Gaybutton

My answer is I don't know what my friend thinks and I'm not going to ask. He's my friend and if he has expressed his wishes, that's good enough for me. I don't need him to explain or justify. Ok, I've answered your question. Now instead of evading it yet again, answer mine. It took me a few minutes to finish my little laugh over this one: "Do you want to go home penniless or do you want to go with me?" How generous of you. You're coming to the rescue of the boy your friend asked you not to take. You merit a statue too. If you're so concerned about the boy that you're going to help him out by fucking him, why not truly help him instead by abiding by your friend's wishes, taking the boy off, giving him some money right then and there instead of taking him home so you can get laid, and letting him go home or wherever he wants to go so he have a night off and not have to go home penniless? Can't do that, though, can you? Nooooo. Doing something like that never even occurred to you. You've just got to have sex with him. From among all the other boys available it just has to be him. After all, your friend's wishes mean nothing to you. And the boy . . . well, he's nothing but a prostitute.

You are becoming very quick to put down people who don't agree with you. "Silly old fools." Why? Because they don't agree with you? Unless their opinion is the same as yours, then they're silly old fools? As far as you not getting it, the point is you don't have to get it. Only your friend has to get it. If he asks you not to take off a certain boy, try at least asking him why before you head out your door to the bar where you know that boy works. So, you go right ahead and take a boy off even if your friend has asked that you don't. I'm still waiting for you to address the question I asked: Given the number of boys available, why would you take off the one boy your friend has asked you not to? Anyone who has a go-go boy boyfriend lining up to be gay_grampa's friend?

If that is the case, then on what basis does he decide to waive the charge?

Velasco: I wish I was ten years older. Corrie: Older?!? Velasco: Yes. Dirty old men get away with much more. - Barefoot in the Park

I think it would be best if someone takes a copy of that article, shows it to Wat, find out from him what the story is, and then let us know what he says.

Amen! Totally agree.

Are you talking about a boyfriend or a marriage? Does moving toward those goals count?

With my luck, instead I'll come back as a cell in the asshole of a dung beetle. Come to think of it, some people out there think that's what I already am. OMG! You're going to be my wife!

I don't disagree with that, but I don't see that as the issue. To my mind, that's between the farang and the boy and is not our business to pass judgment. I don't know how a farang can truly consider the boy to be his boyfriend if he works in a bar. What is important to me is my friend does consider it that way. Also, I neither know nor care whether he condones it or not. For all I know, the farang might be back in his home country and isn't even aware that the boy is still working in a bar. I don't see how that alters the issue. To me, there is only one issue here. A friend has asked that you don't off a certain boy because he has an ongoing relationship with him. Now you have the choice of abiding by his wishes or disregarding his wishes, no matter what the boy does for a living and no matter whether my farang friend condones it or not. That's his business, not mine. He has his reasons and I don't see any need for a friend to have to justify his reasons to my satisfaction. I pose the same question because so far nobody has posted an adequate answer: Given that there are so many boys here to choose from, why would you take off the one boy your friend has asked you not to?

I know this is a silly question, but would someone please explain to me what difference it makes as to which board posted a news item first or which poster made the "scoop"? What's that all about? Are we having some sort of an "I found out first" rivalry contest or something?

Yes, when I am subjected to needless put-down attempts as part of the post I get unreasonable about things like that. I'm funny that way. Ok, as far as I'm concerned you can have the last word.

That's right. I don't dispute gay_grampa's position that the boy is available for anyone, including him, but it still goes beyond me that if he knows his friend's wishes, he'll still take that boy. Don't forget, we're not talking about a boy somebody takes off every so often. We're talking about people who have an ongoing relationship with that boy. Gay_grampa is saying that if the boy works in a bar, then there's no reason not to take him off. I say there is a very good reason if I know my friend has some sort of a relationship going with that boy, beyond casual offs, and has made it known to me that he would rather I not take that particular boy. I'll repeat . . . I would choose to abide by my friend's wishes. Gay_grampa, on the other hand, as far as I can tell from the manner of his posts, couldn't care less whether his friend likes it or not and instead of finding another boy, he's going to take that boy regardless of his friend's wishes. Gay_grampa, I sincerely appreciate you giving me permission to think what I want. I hope some time you really do have a friend who asks that of you, but you go to that bar and off that boy anyhow. I hope as you're leaving with that boy, your friend at that moment is walking in. I'd love to be there when your friend realizes that you didn't give a damn about his feelings, only what you wanted for yourself, and asks you why you did that. I'd be very interested to see what you'll say to him. Since I now have your permission to think what I want, good. I think your attitude stinks.

Whatever the man's reasons were, his behavior was way out of line. Sometimes it can be very difficult to know what goes through the minds of people like that. Certainly part of the job of any hotel staff worker is to be friendly with the guests, but since when does that friendliness mean now he is supposed to date or have sex with the guest?

For me, that's easy. I would choose, if I could have plenty of money, to go to ancient Greece or ancient Rome. Can you imagine what gay life must have been like if you were wealthy? It was probably pretty good even if you were poor. Pompeii, before Mt. Vesuvius blew its stack, must have been a paradise. I would also consider Thailand, before western countries started imposing their homophobia.

I think that's just like saying "If God meant for man to fly, He would have given him wings." Sorry, but I don't view that as valid because I do not presume to know what God would have done and I don't presume to know what someone else would do. How do you know what someone else would do? Just because you feel that way doesn't mean that everyone else has to see it the same way. I see it just as Astrrro does. And again, I don't see your point. Are you saying that if you have a friend who you know would be upset if you took a particular boy, then instead of finding a different boy you would take that boy regardless of your friend's feelings? What are you going to say to him? "Yes, I knew you would be upset, but I didn't give a damn because you are letting him work as a prostitute." How do you think your friend will respond? Do you at least care? Maybe the boy is fair game because he works as a prostitute, but so are hundreds of others. Just because he is fair game, that doesn't mean you have to choose him. Why on earth would you want to take the one boy you know is going to upset your friend? If you value the friendship, why would you choose to disregard his feelings? I really don't understand why you would do that.

I agree with what you say, but I don't think it is upon me to judge how special a boy might be to a friend or upon what criteria the line of "fair game" should be drawn. My feeling is very simple. If a friend lets me know that he would be upset if I go with a particular boy, then to me whether the boy is a bar boy or not would be irrelevant to me. For me the only issue is whether I want to abide by my friend's wishes, as I hope he would abide by mine, or whether it is more important to me to take that particular boy and upset my friend when there are so many others. While there may be all kinds of justification for taking the boy despite my friend's wishes, it is something I simply would not do. I would find another boy. I just don't see any reason why that one boy would be so important to me that I would risk upsetting my friend to have him. This is one sea that has a hell of a lot of fish. I'll choose a different one. I would abide by my friend's wishes as I know my friends would do for me. If it is a boy I know my friend is been seeing, I wouldn't even ask the question as to whether it would be ok with him when he is away or any other time. I just wouldn't do it. If my friend tells me he doesn't see that boy anymore and has moved on to others or tells me they have "finished," now I would assume the boy is fair game.

I'm not so sure I would want a 'next life.' I'd have to go to school again? It's nice to think about going on to something else and even nicer if you genuinely believe that happens. Unfortunately for me, I think this is it and it's all you get. So, enjoy it while you can.

I am very familiar with that case. He's one of my closest friends. There was more to it than that, but you're talking about a substantial amount of money they were trying to cheat him out of and he got a settlement on breech of contract grounds. He had to pay attorney fees and this was a civil action, not a criminal case. I'd say that's a far cry from a 200 baht traffic ticket. I don't feel the least bit guilty about paying it and being on my way, no matter how many times bkkguy wants to insist I am morally wrong. RichLB is right. I have yet to meet anyone who has ever flat out refused to pay and took the consequences. I have no idea what those consequences are. Does anybody know? If you refuse to pay, what happens? What can they do about it? The only thing I am sure of is they can hold your driving license. The first thing they do when they stop you is ask to see your driving license. Until you either pay the cop, or go to the police station and then seek him out again to show your receipt, he's got your driving license. Other than that, I have no idea what can happen. So, excuse me for my terrible immorality, but I'm not about to be the one to find out the hard way. And I'll bet neither is bkkguy. In the meantime, I'm not idiotic enough fight a battle I know I can't win just to satisfy bkkguy that I'm being morally correct. I don't see him stepping up to lead the battle either. He says by not fighting it, then I am shirking my responsibility and leaving it for everybody else to fight . . . except him, of course. To me, his version of morality is the same principle of the terrorist leaders leaving it to others to be the suicide bombers. Lecture everyone else on how moral it is, but get involved and do anything himself? No way. Yep, that sure is fine example of morality on his part, isn't it? Should I ask him my question a fourth time? Bkkguy says at least he has the guts. Goody goody. I'll just have to suffer through life being a sniveling coward . . . "Hell, you're just a goddam coward!" - George C. Scott, 'Patton'

I think the main issue is whether they let their customers know, before they go upstairs, that they are going to be charged the 150 baht fee. I don't have a problem with it if they let you know, but I would be upset if the fee comes as a surprise later. Do they let people know? Also, it used to be that you could go upstairs alone and find boys already up there waiting for customers. Is it still like that or do you need to find a boy you like downstairs first and take him up with you? I'm guessing that whether you go upstairs with a boy or go up by yourself, you get charged the 150 baht fee. Is that correct?

That's precisely what I think. You know why? You don't merely express your opinions. You get personal about it and you express your opinions as if they were fact. Well, my friend, your opinions are not fact. Neither are mine. I notice when you have no valid argument you start resorting to insult and put-down attempts. Unfortunately, with me they don't work. Keep trying, though. With enough practice I think there is a very good chance you might eventually become good at it. Are you ever going to answer the question I asked, three times now . . . the one about what you do to fight corruption in Thailand and what results you've achieved? Well, since you entirely avoid answering that question and since the answer is perfectly obvious anyway, I'll answer it. You do absolutely nothing, give right in if a police officer, even a corrupt one, confronts you, and then get on this board and start posting with a self-righteous attitude if someone, meaning me, won't agree with you. And that's why, in my opinion, your arguments and put-downs have no validity whatsoever. My favorite line of yours is, "at least have the guts to admit that what you are doing is wrong." I'm so grateful to you for presuming to decide for me what I think is right and wrong. Ok, since you are so morally righteous, just let me know where to erect the statue.

Good point. If you have to be stuck somewhere, it might as well be right here. I can certainly think of worse places to be stuck.

My interpretation of bkkguy's standpoint is even if you go to the police station to pay it, if you know you did nothing wrong, then you're still contributing. Based on his post, the only way I see to avoid being a contributor is to refuse to pay at all and face the consequences. Otherwise, according to him, you're taking the easy way, shirking your responsibility, you're morally wrong, and you're leaving the battle to be fought by everyone else. You know what? In that kind of circumstance I'm going to take the easy way, shirk my responsibility, be morally wrong, and leave the battle to be fought by everyone else.

I don't think the issue is determining whether to call it a bribe or call it something else. I believe the issue, stemming from the other thread, is whether you are contributing to corruption or being victimized by corruption if you do give the policeman his 200 baht, even when you know you have done nothing wrong when driving a car or motorbike.

I agree with RichLB. The question on this poll is a loaded question, to my mind similar to "When did you stop beating your wife?" style questions. However, I think people will get the idea if they read the discussion that prompted this thread on page 4 and 5 of the "Red-Shirt Protests Go Violent" thread.

It was getting into a specific debate between bkkguy and myself regarding only one aspect - my personal morality (or lack of same). This thread is about what's happening with the Red-Shirt protest, the Thai political system, and commentary about it, but not whether farang should be involved in fighting corruption or the morality of disputing or not disputing traffic tickets. This thread easily could have gone off on that tangent and stayed there, so I'd rather see that subject discussed on a different thread.