PeterRS

I certainly salute Bryan Ruby. But I do think there is a difference between a gay man deciding to come out and a very straight man identifying with and bringing to world attention his support for the LGBTQ community, even though he himself is not gay. Yet both advance the LGBTQ cause since both are role models.

Earlier this year Hungary passed its anti LGBTQ education bill that bans the depiction or promotion of homosexuality and gender change among under-18s. Many have lambasted the President who promoted the bill and the European Parliament has condemned it. Surely no protest was more symbolic and seen by so many around the world than a short appearance by the 4-time Formula 1 world champion driver, Sebastian Vettel. F1 - along with its more junior ranks of F2 and F3 - directly and indirectly employs many tens of thousands of people and is one of the world's most watched sports seen in almost every country. It has never been associated with the LGBTQ movement. Even as stars in other sports have started to come out, only one has come out it this most macho of sports even though there are a few remaining in the closet - and that happened 30 years ago! Present and former F! drivers are seemingly a totally heterosexual bunch. Sebastian Vettel certainly fits that profile as a happily married straight man with kids. But at the F1 Hungarian Grand Prix held ten days ago, Vettel singled himself out as a champion of gay rights. During the pre-race national anthem line-up, he sported a simple Pride shirt with the message "Same Love". During the race, his shoes and helmet were adorned with the rainbow colours. No other driver joined him, although to be fair that is almost certainly because he did tell them beforehand and did not want to make a fuss. He knew the TV cameras would pick up on his shoes, shirt and helmet and linger long over them. As indeed they did. And the world saw it. The race stewards were not happy, though, and he received a warning for not removing the short when asked to. Photo: Rex/The Sun "It doesn't matter your skin colour, it doesn't matter your background, it doesn't matter where you come from, it doesn't matter who you fall in love with. In the end, you just want equal treatment for everybody . . . "I was surprised it was so much of a big deal," Vettel admits. "Ideally, there wouldn't be any reaction because it's just normal. "There are countries still arguing about whether gay marriage should be legal or not legal. I think there's enough marriage for all of us, you know. It makes no difference to straight people whether gay people are allowed to get married or not, but it makes a huge difference to gay people to be able to get married like everyone else. "So yeah, I was surprised - but it shows that there's still so much that needs to be done." https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/58453220

So true. I wonder how many in 1900 could have foreseen even as a remote possiblity that seven great Empires would quickly collapse - China, Britain, Germany, Austro-Hungary, the Ottoman Turks, Japan and Tsarist Russia? Or that two World Wars would completely revolutionise the world order? Or that warfare would change from mighty armies pitched against other mighty armies largely to monstrous technological machines on the ground, in the sea, in the air and no doubt soon in space? Clearly anyone who predicts the future is as likely to be wrong as he might just be right.

In the old pre-war days, I am told sleeping beths were relatively common for long haul routes. I wonder how many remember that Philippine Airlines was the first post-war airline in the world to introduce beds on their 747-200s in 1980. It installed 16 full flat bunk beds in the upper deck for first class passengers on their trans Pacific routes. It was also the first airline to be awarded the coveted award for its in flight cuisine by Les Chaines de Rotisseurs. The ince mighty continue to fall.

As pointed out above, the interviews took place in 2011/12. Without knowing P's exact age, I can only surmise that he was taught sex education before the first Thaksin government had reached its mid-way point. After the huge success of Meechai's campaigns, it was extraordinary that Thaksin decided to reduce funding for sex education and HIV prevention in schools. Perhaps he was under the influence of his old pal, the deeply religious Interior Minister Purachai and his emphasis on the family - of which the Social Order campaigns were only the most obvious ouward sign). As a guess this reduction would have been put into effect in the curricula around 2003/4. A 2017 study outlined in a very long UNAIDS paper "The Thai State and Sexual Health Policy: Deconstructing the culture of silence and stigmatisation of young people’s non - marital heterosexual activity" states - "for the age group of 15 to 24, only 46 percent of those surveyed could correctly identify ways to prevent the spread of HIV, implying more focus is needed on HIV prevention education for young people." Given that a large part of those surveyed in the cities would indeed be aware, the actual knowledge of boys in the countryside may well have been very limited in 2011/12, as it probably is today.. https://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2440/120203/1/Drew2019_PhD.pdf

Yes, Britain chose isolation by the narrowest of margins. Since I had no vote, it's perhaps wrong to comment, but it is clear that the primary reason for the 'No' vote was the recession in parts of the country that has been continuing since 2008. Clear lying on the part of the Brexiteers was a secondary factor, but perhaps the Stayers also lied. Strange how 45 years ago, China was a total basket case, its economy, education and judicial systems, and family structure in total chaos, and a government that hardly seemed to function. 30 years ago we thought Russia would be relegated to a third world power. Our world changes fast these days.

Thanks you @CurtisD for a fascinating and wide-ranging review. It throws up many issues which I did not realise would be covered in the book and, hopefully, once and for all condemns to the trash can other western outdated notions of why young gay boys in Thailand behave as they do. It has been obvious for decades that the real success Thailand had in combatting HIV and AIDS had little to do with western programmes and vastly more to one Thai man, Meechai Veravaidya. As when I was a young boy, condoms were difficult to buy and there seemed to be a stigma attached to purchasing them in a shop (indeed, in my town only one shop stocked them). Working in family planning, Meechai realised that the only way Thailand could reduce it mushrooming birthrate was to work on birth control. So he set about touring villages to popularise the condom and its use. He even had condom blowing competitions and creating water bombs from them. It worked amazingly well and the birthrate has now been significantly reduced. When HIV came along, he switched to stressing the importance of condom use. By the mid '80s he was a Minister in Prime Minister Prem's government and therefore very high in the social hierarchy. Since condoms had become so popular they were known as 'Meechais', this unquestionably helped in controlling rates of HIV. Had he been able to continue his work which was by the start of the century extensive, more could have been done But the Thaksin government cut the funding for HIV-AIDS education. Sadly the boys in the study largely fall into that group, approaching puberty when the HIV prevention programmes were being wound down. And these I believe are the main reasons for the following conclusions from the book - But even more important, I believe, is the notion of public/private personas and fulfilling a role. It explains why there can be a general acceptance of homosexuality in much of Thai society but non-acceptance in, for example, most places of work. It explains why gay men a bit older than those in the study who are trying to hold down a job in a large company and to fit in to Thai society are exceedingly reluctant to be associated with gay movements. Thank you again.

I wish I could be so optimistic. As I slowly learned about colonialism and its effects, some good but most bad, for a while I felt guilty to have been born British. But we cannot change the past, despite what some of our elected politicians believe. What worries me is that there remain policy makers and politicians in several countries who still believe that their countries are needed to wield power in the world at large. In the UK, Tobias Ellwood, the Chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee on Defence, is a politician whose leader is the ineffective Boris Johnson. It should be remembered that only a few months ago Johnson's one-time closest aide claimed before a House of Commons Committee that Johnson is "unfit to be Prime Minster". Ellwood stated this only yesterday - "For more than 80 years, we were the bridge between America and Europe. Post-Brexit, we are no longer the go-to country when the White House wants a second opinion. The back channels are significantly diminished and our relationship both with our European allies and the US is at its lowest for a generation. We have lost the passion and the art of leadership . . . "When Britain lost America, we built the empire. When we lost the empire, we sought Europe. Now we seem to have lost both with no plan B. Our departure from Afghanistan has no doubt made the world more unstable. My fear is that, without a revival of our will to lead in the world, it will make us ever less relevant. This is not where Britain should go." After some comparisons with Churchill and Thatcher, this man has the gall to talk about "our will to lead in the world?" Who is he kidding? Does he not realise that Britain's influence on World Affairs died in the disastrous attempt to recapture the Suez Canal in 1956? Britain is already virtually irrelevant in World Affairs. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/04/britain-must-rediscover-the-will-to-lead-on-global-issues

I agree, provided the authorities do pay attention to the many studies that are now underway, especially to protect children whose brains can be affected more severely than those of adults. I also accept that all sports have an element of risk, even though these are small. Having just watched the Dutch F1 Grand Prix, I recall that one of the greatest drivers of all time, Michael Schumacher, was skiing when he had a simple fall off piste resulting in his hitting his head on a rock. Although he was wearing a helmet, he was whisked to hospital and has not been seen since. Clearly he suffered a major brain injury in the most unlikeliest of places. A similar and seemingly innocuous accident happened to Natasha Richardson, the wife of actors Liam Neeson and daughter of Vanessa Redgrave. That simple accident resulted in bleeding in the brain which killed her. We all have to be aware of the risks and make decisions accordingly.

I agree with your sentiments. There is another very perceptive piece by the excellent Simon Jenkins in Friday's Guardian Newspaper. Headed "Biden isn’t the first president to promise never to wage another war of intervention", he points out that each of Biden's recent predecessors have make the same claim, even with "Condoleezza Rice, emphasising Bush's opposition to foreign adventures." Her later remarks about mushroom clouds appearing unless Saddam was dethroned only illustrates how quickly the neo-cons gained control in Washington. Tony Blair also comes in for excoriation over his hypocrisy. "The pomposity of his message was absurd." Three paragraphs are worthy of note here. The last sentence is the one which we should all worry about. "In the latter period of the British empire – of which events in Iraq and Afghanistan offer an uncanny echo – colonies became costly, not profitable. They duly required ever-more elaborate eulogies and justifications. To Joseph Chamberlain, Lord Milner and his Round Table, colonial wars were a sacred duty of European powers. The concept of a Christian imperium was one of ethical obligation bound up with macho adventure. The colonialist Rudyard Kipling saw empire as the “white man’s burden”; in his poem of the same name, he exhorted the US to take control of the Philippines. In many ways, the occupation of Afghanistan has been Kipling for slow learners . . . "Wars of intervention have become political baubles and vanity projects. They meddle in other people’s affairs, other cultures and other views on how societies should be run. They are an offence against the UN charter and the rights to self-determination. It is hard to avoid the accusations that they are racist. If we want to help other people in distress, there is a wealth of charitable causes to oblige. In almost every case, military action just makes things worse. "We might hope that the US will now retreat into a period of introversion and sober reflection. It did so after defeat in Vietnam in 1975. To the recent generation of Anglo-American politicians, these wars have been a sick reprise of an old imperialist urge. They are a stupendous expenditure of lives and treasure at mind-boggling opportunity cost. They appear over. Yet even as Iraq and Afghanistan sink below the horizon, we can sense Taiwan and Ukraine stumbling into view. Will anything be learned?" https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/03/biden-president-war-intervention-military-adventurism

Chris Riddell's cartoon in today's Observer

A good suggestion but how on earth do you make it happen? As fedssocr has pointed out, groups opposing the army are joining forces. But let's be honest. What chance do they have? The Burmese army has a strength of around 400,000. It has sophisticated weaponry. It also has China on the side of the generals. Just as Kissinger visited Jakarta just before the Indonesian army invaded East Timor in December 1975 and informed the dictatorship that the USA would not stand in the way of the annexation, so a visit by China's top diplomat Wang Yi to Yangon just before the Burmese army seized power is assumed to have given the generals China's green light. The world can blame China all it wants but no doubt China will point directly at the role of the US in the East Timor invasion. State Department documents in the National Archive are unequivocal - "that the Secretary of State fully understood that the invasion of East Timor involved the "illegal" use of U.S.-supplied military equipment because it was not used in self-defense as required by law . . . "In 1979 the U.S. Agency for International Development estimated that 300,000 East Timorese—nearly half the population—had been uprooted and moved into camps controlled by Indonesian armed forces. By 1980 the occupation had left more than 100,000 dead from military action, starvation or disease, with some estimates running as high as 230,000." This much is only what we know, for much of the material regarding the annexation of East Timor remains classified. Kissinger claimed he never held discussions with General Suharto about East Timor. That has since proven to be a lie, for both Ford and Kissinger discussed the issue when they visited Jakarta that month. In Kissinger's memoirs Indonesia's brutal repression in East Timor is not mentioned and even Indonesia as a country is hardly mentioned, no doubt as Kissinger had acquiesced to having broken the law. Former President Ford similarly omits such mention. So the US is in no position to point the finger of blame at the Chinese who are alleged to be supplying weapons to the Burmese military. In Myanmar today, the leader is a dreadful murderer and tyrant, Min Aung Hlaing. He masterminded the murder, rape, torture and explusion of the Rohingya and has zero intention of letting them back. Whatever happens in the next election (if it does happen), the tyrant has no worries since he has ensured there will be a majority military presence. Only massive intervention by the general population is likely to result in any change. With China determined to maintain stability in its bordering countries, will the world's second largest superpower permit this to happen? https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/ https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Who-is-Myanmar-s-coup-leader-and-what-does-he-want

I noted that Barrack Obama stated that had he had sons he would not have allowed them to play American football. But I do want to stress that this was just one example in a variety of sports that i discussed. Perhaps it is the most obvious because the long-term medical impact of repeated concussions and mere banging into other bodies, sometimes with head forward, have been known for longer. I had absolutely no idea there was any possible impact from playing rugby (which I could not do at school because I wore spectacles) apart from the banning of dangerous neck tackles. And I had even less idea of the impact of constant heading of a soccer ball until about a year ago which is roughy when this came into the public consciousness. I started my earlier post by mentioning boxing. This "sport" has been around for centuries, if not longer. As noted "punch drunk" was a frequent description given to those who suffered head injuries as a result. When I was at junior school, boxing was part of the sports curriculum. Boxing after all was thought of even then as a "man's" sport. As such, once a week, several boys had to take part in short bouts. I can still recall one 10-year old being hit hard on the jaw. He collapsed and could not be revived. A doctor was called and he was rushed to hospital. Thankfully he was OK and back at school th next morning. But I often wondered if that one punch might have done something to his brain. Probably not, as I now understand it is the repeated blows which cause the serious problems.

I'm not sure I agree. A big payday should definitely not be an inducement to play a sport which may result in what is now known may be a pretty ghastly 10-15 years end of life. This is especially true of children for whom sports stars are often role models. After all, there are dozens of other sports as we recently saw at the Olympics and which we will see at the winder Olympics coming up in a few months where there is far less element of danger to quality of life that American Football, Rugby etc. can have Stars like Hanyu Yuzuru who is a doubt Olympic Gold Champion in figure skating might only get paid a fraction of what a top American footballer gets paid for events in which he participates. But he is not risking his life on a regular basis. Besides, in an age when individual sponsorship of sports stars is at an all time high, Hanyu still makes tens of millions of US$$s annually in individual sponsorships. The end-of-season Fedex Golf tournament is presently underway in Atlanta. The top prize in that event is US$15 million. The US Open Tennis now underway is paying out US$2.5 million to the winners. They will also likely to see their sponsorship income increase exponentially. There are plenty of sports where it is possible to make very large amounts of money if an individual works at it without known medical risks

There is news today about the death of an 18-year old boxer who was knocked out in a professional bout 5 days ago. So what, was my first thought? That fact that it was a woman made no difference. If you elect to become a boxer, your head is going to be battered in countless bouts in the ring. For many fighters that will unquestionably have short, medium or long term affects on the brain. You make your choices and take your chances. How many recall Muhammad Ali in his later decades. Mentally alert but increasingly a physical wreck resulting from Parkinson's Disease. I used to think it was only boxers who are at risk of brain injury. Now we know that this is nonsense. Participants in many sports involving head contact are increasingly coming down with brain injuries. I personally have always disliked American football. To me it is not a sport. It is more akin to all out war. When much of the game involves players crashing into each other, when wearing something akin to body armour is required before you ever get on the pitch, how can that be called a sport? It's more like the trench warfare of World War One! Mind you, the husband of a friend of mine in the USA lives for it, spending 2 or 3 evenings each week, popcorn in hand with the TV tuned to football games. But then some retired players started behaving strangely suffering from a variety of serous ailments which often resulted in aggressive behaviour and even suicide. This was brought home to me in the 2015 movie "Concussion" which showed how many former players were subject to chronic traumatic encephalopathy, and how many will do so in the future. Like Alzheimers, CTE gets worse over time. Many studies are presently being undertaken. For the time being, one in 2017 published in the Journal of the American Medical Association showed that of the 202 brains of players who had died, 177, or nearly 90 percent, were diagnosed with CTE. The NFL has certainly made the game safer, but it remains very dangerous for long term medical consequences. Now, though, a study conducted for Imperial College, London, has shown that up to 25% of rugby players display some form of brain abnormality. The research was limited to elite players who play professionally, but there can be little doubt that damaging effects will be found in schoolboys throughout Britain and other parts of the world where rugby is part of the sports curriculum. Most worryingly for most, if only because it is the world's sport, many major soccer players and their families have come out regarding the dangers of constant heading of the ball. When I first heard this, I assumed it was nonsense. Not a bit of it! At least 5 members of the side which won the World Cup for England in 1966 suffer from or did suffer from dementia. 5 out of 11! One, Ray Wilson, suffered for 13 years. Today Sir Bobby Charlton suffers from it. His brother Jack who died in July last year also suffered from the disease. The son of another, Nobby Stiles, informed the media that his father started showing signs of dementia 20 years before his death. Billy McNeil who led Glasgow Celtic to Britain's first ever European Cup win suffered from it for ten years before his death two years ago. The largest study so far was conducted by the University of Glasgow in 2019. Researchers compared the causes of death of 7,676 former Scottish male professional football players born between 1900 and 1976 against over 230,000 matched individuals from the general population. The study revealed that former professional football players had an approximately three and a half times higher rate of death due to neurodegenerative disease than expected. What the study could not discover were the reasons for the imbalance. Several new studies are underway. In the meantime the Scottish and Irish Football Associations have issued guidelines that children aged 11 and under should not be taught to head the ball in training since children are more vulnerable than adults. This is similar to an existing ban in the USA. UEFA, the European Soccer Association, has confirmed that if ongoing studies find conclusive evidence, it is prepared to ban heading in future. The ban will no doubt be contested but the facts stare us in the face. Of that World Cup eleven, 46% suffered from dementia. The WHO estimates that the worldwide average for the over 60s is 5% to 8% of the general population. Who said some sporta are not war? https://www.bbc.com/sport/boxing/58432013

I can't see anything in the quote about these being new condos. So Thais may already own a large number of condos in existing blocks. But I recall reading not so long ago that Chinese are purchasing as it is a way of getting cash out of the country.legally. Not sure what the limit is now, but it used to be US$50K per annum for individuals. That is one reason why Thai developers, especially in Bangkok, have been putting up lots of condo blocks with units of only around 25-30 sq. meters near the end of BTS and subway lines. Before the new Chinese law in Hong Kong, many young people were also buying in Thailand, and also as an investment. Housing in Hong Kong was -and I assume still is - amongst the most expensive in the world. It was estimated that a young couple in their 20s would take until retirement to pay off the mortgage on a very small apartment well out of the city. So many were parking cash in Bangkok condos in the expectation that after about ten years they would have risen sufficiently in value that the couple could get a more affordable home in Hong Kong. But the concern for Thais surely is that so many condos will remain empty - unless there is sufficient rental demand from those moving in to the city from the provinces. Partly, yes. But most Chinese wealthy enough to park money overseas are very unlikely to want to emigrate for even part of a year. They live well and they actually trust their government to continue its policy of economic development. Odd though it may seem, Shanghai has for several years been a more advanced city than Hong Kong in terms of quality of life and what that life offers. I doubt if any believe the government will start interfering with those advances because it is perfectly well aware that its very existence depends on making life better for the Chinese people. Very sadly that does not apply to the Uyghurs or the Tibetans. But I know it will surprise many that the vast majority of Chinese are perfectly happy living in China. They just want added protection for their spare cash since they know their banking system is not strong and their stock markets too volatile.

That's a bit like the Philippines Airline PAL. It was always known as Plane Always Late. A couple of decades it reversed the trend and tried to make the public believe it was Prompt At Last! It didn't work!

Let's not forget that @spoon is just a youngster - unlike most of us here!

And all the villagers who donated so much, including the landowners who refused compensation when their land was flooded by the water pumped from the cave. But surely this TV series is way too late off the blocks. Netflix won the rights over 2 years ago. What has it been doing to progress the project since then? How many other documentaries have already been aired? How many interviews with those who took part? I suspect a lot of international interest will have died before it finally airs.

Does anyone seriously believe in a country where corruption is endemic from top to bottom, where the Prime Minister has stated it will take him 20 years to get rid of corruption (meaning: get as much as you can now boys whilst you are still alive - I'm going to leave it to the next generation to try and solve the corruption problem) that these new rules will be obeyed? I'll believe it when I see it!

Cartoon by Ben Jennngs: The Guardian

I think your comment has been widely disproved. As far as I can see there is only one 2014 study in Australia that suggested vinegar might increase the amount of venom released into the skin. But that study has been widely debunked and its methodology seriously questioned. Every medical website I have currently checked still advocates the liberal use of vinegar after the creature's barbs have first been removed from the skin. This includes those from Australia where this particular genus of the box jellyfish found off Thailand originates. The websites include - https://www.healthline.com/health/box-jellyfish-sting#first-aid https://www.webmd.com/first-aid/jellyfish-stings-treatment https://dermnetnz.org/topics/australian-box-jellyfish-stings/ The last one has this quote - "Once on shore, apply vinegar for at least 30 seconds after envenomation; this deactivates penetrating nematocysts. Many tropical Australian beaches contain vinegar stations with clearly marked bottles for public use in case of marine envenomation. (Vinegar is one of a few chemicals, including ethanol, known to cause massive toxin discharge in a research, in-vitro context but not in the rescue setting, where vinegar prevents further toxin discharge when applied to the skin.)" Even the Queensland Government Department of Health's Ambulance Service website advises the use of vinegar -"immediately douse the string area with vinegar for at least 30 seconds." https://www.ambulance.qld.gov.au/docs/QAS-Box-jellyfish.pdf There are at least 51 species of box jellyfish around the world. Unfortunately it is the most dangerous of the bunch that lurks in the Indo-Pacific tropical regions. So if I hit a beach in this country, I will definitely have plenty of vinegar with me. Hopefully I'll reach it before my heart stops!

As the post mortems begin following the US and NATO disaster in Afghanistan, another issue is starting to hit the news. As in Iraq, it is known that corruption played a major role throughout most of the 20 years of occupation. Phantom troop levels were just a minor part. Now there is information about corruption designed to release some of that country's estimated $1 trillion wealth sitting just under the surface. The disgraced President who fled with unseeming haste with allegedly $169 million in his baggage, was part of a deal which also included a company "deeply tied to the American military and intelligence services." 20% owned by the President's brother, SOS International (SOSi) was illegally given rights to mine for chromite and had built a large factory outside Kabul. Many of its officials were recruited from former officers in the CIA and the top American commander in Afghanistan, David Petraeus. “It’s an open secret that SOSi is essentially a front for the [US Department of Defense],” one high-ranking Afghan official told us. This is part of a longer article by Zack Kopplin, an investigator at the Government Accountability Project, from today's Guardian newspaper. "Another stream of Taliban financing, facilitated by the Pentagon and Afghan elites, was the exploitation of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth. "In April, I co-authored an investigation for the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) that implicated the Afghan president and his family in mining corruption, along with well-connected US military contractors. "An estimated $1tn worth of minerals lies buried under the country’s surface. Before the Taliban takeover, Afghan law prohibited companies from buying minerals from small unregistered mines. One reason for this is because many of these mines were controlled by the Taliban, other terrorist groups, or local warlords. Buying from these mines meant financing the enemy. But our reporting found that there was one company that managed to get an exception to this rule, apparently with the approval of the office of President Ghani. "His office signed off on extralegal rights for the Afghan subsidiary of a US military contractor, SOS International (SOSi), to acquire chromite, a valuable component in stainless steel, from unlicensed mines in six Afghan provinces. The company built a factory outside Kabul and planned to crush and export the chromite. "SOSi is deeply tied to the American military and intelligence services. The company recruited heavily from the office of the former CIA director and top American commander in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus, securing significant political heft in the process. “It’s an open secret that SOSi is essentially a front for the [US Department of Defense],” one high-ranking Afghan official told us. "But SOSi had an even more important connection. Our OCCRP investigation revealed that the president’s brother, Hashmat Ghani, owned 20% of SOSi’s subsidiary, according to confidential documents leaked from an Emirati secrecy haven. "Beyond any mineral money flowing to the Taliban, this deal reflects the broader reasons Afghanistan collapsed. Corruption hollowed out state institutions and left Afghan citizens unwilling to fight for a government that, just like the Taliban, abused its own people, although in this case through theft, extortion and nepotism rather than outright violence and repression. "But the SOSi deal does not just implicate the highest levels of the country’s government, but powerful Americans and US companies too. "The Afghan state and army was in large part a facade, held up only by the American occupation, and it’s no surprise that Afghans were unwilling to fight and die for it any longer. But its failure isn’t on them. Afghanistan fell because after looting all they could from the country, American and Afghan elites gave up and fled, leaving the Afghan people behind. Who would fight for a broken system? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/30/afghanistan-us-corruption-taliban

I have no idea how urban myths are spread. The circumcision ritual in The Philippines is one. That 90% plus of young boys have the procedure done and the stigma they bear if it is not done seems to me not merely ridiculous but almost unbelievable. When I first came to Asia and visited Manila, I was really shocked that all the boys were cut. I rather assumed it was a legacy of the American colonisation, similar to the almost universal circumcision done on baby boys in South Korea after the end of the Korean War. Thankfully - at least I consider it so - that practice in South Korea is now disappearing. In The Philippines, though, it goes much further back in time and remains as common as ever, even to there being a "circumcision season"! Decades ago, Manila was a really fun gay place to visit, provided you could avert your eyes from the fightful poverty resulting from the murdering Marcos kleptocracy. The first two guys I met had probably had the procedure done in hospital for I noticed little out of the ordinary apart from the absence of a foreskin. When the third guy I met undressed I was so shocked I just did not want the assignation to continue. The meat grinder analogy may have been slightly overdone, but not overly so. I later learned that an army of unlicensed doctors and witchdoctors around the country are largely responsible for botched and supremely ugly circumcisions. It is one reason why thereafter I have rarely visited The Philippines other than for a beach vacation with friends. For the life of me I simply cannot understand why centuries (even millennia) ago tribes and certain religions felt it necessary to excise a small piece of skin from every young boy as a mark of belonging to that tribe. It seems especially stupid (with sincere apologies to those circumcised for religious reasons) because the wearing of clothing over the genitals makes it impossible for anyone else to know. Should synagogues and mosques not require men to lift up a flap to prove their adherence to the religion? Why not instead shave heads? Cut off part of the little finger like the yakuza in Japan? Or place a tattoo on the back of a hand?

I attend one of the best private dentists in Thailand. Since mid-last year or thereabouts, just after taking off my mask I have been given a strong mouthwash prior to my teeth being examined. it tastes nothing like Listerine or similar mouthwashes and requires being rinsed in the mouth for 30 full seconds. Clearly it must do something to reduce the possibility of transmission. Perhaps the new Mahidol Version is more effective, I don't know.