18 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Fred is a smart guy. He just suffers from a White Knight complex, a bit like JosephBloggs, he's celebrating himself as the sole protector of women, the only one who understands them and wants to make the world a better place, if only women were more protected.

I still can't believe he quoted Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon mind you. That's out of order even if a woman does it, if a man does it that's rather schocking.

No, simply that I just respect women and don't like to see them abused, neglected or compromised. What's the opposite of that? White knights try to save others while losing themselves. I don't stay with bad women any longer than I need to, and only because of children have I ever stayed long. I never had any real trouble with women besides a couple, and those I had children with, so I had to do what was right for them, which i did. You can't fix others. they are either on the same page as you or not. if not you leave.

I have shown what I know about certain topics here and use facts and personal experience instead of opinions. I do agree with what some say, like this woman, as she says the same things many others do. i don't look at what a person looks like but what they know.

That some here disagree with what i write doesn't make them right, as they are using their own opinions and are not posting facts or evidence to the contrary here on this particular subject. No one.s shown where this woman was wrong.

Edited Saturday at 10:29 AM5 days by fredwiggy

10 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

When people write, they aren't demanding anything as anyone can refrain from reading, and also form their own opinions if they do in fact read, and comprehend it. It's an all encompassing narrative, explaining how male dominance figures into prostitution. This isn't about choices but what happens with those choices made.

There are many reasons people enter the trade but this topic is again what happens to the women and why males are dominating over women in it. Easy to understand if the whole piece is read.

Prejudice towards the writer because she isn't attractive, thinking this means she doesn't know the truth. reading it shows she does, as it again mirrors what many others have also written for years. Does a person have to be attractive to be knowledgeable on a subject?

This also isn't about falling in love with a hooker without knowing she is one, which would be kinda hard unless the man was very blind. Also not about naive men and what certain women are capable of doing, as most adults know full well the evil that is a woman at times.

Instead of reading the whole article, some have already made up their minds what it says, along with what I said. I posted it only for information for anyone willing to read it. The comments I've received have shown that some haven't read the post, as it's gone from what she said into what they think my thoughts are on it, even though I've explained myself a few times, to a couple that are obviously troll baiting replies, coming from the usual suspect.

I'm on the outside here, only going with normal women but respecting all besides those who do use and hurt men. I'm not involved in the trade so I would be on the side of prostitution or the providers.of it.. I'm only against those who use women for their own gains, as all real men shouldn't be. No one can explain that away otherwise.

Fred, understanding an article does not mean agreeing with its framework.

You call it all encompassing, but then explain yourself that it is specifically about prostitution through male dominance and what happens to women. That is exactly why I called it one sided.

And saying anyone who disagrees has not read or comprehended it does not answer the criticism.

My example about naive men was not what the article is about, agreed. That was exactly the point. There are parts of this whole picture the article does not deal with.

4 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

No, simply that I just respect women and don't like to see them abused, neglected or compromised. What's the opposite of that? White knights try to save others while losing themselves. I don't stay with bad women any longer than I need to, and only because of children have I ever stayed long. I never had any real trouble with women besides a couple, and those I had children with, so I had to do what was right for them, which i did. You can't fix others. they are either on the same page as you or not. if not you leave.

One question, Fred. Is demanding that women wear a burka respect for the women themselves?

12 minutes ago, Hummin said:

I do not know what is worse, being absolute one way or absolute the other. You tell me, Cam?

I would rather have some empathy with the girls than none at all, but empathy does not mean I have to see every woman as a victim or every man as an exploiter.

Being a feminist is clearly worse if you're a man. You'll suffer more than you already have to suffer. It's a deluded belief. This notion that women are victims, not the exploiters they are. Men are exploiters too, we all exploit each other. But feminism lets them get away with too much, that's why we need to fight it tooth and nail wherever we encounter it, even if it is one of our own espousing it. Indeed, without support from men feminism would have remained the fringe movement it was always meant to be, like the Moonies. I don't blame the women, I blame the men who made feminism possible. It's a man made problem, and the full force has yet to hit Thailand. Like all poison from the West, it's unstoppable.

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Fred, understanding an article does not mean agreeing with its framework.

You call it all encompassing, but then explain yourself that it is specifically about prostitution through male dominance and what happens to women. That is exactly why I called it one sided.

And saying anyone who disagrees has not read or comprehended it does not answer the criticism.

My example about naive men was not what the article is about, agreed. That was exactly the point. There are parts of this whole picture the article does not deal with.

Yes, that's what this article is about. Not other types of relationships but what happens within the prostitute trade and what are men's agendas within it. I haven't seen anyone disputing what she wrote with any evidence to the contrary. Just that it's "wrong". I'm wondering how many who have commented haven't read it.

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

No, simply that I just respect women and don't like to see them abused, neglected or compromised.

Maybe it's the exact opposite.

Maybe you feel threatened by these women.

Because they are actually quite empowered.

They make decent to good to great money (some of them).

They don't need to rely on any one man, who often may neglect them anyway or become abusive.

There's probably many women who married only for money and not that content in the marriage and trapped there because they don't want to give up the golden goose. They also need to be "saved", yet people are so brainwashed that all marriages are "normal and healthy" that they don't see the shadow side to it.

Edited Saturday at 10:35 AM5 days by save the frogs

1 hour ago, Alpha84 said:

Gawd, you can’t make this up: 4-5 old guys going at each other's necks incessantly for hours, writing page upon page of long dissertations about the morality and dark sides of prostitution.

& they’re no doubt the top 4 - 5 members on the forum that frequent hookers more than anyone else proclaiming their pseudo white knight inverse guilt ridden rationalizations and justifications. It’s always those who talk too much about what they are or are not, are opposite of what they claim, every time plain and simple.

This whole notion of "male dominance" is a total joke. There is no such thing. It's the exact opposite, there's female dominance. Check how much is spent on breast cancer, and how much is spent on prostate cancer. Women have whole swathes of criminal law written in their favour (see "battered woman syndrome"), get ready for Ms Clancy to be acquitted for killing 3 children on some psycho babble. Men don't get away with that, it is well documented that the criminal system is skewed in women's favour and treats them more leniently.

Most countries have laws that put discrimination in favour of women on the backs of corporate entities, boards of directors or public bodies. Men don't get this special treatment.

In the UK now looking at a woman will land you in jail, if she decides its threatening.

And people try to tell you there's "male dominance", you gotta laugh.

Just now, Cameroni said:

Being a feminist is clearly worse if you're a man. You'll suffer more than you already have to suffer. It's a deluded belief. This notion that women are victims, not the exploiters they are. Men are exploiters too, we all exploit each other. But feminism lets them get away with too much, that's why we need to fight it tooth and nail wherever we encounter it, even if it is one of our own espousing it. Indeed, without support from men feminism would have remained the fringe movement it was always meant to be, like the Moonies. I don't blame the women, I blame the men who made feminism possible. It's a man made problem, and the full force has yet to hit Thailand. Like all poison from the West, it's unstoppable.

Why would there be a fight at all? If you don't like someone, you leave, then find another more attuned to your world. Very simple.

Being a feminist doesn't mean anyone has to suffer. Being on the side of women actually has you see things more from their perspective, and learning all you can about women makes it easier to understand what makes them tick, and again, has you not staying any longer than you need to with the wrong ones.

It's especially much easier when no children are involved. They go off, you're gone. if you're the problem and need to dominate women, you'll end up all alone someday wondering why. You either see women as equals or you don't. You either use them or you don't.

Women and men have been victims, and it's usually the good ones that are because the narcissistic ones don't care one way or another. They just use and keep using, and end up all alone. No need at all for feminist or misogynist thinking if you really want a good partner. If you're a decent person you deserve another decent one. You just search until you find the right one, then never let them go.

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

This whole notion of "male dominance" is a total joke. There is no such thing. It's the exact opposite, there's female dominance. Check how much is spent on breast cancer, and how much is spent on prostate cancer. Women have whole swathes of criminal law written in their favour (see "battered woman syndrome"), get ready for Ms Clancy to be acquitted for killing 3 children on some psycho babble. Men don't get away with that, it is well documented that the criminal system is skewed in women's favour and treats them more leniently.

Most countries have laws that put discrimination in favour of women on the backs of corporate entities, boards of directors or public bodies. Men don't get this special treatment.

In the UK now looking at a woman will land you in jail, if she decides its threatening.

And people try to tell you there's "male dominance", you gotta laugh.

Allegedly western governments spend 5x more on women citizens than they spend on male citizens.

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

This whole notion of "male dominance" is a total joke. There is no such thing. It's the exact opposite, there's female dominance. Check how much is spent on breast cancer, and how much is spent on prostate cancer. Women have whole swathes of criminal law written in their favour (see "battered woman syndrome"), get ready for Ms Clancy to be acquitted for killing 3 children on some psycho babble. Men don't get away with that, it is well documented that the criminal system is skewed in women's favour and treats them more leniently.

Most countries have laws that put discrimination in favour of women on the backs of corporate entities, boards of directors or public bodies. Men don't get this special treatment.

In the UK now looking at a woman will land you in jail, if she decides its threatening.

And people try to tell you there's "male dominance", you gotta laugh.

Do you think human trafficking is female dominance? A woman can't use a man for sex, but the opposite is definite. Women were put down for so long they deserved a break, and they got it. If a man can't handle that he's weak, as there's nothing wrong with an independent woman who won't take crap. As far as how much money is spent on certain things health related male or female, that's not prejudice towards one gender or another but politics.

1. Patient Spending: Women Bear Higher Individual Costs

In terms of direct personal spending, women consistently pay more for healthcare than men throughout their lives.

• The Premium and Deductible Gap: An analysis by Deloitte found that working women in the U.S. spend an estimated $15 billion more annually out-of-pocket than men, even when excluding maternity care.

• Utilization Patterns: Women visit healthcare professionals more frequently, utilize more preventive services, and are prescribed more medications (especially for chronic and mental health conditions). Conversely, men are twice as likely to go more than two years without seeing a doctor.

2. Research Funding: A History of Systemic Gaps

The distribution of national research money (such as grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)) reflects historical political and legal mandates rather than individual bias:

• The Exclusionary Legacy: Politically, women of "childbearing potential" were explicitly banned by the FDA from participating in early-stage clinical drug trials from 1977 until 1993. This policy was originally created out of extreme caution to protect potential pregnancies, but it resulted in a multi-decade gap where drugs were optimized almost entirely for male biology.

• Disease Burden Disparities: A study published in the Journal of Women's Health found that when normalizing NIH disease funding to actual disease burden (how much a condition shortens or reduces quality of life), diseases that primarily afflict men are often overfunded relative to their burden, while diseases primarily afflicting women were under funded

Edited Saturday at 10:45 AM5 days by fredwiggy

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

A woman can't use a man for sex, but the opposite is definite.

Not true, the first Thai woman I lived with used to have sex with me when I was asleep at night.

12 minutes ago, novacova said:

& they’re no doubt the top 4 - 5 members on the forum that frequent hookers more than anyone else proclaiming their pseudo white knight inverse guilt ridden rationalizations and justifications. It’s always those who talk too much about what they are or are not, are opposite of what they claim, every time plain and simple.

I haven't been with a hooker since age 17. Another three are married, and one, even though he's a weirdo, is always against men who pay at all. Of course I only really know myself, but listening to what people write here without skimming, that they don't deter from their words, has you believe those others aren't after hookers.

13 minutes ago, novacova said:

& they’re no doubt the top 4 - 5 members on the forum that frequent hookers more than anyone else proclaiming their pseudo white knight inverse guilt ridden rationalizations and justifications. It’s always those who talk too much about what they are or are not, are opposite of what they claim, every time plain and simple.

Well, if I'm honest, I’ve just wrapped up a proper all-hands-on-deck session on Soi 6. Naturally, it was at Bob’s favourite ST bar. Three steamy ladyboys, two four-foot little people, and I even threw a conventional girl into the mix for good measure. All in, 10K baht. Absolute bargain.

I mean, what else are you supposed to do on a rainy Saturday? 😏

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

Not true, the first Thai woman I lived with used to have sex with me when I was asleep at night.

But you might have gotten off without knowing it, seeing you were asleep.

Why would there be a fight at all?

Because that is how the world works. There is always a fight. Every instinct in your body wants primacy, is fighting for dominance. So do women. So do men. The will to power is omnipresent.

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

If you don't like someone, you leave, then find another more attuned to your world. Very simple.

It's not so easy, because women are conditioned, like men. My girl is now watching "Orange is the new black". Lesbians fighting with black women, men are evil and stupid. This is what feminism sells. Men are the enemy. So, you leave one, and you find another who is brought up on the same cultural sludge. It is very difficult to find a woman that is worth having, and you can't insist she be "attuned" to your world. She has her own world and it's not going to be yours.

Being a feminist doesn't mean anyone has to suffer.

Yes, it does. Feminism has brought untold suffering for men. Why do you think we have unemployment problems? Clogged roads? Feminism caused this. Feminism brought untold suffering to Ms Dworkin too, of course, but its real target is men.

7 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Being on the side of women actually has you see things more from their perspective, and learning all you can about women makes it easier to understand what makes them tick, and again, has you not staying any longer than you need to with the wrong ones.

I'm all for empathy and understanding women. This is a good idea. However, to "be on the side of women" is completely unnecessary, they can take care of themselves, and men who supported feminism have made the world worse, not better. You should be on your own side, the side of men. Not the side of women. Nothing good comes of that.

9 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

You either see women as equals or you don't. You either use them or you don't.

Women are not "equals" of men, that makes them so beautiful and interesting. They're different. And we all use them, and boy do they use us.

1 minute ago, Alpha84 said:

Well, if I'm honest, I’ve just wrapped up a proper all-hands-on-deck session on Soi 6. Naturally, it was at Bob’s favourite ST bar. Three steamy ladyboys, two four-foot little people, and I even threw a conventional girl into the mix for good measure. All in, 10K baht. Absolute bargain.

I mean, what else are you supposed to do on a rainy Saturday? 😏

Safe sex by staying on this forum arguing?

1 minute ago, fredwiggy said:

But you might have gotten off without knowing it, seeing you were asleep.

Sometimes I woke up, and it was a total shock.

Another time she started punching me in the face, and I woke up and threw her across the room before I realised what was happening.

8 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Do you think human trafficking is female dominance? A woman can't use a man for sex, but the opposite is definite. Women were put down for so long they deserved a break, and they got it. If a man can't handle that he's weak, as there's nothing wrong with an independent woman who won't take crap. As far as how much money is spent on certain things health related male or female, that's not prejudice towards one gender or another but politics.

A national sample study published via the National Institutes of Health (NIH) found that 10.4% of Thai female sex workers entered the industry through trafficking channels involving force, deception, or being underage (under 18) at initiation.

Note that "being underage" makes them automatically "human trafficking victims", as does "deception". The real percentage of Thai sex workers that were human trafficked is probably half, 5%.

The fact this happens shows that not all women are in a position of power, however, if you want to talk about "dominance" the dominant sex in almost all Western societies now is the female, not the male. Even in higher education there's more women, girls get higher salaries now.

Sure, there was a time, long, long ago, when men were dominant, and women were oppressed, like they are in Afghanistan now, but those days are gone by and large. The opposite is the case now. Maybe some time ago feminism could be justified, now that is not the case. No man should be quoting Dworkin or MacKinnon.

Just now, Cameroni said:

Because that is how the world works. There is always a fight. Every instinct in your body wants primacy, is fighting for dominance. So do women. So do men. The will to power is omnipresent.

It's not so easy, because women are conditioned, like men. My girl is now watching "Orange is the new black". Lesbians fighting with black women, men are evil and stupid. This is what feminism sells. Men are the enemy. So, you leave one, and you find another who is brought up on the same cultural sludge. It is very difficult to find a woman that is worth having, and you can't insist she be "attuned" to your world. She has her own world and it's not going to be yours.

Yes, it does. Feminism has brought untold suffering for men. Why do you think we have unemployment problems? Clogged roads? Feminism caused this. Feminism brought untold suffering to Ms Dworkin too, of course, but its real target is men.

I'm all for empathy and understanding women. This is a good idea. However, to "be on the side of women" is completely unnecessary, they can take care of themselves, and men who supported feminism have made the world worse, not better. You should be on your own side, the side of men. Not the side of women. Nothing good comes of that.

Women are not "equals" of men, that makes them so beautiful and interesting. They're different. And we all use them, and boy do they use us.

Finding a partner that has your back and neither is there to intentionally hurt the other, is the hardest accomplishment we have. Some find it early, and some late, and some never do , especially if they give up. It should be about deserve. if you're good, you deserve good, but that's not how life works. You just keep looking, first at yourself and what you bring to the relationship, ,as you might not deserve a good partner anyway, especially if you're a user, abuser , cheat or neglector.

People allow feminism to hurt them. Plenty of people get along fine without having to think how they should or shouldn't be. That's where your childhood comes into play. Most if not all of life's problems come from narcissism, both male and female, and that again starts at home. Unemployment comes from people not wanting to work. Clogged roads comes from over population and bad infrastructur

A woman can only use a man for things. A man can use a woman for many things, especially sex. They are equals as far as humans. They need us and we need them, which is why there are two genders. Abuse of that is what makes problems.

27 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Being a feminist is clearly worse if you're a man. You'll suffer more than you already have to suffer. It's a deluded belief. This notion that women are victims, not the exploiters they are. Men are exploiters too, we all exploit each other. But feminism lets them get away with too much, that's why we need to fight it tooth and nail wherever we encounter it, even if it is one of our own espousing it. Indeed, without support from men feminism would have remained the fringe movement it was always meant to be, like the Moonies. I don't blame the women, I blame the men who made feminism possible. It's a man made problem, and the full force has yet to hit Thailand. Like all poison from the West, it's unstoppable.

Maybe the truth is somewhere in the middle. Men and women can both have advantages and disadvantages depending on the situation. But when some men see themselves as victims of women all the time, maybe the problem is not the women?

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Safe sex by staying on this forum arguing?

Safe sex is trading barbs with the Fred/Macaroni/Hummer/IsHeNowNow/Froggy circus show for 12 hours while Rocky lurks in the background taking notes and capturing screenshots? Nah, not for me, bro. Some might call that a deranged clusterfurk. I’d rather empty my tubes in real time on Soi 6 a few times with Bob, then come back and watch all you broads go at it some more. 😂

8 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

A woman can't use a man for sex, but the opposite is definite.

This has got to be one of the most idiotic naive statements ever posted here since the beginning of thaivisa. Women are just as horny and promiscuous, if not more than men, the only difference is that women have learned and figured out many different avenues of how to capitalize on their hornyness. The only victims are the likes of you who lack little wherewithal of human interactions, it’s clearly evident that you lack much real world experience in multiple social settings, a loner no doubt.

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

A national sample study published via the National Institutes of Health (NIH) found that 10.4% of Thai female sex workers entered the industry through trafficking channels involving force, deception, or being underage (under 18) at initiation.

Note that "being underage" makes them automatically "human trafficking victims", as does "deception". The real percentage of Thai sex workers that were human trafficked is probably half, 5%.

The fact this happens shows that not all women are in a position of power, however, if you want to talk about "dominance" the dominant sex in almost all Western societies now is the female, not the male. Even in higher education there's more women, girls get higher salaries now.

Sure, there was a time, long, long ago, when men were dominant, and women were oppressed, like they are in Afghanistan now, but those days are gone by and large. The opposite is the case now. Maybe some time ago feminism could be justified, now that is not the case. No man should be quoting Dworkin or MacKinnon.

If you are of the type that thinks men should dominate women, that topic isn't about you. You have clearly shown misogynist behavior here all along, so what she says of course will be dismissed, as well as using her looks as an excuse. Thinking people should be attractive to be smart is prejudiced thinking also. I look at what's written and see if it mirrors others, especially if it's done through studies and personal observation of the people involved, before I decide on what's right or wrong.

There shouldn't be any dominate gender. The man as the head of the household doesn't mean dominating over her.

2 minutes ago, novacova said:

This has got to be one of the most idiotic naive statements ever posted here since the beginning of thaivisa. Women are just as horny and promiscuous, if not more than men, the only difference is that women have learned and figured out many different avenues of how to capitalize on their hornyness. The only victims are the likes of you who lack little wherewithal of human interactions, it’s clearly evident that you lack much real world experience in multiple social settings, a loner no doubt.

I have to respectfully agree. Every time I go ST I always get a discount if I toss the tart's salad and give her minge a proper scrub with the old tongue.

25 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Allegedly western governments spend 5x more on women citizens than they spend on male citizens.

A total cost of £10.9 billion was reported for OP (outpatient) activity, of which £5.8 billion (53%) related to females and £4.2 billion (39%) related to males. Gender was unknown or unspecified for £900 million (8%) of reported cost.

The total cost and count of appointments are markedly higher for females in the age groups from 15 to 64 compared to males in the same age groups.

https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/acute-patient-level-activity-and-costing/2019-20/age-and-gender-copy

According to the charity, breast cancer - the most common female cancer, which has a similar death rate to prostate cancer - received more than double the annual research spend - £853 per breast cancer case diagnosed, compared to £417 for prostate cancer.

BBC News

Prostate cancer research 'lagging'

Despite being the most common male cancer, prostate cancer is 20th in the league table of cancer research funding, say experts.

So much for "male dominance".

Edited Saturday at 11:10 AM5 days by Cameroni

2 minutes ago, novacova said:

This has got to be one of the most idiotic naive statements ever posted here since the beginning of thaivisa. Women are just as horny and promiscuous, if not more than men, the only difference is that women have learned and figured out many different avenues of how to capitalize on their hornyness. The only victims are the likes of you who lack little wherewithal of human interactions, it’s clearly evident that you lack much real world experience in multiple social settings, a loner no doubt

That you think it's idiotic shows how little you do know. Of course women are promiscuous and horny. How does a woman use you if you also get off?

I lack much real world experience, yet I've likely been with many more normal women than you have, and if you're counting hookers, you would have me beat in that category, as I don't bother with them at all.. Married three times also, with 6 children I had custody of. I'm thinking my life experience is so far above yours it's laughable. Assume again, as that's your go to for quite awhile.

Just now, Cameroni said:

A total cost of £10.9 billion was reported for OP (outpatient) activity, of which £5.8 billion (53%) related to females and £4.2 billion (39%) related to males. Gender was unknown or unspecified for £900 million (8%) of reported cost.

The total cost and count of appointments are markedly higher for females in the age groups from 15 to 64 compared to males in the same age groups.

https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/acute-patient-level-activity-and-costing/2019-20/age-and-gender-copy

According to the charity, breast cancer - the most common female cancer, which has a similar death rate to prostate cancer - received more than double the annual research spend - £853 per breast cancer case diagnosed, compared to £417 for prostate cancer.

So much for "male dominance".

Don't forget pensions,

In the UK women had their pensions 5 years earlier and lived 15 years longer.

Not to mention all the welfare payments they get.

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Don't forget pensions,

In the UK women had their pensions 5 years earlier and lived 15 years longer.

Not to mention all the welfare payments they get.

Very true. Official independent research and Office for National Statistics (ONS) data confirm a clear structural trend: men contribute significantly more to total tax revenues, while women receive a greater share of public spending and state support.

https://oxfordtax.sbs.ox.ac.uk/article/should-women-pay-lower-taxes

According to historical personal income audits validated by organizations like Full Fact, women pay roughly 60% less total Income Tax than men.

For the current 2025/2026 tax year, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) estimates that 54.3% of income taxpayers are male and 45.7% are female. Crucially, men are heavily overrepresented in the higher (40%) and additional (45%) tax brackets, creating a substantial revenue skew.

Because women perform roughly 50% more unpaid care work than men, they rely more heavily on public services like childcare, social care, and social housing.

Welfare policies, child benefits, and Universal Credit disbursements disproportionately support women.

Basically, health, pensions, social services spending, it all goes disproportionately on women, even though men pay disproportionately more tax.

Yet we have Fred telling us about male dominance, and how the women are victims, quoting Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon.

Edited Saturday at 11:24 AM5 days by Cameroni

46 minutes ago, Hummin said:

That last example is probably the most common. Men know where they are, have often explained the same thing themselves many times, then suddenly when it happens to them they are the exception.

That is where denial kicks in. Knowing the game is one thing, seeing it clearly when you are emotionally involved is another. And once settled with a partner, some suddenly become more holy than the Pope, as I have tried to explain several times here.

Still not worse than those who worship the bar scene and think they are in a candy shop where they can taste all the sweets without consequences, whether that is moral decline or other scars on the mind or body.

To err is human. That's how we grow. If you think you are already perfect, you've stopped growing.