From shadows to the stars

When someone starts to get white hair, the natural reaction, in most cases at least, is to dye the hair. I do not have anything to say about this. If people want others to think that they are actually younger than they are, that's fine with me. What I don't understand, is why some people choose to dye their hair to a brown or maroonish colour. The slang word for people who have intermittent maroon hair is "copper hair". Yes, that statement was totally irrelevant, I agree. If you dye your white hair to the copper colour, you are not fooling anyone. When I see a person who has black hair sprinkled with copper coloured hair, I realise that he/ she are dying their hair. To these people, I ask, "Why dye your hair at all when you obviously are not achieving your intention of hiding away your white hair?". I suggest that the copper haired people either start dyeing their hair black or - this one's the better option - don't dye their hair at all! ...

I came across a so called fact sometime ago. This fact stated that "Attractive women tend to date bad guys more because they have genetically superior qualities (physically strong, etc) and therefore have better chances of passing on the genes through the progeny than the good guys". I think what the statement categorises as "bad guys" are the people who are physically more attractive and athletic, but somewhat rude, trouble-causing, bullies, etc. Therefore, the "good guys" would be the ones pop culture would call nerds - geeky, "weird" and intelligent. When I first read this statement, I thought, "yeah, that makes sense". Terms like "genetically superior qualities" were used, and therefore the argument seemed convincing. But on second thought, this "fact" makes little sense. Maybe there is certain truth to it. But I have another way of looking at why the attractive women tend to date "bad guys". Q...

Have you ever noticed those facts which begin with "Did you know that...?". What I have observed is that most of those facts are utter crap. I have come across some so called facts about the human brain and how it functions in my lifetime. I have marveled at these for quite a long while, but suddenly, those "facts" have been crushed. Apparently, they aren't facts at all. They are but rumours and myths that have been propagated among the masses due to various reasons. Here, I shall mention a few that I think most people have heard of and believe to be true. 1) "We only use 10% of our brains" This was probably the most astounding thing I had heard about the brain. To use just 10% but to have achieved so much progress, the human brain must be the most incredible thing. But. No, we don't use only 10% of our brains. We use most of our brain, for one purpose or another. This is probably the biggest myth related to brain function ...

Firstly, the very method of testing a person's knowledge via "examinations" is in itself questionable. Let us say that we excuse it's many shortcomings and accept it as the norm. Yes, exams need to have rules and regulations. I wouldn't like people to be able to copy and cheat in an exam (this may be a controversial opinion for many of my peers, but what the hell).  What irks me though are the totally irrational and nonsensical rules that are implemented in exams (at least in my college, if not for everyone). 1) No leaving before the stipulated time has passed. If the exam is, say, for 3 hours, the student is not allowed to leave until those 3 hours have passed. Even if he/ she has finished the exam. You are expected to just sit there and stare into space. 2) Okay. Don't let me leave until the regulated time. But at least, let me sleep! But, no. Sleeping in the exam hall is considered as a sacrilege. "How dare you sleep in the exam...

No, my dear reader, I am not going to bore you with details of how my personal life has been dulled due to the lack of a sustained love interest. I am quite certain you already know enough people who do that. But if you came here led to believe that I was going to do so and interested to hear what I had to say, I am sorry to disappoint. In fact, I am going to discuss how the lack of a sustained love interest can make life better... albeit for TV shows (sitcoms to be more specific) and their characters (and for the networks too). If you do not possess a reasonable amount of information on sitcoms, I advise you to stop reading on. Almost every sitcom's cast is made up of characters that include various stereotypes. This of course, is understandable. It is much easier to produce situations that can generate laughter by including stereotypes. We see many cultural, gender based and racial stereotypes, mostly - but not exclusively - for the purpose of comic relief. What spoil...

Imagine that you are a surgeon. You have just worked your socks off for twenty straight hours to save someone's life. You come out of the operation theatre, to give the good news to the patient's family. You walk up to them and tell them that their loved one is out of danger.  You expect a shower of praises and hundreds of "thank you" and "you are amazing" and the like. But what do you hear? "Thank God!". Or "I prayed with all my faith to the mighty Lord to spare his/her life". I don't know about you, but if i were the surgeon, I'd be pretty pissed off at this situation. I have just toiled for hours, all to save the life of this person whom i probably wont see ever again. Instead of me getting the credit or admiration, there is this invisible, unavailable bloke who is getting thanked for my hard work. This is my opinion and maybe most of you agree with me. It is okay with me if the patient and his family don't fa...

The word kidnap, for me at least, is a very misleading one. Imagine that you have never heard the word "kidnap" before. When you see the word for the first time, what comes to your mind? I imagine that a kid is taking a nap. One would logically assume that “kid + nap = kidnap”. In truth though, as we know, the word has a completely different and shocking meaning. It means that a kid has been abducted by someone with rather ugly intentions. This made me think. Why the hell would you want a word that is seemingly so innocent to describe such a monstrous activity? Then I struck upon something. If you alter just one letter from the word "kidnap", what you get is a much more accurate and suggestive word. That word of course, is kidnab. Kid is still a kid. But "nab" means "grab or seize something/ someone suddenly, unexpectedly". Therefore, “kid + nab = kidnab”. Don't you agree that kidnab is rather more accurate than kidnap. As I typ...