An Evolutionary Analysis Of Thai-farang Relationships

[ColPyat]

But because ev psych concerns human behavior, it is often use to lend the credibility of "science" to some rather dubious and politically-motivated arguments (not always, and I am NOT accusing the OP this, I am speaking about ev psych in general). It's often accused of being the new eugenics.

Given the most of the views it is called upon to justify, it very well sounds like a direct development of eugenics.

[tracer5050]

It is not GREAT when one can afford to do anyting he wants with anyone , And dont Give a Da-- what anybody think , Love it Love it Love it.\

I worked long and hard to be able to enjoy this life style , Now i can afford what i want . Eat you heart out

[canadiangirl]

It is not GREAT when one can afford to do anyting he wants with anyone , And dont Give a Da-- what anybody think , Love it Love it Love it.\

I worked long and hard to be able to enjoy this life style , Now i can afford what i want . Eat you heart out

From John Burdett:

"How do you think the girls feel, when they walk down Sukhumvit with those farang men who grin like Cheshire cats? Do they feel like the found the cream too or merely a dirty job that pays better than factory work?"

[somtaamgaiyang]

young beautiful women know they're sought after and make no effort to be more than visually interesting

I really don't think that is true; it was perhaps more the case in the past, not because beautiful young people can not be intelligent but because this was not a quality valued by their potential partners (rather the opposite, in fact, or at least, there was the idea that the dominant partner must be made to look more smart at all times ).

Edit : yes, I know that is why some people seek their partners from certain cultures.

And if we try to apply an "evolutionary" explanation for the selection of an unintelligent mate, I am not sure where we end up .

Buddhist women are not supposed to have what we would suppose to be the 5 deadly sins (from a Christian perspective). They are a centre of calm and good. Therefore, lust is not a major prerequisite for choosing a partner.

Why does society get so wound up when they hear of "free sex" and giks. It is not necessarily about preventing women having greater freedom in society, it is that it is a complete anathema to buddhist thought. Now whether we believe it to be true or not, I am not saying it is a justification of behaviour rather an explanation of why possibly long term security outweighs the physical attractiveness or age of a partner.

Why is it that a woman can never touch a monk?

Attitudes of this kind are hardly unique to Buddhism, though.

No they aren't unique to Buddhism, but then again, the attitudes exist. It wouldn't be very relevant to provide a Christian perspective in Thailand would it.

Buddhism is also a very inbedded idea in Thailand and one does not need to be a wat visiting person to be an active Buddhist. Schooling in Thailand is very different from the west whereby it is practically impossible for Thai children (other than those in private schooling, and even then it is difficult) to grow up to become any other religion/ideology than Buddhist. Daily life for the vast majority of Thais involves far more interaction with Buddhism than a kid in the west will ever have with a church. It is basically what 90 plus percent of the Thai nation believe and try to practice day by day, minute by minute.

It also defines many laws and most social attitudes in Thailand far beyond supposed sneering at farangs (which if it happens is actually very rare) and therefore has a very strong influence of many the decision making process by Thai people.

If the undercurrent against older farang men whisking young Thai girls off against their will is so strong, why does Thai society allow it to happen? Why do 99% of Thai people not care at all about the existence of the enormous red light districts? Why do social campaigners get very worried about middle class children drinking and carousing to all hours, but seemingly not give a ###### about pattaya and patpong? Most of the answers lie in Buddhist attitudes, but that is for another discussion.

[bangkoksingapore]

It also defines many laws and most social attitudes in Thailand far beyond supposed sneering at farangs (which if it happens is actually very rare)

I just want to comment again that I agree with Somtam about Buddhism's role in these relationships and why Thai people view them as good. To quote my friend who was sitting with me in a cafe when a 65 year old farang in beach attire walked in with his teenager wife. 'na rak, na? na rok thee-soot'. this is the most common reaction ive seen.

[siamamerican]

I agree with Maigo

Jeeez................. That's never happened on this forum before.

Cmon, I've agreed in spirit with many of your posts. Don't strike me as the type that needs confimation.

[lannarebirth]

This is one of the big reasons evolutionary psych is such a controversial field -- there must be some good in there somewhere, but it's always getting trotted out by every jerk with some axe to grind (Op, I'm not accusing you of this) or some racist or sexist bull to back up.

I usually encounter it in some bogus argument about why men are better than women at mathematics.

Canadian Girl you still haven't told us the reasoning behind your strong opinions. T

I made a big post about this yesterday, and it was swallowed by the interweb. I've been too busy to write it up again.

Evolutionary psychology is so controversial people write entire books called "controversies in evolutionary psychology". Just google it -- you don't need to take my word for it. It doesn't mean ev psych is entirely wrong, or that the OP is wrong -- but it does mean that "ev psych says so" is not a sufficient argument for me.

It's one of those scientific fields that seems "close enough" to common sense that everyone is always reading one book on the topic and feeling like they understand what is going on. Most of them lack the grounding in science to understand that scientific theories, especially the big ground-breaking ones, are often subtle, complex and getting some small detail wrong means that the whole thing falls apart.

But because ev psych concerns human behavior, it is often use to lend the credibility of "science" to some rather dubious and politically-motivated arguments (not always, and I am NOT accusing the OP this, I am speaking about ev psych in general). It's often accused of being the new eugenics.

I hope this answers your question. I also hope you're not trying to pick a fight with me, as I can hardly see what offense you can take at my opinion on the validity of evolutionary psychology. It seems a rather philosophical issue, hardly worth debating any longer than this.

canadiangirl,

I am wholly unfamiliar with "evolutionary pysch". Is it a philosophical area of study or scientific? From your description, it sounds like it may incorporate some of Boltzmann's proposed "Fourth law of Thermodynamics" or related "Mmaximum Power Principle". Is that so, and if it is what is your view on that? TIA

Edited September 1, 2007 by lannarebirth

[sbk]

This is one of the big reasons evolutionary psych is such a controversial field -- there must be some good in there somewhere, but it's always getting trotted out by every jerk with some axe to grind (Op, I'm not accusing you of this) or some racist or sexist bull to back up.

I usually encounter it in some bogus argument about why men are better than women at mathematics.

Canadian Girl you still haven't told us the reasoning behind your strong opinions. T

I made a big post about this yesterday, and it was swallowed by the interweb. I've been too busy to write it up again.

Evolutionary psychology is so controversial people write entire books called "controversies in evolutionary psychology". Just google it -- you don't need to take my word for it. It doesn't mean ev psych is entirely wrong, or that the OP is wrong -- but it does mean that "ev psych says so" is not a sufficient argument for me.

It's one of those scientific fields that seems "close enough" to common sense that everyone is always reading one book on the topic and feeling like they understand what is going on. Most of them lack the grounding in science to understand that scientific theories, especially the big ground-breaking ones, are often subtle, complex and getting some small detail wrong means that the whole thing falls apart.

But because ev psych concerns human behavior, it is often use to lend the credibility of "science" to some rather dubious and politically-motivated arguments (not always, and I am NOT accusing the OP this, I am speaking about ev psych in general). It's often accused of being the new eugenics.

I hope this answers your question. I also hope you're not trying to pick a fight with me, as I can hardly see what offense you can take at my opinion on the validity of evolutionary psychology. It seems a rather philosophical issue, hardly worth debating any longer than this.

canadiangirl,

I am wholly unfamiliar with "evolutionary pysch". Is it a philosophical area of study or scientific? From your description, it sounds like it may incorporate some of Boltzmann's proposed "Fourth law of Thermodynamics" or related "Mmaximum Power Principle". Is that so, and if it is what is your view on that? TIA

I am not sure I understand your reading of CG's post here.

[Maigo6]

Yea I do know, I know exactly what the vast majority of Thai people think

No you don't, you only KNOW what YOU think.

You can only assume what others think.

Lets put it this way, if an ex Grave Digger who is 62 was married to a 22 year old Thai woman, do you think that Thai people would think he's a bad man, or that she is unlucky, or they look unsightly together?

Or would they be a celebrity couple in Thailand, invited to all the Elites parties and constantly being interviewed by Thai media and asked to go on TV etc, she would become a Thai Superstar just by her association with the 62 year old ex Grave Digger, or better Known as Rod Stewart.

Would YOU think that their relationship was wrong, would it keep you awake at night, would it lead you to a course of Xanax due the the stress of worrying about what other people choose to do with their lives?

[lannarebirth]

This is one of the big reasons evolutionary psych is such a controversial field -- there must be some good in there somewhere, but it's always getting trotted out by every jerk with some axe to grind (Op, I'm not accusing you of this) or some racist or sexist bull to back up.

I usually encounter it in some bogus argument about why men are better than women at mathematics.

Canadian Girl you still haven't told us the reasoning behind your strong opinions. T

I made a big post about this yesterday, and it was swallowed by the interweb. I've been too busy to write it up again.

Evolutionary psychology is so controversial people write entire books called "controversies in evolutionary psychology". Just google it -- you don't need to take my word for it. It doesn't mean ev psych is entirely wrong, or that the OP is wrong -- but it does mean that "ev psych says so" is not a sufficient argument for me.

It's one of those scientific fields that seems "close enough" to common sense that everyone is always reading one book on the topic and feeling like they understand what is going on. Most of them lack the grounding in science to understand that scientific theories, especially the big ground-breaking ones, are often subtle, complex and getting some small detail wrong means that the whole thing falls apart.

But because ev psych concerns human behavior, it is often use to lend the credibility of "science" to some rather dubious and politically-motivated arguments (not always, and I am NOT accusing the OP this, I am speaking about ev psych in general). It's often accused of being the new eugenics.

I hope this answers your question. I also hope you're not trying to pick a fight with me, as I can hardly see what offense you can take at my opinion on the validity of evolutionary psychology. It seems a rather philosophical issue, hardly worth debating any longer than this.

canadiangirl,

I am wholly unfamiliar with "evolutionary pysch". Is it a philosophical area of study or scientific? From your description, it sounds like it may incorporate some of Boltzmann's proposed "Fourth law of Thermodynamics" or related "Mmaximum Power Principle". Is that so, and if it is what is your view on that? TIA

I am not sure I understand your reading of CG's post here.

That's the point sbk, I did not understand it. I wasn't sure if she was making the point that it was a science or a philosophy, or common sense. Since I was unfamiliar with the field of study, I asked, if a science, is it related to the areas of study I named. I guess I could have go googled it and spent some time learning that for myself, but since she raised the point, and appears to know something of the subject matter, I figured she could address my question and I'd know quickly if I am at all close to "being on the same page" with the discourse here.

[sbk]

My guess its as much a "science" as regular psychology is. So, I guess it depends on your views on psychology if you want to call it 'science', 'philosophy' or 'common sense'

[lannarebirth]

My guess its as much a "science" as regular psychology is. So, I guess it depends on your views on psychology if you want to call it 'science', 'philosophy' or 'common sense'

Well, I just googled it and got the wilipedia version. It appears to be something akin to eugenics and not evolutionary in the "macro" sense.

[meemiathai]

This is one of the big reasons evolutionary psych is such a controversial field -- there must be some good in there somewhere, but it's always getting trotted out by every jerk with some axe to grind (Op, I'm not accusing you of this) or some racist or sexist bull to back up.

I usually encounter it in some bogus argument about why men are better than women at mathematics.

Canadian Girl you still haven't told us the reasoning behind your strong opinions. T

I made a big post about this yesterday, and it was swallowed by the interweb. I've been too busy to write it up again.

Evolutionary psychology is so controversial people write entire books called "controversies in evolutionary psychology". Just google it -- you don't need to take my word for it. It doesn't mean ev psych is entirely wrong, or that the OP is wrong -- but it does mean that "ev psych says so" is not a sufficient argument for me.

It's one of those scientific fields that seems "close enough" to common sense that everyone is always reading one book on the topic and feeling like they understand what is going on. Most of them lack the grounding in science to understand that scientific theories, especially the big ground-breaking ones, are often subtle, complex and getting some small detail wrong means that the whole thing falls apart.

But because ev psych concerns human behavior, it is often use to lend the credibility of "science" to some rather dubious and politically-motivated arguments (not always, and I am NOT accusing the OP this, I am speaking about ev psych in general). It's often accused of being the new eugenics.

I hope this answers your question. I also hope you're not trying to pick a fight with me, as I can hardly see what offense you can take at my opinion on the validity of evolutionary psychology. It seems a rather philosophical issue, hardly worth debating any longer than this.

Fully understood and agreed, CG.

[WaiWai]

One of the 5 precepts of Buddhism :

To refrain from sexual misconduct.

Applied literally this means husbands and wives should not have affairs (see below). However, it could also apply to the quality of their sexual relationship. Sex should be a natural expression of closeness between a husband and wife and should reflect the quality of their whole relationship. A good sex life normally means one has a good relationship. Doing things the partner may not wish to do, or insisting on sex when the other person does not want it, are examples of 'unskillful actions' which can lead to emotional suffering. This is clearly against the first precept.

This precept applies to both partners. I don't think we can argue that a woman is expected to be sexless and would thus more easily accept an older partner to whom she is not attracted (if indeed, that's the position being offered above).

My understanding of the Buddhist attitude towards "people who work in places like Pattaya" is that while they don't blame the person, the act is definitely regarded as unwholesome. Lust & greed exist despite Buddhism, obviously.

Somtaamgaiyang, I am not really sure what you're getting at, but I think it's the duties of a Thai girl to her parents as the reason these partnerships may be accepted by Thais. Is that right ?

Amongst the general community, at least where I live, I have no doubt as to the attitude of most Thais to these relationships.

It can be accepting, in a Buddhist, shrug of the shoulders kind of way, it can sometimes be pitying, when the younger partner is humiliated in some way, and it can sometimes even be faintly hostile, it can be defensive, proudly preserving the Thai face, in the presence of other foreigners, but these are really not, in general, seen as ideal partnerships.

[WaiWai]

It appears to be something akin to eugenics

Eugenics is a philosophy which promotes actively working to improve the gene pool, supposedly to produce better, smarter, healthier humans.

Evolutionary psychology is a branch of psychology. I'll quote Wiki's definition here for everyone's benefit :

Evolutionary psychology (abbreviated ev-psych or EP) is a theoretical approach to psychology that attempts to explain mental and psychological traits—such as memory, perception, or language—as adaptations, i.e., as the functional products of natural selection. The purpose of this approach is to bring an adaptationist way of thinking about biological mechanisms such as the immune system into the field of psychology, and to approach psychological mechanisms in a similar way. In short, evolutionary psychology is focused on how evolution has shaped the mind and behavior.

"Two of the founders of the field, offer these five foundational principles of evolutionary psychology:

The brain is a physical system. It functions as a computer. Its circuits are designed to generate behavior that is appropriate to your environmental circumstances.

Our neural circuits were designed by natural selection to solve problems that our ancestors faced during our species' evolutionary history.

Consciousness is just the tip of the iceberg; most of what goes on in your mind is hidden from you. As a result, your conscious experience can mislead you into thinking that our circuitry is simpler than it really is. Most problems that you experience as easy to solve are very difficult to solve -- they require very complicated neural circuitry

Different neural circuits are specialized for solving different adaptive problems.

Our modern skulls house a stone age mind."

Psychology seems to have taken a devolutionary turn .

Edited September 1, 2007 by WaiWai

[somtaamgaiyang]

One of the 5 precepts of Buddhism :

To refrain from sexual misconduct.

Applied literally this means husbands and wives should not have affairs (see below). However, it could also apply to the quality of their sexual relationship. Sex should be a natural expression of closeness between a husband and wife and should reflect the quality of their whole relationship. A good sex life normally means one has a good relationship. Doing things the partner may not wish to do, or insisting on sex when the other person does not want it, are examples of 'unskillful actions' which can lead to emotional suffering. This is clearly against the first precept.

This precept applies to both partners. I don't think we can argue that a woman is expected to be sexless and would thus more easily accept an older partner to whom she is not attracted (if indeed, that's the position being offered above).

My understanding of the Buddhist attitude towards "people who work in places like Pattaya" is that while they don't blame the person, the act is definitely regarded as unwholesome. Lust & greed exist despite Buddhism, obviously.

Somtaamgaiyang, I am not really sure what you're getting at, but I think it's the duties of a Thai girl to her parents as the reason these partnerships may be accepted by Thais. Is that right ?

Amongst the general community, at least where I live, I have no doubt as to the attitude of most Thais to these relationships.

It can be accepting, in a Buddhist, shrug of the shoulders kind of way, it can sometimes be pitying, when the younger partner is humiliated in some way, and it can sometimes even be faintly hostile, it can be defensive, proudly preserving the Thai face, in the presence of other foreigners, but these are really not, in general, seen as ideal partnerships.

I don't profess to be an expert, just have spoken to a lot of people about the apparent contradictions in Thai culture. From what I hear, see and have read I believe that physical attractiventess is not top of the list for Thai females when it comes to selecting a partner. Men choose their wife, with parental approval not the other way around.

I think I am right that in Buddhist thought men are possesors of the sins of weakness in spades and women are not. Women are believed to be in control of their emotions but men are believed to be completely unable to control their's. In Thailand lust is something is created by women provoking men, not in any way men provoking women. How is it until very recently legal for a man to rape his wife in Thailand? Hence women should be demure as to not arouse men.

That unbeholden feeling of lust that one gets in ones loins when one sees a sexy female or male is not something that is believed to be a good thing in Thai/Buddhist culture. Why does Thai TV show romance in terms of a peck on the cheek and a conversation between mum and dad to take a hand in marriage. Could you imagine the scandal if someone actually had a 20 second heaving smooch on Thai TV? Or that poor student girl who wore that dress last year to the film awards. Vis a vis mediterranean cultures, where the passion of life is something that is understood to be part and part of natural life and is celebrated, playboy is regular bathroom reading in most households, and game shows have women dressed as though for the beach.

You are right I think in that the person is pitied for having to work in a go-go bar, but society politely manages to turn a blind eye to it. In other parts of the world, people would be marching down the street complaining about womens rights, ban prostitution etc etc. Thailand is not proud of its sex industry, so it begs the question, why does it still exist? Money? If Thailand is a conservative country, they could close it down tomorrow, but it still goes on and on and probably will for many more decades. I honestly believe that it is a case of out of sight out of mind, because any right minded person would not want this scale of sex industry to exist in their country would they?

Obligation to parents, I don't know, but long term financial security is a worthwhile pursuit is it not?

Thais might not see the relationships as ideal although I do believe they would rather have their daughter marry an older secure bloke than a potentially less secure younger man. My wife has three divorced cousins, who were left with the babies. All of them are married now to middle to older aged guys in Europe and are in what appear to me to be model marriages. In Thailand these relationships do not evoke the same level of response that they appear to be able to create in some of the farang posters here.

[WaiWai]

Contradictions, yes. Does Buddhist detachment allow some social ills to grow, or do some Thais simply ignore certain transgressions in the cause of financial support of the family, or is the Buddhist influence not great enough, particularly in the face of economic hardship ?

Re the reason certain "industries" continue to exist here, I suppose the financial difference it can bring to individual families must be an important factor, along with a reluctance to dabble in what is undoubtedly a messy & dangerous scene.

Obligation to parents, I don't know, but long term financial security is a worthwhile pursuit is it not?

That's not an absolute good, I think; it would have to be weighed against certain costs or renunciations.

In Thailand these relationships do not evoke the same level of response that they appear to be able to create in some of the farang posters here.

Well, Thais don't tend to respond as strongly and openly as foreigners.

This is a (sometimes contradictorily ) traditional culture where people question their lot in life rather less than we might.

[Aujuba]

Not matter what you post in these young-old relationship threads, it's certainly true that all the posters here are interested in sex. Some posters are envious while others are smug about what they are getting. It's a keeping-up-with-the-Jones story only when it comes to sex some people can't 'compete' sexually as they are bound in some way. As one side enjoys one of the best things in nature, the other side looks on with jealousy and frustration tied down by society's view of morality. We will never be happy with what we have.

Why on earth would anyone spend so much time attacking people who are happy with their lives? The attackers must be unhappy. Why? They obviously don't have something they want.

[Boo]

yawn

[WaiWai]

(I don't see too many people "attacking", just making observations on & attempting to analyse an aspect of life as a foreigner in Thailand that touches us all in some way.)

In looking up "evolutionary psychology" I came across an article applying such an analysis to Thailand. It claims :

Sexual compatibility was never spontaneously mentioned as a characteristic of the ideal spouse, and when informants were directly asked, their opinions about the importance of sex within marriage were varied. Some informants felt sex was a crucial feature of a marital relationship, but many others considered it only of secondary importance. As a male middle class focus group participant in Bangkok said: "Marriage and sex life go together. It's natural but sex life is not the top priority . . . It's like adding spice to the meal." When women discussed marital sex, it was almost always from the perspective of the husband. For example, when discussing the importance of sex in marriage in a group of middle class Bangkok women, one participant said "As I listen to the others, and from my own experiences, sometimes it's quite important for a family, because some men need it and if his wife can't give him, he then must go out and seek it."

Sexual compatibility was not singled out as a crucial characteristic for a long-term mate, although most informants acknowledged it was of some importance for the marriage. The relegation of sex to a place of only modest importance for a marital union among Thais may seem strange to observers from current Western cultures, where it is commonly assumed to be paramount. However, cross culturally and through evolutionary time, first-marriage arrangements have typically been made by others on other grounds. Thus, even though in modern Thai society arranged marriages are rare and individuals are relatively free to choose their mate, it is not surprising that the sexual relationship between husband and wife is subordinate to other issues, especially to the socio-economic functions of marriage (Brummelhuis, 1993; Limanonda, 1995).

I can certainly see how easily this approach can be misapplied to meet some rather dubious ends. It's not a very long jump to the type of articles which advise that people in developed countries have lost touch with their primal needs (& whatever) & this can be amended by relocating their search for a mate to a country with "more traditional values" (and paying a small subscription fee, of course.)

P.S. Gotta love that word "mate". It's soooo animal !

Edited September 1, 2007 by WaiWai

[lannarebirth]

(I don't see too many people "attacking", just making observations on & attempting to analyse an aspect of life as a foreigner in Thailand that touches us all in some way.)

In looking up "evolutionary psychology" I came across an article applying such an analysis to Thailand. It claims :

Sexual compatibility was never spontaneously mentioned as a characteristic of the ideal spouse, and when informants were directly asked, their opinions about the importance of sex within marriage were varied. Some informants felt sex was a crucial feature of a marital relationship, but many others considered it only of secondary importance. As a male middle class focus group participant in Bangkok said: "Marriage and sex life go together. It's natural but sex life is not the top priority . . . It's like adding spice to the meal." When women discussed marital sex, it was almost always from the perspective of the husband. For example, when discussing the importance of sex in marriage in a group of middle class Bangkok women, one participant said "As I listen to the others, and from my own experiences, sometimes it's quite important for a family, because some men need it and if his wife can't give him, he then must go out and seek it."

Sexual compatibility was not singled out as a crucial characteristic for a long-term mate, although most informants acknowledged it was of some importance for the marriage. The relegation of sex to a place of only modest importance for a marital union among Thais may seem strange to observers from current Western cultures, where it is commonly assumed to be paramount. However, cross culturally and through evolutionary time, first-marriage arrangements have typically been made by others on other grounds. Thus, even though in modern Thai society arranged marriages are rare and individuals are relatively free to choose their mate, it is not surprising that the sexual relationship between husband and wife is subordinate to other issues, especially to the socio-economic functions of marriage (Brummelhuis, 1993; Limanonda, 1995).

I can certainly see how easily this approach can be misapplied to meet some rather dubious ends. It's not a very long jump to the type of articles which advise that people in developed countries have lost touch with their primal needs (& whatever) & this can be amended by relocating their search for a mate to a country with "more traditional values" (and paying a small subscription fee, of course.)

P.S. Gotta love that word "mate". It's soooo animal !

From a Buddhist perspective behavioral norms are largely taken from natural law. I think the young/old, Thai/Farang relationships might largely be put down to the interconnectedness of all things. There is such a thing as sexual misconduct however (from the Buddhist perspective) and what that comprises may be found here:

http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Buddhism/Five...ts/sexDZDL.html

[Austhaied]

yawn

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......

[bangkoksingapore]

hit the nail on the head

Not matter what you post in these young-old relationship threads, it's certainly true that all the posters here are interested in sex. Some posters are envious while others are smug about what they are getting. It's a keeping-up-with-the-Jones story only when it comes to sex some people can't 'compete' sexually as they are bound in some way. As one side enjoys one of the best things in nature, the other side looks on with jealousy and frustration tied down by society's view of morality. We will never be happy with what we have.

Why on earth would anyone spend so much time attacking people who are happy with their lives? The attackers must be unhappy. Why? They obviously don't have something they want.

[tracer5050]

how far can this go.

[Maigo6]

This far..

It was an OK thread Till it went into Buddhism, then there are just a few people quoting the whole frigging set of posts, to make another comment.

There is a Buddhist forum on this site........................

General Topics threads are for fighting and bickering amongst ourselves, not to become all enlightened.

Edited September 1, 2007 by Maigo6

[meemiathai]

fighting and bickering

[a2396]

This far..

It was an OK thread Till it went into Buddhism, then there are just a few people quoting the whole frigging set of posts, to make another comment.

There is a Buddhist forum on this site........................

General Topics threads are for fighting and bickering amongst ourselves, not to become all enlightened.

Yes, best not to mingle sex & religion (or whatever it's called here). They are not always compatible "bedfellows".

[qwertz]

This far..

It was an OK thread Till it went into Buddhism, then there are just a few people quoting the whole frigging set of posts, to make another comment.

There is a Buddhist forum on this site........................

General Topics threads are for fighting and bickering amongst ourselves, not to become all enlightened.

Seconded - <deleted> is happening to this forum?

[lannarebirth]

This far..

It was an OK thread Till it went into Buddhism, then there are just a few people quoting the whole frigging set of posts, to make another comment.

There is a Buddhist forum on this site........................

General Topics threads are for fighting and bickering amongst ourselves, not to become all enlightened.

Seconded - <deleted> is happening to this forum?

I have to agree, even though I responded to a post in that vein.

[mikethevigoman]

It is not GREAT when one can afford to do anyting he wants with anyone , And dont Give a Da-- what anybody think , Love it Love it Love it.\

I worked long and hard to be able to enjoy this life style , Now i can afford what i want . Eat you heart out

From John Burdett:

"How do you think the girls feel, when they walk down Sukhumvit with those farang men who grin like Cheshire cats? Do they feel like the found the cream too or merely a dirty job that pays better than factory work?"

In most cases, the 2nd one, however its an easy buck for an easy woman, so 2s happy !