Monks Teach Maleness To Thai 'Ladyboys'

[CHANGOVER]

Sorry i thought we were talking about lady boys not homosexuality, which appears to be quite a different thing?

I might be a thick Mick but I can't get my head around it (pun intended)!

If a man wants to have his bits lopped off so he looks like a female to coerce men to screw him surely to Bhudda

the man must be queer as a coot to start with!

What is all this bo llocks about transexuals being different to gays. They surely must be gay to want to have sex with another man even though they look like a woman. Bejaysus I thought the raving queens in the catholic church/any church were mad!!

Agree with you sentiments, but most gays on this board are attracted to masculine men not lady boys / transsexuals. Apparently lady boys are used by heterosexual men in the main? Do a search loads of information on this in previous topics.

Yeah, but I think his point is about the sexual orientation of the ladyboys. They don't care who takes them up on a sexual offer be it a straight man or a gay one. I completely agree with the point. A man who wants to have sex with men is gay. How he dresses, etc. etc. as far as it goes aren't disqualifying factors in my mind either.

Thanks.

They start off being men who are GAY - dress like a woman, chop their nuts off so they look like more like a woman to get a MAN.

Man (with or without his tackle) wanting to shag a man = GAY!! Why can't people understand this - they are QUEER! ABNORMAL!

[bangkokrick]

Dum it would be nice if you sorted out your quotes as people cannot reply.

Nor is it cultural. Most nations deny homosexuality do they not? Your powers of expression are phenomenal.

[endure]

Sorry i thought we were talking about lady boys not homosexuality, which appears to be quite a different thing?

I might be a thick Mick but I can't get my head around it (pun intended)!

If a man wants to have his bits lopped off so he looks like a female to coerce men to screw him surely to Bhudda

the man must be queer as a coot to start with!

What is all this bo llocks about transexuals being different to gays. They surely must be gay to want to have sex with another man even though they look like a woman. Bejaysus I thought the raving queens in the catholic church/any church were mad!!

Agree with you sentiments, but most gays on this board are attracted to masculine men not lady boys / transsexuals.

Most gays on this board are attracted to men - not men who want to be women. What they get up to in bed is not relevant to the attraction that they feel. If a man goes to all the trouble of taking hormones, growing tits and possibly having their willie chopped off then s/he is not attractive to the majority of gay men because s/he's trying to be a woman.

This has been explained numerous times but there seems to be a subset of straight men who don't seem able to grasp that homosexuality resides in the brain, not in the crotch. Presumably when this subset of straights look at a woman all they see is a vagina? They don't have emotional feelings for women? They don't fall in love with them? They think that the sexual act defines sexual orientation. If I had sex with a woman I'd still be gay.

I promised myself I wouldn't get involve in this thread because tit's gone the way that threads like this always do. We've had page after page of 'expert' opinion on homosexuality and transsexuality from multiple posters all of whom, apart from Jing and I, appear to be straight.

I've said my bit although I shall continue to look on, with some amusement , as all the straight folks give us the benefit of their knowledge on gays and ladyboys.

[chutai]

Man (with or without his tackle) wanting to shag a man = GAY!! Why can't people understand this - they are QUEER! ABNORMAL!

Maybe those who disrespect what a person is are the more "queer" and "abnormal". Yours respectfully, a straight Buddhist.

[Jingthing]

!There is nothing "abnormal" about hot steamy MAN TO MAN sex!

Most lovers of ladyboys are straight identified, BTW, and there is a definite preference of LBs for straight identified men (though of course they aren't all the same).

MSM (men sex with men) is actually not the same thing as gay identified. Many males have MSM all over the world and don't identify as gay.

Edited July 16, 2011 by Jingthing

[SteeleJoe]

Maybe it's all as quaintly medieval as referring to a Lord Buddha. I don't know, but a more important question to me is why disabled people are excluded from ordination ? That includes people with such as web fingers, etc. Not many people know that - including Thai people.

Though there are going to be more palatable scriptural reasons available (in abhidhammapiṭaka) , I believe the arguably ugly truth may well be that the disability is viewed as evidence of not having been a good person in a previous life (as is often the case with many unfortunate people's lot in life -- they are sometimes, consciously or not -- seen as having earned their fate).

[DumFarang]

Agree with you sentiments, but most gays on this board are attracted to masculine men not lady boys / transsexuals. Apparently lady boys are used by heterosexual men in the main? Do a search loads of information on this in previous topics.

Yeah, but I think his point is about the sexual orientation of the ladyboys. They don't care who takes them up on a sexual offer be it a straight man or a gay one. I completely agree with the point. A man who wants to have sex with men is gay. How he dresses, etc. etc. as far as it goes aren't disqualifying factors in my mind either.

Of course they don't because the whole thing is poverty related, as mentioned in my earlier post. your previous post did not go over my head ( arrogance) but don't see the relevance to this topic. and i still detest the emotion crap. Homosexuality was rife in Roman times, but we are discussing lady boys are we not. Not homosexuals. There appears to be a difference. I have been to Korea many times and i don't agree with your statement.

Well I didn't visit Korea. I lived there. Koreans will deny that homosexuality exists in their country. The funny part is you'll see men who lean on each other and rest on each other and stuff like that, while wearing pink sweaters mind you, but it doesn't exist, so they claim.

Anyway, I can't believe you're so caught up on the word homosexuality. If being a ladybody had been fashionable in ancient Rome and Athens then that would be my example. As this wasn't the case it's not.

What they were or condoned is immaterial. My point is cultural not sexual, not sexual, not sexual, not sexual.

Of course you can reply. You just have to delete two quotes. And, yes, I am phenomenal.

[animatic]

davidwright' timestamp='1310798542' post='4562171'

So why do you think (to everyone) that there seems to be a unusual amount of trans gender people in Thailand? Ok I know all some will say not enough! But...have a guess even or give it some thought to why..

here are the reasons that I have been told.

1.Lean bhap..thats copy to be in the gang.

2. Thailand is more open in general towards being gay.

3. Parents would rather see their daughter with another girl as a teenager than with a boy who may get here pregnant.

4. Poisons in the air and food.

5.Born that way.

6. Too much soy milk and tophu in the diet as a teenager which has too many female hormones in..The N.H.S. in the UK warns not to give this to teenage boys!

7.Being taught by elders and piers thats its acceptable to be Bi sexual..

I would probely agree across the board with all this reasons which add up to the reason we seem and do see more cross gender people in Thailand.

So any other reason you all can think of?

As for no.1 I would say that its a fair to say that maybe children who have become a Katoey at a eary age need time to find out if its what they really want so maybe there could be a reason for councilling at a early age? I will get slated for that but as I said some do it to become one of the gang..Told to me and seen by Thais...

I might say that

it is because a tribal genetic predisposition to #5,

explains 1-4 and 6-7. The #2 answer would be a rational response to a great many alternate-sexuals in the society, rather than the other way round. Nature vs Nurture: Born that way and then having accesible role models to emulate in several dozen degrees.

I also think the ladyboys themselves have found their definition: The Third Sex.

More some polymorphous bisexuality, than specifically gay or straight.

A good angle on my post rather than the other persons post that just says there is only one reason people are gay, because they are born that way....And yes some people just like to have sex no matter where it comes from...Maybe why people experiment when young as they have a high sex drive..?? Animatic you make this forum more interesting..

It's been several years since I read Richard Totman's book The Third Sex, he had some fascinating things to say on this subject. He's an Oxford sociologist who came to Thailand on holiday and had the same thought as the rest of us, why are there so many transexuals in Thailand? So he returned for an extended stay in the north, befriended local transexuals and their families, and tried to find some answers.

He argues that throughout human history there have been homosexual and transexual minorities (the latter possessing a mental gender that differs from the physical, which is not the same thing as same sex attraction). This was an accepted fact of life, and in fact transexuals often played a shamanistic role, perceived as 'special' and thus closer to the spirit world. With the advent of monotheistic religion, however, both groups were stigmatized and socially suppressed (although their continued presence was perhaps expressed in subliminal ways, such as the long tradition of crossdressing in performance art).

But more open transexuality survived (at least until relatively recent times) in pockets where the local culture was free from monotheism and/or practiced a very accepting form of religion, including Thailand, India, the south Pacific, Siberia and native America. He notes that in Thailand the transexuals were traditionally associated with the temples, living in communities alongside them, performing at temple fairs, suggesting a link to Thailand's animistic, shamanistic, pre-Buddhist past. But after WWII Thai society began changing enormously and first local cabarets, then the American GI influx, and finally mass tourism lured many transexuals into the booming entertainment and sex industries (while at the same time creating an enormous economic incentive for more individuals to buck family and social pressures and pursue their transexual identity).

Totman also argues that there is growing evidence that transexuality, like homosexuality, has a genetic basis (even if not always), reinforcing the argument that such minorities have existed throughout human history. He says that Thailand's transexuals are taller on average than the average Thai male (which is certainly my observation!), and that a statistically significant number are left-handed. This suggests that one of the genes contributing to the expression of transexuality shares a chromosome with important genes for height and 'handedness'. He also explains how genetics may account for the relative scarcity of female to male transexuals (too complicated to remember). He also expressed surprise at the relative lack of scientific research on this subject, all you budding geneticists out there.....

Anyway, that's what my not entirely reliable memory can retrieve!

Though I haven't read all of Totman's book I have browsed it.

I essentially came to similar conclusions from my observations using Anthropology, Psycho-biology and and Genetics study, and having worked periodically on several continents in artistic circles with most all gender variations represented, as touch points.

The dichotomy of homosexuality versus transsexuality is that if the male body has a 'female wired brain' that wants to have sex with men, then that is not homosexual. The brain is acting properly irrespective of the attached genitals visible structures.

And the men that wants sex with them, but NOT with masculine males, have some form of borderline bisexuality, in that they need representation of both female styling and attitude to be comfortable with male genitalia. Or as noted above, just may be so highly sexed as to not particularly differentiate, as long as they get some.

[chutai]

Maybe it's all as quaintly medieval as referring to a Lord Buddha. I don't know, but a more important question to me is why disabled people are excluded from ordination ? That includes people with such as web fingers, etc. Not many people know that - including Thai people.

Though there are going to be more palatable scriptural reasons available (in abhidhammapiṭaka) , I believe the arguably ugly truth may well be that the disability is viewed as evidence of not having been a good person in a previous life (as is often the case with many unfortunate people's lot in life -- they are sometimes, consciously or not -- seen as having earned their fate).

There's not actually. Those rules were laid down by the 1st Patriarch. Having researched the subject, the only possible reason is that supposedly, disabled people "don't reflect the purity of the Buddha's body". Yet, if Buddhism is anything it's based upon compassion (in both the secular and spiritual meaning). NB These rules only govern ordination into the Thai monastic tradition and doesn't apply to other Theravadan traditions ,e.g. as in Burma.And of course not Mahayana.

Edited July 16, 2011 by chutai

[anterian]

the flipping of one's gender seems to be epidemic in Thailand unlike any other country I have ever heard of. This is not only boys acting like girls, but girls acting and looking much like men. The "problem" will never be "solved" as long as the priority of convenience outweighs the consequence. The over consumption of Phthalates in the food chain from plastic bottles that sit in the sun and putting oily and hot food in plastic bags continues. A well known fact that Phthalates are carcinogenic and cause chromosome damage is well documented is a clear factor in gender disorders. The over use of estrogen mimicking pesticides is also well documented in causing the feminine qualities of a species to take dominance ie. hermaphroditic frogs and fish. In the case of hormones, a small amount has the same effect as a lot but in this country more is always better. More chemicals, more antibiotics, more volume, more MSG, the more "modern" the better. You can't change something that is by telling it it is not, ludicrous.

A good scientific precis of the most probable cause of so many ladyboys in Thailand, and incidentally the Philippines and Brazil. I would add that phthalates are used as plasticisers for PVC, hence the rigid plastic uPVC is not a risk, it is the flexible plastic found in most food wrappings which is the problem. Whilst phthallates will leach even into water, they leach more readily into acidified water such as carbonated drinks, the practice of small shops pouring coke etc into plastic bags, is a common practice in the three countries named.

Meat animals, particularly chickens, are regularly fed oestrogen in order to promote rapid growth, this then enters the food chain.

The end result of all this is that girls mature faster, breast development is precocious, boys become feminised and male sperm count falls.

Where I disagree with the quoted comment is in the incidence and correlation with female to male transition, lesbians are small in numbers compared to layboys, even then the majority are bi-sexual in orientation.

I agree this could well be an additional modern environmental factor.

On the other hand in the, images, literature and general history of Thailand Katoeys have been represented far more than most other cultures. And the generalized acceptance is much more wide spread for this to be a recent cultural adoption. This is why I suspect there is a specific transmittable genetic marker for this in Thai genetic culture. Of course adding 'Phthalates in the food chain', could increase this even more.

evidence for a genetic component to homosexuality is still being debated, unfortunately it is an area which causes heated arguments, but this is a reasonable summary of the present state of play

http://www.physorg.com/news84720662.html other factors can be at the chromosome level.

Additionally where homosexuality is culturally acceptable more homosexually may be overtly noticeable.

Eunuch and homosexuals are part of the cultural heritage of India and China, and therefore Siam. As they were in ancient Greece the Levant and Egypt .

[DumFarang]

!There is nothing "abnormal" about hot steamy MAN TO MAN sex!

Most lovers of ladyboys are straight identified, BTW, and there is a definite preference of LBs for straight identified men (though of course they aren't all the same).

MSM (men sex with men) is actually not the same thing as gay identified. Many males have MSM all over the world and don't identify as gay.

You have to qualify as gay now? Is there a membership card?

[bangkokrick]

Yes in your own very small mind of course you are. You never begin a sentence with And Mr phenomenal.

[SteeleJoe]

Maybe it's all as quaintly medieval as referring to a Lord Buddha. I don't know, but a more important question to me is why disabled people are excluded from ordination ? That includes people with such as web fingers, etc. Not many people know that - including Thai people.

Though there are going to be more palatable scriptural reasons available (in abhidhammapiṭaka) , I believe the arguably ugly truth may well be that the disability is viewed as evidence of not having been a good person in a previous life (as is often the case with many unfortunate people's lot in life -- they are sometimes, consciously or not -- seen as having earned their fate).

There's not actually. Those rules were laid down by the 1st Patriarch. Having researched the subject, the only possible reason is that supposedly, disabled people "don't reflect the purity of the Buddha's body". Yet, if Buddhism is anything it's based upon compassion (in both the secular and spiritual meaning). NB These rules only govern ordination into the Thai monastic tradition and doesn't apply to other Theravadan traditions ,e.g. as in Burma.And of course not Mahayana.

Thanks very much. I really meant to say "perhaps there are going to be more palatable scriptural reasons available..." as clearly I didn't know and I'm glad to be set straight.

Edited July 16, 2011 by SteeleJoe

[stanley2550]

Surely you people can find something much better to write about than this crap. Its beginning to read like the Enquirer New Paper and the Star Magazines....

[endure]

!There is nothing "abnormal" about hot steamy MAN TO MAN sex!

Most lovers of ladyboys are straight identified, BTW, and there is a definite preference of LBs for straight identified men (though of course they aren't all the same).

MSM (men sex with men) is actually not the same thing as gay identified. Many males have MSM all over the world and don't identify as gay.

You have to qualify as gay now? Is there a membership card?

You've heard of 'practising homosexuals'? Well, we have to keep practising till we get it right

[chutai]

Maybe it's all as quaintly medieval as referring to a Lord Buddha. I don't know, but a more important question to me is why disabled people are excluded from ordination ? That includes people with such as web fingers, etc. Not many people know that - including Thai people.

Though there are going to be more palatable scriptural reasons available (in abhidhammapiṭaka) , I believe the arguably ugly truth may well be that the disability is viewed as evidence of not having been a good person in a previous life (as is often the case with many unfortunate people's lot in life -- they are sometimes, consciously or not -- seen as having earned their fate).

There's not actually. Those rules were laid down by the 1st Patriarch. Having researched the subject, the only possible reason is that supposedly, disabled people "don't reflect the purity of the Buddha's body". Yet, if Buddhism is anything it's based upon compassion (in both the secular and spiritual meaning). NB These rules only govern ordination into the Thai monastic tradition and doesn't apply to other Theravadan traditions ,e.g. as in Burma.And of course not Mahayana.

Thanks very much. I really meant to say "perhaps there are going to be more palatable scriptural reasons available..." as clearly I didn't know and I'm glad to be set straight.

:jap:

[DumFarang]

Yes in your own very small mind of course you are. You never begin a sentence with And Mr phenomenal.

You're on grammar now? Beginning a sentence with a conjunction requires a comma to follow it. Why are we on this now? This was an interesting debate about homosexuality, ladyboys, and their place in a culture.

[Jingthing]

You have to qualify as gay now? Is there a membership card?

No. But if there was, I would vote to blackball you.

Sorry you don't get this but here is an example for you as you clearly aren't really up on this subject.

In Mexican culture it is very common for "macho men" to top gay men (and get oral sex, etc.). Not talking about ladyboy trans types, men who look like men.

In their culture, not only do the straight tops not consider themselves gay, their society doesn't. These tops are having MSM but they are NOT gay!

Gay is not only the sex you have but how you think about yourself and your sexual orientation.

Are those two guys having homosexual sex? Well, yes they are, but only one of them is homosexual/gay.

Now if the macho in the example was EXCLUSIVELY having MSM and had access to females and never pursued them, well then I personally would say they are gay but are in denial. But that usually isn't the case in Mexican culture.

Edited July 16, 2011 by Jingthing

[SteeleJoe]

:jap:

By the way, I almost said at the end of my first reply to you "But I think you know that already" but I didn't want to imply you were being disingenuous. I was pretty sure you had a reason for the "question" and it mattered to you...

[DumFarang]

!There is nothing "abnormal" about hot steamy MAN TO MAN sex!

Most lovers of ladyboys are straight identified, BTW, and there is a definite preference of LBs for straight identified men (though of course they aren't all the same).

MSM (men sex with men) is actually not the same thing as gay identified. Many males have MSM all over the world and don't identify as gay.

You have to qualify as gay now? Is there a membership card?

You've heard of 'practising homosexuals'? Well, we have to keep practising till we get it right

[DumFarang]

You have to qualify as gay now? Is there a membership card?

No. But if there was, I would vote to blackball you.

Sorry you don't get this but here is an example for you as you clearly aren't really up on this subject.

In Mexican culture it is very common for "macho men" to top gay men (and get oral sex, etc.). Not talking about ladyboy trans types, men who look like men.

In their culture, not only do the straight tops not consider themselves gay, their society doesn't. These tops are having MSM but they are NOT gay!

Gay is not only the sex you have but how you think about yourself and your sexual orientation.

Are those two guys having homosexual sex? Well, yes they are, but only one of them is homosexual/gay.

Now if the macho in the example was EXCLUSIVELY having MSM and had access to females and never pursued them, well then I personally would say they are gay but are in denial. But that usually isn't the case in Mexican culture.

Okay, so there's a tendency towards bisexuality in Mexican culture. I didn't know that. Am I allowed to use that word or do I have to identify something with the scientific method?

[Jingthing]

You could call the macho guy bisexual if you're getting literal about the sex he has. But usually he wouldn't think of himself as bisexual. In macho culture dominating a "weaker" male is considered extremely masculine and men who wouldn't do that would be seen as more feminine than a man who does. I am not talking about all Mexicans but a large subculture of Mexicans, usually working class. Yes it's relevant because each culture has different attitudes about these things, so this is about much more than sex acts themselves.

[geriatrickid]

Surely you people can find something much better to write about than this crap. Its beginning to read like the Enquirer New Paper and the Star Magazines....

Maybe some are having uncomfortable withdrawals now that News of The World has ceased publishing.

[DumFarang]

You could call the macho guy bisexual if you're getting literal about the sex he has. But usually he wouldn't think of himself as bisexual. In macho culture dominating a "weaker" male is considered extremely masculine and men who wouldn't do that would be seen as more feminine than a man who does. I am not talking about all Mexicans but a large subculture of Mexicans, usually working class. Yes it's relevant because each culture has different attitudes about these things, so this is about much more than sex acts themselves.

It's interesting that you brought it up, but, for me, it seems to exist in a cultural vacuum akin to prison culture. It doesn't make the point for me that you claim. I believe the terms you have provided have already been provided. Heterosexuals, Homosexuals, Bisexuals, and Transsexuals all exist. That's uncontested.

[rubl]

I apologise for not reading all replies till now on this topic. Did anyone already refer to that upright American couple , the Bachmann's ?

[chutai]

:jap:

By the way, I almost said at the end of my first reply to you "But I think you know that already" but I didn't want to imply you were being disingenuous. I was pretty sure you had a reason for the "question" and it mattered to you...

It does. But my main reason for raising that topic was in the context of questioning , or criticising (an articulation of passion), many aspects of "provisional" Buddhist antiquities.

[yumidesign]

You can't change something that is by telling it it is not

good one

[animatic]

!There is nothing "abnormal" about hot steamy MAN TO MAN sex!

Most lovers of ladyboys are straight identified, BTW, and there is a definite preference of LBs for straight identified men (though of course they aren't all the same).

MSM (men sex with men) is actually not the same thing as gay identified. Many males have MSM all over the world and don't identify as gay.

You have to qualify as gay now? Is there a membership card?

You must take a test, it's a two hour oral exam...

Edited July 16, 2011 by animatic

[DumFarang]

!There is nothing "abnormal" about hot steamy MAN TO MAN sex!

Most lovers of ladyboys are straight identified, BTW, and there is a definite preference of LBs for straight identified men (though of course they aren't all the same).

MSM (men sex with men) is actually not the same thing as gay identified. Many males have MSM all over the world and don't identify as gay.

You have to qualify as gay now? Is there a membership card?

You must take a test, it's an two hour oral exam...

[animatic]

But if we told you the guys in this picture were just

two straight drinking buddies in a very noisy bar,

and ones telling him in his ear about the hot girl

back at the bar that asked about him,

you probably wouldn't go "yuck".

But because you believed they are gay you are repulsed.

A learned response from your upbringing no doubt,

but an intolerant one.

Of course having lived in France I have hugged lots of men friends

and never once was there a sexual component, it's just custom,

A good friend gets a hug, and no one is afraid of some implication being made.

Edited July 16, 2011 by sbk