Bashing

[theguyfromanotherforum]

There has been a lot of Thai bashing lately because of recent events.I completely agree that all the criticisms are justified, but just wayyy too much bashing for my taste. I also think most posters are hypocrites. They bash Thai people for not coming forward and condemning the murders, for example... accusing them for being cowards.

Wasn't there a case in UK a few years ago where a Brazilian was shot by Police? What happened to those cops? In Canada a mentally unstable harmless Polish dude was shot by 4 RCMP officers. What happened to those cops? Nothing ever happens to cops in your respective countries when they commit blatant murders and these are murders against innocent foreigners caught on camera by numerous witnesses. There are countless crimes cops do in Canada against their own people and go unpunished, JUST LIKE IN THAILAND! You complain about mafia on koh tao, but in Canada Hells Angels are the "good guys" even though they bombed innocent kids into oblivion. Yet.... most cowardly Canadians are saying Hells Angels are "cool".... and you say Thais are cowards, lol.

I seriously think mods should cut the amount of Thai bashing threads popping up lately.

You really treat Thai people just like their women.

Disgusting.

[DisparateDan]

I think the mods might undertake a considerable amount of pruning, not only in this area.

Any educated Thais reading some of the topics and posts would be more than justified in farang bashing.

I feel ashamed of the levels of abuse and ignorance that appear.

I can't imagine what the mods do delete, it must be a trying pastime.

So thanks mods, for what we are not exposed to.

[mrtoad]

So e of the bashing is ridiculous. I don't know how some people can even get out of their house given the levels of paranoia they have about Thais.

[Costas2008]

"Wasn't there a case in UK a few years ago where a Brazilian was shot by Police? What happened to those cops?"

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) launched two investigations. Stockwell 1, the findings of which were initially kept secret, concluded that none of the officers would face disciplinary charges. Stockwell 2 strongly criticized the police command structure and communications to the public, bringing pressure on the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair to resign. In July 2006, the Crown Prosecution Service said there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any of the officers, although a corporate criminal prosecution of the Metropolitan Police was brought under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. This alleged that the police service had failed in its duty of care to Menezes. The service was found guilty and fined. On 12 December 2008 an inquest returned an open verdict.

OP, I can't speak for the others, but I don't think I'm bashing the Thais.

But I always point out the wrong doings and mall practices, I see in Thailand.

As I point out any wrongdoings I see in other countries.

We all have the right to express ourselves, either this is to the liking of others or not.

[willyumiii]

Yes!

What TV needs is MORE censorship!

Let the bashers bash.

Don't read post you do not like...someone else may love the same post.

If someone habitually irritates you...ignore them..it's easy to do.

I think a little less moderation would be beter.

Some of us are capable of deciding for ourselves what we do and do not want to read, thank you!

TV does not permit discussion of moderation here..hope I haven't said enough to have this post blocked already..and I won't say more about it here.

One question for you OP...

Are you claiming the Thai police committed the murders of the Brit tourist?

Your post sounds like you are.

I don't think it happened that way.

Do you have any evidence to back up your accusation?

[theguyfromanotherforum]

No. I am not claiming that Thai cops did it. I simply do not know who did it.

I was comparing the so-called "corruption" in Thailand to the Western so-called standards.

Suck it up. In many cases it is worse when it comes to police protection.

As I also said, the criticisms about the investigation are justified.

I just think there are too many bashing threads in the "news" section.

[thehelmsman]

No. I am not claiming that Thai cops did it. I simply do not know who did it.

I was comparing the so-called "corruption" in Thailand to the Western so-called standards.

Suck it up. In many cases it is worse when it comes to police protection.

As I also said, the criticisms about the investigation are justified.

I just think there are too many bashing threads in the "news" section.

And here I thought the purpose of a forum was to share ideas, some good and perhaps some bad. Depending on which side of the fence you're on.

[Ulysses G.]

Why are you bashing the Hell's Angels?

[arthurwait]

Thais I have spoken to about the Koh Tao murders are condemning the police the 'mafia' just as everyone I know in the UK condemned the police over Charles de Menezes and that cop who pushed over that guy that died or Hillsborough once the truth got out.

[chrisinth]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So e of the bashing is ridiculous. I don't know how some people can even get out of their house given the levels of paranoia they have about Thais.

The problem is, ironically, that when they do overcome their paranoia, these are the ones who get into trouble first because they can't adapt to what they now have from the so called 1st world countries they came from.

And so, the bashing continues.

[AYJAYDEE]

most canadians say the angels are cool? care to back that up with any facts?

[Laughing Gravy]

There really is a difference in questioning and bashing. Not to question injustice is morally wrong, in my opinion. To the op, yes the cases you mentioned in Western countries were wrong, although isolated cases. What I feel many people here on TV are saying, is that the type of injustice and corruption with the murders are going on all the time, not isolated. Blind Obedience is not an excuse and pretending the corruption that happened on Ko Tao and in many other cases, is Thai Bashing, is totally wrong. To say that people treat their Thai women in a bad way, is ludicrous. I treat my Thai wife like the princess she is.

It would appear that you don't agree with letting others have an opinion on a Message forum. I would try to get use to it as Social Media and forums like this are changing the world.

[bermondburi]

Wasn't there a case in UK a few years ago where a Brazilian was shot by Police? What happened to those cops?

This is what happened:

Independent Police Complaints Commission inquiry[edit]

Several days after the shooting, it was announced that the incident would be subject to an internal investigation by officers from Scotland Yard's Directorate of Professional Standards and would be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), as is the case with all fatal police shootings.

Immediately after the shooting, Commissioner Sir Ian Blair telephoned the Chairman of the IPCC and wrote a letter to the Home Office describing his instruction that "the shooting that has just occurred at Stockwell is not to be referred to the IPCC and that they will be given no access to the scene at the present time." The letter, later released by the Met under the Freedom of Information Act, expressed the Commissioner's intent to protect the tactics and sources of information used in a counter-terrorism operation from public jeopardising future operations.^[31]

Controversy between the Met and IPCC[edit]

On 18 August, lawyers representing the Menezes family met with the IPCC and urged them to conduct a "fast" investigation. The lawyers, Harriet Wistrich and Gareth Peirce, held a press conference where they lamented the "chaotic mess". They stated their desire to ask the IPCC "to find out is how much is incompetence, negligence or gross negligence and how much of it is something sinister."^[32]

On 18 August, the IPCC issued a statement in which they said that the Metropolitan Police was initially opposed to them taking on the investigation.^[33] They also announced that the inquiry was expected to last between three and six months. The IPCC announced it took over the inquiry on 25 July;^[34] the inquiry was not handed over until 27 July^[35] though.

The police lobbied MPs to try to influence the inquiry into the shooting. Unsolicited e-mails were sent by Nick Williams, the acting inspector at the Metropolitan Police's Diamond Support Group, to Labour MPs.^[36] The Met declined repeated requests by the IPCC to disclose hundreds of pages of internal papers that gave the Met's private assessment of the operation, including discussions about how much compensation the Met thought it should pay to the de Menezes family; the risk that individual officers might face murder or manslaughter charges; the vulnerability of Blair and the Met to an action for civil damages; and whether Special Branch officers altered surveillance logs.^[37]

In May 2006, the Metropolitan Police Federation released a 12-page statement which was highly critical of the IPCC in general, and specifically criticised the handling of the "Stockwell inquiry".^[38]

Leak of inquiry[edit]

On 16 August 2005, British television station ITV released a report said to be based on leaked documents from the IPCC investigation which conflicted with previous statements by police chief Sir Ian Blair.^[39] The Met and the IPCC refused to comment on the allegations while the IPCC investigation was ongoing, though an anonymous 'senior police source' claimed that the leak was accurate.

Lana Vandenberghe, the IPCC secretary thought to be responsible for the leak, was suspended.^[40] The IPCC launched an investigation into the leaking of the documents. On 21 September Leicestershire Constabulary Serious Crime Unit initiated dawn raids on behalf of the IPCC on one Scottish and two London residential premises, at which time Vandenberghe was arrested. On 5 October two more dawn raids took place, during which ITN journalist Neil Garrett and his girlfriend were arrested.^[41] On 4 May 2006 the Leicestershire Police and the Crown Prosecution Service announced that no charges would be filed against Vandenberghe, Garrett or his partner.^[42]

Stockwell 1[edit]

According to a press release made on 9 December by the IPCC's chairman Nick Hardwick and John Tate, its Director of Legal Services, the inquiry's report would list some of the criminal offences that the commission thought may have been committed by police. Though without having reached any conclusions, they also admitted the commission's judgement would be a "lower threshold" than the standard prosecutors would apply in making any final decision to prosecute.^[43]

On 14 March 2006, the IPCC announced that the first part of the inquiry, known as "Stockwell 1" had been completed and recommendations were passed on to the Metropolitan Police Authority and Crown Prosecution Service, but the report "[could not] be made public until all legal processes have concluded."^[44]

The report was published on 8 November 2007.^[45]

Stockwell 2[edit]

"Stockwell 2", the second part of the inquiry, focuses on the conduct of Sir Ian Blair and Andrew Hayman following the discovery of Menezes's identity, was released on 2 August 2007.^[46] The allegations are that MPS officers "made or concurred with inaccurate public statements concerning the circumstances of the death. The alleged inaccurate information included statements that Mr de Menezes had been wearing clothing and behaving in a manner which aroused suspicions."^[46]

Brian Paddick[edit]

On 17 March 2006, the Met was threatened with legal action by Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Brian Paddick. In evidence to the IPCC, Paddick had stated that a member of Sir Ian's private office team believed the wrong man had been targeted just six hours after the shooting, contrary to the official line taken at the time.^[47] When this information became public, Scotland Yard issued a statement that the officer making the claim (Paddick) "has categorically denied this in his interview with, and statement to, the IPCC investigators". The statement continued that they "were satisfied that whatever the reasons for this suggestion being made, it is simply not true." Paddick's interpretation of this statement was that it accused him of lying.^[48]

After a statement was released on 28 March by the Met that it "did not intend to imply" a senior officer had misled the probe into the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, Paddick accepted the "clarification" and considered the matter closed.^[49]

In a substantial campaigning Daily Telegraph interview (17 November 2007 – "I know how to make Londoners feel safe") which Paddick gave to support his suitability to become Mayor, "Policing is a dangerous job, we should trust the professional judgement of officers on the front line. We shouldn't prosecute them or their bosses if they decide to put their lives on the line for the public".

Investigation into suppression of evidence[edit]

On 13 October 2008, at an inquest into the death, a police surveillance officer admitted that he had deleted a computer record of Cressida Dick's instruction that they could allow Menezes to "run on to Tube as [he was] not carrying anything." At the inquest he told the court that "On reflection, I looked at that and thought I cannot actually say that." The IPCC announced that it would investigate the matter "[at its] highest level of investigation".^[50]

Result of CPS review[edit]

In July 2006, the Crown Prosecution Service, which like the IPCC operates independently of the Met, announced that it would not carry forward any charges against any individual involved in the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes. The Met faced criminal charges under sections 3(1) and 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 for "failing to provide for the health, safety and welfare of Jean Charles de Menezes".^[51] The decision not to prosecute individuals was made on the grounds of insufficient evidence.^[52] The family of Menezes are appealing against that decision in the High Court.^[53]

The Metropolitan Police Service entered a not guilty plea to the charges, "after the most careful consideration".^[54] The trial started on 1 October 2007.^[55]

On 14 December, three High Court Judges unanimously rejected demands for a full investigation into the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to rule out criminal prosecutions of the police officers who shot dead Jean Charles de Menezes.^[56]

On 1 November 2007, the Metropolitan Police were found guilty of the above offences, and were fined £175,000, with £385,000 legal costs.^[57] The Met published a terse release about this decision.^[58] and Len Duvall, Chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority, asked that the full report on the investigation be published.^[59]

Controversy over police procedure[edit]

Much discussion following the shooting centred on the rules of engagement followed by armed police when dealing with suspected suicide bombers. Roy Ramm, a former commander of specialist operations for the Metropolitan Police, said that the rules had been changed to permit officers to "shoot to kill" potential suicide bombers, claiming headshots are the safest way to engage the target without risk of detonating devices.^[60]

The possibility of a police confrontation with a suicide bomber in the United Kingdom had reportedly been discussed following the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States. Based on this possibility, new guidelines were developed for identifying, confronting, and dealing forcefully with terrorist suspects. These guidelines were given the code name"Operation Kratos".^[61]

Based in part on advice from the security forces of Israel and Sri Lanka – two countries with experience of suicide bombings—Operation Kratos guidelines allegedly state that the head or lower limbs should be aimed at when a suspected suicide bomber appears to have no intention of surrendering. This is contrary to the usual practice of aiming at the torso, which presents the biggest target. A successful hit to the torso may detonate an explosive belt.^[62]

Sir Ian Blair appeared on television on 24 July 2005 to accept responsibility for the error on the part of the Metropolitan Police, and to acknowledge and defend the "shoot to kill" policy, saying:

"There is no point in shooting at someone's chest because that is where the bomb is likely to be. There is no point in shooting anywhere else if they fall down and detonate it."^[63]

The Met's commissioner Sir Ian Blair, and his predecessor Lord Stevens, had expressed concern about the legal position of police officers who might kill suspected suicide bombers. There is no explicit legal requirement for armed officers to warn a suspect before firing, although guidelines published by the Association of Chief Police Officers say that this "should be considered". A potential suicide bomber is thought to represent a circumstance where warning the suspect may put the public at greater risk because the bomber may detonate his explosives after being warned.^[64]

Lord Stevens defended the policy he introduced, despite the error that had been made. Azzam Tamimi of the Muslim Association of Britain was critical, saying: "I just cannot imagine how someone pinned to the ground can be a source of danger." Other leaders of the UK's Muslim community took a similar view.^[65]Ken Livingstone, the then Mayor of London, defended the police as having acted in the way they thought appropriate at the time, and with the aim of protecting the public.^[66]

The police's confirmation bias may have come into play in this case. Disconfirming evidence that Menezes was the suspect may have been present, but it was interpreted incorrectly. The threat of a suicide bombing on the Underground may have produced stress and time pressures in the department, which in turn can affect a person's decision-making threshold.^[67]

Due to the controversy surrounding death of Menezes, the codename of Operation Kratos was dropped from all Police lexicon in 2007–08.^[68][69][70]

[David48]

The gem for me from the OP was this little snippet towards the end.

"You really treat Thai people just like their women."

Are not 'Thai Woman' not also 'their people' ...

[Gecko123]

Why is there so much Thai-bashing?

My theory? It all leads back to the sex industry.

A significant portion of the expat community is attracted to Thailand because of its sex industry. Endless sexual variety with nubile gorgeous women at bargain basement prices is understandably very appealing.

The sex industry attracts some men who have little or no interest in learning anything about Thailand or its culture. The charms of the Thai people are lost on them. They see no need to learn the language as they think Thais never have anything of interest to say. For them Thai music is like listening to a goose with a harmonica stuck in its throat. Thai food gives them diarrhea and heartburn. They come believing they can live here for next to nothing, and if they decided to settle down, they are supremely confident that their chosen wife will be eternally grateful for the simple privilege of marrying a farang.

But very often, sooner or later, this lopsided one dimensional lifestyle runs into trouble. Maybe they were taken advantage of by a girlfriend or wife. Maybe their libido dropped as they got older. Maybe the bar girls aren't as attractive as they once seemed to be. Maybe they're no longer greeted as 'a very hansum man' in the same way they once imagined would be the case forever. Maybe sitting in Nana Plaza buying overpriced beers all the while being bombarded by three competing sound systems and being ignored by bar girls doesn't have the same appeal it once did. Maybe the current bar fines and asking prices seem exorbitant compared to the good old days. Maybe it's the shock of finding out they have to compete with younger guys, richer guys and Asian guys for the affections of a homely overweight bar girl. Maybe (God, it's tough to choke out the words)...they just got old.

So for whatever reason, when the sex industry loses its appeal, some guys look around and suddenly discover that there's not much else here that they find attractive. They really don't know Thai people. They've never had a meaningful conversation with a Thai person who wasn't a prostitute. They don't know the language. They don't like Thai music, Thai food, or understand the religion, etc. The so-called charms of the Thai people seem to be little more than so much TAT hype. But because of their finances or because they're older, they can't really return home very easily without seriously compromising their standard of living. So they're frustrated. And maybe a little angry and a little bitter. And they start looking for someone to blame, and they decide it's all Thailand's fault. They become more and more entrenched in a mindset that 'if only Thailand were the way I want it to be, everything would be great.' Obviously, they can't voice such sentiments to Thai people, and it's too humiliating to admit to family and friends back home that things didn't work out. So venting on ThaiVisa is about the only other option they have.

I think the "proof" that matters of the heart play a role in the extent of 'Thai-bashing' can be seen when you compare expatriate forums in other countries with expatriate forums here in Thailand. Yes, there are always people who have become disenchanted with the host country, but I think you will be hard pressed to find expatriates in other countries being as outspoken about their dislike of the host country as they sometimes are on TVF.

I believe that because the sex industry here affords greater opportunities for romantic interaction between expatriates and the local population than in most other countries, there is a correspondingly greater opportunity for romantic disappointment here as well. This is the basis for my belief that much of the bitter and angry venting about Thailand expressed here can be traced back to romantic disappointment.

Becoming stuck in a place you no longer enjoy living ought to be a cautionary tale for anyone thinking about moving to another country.

Make sure you do your homework, that your motives for moving are sound, and always, always, always have a Plan B if things don't work out the way you hoped.

[AnotherOneAmerican]

I think the mods might undertake a considerable amount of pruning, not only in this area.

Any educated Thais reading some of the topics and posts would be more than justified in farang bashing.

I feel ashamed of the levels of abuse and ignorance that appear.

I can't imagine what the mods do delete, it must be a trying pastime.

So thanks mods, for what we are not exposed to.

I would like mods to enforce the rules on racial slurs ...... farang ..... being the obvious one.

[huawei]

Why is there so much Thai-bashing?

My theory? It all leads back to the sex industry.

A significant portion of the expat community is attracted to Thailand because of its sex industry. Endless sexual variety with nubile gorgeous women at bargain basement prices is understandably very appealing.

The sex industry attracts some men who have little or no interest in learning anything about Thailand or its culture. The charms of the Thai people are lost on them. They see no need to learn the language as they think Thais never have anything of interest to say. For them Thai music is like listening to a goose with a harmonica stuck in its throat. Thai food gives them diarrhea and heartburn. They come believing they can live here for next to nothing, and if they decided to settle down, they are supremely confident that their chosen wife will be eternally grateful for the simple privilege of marrying a farang.

But very often, sooner or later, this lopsided one dimensional lifestyle runs into trouble. Maybe they were taken advantage of by a girlfriend or wife. Maybe their libido dropped as they got older. Maybe the bar girls aren't as attractive as they once seemed to be. Maybe they're no longer greeted as 'a very hansum man' in the same way they once imagined would be the case forever. Maybe sitting in Nana Plaza buying overpriced beers all the while being bombarded by three competing sound systems and being ignored by bar girls doesn't have the same appeal it once did. Maybe the current bar fines and asking prices seem exorbitant compared to the good old days. Maybe it's the shock of finding out they have to compete with younger guys, richer guys and Asian guys for the affections of a homely overweight bar girl. Maybe (God, it's tough to choke out the words)...they just got old.

So for whatever reason, when the sex industry loses its appeal, some guys look around and suddenly discover that there's not much else here that they find attractive. They really don't know Thai people. They've never had a meaningful conversation with a Thai person who wasn't a prostitute. They don't know the language. They don't like Thai music, Thai food, or understand the religion, etc. The so-called charms of the Thai people seem to be little more than so much TAT hype. But because of their finances or because they're older, they can't really return home very easily without seriously compromising their standard of living. So they're frustrated. And maybe a little angry and a little bitter. And they start looking for someone to blame, and they decide it's all Thailand's fault. They become more and more entrenched in a mindset that 'if only Thailand were the way I want it to be, everything would be great.' Obviously, they can't voice such sentiments to Thai people, and it's too humiliating to admit to family and friends back home that things didn't work out. So venting on ThaiVisa is about the only other option they have.

I think the "proof" that matters of the heart play a role in the extent of 'Thai-bashing' can be seen when you compare expatriate forums in other countries with expatriate forums here in Thailand. Yes, there are always people who have become disenchanted with the host country, but I think you will be hard pressed to find expatriates in other countries being as outspoken about their dislike of the host country as they sometimes are on TVF.

I believe that because the sex industry here affords greater opportunities for romantic interaction between expatriates and the local population than in most other countries, there is a correspondingly greater opportunity for romantic disappointment here as well. This is the basis for my belief that much of the bitter and angry venting about Thailand expressed here can be traced back to romantic disappointment.

Becoming stuck in a place you no longer enjoy living ought to be a cautionary tale for anyone thinking about moving to another country.

Make sure you do your homework, that your motives for moving are sound, and always, always, always have a Plan B if things don't work out the way you hoped.

First of all your post comes across as farang bashing and a little arrogant .

Don't you think that the Thais have some accountability in their relationship and interaction with farangs whether bar girls or murderers on the beach or even the majority of Thais who are nice people.

Personally I disagree the sex industry has been here forever.,Thai bashing seems to be on the increase..there appears no direct correlation.

[MrJohnson]

Why is there so much Thai-bashing?

My theory? It all leads back to the sex industry.

A significant portion of the expat community is attracted to Thailand because of its sex industry. Endless sexual variety with nubile gorgeous women at bargain basement prices is understandably very appealing.

The sex industry attracts some men who have little or no interest in learning anything about Thailand or its culture. The charms of the Thai people are lost on them. They see no need to learn the language as they think Thais never have anything of interest to say. For them Thai music is like listening to a goose with a harmonica stuck in its throat. Thai food gives them diarrhea and heartburn. They come believing they can live here for next to nothing, and if they decided to settle down, they are supremely confident that their chosen wife will be eternally grateful for the simple privilege of marrying a farang.

But very often, sooner or later, this lopsided one dimensional lifestyle runs into trouble. Maybe they were taken advantage of by a girlfriend or wife. Maybe their libido dropped as they got older. Maybe the bar girls aren't as attractive as they once seemed to be. Maybe they're no longer greeted as 'a very hansum man' in the same way they once imagined would be the case forever. Maybe sitting in Nana Plaza buying overpriced beers all the while being bombarded by three competing sound systems and being ignored by bar girls doesn't have the same appeal it once did. Maybe the current bar fines and asking prices seem exorbitant compared to the good old days. Maybe it's the shock of finding out they have to compete with younger guys, richer guys and Asian guys for the affections of a homely overweight bar girl. Maybe (God, it's tough to choke out the words)...they just got old.

So for whatever reason, when the sex industry loses its appeal, some guys look around and suddenly discover that there's not much else here that they find attractive. They really don't know Thai people. They've never had a meaningful conversation with a Thai person who wasn't a prostitute. They don't know the language. They don't like Thai music, Thai food, or understand the religion, etc. The so-called charms of the Thai people seem to be little more than so much TAT hype. But because of their finances or because they're older, they can't really return home very easily without seriously compromising their standard of living. So they're frustrated. And maybe a little angry and a little bitter. And they start looking for someone to blame, and they decide it's all Thailand's fault. They become more and more entrenched in a mindset that 'if only Thailand were the way I want it to be, everything would be great.' Obviously, they can't voice such sentiments to Thai people, and it's too humiliating to admit to family and friends back home that things didn't work out. So venting on ThaiVisa is about the only other option they have.

I think the "proof" that matters of the heart play a role in the extent of 'Thai-bashing' can be seen when you compare expatriate forums in other countries with expatriate forums here in Thailand. Yes, there are always people who have become disenchanted with the host country, but I think you will be hard pressed to find expatriates in other countries being as outspoken about their dislike of the host country as they sometimes are on TVF.

I believe that because the sex industry here affords greater opportunities for romantic interaction between expatriates and the local population than in most other countries, there is a correspondingly greater opportunity for romantic disappointment here as well. This is the basis for my belief that much of the bitter and angry venting about Thailand expressed here can be traced back to romantic disappointment.

Becoming stuck in a place you no longer enjoy living ought to be a cautionary tale for anyone thinking about moving to another country.

Make sure you do your homework, that your motives for moving are sound, and always, always, always have a Plan B if things don't work out the way you hoped.

I think you may well be right , certainly about some members but of course not all. There are no doubt a very large number of expats who have virtually zero 'engagement' with Thais.

[AnotherOneAmerican]

I think the "proof" that matters of the heart play a role in the extent of 'Thai-bashing' can be seen when you compare expatriate forums in other countries with expatriate forums here in Thailand. Yes, there are always people who have become disenchanted with the host country, but I think you will be hard pressed to find expatriates in other countries being as outspoken about their dislike of the host country as they sometimes are on TVF.

That's probably because they cease to be expats and become citizens.

Something that, realistically, isn't allowed in Thailand.

[Gecko123]

I think the "proof" that matters of the heart play a role in the extent of 'Thai-bashing' can be seen when you compare expatriate forums in other countries with expatriate forums here in Thailand. Yes, there are always people who have become disenchanted with the host country, but I think you will be hard pressed to find expatriates in other countries being as outspoken about their dislike of the host country as they sometimes are on TVF.

That's probably because they cease to be expats and become citizens.

Something that, realistically, isn't allowed in Thailand.

Only a tiny fraction of Westerners who live in Mexico, South America, Japan, China, Russia, India, Africa, South-East Asia, the Middle-East, etc., become citizens of these countries.

Also, an expatriate obtaining citizenship doesn't really change one's perspective as an expatriate, now does it?

[Jockstar]

10) Do not discuss moderation publicly in the open forum; this includes individual actions, and specific or general policies and issues. You may send a PM to a moderator to discuss individual actions or email support (at) thaivisa.com to discuss moderation policy.

11) You will not post slurs, degrading or overly negative comments directed towards Thailand, specific locations, Thai institutions such as the judicial or law enforcement system, Thai culture, Thai people or any other group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

If you don't agree. Then feel free to contact support.