When I read about two person refusing to stand up during the King's song when they went to a cinema last year (world trade center, bkk). And a royalist foce them to stand, disparaging and throwing pop-corn at them. So Chotisak, a human right activist, decided to file a lawsuit against the agressive guy who eventually sued back with the most serious charge.

Both person were charged with the same accusation. But only the man is active in a campaign: no standing is no crime; different thinking is not a crime. I keep question Why the woman is unseen in the news. Is the woman a kinda passive typo who just blindly follow the man to the cinema and following the man ?

But then she has more than one chance to back off before getting sued with L.M.

First, she chooses to go with the guy. That is the first mistake. O.K. There is a second chance: She could have withdrawed from reporting the offence in the cinema to the police. Maybe she is very angry. A last chance then is she could have lied, such as her pain in a stomach prevented her from standing up.

So my conclusion is that she is not that passive. However, she is not willing to be presented in the news. Some media could act like a mad dog, victimizing woman by giving her a bad name, pricking on her appearance, denigrating her as a sexual object. (Think of Lydia case, for example) They did it to men too. But woman are more vulnerable to it, however radical she is, me think.

Lydia presents herself as a sexual object, so she has no right to complain.

I disagree. She dress like a singer, though not so hot like TATA.

I think that the media did cross the border.

Thanks for a comment naja.