"Sin City" not just for the tourists - Pattaya monk defrocked!

[dinsdale]

5 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Well I could have used the select key, but I thought it was obvious you were objecting to the description of Pattaya as Sin City, which takes most of the second half of your rant. You write as though you've never heard of the expression "Sin City" which in common usage has little to do with the way you define sin. From the article:

 

"Sin City is an urban area (a city or part of) that caters to various vices. These vices may be legal (depending on area) or illegal activities which are tolerated.

Examples of vices include sex-related services (prostitution, strip clubs, sex shops, etc.), gambling (casinos, betting shops, etc.), or drug use (alcohol, marijuana, etc. consumption), and even excessive organized crime and gang activity. If the city is known for prostitution, it is often called a red-light district, as in Amsterdam, Netherlands."

 

Although this most accurately describes Amsterdam, it's hard to not apply it to Pattaya (which is the first in the list of notorious Sin Cities around the globe listed). The term also applies to Bangkok, Las Vegas, they even mention Soho in London which is now largely gentrified, so Pattaya is in some esteemed company, and as with the other cities mentioned, it's this reputation that makes it such a strong tourist attraction.

"Pattaya represents a small percentage of prostitution nationally. Does, however, bring in tourist money for everyone who works there and other similar tourist areas, to support themselves and their families which is more than the 'government' does."

This was really the crux of my post. Red-light district; I'm fine with that, one of if not the biggest in the world. But to call it a sin is religious nonsense. As I say there are far greater 'sins' in this country.  If you think that saying corruption and Thais (esp hi-so) getting away with murder is much worse than people earning a living for their families is a rant then that's your opinion.

[lamyai3]

20 hours ago, dinsdale said:

"Pattaya represents a small percentage of prostitution nationally. Does, however, bring in tourist money for everyone who works there and other similar tourist areas, to support themselves and their families which is more than the 'government' does."

This was really the crux of my post. Red-light district; I'm fine with that, one of if not the biggest in the world. But to call it a sin is religious nonsense. As I say there are far greater 'sins' in this country.  If you think that saying corruption and Thais (esp hi-so) getting away with murder is much worse than people earning a living for their families is a rant then that's your opinion.

I agree with the points made in the crux of your post. It's well established that the vast majority of the sex industry is hidden here, and there's no question that the tourist dollars coming into Pattaya have always been enormously beneficial for the country.

 

The Red Bull story was disgraceful and reflects badly on everyone involved with it, but this article had nothing to do with that. It was about the antics of an errant monk caught with his frock down, and the fact that it happened in Pattaya highlights some of the double standards here in a rather amusing way. Sin City is by no means inappropriate in the headline here, as sin is something that a monk supposedly takes vows on, and getting caught in a compromising position in a place like Pattaya just highlights the hypocrisy. The fact that he said he's look for another job in the morning made it all the more funny.

 

In any event, Sin City is a modern day expression to describe a place which has a reputation for certain vices, it doesn't usually refer to cold blooded murder. It's in line with other more modern day expressions such as "living in sin" (cohabiting before marriage) or "sin tax" (tax on alcohol or tobacco).