thenoilif

12 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

I  agree  with  your  sentiment.  But  not  at all  exclusively  for  Thai.

Social/  cultural   naiveity  is  embedded  in  the  National  Pride  of   many locations in as  many  formats as possible or required in the  manipulation of  populist loyalty.

Humans  are  dubiously   sophisticated  apes who  collectively fail  to  use  the capacity they have  inherited and  instead  prefer  to   abjectively  concede  to the pack leaders in  ridiculous  belief they  have made or  have any more  valid valid choice.

 

Nice job proving your own point while trying to be pretentious. Another common trait of men. 

1 hour ago, owl sees all said:

I don't mind if he put the concrete heads on the wall and painted them different colours. If they looked like they were just decoration; then that's OK with me. What I don't like is the religious nutters that are oh so easily offended. I feel the same about Muslims, Catholics, the ultra US Christians and the Jews.

 

If someone says something bad about my favourite cat I don't get offended or threaten violence.

 

Thais have been told what they must think for a very long time. Getting off their knees would be a good starting point for the country to escape from the third world.

 

 

 

If you look closely at practically every culture, there is a dominant ideology telling everyone what to do and think. You're not any more enlightened (in the grand scheme of things) than Thais. 

I also find it hard to be believe that you've never been offended due to a disagreement someone else had towards something you believe in. In just this thread your beliefs have been challenged and you're not coming off as being totally fine with it.

13 hours ago, owl sees all said:

Everyone is equal. Science is enough to kick all religions into the dust bin. The reason they continue is through indoctrination of children and regeims and groups holding on to power to dictate to the masses.

 

I don't care if the guy put the concrete heads on the wall and painted them. I don't care if they looked nice or not. What I care about is the religious <deleted> getting oh so easily offended. Sounds like the Salman Rushdie affair or ultra US Christians insisting that the earth is less than 10k years old. 

 

It's all nonsense.

You keep blaming this on religion but thats not really the issue here. The image of Buddha is a cultural icon that just happens to be based on a religious figure. But people who are not religious generally will still respect something other than themselves and hold it in high regard. Nowadays that can be an Apple logo, a sports figure, or a parent. If a community reveres a person who made significant contributions to that community (we will always need leaders and people to look up to its human nature) they usually will erect a statue of that person. If an outsider comes into the community and happens to like the look of the person's head and starts to collect sculptures and paintings of his head and eventually places several of them on a wall and tells everyone it's for decoration only, I think he would experience something similar if not worse (if in America).

I mean just look at whats going on in America with the NFL and the flag. That's not even a person, its an object but its still a symbol of a community that is revered. 

13 hours ago, owl sees all said:

So a person living in a different country is going to find it difficult!

 

I have no views on buddhism; except what I see. I'm an athiest. Yes,,, I do find it a challenge but I've got more love and respect for things in Thailand than most of the Thais I know. I find them very shallow indeed. Will change direction at a moment's notice. And principles!!! One of the posters on TVForum has this quote; "Those are my principles and if you don't like them,, well I have others." Thais all over.

As an atheist (still a religious ideology), what is it about Buddhism that bothers you? It's not a 'god' worshipping religion. Its spiritual yes, but it, for the most part, doesn't adhere to the dogma that other religions do.

At its core, it teaches what I would consider being 'practices that  teach someone how to live a happy (enlightened) life and to live in peace and harmony with your environment and your fellow man. You say that western progress has created this enlightenment in the West which is true to some extent but it's also created this conflict between men and nature. 

This idea that religion(s) itself is the problem is seemingly this new cool thing to debate but in reality, most religions aren't the cause of our problems because anything that brings people together will be manipulated by smarter people so they can control the less intelligent.

1 hour ago, Mark Alexander Smith said:

 

But about you’re First Line, about Buddhists never being involved in War, ???  or Killing ?What about the Buddhist Monks in Myanmar Advocating Murder, Rape and ethnic Cleansing, of the Rohingans ??? ... And well Thailand South is No decent example either,  ... where a large proportion of Thailand's Oil and gas is, so well, how much hope of autonomy, or even just Not being threatened do to they have !!! ...Yes about Zero, or Minus.

6

Please don’t misrepresent my words. I say they have never started a war and used Buddhism as the basis for that war.

Its my understanding that the 989 movement is reactionary to Muslim extremism in Myanmar. So its more of an Anti-Muslim movement than a militant Buddhist one.. And while the leader of the movement is a monk, I don’t see any proclamations from the Buddhist side that would be akin to ‘God wills it’ or ‘Allah Akbar’ or whatever the Muslim extremist war cry of the day is. 

With that being said, I will agree that we are seeing a rise in uncharacteristic behaviors from key spiritual leaders among the Thai monkhood. Globalization could be to blame.

7 minutes ago, British Bulldog said:

 

So true ... that's what makes the wars around the world these days and did since Adam was on the Earth ...(If he ever was ?)

To be fair, I can't think of any war that was started by Buddhists because of Buddhism. It's very much the anti-confrontational religion.

Also, to be even fairer, most conflicts use religion as a catalyst and as we see today, some people will, in the absence of Religion,  just find new ideologies (racism, republicans/democrats, Labor/Torrey, Samsung/Apple) to use as an excuse for conflict. 

22 minutes ago, Thechook said:

You seem to be putting the blame on the farangs shoulders and clearing the wife.  Maybe she just had a say or maybe the entire say in this.

"Nualchan said her husband initially had refused to remove the heads but she explained to him that the issue was sensitive for Buddhists.

She said her husband loved art and had bought many Buddha heads from sculptors, collecting so many of them that he had no place to keep them so he had placed them on the wall and along the path to the house."

The article does point out that both made the decision but it seems to me that he was the driving force.  

28 minutes ago, dpcjsr said:

If a farang had not been involved would this have been a problem? I think not. 

I think no. It's the combination of factors I mentioned earlier that made this an issue. If they had  1 or 2 Buddha images on their wall and if the guy was a known Buddhist I don't think it makes the news. 

55 minutes ago, captspectre said:

it did not specify names. it said THAI PEOPLE ! and disrespecting Buddha. the people I am reffering to are THAI and are disrespecting Buddha. now you just want to argue or are you satisfied?

Not all Thai people are Buddhists and unless the people who complained are doing what you say, I don't see where the hypocrisy is. I also don't think that you can apply religious hypocrisy to Buddhism. It's a very loose religion, more of a spiritual practice than the strict laws that are more prevalent in Christianity and Islam. The idea is that if you don't follow the teachings life and the after will be hard enough.

The only thing that they ask is that you don't disrespect the Buddha. 

I think a lot of people are getting hung up on the head as being what is disrespectful. That's not really the issue.

Cut and dry it's because:

1. He's not Buddhist

2. He's using them for decoration only which is not allowed

3. Its excessive use of the image 

And that's pretty much it.

11 minutes ago, cmsally said:

So how would one analyse  if it was worn out of respect or for decoration?

Well, telling everyone that its being worn solely for decoration is one way to go like this American guy did with the heads.

Thais wouldn't wear amulets for decoration given that its taboo. 

For foreigners, one would have to demonstrate that they are Buddhists in order for them to wear amulets and not offend certain people. 

Putting all of these heads on the wall pretty much confirmed that the guy has no knowledge of Buddhist practices and customs. 

7 minutes ago, cmsally said:

Those billboards were actually sponsored by some organisation. Don't remember what they were called, but if that was enforced surely it would mean the arrest of every person with a Buddha shaped amulet and those wearing "Sure" T shirts! That is one heck of a lot of people!

Same rules apply for amulets. They are religious artifacts and are worn by Buddhists as a show of respect for their religion. They are not worn for decoration only. Tattoos also follow the same rules. If you're a Buddhist and get a tattoo due to some form of spiritual practice then its ok, but foreigners get them because they look cool and for body art thus not ok but I haven't seen many if any actual tattoos on Thais that depict the Buddha, mostly Sanscrit style.

8 minutes ago, captspectre said:

disrespecting Budha? so the thai's think that driving drunk and killing people, gangs shooting each other, thai's robbing fellow thai's and foreigners, students fighting and killing each other, husbands cheating on thai's wive's is OK with buddha? 

typical hipocritical thinking! 

How do you know that any of these people who complained are guilty of these things?

3 minutes ago, greenchair said:

So I suppose leaving them to ly on the ground to decay would be more respectful 

If you're referring to the ruins of the old capital I think that they left them there for historical representation purposes. A completely different situation altogether and a good example of how a foreigner just displaying the heads would be seen as extremely disrespectful.

Edit: As far as temples go, I think that a place of Buddhist worship would not automatically make any imagery a religious symbol, and not something that is used solely for decoration. It's not rocket science. 

4 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

I don't think you'll find any Buddha heads (heads only, "decapitated") in a temple. That's what's offensive. If you see such a Buddha head in a temple, take a photo and post it!

That and they are being used solely for decoration which is a no-no in Buddhism. The American is also not Buddhist so technically having these statues around his home is taboo and even if he was Buddhist, there should be some order to placement. Very few Thai homes have Buddhist images strewn about everywhere. They will have their main area like a wall in a room and then a couple of other pieces but that's usually it. 

Buddhists images are not supposed to be used strictly as decorations or furniture which is the main reason why you're not allowed to take them out of the country. Mounting them on a wall like heads on a spike isn't exactly a common way to show respect to Buddha.

Actual practicing Buddhists can have imagery around the house but it is seen as a religious symbol and not just for decor. 

Yes, we do see Buddhists images being sold as decorations in touristy areas but that doesn't mean that there is hypocrisy at play, unless those very same vendors are the ones that are complaining about this particular incident. 

I think that it is the garishness of these people that got them noticed and the guy basically admitting that he only has them for decoration. I mean did they really have to put that many heads on the wall? And the gold ones at that?

I think anyone who has been to Thailand can attest, you can get away with a lot here that goes against the cultural norm but only as long as you don't shoot it all over their faces. 

I wonder how many HIV infected men come to Thailand, do not disclose their illness, and have sex with sex workers. 

11 minutes ago, TSF said:

Yep, so much of it is washed ashore. Also Thais are wonderful beach trashers. Just go take a look at Bang Saen beach late Sunday afternoon when all the Thais from Bangkok have left, and see the piles of garbage they leave.

Like I said, they aren't great at sustainability but that still doesn't remove guilt from anyone else who litters.

It's one of those social norms in Western countries to not do this sort of thing but when they come here all of that goes out the window and then they point the finger away from themselves. 

Places like Phi Phi, Koh Pangnan, and other popular party islands are the worst. We can say that there is a lack of bins but at the end of the day, just throwing it on the beach is contributing to the problem.

So tourists come to Thailand, go to these beautiful remote beaches, take plastic bottles, pre-packaged food, cigarettes, etc. then throw all of their trash on the beach and then blame the litter on the locals? 

While Thailand isn't a bastion of sustainability, this message should be directed more at his foreigner peers. Pick up your own garbage, its that simple.

I suspect foul play. His race car driver was probably a farang and they had a disagreement over the sponsorship. And everyone knows that Thais don't commit suicide using a gun.

2 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

There is no evidence of this.

 

There is plenty of evidence and if you've been to Thailand and Patts this last year it would be very obvious. The scene as it's been known as for decades is dying and it's readily apparent. 

12 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Mia nois and giks are not paid. They pay the girls at the karaoke bars and massage places.

In any case they are not looking at changing the local scene, but the image of Pattaya as an openly "in yer face" sex tourist destination.

3

Mia Nois and giks are paid but instead of renting daily it's more of a leasehold arrangement.  And before you quip, it's much different than a marriage.

The local scene is also being affected. Thai establishments are being raided as well. 

The idea is to get rid of eyesores and any potentially negative establishment/practice that could make into the global media. I don't know if you've noticed but the online presence of p4p is growing rapidly mostly because the authorities see it as an end game solution to this entire problem. 

1 hour ago, Mazungu said:

I totally agree with Spidermike on this issue. Where is the harm if two consenting adults want to have sex together? Why do other people feel so angry about two adults having sex together??? What drives these people to put their noses in other people's business? Are these people just too old to remember the joys of sex or are they just moralistic do-gooders that want to impose their religious morals on other people? I've come to the conclusion that they are just plain jealous. Nobody ever complains about an old fat white guy walking down the street with an old fat ugly hooker. It's only when the old fat white guy has a nice attractive young lady on his arm that you hear the howls of indignation....jealousy, jealousy, jealousy. 

 

I think you're missing the point. 

The issue isn't about what you are doing behind closed doors. If Westerners were like Asians and went about sex tourism in a more discreet fashion, this would be a non-issue. It's the openly seedy aspect of Pattaya that is the problem. In the past, it wasn't that big of a deal because it mostly stayed out of the headlines but because of the internet and social media, Pattaya is now a more obvious scar on Thailand's image.

I mean there is something to be said about the feeling some (mostly everyone) may get when they see hundreds of grey-haired, often unkempt caucasian men sitting around an open-air bar on Beach Road at 11am on a Tuesday acting like sex and alcohol-starved primates with a pint of Leo in one hand and 19-year old (questionable) Asian girl bouncing on his lap. It's not a pretty picture and now it's the subject of many a mini movie on youtube.

5 minutes ago, hansnl said:

Exactly!

 

The money distribution would be completely changed to the rich.

 

It already is.

The idea that the majority of these girls take their earnings and send it back home to mom has about as much truth to it as them being single, hating Thai men, and thinking you're handsum. 

The system already operates like a Casino. It pulls them in and gets them addicted to a lifestyle of either partying and/or frivolous spending on materialistic goods. Some invest in a business  but how many salons and cafes does Issan really need? 

27 minutes ago, whoareyou said:

Pattaya isn't a beach destination. Nobody will come to swim in a sewer.
The tourists would relocate to HH or phuket, Krabi
Russians that go to jomtien all pile into baht buses by the thousands and head to walking St.
Walking St is the glue that bonds everything in Pattaya.

 

It's a beach destination. If you go just outside of the main city you start to see cleaner beaches with more 'trendy' restaurants and boutique hotels. Investors have seen how popular this style of tourism is becoming and see that the 'boardwalk' could become something akin to what is seen in other popular seaside destinations. Many of the older structures in the city proper will be razed and replaced with new high-rise condos and lifestyle venues. 

Walking Street may indeed remain but it will continue to morph into a general tourist attraction and be modernized into something more visually appealing that can attract Bangkokians and the more discerning foreigners alike. 

The proximity of Pattaya to BKK makes it much more valuable just in regards to real estate alone but also as a Khao Yai style weekend excursion destination.  Additionally, social views regarding 'third world' prostitution are changing as are people's views on sexual equality. The customer base for sex tourism is drying up, especially when it comes to the in your face aspect of the scene. 

Most of you are seemingly blind to the fact that beach destinations are generally cash cows or buffalos. 

Sex or no sex, Pattaya will bring in tourist dollars especially if they shift the draw from mostly sex to a more mainstream vibe with beachside shopping complexes, tropical style resorts, and maybe even a casino. The sex will remain but it will be more discreet. Think of it as a slightly more vibrant Hua Hin. 

2 hours ago, jenifer d said:

as a female, i told you that my BS detector was going off on this one-

now the truth comes out, it sounds like the girl & her bf are scam artists!!!

 

so all of you defending this woman's honor, what say you now???

GUARANTEED that if it was TRULY rape, she wouldn't have left w/o saying something and/or going to police immediately!!!

 

i HAVE been raped- at gunpoint- and i didn't dare tell anybody as it was someone whom i KNEW and he had HUGE Crip LA street gang connections-

but anything short of gunpoint and a known gang associate? no way am i getting raped or it goes unreported!!!

 

"so all of you defending this woman's honor, what say you now???"

I will continue to make the same point in that the benefit of the doubt (given absence of definitive facts) should be  given as the majority of these situations do end up turning out to be rape. In this case, and we still don't know what really happened, if she does end up being a scammer than it becomes a criminal situation on her part and things change but to assume that we shouldn't give the benefit of the doubt to alleged rape victims to the point that they dont' feel free of guilt from reporting it is not the right way to go IMOP.

1 hour ago, claffey said:

I disagree with your view. Many of the posters here have lived here a long time. We all know that it's not safe for a western woman to be in certain places at certain times. Does that mean a woman deserves to be raped? No it doesn't. But many western females seem oblivious to the dangers. They don't deserve to be attacked but they put themselves in vulnerable positions. For example, Thai women rarely wear bikinis to beaches. Then a western girl comes on holidays with a tight bikini and , well, large melons! Obviously Thai men will start looking at her. She then leaves the beach at 7pm and walks through the jungle to get back to her small hut. She is attacked on the way... Was it her fault? No but she placed herself in a silly, vulnerable position due to a lack of cultural awareness and common sense ( in terms of Thailand and not her home country)... 

5

In that last sentence you say its not her fault but then basically say that it happened because she put herself in that situation due to a lack of knowledge so are you not saying it is her fault? This is the exact argument that the officials make when these incidents occur.

Your example and the situation that we are discussing in this thread are not cases of wandering out into some untamed  wilderness unprepared. One is a massage parlor and the other is a beach and both are highly explored territories that have been frequented by foreign women for decades. Foreign tourists have always worn bikinis on beaches here and in some cases I've seen them sunbath topless. I am also sure that 100s if not 1000s of foreign women have derobed and been massaged by Thai men without the inclination of being pleasured sexually. None of these women are opening themselves up to rape the same as a businessman wearing a nice suit and strolling down a sidewalk isn't asking to be robbed. Thailand doesn't promote itself as a dangerous place to visit, it doesn't have laws against women getting massages from men, and it doesn't restrict women from wearing bikinis on the beach, in fact it promotes all of this through its tourism trade.

The issue here is not with the victims, its with criminals, sociopaths who don't have respect for other people or the laws of their country. Its all on them and the last time I checked the inmates aren't running the asylum