You are your own best confidant

2518493456.jpgIn the wake of the Hermon K. Raju affair, it is a strange coincidence that a young woman named Beejoli Shah has also had a problem with the viral nature of the internet. A letter to 15 friends came back slam her in the face. Ms. Shah is not manifestly odious from what I can tell. If you want to read the blow-by-blow, check out The Superficial for the full email she sent. Basically Beejoli Shah had a kinky sexual encounter with Quentin Tarantino which she just had to tell all her friends via an email draped in thick descriptive prose, along with pointers to biographical context.

It turns out that the Cal graduate has a job at a Hollywood public relations firm. Or perhaps more accurately, she had a job at a Hollywood public relations firm. I don’t feel sorry for how this turned out because of her professional aspirations. You don’t spill the beans until after you’ve made it big. On the other hand, the more general issue is rather disconcerting. Who hasn’t said something stupid or embarrassing? You can make sure to only talk to people about things, and avoid written communication, but now there are relatively easy technologies with which you can record people. Nothing is the off the record in theory. And perhaps soon in practice. I find that rather sad.

As an aside, I checked Google News for the full range of media reaction. It’s an interesting window into cultural differences. India Today has the headline “Quentin Tarantino’s Indian trick”, which I thought was kind of offensive. Does “trick” not have the implication in India that it does in the United States?

52 thoughts on “You are your own best confidant

  1. Her name is Beejoli, not Beeloji. India Today was probably referring to the Indian rope trick.

    Also, the India Today article is inaccurate keeping in mind the American meaning of ‘trick’. Tarantino was the trick.

  2. oh her future kids will be so proud.

    She, hermon raju, and vijai nathan should start a club. “Im a desi girl and I don’t give a f*ck!”

  3. After Rex Ryan and umpteen other ‘exposures’ of celebrity fetishes and sexual habits, you have to think she was not very bright to think her breathless “private email” would stay private or engender any sort of positive emotional reaction to her writing of it ( among Gawker’s demographic at least.) After all, most Tarantino fans are probably bright enough to know that males have the prize when it comes to fetishes and regarding something as relatively vanilla as feet-loving, it’s like telling America that Billy Jeff likes to incorporate cigars in his private meetings of congress.

  4. I’m envisioning a new product to hit QVC this fall:

    The “I’m an Indian girl and did stupid shit” software patch, will, ladies and gentlemen, in a single fell swoop:

    -delete your linked in profile ! -clear out your myspace ! -protect your tweets ! (can’t make any claims about your twat though) -delete your facebook ! -spider the web for all images of you in the past 10 years and delete them instantly ! -flag all youtube videos of the offending post ! -generate cover stories to tell your parents and aunties !

    Endorsed, tried, and tested by Hermon, Beejoli and that lawyer in Chicago who’s name I forget

    • i would exclude the lawyer. prostitution is unfairly criminalized, contra ashton, demi and uneducated guesses by academics.

        • she escorted to pay law school bills. considering how heavy those are and that she went into solo practice, i’m guessing the economics of that decision are pretty plain.

    • Act now for this revolutionary new software patch and you’ll get our bonus!

      -A dedicated phone connection to an Indian female blogger of your choice to give you those syampathetic words when you need them most!

  5. She’s kinda funny but can see why they fired her if it’s a Hollywood PR firm.

  6. It’s funny, but I feel bad for her and don’t think it’s fair to compare her to Hermon Raju, just cause they’re both Indian women…

    Shah didn’t get on a train and loudly brag about her sexual escapades; she wrote a “private” letter to her friends, sure it was in poor taste, but who hasn’t had the experience of telling something in confidence to someone and having it publicly revealed? Fortunately for me, I think i learned my lesson back in middle school… :P

    Nothing is truly “private” these days, particularly when it comes to celebrities; she should’ve known better, especially since she works in PR of all fields!

  7. “she escorted to pay law school bills. considering how heavy those are and that she went into solo practice, i’m guessing the economics of that decision are pretty plain.”

    I wonder who experiences more shame, a desi girl who escorts to pay bills, or a desi guy who sees an escort because, well, just because.

    • both are rational decisions but the woman’s is moreso because of the time constraints of law school. I think the Raju comparison to Shah lies on the fact that someone who knew them thought so little of their privacy that they would put their names out into the public for the lulz–i don’t hate anyone enough to do that and when I read these stories I think of a medieval scene wherein someone points at a random woman in the crowd and yells, “a witch! she’s a witch!” because that person slighted them in some petty manner.

      • “when I read these stories I think of a medieval scene wherein someone points at a random woman in the crowd and yells, “a witch! she’s a witch!” because that person slighted them in some petty manner.”

        I couldn’t agree more.

        • “”a witch! she’s a witch!” because that person slighted them in some petty manner.”"

          that is about creating a false sense of fear, hence the term “witch hunt”

          this is more like someone casting a spell and someone pointing out “a witch a witch” and transmitting that all over the world instantly. and some people say “oh cmon guys we all cast at least one spell once in a while, its not fair to single this one out”

          Also, there’s the newsworthy element to this. someone once said about the pamela anderson sex tape, (not the tommy lee one, the other one) that they felt sorry for brett michaels or whoever it was, but was equally met with “if you’re gonna bone a famous b*tch, be prepared for the attention” if this was just some no-name 48 yr old guy instead of QT, likely that the letter wouldn’t be sent.

          But more importantly, and this question is to the ladies: if you it were you, could you think of 15 people that you’d completely TRUST with this information? What posesses someone to even send it out in a documented form this way?? That’s the real lapse of judgement here.

      • both are rational decisions but the woman’s is moreso because of the time constraints of law school. I think the Raju comparison to Shah lies on the fact that someone who knew them thought so little of their privacy that they would put their names out into the public for the lulz

        Well I think with Raju it was just some random dude on the train using his iphone, right? Whereas with Khan it’s her “friends” who betrayed her. But your comparison to Medieval Times is interesting, because it all goes back to the idea of a transparent society where people are responsible for everything they do or say, and any minor scandal quickly becomes a public scandal.

        • someone who knew Raju at NYU gave her name to Gawker. If she really was a Flying Dog IPA varietal I totally empathize with whomever outed her–don’t we all feel the long arm of cosmic justice to be tragically short when it comes to the crappiest people in our lives? That said, I don’t think a totally transparent society is always good for individual humans, as the exposure is contingent to prevailing social morals and the sanctions are applied in a similar manner, but it is great for lay students of psychology because it makes what some people consider to be disordered behaviors seem more common in the sense that asshole behavior is a universal heritage–not much difference between the westboro baptist church member screaming at students at my alma mater and obama-voter Raju losing her shit on a commuter train.

  8. “both are rational decisions but the woman’s is moreso because of the time constraints of law school.”

    Hmm, you could say there’s a time constraint on that other thing too. Ever see 40 yr old virgin? And before the find reading public responds with a clever, “OoOOoOOOooooh. how do youuuuuuuuu know, from persona expeeeeerience?” I’ll just nip that in the bud right now:

    “Yes”

  9. Alina, imo a transparent society is a terrible prehistoric thing. Transparency in public affairs is a limited kind of transparency—wherein public figures on the clock should expect to be under scrutiny. In every other situation, scrutiny is just vile voyeurism and gossip and does more harm than good.

    Just watch the Raju episode and the millions of self righteous witch hunters. Not one person has the right to pass judgement on her—what did she do after all? She didn’t say anything against anyone. Everything is based on how bad a person she might have been—all gleaned, of course, with powerful insight by the virtuous mob from 2minutes of selective youtube footage chosen from perhaps 30 years of her life?

    And the worst part is that most people don’t even think this is wrong—I would be much more wary of commentators from SM than Raju. This time it isn’t one or two trolls like that infamous Prema episode.

    • I agree a transparent society can be harmful (this young woman lost her job, and she’s going to have a hard time getting a new one), but one good thing is public figures are held accountable for their actions, like Anthony Wiener. Now in this case, I don’t think Ms. Khan had any malicious intent, she just showed really poor judgment in hitting that Send button.

      I disagree about Hermon Raju. Partly because her behavior on the train disgraceful and out of line, and partly because I attended the same school as her and we have acquaintances in common; apparently she has a reputation as being a stuck up snob. Not only did she quickly become the laughingstock of the university community, but what’s telling is no one seem surprised by her behavior…

      • The point isn’t what the person you know is like. The point is that a majority of the people have no idea who the woman on youtube is, but seem fit to make assumptions—and most importantly, behave like some sort of self appointed virtue police. Welcome to the Saudi States of America.

        Today it is her, tomorrow it could well be you or me. I am sure there are people who hate any one of us and can pin any profile onto anyone.

        • “Today it is her, tomorrow it could well be you or me. I am sure there are people who hate any one of us and can pin any profile onto anyone. “

          Sure, if I got on a train tonight and acted like an imbecile, someone could very well record it and I would be tomorrows Sepia Mutiny headline. I think the trick is to simply not act like an imbecile ;)

          Again, I don’t think it’s fair to compare the two women, because the situations are too different – I feel sorry for Khan, because it was an error in judgment and someone betrayed her privacy, but I have a hard time feeling for Raju.

  10. “Not one person has the right to pass judgement on her—what did she do after all?”

    Lets do the run down:

    1. Exhibit a lack of consideration for people in riding in a mode of public transportation.
    2. When called out, she didn’t admit her mistake and inexplicably rattled off her academic background.
    3. She futher more challenged the conductor to “stop the train” and “repeat for her the profanities used”
    4. She physically contacted the conductor and later stated “

    “all gleaned, of course, with powerful insight by the virtuous mob from 2minutes of selective youtube footage chosen from perhaps 30 years of her life?”

    Then let her issue an apologetic response, and increase the window to more than “2 minutes” and let people know she’s got more to her than just being an inconsiderate, pampered, elitist b*tch. Now you might argue, “why should she have to?” and that would be a great philosophical discussion to entertain. But the fact is, we live in a world now where a mistake if visceral, and relatable enough (ie everyone has been in that position where some a-hole was just talking too loudly in a public space, in fact just last night 2 people sat in a movie theater yapping away, we got up and moved as soon as they started talking, what would telling them to be quiet do? just incite them even further) it’s going to spread.

    You seem to think this is personal against HER. It’s not, it’s personal against that TYPE of behavior (self-centered, rude, inconsiderate, boorish, and in her case, just plain idiotic) , which is prevalent enough in our society that when we see a bit of it captured real-time, it strikes a chord.

    • And I am sure you have never ever done those 4 things or their equivalents in your life. Give me a break. From where I stand, she only asked what profanities she used, your comment has called her “an inconsiderate, pampered elitist b*tch” (sic). All those are labels you are pinning on her btw, based on a video with little context, no matter how much you kid yourself into believing in your omniscience.

      About the apology video—why on earth do you need an apology? The only person deserving the apology is the conductor—and I am assuming you are not her–so since when did it become your business? And will the villagers with pitchforks apologize to her too for the abuse?

      Cut the crap about apology. When people seem to be flooding facebook and youtube with fake profiles of her, who is going to believe one even if she did (or if she has done already)?

      Same story with Beejoli. Shouldn’t this voyeurism be legally wrong—right to privacy? Anyone with legal background?

  11. “And I am sure you have never ever done those 4 things or their equivalents in your life.”

    actually. I haven’t. Im a very considerate person, especially in public spaces, trains, movie theaters, etc… but thanks for asking.

    “About the apology video—why on earth do you need an apology? The only person deserving the apology is the conductor—and I am assuming you are not her–so since when did it become your business? And will the villagers with pitchforks apologize to her too for the abuse?”

    It’s not about ME needing the apology. It’s about how this evil, cruel, privacy-no-more world that has torn her apart can actually help her as well. It’s the flip side of having such technology and ability to broadcast at your fingertips. The point is, she’s not some hapless little victim that’s been targetted for some kind of “witchhunt” she played her card and got nailed. Plain and simple.

    Since you’re defending her behavior so much, I’m left to believe you must be some kind of ‘train/cellphone etiquette kin’ with her, at least other bloggers were quick to state that what she did was INDEED WRONG, before going on the “Dont cry for me argentina” defense of how the world just tore her apart, and she deserves all kinds of sympathy

    So, no I wont be cutting the excrement about the apology any time soon, but thanks for your suggestion.

    “Same story with Beejoli. Shouldn’t this voyeurism be legally wrong—right to privacy? Anyone with legal background?”

    For Hermon, there’s no privacy issue. She committed her act in a public space, that is, no reasonable expectation of privacy, and no one is profiting off the footage (if they did, they’d have to compensate the owner)

    For Beejoli, not sure, you could argue that there was definitely an expectation of privacy, but she’d have to come back with tangible damages, in this case she has it, she lost her job, I think? Anyway, just poor judgement on her part. The precedent here is the starwars kid case (http://www.geekologie.com/2010/06/uhoh_star_wars_kid_is_now_a_la.php) But it depends on whether there was an apriori agreement of privacy (as in did she say, hey guys don’t send this to anyone, or even so, once you email something out, it no longer ceases to be private.. those nuances Im not sure)

    After taking a few quick looks at her, I have to ask, really QT? You’re a famous director and you couldn’t do any better?

  12. And Alina, here is the other thing. You don’t know her—you have acquaintances in common. Who probably forgot everything after the video but the “stuck up”-ness, which is quite easy to pin on a majority of the population in retrospect. In fact, her acquaintances were the ones who started this shaming ritual. Do you know anyone who is her friend? Surely there is something good going for her. Even criminals get lawyers to speak for them, but apparently being stuck up is way worse than murder and rape—stuck up women don’t deserve even the benefit of doubt? Doesn’t this even disturb you?

  13. “Sure, if I got on a train tonight and acted like an imbecile, someone could very well record it and I would be tomorrows Sepia Mutiny headline. I think the trick is to simply not act like an imbecile”

    Thank you Alina for bringing back some sanity to the mix. NotG must be her cousin or some sh*t, to hear it from her you’d think someone pointed a gun to her face and forced her to talk loudly, then ran away while she got left to be crucified.

    And you mean Beejoli Shah, Khan is the girl suing A & F, and also the guy from star trek 2.

  14. “Even criminals get lawyers to speak for them, but apparently being stuck up is way worse than murder and rape—stuck up women don’t deserve even the benefit of doubt? Doesn’t this even disturb you? “

    Now you’re just being silly. No one is equating her to a rapist or murderer. I’m left to wonder why you’re defending her so vehemently. I only hope you’re not in the vicinity of someone with an iPhone on your next outburst (that supposedly we all have but we’re just sly devils enough to not get caught)

  15. @NotG – I think you’re overreacting to the Hermon Raju incident; no one is pretending she’s some sort of evil villain. You’re right, I don’t know her, and I wouldn’t vilify her based on 5 minutes of her life and some rumors. While it’s unfair to make sweeping statements about her as an overall person, judging her behavior on the train itself is not unfair. Part of the reason the video went viral was also because it was so comical; personally I thought it was a joke at first!

    I also think part of the backlash is because everyone sort of knows a “Hermon” in real life; someone who has been condescending and snobby toward you. I guess schadenfreude (sp?) would be a good way to describe it; it’s almost like Hermons everywhere got their comeuppance.

    • “I think you’re overreacting to the Hermon Raju incident; no one is pretending she’s some sort of evil villain.”

      No I am not. I think this is a dangerous precedent, and an urgent call for better privacy laws.

      We were fine, the Internet wasn’t so all pervasive sometime back. It isn’t Raju or Beejoli I am worried about, nor is it some random idiot filming something. It is the future world with my little nephews and nieces and maybe kids in it. They will grow up someday, and will be teenagers. They will do something stupid because they have to test boundaries—if they don’t, they will never truly grow up. And not just teens. If I look back to a few years back, I would call myself very immature. Maturity doesn’t come at a magical, arbitrary age of 18, it is a life long process. At some point, we will all do something stupid—or we are not doing anything at all.

      We at least have the luxury of not having our past come back to bite us. Not so in the future, where every infraction is at the mercy of characters like commentators on this board. They have nothing better to do than to run around with pitchforks. You may rationalize in retrospect that this incident was funny and hence became viral. But can you predict what may go viral? You may not have meant any harm to Raju, but the fact is harm was done.

      These incidents, to me, are exactly why there must be much more stringent privacy laws. Filming is just one thing. Things that you post on this board, or anywhere else, or your blog, or your facebook page, or facebook using face recognition technology to automatically tag you in photos (you didn’t even know were taken) {yeah, this is in the works}, etc etc, are completely equivalent. It need not be an incident like this even. Suspicion can be engendered by harmless photos taken out of context.

      You may just not want your boss to know you party at a particular place. You may not want your colleagues to know you go to church or a temple or a mosque. They are well within your rights—what if your boss finds out you go to a mosque and therefore prejudges you because of his biases? You don’t get a chance to defend yourself (clearly s/he isn’t going to be stupid enough to tell you). You don’t get any recourse to any harm done to you if it is cloaked under other pretexts.

      The list is endless, and the concept of privacy in our age needs a systematic rethink. People do not have the decency to stay out of things that are not their business as these two stories show. So you need laws to put them in line.

  16. “actually. I haven’t. Im a very considerate person, especially in public spaces, trains, movie theaters, etc… but thanks for asking.

    Since you’re defending her behavior so much, I’m left to believe you must be some kind of ‘train/cellphone etiquette kin’ with her, at least other bloggers were quick to state that what she did was INDEED WRONG, before going on the “Dont cry for me argentina” defense of how the world just tore her apart, and she deserves all kinds of sympathy”

    Ah, delusions of infallibility combined with McCarthyism, so essential for a good witch hunt.

    I am saying you have no right to judge since she didn’t do anything to you, nor is this any legally punishable offense. Who said anything about sympathy—and even if anyone did, so what? Should everyone open their mouth with a statement supporting your power trip?

  17. “Ah, delusions of infallibility combined with McCarthyism, so essential for a good witch hunt.”

    ah, yah, and you’re not blowing things out of proportion.

    “I am saying you have no right to judge since she didn’t do anything to you, nor is this any legally punishable offense.”

    Umm, we’re human beings. we all have right to an opinion (if you want to call it a “judgment” go ahead) I base my opinion on being in the exact same position as one of those train riders, with some stuck up person who somehow thinks the train is their living room (she even called it a ‘private conversation’ ? really ? )

    you’re right, being a stuck up bitch isn’t a crime (although it should be) and isn’t legally punishable, but given the way technology has flourished, for better or worse, there is a court of public opinion that operates much more quicker and efficiently than before. It’s her choice whether to see the silver lining in it and use it to her advantage.

    “Who said anything about sympathy”

    Ummm. you:

    “what did she do after all? She didn’t say anything against anyone”

    Not only is that sympathy, it’s a downright denial of her actions. And when I stated what her actions were, your retort was “yea but you’ve done that too” then you accuse me of claiming “infallibility” when I say I actually respect people and am considerate in public spaces (yea, I know its absolutely bonkers to think someone might act this way, for the Hermon Raju types)

    Change your handle to “notSmart”

  18. “I also think part of the backlash is because everyone sort of knows a “Hermon” in real life; someone who has been condescending and snobby toward you.”

    Alina. will you marry me.

  19. typical self hating desi american girl. hates good indian boys that work hard, prefers creepo white guys for their skin

  20. “”what did she do after all? She didn’t say anything against anyone”

    Not only is that sympathy, it’s a downright denial of her actions. And when I stated what her actions were, your retort was “yea but you’ve done that too” then you accuse me of claiming “infallibility” when I say I actually respect people and am considerate in public spaces (yea, I know its absolutely bonkers to think someone might act this way, for the Hermon Raju types)”

    The statements are literally true. She didn’t say anything racist or vile, only something stupid and yeah, comical, in a weird accent. The rest is your imagination.

    I am done with you, and I hope never to meet or know the likes of you. You can have the last laugh or attack me personally, I am not going to respond to you any more on this thread.

  21. I’ve met quite a few snobs over the years, and I’m not sympathetic to them at all; they deserve to be filmed secretly and shamed publicly. The only question is, whether or not Hermon Raju actually was a snob. It’s impossible to tell since we don’t know her personally, but I’m inclined to think she was, based on second hand accounts from people who do know her. Not one person has stood up for her to testify about her “true” character.

    On the other hand, Beejoli Shah is hardly in the same league of obnoxiousness. She definitely doesn’t deserve to lose her job, nor does she deserve the gleeful gloating that some on this thread are displaying. She may have been a little unwise to disclose her sexual escapades, but the fact that such details could cause her to lose her job points towards intolerance in society more so than a flaw in her judgement. Why should anyone be fired because their company does not want to be associated with a foot fetish/ one-night stands? It’s not that different from firing a person because of their homosexual activities. Don’t ask, don’t tell comes to mind here. A person should be free to talk about their private activities without fear of being fired, and that is the real issue in the Beejoli Shah case.

  22. It’s not that different from firing a person because of their homosexual activities.

    it is that different. she works for a hollywood PR firm, and she mistakenly made a huge fool and laughing stock of a very big player in the same general range of potential clients. as a practical matter this was not premeditated, but the “optics” look very bad.

    there is a bigger issue where the line needs to be drawn between “personal” and “public,” and how that impacts our work life (or lack thereof). but this specific case isn’t very easy to transpose to other situations.

  23. “I am saying you have no right to judge since she didn’t do anything to you, nor is this any legally punishable offense.”

    Look, the reality is that people constantly judge others all the time on their behavior, whether or not it impacts them personally. We judge our neighbor when we see him in the grocery store in his pajama bottoms. We judge the parents of the child acting spoiled in public. We judge the man who cheats on his wife and the sloppy co-worker who wears the same wrinkled clothes everyday. You can’t expect folks to turn off their brains and not react to things we see. Is Hermon Raju a villain of some kind? Nahh. Was she funny to laugh at for a few minutes until the next YouTube meme came along 5 minutes later? Sure.

  24. “They will grow up someday, and will be teenagers. They will do something stupid because they have to test boundaries—if they don’t, they will never truly grow up”

    fair enough. but both of these people were adults, into their 20s.

    “If I look back to a few years back, I would call myself very immature.”

    Just a few years?

    “ot so in the future, where every infraction is at the mercy of characters like commentators on this board. They have nothing better to do than to run around with pitchforks. You may rationalize in retrospect that this incident was funny and hence became viral. But can you predict what may go viral? You may not have meant any harm to Raju, but the fact is harm was done”

    this isn’t “every infraction” Hermon’s behavior was deliberate, drawn out, calculated. Yet you keep saying anyone that merely has an opinion on her shitty behavior is carrying a “pitchfork” and rationalizing it. Harm was done to Raju, but as alina said, its better for her to go around not acting like an imbecile, I guess the same would hold true of your neices and nephews.

    “They are well within your rights—what if your boss finds out you go to a mosque and therefore prejudges you because of his biases? You don’t get a chance to defend yourself (clearly s/he isn’t going to be stupid enough to tell you). You don’t get any recourse to any harm done to you if it is cloaked under other pretexts.”

    umm. yes you do:

    http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/006588.html#more

    you’re conflating way too many things. religious discrimination is different than privacy. Secondly, you control all the information you put out on the web. It’s your choice to have a facebook profile, its your choice to put all kinds of things out there. Whats this “other pretext” that you’re talking about?

    The privacy rules may need revision, but Hermon Raju or Beejoli Shah are in no way poster childs for the need for revising. Both of these people made choices, and got what was coming to them. Hopefully other people considering such decisions will make better ones knowing these two cases are already out there.

  25. “She didn’t say anything racist or vile, only something stupid and yeah, comical, in a weird accent.”

    It was a tone of superiority and her complete denial of any kind of inconsiderate and idiotic behavior, sort of the same sentiment I get from a statement like this:

    “I am done with you, and I hope never to meet or know the likes of you.”

    I hope to never ride a train, eat at the same restaurant, see a movie, or just generally never be in a public space with the likes of you… well, not until after I get my iPhone4.

  26. “We judge the parents of the child acting spoiled in public.”

    You’ve met NotG’s parents?

  27. I personally feel that there is nothing wrong with Quentin Tarantino’s foot fetish, and he shouldn’t be made to feel like a “huge fool and laughing stock”. I’ll admit Beejoli Shah is partly guilty for writing about the incident in a somewhat mocking manner, but our society is guilty as well for being so immature about this type of thing.

  28. Alina, yes, people judged. There were also gossips from the beginning of time. It was just mean behavior, but not worth dissuading by law. No longer.

    Imagine this guy saw this 30 years ago. He would have told his friends. Some people would have laughed. But there wouldn’t be a permanent record and the 300 million people of America snickering at this then. The same guy’s action has vastly different consequences today. It is now behavior that is far more dangerous, and we need a systematic rethink of when voyeurism has to be curbed.

  29. “Some people would have laughed. But there wouldn’t be a permanent record and the 300 million people of America snickering at this then. The same guy’s action has vastly different consequences today.”

    Yes, but the same 300 million Americans could also be sent a video showing another side of Hermon. That’s the whole point of an apology video, will everyone accept it? who knows, will the ‘damage’ be undone, maybe, maybe not, will “you curry cunt” comments still continue? probably, but they’d continue anyway by that segment. People love a story of redemption as much as they love a story of “fall from grace” Of course, this is just some random girl on a metro north train, but it’s no use griping about technology, with heightened technology comes good things and bad things, but the same holds true, if a person keeps their head straight and doesn’t act like a complete idiot in public, they’ll do alright, even with the 3000 million iPhone cameras trained on them every second.

    That’s the best you’re gonna get.

    I think we should curb idiotic behavior first, then worry about the more difficult job of curbing ‘voyeurism’ by amending privacy laws, which really are just fine the way they are now.

  30. Beejoli’s feet are going to have like a foot burqa device put on them.

    Everytime she shows her foot anywhere, people are just going to have that sour look on their face, from the image of QT sucking on them while pleasuring himself.

  31. “I personally feel that there is nothing wrong with Quentin Tarantino’s foot fetish, and he shouldn’t be made to feel like a “huge fool and laughing stock”.

    Foot fetishes are pretty vanilla as far as fetishes go. The truth is, the whole incident was far more harmful to Ms. Shah than QT. He is still a famous, established director; it won’t dent his career, and if you google him, this is hardly the first thing that comes up. She is the one who got fired from her job, and is known for letting some old guy she was physically disgusted by jerk off on her. What she does sexually is between her and her partner, but the mistake was relaying the story to 15 people online…who knows, maybe even more than that.