Sex in the City

You know, I have to admit I’ve always been fascinated with Bangkok’s endless supply of “TV rooms” or “Short-time hotels.” Nestled not-so-subtly between such places as store-front homes, petrol stations, and noodle-soup vendors, and sporting discrete, high cement walls next to their flashing “TV HOTEL” signs complete with beckoning arrow, these hotels appear every few blocks or so, from the diminutive to the unabashedly dramatic. (How’s that for a Preamble-like sentence?). What I find so fascinating about them is their combination of the batting-eye virgin and the gyrating “do me, big boy” prostitute. This is sort of how sex seems to be portrayed to me all over Bangkok. No, sex is only something done by husband and wife and we DON’T talk about it. But sure, there IS an incredible sex industry in which THAI MEN (no, those naughty white and Japanese men only make up a single digit percentage of those using a prostitute’s services) are populating these hotels of happiness.

Let me describe these hotels. They are single rooms, with a large bed, dim lighting, a bathroom with a shower, and of course, a TV. They normally have a single purpose – a discrete place to have sex. This is what happens. You drive up in your car and quickly turn into the area of the hotel. Immediately, smiling young Thai men wave flashlights much as those who help land planes do (they try to make the whole area as dark as possible, often with concrete roofs above), beckoning the car forward. Middle-aged women armed with cans of disinfectant walk around the place slowly, exchanging soiled sheets for clean ones. All one sees now are stalls, each with a colorful curtain displaying a large number, pulled tightly across it. The men run quickly to the curtain, fling it back, allow your car to drive in, and then rush it back into place, concealing your car behind it’s vinyl shield. There, in front of your car’s bumper, is a door. Inside that door is your ticket to paradise. Normally, you pay by the hour. Probably around $4-5 USD. The place is yours now, no questions asked.

Several times a week I find myself driving through these hotels. There are several blocks of them that connect from near my home to a nearby mall. By using them as a shortcut, I avoid the menacing traffic of Bangkok and all its danger and headaches. In return, I get an interesting look at what Bangkok pretends to abhor, and yet with a smirk and wink, looks the other way.

These places in their simplicity flourish. What does this mean?? Well, it means that there are a LOT of people who want to have sex and don’t have a place of their own to do that in. This makes sense. Most Thais live in relatively large family units (a house with parents, children, grandparents, etc.). A Thai living on his or her own is rare (and expensive). I personally know of one young woman who must travel up to an hour and half to and from work each day. I ask her why she doesn’t get a condo near school, and she says, “I don’t want to. I like living with my family. I like to come home and eat with them and talk to them.” This is said in all sincerity and I believe her. This is a woman who is engaged to a boyfriend she loves very much. If I was her, I’d have scrambled off to my own place long ago. But, it just doesn’t seem to be that way here. Family is just more important. Growing up in individualistic (yay!) America, this is hard to comprehend much of the time, but it seems to be true for most. A “sense of family” is something I never had, since I had such a fucked up one, so the individualism of America suits me fine, but I am viewed as odd here, because I live by myself and don’t seem to want or need anyone’s help.

What does it also mean? Infidelity, particularly in males, is fantastically high. Thai women grudgingly accept this, claiming that it’s a trade-off since females control the money and the children. Personally, it’s not the kind of exchange I’d like, but I am lucky enough to have the choice to avoid it. I have talked to many Thai women about this. It is kind of a sad burden. I wonder what the rate of women’s infidelity is. There is not much of a male prostitute culture (that which exists caters primarily to gay men), but once in awhile you hear things. Recently, a club where women pay to have men dance with them (and supposedly also sleep with them) was crashed by the police. You don’t hear about the police crashing the thousands of brothels and bar girl-inhabited places much. Anyway, these hotels are in a sense, a nod of approval for these men. Would hundreds, or thousands of TV room hotels exist if it was mostly married women who were taking their bar boys for a roll in the hay? I suspect not. But how is this different from any other place in the world?


Another thing that always makes me smirk, is the usual elaborate and large “spirit house” that is set up at these things. A spirit house is kind of like a mini chapel, and they can be set up anywhere, usually outside a home or business. I often see very dramatic ones at short-time hotels, and often see young women leaving the hotels and paying respect to these houses on their way out. A friend and I talking about Patpong (one of the sex tourist districts), noted that the girls would dance (and possibly screw for cash) all nigh, and then the next morning be fresh-faced, bowing and scraping at the local temple, in all true sincerity. In the U.S., this would be seem as some sort of mockery. How can you be spiritual and be a prostitute at the same time? Why not, I say? Mary Magdalene did it.


This reminds of something I saw on CNN today. A young, beautiful, and articulate princess of Swaziland was advocating and pushing a giant white rope (“tassle”) that all female virgins should wear to promote abstinence – particularly up to the age of 21. And why?? Well, besides the fact that this ridiculously-huge rope was claimed to be a reclaiming of traditional beliefs, the real reason was to PREVENT AIDS!

*cough* *splutter*

Excuse me? If the women stay virgins until they’re 21 (and supposedly married), THIS is going to help solve the spread of AIDS? HELLO? Does anyone REALLY believe it is the married women who are responsible for the spread of AIDS in Africa? I may not be the most educated woman on this subject, but I know full well that it is the single and MARRIED men who sleep around (also with prostitutes) and then come home to their wives and children who are the real carriers of this disease. So, a woman is a good girl. She stays a virgin until she is married at, let’s say, 22. Her husband sleeps with her, gets her pregnant. And, he also gives her another gift – AIDS. Well, isn’t that special. Now, that GOOD wife and her innocent baby are AIDS victims. Rah, rah tradition.

The Foreign Service Exam, and The Morality of "Ignorance is Bliss."

Can you tell by my reading list that I’m doing some studying? Mark, you’ll hate this, but I registered for the Foreign Service Exam and I decided to start cramming for it. Yes, I know, they're going to turn me into a slut in Afghanistan, sleeping with nasty Abdul the gundealer for information.

As for the studying, it’s fabulous, actually. It’s like studying for a big, important test, and yet, if you do terrible on it, who cares?? I’m really enjoying myself. Reading all this history, political science, and economics stuff has been fun for me. I’m learning a lot about the American Presidents, a subject I’ve never felt very well-educated on. Sure, it’s not the greatest source of education, but I really like these Idiots/Dummies/No-nonsense guides. I think they’re a good place to start. We all need a decent foundation in order to go into the minute detail of academia.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a strange philosophical thought to put forward. In the world of “morality,” is something considered a sin if you only feel guilty when caught? Your immediate response might be “Of course not!” but in reality, I think it’s something to think about.

For example, you do something that is beneficial to you, and which would hurt your mother emotionally if she ever discovered it. Of course, if your mother never knows about this action, she will be in the land of “ignorance is bliss” and well, so will you, since you have benefited from said action. After a great deal of time has gone by, your mother does discover said action. Naturally, she is hurt and feels a bit betrayed. NOW…yes, NOW you feel like total dog shit. You didn’t really suffer from guilt (unless you are Catholic) up until this point. What you were doing was too wonderful for you, and sometimes something that makes you happy is difficult to see as wrong.

Is this way of action really wrong? Will it encourage us to do things that society considers as immoral, and then of course, try everything one can to not get caught? You know, although rules and such can be a pain in the ass, and when you’re a child, can seem so arbitrary, when you’re an adult, they start to make sense. MOST rules are created for a REASON. Some are more obvious than others, of course. But experience often tells us, as we get older (I’m pushing 30, kind of excitedly), that often rules are put where they are for a good reason (and in less frequent times, to benefit someone or others).

We tell people in society that if you hurt someone, and they are ignorant of that fact (thus they are not truly hurt), you are doing a deceitful, immoral thing. If you are gaining some pleasure from this unknown immoral act, then it makes it much worse, because you are gaining pleasure from the possible harm it could cause if it was revealed. It seems a bit abstract to me, and of course, society DOES tell us its immortal for a reason – we don’t want everyone going around doing things that could be hurtful to others for their own satisfaction!

Yes, I am guilty of said action. I have hurt someone. Am I trying to excuse myself? Hell no, I accept the consequences (and subsequent guilt) for my actions. And anything terrible I may feel right now is because I don’t enjoy hurting others and would love to prevent it. “Well, you should have thought of that when you did what you did.” Sure, maybe. In this life, if we are trying to be good to ourselves and each other, we try not to hurt them. And sometimes, we try to live life to the fullest, and sometimes that means doing what’s best for oneself. This may hurt people. Now, I am not talking about stomping on people on your way to the top (especially for some sort of monetary gain). I am talking about doing something that makes you feel alive, and then, if it is kept from the “right” person, you continue to feel alive, happy, maybe even fulfilled. Oh mother, now you know, and now you are hurt. And yes, I feel terrible that you are hurt, for I would never want that. BUT, if you did not feel hurt, would my action be wrong? Is it only the feelings of a person (who will hopefully one day forgive you) that makes something a sin? Ahhhhh “sin.” A Christian word. Sin, sin, sin. Sin is a slap in God’s face, when what we should really care about, is if it’s a slap in our fellow “human being’s” face.

I guess I don’t have a point. As someone who has tried hard to live life to the fullest, had a wonderful time, and still feel like I’m feeling awfully short, I do think that sometimes people get hurt, even though you don’t want them to, and even though your actions were intentional. I don’t think that necessarily always makes it so much more evil. I believe in regret and retribution, and strongly in accepting consequences for one’s actions. But like the tree falling in the forest with no one to hear it crash,…is it so that an action taken, that may make someone hurt IF they discover it, is that action a true horrible deed? A SIN? Maybe ignorance really is bliss, for all of us involved. I guess we all decide for ourselves.

P.S. OH god Oh god! They’re going to add a new Bob Saget sitcom to the lineup on my already super-limited cable stations here. *cry*