"stop Hunting For 'foreign' Scapegoats"

[Maizefarmer]

My comment was made with sarcasm Maize. Anyone who has lived here for a decade or more and have met hundreds of couples from all walks of life, from all over the country/all over the world; and made unbiased observations of said couples know what "the stats" are.

Understood - i did read between the lines of what you wrote: my comments were more directed to those who challeneged what I had said, or rather more accurately put, didn't like what I had said.

CdnVic - let me get this right: are you asking me to go away and come back actual figures, as in x number of marriges studied, y number of married Thai girls spoken to - and then present figures or percentages of those who did not have bar/sex work backgrounds versus those who did prior to marrying an expat - is that you what you would like me to present (along with the citations with repsect to who done the research and when i.e. the publications)?

[cdnvic]

I'm saying that if you want to use statistics to support an arguement than produce them. If they don't exist you may as well be quoting a non-existant person and calling it a fact.

Mobi, I don't get wound up about anything except people making broad assumptions about others. I personally don't care who is or isn't married to someone from the sex industry but enough people would be really upset if such an insinuation were made to their face that I think it's important to not make such statements too glibly. If the actual statistics don't support the generalizations being spoken here, it's just reinforcing a negative and untrue stereotype. That's hardly fair to the subjects now is it?

[Mobi]

Mobi, I don't get wound up about anything except people making broad assumptions about others. I personally don't care who is or isn't married to someone from the sex industry but enough people would be really upset if such an insinuation were made to their face that I think it's important to not make such statements too glibly. If the actual statistics don't support the generalizations being spoken here, it's just reinforcing a negative and untrue stereotype. That's hardly fair to the subjects now is it?

I hear what you are saying cdnvic, but I honestly believe you are deluded if you think what has been propounded by Ekachai and Maize is an untrue stereotype. Surely Maize has provided enough background research on this matter to convince all but the 'unconvinceable'.

In fact it would be virtually a "kings's new clothes" situation if we weren't to comment on it, as it is highly relevant to the subject in hand. Or should we refrain from reasonable generalisations in case we offend the few farangs who are married to university professors of agriculture, who have moved into the rural communities to try their hand at 'doing it' instead of 'teaching it'?

And forgive me if I have missed it, but please show me where any insinuations have been made against an individual?

[Maizefarmer]

Short of producing the actualy figures, I have produced referance to creditable persons and experts who have researched the subject .... but if it pleases you cdnvic, I'll do that - I will go away and sometime over the next few weeks, when I have collated actual figures from creditable and respectable social science research sources, I will present them.

I think whats closer to the truth here is what I referred to in my earlier comments on the subject ..... many folk don't like to hear it because of the negative connatations that have come to be associated with the subject, and become uncomfortable and defensive when the subject is discussed ........... mmmmm(?).

[Heng]

If the actual statistics don't support the generalizations being spoken here, it's just reinforcing a negative and untrue stereotype.

No more negative than having ancestors who were slaves (ala a good % of African Americans). Not sure why there needs to be an effort to try to cover things up as opposed to accepting one's history and moving on.

And not necessarily untrue, just unproven by formal research.

[cdnvic]

many folk don't like to hear it because of the negative connatations that have come to be associated with the subject, and become uncomfortable and defensive when the subject is discussed ........... mmmmm(?).

...and maybe they're just sick of hearing people talk out of their ass without being able to back it up. Nobody can win with you. You claim that statistics show something, yet you have none, and if anyone calls you on it you claim they must be upset because you hit too close to home on something. The fact of the matter is that you made something up to back up your argument, and when you got called on it resorted to making insinuations.

Have you ever thought that your own experiences or those of your own small social circle might be giving you a false impression of the facts?

Bottom line is that if you can't back up your own quotes, what kind of credibility does the rest of your argument have?

[cdnvic]

If the actual statistics don't support the generalizations being spoken here, it's just reinforcing a negative and untrue stereotype.

No more negative than having ancestors who were slaves (ala a good % of African Americans). Not sure why there needs to be an effort to try to cover things up as opposed to accepting one's history and moving on.

And not necessarily untrue, just unproven by formal research.

He said "Statistics show...." to back up his argument. I just want him to back up his own words or admit he made it up.

[Heng]

...and maybe they're just sick of hearing people talk out of their ass without being able to back it up.

Surely there's no need to get uncivil about it.

[Heng]

If the actual statistics don't support the generalizations being spoken here, it's just reinforcing a negative and untrue stereotype.

No more negative than having ancestors who were slaves (ala a good % of African Americans). Not sure why there needs to be an effort to try to cover things up as opposed to accepting one's history and moving on.

And not necessarily untrue, just unproven by formal research.

He said "Statistics show...." to back up his argument. I just want him to back up his own words or admit he made it up.

Yeah, you're right on about that. I doubt there are any statistics "that show..."

Although, I wouldn't necessarily agree that meeting/knowing many people whose SO's come from a certain background automatically means that one has a limited social circle either though. Not sure why you'd assume that as well.

[cdnvic]

...and maybe they're just sick of hearing people talk out of their ass without being able to back it up.

Surely there's no need to get uncivil about it.

and insinuating that many members' wives are prostitutes is civil?

[Heng]

...and maybe they're just sick of hearing people talk out of their ass without being able to back it up.

Surely there's no need to get uncivil about it.

and insinuating that many members' wives are prostitutes is civil?

If they're not, they're not. If they are or were, well, then they were. I don't automatically go ballistic because there's a thread that says 89.6% of Thais cut in line (or queues) because I don't do that.

[Orac]

...and maybe they're just sick of hearing people talk out of their ass without being able to back it up.

Surely there's no need to get uncivil about it.

and insinuating that many members' wives are prostitutes is civil?

Erm - were thank you very much. If the implication is that they had to keep on working after marriage I would take issue with it.

[Heng]

That IMO is extremely rare. Although I have heard of cases where it happens (usually guys who send very little support and only live here for parts of the year).

[cdnvic]

...and maybe they're just sick of hearing people talk out of their ass without being able to back it up.

Surely there's no need to get uncivil about it.

and insinuating that many members' wives are prostitutes is civil?

If they're not, they're not. If they are or were, well, then they were. I don't automatically go ballistic because there's a thread that says 89.6% of Thais cut in line (or queues) because I don't do that.

As I said earlier, whether or not anyone's wife worked in the sex trade is not a concern for me, I actually don't care. What I do get upset about is people making insinuations about others, and making up things to back it up. The point is that for many, to insinuate that their wives were probably prostitutes is impolite at the least and quite likely very insulting. And making a glib comment that you have actual statistics to back it up when you don't just makes it worse because you have just said something potentially insulting to a significant number of people here and then lied to back it up.

I don't mind when facts are put before me that I don't like, but if you don't have the basic manners to avoid insulting people unnecessarily, at least be honest enough to back up your claims with real facts, not just something you made up to give your claims credibility.

[Mobi]

This is all something out of nothing.

The respected Thai journalist Ekachai made the original statement :

"Out of familial gratitude, many daughters of poor farmers entered the sex trade to support their families. Many are severely exploited. Many have died from work-related sicknesses. But some, too, found love and security through marrying foreigners. They set up families and started doing business, as all couples do. We should be happy for them, shouldn't we? Why should we harass them with this proxy land ownership fervour?"

She has written with delicacy and tact but hasn't shied away from the truth, and everyone, with an ounce of knowledge of they way things are in Thailand knows that what she has said is true, so I cannot see what there is to get so upset about , or in anything that Maize has subsequently written. (I too have read some of the research stuff that maize has quoted).

Whether it is 30%, 50%, or 80% or some other figure of women who were met by farangs whilst working in the sex trade, who the F. cares?

What a bruised ego cdnvic must have that it is so desperate to feed itself on such petty resentment and outrage.....

Let it go my friend, you will feel much better.

[dondraper]

I thought the farmers stealing the land were Chinese, not retired barbers from New Castle who drink their breakfast (not that there is anything wrong with that).

[Xangsamhua]

This is all something out of nothing.

I sort of agree. Sanitsuda Ekachai spoke about up-country girls working in the sex trade to help their families and finding love and security with a foreign husband. I didn't see anything insensitive in her remarks, but one poster did. Maizefarmer, in responding to that poster, referred to statistics regarding Thai-Farang marriages in general. And it escalated from there.

Maize farmer's assertions may well be right; he seems very knowledgeable. However, for a man married to a Thai woman with no history of working in the sex trade, the inference that the next Farang-Thai couple you meet will have started out in a sex worker-client relationship is a bit hurtful. Whether there are data to support this or not does not justify perpetuating the stereotype. Times change, there may be regional differences, differences related to occupation and industry, and so on. For example, many of my colleagues have Thai wives and girlfriends. I don't know the history of all these relationships, but the ones I know did not start out as sex worker and client.

It is a sensitive matter, not just an academic one. Whatever the origins of a cross-cultural marriage in Thailand, we should respect all couples who are trying to build and maintain a loving marriage. But we should be careful of stereotyping, too.

[abdulrahman]

As I said earlier, whether or not anyone's wife worked in the sex trade is not a concern for me, I actually don't care. What I do get upset about is people making insinuations about others, and making up things to back it up. The point is that for many, to insinuate that their wives were probably prostitutes is impolite at the least and quite likely very insulting. And making a glib comment that you have actual statistics to back it up when you don't just makes it worse because you have just said something potentially insulting to a significant number of people here and then lied to back it up.

I don't mind when facts are put before me that I don't like, but if you don't have the basic manners to avoid insulting people unnecessarily, at least be honest enough to back up your claims with real facts, not just something you made up to give your claims credibility.

OK.Let explain to Maizefarmer apologists:

statistics can be biased,may be corrupted,too,or are you so gullible to believe everything;in the paper or FoxTv for example.

To say that a significant% of women married to farang men,are,or were,prostitutes,without having the means to corroborate it,IS insulting.

My wife of many years is a Thai, BTW.I don't feel insulted,but,personally,don't like the kind of TV members that make similar,BS,claims.

[Maizefarmer]

I most certainly wasn't making it up - I quoted individuals who have well established professional reputations in social science and similar fields, and whose commentry and studies of the phenomana are accepted by their academic peers.

As for comments on Fox TV or in the newspaper - I certainly made no referance to anything any paper wrote up or said, and neither did any of my so-called "apologists" - so quite frankly I can't see why you have raised the subject in that context. That is exactly the kind of referance, as are glib off hand comments about so and so's wife been a prositute, that move the discussion from been a topic that can be discussed in a decent unoffensive manner, to been sordid, judgemental and all the other labels that you and others have attached to the subject [matter] - which detract from the parameters I made very clear in and earlier comment on the subject, to avoid just the sort of thing that is now happening, from happening.

As you have said, abdulrahman - you don't mind facts put before you that you don't like, so the issue here is not really that you could demonstrate any fault with any stat's that I will post up in due course (which will all be based on academic studies that have been carried out by very reputable and established researchers), it is, like others have said, that it is a label folk don't like been attached to them or their partner - and that is easy to understand. But what I can't understand about your reply is this: is it a "pop" at me for raising the issue, or is it going to be a "pop" at the academics and the accuracy of their research and studies - in due course?

I attach no label, I make no judgements - feelings, sensitivities and attitudes are for who ever wishes to make an issue out of them, if they wish - as distracting as they may be, I think most concurr that they don't however undermine any statistics supported against the background of accepted academic research.

Unfortunately, I was challeneged in the space of a few minutes, so I have had not had much time to quote in much more detail or more accurately, other than from whats on the study bookcase here at home - however, a more detailed reply is coming over the next few days. I the meantime, those who wish to vent their emotions, feelins, frustrations ect ect ..... fire away (just make it clear if it's me, or the subject matter that "upsets" one).

Time for bed............ I don't have to get up early.

Nite everyone.

[cdnvic]

What a bruised ego cdnvic must have that it is so desperate to feed itself on such petty resentment and outrage.....

My ego is fine. I just think that you should have your facts before making a serious claim about people, not claim to have them and when someone calls me on it suddenly backpedal, and make insinuations about others. I thought I had explained it simply enough but it still seems to have gone over your head and for that I apologize. Dumbing down isn't one of my better skills.

Edited August 15, 2009 by cdnvic

[endure]

Referring to Sanitusuda as he instead of she ....... sorry - big deal, I was typing away, eating a plate of food, filling in paperwork, had a compressor blerring away in my left ear, someone shouting to me every few minutes .... and I wrote he instead of she! Oh well - nice to know so many folk had read what I had written: I think she could do better - she has not said much about the core of the problem (which I commented on in an earlier thread which raised what she had written) and I think her comments on the subject miss out on some very important points.

But back to the subject that seems to have swamped out Sanitusuda original commentry:

Now you've got her gender right it's time to get to grips with her name - it's Sanitsuda

[mca]

You said "Statistics show....."

I'm still waiting for them.

All I know is 8 out of 10 cats prefer Whiskas.

[cdnvic]

You said "Statistics show....."

I'm still waiting for them.

All I know is 8 out of 10 cats prefer Whiskas.

That's just a stereotype.

[Mobi]

What a bruised ego cdnvic must have that it is so desperate to feed itself on such petty resentment and outrage.....

My ego is fine. I just think that you should have your facts before making a serious claim about people, not claim to have them and when someone calls me on it suddenly backpedal, and make insinuations about others. I thought I had explained it simply enough but it still seems to have gone over your head and for that I apologize. Dumbing down isn't one of my better skills.

This is complete and utter nonsense, and if you were to get off your high horse you would realise it.

Any fool can see you are paranoid about the reputation of the country you live in and are desperate to distance yourself from it.

"Dumbing down isn't one of my better skills."

If that is so, and if we are to believe your signature, why are you bothering to argue with me?

I live near Pattaya, and if anyone were to doubt that a majority of farangs who live in this town are not here for the cheap sex and/or are married or shacked up with prostitutes or ex-prostitutes they would be out of their minds.

Yet there are many farangs here who are either married to farang ladies and have families, and lead normal and happy lives without going near or indulging in the 'wares' of red light district.

There are many other farangs who are married to respectable Thai ladies who did not originate in bars, and who are settled in nice neighborhoods with their families.

But Pattaya is a sex city, and we all get tarred with the same brush. It is inevitable, and is the way of the world

So what?

Who cares?

You know who you are and what you are about in your life. What does it matter what anyone else thinks?

And good luck to those who are married to ex bar girls. May they both find happiness and contentment.

Thailand is the "Sex for sale" country that is known as such throughout the world.

Oh sorry, I must'n say that in case I upset a farang living in Thailand with his respectable Thai wife.

Anyone who lives here with a Thai lady may be assumed they have met that lady in a bar or brothel. It is the price you pay for living in Thailand.

And you still haven't told me where anyone stated that you are married to a prostitute.

You are offended, but no one has insulted you.

Very strange.

Look to your ego my friend, and calm down and enjoy life.

Those who are without resentment will surely find peace.

[cdnvic]

I live near Pattaya, and if anyone were to doubt that a majority of farangs who live in this town are not here for the cheap sex and/or are married or shacked up with prostitutes or ex-prostitutes they would be out of their minds.

Thank you. As I pointed out earlier, your own peers and surroundings can colour your version of the truth.

Anyone who lives here with a Thai lady may be assumed they have met that lady in a bar or brothel. It is the price you pay for living in Thailand.

But we don't have to accept the lowest common denominator. We can show a little intelligence and rise above silly generalizations.

And you still haven't told me where anyone stated that you are married to a prostitute.

Nobody insinuated my wife was a prostitute. I wouldn't settle that one in public. The argument was made that "statistics show most women married to foreigners came from the sex trade" and when that assumption was challenged the response was to insinuate that the statement hit too close to home. That's a cowardly way to try winning an argument because it's nothing more than covering up the fact that you made something up with a veiled insult against a person's family.

You are offended, but no one has insulted you.

I'm not offended actually, just getting a little frustrated at trying to explain something quite simple to you but being unable to put it in simple enough terms for you to get it. I see people make broad assumptions about people, regardless of the reason and I always equate that with ignorance an stupidity. When people claim to have facts to back up their arguments, yet cannot produce them when called upon I see it as either laziness or lies.

All I asked was for Maizefarmer to produce the "statistics" he claimed to have to back up his statement. Turns out he didn't have any.

If he had I'm sure it would have been an interesting read.

That's the main thrust of what I was saying. It's one thing to shoot your mouth off with out backup when talking sports, but when it has the potential to tar a lot of people in what they may perceive as a negative light, you need to be careful and make sure you can back up what you say.

/finished

[Heng]

Anyone who lives here with a Thai lady may be assumed they have met that lady in a bar or brothel.

IMO relatively easy to sort out for locals...mannerisms, speech, fashion sense, and the inevitably shaky history/story. Compounded if there are other family members around. There are plenty of both, but more of the former.

[way2muchcoffee]

Anyone who lives here with a Thai lady may be assumed they have met that lady in a bar or brothel.

IMO relatively easy to sort out for locals...mannerisms, speech, fashion sense, and the inevitably shaky history/story. Compounded if there are other family members around. There are plenty of both, but more of the former.

It all rather begs the question what is the point of sorting anything out in this regards? Does it make people feel superior to know they married a Chula grad? Why? Does it diminish the fact that there are plenty of good-hearted bargirls who could make very good partners and wives if given the chance? Does it diminish the fact that there are plenty of bad-hearted non-bargirls who would not make good wives, despite their elevated social class?

I fail to understand why people are so insecure that they cannot accept that it is a big world out there. People make the choices they make for whatever reasons they make them. People will live with whatever consequences result, both good and bad. There is so much comparison and defensiveness relating to this issue. It all stinks of hypocrisy, non-existent face, and primary school "my dad can beat up your dad" kind of thinking.

Edited August 16, 2009 by way2muchcoffee

[Dakhar]

all this debate about wives and sex industry: blah blah blah

As a man that met his wife in the states, while she was working on her MS degree, I can honestly state that she has never participated in the sex trade industry. Also as a man that probably has sex 5 times a year, I can not say that the fact that my wife never participated in the sex trade industry is a "positive." At least the girls in the industry are far more enlightened regarding the opposite sex & thier needs. It is just a guess, but I imagine those fellows that have married retired bar girls have sex far more than 5 times a year!

Besides, a lot of folks meet their spouses while "on the job." (and in some cases litterally)

Wishing every one the best,

Dakhar

[bonobo]

At the risk of keeping this thread way off topic, what is the difference on what job someone's spouse once had?  If they are happy and satisfied with their marriage, who cares?

I am currently single, so I can't speak from personal experience, but I have known truly happy couples where one member had worked in the sex trade and happy couples where neither person had worked in it.  And I have known truly unhappy couples coming from the same two demographics.  So from my small point of view, I wish these threads wouldn't devolve into the "my wife has an MBA from Chula and has never been in a bar" and the "all Thai women are hookers" posts.

[mrtoad]

At the risk of keeping this thread way off topic, what is the difference on what job someone's spouse once had?  If they are happy and satisfied with their marriage, who cares?

I am currently single, so I can't speak from personal experience, but I have known truly happy couples where one member had worked in the sex trade and happy couples where neither person had worked in it.  And I have known truly unhappy couples coming from the same two demographics.  So from my small point of view, I wish these threads wouldn't devolve into the "my wife has an MBA from Chula and has never been in a bar" and the "all Thai women are hookers" posts.

I wouldn't be TV without those posts In the end Bonobo we all know that everyone here has a wife with an MBA. Personally, I don't give a shit about who people are married to, the main thing is that they are happy.

I still feel that the original article by Ekachai, did have some subtle insinuations about Thai and farang relationships, which were not positive. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with people, as there is no need.