Credit / Debit
An analysis of the Netflix show CA Topper Tribhuvan Mishra and its take on sexual liberation.
Note: This post has spoilers. Ignore it if you plan to watch the show.
"Life imitates Art far more than Art imitates Life.”
Oscar Wilde, "The Decay of Lying”
Art is powerful and captures life in a way that no real story can. It is both a reflection of reality and an articulation of what people want for themselves. It is so influential that there are many people in India who expect their lives to be like a Bollywood movie.
Many women actually expect their partner to be like Shah Rukh Khan (while they may not be as hot has Kajol or Aishwarya themselves). This has been documented in a book “Desperately Seeking Shah Rukh” by Shrayana Bhattacharya. A very similar phenomenon is prevalent among the male gender as well, no doubt.
The more I understand the real world outside the boundaries of logic, the more shocked I am. Probably, the root cause might be my own belligerence to accept people as they are rather than expecting them to behave as I thought they should.
Watching ‘CA Topper Tribhuvan Mishra’ was another milestone in this journey of understanding the human psyche outside my own head.
Summary of the show
Netflix has been able to promote content that would otherwise be banned in theatres. They truly deserve kudos for supporting this show which addresses an often ignored issue.
An honest government employee loses access to his life savings due to a bank scam. He is forced to earn extra as he is a family man without much savings.
He becomes a male escort with the pseudonym “CA Topper”, encouraged by praise from his wife and economic opportunity revealed by a prostitute.
The man becomes famous in the shady extramarital sex market for women. However, the police system and “patriarchal” setup is out to get this “nice man” and women who are exercising their “right” to great sex and pleasure while continuing to reap benefits of a marriage with another man.
The behaviour of CA Topper’s clients is justified with these reasons:
Their men are also fucking around
Husbands don’t think about their pleasure and treat them as baby making machines.
The husband doesn’t dance like a Bollywood actor
In some cases, the male partner is watching his wife do it with CA Topper. (This is the only ethically valid case among the stated reasons).
[ Note: The real way to deal with a husband who’s not upto the mark is to divorce and start afresh. Hiring a gigolo and justifying the act is not a real solution. ]
One of CA Topper’s client, Bindi, whose husband is a local don of sorts. The husband, Raja Bhai, finds out about the extramarital affair and one of his employees gets killed by CA Topper during a scuffle. The second half of the show gets into crime investigation domain.
Bindi apparently falls in love with CA Topper because he “listens” to her, fucks her well, gets her great cake and can dance to Bollywood songs.
Bindi, being the delusional Bollywood fan she is, thinks she can runaway with her lover CA Topper and fit her husband into the murder case.
But CA Topper has not fallen in love. He doesn’t fall in love with any of his clients because he believes that his wife loves him and he is doing this for his family.
In his mind all these sexual encounters are pure business where he credits sexual pleasure and debits money in exchange. Him being nice and considerate is only a part of his nature.
The mental gymnastics performed by CA Topper are valid, with the only exception that he has not informed his wife about this new job. As a result of his crazy sex life outside marriage, he is unable to pleasure his own wife (because he’s tired after all the banging).
Now Bindi gets angry when her crazy plan is rejected and wants CA Topper and his entire family to be killed. The writers have managed to portray her as a hurt and disappointed woman while in reality she is a scheming self-centred bitch.
She joins her husband’s hunt for CA Topper (whom she was protecting till he rejected her) and surprisingly falls in love with her husband again. She goes on a shooting spree with her husband and informs CA Topper’s wife about his real job during the fight.
In a dramatic, yet, poetic ending, CA Topper finds that his wife was also having her side-chick and sees her taking the kids away from him to start her new life.
Misinterpretation of ‘Sexual Liberation’
The show in a way promotes sexual liberation of women with tokenism and zero logic. Let’s first explore the term sexual liberation.
Sexual Liberation
Sexual liberation refers to a social movement advocating for freedom from societal norms and restrictions regarding sexuality.
It encompasses the right to express one's sexuality without fear of discrimination, embracing diverse sexual orientations, identities, and practices. This includes access to comprehensive sex education, contraception, and abortion, as well as the right to consent, engage in, or abstain from sexual activity based on personal choice.
Sexual liberation challenges traditional views by promoting agency over one's body, advocating for sexual health rights, and fostering an environment where sexual decisions are respected, whether they involve activity or celibacy, within or outside conventional relationships.
Source: Grok
The fundamental characteristics of sexual liberation, i.e. right to have sex with anyone and the right to sexual pleasure do not override the emotional and social boundaries that define a relationship.
The boundaries that make sense to me are as below:
The open sexual relationship should have consent of all partners involved.
No partner should be made to feel inferior in the equation.
Consent for this kind of arrangement should not be secured through manipulation. Whoever is uncomfortable in this equation should voluntarily leave the relationship.
If you have taken the marital vow, you are bound by it unless the open sexual relationship is explicitly negotiated with the legal and casual partner.
CA Topper Tribhuvan Mishra’s makers have diluted this concept to ensure that they don’t offend their core audience with real logic.
They are somehow ok with women having sex with a nice guy who can create magic in the bed. And the male characters who are emotionally violated by the extramarital affair are villains.
I don’t stand as an advocate of men’s rights, but as an advocate of a fair system that respects sanctity of love and relationships.
The vindictive character Bindi who goes after her husband and illicit lover based on her delusional ideas of love is enough to turn your stomach (if at all you have a conscience).
That said, independent unmarried women hiring a gigolo is perfectly fine and they should not be feeling guilty about this. This point has been well captured by the show.
Overall, the show, though well made has treated the concept of ‘sexual liberation’ and ‘right to pleasure’ in a cavalier manner without actually highlighting how a person can have an ethical non-monogamous relationship (and enjoy good sex). Of course, that is not their social obligation.
But the makers of this show have inadvertently murdered the real meaning of sexual liberation.