dressedingreen

So help me, if I read the phrase 'crack down' one more time in relation to Thai government ........

If a regime needs to crack down as often as we are led to believe it does here in Thailand, the executive elements of that regime must be sleeping on the job the majority of the time. You don't continually need to crack down if you do the job thoroughly in the first place. It's a glaring sign of incompetence.

DIG

In my opnion any man that does this should have a tatoo across his forehead that reads "I am a child rapest".

Great idea!!

But why stop there? Let's get real and bring a few more of the immoral into this scheme. Here are my suggestions for additional recipients of tattoos...

I am a ...

Philanderer

Liar

Racist

Bigot

Cheat

Bully

Religious zealot

Bore

Sloth

Moralist

Homosexual

Hypocrite

Lecher

or

I am ...

Judgmental

Arrogant

Unenlightened

Sexist

Petty

Exploitative

Afraid of people who don't agree with me (may need shaved head for this one)

Inadequately educated

Course

Rude

Confrontational

Selfish

Sadistic

Make your own up. There's plenty more waiting to be added. Or is there just one character trait that's immoral?

Let's get it done! I look forward to playing a new travel game ... 'spot the head with no tattoos'.

DIG would that be "coarse".....of course it would

appropriate it comes on the list immediately after "inadequately educated"

You're quite right, Newbie! My bad! I'll be at the tattooist later today, and sporting my 'inadequately educated' badge on the beach, tomorrow.

DIG

In my opnion any man that does this should have a tatoo across his forehead that reads "I am a child rapest".

Great idea!!

But why stop there? Let's get real and bring a few more of the immoral into this scheme. Here are my suggestions for additional recipients of tattoos...

I am a ...

Philanderer

Liar

Racist

Bigot

Cheat

Bully

Religious zealot

Bore

Sloth

Moralist

Homosexual

Hypocrite

Lecher

or

I am ...

Judgmental

Arrogant

Unenlightened

Sexist

Petty

Exploitative

Afraid of people who don't agree with me (may need shaved head for this one)

Inadequately educated

Course

Rude

Confrontational

Selfish

Sadistic

Make your own up. There's plenty more waiting to be added. Or is there just one character trait that's immoral?

Let's get it done! I look forward to playing a new travel game ... 'spot the head with no tattoos'.

DIG

When these forums are often full of negatives about life here in Thailand, it's good to read of so many positive relationships.

I married a teacher here in 2006. Married her after just 4 months ... something I'd never have done in the west, and if you'd told me I'd do such a thing, before coming here, I'd have said, 'no way'! But it was about feeling this was the right woman. And that's the way it's worked out, so far. I've learned more from my wife about being a good husband, friend, lover, person than I have from any previous relationship. I've never been unfaithful to her. Never wanted to. Every day is a joy to wake up to. If it's possible to be blessed ... I have been!

DIG

So many people (largely male) constantly need something to rage about. In many western countries, it used to be gay people who were the scum of the earth, 'an affront to common decency' was the war cry of the anti-gay mobs of the early 20th century. Then (and before) it was 'colored people' who were 'coming over here, taking our jobs'. More recently it's been Muslims and paedophiles, who of course must be 'the spawn of the devil'. Society constantly needs scapegoats to throw to the baying pack, to assuage their blood lust. To detract from other important issues of the time that political activists would rather not tackle. And, of course, the mob has always been used by vested interests to promote their political/commercial/power agendas. Sexual predation is wrong whatever the age of the 'victim'. And I see plenty of it over here. I wonder how many of the baying hounds come here because many Thai women look more childlike than western women. Because most are less assertive, and because feminism hasn't taken root here to any noticeable degree. I wonder how many kid themselves that they're really ok because their 22 year old girlfriend only LOOKS 14. I wonder how many, who call their small Thai wives/girlfriends 'baby' or 'my little girl' actually search deeply inward, seeking the real reason behind their fantasies. Maybe none. Maybe many. I'd suggest at least some. I guess I was fortunate enough to have had a life where my orientation has been in sync with the agreed majority. But I also realise it could have been very different. What if I had been born with a predisposition to be gay or non-white, to worship Allah, or with tendencies toward paedophilia? How would I have coped with the calls for my blood by the unthinking mob? Perhaps others should ask the same question before condemning that which they cannot understand. The old adage about walking a mile in another's shoes seems to be relevant here. If those who are different, who we see as 'the other', can bring out such anger, such ferocity, the anger must have been there long before the trigger arrived on the scene. When I was a child I was able to walk freely in my neighborhood, without fear, without fraught parents worrying about my safety because they saw a paedophile around every corner. Paedophilia is anti social. And therefore requires thinking people to find solutions to it. It doesn't need a mob. This person should be removed from the streets, for his own protection and for that of the subjects of his desires. But he is still a human being, regardless of the attempts of some to dehumanize those with whom they do not agree, and cannot understand. On reading many of the responses to this post I have to wonder just how many of the respondents have read a book of any substance in the past 5 years.

DIG

I'm thinking 18 metre Dorito with 666 mysteriously carved in one corner

But I'm obviously not as 'together' as this guy.

DIG

This from the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16543447

What next, one wonders?

Having to cover Buddhist tattoos before entering a gogo bar of ill repute?

Banning westerners from purchasing Buddhist religious icons because they may be resold at a profit?

Perhaps accompanying one's wife/girlfriend to the local wat, in case we walk around with our fingers crossed?

I never quite imagined fundamentalist Buddhism would ever hit the streets.

Methinks Khun Intharasombat may do well to acquaint himself with the word 'priority', instead of trying to find silly little things to do between Pandan tea breaks.

DIG

... and fast cars!

DIG

Be good if Thai traffic cops were banned from pretending they had radar guns

DIG

As is often the case in S E Asia ... militarism abounds. You'd think some of them had just been serving drinks on the poop deck.

DIG

No institution, person or gathering, of whatever persuasion, is exactly as they are perceived from the outside. And all powerful people and institutions have a vested interest in protecting themselves from those who would subvert their mystique. History is littered with fallen angels.

DIG

The person in question made the mistake of publishing certain material, offensive to localized taste and law, on his blog, while remaining in the country where there are laws that can be ranged against him for doing so. I'm guessing he knew the risk, but felt it was worth taking, to exercise his perceived right to say what he felt about the subject. That is the sum total of this story. But forums usually broaden the base and extrapolate the threads. So in writing to the broader subject, sniping at a culture from the sidelines has never proved a viable way of changing it. Engaging in a dialogue that offers mutual respect has historically been the more productive way, except maybe the use of force, or sanctions that encourage the appreciation of enlightened self interest. One cannot address these subjects in isolation. To pick out one aspect of an entire culture, and suggest it should be changed, blurs the myriad strands that interconnect to sustain any cultural identity. Asian systems of governance will naturally evolve over time. One of the most important aspects of change is the way it is managed. Consider, for example, the decision to retain the Emperor Hirohito, following the Japanese defeat at the end of WW2. The American government understood how damaging it would be to Japanese national unity if the Emperor had been removed. Thus making the country far more difficult to govern. So moving too quickly has its disadvantages. Asia is already in the midst of tremendous change. People are uncomfortable with change at a fast pace. They feel far more comfortable, and therefore safe to engage with the process, if certain high profile 'landmarks' are still visible during this period. Many regimes have fallen because the pace of change was too fast, and too many comfortable institutions were abolished at the beginning of the process. Managed change, enhanced educational support, and a constant dialogue with the people is the way to move a culture forward. And a supportive and non-judgmental approach, by those who have made the journey before them, is hugely beneficial.

I constantly read, on these web pages, about corruption, duplicity, racism, xenophobia, inappropriate laws, cronyism, bad behaviour, ineptitude, etc; the implication being these things don't happen in western countries. Those of us who emanate from the west know better. The whole financial debacle of 2007/8 suggests a financial elite, based almost exclusively in western capitals, showed little concern for the effect of their actions on the lives of ordinary people. Blatant racism is still a living memory in most western countries. Cronyism in government, and between government and private industry, is still grist to the mill in western civilization. The wholesale purchase of political power, by organized crime, in eastern Europe, and in the blurred boundary between eastern and western Europe, between Canada and north America, between Mexico and north American border states, belies the idea that western culture is corruption free. And are Mexicans in the USA, Africans in southern Europe, even Poles in the United Kingdom, met without xenophobia?

Ultimately, why are we, as expats, here in Asia, rather than enjoying the comfort of our perfect societies? Could it just be the weather? I'd argue there has to be much more than that to lure us from our own idea of paradise. And are the reasons we are here a good example to those we would influence with our ideals of right and wrong? Or are we simply play acting 'ain't it awful', as we did before we made the journey? Perhaps if we pretend to bite off the hand that feeds us (euphemistically speaking), 'they' will feel we're only here as missionaries, not because we prefer to be so.

Ultimately, respect cannot be forced. There is no such thing as freedom, or freedom of speech. These things are all relative. As people from another culture, we see things those who have lived here all their lives do not see. And the same applies to those who visit our 'home' cultures from 'abroad'. But let's not get carried away with the idea we know better. We know differently. Change is inevitable. But be careful what you wish for. Change is almost never restricted to that which we would like to desist.

DIG

Probably more in hope, that the OP is going somewhere far away.

Cynic!!

"Bai nai?"

"Shhh! Bai mia noi." .........................

DIG

If we are "master of my fate and captain of my soul" we have a much better chance of producing a good outcome.

In view of the gathering battle cries on this subject, perhaps it's pertinent to play that one in full ...

Invictus

Out of the night that covers me,

Black as the Pit from pole to pole,

I thank whatever gods may be

For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance

I have not winced nor cried aloud,

Under the bludgeonings of chance

My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Beyond this place of wrath and tears

Looms but the horror of the shade,

And yet the menace of the years

Finds, and shall find me, unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate,

How charged with punishments the scroll,

I am the master of my fate:

I am the captain of my soul.

-- William Ernest Henley

DIG

I'm grateful to all who have contributed to this thread. From the staunchly held opinions, to the 'this is Thailand, not our country, not our business, and we should stay out of it' types (although I'd suggest if that's the case we might as well close down this forum and die quietly in some corner of a foreign field/beach/bar).

My own feedback, and I claim no scientific approach, therefore it's highly subjective, and maybe suspect, is that many Thai women regard what I referred to as soft, as a more involved and caring approach to relationships. No generalization intended. My wife is a teacher, and therefore moves in circles that may be regarded as 'the thinking classes'. And I'd be surprised if there are weren't a sizable percentage of Thai women who have difficulty with such an involved approach. We are all products of our most influential cultures. As a westerner, I was raised in a culture where people are encouraged, by the state, to take responsibility for their actions. Other contributors to this post have alluded to the enforced approach western states take on this subject. IMO, it's both fair and reasonable to expect citizens to take responsibility for their actions. Although I'd agree that, in many cases/countries, the pendulum swung too far in the opposite direction for many years, and left many men in a position of near poverty after heavy child support payments were imposed. That has slowly been rebalanced in many places. But the point is most western men are used to this regime, and have come to accept the reasoning behind it. So it's not surprising Thai women would notice this kind of difference.

In the west, couples tend to do more together. Apart from family and religious commitments here, many Thai people tend to spend more time in single gender groups. And the commitment (but not necessarily the attachment) appears to be more loosely formed. I remember having a conversation with my wife, a number of years ago, about letting me know if she was going out for an extended period. Not because I wanted to control her movements, but because this is normal polite practice in western relationships. Not so much in Thai marriages, where the husband/wife will often leave for work/social outings without saying anything. It isn't seen as necessary. The expectation being the absent partner will return at some undefined point.

Asia is still largely a patriarchal continent, where male supremacy is still enshrined in many (what westerners may see as unfair, even sexist) laws. Asian media still portrays women as weak, silly and incapable. Of course, the truth is very different. It is often the matriarch who supports and holds the family together. But this is not recognized, in either law or accepted wisdom, to be the case, to the same degree in which it is in western countries. Social trends usually follow economic ones. And therefore these kinds of assumptions will change over time.

Every society has its contributive and its non-contributive citizens. I see as much of a balance here as I have done in other countries in which I have lived. The idea of 'the male as butterfly' is as true in western countries as it is here in Asia. The difference that has been alluded to in this thread is more to do with education and enforcement than it is with a growing altruism among the male of the species. And let's be both honest and realistic, we are driven by our hormonal make up more than we often care to admit. Add time, sufficient funds, alcohol and available sexual partners to testosterone, and it's hard for most men to control the effects of such a combustible mix. Not impossible, but it takes thought, consideration and discipline.

I alluded, in replying to another thread, to the importance of self-critique. Understanding why we do what we do. The idea being, if we act as automatons, we must accept the consequences of (often) ill-thought out actions. In these cases it isn't surprising that so many 'guests' in Thailand get their bank balances burned in relationships. I'd suggest it's often down to simple miscommunication. Multicultural relationships have added complications. If each partner doesn't understand why the other acts in certain ways, and it isn't discussed, mistaken inferences can be drawn, and acted upon. Of course, this approach won't solve all relationship problems. In any society, when opportunities for personal enrichment present themselves, there will always be some who will attempt to take advantage. And sometimes even the best intentioned relationships fail.

Finally, I'd like to draw a distinction between righteousness and happiness. One of the most basic needs of people is to be loved and taken seriously. To be valued and to feel worthy. Some men (I'm assuming I'm addressing a largely male readership) seek satiety of this need through short term liaisons, some through longer term or committed relationships. Some, having reached retirement and perhaps not having family back in their home country, seek love/affection/validation in countries like Thailand. There are many reasons for moving to this part of the world later in life. It's often cheaper than the home country (that may not be the case for too long into the future), the climate is better, there is often access to younger, more attractive women etc. We all have our own list. I have seen many 'older men' wheeling/carrying babies around my nearest city, Pattaya. One thing I notice about most of them. They look engaged, more energetic than many of them would be in their home countries. They are generally of a happier disposition, seeming to have a sense of purpose I seldom saw in my home country (UK). Someone, replying to this thread, alluded to the idea that they could not expect the same in their home country, because of the stigma attached to multi-generational relationships. This is, with few exceptions, undoubtedly true. Asian society is not the same. Age is largely respected rather than despised. Economics play a greater role in family relationships here than in most western countries. Asia has a population that is skewed toward the male (there are more females than males in Thailand). So why wouldn't an older male, feeling he still has much to offer, come to Asia in the hope of living out his life as a useful and important part of a (new) family? It makes both economic and emotional sense. I doubt most delude themselves that they are lusted after for their rugged good looks and dapper dress sense. But accept that they can provide an easier life for a partner, in return for some mutual support, respect and affection.

So perhaps I'm suggesting (and agreeing with another poster to this thread) that some/many are glad to be useful and validated again. And I'd guess, with many older people, age brings the realization that many of the things we used to think were important, are no longer so. Actually, they never were. But as younger people we are often blinded by desire, greed, cultural edicts and a host of other illusory ideals. So perhaps being seen as a little soft from time to time is a small price to pay for the luxury of not dieing slowly in a culture that almost wishes the over 50's would just quietly disappear.

DIG

I read in another thread that the poster believed many Thai women think westerners are (too) soft, compared (I guess) to Thai men. And that they (the Thai women) take advantage of this character trait.

How do others react to this? Do you think the premise is true? And if you believe it is, do you also think Thai women take advantage of it?

DIG

"It's our nature. We are wired to defeat other men who are not part of our tribe. (family) If your not part of my family, your competition for resources ie women and food.

Food to survive and women to perpetuate."

- What planet did you say you you were living on?

"Your trying to solve your problems and in typical academic/liberal behaviour..."

- Can I assume that you didn't go to college? Who needs it? Who needs science? Facts?

"Most of us don't suffer from your affliction. Were not troubled about "what" we're supposed to be, because we're to busy being ourselves."

- How would you know if you did?

It's not the majority of our definition of "manliness" but doesn't make it wrong. For you.

- See my second reply.

I presented the idea that men can benefit from self examination. I presented some statistics to support my claim that dysfunctional men are damaging themselves and others. Many of you have demonstrated my point.

thank you

Stick to the facts. You'll never win a flame war, and it diminishes the value of the original post.

DIG

One of the most interesting groups I worked with was my own maintenance crew in a paper mill. These guys were Harley riding, hard drinking, fist fighting mens men so you can imagine their initial resistance. What I discovered was that the tougher the man the less homophobic they were and the less they cared what anyone thought. It was one of my most gratifying career accomplishments to teach them how to be a part of the management process through quality circles. After a bit of training they would choose one of them to make a presentation to management and they were exceptional at it.

I worked for an American management consultancy back in the 1980's. Some of their programs used video sequences to illustrate key principles. This was around the time quality circles had started to take root in American corporate culture, having traveled over from Japan. I spent almost 6 months in New York's Greenwich village, Anglocizing the American videos, using English actors, because many UK businesses found the content to be irrelevant to English culture. The American approach was seen as too feminine for the culture in the average British machine shop or tech, dept. After the videos were changed, the acceptance level was much higher. And the time taken for the average work group to 'get' the principles of sustained cooperation was greatly lessened. Language, or the application of nuanced semantics, plays an important part in levels of acceptance of corporate, group or individual change.

On a more personal note, I can see your frustration with some of the responses in here. Like the remoulded gambler, alcoholic or serial monogamist, it can be hard to see others not only fail to address similar problems, but refuse even to acknowledge there IS a problem. But as another poster said in this thread, and I'm paraphrasing, we are each on our own journey. Many, perhaps most, will fail to 'get it' in this life. The exercising of personal freedom is both illusory, at least in part, and often at the expense of the freedom of others. To feel so abused by someone in a culture from which we have moved, that we may be prepared to visit the same abuse on a citizen from another culture (perhaps less capable, educated) is to perpetuate the cycle. And any children who may come from such a union will almost certainly exhibit similar traits in their early adult lives. The cycle prevails. Breaking these cycles is extraordinarily difficult. The human animal doesn't like change. Like the daughter of an alcoholic father, who is drawn to marry an alcoholic, and lives in a situation of abuse and fear, failing to see that a door is a door and we have the option to go through it and never return, many continue to live in comfortable discomfort.

Perhaps there's comfort in knowing the responses, although largely negative, have come. It hasn't been ignored. So it isn't irrelevant to the lives of many men who frequent this board. If you've managed corporate change, you'll recognize that the first expression of pain is anger, and more often than not, denial.

For anyone who would like to take a personal foray into the area of understanding masculinity, and managing their own change in a world that constantly demands it, I'd recommend this book ... ... 'The Myth of Male Power', by Warren Farrell. Finch Publishing, ISBN 1 876451 30 0. I wouldn't recommend most start with Robert Bly's 'Iron John' which, IMO, takes too much of a mythopoetic approach, and should perhaps be held back until the reader can gain some appreciation of the reality of the problem of masculinity in today's world.

Having said that, this is a quote from Robert Bly. One I particularly like ...

"A lazy part of us is like a tumbleweed.

It doesn’t move on its own. Sometimes it takes

A lot of Depression to get tumbleweeds moving."

Khun mi wan sabai!

:jap:

DIG

The expression 'real men', and the way it is generally used against men who don't conform to 'the norm', encapsulates the deep seated problems most men face. And it happens in all cultures. This has nothing to do with being gay, or not. It has nothing to do with one's capability to perform the daily requirements of the male of the species. It's to do with the myth of male power, and the way it is used by the resourceful few who wield the kind of financial clout that determines the direction in which our societies move.

I don't have the time to do this subject justice today. But kudos to the OP for bringing this up. You're bound to get flak in here. It goes with the territory. And by the response, you've stirred up a welcomed hornets nest. To the posters who have responded with derision, I can only say, 'methinks they do protest too much'. Behind the derisory remarks lies a can of worms the size of several ... ... well, football fields!

I spent 12 years as part of a mens' network in the UK. I learned a lot. And I mean a LOT about myself. It gave me a level of self understanding I'd never achieved among 'real men'. Maleness can be eternally unforgiving of those who do not conform to its sense of normality, however convoluted that may be. I made deeper, more understanding friendships in that 12 years than I had ever achieved prior to becoming a part of that network. There is a huge amount of fear among men, and between them. It manifests itself in this subject, and on this forum, in the way of defensiveness, and an inability to see beyond the prejudicial barriers that generally keep men apart, from understanding themselves and other men.

The amount of responders, so far, suggests a need exists among many to address the kinds of problems that lie at the heart of the subject. The fact that some will heckle, guffaw and deride is only to be expected.

I'll watch with interest to see if it evolves.

DIG

Hmm, we're discussing Pepsi Max here, it's sugar free.

As for aspartame, WikiPedia has this to say.

Indeed Pepsi Max is sugar free. But other posters had widened the discussion well beyond that particular 'drink'. And it is also why I added the section on sugar free sodas.

The WikiPedia piece is remarkably well researched, if a little one sided. So much so, one has to wonder who it was (or which organization) spent so much time pulling it all together. There are other interesting 'well researched' topics on WP, that also apply to certain branded products that have come up against consumer resistance. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. But I keep an open mind on the subject. Aspartame cost a lot of R & D dollars to get to market. An investment the manufacturer would doubtless be unwilling to have compromised. The acidity of these products however, is not in question. And continued use does have a negative impact on the body. Ultimately, people will do what people will do, regardless of the consequences. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't care, or try to ensure our children understand the consequences, and are in possession of all the facts. My opinion ... it's crap in a can! But there again ... so is Campbell's soup.

DIG

I am glad to hear I am not the only one drinking over 2.5 litres a day of Pepsi Max. Coke Zero tastes flatter. The bottle changed recently.

the whole conversation has made me feel slightly ill, but this disgusts me.

how can you people drink this crap?

-Open container.

-Put opening of container against slightly parted lips.

-Point bottom of container towards heaven.

-Keep swallowing until sated.

Easy!!!

This is what happens to your body after a can of Coke, Pepsi, or any other sugar based soft drink that includes caffeine ...

• In The First 10 minutes: 10 teaspoons of sugar hit your system. (100% of your recommended daily intake.) You don’t immediately vomit from the overwhelming sweetness because phosphoric acid cuts the flavor allowing you to keep it down.
• 20 minutes: Your blood sugar spikes, causing an insulin burst. Your liver responds to this by turning any sugar it can get its hands on into fat. (There’s plenty of that at this particular moment)
• 40 minutes: Caffeine absorption is complete. Your pupils dilate, your blood pressure rises, as a response your livers dumps more sugar into your bloodstream. The adenosine receptors in your brain are now blocked preventing drowsiness.
• 45 minutes: Your body ups your dopamine production stimulating the pleasure centers of your brain. This is physically the same way heroin works, by the way.
• >60 minutes: The phosphoric acid binds calcium, magnesium and zinc in your lower intestine, providing a further boost in metabolism. This is compounded by high doses of sugar and artificial sweeteners also increasing the urinary excretion of calcium.
• >60 Minutes: The caffeine’s diuretic properties come into play. (It makes you have to pee.) It is now assured that you’ll evacuate the bonded calcium, magnesium and zinc that was headed to your bones as well as sodium, electrolyte and water.
• >60 minutes: As the rave inside of you dies down you’ll start to have a sugar crash. You may become irritable and/or sluggish. You’ve also now, literally, pissed away all the water that was in the Coke. But not before infusing it with valuable nutrients your body could have used for things like even having the ability to hydrate your system or build strong bones and teeth.

And if you think you can avoid problems by drinking sugar free products ...

1. Artificial sweeteners are chemicals or natural compounds that replace the sweetness of sugar, without all of the calories. But sometimes the label 'sugar-free' masks calories present in the food or drink. Of course you can always read the product's label, but believe it or not, there are a whole lot of people out there who think that sugar-free or fat-free means low-calorie. On top of that, there are some recent studies that have shown that artificial sweeteners can actually increase your appetite. And then there are sugar-free products with ingredients that can raise your blood sugar dramatically—like the white flour in sugar-free cookies. All in all, 'sugar-free' doesn't always mean 'diet-friendly'.
   
2. Aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal, NatraSweet, Canderel, Spoonfuls, DiabetiSweet) is a common chemical sweetener with possible side effects that sound like they're out of a horror movie. From hallucinations to seizures to brain tumors, it is hardly worth consuming for the sake of saved calories.
   
3. Sucralose (Otherwise known as Splenda, my past-sweetener of choice), is scary. Recent research suggests that Splenda can enlarge both the liver and kidneys and shrink the thymus glands. Sucralose breaks down into small amounts of dichlorofructose, which has not been tested adequately tested in humans. Splenda reportedly can cause skin rashes, panic, diarrhea, headaches, bladder issues, stomach pain, and those side effects don't even sum it up.

Most soft drinks are unadulterated crap. Full of toxic substances that are ultimately very bad for the body. And none of them are as efficient as water at curing the original reason for drinking ... thirst!

DIG

Having said that, I did live in the USA for almost 6 years, and must say their overkill with cable channels has probably produced some of the dumbest tv on the planet.

And it has produced some of the best.

I have a housesitter in my US home, and when I am back there cooking dinner, she often sits in front of the downstairs TV watching and becoming engrossed in shows like Flavor Flav or the Dysfunctional Housewives of Wherever, so yes, I do admit there is a lot of garbage. But cable gives networks the ability to go beyond the network comedies and dramas. Cable has given us The Wire, Arrested Development, Band of Brothers, and The Daily Show.. It created Discovery Channel, TLC, National Geographic, FoodTV, and the History Channel. It gives us CNN and MSNBC. Personally, I find that there is more quality tv now than ever before, especially when compared to when i was a kid watching My Mother the Car and Mr. Ed on the three network channels we could get.

Good post, Bonobo!

I should have been more balanced in my comment about cable tv. There are gems amongst the rubble, for sure.

Nothing wrong with Mr Ed

For those who might have missed this snippet on TVF today ...

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/467190-media-literacy-needed-among-television-viewers/

Relevant to the wider topic of Thai terr. tv

DIG

It's gratifying to know I'm not the only one to suffer the 'dings' and 'yahoos' of outdated drama. My wife, too, is a teacher. And I guess this raises my expectations of her ability to look beyond the culture in which she has spent her life so far. Of course, it's not so easy in the doing. I come from the UK, where, in the past, tv has been pretty good. The BBC, in particular, part of whose mandate has been to educate the populace for almost a century, have generally performed a useful public service in that regard. I've traveled a lot over the years, and seen tv programs in many countries. But I guess I haven't stayed in one place for long enough to become too critical of their program content. Having said that, I did live in the USA for almost 6 years, and must say their overkill with cable channels has probably produced some of the dumbest tv on the planet. Which leads me to suspect that Thai tv stations have had a lot of American influence in their programming. Certainly, many American shows have their Thai equivalents. But that happens in many countries. The idiotic sound effects are one source of annoyance. And I'd also agree wholeheartedly with the poster who brought up the subject of tv being used to pacify the masses. Dross for the dumbasses! And I'm not referring just to Thai programming. It's a worldwide phenomenon. The intelligence level of most national tv programming is utterly appalling. Having said that, it is suggested that around 70% of searches on the internet are for porn. So maybe we get what we deserve.

I was in China for almost the whole of 2005. I saw some tv in each of 3 provinces. It was very similar to Thai tv. Perhaps less drama, and more variety shows, featuring an abundance of people who thought they could sing. Undoubtedly, programming will change as tastes become more sophisticated in this part of the world. But I do agree with the fundamental ideal of tv as educator, as well as entertainer. This is a country in the throws of massive cultural change, or perhaps I should say 'pressure' to change. And as another poster said, it will take time. Thailand, unlike some of its counterparts in the region, resists change like it's the enemy at the door. Rather than guiding their people into a new global era, Thai politicians, in the main, seem to prefer to keep them in their place. Ultimately, not good for Thailand, for its people, for its economy. Rather than being told how special they are (and one only has to refer back to the way Chinese people were told the same during the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward, when the truth was they were lagging so far behind the west as to be virtually back in the Stone Age), Thai children should be given the best education the state can afford, including a serious dose of English and Chinese language, so they can participate in the world economy, and prosper. But ... ... I'm getting slightly off my own topic.

"Time for bed", said Zebidee ... Boinnnnng!!

DIG

First time I came to Thailand, in 2000. Having a late evening massage, and getting to the 'interesting 10 minutes'. Excitement of the moment, leading to my right hand seeking out the softness of her left breast ... ... that had been amputated .

Perhaps we should have talked about her mastectomy, first

DIG