happy_viking Posted September 22, 2005 Share Posted September 22, 2005 i think you people have really lost the plot ifn i think the areas are clearly marked I hear so many people complaining that new Thai laws are killing tourism. Perhaps these laws are not good for sex tourism but I think tourism among the other 90% of people would be encouraged. Thailand does need to clean up its image if it is seeking greater numbers of "medical", "honeymoon", and "family" tourists. Perhaps Taksin Inc. sees this as a move to increase revenue by improving the quality of tourists. Besides, sex tourists will keep coming as long as there is a supply. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hmmm have to clean up their own back yard first since majority of dosh made in this industry is thai. Like everything - this will prob be forgotten as quick as it was said - Thai Govt Way!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_viking Posted September 22, 2005 Share Posted September 22, 2005 i think you people have really lost the plot ifn [qwhy have you gone to thailand to moan ? stay where you areuote=happy_viking,2005-09-22 22:58:46] i think the areas are clearly marked I hear so many people complaining that new Thai laws are killing tourism. Perhaps these laws are not good for sex tourism but I think tourism among the other 90% of people would be encouraged. Thailand does need to clean up its image if it is seeking greater numbers of "medical", "honeymoon", and "family" tourists. Perhaps Taksin Inc. sees this as a move to increase revenue by improving the quality of tourists. Besides, sex tourists will keep coming as long as there is a supply. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hmmm have to clean up their own back yard first since majority of dosh made in this industry is thai. Like everything - this will prob be forgotten as quick as it was said - Thai Govt Way!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwertyuiop Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 amarka - better leave thailand then if you are worried about what your lil ones will see. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeh, you might prefer the way's of the Saudi's <{POST_SNAPBACK}> hi guys, no not really i prefer thailand - even as it is - but everything has its place and some activities should not be near schools or religious sites. its a very simple point and no more than that. there are areas or zones, just like shopping centers or business centers. nightlife zones are for nightlife. schools are for kids. amarka <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Amarka I agree with your sentiments. Yes there are zones. Ratchadapisek is one of them. so in theory the massage parlour owners could open anywhere within the zone. the zones however also include resdientail areas schools etc. noone thought to place furhter restrictions on the locations. Yet one more example imo of how the thais just often do not think things through. As for the psoter who suggested that Khun Chuwit the alleged architect of the Soi 10 destruction owned the majority of such parlours, i think that this is a bit of an exageration. Certainly he was the mmost high-profile owner and I would suggest that he owned (past tense) more than most but the majority i think not. Have you seen how many such parlours there are just on the main Ratchadapisek road itself? Finally regarding the impact on tourism. If they closed down Ratchadapisek completely it would have minimal eefect on tourism particularly from the west. Patrons in that location are mainly Thai businessmen and their asian counterparts. i sense closing it down would have a bigger impact on votes than on tourism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 ''The government will not order them to be shut as that would be unfair to these people, who have been in business a long time. Instead, we have chosen to discourage them from the business,'' he said. The mentality of the authorities never ceases to amaze me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg_Rus Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Thailand does need to clean up its image if it is seeking greater numbers of "medical", "honeymoon", and "family" tourists. Medical ? except fake and dangerous drugs such as "Bangkok pill" to loose weight, drugs and worst massage ever - there's nothing to offer Honeymoon ? If you changed your mind and want to break it - surely the lousiest place ever Family ? nothing at all Come on and look around - who and why comes here, :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danone Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 finally a healthy environment for my children ... or will those taxes and additional fees just heat up inflation?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapfries Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 To: RiskyII Newby You may be a "Newby" but I reckon you're dead-right ! I believe you hit the nail(s) right on the head, with your retort on the massage-biz issue in Bangkok. The other thing I would be very curious about is wether or not this new set of rules ("laws" for the lack of a better word) applies only to Bangkok or to all of Thailand ? I've been in this wondrous & often enigmatic Kingdom for almost 14 years now and can tell you that these "places of 'ill-repute" excist in thousands of towns & villages all across Thailand. Of course, they have nought to fear, as they never had a license to begin with . . . . . . But something in your response caught my attention,when you wrote "I was a born-again Christian from ages 23-45. Now I am 50 and see the world through a new set of glasses." Does this mean that you are now (from age 45-50) not a Born-again Christian ? If this is the case, I would appreciate talking to you about this. Please drop me a line at <[email protected]> if you don't mind. Best regards, Jaapfries Pattaya Thailand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterFingers Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Are they talking about all the massage places, including the legit Thai and oil massage places, or only the soapy sex places? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Are they talking about all the massage places, including the legit Thai and oil massage places, or only the soapy sex places? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> All Massage Parlours!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteShiva Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Thailand does need to clean up its image if it is seeking greater numbers of "medical", "honeymoon", and "family" tourists. Medical ? except fake and dangerous drugs such as "Bangkok pill" to loose weight, drugs and worst massage ever - there's nothing to offer Honeymoon ? If you changed your mind and want to break it - surely the lousiest place ever Family ? nothing at all Come on and look around - who and why comes here, :-) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I totally agree, Oleg - Thailand it is a very, very bad place, with very bad people and very dangerous to tourists and all foreigners should stay away from here - I mean, from there....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkk_mike Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Like everything - this will prob be forgotten as quick as it was said - Thai Govt Way!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ''The government will not order them to be shut as that would be unfair to these people, who have been in business a long time. Instead, we have chosen to discourage them from the business,'' he said. The mentality of the authorities never ceases to amaze me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Does anyone really expect anything at all to happen? The bad publicitiy from Alaina probably means that any new parlours wouldn't be built next to schools/temples anyway... (although you have to wonder about the planning department that chose to build a school on Ratchadapishek in the first place - it's not like the sex industry there is a new creation) The government quote shows, if nothing else, that they don't have a proper answer thought out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stokesey69 Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 There should be more massage parlours all over the world. This archaic idea about every massage parlour being a whore house should be crushed. Massage is a wonderful healing tool. Far better than taking pills from a doctor for sleep or relaxation. Anyone who's been crushed by a wave while surfing will tell you the only thing is a 2 hour massage. As for putting up license fees that sucks. One should not need a licience to practice massage therapy. We all can do it if we try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucadg Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 These may make some sense, but the truth is, stamping out Thai customs to become Westernized doesn't make anyone happy. What is the real goal? Christianity? Sexual repressive societies work harder no doubt? The age of Protestantism/Puritanism however, is over. The West just can' t understand that their culture is already dead, and the east thinks it can imitate its way to success. Wow, looks like going with prostitutes is a liberating act and not expoitation of poverty. Whatever it is, it's nice to know that at least you felt you needed some kind of moral justification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimp Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Reading through these forums quickly it is amazing the different points of view of what a massage parlour is & what the article is referring to. A massage parlour in this case is certainly not going for a body (Thai) massage, it is a " rub in the tub" massage. A room with a bath & a bed & very pretty ladies whom you pay for a service. That service being sex!!! Also I think you will find the majority of people who visit these places are not western tourists. They are Thai's or other Asians. Having massage parlours next to schools may not be good, but if you are that worried about best you not leave your home or if you do make sure it is to the airport!! You can not go out anywhere to a place were westerns would go without seeing western men with young Thai girls. Go to a English/Irish bar with your wife, walk down Suk Rd etc. & there will be old western men walking hand in hand with there Thai daughters. At the end of the day it is probably all about revenue & if I can dare say.... corruption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oljoe Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Why dont they just make an area where all the sleazy people can go...an designated red light zone...licence prostution but keep it in that zone and lock up the ones outside that zone....strict but fair...that way it wont be in our kids faces..... and for all of u guys whining about it, deal with it...! would u want your daughter or sister as hooker with some fat sleazy jurk with them....i dont think so.... justmy pennies worth <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I thought there was such a place already - called PATPONG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oljoe Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Why dont they just make an area where all the sleazy people can go...an designated red light zone...licence prostution but keep it in that zone and lock up the ones outside that zone....strict but fair...that way it wont be in our kids faces..... and for all of u guys whining about it, deal with it...! would u want your daughter or sister as hooker with some fat sleazy jurk with them....i dont think so.... justmy pennies worth <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I thought there was such a place already and long-established - called PATPONG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackJack Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 there seems to be a typo here it should read crackup in massage parlours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StateSix Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 I think we should stop describing Alaina as a massage parlour. It is not. It is a (fairly high class) brothel. Nobody goes to these places for a massage. They go to pay prostitutes to have sex with them. If you want a real massage there are other, legitimate places to go where the staff know what they are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackJack Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 having a house of ill repute next to a school not a problem serves 2 purposes 1. as a deterrant - teacher says bad place stay away 2. finishing school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlRedEyes Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 (edited) Eastern philosophies and religions have always been much more pragmatic than Christianity's futile pie-in-the-sky attitude re prostitution. The only reason Thailand is embarrased about it's sex industry is the Western nation's pressure to fall in line with Christian values, a typical self-righteous do as we say or else approach. Why would Christian families bring their children here, for the clean beaches, heat, dirt in the streets or what. These people cannot imagine exposing their children to sex, only violence is acceptable. Face it few families come here. 90% of tourism indulges in the relaxed sex scene ( not neccesarily pay-for-play), even couples and females, most too scared of condemnation to admit it. To change the profile of tourists will take much money and application. In the process most of the current tourism will be lost, before the new profile kicks in, a financial catch-22 situation Thailand just cannot afford. Christian Imperialism is nasty, destructive and old. Resist it, its time it ends. Edited September 23, 2005 by OlRedEyes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbnomad Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 They're already not giving out new licenses (with the exception of the Alaina license that was cancelled at the last minute), so raising the fees don't really mean anything. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> By raising the fees that just means the police (aka) the authorities want the massage parlors to put more money in their pockets.9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malcolminthemiddle Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Govt targets massage parlours BANGKOK: -- Massage parlours could be hit with higher licence fees or increased taxes under government plans to drive people out of the business. .............................................. --Bangkok Post 2005-09-22 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If implemented in Pattaya would go a long way to solving the water problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 I've never gone to a massage parlor (I am one of those strange people who doesn't like massages--and yes, I have had a traditional thai massage). I did live next to a massage parlor for years. I absolutely see no outward problem with the places. During the day there was virtually no activity and in the evening/night some cars/taxis etc. Nothing loud, nothing "in your face". I never saw a large number of women either coming or going. What little I did see were appropriately dressed. All-in-all a very discreet place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eureka Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 I do not see any problem unless the services on offer are on display outside such as in Patpong. There may be sex offered inside but if it is not obvious what is the problem? There is just as much going on behind closed doors in all the hotels but nobody complaims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Regarding the issue of tourism, I am getting a little confused as to exactly what the gov't is targeting. There are places with equally as nice beaches, scenery and attractions which are better suited to honeymooners and families. I get the feeling that the general feeling on the part of the gov't is that it is Tourists who cause the vice, rather than vice attracting a certain (and apparently not welcomed) type of tourist. For families there has to be ample, safe things for kids to do. There has to be efficient and safe transportation (without rip-offs) etc. There needs to be babysitting services provided, medical care (with staff who speak English and other languages). Etc. Etc. Etc. As it stands, this is a place that is still suited for groups of backpackers, singles looking for a good/exciting holiday and fun. A while back, I had a lady friend who came with several of her co-workers--They were all late 30's to early 40's. All were professionals and earning a good salary. Some were married a some single. They had great fun here together and loved the place. All said they would like to come back--but definitely not with the family. There attitude was that it's great fun, but not really a family destination--at least not yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumpole Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 The government quote shows, if nothing else, that they don't have a proper answer thought out. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Now there's a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 finally a healthy environment for my children ...or will those taxes and additional fees just heat up inflation?!? Are you kidding? Crackdowns in Thailand have a halflife of about 3 days. Nothing will actually get closed down and no taxes will be paid, just a bit more protection money. Yet another completely ridiculous 'face' exercise for the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puma Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 (edited) I think you should ban all yank food (for ex Mac Donald’s and KFC etcetera) near schools, look how fat many Thai children is today, that’s goes for the falang children’s too. And that’s not good for the kids too. Why not build the schools in rise fields? Edited September 23, 2005 by Puma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odysseus221 Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Hitler was in power for just over a month when Hermann Goering decreed that "the naked culture is one of the biggest dangers for German culture and morality" and vowed to eradicate the practice (Wall Street Journal, "Why German Nudists are Wearing Frowns As Others Disrobe", September 23, 2005. On line version). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ServeUncutUncle Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 I wonder if the Massage Palour near The Parliament Building is going to be moved or closed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now