Racist Comment of the Year

[a447]

I'm not going to stoop to your level by trading insults

Really?

Here's a small selection of your insults directed at various board members, demonstrating the level to which you apparently do not stoop:

The only "dribble" I can see is the one trickling down to your third chin as you watch the boys dribble their ball.

He's a good sport (unlike the dimwit from Down Under)

There's an idiot on this forum who's been saying I can't be where I say I'm from because of my English skills and the way I write

Let's hope they're down to the single digits, just like your IQ.

the jumbo dumbo from Down Under...

I thought the standard of farangs in Pattaya have always been low - how much lower can they go?

Keep knocking yourself out!

[scottish-guy]

I have now proven a447 and Moses wrong on the basis of UK law - race can indeed legally mean nationality or citizenship, therefore any disparaging or abusive remarks on the basis of nationality or citizenship can be legally defined as "racist"

The legislation dates from 2010 when the UK, as a member of the EU was required to have all legislation compatible with EU law (as is still the case at least till 2019) - therefore it must be the same in all 27 EU countries.

So on the one side we have 27 EU countries saying that for the purposes of discrimination etc., race = nationality/citizenship.

On the other side we have Moses, a447, and an online dictionary .

No contest really

[sglad]

Really?
Here's a small selection of your insults directed at various board members, demonstrating the level to which you apparently do not stoop:
Keep knocking yourself out!

Again, I shall ignore your attempt to derail the topic - conduct very unbecoming of a moderator - and ask you this, again:

When are you stepping down as moderator because, by your own stickiness for "original" definitions and from your own static way of looking at things, you are mentally ill and an abomination for being a homosexual. Please refer to posts #19 and #20.

[a447]

I wasn't derailing anything. I was simply responding to your post, pointing out your breathtaking hypocricy. So I'm not surprised you've decided to ignore my comments.

As for homosexuality being considered a mental issue, that was a medical opinion, not a definition.

Not even an "original" one!

And that opinion was changed years ago.

Of course, I'm hardly surprised that you can't see the difference.

[a447]

I have now proven a447 and Moses wrong on the basis of UK law - race can indeed legally mean nationality or citizenship, therefore any disparaging or abusive remarks on the basis of nationality or citizenship can be legally defined as "racist"

The legislation dates from 2010 when the UK, as a member of the EU was required to have all legislation compatible with EU law (as is still the case at least till 2019) - therefore it must be the same in all 27 EU countries.

So on the one side we have 27 EU countries saying that for the purposes of discrimination etc., race = nationality/citizenship.

On the other side we have Moses, a447, and an online dictionary .

No contest really

No contest, as we are using different definitions - I'm using the dictionary definition, whereas you are using the legal definition.

They are not the same.

I'll stick to the dictionary definition and you csn use the legal one, and we will have to agree to disagree.

[sglad]

I have now proven a447 and Moses wrong on the basis of UK law - race can indeed legally mean nationality or citizenship, therefore any disparaging or abusive remarks on the basis of nationality or citizenship can be legally defined as "racist"

It's the same in a447's native Australia too where the Racial Hatred Act (1995) clearly prohibits "conduct involving the hatred of other people on the ground of race, colour or national or ethnic origin..."

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2004A04951

I remember going to a pub in Townsville seven years ago with my army buddies (we were on a two-week training stint in Australia as part of our national service). There were six of us, five Chinese and one Indian, all Singaporean. We were having a few beers when a bunch of Aussie guys came in and started hurling racial epithets at us. "Slitty eyes, yellow dicks, go back to China you smelly cunts, etc". We finished off our drinks quickly and left as we could sense trouble brewing. And being soldiers we were under military law at the time and the repercussions were harsher if we did get into some kind of trouble, even if it was through no fault of our own.

It doesn't matter whether they're insulting you because of your ethnic or national identity. You're just splitting hairs by trying to make a distinction. What matters is that it hurts and it breeds and encourages prejudice, which can have disastrous emotional and physical consequences on the targetted group. Chinese relatives and Muslim friends who've migrated to Australia say they still get Aussies coming up to them and forcing them to kiss the Australian flag on Australia Day to show their "loyalty".

[a447]

It's not unknown that people who are strongly dependent on a certain group, in this case Asians for sex, companionship and friendship, simultaneously develop a resentment or a type of loathing towards the same group.

Err...I think it is pretty much unknown. What a silly thing to say.

BTW, I am not dependent on Asians for sex. I have never made a secret of the fact that I prefer Asian guys, but my "partners" here are not Asian. I've mentioned that in previous posts.

having been rejected by their own people

How on earth could I be rejected by my own people when I was living 8,000 km away? By snail mail, perhaps?

It is a projection of their own self-loathing and low self-esteem

As another member here once commented, a farang in his sixties trying to pass himself off as a young Asian guy on a chat forum projects that.

[scottish-guy]

...It doesn't matter whether they're insulting you because of your ethnic or national identity... What matters is that it hurts and it breeds and encourages prejudice, which can have disastrous emotional and physical consequences on the targetted group...

You're absolutely correct of course and what has disappointed me most about this dispute is the conduct of Moses and a447.

Instead of just accepting that in 2018 it's inappropriate to be referring to groups or sub groups of races, ethnicities, citizens, or nationalities as "all looking like they came out the same cookie cutter", preferred instead to split hairs over whether or not the insult was "racist" rather than whether it was an insult at all.

Turns out of course that their hair-splitting was incorrect and it's perfectly proper to describe such comments as "racist" - but will they stand corrected?

Don't hold your breath

[arsenal]

This board doesn't fall under the jurisdiction of UK law Scottish Guy.

Type that up please Miss Impala. It's important Scottish Guy understands his error.

[a447]

You're absolutely correct of course and what has disappointed me most about this dispute is the conduct of Moses and a447.

Instead of just accepting that in 2018 it's inappropriate to be referring to groups or sub groups of races, ethnicities, citizens, or nationalities as "all looking like they came out the same cookie cutter", preferred instead to split hairs over whether or not the insult was "racist" rather than whether it was an insult at all.

Turns out of course that their hair-splitting was incorrect and it's perfectly proper to describe such comments as "racist" - but will they stand corrected?

Don't hold your breath

Well, of course he's right. It's a motherhood and apple pie statement that surely noone could disagree with.

SG, you have twisted Newbie99's comment to suit your own argument.

Newbie99 originally wrote:

all Cambodians who are working in the bars of Jomtien Complex look the same

You changed his comments to read :

By saying that Cambodians all come out the same "cookie cooker"(sic), Newbie99 is saying is that all Cambodians look the same.

Those two comments are obviously at odds with each other.

Newbie99 then posted this:

And what I am saying is that there are a bunch of Cambodian boys in Jomtien who look like they came out of the same cookie cutter. I am not saying all Cambodians look alike.

This demonstrates that his comment was not racist. Unlike Clinton, who referred to "all black" politicians, Newbie99 did not refer to all Cambodians. Had he done so, then yes, that's a different matter.

He called them Cambodians, because that's what they are. If you were familiar with the area, you'd know that the vast majority of guys are Cambodian.

And when he said that group of guys look the same, he wasn't referring to their ethnic appearance - he was referring to the appearance they themselves had deliberately cultivated in order to snare customers.

So no racism involved.

Enough. We are going around in circles.