Top Criminals in Indian Hospitals

Criminals in hospitals Image by murplejane

Ten years inside hospitals gives you a great instinct to pick out criminals. Oh yes, there are a lot of them in the hospitals. Here are the greatest offenders and how to deal with them.

The Poor:

They can’t afford the services, yet they come. They never do what we ask them to, want multivitamins and “saline” and never come when we ask them to. They are dirty, and don’t pay even if they can afford it. Definitely deserve the long waiting times and getting sidelined for “paying” patients.

The old:

Slow, stubborn and forgetful, they can never come to the point. If they have bellyache, they start with the time they stubbed their toe back in 67 and the time they met a white doctor who gave them a red liquid for the belly ache. Definitely deserve the patronizing behaviour that we have perfected; don’t pay attention, just nod, agree and give them something for symptomatic relief. Talk loudly, most of them are deaf.

The very rich:

Scum of the earth, just the worst people in India. They walk around like they own the hospital and treat us like we are beggars. Clearly they deserve to be robbed. Such sense of entitlement, such low respect for the profession. Keep changing doctors, want results yesterday, stingy. Definitely deserve the over charging and the excessive tests, they ask for it.


90% of their problems are psycho somatic and they create such a fuss about the rest 10%. If you are a guy, they wont let you touch them, if you don’t, and get the diagnosis wrong, they curse you. In the labor room they wont push when they need to and scream like a banshee, as if it’s an elephant coming out. Never open their mouths if their husbands hit them, so we can’t do anything. Definitely deserve being given antidepressants for the vague symptoms and the slaps on the labor table.


You can smell them from a mile away. Sure they work in the fields and have animals, but can’t they buy soap? or at least some chap perfume? many of them are rich but pretend to be poor, they don’t change their clothes and treat the women so bad. if you are a girl then you’ve had it, your old man wont spend a penny on you. Depending on the case, definitely educate them about taking bath and sending their girls to school.

Prostitutes and homosexuals:

Why can’t they just say it? how many times will I have to “guess” their tendencies and do the right test?  I mean I am a professional, trained to deal with them in a professional way, then why can’t they just open up? They hem and haw and beat around the bush and never tell you what’s really going on. As if they can fool anyone. Anyway, poor women, forced to live like this, sometimes I feel sad, but I have to do my job and I can’t care for emotions. For them always do STD panel, even if they complain of head ache, they actually mean something else, so no point in asking if you should do it, they will just say no.

Criminals in hospital Woody allen being chased by a gorilla

Image by JohnMcNab


Surely, I am joking. Right? How can an educated, cultured professional hold such beliefs. These show the beliefs of a micro minority, right? No lessons to be learned here, just how some people can’t be cured by education. Correct?

The curious case of the hypersexual homosexual

Bullshit! Ya right! Liar,! funny, “so gay”, “inner beauty, alright”

That’s the typical reaction I get if I show people this quote.

Q:how did you first realize you were straight?
A:around the time I started recognizing my sexuality, I realized that I felt a deep emotional connection with the opposite sex. I discovered that I had a deep attraction towards their inner beauty.

Now, consider these:

…from what iv heard abt gays is that they are purely attracted towards men sex­u­ally and that seems to be the decid­ing fac­tor in them being gay

This comment comes from a well meaning friend with religion-based objections to homosexuality, and is a milder form of a widespread false about homosexuals, made clearer by these quotes:

“they can hardly have a spiritual life with a whole lot of craving in their head”

“you mean gay but otherwise asexual?”

Both the people quoted ultimately believe that homosexuals are characterized PURELY or mainly by sexual attraction, which is not, in essence, different from believing that they are hyper-sexual.

If the opening comment is fake, or unrealistic, does that make an average heterosexual purely interested in sex all the time? Or if it is “gay” does that not mean that you think “gay” means “emotional/soft-brained”

Is it not only fair, that the same standards that are used to evaluate and characterize heterosexuality be applied to homosexuality? Have you ever paused to think that?

If I realized I was heterosexual when i started noticing breasts, how is it hyper-sexual of my friend M to be attracted to cute (male) butts?

In case the comparison was not obvious, let me put it in a sentence. Heterosexuals are identified by sexual attraction, so are homosexuals. Therefore to infer from that alone that they are interested only in sex is logically inconsistent. Given that homosexuality is not a sexual aberration or disease.

I am going to be lenient here and say that perhaps many heterosexuals and conservatives have this false belief because it is never put in perspective, so this should clears all doubts.

Who am I fooling, there is one, deeper, reason why this belief is so wide spread. And that is that homosexuality is unnatural, and unless one is willing to admit that there exists such an underlying religious belief, no amount of explaining is going to help. Nevertheless, being a great believer in education, I asked some of my homosexual friends how important emotion was to their sexuality, here are some quotes.

Me: What do you expect in a partner?

He: ideal is a myth. but if there exists one with these… characters.. id give it a shot. kind, generous,animal lover, vegetarian, long faced, long —-, etc etc. lol.

if you’d take into consideration the straight man. .. he sees his friends get married to women, come to work, go home, have sex, make babies etc. such an example doesnt exist in homosexuals. rather it does exist, it is not brought to the fore. so we are labeled as unnatural and sex driven.

Me: Envision your perfect partner, how important is the sex appeal?

He: yes, sex appeal is important… but not “the” deciding factor.

follow if you want more detail!

and a good friend, in response to the comments on my earlier post

I want someone who’ll love me. I still dream of love, marriage and kids [twin girls :-)]. I dream of a day when my parents will accept me and realize that I still am the same person. I dream of a small house with a little garden and a labrador named Phoebe. The only difference is that we’ll get ‘His and His’ towels for Christmas.

If you still have a small voice in your head saying, “but they are more interested in sex than us” I hope you have realized what the problem is; you have made up your minds and will not be confused by facts. Face it, you think “gays” are an aberration, and accept it openly, no shame in that, people are entitled to their opinion. Do yourself a favor, do not assail me with clams of being objective and scientific, and then hold on to your delusions.

In case you are wondering what this natural unnatural debate is, head here to see what I have written earlier. [link]

thanks to image by Jan Tonne

Unnatural Affections?

Straight To hell

The unknown and the different have always evoked strong reactions from people. Perhaps there is an evolutionary imperative in being wary of all that is alien. Of all the “strange” socio-cultural phenomenons to create waves in the past 30-40 years, nothing matches the gay rights movement in its perseverance and success. Yet, inspite of all the success of the movement across the world, there is perhaps no group so hated and misunderstood. Part of the reason is that in most cultures sex is taboo, and talking about “unnatural”sex is further taboo. Lies mis-conceptions and false information passed on from mouth to mouth end in a grossly misrepresented image or reality.This series will look at the most common  objections and misunderstandings about homosexuality.

That homosexuality is “unnatural” and against the “order of nature” is perhaps the most commonly used argument, heard the loudest and so pervasive as to be even in our constitution till this year.
What is Natural?

Any discussion about the unnatural must begin with understanding what natural is. Explanations and definitions abound and for this discussion I choose to define natural as that which adheres to natural laws.Natural laws are laws that govern what we observe in nature; eg. gravity, electromagnetism etc. but as far as we know, there is no universal law of sexuality and even if there was one, the very fact that homoxesulaity defied the law would mean it was not really a law. It’s not that I have chosen a definition to suit my views, taking any other definition, save those that have a religious origin, there is no scientific reason to call homosexuality unnatural.
Take for example the belief that only human beings have homosexual behaviour, and therefore it is a deviation from the natural norms. Contrary to this belief, there are hundreds of species of animals that exhibit homosexual behaviour. Following is a quote from a popular magazine. The science of the article is accurate, if a bit dramatic.

Giraffes have all-male orgies. So do bottlenose dolphins, killer whales, gray whales, and West Indian manatees. Japanese macaques, on the other hand, are ardent lesbians; the females enthusiastically mount each other. Bonobos, one of our closest primate relatives, are similar, except that their lesbian sexual encounters occur every two hours. Male bonobos engage in “penis fencing,” which leads, surprisingly enough, to ejaculation. They also give each other genital massages.

Click here for the original Article

The Moralistic Argument

However, often statements about the unnaturalness of homosexuality stem from religious or moralistic beliefs. Of the world’s dominant religions, all monotheistic religions have clear cut objections to homosexuality and one can find a wide range of personal beliefs about it, from believing homosexuals to be “lost souls” to “perverts going to hell”.

Most religions believe that there is a clear and fixed natural order, a guideline of how nature and people are supposed to behave. The problem with this outlook is that this presumes that religions know all there is to know about nature and its working. But if religions indeed are right about such an order why do their moralistic and natural standards change with time? Natural and unnatural vary across religions and sometimes even across sects within religions, it is unnatural for a man to be clean shaven if he is Amish and unnatural for him to sport a beard if he is a Quaker. Oral sex was deemed unnatural by all Christian sects till just a hundred years ago, yet now many an evangelical preacher is heard supporting it from posh progressive pulpits. So the natural-unnatural divide as proposed by religions is like writing in sand, with no sound and timeless principles behind them about the natural world and therefore cannot be accepted as a valid one.

Reproduction or Evolution Argument

There are many pseudo-scientific arguments hovering around the theory of evolution, usually propounded by religious groups to lend credibility to their moralistic arguments. The typical argument is that sex was evolved for reproduction and since homosexuality does not lead to reproduction, it is unnatural/wrong/evil. To begin with, it is quiet a big assumption to say that the only purpose of sex is reproduction, and if it were true, any sexual behavior that does not directly or indirectly lead to conception should also be deemed unnatural.

Such reductionist thinking does not keep in mind that the evolutionalry scientists themselves are at times not sure about the evolutionary significance of many human traits. One such example is the female orgasm, if the only purpose of sex is reproduction, then (sorry ladies) the female orgasm is rather useless. In fact for a long time it was not even accepted as normal for a woman to have an orgasm.

In conclusion, there is no good scieintific reason to think homosexuality is an abnormal deviation, or unnatural form of sexual preference. Hopefully with advances in science we will know better about the physiology, psychology and genetics involved.

The next part of this series will talk about the medical aspects of homosexuality, adressing questions like “Arent all gay people HIV positive?” And isnt homosexuality a disease?