Feeling of guilt from going Geylang

if lidat also can?? then i also go and rape her spirtually..

Microsoft said:

Not relli true wat... I can still cum many times... spiritually :p

Click to expand...

I used to have many PRC gf in Geylang.. go there until I am very familiar with the private apartments
(rental & selling prices)

Big Sexy said:

if lidat also can?? then i also go and rape her spirtually..

Click to expand...

Alamak dun say i say u... Here ppl trying 2 cut down u go post all the temptation... Haizz...:( Psst... u go lobang onot har? :p

Leongsam said:

If I could, I would ZAP you for TCSS. Unfortunately, I can't find the "disapprove" button.

Click to expand...

wat? ... cannot tcss in a tcss forum? ...

dont say i dont treat u good.. ok since u want lobong... i give you.

here.. go get her... Miss universe 3000.. please treat her well.

Microsoft said:

Alamak dun say i say u... Here ppl trying 2 cut down u go post all the temptation... Haizz...:( Psst... u go lobang onot har?:p

Click to expand...

To the bro who upped mi .. Thank you :p:p

Big Sexy said:

dont say i dont treat u good.. ok since u want lobong... i give you.

here.. go get her... Miss universe 3000.. please treat her well.

Click to expand...

Uncook? Sori i dun do it raw.

Geylang Cheongster said:

Thx in advance bros. Appreciate your help.

Click to expand...

Here's something from you. Taken from yawning bread...

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="760"><tbody><tr><td align="left" valign="top" width="480">Prostitution and morality
<hr>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" width="480">It is not news to most people that public opinion on prostitution is polarised between two opposing views. The more common view is that it is an immorality of some degree, perhaps one that should be aggressively stamped out, but more often grudgingly conceded as not entirely eradicable. Nevertheless, it should be contained, and public disapproval and relegation to the shadows of shame are essential to this end. The laws enacted against soliciting and prostitution are expressions of the community's values; in fact this sense of shame and disgust is rooted in all societies' cultural traditions and moral teachings, which only goes to show how fundamental this assessment is in human society. For convenience I shall call this the "Moralist" position.
At the other end, the view is that it has nothing to do with morality. It is a willing buyer willing seller transaction. It is a private affair between two persons, and even if the law may criminalise it, it is a victimless crime. It is no business of society and the State to treat prostitutes and their customers as outlaws and outcasts.

Let's call this the "Libertarian" position.

This rest of this essay is in two parts. In the first part, I shall show that both positions are value-equivalent. Despite its pretensions, the Moralist position is not more moral than the other.
The second part of this essay will go further. It will argue that in fact the Moralist position is immoral.

Part 1
Morality ultimately reduces to a question of values. If we attach value to life, then killing for pleasure, like fox-hunting, may be very strongly argued as immoral. If we value honesty, then to cheat and to lie may be construed as immoral behaviour.

The funny thing about "morals", is that sexual transgressions tend to come foremost to mind when we engage this subject. Mention morals and we are likely to get an earful about adultery, "living in sin", pornography and paid sex. To me that is the surest sign that sexual values are in dispute. It is precisely when something is in contention or uncertain that it becomes comment-worthy. It's like Richard Nixon asserting, "I am not a crook".
To the Moralists, sex is an extremely special activity that should not be loosely engaged in. It is central to the bonding between a couple; it is the starting point for a family. Paid sex debases this, it vitiates a person's respect for the intimate and it impairs his ability to bond with another, in the present or in the future.
Some Moralists would add that sex should be given freely, like a gift from one to another. The money aspect of prostitution is another stain on this already sullied affair.

Look carefully and you will see that this view presupposes other values. It presupposes that the pair-bond is valuable and that sexual fidelity is critical to this. It also makes the assumption that casual sex and paid sex (non-relationship sex) somehow desensitises a person to the specialness of sex within a pair-bond. And as for the money thing, it's not explainable unless the person also holds the unstated view that money in itself is dirty (think about how in many traditional Asian cultures, the merchant class was somehow less than respectable) and therefore to add money to sex is to compound the disgrace.

It may be extremely iconoclastic to do so, but every one of these presuppositions can be disputed. A person can quite validly hold the view that sex is no more special than any bodily function; it is only special when one subscribes to a cultural view that it is special. He can also quite validly hold the view that the value we attach to the pair bond, and to the importance of sexual fidelity in support of it, are social constructs. Our modern culture, drawing a lot from its Judeo-Christian roots, puts the pair-bond on a pedestal and generally does not allow any questioning of it. This same culture is extremely embarrassed about sex, and only in reproduction is sex vindicated. Sex in any other context is dirty to a moderate or severe degree. Even nudity is dirty.

Someone can come along and say, no, in my value-system, nudity is not dirty, sex is not embarrassing, and there is nothing in my scheme that says sex should be reserved for the pair-bond. He may even say the pair- bond is overrated. It is unreal to expect as a norm that two persons can mature over the years and not evolve their thinking and tastes in different directions. The divorce rates, and even the extent of unhappiness in marriages that do not get to divorce, are a truer indication of the "facts of life" than any theoretical model. One can have love and obligations to various forms of extended families, siblings, housemates, nephews, even amiable ex-partners, and offspring from various pairings, without making sex and fidelity the precondition for all such relationships. And once sex is downgraded from the pedestal, the specialness evaporates.
Needless to say, he may hold a different, less condescending, view of money.

The Libertarian not only rejects the Moralist views, he holds dear some other values. Primarily there is the ideal of individual autonomy, that each person has a right to seek his own happiness, subject only to not hurting others. This requires the virtue of tolerance and forbearance, and individuals in a community should restrain themselves from interference in others' autonomy and in coercive judgment about others' lifestyles. A willing buyer and willing seller situation, even if the transaction is money for sex, should be no more interfered with than a transaction of money for a haircut.

You don't have to agree with the Libertarian's views. All you need to do is to recognise that these are valid opinions. No doubt one needs to step out of our majority culture to see them as valid, but since culture is a construct, the alternative construction, so long as it is internally coherent, is no less defensible than the conventional view.

Hence, whether we view prostitution with disgust or with equanimity, is ultimately traceable to our ideas as to how our society should be. It becomes a difference in opinion, in conceptual approach. It is not a difference between good and evil. The views are value-equivalent.


</td></tr></tbody></table>

Part 2
But are the views effect-equivalent? In other words, does one position cause more ill-effects than the other?
The Moralist will say that the Libertarian's anything-goes will lead to a breakdown of family and society as we know it. The release of pent-up demand will cause a boom in vice syndicates, the further oppression of vulnerable women, and bastard children all over the place.

Examine each of these alarmist predictions and you will see them as facile and conjectural. More interestingly, the "evils" that are feared are only "evils" by the reckoning of the Moralist's value system. Family is good and legitimate children is good. Paid sex, leading to the demise of family (does it?) and to illegitimate children (does it in this day and age of contraception?) is therefore bad. And as for the fear of vice syndicates, I will mention again further on.

While the ill-effects of the Libertarian position, as warned to us by the Moralists, are conjectural, the ill-effects of the Moralist's position are real, and here with us today. These ill-effects spring from the social stigmatisation and the criminalisation of prostitution. They make an underclass of those who do sell sex in spite of the prevailing climate. The whole business tends to become structured with layers of frontmen (doing the marketing) and protectors (guarding against threats). It is no wonder then that pimps and organised crime are often a part of the industry. (As a parallel, any country that has experienced prohibition -- of alcohol, that is -- would also have seen a boom in bootleggers, moonshiners and protection rackets). The pimps and protectors need to make money from their involvement, and it is all too easy for the sex workers to end up at their mercy.
When the sex workers want to get out from this profession, it can be even more difficult than staying in. Her quitting is against the interest of the pimp and racketeer, and her past makes it difficult for her to go into other kinds of employment. And these impediments of pimp and gangster -- vice syndicates, if you remember -- and an illicit past, are ultimately creations of the judgmental climate produced by the Moralist position.

Two other ill-effects should also be mentioned. Health services for the sex workers are more difficult to deliver to them the more adverse the climate. The sex workers may not want to have to deal with official or institutional bodies. They may fear exposure.

On the other side, the client risks blackmail, and the opportunity for profit will attract all sorts of unscrupulous persons. A moralistic climate creates the conditions for blackmail. The climate is corrupting.
In short, the Moralist position produces some real, demonstrable ill-effects. People are hurt, people are victimised as a consequence of the stigmatisation and criminalisation of prostitution. To persist in holding fast to such an injurious policy, to be insensitive to the suffering, is very simply, immoral.

© Yawning Bread

chuckyworld said:

... You married your wife for her look? ...

Click to expand...

bro,

how many still honor the institution of marriage? how many still honor the vow? seen the divorce rates? wished i bought stocks of it in the early 80s, if there were any...

hmmm the moralist view sex as central to bonding of a pair then like that if my wife no want sex that means she cannot fault me for finding other women to bond with...tio bo?

heartbreak kid
What are the approximate selling prices of a 1 or 2 bedroom private apartment in Geylang?

Leongsam said:

Here's something from you. Taken from yawning bread...

Click to expand...

The Yawning Bread article is not really relevant to Geylang Cheongster as it deals soley with whether visiting a prostitute should be considered less moral than having sex with a regular partner - be it wife or girlfriend... or probably in Yawning Bread's case, boyfriend.

In Geylang Cheongster's case he is already in a supposedly 'exclusive' relationship - ie. he is married. So the question is whether, given his situation, he should be doing what he is doing.

I have always read i think in the old forum of cheating female spouses. Of how if a female is bored and tired of you she would not care. In this day and age females are so-called more liberal, thus the image of the poor homely woman waiting at home for her philandering husband sowing his oats at every passing vagina is over. I feel that women cheat just as much as men and i bet they do not feel the least bit remorseful as the men.

In sg's context we have those mediacock dramas that always show those evil cheating men who go out with their shameless hussies while their very pretty but homely looking wives stay faithfully by their side, all this to reinforce what else but the stereotype of the flirting male while the female is supposedly the faithuful one. Hogwash. This is Sg and hence males are always supposedly brought up to be submissive to females. How about think in a different context. Does the TS wife ever felt that she is causing her husband to stray by rejecting his advances unto her?

Let's change the scenerio and say a man rejects having sex with his wife because he is not interested in sex. The wife decides to find sex outside the relationship. What would you guys say? I would bet that almost more than 90% of you would support the wife and might even volunteer to be the surogate sex partner and of course on the moralistic viewpoint support and even encourage her to cheat.

Now back to say a male not getting enough sex from his wife and decides to do the above. Now the opinion changes to say 80% against the male for even habouring such thoughts. Suddenly even the morally bankrupt become righteous cursing and condemning the male to hell.


Actually forget it for some of us it has become so ingrained into my mentality that we can only think of males being slaves to females.


That is why in sg if ur born in a certain race or a particular gender u are supposed to behave in a certain manner and stepping out of ur station would ripple the pond.

Jah_rastafar_I said:

I would bet that almost more than 90% of you would support the wife and might even volunteer to be the surogate sex partner

Click to expand...

hahaha i like the "surrogate" sex partner makes the whole thing sound more legit...and yeah i too was once a "surrogate" partner but only for a short period...

Jah_rastafar_I said:

I have always read i think in the old forum of cheating female spouses. Of how if a female is bored and tired of you she would not care. In this day and age females are so-called more liberal, thus the image of the poor homely woman waiting at home for her philandering husband sowing his oats at every passing vagina is over.

Click to expand...

What's your guesstimate of the stats in the SG context? Higher or lower than 1 out of 4?


Print this article | Close this window
Paternity shock begets push to test babies

Maxine Frith November 18, 2007<small></small>

MEN'S groups are calling for mandatory paternity testing of all newborns after revelations that one in four Australian men who submit paternity tests discover they are not the father of children they had believed were theirs.

About a quarter of paternity tests done by one of Australia's largest DNA laboratory companies show the man submitting the sample is not the father, compared with estimates of one in 10 "exclusions" a decade ago.
The number of paternity tests taken in Australia has doubled from 3000 in 2003 to more than 6000 last year.

Thousands of men are now turning to DIY testing kits, available over the internet, to discover whether they are the biological father while they are still in a relationship — without telling their partners of their suspicions.
Some have raised children to adulthood or paid tens of thousands of dollars in maintenance to the Child Support Agency before finding out the truth.

Sue Price, a director of the Men's Right Agency, said the deception was ruining people's lives.

"It is not just the men, it's the children who grow up thinking one person is their father and then find out it's someone else," she said.

"In the future, more and more health treatments are going to be based on genetic technology so it is going to be even more important to know who your biological father is.

"Mandatory testing would get rid of all these problems."

The DNA Bio Services lab now conducts more than 2000 such tests a year from the sale of its DIY kits.

New figures compiled for 2007 by the company show that one in 4.5 paternity tests exclude the man as the biological father — a record high since DNA testing began a decade ago.

"The increase is across all social classes and ages — it affects everyone," according to company director Gary Miller.

"Before, a lot of the work was for men who had been contacted by a woman or the CSA for maintenance and wanted a test to prove they weren't the father.

"Now we see a lot of men in a relationship or just out of one who are just looking for reassurance that they are the father and then find out they're not and are completely devastated."

Under Australian law, the family courts will order a paternity test only if there are reasonable grounds to doubt an estranged partner is not the biological father.

The CSA does not require proof of paternity beyond a birth certificate or a man's acceptance that he is the father. This means that some men pay tens of thousands of dollars in child support before finding out that they are not the father. Even if they have reared the children as their own, they are then denied any legal access rights.

But some experts say that the high proportion of negative paternity tests reflects the fact that the men coming forward already have suspicions. They maintain that across the wider population, only 1% of fathers are not the "real" parent.

But Professor Margaret Otlowski, deputy director of the University of Tasmania's Centre for Law and Genetics, said mandatory testing was not a good idea. "I can see the argument from the point of view of creating certainty about parentage, but it would stem from a very suspicious premise and there would be huge implications in terms of relationships."
When Steven Gillespie's girlfriend of just a few months told him she was pregnant, he was shocked but then overjoyed at the idea of becoming a father.

He moved in with his girlfriend and was present at the birth in 2004, cutting the umbilical cord. He had the baby's name tattooed on his chest.
It was only after Steven had split from his girlfriend that she told him that the little girl, then 2, was not his — a claim confirmed by a paternity test.
"I was absolutely devastated," said 46-year-old Mr Gillespie. "My whole family was affected. My parents had been delighted to have a granddaughter.

"For two years I … loved her and cared for her and now I don't have any rights to see her."

Dad's shock: 3 out of 4 kids not his

MIKE (whose name has been changed for legal reasons) brought up four children believing they were his.

The labourer from rural NSW was married for 10 years. He had three boys, now 14, 13 and 10, with his wife before having a vasectomy.

When his wife then fell pregnant, he believed the vasectomy had failed and accepted the girl, now nine. But when she again fell pregnant, in 2003, and had an abortion, the marriage fell apart.

Mike, now 39, was initially suspicious that only the youngest child was not his and used a DIY kit that proved he was not the father.

Within weeks, more tests showed only the eldest was his.

"I was totally shocked," he said. "I have lost my whole family and now
I only get to see my biological son."

This story was found at:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/11/17/1194767024558.html

Interesting article u have posted of the cheating Ozzie FEMALE spouses. These men have literally become cuckhold. There is such a bird in nature which would lay its egg in the nest of a bird from a different species and the parent bird of another species would even feed this chick of the cuckhold bird over its own biological chick and this chick would outgrow even the surrogate parent in size.


Anyway if i were to fanthom a guess i would say around the same as the ozzie context. 1 out of 4. Although i am tempted to say 2 out of 4.


There are still loyal spouses both male and female in Sg entrenched in "Asian" values unlike the more "promiscious" western educated ozzies.

So i say not as bad as the ozzie am i right sam??

Jah_rastafar_I said:

I

There are still loyal spouses both male and female in Sg entrenched in "Asian" values unlike the more "promiscious" western educated ozzies.

So i say not as bad as the ozzie am i right sam??

Click to expand...

My guess is the figures in SG are slightly lower too but it won't take too long before SG catches up with the promiscuous Western world. :(

Brother, listen. Some people drive the first car they bought until the day they hand over their licence back to God. They had never tasted the pleasure of driving different models of different makes in their entire lives. They had never experienced the thrill of pushing to the limit, every which way, on high priced sporty models that often will result in a powerful spurt of adrenalin that can hit the roof. Of course, it won't do to drive recklessly, one must always be properly outfitted with the right protective equipment to avoid injury or even death. Some people can change cars on a monthly or yearly basis because thy are filthy rich. Some will wait to buy second hand. the rest will just rent whatever they can afford. But they all have one thing in common with you. They will all die cock standing with a smile on their faces.

To the OP, Geylang Cheongster, here are my thoughts.

The fact that you are on this forum asking this question is quite revealing. To my mind it would appear that you do indeed feel guilty about your Geylang activities. So let's look at what can be done.

Putting aside the Geylang issure for the moment:

You mention that your wife has become fat and ugly. (While no doubt you have retained your youthful good looks and physique... )

You have also mentioned that she no longer has any interest in sex.

These points would indicate to me that your wife has some serious issues - quite possibly depression.

While a woman could quite easily put on weight as she gets older, she would normally fight tooth and nail to maintain her looks be it through clothing or make up.

Similarly, the fact that she has gone off sex at a relatively young age - what mid-thirties? - again is quite worrying. Sex is an important part of marraige and retaining relationships. (I'm presuming that she enjoyed sex when she was in her twenties.)

I also get the impression that she is a stay at home housewife. She may be very bored with only your kids for company and no real adult friends.

Let me be honest. If you want to help her, you need to seriously sit down and talk with her in a gentle, non critical way. You may even need a marraige guidance counselor. If you are a member of a church/temple ypu might want to see if they have counselors who can help. Failing that, MCDYS has counselling services too. I am been very serious here. If you love her and your kids, you need to make a BIG effort to reach out to her.

Going back to your Geylang activities...

As I mentioned at the beginning, the fact that you are on here asking for opinions would clearly indicate some guilt on your part. And, sorry to say, IMO that guilt is well justified. I'm not trying to get on any high moral platform here but marraige is all about commitment. And fucking around with whores in Geylang is NOT exactly conducive to a deeply commited rekationship.

The only question you have to ask yourself is this: if your situations were reversed, would YOU like discovering that your wife was fucking male gigolos while you were working your ass off trying to support your family?

I know that she is depriving you of sex and that her looks have declined but, as I mentioned above, these are indicative of some very serious issues whether with her (depression) or with your marraige. Screwing around in Geylang treats your sex deprivation but does nothing to help your marraige.

Believe me, I know that your Geylang exploits are very addictive and hard to break away from. Having a different pussy to enjoy, different techniques and styles to try, different breasts to suck - every week - is obviously a lot of fun. And, if you were single, I would say go ahead, enjoy yourself. But you are not single - you have a wife and kids. So, very sorry, but different rules apply.