In the traditional way in LOS, when two people meet they greet each other with a wai(bow). The proper procedure is that the "inferior" person wais the
'superior" person first. Then, in turn, the superior person wais the inferior person. Inferior and superor do on mean that one person is better than the other. One person has a higher status than the other. That is all it means. The words inferior and superior as used here are not meant to connote what we think of as inferior or superiority, but just who is more deemed as higher up on the social ladder. The inferior person shows his respect for the inferior person and the superior person then shows his repspect for the inferior person. Wai-ing is a show of mutual respect.
This is the Thai way. You may know that in LOS, there aren't even words for brother or for sister, but the words are younger bother, older brother, youinger sister, older sister. Even for aunts and uncles, the words for aunt or uncle actually indicate uncle who is older brother of my mother/father or younger, and so on. This is because one's place in the social order is very core to the Thai way of life.
Every time you address someone in Thai, unless it is your buddy/GF, you are supposed to put the word khap or ka at the end of the sentence, which indicates that you are being polite to the person you are addressing. Politeness is at the heart of Thai society, and central to Thai thought.
Establishing the social order makes for a more orderly society in that way of thinking and living. Everyone knows their place. Conflict is avoided. Anxiety is reduced. Life is more simple, which makes it easier for everyone. HUMILITY is still a virtue in Thai society, although Western ideas are eroding it , especially among BGs and those that have close contact with Westerners on a daily basis. In Western society, humility is no longer looked upon as a virtue, and is deemed to be a weakness, closer to a vice than a virtue. Our Darwinian mode of thought says that the strong will survive, and the humble are seen as people who are weak and easily taken advaneforum.xxxe of.
So if a woman chooses to humbly serve her husband, then their is nothing wrong with that. If she chooses to honor him by regarding him as having a higher status in the social order than her, there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't make her less of a person. It does not mean that she does not have equal worth as a person to her husband or anybody else. It may mean that she is even more worthy, because she has the strength and power to humble herself. It may mean that she is even more worthy because by doing so she creates a stronger and more stable family structure. It may mean that she is a giving person and not a selfish person. Has it come to where we fault a person for having a giving nature, fault them for not being as selfish as most people seem to be these days.
IMHO, 50/50 relationships, as espoused in current politically correct Western thought, are inherently unstable. Every time two people have different a opinion on how to deal with an situation which affects the realtionship, there is the potential for conflict, and there usually is conflict, be it open or unspoken(passive/aggressive). And there is no mechanism in place for dealing with conflict, and for settling issues being contested. A 50/50 realtionship is like a ship with two captains. When a storm approaches, if one captain says turn to the starboard side, and the other says to turn to the port side, then which way does the man in charge of the rudder go. The two captains have to have a conference and negotiate the matter, and often which ever one doesn't get his way will start to build resentment towards the one that does. The simple solution is that one captain is given a higher rank than the other. Then you don't have constant turmoil, but rather a more stable situation and a safer ship.
In the family, the fact that a woman can recognize the value in creating a stronger, more stable unit by allowing the man a higher rank than her, shows her strength and good sense, not weakness. And if you, Liam, want to concede the helm in your future relationships to a woman, then that is fine and dandy, too. For my part, I will be wearing the pants in any relationship I enter into. I will be the captain of my destiny. I've been the 50/50 route; it rarely works, not for the long run. In most, if not all, successful farang relationships, one of the partners holds the balance of power. The relationship is only 50/50 in a nominal way. The 50/50 designation is a pretense, a facade, a hoax. It is a face-saving device for the one who has less than 50% of the power. In the vast majority of successful modern Western relationships, I submit to you, the fact is that the woman bears a greater than 50% share of the power, and the 50/50 facade justs helps the man feel that he is not a wimp, and saves him from being subject to the ridicule of his macho peers.
Think about it. I dare you to tell me that I am not right. Men want sex. It is a big part of the reason they marry. Especially nowadays with AIDS. Women don't do all the cooking and cleaning as they once did. And if you are not getting that service, what does it leave? Sex and companionship, primarily. That is why men enter into relationships. Women are not as horny as men because they don't have testicles and don't produce as much testosterone, which is the horniness hormone. Therefore, many women can and do control men and get their way by trading sex for power in the relationship. Rarely is this done on a quid pro quo basis, it is usually more sublte, i.e., wanting to keep the wife in a "good mood." At one time, the sex power factor was more than compensated for by the power of the purse(or wallet, if you like), but that advaneforum.xxxe has been greatly diminished by women in the workplace and by divorce laws favorable to women.
That is the way it is. Admit it. A first mate is no less worthy a man than the captain on a ship. In many cases, I am sure the shipmates could tell you that the first mate is a better man. But that doesn't change the fact that the captain gives the orders. The first mate takes the orders and he would be less of a man if he didn't. So, in a marriage or relationship, where the husband is the "superior", i.e., has more than 50% of the decision-making power, the wife may in reality be the better person. But, if for the good of the relationship, she lets the husband control the balance of power, then that shows her strength, character, discipline, and dare I say it, her humility. If she is OK with this arangement and agrees to it, then she is more of a woman for it, and worthy of the highest respect from her husband and from society.
BTW, Liam ,if you have children, will you treat them as equals before they are adults, when they are little. I hope, for their sake, you won't. And if you don't treat them as equals, then does that mean that they are not respected human beings.
Your logic is "swiss cheese" logic, full of holes!
JayBee