But I Don't Give A Hoot !

[johna]

P.S. On a another sort-of-related topic.....Is there anyone still around on the forum who actually remembers Tiger and Tiger's bar? Or am I the last one?

I remember Tiger from when he could walk and when he couldn't and his bar (on Suriwongse if I remember correctly) and also Lucy's Tiger Den when his widow moved it to Silom. I also know quite a few other people of that era who are still around.

I was in Lucy's Tiger Den in the early 80's, a friend and I ordered his chili beans and Tiger went crazy, shouting that the beans were only a come on and were not meant to be served.

The wall behind the bar was covered with bad checks that Tiger had accepted from various patrons claiming a temporary shortage of funds.

Lucy's Tiger Den gets a bit of a write up in Monika Jensen-Stevenson’s NF book “Kiss the Boys Goodbye” and I recently heard there is a book out on Tiger.

My geography may be a bit off here, but was Lucy’s Tiger Den on Silom Road almost opposite the entrance to Patpong.?

[p_brownstone]

His earlier Nite Owl columns had reviews of different BJs available around town and was a valuable public service.

Ah yes, his Massage Parlour Reviews, he used to include the girls' Number and ended with a comment on her ability at "Specials" - Bernards' eupemism for a BJ .

He used to write extensive Restaurant Reviews in the old Bangkok World too, and as someone already mentioned he would order a huge array of dishes - although I guess he never fiinished them all; as I recall he also used to take his Thai wife on these restaurant outings and I often wondered at the relationship - I mean, he was writing openly about his massage parlour exploits, what did she feel about that?

His weekly Bangkok World articles back in the early 70's ran to 4 pages sometimes (OK, it ws a Tabloid not a Broadsheet) and keeping it interesting and topical must have beeen a heavy load.

Love him or hate him, he was a Bangkok Institution and a colourful character in a world fast going pastel - if not grey.

Patrick

[Spaniel]

Does anyone know what Bernard is doing now ? His columns went downhill in the last few years, but I always enjoyed him.

"nuff said.

I ran into Trink & wife in November 2007 at Foodland's customer appreciation/wine tasting party in Bangkok. At the time, and I think he still does, a couple of weekly book reviews for the Bkk Post. Still dressed the same, pants hiked up and wearing his medallion, right out of the fifties/sixties. At that time he didn't seem to be in the best of health although he was wolfing down a good bit of Foodlands free food. I haven't seen him since but I also haven't heard of him passing away so I'm sure he is still in Bangkok.

His weekend colums were definetly eagerly awaited by all. Agreed?

[Spaniel]

Pierrot, you've just read a book about him right? I'm confused as to why you said his last columns were in 1993 - i would have said more like about ten years later. No?

In December 2003, Trink's column was dropped without fanfare by a new editor, who decided it was time for Trink to go. There was no announcement that it was ending, nor any farewell party for the long time columnist. The "Nite Owl" column simply vanished. Trink still writes book reviews for the Post and for a time did his own web site, but he is now more or less retired.

source wiki

I have a copy of the December 29, 2003 Time Magazine article that noted Trinks retirement. I dont have a scanner so I'll type out the article. Also included in the article is a picture of Trink.

RETIRED. BERNARD TRINK, 72, revered and reviled newspaperman whose "Night Owl" colum extolled for nearly four decades the sybaritic pleasures avaiable to expatriate men in Thailanl's capital. The Brooklyn-born Trink covered the city's go-go bars, massage parlors and pubs, making the rounds with his Thai wife in tow, owl medallion around his neck and maroon polyester pants hitched up to his chest. He wrote in a retro style in which prostituse were "demimondaines" and press releases were preceded by the phrase, "The tom-toms have it...". His signature sign-off was, "But I don give a hoot." The column was one of the most popular on Bangkok Post's website-on average, 30,000 readers logged on to digest it every week- but the Post has decided to drop it. Said editor Veera Prateepchaikul: "Do you want something that's modern, or something from 30-40 years ago? Time magazine, December 2003.

I have another article from the Bangkok Post, 13 July 1996 "The party's over at the Thermae". That I'll save for the next Thermae thread.

[wamberal]

Trink's column was a joke, pure and simple. It made Thailand in general, and Bangkok in particular, look like the most pathetic third world country imaginable.

Can anybody seriously imagine a leading newspaper in any other country giving over a whole page to what amounted to a series of advertisements about venues for prostitution?

[Birdman]

Trink's column was a joke, pure and simple. It made Thailand in general, and Bangkok in particular, look like the most pathetic third world country imaginable.

Can anybody seriously imagine a leading newspaper in any other country giving over a whole page to what amounted to a series of advertisements about venues for prostitution?

Not at all, they only show pornographic pictures, which are widely appreciated by the one handers, in Europe at least.

Edited March 22, 2009 by Birdman

[wamberal]

Trink's column was a joke, pure and simple. It made Thailand in general, and Bangkok in particular, look like the most pathetic third world country imaginable.

Can anybody seriously imagine a leading newspaper in any other country giving over a whole page to what amounted to a series of advertisements about venues for prostitution?

Not at all, they only show pornographic pictures, which are widely appreciated by the one handers, in Europe at least.

Which leading newspapers in Europe publish pornographic pictures?

[ballpoint]

Trink's column was a joke, pure and simple. It made Thailand in general, and Bangkok in particular, look like the most pathetic third world country imaginable.

Can anybody seriously imagine a leading newspaper in any other country giving over a whole page to what amounted to a series of advertisements about venues for prostitution?

You could either read it or not. Like it or not, the fact that there were regularly letters about it, on both sides of the argument, and that his website received so many hits, suggests that many people did read it. Indeed, the Trink pages, then page then half page, were reason enough to buy the Saturday edition. Most of his snippets were infomercials - what bars a live sporting event was going to be shown, who was having an anniversary or birthday party and what food would be served. Interspersed were observations on life, references to the old days and Trink's own opinions, such as the HIV / AIDS one. Sadly, the wowsers won out, and his column was reduced to nothing over the last years of its existance. These sad busybodies seem to actually think that if nothing is written about the less savoury truisms of life, then they don't exist. Personally, I regard the 'society page", with its sickening pictures of "hiso's" kissing arse, sucking up to the hiest so, and spending enough money in one evening to keep a village going for a year, to be far more shameful that the Trink page, and that's still going. A case of manure (huMAN natURE).

[villagefarang]

My main memory of him was that he was a singularly unattractive creature. With a grotesque form and a large medallion hanging from his neck, closely followed by his young Thai cameraman. That said he was the perfect man to report on the nightlife seen in those days as he was representative of a rather large demographic of desperate souls. He was everywhere and hard to avoid but the world he wrote of and the world I lived in were quite dissimilar.

[Ulysses G.]

Can anybody seriously imagine a leading newspaper in any other country giving over a whole page to what amounted to a series of advertisements about venues for prostitution?

There is probably not another country in which prostitution is so ingrained in the culture. The only thing that is a "joke" would be trying to pretend that it is not absolutely everywhere - in every city and

town.

[dbrenn]

Specious allegations.

Back that up.

You obviously weren't around at the time. Trink made repeated claims in the 90's and early 00's that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, often directing readers to his favourite source of information www.virusmyth.com, which was the only source of external information that I recall him ever quoting. He also pointed out on many occasions that condoms were only of any use in preventing VD - AIDS was never mentioned.

Having known three people who caught AIDS from having unprotected sex in Thailand, one of whom died from it and the other two who became extremely sick, I thought that Trink was grossly irresponsible, and I was glad to see him go.

After getting the boot from the Bangkok Post, I heard that he started his own website, for which he charged a subscription. It fizzled out a while later.

[wamberal]

Can anybody seriously imagine a leading newspaper in any other country giving over a whole page to what amounted to a series of advertisements about venues for prostitution?

There is probably not another country in which prostitution is so ingrained in the culture. The only thing that is a "joke" would be trying to pretend that it is not absolutely everywhere - in every city and

town.

So, why has there never been any sustained serious journalism about prostitution in Thailand? The "joke" is surely that an allegedly serious newspaper would descend to the levels that Trink's ramblings epitomise.

[Ulysses G.]

Wake up. There has been lots of "journalism" about prostitution in Thailand published all over the world for many years and much of it by major authors.

[PattayaParent]

Specious allegations.

Back that up.

You obviously weren't around at the time. Trink made repeated claims in the 90's and early 00's that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, often directing readers to his favourite source of information www.virusmyth.com, which was the only source of external information that I recall him ever quoting. He also pointed out on many occasions that condoms were only of any use in preventing VD - AIDS was never mentioned.

Having known three people who caught AIDS from having unprotected sex in Thailand, one of whom died from it and the other two who became extremely sick, I thought that Trink was grossly irresponsible, and I was glad to see him go.

After getting the boot from the Bangkok Post, I heard that he started his own website, for which he charged a subscription. It fizzled out a while later.

An also, it must be said, the claim of many research professors who have actually studied the links between HIV and AIDS and the causes of the two separate diseases.

[PattayaParent]

My main memory of him was that he was a singularly unattractive creature. With a grotesque form and a large medallion hanging from his neck, closely followed by his young Thai cameraman. That said he was the perfect man to report on the nightlife seen in those days as he was representative of a rather large demographic of desperate souls. He was everywhere and hard to avoid but the world he wrote of and the world I lived in were quite dissimilar.

You obviously hung out in the same places as him if you couldn't avoid meeting him.

[mikehock]

Last week, knowing I was going to spend the day in a bus, I took a book from my bookshelf to read during my trip. It was a book from Jennifer Bliss about "The life and times of Bernard Trink, Bangkok's Nite Owl".

I don't know if younger members are familiar with Mr Trink, but once you have read his column, you can't forget him

For the people old enough to remember him (not that old actually, his last columns were in 1993, but were very different from the original ones), what did you think of his column ? I remember reading it with ambivalent feelings, believing he belongs to a a different time, long past, but at the same time appreciating his straight forward opinion that never sacrificed to the "politically correct" of our time.

Actually his last posts were in the Bangkok Post in 2003

Jennifer Bliss published an unauthorized biography in 2000

it seems that the powers that be at that time (read new editor -Bangkok Post)decided to drop him

i thought that his weekly contribution , though sometimes lacking in taste, gave an interesting update on some of the nightlife in Bangkok

[villagefarang]

My main memory of him was that he was a singularly unattractive creature. With a grotesque form and a large medallion hanging from his neck, closely followed by his young Thai cameraman. That said he was the perfect man to report on the nightlife seen in those days as he was representative of a rather large demographic of desperate souls. He was everywhere and hard to avoid but the world he wrote of and the world I lived in were quite dissimilar.

You obviously hung out in the same places as him if you couldn't avoid meeting him.

How clever of you to deduce that from my words. Everybody who was anybody, back in the day, spent some time there, whether alone, with friends, or ones clientele. Just part of the old equation of get them fed, get them drunk, get them laid and get them obligated and eager to do business here. You can be in the same environs while experiencing a very different world. What he saw and wrote about was very different from what some of us knew of that world.

[MrHammer]

Trink's column was a joke, pure and simple. It made Thailand in general, and Bangkok in particular, look like the most pathetic third world country imaginable.

Can anybody seriously imagine a leading newspaper in any other country giving over a whole page to what amounted to a series of advertisements about venues for prostitution?

Not at all, they only show pornographic pictures, which are widely appreciated by the one handers, in Europe at least.

haha.. exactly.. keep on spanking the monkey and be a good boy! masturbaters are not a treath..

though in countries like Denmark and Holland, there are big newspapers that make most their income of "massage" adverts in the back..

now, I have never read this old mans column, but Bangkok is the city of sin, no two ways about it and even if you don't usually take advantage of its offerings, why the hel_l do we need to pretend it isn't so? what else is so interesting to read about in a thai newspaper? the latest red-yellow puppet show? token police crackdown?

[BigSnake]

Last week, knowing I was going to spend the day in a bus, I took a book from my bookshelf to read during my trip. It was a book from Jennifer Bliss about “The life and times of Bernard Trink, Bangkok’s Nite Owl”.

I don’t know if younger members are familiar with Mr Trink, but once you have read his column, you can’t forget him

For the people old enough to remember him (not that old actually, his last columns were in 1993, but were very different from the original ones), what did you think of his column ? I remember reading it with ambivalent feelings, believing he belongs to a a different time, long past, but at the same time appreciating his straight forward opinion that never sacrificed to the “politically correct” of our time.

NUFF SAID For sure miss his weekly column in the BP>

[t.s]

I used to read him faithfully and don't remember him ever advising unprotected sex. I actually stopped my subscription to the Post when they cut his former page to a tiny column. Some of you have poor memories or you have no idea what you are talking about.

oh really?

while he does not advise unprotected sex, he claims that HIV is near impossible to catch from vaginal intercourse

October 31, 1997

THE TRINK PAGE

The spurious HIV connection

The reason I postponed writing about HIV/Aids (i.e. the minority scientific and medical view I believe to be correct) for several months is that I was waiting for recent material from which to quote. Midweek, one of my readers who follows this column on the Internet in the States arrived and presented me with a 41-page book. Published in 1996 ($7.95) Christine Maggiore's What If Everything You Thought You Knew About Aids Was Wrong? is, to the best of my knowledge, not available in Thailand.

Though the following quotes are taken from different parts of the book, none are out of context: "Aids is not new and is not a disease. Aids is a new name for 30 old illnesses and conditions, including yeast infection, diarrhoea, pneumonia, cancer and tuberculosis. These illnesses and conditions are called Aids only if the person who has them tests positive for antibodies to HIV.

"In other words, pneumonia in a person without HIV antibodies is called pneumonia, while pneumonia in a person with HIV antibodies is called Aids. The clinical manifestations and symptoms of the pneumonia are exactly the same, but one is considered Aids while the other is just pneumonia.

"Since 1984, more than 100,000 papers have been published on HIV. None of these papers has been able to reasonably demonstrate or effectively prove how HIV can cause Aids. Though more research money has been spent on HIV than on the combined total of all other viruses ever studied in medical history, there is still no scientific evidence to validate the hypothesis that HIV is the cause of Aids or that Aids has a viral cause.

"A good hypothesis is defined by its ability to solve problems and mysteries, make accurate predictions and produce results. The HIV hypothesis has failed to meet any of these criteria.

"HIV tests are not accurate because they are non-specific for HIV. Non-specific means that they respond to a great number of non-HIV antibodies, including the antibodies to a variety of microbes and bacteria that appear in the blood of normal, healthy people. These reactions to other antibodies and conditions will register as an HIV positive result.

"A common illness like a cold, the flu, a flu shot or other vaccines can cause a positive reaction on an HIV test. Conditions such as arthritis or lupus or exposure to diseases like tuberculosis, hepatitis and malaria can give positive readings. Pregnancy or prior pregnancy is also known to produce a positive response.

"HIV is not on the rise. According to 1995 CDC (Centre for Disease Control) statistics, the total number of Americans estimated to be HIV antibody positive has not increased at all since the test was introduced in 1985, even though the number of people taking the test has increased by hundreds of thousands each year.

"In 1996, following an investigation by NBC News, the CDC states in further interviews that they had not wanted to reveal these numbers for fear of provoking budget cuts for Aids. Actuarial calculations demonstrate that the average, non-IV (intravenous) drug-using heterosexual has as much chance of acquiring Aids as being struck by lightning.

"Approximately 70 per cent of American babies with Aids are born to drug-addicted mothers ('crack & heroin babies') and 13 per cent are born with congenital conditions like haemophilia."

More book quotes farther along.

QUOTES continued: "75 per cent of infants who test HIV antibody positive at birth will convert to HIV antibody negative within the first 18 months of life without medical intervention. This occurs because babies are born with no immune system of their own and as they develop one, 75 per cent naturally discard antibodies passed on to them from their mothers.

"American news reports of an African 'epidemic' raging out of control differ greatly from information presented in other parts of the world. For example, a front page story in The London Times called Aids in Africa 'The Plague That Never Was.' Africa is often cited as a worst case example of what could happen in America despite actual numbers that prove 99.95 per cent of Africans do not have Aids.

"Aids is not, as many believe, Africa's primary health threat; 500,000 children die each year in Africa of diseases such as neonatal tetanus, measles, typhoid and pertussis, which is greater than the total number of African Aids deaths in 17 years.

"It is often said that everyone is at risk for Aids, but actual numbers suggest otherwise. After two decades, close to 90 per cent of all Aids cases in the US are still confined to males, and 97 per cent have remained in the originally identified risk groups: gay males - 62 per cent; IV drug users - 32 per cent; transfusion recipients - 2 per cent; haemophiliacs - 1 per cent. Aids has not behaved like a truly contagious condition which will spread equally among the sexes and randomly within a population.

"In Minneapolis, Minnesota, an orphan with adoptive parents was tested HIV positive. Doctors put the baby on AZT though she was in perfect health and without symptoms. 'As soon as the medication began, our daughter became extremely ill. Research made it clear to us that the AZT was killing her. Against the vehement orders of Aids doctors, we took her off AZT, and today she is a healthy five-year-old'."

For further information, contact Group For The Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/Aids Hypothesis. E-mail http://web.archive.org/web/19980122042857/....virusmyth.com/

HIV to Aids? Not according to the facts

More danger from a random lightning strike than the dreaded disease

by Bernard Trink

'Much as I love your column, I am puzled by your belief that HIV may not be the cause of Aids. Some years ago, A California scientist questioned the link between the two and his alternative theory - that Aids is caused by a "homosexual lifestyle" - was taken up by a homophobic newspaper editor in Britain. However, since then, the epidemic has clearly shown that HIV causes Aids, not only in homosexuals but in the heterosexual partners of infected people and, more conclusively, in those infected by blood transfusion, needle sharing, accidental needlestick injuries and breastfeeding."

B.T.: If the epidemic has clearly shown that HIV causes Aids, as you assert, then there wouldn't be the minority view of scientists and doctors, Nobel laureates among them. I'd like you to consider the following excerpt in The West Australian newspaper, December 15, 1999 by writer Andrew McIntyre (page 16) headed "HIV scare defies facts":

"At the very least, all%

Edited March 22, 2009 by t.s

[Johpa]

Oh come on, the only reason we all use to read Trink was that he kept us abreast, so to speak, about which bars were "showing" and other such tidbits of news. And we all wanted to imagine ourselves on a first name basis with every hooker and bar owner in Bangkok, in essence to live vicariously through his column for five minutes once a week as a guilty pleasure. His writings were rather humorous although of a literary quality matching that of your former high school newspaper, but we still read him, often in secret, religiously. And on occasion, the old coot had some real insight into everyday life in Thailand. But yes, his stance on AIDS caused him to lose many of his readers as he finally became completely out of touch with the times, he was always a bit of an anachronism, as the AIDS epidemic became truly epidemic in many regions of the Kingdom. By the early 1990s the ex-pat community had begun to change in character and Trink had become perceived by many, including some old hands, as rather pathetic in his causes.

[dbrenn]

Specious allegations.

Back that up.

You obviously weren't around at the time. Trink made repeated claims in the 90's and early 00's that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, often directing readers to his favourite source of information www.virusmyth.com, which was the only source of external information that I recall him ever quoting. He also pointed out on many occasions that condoms were only of any use in preventing VD - AIDS was never mentioned.

Having known three people who caught AIDS from having unprotected sex in Thailand, one of whom died from it and the other two who became extremely sick, I thought that Trink was grossly irresponsible, and I was glad to see him go.

After getting the boot from the Bangkok Post, I heard that he started his own website, for which he charged a subscription. It fizzled out a while later.

An also, it must be said, the claim of many research professors who have actually studied the links between HIV and AIDS and the causes of the two separate diseases.

There are always conspiracy theorists who go against the vast weight of scientific proof that HIV causes AIDS. But all three of the people that I knew who caught this disease were HIV positive. The two who survived did so thanks to drugs that controlled HIV replication, causing their T cell count to increase, causing remission of their symptoms. Prior to treatment they were very sick.

In any case, Trink, in his capacity as a journalist, was not in any way qualified to use his column to make recommendations of a medical nature. He is not a doctor.

[polecat]

How many times does Trink have to come up on this forum?

He wrote the Nite Owl column for 40 years or something, and the newspaper decided it had run its course.

Far from being mean to him, they let him do the book columns now out of kindness.

He is the only writer at the Post who can not use a computer and the only one who wears yellow trousers pulled up to his chin.

[polecat]

In any case, Trink, in his capacity as a journalist

Please don't ever call him a journalist. He can't even type <deleted>. The correct term is "opinionated, ageing farang"

[taxexile]

the only one who wears yellow trousers pulled up to his chin.

they were white when he bought them.

[Scott]

I was based in BKK, but posted to a number of other countries. I loved Trink's column. It helped keep a pulse on what was happening--a sense of nostalgia, I guess. Great journalism--no, but enjoyable.

His simply disappearing from the pages of the post was very sad. At least a goodbye column would have been nice.

[polecat]

His simply disappearing from the pages of the post was very sad. At least a goodbye column would have been nice.

You can't have liked him that much - he still appears every Friday in Real Time with his book column, in which he shares his very special world view. Why do people propogate this myth that he was "disappeared"?

His Nite Owl column was cut after 40 years. If that is silencing a truthsayer, it is the most drawn-out, laborious, toothless act of censorship I have ever come across.

[PattayaParent]

Specious allegations.

Back that up.

You obviously weren't around at the time. Trink made repeated claims in the 90's and early 00's that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, often directing readers to his favourite source of information www.virusmyth.com, which was the only source of external information that I recall him ever quoting. He also pointed out on many occasions that condoms were only of any use in preventing VD - AIDS was never mentioned.

Having known three people who caught AIDS from having unprotected sex in Thailand, one of whom died from it and the other two who became extremely sick, I thought that Trink was grossly irresponsible, and I was glad to see him go.

After getting the boot from the Bangkok Post, I heard that he started his own website, for which he charged a subscription. It fizzled out a while later.

An also, it must be said, the claim of many research professors who have actually studied the links between HIV and AIDS and the causes of the two separate diseases.

There are always conspiracy theorists who go against the vast weight of scientific proof that HIV causes AIDS. But all three of the people that I knew who caught this disease were HIV positive. The two who survived did so thanks to drugs that controlled HIV replication, causing their T cell count to increase, causing remission of their symptoms. Prior to treatment they were very sick.

In any case, Trink, in his capacity as a journalist, was not in any way qualified to use his column to make recommendations of a medical nature. He is not a doctor.

Did he ever claim to be a doctor or make medical recommendations?

As you can see by the post from t.s. he referred to medical publications by qualified doctors conversant with the subject.

[Ulysses G.]

His simply disappearing from the pages of the post was very sad. At least a goodbye column would have been nice.

You can't have liked him that much - he still appears every Friday in Real Time with his book column, in which he shares his very special world view. Why do people propogate this myth that he was "disappeared"?

You have got to be kidding. Writing book reviews is NOTHING like writing a column.

Edited March 23, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[dbrenn]

Did he ever claim to be a doctor or make medical recommendations?

As you can see by the post from t.s. he referred to medical publications by qualified doctors conversant with the subject.

Trink was also unqualified to comment on medical opinion in a biased way that amounted to a recommendation - only a doctor should do that. In any case, he was wrong. HIV does cause AIDS, as any doctor will tell you and as I have seen in three people I know. Come to think of it, that www.virusmyth.com website that Trink valued so highly looks much the same as it did in the 90's - hardly indicative of a cause that is gathering momentum.

Trink did Thailand a great disservice by using his position of trust (as a Bangkok Post contributor) to delude people into thinking that having unprotected sex could not transmit HIV and/or that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, while using his column to encourage people to visit his favourite prostitution venues. In effect, he was saying "Come on guys, here is where you can get laid and don't worry about catching anything that can kill you and those around you". His recklessness and ignorance no doubt ruined lives, and I was glad when the Bangkok Post finally came to its senses and fired him. Needless to say, my AIDS sufferer friend who used to believe that he was in no danger now has no illusions about the link between HIV and AIDS and hates Trink with a passion.

It wouldn't surprise me if Trink was getting paid to propagate this misinformation for the benefit of the sex industry - I heard that he was only paid a pittance for his trashy column.