Heidi Fleiss and Shahrukh Khan – Spot the Difference!

you wasted your energy and time on heidi fleiss and a stupid indian movie where ghosts have sex?

the best part about the article was the footnote.

even the footnote makes sense only for US conditions, not when applied to the subcontinent.

what a waste of time! If this is standard of writing coming from editor-in-chief, than god save the chowk...

Farzana,
What a con job? Beautifully written and masterfully exploited, but still a bait `n switch trick that uses an insidious title to invite an unsuspecting audience. I mean ``Heidi Fleiss and Shahrukh Khan – Spot the Difference!`` is one inexpensive (I should say cheap :) ) way to get us to enter this brothel of social commentary. Here I was, all set to learn about how the aspiring King of Bollywood had made an entry in Heidi`s list. Was it possible that our own Zara sa ``Veer`` was going to be a spud farmer in Nevada? It`s right next door to Idaho and the thought is not that far-fetched. One could imagine carloads (rather vanloads) of desi babes - PAPs, IAPs, SLAPs, NAPs, and BAPs, armed with their daddies` Amex cards, speeding through the desert, creating dust storms, on their way to nail ``MeN hooN na`` at $250 a pop without any ``Dar.``

Alas, the hard reality of the cruel world manifested itself in your statement ``But many more women’s wet dream is to spend 250 dollars in a chocolate spa or on some impulsive shopping.`` That was a terrible letdown. Leave it to the female obsession with emulating males to desecrate every last bastion of male sanctity. Somehow, chocolates, candy, and self-induced orgasms involving images of George Clooney, will forever negate the pleasant memories of the Mustang Ranch and Bunny`s.

You could have started your piece with your quote from Betty Friedan and saved us all the trouble of reading an excellent and captivating essay on why men and women are so different. Please keep writing - whether we agree with your message or not, you have such a superior way of delivering it. By the way, I don`t care if she is dead - I still think that God was extremely unkind to Betty. Her face could be used as a traffic light on the Autobahn or I-80 right outside Reno in Sparks, Nevada. :)

Shah Rukh Khan is a true artist and a gem of a person – a rather rare combination now-a-days. He is a credit to the community, the society at large, and his country – and he makes our hearts swell with joy and pride – even from a distance. If he is successful commercially in the practice of his art – more power to him. But stay under no illusions – it is the practice of the art which truly makes him happy, not the commercial part of it or the adulating hordes – it is that blessed state of being!

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Heidi Fleiss is an opportunist who has little positive to contribute – she is strictly about making money – and purely driven by her own personal profit – and to her, the exploitation (whether it is of a woman, or a man, or all women, or all men, or the media at large) is just a means to that end. In case you don’t believe me – go watch the episode of “Blind Date” where she took part and candidly explained what she wanted in a man for HERSELF – she had a clear-cut rule of thumb - $100 million would be a good start, $1 billion would be about right! If she indeed goes about getting settled in this special variety of farming, she is unlikely to get farm-hands who are driven by anything other than similar “basic” considerations. Commercial transactions are not about considerations for others! For Ms. Fleiss, spoken words – especially those to promote her commercial interests – do not hold the same sanctity that others may hold to theirs – she will do and say pretty much anything which suits a particular purpose. It is a mistake to read too much in what she says at a given moment and extrapolate to worldviews on what women and men are about.

In fact, mentioning these two individuals in the same breath is (in my view) virtual blasphemy and also displays an absolute lack of understanding of what each individual is about!

Notes

[… a typical bania-type ….]
What is that creature, would you care to elaborate – and does he exist? Where do we find him? Is he a cousin of the typical “black-type” or the typical “Muslim-type” or the typical “woman-type” creature?

What a waste?.... You need to interview some women before making solid assumptions...

Farzana,
In posts #1, 2, and 3, we can see why literacy is not always an accurate measurement of intellect. If your beautifully written commentary on society`s perception of guiltless pleasures can be summarized as ``you wasted your energy and time on heidi fleiss and a stupid indian movie where ghosts have sex?`` then indeed the level of comprehension among opinionated Chowkies is really shameful. While from a male perspective, I found your commentary to be confusing to the point of demoralization, I must credit you with the ability to write so capably on almost any topic. Your critics in the first three posts would never make good judges in the Olympics when it comes to diving, dance, gymnastics, and any other event where subjective evaluation of talent is concerned. You have to have talent to appreciate talent. These incompetents couldn’t recite the alphabet in random order. Don`t let them discourage you - you are a fantastic writer. Please continue.

...sex, prostitutes, pimps, male domination, sexual frustrations...only a farzana versey could write with such feelings and only a salim chauhan could appreciate the machinations of a heidi fleiss...great job...

#8, Dear Chowk Editor,
In compliance with Chowk Interaction guidelines, please delete post #8. It has no relevance to the article and is diabolically stated to harass and insult both the author of this fine article and me. Better yet, please permanently ban Mr. Khamkwa. (with the permanent period . affixed to his nic`s posterior) for multiple nics. Thanks,

I have seen the movie Paheli in passing but whatever I could gather there tells me that perhaps Shahrukh was referring to a woman having freedom of pleasure in a dud marriage. I think the real difficulty with social taboos that we have in India, caused the use of a ghost, who morphed into her husband(Don’t they all become husbands once the eyes are closed?).

This subject has been handled in the subcontinent literature. I think the movie makers did have a message out subtly. Shoukat Siddiqui in his novel Khuda ki Basti handled the issue too.

There are plenty of predators in the subcontinent especially in the rural areas where women seek friendship or are pursued for sexual favors. There are whole bunch of women in the rural areas whose spouses leave village for work or have bad marriages. In villages, people know about these things and it is pretty common to see people making their moves on a suspecting or an unsuspecting woman. There are plenty of women that seek pleasure outside of marriage because there is none in the marriage. The social taboos that are placed on women, make them non aggressive and men have to take the lead but it never means that the intent or the encouragement was not there in the first place. I think if we look at what Sharukh said in the right context and have a grip on the Indian village life, we too would end up agreeing with Shahrukh that the movie did attempt to create an acceptance of such relations even when they are for the carnal pleasure only.

It is not uncommon to have SIL having relationship with BIL or even FIL. Then there are people outside the immediate family. Recently, there was a case when the woman had relationship with her FIL in Lucknow and FV wrote about that too.

The problem in the Indian context is that we can never ascertain the “who pursued whom” but the reality of such relationship is out there. Now please don’t even think that women in the subcontinent are just “moom ki guriya”. They know how the game is played and some play it very well:)

Now about Heidi Fleiss; she is using words like stud farm etc. to promote her services. The fact of the matter is there are at least four to five companies that provide escort service for women in Vegas. It is not confined to Vegas alone; all major cities in the US have these services. Women use them for different reasons.

I may also make a correction here for FV too. Women in at least the US do have sex for sex only with the faceless men, men they forget in the morning before buying the morning after pill.

At least in the US, we have come to accept aggressive women. They are aggressive in their professional and also in the sexual lives. They will pursue men, make their moves and see whether they can seduce them. (Indian men chew your heart out. No dice for you) At least in sexuality, men and women have pretty much reached equality in the US and I would say men love it too. $250 per hour is not really a high rate in Vegas.

A feminist from the subcontinent may consider that an aberration in women’s liberalism or even call it canonizing of the clit, but that really does not exist in Heidi Fleiss context. It is just business as usual and Heidi is promoting it in her old brazen way. After all she is a professional!

``Do men and women pay the same price for pleasure? ``

In this part of the world, Yes!

mr chauhan...
my critique about the article is a valid one and congratulates the author for a job well done...why this angst over my comments...?

Re:HP#10

[...(Indian men chew your heart out. No dice for you)..]

You had to get that in, didnt you? :-) Now arjun_m will retaliate and behram1 will retaliate against that and this board will be destroyed.....business as usual!!

#11, Mr. Khamkhwa,
You are welcome to congratulate the author, but please don`t drag me into your harassment. I insist that your post in #8 was an instigation and not at all an appreciation of the article as you contend. I think that you are one sick, lonely, individual with homesexual tendencies. Please stay away from me. Thank you.

#10 HP

Your picture of women in Indian villages is so grossly off – so far off that one could be forgiven for thinking it was conjured up after a few pegs of alcohol – or was simply a product of the gun of idle imagination shot under the cover of the darkness of utter ignorance.

You forget the very basic fact that most families in Indian villages are joint families – these families stay intact just as much out of financial necessity as tradition. Therefore, just because the husband is not present, it does not mean the women become free lady monkeys, making their posteriors freely available to each and any person with the required anatomical attribute – there is plenty of family structure still around to anchor these ladies into and stabilize them! Besides, village life is a life of drudgery and toil – stuff that booze-slurpers in the States (individuals like you, and perhaps me) can NEVER identify with. I don’t want to shock you too much – but sex is NOT the first thing on their minds. (Some of the comments you make ensures that my regard for your sharp acumen remains firmly rooted where it has been for a while.)

In any society, there always exists a certain level of extra-marital hanky-panky. Your implicit assumption that it is any higher in remote Indian villages compared to the suburbia Americana is so ludicrous that it’s not even worth commenting. One can always find isolated cases, anywhere – but picking those and claiming them as the norm is a form of intellectual dishonesty, in my view. There are greater numbers of predators present in the USA, in my view.

Your wholesale generalization of the American womanhood (“Women in at least the US do have sex for sex only with the faceless men, men they forget in the morning before buying the morning after pill”) is utterly deserving of contempt – the type of contempt which occasionally requires that individuals be tarred, feathered, and accorded a comfortable donkey ride.

Similarly, to say stuff like “Do men and women pay the same price for pleasure? In this part of the world, Yes!” is completely off the mark. Let me explain in a way which you can understand.

Men and women NEVER pay the same price for pleasure – in ANY part of the world.

Nature saw to that – anatomically.

Because only ONE side is left holding the bag, the results, of such “pleasure”!

`Neither of them knows what women want and what women are.`

This charade of expectations.. this twisitng of agendas, creating a strawman to be thrashed away by a `knower of women`, has been going on for too long and getting too thin now. Nobody, not the least Fliess, really cares about women`s issues. Fliess with her plans, cannot be accused of anything except trying to make money. Burdening her to address women`s problems is, like kaka`s attempts to make women (of all ages) feel important by flirting with them.

And this `knowing and understanding women` routine is getting old (not just Versey but in popular media). Do we understand the animals we sacrifice for rituals or consumption? This analogy may seem far-fetched, but it is a lot of fun to read.

PS. scout, are you doubling for samina in her quest to belittle Versey? Or is it your own personal jealousy making it to the front? Why can`t you women let each other be???

Farzana Versey
Chief-editor
Once, again you gave us a very different, but, well written article. Good work.
You have given all of us a point to ponder? To think.
{{It has now become our overarching ambition to reveal liberalism through the libido.
These are personal choices and one wishes that they were not marketed as path-breakers.

This has less to do with revolution and more to do with instincts. }}}}

Heidi Fliess, totally misunderstood the exact physiology of women. And, funny thing is, she herself is female.
I believe Heidi is one ignorant creature, misguided by the confusion of differentiating between liberation and sex mania , perversion and pathologic libido.(to have libido is basic human physiology), but, libido bcomes pathologic, when it leads towards perversion to mania, that women and men start using dildos..........................................................
Again, men have more libido than women, except those women with mental derailing. So, all Heidi wishes to do is helping men to stand up for their masculine rights and compete with their women counterparts in prostitution.
Hey, who knows, her male brothels will be a huge success!!! You aint see nothin yet.

I don`t see Indian movies that much, so, hard for me to grip what exactly Shah rukh`s movie was all about?
But, if I go by your article, it looks like some deprived wife is trying to struggle with her sexual fantasies in the absence of her husband. Well, i guess Haidi`s idea of male brothel lies behind such deprived wives, who are unable to quench their thirst of libido. May be Haidi will become an icon and sexual guru with millions of female clients to buy sex in line??
HaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaHahaha

Take care