Bangkok Shop Owner Defends Right to Sell Controversial Shirts

[RUSirius]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Valid points - nevertheless both are provocative, and when worn by some (i.e forum members who suggest they will go out and buy such shirts) would be deliberately provocative. 

 

 

 

 

Again, valid, yet it continues to highlight a degree of insensitivity when anyone wishes to wear such items - even to the point of being deliberately provocative.

 

Those wearing such items or displaying such symbolism can only be dismissed as simple minded idiots. 

 

 

 

Being elated over someone wearing a hitler T-shirt in Thailand would tend to show a significantly juvinile mindset.

 

 

 

Indeed...  If there wasn't a market for them, they wouldn't print such T-shirts.

 

Fortunately, we don't see many, because the vast majority of people are not ignorant and culturally insensitive fools. 

 

 

 

I pity your wife. It's good her English is probably not that strong.

 

You seem a miserable, overthinking person.

 

Go enjoy the day outside

[Autocan]

Do they sell online? I would buy a bunch of Putin t-shirts of all sizes. I love the man, the greatest world leader of the 21st century.  I know friends back in the home country who would be delighted to get them as gifts.

[NoDisplayName]

Just now, richard_smith237 said:

 

Valid points, I completely agree...

 

If we were to see a T-shirt that says "Moh is a Pedo"  - I think it perfectly normal for anyone to understand that this is offensive and its down the personal responsibility of both the printer (designer) and shop owner to avoid such deliberately controversial indecency. 

 

It's up to the designer/producer/buyer to CHOOSE whether they desire to avoid controversy.

 

But then it might encourage a conversation, and facts could be introduced.  At that point, if the wearer can PROVE his slogan is factually correct, what then?

 

It's evidently true, but some guy over there doesn't like it, and he'll chop your head off if you say it.

 

On the other hand, that same guy can say what he likes about you and yours, and you better not complain, or he'll chop your head off.

[RUSirius]

3 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Irrelevant.  Provocative speech is still protected speech.  Heck, if speech wasn't provocative or distasteful, it wouldn't need protection.

 

I don't believe any speech in Thailand is protected. I'm not up on its (latest) constitution.

 

Certain speech is DEFINITELY not protected.

[Ralf001]

2 minutes ago, RUSirius said:

 

I don't believe any speech in Thailand is protected. I'm not up on its (latest) constitution.

 

Certain speech is DEFINITELY not protected.

 

Freedom of speach certailny is protected.... Thailand has harsh defamation laws !

[NoDisplayName]

Just now, RUSirius said:

 

I don't believe any speech in Thailand is protected. I'm not up on its (latest) constitution.

 

Certain speech is DEFINITELY not protected.

 

Discussion is based on events in Thailand, but encompasses the principle of free speech.

 

You can wear a nazi outfit and march through the streets in the USA with police protection, as long as you don't commit violent acts.

 

You can be arrested for yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, or for posting tweets calling for shooting the president, or threatening someone with violence.

[Cameroni]

20 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Perhaps they believe those days are behind them - yet the very fact that this debate continues suggests otherwise.

 

Your argument on morality feels somewhat shallow, as it hinges on a cross-species principle. By the same logic, one could justify humans eating steak, chicken, or any other animal product. The foundation of the argument seems to miss the crux of the issue.

 

That said, I do agree with your point regarding those who treat their sense of decency or morality as universal truths. They are not.

Concepts of decency and morality exist on a spectrum, shaped by location, nationality, culture - even by time itself.

 

Much of the tension lies in this grey area, yet it is important to recognise that extremes do exist. There are actions and symbols that are, by most reasonable standards, unequivocally indecent.

 

Consider, for example, the symbol of Hitler. In Thailand, due to differing historical and cultural contexts, such imagery may not carry the same visceral weight as it does in France, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, and other countries scarred directly by his legacy.

 

However, the world has grown small. Social media has shrunk it further still. What might once have been an isolated local misstep - selling a Hitler-themed T-shirt, for instance - now has global reach and, with it, the potential to cause Thailand embarrassment on the world stage.

 

The boundary between decency and indecency often shifts within the fog of subjectivity. Yet, there are cases where certain imagery strays so far beyond that line that it may be argued it is simply never acceptable.

 

 

 

 

Whether any particular interpretation of decency or morality has absolute value is a simple question, which has a yes or no answer.

 

The point I was making about the snake eating the mouse was not about species or food, but about perspective. It appeared shallow to  you because you did not look in the right place. The point is perspective. Morality and decency are dependent on perspective, where you sit determines your interpretation.

 

You yourself actually then, correctly, raise the issue of perspective yourself. Yes, an image of Hitler is viewed differently in Poland than in Thailand, quite so. But the very fact that this is the case shows that there is no absolute valid right or wrong on this question. Even in the West, you may recall the funny T-Shirts in the 90s that were sold of "Hitler on Tour". Context matters, everyone knew it was a joke. So yes, people can argue about this day and night, find it offensive or not offensive. However, clearly these T-shirts are not political statements. They do not contain images of Hitler actually killing someone or fornicating with a dog. They are just faces.

 

So personally I see no issue with this. It's not that I would view certain other things, murder, bestiality or such as having absolute wrong, even if most cultures in the world today view these as morally wrong, because in fact there times when they were not considered such, and even today if the state murders a criminal many consider that right.  Of course there are gray areas. But whether Thailand is embarassed by a Hitler T-shirt, because of Tik Tok, I doubt it very much, and in any event that is for Thais to decide, not farang with an axe to grind. Whatever colour that axe has.

 

No doubt there is imagery that is so far beyond that which is considered acceptable in most cultures, I alluded to it above,  murder, bestiality, mass kiling or such, however, even that would not make it absolutely wrong, as there were times and cultures when they were not. But here clearly these T-shirts are nowhere near this level of offence, and in any event it is for Thais to decide if it breaks any laws within Thailand. Not guests.

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, RUSirius said:

11 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

They wouldn't be allowed to wear Swastika or Hitler T-shirts in their own, or other European countries.

 

But to see one being sold or worn, saying Hitler was God, or Jesus is a puff, or Mohammed was a paedo could be upsetting for some.

 

But it's Thailand. What happens in home countries is irrelevant.

 

It’s difficult to ignore this, especially when Thailand so actively markets itself as a global destination.

 

If Thailand aspires to be part of the global community, then surely it carries a responsibility to act with a sense of decency and consideration towards other cultures - just as we should all strive to do. Basic mutual respect should be the foundation of any society that wishes to engage with the world at large.

 

1 minute ago, RUSirius said:

Do you live your life by what might be potentially offensive to some? Seems these days everyone is offended by everything. That's why I love being here.

 

Agreed - many of us aren’t personally offended by such symbolism (I certainly am not), but that doesn’t mean we’re blind to the fact that others might find it offensive.

 

As you’ve pointed out, one of the reasons I (we) enjoy being here is precisely because there is generally less confrontation over minor social faux pas.

 

Many small slips that would spark conflict in the West are simply shrugged off here, thanks to a more relaxed temperament and a capacity to let the small things go.

 

That’s exactly why I take issue with the individual confronting the shop owner in this particular story.

 

Yet, for the sake of honest discussion, I also fully understand why some would take offence - and I recognise that openly pushing such symbols often stems from ignorance.

 

It’s the same kind of ignorance as selling socks emblazoned with a Thai flag or panties featuring an image of Buddha in a Western market.

 

In many cases, it may simply be a lack of awareness - ignorance without malice. But once someone knows, and continues regardless, it crosses into insensitivity.

[hotchilli]

1 hour ago, Ralf001 said:

 

so your post.... "Japanese running Thailand"... means what ?

Go do some research

[Ralf001]

1 minute ago, hotchilli said:

Go do some research

 

Nothing to research, the japanese are not running Thailand..... fact.

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Whether any particular interpretation of decency or morality has absolute value is a simple question, which has a yes or no answer.

 

The point I was making about the snake eating the mouse was not about species or food, but about perspective. It appeared shallow to  you because you did not look in the right place. The point is perspective. Morality and decency are dependent on perspective, where you sit determines your interpretation.

 

You yourself actually then, correctly, raise the issue of perspective yourself. Yes, an image of Hitler is viewed differently in Poland than in Thailand, quite so. But the very fact that this is the case shows that there is no absolute valid right or wrong on this question. Even in the West, you may recall the funny T-Shirts in the 90s that were sold of "Hitler on Tour". Context matters, everyone knew it was a joke. So yes, people can argue about this day and night, find it offensive or not offensive. However, clearly these T-shirts are not political statements. They do not contain images of Hitler actually killing someone or fornicating with a dog. They are just faces.

 

So personally I see no issue with this. It's not that I would view certain other things, murder, bestiality or such as having absolute wrong, even if most cultures in the world today view these as morally wrong, because in fact there times when they were not considered such, and even today if the state murders a criminal many consider that right.  Of course there are gray areas. But whether Thailand is embarassed by a Hitler T-shirt, because of Tik Tok, I doubt it very much, and in any event that is for Thais to decide, not farang with an axe to grind. Whatever colour that axe has.

 

No doubt there is imagery that is so far beyond that which is considered acceptable in most cultures, I alluded to it above,  murder, bestiality, mass kiling or such, however, even that would not make it absolutely wrong, as there were times and cultures when they were not. But here clearly these T-shirts are nowhere near this level of offence, and in any event it is for Thais to decide if it breaks any laws within Thailand. Not guests.

 

+1 from me — I agree with your points (mostly).

 

The very fact that we can have these kinds of discussions is, in itself, a testament to the freedoms we enjoy. And I wouldn’t trade those freedoms for anything.

 

In my view, someone should absolutely have the right to sell such symbolic images if they wish — but equally, others should have the right to peacefully voice their objection. That’s the healthy balance of free expression.

 

That said, this particular individual acted like a bit of a pr!ck, if I’m honest.

I can't help but wonder - had he calmly and respectfully explained to the shop owner that these T-shirts are considered offensive by many, might she have been more open to the conversation?

 

Perhaps the problem wasn't just the symbol on the shirt, but the attitude the Westerner brought into the discussion. It’s entirely possible that he approached it poorly from the outset, upsetting the shop owner before the conversation even began.

 

Having an opinion and voicing it respectfully should not be contingent on holding a Thai passport - nor should it be in any country.

 

I completely disagree with the perspective held by some that "we are guests in this country and have no rights to an opinion" - I find such sentiment rather stupid.

 

 

 

[black tabby12345]

shirts featuring Russian President Vladimir Putin and Adolf Hitler. 

 

Very appropriate indeed.  She better be keep going as it is.

As that's what that SO* is like; started reverse Operation Barbarossa, this time from the east.

 

[RUSirius]

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

It’s difficult to ignore this, especially when Thailand so actively markets itself as a global destination.

 

If Thailand aspires to be part of the global community, then surely it carries a responsibility to act with a sense of decency and consideration towards other cultures - just as we should all strive to do. Basic mutual respect should be the foundation of any society that wishes to engage with the world at large.

 

 

Agreed - many of us aren’t personally offended by such symbolism (I certainly am not), but that doesn’t mean we’re blind to the fact that others might find it offensive.

 

As you’ve pointed out, one of the reasons I (we) enjoy being here is precisely because there is generally less confrontation over minor social faux pas.

 

Many small slips that would spark conflict in the West are simply shrugged off here, thanks to a more relaxed temperament and a capacity to let the small things go.

 

That’s exactly why I take issue with the individual confronting the shop owner in this particular story.

 

Yet, for the sake of honest discussion, I also fully understand why some would take offence - and I recognise that openly pushing such symbols often stems from ignorance.

 

It’s the same kind of ignorance as selling socks emblazoned with a Thai flag or panties featuring an image of Buddha in a Western market.

 

In many cases, it may simply be a lack of awareness - ignorance without malice. But once someone knows, and continues regardless, it crosses into insensitivity.

 

You're all over the board here mate.

 

They don't know

They don't care

 

It's idiocy to assume that simply having heard of a random issue that some have sensitivity about that a person half way round the world should conform to doing their utmost not to demonstrate in any way that sensitivity. Sorry, no.

 

This vendors will suffer (or not) due to their* cultural insensitivity*

 

Unfortunately in the West, speech issues are muddied with this soft  malleable thinking.

[Thingamabob]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

You are missing the point by resorting to baseless accusations instead of attempting to grasp the simple matter of basic decency.

 

The usual lines - “We are guests in this country,” “foreigners have no right,” or “if you don’t like it, go home” - are not legitimate arguments. They are cheap jabs, often made by those more interested in scoring points than engaging in thoughtful discussion.

 

None of these claims justify what is clearly wrong - this couple is selling T-shirts that can reasonably be seen as offensive.

 

This has absolutely nothing to do with nationality and everything to do with fundamental human decency. She is surely aware of what Hitler did - and if, by some miracle, she wasn't, she most certainly is now - yet I suspect the offensive T-shirts remain on sale regardless.

 

Consider this as a simple parallel: Would it be acceptable for her to sell a T-shirt depicting a deceased loved one of yours, accompanied by offensive or mocking words? Of course not.

 

While this may be an extreme comparison, it illustrates an important truth - what one person dismisses as trivial can cause deep offence to others. And this is precisely why freedom of expression must always carry with it a measure of responsibility - the responsibility not to be deliberately offensive simply because you can.

 

When I open up some of the posts made by 'ignored posters' its patently clear that there are those who would take active steps to deliberately be offensive - thus proving why they are on ignore in the first place, their content has no place in decent discussion.

 

I reject the argument that foreigners have no right to voice concerns. In fact, I would say that no private individual, regardless of nationality, has the unilateral right to dictate what can or cannot be sold. That responsibility lies with the relevant authorities - those tasked with upholding decency and common standards within society.

 

If policed correctly, i.e. if the Police here were not so apathetic and lazy, this may be seen as causing public offence, disturbance, or even perceived as inciting hate, authorities could act on that if they so wished - they don't because they are lazy.

 

But, there is precedence of the such actions where ignorant insensitivity has led to the need to react with a decent response and a apology. 

 

In 2011, students in Chiang Mai held a Nazi-themed sports day parade (yes, really). When photos went viral internationally, it caused a scandal and formal apologies were issued by the school and Thai officials.

 

 

Just because we've seen a few random market stalls selling this stuff, do not think it's actually accepted - it's more tolerated due to misunderstanding, not approval.

 

 

 

 

I totally disagree. We have no right as foreigners to tell Thais trying to earn a living what items they should or should not sell in their shops. 

[Thingamabob]

1 hour ago, Don Giovanni said:

Tiresome.

 

The Don.

Oh dear. Take a nap.

[RUSirius]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

others should have the right to peacefully voice their objection. That’s the healthy balance of free expression.

 

In Thailand, you and tourists like you have few rights. Certainly,  not right to speech.

 

How are you suggesting this speech be exercised against the hapless vendor.. of which there are probably 100 selling the same shirts?

 

What if we were in Iran and not Thailand? Would these soft, western sensibilities apply? Lol. No

[smew]

 

Contentious issue: I do not agree with selling and promoting dictators and their tee-shirts.

I would simply walk in, tell her/him why I will not buy anything from them and walk away.

 

Vendors simply want publicity and attention and more business and not knowing anything (as most Thai know very little about outside world and its history).

It is her ignorant right to sell, but it is repulsive to see hitler, stalin, putin, franco, pol pot, mao, etc…on a tee shirt and someone trying to promote by selling , very insensitive.

[Cameroni]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

+1 from me — I agree with your points (mostly).

 

The very fact that we can have these kinds of discussions is, in itself, a testament to the freedoms we enjoy. And I wouldn’t trade those freedoms for anything.

 

In my view, someone should absolutely have the right to sell such symbolic images if they wish — but equally, others should have the right to peacefully voice their objection. That’s the healthy balance of free expression.

 

That said, this particular individual acted like a bit of a pr!ck, if I’m honest.

I can't help but wonder - had he calmly and respectfully explained to the shop owner that these T-shirts are considered offensive by many, might she have been more open to the conversation?

 

Perhaps the problem wasn't just the symbol on the shirt, but the attitude the Westerner brought into the discussion. It’s entirely possible that he approached it poorly from the outset, upsetting the shop owner before the conversation even began.

 

Having an opinion and voicing it respectfully should not be contingent on holding a Thai passport - nor should it be in any country.

 

I completely disagree with the perspective held by some that "we are guests in this country and have no rights to an opinion" - I find such sentiment rather stupid.

 

 

 

I totally agree with you Richard, that the attitude of the complainant is the crux of the issue. As so often he displayed a messianic, I am so right and know it all better attitude,  you are stupid and wrong and no doubt that rubbed the Thai lady the wrong way.

 

Of course I support the right of anyone to have an opinion on this, and to express it respectfully and politely. The problem with ganging up on a Thai Lady selling T-Shirts is that this is picking the wrong target. It is already very hard to survive for most Thais, and selling T-Shirts she barely scrapes by. She cannot be expected to cater to the finer points of farang sensibilities. In fact she thought she was catering to farang preferences and is just trying to make a living.

 

Whilst foreigners can have whatever opinion they like on this, and indeed express it respectfully, they still need to realise that they are guests in this country and cannot mandate a Thai woman what she can do and can't do in her own country. That is just wrong. I think more wrong than selling a T-Shirt with a face of a long forgotten or present political leader on it.

[black tabby12345]

foreign tourists demanding she stop selling shirts featuring Russian President Vladimir Putin and Adolf Hitler. 

 

Which foreigners are complaining about it?

Can easily imagine who do that though.

 

Must be Ruscists(Rus military expansionists; pro invasion soldiers/civilians), and some Pro-Xi Jing Ping Chinese.

Ruscism - Wikipedia

 

Russians with conscience and the sense of justice, won't do that, as they well know it is shameful to wage war for territorial gain.

[hotchilli]

16 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

 

Nothing to research, the japanese are not running Thailand..... fact.

I wasn't talking about now... why do you think I mentioned WWII... fact

[black tabby12345]

9 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

I totally disagree. We have no right as foreigners to tell Thais trying to earn a living what items they should or should not sell in their shops. 

 

That's right.

None of the 3rd party business.

 

[smew]

21 hours ago, chuang said:

Who the fork are these people to order others what to sell...if they don't like they can buy off the products and throw them away..

These people are making a living in their own country if you don't like go back to your country...

 

very self centered statement: wait until it is an issue that is sensitive to your opinion or your feelings  

[richard_smith237]

10 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

I totally disagree. We have no right as foreigners to tell Thais trying to earn a living what items they should or should not sell in their shops. 

 

I would argue that it largely depends on how the subject is approached.

 

I’ve personally given restaurant owners respectful feedback when I felt their food wasn't up to standard - is that not simply voicing an opinion about how they run their business? In fact, clever business owners depend on honest feedback to improve.

 

So, I see nothing wrong with offering respectful feedback - it’s part of any healthy exchange.

 

Of course, as you rightly pointed out, there is a big difference between offering feedback and outright telling people what to do, or, to use your stronger example, “telling Thais trying to earn a living what items they should or should not sell.” That would indeed be crossing a line.

 

But then I have to ask - would it be any different if a Thai person did the same?

 

Why would a Thai have any more right than a foreigner to tell another Thai - a stranger - what they should or shouldn’t be selling in their shop?

 

Would that not also be overstepping? This is precisely why I don’t think nationality is the deciding factor here.

 

It comes down to how something is said, not who is saying it.

 

[black tabby12345]

18 hours ago, jvs said:

Haven't seen many of these lately.

 

I have this about 10 years ago at the night bazar in Thailand.

 

[Autocan]

The good woman is printing and selling these shirts because there's a market for them, presumably not because she has an ideological affinity for particular leaders. So why go after her? She's just hustling for a buck.

 

If you are offended by certain imagery talk (respectfully) to those who wear them. E.g., when I get the chance I will go to her shop and buy a Putin t-shirt and wear it because I love the man. And then if I run into someone wearing a Slava Ukraini t-shirt I will politely invite him to a beer and explain to him why he's an idiot. And hopefully he'll understand and switch to a Putin shirt but if he's adamant that's his right and he can wear what he wants.

[black tabby12345]

Another Orc invasion to BKK garment shop, next to Ukraine.

But met evenly counterattack and struggling LOL.

[gravity101]

19 hours ago, Cameroni said:

Good on this woman for standing up to the virtue signaller bullies.

Virtue Signaller?? The guy was Ukrainian.

[black tabby12345]

21 hours ago, chuang said:

Who the fork are these people to order others what to sell...if they don't like they can buy off the products and throw them away..

These people are making a living in their own country if you don't like go back to your country...

 

You are absolutely right.

These invasive "tourists" shouldn't be here.

Deserves to be kicked out.

[impulse]

She has every right to sell 'em. 

 

And I have every right not to buy them or wear them (or hide them in my closet).

 

How simple was that?

 

[Cameroni]

1 minute ago, gravity101 said:

Virtue Signaller?? The guy was Ukrainian.

 

So? He was signalling "I'm good, Putin bad". In a most obnoxious and offensive manner, which hopefully seems him deported. Too many Ukrainians and Russians causing problems in Thailand.