Heidi Fleiss and Shahrukh Khan – Spot the Difference!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

LOL...was wondering how long Salim the Mouse`s lovefest with Editor-in-Chief would last!

Not too long, as it turned out.

And what the hell...the one post where I say something nice about Pakis gets filtered out? FV must be a closet Hindutvawadi after all...

#58,59,60,61,62 and 63...;))

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Farzanaversey #54
{``‘I am a woman therefore I know a bit more about them’? ``}
There we go again. This is such a copout. You seem to be saying ``If you are not hiding in a cave with smart bombs following you to the bathroom, then don`t write about Osama or his mama. ``:)

{``...So are geishas and the classy girls on call. No one wants them for keeps.``}
I know something about Geishas and Japan. Many of these relationships last a lifetime. Honto ni anata wa imantokoru fuka desiyo. Minasaan no unna wa warui janai desu. Watashi anata dai suki. Arigato. :)

{``Salim:
Males of the opposite sex? I did not know there were males of the same sex as women. Show me the mooney! I think I was sensitive to the subject, but I don’t have the time for fairplay just for the heck of it.``}
``Males of the opposite sex`` is an emphasis for actual men and not those effeminate metrosexuals feigning just enough masculinity for an inside track in the henhouse. Please don`t be so nonchalant about fairness - you might take on the dubious qualities of your predecessor and become just another two-bit autocrat with a Mushy throne. :)

{``There are several sentences that are very kind to men. I guess guys get satisfaction only with invisible situations... ``}
You mean you remembered the two sentences? Are those the ones you outsourced to Kaka to write? Oh, please shine some light on these ``invisible`` situations. That was an extremely matronly comment.

{``I alluded to this when I posed the query about whether female clients can demand the same standards and how it was not possible. ``}
Farzana, on this point I agree with you. The price per session has to be much much higher for the males - and even then they cannot expect to earn as much as the females. I don`t know which brand of calculator Ms. Heidi Fleiss is using - or did you swipe the batteries from her calculator for yourself?

{``Pity you did not understand that I was in fact rooting for the withering male ego there.``}
You call that ``rooting`` for the male ego? It`s more like ``routing`` the male ego.

{``And now…
That is not just a feeble excuse, but may I suggest you leave this patronising tone for those who engage you in such time-pass? Perhaps you would like to take a few hours off and see that reaching those heights has been achieved multiple times by me without any assistance, not even my own! 500 posts do not give me a high, but been there, seen it – with me merely adding the occasional whiff. ``}

...and here comes the 2 x 4 edict disguised as an advice. If I were to patronize you I wouldn`t be following you around like a teen-aged autograph seeker reading and rereading every time you got the urge to merge a few words here and there. :) Just because I admire your talented style of writing and your superior wit and humor, does not mean that I have to say ``Amen! right on Sister!`` to every one of your sermons. The use of ``sister`` was merely for situational effect and not meant to insinuate any sort of relationship - patronizing, fraternizing, or asexual. :)

{``Also, is it possible for you (and some others) to stay away from your insider jokes/innuendoes about others from elsewhere? I admit you are helpful enough to post these separately to make filtering them out easy, unlike some smart people who sneak in a line or two in the main body of their ‘analysis’. A couple of your posts that have not ‘added’ to the discussion will be retained because they were responding to what I mentioned in my post.``}

Farzana, are you implying that I am not smart? :) Please allow us to go on tangents during humorous situations. After all, anyone who can link Heidi Fleiss and Shahrukh Khan doesn`t need to be reminded to stay within the narrow lanes of congested monotonous traffic. Thank you for retaining any of my posts. As always, I defer to your good judgment in controlling what I and my friends are allowed to read. It`s not as if we are drawing silly cartoons, is it?

{``See, I don’t always use the axe…not when a chisel works…
Thanks for the few enlightening posts, critical or otherwise. .``}

Yes, a very sharp chisel at that. Sometimes the blunt axe would have been less deadly. I am glad that you found a ``few`` of my posts to be enlightening. I thought they were all very critical. Please continue to write in your usually effective, creative, and very stimulating style. I do request that you confer with me, via private e-mail, the subject of your material and the surreptitious message that you intend to convey. Just stick around and we will have you breaking wind through silk in no time. :)

amansandhu #53 {``Salim, where there is true love and understanding of each others needs theres no need for the man to worry about his performance and the woman to shout and scream.``}

Aman,
You are so right, my friend. Sometimes the shouting and screaming is quite encouraging and enhances performance. As long as the noise is limited to the bedroom. :) LOL.

pretty good and chowk is looking up.
However, as usual farzana is very adept at putting up questions (way too many for my liking), but very rarely answers the question.

For example she asks ``Do men and women pay the same price for pleasure?``. Then there is a rambling for a few lines without ever getting to the point. As some said here, men give love for sex and women give sex for love. Rather neatly put. If we compare this with what Farzana said above it, and then comprehend it - you need to be living on pluto forget Mars and Venus.

This article reeks of ``men are from Mars and women are from Venus`` syndrome, with a few well chosen bandages for the men.

That footnote reminded me of an article I read sometime back, and it started with the following question

Are women to be the servants of man or were they created to be a partner to man, a help mate? Did Eve`s sin of taking the apple make women lesser than man?

HP…we are going round in circles, of a stable it would seem.

Let us just settle for the ‘I am a woman therefore I know a bit more about them’?

But…

[That is where differences between Indian/pak women and western women show up.
Back in the boondocks, they have limited choices; here you have Heidi Fleiss and credit cards with benign names for merchant on the statement.]

Boondocks? Weren’t you the one holding forth on how rural women got their jollies? And when did you visit urban India last (I might add Pakistan too because the scene there is simmering and sultry for some women).

The issue is not so much about whether women can but whether women would, and the consequences to themselves more than anything else.

[A guy who can only set the table, do the sweet talk is a goner. He is there for the moment.]

So are geishas and the classy girls on call. No one wants them for keeps.
- - -
Salim:

The two are not unrelated – as ‘events’ maybe, not as metaphors.

[The issues I have with this article are certainly not ideological - they are more related to logic, fair play (no, not foreplay), and your total lack of sensitivity, when it comes to males of the opposite sex.]

Males of the opposite sex? I did not know there were males of the same sex as women. Show me the mooney! I think I was sensitive to the subject, but I don’t have the time for fairplay just for the heck of it.

There are several sentences that are very kind to men. I guess guys get satisfaction only with invisible situations...

[How can anyone advocate sexual balance when the very act demands performance from one and, at the most, pretensions of passive satisfaction from the other? Nature has not been kind to the ``killers of bears.``]

I alluded to this when I posed the query about whether female clients can demand the same standards and how it was not possible.

[And was it really necessary to take that last parting shot just before the nasty footnote?]

Pity you did not understand that I was in fact rooting for the withering male ego there.

And now…

[I was merely trying to take you to new heights. :)]

That is not just a feeble excuse, but may I suggest you leave this patronising tone for those who engage you in such time-pass? Perhaps you would like to take a few hours off and see that reaching those heights has been achieved multiple times by me without any assistance, not even my own! 500 posts do not give me a high, but been there, seen it – with me merely adding the occasional whiff.

Also, is it possible for you (and some others) to stay away from your insider jokes/innuendoes about others from elsewhere? I admit you are helpful enough to post these separately to make filtering them out easy, unlike some smart people who sneak in a line or two in the main body of their ‘analysis’. A couple of your posts that have not ‘added’ to the discussion will be retained because they were responding to what I mentioned in my post.

See, I don’t always use the axe…not when a chisel works…

Thanks for the few enlightening posts, critical or otherwise.

Salim, where there is true love and understanding of each others needs theres no need for the man to worry about his performance and the woman to shout and scream.

``The only ``battery-less dildos`` on Chowk are the sugarcanes provided through the courtesy of Behram Rustemji Gannawala`` LOL.