Private colleges to be asked to rethink the ban against students with tattoos

[SpokaneAl]

...

Really! I have to explain the difference to you? Discriminating against someone because of a facet of their genetic make-up, ie skin colour, sex, disability is not the same as discrimination against someone who makes choices you do not agree with.

The logic of your argument would also allow students to turn up naked, drunk, smoke in class, bring their pet goat or masturbate whenever they want, all are personal choices, and I'm guessing you would defend these choices equally?

What a poorly thought out response, perhaps take a little longer to think about it. All of the other scenarios you give could give others a genuine inconvenience therefor it is not prejudiced to exclude these activities, besides turning up naked of course, which I would support anyway, and why not?

By the way, the explicit similarity which you appear unable to grasp, is that all of these prejudices, racism, sexism and classism, involve an assumed inherent difference between the people other than their race, sex or in this case, tattoo. An inherent difference is just not actually there and so it is prejudiced to assume that there would be, get it now? And I'm surprised I have to explain this but there you go, I must be on TV.

First of all having tattoos is not related to class discrimination, it just is not. And secondly you might say that being a free masturbator or an alcoholic is not the same as they are "genuine inconveniences", but that just goes to prove that there are somethings that we all agree to be disruptive, but try telling that to the alcoholic or monkey basher, and they would think you are just being a fascist for not letting them do what they want as in their opinion it is not harming anyone.

If someone believes that a visible tattoo makes someone look low class then it becomes entwined within classism. As it is a fact that many people associate tattoos with low class people, it is clear you are talking nonsense. Peoples prejudice of tattoos may not always be classist in origin, but it certainly sometimes is. If there is a belief in the mind of the discriminator that those with tattoos are more likely to take part in anti social activity, such as the reason given by these colleges, then that would be also be linked to classism, as many people do associate anti-social behavior with low class people, in fact many people differentiate between classes purely by behavior. As the Buddha said, "By your deeds alone you are a Brahmin." It is certainly the feeling of many Buddhists that bad behavior is low class.

It doesn't matter what is in the mind of an alcoholic or public masturbator, they actually do cause a genuine inconvenience to others, the colour of someones skin, whether through genetics or through tattooing does not actually inconvenience others at all, so they should just get over their prejudice instead of inconveniencing the person with the different skin. Is that clear enough?

Personally I just believe people who tattoo excessively like the two " scholars " you depicted have a screw loose!

In Thailand amongst the younger generation those with visual tattoos and big ear ear piercings who attend technical college tend to be bad apples. Private colleges don't want them, public colleges don't want them (but will take them) Why, because generally they cause trouble!

In a way the colleges are actually looking out for the youth of Thailand by discouraging excessive tattooing and piercing until the students (16-20) have finished their technical education and get a job.

And of course you have data to back up this analysis.

[casualbiker]

...

Really! I have to explain the difference to you? Discriminating against someone because of a facet of their genetic make-up, ie skin colour, sex, disability is not the same as discrimination against someone who makes choices you do not agree with.

The logic of your argument would also allow students to turn up naked, drunk, smoke in class, bring their pet goat or masturbate whenever they want, all are personal choices, and I'm guessing you would defend these choices equally?

What a poorly thought out response, perhaps take a little longer to think about it. All of the other scenarios you give could give others a genuine inconvenience therefor it is not prejudiced to exclude these activities, besides turning up naked of course, which I would support anyway, and why not?

By the way, the explicit similarity which you appear unable to grasp, is that all of these prejudices, racism, sexism and classism, involve an assumed inherent difference between the people other than their race, sex or in this case, tattoo. An inherent difference is just not actually there and so it is prejudiced to assume that there would be, get it now? And I'm surprised I have to explain this but there you go, I must be on TV.

First of all having tattoos is not related to class discrimination, it just is not. And secondly you might say that being a free masturbator or an alcoholic is not the same as they are "genuine inconveniences", but that just goes to prove that there are somethings that we all agree to be disruptive, but try telling that to the alcoholic or monkey basher, and they would think you are just being a fascist for not letting them do what they want as in their opinion it is not harming anyone.

If someone believes that a visible tattoo makes someone look low class then it becomes entwined within classism. As it is a fact that many people associate tattoos with low class people, it is clear you are talking nonsense. Peoples prejudice of tattoos may not always be classist in origin, but it certainly sometimes is. If there is a belief in the mind of the discriminator that those with tattoos are more likely to take part in anti social activity, such as the reason given by these colleges, then that would be also be linked to classism, as many people do associate anti-social behavior with low class people, in fact many people differentiate between classes purely by behavior. As the Buddha said, "By your deeds alone you are a Brahmin." It is certainly the feeling of many Buddhists that bad behavior is low class.

It doesn't matter what is in the mind of an alcoholic or public masturbator, they actually do cause a genuine inconvenience to others, the colour of someones skin, whether through genetics or through tattooing does not actually inconvenience others at all, so they should just get over their prejudice instead of inconveniencing the person with the different skin. Is that clear enough?

Personally I just believe people who tattoo excessively like the two " scholars " you depicted have a screw loose!

In Thailand amongst the younger generation those with visual tattoos and big ear ear piercings who attend technical college tend to be bad apples. Private colleges don't want them, public colleges don't want them (but will take them) Why, because generally they cause trouble!

In a way the colleges are actually looking out for the youth of Thailand by discouraging excessive tattooing and piercing until the students (16-20) have finished their technical education and get a job.

And of course you have data to back up this analysis.

Yep.. They passed the ruling!

Have you anything to refute it.

[rijit]

If the 'real world' are refusing to employ people with v visable large tat's then it makes sense the college should reflect that but if the said industry doesnt appear to hold any issues with tats than again the college should reflect that.

rijit

[Shawn0001]

And of course you have data to back up this analysis.

Yep.. They passed the ruling!

Have you anything to refute it.

"In Thailand amongst the younger generation those with visual tattoos and big ear ear piercings who attend technical college tend to be bad apples."

I think they were actually asking you to back up this wild claim, which judging by your, "I know you are but what am I", type response, it is safe to presume that you can't.

[Shawn0001]

If the 'real world' are refusing to employ people with v visable large tat's then it makes sense the college should reflect that but if the said industry doesnt appear to hold any issues with tats than again the college should reflect that.

rijit

Yes of course, if SOME employers are not employing people with tattoos then that must mean that it "makes sense" that colleges should refuse ALL students with tattoos from ALL courses! Clearly there is no need to encourage the foreign employers to appreciate Thai religious tattoo culture, better just to pander to their ignorant belief that all tattoos are related to gang culture!

[casualbiker]

And of course you have data to back up this analysis.

Yep.. They passed the ruling!

Have you anything to refute it.

"In Thailand amongst the younger generation those with visual tattoos and big ear ear piercings who attend technical college tend to be bad apples."

I think they were actually asking you to back up this wild claim, which judging by your, "I know you are but what am I", type response, it is safe to presume that you can't.

Have you EVER taught in a Thai technical college?

Have you read or seen the news reports about technical college violence?

Have you read or seen the news coverage about Dek Waen teenage street racers?

If you have then you can draw your own conclusions, we are not talking about arty rich kids. We are generally talking about poorer kids who run with the crowd.

You think the ban is wrong, That's fine.

I think the ban is correct for the benefit of the existing and future students, hopefully you will accept that as OK!

[casualbiker]

If the 'real world' are refusing to employ people with v visable large tat's then it makes sense the college should reflect that but if the said industry doesnt appear to hold any issues with tats than again the college should reflect that.

rijit

Yes of course, if SOME employers are not employing people with tattoos then that must mean that it "makes sense" that colleges should refuse ALL students with tattoos from ALL courses! Clearly there is no need to encourage the foreign employers to appreciate Thai religious tattoo culture, better just to pander to their ignorant belief that all tattoos are related to gang culture!

Honestly how many Thai "religious" tattoos are visible: ie on the hands, face or neck?

[Shawn0001]

If the 'real world' are refusing to employ people with v visable large tat's then it makes sense the college should reflect that but if the said industry doesnt appear to hold any issues with tats than again the college should reflect that.

rijit

Yes of course, if SOME employers are not employing people with tattoos then that must mean that it "makes sense" that colleges should refuse ALL students with tattoos from ALL courses! Clearly there is no need to encourage the foreign employers to appreciate Thai religious tattoo culture, better just to pander to their ignorant belief that all tattoos are related to gang culture!

Honestly how many Thai "religious" tattoos are visible: ie on the hands, face or neck?

Have you never been to a temple? Perhaps you have never even seen a monk? Tattoos on hands are perfectly normal, faces are less common but can still be seen regularly all over Thailand. You would ban these people from studying, right? And the reason being that these colleges state, correctly, that they will never work for a Japanese employer! LOL

[lovetotravel]

If the 'real world' are refusing to employ people with v visable large tat's then it makes sense the college should reflect that but if the said industry doesnt appear to hold any issues with tats than again the college should reflect that.

rijit

And that is the problem. Good article in the Post today and this is what it says. Many local employers won't hire grads that have visible tats/large ear rings. They're just trying to help the students.

Again, these are not universities. They are vocational schools. Which have been having a lot of problems with unruly students.

[Shawn0001]

And of course you have data to back up this analysis.

Yep.. They passed the ruling!

Have you anything to refute it.

"In Thailand amongst the younger generation those with visual tattoos and big ear ear piercings who attend technical college tend to be bad apples."

I think they were actually asking you to back up this wild claim, which judging by your, "I know you are but what am I", type response, it is safe to presume that you can't.

Have you EVER taught in a Thai technical college?

Have you read or seen the news reports about technical college violence?

Have you read or seen the news coverage about Dek Waen teenage street racers?

If you have then you can draw your own conclusions, we are not talking about arty rich kids. We are generally talking about poorer kids who run with the crowd.

You think the ban is wrong, That's fine.

I think the ban is correct for the benefit of the existing and future students, hopefully you will accept that as OK!

"I think the ban is correct for the benefit of the existing and future students, hopefully you will accept that as OK!"

As I have already said, you are entitled to your opinion, but I am also entitled to point out holes in the concept behind the ban.

Preventing violence should be a priority, they should come down hard on gang violence for sure, and road safety as well. But relating this to tattoo is, in my opinion just plain daft, and a major cop out from their true responsibilities. They are just looking for a work free solution which appeals to the right-wing. The method they have chosen will be completely ineffectual, do you really think that barring people from education, even if they do happen to be the anti-social students, will actually have a positive effect on gang culture? The violence happens on the street at night, that will continue but will likely increase if the anti-social students are denied an education as they will be even more likely to turn to crime. Better to educate all of the gangsters so as to help them toward leading crime free lives.

[casualbiker]

If the 'real world' are refusing to employ people with v visable large tat's then it makes sense the college should reflect that but if the said industry doesnt appear to hold any issues with tats than again the college should reflect that.

rijit

Yes of course, if SOME employers are not employing people with tattoos then that must mean that it "makes sense" that colleges should refuse ALL students with tattoos from ALL courses! Clearly there is no need to encourage the foreign employers to appreciate Thai religious tattoo culture, better just to pander to their ignorant belief that all tattoos are related to gang culture!

Honestly how many Thai "religious" tattoos are visible: ie on the hands, face or neck?

Have you never been to a temple? Perhaps you have never even seen a monk? Tattoos on hands are perfectly normal, faces are less common but can still be seen regularly all over Thailand. You would ban these people from studying, right? And the reason being that these colleges state, correctly, that they will never work for a Japanese employer! LOL

tattooed_monks_hand_by_khunsam-d1fryei.jpg

main_900.jpg

Seen plenty of monk's, even taught English to a few. Can honestly say I've never seen any tattoos on hands or face.

Obviously those pictures came from your personal photo archive and not Google, seeing as how you had the snide comment about me seeing monks!

[casualbiker]

And of course you have data to back up this analysis.

Yep.. They passed the ruling!

Have you anything to refute it.

"In Thailand amongst the younger generation those with visual tattoos and big ear ear piercings who attend technical college tend to be bad apples."

I think they were actually asking you to back up this wild claim, which judging by your, "I know you are but what am I", type response, it is safe to presume that you can't.

Have you EVER taught in a Thai technical college?

Have you read or seen the news reports about technical college violence?

Have you read or seen the news coverage about Dek Waen teenage street racers?

If you have then you can draw your own conclusions, we are not talking about arty rich kids. We are generally talking about poorer kids who run with the crowd.

You think the ban is wrong, That's fine.

I think the ban is correct for the benefit of the existing and future students, hopefully you will accept that as OK!

"I think the ban is correct for the benefit of the existing and future students, hopefully you will accept that as OK!"

As I have already said, you are entitled to your opinion, but I am also entitled to point out holes in the concept behind the ban.

Preventing violence should be a priority, they should come down hard on gang violence for sure, and road safety as well. But relating this to tattoo is, in my opinion just plain daft, and a major cop out from their true responsibilities. They are just looking for a work free solution which appeals to the right-wing. The method they have chosen will be completely ineffectual, do you really think that barring people from education, even if they do happen to be the anti-social students, will actually have a positive effect on gang culture? The violence happens on the street at night, that will continue but will likely increase if the anti-social students are denied an education as they will be even more likely to turn to crime. Better to educate all of the gangsters so as to help them toward leading crime free lives.

Again they ARE NOT BARRING people from education. They are barring them from mainstream classes in PRIVATE technical colleges. They can still go on the evening courses at the private colleges or attend public technical colleges.

This is aimed at the students who WANT to learn and who generally are not anti social. Many education systems have a separate system to try and control anti social and trouble making students in mainstream schools, they segregate them into different school units.. No real difference to this!

Road safety is a concern of the government and police. Not private technical colleges.

[Shawn0001]

Have you never been to a temple? Perhaps you have never even seen a monk? Tattoos on hands are perfectly normal, faces are less common but can still be seen regularly all over Thailand. You would ban these people from studying, right? And the reason being that these colleges state, correctly, that they will never work for a Japanese employer! LOL

tattooed_monks_hand_by_khunsam-d1fryei.jpg

main_900.jpg

Seen plenty of monk's, even taught English to a few. Can honestly say I've never seen any tattoos on hands or face.

Obviously those pictures came from your personal photo archive and not Google, seeing as how you had the snide comment about me seeing monks!

Your denial of monks having visible tattoos is coming from not looking, not from them not having tattooed hands. Start looking a bit closer, it is extremely common.

Tattoos are made for protection, do you really think they are going to leave their hands exposed to danger?

[Shawn0001]

Again they ARE NOT BARRING people from education. They are barring them from mainstream classes in PRIVATE technical colleges. They can still go on the evening courses at the private colleges or attend public technical colleges.

This is aimed at the students who WANT to learn and who generally are not anti social. Many education systems have a separate system to try and control anti social and trouble making students in mainstream schools, they segregate them into different school units.. No real difference to this!

Road safety is a concern of the government and police. Not private technical colleges.

Bar people to evening classes for their anti-social behavior, I would support that. Bar them as you associate their tattoos with anti-social behavior and I will call you a bad man. Let people be judged by their actions not their appearance.

If road safety is a not their concern then why did you bring up street racers as if this ban would be aimed at reducing that? Why not bar those students to the evening classes who are known to be street racers? Nope, just ban the ones who have tats, you probably once saw a street racer with a tat, right? Perhaps all the ones with tats are street racers? LOL This is the dumbest argument I have ever had, I've had enough, thanks.

[casualbiker]

Have you never been to a temple? Perhaps you have never even seen a monk? Tattoos on hands are perfectly normal, faces are less common but can still be seen regularly all over Thailand. You would ban these people from studying, right? And the reason being that these colleges state, correctly, that they will never work for a Japanese employer! LOL

tattooed_monks_hand_by_khunsam-d1fryei.jpg

main_900.jpg

Seen plenty of monk's, even taught English to a few. Can honestly say I've never seen any tattoos on hands or face.

Obviously those pictures came from your personal photo archive and not Google, seeing as how you had the snide comment about me seeing monks!

Your denial of monks having visible tattoos is coming from not looking, not from them not having tattooed hands. Start looking a bit closer, it is extremely common.

Tattoos are made for protection, do you really think they are going to leave their hands exposed to danger?

So now you're telling me I'm not looking. Wow, thanks.

Ok. Thaivisa members. How many monks have you seen with tattoos on their hands or faces?

Maybe, you also have eye problems like it seems that I do!

[SpokaneAl]

[jaywalker]

Employers here are at times very strict and very selective, especially for the better jobs. If you had a choice between a person with visible tats and a huge ear piercing versus a clean cut person, who would they choose? Actually, that's pretty much the case in most advanced societies. The number of teachers with tats on their neck, I would guess, is extremely low.

If you ever watch the US TV show "Cops", (where they only show the good cops - it's a VERY biased show), a HUGE percentage of the people they arrest have neck tats.

Just sayin'.......

[SpokaneAl]

Employers here are at times very strict and very selective, especially for the better jobs. If you had a choice between a person with visible tats and a huge ear piercing versus a clean cut person, who would they choose? Actually, that's pretty much the case in most advanced societies. The number of teachers with tats on their neck, I would guess, is extremely low.

While I tend to agree with your assessment on employers/employees I do not believe that a school should be making enrollment decisions on this basis.

[starky]

Just degrading into he said, she said bull shit now. Isn't about what you think about tattoos or whether you think they are ugly or whether all tattooed people are gangsters. It is about everyones fundamental right to education. Some of these young kids may have made a stupid mistake in getting tatted up does that mean they should be denied an education. We're talking about tech colleges not finishing schools for young ladies.

[lovetotravel]

Employers here are at times very strict and very selective, especially for the better jobs. If you had a choice between a person with visible tats and a huge ear piercing versus a clean cut person, who would they choose? Actually, that's pretty much the case in most advanced societies. The number of teachers with tats on their neck, I would guess, is extremely low.

While I tend to agree with your assessment on employers/employees I do not believe that a school should be making enrollment decisions on this basis.

I spoke with our maid about this. She's no expert, but her opinion is most of the trouble caused at these schools is done by kids with tats and piercings. You don't see many grade A students covered in tats. Just saying. I'd bet if that was the case, this would be an issue???

The article in the Bangkok Post yesterday even mentioned this. Violence/gangs at these schools has been a big problem for many years. Congrats to them for trying to deal with it.

[lovetotravel]

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/02/20132109331225548.html

Thai schools breed fraternities of violence

Deadly clashes escalate between rival schools as police scramble to limit the spillover into society at large.

Yupa Prai-ngam's body lay slumped on her bus seat like a dozing passenger. Around her, forensic police cased the scene, zipping up the corpse of her fellow victim, 21-year-old art student Wanchai Thongsaengkaew, and dragged him away.

Yupa, 48, was returning home to Bangkok's suburbs, when at about 6:20 pm a group of students ambushed the vehicle at a bus stop and opened fire. Police believe the attack was the result of a feud between rival student gangs; in the end, the incident claimed the lives of two innocent passengers.

According to Manit Wongsomboon, deputy commissioner of the city police, there were 1,222 cases of student violence reported in Bangkok and its suburbs in 2012 - a rate of about 100 cases per month. He estimates about 20 of these resulted in death or severe injury.

Most of the clashes take place between students at vocational colleges - academies that train pupils to become machinists, electricians, and other specific trades - who carry on a longstanding tradition of fighting adversaries from rival schools to preserve institutional pride.

[lovetotravel]

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/840330-gang-wars-tackling-thailands-vocational-college-violence/

From the linked article. Which seems to be a major problem with Thai men. They resort to violence at the drop of a hat. And normally in large gangs. Maybe this is indeed a societal problem that needs to be addressed immediately????

Violence is also self-perpetuating as to save face – and therefore maintain a reputation – a gang member must retaliate”, and emphasized what appears to be a value also common in Thailand: “To maintain his reputation the gang member must respond, normally through violence.”