I was shocked about that when I first found out. The town I lived in was very traditional, orthodox, religious.

So now aunties are paying guys? I guess it means they want experienced men to pleasure them rather than the other way around.

I also think that payment for sex somehow also establishes a kind of power hierarchy between the payer and the receiver. Perhaps, women paying these men to have sex indicates their desires to somehow be in a position of power and in a situation they perceive they can control?

Thank you for your response. However, I find that you heavily distorted the content of my post by selectively taking segments without their subsequent explanations (remember, we support responsible reuse only).

But that’s okay, first time offense. To address your response:

1) First, I’m not sure if you noticed, but this article was posted under the “Comedy” category. That’s because it’s meant to be a tongue-in-cheek look at my obviously callow notions vs the reality of the day. I frequently allude to my misconceptions throughout the article. Which, again, was posted in “comedy.”

2) You quote me as being “appalled” that this is happening. Where did you get that from? As I mention early on, I’m sure it had been happening since time immemorial; it’s just not something that I’d actually thought of or heard of prior. If you continue to read the article, I’m actually supportive of the idea. Nowhere do I say it’s a bad thing, and nowhere do I mention that women must adhere to some kind of strict moral code.

3) You are liberal with one of my better quotes about aunties having no sex drive and rolling rotis, etc. Once again, in the context of the post, this was clearly a joke, and as I say in the next paragraph, these conceptions were obviously misguided. Funny, because there are others who have never thought of (or refused to think of) older Indian aunties and sex, and some readers surely could relate. But a clear joke.

4) I know you take it as an affront to your values, but, unless you’re a married auntie, the post is not about you, as you are, I’m assuming, a younger Indian woman. And we all have highly qualified Indian women in our lives, both auntie and non, so we are not ignorant of their existence as individuals.

5) As for the shock in realizing that they, too, can be sexual beings—that’s the point. That many of us have likely never gone to that point mentally, but it’s time to realize it. I simply use my own revelation as the basis. I think you’ve read this as though you were under attack from the start. I know it’s “The Forum for South Asian American Men,” but we’re nice not-sexist guys. Really.

6) Yes, safe sex is good. Please see the Latex Archie post.

7) Not quite sure what your issue is with my theory on unsatisfying arranged marriages serving as a possible catalyst for women paying for sex. If you read the original BBC article I source, the gigolos themselves say as much, although their base is expanding as of late. Would you rather I say that the women seek sex because they are whores or something offensive like that? Because I don’t believe that.

Had they been talking about women and sex in general, then it would be an entirely different post. But my post is based on the original article and its scope. Whether you find that scope to be narrow or not is your prerogative.

8 ) My basic theory is just that women who essentially have been coerced into unhappy relationships are now, more than ever, able to at least take some kind of action (even if it’s hiring gigolos), and that reflects more empowered women in general.

9) Where’s the contradictory PC stuff? The “nice” stuff is what I think is more towards the truth. Unless you didn’t realize the post was tongue-in-cheek. We have no reason to be PC, and if you read other posts, you’ll see we’re not.

10) You say my post “doesn’t begin to fathom the social consequences of this phenomenon.” Well, I actually think it does begin to fathom it. It doesn’t quite finish fathoming, however, as that would require years of research. If you’d like to inform me about the consequences, please post.

I probably was remiss in not mentioning that women could simply be paying for sex because they enjoy it. Good for them, and I’m sure that’s part of it. But everyone likes sex, and not all men or women pay prostitutes. Seems like it’s almost a little too simplistic.

That’s what this is about, spreading knowledge, comedy, and maybe just a little bit of vitriol.

Thanks for commenting.

“then why r u paying us for sex?”

Ah yes, a couple pigheaded responses that turn this into a men vs. women debate, when it’s not really about that. It’s about women gaining power, though it’s displayed in an usual way at the moment (symptomatic of the larger shift). While both of these retorts muddy the point, it is still there for those who choose not to use this for an agenda.

That said, it is funny, so keep sniping.

then why r u paying us for sex?

puhleez. give yourself a break.