WTF in Jomtien Complex

[a447]

I don't have a problem with pejorative terms regarding how I behave.

I've always been open about my activities -some would say too open - and have often referred to myself here as a "sex tourist"; hardly a flattering term. I am someone who the majority of society no doubt looks down upon. But to describe myself otherwise would be dishonest. So I'm not in any way "sensitive."

I'm just going on the definition quoted by Brad. It's too general and ends up encompassing every male on the planet.

A "predator" is much more than someone who looks at others in some kind of sexual way. That's what we all do. It's part of who we are.

The meaning the days has changed drastically. There is nowvsomething inherently sinister and evil about a predator. If the guy who gies to the beach looking for sex - nothing wrong with that - makes unwanted advances, then he's a predator. If the other party is willing to go along, then that's fine. Neither person should face criticism as they are in mutual agreement and are over the age of consent.

But our advances are not unwanted. On the contrary, they are invited.

I refuse to believe that I am in any way sinister. I don't get that impression about other board members, either. Many of us are just sex tourists, nothing more, nothing less.

BTW, the main article on the from page of today's Bangkok Post tells us that the authorities do not believe Thailand is a destination for sex tourists and that, in any case, they are going to "get rid of this [sex tourism]. WTF?

So my days may be numbered!

[francois]

I enjoyed reading this thread with all the diverse perspectives by all who posted herein; a good debate.

[a447]

A very interesting topic - how we define ourselves.

[scottish-guy]

.. If you feel that the life style or comments of a particular board member are objectionable, then it would be appropriate to direct your comments towards that individual rather than questioning the moral fibre of all the other farang in Thailand...

Except that I did direct it at a particular "mid-70s" person - it's just that while he is well aware of that, you didn't pick up on it Bob.

[arsenal]

a447 wrote.
"So my days may be numbered!"

All of us here have numbered days a447. The difference is that you're not expecting a guy 3 decades younger than you to waste the best years of his life propping up your over inflated ego before you drop off the cliff.

[francois]

Hum,you do mean 4 decades?

[dinagam]

Monsieurs, vous-etes tellement cruel.

[bobsaigon2]

Except that I did direct it at a particular "mid-70s" person - it's just that while he is well aware of that, you didn't pick up on it Bob.

My final final thought: If you did intend to castigate a particular board member, that would more appropriately have been done by starting a thread in the Holding Room, and let it stay there.

[scottish-guy]

No, because I wasn't starting a thread or setting out to castigate anyone.

What I was doing was responding to the mid-70's person's insulting posts on this thread, by pointing out his own considerable shortcomings.

If members want everything that's contentious hidden away in the Holding Room (and believe me there's even more secretive places that posts can be shuffled off to) then may I suggest they apply to moderatorapplications@sgt.com

[arsenal]

I fear that Bob's question regarding fidelity will remain unanswered amid a torrent of diversion posts. It looks as though Mother Superior might have dropped her nickers for someone other than her 'boyfriend'.