Did Stuff magazine cross the line or are they just plain obtuse?
img: via Ox House Camel Door
(tip Karthik via email and UberTipster via Tipster)
To me, these images make zero sense. The yoga pose, shows a goddess with dark skin. Is this Laxmi, the goddess of cash-munney a.k.a bling bling, since she’s sitting on a Lotus? To me looks like a mix between her hubby, Vishnu, and Mola Ram’s Kali.
The second figure is Ganesha with enough alcohol for a party of desi graduate students. Starting with the upper left going anti-clockwise, tequila shots, draft beer, whiskey (on the rocks??), something in a beaker (ethanol perhaps or maybe Irish Cream?), martini (shaken but not stirred) and wine (aged thousands of years). Now showing a Hindu god consuming alcohol may be offensive to some but Hindu mythology always talks about gods consuming soma before getting it on with the apsaras. It should be pointed out that Ganesha, being the lord of wisdom, would be aware of the old adage “Beer and whiskey, very risky” and hence, would never mix drinks.
The third one is the most senseless image of all and, probably, the one that most people may find most offensive. It depicts Anjaneya, getting it on with a Hindu woman. Remember the dot on the forehead, must be a Hindu woman, right? Of course, this makes no sense because anyone who knows anything about Hanuman, knows he is celibate, even though he purportedly has a son. India being the land of Kamasutra and all, no stereotypical image of India is complete in the Western media, without an ancient picture depicting some act of Kama (not to be confused with Karma, unless you draw cartoons for Stuff). Some research on the topic at hand would’ve revealed that perhaps a playa like Krishna would be more in line for this context. Not that I’m suggesting they do that, but if you’re going to offend people, at least be accurate so you dont end up looking like an ignoramus.
Snehal at Ox House Camel Door writes a scathing letter to the editor. I personally thought this footnote was hilarious.
PS: For the record, Ganesh is supposed to have four arms instead of six, and Hanuman should look more like a monkey and less like the Grinch.
While this will most likely draw the ire of Hindu extremists, and may result in the destruction of a few book stores, Internet cafes and McDs in India, the biggest problem I see with this incident, is that a bunch of frat boys (stereotyping is a two-way street) abused their freedom of expression to have a few cheap laughs at the expense of a religious minority in America.
Regarding Stuff magazine (sorry, no link love), I have to confess that I used to read that crap when I was in college, mostly for their coverage of cars (and women). I knew there was a reason I stopped – the content became increasingly mind-numbingly dumb and intellectually insulting. Thanks, Stuff, for reinforcing that my decision to stop reading your crap was the correct one.
Update:
Yahoo has picked up this story (tip: Snehal). Since we’re on the topic of pictures and statues of Hindu gods in sexual positions, here’s one I came (pardon the pun) across yesterday. Depicted in this picture circled in red is not one but two statues of Kamadeva and his consort Rati, in a ….. ummm….. compromising position. Here’s one more image of the two of them shagging each other rotten. The Hanuman in the picture is just coincidental.
The editor of Stuff Magazine deserves a kick on his kundi for not displaying the correct god. My man, Hanuman, would never do that. Krishna and Kamadeva on the other hand – time for the editor to hide his wife.
This has been reported in multiple media outlets.
DNAIndia.com reports “Gods depicted in controversial manner in US”. Yup, this was a governmental conspiracy against Hindus.
AndhraCafe.com says “Ganesha has beer while Hanuman poses obscene”.
TOI and IndiaWest also expound on this issue.
Some stories have mentioned blogger Snehal.
Loading ...