Could Thailand become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions?

[LeCharivari]

The "meaning " is that you have said I am a "self proclaimed "expert" " - something I deny ever having claimed to be (in this thread I said I was "very much a novice").

OK, thanks for explaining. I wasn't referring to your level of Buddhism.

I was referring to the authoritative tone of your pronouncements such as

"particularly as you're completely incorrect in your explanation of what the Tipitaka is about and Thai history"

I apologize if my meaning on that point wasn't communicated effectively or clearly enough, but now I trust that's cleared up.

As Scott requested, let's at least try to keep this civil and about the topics, not about personality frictions.

Cheers.

No, it is not "cleared up".

You wrote that I was a "self proclaimed "expert" " - that I personally had claimed to be an "expert" which leaves no room for misunderstanding, not that it was something you had interpreted from my "tone".

Following that you initially rejected my unambiguous request to "please validate your observation" replying "I don't see the point or even the meaning of your request.", posted immediately following a moderator's warning to "post in a civil manner ... etc" and similar specific warnings in other threads.

Your apology is meaningless as your post had nothing to do with a failure to communicate your meaning effectively.

Given the repeated recent warnings from a moderator this will be "cleared up" once it is dealt with appropriately by a moderator, as will the recent confusion over "who's allowed to post what in the gay forum".

[Jingthing]

Regrets that my explanation didn't meet your satisfaction.

Clearly nothing I could possibly say would help for someone who treats this forum like its a court of law instead of just an internet forum where people share divergent OPINIONS.

[sustento]

Regrets that my explanation didn't meet your satisfaction.

Clearly nothing I could possibly say would help for someone who treats this forum like its a court of law instead of just an internet forum where people share divergent OPINIONS.

If this is just another internet forum where people share divergent opinions why do you find it so difficult to accept that not everyone shares yours?

[Scott]

I see some posts not heeding the previous warning to be civil.

[Jingthing]

Regrets that my explanation didn't meet your satisfaction.

Clearly nothing I could possibly say would help for someone who treats this forum like its a court of law instead of just an internet forum where people share divergent OPINIONS.

If this is just another internet forum where people share divergent opinions why do you find it so difficult to accept that not everyone shares yours?

Expressing opposing opinions when that is what you think is just that.

I would be happy to answer your specific personal question more directly if that reflected what I think but in actuality I do NOT find it difficult to accept diverse opinions. That doesn't mean I won't sometimes strongly express opposing comments to such opinions that I do not agree with, as is normal and expected on an internet forum.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Jingthing

[onthemoon]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

[LeCharivari]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

[onthemoon]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

Thanks for your invitation, but it's a bit difficult. I don't know who is an expert and in what tones postings are written. I just wanted to avoid that Scott (who seems to be the only remaining mod here) shuts the thread down.

OK, on-topic: I do not believe that Thailand will become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions. It is good that it is being discussed now finally (a bit late, but better than never), but it will take some more changes in the political environment before it becomes reality.

I would love it if Thailand did become the first Asian country, or at least allowed same-sex marriage soon. Yes, there is the question of marriage visas. In fact, it should be no difference for straight couple whether the foreigner is the husband or the wife, so that law would have to be adjusted first, and then the question about same-sex couples is automatically solved.

I do not think that tourist-dollars should be the motivation, and I don't believe for a moment that this is the reason why it becomes law. They'd rather stop the Phuket water scooter scams! And then, if a gay couple gets married in Thailand and it won't be recognized by their home country, what's the point?

As for the practical use of same-sex couples living in Thailand getting married: If the law allows them to, it does not mean that they have to. Some might want to, why not let them? Even without material benefit, some couples do feel good when they are officially and legally recognized by law.

The world would be so easy if everybody just followed my ideas.

[ToddWeston]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

Thanks for your invitation, but it's a bit difficult. I don't know who is an expert and in what tones postings are written. I just wanted to avoid that Scott (who seems to be the only remaining mod here) shuts the thread down.

OK, on-topic: I do not believe that Thailand will become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions. It is good that it is being discussed now finally (a bit late, but better than never), but it will take some more changes in the political environment before it becomes reality.

I would love it if Thailand did become the first Asian country, or at least allowed same-sex marriage soon. Yes, there is the question of marriage visas. In fact, it should be no difference for straight couple whether the foreigner is the husband or the wife, so that law would have to be adjusted first, and then the question about same-sex couples is automatically solved.

I do not think that tourist-dollars should be the motivation, and I don't believe for a moment that this is the reason why it becomes law. They'd rather stop the Phuket water scooter scams! And then, if a gay couple gets married in Thailand and it won't be recognized by their home country, what's the point?

As for the practical use of same-sex couples living in Thailand getting married: If the law allows them to, it does not mean that they have to. Some might want to, why not let them? Even without material benefit, some couples do feel good when they are officially and legally recognized by law.

The world would be so easy if everybody just followed my ideas.

Spot on, I too would like to see Thailand allow civil unions and be the first in Asia, I understand from a filipino mate things are brewing there as well. I'm not terribly concerned over visa issues as when it's time I'll simply do a retirement visa.

I am not so sure marriage is the correct course of action at this moment in time - better to take baby steps given the culture of face. I say this as being now married to a Thai for over five years and in our relationship for twenty two. it has been an uphill battle for them to accept me. I am of the opinion either civil or marriage is same same as long as the country deals with legal issues for the couple.

I've gone from - my sons UNI flat mate, my sons friend, my sons work mate, my sons business partner, my sons boss, my sons employee, my sons travel guide and now since we're married I'm simply Toad (not Todd hehhe) It's been far more of a challenge easing his parents into our relationship, were almost there

We held a bit of a family due last night and I noticed many eyes were looking at our bands so it's a good sign - I think

[LeCharivari]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

Thanks for your invitation, but it's a bit difficult. I don't know who is an expert and in what tones postings are written. I just wanted to avoid that Scott (who seems to be the only remaining mod here) shuts the thread down.

OK, on-topic: I do not believe that Thailand will become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions....

....

The world would be so easy if everybody just followed my ideas.

Technically they're all a bit late, as Nepal's Supreme Court ruled in favour of gay marriage in 2008 and its included in the new Constitution, but Nepal's politics are in a bit of a stste at the moment.

Oh, .... as far as I am aware there are no "experts" on being gay - just diverging opinions on other issues.

[Jingthing]

Asean is still up for grabs, for sure.

[LeCharivari]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

Thanks for your invitation, but it's a bit difficult. I don't know who is an expert and in what tones postings are written. I just wanted to avoid that Scott (who seems to be the only remaining mod here) shuts the thread down.

OK, on-topic: I do not believe that Thailand will become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions. It is good that it is being discussed now finally (a bit late, but better than never), but it will take some more changes in the political environment before it becomes reality.

I would love it if Thailand did become the first Asian country, or at least allowed same-sex marriage soon. Yes, there is the question of marriage visas. In fact, it should be no difference for straight couple whether the foreigner is the husband or the wife, so that law would have to be adjusted first, and then the question about same-sex couples is automatically solved.

I do not think that tourist-dollars should be the motivation, and I don't believe for a moment that this is the reason why it becomes law. They'd rather stop the Phuket water scooter scams! And then, if a gay couple gets married in Thailand and it won't be recognized by their home country, what's the point?

As for the practical use of same-sex couples living in Thailand getting married: If the law allows them to, it does not mean that they have to. Some might want to, why not let them? Even without material benefit, some couples do feel good when they are officially and legally recognized by law.

The world would be so easy if everybody just followed my ideas.

Spot on, I too would like to see Thailand allow civil unions and be the first in Asia, I understand from a filipino mate things are brewing there as well. I'm not terribly concerned over visa issues as when it's time I'll simply do a retirement visa.

I am not so sure marriage is the correct course of action at this moment in time - better to take baby steps given the culture of face. I say this as being now married to a Thai for over five years and in our relationship for twenty two. it has been an uphill battle for them to accept me. I am of the opinion either civil or marriage is same same as long as the country deals with legal issues for the couple.

I've gone from - my sons UNI flat mate, my sons friend, my sons work mate, my sons business partner, my sons boss, my sons employee, my sons travel guide and now since we're married I'm simply Toad (not Todd hehhe) It's been far more of a challenge easing his parents into our relationship, were almost there

We held a bit of a family due last night and I noticed many eyes were looking at our bands so it's a good sign - I think

"I've gone from - my sons UNI flat mate, my sons friend, my sons work mate, my sons business partner, my sons boss, my sons employee, my sons travel guide and now since we're married I'm simply Toad (not Todd hehhe) It's been far more of a challenge easing his parents into our relationship, were almost there "

My partner's parents are long gone (mother in childbirth, father at 13) so that issue never arose, but his relatives have always been fine with us, whether its his cousins, etc, in Bangkok or Australia or his sisters and school friends in his rather isolated home village. It's never been an issue in any way.

When we last went up north a month ago we were staying with the village policeman (who runs a "resort" nearby) and I mentioned in passing that we were "married" under UK law (I can't remember how the subject came up) and I was surprised that he knew it was under discussion in Thailand.

[sustento]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

Thanks for your invitation, but it's a bit difficult. I don't know who is an expert and in what tones postings are written. I just wanted to avoid that Scott (who seems to be the only remaining mod here) shuts the thread down.

OK, on-topic: I do not believe that Thailand will become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions. It is good that it is being discussed now finally (a bit late, but better than never), but it will take some more changes in the political environment before it becomes reality.

I would love it if Thailand did become the first Asian country, or at least allowed same-sex marriage soon. Yes, there is the question of marriage visas. In fact, it should be no difference for straight couple whether the foreigner is the husband or the wife, so that law would have to be adjusted first, and then the question about same-sex couples is automatically solved.

I do not think that tourist-dollars should be the motivation, and I don't believe for a moment that this is the reason why it becomes law. They'd rather stop the Phuket water scooter scams! And then, if a gay couple gets married in Thailand and it won't be recognized by their home country, what's the point?

As for the practical use of same-sex couples living in Thailand getting married: If the law allows them to, it does not mean that they have to. Some might want to, why not let them? Even without material benefit, some couples do feel good when they are officially and legally recognized by law.

The world would be so easy if everybody just followed my ideas.

[bdw]

To answer the OP, NO.

[sustento]

Could you give us some reason as to why you think that way? We'd be really interested to hear your views...

[Scott]

A post with messed up quotes has been removed.

[isanbirder]

I don't think it matters whether Thailand is the first! This is not a race.... we don't have to beat the Filipinos and the Vietnamese, let alone the Nepalese!

[onthemoon]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

Thanks for your invitation, but it's a bit difficult. I don't know who is an expert and in what tones postings are written. I just wanted to avoid that Scott (who seems to be the only remaining mod here) shuts the thread down.

OK, on-topic: I do not believe that Thailand will become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions....

....

The world would be so easy if everybody just followed my ideas.

Technically they're all a bit late, as Nepal's Supreme Court ruled in favour of gay marriage in 2008 and its included in the new Constitution, but Nepal's politics are in a bit of a stste at the moment.

Oh, .... as far as I am aware there are no "experts" on being gay - just diverging opinions on other issues.

I didn't know that about Nepal! In fact, neither does Google. I found the following:

Advisory: In Nepal, "natural" sex is understood by the law as penile-vaginal sex only. Anal sex, oral sex, lesbianism and masturbation are viewed as "unnatural."

Homosexuality is illegal in Nepal.

So, back on topic, the question which country will become the first in Asia seems to be still open.

[onthemoon]

This thread is highly entertaining. Thank you, JT and LCV!

Feel free to join in anytime, OTM - after all, this forum should not be allowed to become a blog and the only way that can be avoided is by a diversity of posters and views

Thanks for your invitation, but it's a bit difficult. I don't know who is an expert and in what tones postings are written. I just wanted to avoid that Scott (who seems to be the only remaining mod here) shuts the thread down.

OK, on-topic: I do not believe that Thailand will become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions. It is good that it is being discussed now finally (a bit late, but better than never), but it will take some more changes in the political environment before it becomes reality.

I would love it if Thailand did become the first Asian country, or at least allowed same-sex marriage soon. Yes, there is the question of marriage visas. In fact, it should be no difference for straight couple whether the foreigner is the husband or the wife, so that law would have to be adjusted first, and then the question about same-sex couples is automatically solved.

I do not think that tourist-dollars should be the motivation, and I don't believe for a moment that this is the reason why it becomes law. They'd rather stop the Phuket water scooter scams! And then, if a gay couple gets married in Thailand and it won't be recognized by their home country, what's the point?

As for the practical use of same-sex couples living in Thailand getting married: If the law allows them to, it does not mean that they have to. Some might want to, why not let them? Even without material benefit, some couples do feel good when they are officially and legally recognized by law.

The world would be so easy if everybody just followed my ideas.

Spot on, I too would like to see Thailand allow civil unions and be the first in Asia, I understand from a filipino mate things are brewing there as well. I'm not terribly concerned over visa issues as when it's time I'll simply do a retirement visa.

I am not so sure marriage is the correct course of action at this moment in time - better to take baby steps given the culture of face. I say this as being now married to a Thai for over five years and in our relationship for twenty two. it has been an uphill battle for them to accept me. I am of the opinion either civil or marriage is same same as long as the country deals with legal issues for the couple.

I've gone from - my sons UNI flat mate, my sons friend, my sons work mate, my sons business partner, my sons boss, my sons employee, my sons travel guide and now since we're married I'm simply Toad (not Todd hehhe) It's been far more of a challenge easing his parents into our relationship, were almost there

We held a bit of a family due last night and I noticed many eyes were looking at our bands so it's a good sign - I think

I had to read this twice - first I thought you'd had a fling with your son's uni flat mate, then with his friend, then with his work mate etc...

What's a "family due"?

BTW we've been wearing "bands" for years. You don't need to get legally married for that.

[onthemoon]

In Thailand we know small communities love to gossip and there is still a stigma associated with being gay. With older inlaws we respected their honour and face, that's us. It's only in the last 10 years we've actually slept in the same room here heheh. In the early days boy did we spend a small fortune on hotels

Our nephew joined us last evening for a family due, sadly we haven't seen him on this trip yet and we were told he's bringing his new girlfriend to the party. I changed this kids nappies and have adored him from birth, he's a star IMO. When he entered the room he gestured to his Grandparents - Thai style then made a bee line to my husband and I and we got the biggest hug and kiss, Uncle Todd inwant you to meet (dont like her and forget her name already) I think the gf was a little shocked and some were not so keen.

My point is that it takes time here I accept that - let's not push western ideals on Thailand. If the family won't accept the couple then what are we doing to the next generation.

After having lived here for so long, I don't think acceptance is a problem in Thailand. You find openly gay people in all walks of life, be it the cashier in the bank or the manager of a big company.

[ToddWeston]

Lol - I read it again and I could see that too hard to edit on an iPhone with my clumsy finger.

Family gathering is probably a better description.

Agree bands can be worn with or without the licence, I should have started years ago as well as I'm not used to wearing rings and i end up fiddling with it everytime I wear it bringing more attention

[LeCharivari]

I didn't know that about Nepal! In fact, neither does Google. I found the following:

Advisory: In Nepal, "natural" sex is understood by the law as penile-vaginal sex only. Anal sex, oral sex, lesbianism and masturbation are viewed as "unnatural."

Homosexuality is illegal in Nepal.

So, back on topic, the question which country will become the first in Asia seems to be still open.

Just shows the sort of rubbish you can find on the internet, OTM, and I can assure you that your links could not be more wrong.

.... and Nepal's an Asian country, so its actually still on topic.

Homosexuality was legalised in Nepal in 2007 - late admittedly, but previously the law was not enforced and homosexuality is anything but hidden in Nepal, even among the Gurkhas (definitely a separate topic!). Nepal is one of the few countries in the world to formally recognise a "third gender".

The only thing holding up the legislation is the state of Nepal's government, which is in an interim, power sharing mess in a sort of political "limbo". All parties (even the Maoists) are pretty gay friendly, and the Blue Diamond Society which your link says is being harassed actually gets government support ( http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-06-22/south-asia/29689088_1_sunil-babu-pant-blue-diamond-society-gay-rights-organisation ).

.

Edited August 4, 2013 by LeCharivari

[onthemoon]

I didn't know that about Nepal! In fact, neither does Google. I found the following:

Advisory: In Nepal, "natural" sex is understood by the law as penile-vaginal sex only. Anal sex, oral sex, lesbianism and masturbation are viewed as "unnatural."

Homosexuality is illegal in Nepal.

So, back on topic, the question which country will become the first in Asia seems to be still open.

Just shows the sort of rubbish you can find on the internet, OTM, and I can assure you that your links could not be more wrong.

.... and Nepal's an Asian country, so its actually still on topic.

Homosexuality was legalised in Nepal in 2007 - late admittedly, but previously the law was not enforced and homosexuality is anything but hidden in Nepal, even among the Gurkhas (definitely a separate topic!). Nepal is one of the few countries in the world to formally recognise a "third gender".

The only thing holding up the legislation is the state of Nepal's government, which is in an interim, power sharing mess in a sort of political "limbo". All parties (even the Maoists) are pretty gay friendly, and the Blue Diamond Society which your link says is being harassed actually gets government support ( http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-06-22/south-asia/29689088_1_sunil-babu-pant-blue-diamond-society-gay-rights-organisation ).

OK, but do you have a link that backs up your statement that Nepal's Supreme Court ruled in favour of gay marriage in 2008 and its included in the new Constitution?

In fact, you are now saying that homosexuality was legalised and not gay marriage, and now you are referring to a "thing" that is delaying legislation. I don't actually see how that means that Nepal does recognize same-sex unions or marriage at this time.

I may be thick though, and am looking forward for your enlightening reply. Thanks.

[LeCharivari]

I didn't know that about Nepal! In fact, neither does Google. I found the following:

Advisory: In Nepal, "natural" sex is understood by the law as penile-vaginal sex only. Anal sex, oral sex, lesbianism and masturbation are viewed as "unnatural."

Homosexuality is illegal in Nepal.

So, back on topic, the question which country will become the first in Asia seems to be still open.

Just shows the sort of rubbish you can find on the internet, OTM, and I can assure you that your links could not be more wrong.

.... and Nepal's an Asian country, so its actually still on topic.

Homosexuality was legalised in Nepal in 2007 - late admittedly, but previously the law was not enforced and homosexuality is anything but hidden in Nepal, even among the Gurkhas (definitely a separate topic!). Nepal is one of the few countries in the world to formally recognise a "third gender".

The only thing holding up the legislation is the state of Nepal's government, which is in an interim, power sharing mess in a sort of political "limbo". All parties (even the Maoists) are pretty gay friendly, and the Blue Diamond Society which your link says is being harassed actually gets government support ( http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-06-22/south-asia/29689088_1_sunil-babu-pant-blue-diamond-society-gay-rights-organisation ).

OK, but do you have a link that backs up your statement that Nepal's Supreme Court ruled in favour of gay marriage in 2008 and its included in the new Constitution?

In fact, you are now saying that homosexuality was legalised and not gay marriage, and now you are referring to a "thing" that is delaying legislation. I don't actually see how that means that Nepal does recognize same-sex unions or marriage at this time.

I may be thick though, and am looking forward for your enlightening reply. Thanks.

The "thing" is "the state of Nepal's government, which is in an interim, power sharing mess in a sort of political "limbo"."

Its really too complicated to summarise in a few lines or to say anything particularly "enlightening", but as I've spent quite some time in Nepal as I served with the Gurkhas and have many friends there I'll give it a brief try:

Nepal was a monarchy for a couple of centuries, with a brief try at democracy in the 1950's and another try in the 1990's with various coalition communist parties (and a ruling monarchy at the same time).

In the mid 1990's the Maoist Communist Party of Nepal started an armed revolt.

In 2001 Crown Prince Dipendra killed his parents (the King and Queen) and most of his family, then committed suicide. His brother, Gyanendra, took over as King (some think he actually killed his family and his brother) and took on the Maoists. He failed, and in 2006 he resigned and Nepal changed from being a Hindu Kingdom to being the Democratic Republic of Nepal and a secular state, with a new Constitution written in 2008.

The first elected government was a Maoist coalition, then a Marxist-Leninist coalition, then a different Marxist-Leninist coalition, and now back to a Maoist coalition.

None of the coalitions have managed to ratify any effective legislation, including the new Constitution, as parties and politicians come and go and some regions have declared themselves and been declared autonomous states.

Any more "enlightened" yet?

Homosexuality was legalised in 2007 - between King Gyanendra leaving and the first elections as a republic, two days before the monarchy was actually abolished - following a Supreme Court ruling ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7156577.stm http://pulitzercenter.org/blog/nepal-society-lags-behind-progressive-laws-homosexuality ).

The Supreme Court ruled in favour of gay marriage in 2008 ( http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/Nepal/Nepal-SC-approves-same-sex-marriage/Article1-352722.aspx ) and this has apparently been approved by one of the interim governments ( http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Prince%27s+marriage+stokes+gay+issue/1/68792.html ) and Nepalese friends support this, but as the new Constitution hasn't been formally approved its all a bit open to interpretation (like most things in Nepal at the moment).

Sorry I can't be much more "enlightening"!

[Jingthing]

Back to the Thailand topic.

This is interesting, especially this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/22/thailand-gay-marriage-_n_3788345.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Thailand Could Legalize Gay Marriage Despite Conservative Mindset

Wiratana Kalayasiri, an opposition lawmaker pushing the civil union bill, said getting it on the agenda was tough as most members of parliament have conservative views on the issue.

"At first they bad-mouthed me and wondered if I would be struck by lightning for backing this," he said.

But many now see the merits of appealing to LGBT voters, he said, predicting the bill would pass in "less than a year".

Within a year? Is that really true? Does anyone know of any more recent info regarding the bill?

Of course they are referring here to the possibility of Thailand legalizing same sex civil unions, not marriage. regardless of the headline which refers to marriage.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Jingthing

[onthemoon]

Back to the Thailand topic.

This is interesting, especially this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/22/thailand-gay-marriage-_n_3788345.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Thailand Could Legalize Gay Marriage Despite Conservative Mindset

Wiratana Kalayasiri, an opposition lawmaker pushing the civil union bill, said getting it on the agenda was tough as most members of parliament have conservative views on the issue.

"At first they bad-mouthed me and wondered if I would be struck by lightning for backing this," he said.

But many now see the merits of appealing to LGBT voters, he said, predicting the bill would pass in "less than a year".

Within a year? Is that really true? Does anyone know of any more recent info regarding the bill?

Of course they are referring here to the possibility of Thailand legalizing same sex civil unions, not marriage. regardless of the headline which refers to marriage.

Thanks for the link. I do believe the issue is gaining momentum, let's watch the space. Personally, I don't believe it will happen within less than a year, but I have learned not to rule anything out.

I agree with you that the authors were sloppy with the research. They interchange "marriage", "civil union" and "civil partnership". They also imply that there are no gay scenes in Malaysia and Singapore, and they further say that Thailand positions itself as a gay holiday destination - I must have missed a TAT campaign or new government policy.

[Jingthing]

...

They also imply that there are no gay scenes in Malaysia and Singapore, and they further say that Thailand positions itself as a gay holiday destination - I must have missed a TAT campaign or new government policy.

Yep. You missed it.

http://gothaibefree.com/lgbt-thailand/go-thai-be-free-promotional-video/

It is the only Asian country, travel industry analysts say, that has a government-sponsored campaign — “Go Thai. Be Free.” — aimed at gay and lesbian travelers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/world/asia/thais-cast-a-wide-net-for-diverse-tourists.html?hp&_r=0

I do agree I'm not overly confident in the authority of the article overall. I would be very surprised if Thailand actually passes a civil union bill within a year. Eventually, I think so.

Edited August 24, 2013 by Jingthing

[Scott]

I feel a bit guilty, I misread it, I thought it said "Blow Thai, be Free."

[onthemoon]

...

They also imply that there are no gay scenes in Malaysia and Singapore, and they further say that Thailand positions itself as a gay holiday destination - I must have missed a TAT campaign or new government policy.

Yep. You missed it.

http://gothaibefree.com/lgbt-thailand/go-thai-be-free-promotional-video/

It is the only Asian country, travel industry analysts say, that has a government-sponsored campaign — “Go Thai. Be Free.” — aimed at gay and lesbian travelers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/world/asia/thais-cast-a-wide-net-for-diverse-tourists.html?hp&_r=0

I do agree I'm not overly confident in the authority of the article overall. I would be very surprised if Thailand actually passes a civil union bill within a year. Eventually, I think so.

I missed that indeed. Great news, good move by the TAT!

I have sent the two links to some friends.

[sustento]

I feel a bit guilty, I misread it, I thought it said "Blow Thai, be Free."

Shouldn't that be "Blow Thai for free"?