Increase In Rape Of Foreigners In Thailand

[spacebass]

It is a terrible shame that you have not learnt to control your verbosity. What a rambler!

Nice try at trying to rile me, Polly. It's a lost cause, really.

Had you agreed with the contents of the post you would have applauded, and looked expectantly for the next. Sarcasm is so shallow, I just don't understand why people continue the attempt. It's belittling not to the intended receiver, but of the giver.

Without wishing to judge or get embroiled in this exchange , it woulds seem to me that the comment:

"It is a terrible shame that you have not learnt to control your verbosity. What a rambler"

is not sarcastic.

[blabbel]

1. Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing: crimes of violence.

4. Abusive or unjust exercise of power.

I believe that this is the definition I was looking for and the one that is less seen in most rape cases I have witnessed...

...

The high lighted definition relates to what I said...and most men would see a violent rape as falling under definition 1.....women tend to see it as being under definition 4. That is understandable as in most cases it is the woman who has been violated.

You seemed to be familiar with no1 already, so I posted no4, which hit home, you seem to associate this with the squeamish girlies rather than grown up he-men....

Curiously, the dictionary doesn't offer different definition for the genders, no 4 is a definition of violence, alongside the others, not what women "tend to see it as". You have invented this distinction single-handedly, congrats, mr. master(de)bater!

Sorry for being so tedious, although I am not worth considering, but there still is the question:

Is it "most men" who see it your way, or are you speaking for yourself here?

I agreed that an action against the will of a person was a form of violence as much as merely touching someone is an assault if it is uninvited.

Ahh..., now I get it, rape is similar to touching someone uninvitedly, and classified as violence in this regard.

Your comments are truely vile and hypocritical.

[cdnvic]

Start replying with some manners or you will be finding it hard to reply at all.

cv

[gburns57au]

You seemed to be familiar with no1 already, so I posted no4, which hit home, you seem to associate this with the squeamish girlies rather than grown up he-men....

Curiously, the dictionary doesn't offer different definition for the genders, no 4 is a definition of violence, alongside the others, not what women "tend to see it as". You have invented this distinction single-handedly, congrats, mr. master(de)bater!

Sorry for being so tedious, although I am not worth considering, but there still is the question:

Is it "most men" who see it your way, or are you speaking for yourself here?

I agreed that an action against the will of a person was a form of violence as much as merely touching someone is an assault if it is uninvited.

Ahh..., now I get it, rape is similar to touching someone uninvitedly, and classified as violence in this regard.

Your comments are truely vile and hypocritical.

You have been told.....now start to listen

Edited January 19, 2006 by gburns57au

[GuestHouse]

The following is perhaps deserving of some explanation.

I believe that this is the definition I was looking for and the one that is less seen in most rape cases I have witnessed...

[Tippaporn]

Why does a woman minding her own business find herself in the wrong place at the wrong time? Nobody knows why.

So let me get this right.

A woman goes to bed in her own home where she has lived perhaps all her life in safety.

I stranger breaks into the house while she is asleep, gets into her bedroom and rapes her. ( A scenario that is repeated often around the world).

The woman is raped, she is a vicitim of rape, she did nothing to preciptate her rape.

The rapist made the decision to rape. It is he who is responsible and it his HIS THOUGHTS that led to the rape.

Now. Don't waffle, stick to the point and tell us how a rape victim (female of male) in this situation has any part to play in the attack other than being a victim. You can repeat quotations from management motivation books till the cows come home, what I would like to see is reasoned argument. (Sadly lacking).

Guesthouse, I'm glad to see you're still hanging in there. Although I do believe the motive is now purely for entertainment and a sense of personal satisfaction in "winning out" on your views, which also extends you even more credibility among your peers on this thread since you have already been lauded several times for your insight, and especially the immense personal satisfaction that must be felt by running a crackpot out of a thread with his tail between his legs. Beyond that I don't see any sincere effort towards attempting any understanding whatsoever of an idea that, despite your inferred insistence that it's wacko, has validity nonetheless. It is, after all, you who cannot sense that validity and not I. Even after explanation which while not utterly comprehensive is still adequate enough to enable a connection with the concept at some level to be able to take it further within yourself. I haven't heard you respond to a single question which I've put out there, which is extremely indicative.

The above is in no way meant to belittle you, Guesthouse. It's merely an accurate assessment of your attitude, which then determines your approach towards me. An excellent, if small, example of how your thoughts determine your behavior. But the evidence abounds in all of your posts that are in reponse to mine. For instance, your comment about quoting from management motivational books suggests triteness on my part as a reason for supplying the quotes. Since I could not possibly explain these matters rationally or comprehensively enough then perhaps the best and only thing I could do is to simply toss out some researched quotes by others. At the same time the comment serves to conveniently dispense any notion that the quotes fit in very well within the context of the explanations I offered, or have within themselves value or truth or use beyond cliched and tired addendums to the motovational material that commonly include them.

I believe that the true intention of a discussion board such as this is to exchange ideas in a proactive manner for the benefit of increasing one's understanding. Yet all to often this noble intention becomes bastardized by people who have little more to contribute than upholding and maintaining the integrity of ideas that they happen to cling to. While they are willing to endure straying to a degree they are quick to admonish any and all who digress too much from the familiar comforts which their ideas seem to impart. The bottom line conclusion is that most people who consider themselves to have open and fluid minds rather, in reality, have minds which are sealed as tight as a drum.

This discussion can go no further with these attitudes as a basis of discussion. I could very well expound indefinitely on this topic if I chose, and I've inferred a number of times that this subject matter has a great deal of depth to it. But if you've already convinced yourself that I have nothing to offer then you will not be accepting of anything I could offer towards further understanding. (Your thoughts at work again, as a premature conclusion that something has little or no value will actually prevent you from recognizing any.) When the intention is towards further ridicule rather than understanding then it becomes pointless. When the intention is to cling to beliefs at all costs for no sake other than maintaining personal comfort then I would just as soon bow out. People who are immovable in their thoughts simply will not allow their minds to be penetrated by anyone. The expression, "I'd just as soon be talking to a wall" isn't deragatory in nature but merely factual.

I've asked many, many questions throughout this thread and have yet to hear a single reply to any one question. But I'll ask some more, and possibly some final questions (and quite possibly to the relief of many). Is there anyone at all within this discussion who has a playful attitude towards the endeavor of exchanging ideas? Or is that endeavor just too dam serious? Has curiosity been declared dead? Is there an outright fear of entertaining ideas that contradict one's personal ideas? Is it so difficult to suspend personal beliefs while giving another idea a chance to prove itself out?

And here are some questions regarding this topic specifically. What is hoped to be accomplished within this thread? Is it to receive insight regarding the issue of rape? And what insightfulness would add value to your lives? How can statistics, even if absolutely accurate ones could be produced, shed any light in understanding what could be done to prevent rape? Or how does an understanding of a rapist's psychology help if it does not hint at how personal beliefs determine behavior (which is part, only part of what I've been hammering at)? Is rape something that can be eradicted from the world? Like disease, or war, or hate, or dishonesty, or killing, or plunder, or greed, or any other vile aspect of man which he has the potential to manifest in this world? Is it hoped that some solution could be found, if only one on a personal level? Is there a way to protect one's self against rape in absolute terms? And if so, then how? What is the real point to this thread if it not to gain some type of useful understanding which could practically be applied to one's life?

I've been accused of "rambling" at length with unforgivable and tasteless verbosity. Yet I truly don't see much else happening here. Again, I'm not denigrating, just trying to give an honest assessment of what I see as an aimless thread that has very little direction to anywhere. Does anyone care to answer what purpose there is here? I'd be more than happy to discuss.

One last note for this post. People are not the ideas that they hold. They are merely the vessel to receive the thoughts. Be playful.

It is a terrible shame that you have not learnt to control your verbosity. What a rambler!

Nice try at trying to rile me, Polly. It's a lost cause, really.

Had you agreed with the contents of the post you would have applauded, and looked expectantly for the next. Sarcasm is so shallow, I just don't understand why people continue the attempt. It's belittling not to the intended receiver, but of the giver.

Without wishing to judge or get embroiled in this exchange , it woulds seem to me that the comment:

"It is a terrible shame that you have not learnt to control your verbosity. What a rambler"

is not sarcastic.

[gburns57au]

The following is perhaps deserving of some explanation.

I believe that this is the definition I was looking for and the one that is less seen in most rape cases I have witnessed...

GH....as you may have noticed I said rape cases.....not rapes.....it is well known to some on this forum that I work within the criminal court system....I sit on trials everyday of the week..many are sex trials..many unfortunately are sex trials involving children...I also sit on indecent dealings, assault, fraud, drugs and many other cases.

I cannot tell you exactly what my job is...but suffice to say, I have seen and heard some very tragic situations. Due to my job I do have a fair understanding of matters of law and how the defence and the prosecution build their cases. Through my work I have learnt that I have to be objective and that I cant stereotype or judge the people I deal with, so I listen to the facts. Even then I cant let myself be clouded by my own views or opinions.

It is a unique job and sometimes can be very depressing....but it is a great job in other areas

[Sheryl]

Perhaps we could call ahalt to the flame-fest and go back to the original question.

The ludicrous idea that government "crackdowns" (SIC) on prostitution have a) realy occurred and caused an increase in rape has already been eloquently answered by GuestHouse and others. So I'll stick with the first issue, which is the assumption that there has been an increase in rape of farang women.

The fact is, no one knows what the incidence of rapes of foreign women is now nor has been in the past and there is no way to determine if it is changing in either direction.

We only know what we rerad in the press. Most rapes go unreported -- even in developed countries with special rape crisis teams & the like.

Of the rapes that do get reported, most do not make it into the press. The recent Pattaya rape would never have gotten the press it did if it hadn't followed right on the Horton rape/murder. And that rape would not have gotten much if any press had it not ended in a brutal murder. Additional factors in the degree of press may have been that it was otherwise a slow news period, and just a year after the tsunami which highlighted tourists dying in Thai Beach resorts.

I'm not saying thjere hasn't been an increase -- I'm saying we simply do not know, and a recent spate of highly publicized inciodents does not tell much of anything about the actual incidence.

For that matter, there is little actual knowledge of the incidence of rape in most countries, due to the fact that it is one of the -- if not the -- most underreported crimes. In recent years special survey instruments and methodologies have been developed to get at this data throug confidential interviews with women chosen at random from the general population. Even this is apt to yield some underestimation because some women refuse to be interviewed and others may deny rape because it is just to painful to acknowledge. Still, it's better than relying ion crimestats. The World Health Organization recently conducted a multi-country population-based survey of gender-based violence, the first of its kind, and one of the countries included was Thailand. So for the first time ever there is some indication of the incidence of rape in Thailand (of Thai women). There is, however, no previous baseline so we can't say anything about trends. For those interested to know, the findings were as follows -- limited to women who are or have been married or otherwise in an "intimate" relationship (and therefore not capturing rapes amongh never married women):

Raped by someone other than " intimate partner" (husband/boyfriend) after the age of 15 years = about 6%, higher in urban that rural areas.

Raped by an "intimate partner" = close to 30 percent.

Raped or otherwise sexually molested prior to the age of 15 = around 25 percent.

The survey did not include any developed countries so no way to compare this to them, unless anyone knows of any nationally representative surveys in the West.

Anyhow -- we don't know anything about trends but there is clearly quite a lot of sexual violence suffered by Thai girls and women...seemingly more so by young girls.

I have known of rapes of girls as young as 5 years in rural Thailand (knew the girl & mother & perpetrator personally). It didn't make its way into any statistics, although the family did report it...they were persuaded by district authorities to settle for a cash payment instead of prosecuting (it was a very poor family). My impression is that this is common practice in Thailand.

For sure, Thailand needs to do more to improve security at tourist areas -- the number of police in general and tourist police in particular assigned to Samui was absurdly low.

Even more important, though, Thailand lags behind many countries -- at this point, even behind Cambodia -- in taking measures to combat rape and violence against women, prosecute offenders and provide appropriate support for victims. Until it does, neither Thai nor foreign women are being rightly served.

[gburns57au]

I have known of rapes of girls as young as 5 years in rural Thailand (knew the girl & mother & perpetrator personally). It didn't make its way into any statistics, although the family did report it...they were persuaded by district authorities to settle for a cash payment instead of prosecuting (it was a very poor family). My impression is that this is common practice in Thailand.

I know of one young girl yet to make her teens who has been interfered with twice as far as we know...both times the cash settlement was used along with very strong threats from her family and the police to make sure the settlement was made....this was agreed to by the local Magistrate.

Other cases can also be settled this way.....if you can offer a suitable recompense to the aggrieved parties or come to negotiated settlement then it is more than likely to be accepted. I know of one murder that was settled in this way.....the offender was mentally unstable and his family agreed to pay up in order to keep it out of the courts. They also agreed to move the guy (60+ yo and suffering dementia) out of the village and to a remote area.

[mogoso]

prostitution and pornography legalised in holland in the sixties

pornography legalised in america in the late 60's 68 i think

any way after these were legalised rapes incidences increased at alarming rates, why?

Perhaps the most signicant issue in the rape statistics is the attitudes of the victims to their experience. Tippaporn is coming dangerously close to suggesting the victim's mindset determines their victimhood. I don't agree with that argument.

However, women in the west, and particularly America, have become far more aware of their rights and perhaps more importantly far more assertive in claiming their rights not to be victims. This results in a willingness to report rapes and that eventually appears as higher rape statistics. The truth is not more rapes, but more rapes reported.

Thai women have yet to assert themselves on this issue, until they do, they will remain silent victims and some will see that as evidence that there is a lower incident of rape in Thailand.

Sadly we know from experienc of every country that has adopted more womens rights that the incidence of rape is hidden until women gain confindence to report the crime and, importantly, support when they do report the crime.

For now, point the finger else where, blame foreigners, blame the victims.

But at some time the reckonning has to be made. There is a causal link between a lack of woman's rights and rape and what a Catholic priest can do, so can a monk.

.

Good posting, but it brings to mind things I've read about courts in Scandinavian countries blaming the victims mode of dress for being the reason they were attacked by Islamic males. They have strong womens rights in those countries that are set back in the effort to be politically correct towards those of a different culture living in their country. I dare say it should be our country our rules and justice should be blind when it comes to administering sentences, foriegner or citizen.

[Tippaporn]

<snip>

For sure, Thailand needs to do more to improve security at tourist areas -- the number of police in general and tourist police in particular assigned to Samui was absurdly low.

<snip>

Statistics on rape have been talked about at length here. My question is, what's the point of knowing? Is it hoped that if the statistics show that the numbers are great enough then that would prod governmental action? Wouldn't a single rape suffice?

And if the government is to take action then what action could they possibly take in terms of prevention? Action taken after the fact is too late, albeit there is value in assisting the victim. The west, IMHO is hel_l-bent on beefing up security to the nth degree for all social disorders. How much security would have be required to prevent the case of the recent rape/murder incident? Could any government, even if they had the resources available, or the willingness to allocate them, provide enough security to prevent all cases of rape, or even to reduce the number of instances? Note that any answer would be purely speculation as definitive conclusions cannot be surmised.

Is there another way besides increasing security to astronomical levels at astronomical expense with no guarantee of success? Which, BTW creates a host of other issues, repression of freedom being the prominent one.

What is at the root of rape, in terms of the event being actualized? How does it come about? There are two people involved, always, unless it's gang rape. While all the emphasis for explanation in terms of understanding the creation of the event is directed soley towards the rapist there is absolutely none directed towards the victim. That simply cannot be. Two people were involved, not just one. Yet not a soul would attempt to go there due to the mass held beliefs that the victim has absolutely nothing to do with the situation. To go there would be blasphemous and anyone who would dare it will then fall from the grace of mankind quicker than the speed of light.

Until it is understood what role the victim has in contributing to the creation of such an event true understanding will never be derived. And without true understanding true solutions will never be found. Only ineffective stop gaps.

Beefing up securtiy is the only customary solution offered thus far (other than to be sensible and keep your wits about you). And yet, look around!!!!! The entire world has implemented more security measures than at any time during the course of recorded history and yet not one single social disorder has been eradicted from the face of the earth. In fact, it could be argued that despite the increase in security social disorders are on the rise.

Again, the ideas generally expressed here have been around for ages. They don't work. Time to start looking elsewhere for new ideas. Time to step outside of the box, out of the paradigms that prevent further, and perhaps truer, understanding. The inherent problem with searching out new ideas will always be that they will tend to be contradictory to currently held, mass accepted ideas. Of course!!!! They will be targets of rejection initially, and anyone who expects immediate acceptance is naive. It takes courage to take that direction. And a great deal of effort, among other attributes. And the pursuit of new ideas is not done with mindlessness and wild acceptance of any ideas that just happen to orbit out in the furthest reaches of space.

Am I surprised that no one, other than Guesthouse and Blabbel, have responded to anything I've posted? Seems odd given the number of individual posters that have replied, doesn't it? Not at all. As long as I am suggesting that the victim plays a role there isn't a single person within this thread who would dare to give me the time of day for fear of being lumped along with me as inane and insane. I'd rather be sane and considered insane than to be insane so that I could be considered sane. With the character so evidently displayed here don't expect change anytime soon.

Again, this thread is going round and round and round without a final destination.

Edited January 19, 2006 by Tippaporn

[wiki256]

that's very bad presumption...

u cant just get into minds of ppl and say that's the reason why ...blah ...blah ...blah...

[meom]

..What is the real point to this thread if it not to gain some type of useful understanding which could practically be applied to one's life?

I don't know if there has to be a real point. Everybody that participates in the discussion has probably his own motivation.

I can only speak for myself and I took part in the discussion because i'm interested in what other people think about things. It doesn't really matter to me what subject is discussed be it rape, house maintenance, politics or whatever.

Some people have a lot of knowledge about certain things while other people (including myself maybe) are quick to lose the plot.

Regarding your thought about thoughts and reality it reminds me of John Lennon's tune mindgames.

Nothing wrong with thinking out of the box but as somebody mentioned before it's better to mindfvk about these issues in a philosophical forum where people don't take themselve so serious all the time.

[Boo]

Tippaporn, you presume a lot about people but maybe, like me, they haven't responded to you posts as they find them too long winded to read. Your basic premise seems to be that the victim plays a part in their attack? Guesthouse has already asked you to clarify on one senario but instead of answering you chose to disect his personality according to your own reasoning. That IMO is incredibly rude. Unless you can be bothered to back up your opinions when asked then you have no place to citisise others for not agreeing or responding to your own skewed view of rape or the reasons it happens.

[GuestHouse]

Tippaporn,

Please if anything in my attitude has caused offense, I offer my appologies. I am genuinely interested in hearing your point. To that end can I ask that you indulge me by going back to the very specific question I have asked. I'll remove anything that you might find to be 'trite' in order not to offer offense or distraction.

And please for once believe me, I am sincerely interested to see your response:

A woman goes to bed in her own home where she has lived perhaps all her life in safety.

A stranger breaks into the house while she is asleep, gets into her bedroom and rapes her.

The test of your prepositon is simply to tell us, what part the woman's thoughts had in her becoming the victim of a Rape?

[Tippaporn]

that's very bad presumption...

u cant just get into minds of ppl and say that's the reason why ...blah ...blah ...blah...

..What is the real point to this thread if it not to gain some type of useful understanding which could practically be applied to one's life?

I don't know if there has to be a real point. Everybody that participates in the discussion has probably his own motivation.

I can only speak for myself and I took part in the discussion because i'm interested in what other people think about things. It doesn't really matter to me what subject is discussed be it rape, house maintenance, politics or whatever.

Some people have a lot of knowledge about certain things while other people (including myself maybe) are quick to lose the plot.

Regarding your thought about thoughts and reality it reminds me of John Lennon's tune mindgames.

Nothing wrong with thinking out of the box but as somebody mentioned before it's better to mindfvk about these issues in a philosophical forum where people don't take themselve so serious all the time.

Both of you are absolutely correct. Everybody has their own intentions for participating. And not everyone's intentions are to seek solutions, personal or en masse. As you say, meom, many are here just to sample the ideas of others and don't really care for any further involvement. I do that myself quite often, as is evidenced by my low post count considering the length of my TV membership. I obviously have my own specific intentions for posting here, and they are multiple intentions.

I'm familiar with Lennon's Mind Games but couldn't recall the lyrics. Just checked and no, at least IMHO. I would have doubted it even had I not checked.

Philosophy, as far as I'm concerned, is something everyone espouses as soon as they utter the words, "I think . . . ." Opinions, not all but in many cases, are nothing more than philosophical stances. Therefore I don't think that it should be relegated to it's own dusky and obscure corner, even if it were possible. And I do not believe that philosophy is a lifeless and purely academic pursuit. Ideas are alive, as far as I am concerned, or at least we breathe life into them. I do believe that the depth to which you take your views can become tiring, and wouldn't doubt it at all if that were the case with me, but that would depend on someone's personal level of interest.

All in all there is an aspect of seriousness attached to any discussion, which can get out of hand. Playfulness needs to be incorporated as a balancing attitude. Life and death certainly do not hang in the balance within these discussions.

[meom]

Tippaporn,

Please if anything in my attitude has caused offense, I offer my appologies. I am genuinely interested in hearing your point. To that end can I ask that you indulge me by going back to the very specific question I have asked. I'll remove anything that you might find to be 'trite' in order not to offer offense or distraction.

And please for once believe me, I am sincerely interested to see your response:

A woman goes to bed in her own home where she has lived perhaps all her life in safety.

A stranger breaks into the house while she is asleep, gets into her bedroom and rapes her.

The test of your prepositon is simply to tell us, what part the woman's thoughts had in her becoming the victim of a Rape?

If thoughts are energy and same as with energy positive attract negative than in theory the rapist and victim crossed each other's path due to the difference in energy.

Tippaporn to explain who had the positive energy and who the negative.

Edited January 19, 2006 by meom

[Tippaporn]

Tippaporn, you presume a lot about people but maybe, like me, they haven't responded to you posts as they find them too long winded to read. Your basic premise seems to be that the victim plays a part in their attack? Guesthouse has already asked you to clarify on one senario but instead of answering you chose to disect his personality according to your own reasoning. That IMO is incredibly rude. Unless you can be bothered to back up your opinions when asked then you have no place to citisise others for not agreeing or responding to your own skewed view of rape or the reasons it happens.

Boo, there's always a margin of error when making presumptions. We all make assumptions and we're all guilty when we're wrong. Mai pen rai. On the other hand it's important to note that presumptions don't necessarily include effrontery, which was not my intention regardless of how it appears. So you're wrong in you're presumption of me. I wasn't being rude at all. Mai pen rai again.

You'll have to accept my sincere word that I felt no animosity towards Guesthouse nor intended any attack on his character. But, after reading Guesthouse's reply I could not read a lot of sincerety into it. Some things simply cannot be construed in too many ways. And I've experienced enough baiting in my life to become wary of it. My apologies if I'm wrong; to Guesthouse and to all the other posters.

I don't consider my posts to be verbose, as it's a term that is relative. Generally relative to one's interest in the subject matter. My posts are lengthy, but how else to explain a concept that cannot be explained with a few sentences or paragraphs? I truly wish I could. Find me an answer to that and I'll be more than happy to oblige.

The last part of your post does come across as being inflammatory. "Unless I can't be bothered . . . " is that not presumptious for haven't I already made assertions to the contrary? " . . . you have no place to critisise . . . " when does an assessment become criticism, and is there a difference between the two? " . . . your skewed view of rape . . . " my dear Boo, and I mean this with utmost sincerity, "skewed" is a term that I believe carries quite negative connotations as it is commonly used in such a context, and is akin to meaning "twisted." Am I wrong? There's obvious emotion expressed by you, and I don't feel it to be very kindly in nature. If I'm wrong you have my apologies. But please be blunt.

Now I ask you, Boo, since my ideas have not been well received what chance do I stand of going any further in trying to explain? If the idea has already been condemned to the trash heap should I offer myself up for what . . . entertainment and amusement? If people have a sincere desire to know then you won't be able to shut me up, honestly. If you want to laugh at me then I'll simply be on my merry way feeling none the worse for my attempt.

Reread my comments on the true spirit of discussion. You and I both know quite well that it's a spirit which is oftentimes lacking. Sometimes too often. Again, if there are no amiable spirits to play with then I'll take my spirit and go home. You may call that an attitude of backing out. Fine. Again, I wouldn't feel bad about it one way or the other.

So what's the deal here? Are people truly interested or am I just a joke? I've asked questions and, blame my "long-windedness," there have been zero replies. Is that an indication of short attention spans or is it an indication of no interest? Tell me. And if I do continue I hope, I truly hope, that focus be laid on the ideas and not the messenger.

[Tippaporn]

If thoughts are energy and same as with energy positive attract negative than in theory the rapist and victim crossed each other's path due to the difference in energy.

Tippaporn to explain who had the positive energy and who the negative.

Thank you, thank you for that, meom. You have my sincere gratitude in putting forth a real, honest to goodness question relating to the topic. Aaahhhh!

Just remember that there is no short explanation since too many concepts are involved. In fact, don't be surprised if I don't conclude with a comprehensive explanation all in one sitting. I, too, live another life which demands attention, also.

And don't think that the explanation will leave you with all of your questions answered. As long as you have little familiarity with the idea that thoughts create then you will naturally have a good share of questions as you attempt to apply the concept to all areas of your life to see how it works, if indeed you determine that it does at all.

You bring up an exceptionally excellent point, meom, and one that is pivotal in any understanding of how thoughts create. Thoughts are indeed energy. And in a sense they, like us, seek their own expression, their own fulfillment if you will. Again, a seemingly strange concept but patience must be exercised if the intent is to see how it all fits together.

Like attracts like is the rule and it is unwavering. In which case like thoughts attract unto each other. I could give thousands of examples to support this idea. But it's easy enough to comprehend just by looking for examples within your own personal life. They abound.

Now, a bit of necessary preamble. It must be understood that there are a great deal of ideas out in this world which simply aren't true. So don't be surprised if you find that you have picked up some of these for yourself. I mention this specifically because there is a need to understand the possibility of holding bogus ideas for one's self is very great.

Since like attracts like then how is it that two people who are obviously on opposite sides of polarity connect? As you say, meom, you would think that they would repel each other instead. But, are they truly opposing in thought despite appearances? If it's true that like attracts like and it can be no other way then there must be similiarties of some sort between two people who by all outward appearances appear to be opposite.

Before you can apply this to a situation of rape, for instance, other concepts must be known. If thoughts are the tool we use to create experience, then emotion is the force that propels the thought into manifestation. Imagination is the tool that allows us to create mental pictures of things that do not yet exist in our world. Intention is a the force that gives thought consistent direction. The captain, if you will.

I'll stop here since I've been on this thread for eigth hours straight now. And I still want to reply personally to Guesthouse once more.

[GuestHouse]

I'll stop here since I've been on this thread for eigth hours straight now. And I still want to reply personally to Guesthouse once more.

And I sincerely want to hear the response. But just incase the question has been overlooked... here it is again.

A woman goes to bed in her own home where she has lived perhaps all her life in safety.

A stranger breaks into the house while she is asleep, gets into her bedroom and rapes her.

The test of your prepositon is simply to tell us, what part the woman's thoughts had in her becoming the victim of that Rape?

So as to remove as many variables as possible, can we assume for this example that the woman is fast asleep and is awoken at the exact moment the rapist enters her body.

Edited January 19, 2006 by GuestHouse

[Tippaporn]

If thoughts are energy and same as with energy positive attract negative than in theory the rapist and victim crossed each other's path due to the difference in energy.

Tippaporn to explain who had the positive energy and who the negative.

Thank you, thank you for that, meom. You have my sincere gratitude in putting forth a real, honest to goodness question relating to the topic. Aaahhhh!

Just remember that there is no short explanation since too many concepts are involved. In fact, don't be surprised if I don't conclude with a comprehensive explanation all in one sitting. I, too, live another life which demands attention, also.

And don't think that the explanation will leave you with all of your questions answered. As long as you have little familiarity with the idea that thoughts create then you will naturally have a good share of questions as you attempt to apply the concept to all areas of your life to see how it works, if indeed you determine that it does at all.

You bring up an exceptionally excellent point, meom, and one that is pivotal in any understanding of how thoughts create. Thoughts are indeed energy. And in a sense they, like us, seek their own expression, their own fulfillment if you will. Again, a seemingly strange concept but patience must be exercised if the intent is to see how it all fits together.

Like attracts like is the rule and it is unwavering. In which case like thoughts attract unto each other. I could give thousands of examples to support this idea. But it's easy enough to comprehend just by looking for examples within your own personal life. They abound.

Now, a bit of necessary preamble. It must be understood that there are a great deal of ideas out in this world which simply aren't true. So don't be surprised if you find that you have picked up some of these for yourself. I mention this specifically because there is a need to understand the possibility of holding bogus ideas for one's self is very great.

Since like attracts like then how is it that two people who are seemingly on opposite sides of polarity connect? As you say, meom, you would think that they would repel each other instead. But, are they truly opposing in thought despite appearances? If it's true that like attracts like and it can be no other way then there must be similiarties of thought between two people who by all outward appearances look to be opposite.

Before you can apply this to a situation of rape, for instance, other concepts must be known. If thoughts are the tool we use to create experience, then emotion is the force that propels the thought into manifestation. Imagination is the tool that allows us to create mental pictures of things that do not yet exist in our world. Intention is a the force that gives thought consistent direction. The captain, if you will.

I'll stop here since I've been on this thread for eigth hours straight now. And I still want to reply personally to Guesthouse once more.

Edit: Sorry, but this ended up getting posted twice. If one of the mods could possibly delete the first instance since the last has been edited I would be grateful. Thanks.

Edited January 19, 2006 by Tippaporn

[Tippaporn]

Tippaporn,

Please if anything in my attitude has caused offense, I offer my appologies. I am genuinely interested in hearing your point. To that end can I ask that you indulge me by going back to the very specific question I have asked. I'll remove anything that you might find to be 'trite' in order not to offer offense or distraction.

And please for once believe me, I am sincerely interested to see your response:

A woman goes to bed in her own home where she has lived perhaps all her life in safety.

A stranger breaks into the house while she is asleep, gets into her bedroom and rapes her.

The test of your prepositon is simply to tell us, what part the woman's thoughts had in her becoming the victim of a Rape?

Guesthouse, I appreciate your reply, but I appreciate your sincerity even more.

There's no need to apologize. I truly don't feel offended. I've been walking around for well over a quarter century with an understanding that thought is vitally alive and active in our lives. So you can well imagine that this is not the first time I've expressed my opinions to people. Reactions haven't changed much over the years (though I am finding many more people from all walks of life who are coming to recognize this same fact themselves). I've been verbally abused more times than I care to remember. The pain I felt initially has completely dissolved many long years ago once I gained a broader understanding which put it all into proper perspective.

This is the first time I've expressed these ideas to a public audience and I've wondered why I'm doing it. I am only too well aware of the multitude of obstacles that exist and I really don't expect a lot of success. And to be honest, it's not success I'm after. I don't believe in attempting to save people, for there is nothing to be saved from. I would never want to be a saviour and I'd punch anyone in the nose if they made me out to be just that (figuratively speaking, you understand). I have no cross to bear and wouldn't wish it upon anyone.

People I've met who are of like mind tend to be just as quite about it as I am. They also understand that there's no point in heralding this information to the world at large. It only gets you crucified or hung, neither of which appeals to me. I'm fine by my lonesome and I've learned to build bridges for those people who are near and dear to me. I don't even need to be as blunt with them as I am right now on this thread to get many beneficial thoughts arcross to them.

Oh, I'm rambling again, aren't I? I generally don't talk much but when I do have something to say I'm an express train. Forgive me.

As I mentioned, I've been wondering why I would ever let this nasty cat out of the bag and dam myself to a lot of would-be friends here at TV. And I guess it's because of my love for Thailand that I speak out in such a radical vein. I truly do love this country, especially it's people, for I am blissfully married with body and soul to one of them. Moo Noi teehrak wan jai.

So here's my motivation, my intention for speaking out if it must be known. I've read many threads on this site the past year and a half and have too often heard such deragatory comments aimed at Thailand and her people. I'm not one to stick my head in the sand and declare Thailand Utopia. Problems exist here as they do elsewhere in the world. Mai pen rai. The Thais do handle their problems differently than the west does, or so it seems to me. It's an arguable point but then what isn't arguable? I base my opinion through my observations and interactions with khon Thai.

Along with the deragatory comments come ideas to change the face of Thailand. Since it's a western audience that I am listening to then it seems the changes the some would lobby for would turn Thailand into another western culture. I, truly, would pity that. Calls for increased security probably rile me the most, since I am at base a freedom lover and am not so easily given to surrender my liberties for even the slightest degree of added safety.

Why? Because I am quite familiar with the true source of my safety. My safety lies with me and none other. Do not attempt to take care of me because I can take care of myself very well on my own, thank you. I do not fear for my safety and never have. My safety is mne to give to me; no one can provide it for me. That is an illusion, an illusion that comes from a lack of understanding who you are and the gifts that you have been given when you entered into this fair world.

So, maybe I can turn a few heads (which I've done quite well already, but not in a positive way yet ). Maybe I can convince at least a few more others that safety is yours, it has always been yours, and if your experience does not reflect that then it is time to look within for the answers, not without, because they don't exist there. Look all you want but you will come up empty handed.

Anyway, Guesthouse, I'll extend my personal apologies as well if I have inadvertently given any offense. Giving offense has been for a long while now the furthest thing from my mind as I understand where it comes from and more importantly what results you might expect to receive from it's practice. As they say, what goes around comes around. Another truism which again reflects how your thoughts will always mirror back to you, for that is the essence of that saying.

One other thing I'd like to mention, and I should pause to give my readers a chance to take another breath.

If ever we were to meet up in person I guarantee you would find me most amiable, fun-loving, witty, polite, and very congenial (and very outspoken at times). That's my true nature so please don't be fooled by any appearances to the contrary which these impersonal posts can easily portray. I have no enemies, never have; only friends.

P.S. I'm too tired to edit this post for misspellings or other grammatical errors.

Edit: My gratefulness extends also to the mods for putting up me throughout this thread.

Edited January 20, 2006 by Tippaporn

[Ijustwannateach]

Tippaporn, I'd have to say that before this thread I was beginning rather to like what you had to say on the forum. Now, I'm not so sure. Part of it has to do with the disturbing "link the victim to the cause of the crime" train of thought you've been so close to wrecking yourself upon, and the other part is this new, long-windedly off-topic alter-ego. Your previous posts in other threads were not concise, but they were entertaining and usually to the point. I'd suggest that this thread, being one where emotions are naturally high because of the sensitive topic matter, is not the place to have a meta-discussion about the nature of forum discussions- perhaps a new topic in the general subforum would be more appropriate?

One point that may be worth keeping here is a discussion of the general cause of rape, or the phenomenon of rape. How is it different from other forms of violence, and how is it the same?

One question that could help answer this is: can animals murder, and can animals rape?

I don't think there are many situations in which we would say that animals murder (though they do kill), but I know of at least one example of rape in the animal world. Among certain species of whales, male whales cooperate to mate with female whales who are obviously unwilling. A whale will swim on either side of her, so that if she turns on one side or swims in her normal orientation, she will be vulnerable to mating. So she turns on her back, but can only swim so long before she has to turn and breath, at which point one of the male whales will be able to attempt to mate. This sounds a lot like rape to me.

Among other animals who have "seasons" and "heat" one could say that their reproductive behavior is simply not a matter of individual choice- they mate when they are uncontrollably compelled to do so. However, I think there are enough examples of animals without such constraints committing sexual violence that we could say that animals can rape. And we are animals, so in some measure this behavior may be part of our animal inheritance. But like everything else, we have the rational ability now to control our behavior- for better and for worse.

It hits uncomfortably close to home when one reads military history and realises that the rape of captives/slaves/the enemy population was more or less assumed to be a fact of life until very, very, very recently among a very few human military organisations on the Earth. It hasn't been so long ago that rape was generally blamed on the victim (for not avoiding it). And even today in many countries, assuming that rape comes to light at all, its remedies are rarely criminal but involve financial payments or even marriage between the rapist and the victim.

I would tend to attribute higher levels of rape to lower levels of education in general, especially regarding sexual information, and to the dehumanisation or depersonalisation or construction of women as the "other" within a society. For example, in societies where men don't generally regard it as possible to be friends with women, where they are defined primarily either as wives or daughters or sexual objects, one would expect to find more rape.

But I would trust more what the women have to say on this matter.

"Steven"

[Ladphrao]

Yeah, Thaksin is responsible for increased rape, my hemorrhoids, global warning, the increase in prices at the corner noodle stand I frequent, piss-poor music on Thai radio, my uncle in Norway's ulcer, the stupid looking costumes back-packers on Kao San Road are wearing these days, fewer good-looking bar girls in Nana, the low wages of factory workers in Isarn, the difficulty in finding Canadian beer in Bangkok, the lack of Finnish language skills of Thai students, the price of oil in Laos, spam and internet viruses, the overuse of SUV's in America, the Iraq war, famine in Africa, racial violence in Europe, suicide bombers in Israel, and my current headache.

It is all Thaksin's fault!

He is a bad bad bad man!!!

[astral]

Yeah, Thaksin is responsible for increased rape, my hemorrhoids, global warning, the increase in prices at the corner noodle stand I frequent, piss-poor music on Thai radio, my uncle in Norway's ulcer, the stupid looking costumes back-packers on Kao San Road are wearing these days, fewer good-looking bar girls in Nana, the low wages of factory workers in Isarn, the difficulty in finding Canadian beer in Bangkok, the lack of Finnish language skills of Thai students, the price of oil in Laos, spam and internet viruses, the overuse of SUV's in America, the Iraq war, famine in Africa, racial violence in Europe, suicide bombers in Israel, and my current headache.

It is all Thaksin's fault!

He is a bad bad bad man!!!

I am not sure I agree with blaming the Prime Minister for everything,

but at least you have back to my original point.

Should the government bear the blame for the increase in reported rape??

Most of the other posts seem to be about defining rape.

Edited January 20, 2006 by astral

[Ladphrao]

Rape isn't exactly my field of expertise, I have no info on rape stats in Thailand, but even if there are up, it would take some pretty compelling evidence to show how Thaksin is personally responsible for it. your post came off to me as nothing but yet another anti-thaksin rank started by some farang that is still angry over setting the bar closing times years ago or some such thing.

to the rest of you, just one thought sums it all up. rape is bad and shouldn't be done, is there anything else to add to this topic?

[GuestHouse]

Tippaporn, did I miss something, I was hoping that after repeating a very simple question three times, you might have answered it. I got the bit about why you think what you think and have no further questions on that.

But the question I asked (three times) remains unanswered.

A woman goes to bed in her own home where she has lived perhaps all her life in safety.

A stranger breaks into the house while she is asleep, gets into her bedroom and rapes her.

The test of your prepositon is simply to tell us, what part the woman's thoughts had in her becoming the victim of a Rape?

As a mark of respect and good feeling, perhaps you might respect the question and give some good feeling by answering it.

[Tippaporn]

Tippaporn, did I miss something, I was hoping that after repeating a very simple question three times, you might have answered it. I got the bit about why you think what you think and have no further questions on that.

But the question I asked (three times) remains unanswered.

A woman goes to bed in her own home where she has lived perhaps all her life in safety.

A stranger breaks into the house while she is asleep, gets into her bedroom and rapes her.

The test of your prepositon is simply to tell us, what part the woman's thoughts had in her becoming the victim of a Rape?

As a mark of respect and good feeling, perhaps you might respect the question and give some good feeling by answering it.

Guesthouse, if others can't see through you I can. If you choose to be your own fool then do so. I'm done.

[phuketsiam]

Guesthouse, looks like Tippaporn doesn't want to answer your question

[GuestHouse]

Tippoporn I am saddened.

I am saddened most because you seem to have turned on me, I who tried to help, I who tried through a fair question, fairly posted to offer you the opportunity to demonstrate the universality of your theories. I am sorely disappointed that you did not grasp that opportunity and enlighten us.

It is a great shame, I for one was genuinely looking forward to having my views expanded, I, like many, thrive on intellectual challenges - and I enjoy rigorous intellectual examination of ideas.

“Thought”, as you have said, is a powerful thing. I would have loved to hear from you how this mystical power of thought of which you speak can manifest itself with physical consequences, demonstrating this against the simple test I proposed would have been enlightening; not just enlightening, but having been tested with intellectual rigor might have opened the eyes of the world to things we, perhaps even you, have not yet imagined.

I am saddened. I feel we are robbed of enlightenment and I fear too that others, less charitable in their views might take it that what you have is a meaningless ramble about some half baked ideas, strung together with irrelevant quotations and protected by the claim of all wackos that 'There are dark forces trying to suppress your ideas'.

I didn't want that to happen, I really was in hope that you would rise to the challenge and banish all skeptics with a simple demonstratable truth.

Oh but what is truth? What does truth matter?

Why are things more important than others?

Why did your momma tell you not to mix the cough mixture with the cooking brandy?