Gaybutton

Folks, please do me a favor and include the http:// when posting a link. The link won't work without it and I keep having to go into posts and add the http:// so the link will work for you. This won't work: www.gaythailand.com This does work: http://www.gaythailand.com

Ok, ya got me! I should have clarified that the boy I'm talking about is a freelancer who works without salary at a beer bar, fully clothed. I don't know whether that makes a difference. I also don't know at what point he explains that he doesn't go off with people. However, he is not a go-go boy and he is not paid anything by the bar (although every one the bars get an off fee for any freelancers that leave the bar with a farang). On that basis I would say the choice is his, but I would be annoyed too if I had spent money on drinks at the bar, spent time with the boy, and gave him a tip only to find out at that point that he won't go off with me. On the other hand, if he is up front with customers, before they start spending money, then I would say he is being fair. Meanwhile, in all of the bars there is nothing that forces a boy to go off with a farang, even in the go-go bars. If the boy doesn't want to go off with a customer, that's his choice and nobody forces him. It's rare for a boy to make that choice, but I've seen it happen with particularly gross customers and farang known to be very cheap when it comes to tips. There are even occasions when a boy has no choice but to refuse an off. I don't see this happening very often anymore, but not too many years ago it was quite common for a farang to literally reserve a boy. He would let the bar know which boy he wants and what time he'll be there. That obligated the boy to wait for the farang to show up. If the farang failed to show up within about 20 minutes of the appointed time, now the boy was free to do what he wanted to do again. That practice is rather rare now because there were too many instances in which a farang had reserved a boy, but didn't show up. Meanwhile the boy had customers who wanted to take him off, but had to refuse because he had been reserved. Nowadays the boys want the bird-in-the-hand, so the reservation system is pretty much a thing of the past. That was back in the days when most bars had plenty of customers every night and boys were taken off quite regularly. But now, because of a lack of customers, most boys consider themselves very fortunate if someone takes them off two or three times a month. Only a few years ago many boys could count on two or three times a week, or even more if they were popular.

That's my question too. It's one thing if mama-san is their ya ba connection. That's a far cry from spiking their community water container without their consent or knowledge.

So does his . . . ?

There are several boys who have no interest in going off. Some freelance in bars and make their money by having a few drinks with customers and getting what tips they can for it. Don't ask me to explain this. I don't think I could explain it in a million years and I fully expect snide remarks and jokes to follow this post, but I know one boy who works in a Sunee Plaza bar. He is very attractive. He's delighted to have drinks with you for tips, but he won't go off with anyone. But he likes me! He calls me quite often, gets together with me, and refuses to take any money whatsoever from me other than I foot the bill for what we do when we're together. The one time he ever asked me for anything beyond that was about six weeks ago when he wanted some clothes. He wanted to shop at Big-C. He bought a couple shirts and some underwear. The total bill was less than 500 baht. That's the only money he ever wanted from me. I have absolutely no idea what the attraction about me could possibly be, but I'm glad it's there.

Don't be so sure . . . I tried it and got the same message.

I agree completely with lvdkeyes. So do you. You've told me that yourself on several occasions . . . once they start lying, it's not going to stop. I've found that out the hard way too. The most difficult things I have had to do in my life was letting my boyfriends go once the reality of the situation finally hit me. A "little white lie" is one thing, but this boy flat out lied and tried his damnedest to mislead you. I believe lvdkeyes is absolutely right, that not only will it continue, but it's virtually a sure thing that quite a bit has already been going on behind your back for a long time. Few emotions are as painful as having to give up someone you care about. Obviously you care about him very much, but as someone not emotionally involved and looking at it from outside, my opinion is giving him up is the only thing to do. You have spent a fortune on him and he still lies to you to get what he wants, even when he knows it's totally against your wishes. He chose that for himself. Now he has to pay the consequences of it. If you have the money to do it with, I would urge you to give him a reasonable 'severance,' send him on his way, and get on with your life. It will be terribly painful to do that, but I know you well enough to know what a terrific person you truly are. You will find someone else and it won't take long for the emotions you feel for this boy be transferred to the next one. So many of us have been through this, GT. You know me well enough to know I'm no more immune to it than you are, but there comes a time when you have to choose reality over emotions. It will take a while, but you will get over it. I hope you make the right decision.

You're not wrong and it isn't just that bar. Many bar boys are freelancing, without salary, in many bars. Just ask them.

I'm with Bob on this one. It's difficult for me to consider an argument of this kind, based on nothing but pure speculation, as a valid argument. There is simply no evidence that bars are drugging their employees. Even if they were, from what is being said the boys would all have to be drinking out of the same container. Many do drink from that "community water bucket." Many also don't. What about them? I'll repeat that I have drunk from those buckets too and I wasn't drugged. Now I understand that things in Thailand can be quite different for farang, but drugs? Also, why would the bars do it? The bar boys have no problem doing their thing and they don't need drugs to convince them. I also see no comparison to condoning drug use to prostitution. Legal or not, drug use is clearly harmful to anyone who is a user. When it comes to prostitution, what's the harmful part? The possibility of STDs is there, of course, but I don't see that as comparable to drug use. When you start talking about the morality of prostitution, whose morality? I think everyone reading this is fully aware that Thai concepts of morality surrounding this issue are quite different from Western concepts of morality. The argument that parents would not accept 'consenting adults' as grounds for approval when it come to prostitution and/or drug use. If I was a parent, I certainly wouldn't like it. Then again, I doubt my child would tell me. "When you stop telling your parents everything, a whole new world opens up." - Lee Marvin, 'Paint Your Wagon'

Thank you. I appreciate it.

Whatever it is, it's bizarre. I got that message when I tried to go to both the CNN web site and YouTube. But for me, a second try always works . . . so far.

Why didn't you say so? Ok, ok. I'll stop dying my hair blonde . . .

I've been seeing that too. It started a few days ago on this and some other web sites. I just click the link again or refresh the page and it works fine. I have no idea what that's about.

Gentlemen, I have a feeling I'm about to go through a new round of criticism, but I edited out the bar name of a poster's opinion about which bar is an "avoid at all costs" bar and removed another post that had done essentially the same thing. I'm sorry, but we've been all through this on other threads. Naming a particular bar as an "avoid at all costs jailbait" bar sets this board, its owner, and moderators as a prime target for a libel lawsuit under Thai law. I'm not willing to let that possibility happen. Please refrain from posting things like that. I don't enjoy editing or deleting posts, but that sort of thing forces me to do so.

"Selling is legal. Fucking is legal. Why isn't selling fucking legal?" - George Carlin

I found the following on a web site about the film: "When asked about the misspelled title, director Quentin Tarantino gave the following answer: 'Here's the thing. I'm never going to explain that. You do an artistic flourish like that, and to explain it would just take the piss out of it and invalidate the whole stroke in the first place.'"

Cant's get it up? Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYGBsrCmcCw

I don't know. I knew that White Night had closed, but I had been told it was only temporary. The first I saw of Mike's message was today.

Message from Mike: _____ It is with huge regret that due to Doctor's Orders, I have been forced to give up running the White Night. I made the decision to close the restaurant, but my staff offered a "Management Buyout" and have decided for the time being to run it their way. It will reopen serving Thai food. I wish Joe and his staff well for the future. Mike

I agree. If it's anything I can't stand, it's Bible thumpers telling me all about what's right and wrong regarding sex. Meanwhile, many of them seem to think it's just fine as long as they get to do it without getting caught. When they do get caught, the hypocrisy stands out like a cherry on vanilla ice cream. Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart come to mind. I'll make my own decisions when it comes to the morality of prostitution sex, thank you very much. I do agree with the necessity for age of consent laws, but not because some holier than thou self-appointed spokesman for morality says so. I agree simply because I share the same opinion, but I made my own decision about that.

The following appears in the BANGKOK POST: _____ Officers Cleared of Attempt to Assassinate Thaksin Writer: WASSANA NANUAM Published: 20/08/2009 The Bangkok Military Court has cleared three military officers accused of trying to assassinate former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in 2006 using a car bomb. The court on Wednesday acquitted the officers of the charge of trying to murder Thaksin, but sentenced them to jail for illegally possessing and transporting weapons in the capital. Lt Thawatchai Klinchana, Col Surapol Supradit and Lt Col Manas Suprasert were accused of attempting to kill Thaksin on Aug 24, 2006. Lt Thawatchai of the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) was arrested in a Daewoo car stuffed with bombs under the flyover at Bang Phlat intersection that morning. He was on a route used by Thaksin every day to get to work. Lt Thawatchai's account of why he was in the car led to the arrest of the two other officers. The court acquitted the three of the attempted murder charge after it heard the bombs had not been wired to go off, that Lt Thawatchai had not held a remote control to detonate them, and Thaksin's limousine had already passed the flyover. On the charges of illegally possessing and transporting the weapons, the court sentenced Col Surapol and Lt Col Manas to six years in jail and fined them both 4,000 baht. Lt Thawatchai's sentence was commuted to four-and-a-half years in jail and a fine of 3,000 baht for giving useful testimony. The three officers said they would appeal the sentences. All three are close to Gen Panlop Pinmanee, who was an Isoc deputy director at the time of the offence. Thaksin dismissed Gen Panlop from the security post following Lt Thawatchai's arrest. Gen Panlop has denied involvement in the alleged plot to assassinate Thaksin. _________ In my opinion, just based on what I'm reading, while the evidence may have been lacking on a legal basis, on a logical basis they sure seem guilty to me. Why else would they have bombs on the very route Thaksin normally traveled? I don't approve of Thaksin and his methods, but I see no justification in attempting to murder him. Obviously Thaksin wants nothing more than to be able to return to Thailand and take over the country. Maybe one of these days he'll achieve that. But I can't help thinking of what happened to Benigno Aquino when he returned to the Philippines. He never even made it off the plane. I can certainly envision something similar happening to Thaksin. I hope nothing like that ever really happens. If it does, not only would it be wrong, but all hell would break loose in Thailand. Assassination of politicians has been all too common throughout history. You never see much good coming from it. I believe these officers attempted it, despite the court ruling. If they attempted it, will there be others?

I'm very sorry it worked out that way. I was truly hoping you would prevail.

If you're going to answer your own question, why ask it? The fact is that I have "lurked from the pot," and many times more than once. I didn't end up drugged, although I did start dancing naked on the stage. Now you know the real reason why a few bars permanently closed.

GT, I'm curious as to whether there is a "rest of the story." Did you ever try to make contact with him again?

I like the idea of suspending them, or even firing them and some sort of system to blackball them from working in any other bar, if they test positive for drugs, but I disagree that it should be the bars that do the testing, or at least have to finance the testing. I don't see why the bars should be held responsible for the behavior of their employees any more than a grocery store should be held responsible for the behavior of their employees during non-working hours. I could see a daily pee test, or whatever kind of test, if the police or a government agency does the testing or foots the bill, but I can't see forcing bar owners to do so. I also disagree with the idea that if the bars don't drug test their employees, then it means the bars condone drug use or are even drugging the boys themselves. It could just as easily mean that they don't consider it to be their responsibility, or it's an exercise in futility, or that they simply couldn't care less. I despise drug use too and I don't want to bring home a boy if I know he's a drug user, but does that mean it is now incumbent upon me to personally drug test any boy I take off? I don't think so. I think the same goes for the bars.