Back from Kazan

[slim 1,514]

Now...imagine if Cam's story had gone something like this: He had gone over to Kazan, remained faithful to his beautiful Tatar woman, only to find out on the last day of his trip that she had been sleeping with other men while he was there. She explained to him that she loved him very much, and that these men meant nothing to her. She even shed tears as he boarded the plane to leave.

Didn't that actually happen?

Anyway, I would argue the reason Cam, or any other man going over there to "shop" for a wife, would be "entitled" to it and she wouldn't is because he's taking the time and money to visit her in her environment, and her life should be "normal" at the time. He's on vacation and/or a fact-finding mission to view her in her natural habitat, not the other way around.

If she were to come visit him, then by all means, she would be "entitled" to sample the local fare and see what America had to offer, Cam and others, if she so desired.

If they were to meet at a "neutral location" then all bets are off for both. Or, all bets are on, depending on lodging arrangements and agreed upon standard.

I'll resort back to my earlier post, if there's an agreed upon standard following a somewhat lengthy courtship, "I love you so much, I'm only coming over so we can meet the requirement and get the paperwork done then we're going to be together forever......" then both parties should be "locked in" and not seek out other sources. However, if a guy clicked on a girl's profile, used a translator to talk to her a few times and then a couple months later spent thousands of dollars to go see her after she agreed he could meet her in person, then by all means, he's still "shopping" and not "locked in" to anything.... yet. He has the right (I would even argue - responsibility) to seek out other possibilities. Same goes for her if she's shopping abroad.

[mox 298]

Now...imagine if Cam's story had gone something like this: He had gone over to Kazan, remained faithful to his beautiful Tatar woman, only to find out on the last day of his trip that she had been sleeping with other men while he was there. She explained to him that she loved him very much, and that these men meant nothing to her. She even shed tears as he boarded the plane to leave.

Didn't that actually happen?

The facts from his posts are that he went over, had sex with a hooker, waved goodbye to his girlfriend at the airport. There are a lot of details missing, so any combination of events is likely. I threw this little fairy tale together just to kind of make a point, which is that a lot of guys would completely condemn a woman who did this, but would give the guy a pass in the same situation.

Anyway, I would argue the reason Cam, or any other man going over there to "shop" for a wife, would be "entitled" to it and she wouldn't is because he's taking the time and money to visit her in her environment, and her life should be "normal" at the time. He's on vacation and/or a fact-finding mission to view her in her natural habitat, not the other way around.

Hmmm. I can see if the situation was one of those bride tours where you and 10-15 other guys are set up with a disco full of women. You have no previous relationship with these women, so of course anything goes.

I would also agree if you've set up meetings with more than one other woman, and they are all aware of this situation.

But I think it would be unconscionable to do this to a woman who you have been corresponding with and will be exclusively visiting. It doesn't matter how much money you've spent. It now just boils down to an extended blind date where exclusivity should be the default.

Same goes for her if she's shopping abroad.

I'm just trying to wrap my head around why geographical location or how much money you spent should matter. Also...if I understand Brad correctly...the humidity level has something to do with it too.

But I do appreciate the fact that you have a moral code of sorts, and it sounds like you've put a lot of thought into it. It's a lot different than mine, but I'll take yours over the "do what feels good at the time" code many guys live by. I have absolute no doubt that if your wife didn't know what she was getting in to when she met you, she had at least been read her rights.

[akdiver 3]

Bottom line, regardless of anything else: If you're not willing to tell the woman that you had sex with the hooker, then you're being dishonest, and substantially so.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Bottom line, regardless of anything else: If you're not willing to tell the woman that you had sex with the hooker, then you're being dishonest, and substantially so.

Now that is a moral code!

[Brad and Vika 129]

Now...imagine if Cam's story had gone something like this: He had gone over to Kazan, remained faithful to his beautiful Tatar woman, only to find out on the last day of his trip that she had been sleeping with other men while he was there. She explained to him that she loved him very much, and that these men meant nothing to her. She even shed tears as he boarded the plane to leave.

Didn't that actually happen?

The facts from his posts are that he went over, had sex with a hooker, waved goodbye to his girlfriend at the airport. There are a lot of details missing, so any combination of events is likely. I threw this little fairy tale together just to kind of make a point, which is that a lot of guys would completely condemn a woman who did this, but would give the guy a pass in the same situation.

Anyway, I would argue the reason Cam, or any other man going over there to "shop" for a wife, would be "entitled" to it and she wouldn't is because he's taking the time and money to visit her in her environment, and her life should be "normal" at the time. He's on vacation and/or a fact-finding mission to view her in her natural habitat, not the other way around.

Hmmm. I can see if the situation was one of those bride tours where you and 10-15 other guys are set up with a disco full of women. You have no previous relationship with these women, so of course anything goes.

I would also agree if you've set up meetings with more than one other woman, and they are all aware of this situation.

But I think it would be unconscionable to do this to a woman who you have been corresponding with and will be exclusively visiting. It doesn't matter how much money you've spent. It now just boils down to an extended blind date where exclusivity should be the default.

Same goes for her if she's shopping abroad.

I'm just trying to wrap my head around why geographical location or how much money you spent should matter. Also...if I understand Brad correctly...the humidity level has something to do with it too.

But I do appreciate the fact that you have a moral code of sorts, and it sounds like you've put a lot of thought into it. It's a lot different than mine, but I'll take yours over the "do what feels good at the time" code many guys live by. I have absolute no doubt that if your wife didn't know what she was getting in to when she met you, she had at least been read her rights.

No Mox, I was just suggesting that not even a comment as tame as "water is wet" could get by you without a critical comment about the chemical composition of water, or the subjectivity of the word wet. I see you chose the latter this time around. I suspect the same would occur if I had said water is dry. I am still learning the personalities of some of you guys, but I get the impression that you are one who enjoys a, shall we say, robust discussion. The conclusion of same is really far secondary, or maybe irrelevant to the discussion itself. This is not a slam at all, just a follow up to the earlier comment. I like a good discussion too, so long as the other parties to it are articulate and persuasive. I have always found you civil - even when being stalked

[mox 298]

No Mox, I was just suggesting that not even a comment as tame as "water is wet" could get by you without a critical comment about the chemical composition of water, or the subjectivity of the word wet. I see you chose the latter this time around.

Yep, I got it. Which is why I *had* to answer in the manner I did.

I suspect the same would occur if I had said water is dry. I am still learning the personalities of some of you guys, but I get the impression that you are one who enjoys a, shall we say, robust discussion. The conclusion of same is really far secondary, or maybe irrelevant to the discussion itself. This is not a slam at all, just a follow up to the earlier comment. I like a good discussion too, so long as the other parties to it are articulate and persuasive. I have always found you civil - even when being stalked

You know me all too well my friend. No offense taken, you're pretty on target actually. I do like the spirit of the debate, especially when it's all in good fun. I also like to sling a little snark once in awhile, which is also not meant personally. Usually.

[slim 1,514]

But I think it would be unconscionable to do this to a woman who you have been corresponding with and will be exclusively visiting. It doesn't matter how much money you've spent. It now just boils down to an extended blind date where exclusivity should be the default.

If you've been corresponding with a woman, through a translator, for a couple months, why should you be exclusive with her when you're basically spending several thousand dollars to simply "test drive the car before you buy it."

I would agree with you, if there's been a long courtship (sans translator) and you've developed some intimacy and know you're both really 100% into getting married, you're just going over to fulfill the meeting within two year requirement, then partaking in the services of a "working girl" would be immoral, especially if you didn't tell your fiancee.

For the guys that "click on a profile", send a few e-mails through a translator, call through a translator, then fly over there three months later to meet her (and the translator) they might as well "employ" as many girls as possible while there. Hell, by all means, they should go ahead and have the translator do a little side work! That's the one they've been talking to, after all.

I'm not suggesting that anyone do anything they think immoral. However, guys like Cam and many, many others, spend thousands and thousands of dollars to go over there and meet a girl they don't really know and there's no guarantee she'll be as cool as the translator said she was. If they don't partake in the services of other girls, then they're limiting themselves and wasting their money. (That is, if nothing comes out of the relationship they were there to investigate.... through the translator.)

I'm just trying to wrap my head around why geographical location or how much money you spent should matter.

The person spending all the money is the one taking the chance to make the relationship work. They're the one leaving their home and "gambling" on something coming out of it. The person staying home and meeting "a guest" isn't taking that chance so if nothing comes out of the visit, they've lost nothing.

There's no guarantee it's going to work. So, if/when it doesn't work with the person you went to meet, if you've "met" a few others while there, you minimize your risk of nothing coming out of the investment. Not to say partaking in the services of prostitutes actually "gains" something from the investment, but when reconnecting with the $5000 trip to the FSU is the story going to be "I met this nice girl over the Internet, went over to meet her, had a nice week together but it just didn't work out." Or, is it going to be "I went over to the FSU to meet up with one chick, that didn't really work out, but dude, I nailed the hottest chick(s) in the world while I was there and had a great time."

And I know that's not the story everyone wants to hear, but it sure beats, "Yeah, I met this girl over there.... and it just didn't work out. I have some nice photos of me drinking with her uncle and cousins, the local churches, a river..... it was a good experience." $5000 for some pictures and a "good experience." If I'm paying $5000 for anything, it's going to be the "experience of a lifetime" and there better not be any pictures!

But I do appreciate the fact that you have a moral code of sorts, and it sounds like you've put a lot of thought into it. It's a lot different than mine, but I'll take yours over the "do what feels good at the time" code many guys live by. I have absolute no doubt that if your wife didn't know what she was getting in to when she met you, she had at least been read her rights.

As F'd up as my moral code is, there is a method to my madness. My wife has an equally F'd up moral code, slightly different from my own, but it mirrors mine on key points and doesn't stray into the "feels good at the time" so it works for both of us.

If I were to sum up my moral code, it would look something like this -

((10 Commandments + Bill of Rights) X (Necessity / Drive) - (Desire - Possession) + (relative ease) / ((beauty - age) X (alcohol) / (cost))) X Long term satisfaction ....... and then I determine a percentage based on that. If it's above 50, I go for it. If below, I hold off. Pretty simple, really.

My wife's looks something like this -

(100 - Bad) X Long term satisfaction / short term loss Or, (0 + Good) X Long term satisfaction / short term loss ...... in this case, if it looks more bad than good, she'll hold off. If more good than bad, she'll go for it. Pretty simple, really.

When you think in long terms, it helps avoid the "feels good at the time" which leads to so many poor decisions. One thing that really helps me is to keep in mind how long eternity is. That pretty much kills my average and anything I was thinking about doing to gain short term satisfation gets blown out of the water.

[Bobalouie 0]

Mox - Water is wet, don't you agree? Sheesh!

Best Bill Clinton impression: Well it depends on what the definition of "wet" is.

Wet like a warm apple PIE

[eekee 182]

Lending a female perspective, I don't think that there's anything wrong with sampling the local offerings if it's a "fact-finding" mission. But living in the hiv'n'heroin capital of Russia, the whole hooker thing is just really gross to me. Thinking first of the Russian guys who would actually pay for a hooker and the terrible all-over life of a Russian prostitute... I wouldn't ever even consider a guy who had paid for sex here.

[Brad and Vika 129]

No Mox, I was just suggesting that not even a comment as tame as "water is wet" could get by you without a critical comment about the chemical composition of water, or the subjectivity of the word wet. I see you chose the latter this time around.

Yep, I got it. Which is why I *had* to answer in the manner I did.

I suspect the same would occur if I had said water is dry. I am still learning the personalities of some of you guys, but I get the impression that you are one who enjoys a, shall we say, robust discussion. The conclusion of same is really far secondary, or maybe irrelevant to the discussion itself. This is not a slam at all, just a follow up to the earlier comment. I like a good discussion too, so long as the other parties to it are articulate and persuasive. I have always found you civil - even when being stalked

You know me all too well my friend. No offense taken, you're pretty on target actually. I do like the spirit of the debate, especially when it's all in good fun. I also like to sling a little snark once in awhile, which is also not meant personally. Usually.

I understand, and tend to engage in a little thread jacking and digression myself on occasion. All pretty entertaining, although it can be frustrating to make a serious post and get mostly bullsh#t in response. Like this:

OP - Question about customs forms required to bring a pet iguana into the US

Post 1 - eloquent half page dissertation on the traditional migration pattern of the Alaskan caribou. Nothing remotely to do with OP.

Post 2 - poster claims #1 doesn't know sh#t about caribou - gives three citations refuting #1

Post 3 - #1 sarcastically critical of #2, says #2s sister looks like a caribou

Post 4 - New participant offers three sentences on OP topic, and suggests that OP should be addressed instead of caribou

Posts 5 and 6 - Both caribou posters call OP and last poster a f#cktard, and state that their mothers rut like caribou

Eighteen pages follow about name calling, caribou, mothers, etc. OP is never really answered

What I like about this forum is that amid the sarcastic comments, the original question is usually answered, or at least discussed.

[mox 298]

What I like about this forum is that amid the sarcastic comments, the original question is usually answered, or at least discussed.

Well it depends on what you mean by "what I like about this forum." (kidding!!)

I like that about this forum too. I've yet to see a sincere question go unanswered. Sure, the thread inevitably devolves into stuff about the things, but compared to most of the other regional forums the RU forum does about the best job of answering the OP.

Which reminds me. Why haven't we invaded any of the neighboring regional forums and set up permanent bases and issued RU forum passports?

[Kazan' Tiger 1]

Why haven't we invaded any of the neighboring regional forums and set up permanent bases and issued RU forum passports?

[Brad and Vika 129]

What I like about this forum is that amid the sarcastic comments, the original question is usually answered, or at least discussed.

Well it depends on what you mean by "what I like about this forum." (kidding!!)

I like that about this forum too. I've yet to see a sincere question go unanswered. Sure, the thread inevitably devolves into stuff about the things, but compared to most of the other regional forums the RU forum does about the best job of answering the OP.

Which reminds me. Why haven't we invaded any of the neighboring regional forums and set up permanent bases and issued RU forum passports?

Pick a forum - it doesn't have to be next door

[mox 298]

Pick a forum - it doesn't have to be next door

If I were truly evil, I would say MENA.

I am truly evil.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Pick a forum - it doesn't have to be next door

If I were truly evil, I would say MENA.

I am truly evil.

No need to invade MENA. They seem to be OK with every one. How about a PI forum, where everybody lapses into Tagalog? Many of us have cyrillic keyboards.