Concerns after two foreign women sunbathe in Chiang Mai temple

[richard_smith237]

30 minutes ago, BigStar said:

My posts aren't on the article, but about the nonsense written by other posters. I'll continue as long as they're good for a laugh.

 

Well, if we're deviating from the subject and discussion comments it could be argued that you appear to be a far greater Karen than the person who found two girls in shorts and tank-top laying the grass inappropriate. 

 

 

[Ben Zioner]

8 hours ago, stix40 said:

They should respect the budist culture ! 

Plenty of sign's as you enter most temples ! 

 

Signs? Monks boombooming monklets? 

[BigStar]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

It seems that your point is because I'm not Thai I am 'foisting my view point onto Thai's'....  Which implies Thai's would not have the same opinion...  Do YOU know, they don't ??? all of them ?

 

... I know a very many Thai's and it may surprise you that on the vast majority of subjects the viewpoints of both educated Thai's and educated Westerners (foreigners) is incredibly similar. 

It may also surprise you that on forums such as Panthip similar subjects have come up before and just as this forum there is a wide ranging and varying degree of opinions on such subjects.

 

You have read Panthip and also integrated into society to understand the degree of similar in opinions between Thai's and Westerners haven't you ?????... have you ???

 

While I haven't asked my Thai friends about this thread, we've discussed enough similar subjects for me to guess that their reaction would be... 'Yes, mildly inappropriate, but big deal' (much as mine is) so yes, they'd find it as ironic as not being able to buy a beer from a 7-11 after midnight while the nation continues to drink drive. 

 

So.. are you 'foisting your viewpoint' on to Thai's that each and every one of them would find this issue culturally inappropriate and they'd fail to see the irony of some in society getting upset at such behavior in the shadows of hedonism ?

 

 

 

 

Thais are accustomed to contrasts without finding them ironic. Ask how many understand puritanism. I think if you research the word, you'll find it has nothing to do with Thailand and very much to do with--wait for it--your very own Blighty.

 

Despite these desperate efforts to trivialize, diminish, and excuse the girls based on your own ethnocentric viewpoint, the Thais at the Wat at this time and place did think their behavior inappropriate. Their judgement counts and it's final. Yours is irrelevant and nobody cares about it except perhaps our peanut gallery here to reinforce their own misguided opinions.  

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

 

I also think this is blown way out of proportion.

 

I have often been with larger groups of Thais visiting famous temples, and quite often they had blankets in their pickup and we then sat there to eat something on similar temple grounds.

 

I am much more offended by tourists shouting in full disregard of their surroundings and shoving each other around nice photo spots than I would ever be of two tourists doing their own thing in comparable silence. Why should one not rest at a temple and soak in the peaceful feeling?

 

Quite a different thing if they were -- on the suggestion of a monk -- asked by a layperson in white if they please could move. This would have been the *only* proper Thai way of dealing with this situation, but the story gives no hint of such. So I would suggest, that the Thais themselves did not behave appropriately here.

 

Completely agree....     they also had a Thai guide with then (I assume the guide was Thai)... So, if this was 'so offensive to Thai's' as some are suggesting... surely the guide would have said something... 

 

How did the media get hold of this I wonder ?....       A non-story which has triggered a few western karen's into outrage at 'farangs culturally offending Thailands virtuous culture' for showing a bit of shoulder... 

 

 

[BigStar]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Well, if we're deviating from the subject and discussion comments it could be argued that you appear to be a far greater Karen than the person who found two girls in shorts and tank-top laying the grass inappropriate. 

 

 

 

But you see it could be argued far more cogently that you're the far greater Karen for making such a big issue about the Thais finding the girls' behavior inappropriate. Have we got the Karen issue out of the way now? 

[Ben Zioner]

One of the two is grossly obese while the other is overweight, must be the cause of concern.

[jts-khorat]

10 minutes ago, BigStar said:

the Thais at the Wat at this time and place did think their behavior inappropriate

 

*One* Thai thought this inappropriate. He talked to a monk, who appeased him, but then did not send out a layperson to talk to the tourists (so unnecessary conflict was prevented, the proper action by the monk both towards the Thai and the two tourists).

 

If I would be wanting to nitpick and "dive deep" into Buddhism: did the two girls lay on the grass within or outside the Sema stones for Wat Chiang Man? A temple from the 13th century would have his boundary stones in all likelihood close around only the Ubhosot ordination hall, and the "temple grounds" within which the monks wield spiritual control is within this enclosure.

 

I therefore still believe, the person who has acted the most inappropriate was the Thai tourist talking to the monk, but then not being happy with his de-conflicting non-action.

Edited January 15 by jts-khorat

[richard_smith237]

10 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

Thais are accustomed to contrasts without finding them ironic. Ask how many understand puritanism. I think if you research the word, you'll find it has nothing to do with Thailand and very much to do with--wait for it--your very own Blighty.

 

Despite these desperate efforts to trivialize, diminish, and excuse the girls based on your own ethnocentric viewpoint, the Thais at the Wat at this time and place did think their behavior inappropriate. Their judgement counts and it's final. Yours is irrelevant and nobody cares about it except perhaps our peanut gallery here to reinforce their own misguided opinions.  

 

 

 

One person found it offensive and sent a photo to Channel 3 and then complained to a Monk about it.

 

The monk was clearly so upset by the 'cultural offence' that he dealt with the issue immediately, right ???... he did deal with the issue didn't he ?????

Well nope... the monk did nothing except tell the 'Thai tourist' that the message would be relayed to the tour guide.

 

 

The tourists were behaving in such a culturally offensive manner that other Thai's complained right ??... no, ok, just one then. 

The tourists were behaving in such a culturally offensive manner that those working at the temple approached them and asked them not to lay on the grass, right ???... no, ok then... they left them alone in peace to carry on..... 

 

What did Channel 3 do ?... they went with a ridiculous story anyway, which was then picked up by The Thaiger... 

[ikke1959]

Sunbathing is forbidden in Thailand ... Nothing wrong with this, but again just an example why tourists don't choose Thailand anymore.. It seems that everything they do is wrong.. Laying on a grassfield... inappropriate... vaping   get fined and forbidden( while police is doing itself), pictures with a leg out of a skirt at a temple.. not allowed.. and list can go on and on..

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, BigStar said:

But you see it could be argued far more cogently that you're the far greater Karen for making such a big issue about the Thais finding the girls' behavior inappropriate. Have we got the Karen issue out of the way now? 

 

It depends, are you still going to cry offence on behalf of all Thai's because one found it in appropriate that two women were sat on the grass in the temple grounds in shorts and a tank top ?

 

 

 

[BigStar]

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

they also had a Thai guide with then (I assume the guide was Thai)... So, if this was 'so offensive to Thai's' as some are suggesting... surely the guide would have said something... 

 

Again, the same exaggeration, returning to grossly. Get over this little straw man. Nobody said it was SO offensive. Nor should the request for the girls to stop sunbathing out there be SO offensive to you and the rest of our peanut gallery. The guide's being paid and maybe not much of a Buddhist anyway. But some serious Thai Buddhists do attend the Wats. We may also assume the monk was serious enough.

 

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

A non-story which has triggered a few western karen's into outrage at 'farangs culturally offending Thailands virtuous culture' for showing a bit of shoulder... 

 

 

You have it completely backwards. The purpose here is to trigger our Western Karens, such as yourself, with outrage at the idea that Thais might be offended at Western behavior in their own country and Wat and dare find such behavior inappropriate. It worked beautifully. As I noted, the site will probably get ten pages out of this. Hee hee.

Edited January 15 by BigStar

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

 

*One* Thai thought this inappropriate. He talked to a monk, who appeased him, but then did not send out a layperson to talk to the tourists (so unnecessary conflict was prevented, the proper action by the monk both towards the Thai and the two tourists).

 

If I would be wanting to nitpick and "dive deep" into Buddhism: did the two girls lay on the grass within or outside the Sema stones for Wat Chiang Man? A temple from the 13th century would have his boundary stones in all likelihood close around only the Ubhosot ordination hall, and the "temple grounds" within which the monks wield spiritual control is within this enclosure.

 

I therefore still believe, the person who has acted the most appropriate was the Thai tourist talking to the monk, but then not being happy with his de-conflicting non-action.

 

100% agree....   

 

That said... I do understand how some consider many foreigners here to behave in a culturally inappropriate manner...  I just find that using this issue to highlight that stance is flawed... there are better examples to draw upon to highlight this and find the 'faux offence' some are taking on behalf of the Thai's is really over egging it... I don't know many Thai's who'd raise an eyebrow at this specific example. 

 

 

 

 

[BigStar]

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

It depends, are you still going to cry offence on behalf of all Thai's because one found it in appropriate that two women were sat on the grass in the temple grounds in shorts and a tank top ?

 

Are you still going to cry on behalf of all farang because some Thais--you don't know how many, as only one went on record (one is enough) and the monk agreed but did nothing--at a Wat found it inappropriate that two women were sunbathing on the temple grounds? If so, I'll continue pointing out your irrelevancy and illogic, for the fun of it. :)

 

Edited January 15 by BigStar

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, BigStar said:

18 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

they also had a Thai guide with then (I assume the guide was Thai)... So, if this was 'so offensive to Thai's' as some are suggesting... surely the guide would have said something... 

 

Again, the same exaggeration, returning to grossly. Get over this little straw man. Nobody said it was SO offensive. Nor should the request for the girls to stop sunbathing out there be SO offensive to you and the rest of our peanut gallery. The guide's being paid and maybe not much of a Buddhist anyway. But some serious Thai Buddhists do attend the Wats. We may also assume the monk was serious enough.

 

You don't think its offensive but agree with the 'one' Thai who did and complained... I see...

 

6 minutes ago, BigStar said:

18 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

A non-story which has triggered a few western karen's into outrage at 'farangs culturally offending Thailands virtuous culture' for showing a bit of shoulder... 

 

 

You have it completely backwards. The purpose here is to trigger our Western Karens, such as yourself, with outrage at the idea that Thais might be offended at Western behavior in their own country and Wat and dare find such behavior inappropriate. It worked beautifully. As I noted, the site will probably get ten pages out of this. Hee hee.

 

Valid point - it has triggered discussion...odd that on a forum designed for discussion.

Whats your purpose of being here if not to discuss various topics ???\

I'm triggered by the ridiculous over egging and appropriation of cultural sensitivity by some on behalf of the Thai's. 

You are triggered by those who are trivialising something you see the Thai's as considering culturally insensitive.

Interesting... 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

11 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

Are you still going to cry on behalf of all farang because some Thais--you don't know how many, as only one went on record (one is enough) and the monk agreed but did nothing--at a Wat found it inappropriate that two women were sunbathing on the temple grounds? If so, I'll continue pointing out your irrelevancy and illogic, for the fun of it. :)

 

 

What did the Monk do about it ???

What did anyone at the Wat do about it ???

 

Don't you think if this was something those in the vicinity found inappropriate someone would have spoken up ????

 

That's are generally very non-confrontational, yet when it comes to offending their culture or Thailand they are extremely vocal and don't shy from confrontation at all.

 

I recall first being here, dropping money and trying to stop it rolling down the drain with my foot - I thought I was going to be lynched !!!..

No Thai nearby was shy to intervene then...  yet, these women were permitted their peace for the whole time they were there - why ?????

Because no one but this Thai Tourist was bothered at all... 

Then... Slow news day Chanel 3 thought they could make something of it...

 

It is the 'thinking they can make something of it' which I consider objectionable and even potentially attempting to trigger an element of xenophobia in its audience to tigger interest...  The Thaiger obviously taking the opposite approach and triggering the 'not a big deal' defence as you mentioned.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[tgw]

Temple grounds - a matter best left to the Monks to deal with.

[richard_smith237]

19 minutes ago, BigStar said:

and the monk agreed but did nothing

 

The monk agreed ???... You know that how ?... nothing indicates the monk agreed with the Thai tourist at all.

 

The Thai tourist told to Channel 3 that the monk mentioned he'd 'relay the message to the tour guide'...  thats it.

 

Translation: 'this person [Thai Tourist] is bat$#it crazy... just agree and he/she'll go away'....   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, tgw said:

Temple grounds - a matter best left to the Monks to deal with.

 

Agreed....  and the Monks clearly didn't see it necessary to bother with at all...  

[FruitPudding]

1 hour ago, BigStar said:

 

Irrelevant whataboutism for the enjoyment of bashing.

 

 

Much like the entire topic. Lol

 

You don't see the irony here?

 

 

1 hour ago, BigStar said:

 

Then you could set the example by refraining from criticizing the Thais. Hypocritical, of course.

 

I am not the one criticizing people for something like sitting on grass.

 

Nor am I coming from some moral, cultural, or religious highground.

 

You are just going round in circles now.

 

So I should refrain from criticizing Thais, who should (or shouldn't?) refrain from criticizing guests in their country about an innocous thing? Is that your reasoning?

 

Edited January 15 by FruitPudding

[RayC]

9 hours ago, Tarteso said:

Jesus !

 

Wrong temple, mate. You'll find him in the one down the road.

[swm59nj]

These two women are the female version of dumb and dumber. 
Just another example of visitors coming to another country thinking they can do whatever they want 

[Hanuman2547]

If the two young women were just sitting down on the grass and not laying down would that have been ok?  Perhaps sitting on the grass and enjoying some somtam would make it ok?

[Jing Joe]

12 hours ago, Deerculler said:

I do wonder about the mentality of some of the people post such rubbish in forums.

Yes "dear" but just notice how we even get  rubbished if we stand completely back from the subject only to observe/comment on their mentality and ravings. Point proven? Just watch.. 3 more days and it will be forgotten.

 

[Samphawesi]

Surely these images are Photoshopped? Taken on a beach and then superimposed on pics of Sanam Luang, temple precincts etc?

[cdemundo]

Seems the monk wasn't bothered, just the Thai "Karen" if that is still a current expression.

[Wrwest]

15 hours ago, digger70 said:

Sunbathe yes, They had clothes on Not Bikinis or Topless  and they weren't In the temple.

What's the problem than, can't anyone do anything without the stupid locals go berserk.

One can see a lot worse on the street or anywhere .

Hmm, this photo shows a bikini bottom. But I agree, some distance to the temple. Thailand is promoted as a tropical trust destination for those from cold northern climates.

[Derek B]

Just missing a keep off the grass sign................like the keep off the Moat Wall signs only in English.

 

[ChrisY1]

The pigeons are offended!

[Enoon]

14 hours ago, BigStar said:

 

Thais are accustomed to contrasts without finding them ironic. Ask how many understand puritanism. I think if you research the word, you'll find it has nothing to do with Thailand and very much to do with--wait for it--your very own Blighty.

 

Despite these desperate efforts to trivialize, diminish, and excuse the girls based on your own ethnocentric viewpoint, the Thais at the Wat at this time and place did think their behavior inappropriate. Their judgement counts and it's final. Yours is irrelevant and nobody cares about it except perhaps our peanut gallery here to reinforce their own misguided opinions.  

 

 

 

 

Puritanism was an historical phenomenon.

 

There are plenty of people in the world at large, far beyond the shores of "Blighty" and the influence its culture, who happily evince a puritanical outlook.........even though they know nothing of Christian sectarian dissent/dispute in Britain during the 16th and 17th centuries.

 

Certain Islamic countries are especially enthusiastic.

 

They have their equivalents in Buddhist countries:

 

adjective

adjective: puritanical

1. practicing or affecting strict religious or moral behavior.

   "his puritanical parents saw any kind of pleasure as the road to damnation"

    

    

Edited January 16 by Enoon

[digger70]

17 hours ago, BigStar said:

 

Looks like bikinis, even a thong in the latest pic.

 

 

"Anything" and "beserk" are attempts to trivialize by exaggeration. Something, yes. Nor are the locals stupid. Such condemnations invoke the ANF Poster Boomerang Principle, merely applying to the poster himself.

 

 

This wasn't the street or anywhere but somewhere in particular. Next.

 

Next time I will send my replies to you so you can Edit them to your liking OK? 

If you don't like what I am posting Don't read them and be Quiet