richard_smith237

Which schools are those ? indeed..... Barnet clearly off his barnet with such a ridiculous statement...

I’d wager most of the people frothing at the mouth over their inalienable right to dress like slobs in a pressurised tin can - utterly indifferent to the discomfort of everyone else - have never actually seen a pair of running shorts, let alone worn anything not steeped in stale body odour and delusion......

Face plant...

He who denies supplies. "He who accuses, often abuses."

Nice try.. but you're defending sweating hairy men in tank-tops... isn't that just a bit too Blue-Oyster-bar for you, queeny ???

He who smelt dealt. "The one who said the rhyme did the crime."

ll this faux outrage is a bit rich, especially when the reality speaks for itself... Being wedged next to some sweaty, hairy lump in a vest is thankfully rare – because most people still have the decency to dress with at least a shred of self-respect. But let’s be honest – the loudest voices screeching about 'freedom to wear what they like' tend to be the ones with zero personal standards, or those who just live to argue. These debates always bait out the ponces desperate to perch on a moral pedestal, flapping about rights while reeking of entitlement - but is not a right of someone (other passengers) not to be exposed to stinky sweaty hair bodies themselves ???? Seems this topic hits a raw nerve — too close to the cloth for way too many disgusting boomers.

Ah yes, the classic defensive screed – part envy, part projection, all noise. If you're happy wallowing in filth and farts, do crack on. Just don’t confuse your lowered standards with some moral high ground.

BTW - he means 'coach' as in Economy class, not as in 'bus'... 'Mericans use the term 'coach'...

And yet here you are, championing the ‘right’ to wear whatever you like, with zero regard for the poor souls around you… It’s obvious who the self-centred fool is. Every word you've typed outs your complete lack of self-respect – and decency....

It’s the perpetual farter that really gets me... Nothing worse than being trapped next to some flatulent gremlin who treats the cabin like their own personal gas chamber. Some are worse than others – and you just know a few of them are on here reading this, ready to bleat about how it’s their God-given right to cropdust the aisle... same as it’s their right to rock a Chang vest at 30,000 feet!.... But hop on a songthaew in Pattaya, a shared tuk-tuk in Hua Hin or Phuket, or squeeze onto the BTS in Bangkok – and it becomes painfully clear why some folk get so defensive over their 'right' to wear such minging attire. They're not just clueless... they're just pigs...

Ahhh, the Chang vest hit a sore spot, did it? How many disapproving looks have you copped at the bank in your finest pikey vests?..... Additionally: Airlines can absolutely deny boarding if your outfit might offend others – just a heads-up before you rock up looking like washed out hippy. ....And that sock you're thinking of stuffing somewhere? Wash it first – fungal crotch rot isn’t a good look on anyone....

Who got hold of a pick of Malcy on his Birthday ?

Has anyone used one of these 'Nothing Phones' ?? https://nothing.tech/pages/phone-3a I'm quite interested in them... but real world comparisons (on here) would also be useful..... Even though iPhones are the clear winner for usability for me, I'll probably tear myself away from them and any other brand which now charges a fortune... IF the Nothing Phone tech works as seemlessly.

Should it not be a reasonable expectation that those amongst whom we travel also show consideration towards their fellow passengers - I believe so and fortunately so do most passengers as 'hairy sweaty men in vests' is somewhat or a rarity.

Nothing colonial... But should vests really be acceptable on flights... especially when is some hairy bloke..... Would you (or any of us) really feel comfortable sat next to another 'vest wearing' version of ourselves for 6 hours ????

No, he doesn’t – not in the slightest. He’s already made it perfectly clear he wouldn’t care if the women seated beside him were wearing burkas. You, on the other hand, come across as a complete tool – first, for trying to force a faux-moral high ground by injecting racism into a conversation where it clearly doesn’t belong; and second, for that laughably snobbish remark suggesting that flying Economy somehow makes one a loser....

This is the kind of comment characterised by people who go into a McDonalds without any shirt... Or grace the BTS in a Chang vest and sweaty pits... You know the type... those who think its cool to say "suck it up" when someoene makes a perfectly valid point about basic common social decency.

True... Regular Taxi's, BOLT, GRAB etc... I always have to specify when I want to use the Expressway as it seems the 'default' is not to use it... ... So, is there more to this story... or did the driver just make an assumption as the Express/tollway was the best route and he simply ingored the instruction from the woman ?.... --------- Slightly of topic, but it may give some reasoning: At night, when both my Wife and I were drinking, I always used to be the one to speak with the Taxi driver - I found that some just 'take instruction' better from a man than a woman, especially at night.... thats perhaps the inner nature of some of these characters not to give any credence to a females directions / instructions - perhaps a facet of this anyway, as had this been a male passenger, its far more likely the driver would have followed his instructions to the letter. Then again, this woman is clearly after 'views' too... so she's looking for the drama...

Perfectly reasonable... If the flag-fall taxi uses the meter without any hassle, drives well etc... then he'll always get a tip... as will a GRAB or BOLT IF the journey is longer in a more congested area than I anticipated.

She's right... She told the taxi driver not to take the toll way and he did... His fault. Whenever I get in a Taxi, a GRAB, a BOLT etc... I always tell the taxi driver which route to take - thats because: a) I've lived here and been driving in Bangkok probably longer than most taxi drivers have. b) I know the short cuts and where traffic is worse. c) I can also see the area's of congestion on Google Map. Once I had the taxi driver disagree with me, he wanted to take a route that I know would be heavier traffic. We hadn't moved off by that point, so I simply got out.

When I saw the headline of this thread I thought it was going to be about something ridiculous such as wearing slacks and a collared shirt !!... But... you've made a wholly valid point: Just like being in any reasonable restaurant (non beach) there are certain reasonable social standards to adhere to and I quite agree - I wouldn't want to be making 'skin contact' with the passenger next to me. Seems you handled this exactly as it should have been. Fortunately - most passengers are always dressed within reasonable limits for this not to be an issue.

Agreed - its the 'general acceptance' for drink driving and the fact that its normalised that costs so many lives. I'm guessing adding to the severity of injury leading to death is the 'likely' reality that no one inside the vehicle was restrained at all... no seatbelts and almost certainly no child seats. Its tragic that so many kill others, themselves, their loved ones because they are so selfish to DUI - Its not uncommon amongst some of the more cretinous posters in this forum too - they're too stupid to understand the risks and just don't care about anyone else.

Spiteful... ...... why not help and make things easier for her... not everyone has a bitter twisted relationship or ending to it....

You mentioned: "Except sensationalism" ... One of the major issues in these kinds of debates is the influence of sensationalism. Too often, opinions are drawn from short, highly selective video snippets posted on social media – clips designed to provoke, outrage, or mislead. They typically present the worst angle of an event, often from an extremely biased perspective, and rarely provide the full context. Another concerning aspect is how police charges are handled. I recently read a case on this forum where a woman, driving straight along a road, was deemed at fault by police after an unlicensed rider pulled out in front of her. She skidded in the wet and fell from her bike, and because there was “no collision,” the police blamed her for the fall – despite clear video evidence showing otherwise. This highlights a bigger problem: regardless of the official police line, we’re already well aware of the apathy, corruption, laziness, and flawed assumptions that frequently characterise local policing. Personally, I would never rely on police charges as a reliable indication of what actually happened. A perfect example: if you or I were involved in a road incident where a motorcyclist suddenly pulled out and was killed, we would automatically be charged with “Reckless Driving Causing Death.” It’s a default position – part of the process – and charges are often dropped within days. So no, I treat such charges with a healthy dose of scepticism. It’s also no secret that charges are applied unequally. A wealthy Thai may escape unscathed, while an African or Indian tourist is far more likely to face harsh consequences. Thailand is indeed tolerant on the surface – but beneath the polite veneer, discrimination remains alive and well. We’re seeing more and more of these shortened, selectively edited clips circulating on social media – often picked up by Thai news outlets without any scrutiny of their obvious bias. These videos are typically cut in a way that removes all context, omitting the lead-up or trigger that might completely change the narrative. We’re shown a 10-second tantrum and, without hesitation, the comments start rolling in: “Deport them!”, “Blacklist them!” – all based on a carefully curated moment, with no understanding of what actually led up to it.