californiasardar1

I appreciate the suggestions, but I highly doubt that "confidence" impacts the rejection rate of an online dating profile. I also doubt that "confidence" or "body language" matters to the nonexistent population of women who never encounter me. You guys seem to think that there are women all around me who I encounter on a daily basis who are just dying to meet a guy like me, but I do something to put them off. How can I put off people I never encounter? How many Sikh women do you think are even within a one-mile radius of me on a given day? Or even a given month? Or year? Not everybody lives in Southall. Your suggestion for boxing sounds great in general. But personally, I'm done looking. There is nothing in it for me.

That's great for that Singh. Sometimes it comes down to having the right connections or being in the right social circle or being in the right place at the right time. You can be as confident or whatever as you want. When you literally NEVER randomly run into Sikh women in real life, it won't make a difference.

I exercise regularly and am fairly fit, but I don't have the body type that people (women) like. I have a small frame and struggle to put on muscle mass. No, I don't have a "physical job." Maybe that is where I fall short: I'm not like the SikhSangat blue-collar tough guys ?

Bhagat Singh will never lose support among common Sikhs for any reason. Common Sikhs (over 99% of whom are monay nowadays) like Bhagat Singh because he was a mona. So whenever some "extremist baba" tells them they should keep their kesh they can point to Bhagat Singh and say "How dare you say that! Don't you know that many of our shaheeds were monay?!" Bhagat Singh was propped up as a hero first by the Indian establishment because he represented the ideal "Sikh hero" (one who had disowned Sikhi in ever way possible and valued country rather than religion). Bhagat Singh was subsequently propped up as a hero by mona "Sikhs" for the reasons I mentioned.

The "religious connotations" are just too much for most people. When thicker beards started to become popular a few years ago, I thought we'd see the "proper singh look" become more popular. Instead we just saw a bunch of monay grow out their beards. It's similar to how the pagh made a (very) mild resurgence in Punjabi popular culture. Some people began to view the pagh/trimmed beard ("beard" is generous, I should really say "stubble") look favorably. But no real resurgence of the "proper singh look." Apparently, there is no problem with thick beards and no problem with paghs. The problem is when you put them together and become a "baba." haircut + long/thick beard = okay pagh + stubble/very short trimmed beard = okay pagh + long/thick beard = NOT okay

Your jokes would stand a better chance of being amusing if they were at least rooted in reality. Nobody has ever accused me of needing to lose weight.

I am at the point where I am so cynical that it will be impossible for me to fall for anything like that again. I see where you are coming from regarding the difference between Sikh men and women. But I have to disagree a bit. I have see many Sikh guys go from being nonreligious to going through a religious phase, to reverting to what they originally were. But perhaps you are right that the motives are different. I think with guys it's not always necessarily that they "see the light." Sometimes it is just the appeal of being contrarian or nonconformist. With guys like that, I have noticed that they like the initial phase when their kesh is just starting to grow and they look like a hippie or hipster, and they continue to like it when they first put on a pagh and look different. But once their beard grows out to full length and stupid Punjabis just view them as a regular "baba," they lose it. They will either stop wearing a pagh (so that they can be hipsters with beards and man-buns instead), or they trim or cut their kesh. I have also seen multiple examples of mona guys who become religious and grow out their kesh and/or take amrit, but then go back to being mona after their wives (or girls who previously liked them) complain.

The point is, you go on and on about various minority groups who you dislike for whatever reason getting preferential treatment. Do they actually? Probably not, but you are convinced that they do because that is what you want to see. It makes you feel good. It feeds your sense of aggrievement. You undoubtedly believe that you come from a group that does not get preferential treatment. But there are ironically many people out there who talk themselves into believing that you DO come from a group that gets preferential treatment. That is what they want to see. It makes them feel better because then they can feel aggrieved.

Have you been living under a rock? Go read of the heroism of Shaheed Deep Sidhu! He is a shaheed of the kaum (according to today's Sikhs), and he cheated on his wife. Therefore, Punjabi Logic implies that cheating on your wife is okay!

Stupid Punjabi Logic: Me: Doing X is good for you Stupid Punjabi: But person A does X and they are a bad person! Therefore doing X is meaningless. I suppose I should start eating meat since Hitler was a vegetarian!

What does this have to do with anything? Read what I wrote in this thread. These people were keshdharis not because they had faith in Sikhi, but because the Sikh community had a certain standard: people in leadership positions HAD to be keshdhari, period. Notice the example I gave of the Patiala royals. The fact that these standards no longer apply reflects a general moral decay and erosion of standards among the Sikh community in general.

I learned the hard way to be very skeptical of people. It is in my nature to want to believe in people. I met other women who were similar to this girl: they came from very nonreligious backgrounds (no Singh in their family tree for multiple generations, etc.) but were apparently really into Sikhi and spirituality and Gurbani and wanted to find a Singh to marry. And then the novelty of the brief "spirituality phase" wore off and they reverted to what they always were. Now (and I know this sounds horrible) I am extremely skeptical of Sikhs who come from very nonreligious backgrounds and suddenly appear to be very religious. It is horrible because there are some people who genuinely go on a new path and stay on that path. But when you have been burnt, it is difficult to maintain a fully open mind.

I met a UK girl many years ago. She was not from a religious family, but she was really into Sikhi, used to send me links to Kirtan online, etc. Long story short, she was apparently just going through some "spirituality phase" that she eventually got bored of. She had family issues, got into a fight with her family, and moved out of the house. She started hanging out with all kinds of sketchy guys (not just Muslims), smoking hookah, etc. She slept around with random Euro guys on holiday, ended up cohabiting with some French dude (in the same UK town where she grew up). I guess she eventually got bored of that life because she started posting Sikh-related stuff on social media again. And after having her fun, she recently got married to some mona guy. As much as I want to laugh at her fickle nature, it still makes me feel sad. I really liked this girl in the beginning, and it really hurt when I first started to see her change.

It is just interesting to hear an alternative perspective on what is going on with the whole "grooming" situation in the UK. Since I am not from the UK, you guys obviously know a lot more about it than me. It does make sense to me. Our community has a tendency (and we aren't the only community with this tendency) to put a certain "spin" on things to save the "honor of the family."

How can there be a punishment for cheating on your spouse? Cheating on your spouse doesn't mean you are a bad Sikh. Don't you know that there are shaheeds who have been cheaters?

That's interesting.

Singhs pandering to monay is understandable, but I don't condone it. It is really not that different from the "liberal Sikhs" that you guys complain about nonstop pandering to the "interfaith/nonreligious" non-Sikh crowd. "Liberal Sikhs" pander to outside groups because they feel like they are a tiny minority and they need to build bridges with the larger society in order to have any relevance and influence. Many of them feel that by supporting "interfaith Anand Karajs," for example, they are creating an opportunity for someone who is not Sikh to move closer to Sikhi and maybe one day embrace it. Similarly, many religious Sikhs these days pander to monay because they realize that the keshdhari Sikh population is a tiny minority and they feel that they need to build bridges with monay in order to have an relevance and influence. Many of them feel that by going out of their way to embrace monay (and never, ever ask them to keep their kesh or even say anything that would hurt the feelings of the ultrasensitive monay), they will create an opportunity for them to move closer to Sikhi. Personally, I think minimal standards should be upheld. I wish "liberal Sikhs" did not act so desperate, begging for acceptance from the non-Sikh crowd. And I wish more religious Sikhs did not act so desperate begging for acceptance from the "mona Sikh" crowd.

1. Divorce is not allowed in Sikhi 2. Extra-marital affairs are not allowed in Sikhi But who cares? He said some nice things about Bhindrawale.

I am assuming that you are a non-Christian whose ancestors were immigrants from outside of Europe. The internet is filled with white people moaning about how people like you get preferential treatment in their countries. But because you are too thick to understand this, you join the chorus of people complaining about various minority groups getting preferential treatment.

The people of Punjab have consistently voted in bums. I hate to say it, but by voting for such people, they get what they deserve.

How did you find the time in your schedule to post in this thread? I thought you had an appointment at the barber shop today.

Where are you from? Where were you raised?

Why do you have so much resentment towards these groups? Do you not have enough self-awareness to understand that they same people who moan constantly about women's-rights and trans-rights activism are also very likely to moan about activism focused on some brown guy from an immigrant background who is imprisoned in a third-world country for some reason that they absolutely do not care about?

Why are you complaining about "bhappay"? They are a tiny percentage of the population. Even if they do that, the harm is minimal.

Bhagwant Mann is a mona too. Him wearing a pagh is completely meaningless, just like when Deep Sidhu would pose in a pagh.