Condoms and catching diseases

[Guest]

And yes I should have asked not to move this thread, my mistake.

[elef]

Hi Fly,

 

I've heard the same argumentation before. The problem with that it's not explaining the drastical change compared with South Africa. If it was like your theory it's my opinion that the situation would be the same in both countries, but it's not! A theory based on a few cases is weak. So maybe a statistical analysis will be made so we can get the answer. Until then I believe the cited theory is much better explaining the actual situation than yours.

 

 

elef

[iuytrede]

I am also qite pissed off by those farangs who think they don't need a condom.

 

It is no fun to see teenage GTGs who have been infected with STDs by farangs who told them they had been checked for STDs. And when the farang is not here anymore, the girl is waiting 3 months for the HIV test. Or 18 year old students aborting the child of some 40+ y.o. tourist whith whom they foolishly fell in love and who didn't give a shit about the possibility of disease or pregnancy. And when you are a 18 y.o. student you still believe the guy who tells you he is going to Cambodia "for business".

 

In the relationship between a TG and a farang man - be it P4P or nonP4P - it is almost always the farang who has the power. He is relatively rich, he is mature, he is educated, he has a lot more experience. He does have the responsibilty to use a condom.

[Guest]

>>>it's not explaining the drastical change compared with South Africa<<<

 

 

i have not the slightest idea about south africa, so i can't comment on that. would you please explain more.

 

 

>>>A theory based on a few cases is weak. <<<

 

well, if those few cases correlate with the finding of almost every non siam-trap (or embarrassments like cleo odzter's crap) anthropological study than it is not just a few cases.

 

 

>>>So maybe a statistical analysis will be made so we can get the answer. <<<

 

personally, i do believe that in this aspect we would do a lot better with anthropology than with statistics.

[elef]

Hi Fly,

 

I'll try to find the article but if you have time you can find more information on the websites of UN and WHO.

 

"personally, i do believe that in this aspect we would do a lot better with anthropology than with statistics."

 

Sorry, I totally disagree. Statistics is a scientific tool so if anthopologists don't use statistics it's just a collection of unverified theories instead of facts.

 

 

elef

[Guest]

a scientific tool not to be overstated.

without some basic facts of human behavior in todays thai village society any statistic will have a serious flaw.

lots of women in normal ralationships do appear in the newly infected rates. fact.

they were mainly infected by their whoring husbands. conclusion based on a stereotype which does not get questioned.

result: there will be wrongly aimed prevention tactics.

 

reality (based on personal observation and long term study):

there are many ways of infection.

thai village women are not little opressed wifeys. there is hardly a village which does not have a pub where married women can congregate and have meetings with the moneyed classes of the village society. some of those pubs do have short time rooms in the back, and in others only initial meetings are fixed which usually come to frutition in the little shacks you see on the ricefields.

most unmarried men very often have sex with village katoeys (without being marked as "gay". very often they grew up together and and therefore use no condoms as they are from the same clan.

as i said before - many young men in the village do not have the money for the singsot of a virgin. they do very often marry a returning retired prostitute or divorcee (often infected by her husband) without testing beforehand.

also, a long time neclected by the NGO establishment: during the boom many families were separated for long stretches of time. it was always taken for granted that the wifey in the village took care of the children while the hubby whored around after the factory job. wrong. the wifey played around at leats as much with the moneyed village class, such as teachers, cops, rich farmers who had no need to look for factory jobs in the city.

 

basically, by the NGO establishment, certain stereotypes are taken for granted, mainly flawed by the same thing which we do accuse the thai society of: taking things at face value without looking any deeper because we have a certain picture of siam that cannot be shaken up. there might also be a certain slant towards looking at things from a certain comfortable angle: "women are exploited by men, point." any digressing view is staright away challenged by politically correct opinions. so, just be a parrot and you won't get into trouble.

 

i just do not believe into generalisations especially if they are obviously simplistic (reality rarely is), and if they go completely against my findings and the results of everyone i know who has performed long term studies on thailand's village society.

[pattaya127]

there is hardly a village which does not have a pub where married women can congregate and have meetings with the moneyed classes of the village society.

------------------------------

Can you be more precise what is meant here. Pub? It's a lot more public than philandering in a little shack in the fields. Thais can do everything, i admit, but they usually pretend to discretion in indulging sex (maybe a room in the next town, but down the street from home?). Moneyed classes? prostituting oneself to them, in one's own clan/village for the fun of not being little oppressed wifeys?

 

Thanks for expanding on that.

[Guest]

>>>Can you be more precise what is meant here. Pub?<<<

 

what do you mean with precise? a village style pub, often near the market or the busstop, or a bit out of the way to keep appearances.

 

 

 

>>>Moneyed classes?<<<

 

rich farmers.

cops.

teachers.

shopowners.

whoever has more money than a landless labourer, and who can afford to spend it. not everbody in the village is poor.

 

 

 

>>>prostituting oneself to them, in one's own clan/village <<<

 

yeah, what else? prostitution village style.

do you think that doesn't go on in the village as well?

what do you think is for many girls the first way into prostitution? do you think they arrive as virgins in the city? or are all those hookers poor girls who were left by their bad bad husbands?

[pattaya127]

often near the market or the busstop, or a bit out of the way to keep appearances.

-------------------

More like a small town, then. in a village, there is no "out of the way". I can certainly see that some adulterous meetings can happen, with money changing hands, though.

I used to stay with my grandparents in a small town in France, and there were alot of things going on i overheard, for sure. down to the local priest.

 

 

not everbody in the village is poor.

----------------------------------------

I understand that, I was not sure if you meant that he rich in the clan P4P with a guy's poor wife.

 

 

 

or are all those hookers poor girls who were left by their bad bad husbands?

----------------------

There are all knid of reasons why they find their way into the scene, i would not reduce it to a bad bad husband.

 

I doubt indeed a lot started with a prostitute experience in the village, and made a career of it early on.

 

Do you mean to say that most girl in the P4P scene of pattaya and BKK came as prostitutes already?

[sabio]

iuytrede said:

It is no fun to see teenage GTGs who have been infected with STDs by farangs who told them they had been checked for STDs. And when the farang is not here anymore, the girl is waiting 3 months for the HIV test. Or 18 year old students aborting the child of some 40+ y.o. tourist whith whom they foolishly fell in love and who didn't give a shit about the possibility of disease or pregnancy. And when you are a 18 y.o. student you still believe the guy who tells you he is going to Cambodia "for business".

 

In the relationship between a TG and a farang man - be it P4P or nonP4P - it is almost always the farang who has the power. He is relatively rich, he is mature, he is educated, he has a lot more experience. He does have the responsibilty to use a condom.

May I respectfully present a different point of view?

 

1. As long as the man is honest with the woman and the woman is competent to consent, he bears no more responsibility than she does. If she is not competent to consent, he should not have sex with her with or without a condom.

 

2. If someone enjoys bareback sex enough to take a risk on their own life by not wearing a condom, it is not realistic to expect them to refrain from that on account of the potential risk to others. It is morally nice-sounding to say that they should, but it is not realistic. Our lives matter to us more than the lives of others.

 

3. The same argument about exposing the girl to STDs and pregnancy can be made by someone advocating abstinence over (condom) sex. After all, condoms are far from full-proof. I think we tend to take our choice in the risk-reward balance as a reference, with those who take more risk being morally irresponsible, and those who take less risk missing out on the fun.