Exploitation: Real, imagined, or deliberately disingenuous?

[Muzh]

The fact you had *little* time to socialize locally while raising young children
is mirrored by a lot of MOBers  for various reasons, not unlike your own..
I was raising a young boy on my own as well..

Another funny guy.
 
The vast majority of MOBers go abroad BECAUSE ALL women where they live are fat, feminazi bitches from hell. Where you've been? It's all over these pages. ALL FCUKING WOMEN form their neighborhood. Not a single exception.
 
Rasing their young children? Sure. My 20 yo will still be my baby. But he ain't no dependent child anymore and so were most of the "children" from the majority of MOBers.
 

I dated women I met locally,and internationally, some  met from various internet sites, some where from travel interest or hobby sites , some where dating sites , and  it also included MOB sites!

Is it really gong to be defined by the website utilized?
 
Shouldn't they be ranked by exactly which MOB site uitilized then?
http://mail-order-brides-websites.no1reviews.com/

Is this a PSA? I have to admit I took a peek. 

To John Q Public, you met your (fill in any stereotype MOB country) wife on the internet,
regardless of website. You went to her country, visited her ,and eventually married with her immigrating to your country.In John Q Publics eye that's MOB,
May not  make it technically correct,but wont change the perception or stereotyping.

You are failing to name the main reason for John Q to be a MOBer. He was surrounded by aging, fat, feminazis.
 

But hey ,good luck with the caste system.. the one defining how is or isn't an MOBer here,
or the higher and lower levels of it.
You know I always love when its defined very clearly so *they* all know their proper place.

To bring this back to topic, I'm sure the higher levels of the caste , exploited less! Likely in some very exacting ratio/proportions.

I not going the GQ way and call MOBers a bunch of losers. However, when men exhibit this kind of attitute towards women, it don't matter where his future wife will come from that will change their stripes. And these are what I refer to MOBers.
 
Here's the part where I make the reference of using a shoe horn for proper fitment.

[Muzh]

Nice!


It is rather humorous that some people start doing handstands to try to distinguish themselves as meeting their wife some 'better' way...or by shear dumb luck...when you boil down their stories you often find they are absolutely typical as those they like to criticize. 


In addition, the poll is really showing how isolated those that are convinced women are being 'exploited' by men looking to get married.


Fathertime!

Can I ask you how many agencies you worked with before you went to the FSU? And what was the major reason you went to the FSU looking for a wife?

[Muzh]

My post was directed at FatherTime - the man that's neither married to an FSUW (South American? Yeah, another deprived area) nor, as far as I can tell, interested in the FSU in general. One wonders what his motivations are for posting here at all in fact...

Ooh? Well, this is interesting.

[Muzh]

Note the framing:  the default assumption that exploitation is going on, and that it is the Western man doing the exploiting. 

Low information, biased, hackish... a kludge.

I'm almost positive that there was consensus here that exploitation was happening, albeit in a benign way.
 
 
 
   In a benign way.

[Muzh]

Of course i owe you no explanation, but I delight in letting you know why I'm here....I enjoy reading stories/biography about people...this place is like an interactive biography...I like many of the individual stories...such as Gator's, Billyb's, and ML's...just to name a few.... After a while it became an annoyance to read all the angry/baseless accusations, so I've decided to step up the participation to give a few of the 'agitators' some pause, and some comeuppance.  Not surprisingly, about 1/2 of the previous agitators hit the road within days, or made themselves irrelevant.., and the tone is already improving....I look forward to the day when I am quietly lurking and reading what people are doing/thinking (and relating it to my own life), without reading every third post implying 'sex tourism' 'abuse' and 'exploitation' among other things....

More interesting wording. So you are going to annoy the annoyers. Priceless.
 

[Muzh]

As a kid I was taken by the ear to many Southern Baptist revivals where I heard way too much sanctimony.   I am sure others thought what you wrote to be spot on.  The collective experiences, insights and opinions of RWD are very wise.

You know I'm a liberal. What do you expect? 

[Muzh]

I wondered what prompted the highlighted line, so I went back and reviewed the conversation...and it appears to have come outta the blue...I don't think many would be put a 'halo over the head' of guys looking for wives abroad...BUT How about if some guy out of the blue made some crack about Divorcee's from abroad don't EVER complain about ex-spouses and paint them as devils?  I would say it has about the same relevance as the comment about halos and men...Zero....you are not complaining and devil painting and I'm not seeing people placing halos over men looking for wives abroad.  To be earnest, it just looked like you were taking a shot at men in general...because they are a safe target.   


I agree with the point that men going abroad are in it for their overall benefit, not altruism....it just goes without saying though...doesn't it?   


Fathertime!

LMFAO
 
Well MissA, it seems that the answer to your question is the latter.
 

For some it could be SO for better or worse and for some it could be young hot babe that would cause envious stares from other guys (of course former isn't mutually exclusive of latter and neither latter mutually exclusive of former).

[Muzh]

You must have forgot the time you told the forum you would have considered a threesome with a couple of prostitutes you communicated with on the internet if it weren't for them living so far away. Do you want me to remind you that you admitted to being a troublemaker in your youth? How much bad have you done to people? These are the things you have told the forum. I wonder what you haven't told us.


I've been catching up on some reading in this thread and I see people are hostile to you. If you'd quit putting people down and insinuating they're exploiting FSU women and portraying you're honorable, decent and have taken the high road, you'd have a much better debating experience with those you disagree with. People are treating you like a hypocrite for good reasons.

That is what I love about you Billy, you always seem to be 'catching up' on threads at very opportune moments, don't ya? Similar to what some have accused TomT of doing.

[Muzh]

Let us not forget as well the notarized documentation that the RWD elite were dating models at least a few decades younger than they were before getting on the plane...

Roger that!!

[Muzh]

Fathertime, not sure if you realize but you are making what you call 'push backs' way more often than contributing anything substantial to actual discussion. Those 'push backs' coming every time you are seeing something as any kind of criticism or even as view that portrays something/someone in uncomplimentary/negative light. If you had difficulty to understand apparent reason behind one of my sentences, you could have asked me to explain. Instead you took swipe at me

I am not posting on this forum to engage in 'push back' games and I do not have time to waste to discuss with you every my word that in your eyes portraying men (as well as anyone/anything else for that matter) in negative light. Do not expect from me response to any of your further 'push backs'.

Let's be painfully obvious.
 
There are some men who 'dislike' when a woman or women express their opinion when it goes against what the men said.

[Muzh]

I don't know ade, if a guy is looking at pictures of prostitutes and then commenting publicly about how he would like to use  them...it seems pretty likely he WOULD use one, and probably has at some point...Either way doesn't it seem hypocritical of you to criticize another poster through 2nd or 3rd hand gossip about the very thing you  talked about doing yourself?


Fathertime!

You starting to sound like a man who has lived long enough to know better, eh? 

[Daveman]

I'm almost positive that there was consensus here that exploitation was happening, albeit in a benign way.
 
 
 
   In a benign way.

Here's the thing.  The word itself is too varied in connotation.  One definition requires an unfair condition to apply.  The comparisons with sex slavery and sweat shops are ludicrous because the "deal" the women are making is equitable and a free choice of an option available at a specific point in time.  Utilizing an opportunity which presents itself, from either side, does not automatically equate to taking an unfair advantage of the other  party.  The stickler in this discussion is that problematic "unfair" terminology.  Men naturally tend to chase the prettiest women within radar range. Women do go after stability.  Whether short term or long term, both are getting what they want from the deal.  The assertion that one, the other, or both had fewer options may be factual but is irrelevant to the discussion as all must choose from available options at the time of the choice. Whether he, or she, can get what he/she wants at home is also irrelevant.


I don't know what percentage love plays into any of these relationships.  My *guess* is that in all probability, that percentage would not equal a majority.  So that does indicate a trade/barter system. 

The default position is that something does not exist until there is convincing evidence that it does.  Lots of emotions here, and many assumptions, but very little actual evidence that there is an "unfair advantage".

[Muzh]

Here's the thing.  The word itself is too varied in connotation.  One definition requires an unfair condition to apply.  The comparisons with sex slavery and sweat shops are ludicrous because the "deal" the women are making is equitable and a free choice of an option available at a specific point in time.  Utilizing an opportunity which presents itself, from either side, does not automatically equate to taking an unfair advantage of the other  party.  The stickler in this discussion is that problematic "unfair" terminology.  Men naturally tend to chase the prettiest women within radar range. Women do go after stability.  Whether short term or long term, both are getting what they want from the deal.  The assertion that one, the other, or both had fewer options may be factual but is irrelevant to the discussion as all must choose from available options at the time of the choice. Whether he, or she, can get what he/she wants at home is also irrelevant.


I don't know what percentage love plays into any of these relationships.  My *guess* is that in all probability, that percentage would not equal a majority.  So that does indicate a trade/barter system. 

The default position is that something does not exist until there is convincing evidence that it does.  Lots of emotions here, and many assumptions, but very little actual evidence that there is an "unfair advantage".

I do agree with the above highlighted. When two people barely know each other and in many cases cannot communicate in an effective way, love is way down on the totem pole. Hope is at the top.
 
However, I do see an unfair advantage. Consider that in the majority of these marriages, she leaves behind her support system and relies exclusively on the man, who happens to be the only source of income. Add to that cultural differences and lack of understinding on both parts and the possible altercation where most of the time the woman is on the receiving end.

[Gator]

     I don't know what percentage love plays into any of these relationships.  My *guess* is that in all probability, that percentage would not equal a majority.  So that does indicate a trade/barter system.   

I do agree with the above highlighted. When two people barely know each other and in many cases cannot communicate in an effective way, love is way down on the totem pole. Hope is at the top.

From the disputed Chester survey done around the year 2000 when most AM-RW marriages were of the "One Week Wonder" category:



6.   60% of the women did not love their husbands when they married

7.   99% of the men 'loved' their wives when they married.

A practicing psychologist years ago made a compelling argument that in the typical romancing of a RW, the man is not feeling love but limerence.   The psychologist (Richard?) made this analysis based on having made a trip or two to the FSU.  He posted his opinions on a defunct board.

Rather than "love" I believe a more important question is how many FSUW enter a marriage in "good faith," i. e., committed to making the marriage work.

A summary of the  Chester survey and the different opinions regarding its authenticity are presented here:    http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=3165.msg58854#msg58854

[BTW:   The 2-page thread shows that RWD had spirited disagreements in 2006, yet the attacks were mostly confined to the message, and for sure did not make malicious insults of the messenger.   IMO the forum had more the feeling of a gentleman's club (women invited) rather than a mud wrestling pit.]

[Gator]

 
However, I do see an unfair advantage. Consider that in the majority of these marriages, she leaves behind her support system and relies exclusively on the man, who happens to be the only source of income. Add to that cultural differences and lack of understinding on both parts and the possible altercation conflict where most of the time the woman is on the receiving wrong end.[/b]

I agree with you if the last sentence is changed as I did above.

[CanadaMan]

Quote from: Jumper on Yesterday at 15:49:57

To John Q Public, you met your (fill in any stereotype MOB country) wife on the internet,
regardless of website. You went to her country, visited her ,and eventually married with her immigrating to your country.In John Q Publics eye that's MOB,
May not  make it technically correct,but wont change the perception or stereotyping.

You are failing to name the main reason for John Q to be a MOBer. He was surrounded by aging, fat, feminazis.
 

First of all 'John Q Public' in Jumper's post was the cynical public at large, not the MOBer!
You missed that.

Secondly, Jumper was not stating the main reason why MOBers search out of country.
He was stating how YOU in your personal case, met YOUR wife!

Quote from: Slumba on Yesterday at 17:20:20<blockquote>

Note the framing:  the default assumption that exploitation is going on, and that it is the Western man doing the exploiting. 

Low information, biased, hackish... a kludge.

</blockquote>

I'm almost positive that there was consensus here that exploitation was happening, albeit in a benign way.

Not according to the poll in this thread.
In fact, the overwhelming consensus is the exact opposite.

[Gator]

I wrote this some time ago but it seems likely to take this discussion into useful territory. 

Your work is relevant because this also serves as an inverse scale for how much a man has exploited the socio-economic situation. 


From there the potential uses are limitless, e. g. calculating an individual's FICO credit score, deciding eligibility for admission to the finer education institutions,  not having to wait one's turn for organ transplants, awarding perks such as preferred seating so that the top class do not sit with the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are not even allowed to ride, acquittal of crimes against someone of a lower caste, etc.


Also consider the business opportunities for products akin to skin-whitening chemicals.  For sure we need to carry certificates that can not be questioned as forgery.   My mind is spinning thinking about the possibilities.   Larry, do you realize what a pioneer you are?!

A few questions as you roll up your sleeves and complete this: 

1.  What if you are in Class One but you are Richard Gere of Pretty Woman and fell in love with a prostitute you hired?   BTW, most RW really enjoy this film - consider the suggested implications.

2.  What if you are in Class Nine but you and your wife are very happy with each other, share true love, and are committed for the long term? 

3.  What if in reality you are in a lower class but claim to be different and better?    Are you sure the entire community will recognize an untouchable no matter how much he pretends otherwise?

Yes, you have started something. 

[Daveman]

I do agree with the above highlighted. When two people barely know each other and in many cases cannot communicate in an effective way, love is way down on the totem pole. Hope is at the top.

Hope and perhaps a bit wishful thinking..

However, I do see an unfair advantage. Consider that in the majority of these marriages, she leaves behind her support system and relies exclusively on the man, who happens to be the only source of income. Add to that cultural differences and lack of understinding on both parts and the possible altercation where most of the time the woman is on the receiving end.

Well, yeah, that situation does exist and altercations are a possibility, and a foreign woman does have a distinct disadvantage if an altercation does occur, but can that (real altercations as opposed to disagreements) be considered normal?

About the overall situation where she relies on the man for a period of time, she *should* understand that will be the situation and made her choice to accept that situation, as least temporarily, until her independence grows.  This still isn't "unfair". It is merely a condition of the situation of which the existence s known in advance of her choice.

Of course, he has a power advantage during that time and could resort to using that power to manipulate her.  That is very possible. But, is using that power to manipulate her the "norm"?

This may be a good discussion point, at what point does free choice and personal responsibility cease to apply?

I'm actually not trying to split hairs here.  I just don't see the need to fill in the evidentiary gaps with emotions or suppositions.  Personally, it makes not a whit of difference to my life whether it is or it isn't. 

[Muzh]

Quote from: Jumper on Yesterday at 15:49:57
First of all 'John Q Public' in Jumper's post was the cynical public at large, not the MOBer!
You missed that.

Secondly, Jumper was not stating the main reason why MOBers search out of country.
He was stating how YOU in your personal case, met YOUR wife!
 

I AM SO sorry. Please forgive me for my crass error. Oh please dear god forgive me.
 
No, I didn't call you god.
 
Okay so let's try John Doe. It really DOESN'T matter.

Quote from: Slumba on Yesterday at 17:20:20<blockquote></blockquote>
Not according to the poll in this thread.
In fact, the overwhelming consensus is the exact opposite.

Says who? What consensus?

[Muzh]

Well, yeah, that situation does exist and altercations are a possibility, and a foreign woman does have a distinct disadvantage if an altercation does occur, but can that (real altercations as opposed to disagreements) be considered normal?
 

Hey, no argument from me. However, if we use the same yardstick for determining consensus based on a few people who responded to this survey, then this should also be considered the norm based on examples posted here.

About the overall situation where she relies on the man for a period of time, she *should* understand that will be the situation and made her choice to accept that situation, as least temporarily, until her independence grows.  This still isn't "unfair". It is merely a condition of the situation of which the existence s known in advance of her choice.

I'm pretty sure most women who embark into this are fully aware of this.

Of course, he has a power advantage during that time and could resort to using that power to manipulate her.  That is very possible. But, is using that power to manipulate her the "norm"?

For the sake of these women, I surely hope not.
 

This may be a good discussion point, at what point does free choice and personal responsibility cease to apply?

Agree.

[fathertime]

Can I ask you how many agencies you worked with before you went to the FSU? And what was the major reason you went to the FSU looking for a wife?

Yes you may ask Muzh, and I'd be delighted to respond. 
1.  I used one agency


2.  Looking way back, I think I went because it appeared to me that the ladies were interested in a guy like myself...36, good shape, divorced...i figured why the heck not? I had plenty of cash, and a sense of adventure and maybe I'll find a beautiful lady that enjoyed my company that I'd like to marry..


Fathertime! 

[fathertime]

Let's be painfully obvious.
 
There are some men who 'dislike' when a woman or women express their opinion when it goes against what the men said.

Lets be painfully obvious...it doesn't matter to me if it is man or woman...I disagree equally with both...So why DO YOU find it necessary to try to turn into a gender issue? 
So lets use 'wise' Muzh logic...if you disagree with a woman and express it the same way you do with a man, that makes you a woman 'disliker'...wow that makes perfect sense...
Fathertime!   

[fathertime]

 
Says who? What consensus?

Let me guess...you think the world is still flat...and that Obama is secretly a Muslim terrorist too...oh and the holocaust didn't happen either.   


Fathertime! 

[Misha]

2.  What if you are in Class Nine but you and your wife are very happy with each other, share true love, and are committed for the long term? 

Clearly, she is deluded as to her true status as an exploited woman and a white knighter committee will have to be promptly convened to ensure her prompt re-education and thus ensure that order be restored to the newly regulated MOB universe 

[2tallbill]

I posted one of the definitions of 'exploitation' that came up on google search for 'exploitation definition'. The other one is:

the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work.
"the exploitation of migrant workers"
synonyms: taking advantage, making use, abuse of, misuse, ill-treatment, unfair treatment, bleeding dry, sucking dry, squeezing, wringing

But let's leave the definition for a moment and look at guys who seek MOB.

How many guys are like you? How many in it just to enlarge the pool and not to take advantage of girls who live in economically deprived countries? How many not trying to trade possibility for living in western country in exchange for youth and beauty? How many at all prepare to trade anything instead of simply wanking off? How many bother to get on the plane instead of seeking confidence inflation by getting attention from good looking girls in exchange for empty promises?

There are many different types of guys seeking an FSUW.
Many are unrealistic, some bought into the media and agency hype.


The percentage that get on a plane? according to Elena at EM the percentage
of men who write letters vs get on a plane is 100% vs 5% 


What percentage of that 5% are realistic? or have honorable intentions? I have
no idea.