Shaadi Dot Kya?

Superfluous, much! I mean, a guy has plastic on his chair, so that is grounds for rejecting a prospective husband! A pet name is another. Heck, why not be honest and say that there is no interest in a husband with an Indian background. Glad that you recognize your own, "innate shallowness."

That's right Preeti! You tell em! As women of the world we have a right to demand a guy be perfect in every way. and fall at our beck and call!

Yea!

Ok, now lets get real. Do you ever think what its like to be a guy and have the burden of asking girls out and doing all the work in a relationship? Especially early on? Do you ever think oh hey maybe this guy is saying something like "hangout" because the last 10 girls he approached were bitches to him, and maybe he doesn't want to put all his cards out there just to get rejected one more time?

"still single" yeah, get used to that.

Read this. it's good for you

http://bit.ly/mYOrmG

My3, you are right on the money here. I love it when these Indian women come to the table with all these inherent biases that have been ingrained for years and years, claim they are "open and have no such biases" then go out and just see what they want to see, just to reinforce their own bullcrap ideas.

Every desi girl who's "still single" should read this article cited earlier in the comments: http://bit.ly/mYOrmG

although, I'm glad this kind of article gets published, because those with an ounce of intelligence can easily read behind the lines here, and see that we live in a society that goes on and on about how hard women have it, how they have to live up to so many pressures, to be attractive, and sex freaks, but also cultural icons and this and that, but no mention is given (especially in this new generation) to the pressures that women put on men - how something silly as plastic on a chair or saying "would you like to hang out" immediately writes you off, heck even your own skin color is seen as an immediate liability.

Think about something, what's the word to denote hatred against women: misogyny, it's such a common word that gets thrown around and used ad naseum.

What's the word for hatred against men (yes there is one!): misandry. How many times do you hear that used? almost never, is it because it doesn't happen as much or is it because acts of misandry are never identified as such. I'd call this article a CLEAR example of misandry. (desi misandry, which is all too common unfortunately)

preeti if you have even an ounce of integrity, you'll recognize your own faults here rather than projecting everything onto the guy, just because he doesn't kneel at your feet with a ring by date number 2.

I met this girl a few months ago in NJ....she seemed like your typical average Indian American girl......I wont divulge her past due to confidentiality reasons, but needless to say not surprised by this article's shallowness and her singledom.

Shaloooowwww! not to mention a total btc!

this article is so non-PC i dont even know where to start! calling a bi guy a 'freak'. rejecting a guy because he has not properly inaugurated his furniture. Get off your high horse and maybe, just maybe, you will find love.

Sorry fellow commentators, I have to disagree with you (for the most part).

Plastic on chairs for 8 years - yes, I'd have dumped him too. That to me tells me more about his personality. Doesn't seem like he really wants to live life, he wants to watch it from the outside, not disturb it, keep things perfect. And what does any of this have to do with wanting or not wanting an Indian husband?

No doubt, guys have to face a lot of the burden in a relationship, but that's a different story than this one...

Now, the Ladoo, I would have kept. I know a "Bunty", he's 50+, a very accomplished lawyer, owns a successful law firm, a pillar of the community in volunteer works, a tall handsome gentleman; and, yes, most family and friends refer to him as "Bunty". The childhood name has just stuck. The childishness of the name morphs into - just any other name.

IMHO, the indian dating/marriage websites have the shallowest people I have seen... move on from those, try eharmony or something else........ :)

"Doesn't seem like he really wants to live life, he wants to watch it from the outside, not disturb it, keep things perfect. And what does any of this have to do with wanting or not wanting an Indian husband?"

C'mon really, all that from some plastic sheets?

I agree that the extrapolation to anti-Indian sentiments is a stretch, although all the negative things she said here were towards Indian men.

I had an ex-gf say to me something like "all my experiences iwth Indian guys have been negative" and I said, maybe you're expecting all of them to be negative, so you suppress the positive and focus on the negative. She had no answer (because she knows Im right)

"No doubt, guys have to face a lot of the burden in a relationship, but that's a different story than this one..."

ok , finally some honesty here. and I'd say no, it's not a different story completely, part of the reason we have the difficulty is because of women like Preeti that have been force-fed all this Disneyfied bullsh*t about prince charmings and such.

"Doesn't seem like he really wants to live life, he wants to watch it from the outside, not disturb it, keep things perfect."

And what's wrong with that? maybe he took risks before and got rammed up the ass because of it. I find that so many women make illogical judgements just like this one, then go back and rationalize why they made a decision.

Does nobody have a sense of humor here? Stereotypes exist for a reason - these people exist in real life. We've all had our share of humorous dating stories and people we haven't given a chance. We also have our stories about people to whom we gave a chance for years and things just plain didn't work out. She is just giving her impressions and bits of her experiences and having some laughs. Lighten up!

Wow - harsh responses. Give a little credit for the guts it took to post this. Shallow? Sure. Funny? I thought so. Yeah there are pressures on men, but in Indian culture there is so much pressure on women to be pretty, fair, look down, cook, clean, and be submissive that there is no comparison.

I have a friend who is not in the best of shape, dark, and the sweetest girl you could ever know. How many guys of these dating websites do you think scoffed at paying for her dinner, walked out on her on sight, or expected her to do things for them because she was "lucky" enough to be out on a date with them? Horrible stories and all more heartbreaking than the rest.

As a guy (like me), ever thought about how that might feel if guys were put under that scrutiny instead of the girls? It would suck as the responses clearly show.

Man or woman - not giving people a deeper chance beyond superficial things is what is wrong. Do we know that Preeti G. isn't just telling us some of the story and not the rest for entertainment purposes?

I'll give her the benefit of the doubt on this one, and even if she does turn out to be very shallow, hopefully this is a good learning experience for her and for the Indian community fortunate enough to see this perspective.

I think the article is meant to entertain and make light of dating - not be a true commentary on men. Clearly the article is written in a light tone, and the author is self-deprecating at times as well. If you want to read more into it, then of course it can come across as offensive (like humor often can), and I don't blame you for being angry. But consider the article from a different perspective before passing judgement. If you think it is an inappropriate topic for a humorous article, then say so. But if you are expecting a "balanced perspective" in a funny article, I'm afraid you are unlikely to find it.

If this is the way she really thinks and rejects people, then I agree it is shallow. If she is just joking, as you say, then it is not. So I think that solves the debate, no?

"How many guys of these dating websites do you think scoffed at paying for her dinner,"

Ok dude, I'll wait for you to go recollect your nuts and reattach them. You probably think Preeti G is hot and are just saying this to get on her good side. I'll let it go if thats the case.

If anything women have it easy, they know exactly what they need to do in order to attract men. in fact you stated them down here:

"Yeah there are pressures on men, but in Indian culture there is so much pressure on women to be pretty, fair, look down, cook, clean, and be submissive that there is no comparison."

Disagree, there is a comparison, men have to:

-be strong but sensitive -be bold but composed -be confident but not cocky -be rich and wealthy but pursue their dreams -be in charge but not controlling

and thats just a short list...

Ever ask a woman what attracts her? She herself cant explain it with even a minute amount of clarity. They go in circles, so whats a guy to do? Especially since the ONUS is on us to approach and initiate the whole goddamn thing.

Uh....guyshavefeelingstoo...I think you need a hug.

"Ok dude, I'll wait for you to go recollect your nuts and reattach them." - says the guy who's name (guyshavefeelingstoo) suggests he cries every night while watching the food network.

"You probably think Preeti G is hot" - I'm married with kids for the record. I believe I shared a story of a good friend of mine who gets rejected by men all the time because she isn't good looking enough for them, or "too dark". I'm friends with lots of women - hot or not, and I don't need more from cyberspace.

If women know exactly what to do to attract men, how does a woman control how dark her skin color is? How do you fix that? Also if what you say is true, that they know exactly what to do to attract men, is it because it is easy to know what men like, or is it because those expectations have reached clarity after having been unchallenged cultural requirements in the Indian community for a very long time.

Do men have unfair expectations on them as well? Yes of course. If you aren't the breadwinner in the house with a respectable job you are a loser. That's an Indian cultural expectation. It isn't just Indian - in the movie "Meet the Parents" Ben Stiller's character is looked down upon for being a male nurse. Loved the movie, but in all seriousness male nursing should be a fine choice for a man if they choose.

“Especially since the ONUS is on us to approach and initiate the whole goddamn thing.” If a woman initiates dating, doesn't that violate the "look down and be submissive" expectation? Does she run the risk of scaring off the guy and being too forward? You list several “be this but be that” criteria for men, and in the very same email you show an example of this for women – “be submissive but initiate the dating ritual”.

My point is, women and men alike can have unclear and unreasonable expectations of the opposite sex. Stop crying about that. I hope you realize the irony of calling me nutless when you are the one whining about how hard it is to be a guy.

"be submissive but initiate the dating ritual"

I never said a woman should be submissive, I believe in equality. but 100% equality, not this selective equality crap.

I'm not crying about that, what Im stating to you is our society has a consciousness that accepts "misandry" and doesn't accept misogyny (we know this because every time anything negative said against women is made public, ooh! misogyny! ohh!")

yet women can write articles like this and retreat back into "oh yea it was just a joke, get it. ha ha"

The unreasonable expectations men have against women are called out repeatedly (you did a great job of it yourself)

The unreasonable expectations women have against men are barely identified, and if ever called unreasonable are met with "stop whining" (you did a great job of it yourself)

In fact, I'd be very surprised if this comment was even let through the filters and got published (if preeti herself is the one letting them through)

"Uh....guyshavefeelingstoo...I think you need a hug."

I need a lot more than a hug. But more to my point, if a woman complains about her trials and tribulations in the dating world (ie the very article we're all commenting on)

she's met with genuine sympathy, warmth, but for a guy... it's "quit whining" or "I think you need a hug"

"I never said a woman should be submissive" - you implied that when you said "If anything women have it easy, they know exactly what they need to do in order to attract men. in fact you stated them down here:". Your subsequent statement about 100% equality is something I can agree with.

"Our society accepts misandry and doesn't accept misogyny". First does our society = American society? If so it accepted misogyny for a very long time and only recently, say in the last 30-40 years has it been less acceptable or unacceptable. Go watch an episode of Mad Men to see what it was like for women in the 50's and 60's.

Second, If our society = Indian society or some other country's society, then there are cultures out there where misogyny is sitll "accepted". Neither misogyny nor misandry should be acceptable anywhere.

"Stop whining" - that comment was in response to your fixation on people's missing nuts. There is nothing wrong with a debate on misandry and misogyny and it is an interesting one. Just stop throwing my nuts around.

"ever thought about how that might feel if guys were put under that scrutiny instead of the girls"

We already are, they just aren't as visually based, rather they're character based, but they could be just as uncontrollable and endemic as being dark.

Women delude themselves into thinking they are more refined and mature when choosing mates just because they claim they aren't as visually driven.

HI everyone – Interesting discussion. Truthfully, I had no idea this would offend anyone so much, I thought it was obvious that it was meant as a lighthearted commiseration with anyone reading my experiences who is also going through the dating process. A few points I will make, and then I'm not sure how much I want to go back and forth on this, I am sorry if I am offended anyone, but at some point I can only tell you what I meant, and then you can continue to make the judgments you want to make. I realize I am not going to please everyone, there will always be different perceptions. Although if it seems most people who read this got offended, then I would certainly take a second look and try not to repeat my mistake next time, because I am open to being told that something I wrote is offensive and not wanting to do that again. But from feedback so far, I think most people took this in the spirit it was intended.

1) No Gender Bias Intended - I have nothing against men, I quite like them. If you look at what I wrote, you could substitute a female in the stories and I could be a male author. A female could be cheap. A female could look disappointingly different from her pictures. A female could not contribute to the conversation, and be dubbed “Cavewoman”. I just happen to be female so the people who I am writing about are male. That’s all.

2) These were not Dealbreaker Issues - I think it can be inferred, in a 1000 word, 1 page article, that parts of each story are missing due to space limitations. Yes, I can see where this would be a case of “Jerry Seinfeld rejecting a girl just because she ate her peas one at a time”. That was somewhat the point, but not exactly. I’m making fun of how shallow I am for being so picky, but I don’t necessarily say these were the only issues or dealbreakers.

For example, I have a few dealbreakers that I just cannot live with, such as smokers or someone who does not speak Hindi. One might say I am shallow for wanting the guy to speak Hindi, that love is universal, etc. and etc. I would respond that yes, it is admirable to be open to all cultures/languages. But I also want someone I can share Indian movies and music with. It just happens to be my preference. So for me, shallow as someone might think it, not speaking Hindi is a dealbreaker. But I am open in other areas. I don’t have kids but I am open to someone who does. There are those who would view that as a dealbreaker. I don’t. So everyone has their priorities, and I may have a few that seem shallow to some people, but what I write about in the article (all true stories) were not in and of themselves dealbreakers. There was more to the story.

3) Incompatible Partners can make Great Friends - Just because I found them incompatible as partners, does not mean they are not good people. I am still friends with one of them, and many of the quality people I have met through these sites. And yes, Caveman knows we have different communication styles and I have told him to stop being so closed up. No, I did not tell the rest what I thought of them, because you are right, it would hurt feelings, most of these were quirky traits or experiences I shared with friends – guys and girls – behind the scenes, just like they share their funny stories with me. And that is what I was trying to do with you.

4) This was a Humorous Rant - People can have quirky traits and not be wrong or beneath me. I truly don’t think that way. Everything is in the mind, and its all relative. I don’t think people are wrong, they are just different from me, that’s all. But in a potential partner, you seek compatibility. Yes, I may joke that Slumdog was dirt poor or cheat or both…but I also know that he could have legitimate reasons for why he was like that. Or sometimes people don’t have so-called legitimate reasons, but that’s how they grew up, and frugality just happens to be one of their values, which some of us would actually respect. I understand that. But the tone of the article implied a frustration that one might feel for a moment, like “Oh my God, why is this so hard, why do I meet people so different than what I am looking for” and in that moment you would use superlatives and descriptions that would seem judgemental and extreme.

That is why I might use the word “cheap” which has negative connotations. I do understand that he might not be cheap to someone else. Or that its not enough to be a dealbreaker. But you can be whiny at times when commiserating with friends (which was supposed to be you, the readers) and then you can be reasonable about it once you get past that mood and that moment. You might still find those quirks very odd and funny, but you might stop using such strong language. Rants are sharp and cutting. They can be immature and whiny. They are illogical and emotional. That was purposely the point. This is supposed to be a “Humorous Rant”. I am using sarcastic humor to complain about the guys AND myself. They are strange but I am also shallow and you are right, with this attitude, I will never get married! That’s exactly what I am trying to say here. And yes, these were based on true stories, I did not make any of it up, but these are obviously not the complete stories. Humorous Rants focus on the parts that make the biased point the annoyed "Ranter" wants to make at the moment.

Some people get that without having it explained, some read between the lines and become very literal with what I wrote, and that’s where the problem seems to be. It wasn’t meant as a dissertation or serious commentary on dating. Just treat it like a Bollywood movie, don’t think too much, enjoy the mindless entertainment, have a laugh if you think its paisa/time vasool, curse me for wasting your 5 minutes if it is not, and move on. Don’t try to find too much logic in what I wrote, I am telling you myself, it is not there.

5) In Conclusion - I hope this helps clarify the intent of the article. There is not much more I can say on this, because it is hard to defend myself as an entire person in a few emails back and forth, and if people want to judge me in such a strong manner based off a one-page, humorous article, then they are going to do it no matter what I say. If I eventually find that I have offended too many people, then I will certainly try not to repeat my mistake next time. Thank you for taking the time to give me your feedback, it is always welcome.

Warm rgrds, Preeti

"I thought it was obvious that it was meant as a lighthearted commiseration with anyone reading my experiences who is also going through the dating process."

Joel Stein backtrack. Preeti, how would you take it if a guy wrote an article about not liking fat and ugly women, and saying later, 'oh that was just a few instances, it was just a humorous rant'

"Jerry Seinfeld rejecting a girl just because she ate her peas one at a time”. That was somewhat the point, but not exactly."

Cmon, get real, the context is totally different, this is an online news publication and the article was NOT filed under a humor label. Also, it's not humorous unless the people you're poking fun at are in on the joke, otherwise it's insulting.

" Don’t try to find too much logic in what I wrote, I am telling you myself, it is not there."

Then file it under humor. or go write for the onion. Or maybe that's indiacurrents mistake and not yours. but it seems to me you and Joel Stein are taking a page from the same playbook.

""Stop whining" - that comment was in response to your fixation on people's missing nuts. "

No it wasn't, it was your response to my statements on the difficulties of men in the dating scene. Try and be intellectually honest:

"Stop crying about that. I hope you realize the irony of calling me nutless when you are the one whining about how hard it is to be a guy."

the whine was in reference to how hard it is to be a guy.

As for misogny existing before hand. Misogny and Misandry really only can exist with a context of equality. In the 40's and 50's, there was no such context. Women gladly accepted a 'submissive' role (with the exception of few) and there was no concept of equality. Thats why I say, "racism" in the US really only started (from a point of view, AFTER, the civil rights movement was completed, because prior to then, there was no concept of equality) This is a subtle and very difficult point to comprehend (so I know its going to take you a while), but try and understand, misogyny and misandry and racism, Im taking here as behavior that we exercise against a backdrop of "equality"

yes slavery, jim crow, and denying women the right to vote are discriminatory, but they're out in the open. White people and men didn't take their behaviors as "misogynous" or "racist" because that was the norm. then.

It only becomes misogynous when you pretend to be equal, yet still behave in ways that result in equality. LIkewise, same is true for women against men (and no matter how much Preeti says, 'oh it was all in fun', this article is a clear example of misandry)

Ok let's be "honest" as you say, or more "literal" for you - when I said stop whining it was a "reaction" to your insulting my manhood, and it was referencing your whining about how hard it is to be a guy. If you want me to be very literal in everything I write, I frankly won't be doing that for you. Sorry.

Another key point. Here is what you wrote to me earlier: "You probably think Preeti G is hot and are just saying this to get on her good side. I'll let it go if thats the case. "

Are you saying you "let it go" only if Preeti G is hot, but if she's ugly then I have no right to defend her speech? Is that an acceptable statement for you to make? I didn't take it seriously because I believe you were being light hearted or joking. Can't you take everything here in that same spirit, or should I label you a misogynist because of that remark.

Something like this article should not get someone as worked up as you have become, sit back and evaluate that. If you are hurting because of your recent experiences with women, own that as your issue and don't make it a "guy vs. girls" issue or a "guys are victims" issue.

If I had to guess, your problem with women isn't the impossible standards they are requiring you to meet, your problem is likely the way you argue and fixate on things that shouldn't be a big deal in the first place.

Feelings Guy – 1) Context - You make a very good point. If this article was not appropriate for this type of publication, it would understandably be jarring. I’m not going to comment on whether this was an appropriate publication or not, whether this is a serious news publication or not, or whether it was just my article that was not well written, that remains to be seen and discussed, but I think your point of context is a good one, and it will be kept in mind.

2) Shades of Humor - You seem very well spoken and intelligent, the point you make on m & m against a backdrop of equality vs a bias norm was quite interesting. So I appreciate all that you wrote. But here is where we may have a difference of opinion, where my shade of grey may be different than yours, because issues are rarely black and white. Some people may say that perpetuating or joking about stereotypes, ie gender bias (which I think is not in my article, its not about males in particular) should be stopped completely. IE, if we all stop speaking about stereotypes or writing cutting humor and become as PC as we can, then eventually the world will be a better place. However, much of the world is based on these influences, our biases, of all kinds, seep into everything, comedy, Bollywood movies, writing, dating, etc. As a society we should become more open and tolerant, which we are in some ways, albeit slowly. But I think there is always room for poking fun at each other if a fine line is walked between trying to offend minimally and being very offensive to many. There is a fine line between commenting on life or describing one’s emotions and experiences, and actively pushing some agenda or new stereotype. There is a fine line between knowing or joking about general stereotypes, but not using them in real life when interacting with someone one-on-one. Judging someone on their own merit.

When I wrote what I did, I thought I was walking these lines appropriately. I would not compare my style to Joel Stein, but yes, I might compare it to the style of writers for the Onion. Its just a matter of where you draw the line or your shade of grey. Yours may be different than mine, or yours may be the same as mine, but you were simply not expecting this type of humor in this publication, and understandably were taken aback when viewing it in a more serious light. I think there is nothing wrong with the way you reacted, and again, I am glad you wrote, your feedback is helpful and it will certainly make me think. If more people compare me to Joel Stein, which crosses the line for me as well, then trust me, I will change. Lets see....

As a woman I take offense to what you're saying, Mr. "Guyshavefeelingstoo" - discrimination is discrimination, whether or not it's considered a social norm at whatever time or place you are at. You're being too relativistic in suggesting that women being placed in a submissive role can be appropriate in a certain time or place. My impression on this whole thing is your strong desire to have the last word in which you keep throwing flame-like responses in so that you can prove you know everything and everyone else's responses are wrong. You don't even concede when you and another person are saying something similar. Try writing an acutal response to people that makes sense rather than quoting sentences and taking everything out of context. Furthermore, just because something is a publication in a newsmagazine does not mean it should be taken as fact. A news piece should be truthful, but a commentary or features section by definition has more leeway and is meant to have a slant. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it shouldn't be published in the first place.

so much to respond too, so little time

"when I said stop whining it was a "reaction" to your insulting my manhood, and it was referencing your whining about how hard it is to be a guy."

how is insulting your lack of courage a whine? It doesnt make sense, the latter is exactly what Im saying. And it wasn't even that, although your characterization of it as "how hard it is to be a guy" just proves my point. Any time men complain of our unreasonable expectations. it's a "whine"

"You're being too relativistic in suggesting that women being placed in a submissive role can be appropriate in a certain time or place"

When did i say women can be placed in a submissive role? In fact, I think nonutsnoglory was completely wrong when he connected submissiveness to passivity in dating.

"but a commentary or features section by definition has more leeway and is meant to have a slant. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it shouldn't be published in the first place."

It can be published, but I have the right to state my perspective on it. It's obviously opinion, I never stated it was unbaised journalism or that it should be.

However the tone was very dismissive, the language downright caustic, and simply reeked of superiority... "another one bites the dust" ? Give me a break.

It's just a complete dodge to go back and say " tee hee I was just joking"

"You're being too relativistic in suggesting that women being placed in a submissive role can be appropriate in a certain time or place."

Ok, I just caught what you're referring to. and read it again, its a subtle point Im making, Preeti seems to have gotten it.

I'm not saying it's appropriate, Im saying during that time it wasn't identified as "misogny", it was just "life", it's the way things were.

Dumb idiots think racism happened in the slave days. and no longer exists. If a slave said to his master in the 1800s, "you're treating me lesser than you, that's racist!" the white slave master would say, "uhh? yea? so?"

See my point? it's not a distinctly identifiable behavior because there's no general consciouss understanding of equality for a separately identifiable behavior called "racism" to exist against.

Same with misogny/misandry (again the former gets HEAPS more attention placed on it) It's not about it being acceptable or not, it's about a truth of fact, of the past. the point is it WAS accepted as a norm then, and many women were ok with it, and some werent (I think its a deeper issue here though with the feminist movement just being completely undefined, women want equality but still want guys to ask them out and chase them?.. uh.. confused much?)

"but you were simply not expecting this type of humor in this publication"

I wasn't expecting it, because there was nothing to indicate it, other than your belated explanations of "ohh I was just joking"

And you never answered my question, if I had written an article about how some fat ugly woman wanted to go out with me, but I brushed her off because she's fat and ugly, then joked about it with my friends that she'd have no shot in a million years with me,

..and women said "ugh thats so misogynistic, that's so chauvinistic" and I retracted with "oh oh, it was just humor, I don't really believe that, I respect all women" or some such backtrack, how would that be taken?

"(which I think is not in my article, its not about males in particular)"

I seriously disagree, yes they are your experiences, which just happen to be with men, but there was no prefacing about being some general commentary about the world of dating, in your first paragraph:

"It’s hard to say no to that when the usual invitation from a guy involves some variation of “Wanna hang out sometime?”"

and end with

"another one bites the dust"

In speaking of these specific instances, you've made at least two extrapolation-like statements expanding them to the general population "usual invitation...." "another 'one' (i assume you didnt mean another man that goes by the name ladoo)"

And really, the entire tone of the article is very defeatist and accusatory towards a group, yea sure you didn't say "I hate men they all suck" but you certainly didnt say anything to support that you respect or "love men" as your belated claim states.

As for Joel Stein comparisons, let me save you time, very few people will make the same comparison, not because it's not true, but because we live in a society where discrimination against men has no attention put on it, and the opposite has loads of attention put on it. Why? because if we live in a world where men are supposed to be the "strong" ones, we're supposed to be able to just grin and take stuff like this, or immediately "get" that it's humor and brush it off as such.

Just look at some of the sarcastic remarks made against me:

"you need a hug" "stop whining" "make some real points"

all these do is prove my point, the irony of the whole situation is, I've routinely heard women ask men to "feel" something, yet when we do , we're written off as being weak and emotional.

And by the way, there's no comparison here to the racial divide. men and women are biologically, and hormonally different, it's pretty clear (just look down) Those differences aren't societally imposed.

People of different races don't have salient differences: (other than the ones superimposed by racist societies - ie. all so-and-so groups are lazy, etc.. etc..)

Yet men and women alike can agree on profound differences in looking at the world differently, understanding the world, etc. also there is a physical result of men and women living together in the same society (procreation) and clear physiological differences (ie women get pregnant), no such need exists for people of different races to live together

This is highly entertaining. The best part was this line "However the tone was very dismissive, the language downright caustic, and simply reeked of superiority" - are you talking about the author's article or your own responses?

Let's talk about your double standards, shall we? You conveniently ignored it so I'll repost here:

Here is what you wrote to me earlier: "You probably think Preeti G is hot and are just saying this to get on her good side. I'll let it go if thats the case. "

Are you saying you "let it go" only if Preeti G is hot, but if she's ugly then I have no right to defend her speech? Is that an acceptable statement for you to make? I didn't take it seriously because I believe you were being light hearted or joking. Can't you take everything here in that same spirit, or should I label you a misogynist because of that remark.

I also found this highly amusing:

I had an ex-gf say to me something like "all my experiences iwth Indian guys have been negative" and I said, maybe you're expecting all of them to be negative, so you suppress the positive and focus on the negative. She had no answer (because she knows Im right)

Your parenthetical reeks of superiority. How do you know she had no answer because she knew you were right - can you read her mind? Could it be equally plausible that she had no answer because: 1) You'd keep coming back at her until you "won" or until your points got so technical that they weren't even relevant anymore, 2) You'd mix insults into any attempt at a proper discussion, or 3) You care more about being right than about the relationship.

Finally, I say "to-may-toe", do you say "to-mah-toe"? Let's vigorously discuss the semantics and insult each other in parentheses.

"Can't you take everything here in that same spirit, or should I label you a misogynist because of that remark."

"How do you know she had no answer because she knew you were right - can you read her mind? "

How is any of this relevant? I'm not the author of an article published in an online magazine. A conversation between me and my ex isn't even in the same ballpark as this article? What a silly comparison to make? Yea I was superior in that particular point, because I had other evidence to show this girl was strongly biased against Indian men, but how is any of that relevant here?

Regarding the tangential Preeti point, If Preeti wasn't attractive to you, it's not about you having the right or not, it's just not as likely you'd be so quick to defend, that's the point/joke Im making, its more a statement about you than a statement about her, so misogyny is not the right descriptor, mis-nonutsnoglory-y is the better word.

by the way, not a single person has answered this point of mine:

"And you never answered my question, if I had written an article about how some fat ugly woman wanted to go out with me, but I brushed her off because she's fat and ugly, then joked about it with my friends that she'd have no shot in a million years with me,

..and women said "ugh thats so misogynistic, that's so chauvinistic" and I retracted with "oh oh, it was just humor, I don't really believe that, I respect all women" or some such backtrack, how would that be taken?"

"Can't you take everything here in that same spirit. . ." That's very relevant as it points out your hypocrisy. You are the author of comments published in an online magazine. You rush out to label this article an example of misandry and at the same time imply misogyny in your casual remarks about women. You then claim yours is a joke and hers is not.

RE: the conversation between you and your ex - if it is silly and irrelevant, why did you bring it up in your 3rd post out of the 16 or so you've made? I stated my reason for re-referencing your post about your ex-gf - it amuses me. Who cares whether you respond to it or not, it's hilariously revealing about your nature.

"mis-nonutsnoglory-y is the better word" Way to be dissmisive, caustic, and reek of superiority.

The example you provide is so extreme it doesn't apply here. You've already established you have an extreme view of this author's article - that you believe it is an example of misandry. I do not share your view as is the case with several other posters here.

You then provide a very extreme example in the other direction as your counter-argument. I don't agree with the extreme interpretation you had of this author's article, and I don't agree with the extreme scenario you provide here either.

If you talked about a girl with a funny nickname like "gelebi" or a girl who reminded you of her grandmother because she left her seat covers on her chair, or a girl who said "like oh my god" all the time, I would find that comparable and humorous. I would not call that misogynist.

Your examples on race, gender, and counter-examples to this article have hate for other people in them. This author does not have hate for men. You may try to tell people in this forum that she does, but I disagree strongly with your interpretations. Everything in your numerous posts afterwards have simply reaffirmed my belief that you are way off base.

Though I vowed not to break confidentiality, I am here. I met Preeti G in person and found her to be a decent/nice person. I just think she has some superficial standards and unrealistic expectations of what she wants in a future spouse. Considering her age and past, I do not know who she thinks she is being so picky and demanding. I truly hope she becomes enlightened about what is truly important in a life partner beyond height, income level, and languages spoken.

I think many Indian Americans (both 1st and 2nd gen US raised), like the rest of the world, have become increasingly more shallow and superficial in what they are looking for in a spouse. I mean, cmon, you cannot find someone in our pool of successful, well educated, affluent, and well rounded individuals? I think all this success has gotten to our heads and nothing is good enough. As my Dad says "With education and money comes ego and arrogance and loads of other problems!" Not to mention career and making money is the be all and end all. There never seems to be enough time! When will we make time? In our 40s and 50s? The sad reality in our community now is that not only is it so hard to find "the right one", even the so called successful Indian Americans that supposedly found "the one" are struggling to keep their marriages afloat. And having tons of money, I have learned, is not enough to keep a marriage together. Bankers and MDs get divorced too! Divorces, prenups, second marriages, etc etc are all on the rise. I know of many. So rather than right such shallow articles, why dont we reflect, introspect, and honestly dialogue why getting married and staying married is so difficult these days in our community?! Grow up people.

GuysHaveFeelingsToo: you've lost me. I think you're going into an argument that's much different from the point Preeti tries to make in her article, and you're in quite deep. All I can say is that it's not even interesting to me anymore to see how much the pot is calling the kettle black.

Good comments, EastCoastGal . . . it is tough but it's not even just Indian American marriages - marriage in general is tough and there are divorces and poor relationships across cultures. I will say this, though, the "successful" marriages of the past for Indians were not always successful - in many marriages because of egotism and . . I think denial . . people would stay in unhappy marriages just because it was a marriage and they would allow themselves to be suppressed in that marriage. Or because a woman was placed in a submissive role, she was dependent upon her husband to work even if she wanted to. Or because of social pressures they'd both stay married indefinitely. Divorce is not the evil here - I think at least with divorce people recognize there is an incompatibility and act on it, which is better than staying unhappy in a loveless marriage. I don't think that people are any more superficial than they once were, they just aren't willing to settle for a situation that doesn't make them happy. I know that settling didn't work for me; and when I did in previous relationships, it only caused more problems. I recall one person I dated (non-Indian) who I didn't feel too compatible with, but I tried to work past the first impression. I broke up with him after a month or two and he was extremely distraught that I was not "giving things a chance." But I think that those first impressions we have, those cues, are extremely important to giving us a sense of the person. In Preeti's article, though it is lighthearted to me in its approach to dating, if you look at some of the people she was dating there seem to be incompatibilities that suggest that there isn't a future to the relationship. I wouldn't want to date someone who kept the plastic on their chairs forever, either; would that mean they expected the same of me in our relationship - not to want new things, not to want to enjoy the achievements I had made? The other examples are comparatively unreasonable but I think that's the point and I really did think the point was to show the humor in the dating scene. There are so many things that take us surprise about people and we do often dismiss to early when, had we given things a chance, the relationship could have progressed.

"I truly hope she becomes enlightened about what is truly important in a life partner beyond height, income level, and languages spoken."

Amen to that.

Good post EastCoastGal - agree with that perspective. I found this article funny, but defninitely shallow, and definitely not an example of hatred towards men. I like the energy and discussion it causes us to have - it's been fun to think about.

East Coast Gal - I sense a bias towards Indians born in the US. I have noticed that those from India (assuming you are) who came to the US seem look down upon those of us born here.

How about arranged marriages? They matched income, height, family status, dowry expectations, complexions, and much more. In fact, it was ALL based on superficial matching, no one got to know anything about the groom or bride because it wasn't possible within an arranaged marriage type setting. And that is why you have one of the highest adultery rates among nationalitites - it is in India. people don't divorce, but they cheat, it is well known, even the middle class have started doing it.

So Indians from India can look at these thigns, but its not fair for us to try and match up our values or have some requirements of our own, we have to be open to anyone and everyone no matter what, otherwise we are being superficial?

When people look at matching family status and profession and income, it is because it indicates a matching of background and intelligence or education. I don't know about the height thing, but I don't see what is wrong in wanting someone to speak a certain language. Please take a hard look at yourself, and if you are married, or even if you are not, ask yourself if you would marry someone who didn't speak whatever Indian language you speak. I highly doubt you would, if you grew up in India, you would require they speak the same language as well, besides English of course.

Your "grow up people" is quite offensive also I might add. Thanks for insulting those of us born in this country, I have seen time and time again that those from India have some type of superiority complex over us poor, uncultured Indian Americans who are lost and need to be "enlightened" by the likes of you.

Here's another article the author might benefit from:

http://bit.ly/p5dXdv

For the mathematically inclined, a funny cartoon about the dating pool as you age:

http://xkcd.com/314/

guess this convo is dead now.

This is what I think the feelings guy was trying to say,

women tend to "joke" a lot about how there are "no good guys out there" and pick on seemingly little things (or even sometimes try and say those "little" things are bigger character things - he keeps plastic on his chairs.... means... he hates life!) any time men pick on similar things, it's so quickly labelled "misognyistic", but the reverse isn't true.

yes, just like it used to be ok (supposedly) if a woman hit a man, but not the reverse.

He has a point. but personallY I thought the article was funny. i am not indian, so maybe i didn't get as offended because of that, but i am married to an indian, and so i got the references overall to the $31 (i used to think it was funny to not have a $30 round number as a gift, now ive gotten used to the $31 msyelf).

i think non indians write these types of articles all the time and even worse, so i don't know why it raised such a ruckus here, but the posts were interesting to read as well, i enjoyed all of it.

yea, I mean never mind hitting, it's ok for a woman to basically do anything, and we as men have to sit back and try and "understand her world"

Here's the thing, and it really goes back to what we as humans use to define "funny" or not, and here's the general rule:

if its an oppressed group mocking an oppressor. It's funny.

if it's oppressor group mocking the oppressed, it's not.

For example, I was at a comedy club and this white girl did a joke about how she couldn't get an apartment because she had no job and she said, "oh but I told the landlord.. i AM white.."... no one laughed. why? because we all know white people at one point TRULY believed in stuff like that, (ie that being white is just being better) so whats the joke ? there is none.

but when chris rock does a joke like, "black people have a life expectancy of 55 these days, cuz something will get ya, high blood pressure, hypertension, nypd.. something will getya!"

it's hilarious, because we understand that historically at some level the nypd has had a history of unfairly targetting black people.

If you think this article is "just funny" bascially you're subconsciously agreeing with the fact that men have oppressed women, and this is an example of women poking fun at her oppressor.

I found this article extremely entertaining and very well written. I have had my own share of funny experiences from shaadi.com.There was Mr cute fob,Mr hairy dude,Mr desparado,Mr cute yet boring google guy, Mr hot wannabe ABCD gold digger IIT guy!, Mr ABCD pervert, Mr practical in search of a citizen.. H1 visa guy, and so on!!! One thing I must say about this whole dating game is that it helps one learn what exactly they want and don't want in a potential husband. All we girls are looking for is a normal guy who is ready to accept the girl for who she is. The super hot desi guys are stuck up and shallow, the hot ones are players and not ready to settle down, the not so hot ones are super sweet and extra nice( which can repel a girl,will make good friends). i am not trying to be shallow but where the heck are the good looking, funny, genuine guys out there? Are they all taken? In this "mathlabi duniya" a lot of the guys are looking for a "catch" family networth,citizenship and then comes the rest. Being an Engineer myself and knowing how to support myself I find it odd if the guy is looking for things like...does ur family own businesses, do your parents live in a good neighborhood..why does that even matter...anyway..decided to meet Mr cute fob after talking to him and looking at his pictures on facebook. Seemed like a cool guy with some kind of social life. His accent did bother me but i decided looked past that and consider his good etiquette and polite nature. We met at Olive Garden and i must say i did get the butterflies in my stomach. He was cute,confident and knew how to treat a lady. We got our table and had the small talk. He made me laugh. i couldn't help but wonder how come he looks a little mexicanish..but it was in a good way..he was tall and buff and had that short sexy hair do..we were in the middle of a convo and out came a major thick accent slur of words..thats it..I was taken aback..i mean was he tryin so hard to hide his real accent? did he get so comfy with me that his real accent just came out? I decided to continue the date, do the small talks and leave...then there was Mr hairy dude..he was a Punjabi and apparently decided to quit his day job to venture out business opportunities..his gas station is doing well and is close to where i live now haha..he told me i didn't have to work and I could help him with his business. Not that I wanted to do that..anywho we were talking at a restaurant and he told me how he almost married a girl and how his family showed a pic of the girl to a pandit!..the pandit told him that the girl wouldn't make good babies..or have babies..watever! he also told me how pretty my eyes were and how he wasn't sexually attracted to the other girl! eww...I literally almost ran out of there!!!

My fav and almost wished it worked out was Mr wannabe ABCD IIT gold digger guy..Amazing personality, interesting, outgoing, cute, buff..made me giddy, behave childish..but slowly his true colors came out..we went on a couple of dates, got introduced to his friends, he started to show his cheap side..wanted to split the bill more than once..started makin his friends ask me about my networth..,interviewed me on my General knowledge about the great lakes or sumthin..checked out other women right infront of my eyes..(at least don't do it on the initial dates and right infront of me) ,wanted me to share a room with him on the 4th or 5th date, thought I was conservative that I didn't want to...that ended there..i did make some good friends with his friends though...there are a few more that I am in touch with and I am keeping my options open..

"wanted to split the bill more than once"

What's wrong with that? Don't you think men and women should be treated equally in our society? What does this one situation get a pass, and get treated like we're still in 1950?

Justjoiningthediscussion : BTW, I am US BORN AND RAISED like many of you here, a physician, come from a successful and well educated family and still find it challenging to date. It was not my intention to offend anyone, but to be honest about what I feel is the current state of marriages in the South Asian American community. It is challenging to find the one but later on it is also challenging to stay married. We put a high premium on looks, well roundedness, education, income level etc et which is fine. But as the years go on in marriage, it seems that South Asian American couples are facing the challenges of keeping marriages afloat (even the ones who have money!) like mainstream Americans. I wish South Asian Americans would openly and honestly discuss why our community is facing so many problems in the relationship/marriage realm. I do apologize for offending!

I am a non-Asian, married for 25 years to a foreign-born South Asian. I am sitting here open-mouthed at some of the sillliness passing back and forth in this discussion. Back in my dating days, I was called shallow for not wanting to seriously date anyone without a college education. The fact was, that I had put myself through college, and I wanted someone who shared my expectations and outlook, since I was, austensibly, looking for a possible husband, and not just someone to spend time with (that's called a "friend.") If something happened where I had to go back to the dating pool at this stage in my life, my reactions would be different, since I would have different expectations about what I was looking for. Everyone has their own private list, that is hopefully somewhat flexible, as to what they want in a spouse. To deny that is to pretend to be someone you are not, no matter how much you wish to be more pc, open-minded, or liberated. It is hard to know, from the brevity of the article, how much the author shared of herself with her dates, and which men might have dumped her as well. We can argue back and forth about fairness and equality, but in the end, all that matters is the honesty of an individual connection; will it work or not. One lives in the real world, not the ideal.

"To deny that is to pretend to be someone you are not, no matter how much you wish to be more pc, open-minded, or liberated."

I don't think anyone is saying preferences are wrong or shouldn't be expressed. The question is how are those expressed.

There's a world of difference between

"I prefer slimmer women" than "that chick is just WAY to large for me, she should find a whale to go mate with"