Whoa!
That is Nataraja and not Kali. And Kali does not dance on Shiva’s body but on the dead body of an asura (demon) she has killed (according to Indian mythology).

I know these are not relevant to the above post but couldn’t help correcting people :)

Hey! whats so “backward” about India?

“men never touch a woman in public, unless she is elderly or sick”

hmm… I know what you mean but why is that such a problem? Do all cultures need to judged by western standards?
Plus, it is not entirely true — http://mumbaigirl.blogspot.com/2005/11/why-did-you-touch-her.html

Maxim will start by replacing the outdated “typical coy, sari-clad Bollywood pose” with the “scantily clad woman who looks directly at the camera.”

Maxim is too late. We already have numerous Shakira-, britney-, mariah-wannabes in numerous remix videos!

I guess you post was pretty sarcastic but I am not sure how sarcastic it is. So, if you really did not mean all the above (in this post) literally, ignore this comment.

Oh, and this is my de-lurk post after a year of readership. Awesome blog, Twisty!

anyway, Harriet Meiers must be relieved that there still are options.

I dunno much about India’s particular patriarchal culture, but from what snippets I’ve seen of their popcult and news I get the impression that they’re even more conflicted about sexuality than we are. Heavy British Empire repressive hangover, even still, I think, on top of the homegrown stuff. and yet, recently I caught a music video, which was sort of MTV and sort of…something else. whatever it was, ay yi yi, it was *raw.* Hardly unpatriarchal, what with the crowds of shouting, sweating men surging around the feet of the dancing women, but it was definitely a different flavor than anything I was used to seeing in our mainstream media. Interesting stuff.