33 minutes ago, JakeC said:

 

Stop posting your likenesses here. It's disconcerting. 

 

So, for miillions of years, ever since the first Homo habilis discovered there was no need to fight the Alpha male to the death, but a shrub of berries and slab of meat every week would equally entice the female to open her legs, for millions of years when it came to long-lasting male-female relationships, the principle of "resources for sexual access" has ruled every society of our species that has ever lived.  Indeed rules almost all animal species as well.

 

It has been the guiding principle of our ancestors and forefathers, and their ancestors and forefathers, going back hundreds of thousands of  years.

 

Elvis Presley, Johnny Depp, Cary Grant, Frank Sinatra, Marlon Brando, Sean Coombs, the richest and best looking and most famous celebrities of our time, all had to live by this principle of resources for sexual access.

 

But you have the SHAMELESS AUDACITY to pretend that somehow you are exempt from this iron rule, that you've found a better way, that you don't pay for your woman. Because you're so likeable.

 

And you dare to imply that I'm the liar? You really are a shameless bounder, Jake.

 

 

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Yes, you post BS and assumptions, all the time. Again seeing you're too dense to fathom this. You were not there. You have no idea how I relate to women. You, along with others here,were told the truth about me, as I have never had anything to hide.

 

You, along with Malcy and couple of others, either have very poor memories or more likely are just disturbed enough to twist things around, likely from the inability to have a normal relationship with a woman, even though you act like you look at them as equals. That's exactly how I look at them as, and treat them very well.

 

Saying i drove my woman to NPD, when anyone with any knowledge on the subject knows it comes from childhood trauma, shows just how ignorant you are. She didn't run. I divorced her, and the day before yesterday, she came to my house to pick up our daughter, and in front of her, hugged and kissed on me, saying papa is a good man, and she's sorry what she did to me, that she re,e,bers everything how well I treated her, and regrets it, even more now that's she's married again.

 

I've said this before, when I never had to say anything about my life, as I know some normal expats can relate to what I've experienced. Some, like you, have their reasons why they have to twist things around. Maybe you're inferiority complex, possibly that you haven't a clue how to treat women and make up lies to make yourself sound like a gentleman. That you are going after more besides me also shows them how you really think. I don't pay women to stay. I treat them well.

 

I don't even need to read your replies. I can see that they are peppered with your angry attempts at insults and abuse. The real @fredwiggy 😊

Firing out post after post without even thinking. Oh so very emotional.

 

1 hour ago, MalcolmB said:

Do you know @transam

He lives out there also. 

Oh, you've been going through your members file notes again, paleeeeease find yourself a soulmate, it's never too late, even Quasimodo could find a soulmate in LOS..............🤒

2 minutes ago, georgegeorgia said:

Oh leave old Fred alone.....he hasn't got long 

Another one assuming how long people live. You might bite the bullet today, as I'm in far better shape and health than you'll ever achieve, and I'm much older. I don't go to doctors every week complaining.

Just now, JakeC said:

 

I don't even need to read your replies. I can see that they are peppered with you angry attempts at insults and abuse. The real @fredwiggy 😊

Firing out post after post without even thinking. Oh so very emotional.

You don't read my replies. You skim and forget what people say, then add your own sick way of thinking , being an inferior being never having learned restraint nor respect. I don't insult from a bad memory like you. I point out exactly what you are.

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

 

So, for miillions of years, ever since the first Homo habilis discovered there was no need to fight the Alpha male to the death, but a shrub of berries and slab of meat every week would equally entice the female to open her legs, for millions of years when it came to long-lasting male-female relationships, the principle of "resources for sexual access" has ruled every society of our species that has ever lived. 

 

It has been the guiding principle of our ancestors and forefathers, and their ancestors and forefathers, going back hundreds of thousands of  years.

 

Elvis Presley, Johnny Depp, Cary Grant, Frank Sinatra, Marlon Brando, Sean Coombs, the richest and best looking and most famous celebrities of our time, all had to live by this principle of resources for sexual access.

 

But you have the SHAMELESS AUDACITY to pretend that somehow you are exempt from this iron rule, that you've found a better way, that you don't pay for your woman. Because you're so likeable.

 

And you dare to imply that I'm the liar? You really are a shameless bounder, Jake.

 

 

 

Of course you were there to see it all. Now you have tremendous experience and can show us all how it is done.

The difference is that we don't need to fight over women these days, as they aren't feral and hiding from danger. They have a certain amount of autonomy and can choose their partner. Someone who tries to buy women is going to end up with a certain type of woman. That's what is happening to you. Leading to you believing that all women are the same. It's not true. You are the problem.

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

You don't read my replies. You skim and forget what people say, then add your own sick way of thinking , being an inferior being never having learned restraint nor respect. I don't insult from a bad memory like you. I point out exactly what you are.

 

'Skimming' again? Again, you are referring to yourself. Look at your own posts and then tell me about restraint. There are none so blind as those who won't see...

I see your abuse and ignore it. If you want me to read your utter tripe, then edit it, remove the abuse and repost it. See if you can do that.

30 minutes ago, atpeace said:

Get where you are coming from but you are assuming we all are just like you. I find 40+ women much more attractive and felt this way in my 40s.  Much, much, much  easier to pay for a 20 something than find the rare 40+ beauty hence the path most follow here in Thailand.  

 

Some just need to continuously get their rocks off as often as possible and I have many friends that fall into this category.  I was one of them 🙂  Now, I have a beautiful older woman and life is good.  To each his own.

 

It is precisely because I have had so much sex that, how shall I put this, you could say I have emptied the cup of Lust to a degree few on here could ever hope to experience, that I care so much for quality. Not quantity.

 

I've had so much sex, that having sex is not all that important, however, it is extremely important what quality the woman is that you are with.

 

For this reason I would not entertain a 45 year old. You say you find women in their 40s "more attractive". Now, I can give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not blind and not mentally ill, and really truly have some incomprehensible fetish for older women, okay, let's say that is the case. Sure you can enjoy your older woman. I'm very happy for you.

 

However, just as some find it offensive when some guy like Malcolom brags about the young hotties he can buy, I find it equally and even more offensive for one of these decrepit old people to come on here and say that because they have sex with a 45 year old woman three times a week they have an awesome life. Dude, you're having sex with a 45 year old woman. That's nothing to brag about in any universe. Just keep quiet about it. Enjoy it, sure, but don't try and brag about the sex you're having, because qualitatively you're banging a  woman well past her sell-by date, past her prime by a long shot.

 

I don't mean to offend anyone, I'm just saying what I find offensive. I LEFT a relationship with a 39 year old that was providing sex 3 times a week and more, because she was no longer the woman she was. 

 

We are men. We deserve better. We deserve young attractive women. That's just my view. If you then settle for a 45 year old, don't make it out like you have a fantastic life, you have to wake up next to a 45 year old face. It's my idea of hell on earth.

21 minutes ago, JakeC said:

 

Wow...you've managed to get assuming, skimming and narcissist all on the same page.

 

You do understand that repeating these things hundreds of times to different people indicates that it is you who suffers from those things...don't you?

 

Thank you for admitting that you were hurt by your 'narcissist' ex-girlfriend and so you became one. Surely that is the concept you tried to explain there. 

That it happened to you, so you became that. Keep paying, keep pretending to be nice. But we see the real @fredwiggy here. Nasty, vindictive and abusive when he cannot get his own way.

The problem is ALWAYS with someone else and not you. You see yourself as infallible. That's part of what makes you a narcissist IMHO.

You don't become a narcissist at 62 years old. That you don't understand this also shows you really shouldn't be arguing with someone that's plainly way above your level of rational thinking. Again, don't answer for anyone here, as the only ones who agree with you are Malcy and a couple of others. Well known trollers, liars and very disturbed thinkers, who are only in Thailand because they can't obtain a normal girlfriend and have to pay, besides you of course, the Don Juan of Thailand. Do you not see I'm only arguing with you and a couple of others? Remember this. Your opinions mean nothing, as your personality disorder doesn't allow for normal thinking, but skewed towards your own ingrained agenda of self hatred, which you turn against others who point you out.

 

And standing up against petulant little worms who try and cut me down isn't being nasty. I get along with most everyone here besides the ones who cause trouble here, and you're one of them. You are only here to cause trouble, and haven't the intelligence to see you're being not only pointed out, but are constantly showing everyone here, by yourself, exactly how you really are.

3 minutes ago, JakeC said:

 

'Skimming' again? Again, you are referring to yourself. Look at your own posts and then tell me about restraint. There are none so blind as those who won't see...

I see your abuse and ignore it. If you want me to read your utter tripe, then edit it, remove the abuse and repost it. See if you can do that.

Even if you did read, and possibly understand, what I write, you'll never change your thinking, as it's there from your childhood. 

11 hours ago, JamesPhuket10 said:

I have noticed many guys on this blog over the years do have the attitude where women are just for sex and are waiting for a farang with a wallet but that is a reflection of these guys and not women in general as these types of guys can only get women if they pay for them and thus have a distorted view of the word. 

 

I think you have a distorted view of Thailand.

At most 10% of women in Thailand have substantial savings and do not need financial support. 

 

I met a few who were well off. One worked in Dubai, another worked in Singapore, and the other married a guy in UK and worked there for many years. But I'm guessing not many don't need financial support. And I'm guessing the net worth of most foreigners is much higher. Doesn't make sense to "go Dutch" when your net worth is 10 times higher than the woman. 

 

Jake has even admitted that his girlfriend is not Thai. So I'm not even sure why he's sharing his story as it won't apply to most people here. 

 

 

37 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Why? You're paying as well.

 

I won't waste my time going through and explaining all that yet again, I would rather watch paint dry. 

 

What about guys who are with women with a lot of their own money, property, rental income, from a business they had of their own making, you wold not know as you have to buy all of your women, such women would have no interest in you and your attitude. 

12 minutes ago, JakeC said:

 

 

The difference is that we don't need to fight over women these days, as they aren't feral and hiding from danger. 

 

Do you not understand English? The reason why we don't have to fight over women anymore is PRECISELY because men have universally adopted the principle of "resources for sexual access" for hundreds of thousands of years. Almost every animal species in the animal kingdom has adopted this principle..

 

The only reason we don't have to fight over women is BECAUSE we ALL follow this "resources for sexual access" principle. How do you think we can do that? By ourselves? Because women ALSO follow this principle.

 

You are no more exempted from this than James is.

 

When you scratch the surfacce of your "relationship" you're not even living together,  you're barely in a relationship. Of course you don't have to pay for her, if she's not you're real long term gf or wiffe. But then you scratch the surface and you gave her a loan, you pay for her meals...I mean for f£$%'s sakes, stop lying through your teeth Jake!

3 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

I think you have a distorted view of Thailand.

At most 10% of women in Thailand have substantial savings and do not need financial support. 

 

I met a few who were well off. One worked in Dubai, another worked in Singapore, and the other married a guy in UK and worked there for many years. But I'm guessing not many don't need financial support. And I'm guessing the net worth of most foreigners is much higher. Doesn't make sense to "go Dutch" when your net worth is 10 times higher than the woman. 

 

Jake has even admitted that his girlfriend is not Thai. So I'm not even sure why he's sharing his story as it won't apply to most people here. 

 

 

 

Your 10% guesstimate is far too low.

 

And of course it is much easier not to find such a woman for many guys as it is easer to go for the low hanging fruit, all that is needed is money.

 

Such a woman would want to meet an equal not some average bloke with a thick wallet, well thick compared to the poor Thais they end up with. 

 

 

11 hours ago, Cameroni said:

I don't mean to offend anyone, I'm just saying what I find offensive. I LEFT a relationship with a 39 year old that was providing sex 3 times a week and more, because she was no longer the woman she was. 

 

We are men. We deserve better. We deserve young attractive women. That's just my view. If you then settle for a 45 year old, don't make it out like you have a fantastic life, you have to wake up next to a 45 year old face. It's my idea of hell on earth.

 

Yes but the opposite is also true.

Young girls get with much older guys for resources and then sometimes wake up one morning and decide they don't want to do it anymore.

So if you go too young, you might get dumped at some point.

But go ahead and take your chances. 

 

33 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

You don't become a narcissist at 62 years old. That you don't understand this also shows you really shouldn't be arguing with someone that's plainly way above your level of rational thinking. Again, don't answer for anyone here, as the only ones who agree with you are Malcy and a couple of others. Well known trollers, liars and very disturbed thinkers, who are only in Thailand because they can't obtain a normal girlfriend and have to pay, besides you of course, the Don Juan of Thailand. Do you not see I'm only arguing with you and a couple of others? Remember this. Your opinions mean nothing, as your personality disorder doesn't allow for normal thinking, but skewed towards your own ingrained agenda of self hatred, which you turn against others who point you out.

 

I read this one as you toned down your abuse. You couldn't quite eliminate it, as you obviously still have a problem with your brain.

I didn't say that you became a narcissist at 62 years old. I have no idea when the seed was planted. But you certainly are one now. Covert or otherwise. That's my opinion. You can disagree, but don't become abusive about it.

That, for me, is a demonstration of disturbed thinking. Try posting without becoming abusive, paranoid and accusatory.

If my opinion means nothing, then why are you becoming hysterical about it?

 

Now you are suggesting that I hate myself? Please outline the evidence that you have used to come to such a conclusion. Methinks you are just ranting and trying to throw mud...like a monkey. 

 

 

2 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

A decent man will agree, because it has women looked at as partners and not objects. How do you look at women?

All your wives keep leaving you.

I suspect because they just don’t see you as a sex object.

 

And they had to listen to endless dribble.

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

 

Yes but the opposite is also true.

Young girls get with much older guys for resources and then sometimes wake up one morning and decide they don't want to do it anymore.

So if you go too young, you might get dumped at some point.

But go ahead and take your chances. 

 

 

It's exactly what happens to him. But they keep the money pipeline open.

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Do you not understand English? The reason why we don't have to fight over women anymore is PRECISELY because men have universally adopted the principle of "resources for sexual access" for hundreds of thousands of years. Almost every animal species in the animal kingdom has adopted this principle..

 

The only reason we don't have to fight over women is BECAUSE we ALL follow this "resources for sexual access" principle. How do you think we can do that? By ourselves? Because women ALSO follow this principle.

 

You are no more exempted from this than James is.

 

When you scratch the surfacce of your "relationship" you're not even living together,  you're barely in a relationship. Of course you don't have to pay for her, if she's not you're real long term gf or wiffe. But then you scratch the surface and you gave her a loan, you pay for her meals...I mean for f£$%'s sakes, stop lying through your teeth Jake!

 

You have misrepresented me again.

 

I do not pay and the reasons I have explained, you will never understand my situation as you have blinded yourself by having to pay for women and that will not change.

 

I am not making that up as you have explained this many times.

 

So good luck, but do not misrepresent me to others.

2 minutes ago, JakeC said:

That's my opinion. You can disagree, but don't become abusive about it.

That, for me, is a demonstration of disturbed thinking. Try posting without becoming abusive, paranoid and accusatory

I don’t think his father taught him how to be a man.

If his dad was a simp he didn’t have much of a chance really.

The one thing his wives all have in common is that they all left him.

9 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

I think you have a distorted view of Thailand.

At most 10% of women in Thailand have substantial savings and do not need financial support. 

 

I met a few who were well off. One worked in Dubai, another worked in Singapore, and the other married a guy in UK and worked there for many years. But I'm guessing not many don't need financial support. And I'm guessing the net worth of most foreigners is much higher. Doesn't make sense to "go Dutch" when your net worth is 10 times higher than the woman. 

 

Jake has even admitted that his girlfriend is not Thai. So I'm not even sure why he's sharing his story as it won't apply to most people here. 

 

 

 

Same situation with Thai girl. She stalked me and left gifts outside my place. Was only seventeen. Now that she is older and wealthier, has made offers.

It's about the person. If they like you, they won't feel good about taking your money.

11 minutes ago, JakeC said:

 

I read this one as you toned down your abuse. You couldn't quite eliminate it, as you obvious still have a problem with your brain.

I didn't say that you became a narcissist at 62 years old. I have no idea when the seed was planted. But you certainly are one now. Covert or otherwise. That's my opinion. You can disagree, but don't become abusive about it.

That, for me, is a demonstration of disturbed thinking. Try posting without becoming abusive, paranoid and accusatory.

If my opinion means nothing, then why are you becoming hysterical about it?

 

Now you are suggesting that I hate myself? Please outline the evidence that you have used to come to such a conclusion. Methinks you are just ranting and trying to throw mud...like a monkey. 

 

 

You have no ideas about me besides what I've said here. Then you twist that around, which shows your true character. You aren't getting this yet. You don't have any idea about narcissism because you're suffering from it, and denial is your mainstay. Don't make opinions without any evidence or knowledge on the subject, as it makes you look foolish with every reply. It again, is not abuse defending my position. It is ignorance when you assume how I live my life, and a poor memory when you forget what I've said. And narcissism when you twist things around to suit your agenda. Studying narcissism for 30 years isn't done by narcissists you twit. It's so we can spot your kind easier.

2 minutes ago, JamesPhuket10 said:

 

You have misrepresented me again.

 

I do not pay and the reasons I have explained, you will never understand my situation as you have blinded yourself by having to pay for women and that will not change.

 

I am not making that up as you have explained this many times.

 

So good luck, but do not misrepresent me to others.

 

Don't worry about it. A few here are a bit 'off the wall'. That's putting it politely.

1 hour ago, Celsius said:

 

You are really missing out.

 

Google Coco Scorpio

 

Is that the lady that can eat out her own cooter ?

26 minutes ago, JamesPhuket10 said:

What about guys who are with women with a lot of their own money, property, rental income, from a business they had of their own making, you wold not know as you have to buy all of your women, such women would have no interest in you and your attitude. 

 

Guys like you James ,and Jake, really make laugh. Honestly, I'm chuckling here. You both have the sheer audacity to claim you don't pay for your women, when we  both know you have and you will continue to do so.

 

For a start, women who have a lot of money from a business of their own are by definition old and used up, with a terrible attitude, so naturally I wouldn't even consider them.

 

However, EVEN women with money from a business will seek out a man with more resources than she has, it is a well known principle called hypergamy, women always want to improve their life. They will simply NOT entertain being with a guy long term who does not improve their life financially.

 

The only, extremely rare, exceptions are women like Taylor Swift, who are bilionaires, so rich, that they could never hope to improve their life  financially with any man. And EVEN SHE picked a guy with a networth of 70 million USD, with fame, good looks and much else that she wants

 

Sure, there are some women so old and ugly, they will also adopt the strategy of paying for a guy. But those are outliers, very rare exceptions. It almost never happens. Just as the rich young sexy businesswoman with millions with a fetish for young guys that are  notwell off. You're veering into fantasy territory, which is not surprising, because like Jake you live in delusion.  And I get it, it's nice there in fantasyland. I love to read Comics. But it's not reality!

 

 

26 minutes ago, transam said:

Oh, you've been going through your members file notes again, paleeeeease find yourself a soulmate, it's never too late, even Quasimodo could find a soulmate in LOS..............🤒

Yes, but I am after quality.

Issan single mothers do not qualify.

On 10/22/2025 at 11:46 AM, novacova said:

None of your business?

 

Aha! So it WAS the temples after all.

 

On 10/22/2025 at 11:53 AM, ravip said:

This question might be too embarrassing to answer, for some.

 

Nothing embarrassing about shagging.

 

On 10/22/2025 at 12:06 PM, ezzra said:

30 years ago, Thailand was indeed a paradise in every sense of the word, from cost of living, food, ease of doing business

cheap girls and booz were at laughable cost and Somtam was 15-20 baht and the foreigners you meet in the bars

and on the street were easy going and friendly.

since then, everything gone to the dogs, any worse then that, and Thailand is really not a place worth staying. 

 

So, why are you still here?

 

On 10/22/2025 at 12:12 PM, Watawattana said:

Not going to disagree with you, but isn't "it was better in the old days" a mantra for most old folks round the world?  Is it just "different" now rather than worse?

 

Most old folks fail to consider that not only has the country changed, and maybe not for the better, but they also have changed and definitely not for the better.

 

On 10/22/2025 at 12:14 PM, Harrisfan said:

30 years ago people said it was better 30 years ago

 

Yes, indeed I did. If they did decent somtam in Isabela de Sagua la Grande in Cuba, I'd be gone in a instant.

7 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

It is precisely because I have had so much sex that, how shall I put this, you could say I have emptied the cup of Lust to a degree few on here could ever hope to experience, that I care so much for quality. Not quantity.

 

I've had so much sex, that having sex is not all that important, however, it is extremely important what quality the woman is that you are with.

 

For this reason I would not entertain a 45 year old. You say you find women in their 40s "more attractive". Now, I can give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not blind and not mentally ill, and really truly have some incomprehensible fetish for older women, okay, let's say that is the case. Sure you can enjoy your older woman. I'm very happy for you.

 

However, just as some find it offensive when some guy like Malcolom brags about the young hotties he can buy, I find it equally and even more offensive for one of these decrepit old people to come on here and say that because they have sex with a 45 year old woman three times a week they have an awesome life. Dude, you're having sex with a 45 year old woman. That's nothing to brag about in any universe. Just keep quiet about it. Enjoy it, sure, but don't try and brag about the sex you're having, because qualitatively you're banging a  woman well past her sell-by date, past her prime by a long shot.

 

I don't mean to offend anyone, I'm just saying what I find offensive. I LEFT a relationship with a 39 year old that was providing sex 3 times a week and more, because she was no longer the woman she was. 

 

We are men. We deserve better. We deserve young attractive women. That's just my view. If you then settle for a 45 year old, don't make it out like you have a fantastic life, you have to wake up next to a 45 year old face. It's my idea of hell on earth.

OK, fare enough.  I was simply sharing my preferences.  Why I have these preferences is complicated and not sure I know why myself. I was with many younger women pre 2020 and had some great times.  Finding my type in the 40+ age group is extremely difficult and younger women were easier to find.

If you pay your women they are much easier to control.

 

9 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

I don’t think his father taught him how to be a man.

If his dad was a simp he didn’t have much of a chance really.

The one thing his wives all have in common is that they all left him.

My dad was a real man. he provided and was good to us. How you act towards women and that you took advantage of many while they were unconscious (your words) shows your dad didn't do his job, along with your grandpa, who you said also taught you things. I'm guessing he was your dad's dad. Try calling people a simp in person and you'll find out the hard way .Doing it here shows cowardice. And I've said this before many times, so add it to your files. I divorced the three of them, and got custody, as I am the only stable parent my children have.........