The Door Swings Both Ways
In a reader submission entitled, "They Make It Easy And Then They Break Your Heart" by Jack Flowers, I read about a punter that got angry when a girl tried to butterfly on him when a better opportunity was presented to her. While his reaction is understandable, given people are jealous (and jealousy is irrational too often) and men can be as possessive as women, I did not believe it was justifiable for the reasons he indicated.
I’m not really responding to Mr. Flowers situation in particular, but to how so many punters seem to attach expectations of loyalty to bargirls. Mr. Flowers case, though, makes a good example of the situation I want to comment on, so I will use it as a point of reference.
First, to expect this from a prostitute is unjustified. Second, it’s hypocritical to do so. Such an expectation is enforceable neither morally nor practically, given the punter doesn’t give the loyalty he demands.
Mr. Flowers story opens with the following paragraph, of which I've only highlighted a quick summary:
”Visiting Thailand was something I had wanted to do since I was a young man in the American Military during the Vietnam War…After getting a divorce several years ago, a good friend asked me over and over to make the trip with him to LOS…I finally agreed to make the trip about a year ago and now wish I would have agreed sooner…"
This paragraph indicates Mr. Flowers is new to the LOS scene, and I think it's very relevant as to why he started thinking this bargirl (that got him quick angry) was "different". (Few, if, bargirls are ever really different. You just learn to accept who they are or leave, if you chose to get involved with them emotionally or relationship-wise.) However, many if not most punters find themselves starting to think their girl is the exception at some point, even if the guys is experienced in this scene, and is not the subject of my response.
It is very contradictory when a butterflying customer gets upset with a bargirl trying to butterfly on him for a quick short-time. He admitted doing the same thing previously to another bargirl so he could go off and butterfly elsewhere. Why was he angry when his bargirl tried to do the same thing, when she lied to him and tried to sneak off for high-paying short-time? Didn't he lie and sneak off previous to do the same thing? The door swings both ways. Very often, you get back what you dish out.
Additionally, the bargirls are professionals. They are there for the financial compensation. I think that is clear and obvious, but guys will come up with all kinds of euphemisms (bargirl, sanuker, "farang bar scene", etc.), excuses (it's the same as marriage, white women are the same, etc.), and exceptions (this one is "different") to avoid dealing with this reality. Yet, if you look at the picture, it is clear they are professionals and they work for money, and guys that claim otherwise need to re-assess reality. The fantasies or fact that some may actually enjoy the “boom boom” or like the guy doesn’t change the reality that they are there for the money. I work primarily for the money. I may or may not enjoy the work, but if I were not paid, I would not go to work, whether I enjoyed it or not. I would simply enjoy not working even more. There are things I enjoy more than working, like my hobbies, visiting friends, etc. If a bargirl likes a punter, and he stopped paying or she didn’t need the Baht, wouldn’t she enjoy spending time with her “real boyfriend/husband” even more? Of coarse she would. And if she didn’t have such real relationships, wouldn’t she prefer a younger or more attractive guy with a similar language, culture, or set of interests? Wouldn’t she want to find a non-customer farang, even if she preferred a farang for a real boyfriend? I mean, nobody knows the shortcomings of farang punters more than a Thai bargirl. It would only make sense for her to avoid these individuals, whom she should see as often troubled, alcoholics, socially troubled or lacking, and disloyal. After all, as mentioned before, the door does swing both ways. The bargirls and the punters are both disloyal, troubled, and participate in a questionable trade. That includes all current and past participants, myself included.
The loyalty and "sincerity" so many punters expect is pretty ridiculous. You don't buy their hearts and minds, just TEMPORARY use of them physically. It doesn't change to where you can expect more unless you get into that rare instance where BOTH parties are sincere in entering into a real, normal, committed relationship. This is quite rare, as at least one party (if not both) is simply pretending to be sincere. The guy often lies about loyalty to butterfly for fun, and the girl often (and I personally think, usually) lies to get the money and continues to work. For money or for fun, cheating sexually is just that, excuses or motivations aside. The motivations may give some insight into “why” someone cheats, but it doesn’t change the fact they cheated.
In any event, no such relationship was entered into explicitly in Mr. Flowers case, and any expectation that it had been was incorrectly assumed. The punter knew he was leaving LOS soon, and he expressed no intentions for her to convert to a normal relationship, nor did he ever get a clear agreement from her. Even if he had asked and she had agreed, she could easily have lied to him in order to obtain the extra monthly income.
And most striking is that he never demonstrated the loyalty, which he expected she give him. He got angry over her lack of loyalty. He did what he wanted and went off when he saw a physically attractive girl. She simply wanted to do the same thing when she saw a financially attractive man. Though I understand why and how many guys think like this, it is hypocritical to think you can expect something from a bargirl like loyalty, ESPECIALLY when you don’t provide what you demand. The door swings both ways, or as another saying goes, “what is good for the goose is also good for the gander”.
Many men come to LOS and places like it, because they like how it's a man's world. That doesn't change the fact that it's hypocritical to cheat and then demand loyalty (plus to expect any kind of loyalty from a bargirl is unjustified in most cases), and that in the end she was no more wrong than he was.
The one thing she might be faulted for was to enter into an agreement, which she broke. That's unethical business. However, consider the kind of person you are doing “business” with. Despite all the claims, usually true (I think), that bargirls usually do deliver on their services, when a punter buys an illegal service and it’s not delivered, there is usually little recourse, except to demand a refund, as Mr. Flowers successfully did, and hope for the best. If someone bought fake drugs, they couldn’t go to the authorities, and it is the same case with a punter screwed over by a whore (with the possible exception of complaining to the bar she may work in).
I believe Disneyland's motto is to "exceed the customer's expectations". With prostitutes, customers should have no expectations whatsoever 0- and that ay there can be no disappointment.