thaibeachlovers

I would certainly not want a stranger touching my child - it is just not worth the risk. Call that being overly PC if you wish.

If your child was falling down on the cement, you would not want a stranger to help them? Political correctness really is a strange disease!

Yes it really is sad what has happened, but as a middle aged single man passing through airports after visiting Thailand I am "convicted" by the customs staff of being a paedophile, and held for hours while they search for the evidence of the crime they believe that I have commited. Needless to say they have not found any evidence, as it never existed, of course. Guilty in their eyes, but no evidence to arrest me!

Therefore, I would NEVER assist ANY CHILD in the west, no matter what was happening, as I would be a sitter for any accusation made against me. I will not even go to the assistance of someone under assault by children, as I will be the one convicted of assault afterwards.

Neither would I assist any woman in trouble, as afterwards she might complain that I took advantage of her. I have not even offered a lift to single women hitch hiking for the past 30 years, in case they accused me of something. Sometimes doing my job, I have to be alone in a room with a woman, but I will always leave the door open, in case they accuse me of something improper.

If I was looking for a new job, I would not get anything to do with children. It's just not worth the risk.

I'm surprised that they can even get men to do the store Santa job anymore.

So this is what PC has reduced the west to. Men are convicted without evidence of heinous crimes in women's ( and their bootlicking male sycophants ) minds. Fathers are afraid to hug their children. Men cannot do their jobs without fearing false accusation, and single men are harrassed for enjoying their holidays in Thailand. No wonder so many of us hate PC and everyone who supports it.

This sort of question / discussion is dictated by individual circumstances..but the decision must have been faced by most here. I guess one thing in my favour I am not hooked on a thai lady ( yet.). I have a friend who is fortunate to be able to come out every 3 months whilst living on a pension and rental income. Sadly I don't have his resources.

Guess a retirement visa is best? or non immigrant O not sure if it makes any difference.....

I will make a decision soon... before the grim reaper

You seem to be in much the same position as I.

I have on all my visits over the past 10 years put money in the ( Thai ) bank, in anticipation of the great day I could afford to reach the magic 800,000 bht level and retire over there. Unfortunately, while I have reached the end with work, now that the financial world has gone insane I will never reach the required level to retire in Thailand. However, I do have enough put away to finance one marvellous year, and am looking forward to that.

So, unless you have some property to sell, or enough cash, I think you may, like I, have missed the boat.

Also, unless you can work there, and get into the Thai medical system I agree with you that it would be better to aim to return to the UK for the medical cover. As one who works in, and has experienced the NHS as a patient, I can say it's not perfect by a long shot, but better than expiring in the Thai gutter because you couldn't afford to pay!

However, you are not yet 60, and if you set your mind to it, you may be able to save enough in the next few years to achieve the dream. The conundrum is though, that if you do not go to Thailand you can easily save enough to retire there, but if you go, you may not save enough to retire there. Certainly true in my case, but I wouldn't change it. Had too many great trips to wish otherwise.

I'll respond on one point, however. Google turns up 160,000 anonymous discussions on muslim integration.

I think you'll find there is not a lot of anonymity when many of the discussions carry the title of the people/organistions discussing the issue.

The 'Black and White' issue here, is 'Black and White' evidence of discussion that you deny is taking place, is once more denied.

Putting asside the Golly <deleted>, have you one single case where you can demonstrate Political Correctness is causing the ills which you attribute to it?

You have told us of your many years on the civil service, and you mentioned Shysters, Snake Oil Salesmen and men in Shiney Suits but you have not given us a single example of how Political Correctness stopped you from doing your job as a Civil Servant. Not withstanding anything you are not allowed to talk about under the OSA, is there any example you can give us?

OSA? That's not stopped me so far!

Ok, here's the scenario I was faced with a few years ago. There is a recruitment exercise for low level admin staff. I have a second/third generation asian girl working for me as a casual. I'm her boss, but she does actual work for someone else - a PC thug as it happens - so I don't really see much of her day to day output. Girl applies for job, then does some work for me whilst PC thug is on holiday. I am shocked at the quality of work she provides - she lacks basic numeracy and literacy skills for starters, and her judgment is poor. I also discover she's 120 hours down on her flexi clock - she claims she doesn't understand the need to clock on for 37 hours a week. I like her as a person and we are good friends, but I could not in all conscience recommend her for a permanent position. The application process involves a line manager's assessment, which simply states "if this person is successful at interview, would you like them working for you?" This is a fairly euphemistic way of sifting out people who are no good - tick the "no" box and the applicant will not be offered a job, irrespective of their application and how they perform at interview. I am immediately (and very publicly) called into the director's office and asked to explain my decision. I do this robustly, with examples of her work as evidence. I'm told that that is irrelevant and I must revise my assessment as it is open to legal challenge on racial grounds. I refuse, my assessment is forcibly withdrawn and my director writes it instead. She is ranked 26th at interview, yet offered a job.

Just for those getting a twitch-on at this, I have made the exact same decision about dozens of other, white, people who did not meet the minimum requirements - none of these were queried.

Incidentally, the girl gets placed in the team dealing with community integration, along with every other asian people in the building. She is promoted within months of being made permanent against her will. She is unable to cope with new demands and is extremely unhappy. She resents management interference and hates PC with as much passion as I do. She also has some rather extreme views on immigration.

There are also countless examples of people being promoted because of their background, not their abilities. Some have even failed their interviews, yet been given the post. If you really think banging square pegs into round holes is the way to go, good luck to you. Is having a workforce that is reflective of the community more important than having the most competent workforce possible?

In terms of the job itself, there are examples too numerous to mention of how PC has been crowbarred into public policy. All government programmes have been adapted in recent years, many unnecessarily in my view.

The problem lies more within the recruitment policies; at least for now. In order to succeed you need to be able to demonstrate you've "out-diversified" your opponents. This is leading to a spiral of often unnecessary schemes, propagated by people whose intentions are nothing but naked ambition. They have spotted a mechanism for making pretty bloody comfortable careers for themselves, often with little or no added value. In such circumstances, PC becomes a runaway train.

I dont know how many can remember the days of affirmative action,(however well intentioned it may have been) or how many know of its consequences..

I can remember the days of affirmative action, and indeed I directly benefitted. Back in 1985 I applied for nurse training ( there were almost no males in nursing in my country back then ), and was accepted, despite better female applicants not even being interviewed, due, I am certain, to a desire to have more male nurses. This would be supported by the other 2 males on the course being totally unsuitable applicants ( IMO ), one of whom did not complete the course, and the other stopped nursing on graduation.

However, in my defence, I am still nursing, while the majority of the females on my course long ago gave it up ( mainly after getting married ), so I was probably one of the most cost effective students they enrolled.

Incidentally, there are lots more male nurses in the UK, where I now work in the NHS, to the extent that some days I work with no female nurses at all! Makes a change from being the only guy.

I also spent time in Antarctica in the '70s, when they were trying to get females down there. In fact they created a new position on the base just to be able to employ a female. While she was capable of doing the job ( kitchen duties ), she caused all sorts of tensions amongst the men, which is understandable when you have up to 60 males and two women ( one was a scientist ) on a very small base! I'm not saying there shouldn't be women there ( that would be very politically incorrect ), but the numbers should be more balanced, or not at all. ( I believe there are indeed lots of women down there these days. )

Where I disagree with affirmative action, is in the armed forces, where we now have a situation that allows female officers with no combat experience to command soldiers going into action ( themselves safely behind the lines ). The US recently announced that they have promoted their first female general.

I would have no problem with women that have been under fire commanding front line troops, but there's not a lot of them about, are there!

My main beef with PC, is where it is used by ignorant bureaucrats to justify being killjoys, mainly in forcing a majority of the population to suppress it's own culture/ religion in deference to a minority/ immigrant culture/ religion. In the UK there are countless instances of Christian rituals being banned "in case people of other religions object".

As for most of the other stuff blamed on PC, IMO it's just good manners not to use insulting language or actions directly to another person, regardless of color, race or creed. Why would anyone want to be able to insult someone else- not nice.

The only instance I can think of where PC ( if it can be applied in this case ) would be a "good thing", is where it is used to enforce equal access for the disabled/ less able.

Given that there are so many English speakers around to ask, it always puzzles me to see such.

However, I'm glad that they keep making such errors, as it's one of the quirks that you've gotta love about the place. TIT.

I'm talking 3 to 4 months. After years of 3 week holidays, 3 months will seem to be Paradise.

Three weeks is a holiday, three months is an endurance test.

I once tried three months to see if I could find something in Pattaya to keep me occupied every day, other than the bar scene. It was a test to see whether I could eventually live there permanently.

I took with me a pile of English language type books with the view of offering private English lessons to Thai nationals. Not for the money but something to fill in the days.

After one month I was in a rut and doing the same things every day. After two months I missed my lifestyle back in Australia. At two and a half months I changed my ticket and headed home.

Just as well we're all different.

To me, the "rut" is what is so delightful. Getting up whenever, leisurely breakfast and read the paper for an hour or so. Internet in the afternoon, perhaps an ice cream at Swensons. Walk along the beach in the evening and watch the sun go down.

Dinner sometime. Cruise around the bars night time, or sit in Lucky Star on WS and observe the passing throng. If there's a decent movie on, go see it. Usually finish up at Malibu Cabaret Show.

If ever I got bored with that, off to the islands with the TGF, and check out a new beach or three.

I've worked bl*** hard my whole life ( with a 2 year break for travelling, mainly in Thailand ), and now that I've achieved the free bus pass, I intend to stop working and just let life happen, with as little stress as possible. I won't be able to stay indefinitely in Thailand, as my country won't pay the pension there, but I'll stay as long as I possibly can. And when I can no longer afford to stay in Thailand, I'll be doing much the same, but minus the girly bars, WS, Malibu Cabaret, and the beach stays with the TGF. Now that really is going to be boring!

And another nice 'getaway' place is ruined by greedy developers..... They have destroyed the quality of life in Samui, Koh Chang, Phuket, Pattaya and now poor old Bang Saray is on the chopping block... Why can't they bu**er off back to Spain or Tenerife ? Oh I forgot they have already over developed it

Turn another beach and quiet area into a tourist trap and 'lifestyle' resort.... Jesus if I keep moving down the coast to escape all the condos and shopping malls I'm gonna end up in Cambo.... Not that I'd be safe there.. It's next on their 'hit list' once they have finished 'raping' Thailand.... S*d off developers and real estate types... We a happy with the way things are.... We don't need 'improvement'

Well said!

Anyway, if they really want to develop something, why Pattaya? Aren't there enough already stuffed places to build these monstrocities.

If they're trying to build a lifestyle for rich people, wouldn't the rich people want decent infrastructure, taxi service, good roads, decent clean beaches, none of which exist in Pattaya. Just look at the walkway of shame!

Think about it- Dubai, top infrastructure.

Pattaya, rubbish infrastructure.

Which one are they going to choose.

how about a trafficlight there turning red every 3 or 5 mins for 30 seconds at night time say 7 till 12 pm,wouldnt do any harm would it?????

Do you not remember the traffic lights on 2nd Rd next to Mike Department Store?

They were there for a couple of years, but never once went on red! Eventually they were removed. TIT.

If there is a place in Pattaya in real need of lights, or overhead walkway it's 2nd Rd by Big C, as the traffic has built up speed there with the long straight from Central. At least, by WS the lights do slow the traffic occasionally, enough to get across safely.

<snip>

I have long thought that the road at the corner of Walking Street with no right of way for pedestrians to cross and the side walk fenced off, is extremely dangerous and lacks any consideration for walking tourists - especially the elderly and infirm.

What other "World Class" tourist resort would force pedestrians to walk through the forecourt of a jewellery store to get to the main entertainment district?

Some time ago, I started a post that the idea of Pattaya being a World Class resort is a bad joke; but I seem to remember being put down for it. Glad to see some more evidence for my viewpoint.

And just what is the point of those farang TP volunteers anyway? I presume they have no power of arrest, and I never see them actually do anything other than sit around at the entrance to WS.

A lot will depend on what you mean by "long stay." Are you talking weeks/months/years?

If you choose to live in Pattaya it could be that you plan to spend most of your time in the tourist playgrounds. That could result in a quick burnout.

My advice: pack a lot of money and bring a spare liver.

I'm talking 3 to 4 months. After years of 3 week holidays, 3 months will seem to be Paradise.

I used to stay 3 months at a time way back in the '90s, and when I arrived the time seemed endless, but it still went way too fast.

Unfortunately, thanks to incompetent Gorden, the £ is now worth almost the same ( 45 bht ) as in the '90s, but with prices doubled ( at least ) the money has become much more important.

In general, no replies have indicated a drastic drop in prices of accomodation and "essentials", so it looks as though I'll need to stay here till April, as originally planned.

Thanks to those that gave answers of some value.

You posted the same question in General Topics.

Are you going to post in the Issaan, Koh Samui etc. forums too?

Yes I did post in general topics as well, as, surprisingly, Pattaya is not the only place in Thailand worth staying in!!! However, as the mods have decided that Pattaya is the only place I can post in, if anyone from Phuket ( Patong ), Kho Phangan, Koh Tao or Krabi happens to be reading this, I'd appreciate their input as well.

Thanks.

PS, while I used to hang out in Samui a lot, it's too trashed to consider now, and I don't believe there are any beaches in Issan ( correct me if I'm wrong ).

So I was reading another thread where a poster's life was physically threatened because he stated that he did not stand up for the National Anthem at 6pm and it got me thinking that, reading these boards, it seems that many farang are very serious when it comes to Thai pride and Nationalism. Despite not having Thai citizenship and very few legal rights in the country, many farang appear ready to cut anyone's throat who does not feel the same level of Nationalistic pride as they do or does not wear the right color t-shirt.

And often it seems, that many of the principles they feel so passionately about, go against the Western social outlook of freedom of choice. Why is it that things you would never accept or believe in in your own country all of sudden become acceptable and enforcable to the death in Thailand?

Do you feel that you are more apart of Thailand than you were your own country?

While I am not a part of Thailand, I'd certainly like to be, as I love it more than I ever loved my own country.

What social outlook of freedom of choice??? 1984 is increasing rapidly in the west!

I have much more choice in Thailand than ever I did in my PC country.

The last time I returned there ( my country, in the free west ), I was treated like a criminal for being a single man visiting Thailand. Bureaucratic scum.

This is not an unknown phenomenon, as English settlers in Ireland became more nationalistic than the original inhabitants.

If you are retiring here ... why worry about hotel prices? But there are many on this board posting from cold old blighty .. you can take comfort in that

Erm, I did say retiring and wanting to go for a long stay over there, but I'm not retiring to Thailand. Once no income, budget will be real tight, so need to have low season hotel prices for sure, not maybe.

Anyway, thanks for the answers.

Thanks for the answers. However, I think some do not realise that I know Thailand well, and do not wish to go elsewhere. Just doing the sums, and need low season prices to get by. Have lived there before in poverty, and no desire to repeat that experience.

I am currently waiting for April/ low season before retiring,

What are you retiring from ?

What are you 'sacrificing' by coming over sooner ?

If you have the opportunity to go earlier, and the economics stack up, just do it

Only sacrificing income to go. However, no one has yet answered as to whether the hotel prices are down. Budget would be tight even at low season prices, and impossible at high season prices.

boring London

(Reads that and splurts tea all over his keyboard... )

I guess it takes all sorts, but London Boring...

Yes, boring.

I work, I day dream of Thailand, I spend not working hours on the internet reading about Thailand, I sleep, I dream about Thailand.

If I was a LOT younger, perhaps I would be a clubber, but not my scene. Museums- got the t shirt. Anything costing money- not on, as saving for Thailand.

Sitting here in cold boring London, I'm waiting for April/ low season before retiring and heading off for a long stay in my favourite town.

However, is it really as quiet as people are saying, and more importantly, have the hotel prices fallen?

Advice welcomed from people actually in Pattaya now, please.

Sitting here in cold boring London, I am currently waiting for April/ low season before retiring, and heading back to sunny beaches for a long stay.

However, is it really as quiet as some say, and have the hotel prices dropped.

Advice from those in Thailand now please.

I am afraid that Pattaya could get worse if something positive is not done.Over a period of a few years the area has been improved,but the problem is shoddy,pathetic workmanship and totaly inept controls of work management.Will not even mention the bung money which reduces the cost,hence reduces the quality.

This whole subject has been well discussed on the Pattaya forum.

Personally, I'm happy that the walkway is rubbish, along with most of the infrastructure, as that is all that keeps the package tour hordes ( with resultant price increases and the bars being banished ) from descending on our little bit of nightlife paradise. May it continue this way for a long time.

The problem is that the anti-PC brigade miss 'the good old days' when you could openly call black people 'darkies' or 'coons' and call the disabled 'spastics'. They resent the fact that society wants to try and control the worst aspects of the darker side of their natures. They fondly remember the days when you could openly spit on your neighbor (or worse) because they looked or spoke different or because they went to a different church. They miss the days when being an ignorant bigot or racist wasn't frowned upon so much. Poor them. The world has gone PC mad.

Were that all being PC represented I'd have no problem with it, but it has been hijacked by certain persons ( usually of the female gender ) to advance stupid political policies, and relies on the desire by everyone else not to oppose them for fear of being PC uncorrect. Eg, the British home secretary is trying to eliminate ALL prostitution by criminalising the customer. The rational is that it is to combat trafficking, but overlooks the fact that most prostitution is by persons who CHOOSE to earn money that way. As most male MPs are afraid to speak out against this idiocy as they would look PC uncorrect, it will probably become law. The prostitutes collective has spoken out against it, saying that the police should deal with trafficking, and trying to eliminate prostitution will just drive it underground, making it worse for all women involved.

Incidentally, New Zealand, which is sickeningly PC, has legalised prostitution, and it has been a great success.

IMO, being PC is the last refuge of man hating women, and their spineless sycophantic male camp followers.

Oh, so those nasty PC crowd are trying to interfere with your right to openly buy sex. How dare they. I hate to break the bad news to you, but going with prostitutes was frowned upon long before the PC crowd arrived on the scene. Anyway, even many of my politically incorrect friends look upon those who pay for sex as degenerates or 'saddos'.

Who are you to say it is wrong to openly buy sex, provided it is sold by a willing and autonomous person?

Just who are these people frowning? PC people? Emotionaly retarded people? Please specify whom they are, and why their opinion is of more consequence than the people who think it OK to buy sex.

As a PC person, why do you think it OK to use derogatory names against people who can't get a girlfriend to have free sex with them. Consider disabled and burn victims. Are they to be denied sex because you and your friends think they are degenerates or saddos? What about people too ugly to have a normal relationship? What about persons who don't want a long term relationship for whatever reason? Perhaps they should be castrated to avoid upsetting all those fine upstanding people who go to pubs, drink themselves stupid, and have casual sex behind a dumpster in an alley ( just as long as it's free, OK ).

I would have thought that being PC was avoiding using language offensive to people, but perhaps you think it's OK to be offensive to people that YOU don't like. Oops, isn't that what this post is all about?

Is it morally wrong to buy sex? That is a difficult question, but I would say that so long as there was no exploitation involved maybe it would be OK. Not my cup of tea though. The fact is though that in many countries it is illegal to buy sex. According to Thai law it is illegal here.

You seem to have misunderstood the second part of my post which was that even otherwise non-PC people dislike the idea of people going with prostitutes. Many people do see those who pay for sex as deviants and this has nothing to do with whether they are PC or not. As for why they feel this way? You would have to ask them. Their reasons differ.

Yes, it is illegal to pay for sex, but just like hiring an escort in the west, it is not illegal to pay someone for their time. What happens between escort and client after that is their business. If not so, there would be many thousands of farangs under arrest at this very time.

As for many people seeing people paying for sex as deviants, there must be millions and millions of deviants in the world.

Something to bear in mind; most troops fighting overseas during the ongoing and recent past wars would have used prostitutes, which means that many people's sons, brothers, fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers are by that definition deviants, or is it OK if it's a relative?

Why would the gov't purposely under/over report tourist revenue?

Mostly because they have no Fing clue what tourists spend their money on and don't want to admit that it is mostly ladies of the darkness.

The above is probably one of the most accurate statements in this thread !! I appreciate families spend as well, but I am sure the majority of tourist money comes in with another sort of tourist.

Quite possibly. I know 2 English guys that come out every year and last time they blew 5000 pounds and 3000 respectvely mainy on the nightlife. They can't come next year, one out of spending money, the other with serious debt issues.

That's serious money being spent, possibly more than the average Thai spends in 10 or even 20 years perhaps a lifetime. Remember it's one way money too.

Reminds me of something I read:

I spent most of my money on women, wine and song. The rest I wasted.

The problem is that the anti-PC brigade miss 'the good old days' when you could openly call black people 'darkies' or 'coons' and call the disabled 'spastics'. They resent the fact that society wants to try and control the worst aspects of the darker side of their natures. They fondly remember the days when you could openly spit on your neighbor (or worse) because they looked or spoke different or because they went to a different church. They miss the days when being an ignorant bigot or racist wasn't frowned upon so much. Poor them. The world has gone PC mad.

Were that all being PC represented I'd have no problem with it, but it has been hijacked by certain persons ( usually of the female gender ) to advance stupid political policies, and relies on the desire by everyone else not to oppose them for fear of being PC uncorrect. Eg, the British home secretary is trying to eliminate ALL prostitution by criminalising the customer. The rational is that it is to combat trafficking, but overlooks the fact that most prostitution is by persons who CHOOSE to earn money that way. As most male MPs are afraid to speak out against this idiocy as they would look PC uncorrect, it will probably become law. The prostitutes collective has spoken out against it, saying that the police should deal with trafficking, and trying to eliminate prostitution will just drive it underground, making it worse for all women involved.

Incidentally, New Zealand, which is sickeningly PC, has legalised prostitution, and it has been a great success.

IMO, being PC is the last refuge of man hating women, and their spineless sycophantic male camp followers.

Oh, so those nasty PC crowd are trying to interfere with your right to openly buy sex. How dare they. I hate to break the bad news to you, but going with prostitutes was frowned upon long before the PC crowd arrived on the scene. Anyway, even many of my politically incorrect friends look upon those who pay for sex as degenerates or 'saddos'.

Who are you to say it is wrong to openly buy sex, provided it is sold by a willing and autonomous person?

Just who are these people frowning? PC people? Emotionaly retarded people? Please specify whom they are, and why their opinion is of more consequence than the people who think it OK to buy sex.

As a PC person, why do you think it OK to use derogatory names against people who can't get a girlfriend to have free sex with them. Consider disabled and burn victims. Are they to be denied sex because you and your friends think they are degenerates or saddos? What about people too ugly to have a normal relationship? What about persons who don't want a long term relationship for whatever reason? Perhaps they should be castrated to avoid upsetting all those fine upstanding people who go to pubs, drink themselves stupid, and have casual sex behind a dumpster in an alley ( just as long as it's free, OK ).

I would have thought that being PC was avoiding using language offensive to people, but perhaps you think it's OK to be offensive to people that YOU don't like. Oops, isn't that what this post is all about?

I find it curious that so many posters here easily switch from a discussion on Political Correctness to ranting over issues they themselves have with women. I mean really, there are times I wish I'd read Psychology instead of Engineering, reading many of the responses to this thread is one of them.

Take this little gem from Thaibeachlover as an example:

...

Were that all being PC represented I'd have no problem with it, but it has been hijacked by certain persons ( usually of the female gender ) to advance stupid political policies, and relies on the desire by everyone else not to oppose them for fear of being PC incorrect. This assumes a desire in others for which there is no evidence and that an accusation of being Politically Incorrect would a) be made, or actually bother anyone. Eg, the British home secretary is trying to eliminate ALL prostitution by criminalising the customer. Actually no - The proposed change in the law is to make it illegal to pay for sex from a prostitute who is controlled by another person for gain (ie being pimped or trafficked for sale in the sex trade) - the proposed change in the law, wisely thought out/or not, is against the trading of human beings for sex The rational is that it is to combat trafficking, but overlooks the fact that most prostitution is by persons who CHOOSE to earn money that way No the proposed law stipulates those buying sex from prostitutes under the control of other people for gain - a transaction involving a freelancing prostitute would not come under the law.. As most male MPs are afraid to speak out against this idiocy as they would look PC uncorrect, Again, a statement lacking foundation but pointing at Political Correctness where Political Correctness is not an issue.it will probably become law. The prostitutes collective has spoken out against it, saying that the police should deal with trafficking, and trying to eliminate prostitution will just drive it underground, making it worse for all women involved. Agreed, and that is why the law is being debated.

Incidentally, New Zealand, which is sickeningly PC, has legalised prostitution, and it has been a great success. So erm... was it Political Correctness that got that law passed or are Male NZ Members of Parliament immune to Political Correctness...... OR..... are you just screaming political correctness when you don't like the way the world is going?

IMO, being PC is the last refuge of man hating women, and their spineless sycophantic male camp followers.

So it seems Political Correctness is to be linked with the 'women issues' many men have, or if some change in the law restricts YOUR choice to play the part in abusing someone who has been trafficked or is being pimped you call that 'Political Correctness' and those men who consider it a good thing to protect other human beings against such abuse are spineless sycophantic male camp followers?!

This is a curious accusation in a post complaining about laws that restrict the right of a man to pay for a prostitute - Is there any better example of self emasculation than paying for sex?

---

I often make what might be regarded as a 'Politically Incorrect' observation that Thailand attracts a disproportionate number of men with, shall we say 'a lot of baggage', reading the responses to this thread I'm inclined to believe I may have been underestimating the extent to which this is true.

That aside, it is interesting that many who object to 'Political Correctness' (assuming of course they are referring to Political Correctness and not other problems they have ) are often quick to point to their rights to freedom of speech, it seems to escape them that rights and freedoms come with responsibility.

If, and this is not to be missed, they are unable or willing to question the language they themselves use and the impact that might have on others, what then of this right to freedom of speech - Speaking but not actually understanding what impact your words have is not using a freedom, its simply making a noise regardless of how it impacts others.

Actually yes. While the law may specify paying for sex from a prostitute controlled by a pimp, in practice it will be impossible for a punter to be CERTAIN that s/he is not in fact being pimped.

While you may object to men ( and hopefully women ) paying for sex, it is yourself using PC to try and put down persons so doing. What business is it of yours if a woman willingly rents her anatomy to a man wishing to pay for the use of it. No one is trying to excuse trafficking, but there is no excuse to interfere with free will. Perhaps you believe that willing prostitutes need to be protected from themselves. Very PC!

As for the law concerning prostitution in New Zealand, it is just common sense at work, and perhaps males there tend to be less PC than their UK equivalents.

If Thailand attracts a disproportionate number of men with baggage, it may be that they are the ones lucky enough to retain enough money after the courts gave their ex wives most of their cash, that they are able to get out of the west. Perhaps you should listen to their story before putting them down.

One of the characteristics of PC persons is that they are only too ready to use the language of denigration against persons contravening the PC person's version of correct behaviour. Anyone for self emasculation?

As a final observation, IMO, any woman who seeks a greater amount of money than the minimum amount needed to live a reasonable life from a husband during divorce proceedings ( unless she actually helped to make it ), is a prostitute. I could give examples, but not sure as to TV policy on naming people.

I mentioned it above, perhaps because it came as a surprise, that Political Correctness clearly equates in the minds of many of the men responding here with issues they themselves have over women.

What surprises me more is the depth of these 'women issues' in some of the male respondents, not just what they are telling us (much of which seems more fitting for a patient doctor conversation) but also in that this baggage they are carrying spills over into open hostility towards female members of this board.

Hmmm. Would disagree with that; more about Christianity and misrepresentation of historical figures on the Beeb. Incidentally, in the new Beeb show about Merlin and Prince Arthur a major character is a black ( or perhaps coffee colored ) female!

Perhaps most of these type posts will always include rants against women, because they deserve it! Many men have been financially and emotionaly devastated by ex partners, and end up in Thailand where women are ( superficially at least ) less hostile to men. The only PC related aspect, IMO, is that the ( western ) courts generally favour women over men, especially where children are concerned, though in my experience there is nothing to prove that fathers do a worse job than women in raising children.

The problem is that the anti-PC brigade miss 'the good old days' when you could openly call black people 'darkies' or 'coons' and call the disabled 'spastics'. They resent the fact that society wants to try and control the worst aspects of the darker side of their natures. They fondly remember the days when you could openly spit on your neighbor (or worse) because they looked or spoke different or because they went to a different church. They miss the days when being an ignorant bigot or racist wasn't frowned upon so much. Poor them. The world has gone PC mad.

Were that all being PC represented I'd have no problem with it, but it has been hijacked by certain persons ( usually of the female gender ) to advance stupid political policies, and relies on the desire by everyone else not to oppose them for fear of being PC uncorrect. Eg, the British home secretary is trying to eliminate ALL prostitution by criminalising the customer. The rational is that it is to combat trafficking, but overlooks the fact that most prostitution is by persons who CHOOSE to earn money that way. As most male MPs are afraid to speak out against this idiocy as they would look PC uncorrect, it will probably become law. The prostitutes collective has spoken out against it, saying that the police should deal with trafficking, and trying to eliminate prostitution will just drive it underground, making it worse for all women involved.

Incidentally, New Zealand, which is sickeningly PC, has legalised prostitution, and it has been a great success.

IMO, being PC is the last refuge of man hating women, and their spineless sycophantic male camp followers.

Very sorry, couldn't be bothered to read the whole thread, but the answer is very simple.

Women back home don't dress or behave like whores. Come here, and never mind how unattractive you are, they behave as if you are the most sexy man in the world! Suddenly they "love you too much" and you are "hansum man" - and to top it off, they dress in the clothes that only whores wear in the West! Of course you leer!!

So you've never been to the UK then! There are countless news stories about women "binge drinking" and behaving badly. Try taking off the rose colored glasses!

As for your comments about the way Thai women dress and behave, I can only assume you have never been anywhere other than tourist areas, and even in them, there are plenty of women dressing modestly, and certainly not behaving badly. Perhaps you are leering too much to notice them!