Summary:
1. Supporters of AIB seem to give no reason at all other than freedom-of-expression which they do not even seem to be able to explain, they behave like fanatics, they yell "freedom of expression" and run away.
we share not-so-funny, rude crass jokes all the time, so why will we have any issue with them being just jokes... because you are turning a private, individual level thing/short-coming into sick public culture... and you are doing so because in your zeal to copy things from western culture you found this as one more thing to fashionably portray as fun....
2. Keep your freedom of expression, say whatever you want to say, but don't do show with 4000 people (private?) and youtube for millions of people (very private?).
do this fun at individual level, but don't teach younger generation that indulging in such a fun is something that they need because they have run out of all other ways to do comedy
3. No, doing it in movies is different than doing it as real people, the star's personal touch/power is not associated with the movie character, in these shows you are making this acceptable as culture by associating it with these people and you kind of cheat by saying both (1) roast is a style in which you say real/truthful things (2) it is just a joke, both are irrelevant because we are concerned only with the public acceptance it gives to such filth.
this is basically a serious attempt in making our already shallow/fashionable/show-off culture much worse, where people must buy big car, even if they can never drive it,... we do not consider you guys (actors/actresses) to be outside of society and not responsible for its problems... we want you to be responsible and do things that help improve society.. you are public figures and have more responsibility than us "unknowns".. and it is not optional for any public figure..
4. What? You do have some argument, then tell us, we will provide good reply to basically prove the obvious, that as responsible people you do not go by some assumed freedom of expression stuff, you go by what difference your action makes, why you need to do something that has more chance to be problematic and less to be anything good.
5. Don't give impression to young people that the society is filthy and immoral, don't wait for moral police, you yourself and we ourselves are moral police, since ever and forever.
and don't give pathetic excuses for your insensible attempt to have "public" fun with such shows... all couples do things in their bedroom, so for you it will be hypocrisy if they oppose showing those things in public.... everyone urinate in private, so for you guys it will be hypocrisy if they oppose you urinating in public...
6. You don't know what is meaning of society? You don't know why you should be burdened with any responsibility, after all it is your life and your choice, right?? No problem, try defining society to the best of your intellectual ability, try to define what a society should be, how a society can ensure healthy social/moral/xyz environment for its people, write 10 lines on it and you will learn more than what you learned by repeating "freedom of expression" so many times.
7. Be less tuned with the herd mentality and meaningless copy of west. Western nations are called "developed nations", see what it means and what difference it makes for their society. Write 10 more lines on what social issues are easier to handle in those developed nation than in India.
it is better to have legalized pro*stitu**tion, because at least it solves some social problems... better to have po**no**grpahy, because it still doesn't make it seem something normal.... but with your kind of stuff you are making something stupid look normal or in fact with your popular start, you are making it look fashionable... try to understand the difference... ...
8. The kind of culture such idiocy will create will far outweigh any fun or money being generated...
----------Cross Country Marathon Explanation----------
The Hindus and their God
In Hinduism, everything is considered part of the one infinite God, which implies that AIB was doing its B and all other decent acts of indecent mimicry with in this infinite God, perhaps to feel one with its existence in their own not so decent ways (in Hinduism the sole reason of our existence in this plane is to realize God).
But indecency is not a problem with-in our Hindu concepts where almost everything can be allowed as long as the envelope itself is guided in the "satvic" direction of unity with the God. Both the Khajurao temple and the Kama-Sutra prove that nothing is considered indecent if it is done in way to experience the manifestation of that infinite (so called Maya) with good intentions.
Hindu Purans (religious scripture written by ancient Brahmin/Sages) provide one more way to illustrate why an act in itself is not that important but the original intention and its results define whether it is good or bad.
A poor peasant was angry with Lord Shiva because of his poverty and will daily cross a river and hit Shiva Idol with a shoe, irrespective of any difficulties he has to face, be it rain or flood or whatever. A Brahman used to come to worship the same idol but will skip if weather is bad. After many years, one day Lord Shiva manifested himself in front of poor peasant and asked him what all he wants; peasant was surprised, he asked Lord Shiva that why he is not angry at him and happy with the Brahmin, to which Shiva replied that Brahmin's intention is to get something good from me but still he is not willing to suffer a little bit and skips his worship in bad weather, while you never expected anything in return but kept your ritual of hitting my idol with shoe everyday and therefore you are a more refined soul than Brahmin. So not only Hindu God is a very nice guy but He goes beyond any definition of class, caste and even means to see if your action/effort is really good or not.
Philosophically, there is nothing bad about what AIB is doing till their intentions or eventual results turn out to be bad. Even then if their intentions were not bad, they derive no bad Karma out of it. If philosophy and God both can let AIB do its indecent acts for the time being, who we are to oppose? and why? if God is OK with that, why should be the society?
For answer we should check these examples again. The results in all those stories are known to be good, the actions are done with best intentions possible (note that most people do not know what all is there in Khajurao temples because they haven't seen it, the erotic sculptures are small part of an awesome/grand philosophical/mythological depiction, similarly Kama-Sutra is something which our generation know by way of watching shallow movies based on it and they know nothing about the actual book or what it contains). The idea/intention of both Khajurao and Kama-Sutra is not to depict nudity or to make things sensual, both are very sophisticated work of art and literature depicting sensuality only to add the context. Kama-Sutra warns again and again that the enjoyment of senses should be proper, unlike arbitrary enjoyment in our sick comedy style. The peasant is hitting God's idol, nobody needs to care for God, there is nothing wrong that can happen to God, his only intention is to check if that stone/idol can tell God about his unhappy life; so we as individuals or society do not need to worry about what peasant is doing (unless he ends up damaging the idol:-)).
The Society, its Culture and Evolution
Societies are complex entities or in fact complex living beings that get impacted by so many different things on their way to evolution. An individual in a society starts as a very innocent kid, knowing nothing, not even how to eat and then later grows to learn how to eat, sit, walk, talk and act as part of the overall society. If a society doesn't have some sort of framework to guide its direction in overall evolution, it doesn't need to be a society, you will only have individuals in that case, all having conflicting rights over each other and capable of annihilating themselves.
The most fragile part of social structure that takes years, decades, centuries to build and can be degraded fairly quickly is its culture or a vague idea of what to practice and what not in absence of any law allowing or disallowing something. No law requires us to respect our parents, elders, teachers, so you can think that you have freedom of speech and use AIB's way to honor your parents, teachers in a a private gathering of 4000 people (private with 4000 people, no law to tell how big a gathering can be considered private:-)). Such practices, traditions and other such characteristics of a society or civilization are termed as culture. Things that make up a culture are not required to be law but they are still most important part of a society or civilization. They define what is acceptable or not so acceptable with-in a society, or what you will find or not find as part of a particular society. This definition guides the future evolution of the society.
The B in AIB and its Acceptance as Freedom of Expression
Perhaps AIB and its supporters do not understand that nobody is against their freedom of expression. But freedom of expression/speech in itself is not something that stands in isolation. In the context of a society and its culture, freedom-of-expression/speech is one area where you define what is free and what is not but not a right unto itself. So you have laws against inciting crowd for communal-ism that curtail or bound your freedom of expression/speech. You have laws against nudity in public that curtail your freedom of expression.
As an individual you have right to be nude in private, you have right to be inciting comunal-ism with-in yourself, you can express these things in front of mirror as much as you want. However, you are barred from public expression of such activities to protect certain definition of our culture that we assume is required to move society in a certain positive direction. If it is not obvious that society does need laws for its survival than it is a different discussion, but once you understand that we do need laws, we must also understand that laws are basically restriction on your freedom of expression/activity (that is all they do in order to give society a predefined/expected direction).
Fighting blindly for freedom of expression, without even understanding it, is meaningless and people who are opposing AIB are using their freedom of expression to curtail the freedom of expression of AIB. It is society trying to define a new law or reinforcing an existing tradition if it is not being followed. So both AIB's supporters and their opponents are using their freedom for expression to define the direction for society.
Now, we may or may not have an existing law that bars B in AIB in a group of 4000 people and then post it on youtube. But if we deem fit, we can have such a law, it is our freedom of making laws.
What is not so good about AIB's Way-of-Expression
1. Supporters of AIB seem to give no reason at all other than freedom-of-expression which they do not even seem to be able to explain, they behave like fanatics, they yell "freedom of expression" and run away.
we share not-so-funny, rude crass jokes all the time, so why will we have any issue with them being just jokes... because you are turning a private, individual level thing/short-coming into sick public culture... and you are doing so because in your zeal to copy things from western culture you found this as one more thing to fashionably portray as fun....
2. Keep your freedom of expression, say whatever you want to say, but don't do show with 4000 people (private?) and youtube for millions of people (very private?).
do this fun at individual level, but don't teach younger generation that indulging in such a fun is something that they need because they have run out of all other ways to do comedy
3. No, doing it in movies is different than doing it as real people, the star's personal touch/power is not associated with the movie character, in these shows you are making this acceptable as culture by associating it with these people and you kind of cheat by saying both (1) roast is a style in which you say real/truthful things (2) it is just a joke, both are irrelevant because we are concerned only with the public acceptance it gives to such filth.
this is basically a serious attempt in making our already shallow/fashionable/show-off culture much worse, where people must buy big car, even if they can never drive it,... we do not consider you guys (actors/actresses) to be outside of society and not responsible for its problems... we want you to be responsible and do things that help improve society.. you are public figures and have more responsibility than us "unknowns".. and it is not optional for any public figure..
4. What? You do have some argument, then tell us, we will provide good reply to basically prove the obvious, that as responsible people you do not go by some assumed freedom of expression stuff, you go by what difference your action makes, why you need to do something that has more chance to be problematic and less to be anything good.
5. Don't give impression to young people that the society is filthy and immoral, don't wait for moral police, you yourself and we ourselves are moral police, since ever and forever.
and don't give pathetic excuses for your insensible attempt to have "public" fun with such shows... all couples do things in their bedroom, so for you it will be hypocrisy if they oppose showing those things in public.... everyone urinate in private, so for you guys it will be hypocrisy if they oppose you urinating in public...
6. You don't know what is meaning of society? You don't know why you should be burdened with any responsibility, after all it is your life and your choice, right?? No problem, try defining society to the best of your intellectual ability, try to define what a society should be, how a society can ensure healthy social/moral/xyz environment for its people, write 10 lines on it and you will learn more than what you learned by repeating "freedom of expression" so many times.
7. Be less tuned with the herd mentality and meaningless copy of west. Western nations are called "developed nations", see what it means and what difference it makes for their society. Write 10 more lines on what social issues are easier to handle in those developed nation than in India.
it is better to have legalized pro*stitu**tion, because at least it solves some social problems... better to have po**no**grpahy, because it still doesn't make it seem something normal.... but with your kind of stuff you are making something stupid look normal or in fact with your popular start, you are making it look fashionable... try to understand the difference... ...
8. The kind of culture such idiocy will create will far outweigh any fun or money being generated...
9. The show proves yet again, that our bollywood industry is devoid of any innovation or good ideas, it can only copy west and that too in very pathetic ways.
10.These guys (AIB) will probably faint if they read the jokes of unemployed mohalla guys who invest lot of effort in such pathetic jokes, almost religiously but they have excuse, they do not have means to do anything better..
11. While it is so difficult to get those mohalla guys off that stupid/unproductive/addictive pastime, these celebrities want to encourage more people to indulge in such pastime.
12. Read the stuff below as your first level of punishment.
It covers some more argument people gave, like Kamasutra has all this or Khajurao temples are like B in AIB? Read it to know that those are absurd arguments
The Hindus and their God
In Hinduism, everything is considered part of the one infinite God, which implies that AIB was doing its B and all other decent acts of indecent mimicry with in this infinite God, perhaps to feel one with its existence in their own not so decent ways (in Hinduism the sole reason of our existence in this plane is to realize God).
But indecency is not a problem with-in our Hindu concepts where almost everything can be allowed as long as the envelope itself is guided in the "satvic" direction of unity with the God. Both the Khajurao temple and the Kama-Sutra prove that nothing is considered indecent if it is done in way to experience the manifestation of that infinite (so called Maya) with good intentions.
Hindu Purans (religious scripture written by ancient Brahmin/Sages) provide one more way to illustrate why an act in itself is not that important but the original intention and its results define whether it is good or bad.
A poor peasant was angry with Lord Shiva because of his poverty and will daily cross a river and hit Shiva Idol with a shoe, irrespective of any difficulties he has to face, be it rain or flood or whatever. A Brahman used to come to worship the same idol but will skip if weather is bad. After many years, one day Lord Shiva manifested himself in front of poor peasant and asked him what all he wants; peasant was surprised, he asked Lord Shiva that why he is not angry at him and happy with the Brahmin, to which Shiva replied that Brahmin's intention is to get something good from me but still he is not willing to suffer a little bit and skips his worship in bad weather, while you never expected anything in return but kept your ritual of hitting my idol with shoe everyday and therefore you are a more refined soul than Brahmin. So not only Hindu God is a very nice guy but He goes beyond any definition of class, caste and even means to see if your action/effort is really good or not.
Philosophically, there is nothing bad about what AIB is doing till their intentions or eventual results turn out to be bad. Even then if their intentions were not bad, they derive no bad Karma out of it. If philosophy and God both can let AIB do its indecent acts for the time being, who we are to oppose? and why? if God is OK with that, why should be the society?
For answer we should check these examples again. The results in all those stories are known to be good, the actions are done with best intentions possible (note that most people do not know what all is there in Khajurao temples because they haven't seen it, the erotic sculptures are small part of an awesome/grand philosophical/mythological depiction, similarly Kama-Sutra is something which our generation know by way of watching shallow movies based on it and they know nothing about the actual book or what it contains). The idea/intention of both Khajurao and Kama-Sutra is not to depict nudity or to make things sensual, both are very sophisticated work of art and literature depicting sensuality only to add the context. Kama-Sutra warns again and again that the enjoyment of senses should be proper, unlike arbitrary enjoyment in our sick comedy style. The peasant is hitting God's idol, nobody needs to care for God, there is nothing wrong that can happen to God, his only intention is to check if that stone/idol can tell God about his unhappy life; so we as individuals or society do not need to worry about what peasant is doing (unless he ends up damaging the idol:-)).
The Society, its Culture and Evolution
Societies are complex entities or in fact complex living beings that get impacted by so many different things on their way to evolution. An individual in a society starts as a very innocent kid, knowing nothing, not even how to eat and then later grows to learn how to eat, sit, walk, talk and act as part of the overall society. If a society doesn't have some sort of framework to guide its direction in overall evolution, it doesn't need to be a society, you will only have individuals in that case, all having conflicting rights over each other and capable of annihilating themselves.
The most fragile part of social structure that takes years, decades, centuries to build and can be degraded fairly quickly is its culture or a vague idea of what to practice and what not in absence of any law allowing or disallowing something. No law requires us to respect our parents, elders, teachers, so you can think that you have freedom of speech and use AIB's way to honor your parents, teachers in a a private gathering of 4000 people (private with 4000 people, no law to tell how big a gathering can be considered private:-)). Such practices, traditions and other such characteristics of a society or civilization are termed as culture. Things that make up a culture are not required to be law but they are still most important part of a society or civilization. They define what is acceptable or not so acceptable with-in a society, or what you will find or not find as part of a particular society. This definition guides the future evolution of the society.
The B in AIB and its Acceptance as Freedom of Expression
Perhaps AIB and its supporters do not understand that nobody is against their freedom of expression. But freedom of expression/speech in itself is not something that stands in isolation. In the context of a society and its culture, freedom-of-expression/speech is one area where you define what is free and what is not but not a right unto itself. So you have laws against inciting crowd for communal-ism that curtail or bound your freedom of expression/speech. You have laws against nudity in public that curtail your freedom of expression.
As an individual you have right to be nude in private, you have right to be inciting comunal-ism with-in yourself, you can express these things in front of mirror as much as you want. However, you are barred from public expression of such activities to protect certain definition of our culture that we assume is required to move society in a certain positive direction. If it is not obvious that society does need laws for its survival than it is a different discussion, but once you understand that we do need laws, we must also understand that laws are basically restriction on your freedom of expression/activity (that is all they do in order to give society a predefined/expected direction).
Fighting blindly for freedom of expression, without even understanding it, is meaningless and people who are opposing AIB are using their freedom of expression to curtail the freedom of expression of AIB. It is society trying to define a new law or reinforcing an existing tradition if it is not being followed. So both AIB's supporters and their opponents are using their freedom for expression to define the direction for society.
Now, we may or may not have an existing law that bars B in AIB in a group of 4000 people and then post it on youtube. But if we deem fit, we can have such a law, it is our freedom of making laws.
What is not so good about AIB's Way-of-Expression
How do we decide what is acceptable public behavior? I am 18 year or 25 year old guy/girl and I want to understand if AIB's style of expression is acceptable or not. AIB did it in front of 4000 people terming it private, I mostly happen to be in a group much smaller than that, so why will I feel it unacceptable to use when popular stars can use it in front of 4000 people.
Our young generation works under peer pressure and follows fashion more than reason, the AIB's show sets it in fashion and peer pressure will make small groups of young generation adopt this as acceptable part of their culture in no time. Already young generation on facebook is clueless as to what may be wrong with such a culture when it is already part of private speech. They do not understand difference between individual short-coming and publicly accepted/practiced behavior.
Why we can't always copy USA/UK
The acceptance of something useless and in all probability harmful for society as something normal for public entertainment is going to set society in a wrong direction in at least one area. It doesn't matter how US or Europe handle this type of entertainment.
Society's overall direction is set by thousands of such practices and each such practice is one force, together all such forces set the society in motion towards not so good or good path.
US and Europe are many times richer than India and are much ahead in their evolution path than India. India is much more diverse with much fragile society that is managed by very small law-enforcing organization given the size of it population. US and Europe have people who follow their own instincts and not fashion, they set fashion for the third world. Think how people in USA come to office, in almost any type of dress, they don't care, they come in slippers, shoes, pajamas and what not. Indians in US buy only iphone, american's buy all sorts of phones. Indians are breaking iphone sales record in India, not because they need it or they like it, because it is fashion which they are forced to copy.
Indian adults copy the fashion of US teenagers, adults in US are much more individualistic. In US teenagers have maximum peer pressure, maximum fashion following, buying branded clothes, branded accessories etc, using face-book, face-time is teenagers fashion in US; in India, neo-rich, adult population have same mentality.
So acceptance of such a comedy-style or show or language in US affects a small population, mostly a section of teenagers who improve by the time they start working to earn their livelihood and become more individualistic; In India even our middle class is capable of financially supporting their children well beyond teenage and hence even young adults live life irresponsibly, more addicted to fashion than their US counter parts of same age (unless you live in/around areas of Hollywood).
Let's not teach our younger generation that indulging in such a fun is something necessary or fashionable. Let's not make them social waste. US President keeps on asking US kids to study more and compete with Indian/Chinese kids, and we at the beginning of that tiny advantage because of our sheer numbers want to waste more and more of younger generation on show-off/pretentious life-style. Let's make our actors/stars more responsible for what they give to their society at least outside of movies, we do not care if they use such language in movies as long as they have age restriction, but we will oppose if they give it a personal touch outside of movies and make it part of acceptable culture. Let them find better ways of creating fun/comedy.
