AIDS - From Neung thread.

[cuteboy]

I think that I came across Neung in Pattaya. He is one of many who die young. You do not say how he came to die at such a young age. But it is worth saying that it could very well have been AIDS related.
Over a year ago a boy known to some of us died just as quickly. He worked in a bar in Sunnee Plaza. His illness in itself could have been life-threatening, but he got it and died of it because of AIDS. I shared this information on the board for the fact to be refuted by those who claimed to know better. They did not.
Boys do not usually die of AIDS in Pattaya; they return to die unobserved in their villages.
But why do they die? They die, by and large, because they have unprotected sex. That really means that we kill them, because the illness is well enough understood now. Where does the responsibility lie? With the boys? I do not think so
It would be good as we mourn Neung if we also resolved to prevent it happening any more. Wouldn't it be great if your post saved even one boy in the future?

That really means that we kill them

This is really rather sweeping.

I suspect that the majority of the readers and posters here do not partake in unprotected sex and some will do their bit to make those they meet aware.

[cuteboy]

I agree with you.
You, me and the great majority do just that.
But the responsibility still lies with us, collectively, because from our number are those who do not follow your wise approach.

I know exactly how you feel. I think that I came across Neung in Pattaya. He is one of many who die young. You do not say how he came to die at such a young age. But it is worth saying that it could very well have been AIDS related.

I was careful to state in my second posting that Neung was not HIV+ and his death therefore had nothing to do with AIDS. He died in hospital after a short illness just six days after being admitted.

I agree with you.
You, me and the great majority do just that.
But the responsibility still lies with us, collectively, because from our number are those who do not follow your wise approach.

No. I don't accept any doctrine of "group guilt." I'm from the Paleolithic Era, and I still hold people responsible for their actions.

Besides, the whole idea of "collective guilt" is incoherent, not to mention totalitarian. "A woman shot the President, therefore (?) all women are guilty."

Boys do not usually die of AIDS in Pattaya; they return to die unobserved in their villages. But why do they die? They die, by and large, because they have unprotected sex.

Very true, so far.


That really means that we kill them, because the illness is well enough understood now. Where does the responsibility lie? With the boys? I do not think so

Only true if "they" just have sex with "us" and no-one else (each other, boyfriends, girlfriends, etc). Unlikely.

I know exactly how you feel. I think that I came across Neung in Pattaya. He is one of many who die young. You do not say how he came to die at such a young age. But it is worth saying that it could very well have been AIDS related.

I was careful to state in my second posting that Neung was not HIV+ and his death therefore had nothing to do with AIDS. He died in hospital after a short illness just six days after being admitted.

Kun Jon has stated quite categorically TWICE now that HIV was NOT a factor in this case!

To continue to allude to HIV in this case is therefore completely irrelevant and is frankly disrespectful to the memory of this young man.

Kun Jon has stated quite categorically TWICE now that HIV was NOT a factor in this case!

To continue to allude to HIV in this case is therefore completely irrelevant and is frankly disrespectful to the memory of this young man.

My original posting was copied, NOT BE ME, from the first thread and added to this thread, I've no idea why or who choose to do that. I only made that original post to clarify the situation about Neung as someone else suggested that HIV might have been involved. Your suggestion that I'm being disrespectful is about as offensive as I can imagine and I can only hope that you don't realise how insensitive you are being.

I had no intention of posting to this thread but, as I explained the post with my name was copied here, but your offensive attack has unfortunately made it necessary. As I have found on previous occasions the benifits of this Forum are always, eventually, outweighed but the sheer thoughtlessness of some who choose to post their poisonous pieces of self serving rubbish.

I'm left as before feeling that it's simply not worth the effort.

My original posting was copied, NOT BE ME, from the first thread and added to this thread, I've no idea why or who choose to do that. I only made that original post to clarify the situation about Neung as someone else suggested that HIV might have been involved. Your suggestion that I'm being disrespectful is about as offensive as I can imagine and I can only hope that you don't realise how insensitive you are being.



I am afraid that this sort of thing is what happenes when mods, sometimes without explanation, split threads in two. I suspect it was done in this case to remove the "offensive" bits about HIV from the main Neung thread.

I do not take the disrespectful remark to be aimed at you, Kun Jon, but rather at cuteboy who made the first suggestion about Neung's death being aids related.
I hope you are able to read it in that light too Kun Jon, and please keep posting - there are some of us here who find your posts valuable and informative and rewarding.

Again, my thoughts are with both you and Neung, RIP

I think that I came across Neung in Pattaya. He is one of many who die young. You do not say how he came to die at such a young age. But it is worth saying that it could very well have been AIDS related.
Over a year ago a boy known to some of us died just as quickly. He worked in a bar in Sunnee Plaza. His illness in itself could have been life-threatening, but he got it and died of it because of AIDS. I shared this information on the board for the fact to be refuted by those who claimed to know better. They did not.
Boys do not usually die of AIDS in Pattaya; they return to die unobserved in their villages.
But why do they die? They die, by and large, because they have unprotected sex. That really means that we kill them, because the illness is well enough understood now. Where does the responsibility lie? With the boys? I do not think so
It would be good as we mourn Neung if we also resolved to prevent it happening any more. Wouldn't it be great if your post saved even one boy in the future?

Anyone could just drop dead and die from anything at any age, even at the young age of 35 - it doesn't have to be AIDs related. As a matter of fact if it were AIDs related - most death by HIV are long drawn out affairs with visible symptoms. A friend of mine went to South America, came back with a mild stomach virus and died one month later - the doctors were never sure what he got. My 15 year old nephew drop dead of Heart desease one week after being declared a healthy young man by his family doctor.

Khun John has already said more than once that this young man did not die because AIDs - So why are you so hung up on the idea?

[cuteboy]

Yes, of course, young men of 35 take ill and die all the time in the developed countries. Who are you kidding?
Of course it can happen, statistically, but it is very rare.
It is not believed that Neung died of an AIDS related disease and that may be true; some of the farangs closest to the other young man I referred to believed the same, but their view was not supported by his death certificate. The huge majority in Thailand who become ill and die at this age do so of only one thing. Factor in those who have been working boys in Pattaya? Well.
But, if you like, believe what you like. Boys who have worked in the boy bars of Pattaya do not die of AIDS and they do not feel forced for economic reasons to have unprotected sex with westerners. So we have no responsibility. As you like.
'Man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest' Paul Simon.

[cottmann]

That really means that we kill them

This is really rather sweeping.

I suspect that the majority of the readers and posters here do not partake in unprotected sex and some will do their bit to make those they meet aware.

Practicing safe sex by using a condom, however, might not be as safe as one believes. The small print on the back of a box of Durex Avanti condoms states: "The risks of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including AIDS (HIV infection), are not known for this condom." Durex is to discontinue this particular line of polyurethane condoms in favor of a new version, but it might be wise to check the small print on whatever brand one uses.

[Smiles]

" ... I am afraid that this sort of thing is what happenes when mods, sometimes without explanation, split threads in two. I suspect it was done in this case to remove the "offensive" bits about HIV from the main Neung thread ... "
Is this actualy what happened, or did Cuteboy take his own post and start up another entirely different thread? I'd like to know.
I'd have though by now that the Mods on this Board would have the decency to let the Members here know when they split a thread like this.

But in the event that Cuteboy started up his own thread, then it is obvious the man has an agenda wherein the sadness of one Thai man's death (for whatever "unknown" reason) takes the back seat of the bus in the moral crusade of another ... even given that Cuteboy is ignorant of the true details of this particular case.

For myself, the ignorance and insensitivity of Cuteboy trumps his message by a country mile ... and he can quote hoary old Paul Simon sound bites out the ying yang as far as I'm concerned. It makes no difference to his leaden and phony take on the matter.

Cheers ...

Yes, of course, young men of 35 take ill and die all the time in the developed countries. Who are you kidding?
Of course it can happen, statistically, but it is very rare.
It is not believed that Neung died of an AIDS related disease and that may be true; some of the farangs closest to the other young man I referred to believed the same, but their view was not supported by his death certificate. The huge majority in Thailand who become ill and die at this age do so of only one thing. Factor in those who have been working boys in Pattaya? Well.
But, if you like, believe what you like. Boys who have worked in the boy bars of Pattaya do not die of AIDS and they do not feel forced for economic reasons to have unprotected sex with westerners. So we have no responsibility. As you like.
'Man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest' Paul Simon.

I'm afraid you're missing my point completely. I am NOT agreeing or disagreeing with your crusade - I'm just saying leave the poor boy alone. You CAN still get your point across without crucifying someone already dead whose cause of death unknown to us all including YOU!

Whether poor Neung died as a result of being HIV+, or it being a contributing factor, is entirely irrelevant.

Sadly he died at a far too early age - that is all that needs to be said on the fact. I did once meet him via a former b/s and found him to be charming, polite and unassuming.

The implied inference, which I read here from some, that his death was somehow less noble or 'we' as a community are somehow culpable in the death because HIV could have been involved is a sad reflection on still prevailing attitudes today even within the gay community to this dreadful disease.

I just hope that all the speculation about this death does not reach his family.

RIP Neung

As I have found on previous occasions the benifits of this Forum are always, eventually, outweighed but the sheer thoughtlessness of some who choose to post their poisonous pieces of self serving rubbish.

Kun Jon,

I deliberately did not post anything in the thread you started on Neung, apart from expressing my utter distaste at the post by RS which was unnecessary and unjustified, even if it was undeniably true. This was out of the same respect I would show for anyone who died, regardless of their age, profession or nationality, and out of sympathy for their friends and family. In this thread, however, both the heading and the circumstances are different.

As far as I can recall, and as far as I can verify from a brief search, nearly all of your posts concern the medical condition of your boyfriend who has HIV/Aids. The exceptions are the thread on Neung, your "special friend", who died recently from causes which none of us are in a position to know or comment on, including you, and your hostile and unreceptive responses to anyone who does not post gushing commiseration, support, sympathy and compliments even when very few know/knew you or them. This even applies to those who have tried to help or give advice from their own experience, who are castigated for their pains and whose often well-meaning advice is rejected. Even when only one poster steps out of line you immediately take insult at the board en masse and withdraw to wallow in self pity, undertaking to never read or post again - little, with all due respect, can be more self-serving and more self indulgent than that.

You cannot reasonably post on a board where any topic is automatically up for discussion and expect everyone to agree with you or to avoid posting something you may not agree with out of sympathy - initially possibly, but that courtesy is soon exhausted and that point appears to have been passed long ago. Others in a similar position to you have preferred to open a blog where a dead friend can be honoured or up to date news of a sick friend posted, with a link in their posts - a choice which would seem to suit everybody.

Men usually have their most passionate arguments about things of which they know nothing.

Gone Fishing wrote that I was wallowing in self pity. Well the last time I posted about my seriously ill boyfriend I was told by one poster that he didn't give a "flying fuck" about his health and I was accused of touting for money. I think my comment about "self serving rubbish" was mild in the face of comments like that.

And now I'm being attacked for paying tribute to a friend and trying to keep the facts accurate. That was in the face of comments from "Rickshaw" that were so offensive that the moderator removed them. And a post from "Scottish-guy" that accused me of being disrespectful but which was based on his misunderstanding of the way the thread had been split and my comments repeated without my knowledge.

What am I meant to do, keep quiet while all this is posted? Again I think my description was mild and if you take such exception to my posts then I suggest you don't read them. They are clearly marked so it's quite easy.

I'm not clear if you are also taking exception to my description of a "Special Friend" but that's the truth of the situation and it's a phrase that meant something to both Neung and my boyfriend and that's why I used it.

I wanted to post a tribute and others responded so I reserve the right to reply to them in exactly the same way as you have.

I chose not to produce a Blog and don't see why I should have when this Forum exists. I've had enough replies both on the Forum and Private Messages to know that others seem to have appreciated my attempt to honour a friend's memory.

[Bob]

I've had enough replies both on the Forum and Private Messages to know that others seem to have appreciated my attempt to honour a friend's memory.

Quite correct, Jon, and that's what's worth remembering. Best to forget the ignorant minority other than to remember that they are the minority here (and hopefully everywhere else). Best wishes.

[quote="scottish-guy":295iiayq]Kun Jon has stated quite categorically TWICE now that HIV was NOT a factor in this case!

To continue to allude to HIV in this case is therefore completely irrelevant and is frankly disrespectful to the memory of this young man.

My original posting was copied, NOT BE ME, from the first thread and added to this thread, I've no idea why or who choose to do that. I only made that original post to clarify the situation about Neung as someone else suggested that HIV might have been involved. Your suggestion that I'm being disrespectful is about as offensive as I can imagine and I can only hope that you don't realise how insensitive you are being.

I had no intention of posting to this thread but, as I explained the post with my name was copied here, but your offensive attack has unfortunately made it necessary. As I have found on previous occasions the benifits of this Forum are always, eventually, outweighed but the sheer thoughtlessness of some who choose to post their poisonous pieces of self serving rubbish.

I'm left as before feeling that it's simply not worth the effort.[/quote:295iiayq]


Kun Jon - I would suggest you read my comment again, this time more more carefully - and if you do it is 100% clear that I am SUPPORTING you and it is the OTHER posters I am suggesting are being disrespectful by keeping going on about HIV when you have made it clear not once but TWICE that a discussion on HIV is completely irrelevant in the case of your late friend.

My original posting was copied, NOT BE ME, from the first thread and added to this thread, I've no idea why or who choose to do that. I only made that original post to clarify the situation about Neung as someone else suggested that HIV might have been involved. Your suggestion that I'm being disrespectful is about as offensive as I can imagine and I can only hope that you don't realise how insensitive you are being.



I am afraid that this sort of thing is what happenes when mods, sometimes without explanation, split threads in two. I suspect it was done in this case to remove the "offensive" bits about HIV from the main Neung thread.

I do not take the disrespectful remark to be aimed at you, Kun Jon, but rather at cuteboy who made the first suggestion about Neung's death being aids related.
I hope you are able to read it in that light too Kun Jon, and please keep posting - there are some of us here who find your posts valuable and informative and rewarding.

Again, my thoughts are with both you and Neung, RIP

Correct gwm4asian - my comments were not aimed at Kun Jon at all. I'm sorry he misintepreted what I said and hope he will now realise this

Your suggestion that I'm being disrespectful is about as offensive as I can imagine and I can only hope that you don't realise how insensitive you are being.

What on earth is wrong with you Khun Jon? The only person that is being bloody offensive in this thread, as well as insensitive, is you. Well, apart from cute boy that is and as far as he is concerned, why he is on the crusade he is and why he has made the statements that he has, is something that is totally beyond my comprehension. Perhaps instead of having gone on this crusade, he should have instead gone on one whereby it was in search of a brain, as the totally nonsensical posts that he has been making here, indicates to me that he is badly in need of one.


I had no intention of posting to this thread but, as I explained the post with my name was copied here, but your offensive attack has unfortunately made it necessary. As I have found on previous occasions the benifits of this
Forum are always, eventually, outweighed but the sheer thoughtlessness of some who choose to post their poisonous pieces of self serving rubbish.

Back to you Khun Jon and once more I say to you, what on earth is wrong with you? scottish-guy has made no offensive attack on you, neither has he been responsible for posting poisonous pieces of rubbish. However you bloody are, as well as making offensive attacks on him and I say attacks in the plural form, as you have now made two of them on scottish-guy. Are no other posts important here, other than your own? I say this as you show absolutely no evidence whatsoever that you read any of them.

gym4asin said to you what was eleven posts back when I started this post, the following:

I do not take the disrespectful remark to be aimed at you, Kun Jon, but rather at cuteboy who made the first suggestion about Neung's death being aids related.

I agree with gym4asin on what he has said 100 per cent, as anyone would do who had taken the time to actually read scottish-guy's post. He quite clearly said: quote:



Kun Jon has stated quite categorically TWICE now that HIV was NOT a factor in this case! To continue to allude to HIV in this case is therefore completely irrelevant and is frankly disrespectful to the memory of this young man.

How could you possibly have believed that scottish-guy's comments above, were meant for anyone other than cuteboy? Because I don't think there is one other member on this forum, who after having read them, would have possibly believed that they could be meant for anyone else. His statement to cuteboy of, To continue to allude to HIV should have been enough in itself, to have told you who his comments were directed at. ]Allude] To refer to something indirectly or by suggestion; to have reference to a subject not specifically and plainly mentioned:

I believe that an apology is in order on your behalf and one that is more than deserved on the part of scottish-guy. Let's see if you are as strong in the integrity, respect and common courtesy department, by giving him that apology, especially as it is always something that you are demanding that others do.


I'm left as before feeling that it's simply not worth the effort.

As I am now feeling the exact same way about my reply here.

I had a run in with you the last time you were here and in doing so, let someone down very badly, that someone being myself. I will not allow you to be responsible for my doing so again. I consider myself to be an extremely compassionate person in the way I exress my feelings toward others when needed and I had the utmost compassion for the situation your b/f was in. I was also deeply saddened to hear of Neungs death, as I would be to hear of any boy's death who looses his life at such a young age, regardless of the causes. I hope that this was reflected by my post in Neung's thread.

Buddha knows I have been through enough tragedies of my own here in Thaiiland, in having lost too many Thai boys who were either my b/f, or very good friends of mine, as well as that of loosing a 15 year old son. However, I have dealt with these losses and done so much differently, than the way you appear to deal with yours. I wouldn't have dreamed of sharing those losses of mine, with people on a message board, whom are not only people that I don't know, but ones that don't know me either, or those I have lost. It seems however, this is something you have no problem in being able to do, as well as seeming to find that handling someones death and discussing it with others who had no knowledge before your post as to who he was, is the most normal thing in the world to do.

Well let me tell you, that in my opinion doing what you do here in these matters and as you have done in the cases of both your b/f who was dealing with AIDS and Neung whose death you reported to us all, is something I personally consider to be a long bloody way away from being normal. Especially and even more so, when you take it to consideration, that your posts about your b/f and Neung, are the only ones that you have ever made on this forum. As a result of that last fact, it leads me to consider whether there is a possibility, that you are someone that is susceptible to having too much preoccupation with only matters of the macabre.

By the way, did you obtain Neungs family's permission to make your posts about him, as well as and more importantly in my opinion, their permission to post of all those photographs of him that you did? How more lacking in respect could one possibly be, if they hadn't done this before posting them? That's one question I would dearly love to know the answer to, though I am pretty certain, that even without it I know what that answer would be.

It's you that I have a problem with Khun Jon and always have had. I never had a problem showing both respect or compassion in the case of both your b/f and Neung. So before you go bleating to anyone or make a post on the subject, that once again I have not shown you any respect as a member here, let me educate you to the reason, as to why that is. It's because, you have never done one single solitary thing, that has warranted, or been deserving of having earned that respect. Respect is something that I have never given away for free and has always had to have been earned by those wishing to attain it from me. I strongly doubt it is something that you are capable of attaining from me, or of having any hope of ever being able to do so..

Gone Fishing summed you up perfectly for me and in a way I could not better, when he stated in his post to you above, the following: [b]Even when only one poster steps out of line you immediately take insult at the board en masse and withdraw to wallow in self pity, undertaking to never read or post again - little, with all due respect, can be more self-serving and more self indulgent than that.

If you do decide to leave this forum for a second time, as a result of being unable to except that the person who is more responsible than any other, of causing all of your problems, as he has once again done in this thread and is none other than yourself, up to you.. But on leaving the forum Khun Jon, please make sure that door doesn't hit you up the arse on your way out. Hopefully arrangements can be made for the locks to be changed imediately after your exit and before; you make any attempt to come back through it for a third time.


G. :cwm10:

Hi scottish-guy, my apologies if you think I have interfered by replying on your behalf. At the time I went to make my post, you had not posted a rebuttal to Khun Jon in regard to the accusation he had made against you. The post which you have now made, was obviously done so by you whilst I was working on my latest novel. ;) Should you wish me to remove any part of my post that is pertaining to you, I would be happy to do so.


Choc Dee SG,



George.

I obviously rub some people up the wrong way so please do use your "Ignore Button" as I do.

I doubt that one author, who's particular brand of verbosity I had already decided I could do without, was complimentary anyway.

I didn't start this particular thread and felt the presence of Neung's name in the title was unfortunate.

The vast majority of the replies I've received have been positive and I've also had personal messages from others who knew Neung and who appreciated my posting so as that was the object of the exercise I'll leave it there.

I'll leave it there.





:hello2:

Hi scottish-guy, my apologies if you think I have interfered by replying on your behalf. At the time I went to make my post, you had not posted a rebuttal to Khun Jon in regard to the accusation he had made against you. The post which you have now made, was obviously done so by you whilst I was working on my latest novel. ;) Should you wish me to remove any part of my post that is pertaining to you, I would be happy to do so.


Choc Dee SG,



George.

No, George I'm happy that you read my post the way it was intended and that you took the time to point it out.

:cheers:

And now I'm being attacked for paying tribute to a friend and trying to keep the facts accurate. ... And a post from "Scottish-guy" that accused me of being disrespectful but which was based on his misunderstanding of the way the thread had been split and my comments repeated without my knowledge.

You were not being "attacked for paying tribute to a friend" but for what I termed "your hostile and unreceptive responses to anyone who does not post gushing commiseration, support, sympathy and compliments" which is a totally different matter that you have repeated yet again. As George pointed out, you must be the only one to have mis-read scottish-guy's comments as you have - apparently twice; apologies, as he said, are in order.


What am I meant to do, keep quiet while all this is posted?

No, what I believe you are meant to do is try to read and understand others' posts before lashing out blindly, particularly when some are trying to help you - they are unlikely to make the same mistake twice.


if you take such exception to my posts then I suggest you don't read them

Since I know neither you nor your bf and have no morbid interest in either his physical health or your mental state, I don't; this topic, however, was not primarily about him, you, or Neung.


I'm not clear if you are also taking exception to my description of a "Special Friend" but that's the truth of the situation and it's a phrase that meant something to both Neung and my boyfriend and that's why I used it.

I think you are becoming paranoid; you chose the phrase, so it seemed appropriate for me to repeat it.


I reserve the right to reply to them in exactly the same way as you have.

I fully respect that, but the problem is that you do not appear willing to give those replying to you the same "right to reply" unless it meets with your approval.



(George, I hope you are not getting as mathematically challenged as Out to Lunch: "... leave this forum for a second time ..." - you must have overlooked the many previous broken promises!)

[Hmmm]

A guy is dead. Give it a rest.

RIP Neung.