Unveiled May 25th 2009
Some of the words, especially used as a news headline, in Economist are almost blasphemous & sacrilegious, a magazine that I have been reading with pride for more than quarter of a century.
Certainly, Economist does not need such conjectures to make it. I am still proud that my children also read it, though very young, but inculcated as habit to them.
It would be profane to label a palaeontological finding as a piece of pornographic material.
In that case what Economist can comment about the first documented Vatsyan classic called Kamasutra. Old day playboys & Penthouse? Most certainly not I guess.
Yes indeed, when coming to male psyche, it is almost an axiom that they think alike when it comes to the matter of, well we all know.
Symbolism has been the hallmark of our history, both modern and old and our mindset makes it as an object of desire or a sex toy. What do your scribes would say when they interpret a modern painting? All camouflaged pornography?
We expect better journals from Economist.
