& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

The War of the Triangles

by Andaz
Some Years ago i was travelling by train In Europe with a copy of the London Independent (daily). There was an Interesting article on the mammary (glands). These holy reflections are based on the notes jotted down during the silent and uncrowded (but not boring) trip.
The Creator, in His infinite wisdom, decided that bra-less the female shall come into this world, and bra-less shall be her return, and wisely deigned not to provide an in-built bra to the human female form; otherwise a multi-billion dollar industry would not have seen the light of the day — thanks to modern
human weaknesses, and the ensuing battles of the sexes (
Men associate women with the figure of 8, or that of the hour-glass, but women aspire to higher forms of mathematics; and insisted on maintaining the shape of the equilateral triangle (the three sides are equal; that is, the distances between the two nipples and the navel). This space configuration of the three points was said to have been discovered by the yogis of yore; but no mathematician ever got a doctorate on this thesis, and no professor of anatomy harped upon it.
But Mother conspired with Father
Time to transform this equilateral triangle into an isosceles one (two sides equal). Hence this space war, soon after Father Time had exacted its toll; with the industry providing the technical assistance, and the fair sex taking control of the cunning strategy and tactics;
Experts are of the opinion that for the perfect design of the bra. the services of aeronautical specialists are required, as it is easier to design an aeroplane (with a rigid body) than to design a bra to contain a soft, shapeless mass of mobile tissues, without changing its outer shape under any form of dynamic stress. That's a tall order for any scien-
Ust.
To cite an example of tbp social strain, sometime back, a press report from a SE Aslan city reported that the headmistress of a girl's school had reprimanded a student for attending school without the bra. The school authorities considered the non-use of the bra as immodest.'
Perhaps the movement of the organ was frowned upon; as we find that in some countries nude shows are allowed if the live models remained perfectly still (did not move). But this explanation is not enough, as the question arises: what about the Immodest
movements of; thi imagination? The moving picture is a deyil's workshop; therefore a bra is required to contain the imagination (of the gazer). But there Is no bra or goggles available for the roving eyes.
Men have nothing much to contribute, except as onlookers, and very keen ones at that. It is a spectator sport, in which only the players pay. But men do have a ready complaint: pointed references are pointedly noticeable. Why not call a round-table (or triangular?) conference and try for a consensus? Mind your own business, is the retort. How? Was the body given to woman to
conceal the dress. With the exception of the bra? : > ,, dl
It is still debatable why women wear the bra. Men wisely keep mum, perhaps angling for the benefit of the doubt. Also open to subjective debate is the question as to who has the first option on the appreciation of the contraption: the wearer, or the onlooker?
Never in the history of women's emancipation was so much covered to expose so much of covert intentions. In strategic manoeuvres, only the tip of the iceberg is clearly outlined (but not exposed).