The Third Sex

[Harcourt]

At least I thought I was straight until I saw those pics of Nong Poy!

[tigermonkey]

"Straight" , " gay ", "ladyboy " or many others -- why are we all so busy trying to hang tags on everyone -- the only person who truly deserves a tag is one who is in the morgue -- and then the tag hangs from your big toe !

As Laopo said in an earlier post -- there is not only black and white!

..and there is not only male and female, as Thai law prescribes. Masculinity and femininity are defined on a continuum, and not by absolutes at either extreme of the continuum . What is the absolute male ? -- a man who is like an oversexed gorilla? What is the absolute female ? Is she a 'drop dead ' gorgeous nynphomanic ?

Let's get some reality into our thinking here - people are all different and masculinity/femininity is part of the difference.

Of course, we can always say that all with the 46XY chromosome are malem and all others are female -- but then there is the man who is a Type 1 Androgen Insensitve --- in every way a female on the outside -- but no female organs internally and 'she' has the 46XY chromosome in every cell !?!

[WinnieTheKhwai]

^and it isn't just about situational options. There are straight men all over the world who indulge from time to time in sex with other men and don't identify as gay. They're not gay, and neither are the men who like sleeping with ladyboys. Gay is about the conscious identification as a man of one's primary sexual interest as being other MEN (and not pseudo-ladies, either).

..Real men ... and then you move to Asia so you can be with by and large fairly feminine looking boys? When I see Western gays around in Thailand they're usually with a super queenie looking femboy a third their age.. Were they just unlucky to not find a Real Man?

[twschw]

Why don't you define what a real man is Winnie since you are such an expert. I believe what IJWT was referring to were men who do not wish to be nor believe they are women. Your comments are just rude.

[manarak]

Winnie, that's because they are more into boys (or young men if you prefer) than into "real" men (mature)...

A lot of guys also prefer girls (young women).

I think another view of this discussion is desire.

We are beyond biological gender considerations here - biological gender is for reproducing, with contraception what's the point?

A biological male who is attracted by male characteristics can be considered gay.

A biological male who is attracted by female characteristics can be seen as straight.

So... I would be inclined to say that ladyboys can possibly be considered gay, while the same is not true for their partners.

But the gay community is not endorsing the ladyboy image, nor do ladyboys endorse gayness.

There are gays and there are ladyboys. period.

Another question for guys could be "do you like anal sex with your girlfriend?".

There is a religion-based phobia of that too, but still guys do it.

Then... guys being on the receiving side of anal sex with their girlfriend doing it with a strap on... does it make them gay?

Now imagine it is not a strap-on but the real thing...

Edited September 8, 2009 by manarak

[panpac]

Generally Western Christian upbringing is for heterosexual people and couples. Gays or whatever you want to call them, including Ladyboys are frowned upon. That does not make us uptight or bad people.

Brigante7

and

Why does it make us uptight and bad people, because you say so? There are 2 sex's men & woman accept it and move on. Ladyboy's are just men dressed as woman who are in denial that they are men and no matter what they do they will always be men.

Brigante7

Hmmm--I thought Christian teachings were for everyone, the world over. It's been a while, but I don't recall any regional application of Christian upbringing to any specific parts of the globe. And isn't it just a bit over-the-top to claim a religion that supposedly preaches tollerance and acceptance--even for "sinners"--presumes to condemn people for certain behaviors? Condemn the actions if necessary, but not the person. To shun the individual is decidedly unchristian. I won't say it makes one a bad person, but it definitely qualifies for uptight and very misguided in my book. (BTW, has the story of Mary Magdelene been forgotten, or is it just too inconvenient to recall?)

As for the "judgement" you pass that Ladyboys are just men dressed as women, and are in denial, and that "no matter what they do they will always be men" is just absurd, and my guess is that any first year psychology student would laugh at such a simplistic diagnosis. Even science (unbiased science, that is) is beginning to find evidence that things go a lot deeper than this. This is the problem with established religions in general--they are based on dogma set down in the middle ages and before, by men interpreting biblical teachings from the standpoint of relative ignorance. There is often no real relationship between how science has shown things to actually exist, and what things were thought to be when religious precepts were decided, and established religion therefore finds itself irrelevant and out-of-touch with reality. (I'm not saying religion and/or a spiritual life is bad, just that many established religious sects have little application to enlightened thought.)

[Rumfoord]

And briefly again. You don't become a homosexual because of outside factors. It's an internal thing and it's the same all over the world. How you're forced to behave as a gay person in Iran, Thailand or the USA may be different but those different circumstances don't make you gay.

As an aside whenever conversations on homosexuality crop up on here we're always treated to a barrage of opinion disguised as fact by straight posters who seem unable or unwilling to accept the fact that us gay folks might know at least as much, if not more, than they do about being gay.

as a "straight" poster and constructivist feminist i see it different:

Social construct

Further information: Queer theory

Because a homosexual orientation is complex and multi-dimensional, some academics and researchers, especially in Queer studies, have argued that it is a historical and social construction. In 1976 the historian Michel Foucault argued that homosexuality as an identity did not exist in the eighteenth century; that people instead spoke of "sodomy", which referred to sexual acts. Sodomy was a crime that was often ignored but sometimes punished severely (see sodomy law).

The term homosexual is often used in European and American cultures to encompass a person’s entire social identity, which includes self and personality. In Western cultures some people speak meaningfully of gay, lesbian, and bisexual identities and communities. In other cultures, homosexuality and heterosexual labels don’t emphasize an entire social identity or indicate community affiliation based on sexual orientation.[37] Some scholars, such as David Green, state that homosexuality is a modern Western social construct, and as such cannot be used in the context of non-Western male-male sexuality, nor in the pre-modern West.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual#Social_construct

Just a phase

Queer, gay, homosexual ... in the long view, they are all just temporary identities. One day, we won't need them at all.

Like every other expression of human culture, homosexual and heterosexual identities are historically transient. They haven't always existed, and they won't last forever. Indeed, the weakening, blurring and eventual dissolution of the labels queer and straight will be final proof of the demise of homophobia.

Peter Tatchell in The Guardian

[dominique355]

"The ladyboy cabarets of Thailand are a leading tourist attraction but the glamorous and attractive men, who are now women, are a modern expression of an archaic attraction. The kathoey, the Thai term for ladyboys, have long been part of the cultural landscape of Thailand. Many communities acccept a "third sex", from Thailand and Samoa to American Indians and the Philippines. Only in the West has savage repression occurred. If the existence of a "third sex" is a universal property, is Western society so repressed by its cultural heritage that the Thais represent a norm in nature? Why are there so many kathoey in Thailand? Why are there so few in the Western world?"

Richard Totman

Generally Western Christian upbringing is for heterosexual people and couples. Gays or whatever you want to call them, including Ladyboys are frowned upon. That does not make us uptight or bad people.

Not so many years ago Buggery was treated with harsh penalties in the west and in the Royal Navy you could be flogged and hung for such acts.

Maybe we are more enlightened these days, that is a matter of opinion.

Did you guys read Bangkok Post of September 8, 2009? It's obviously not a privilege of the West or Christianity to oppress TS. Muslim are also god at that, such as apparently the Malaysians.

[SongtaiJ]

Why so many? hummmm to me, as the Thai, the children are very close to their mother and see her as the model.. and you know, many fathers here hit his wife and do not give enough attention to the children, not being depenable enough.. so I think some boys would prefer to be lady than being guy like his dad.

Just my opinion. Though, Don't you think Thai Katoey are pretty? even more than Farang Katoey. LOL

[Ijustwannateach]

^and it isn't just about situational options. There are straight men all over the world who indulge from time to time in sex with other men and don't identify as gay. They're not gay, and neither are the men who like sleeping with ladyboys. Gay is about the conscious identification as a man of one's primary sexual interest as being other MEN (and not pseudo-ladies, either).

..Real men ... and then you move to Asia so you can be with by and large fairly feminine looking boys? When I see Western gays around in Thailand they're usually with a super queenie looking femboy a third their age.. Were they just unlucky to not find a Real Man?

I don't believe you know me or anything about why I moved to Asia, nor will we be discussing that on this thread- and your opinion of their looks says more about you than it does about them or me. Perhaps your impression of Western gays only comes from the "obvious" ones- i.e., the ones you think you can definitely pick out as gay. That doesn't make them the norm or the majority. And "real" men is your obsession here, not mine, so once again it says much more about you than anything about me. Ahhh, projection.

[endure]

Perhaps your impression of Western gays only comes from the "obvious" ones- i.e., the ones you think you can definitely pick out as gay.

This is a major problem when talking to straight folks about gay things. They make assumptions about all of us based on people who fit their stereotypes.

[Ijustwannateach]

To be fair....I think LaoPo, Rumfoord, myself, et al are straight....but we have not tried to tell gay folk about gayness, but to show straight folk that not all other straight folk have the same phobias, misinformation, or ignorance, as many of them assume.

You're right- and you guys definitely aren't the ones that I (and I would assume Endure also) were talking about!!!

[Ijustwannateach]

Perhaps your impression of Western gays only comes from the "obvious" ones- i.e., the ones you think you can definitely pick out as gay.

This is a major problem when talking to straight folks about gay things. They make assumptions about all of us based on people who fit their stereotypes.

And also, most probably, their own tastes in men!!!

[raro]

At least I thought I was straight until I saw those pics of Nong Poy!

no worries...if you liked the pics you are still straight!

[Harcourt]

At least I thought I was straight until I saw those pics of Nong Poy!

no worries...if you liked the pics you are still straight!

Yeah, I know....it was just dramatic effect sort of comment and designed more to point out that I think Nong Poy is sexy.

[endure]

And briefly again. You don't become a homosexual because of outside factors. It's an internal thing and it's the same all over the world. How you're forced to behave as a gay person in Iran, Thailand or the USA may be different but those different circumstances don't make you gay.

As an aside whenever conversations on homosexuality crop up on here we're always treated to a barrage of opinion disguised as fact by straight posters who seem unable or unwilling to accept the fact that us gay folks might know at least as much, if not more, than they do about being gay.

as a "straight" poster and constructivist feminist i see it different:

Social construct

Further information: Queer theory

Because a homosexual orientation is complex and multi-dimensional, some academics and researchers, especially in Queer studies, have argued that it is a historical and social construction. In 1976 the historian Michel Foucault argued that homosexuality as an identity did not exist in the eighteenth century; that people instead spoke of "sodomy", which referred to sexual acts. Sodomy was a crime that was often ignored but sometimes punished severely (see sodomy law).

The term homosexual is often used in European and American cultures to encompass a person’s entire social identity, which includes self and personality. In Western cultures some people speak meaningfully of gay, lesbian, and bisexual identities and communities. In other cultures, homosexuality and heterosexual labels don’t emphasize an entire social identity or indicate community affiliation based on sexual orientation.[37] Some scholars, such as David Green, state that homosexuality is a modern Western social construct, and as such cannot be used in the context of non-Western male-male sexuality, nor in the pre-modern West.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual#Social_construct

Just a phase

Queer, gay, homosexual ... in the long view, they are all just temporary identities. One day, we won't need them at all.

Like every other expression of human culture, homosexual and heterosexual identities are historically transient. They haven't always existed, and they won't last forever. Indeed, the weakening, blurring and eventual dissolution of the labels queer and straight will be final proof of the demise of homophobia.

Peter Tatchell in The Guardian

Well, I'm neither an academic nor a researcher and I'm certainly (fortunately) not Peter Tatchell. I'm just someone who's been queer for the past 50 years and I'm just posting my thoughts. If you want to read a book that's not been written by academics but by ordinary Thais get hold of a copy of 'Dear Uncle Go- male homosexuality in Thailand' by Peter Jackson - that's always assuming you haven't yet read it.

Edited September 8, 2009 by endure

[Ijustwannateach]

Regarding social construction of identity: of course! Both heterosexual and homosexual 'roles' are created by societies, which have mostly been dominated by various definitions of straight masculinity (at least in English-speaking countries) with other 'identities' being constructed as less powerful or 'inferior.'

Men have been having sex with men MUCH longer than anything like the idea of 'gay.' Furthermore, the greater (and more violent) oppression of gay people in English-speaking countries has led to a more radicalised identity for most gay people in such countries compared with here, for example. Even the definition of homosexuality itself in western culture is not older than the 18th century (I believe it started out as a medical 'definition').

The OP's question is finally relevant to the thread topic: one reason there are more ladyboys in Thailand is that the social construction of sexuality here is simply very different. This is true for straight men and women as well- the lack of homophobia, for instance.

[PeaceBlondie]

The word homosexual dates to the mid 19th century. Most descriptions and definitions of gay behavior were homophobic for a thousand years before that. Yet Greek and Roman cultures, the basis of Western civilization, saw gay and bisexual men as their great leaders. Alexander; most Roman emperors, et al. (especially Alex )

[LaoPo]

The word homosexual dates to the mid 19th century. Most descriptions and definitions of gay behavior were homophobic for a thousand years before that. Yet Greek and Roman cultures, the basis of Western civilization, saw gay and bisexual men as their great leaders. Alexander; most Roman emperors, et al. (especially Alex )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_topics_and_Islam this link has some very interesting links, at the bottom

It's a well known fact but also a silenced issue (not "existing") in northern African countries -in rural areas- that men have sex with young(er) boys before they marry a virgin, chosen by his parents; but they're supposed to be a "virgin" themselves when they enter marriage. Having sex with a boy isn't supposed to have any influence on his virginity...It's such a hypocrite society.

LaoPo

[WinnieTheKhwai]

^and it isn't just about situational options. There are straight men all over the world who indulge from time to time in sex with other men and don't identify as gay. They're not gay, and neither are the men who like sleeping with ladyboys. Gay is about the conscious identification as a man of one's primary sexual interest as being other MEN (and not pseudo-ladies, either).

..Real men ... and then you move to Asia so you can be with by and large fairly feminine looking boys? When I see Western gays around in Thailand they're usually with a super queenie looking femboy a third their age.. Were they just unlucky to not find a Real Man?

I don't believe you know me or anything about why I moved to Asia, nor will we be discussing that on this thread- and your opinion of their looks says more about you than it does about them or me.

Sorry, it's not about you; 'you' here should be taken as "gay people in general". You could have distilled that from me using the word 'they' later on (emphasis added). I agree though that I could have made that clearer. Indeed I know nothing about you beyond who you are on this forum.

> Perhaps your impression of Western gays only comes from the "obvious" ones- i.e., the

> ones you think you can definitely pick out as gay. That doesn't make them the norm or the majority.

Western gays partnered with a masculine looking Thai gay male stand out just the same; in my experience you see far less of those couples. It does not mean they don't exist.

> And "real" men is your obsession here, not mine, so once again it says much more about you than anything about me.

LOL! Sorry, but look at your own quote, above: "Gay is about the conscious identification as a man of one's primary sexual interest as being other MEN (and not pseudo-ladies, either).

I'm SO sorry for summarizing the phrase "MEN who aren't pseudo ladies" as 'Real Men'. I do apologize, let's revisit my statement updated to revision 1.1:

..Real men MEN who aren't pseudo ladies? ... and then gay Westerners move to Asia so you they can be with by and large fairly feminine looking boys? When I see Western gays around in Thailand they're usually with a super queenie looking femboy a third their age.. Were they just unlucky to not find a Real Man MAN who's not a pseudo-lady?

Not as readable, but one does aim to please.

[ NB: We're discussing the differences between ladyboys (as per the OP) and short-haired ladyboys / kathoey-phom-san who don't dress as women, and if there's overlap or similarities. We're firmly on topic. ]

Edited September 10, 2009 by WinnieTheKhwai

[PeaceBlondie]

I have lived with a gay Thai guy who's now 41, since 2003. I'm 67. Another gay Westerner isn't 40 and he's dating over-30's. I know many gay western men here who fit this pattern. To say nothing of the over-50 farang dating/marrying Thai girls under 30. Publicly these gay Thais are not noticeably queens. Katoeys act super-femme, more than females. This is about katoeys, yes?

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Katoeys act super-femme, more than females.

The good/confident ones don't.. I guess you now too fell into the trap of making generalizations about a group of people you don't know too much about.

I do know some very femme gays who are consciously trying to tone down their overly female behavior because their (gay) boyfriend doesn't care for overly queenie/lady behavior, but they're basically kathoeys-at-heart. (As in, they WOULD dress and act more female if they had a boyfriend who appreciated the female look (a.k.a someone straight-ish ) This may be a burden on a relationship.

Edited September 10, 2009 by WinnieTheKhwai

[PeaceBlondie]

Pardon me for generalizing. You may know far more about katoeys, as a straight western male, than I do. Yes, some gay Thais are katoeys at heart. Or queeny gay Thais. And the west has some very femme gay men (as shown in Birdcage, Queen of the Desert, etc.).

[MiG16]

alright

I think every one has had a fair bit to say on this thread - both on and off topic

I cant claim credit for it, but a number of MODs have had to keep a very close eye on the topic to try to keep personal attacks, insulting comments etc off the thread. Its about time this is brought to a halt

cheers, and thanks all for sharing your views.