No Money No Honey – Cambodian Men Going Their Own Way

Heh. After a lengthy phase of anatomic ambivalence and intestinal introspection I am once again back on the road. It’s been a scary experience in Cambodia but on the bright side it did give me an opportunity to rub noses with a lot of the common men there. What was revealed to me I found nothing short of fascinating.

The thing is, Cambodian men have a veritable pussy paradise compared to what most blokes in the West have to grapple with. Cambodia is still a deeply traditional country with patriarchal structures and all those evil, eeeevil things restrainining women’s hypergamy liberty. So you would assume men would go for it and by and large jump to the chance of getting with these sweet and affectionate damsels? Interestingly enough, this is not at all the case.

Don’t get me wrong. Just like all men everywhere in the world (except for perhaps the pathological manginae who just want to cuddle), Cambodian men, too, strongly crave the good old ‘In’n’Out’. It’s the circumstances of said that deter them, however. Cambodia is a monogamous society and this monogamy is still rather robustly enforced. Maybe less so in the capital, Pnom Penh, but certainly in the countryside where things remain strongly traditional and time seems to be stuck firmly in the 19th century (I even saw horse/donkey/buffalodrawn carts there, seriously).

So just as women’s hypergamy is reigned in, so is men’s polygamy. At the same time Cambodia is a miserably poor country. And not just in a global but also in a regional context. Even Vietnam – itself a country of rather modest means – compares very favorably to Kampuchea where some men earn as little as 45$ per month, slaving working 7 days a week. This then, in a nutshell, is the roach in their pudding: if they want sex they are supposed to marry. But if they marry they have to support their wives and children on ofttimes catastrophically low incomes. It’s a recipe for misery and failure. And, unsurprisingly, it is thus not something they seem to be relishing.

I talked to several guys who all told me straight out, they’d much rather just go to a prostitute for a shortterm “sex fix” than have to deal with a wife, family and all the concomitant bother. These were good guys, not cads. Honest to Earth salts, the beta backbone of society. And if even these guys – who have truly pleasurable women (oftentimes still virgins, at least in the countryside) to pick from – don’t really want to go for it I conclude the future of marriage in the West with all the  toxic, merry brew of harridans, shrews, harpies and succubae…is altogether hopeless.

I thus posit men don’t naturally want to marry. It is quite difficult to harness them to the yoke of wife and family support. Historically, kickstarting the monogamy-marriage dynamic was only possible in those societies where sufficient incentives (for men!) were present and the surrounding circumstances benign. Once a monogamous tradition had been established, I suspect, it was able to sustain itself through societal pressures and man’s tendency towards conservatism.

Wherever and whenever a society removes all these incentives for men and replaces them with deterents (feminism, divorce rape, false rape allegations etc.) or falls below a minimum threshhold of economic stability (45$/month in Cambodia) thus placing an undue economic burden on men seeking to provide for their families…monogamy and marriage will tend to fail. And men will start going their own way, putting their own interests first. In short they’ll say: “forget this yoke, you can pull your cart on your own, thank you. I be gone. You’ll find me poolside.”

As the saying goes:

“No money no honey. No honey no baby. No baby no problem.”

Advertisements

9 comments on “No Money No Honey – Cambodian Men Going Their Own Way

  1. I think you’re spot on with the monogamy thing. Pair bonding has evolved for thousands of years, but in different ways for men and women, obviously with the polygamy/hypergamy thing.

    I fully believe you’re right in that monogamy and marriage are completely a social thing that is only a desirable option in specific set of social and economic circumstances – mostly a wealthy, industrialized, but moderately to heavily conservative society. Or one that has none of these things and, infact, the lack of resources and enough danger dictates that the society can’t spend resources with inner conflicts. Though really I can’t see that happening on anything more than a tribal or small (and socially tight knit) town.

    If you take away any of those elements, it breaks down. We took away the conservative parts of society and let hypergamy run wild – so we had men willing to commit but getting a bum deal because the women weren’t willing to fulfill their side.

    Then the economy went to shit and you have men that wouldn’t be prone to commit anyways now looking at the slutty options most men have to deal with (unless you find the rare gem), and say no.

    Looking at your post and that the society only has the conservative part, it’s not surprising that men there aren’t subscribing to marriage. If you only have limited resources and are barely able to pursue your own life goals, why give those up for a marriage? Did you see any sign of older men marrying women 10-15 years younger? Just curious if, after accumulating some moderate wealth and pursuing any goals, men decided it was time to settle down because they could both afford to and got to an age where the cost of supporting a wife was worth having feminine support at home.

    • umslopogaas says:

      @Leap:

      Yes indeed. That is how I see things as well. There is a relatively limited “Green Zone”, a sweet spot of sorts, between too much poverty and too much sluttery / feminism (societywide). If a society falls below a minimum thresshold of wealth men start to not want to marry. They will still try to have sex with women, of course, yet will shy away from monogamous committment in any meaningful way. Africa comes to mind. As well as this example here…Cambodia.

      Conversely, in afluent societies where success has led to decadence and decadence in turn to hedonism and feminism we as men experience women devaluing themselves, slutting things up on the Cock Carousel and thus we likewise lose interest in marriage and family. Additionally, our ability to function as bread earners is, of course, also seriously compromised in feminist societies. Altogether these factors compel us men to ghost / go our own way.

      Oh and of course. Older guys with younger / nubile women was a common sight in Cambodia. Any man that has wealth is immensely attractive to these ladies. Simply because relative to their level of poverty his comparative wealth automatically gives him ‘Prince Charming’ status. Female hypergamy is thus revealed…yet again.

      Heh, so guys…if you want a wife for life…go to Cambodia. They know how to cook, treat you with deference, are beautiful, warm and nurturing. The only problem is that most of them cannot speak English.

      But that, too, is actually a good thing: stay away from those that *do* speak English. Chances are, those are the prostitutes and ‘good time girls’. Those that act demure, shy and respectful…and cannot speak English….those are by and large unspoiled, traditional women.

      Rare gems and emeralds in this world of cheap fakes!

      • Hurray for quality!

        Also – I saw the post in the comments over at HUS that Susan had deleted one of the previous ones you made about a week ago. Curious, what was it?

        Sad how much of an echo chamber that place is these days.

  2. umslopogaas says:

    @Leap:

    Heh, yes. The good Mrs. Walsh decided – in her unlimited wisdom – to delete my comment and permanently ban me at HUS.

    As for the comment itself: it was in the thread ‘dificulties for intelligent women to find a man’. I somewhat snarkily expressed my opinion that I have almost never met a western woman that was truly intellectually curious (i.e. intelligent). I wrote about my impression that most women I’ve ever met in my life were interested only in a rather limited range of topics (gossip, sexuality, family, babies, shopping, makeup/beauty, wellness / astrology and psychology).

    I added that thus the only field I enjoyed discussing with women was psychology and even here their interest was often fleeting. I went on to describe how counterproductive my discussions vis a vis politics, history, economy and technical stuff had been with women.

    I concluded from these experencies (that all truly happened to me) that maybe that might be the reason women have invented so little in mankind’s history?

    Bottomline: my comment might have been less than absolute polite, that’s true. It was somewhat snarky. However, to label it (and me) as “women hating” is kind of crazy, imo. Moreover, this was a less than flattering opinion of mine but one I’ve developed after talking to women for litterally dcades. So it was not just an attempt to be disrespectful.

    Ah well too bad really. You have to walk on egg shells over at HUS. Blunt speech can get you banned in an inkling. It’s a female thing, I guess. Fragile egos and all. Of course…in consequence it leads to HUS becoming an echo chamber, agreed.

    Which is ironic…seeing as Mrs. Walsh labelled the ‘Manosphere’ as an echo chamber, Heehhh!!

  3. ema florence says:

    a woman in my village near siem reap (cambodia) was abandoned by her husband. he took their first child with him, which is permitted by cambodian law, and left her with a one month old daughter. he gave the first child to his mother to take care of, and went with his second “wife” (never divorced the first one technically) to live in the city. he had more children with her but we are not certain how many. he left her and he is now ON his third “wife.”

    most men have at least one “wife” which they do not actually support. the women in cambodia support their families while the men drink rice wine out of plastic bags and are drunk before lunch. men in cambodia know how to do the following: have sex, get drunk, kill people, create bogus NGOs and steal money from contributors, beat their children, wives, and even their parents, according to many people i have interviewed.

    what they don’t know how to do is love, forgive, take responsibility for their actions, have courage, and actually improve the lives of their families.

    you don’t know anything about real khmer life. you don’t speak khmer, and the men you spoke to are all liars and drunks. you lived the touristic illusion of a cambodian experience. why don’t you try again. go back to cambodia. learn the language and try to do something useful, instead of making ignorant commentary about a culture that is beyond your intellectual grasp.

    • Paul Murray says:

      So – why do the women go along with this? This second “wife” you speak of – what was her story?

    • Mike says:

      Oh look, a hamster.

    • Kirk says:

      In the West, it’s the women who beat and kill their children. It is the women who sleep around, produce children with loser men, abort the children they don’t want and use the children they do want to collect welfare from the state and child support from the father – even if he’s not the biological father. It is the women who break up families on a whim and who plunge their families into poverty. It is the single mothers who raise criminals and who fill the jails with their offspring because of their poor parenting skills. It is the single mothers who shack up with men who are poor role models for their children. It is the female teachers who sleep with their under-aged students. It is the women who file for bankruptcy relief after making poor life decisions that cost them. And it is the women who are more likely to default on child support payments.

      In the West, it is the women who don’t know how to love, sacrifice, nurture, compromise, forgive, have courage, or take responsibility for their lives. And the feminists are proud of that. You don’t know anything about what goes on in the West. You are living in a feminist illusion about life in the West, which means that you have no intellect. The feminists are hateful, sexist, arrogant and substance-abusing liars. Come to the West and see the poverty. This is assuming that you are not one of those Western feminists posing as a Third World female just to spread your propaganda. If you are such a feminist, do something positive to help men, women and families instead of breaking them apart.

  4. Well Said. Will be visiting cambodia for the first time soon and dyning to see one of the world’s greatest civilisation. I have booked nothing really enjoy people and talking to them. Anyone would like to be my guide and mentor while i am in cambodia? I m from Sweden and à researcher.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s