I heard that, an another super-bharwa, fakk-tard, ladizo ke kapare banaane waala Chhakka,... Manish Malhotra
is also gonna deliver soon such sheedy-shitt.. of a rented-vaginal Baloney, using someone's womb...
Ek din aisa aayega,.. ki Abrahm
led ( hakla's najaayees paidaash ) these all chodu kids baraat,....
........ will come in a re-make of a film,. " Phool khile hai gulshan-gulshan,.. ! "
Karan has twins through surrogacy. Recently super-shitt-star Tushar Kapoor had one. And of course Hakla had one too earlier. I think Manish Malhotra will also have one soon. But govt is working to put an end to this madness.
When wil TOILET paper publish the baby shower photos?. KJo's might have been very lavish.
BTW, superstar TK bhi kjo biradari wala hai Kyla? Mujhe tho lagta tha uske KhanDan ne Softie ko rakha hai but maybe Sirf wo uske behan ki jaydaad hai
I thought this madness or whatever was already outlawed. So i was surprised to see this nooze.
Why cant these guys learn from Sushmita Sen and adopt some girl thrown away.
In any case they adopted a lifestyle that doesnt produce children. So why bother? I dont understand their logic.
Why go through all such hassle? Pregnancy and stable relationship and all when one can have all these at appropriate price?
If one likes banging same gender and be unconventional, then be unconventional in not having children too. Why crave for them and that too of ones own DNA? Isnt it (according to liberal ch**tiyas who want to be accepted) too conventional and narrow minded to crave for kids of own DNA?
U may say,.. isnt that a personal choice? whether or not to have kids of their own DNA or adopt?
By this logic, even people who are married should adopt? why have their own biological?
I have no issues with personal choices. But just trying to point out how some reserve the right to diss conventions as and when convenient. They want to be seen as unconventional, progressive etc. While still yearning for their own DNA propagation which isn't so progressive from their own perspective.
I think its unfair to expect people (celebrities mainly) to act progressively when it comes to children. Everyone wants a child and he is no exception.
Are you saying that female feticide and surrogacy more or less same?
Why should people, who can reproduce, adopt? And if it is a matter of choice, then what's wrong with choice of sex? If these buggers are forced due to their choice and circumstances, then there are many poor who want a choice of sex becaus of their own circumstances? Why do these dumbos come out and criticise such choices, wear a progressive mask and be all judgemental when they harbour such regressive mindset of DNA choice.
Also, aren't these progressive types worried about poverty, burdening limited resources etc? If they are true to it then they should rather adopt than bring more lives to burden earth further.
So I see hypocrisy in such actions at many levels by KJo types. I would have no prob in their choices if they did not sit in judgement of others and preach liberalism when suitable.
U may say,.. So what other choice did she have if she did not want to marry? Be pregnant and bear a child?
adopt is what he is saying.
But i dont agree with it.
I think progressiveness is not complete for anyone. Just because one has that so called progressiveness, that doesn't mean he/she should be of the same thought consistently, especially when it comes to life changing decisions like kids.
Surrogacy is one of the most beautiful things that has happened in the recent past for people who want their own DNA and cannot.
Same sex couples, single parents and people who cannot themselves have a kid naturally can go this route.
Well why not ? Why not ?? Another bangalan did it with Viv Richards... ?? Neena Gupta ??
Not by any means that I am justifying any evil.
I am questioning the undeserved right to judge or criticise or act all holy. And especially the celebrities deserve more scrutiny because they try to be opinion makers by the virtue of their position.
Wouldn't adoption be a better choice? In Indian context we have to take into account who rents a womb and who hires them. I am pretty sure most who rent their wombs are lower income people and most who hire are rich or upper middle class. So it's paisa bolta hai.
Some says,..Sush has shown such class in this aspect. But I read somewhere she was afraid to death for bearing pregnancy that's why she did that,.. ( just like Oprah Winfrey was not taking flight for years as she was afraid of death ) So what other choice did she have if she did not want to marry? Be pregnant and bear a child?
Someone may say... Why not? It is neither illegal nor unnatural to have children without marriage.
Someone may say.... Maybe his parents wanted a waaris , But hey,.. That is typical Indian mindset with which I don't have any issue but these guys will have problem with such other mindsets. They will exclude some mindsets as regressive if it is theirs but will judge others on ones that are not their problem.
IVF usually involves implanting more than one egg in the hopes that at least one will survive. That's how many IVF pregnancies end up with twins/ triplets.
Now, when they use the technology (spin technology i think), they can figure out the most healthy eggs suitable for implantation. during the process they find out the x or Y chromosomes which in turn tell you the gender of the baby.
I am yet to hear of a single case where people used this IVF as a tool to get the gender of choice. Its a tedious process and there is no guarantee that one would be pregnant. Many a time, you need several rounds of IVFs to get pregnant and the hormones/ the moods/ injections/ physical and emotional stress....its just not worth it, if its your own body/ your wife/ girl friend (Edit: just to clarify its not worth it to persu IVF as a tool for gender of choice).
I dont know this Karan guy and I havent heard his speeches. i merely saw a few movies that he directed. That is all I know about him. So, when i am saying something, I am not really talking from his POV. I am saying in general for any person of popularity.
If he were judging or criticising, then yes, it was undeserved and uncalled. I fully agree.
Adoption maybe a better choice but may not be a suitable choice. I hope you see the difference.
I understand and acknowledge the differences. Like I said I have no problem with anyone with their choices of how they want to lead their life. I am not against surrogacy, gays, celebrities or what have you. My grouse is with those who sit in judgement of others and go all progressive on them when they themselves go regressive when an option is available.
I think Karan Johar is a far more realistic liberal ( Sshhhhh he is madarpaat ) and less hypocritical than, say, SRK. One may say,.. I like Johar's chakka-giri via language smart-arse-ness, not his movies though. Karan is good till he opens his mouth, after that it is all down hall. Sounds so fake. He has no laughing sense, just laughs anywhere,..... This Chhakkaa needs a hard drilling by Khali or so.. .
Actually here we bring up a sensitive topic. Is surrogacy an excuse for tailor-made progeny ?
(1887) : God is dead
(1900) : Nietzsche is dead
I will not be hurried and I will not be bullied