They also breed - we don't. Only lesbians and bed-wetters do that sort of thing in same-sex relationshipsOriginally Posted by FarangRuMak
They also breed - we don't. Only lesbians and bed-wetters do that sort of thing in same-sex relationships
What are you talking about? Lots of same-sex couples have monogamous relationships. He agrees as well, as do apparently all his friends, even gay friends, back in his village.
It's not like I'm forcing anything on him. He has more than enough money in his bank account to start a new and good life for himself, so it's up to him. He can decide to either be in a monogamous relationship with me, or go at life alone and have the freedom to have all the sexual partners he wants. Same rule applies to me. We chose each other.
In my mind at least, the whole point of a relationship is to walk together through this journey called life, and both be stronger for it. Quite difficult to do that when one of you is a cheating liar.
There are lots of conformist fools everywhere, Matt. Besides, if you have an open relationship there's no cheating and no lying. You are simply imposing these Christian constraints on yourself and those around you
I'm glad you raised the point about the money in his bank account again, while claiming elsewhere he's been nothing but a poor rice farmer from Laos. Been paying him for sex have you?
That's the difference between us. I don't view him as some poor, rice farming peasant who sells his body. I view him as the intelligent, loving, compassionate, empathetic, funncy, eccentric, strong, healthy human being that he is.
But yes, I take good care of him. After all, he takes care of me. I'm blind, remember? I need to be able to trust him 100% with my life, or else this doesn't work. That's why the Vientiane move is now delayed by at least a few weeks.
Too bad too, because I just finally got my passport yesterday. He could have been on his way to Vientiane today to find a house if he didn't pull this stunt.
200,000 baht (and no Bitcoin)
Yes there is the not unimportant breeding imperative behind these hetro relationships.
Your point reminds me of an interview given by R Dawkins in which he gave his views as to how a 'gay' gene has been passed on though the passing on should be oxymoronic given that gays carrying the gene don't usually breed.
Part of his answer was that some gays did breed when they were trusted among the females as camp guardians by the alpha males in 'primitive' times.
But he credits the 'sneaky fuckers' ie the bi-sexual males for being largely responsible.
A bit off topic but so what.
Did Dawkins actually use the phrase 'sneaky fuckers'?
Surely not!
This is disappointing. As we all know, the Moderators' knowledge and understanding of Thai history, culture and social mores is unparalleled. I've therefore been waiting for a riposte from them to Matt's assertion that monogamy is the norm in Thailand ("monogamous relationships. He agrees as well, as do apparently all his friends, even gay friends, back in his village"). A friend of mine says his apartment building is infested by the mia noi (minor wife) of any Thai man who can afford one. He can't move in the car park on a Saturday morning for the cars of these men who arrive to take the minor wife shopping. It's a long-standing Thai practice. The only reason they would not exist in a village would be the lack of wealth. And that's leaving out any discussion of nickels and dimes
Frequent wrote.
"As we all know, the Moderators' knowledge and understanding of Thai history, culture and social mores is unparalleled."
Yes he did.
And he used to mean what it says;
The bi-sexual males played a double game in that they presented their 'gay' side so the alpha males would trust them with the women and when they got the chance they became fuckers of these women.
It's on utube somewhere.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote