You are muddying the subject to suit your discriminatory beliefs.

If they are not citizens then they cant legally work.

If both groups can legally work and you openly prefer one group over the other based on race (culture/nationality/ethnicity) you are being racist.

Your extreme strawmen arguments do not provide proof of anything.

Im waiting for links. I specifically put it out there that racist's opinions would not be proof that i am wrong.

Provide links please.

non citizens can work if they have work permits. ie:landed immigrants, temporary workers etc

So make your case clearer then. Include all of your info.

And some links please.

Dont forget to provide sources that prove nationality bashing is not racism. Official, legal sources, please. Not fellow racist opinions.

Good luck. Aim straight.

Racism and "nation-bashing" would fall under discrimination so you have it backwards. If you treat women differently to men are you a racist? If you treat the handicapped differently- racist again?

Calm down, take a step back, think a little.

Also treating people from different nationalities differently is perfectly legal in most countries. You give priority to citizens from your country in terms of jobs in almost every position in almost every country in the world. Now obviously there are exceptions- like English teachers in Thailand but generally it is the way it is.

Racism- bad, inexcusable, Discrimination- bad but understandable on a evolutionary/psychological level (briefly discussed by someone earlier),

Stereotyping- a little bad but meh who doesn't do it

your country allows jobs to be given preferentially to citizens over other legal residents? what country is this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/8102057/Discrimination-against-immigrants-rife-in-Germany-says-Angela-Merkel.html

Dont forget to provide sources that prove nationality bashing is not racism. Official, legal sources, please. Not fellow racist opinions.

Good luck. Aim straight.

Racism and "nation-bashing" would fall under discrimination so you have it backwards. If you treat women differently to men are you a racist? If you treat the handicapped differently- racist again?

Calm down, take a step back, think a little.

Also treating people from different nationalities differently is perfectly legal in most countries. You give priority to citizens from your country in terms of jobs in almost every position in almost every country in the world. Now obviously there are exceptions- like English teachers in Thailand but generally it is the way it is.

Racism- bad, inexcusable, Discrimination- bad but understandable on a evolutionary/psychological level (briefly discussed by someone earlier),

Stereotyping- a little bad but meh who doesn't do it

your country allows jobs to be given preferentially to citizens over other legal residents? what country is this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/8102057/Discrimination-against-immigrants-rife-in-Germany-says-Angela-Merkel.html

germany!!?? why am I not surprised by that one?? lol

You are muddying the subject to suit your discriminatory beliefs.

If they are not citizens then they cant legally work.

If both groups can legally work and you openly prefer one group over the other based on race (culture/nationality/ethnicity) you are being racist.

Your extreme strawmen arguments do not provide proof of anything.

Im waiting for links. I specifically put it out there that racist's opinions would not be proof that i am wrong.

Provide links please.

non citizens can work if they have work permits. ie:landed immigrants, temporary workers etc

So make your case clearer then. Include all of your info.

And some links please.

what do you mean? are you suggesting that landed immigrants and those on temporary work permits CANNOT work??

Catman- The only beliefs I have shared are my beliefs in what words mean. Your accusation is absolutely unacceptable. Show where I have been racist or said discrimination is ok. Otherwise apologise or I will be reporting you.

Citizenship is absolutely discrimination based on a number of different things depending on the country. As is the ability to get a work-permit. Therefore you are saying every country is racist (according to your weird view of what racism means)

http://m.spiegel.de/international/germany/a-922529.html#spRedirectedFrom=www&referrrer=

Catman- The only beliefs I have shared are my beliefs in what words mean. Your accusation is absolutely unacceptable. Show where I have been racist or said discrimination is ok. Otherwise apologise or I will be reporting you.

Citizenship is absolutely discrimination based on a number of different things depending on the country. As is the ability to get a work-permit. Therefore you are saying every country is racist (according to your weird view of what racism means)

a country is racist only if the country discriminates against one country versus others in their policy

You are muddying the subject to suit your discriminatory beliefs.

If they are not citizens then they cant legally work.

If both groups can legally work and you openly prefer one group over the other based on race (culture/nationality/ethnicity) you are being racist.

Your extreme strawmen arguments do not provide proof of anything.

Im waiting for links. I specifically put it out there that racist's opinions would not be proof that i am wrong.

Provide links please.

non citizens can work if they have work permits. ie:landed immigrants, temporary workers etc

So make your case clearer then. Include all of your info.

And some links please.

what do you mean? are you suggesting that landed immigrants and those on temporary work permits CANNOT work??

I dont know anything about legal working status as i have only ever worked in my home country.

Thats actually why i joined this very forum.

So sure, twist my lack of understanding of one topic as a lack of understanding with something completely unrelated.

It does not provide a link, however.

Catman- The only beliefs I have shared are my beliefs in what words mean. Your accusation is absolutely unacceptable. Show where I have been racist or said discrimination is ok. Otherwise apologise or I will be reporting you.

Citizenship is absolutely discrimination based on a number of different things depending on the country. As is the ability to get a work-permit. Therefore you are saying every country is racist (according to your weird view of what racism means)

You are completely fabricating absurd strawman concoctions to somehow contradict what i have said to prove it false.

Surely providing a link to "your" definitions of race and racism is a lot simpler.

It took me 15 seconds.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Thailand

Just to get back to topic a little closer...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Thailand

Just to get back to topic a little closer...

There are conflicting ideas on what racism actually is.

I feel that its very important to the topic that all definitions are compared and the best is chosen.

So far only 1 set of definitions has been provided.

So are you agreeing with that one set?

Catman- The only beliefs I have shared are my beliefs in what words mean. Your accusation is absolutely unacceptable. Show where I have been racist or said discrimination is ok. Otherwise apologise or I will be reporting you.

Citizenship is absolutely discrimination based on a number of different things depending on the country. As is the ability to get a work-permit. Therefore you are saying every country is racist (according to your weird view of what racism means)

You are completely fabricating absurd strawman concoctions to somehow contradict what i have said to prove it false.

Surely providing a link to "your" definitions of race and racism is a lot simpler.

It took me 15 seconds.

Which part is the strawman? You said your country does not allow racism. You said racism is discrimination based on the country someone is born in.

Virtually every country requires those who are not citizens of the country to get a work- permit whereas those who were born inside it do not. Therefore every country has a racist policy according to you.

I dont know anything about legal working status as i have only ever worked in my home country.

Thats actually why i joined this very forum.

So sure, twist my lack of understanding of one topic as a lack of understanding with something completely unrelated.

It does not provide a link, however.

I'm not twisting anything and my only purpose in posting it was to inform you of an error in your post.would you prefer to remain ignorant of the the real facts? if you joined this form to become informed, i would think you would be happy to have information.

Catman- The only beliefs I have shared are my beliefs in what words mean. Your accusation is absolutely unacceptable. Show where I have been racist or said discrimination is ok. Otherwise apologise or I will be reporting you.

Citizenship is absolutely discrimination based on a number of different things depending on the country. As is the ability to get a work-permit. Therefore you are saying every country is racist (according to your weird view of what racism means)

You are completely fabricating absurd strawman concoctions to somehow contradict what i have said to prove it false.

Surely providing a link to "your" definitions of race and racism is a lot simpler.

It took me 15 seconds.

Which part is the strawman? You said your country does not allow racism. You said racism is discrimination based on the country someone is born in.

Virtually every country requires those who are not citizens of the country to get a work- permit whereas those who were born inside it do not. Therefore every country has a racist policy according to you.

^strawman

I dont know anything about legal working status as i have only ever worked in my home country.

Thats actually why i joined this very forum.

So sure, twist my lack of understanding of one topic as a lack of understanding with something completely unrelated.

It does not provide a link, however.

I'm not twisting anything and my only purpose in posting it was to inform you of an error in your post.would you prefer to remain ignorant of the the real facts? if you joined this form to become informed, i would think you would be happy to have information.

What information have you provided on racism?

Information. Not opinion.

I dont know anything about legal working status as i have only ever worked in my home country.

Thats actually why i joined this very forum.

So sure, twist my lack of understanding of one topic as a lack of understanding with something completely unrelated.

It does not provide a link, however.

I'm not twisting anything and my only purpose in posting it was to inform you of an error in your post.would you prefer to remain ignorant of the the real facts? if you joined this form to become informed, i would think you would be happy to have information.

I confused you with Lorn.

"Legal working status" has absolutely nothing to do with racial discrimination and i dont know why it was introduced to the debate.

Just another ploy by the bigots to derail the flow of the thread and hope that nobody notices they have not provided a definition on what race or racism is.

Trying to shoot holes, or taking cheap shots, does not prove anything.

"Nations" fall under "race" in category. People can claim that any group is a "race", sure. It might seem humorous to most. But this does NOT prove that a "nationality" is not a "race".

A "legal working status" is not a racial characteristic. At all.

I dont know anything about legal working status as i have only ever worked in my home country.

Thats actually why i joined this very forum.

So sure, twist my lack of understanding of one topic as a lack of understanding with something completely unrelated.

It does not provide a link, however.

I'm not twisting anything and my only purpose in posting it was to inform you of an error in your post.would you prefer to remain ignorant of the the real facts? if you joined this form to become informed, i would think you would be happy to have information.

What information have you provided on racism?

Information. Not opinion.

i was correcting an erroneous statement you made concerning eligibility to work. if you would rather continue believing your error thats fine by me.

I dont know anything about legal working status as i have only ever worked in my home country.

Thats actually why i joined this very forum.

So sure, twist my lack of understanding of one topic as a lack of understanding with something completely unrelated.

It does not provide a link, however.

I'm not twisting anything and my only purpose in posting it was to inform you of an error in your post.would you prefer to remain ignorant of the the real facts? if you joined this form to become informed, i would think you would be happy to have information.

What information have you provided on racism?

Information. Not opinion.

i was correcting an erroneous statement you made concerning eligibility to work. if you would rather continue believing your error thats fine by me.

I thought Lorn posted it.

Any errors on working visas etc have nothing to do with the topic anyway.

It was just thread derailment by bigots.

Its the internet. It happens.

The quoting on this forum is terrible.

Catman- The only beliefs I have shared are my beliefs in what words mean. Your accusation is absolutely unacceptable. Show where I have been racist or said discrimination is ok. Otherwise apologise or I will be reporting you.

Citizenship is absolutely discrimination based on a number of different things depending on the country. As is the ability to get a work-permit. Therefore you are saying every country is racist (according to your weird view of what racism means)

You are completely fabricating absurd strawman concoctions to somehow contradict what i have said to prove it false.

Surely providing a link to "your" definitions of race and racism is a lot simpler.

It took me 15 seconds.

Which part is the strawman? You said your country does not allow racism. You said racism is discrimination based on the country someone is born in.

Virtually every country requires those who are not citizens of the country to get a work- permit whereas those who were born inside it do not. Therefore every country has a racist policy according to you.

your citizenship IS your work permit. just as landed immigrant status is a work permit.

Legal norms are not the same as social norms.

In Thailand there are no legal norms to discriminate Issan women, but there may be social barriers to the better jobs.

So, what can a woman from Issan do to get a proper education for her child(ren) and some social security for her parents?

I guess a Farang as a substitute for social security and welfare would be a way, wouldn't it?

According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, it should not be made too easy, and it should not be forever.

I guess Thailand is a country in transition - from a class society to a welfare state. Farangs may be a part of the transition process. And I don't think anyone would look down on them (or their ladies) if this is understood.

Race is an obsolete concept, brought up long long time ago. Races may still be there, but they tend to mix with each other. Biologists would call it "diversification of the gene pool" - a prerequisite to the survival of a species.

Dont forget to provide sources that prove nationality bashing is not racism. Official, legal sources, please. Not fellow racist opinions.

Good luck. Aim straight.

Racism and "nation-bashing" would fall under discrimination so you have it backwards. If you treat women differently to men are you a racist? If you treat the handicapped differently- racist again?

Calm down, take a step back, think a little.

Also treating people from different nationalities differently is perfectly legal in most countries. You give priority to citizens from your country in terms of jobs in almost every position in almost every country in the world. Now obviously there are exceptions- like English teachers in Thailand but generally it is the way it is.

Racism- bad, inexcusable, Discrimination- bad but understandable on a evolutionary/psychological level (briefly discussed by someone earlier),

Stereotyping- a little bad but meh who doesn't do it

your country allows jobs to be given preferentially to citizens over other legal residents? what country is this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/8102057/Discrimination-against-immigrants-rife-in-Germany-says-Angela-Merkel.html

Allowing it and having it happen are not the same.

Legal norms are not the same as social norms.

In Thailand there are no legal norms to discriminate Issan women, but there may be social barriers to the better jobs.

So, what can a woman from Issan do to get a proper education for her child(ren) and some social security for her parents?

I guess a Farang as a substitute for social security and welfare would be a way, wouldn't it?

According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, it should not be made too easy, and it should not be forever.

I guess Thailand is a country in transition - from a class society to a welfare state. Farangs may be a part of the transition process. And I don't think anyone would look down on them (or their ladies) if this is understood.

Race is an obsolete concept, brought up long long time ago. Races may still be there, but they tend to mix with each other. Biologists would call it "diversification of the gene pool" - a prerequisite to the survival of a species.

Festinger theorized the desire for cognitive consistency drives us to over-rationalize our thoughts and actions to achieve that balance, but posits no correlation to rationalize simply or temporarily.

Your example of the Isaan girl is a classic case of the plight facing the lower economic/social classes in every society. In more traditional societies, common ways to elevate personal status was through marriage, the military, or the clergy. In more advanced societies and in modern times, the individual characteristics of business, profession, or skill have been added to the mix.

Race is not obsolete; race is still an element of social distinction, be it advantageous or disadvantageous. Race can, as all other social distinctions can, have its perception elevated by the aforementioned ways.

Saying discrimination should not happen when it does, makes little difference unless you can convince others.

How can you convince those in denial?

How can you convince those in denial?

An excellent question.

Legal norms are not the same as social norms.

In Thailand there are no legal norms to discriminate Issan women, but there may be social barriers to the better jobs.

So, what can a woman from Issan do to get a proper education for her child(ren) and some social security for her parents?

I guess a Farang as a substitute for social security and welfare would be a way, wouldn't it?

According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, it should not be made too easy, and it should not be forever.

I guess Thailand is a country in transition - from a class society to a welfare state. Farangs may be a part of the transition process. And I don't think anyone would look down on them (or their ladies) if this is understood.

Race is an obsolete concept, brought up long long time ago. Races may still be there, but they tend to mix with each other. Biologists would call it "diversification of the gene pool" - a prerequisite to the survival of a species.

Festinger theorized the desire for cognitive consistency drives us to over-rationalize our thoughts and actions to achieve that balance, but posits no correlation to rationalize simply or temporarily.

Your example of the Isaan girl is a classic case of the plight facing the lower economic/social classes in every society. In more traditional societies, common ways to elevate personal status was through marriage, the military, or the clergy. In more advanced societies and in modern times, the individual characteristics of business, profession, or skill have been added to the mix.

Race is not obsolete; race is still an element of social distinction, be it advantageous or disadvantageous. Race can, as all other social distinctions can, have its perception elevated by the aforementioned ways.

Saying discrimination should not happen when it does, makes little difference unless you can convince others.

True, racism is alive in Thailand. When Thais look down on Laotians who live in isaan and make fun of them.... that is racism.

How can you convince those in denial?

Tell them the background situation, and show them that in the same situation they would do exactly the same that your gf did.

The social situation of an Issan girl normally is

1. parents and maybe children with no social security,

2. parents brought her up and in return need support when they are old,

3. child needs education for a better life than her mother.

In a situation like this every good daughter and mother would do *everything* to care for her family, whether in Europe or in Thailand.

In European welfare states this would simply mean to fill forms for social security services - if family have the citizenship of the country they are in. (if not, it would mean to do everything to avoid deportation)

In Thailand it would mean to make or get enough money to take care for your family yourself, ie. get a good job or a good husband who can (and will) pay.

If there's not so many good jobs available for Thais, then marry a Farang for social security. I think everyone in Thailand will understand this: A Farang husband is for social security.

Those upper middle-class people from Bangkok that look down on the less privileged do so because they are afraid to lose their social status again. You might call it social paranoia, or cognitive dissonance. Racism is the easiest way to solve the dissonance stress.

A suggestion for foreigners (Indians etc.):

The smell under your armpits comes from the spices you eat (curries eg)

Simply eat Thai food, then you smell like a Thai.

^racist

A post containing inappropriate language has been removed.