of kids.

    if freedom can be used to justify it....same logic can be used to justify porn also....after all it has a market ( and don't tell me it doesn't) there must be some people who consider it within their freedom to make and distribute why not remove censorship and make it "free for all" freedom. Don't u think freedom is not absolute or can u argue that indecent clothing has a good influence on kids???????

    (asking u only because u say "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. ").

    (All quiet on the battlefront :-p)

  43. Freedom to live, is not the same as Freedom to kill
    At the same time, Freedom to live includes Freedom to kill if under self defense.

    There might have been "battles" "wars"for you . Not for me. I wrote a post, clarified to it.

    Do you have approximate data on how many are raped (lets omit the molestation and sexual harrassment at work). How many in India roam about in mini skirts. Yet you think its more important to win a "battle" with me(who just says that people have the right to wear a purdah or a miniskirt) rather than with people who molest or sexually harrass, well thats what is obvious from your posts.

    On one hand its the claim , men dont have the right to rape or molest irrespective of dress and yet no post on that, but a post on women dress decently (what is the approximate percentage of women who get raped because of their miniskirts and tight strapless tops?)

    I have already clarified my stand on porn through my other posts and comments. I dont see the need to repeat or justify myself.

    Another blogger would notice there are questions, which you havent answered either. But its my belief that while one can wake a person who is sleeping, not one who is pretending to be sleeping, so you can either scroll and see if there are any questions you have to answer, or just ignore.

    First it was men.
    There might be men who will molest their sister if they appear in miniskirt. But hopefully the majority wont. And if these men cant see another woman as their sister, the fault lies with the men.
    I already used the Ram vs Surpanaka and Ravan vs Sita eg.
    One of the most wonderful festivals of our culture according to me is Raksha Bandhan. So to the males who get "agitated" on seeing a woman in mini, a woman in miniskirt ties rakhi, will they say no, dont be my sister?

    And re.children, what next , will you say, children above one year shouldnt be breastfeeded?

    Angelz with due respect, we seem to have different priorities. I dont want to say which is better etc, but they are definitely different, when it comes to posts and comments.

  44. @$#!$# thanks that was an interesting link.
    and that also proves how important learning self defense is for women.

    hope she gets justice.

    B E A UTIFUL !!
    i loved it ! very nice story. serves all the bastards right who rape women and say they deservered it.

    The Dog That Knew Too Much

  46. and i would be extremely oblighed if the paedophile and serial rapist, angelzfear, gets out of my view with his prehistoric views on women.

    i really hate such dickheads who have their head up their arse. i am not talkin of women liberalistaion here.
    i am talking of individual freedom. every living thing whether a persident , man , female or prostitute has his/her own freedom which they can express at any time. who are we to impose conditions ?? get the fuck outta my sight asshole
    The Dog That Knew Too Much

  47. wd,
    ok... the topic is closed.

    well its gaya's post so wud spare u here. neways ...if u cud be a little civilized with ur language..........but but...then won't that be going against ur name?

  48. wd,
    ok... the topic is closed.

    well its gaya's post so wud spare u here. neways ...if u cud be a little civilized with ur language..........but but...then won't that be going against ur name?

  49. Hey WD...that makes a half-century!!

    BTW Could u delete some of the posts that are aimed at other bloggers? I really wouldn't want to see more slugfests out here...and hope neither would u!

  50. @$#!$#
    Whats important is the quality of comments, not just the quantity :)

    angelz has mentioned in his blog, he wont delete, similar comments and i agree with his reasoning and so I am not deleting.

    otherwise i delete on request and sometimes if both get in it, delete without request:)

  51. Thanks so very much for taking your time to create your blog. Excellent work


Have a Great Day!