Are You A Real Knight?

[Glauka]

It is that kind of attitude that really makes me very sick. My father left my mother to raise me and six siblings on her own. As soon as I got a job I helped out all I could and continue to this day as do my brothers and sisters as they can. One of my sisters is having a hard time making a go of it and I have helped her out occasionally as well. It's called "LOVE", something maybe you don't have a clue about. I'm really suprised at the number of greedy farangs that think loving someone means you should never give them any money because that would be like trying to buy their love. Such thinking just proves that you have absolutely no idea how to love someone. Loving someone means doing for them whatever you can. Putting them above yourself. Whether it be money, time, encouragement, taking care of them, or whatever. I love my family dearly and gladly part with some of my money if they are in need, but of course I won't just give money if they are not truly in need or are not willing to work if they can, etc. I'm not being taken advantage of, but I'm certainly not stingy with my money. And if I was married and loved my wife, I would treat her family the same as my own.

I think your statement "I have NEVER expected a man to support me" says it all and is one of the big reasons why I never have and never will consider marrying a western woman. In the not too distant past, women were in general not financially independent and needed to depend on a man to live a decent life. Then along came industrialization and our modern economies and ideas about women working changed. With the coming of women's financial independence the need for a woman to find a knight in shining armour rapidly dissappeared. Many men need to be the knight in shining armour and save a damsel in distress, and luckily there are many damsels in distress in Thailand that need saving. As a woman, you may find such talk offensive, but that's they way many, if not most, of us men are, although modern western culture tries it's best to oppress such thoughts and teach men and women that they should be totally independent and keep as much of their money for themselves to enjoy.

For me, I'll enjoy spending my money on my family, and someday on my wife and her family should I get married. That's what makes me happy. For me, money can't buy happiness, but spending my money, time, or other resources on the ones I love does. As the saying goes, "It's better to give than to receive."

Well IMHO the way you talk about western woman shows that you are a fraud as a knight ...also shows your lack of sensitivity...

I am going to tell you something ...

My aunt and my uncle met when they were 17 years old...they have two daughters...my uncle used to work outside and he was in charge of support his family financially, my aunt stay at home and looked after the children...they were happy for 15 years...then they got married...

two years after married my uncle fall in love with someone elses and went away...of course he did not take my cousins with him...

even though he gave some money it wasn´t enough so my aunt had to find a job...it was not easy because she spend half of her life as a housewife and because she has not studies the jobs she found were not well paid. She has two different jobs outside her home but also she has to do the housekeeping and bring her daughters up...

So tell me brave knight what a damsel should do in this case? maybe find another knight? Let me tell you something there are not many knights out there who will be willing to lok after someone elses children? Will you?

You know what i find funny about your post is you ignorance about women matter...

I am a western woman, i am financially independent and I am not a poor woman who need to be saved by a man. But I consider myself a Damsel in need of a Knight...but I don´t want my Knights money...I want his caring...I want to know that he will be there when sometimes life is too much and everything you try goes wrong, I want him to hug me and say "don´t you worry i am here" when I feel sad , I want him to hold my hand when I am ill, I want him to make me laugh, I want him to surprise me, I want him to respect me, I want him to be honest with me, I want him to treat me tenderly when making love...

That is the knight I am looking for and as i mention before I am financially independent and I am a western woman who has not find his knigt yet...so well you can go to thailand and save all the poor(economically poor) thai damsels but do bear in mind that you could not save a western damsel because you overlooked too many things or you are not sensitive enough and why it is more important you are not a real knight and a gentleman because I real one will never talk about women in the way you did.

Glauka the Damsel

Edited January 5, 2006 by Glauka

[Simbo]

It is that kind of attitude that really makes me very sick. My father left my mother to raise me and six siblings on her own. As soon as I got a job I helped out all I could and continue to this day as do my brothers and sisters as they can. One of my sisters is having a hard time making a go of it and I have helped her out occasionally as well. It's called "LOVE", something maybe you don't have a clue about. I'm really suprised at the number of greedy farangs that think loving someone means you should never give them any money because that would be like trying to buy their love. Such thinking just proves that you have absolutely no idea how to love someone. Loving someone means doing for them whatever you can. Putting them above yourself. Whether it be money, time, encouragement, taking care of them, or whatever. I love my family dearly and gladly part with some of my money if they are in need, but of course I won't just give money if they are not truly in need or are not willing to work if they can, etc. I'm not being taken advantage of, but I'm certainly not stingy with my money. And if I was married and loved my wife, I would treat her family the same as my own.

I think your statement "I have NEVER expected a man to support me" says it all and is one of the big reasons why I never have and never will consider marrying a western woman. In the not too distant past, women were in general not financially independent and needed to depend on a man to live a decent life. Then along came industrialization and our modern economies and ideas about women working changed. With the coming of women's financial independence the need for a woman to find a knight in shining armour rapidly dissappeared. Many men need to be the knight in shining armour and save a damsel in distress, and luckily there are many damsels in distress in Thailand that need saving. As a woman, you may find such talk offensive, but that's they way many, if not most, of us men are, although modern western culture tries it's best to oppress such thoughts and teach men and women that they should be totally independent and keep as much of their money for themselves to enjoy.

For me, I'll enjoy spending my money on my family, and someday on my wife and her family should I get married. That's what makes me happy. For me, money can't buy happiness, but spending my money, time, or other resources on the ones I love does. As the saying goes, "It's better to give than to receive."

Well IMHO the way you talk about western woman shows that you are a fraud as a knight ...also shows your lack of sensitivity...

I am going to tell you something ...

My aunt and my uncle met when they were 17 years old...they have two daughters...my uncle used to work outside and he was in charge of support his family financially, my aunt stay at home and looked after the children...they were happy for 15 years...then they got married...

two years after married my uncle fall in love with someone elses and went away...of course he did not take my cousins with him...

even though he gave some money it wasn´t enough so my aunt had to find a job...it was not easy because she spend half of her life as a housewife and because she has not studies the jobs she found were not well paid. She has two different jobs outside her home but also she has to do the housekeeping and bring her daughters up...

So tell me brave knight what a damsel should do in this case? maybe find another knight? Let me tell you something there are not many knights out there who will be willing to lok after someone elses children? Will you?

You know what i find funny about your post is you ignorance about women matter...

I am a western woman, i am financially independent and I am not a poor woman who need to be saved by a man. But I consider myself a Damsel in need of a Knight...but I don´t want my Knights money...I want his caring...I want to know that he will be there when sometimes life is too much and everything you try goes wrong, I want him to hug me and say "don´t you worry i am here" when I feel sad , I want him to hold my hand when I am ill, I want him to make me laugh, I want him to surprise me, I want him to respect me, I want him to be honest with me, I want him to treat me tenderly when making love...

That is the knight I am looking for and as i mention before I am financially independent and I am a western woman who has not find his knigt yet...so well you can go to thailand and save all the poor(economically poor) thai damsels but do bear in mind that you could not save a western damsel because you overlooked too many things or you are not sensitive enough and why it is more important you are not a real knight and a gentleman because I real one will never talk about women in the way you did.

Glauka the Damsel

I'll bet that knocks him off his steed.

[gburns57au]

Where is my suit of armour ???

And my white Steed.....I am sure I left it in my garage....Help POLICE...!!!!!

[the_heart_thief]

Glauka -----------

You're cool! You got him!

Most foreigners think that the only thing "WE" all Asian women want from them is their money! The LoSErS!

[Boo]

confused, who are you replying to glauka?

[Glauka]

hi boo

I think his nick name isl bkk traveller...

he posted this in tired of supporting girlfriend family thread (or something like that)

the thread is closed so that´s why I start this one...

[Boo]

ok, just wanted a reference point.

Cheers

[BKK Traveler]

It is that kind of attitude that really makes me very sick. My father left my mother to raise me and six siblings on her own. As soon as I got a job I helped out all I could and continue to this day as do my brothers and sisters as they can. One of my sisters is having a hard time making a go of it and I have helped her out occasionally as well. It's called "LOVE", something maybe you don't have a clue about. I'm really suprised at the number of greedy farangs that think loving someone means you should never give them any money because that would be like trying to buy their love. Such thinking just proves that you have absolutely no idea how to love someone. Loving someone means doing for them whatever you can. Putting them above yourself. Whether it be money, time, encouragement, taking care of them, or whatever. I love my family dearly and gladly part with some of my money if they are in need, but of course I won't just give money if they are not truly in need or are not willing to work if they can, etc. I'm not being taken advantage of, but I'm certainly not stingy with my money. And if I was married and loved my wife, I would treat her family the same as my own.

I think your statement "I have NEVER expected a man to support me" says it all and is one of the big reasons why I never have and never will consider marrying a western woman. In the not too distant past, women were in general not financially independent and needed to depend on a man to live a decent life. Then along came industrialization and our modern economies and ideas about women working changed. With the coming of women's financial independence the need for a woman to find a knight in shining armour rapidly dissappeared. Many men need to be the knight in shining armour and save a damsel in distress, and luckily there are many damsels in distress in Thailand that need saving. As a woman, you may find such talk offensive, but that's they way many, if not most, of us men are, although modern western culture tries it's best to oppress such thoughts and teach men and women that they should be totally independent and keep as much of their money for themselves to enjoy.

For me, I'll enjoy spending my money on my family, and someday on my wife and her family should I get married. That's what makes me happy. For me, money can't buy happiness, but spending my money, time, or other resources on the ones I love does. As the saying goes, "It's better to give than to receive."

Well IMHO the way you talk about western woman shows that you are a fraud as a knight ...also shows your lack of sensitivity...

I am going to tell you something ...

My aunt and my uncle met when they were 17 years old...they have two daughters...my uncle used to work outside and he was in charge of support his family financially, my aunt stay at home and looked after the children...they were happy for 15 years...then they got married...

two years after married my uncle fall in love with someone elses and went away...of course he did not take my cousins with him...

even though he gave some money it wasn´t enough so my aunt had to find a job...it was not easy because she spend half of her life as a housewife and because she has not studies the jobs she found were not well paid. She has two different jobs outside her home but also she has to do the housekeeping and bring her daughters up...

So tell me brave knight what a damsel should do in this case? maybe find another knight? Let me tell you something there are not many knights out there who will be willing to lok after someone elses children? Will you?

You know what i find funny about your post is you ignorance about women matter...

I am a western woman, i am financially independent and I am not a poor woman who need to be saved by a man. But I consider myself a Damsel in need of a Knight...but I don´t want my Knights money...I want his caring...I want to know that he will be there when sometimes life is too much and everything you try goes wrong, I want him to hug me and say "don´t you worry i am here" when I feel sad , I want him to hold my hand when I am ill, I want him to make me laugh, I want him to surprise me, I want him to respect me, I want him to be honest with me, I want him to treat me tenderly when making love...

That is the knight I am looking for and as i mention before I am financially independent and I am a western woman who has not find his knigt yet...so well you can go to thailand and save all the poor(economically poor) thai damsels but do bear in mind that you could not save a western damsel because you overlooked too many things or you are not sensitive enough and why it is more important you are not a real knight and a gentleman because I real one will never talk about women in the way you did.

Glauka the Damsel

I didn't mean to infer that money is the only thing a man brings to a relationship. The things you mentioned are also very important - caring, respect, honesty, etc. And without those the relationship is very likely to fail. But the thing missing in today's modern economies is the economic dependencies that once kept couples together even through difficult times.

In times past, most women couldn't go out and make a living on their own. So a man felt it was his responsibility to maintain the marriage even though trouble might arise, and likewise the woman wouldn't leave the relationship either without very serious thought. But in today's world, with the financial independence of most women, many men don't think twice about leaving a marriage at the first sign of trouble, and women also know they can make it on their own so don't always put in as much effort in working out their problems because they know a failed marriage isn't the end of the world. With the dramatic rise in financial independence of women has come an equally dramatic rise in the divorce rate.

Men may try to fulfill a woman's emotional needs, but the fact is most men don't really understand women and even though they may want and try to fulfill all her needs, they find it difficult to know what to do. They want to care for a woman's emotional needs, but often she will find it easier to talk to her female friends rather than to her husband to get the emotional support she needs. So if a man is not able to fully understand a woman and cannot fully fulfill her emotional needs, then what is it that he is giving her if not financial support? Nothing, in his mind. He has a strong desire to give something to his woman that she needs so that he can feel that he has some worth in the relationship. Traditionally being the bread winner was enough to satisfy a man that he was truly needed in the relationship and trying his best to give emotional support was important but likely secondary to providing financially.

So the end result is that many more marriages fail today because the man doesn't feel the same degree of worth in a relationship as in past times, plus he doesn't feel the need to make the relationship work at all costs because he knows the woman can make it on her own.

Ask yourself one question. Why is it that so many men go to Thailand and other third world countries to find a bride? For some it may be that they are attracted physically to the women of a certain country. But for most it is a matter of economics. The poor women of Thailand and other such countries are looking for a farang to come save them from their economic distress, and men all over the place are willing to go and save them and it makes them feel good that they could do something for a woman in need. Like it or not, that's the way it is and the numbers show that Thai/Farang relationships are hugely skewed to Thai women/Farang men and not the other way around. And as long as western women continue to be financially independent and be seen by men as not needing them, men will continue to look elsewhere for their partners.

I'm sure if you were to try an experiment with a helpless looking lady standing out in public needing financial assistance and put an equally helpless looking man in the same situation, more men would be willing to help out the woman than help out the man. Even though the man isn't expecting anything in return, it makes him feel good to be able to help out the woman. But when he sees a man begging for money he will more likely think "why doesn't he go get a job like I have" and ignore him.

You may consider yourself a damsel in distress, but unless the men around you see you as one you will not likely find your knight in shining armour. We men may not be the brightest when it comes to figuring out women, but that's the way we were made and there isn't anything you can do to change us.

Sorry for being so blunt about it, but that's my honest opinion. And I have the utmost respect for all people of all countries, women included. But that doesn't mean I want to marry a western woman. Not wanting to marry a western woman has nothing to do with respect for them.

Glauka -----------

You're cool! You got him!

Most foreigners think that the only thing "WE" all Asian women want from them is their money! The LoSErS!

No, we don't think that money is the ONLY thing you need. We want to supply all your needs. But money is the most visible and easiest need for us to supply.

Throughout the history of man, it was traditionally the man that was the bread winner for his family. Now in the past 100 years, suddenly our economies have changed drastically such that many women don't need a man's money. Do you think all the years of history of human existence can suddenly be changed overnight? It is imbred into men to think one way. If it wasn't, the human race would have never survived up until the industrial and economic revolution. It is simple human biology that creates men with this desire. So call us losers all you want but that won't change a thing.

[Boo]

I think you will find the the amount of men who come to poor countries looking for a wife (for the reasons you have stated) is minimal in comparison to the amount of couples from the same country or economic background, so although you feel the need to have a wife rely on you financially to make you feel worthwhile as a man, many many other men do not.

Also, in your senario, what happens if your wife, after a few years of marriage, doesn't want to stay with you anymore (fell out of love or unhappy) would you really be happy with the knowledge that she is only staying with you for your money as she is unable or never learned to make her own & not out of love or free will?

[sadman]

Hmmm...

Cynic: one who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Just a thought....

[BKK Traveler]

I think you will find the the amount of men who come to poor countries looking for a wife (for the reasons you have stated) is minimal in comparison to the amount of couples from the same country or economic background, so although you feel the need to have a wife rely on you financially to make you feel worthwhile as a man, many many other men do not.

I totally agree with you that the number of men who find a wife in a poor country is minimal when compared with the total population. A huge number of men have no idea of what exists outside the borders of their own country. Many of them if ever given the opportunity to travel abroad would join those numbers. But even still the vast majority of men have no desire to look outside their country for a mate. They may not like women of a different race, or they may find the idea of looking for a mate in a distant land to be too difficult, or for whatever reason. So unless you know what is the reasons for men marrying women of their own country, I don't think you can confidently say that many men don't feel the need to provide financially for a woman.

In modern western culture we are taught that love cannot be bought. That love should only be freely given. That we should despise love that appears to be purchased. We (both men and women) pride ourselves in the fact that we are financially independent. For many men, they even like to brag about how much better off financially his female companion is that himself. I've even known men to blatently lie about their partner's financial situation just to make it look like she was well off and not in need of his money. It's because we are being taught that a financially independent woman who wants to be with you must really love you and not your money. Many men buy into this newly created line of thinking, but that is not the natural way men think but a learned behavior due to our modern society. Deep down, most men still have this desire to be the knight in shining armour financially as well as in other respects, even if that desire is suppressed by our culture.

[Boon Mee]

Well. the Queen of England gave Mick Jagger the "K" so I guess anyone can qualify...

Edited January 5, 2006 by Boon Mee

[BKK Traveler]

Also, in your senario, what happens if your wife, after a few years of marriage, doesn't want to stay with you anymore (fell out of love or unhappy) would you really be happy with the knowledge that she is only staying with you for your money as she is unable or never learned to make her own & not out of love or free will?

Of course a man wouldn't be happy if his wife didn't really love him or wasn't happy with the marriage. I'm not saying that things were perfect in past times. They were far from perfect and I'm sure there were many very unhappy marriages then. And certainly wouldn't want to be a woman in past times who had to depend financially on an abusive husband and had no way out of her situation. But I'm not making any statement about which way is better or worse than another. I'm making a statement about man's basic thinking. Like it or not, most men (at least most men I know) enjoy being able to fulfill the economic needs of a woman. Sometimes this desire of man leads to a good relationship. Sometimes it leads to a very bad relationship. Sometimes it brings the man to economic ruin. Sometimes the man even knows it will bring him to economic ruin but he still continues because he's in love and is fulfilling his desire to provide for a woman. I've known many cases where a man is told be all his mates to get rid of a woman and not to spend any more money on her. He knows that they are giving him good advice, but yet he can't seem to bring himself to do what he knows he should. And look at how easy it is for many Thai women working in the "entertainment" industry to separate a man from his money.

If someone were to design a perfect society and human race, I suppose that many would choose one where men are free from this desire to provide financially for a woman. And maybe it would be a better society than what we have, or maybe not. We have no way of knowing because we cannot change basic human nature.

[Glauka]

In times past, most women couldn't go out and make a living on their own. So a man felt it was his responsibility to maintain the marriage even though trouble might arise, and likewise the woman wouldn't leave the relationship either without very serious thought. But in today's world, with the financial independence of most women, many men don't think twice about leaving a marriage at the first sign of trouble, and women also know they can make it on their own so don't always put in as much effort in working out their problems because they know a failed marriage isn't the end of the world. With the dramatic rise in financial independence of women has come an equally dramatic rise in the divorce rate.

Earlier days women need to marry some men because of their family financial situation...even though they didn´t love them...

sometimes they were disgust with their husband...

nowadays we are more free to choose our live partner, financial problem is not much of an issue for many people in western countries ...still you blame money for marriage failure?

well I disagree with you when you don´t put much effort into a relationship is not because women are financialy independent is because some people don´t want to fight for their relationship.

my gosh your view of love is so superficial...

what about a marriage formed by each other understanding, caring, respect...I wonder if your marriage is based on money will your woman love if you get bankrupt...better not to find out, eh! bkk?

I can tell you my prince charming will know I love him because is HE and not someone elsw and also he will know that i am not interested about his financial situation because i can survive without him.

Men may try to fulfill a woman's emotional needs, but the fact is most men don't really understand women and even though they may want and try to fulfill all her needs, they find it difficult to know what to do. They want to care for a woman's emotional needs, but often she will find it easier to talk to her female friends rather than to her husband to get the emotional support she needs. So if a man is not able to fully understand a woman and cannot fully fulfill her emotional needs, then what is it that he is giving her if not financial support? Nothing, in his mind. He has a strong desire to give something to his woman that she needs so that he can feel that he has some worth in the relationship. Traditionally being the bread winner was enough to satisfy a man that he was truly needed in the relationship and trying his best to give emotional support was important but likely secondary to providing financially

This show how little you know about woman...you just assume things that are just sterotipycal....and you know why you are mistaken because you generalize too much. If you want to know ask...don´t assume.

We don´t live in the middle age anymore...so s we don´t need to say "I need my husband because otherwise i will die of hunger" nowadays you can say "I love my husband because I don´t need him".

I love him because i respect him, because i like him, because i try to understand him...i not need him so i choose to be by his side because I truly love him...

So the end result is that many more marriages fail today because the man doesn't feel the same degree of worth in a relationship as in past times, plus he doesn't feel the need to make the relationship work at all costs because he knows the woman can make it on her own.

Ask yourself one question. Why is it that so many men go to Thailand and other third world countries to find a bride? For some it may be that they are attracted physically to the women of a certain country. But for most it is a matter of economics. The poor women of Thailand and other such countries are looking for a farang to come save them from their economic distress, and men all over the place are willing to go and save them and it makes them feel good that they could do something for a woman in need. Like it or not, that's the way it is and the numbers show that Thai/Farang relationships are hugely skewed to Thai women/Farang men and not the other way around. And as long as western women continue to be financially independent and be seen by men as not needing them, men will continue to look elsewhere for their partners.

To find a bride...

You don´t look for love...on the contrary Love find you...

Maybe I will be single the rest of my life but I will not be with someone who come to save me because otherwise he feels useless or wothless.

I am a valuable person I have good things and my bad things, I know what i like and what i don´t, I can support myself so...i don´t need anyone to full fill any lackness i may have I just want to share muyself, my life with someone because i think is better to do it with someone you love than alone.

also I don´t need to show I am in distress...if someone love me or is interested in me he will know when I feel sad, when I need a hug, when to make smile blah,blah,blah...I don´t need to look miserable to gain attention...

I am not a superwoman I am a woman who just want to be love by someone who really knows how to love a woman who knows ,many times, what she wants. Finally you are mistaken if you think that a weak woman needs more care that a strong one...be self suficiency has nothing to do with being sensitive and nees to be love...

[BKK Traveler]

Earlier days women need to marry some men because of their family financial situation...even though they didn´t love them...

sometimes they were disgust with their husband...

nowadays we are more free to choose our live partner, financial problem is not much of an issue for many people in western countries ...still you blame money for marriage failure?

well I disagree with you when you don´t put much effort into a relationship is not because women are financialy independent is because some people don´t want to fight for their relationship.

my gosh your view of love is so superficial...

And why is it that you think these days people don't want to fight for their relationship? I say it is because they have other economic options and it is too easy for them to just get up and walk away. If it's not because of financial independence, then what is it that is making people to not fight for the relationship and for the divorce rate to go up?

I think your view of love is too idealistic and naive. I think I have a more practical view of love. Of course I want someone to love me for just who I am, but I'm not naive enough to think that there is much chance that the love will continue forever unless there is something more that is binding the two together, such as needs for each other. People too easily change and get tired of the same thing. That is human nature. Just needs without love is not good, but also just love without needs is likely to fade quickly and end in divorce. A combination of both needs and love may not be so idealistic, but is much more practical and likely to last I think. Of course if all you care about is having a short-term relationship based solely on love, then maybe a relationship not based on any needs would be good for you. But for me, I want a relationship that will last, not a short-term one.

If a woman's financial need is the only thing holding together a relationship, then it is little more than a man paying a prostitute to have sex with him and/or a maid to take care of his house. But if there is love, together with (as you mentioned) caring, understanding, respect, etc. AND a need for each other, be it a financial need or some other need(s), then what is so wrong with that?

But again, as I've already clearly stated in other replys, the bottom line is that in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

[sbk]

In the not too distant past, women were in general not financially independent and needed to depend on a man to live a decent life. Then along came industrialization and our modern economies and ideas about women working changed.

Um, just a quick reminder here, the Industrial Revolution started in the early 1700s .

in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

Also, if its a built in genetic desire to take care of one's wife and children why are there so many deadbeat dads?

[BKK Traveler]

In the not too distant past, women were in general not financially independent and needed to depend on a man to live a decent life. Then along came industrialization and our modern economies and ideas about women working changed.

Um, just a quick reminder here, the Industrial Revolution started in the early 1700s .

in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

Also, if its a built in genetic desire to take care of one's wife and children why are there so many deadbeat dads?

The Industrial Revolution may have started in the early 1700's but it didn't have much impact on individuals until much later, and it wasn't until much much later that it brought any sort of financial independence to women. I didn't mean to imply that financial independence for women came right at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

The desire to take care of one's wife and children isn't the only desire a man has. He has many desires and has to choose sometimes which one he wants to follow. If a man has no job and no money and no way of getting a job, he can steal the money to try to provide for his family, or he can run away, or he can do nothing. If a man has a strong desire for some thing but is prevented from getting it due to his marriage, he may abandon his wife and child. I personally don't want anything to do with such a man, but I agree they do exist. Everyone makes choices in their lives. Biology and genetics is a major part of us humans, but still our mind is strong enough to overpower our built-in nature if we want to.

[sbk]

Try checking your history first:

Industrial Revolution

The Industrial Revolution transformed women's lives. A worldwide economic and social revolution, industrialization in the United States began in New England in the 1790s and integrated women into an emergent industrial capitalist society.

Industrialization in the antebellum era occurred as the result of two distinct processes. The first, the rise of the factory system, had its greatest impact on northern textile manufacture. The second, the development of the more labor-intensive sweating system, which kept production decentralized in households and small shops, was vital to the growth of the garment, hat, box, glove, and flower industries.

In preindustrial America, women and girls performed much of the labor necessary for family survival, including the household manufacture of yarn, cloth, candles, and food. By 1790 the availability of water-powered machinery such as spinning frames and carding machines enabled businessmen to substitute power tools for women's hand labor in the manufacture of cloth. In December 1790 the first water-powered spinning mill opened its doors in Pawtucket, Rhode Island; by 1813, 175 other cotton and wool spinning mills, employing entire families, punctuated the river-rich New England landscape.

Ironically, early mills increased the market value of women's household labor. Mechanizing only some of the most labor-intensive steps of textile production, spinning mills paid women at home to weave factory-manufactured yarn into marketable cloth. (The arrangement whereby labor was contracted out to women by local merchants, manufacturers, or middlemen was, and continues to be, known as "outwork" or the "putting out system.") As late as 1820, two-thirds of all cloth manufactured in the United States was produced by women working at home.

The importance of outwork to textile manufacture declined after the first fully integrated textile factory began operations in Waltham, Massachusetts, in 1814. The success of the Waltham model, which centralized under one roof all of the steps necessary for producing cloth, facilitated the rise of both an urban working class and a network of single-industry textile towns. The most famous of these was Lowell, Massachusetts, by 1860 the leading textile center in the nation. In the 1830s and 1840s Lowell attracted international attention as an industrial utopia that had dodged the hazards of English industrialization, particularly the creation of a permanent, "debased" working class. Until the immigration wave of the 1840s, Lowell's factory workers were single, white, native-born women recruited from middle-class New England farms. Symbolically virtuous because of their youth, class background, and race, Lowell workers ostensibly remained pure because of the mills' stringent behavioral rules and the expectation that women workers would leave after a brief period of employment. The reality was less glamorous than propagandists claimed. Lowell's female factory hands worked over seventy hours a week at substandard wages. In 1834 and 1836 they went on strike, challenging the depiction of female fulfillment and passivity in this "model" factory town.

Women's experiences as factory workers varied according to ethnicity, race, and class, and differed from those of men. An occupational hierarchy among women prevailed in which Yankee women enjoyed greatest access to the best-paying women's jobs; daughters of immigrants concentrated in semiskilled positions; and immigrant women worked in the least skilled, most poorly remunerated occupations. As a rule, free African American women were excluded from factory employment. The cleavages that distinguished women's work from men's were equal in importance to those existing among women. Rigid gender-based occupational segregation ensured that even the highest-paid, most senior female factory worker could expect to receive less than a man employed in the same establishment. Although by the 1840s women represented 50 percent of factory workers in the shoe and textile industries, they rarely worked alongside men. Instead, they held jobs reserved exclusively for women, jobs whose low wages affirmed the belief that women's work was less skilled than men's and less important to family survival.

Most women holding factory jobs in the first decades of industrialization were single. Immigrant and working-class wives and mothers were more likely to participate in the wage-based labor market as outworkers. In New York City, the foremost manufacturing center of the antebellum period, outwork was the dominant form of female employment. It was also one of the most exploitive. Outwork enabled women confined to their homes to contribute to the family economy while still performing tasks as wives and mothers. But merchants took advantage of women's limited mobility and bargaining power by withholding and cutting wages. Already doubly burdened by society's expectations of them as wives and wage earners, female outworkers coped with their precarious financial status by accepting more contracted jobs to make ends meet. Converting households into workshops, outwork meshed gender roles with the most exploitive features of industrial capitalism.

Although upper- and middle-class white women were typically spared the long hours and low wages that characterized both factory labor and outwork, they were nevertheless forced to contend with the ideological devaluation of homework that industrialization spawned. As "real" labor became more closely identified with work that had a concrete market value, women lost out. Childbearing, child rearing, cooking, cleaning, and other traditionally female tasks, whether performed by elite women, working-class women, or a growing number of domestic servants, were demeaned. The household, increasingly perceived in opposition to a male-dominated market as a feminized space, came to be viewed as a site of leisure and consumption rather than labor and production.

Thomas Dublin, Transforming Women's Work: New England Lives in the Industrial Revolution (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1994); Bruce Laurie, Artisans into Workers: Labor in Nineteenth-Century America (New York: Noonday Press, 1989); Christine Stansell, "The Origins of the Sweatshop: Women and Early Industrialization in New York City," Working-Class America: Essays on Labor, Community, and American Society, edited by Michael H. Frisch and Daniel J. Walkowitz (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983).

The lives of the poorer classes were transformed long before this century. Many people use the model of the typical middle class family as their standard to uphold when, in fact, most people did not live that way at all. The rise of the middle class is a much later phenomenon than the Industrial Revolution and it seems to be the rise of the working middle class wife that offends you most.

[Old Croc]

To find a bride...

You don´t look for love...on the contrary Love find you...

Maybe I will be single the rest of my life but I will not be with someone who come to save me because otherwise he feels useless or wothless.

I am a valuable person I have good things and my bad things, I know what i like and what i don´t, I can support myself so...i don´t need anyone to full fill any lackness i may have I just want to share muyself, my life with someone because i think is better to do it with someone you love than alone.

also I don´t need to show I am in distress...if someone love me or is interested in me he will know when I feel sad, when I need a hug, when to make smile blah,blah,blah...I don´t need to look miserable to gain attention...

I am not a superwoman I am a woman who just want to be love by someone who really knows how to love a woman who knows ,many times, what she wants. Finally you are mistaken if you think that a weak woman needs more care that a strong one...be self suficiency has nothing to do with being sensitive and nees to be love...

Good luck with your search for a caring soul mate Glauka. I think you are a good person (If sometimes a bit wacky) and I wish you happiness.

I am financially comfortable and could easily find (buy) a partner in Thailand to depend on and cater to me, but I also want something else. Someone to care for me as the person I am, not an ATM. Not every man has the same values as some members of this forum. This is not a dig at the many who have found their perfect partners in various ways in LOS, just my personal thoughts and values.

[Fast Eddie]

But again, as I've already clearly stated in other replys, the bottom line is that in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

I think you are incorrect. As far as i'm aware this has nothing to do with biology. It's easy to say that, in order to justify your feelings on the matter, but it sounds like some people need to do this in order to increase their feeling of self worth, and in order to retain a sense of control in the relationship. I don't know anyone who feels the way you do, nor do i know anyone who wants to be valued by their partner because of how much money they give them. In fact quite the opposite usually, and this is down to people believing in their own value as a unique personality. You assert that men want to be a 'knight in shining armour' rescuing a 'damsel in distress'. This might make you feel good about yourself, but to attribute it to an inbuilt biological urge is just wrong. Most men do not feel this need, but if it works for you then i'm not going to knock it.

[thaibebop]

But again, as I've already clearly stated in other replys, the bottom line is that in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

I think you are incorrect. As far as i'm aware this has nothing to do with biology. It's easy to say that, in order to justify your feelings on the matter, but it sounds like some people need to do this in order to increase their feeling of self worth, and in order to retain a sense of control in the relationship. I don't know anyone who feels the way you do, nor do i know anyone who wants to be valued by their partner because of how much money they give them. In fact quite the opposite usually, and this is down to people believing in their own value as a unique personality. You assert that men want to be a 'knight in shining armour' rescuing a 'damsel in distress'. This might make you feel good about yourself, but to attribute it to an inbuilt biological urge is just wrong. Most men do not feel this need, but if it works for you then i'm not going to knock it.

Said it much micer than I could, Eddie.

[Rigger]

No rape and pillaging is more fun than being a white knight

[thaibebop]

No rape and pillaging is more fun than being a white knight

HAHA! The ugly truth about knighthood!

[Glauka]

And why is it that you think these days people don't want to fight for their relationship? I say it is because they have other economic options and it is too easy for them to just get up and walk away. If it's not because of financial independence, then what is it that is making people to not fight for the relationship and for the divorce rate to go up?

I think your view of love is too idealistic and naive. I think I have a more practical view of love. Of course I want someone to love me for just who I am, but I'm not naive enough to think that there is much chance that the love will continue forever unless there is something more that is binding the two together, such as needs for each other. People too easily change and get tired of the same thing. That is human nature. Just needs without love is not good, but also just love without needs is likely to fade quickly and end in divorce. A combination of both needs and love may not be so idealistic, but is much more practical and likely to last I think. Of course if all you care about is having a short-term relationship based solely on love, then maybe a relationship not based on any needs would be good for you. But for me, I want a relationship that will last, not a short-term one.

If a woman's financial need is the only thing holding together a relationship, then it is little more than a man paying a prostitute to have sex with him and/or a maid to take care of his house. But if there is love, together with (as you mentioned) caring, understanding, respect, etc. AND a need for each other, be it a financial need or some other need(s), then what is so wrong with that?

But again, as I've already clearly stated in other replys, the bottom line is that in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

indeed my view of love is idealistic...but is the one I believe on. I think you misunderstand my view of love...I don´t want the love relationship found in films where everything is beautiful and you have butterflies in your tummy all the time...

first you fall in love and everything is nice and colourful but after that, something more special and deeper comes...LOVE which is understanding, respect, caring...DO you really think that this will fade with time? well I don´t think so...

Sometimes things get too difficult and you just want to walk away...but if you really love your partner you will try to overcome those times when things get a bit hard...

My view is naive but I know people who have this idealistic relationship where not everything is perfect but the love they feel for each other is strong enough as to overcome as many difficulties and distress that they had or will experience...

I am nearly thirty years old and yet I have many things to learn and many mistakes to make, I migh change my mind in the future but at this moment this is how I think and this is what i want in my future love relationship....I will fight for it if ever comes...

Good luck with your practical relationship...but I am afraid is not for me...

[Glauka]

To find a bride...

You don´t look for love...on the contrary Love find you...

Maybe I will be single the rest of my life but I will not be with someone who come to save me because otherwise he feels useless or wothless.

I am a valuable person I have good things and my bad things, I know what i like and what i don´t, I can support myself so...i don´t need anyone to full fill any lackness i may have I just want to share muyself, my life with someone because i think is better to do it with someone you love than alone.

also I don´t need to show I am in distress...if someone love me or is interested in me he will know when I feel sad, when I need a hug, when to make smile blah,blah,blah...I don´t need to look miserable to gain attention...

I am not a superwoman I am a woman who just want to be love by someone who really knows how to love a woman who knows ,many times, what she wants. Finally you are mistaken if you think that a weak woman needs more care that a strong one...be self suficiency has nothing to do with being sensitive and nees to be love...

Good luck with your search for a caring soul mate Glauka. I think you are a good person (If sometimes a bit wacky) and I wish you happiness.

I am financially comfortable and could easily find (buy) a partner in Thailand to depend on and cater to me, but I also want something else. Someone to care for me as the person I am, not an ATM. Not every man has the same values as some members of this forum. This is not a dig at the many who have found their perfect partners in various ways in LOS, just my personal thoughts and values.

WACKY!!!! what do you mean by wacky? (well this are the kind of post that make me wacky I guess )

Thank you old croc I also wish you happiness...I am not so sure if I am a good person or not...I am not trying to be I just try to be loyal to my values (although sometimes I fail myself)...maybe that makes me a good person...I just don´t know

I hope you find a beautiful salamander to chare your knowledge and your witty humour...

take care old grumpy croc...

[Glauka]

Many men need to be the knight in shining armour and save a damsel in distress, and luckily there are many damsels in distress in Thailand that need saving.

Sorry I just want to add...that your practical and biological view of love do not fit with the novel character of a Knight and a gentleman....sorry you are not one...

on the contrary you are more like a rough farmer looking to do something noble ( i am not refering to historical reality I refering to knights and knighthood novels)

People too easily change and get tired of the same thing. That is human nature. Just needs without love is not good, but also just love without needs is likely to fade quickly and end in divorce. A combination of both needs and love may not be so idealistic, but is much more practical and likely to last I think. Of course if all you care about is having a short-term relationship based solely on love, then maybe a relationship not based on any needs would be good for you. But for me, I want a relationship that will last, not a short-term one.

Too broad generalization... talk for yourself...

My father has been in love with my mother for 31 years...their marriage is far from idealistic...but the feeling is still idealistic and naive...

Why do you think I want a short term relationship?

you state that a relationship based soley in love will not last...however what will happen to your relationship if your run out of money?...you see both statements are pointless because either in my case or in your case time and experiences is what will make bonds between ourselves and partners strong...

however in your case your partner is more attacht to you that you are to her...you can leave...and find someone else or not becase you do need her to survive...however she has to stay with you or find another knight of your kind...

very selfish attitude in my opinion...

I want my partner to stay with me because he want to...is the same as a friend...they are your friends and stay beside you because they want to...

hold on, wait a minute do you also have financial friendships?

Loving someone means doing for them whatever you can. Putting them above yourself. Whether it be money, time, encouragement, taking care of them, or whatever.

Please can you defined for me practical love? is not your above statement idealistic? HOw this fit in your biological way of thinking?

But again, as I've already clearly stated in other replys, the bottom line is that in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

sorry but your hypothesis is not a natural law...so you should better say...nothing that you do or say will change my opinion.

AND a need for each other, be it a financial need or some other need(s), then what is so wrong with that?

financial need or dependence limit your freedom...why? because money gives you food, a roof and some other things that you cannot survive without them...

what is wrong with that...well you don´t have a choice...

other needs are not some important...you can survive without them...(in biological terms)...

Sorry for being so blunt about it, but that's my honest opinion. And I have the utmost respect for all people of all countries, women included. But that doesn't mean I want to marry a western woman. Not wanting to marry a western woman has nothing to do with respect for them.

I didn´t think that you don´t respect us I only think that if you exclude us from your noble actions you are not a knight....and if you say " I never have and never will consider marrying a western woman" you are not a gentleman.

Again broad generalization...there too many western woman...

when you state that you don´t want to marry (any) western woman you are generalizing...you assume that the values, the needs , the way of thinking of western woman are all the same...and this is a big mistake...

the fact that you considered only some women ( in this case thai women) damsels in need for a knight...decrease your noble knight values...

distress damsels are not the only the ones that need your money...but if you think so that´s show your lack of sensitivity...

again I don´t need to be saved...I want to be loved.

[AlexLah]

(Quote): But again, as I've already clearly stated in other replys, the bottom line is that in my opinion there is a built-in desire for men to provide financially for women. Hate it all you want, but nothing you do or say will change it. It's nature/biology at work.

My goodness I didn't wanna reply but it seems you have a block of concrete behind that thick skull of you where most of us have something called: Brains

Inside the brain there can be wonderfull chemical processes started that causes feelings of intense pleasure and joy, for example if you meet someone and it sort of clicks no matter how someone looks It is how you connect with eachother. It can be a smell, a look of the eye, the way someone thinks and expresses his/her thoughts and feelings when together.

The problem is that that feeling many times slowly fades away.

After sometime things get sort of normal and slowly your partner becomes your dearest friend (at least in my previous experience).

Yes for sure you like it when being together but that passion that first feeling does not come back anymore and then what you do when you are longing for that passionate feeling ?

Are you going to look and try to find it with a different partner?

Or are you trying to find ways that will excite you and your partner again?

Just my two cents, good topic!!!!!

KR,

Alex

[Glauka]

The problem is that that feeling many times slowly fades away.

After sometime things get sort of normal and slowly your partner becomes your dearest friend (at least in my previous experience).

exactly!!!

[kat]

I think you will find the the amount of men who come to poor countries looking for a wife (for the reasons you have stated) is minimal in comparison to the amount of couples from the same country or economic background, so although you feel the need to have a wife rely on you financially to make you feel worthwhile as a man, many many other men do not.

I totally agree with you that the number of men who find a wife in a poor country is minimal when compared with the total population. A huge number of men have no idea of what exists outside the borders of their own country. Many of them if ever given the opportunity to travel abroad would join those numbers. But even still the vast majority of men have no desire to look outside their country for a mate. They may not like women of a different race, or they may find the idea of looking for a mate in a distant land to be too difficult, or for whatever reason. So unless you know what is the reasons for men marrying women of their own country, I don't think you can confidently say that many men don't feel the need to provide financially for a woman.

In modern western culture we are taught that love cannot be bought. That love should only be freely given. That we should despise love that appears to be purchased. We (both men and women) pride ourselves in the fact that we are financially independent. For many men, they even like to brag about how much better off financially his female companion is that himself. I've even known men to blatently lie about their partner's financial situation just to make it look like she was well off and not in need of his money. It's because we are being taught that a financially independent woman who wants to be with you must really love you and not your money. Many men buy into this newly created line of thinking, but that is not the natural way men think but a learned behavior due to our modern society. Deep down, most men still have this desire to be the knight in shining armour financially as well as in other respects, even if that desire is suppressed by our culture.

I stopped reading the thread with the above post. Just a couple of things:

Most modern women have changed due to male withdrawl or rejection of "needy" women. The cultural revolution didn't just happen due to women not having something to wear that day -- got it?

My mother was regularly beaten by my father. She was a traditonal lady -- your type, too. Most money that she earned, she handed over to my father

She always served him before the kids, because after all, he was the man of the house.

Women of my mother's generation have countless stories of repressed heartbreak and regret for chances not taken because of being a "rescued" damsel with no other options for fulfillment in life, or devleopment of her full self.

In the 1950s, women married men that reflected their own aspirations: doctor, lawyer, architect, etc. Modern women achieve their own aspirations as doctors, lawyers, architects, etc.

Many women back then had terrible sex lives, because, well, we all know how monopolies work.

[Glauka]

Kat Great post!!!