Comments on: Shamita Shetty Showed her Shame Shame!

By: sanjay rawal

sanjay rawal — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:46:35 +0000

i think she has forgotten and where the sitting there the work is important but problem is there,some sharam (shyness) is there on her face and cryness also it means she has not done any bad and she has love.where she is sitting there people who were sitting we have to ask she is crying or not.if she is crying sheis not in fault but fault is only that is she is in love.

sanjay rawal

By: monk

monk — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:30:17 +0000

i don’t think is the great issue for the celebrety not to wear the underwear or any thing else as they are in the glamour world so the can have the right to do anything they want .being showing fanny is not a big deal ha.if she want she show if she don’t want she won’t show.but she is so sexy

By: mkg

mkg — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:18:45 +0000

less clothing, less shopping, less laundry,less baggage to carry, less thing to worry, and if everyone follow, this will be norm in no time.

By: Come On

Come On — Sun, 20 May 2007 16:31:59 +0000

So, you are all going to just take it for granted that a picture appearing on the cover of a British tabloid is the Vedic Truth now?

There is this computer software called photoshop. Look into it. It can do many things that to older generations would look like magic.

Shame shame indeed.

By: Ms Fink Nottle

Ms Fink Nottle — Fri, 18 May 2007 01:44:39 +0000

My parents (Delhi folk, although they grew up in the South) refuse to wear undies to date … something I never quite got used to, although I thank my stars that they did not impose this preference (or lack thereof)on me.

Delicious: a Tamilian friend of mine would insist that in her circle it was common to refer to a woman’s “idlis” as in “he really loves her. she must have great idlis” ! Now surely you can’t beat that for sheer fun factor…not to mention a certain indefinable appropo-ness!

By: Runa

Runa — Tue, 15 May 2007 21:53:42 +0000

“no need to get your undies all in a bunch ……”

ROTFL

By: macaca mother

macaca mother — Tue, 15 May 2007 17:23:27 +0000

My young daughter calls that part a “virginia”.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Tue, 15 May 2007 16:27:41 +0000

@105:

Heyyyy….don’t be dissing my peeps. Jhumri Taliaya is a fine place. No, I am not from there but grew up pretty close from there…….Bhopal. I was born in Kerala, in the middle of sixties and spent first five years of my life there. My first school was “Aasante kallari” where an old man who is the self appointed village teacher would teach little kids to write in palm leaves with an iron nail (naarayam). My grandpa and I would walk around the village wearing just a loin cloth (konakam). Like I said, underwear was not a necessity till one reached the teens….you know what I mean

And…calm down…….no need to get your undies all in a bunch ……India and Indians are doing fine with or without it.

Cheers

By: Derick

Derick — Tue, 15 May 2007 16:05:59 +0000

Well, I concur with milli. I’m a little surprised at the shock expressed by some people, at the fact that there might be quite a few people who don’t wear any underwear in India. I grew up in the south and i know many who’d do it freestyle. Sometimes it’s just a preference.

By: Kush Tandon

Kush Tandon — Tue, 15 May 2007 08:51:55 +0000

circus in jungle,

langoti = underwear or very modest, loose brief/ loincloth (even according to Kamat Potpourri).

That is one of the reason Sikh/ Punjabi warriors chose a more formal brief over loose langoti as a garrison wear.

Now to your point, poor small children when infants only wear underwear (lioncloth) as their only cloth, so you, you can also use it for someone who knew you (was your friend) since you both only wore underwear from childhood.

howevever, langoti yaar is also used for someone very close - as close as...., it has many meanings depending on the context.

i think undergarments became an art form in mughal court too.