Walker88

I laugh whenever I hear people talk about great cabals, puppet masters, international conspiracies, Deep State, etc. I know such people have never been close to the halls of power and never been in elite financial circles. Not everyone can be, but that doesn't excuse tossing out logic and common sense. Think about it. Macy hated Gimbel. Musk doesn't like Bezos. Gates and Jobs didn't exactly get along. Those folks all share the same nationality. Imagine how different the Chinese are from Americans, the Iranians from the Saudis, Saddam from George W Bush. Those who reach the pinnacle couldn't care less you exist. They want to knock their competitor off the top, but you are meaningless to them. Cooperate? Hardly. Even the Federal Reserve and ECBank are often at odds. Nobody is so clever they can control the myriad of variables in the world. Influence is quite limited, and usually has an adversary. Those who know nothing, but who do 'research' (aka engage in confirmation bias) fear everything, from the Rothschilds (a spent force and widely dispersed fortune that is dwarfed by Elon Musk), George Soros, the Bilderbergers, Bohemian Grove, Skull & Bones, Davos and the WEF, Freemasons, etc. Quite silly. All of those folks are human, which is to say fallible. Sometimes they are outright dumb (e.g., trump, Reagan), or they have peccadilloes that occasionally hurt them (Bill Clinton). The world is actually quite random, because it is far too complex and dynamic for anyone to get a handle on things and exercise anything but very short term control. Put away the Faraday Cage. You're anonymous and safe.

Apples and oranges. The cost of an average American wedding does not include a purchase price for the bride, it's just a party. The parents of the bride did not raise her like a crop to be sold in the market nor a cow to be sent to the meat packer. They took care of her growing up because they are PARENTS and that responsibility is thrust upon them for choosing to bring a life into the world. If they raised her thinking 'Well, we'll get this back when we sell her off', then they are bad parents and bad human beings. Tradition is just an excuse.

So does he get citizenship? No. He's still not Thai. In an equal marriage, both sides give in to bridge the cultural gap. I appreciate you must have paid a lot to buy your wife and let her parents show off and make the other villagers jealous. Your choice. Not for me.

It's unlikely anyone of this Forum is unaware of sinsod, nor is anyone unaware of the concept of face. We just have different opinions. Desperate men will pay the dowry, then salve their ego by anointing themselves 'culturally sensitive' or chant "When in Rome...". They'll rationalize buying another human being by calling it 'tradition', or claiming it's an outward sign of devotion and commitment. They will allow themselves to be used by their in-laws, who will 'gain face' by selling off their daughter, ideally for a higher price than their neighbors sold off their daughter in the village pissing contest. Men with self-respect won't pay, even if it's a trifling sum, because they want an equal partnership, not someone who holds a deed or who bought the first schtupping of someone's daughter. A man with self-respect will not engage in human trafficking, which sinsod is. While Thailand has some lovely women, so does every other country, just as every country---Thailand included---has gold diggers and opportunists. Some here argue that we also buy our women in the West, but I disagree. Equality has put many women on equal financial footing as men. I happen to be wealthy, which comes with the curse of being suspicious of others' intentions. Fortunately, I dated women who are also wealthy, so none needed anything monetary from me. There are wealthy women in Thailand, too, but I suspect few would have any interest in a foreigner. What that means for me is that I am unlikely to ever marry a Thai woman, as there is no way I would buy a life partner. I can accept that, while maintaining my principles. Even if I did marry, I owe her family nothing, because they did not raise her as a crop to sell at the local market or a cow to sell to a meat packer. They took care of her because they chose to bring her into the world and assumed a parental responsibility. If they want to judge me as suitable or not, they should base that on my character and how I treat her, not by how much I'm willing to pay to purchase her.

One can buy a couple of slaves in Nouakchott for that price. Perhaps I'm too optimistic, but I think in 2023, buying human beings should be an embarrassment and outrage. In Thailand, the 'tradition' is selling a daughter's virginity, as a dowry was 'traditionally' demanded only for women not yet de-flowered. Do mom and dad supply certificates of purity?

Yes, you are buying her. Call it 'tradition' of 'cultural' or whatever makes you feel better about it, but the bottom line is you're buying your wife, plus letting the family show off to the rest of the village on your dime. You are being used. You are also letting the family dictate what culture will be at the core of your relationship, and it's not even .1% your culture. All take and no give. If it works for you, great. I prefer an equal relationship.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxW789jHXII And in India it's the woman's family who has to buy the groom. Then the wife moves in with the MIL and sits on the floor at her feet, treated like a slave. These sorts of things are corollaries to slavery and bondage. Since I am opposed to buying and selling other humans, I guess I'll never marry into a place where I must show my 'outward display of caring and devotion' (as another poster wrote) via money. It's materialism, pure and simple. Love and devotion have nothing to do with it. Like slavery, dowries ought to be tossed into the dustbin of history. Let the chumps...oooh, sorry, the 'culturally sensitive' pay.

The modern term for sinsod is 'barfine'. In both cases, 'traditional' or modern, one is buying a human being's services and affection, feigned or real. Of course with the 'traditional' comes the showing off and face, so neighbors might be jealous. It's a village pissing contest. Perfect way to start a loving relationship, isn't it.

Do Thai women spit gold coins or something? Don't deserve? That's rather provincial thinking. I guess I'm just going to have to suck it up and live with my lack of worthiness.

No, I don't understand. It's a Thai-American marriage, but HE must be the only one culturally sensitive and understand women are chattel and must be purchased like a rug or used Toyota. If it takes money to be 'an outward display of caring and devotion', then it ain't love. An actual outward display of love and devotion is to be a faithful and devoted husband, not a family ATM. I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Yes, because it's obviously up to the foreigner to give in 100% to Thai culture, while the family in a Thai-Foreigner marriage is under absolutely no obligation to give an inch toward the foreigner's culture. /sarc Perhaps I haven't had enough time in Thailand to understand the subtle difference between buying a woman short term from an agogo and buying a woman long term from her family. It seems both ways the woman is just a good for sale. I'm not a 'cheap ass without a pot to pee in'; I can easily pay $30K or $1 million, but damn if I'm going to buy a spouse just because she's Thai. I prefer being single to buying a wife. It IS about the money in Thailand. I understand. And money=face. It is also going to be expected that the 'farang' continue to give in to 'tradition' forever. Nice guy? Loving and devoted? Who cares? Means nothing without the cash, and this---ironically---in spite of the local faith where the goal is to be without want or desire. It's almost as if they're saying, "Sure, deity, I want to be without want or desire, but how will I truly know I have no wants or desires until I've experienced money?" So how much did you pay for your wife? The wedding march is not "Here Comes the Bride", it's the late Tina Turner singing...."What's love got to do with it?" followed by the O'Jays "money money money money"

Maybe he was joking? Come off your high horse. Come to Thailand solely for the temples, did you? Never had a carnal thought in your life? When is your Ascension? Sinsod might be tradition to you oh-so-culturally-sensitive Thai-aphobes, but it is literally buying the woman, no less than barfining a woman from an agogo. A rose (or tradition) by any other name...... A Thai-Foreigner marriage involves TWO cultures, not one. The expectation that the foreigner give in 100% to Thai culture, with nothing in return, is something a chump would do. Such a man sets himself up to be a lifelong ATM. Bridging the cultural gap is not a one way street. While I do enjoy Thailand for a number of reasons, absolutely no way I would marry into a family where a visible display of what they sold their daughter for is part of the ceremony, and the goal is to show off for the neighbors. Some might find that 'cultural', I see it as a weakness, as well as a harbinger of what is going to be expected of me in the future.

Perhaps my logic is different, but I see a difference. An engagement ring is direct to the bride (and admittedly is often wildly overdone). A sinsod is buying the woman. To me---no doubt culturally insensitive---it's no different than barfining a woman from an agogo, except it's a payment for many schtuppings, rather than just one. As I noted in my earlier post, Tevye can sing TRADITION! until the sick buffaloes cows come home, but a sinsod is an admission that a woman is a commodity and you're paying for her companionship/sex. It's also a one-way street of cultural acceptance, demanding the groom see both the tradition of sinsod and the cultural peculiarity of 'face'.

What's the difference between paying 1 million baht for 300+ trysts with agogo women, or paying 1 million baht sinsod for a wife? Answer: (cue Tevye) TRADITION ! For me, this is an example of a cultural gap I would having trouble bridging. It makes the woman a product or a service provider, hardly different from barfining an agogo woman, despite the fact sinsod is a Thai tradition. It just doesn't sit well with me personally. I believe I'm culturally sensitive after having resided in many diverse countries, but I am always aware that the cultural gaps often present problems. I'm hardly poor, so the sum is no big deal, but I would suspect that 1 million baht is just the first payment on the way to 100 million or more, especially if every relative, close or distant, became aware of what I have. That would be irritating to me, and put unnecessary pressure on my spouse. I know many Thai-Foreigner marriages work. I would not be confident enough to ever enter into one, however, as I assume I would become the village or locale ATM. Yes, I might miss out on paradise. So be it.

Well, if you're in a natural STOL a/c like a Pilatus PC-6 Porter, your chances for survival are much greater, provided you avoid a ground loop. Wouldn't want to try that landing in a Mooney.

Move up to twins. It's a whole new kick, and will take you a while to lose the thrill...at which point you can move up to turboprop, pressurized cabins, flying above FL180. Start with something like a Seminole or Aztec, move up to a Seneca, then enjoy something special like a Diamond D-42.

I guess it's a function of one's personal experience. I enjoyed my work. Still do. It isn't a burden. My spouse was equally successful, so never needed financial support. I chose not to reproduce. (DINKs) Contrast that with PMS, monthly messes, getting bloated with wild hormone changes, morning sickness and stretch marks....and then hot flashes and the bizarre emotional swings of menopause....being a male is so easy in comparison. (An aside: in my experience from speaking with acquaintances or even overhearing conversations in coffee shops, stores, etc., the absolute most boring thing on Zeus' Green Earth is a new mother..."My baby rolled over on his own today!", as if 125 billion humans since Oldavai Gorge hadn't done that. The kid isn't Mozart or John von Neumann, so shut up!) I thank Zeus every day for my gender.

I think being a man is pretty easy, certainly relative to the biological irritations that come with being female. Women have two choices: bad and worse. They can endure the discomfort of monthly menstruation, or they can get pregnant and watch their body go out of control just to propagate their gene pool and be stuck caring for an ungrateful and demanding pile of pooping, peeing, vomiting, crying flesh that they 'love so much'. No thanks. There's a reason Freud, even if he was a weirdo, never even considered 'womb envy'. Few if any males would envy that baggage. My greatest treasure is my Y chromosome. I love women; I just would never want to be one. All we men have to do is work hard and stay fit, and life is a piece of cake. Yes, we can be 'success objects', but if we're discreet, no one knows our financial status unless we share the news with them, which would be a huge mistake. Only when a relationship reaches an advanced stage, might we share details of our stash...and even then, give it some thought. Or better, find a woman equally successful who doesn't need your money. That being said, being a kid nowadays seems a lot tougher than pre-social media. Kids are so needy today, because they've grown up in a world where one's life is measured in "Likes" (and maybe because both parents work, so kids are starved for affection). It's astonishing to me how public so many young people want/need to make their lives. Half their social media postings are an attempt to build a fantasy about how great their lives are, and in the other half they 'share' every woe-is-me moment of weakness, actually expecting anyone to care---and not feel schadenfreude---when they are 'sad' or 'lonely' or need to ask everyone 'why is my life so difficult'. Also, before social media we actually had genuine friends, even if there weren't 6,589 of them. We spoke to them face to face. When we went out together we actually chatted. We looked across the table, rather than down at our phones. (I use things like LINE and WhatsApp to communicate with my staff and with some women I've met here and there, so I see everyone's "posts". Though I think this craving for attention is bizarre, I tip my hat to a guy like Mark Zuckerberg who saw this Neo Narcissist trend and found a way to monetize it. On balance, however, I think social media is a negative and ultimately harmful.)

Damn ! trump and climate in one thread. If only you can work in religion and circumcision, this discussion could get really animated !

That's right, donny. We need more diesel ! More coal ! And those yearly car inspections that check for toxic emissions? Waste of money. We all need to be able to chew the air we breathe. No grit, no spit ! Put THAT on a hat made in China.

If the tyrannical govt was led by trump, then I would be on the front lines going after him and his goobers. I took the oath against "all enemies, foreign and domestic", and have lived it. trump is the fascist who claims he will jail his political opponents, and he did not caveat that statement with 'after a fair trial and a conviction'. Sounds like tyranny to me. Lock and load.

I guess you're referring to how trump said that the revolutionary army 'controlled the skies and secured the airports'. Of course, in 1776 the Brits weren't flying Spitfires, much less Typhoons or Harriers or F-35s, so securing airports (sic) must have been pretty easy. Even Orville and Wilbur were 127 years away.. Only in Call of Duty fantasy lives can a bunch of fat trumpers take on a SEAL Team or Apache attack helicopters.

No need to change the 2nd Amendment, even if that would be a good idea. What needs to be done is ban more weapons. You cannot keep "home nukes" or bazookas of RPG-7s or SAM-7s. It is hardly the stretch to add AR-15s, semi-auto AK-47s, etc. Yes, handguns can kill, but several things mitigate the damage one can do with a 9mm Glock or a shotgun or hunting rifle. ---AR-15 type weapons have large, easily replaced mags, even upwards of 100-rd mags are readily available ---It's easier to hit a target with an AR-15 than a handgun ---Handguns are generally max'd out at 15-17 rounds, shotguns maybe 7 shells, most hunting rifles 5 rds ---Handguns muzzle velocity is a fraction of an AR-15 ~800 fps for a .45ACP, maybe 1200 fps for a 9mm, vs 3200 fps for an AR-15. Since E=mc^2, that "c" has much more impact on hitting power It's no surprise AR-15s have become the weapon of choice in most mass shootings, and certainly in the mass shootings that result in death. They holds lots of rounds, are easy to aim and hit a target, mag replacement takes a second, victims struck by a round are unlikely to be able to attack the gunman, and the weapon itself is intimidating to law enforcement when they finally arrive. In the Uvalde school mass murder, the cops sat outside for 20 minutes when they knew the killer was armed with an AR-15. If it had been a 9mm, likely at least one cop would have had the courage to enter the school.

No, I'm not implying 'conspiracy'. I am implying poor prosecution. Imagine you see some kid who looks like Adam Lanza coming at you with an AR-15. You are going to assume he's just some concerned high school student coming to help the well-trained police keep a protest peaceful? You would think he's a lunatic out to kill, and unless your froze or could get away, you would try to save your own life and disarm him. Nobody knows what the intent of those he claimed attacked him was, because they're dead.

Some pimple-faced kid took his AR-15 and drove hundreds of miles to a scene of 1st Amendment protest. He ended up killing 3 people. He got off, when he should have gotten the electric chair. He claims he drove all that way to 'help the police', who were likely much better trained and equipped than that high school punk. He claimed 'self-defense' when he murdered 3 people. Now that is America, the regular scene of deadly gun violence. Had I been a peaceful protester there, and saw some punk coming at me with an AR-15, I would not have thought "he's just a concerned citizen here to help the police". I would have thought he's another lunatic out to kill. I would have attacked him, if I could not escape. Nobody knows if those he killed were violent protesters or just people exercising the right penned BEFORE the 2nd Amendment, who saw a crazed gunman threatening innocents. Nobody can ask them, because they're dead, all because some punk wanted to play act. By the way, if the punk was Black, the cops would have gunned him down.