PeterRS

The Impact of MacLennan’s “Suicide” The tragic circumstances of MacLennan’s death are unlikely ever to be known – or at least made public. Could it possibly have been suicide? Was he indeed murdered, as so many continue to believe? Several books and articles have been written on the subject. The latest “A Death in Hong Kong” by Nigel Collett was published early last year. I have not read it. Based on its reviews, though, Collett places the suicide/murder in the context of the times, something not generally well known now and which I have also tried to explain above. As the South China Morning Post (Hong Kong’s primary daily English language newspaper) reviewer noted, many homosexual and bisexual men had arrived in the 1970s to take up official positions in Hong Kong where, despite the law, the city was more open to gay behaviour than Britain where it had actually been decriminalised. That relatively casual approach to homosexual affairs all changed after Richard Duffy was jailed and opened the Pandora’s Box which revealed a degree of sleaze and corruption that shocked many to their core. There can now be no doubt that that one act inevitably led, albeit indirectly, to much of what followed, including MacLennan’s death. It is also unlikely we will ever understand how MacLennan’s death and the resultant utterly shambolic attempts by the RHKP and the government to keep it quiet had such an impact in changing what were allegedly entrenched beliefs about homosexual behaviour amongst the Chinese population in Hong Kong. I suspect the vast majority of the Chinese population had never given much thought to it. With most being an immigrant population fiercely determined to work hard and make lives better for their families, homosexual behaviour was well down their list of priorities. After a thorough examination of facts, Collett concludes that MacLennan did commit suicide. Before his death last year, I spoke to Peter Moss who had been a friend for decades, a former Deputy Director in the Hong Kong Government Information Services Department for my first dozen years in Hong Kong. Peter was then living in retirement in Malaysia where he had served the colonial government prior to independence. I asked for his views. Collett had consulted him when drafting his book and Peter agreed with the suicide theory. I, though, have three reasons for doubting Collett’s conclusion. First, Collett did not arrive in Hong Kong until 1984. He therefore had no first-hand knowledge of the events he describes. I lived in Hong Kong for 25 years from 1975 and witnessed the events as reported at the time. Second Collett’s main occupation had been as an officer in charge of Gurkha regiments. In 1994, he formed a company Gurkha International Manpower Services Ltd. He has written only two books but contributes to a number of publications. Through his company he had links to law enforcement in colonial Hong Kong. There is therefore the possibility, however remote, that his views might have been swayed in favour of the RHKP. Third, in 2014 he wrote Firelight of a Different Colour, a biography of the extraordinarily talented gay Hong Kong superstar actor and singer, Leslie Cheung Kwok-wing, who committed suicide in 2003 aged 46. I worked with Leslie on two occasions, I had known his manager, Florence Chan, for many years, and I knew in detail the background to an offer made to him by the London impresario Sir Cameron Mackintosh which could have led to his appearance in Phantom of the Opera on Broadway. I knew because I was in Leslie’s dressing room at the Hong Kong Coliseum when the offer was made by Sir Cameron’s Managing Director, Martin McCallum! I did not know Leslie well but admired him immensely both for his amazing talent and his total modesty. InFirelight Collett relies on a vast amount of speculation and few specific sources – understandable, since Leslie’s family did not want the book written. The Phantom episode Collett describes is totally wrong. When one book gets this and other alleged “facts” wrong, I hear alarm bells when another book allegedly based on a reconstruction of “facts” appears by the same author. We all love conspiracy theories and most of us believe – or want to believe – that we know better than official versions. I believe I know who killed John F. Kennedy and how, based on facts that keep emerging as time goes on, it is not what the Earl Warren Commission wanted us to believe. But I will never know if my theory is correct. Equally I believe I know that John MacLennan could not have committed suicide – not given the background of the times and by shooting himself five times in the abdomen. That to me defies credibility. As he had told Elsie Elliott, MacLennan still was in possession of a great deal of information about the homosexual activities of many people in high places. Most, if not all, of these prominent individuals would not wish that information to become public. I accept that MacLennan came from a small town in the north of Scotland where his life would have been massively different from that he enjoyed amidst the bright lights and temptations of a teeming international city like Hong Kong. It was known he had a girlfriend in Scotland whom he planned to marry and that he had fooled around with at least three mistresses on various occasions during his time in Hong Kong. Yet, I also accept it was perfectly possible that he was in some way enticed to try sex with one or more male prostitutes. I do not believe for a moment that makes anyone a homosexual. It may at best have illustrated a tendency towards his being bisexual. Yet, given the determination of his superiors to “set up him”, even that must surely be open to more than considerable doubt. Would the very huge psychological pressure he was under, given the detailed knowledge he had obtained whilst working for Special Branch, the knowledge that Brooks and Quinn were out to “get him” and the further knowledge that the planting of evidence by the RHKP was well-known within the Force – would that have been enough to unhinge his mind and pressure him towards suicide? The resultant publicity of a trial would have unquestionably brought unbelievable shame to his family in Scotland. He must also have realised that the vague chance of an acquittal could not undo the public damage to his reputation and the almost certainty of his never being able to work in any police force again. There can be no doubt that he would not on that evening have been capable of particularly rational thinking. But does all that explain his actions on the night of his death? Can it possibly explain the reason for attempting to commit suicide with five bullets to his abdomen with the gun pointed in an unnatural direction for firing? If indeed it was a suicide, why were so many outright and provable lies told in the subsequent investigations? Why did the Governor through his aides and the Attorney General do all in their power to keep the case under wraps? Taken all together, it indicates at least to me that there was much more to the MacLennan affair than we know even today. And so I and the few friends I still have who also lived in Hong Kong at the time of MacLennan’s death refuse to believe that it was suicide. To us it was a botched murder to cover up a great deal of sleaze and sludge in a filthy little swamp. I wish I could prove it! All I know is that that death of one very insignificant member of the police force contributed in no small way to a major ‘clean up’ of the forces of law and order in Hong Kong. At the start of the millennium an opinion poll was conducted amongst Hong Kong people to name the most significant events in 150 years of Hong Kong history The establishment of the ICAC was voted as the sixth most important. Equally, MacLennan’s death was eventually to result in Hong Kong becoming a much more tolerant, open and free society for gay men and women. If only for these two reasons, Inspector John MacLennan should always be remembered. Sources 1. https://unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/GRHS.2007.CaseStudy.Crime_.HongKong.pdf 2. Hong Kong welcomed the ICAC. In 1999 the people of Hong Kong were polled about the most important events since the founding of Hong Kong. The establishment of the ICAC was voted as #6 3. https://www.thecrimevault.com/exclusives/what-was-it-like-as-a-brit-in-the-royal-hong-kong-police/ 4. In an article about MacLennan’s death, the following appeared in Scotland’s National newspaper on 16 January 2018. Writing after the inquest in 1981 [see below], the investigative journalist Duncan Campbell, who inquired into the death of the Scot, wrote: “MacLennan’s death is a savage reminder of the style of operation of the notoriously corrupt Hong Kong police. At the centre of the affair is a police campaign against homosexuality: MacLennan was about to be arrested, it was said, by a Special Investigation Unit which hunted down homosexuals. But the police campaign is more a means of stabilizing police power in the colony, than an actual piece of law enforcement. “In this enterprise, the police have collaborated with the Triad, criminal syndicates procuring youths, and have thus ensnared several government officials in compromising circumstances. “The police venture had two objectives: first to pursue minor offenders against Hong Kong’s repressive sexual laws; and second to render more highly placed officials liable to pressure – from the police. Those who complied were secure. One person who did not give in to this racket was an English lawyer Howard Lindsay. As a result he was put on trial for sexual offenses last year” 5. HC Deb 11 March 1983 6. The Hong Kong government had established the Urban Council in 1883. Its functions were primarily to look after local issues like waste collection and hawker control. Eventually its portfolio would include arts and entertainment facilities. Council members were appointed by the government. In 1952, two seats were offered for election and by 1956 the number increased to half, although there were major restrictions re those entitled to vote. The Council became an autonomous body in 1973. A social activist who had arrived from England as a missionary in the early 1950s, Elsie Elliott (later Elsie Tu) had been an elected member since 1963. She was a passionate advocate for the ordinary men and women of Hong Kong. She was a thorn in the side of authority but loved by most Hong Kong people. 7. Ken Bridgewater “Open Verdict: A Hong Kong Story” 8. Paragraph 12.22 on page 135

Public Anger following the Inquest There was an immediate public outcry with calls for an independent inquiry. On May 23 the recently appointed Attorney-General John Griffiths announced there was no need to reopen the inquest as the overwhelming body of evidence pointed to suicide. Griffiths himself had held two concerns prior to taking over the post of Attorney General less than a year earlier: homosexuality and the molestation of underage youths. He was determined to address both, but in his zeal tended to forget that there was a very marked difference between the two ‘crimes’. With new details of the MacLennan affair daily appearing in the media, he was well aware his own credibility was on the line. On June 1 Inquest Jury Foreman Tony Pannell stated he was not satisfied with the Attorney General’s statement and itemized many points where the jury had disagreed with the evidence. The RHKP attempted to reinforce their failed case. On June 4 they coerced four male prostitutes to claim that MacLennan had been one of their customers. Indeed so regular was he that – quite ridiculously given the ease with which payments could have been tracked, but no evidence found – they suggested he had been permitted to pay by cheque rather than cash! On June 18 Elsie Elliott delivered a public bombshell. She revealed that as early as November 1979 the Attorney General had been made personally aware by his Crown Counsel, Howard Lindsay, of the plot against MacLennan - two months before his death. Her statement referred to the comments made to her by Inspector Michael Fulton (see above). On July 2 Fulton himself went public and confirmed he had been asked by members of the SIU to set up MacLennan. As public anger continued to mount, the Attorney General and Police Commissioner remained silent. On July 3, the Foreman of the Inquest Jury, Pannell, publicly called for the resignation of the Attorney General. Elsie Elliott repeated her call for a formal Inquiry into MacLennan’s death. The government again stated there would be no fresh Inquiry. On July 7, Elsie Elliott compounded the government’s problems by announcing she was willing to help raise funds to sue both the Attorney General and the Police Commissioner. For as long as she lived, Ms. Elliot never fully accepted the suicide theory, insisting that McLennan’s death had been a case of murder, but adding that the pressure on him was so great that there was a slight possibility that he might have been “pushed to killing himself”. Government establishes a Royal Commission of Inquiry By this time public opinion, particularly in the large and influential Chinese media outlets, had become so great that the government had to reverse course. It agreed to establish a Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by a respected Supreme Court Justice (and later Chief Justice), T. L Yang. Evidence was heard from 110 witnesses including senior government and RHKP personnel and male prostitutes. This Inquiry was the most expensive in Hong Kong’s history. It came to the conclusion that MacLennan had indeed committed suicide. Yet again this verdict was ridiculed in public. It was eventually to become clear that some evidence had been deliberately withheld from the Inquiry and its work greatly hampered by severe restrictions to its terms of reference. One piece of information never reported to the Commission was the fact that MacLennan had a mistress. The lady was never publicly identified. Nor was it ever reported that on the night of his death she had lent him her Volkswagen which he had parked in the car park below his apartment block. Following his death the car was towed away by the police. Within hours, this lady was visited by two members of the police force and sternly warned not to talk to anyone in the media. Her story only came to light because she knew the broadcaster Aileen Bridgewater. Government Considers Possibility of Changing Law on Homosexuality Behind the scenes the government was clearly extremely concerned by the impact of the affair on the Chinese community. Prior to the announcement of the T. L. Yang Inquiry, on June 14 1980 it officially but quietly requested the Law Reform Commission to consider the following topic: “Should the present laws governing homosexual conduct in Hong Kong be changed and, if so, in what way?” On July 5 the Commission appointed a high level Sub-committee “to research, consider and then advise it upon aspects of the said matter.” After three years of deliberation, the Sub-committee made a number of specific recommendations and provisos, the most important of which was: “We recommend that the law should not prohibit consensual sexual conduct in private between two males provided both are 21 or more years of age [8].” One controversial recommendation was the proposal that the age of consent be 21 for males whereas it would remain at 16 for females. Government Action following Publication of the Commission’s 1983 Report Following publication of the Law Reform Commission Report, the government did precisely nothing! It was in the midst of extensive discussions with its masters in London regarding the future of Hong Kong after the expiration of the 99-year lease on the New Territories (by far the largest part of Hong Kong) on June 30 1997. Even after the December 19 1984 signing of the Joint Declaration between China and the United Kingdom on Hong Kong’s future, homosexual law reform remained on the back burner. It took several more years of pressure before the government finally realised it could procrastinate no longer. Before becoming a Special Administrative Region of China with many rights exclusive to Hong Kong citizens, Hong Kong would need to enact further legislation covering the international rights of its people. Hong Kong Bill of Rights The Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (HKBORO) was enacted into law in June 1991. This empowered local courts to rule on cases regarding the violation of the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as applicable to Hong Kong, and to provide redress through HKBORO for cases where violation had been proved. As regards homosexuality, the government’s stated position up to this point had always been that Chinese society would not accept homosexual behaviour. This stood little scrutiny given a tradition of acceptance of such behaviour stretching back millennia and there being no law on mainland China banning homosexual behaviour. Although the former Governor Sir Murray MacLehose (see above) had believed the old British law should have been changed, this concern about public opinion was a primary reason for him, his successors and senior officials making no moves to effect any change. The requirement for a Bill of Rights brought the matter of homosexual law reform back into the discussion and inevitably the MacLennan case came again to the fore. The Bill finally enabled those proposing a change in accordance with the Law Reform Commission recommendations to make that change. The government decided not to challenge that view. The law against homosexual behaviour was immediately repealed. Unequal Age of Consent As a result of a lawsuit later brought by human rights groups, Hong Kong’s Justice Michael Hartmann ruled in the Supreme Court in 2005 that the unequal age of consent was unconstitutional under the HKBORO. His decision was upheld in the Court of Final Appeal. From 2006 the age of consent for males was brought into line with those for females. Both became 16 years of age.

Sorry that is not quite the case. I did have Hepatitis A in my early 20s. I was around 38 and in Asia when I was infected with Hep B. As you suggest there is no cure, but most of those westerners infected quickly develop antibodies so they are no longer infectious. That was the case with me within 3 months. That said, Hep B is virtually endemic in Asia. In December 2021 the Contagion Live website estimated that nearly 300 million people in Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific were infected chronically with the Hep B virus. Worse, roughly 87% of those with chronic Hep B remain undiagnosed. Thanks to vaccination, the numbers are slowly dropping, but you have a much higher chance of infection by close association with SE Asians than westerners. Vaccination is definitely recommended.

More than a decade ago there was a post here about a famous suicide/murder in Hong Kong that reverberated through the gay community and how the general community reacted to it. Given the interest that has been expressed in a thread recently in learning more about the gay history of Bangkok, I thought some might find an expanded version of the events in January 1980 in Hong Kong of interest. This long article was written by a prominent gay expat journalist and author based in Hong Kong for several decades. Before he sadly died, he asked me to assist him with some research for the following article which he hoped would be published in one of the international gay magazines. It was written in mid-2019 to commemorate the events of mid-January 2020. Sadly no magazine was interested. So the article was expanded to its present form. It illustrates a number of issues - police corruption in Hong Kong (almost worse than here in Thailand), major official attempts to root out homosexuality, the confusion between pedophilia and homosexuality . . . and how it was that the 19th century British colonial law making sodomy between men illegal came finally to be repealed in 1991. Unfortunately, this is not posted on any website so I have to post the full article. Given its length, I will split the article into several posts. Was It Suicide? Was It Murder? Whatever The Facts, It Changed Hong Kong’s mid-1800s Anti-Gay Law Forever Introduction A young Special Unit detective is found, fatally shot five times in his abdomen, the night before he is to appear in court on a charge of abusing a teenage boy. His hometown girlfriend was planning to join him in his distant posting for their announcement of engagement to marry. Neither she nor his family could accept the suicide report or homosexual slanders about him. His drinking and partying friends in the police force also refused to believe that he was a closet homosexual or paedophile. The suspicious death of an overly curious detective prompted a seemingly endless stream of scandalous reports, manipulated official inquiries, and revelations reaching the top heights of the Government and its police force. But might the detective also have been a closet gay? Was he also a secret spy for the federal police authorities? Was the local government covering up hidden affairs in its own ranks? Was the community suddenly made aware of a host of expatriates in senior positions who had to hide their emotional attachments to younger Chinese men? Those five bullets in an abdomen ricocheted through a community rife with corruption, prostitution, racism, political uncertainty and exploitation. Nothing was what it appeared to be ... or what people wanted to believe. The Death On the morning of January 15 1980, five gunshots rang out. In bustling, over-populated Kowloon preparing for the day ahead, no one seemed to hear those shots above the noise of the rush hour traffic below. In the source of the shots, a government flat, a young expatriate police inspector lay dead in his bedroom. It was a scene reminiscent of an Agatha Christie or John Le Carre novel. Five bullets had pierced his body – but not his heart or head. A police revolver lay by his side. Allegedly the door and windows to the room were all securely locked from the inside. Had anyone taken a snapshot of that body, the conclusion would almost certainly have been one of murder. As the events leading up to this death ever so gradually became public knowledge, they were to resound for years and lead to the uncovering of a secret world where the gleaming, glistening facade of prosperous Hong Kong would be shown to be no more than surface deep. As layer upon layer of the undergrowth was exposed, an incredulous public was shocked. No one on that January morning realised it at the time, but these events would ultimately lead to a change in a law that had been on the statute books for more than 100 years. Gay men would finally be able to lead much more open lives. Background Under British rule following the two Opium Wars in 1841 and 1860, Hong Kong in 1980 with its 236 islands and the Kowloon Peninsula is situated on the southern mainland of a China that is just starting to recover from the murderous decade of the Cultural Revolution. That decade from 1965 had all but destroyed the very fabric of Chinese society, its education and legal systems and, above all, the family unit. Hong Kong’s economy had for some decades been built by and expanded through immigrant labour from China. Its population had grown from 600,000 after World War II to over four million by 1966. After the Cultural Revolution, the stream of migrants increased. By 1980 the number of small shantytowns visible on many Hong Kong hillsides had increased. To accommodate the inflow, the Hong Kong government commenced what at the time was the largest urban development programme in the world, creating vast new housing estates and four New Towns that would each eventually accommodate over 500,000 people. With a land area of just over 400 square miles, Hong Kong was the most densely populated part of the planet. By the 1970s, Hong Kong’s economy was in transition from a “sweat shop” producing cheap goods for export to an international centre of trade and finance. Hong Kong’s freewheeling capitalist economy was attracting much international praise and investment. Local Chinese entrepreneurs who had hitherto headed small to medium scale companies began to take over long-established international British colonial conglomerates (known locally as “hongs”). Criminal Activity in Hong Kong Underneath its glittering surface, though, there was much the world did not see and which the all-powerful British colonial administration did not want it to see. The Hong Kong Governor, always British and usually a senior civil servant who had spent time in Beijing, was appointed by the United Kingdom. He wielded far more authority than the British Prime Minister. Hong Kong’s legal system was based on British Common Law. Maintaining order in the British colony (the British preferred to call it “Territory” whereas the Chinese claimed it was “Chinese Territory temporarily under the control of the British”) was the Royal Hong Kong Police (RHKP), a large body of Chinese whose senior officers were almost exclusively from Britain and its former colonial outposts. Rampant and endemic corruption and triad-organized crime activity were rife at all levels of society. With the Cultural Revolution had come a period of considerable instability in Hong Kong, including riots. Maintaining civil order became a key objective of the RHKP. The crime rate in Hong Kong had been rising rapidly. Official statistics show the violent crime rate had risen from 48 per 100,000 of the population in 1963 to 477 in 1976 [1]. It was also known that the percentage of violent crimes reported to the police was almost certainly a small fraction of actual numbers. Another well-known fact was that corruption within the RHKP itself was rife and had reached epidemic proportions. Bribes were expected equally from businesses and individuals. Worse, many of the senior police were in the pay of the triad bosses whom they were supposed to be suppressing. In 1974 the then Governor Sir Murray MacLehose (the longest-serving Hong Kong Governor from 1971 to 1982 and much admired by all in Hong Kong for his achievements) decided the time had come to get rid of corruption. The previous year Peter Godber, a Police Chief Superintendent, had been discovered to have assets of HK$4.3 million (at that time approx. US$860,000) in bank accounts in six countries. It was suspected his wealth had been accumulated through corruption. Given a week by the Attorney General to explain the source of this wealth, Godber managed to slip out of Hong Kong and fled to England. The result was a public outcry in Hong Kong with students spearheading a mass rally condemning the government for its failure to tackle corruption. (Godber was extradited from England in 1975. He was convicted of corruption and sentenced to four years in jail.) Following Godber’s escape, MacLehose established the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) with its own police force and separate Judiciary and answerable only to the Governor [2]. In essence, anyone accused of corrupt activity was thereafter basically guilty until proven innocent. Immediately a number of high-ranking officials fled Hong Kong. The ICAC itself was not a total panacea in solving Hong Kong’s problems. One police officer at that time, Stephen Griffiths, claims in an article that many policemen suggested the initials stood for “I Can Accept Cheques” [3].

Homosexuality in Hong Kong In 1967, the government in Westminster had decriminalised homosexuality. The law had been on the UK statute books since 1861 and immediately became law in all British colonial possessions. The repeal of the law was initially confined to England and Wales, although later confirmed also in Scotland and Northern Ireland. By 1967 Britain had already relinquished power in almost all of its former colonies, but the homosexuality law in these countries had not been repealed. It therefore remained – and in close to forty countries still remains – as law, including Hong Kong (eventually repealed in 1991 – see below), Singapore, Malaysia, Jamaica and Uganda. It was known that despite the law there were many homosexual men in Hong Kong, some in the higher echelons of the government, the Police Force and the Judiciary. More than a few had steady Chinese boyfriends. Yet during the 1960s homosexuality rarely appeared on the radar of law enforcement in Hong Kong and police made little attempt to enforce the law against private homosexual conduct. This was to change towards the end of the 1970s. Some incidents involving homosexual blackmail and even murder occasionally appeared in the Hong Kong media. In October 1980 a noted Australian antique dealer and homosexual, Ian McLean, was found dead in his expensive Peak apartment. His Filipino servant discovered his naked body lying on his bed with an arm and leg bound together with an electric cord. He had been suffocated. His home had been ransacked and his car stolen. It was later discovered he had taken two young Chinese youths back to his home for the purpose of sex. They had murdered him. Worse for the authorities, two years earlier in 1978 33-year old Richard Duffy, a prominent English lawyer practicing in Hong Kong, pled guilty to charges of “buggery and gross indecency” involving four 15-year old Chinese boys. He was sentenced to three years in prison. In a petition for clemency, he named many “highly-placed” men in Hong Kong who were homosexuals, gay prostitution rings some involving young boys in their early teens, and the triads who ran them. So well-looked after was Duffy in prison by his triad acquaintances that he continued to enjoy so much sex he contracted a venereal disease! Howard Lindsay was a highly placed lawyer in the Attorney General’s chambers. He had been threatened with prosecution for “buggery”, refused to bow to police pressure but was soon charged and appeared in court. As he later told the broadcaster Aileen Bridgewater, “In court I was confronted by male prostitutes of very questionable integrity, whose evidence was full of loopholes. The magistrate found no case to answer and I was duly acquitted [4].” Lindsay was eventually dismissed and left Hong Kong to recover from what for him had been an extremely trying time. It quickly become very clear that the government was desperate to ensure that the claims made by Richard Duffy in his appeal for clemency be kept totally under wraps. Partly as a result, in August 1978 the Hong Kong government set up another division – the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) of the RHKP. Its main function as described to parliament in London was “to investigate cases of homosexuality which may involve procuring or the abuse of young people or in response to complaints made by members of the public [5].” The penalty for homosexual behaviour could be from two years to life in prison. The new policy to ‘out’ and prosecute homosexual men was given the name Operation Rockcorry. In pursuit of this new policy, triad gangs were consulted and young male prostitutes questioned to provide evidence that would ensnare key government officials. At this time, despite the law, Hong Kong did have a thriving underground gay community. It also had two bars/clubs that catered almost exclusively to homosexuals – Waltzing Mathilda in Kowloon and Dateline in a basement in the Central District of Hong Kong, and a mostly gay nightclub Disco Disco in the increasingly popular Lan Kwai Fong entertainment district also in the centre of Hong Kong. Waltzing Mathilda was known as a hangout for gay men and not a few rent boys. One of the barmen, Dick Stanford, himself gay, was also an informant for the police. A different means of identifying clients at Dateline was chosen. Access to the basement bar was by a long set of steps down from Wellington Street. These steps were brightly lit by a floodlight placed above and behind that entrance on Wellington Street. This light was less to do with assisting patrons to down the steps. It was there only because in a rented apartment on the opposite side of the small one-way street the SIU had set up a camera to photograph everyone exiting Dateline. Fearing a witch-hunt, a number of academics, lawyers and social workers began to criticize the SIU and the laws that it sought to enforce. In mid-1979, 424 individuals petitioned the government to bring Hong Kong into line with England and Wales and decriminalize homosexual conduct between consenting adults. The petition had no effect. Inspector John MacLennan In 1973 John MacLennan, a young 22-year old Scot, flew to Hong Kong to join the RHKP. After passing through the police training academy, he was posted to the area of Kwun Tong in Kowloon. With a close friend, a fellow Scot and member of the RHKP Christopher Burns, MacLennan spent much of his spare time trawling the girlie bars and low-life nightclubs. Burns assumed his friend was a womanizer. It is known that he frequented occasionally with female prostitutes. He also enjoyed longer relationships with three women including a Filipina maid. It now seems as though Burns might have been mistaken – if only in part. It has been alleged that MacLennan was either bisexual or even a closet homosexual. On his nightly meanderings he had discovered the city’s underground gay scene and met a triad pimp named Molo Tsui. Tsui, it was alleged, found young Chinese men for him. It was also alleged that MacLennan was a regular at the Waltzing Mathilda bar. Towards the end of his tour of duty, MacLennan was temporarily transferred to the Police Special Branch (a different RHKP branch from the SIU and comprising almost 1,000 officers). Special Branch was considered a highly professional security apparatus, pursuing anti-corruption and anti-triad duties in addition to intelligence and counter-subversion operations. Leaving for a vacation back in Scotland and with a new contract in his pocket, MacLennan knew he would again be transferred to Special Branch on his return. Digging through police files in his new assignment, he was shocked to discover that Special Branch had been building cases against likely gay men for at least a decade. Many were in prominent positions in Hong Kong including in the RHKP. He was later to tell a City Councillor, Elsie Elliott [6], that the files he had seen were “political dynamite that would blow the lid off the territory.” Many civil servants, senior and junior, were named in the files. He was thus able to confirm much of the information provided earlier by Duffy. One, named by his gay friends as “Brenda” with a penchant for underage youths, was none other than the territory’s Chief Justice, Sir Geoffrey Briggs. Briggs very quickly left Hong Kong. Another on MacLennan’s list was his boss, the new Police Commissioner, an unmarried fellow Scot, Roy Henry. Police Commissioner Roy Henry On leaving the British Army in 1948 aged 21, Roy Henry had joined the Colonial Police Service as an Assistant Superintendent in the Malayan Police. After several promotions and the award of the title “Datuk” (the equivalent of a knighthood in the UK), he left the new Malaysia to serve as Police Commissioner in Fiji. In 1973 he again moved, this time to Hong Kong as Senior Assistant Commissioner of Police Operations. The following year he was promoted to Deputy Commissioner. He was named Commissioner in March 1979, taking over a Force that was plagued by corruption scandals, a breakdown of discipline and a lack of public confidence. By all published accounts, he was known as a steadfast, upright man who transformed the force into a modern, efficient and sophisticated law enforcement agency. But there might have been more behind that mask. As he tackled the major restructuring and “clean up” of the Force, he maintained his former ties in Malaysia. He shared his home with old friends from his days in Malaya, Jack and Eileen Cradock. He is also alleged to have travelled for weekend trips to Penang and Kuala Lumpur. Although the majority Muslim population and Malaysian law were anti-homosexual as a result of the old English Colonial “sodomy” Law, Kuala Lumpur had always had an active homosexual underground. Its one openly gay bar, Blue Boy, was packed every evening, especially at weekends. Whether Henry visited the bar on his Kuala Lumpur trips we do not know. But it would have been a convenient and – in terms of his Hong Kong career – a virtually anonymous venue for trysts with Malaysian youths. It was also known to insiders that he had a Chinese boyfriend in his mid-30s who lived on the island of Penang. Adding to the suggestion that Henry might have been homosexual, the journalist Aileen Bridgewater (whose husband Ken had written one of the first books about the MacLennan affair) later met him in Kuala Lumpur where he lived in retirement after leaving Hong Kong in March 1984 aged 57. Aileen was conducting seminars in the city. As Ken wrote in his fictionalized version of the events in Hong Kong (thereby adding considerable doubt to the following quote): “Roy Henry retired to Malaysia and lived openly as a gay [7].”

Suspicion Falls on MacLennan In possession of so much detailed knowledge that many might wish to suppress, MacLennan became nervous. Within months of his return he was sacked from the RHKP and given one month’s salary in lieu of notice. The reason was an alleged homosexual advance. In the summer that year, he is alleged to have made a pass at a 17-year old Chinese student who was studying in Glasgow and had returned to be with his family for the summer vacation. The advance was rejected. The student later told a friend about the incident. This friend’s father happened to be a corrupt former police sergeant who had been sacked from the Force. With no love for any police official, the father, Tsang Shing, made a formal complaint. Attempts, ultimately successful, were made to dismiss MacLennan from the Force. It is believed Roy Henry signed the dismissal order. Soon the Police SIU, known internally as the “bum” squad, was established. Instead of pursuing senior officers suspected of being homosexual, perhaps to ensure their future careers the SIU picked on more junior officers. Following the Duffy allegations, it was surely clear they were following guidance provided by some higher authority. MacLennan was one target. Following his dismissal on November 4 1978, he spoke to Elsie Elliott. A formidable campaigner, a month later she managed to get the dismissal overturned. This angered the heads of the SIU, a pair of bullies, Superintendent Bob Brooks and his second in command Chief Inspector Mick Quinn. They would later seek revenge. Brooks and Quinn determined to set MacLennan up. In October 1979 Howard Lindsay, the Crown Counsel in the Attorney General’s Chambers mentioned above, was approached by Inspector Michael Fulton. For about a year Fulton had been providing information to the SIU. He informed Lindsay that he had recently been asked to set up a fellow officer, John MacLennan, but had refused to do so. Allegedly gay, he was worried about his own future in the Force. Lindsay spoke directly to the Attorney General in both November and December about the allegations. A subsequent Inquiry (see below) found that senior officers in the RHKP then attempted to set up MacLennan by rounding up rent boys and getting them to admit that MacLennan had paid them for sex. It seems that one had almost certainly slept with MacLennan. The others lied. On January 14 1980 an officer friend warned MacLennan that Brooks was planning to see and arrest him the following morning. He heard that a case had been prepared accusing him of eight counts of indecency with five sex workers. MacLennan then went to the mess bar where, it was alleged, he had several drinks. He then returned to the police station in the early hours of January 15 and withdrew a Smith and Wesson .38 revolver. Back at his flat, five shots were heard in the early morning. MacLennan’s Death Later that morning a team of policemen headed by Brooks and Quinn forced their way into MacLennan’s apartment. The outside door had been bolted inside at the top and bottom. So thick was the door a crowbar had to be used. It still took a full ten minutes to gain entry. The police who first entered the apartment noticed a letter and an envelope on the desk. Quinn picked up both and placed them in a plastic bag which he then put in his pocket. One of his colleagues had noted the blue biro ink writing on the envelope and letter. It said, “Please, please tell my family it was an accident and that I was a good Police Officer. JM. 0610 hours 15.1.80.” The crowbar was also used to gain access to the locked bedroom. On the floor they found the body of MacLennan, the revolver and the cartridges from five bullets. The police alleged that MacLennan had committed suicide by firing five bullets into his abdomen. The first three had resulted in superficial wounds. The fourth had resulted in a more serious wound. The fifth had killed him. MacLennan was 29 years old. At first the police refused to provide much information about what they termed a “suicide”. The RHKP claimed that MacLennan’s body had been discovered by his maid. No mention was made of multiple gunshots. No official RHKP spokesman explained why a man used to firearms would attempt to commit suicide by firing into his abdomen no less than five times rather than once to his brain. A solicitor involved in the subsequent Inquiry into the death and acting for the RHKP, Murray Burton, stated that, “MacLennan was seated on his bed holding his revolver reversed. Some shots were fired into his stomach and abdomen area, as well as his chest. He did not shoot himself in either the head or the heart.” Burton failed to explain how anyone could remain conscious and psychologically alert after firing no less than four bullets into his body and still have the strength to turn the gun around and fire a fifth time. An autopsy on MacLennan’s body had taken place on January 16 and it was then cremated on January 22. No prior permission for cremation had been sought from his parents in Scotland. When Elsie Elliott learned of MacLennan’s death, she was in two minds about the claimed suicide. As she reported on the popular radio phone-in programme hosted by Aileen Bridgewater, “As soon as I heard he was dead, I immediately thought, ‘Oh no, not suicide, he wouldn’t do that,’ and then I heard he had five shots in him. Very strange, five bullet wounds. Policemen are voicing their doubts. I understand people who knew him are scared to speak.” The radio programme had an immediate effect. Amongst many views, an army officer rang in to claim that the recoil from a .38 revolver would have made it impossible for five shots to be fired as the police were suggesting. Broadcaster Aileen Bridgewater and her husband Ken also lived in a government apartment very similar to that of John MacLennan. Interestingly, the bedroom doors to both apartments were identical with identical locks. It did not take her long to discover that contrary to what everyone had been told, it was perfectly possible to unlock and relock the bedroom door from the outside by simply unscrewing the lock. Coroner’s Inquest As is usual in British territory, an inquest was held because this was a case involving an unusual death. The inquest on MacLennan’s death was scheduled for February 20. It was postponed twice before commencing before a coroner and a jury on February 29. There was then an immediate adjournment. It finally reconvened on March 3. The RHKP witnesses claimed to prove that MacLennan had been homosexual and had taken his own life, fearing he was about to be arrested and exposed that morning. Certainly that prospect must have unnerved him. Coming from a small church-going, conservative farming community in Scotland, he would surely have been afraid of the effect on his family. In addition, his future prospects in any police force would probably vanish. In MacLennan’s apartment, the action of the police was sloppy and illustrated many failures. Much evidence seems to have been tainted. It was revealed that at no time did the officers who entered MacLennan’s apartment bag his hands as a way of proving he had actually fired any shots from the gun. With 29 people roaming around the apartment, the “crime” scene was thoroughly compromised. The explanation given by the police was that as it was obviously a case of suicide, there was no requirement to control access to the bedroom. A second issue raised at the Inquest concerned the photographs of the scene. Two official police photographers were amongst those present. Yet it was obvious from their photographs that in some the furniture had actually been rearranged; in others there were no members of the police or other persons visible. The latter had to have been taken after the police had left the apartment, at least two hours after discovery of the body. The most obvious omission was the lack of forensic examination. This was explained as there being no regulations concerning treatment of an apparent suicide involving multiple wounds as a case of suspicious death. A third was that, as an investigative journalist later discovered, it was not impossible to enter and exit MacLennan’s apartment through the small bathroom window, the one apartment window that had not been locked. There were other serious lapses. No fingerprints were taken from the suicide note, the inside door and window locks or the cartridge cases. Prints were taken only from the gun and the back of the main entrance door. The police were therefore unable to prove conclusively that MacLennan had actually pulled the trigger. It was later revealed that the windows were not actually locked, merely closed. The autopsy provided evidence of the consumption of only a small quantity of alcohol in the blood samples. Several police witnesses all identified the handwriting on the suicide note as MacLennan’s despite other experts commenting on the extraordinary wording of the note which, it was stated, did not conform to that of a native English speaker. Three pens were found in the room, but none containing any blue ink with which the suicide note was allegedly written. There was then the issue of MacLennan’s official warrant card. He had used this to withdraw the gun at the police station. Yet it was never found. As a proud Scot, he had brought his kilt to Hong Kong. That, too, was never found. Other personal items including an expensive watch and a pair of gold cuff links were amongst several personal items that were missing. About an hour after the break-in, control of the investigation was handed to Superintendent Marc Pelly. Elsie Elliott wrote to the Governor objecting to Pelly being handed the case. She reminded the Governor that Pelly had himself been accused of corruption in a famous conspiracy trial two years earlier, even though he had not been convicted. The Attorney General later agreed that the selection of Pelly to head the investigation was “unfortunate”. The coroner informed the jury of his view that the verdict should be suicide. The jury came to a different conclusion. The members recommended an Open verdict, meaning no cause of death had been determined. Even worse for the government, the jury requested the addition of two riders to their verdict – that the law on homosexuality should be reformed and that it include severe criticism of the police handling of the case.

But you continue to make assumptions! 100 is a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the number of tourists (if just limited to tourists). Even 1,000 is just a larger drop! And don't you recall that Thailand did well in the first 10 months or so of covid? Very few cases. It was only when it dropped its guard by not testing the Burmese workers at the main fish market near Samut Sakhon that there was the first main outbreak. With 2,000 Burmese illegal workers and porous borders, no doubt someone paid off someone else to ensure there was no drop off in the work force. Thereafter again Thailand did well until one hi-so youth decided to bribe his way into and back from Cambodia in order to satisfy his craving for gambling. He brought back the virus which spread quickly in the hi-so clubs and discos he frequented in the Thonglor area. In my view these were deliberate acts of omission by the authorities - and a result of corruption. I cannot see a tiny outbreak of diarrhoea and covid as having any similarity.

Your comment is correct, but having had Hepatitis B 30 years ago from infected seafood I can tell you it is no fun. In fact it will kill your fun for quite a long time. It takes about a year for the body to fully recover. My first few days were in hospital, then 6 weeks resting at home. Thereafter I had precious little energy for a few more months.

Another of the assumptions you seem to love to make - and again for the wrong reasons. I visit that site less than once a week but only because it has a huge detailed Asian travel section with posts on personal experiences of gay venues, often with more detail on other cities than one can find here. You will be aware I post frequently about my regular travels in the region. While checking the site I like to see the sort of subjects that attract guys to other chat rooms, especially younger guys because I have several times expressed the hope that more younger guys could be encouraged to join this chat room. It hardly takes more than a few minutes to see who has been posting regularly in the main room. And when one who attracted my attention some years ago for the nonsense he posted, his avatar shows exactly what he posts and how many posts he regularly makes. Satisfied? Please do not make unsubstantiated assumptions in future.

An emergency centre is opened for just 100 cases (or slightly more) of diarrhoea? How strange. With 12 million tourists annually, the island must have its fair share of western and other tourists not used to spicy Thai food which results in some form of stomach upset including diarrhoea. As this is still high season, presumably there are something like 700,00-800,000 or so tourists on the island. An emergency centre is opened for a tiny fraction of these numbers? Odd that the Thaiger article first states "severe diarrhoea". Yet the final paragraph mentions only "mild symptoms". Typical Thai reporting in my view.

And that is pure nonsense of the sort you have resorted to before! Enjoy yourself!

Never been to Dubai but did spend several days in Doha 4 years ago. I believe Doha is even more strict than Dubai. Even so there were quite a number of hits from the apps - including some Filipinos. But I was not prepared to take the risk.

Sorry to say that I have zero charity or zero good feelings for the contributor to that other chat site. Similarly I have precious few good feelings for the owner and moderator of that site. But then I am but one individual. Others obviously do not agree with me, as indeed you may not. With that i have no issue whatever. To each his own. In that sense perhaps I am more like @gayinpattaya who found the individual who is the subject of this thread one who "spouted drivel" and was "offensive" to other bar customers. That's one view. The Pattaya Mail, on the other hand, was "privileged" to have him as a guest speaker. That's another. To each his own.

Indeed, only the future beckons for us all. But if I could not think back and remember a whole host of not just good times but also great times in the past, I would probably be pretty unhappy. It is not just the young guys I met and spent time with in various parts of the world stretching back decades - of most of whom I have nothing but wonderful memories, it has been the opportunities I was afforded (mostly by my work) to travel very regularly to and experience many amazing parts of the globe. In itself, in my case no doubt a result of changing desires and expectations as much as to serendipity!

One sits almost permanently in another Asian chat site (not a Thai one). He was married for at least 20 years, has a son and now grandchildren. Around his early 50s he discovered he was gay, found a South American boyfriend in a "sleazy" bar (his description) and realised he was the love of his life. Wife quickly divorced, boyfriend moved in and they lived happily ever after. But - don't our lives always have 'buts'? - he then had a business trip to South East Asia around 20 years ago. For each summer vacation thereafter, he left the love of his life and flew to Asia where he spent virtually his entire vacations in gay saunas around the region having endless sex with young Asian guys. Meanwhile his lover was ill and getting no better. Eventually he died, probably around 7 years ago. Thereafter he filled the chat troom with the agonies of having lost the love of his life. He gave up his annual Asian adventures to live what appears to be a life of virtual solitude. The insights members receive on this board from those who live around the world are often fascinating, both about their trips to Thailand and sexual adventures in other countries. This bore is 80 years old this year and has lived for the last 30 or more years in a large city in Texas! Now alone, he appears to regard that oter chat room as his one lifeline to some sort of normalcy, almost daily dispensing his wisdom to 20-something Asians about how to grow old gracefully! Hopefully he never discovers this board! 🙏

Reading that article, I started out thinking that most of us probably have experienced changing desires and expectations as we have gone through life. That has certainly been my experience with quite a few more major changes than I ever thought might happen. But then I considered the experiences of my sister and brother. Both doctors, their lives have hardly changed at all as they have aged. I assume many professions are more or less the same. Perhaps one major change that I have seen in some others is a transition from being totally straight to becoming totally gay (insofar as "totally" can ever mean precisely that in a romantic/sexual context). I have friends in Australia, the UK, Austria, the US and various other countries who had been married for at least a couple of decades and have in almost all cases two children who then divorced their wives and quite quickly started living with another man. Most kept in agreeable contact with their children, although not all. The wife and kids of one friend who now lives in Chiang Mai with his partner totally refuse to have anything to do with him even though he continued to pay alimony and for his kids' university education. I also know people who wish they had made changes much earlier and taken a different path in their lives. For many, the social conventions in place 50 and more years ago often dictated a certain course, even though those concerned might have had a deep rooted desire to take a different path. Even if they managed to find their way on to that path later in their lives, I often wonder if they feel they missed out on much that could - perhaps - have given them a more satisfying and meaningful existence.

Continuing the theme of gay bars and venues in Bangkok of old, although not on topic I think the Moderator will not mind this being posted here. The name Professor Peter Jackson will be known to some as a result of the books he has written about Queer Asia. He is Emeritus Professor of Thai History and Cultural Studies at the Australian National University's College of Asia and the Pacific's School of Culture, History and Language (I wonder how he gets all that on to a business card 😵)! He is also a member of the Hong Kong-based editorial collective of the HK University Press' Queer Asia series of monographs. The histories of Buddhism, gender, sexuality and globalisation in Thailand have been his primary research. His recent books include Queer Bangkok and The Language of Sex and Sexuality in Thailand. He has frequently made the point that rather than being "traditional", the country's queer communities only came into being in the latter decades of the 20th century. One of the posts on the sawatdee nation thread on the Gay History of Thailand has a link to a long academic paper he wrote for the Journal of Gay and Lesbian Studies in 1999. This is titled An American Death in Thailand and subtitled The Murder of Daniel Berrigan and the Hybrid Origins of Gay Identity in 1960s Thailand. The post was made by RonantheBarbarian on August 17 2011. As he introduces the paper, he writes - "One of the best known gay westerners in Bangkok in the post-World War II years was Darrell Berrigan. He was one of the founders of the 'Bangkok World' newspaper in 1945, which was up until the 1980s the main competitor of the Bangkok Post. He was quite closeted seemingly, it is only known that he was gay because he was rather sensationally murdered in 1965, by a male sexual partner, and this became something of a celebrity scandal in the press. "The article can be hard reading, because as with all academic articles Jackson has to spend the firsts few pages spouting theoretical jargon. I would suggest you read from the paragraph entitled 'Expatriate Homosexual men in Postwar Bangkok' From that point on it is fascinating. In the article, as well as giving a lot of information about Berrigan's life and times (he was involved with the CIA, American espionage, etc.), Jackson also talks about Jim Thompson. Thompson was almost certainly also gay, although some who have written about him, such as William Warren, have made an attempt to make him out as straight. However Jackson does not accept that argument at all and according to him, we can take it one of the most celebrated farangs of mid-twentieth century Bangkok was gay." I entirely agree that the first pages should be skipped (unfortunately there are no page numbers but each section is headed in large type and so it is not difficult to find Expatriate Homosexual Men in Post-War Bangkok.) The name Daniel Berrigan may not be known to many now but he became something of a cause celebre as a result of his murder. The history surrounding that event is fascinating. At a time when the new government-to-be (hopefully!) is talking about gay marriage, in the mid-1960s the Thai language media was almost vicious in its declared loathing of homosexuality. The Thai Rath newwspaper referred to Berrigan's "sexual degeneracy"; Siam Nikorn described Berrigan as "having the illness of sexual degeneracy". Indeed the word "gay" had never been used in Thailand until around that time. Kathoeys were accepted. A man with a desire to have sex with another man was not! Berrigan himself had adopted two young men who lived with him. But they were referred to as his sons. Even so, one Thai newspaper claimed it was common knowledge that Berrigan had forcibly assaulted him sexually not once but twice. Jim Thomson features in Berrogan's story. It was always assumed that, like his friend Berrigan, Thomson was gay, although his official biographer threw in suggestions of romantic affais with women. On his last visit to Bangkok in 1959, Somerset Maugham was invited to dinner at Jim Thomson's house. Berrigan was also a guest. The author William Warren, who was to write one of the first books on Jim Thomson's later mysterious disappearance The Unsolved Mystery, described ". . . Thompson, and we might add their mutual acquaintance Berrigan, as resembling characters from a Maugham tale, 'lone—but never lonely—men who find contentment in exotic places': often homosexual men attempting to escape homophobic attitudes and laws back home or on a romantic quest for foreign partners." When Berigan's murderer was arrested, Thai Rath had a banner headline stating the murderer "Confesses He Shot Berrigan While 'Making Love.'" All the while the English language media were far more reserved in their reporting. Other interesting issues Jackson raises is describing how in the early 1950s the police and the army formed two opposing politicoeconomic cliques. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/12116

Another memory thanks to the friends at sawatdee network. This time a post by dab69 made on August 16 2011. "In its early days Soi 4's nocturnal entertainment was fairly low-key. Except for one bar which was perhaps the most famous and popular of the early gay venues. The Rise of the Rome Club The Rome Club had a number of unsuccessful incarnations before its long run as Bangkok's erstwhile foremost gay/mixed venue; initially occupying a single shop-house it was so popular that it soon quadrupled in size. The club presented a successful mix of extravagantly staged dance shows with a Saturday Night Fever-style disco. The owners presided over the events and the place did not warm up until the DJ strode across the floor, entered his box and played music that many recall as being the best disco selection in Bangkok. From 11 PM to closing the place was buzzing with bodies gyrating to the sounds of Abba, U2, Culture Club, Michael Jackson, Gloria Gaynor, Duran Duran and other pop greats. For the times it was an unbeatable formula. Decline and Fall of the Rome Club The Rome was a kind of Asian Studio 54, attracting a diverse and eclectic global clientele with many of what has been described as Bangkok's "Beautiful People" mixing and mingling with the more ordinary mortals. For many years the Rome Club dominated the Bangkok gay scene by providing what their public wanted and operating an inclusive door policy: if you were gay or gay friendly, bisexual or some other orientation and above all good looking and trendy you were welcomed to enjoy the bar. But in a strange, sudden and inexplicable reversal of strategy the club's owners decided that their gay clientele were no longer welcome heralding the beginning of the end for this particular empire." https://sawatdeenetwork.com/v4/showthread.php?12445-Does-anyone-know-Gay-History/page2 The end was quick. As soon as gays began leaving in droves, the Club desperately tried to survive. But when a good 70%-75% of your clientele has disappeared, survival became impossible. Perhaps after such a success for at least 15 years the owners just had a death wish.

I am sure @macaroni21 will have lots more fascinating anecdotes. As for those interested in the history of gay Bangkok going much further back, I note there is a series of articles in the sawatdee network forum. I'll wade through a few but in the meantime here is one from Brad the Impala dated April 13 2011 about his first Bangkok experiences in 1973. I am sure neither he nor the sawatdee owner/moderator will mind my copying that article here - "I believe that the oldest gay bar in Thailand was the Sea Hag in Silom Road. It opened and probably closed it's doors before I visited first in 1972, when I spent only a few days in Bangkok, before spending a couple of months in Pattaya, just enjoying the beach and exploring the area where there were no gay specific venues. The following year I investigated Bangkok a little further and discovered Silom Soi 4, which had the Lonely Boy, the bar next to it, Tomboy, owned by a working policeman, and the Apollo, which was wrongly thought of as only a Thai for Thai venue." https://sawatdeenetwork.com/v4/showthread.php?12445-Does-anyone-know-Gay-History I have written here before about the small Apollo bar located above where Sphinx restaurant and bar used to be at the end of the right side of Soi 4. It was definitely not a Thai-for-Thai bar although may have looked so because a quick glance inside would have shown there were hardly ever any farang. I had found the Apollo bar by accident in the Spring of 1980 and absolutely loved it. I was a regular on several visits every year, all before I discovered the first bar in Soi Pratuchai, Twilight, around 1983. I believe Twilight had opened quite a few years beforehand in a different location. It certainly seems to have been the first go-go bar in what became known as Soi Twilight. After that, from around 1986 for me it was almost always Barbiery across the road. I'm not sure when Apollo died but I think it was before then. Barbiery was such a fun place to visit and must have had around 100 boys working over the weekends. All the boys seemed to be having a ball, the shows were innovative and the mamasans never pushy. Mind you, you could tell from the attendance board in Twlight that it, too, had a large number of boys. And of course in those days I think every barboy was Thai, not a few from the same villages.

I only remember Roxy because for a time it employed a group of genuine dancers - as oppposed to go-go dancers. This group of 8 or so students had been formed in early 2001 specifically to provide alternative entertainment in the X-treme bar on the first floor of a building in Soi Twilight. Many found it a bit strange that the bar was run by a retired expat who had been employed by the Church of England in some capacity. All I recall is that he had a full head of white hair and his Thai boyfriend who was sometimes studying in the bar was aggressively handsome! The bar also had a dozen or so go-go boys who never seemed very enthusiastic about the dancing part of the job. The boys in the real dance troupe on the other hand were great - mostly very good looking, excellent dancers, generally well-choreographed numbers with a bit of sexiness thrown in, and they happily flirted with customers between their two sets. If there was any problem with their 'act' it was long pauses between numbers. X-treme died about a couple of years later when the German who owned 2 or 3 go-go bars on the opposite side of the soi took the dancers on for his bars. They obviously did little to improve his patronage and so he let them go. Roxy on Soi 4 took them on but there again I think they did not last long. I still have a DVD produced by the bar, although the visual quality is not good.

Some years ago I saw a tv programme about the possibility of a mega-tsunami hitting the US East Coast. Apparently one of the islands in the Canary Islands chain has a major fault line and the western edge of the main active volcano Cumbre Vieja could collapse into the sea. Much of the Canary Islands coastline is made up of massve steep cliffs. Were a collapse to happen, 1.5 trillion metric tons of earth would crash into the ocean. There is a paper about it in the Penn State/University of New Orleans site - "models suggest that if it were to collapse it would generate a tsunami 1000 m high that would be 50 m when it arrived in Europe and along the eastern coast of the US. Because this scenario would be devastating to cities including New York, Boston, and Miami as well as coastal real estate in New Jersey, North and South Carolina, and Florida, it has been rigorously investigated by scientists." The tv programme estimated the height of a tsunami reaching the US East Coast as nearer 100 m. Whichever it might be, the site does point out that not all scientists are in agreement, but it is one of any number of natural disasters that might just happen. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth107/node/1609

All the experts seem to suggest this. What concerns me as much as the physical heat in our cities and countries is the melting of the polar ice caps. The inevitable rise in sea level will soon start causing havoc in our coastlines. Bangkok is just one city at risk and that's before we consider it rate of sinkage. We have already seen in several years bad flooding in the October period when flood waters from the north flow down the Chaophraya river and meet the annual rise in sea levels coming up from the Gulf. When you see sandbags not only at the riverside of the Shangri-La Hotel but also around its pool, you know something is wrong. If I were much younger and had the funds, I wouldn't consider buying an apartment in much of coastal USA, Australia, Japan and a host of other countries. Even with its massively expensive coastal defences already in place, even The Netherlands would be far too risky. And the frightening thing for the next generations is there seems to be little evidence that the world if doing anything to enable it to cope.

I have never used the commercial bars but have friends who have. They all tell me the system and the service works very well and they have usually had a great time. These boys seem to know exactly how to please you. But one suggested that when making appointments it sometimes helps to give the bar an indication of your age/fitness level (i.e. are you very overweight?) I think the boys have a duty to go with customers whoever they are, but a slim 20 yo may find it difficult being with a very overweight 70 yo! Just a thought.

I find the price reductions peanuts! Early last year BNH on Soi Convent was offering 65% off joint packages - colonoscopy plus gastroscopy; heart MRI plus carotid artery ultra sound; and others. The year before, Bumrungrad offered a reduction on a colonoscopy for 44,000 baht incuding an anaesthetist. The BNH joint price was 36,000 baht. Although with my lifestyle I have always had a slight concern about heart issues, I was delighted when the doctor told me the scan showed absolutely no problems whatever. We then spent the rest of the consultation talking about whiskies!

Totally endorse @a-447's comments. Compared to pre-covid years and despite a rush of tourists, prices are historically still pretty cheap. All Japan rail passes at US$225 for 7 days or $359 for 14 days are great value (and include many of the bullet trains) if you can plan some of your trip in advance. Details here. https://japanrailpass.net/en/purchase.html Also stunning. The only problem is if you have just a few days, you can never be certain exactly when the sakura will be out. Understandably it appears earlier in the warm south and then works its way up. But it is the most delicate of petals and one shower of rain will see many disappearing. There are many internet sites telling you exactly when the sakura will bloom in each part of the country. The problem is that these are only posted at literally a week or so notice. And with all prices tradtionally rising in Japan for the sakura season, that's not great for cheap deals in hotels. On the other hand, if you can go for at least 5 days and be flexible in your itinerary, there is a very good chance you will see it in full bloom somewhere.