Hey that's a scene from Khun Chai :loool:Kayla said:I don't know Nat. Maybe he's afraid Sia might take him hostage and make him wear pink bunny outfits. LOL :lmao:
I still dont get ur point, cause you're contradicting urself :loool:jeanie said:No I'm saying being "moral" isn't relevant to his job. You look up a job description of being a movie star and not lying to the public isn't one of them. Those situations you described aren't exactly analogous to what I'm saying. First what you described are all criminal acts and are not on par with the particular "crimes" Film has committed. There's quite a distinction between morals and ethical. What you described is unethical. I'm talking specifically about morality.
A lawyer is someone who defends, and explains the law. I'd expect them to be a law abiding person and intelligent and articulate. I could care less if the man was an adulterer.
A physician's job is to help people or at the very least "must do no harm." I'd say molesting a child was doing harm wouldn't you? That interferes with how he's expected to perform his job. So what if he's gay, lies about it, or uses a woman as his beard, or dumps his pregnant lover? If I had cancer and he could cure it yeah who cares?
A teacher has 50% of a kid's time when they're up and about and when they're at their most impressionable and some say vulnerable. Their job is to teach, and guide, so yeah you'd expect them to have some values. That's in the job description. That's why they have extensive background checks on teachers. If you have a criminal record or a felony, well chances are you're not gonna get hired. Same thing for a lot of other careers. That's why you have background checks because certain attributes are "required" for the job.
Now why don't they do background checks on performers? Because most people don't see it as relevant to the job. What's relevant? Talent, ability and looks. Someone could be the nicest, honest person you know, but that doesn't mean I want to watch them on t.v. And if you're hideous looking? You're not going to get a job as an actor or singer now are you? Why? Because looks is one requirement of being an entertainer. Looks however is not for being a teacher, or cop or whatever.
A taxi driver being drunk? Drinking interferes with driving therefore it effects his job. Besides drinking isn't actually a sin is it?
Yes Film is a liar, a user, a selfish idiot, greedy, money-grubbing social climber, a downright despicable human being if you think so. Maybe he's even a crappy entertainer. I could say and judge all I want on his looks and abilities. He still doesn't owe me anything but entertainment.
Maybe in Thailand its a little different because its a "conservative" society and you think of celebs as role models. If being a role model comes with the job description and expectations there, by all means judge him on his morals.
I'm not saying as a star Film has to be all this, I could careless if he's a doctor, he could be a drug dealer, his actions are still WRONG, no matter what his occupation is but since you used the defence that being a "role model" isnt part of the job describtion.... I couldnt resist but to enlighten you :loool:celebritycelebrity - a widely known person; "he was a baseball celebrity"
immortal - a person (such as an author) of enduring fame; "Shakespeare is one of the immortals"
important person, influential person, personage - a person whose actions and opinions strongly influence the course of events
social lion, lion - a celebrity who is lionized (much sought after)
guiding light, leading light, luminary, notability, notable - a celebrity who is an inspiration to others; "he was host to a large gathering of luminaries"
personality - a person of considerable prominence; "she is a Hollywood personality"
toast - a celebrity who receives much accalim and attention; "he was the toast of the town"
2. celebritycelebrity - the state or quality of being widely honored and acclaimed
honour, laurels, honor - the state of being honored
:loool: nways if that definition wasnt enough, nothing I say will matter much. I'll just let natty, kayla and juicee take it from here.jeanie said:No no Mai, you completely missed my point obviously. To make it clear, he's wrong, he's immoral and sinful but its still irrelevant to his job. That makes him a bad human being. But does that make him a bad singer?
Good say lol....KaylaKayla said:He doesn't owe you anything but entertainment, but he owe the Sia guy a couple of million bahts and an apology.
And why are we discussing this topic? Cause he's an entertainer. And why is he a public figure? Cause he's a celebrity.
And why should he have gratitude towards someone who helped him? Because he's human!
Being an entertainer is his job, your action as a human being justify your morals.
:loool: I get ur point, I think we all get ur points.....jeanie said:Let's try this one last time and if you don't get it well then you'll never get my point.
Say Beethoven did everything Film did. Does that take away from his symphonies or composing abilities? Einstein dumped his pregnant lover and their 3 little kids on the side of the road with no money, clothes or food. Does that take away from his theories or intellect?
No obviously you don't get my point because my point has nothing to do with your point. I understand your point. Film is wrong. You have a right to judge him. That's your 2 main points right?Mai said::loool: I get ur point, I think we all get ur points.....
just that we dont agree. I dont think you get what we're trying to say. so never mind....