For those of you who have asked me how I feel about Sylvie von Duuglas-Ittu’s highly debated GoFundMe initiative, this is my response.
To begin, a bit of history on my time in the muay thai blogging landscape…
Aside from a handful of posts on my now defunct MySpace page in 2007, I began blogging about muay thai in 2008. I had sold most of what I owned to fund living and training muay thai in Thailand until my course changed. Nopadon Wongpakdee of My Muay Thai was in correspondence with my friend Ange. Ange and I were making the trip together and Nopadon offered to support us by allowing us a voice and setting up a donation button on the site. Our post 2 Paths. One Destination went live on September 19 and we were on our way. Ange and I thankfully received a few hundred dollars to share and Nopadon asked if I was interested in blogging my journey on My Muay Thai. I knew nothing of blogging and accepted the challenge.
There were few people blogging about muay thai (that I was aware of) in 2008. Since that time, the number of individuals documenting their path in muay thai has grown. I think this is an incredible thing as we can all learn and benefit from each other’s journeys. We can travel safer; train more effectively; understand Thai culture so we’re able to connect with and ultimately show respect to the people we meet in Thailand; and perhaps we can inspire others to do the same. There is much good that can come out of it all. That is, if we’re authentic in our approach.
On Authenticity Online
My first trip to Thailand was in 2007 and I stayed for six months training in the outskirts of Chiang Mai. When I returned in early 2009 I took root in Bangkok and stayed for approximately one year. I spent the remaining two and a half years training muay thai in Buriram. My time spent in Thailand was a constant learning process. What I felt I knew about muay thai and the muay thai game was often challenged and negotiated – it was all connected to Thai culture and the realities of living in Thailand, particularly as a single, white female travelling alone.
This was very much reflected in much of my writing. In retrospect, a lot of my initial posts were well meaning but were reflective of my naivete. Now in 2014, when I read posts written by other bloggers and muay thai journalists, I see that as a common thread. It’s part of the path in my opinion and naivete is not something I have contention with. Rather, it’s the constructing of persona, the manipulation of events, and the omission of truth.
We all have our different paths in muay thai, including our time spent in Thailand. My experience may not be like yours and I believe it’s best to leave room to accept what others write, regardless of the extent their perspective differs from yours. Additionally, some people are more private than others and it cannot go without saying that fully disclosing apsects of your training in Thailand can be dangerous.
I completely understand why writers may not discuss specific events they’ve experienced in muay thai. The consequences of causing someone in Thailand, particularly someone with power and connections, to lose face are often dire. Death threats have been known to be made for offenses and this is one reason why I avoid gym names in posts that detail some of my darker times in Thailand. To give an example, I caused a trainer to lose face once and I’m fairly certain my hand was broken as a result.
That being said, with experience in Thailand comes an increasing knowing, a sensing of what’s real. Often, particularly for those of us there long-term, we build connections with other nak muay across the country. For some of us, it acts as a support system. We often discuss our experiences in our gyms, much of it, from my experience, being held private. We learn this way. In trust, we bounce our experience off of the experience of others and increase our knowledge and understanding of our paths navigating a new culture, gym culture included.
In my case, with time, I also began to see a pattern in some people of crafting their experience on their social media platforms. For example, the nak muay who breaks down under the pressure but posts a ton of updates that they’re having the time of their life simultaneously. Or the nak muay on holiday who tells everyone of their grueling training schedule and their dedication, but leaves out their partying, regular missed morning sessions and general loafing. Lastly, the nak muay who hurts themselves outside of training but constructs a scenario of how they were injured working with the most famous fighter in the gym.
Personally I think it’s pretty goofy, but we all have our reasons and I don’t consider what they’re doing truly negligent. Social media is powerful, but unlike blog posts and articles, the message is often short lived, even if the poster’s engagement isn’t. It’s short bursts of communication that have the power to influence, but in my opinion, their power to truly connect and influence is minimal when compared to the power of a blog with a social media platform and fan base.
When that lack of authenticity, when the crafting of reality is transferred over to someone’s blog, then I take issue with it. It’s negligent and it’s irresponsible to their readers. As bloggers, we cultivate a following online that is often based in trust. When you discuss your path in muay thai, particularly if your publicly expressed mandate is to inspire and assist others, then I believe that being anything less than authentic undermines that trust, thus your readers. In some cases, it may put them in danger. This is particularly true when bloggers concentrate only on presenting an idealized version of their time in Thailand. Discussing your reality and the topics you choose to focus on while maintaining positivity is one thing. Constructing a reality that plays into the fantasies others have about training in Thailand is another.
When a writer manipulates their truth to fit their agenda, it devalues everyone involved.
Sylvie von Duuglas-Ittu’s Crowd Funding Initiative
Sylvie von Duugla-Ittu is a female muay thai fighter that has been living and training in Thailand for approximately two years. She details her path in muay thai on her blog 8limbs.us utilizing a variety of media including YouTube videos and vigilent social media activity. Recently, she created a GoFundMe campaign entitled Help Get Me to Fights. At time of writing, she’s amassed $4,380 dollars within a few days. She has also attracted a backlash from people who’ve expressed a number of criticisms, including that she’s asking for handouts. To help articulate her perspective, Sylvie has directed people to the following Amanda Palmer video which offers a positive stance to crowd funding.
From Sylvie’s original post Help Get Me to Fights – On My Way To 100 Fights in Thailand:
This presentation by Amanda Palmer (below) on how asking for help makes you vulnerable, it opens you, is part of what convinced me that I should ask. Aside from the question of this donation I urge you to watch it. It says really cool things about life, and what it means to rely on others.
And again on her Facebook Page:
You can donate directly here: (GoFundME link) or you can read the blog post and get the full story (Blog post link). if you want to see where I’m coming from on this, watch this TED talk by Amanda Palmer on why one should ask for help, it changed my perspective.
Perhaps a more correct statement would include again.
I want to make it clear that I’m not attacking Sylvie’s decision to create a GoFundMe campaign. I understand the concept behind it; she and her husband have been diligent in Sylvie’s online presence. From her 1,400+ videos to her, on average, multiple blog posts a week, Sylvie has been creating free content for years. Additionally, she has cultivated an audience that fully supports what she’s doing and wants to contribute to her success. She inspires many of them. I get this; it’s not uncommon practice online. I also understand the arguments opposing this view. I believe that many are valid and are intrinsic to a healthy discussion on the place of crowd funding in achieving one’s goals, and in this case, goals in muay thai.
That being said, I’m using this as an opportunity to illustrate what I’m seeing as a thread among some muay thai bloggers as not being transparent in their online presences. I personally find a lot of what is being presented in this case as misleading. Sylvie had a crowd funding campaign one year before the Amanda Palmer video. Amanda’s video was filmed in February 2013 and Sylvie’s Kickstarter campaign which amounted to $3,013 was successfully funded in May 2012.
Perhaps I’m misreading what she’s implying, but my understanding that the reference to the Amanda Palmer video, in conjunction with previous statements, such as this one, “I’m asking my supporters to help me cover travel expenses as I try to get to fights outside of the local areas of Pattaya. I don’t readily ask for help, I’m really a do-it-yourself person – but as my entire mission may be at risk, from a practical standpoint it seems best to invite others to give me a boost to help make it happen.” implies this isn’t part of her repertoire.
So where do I leave this? For you the reader, particularly those who have little to no experience training muay thai in Thailand I offer this, be critical in your consumption of muay thai blogging and journalism. By critical I mean awake, not skeptical. Be open to what you read but also question what doesn’t sit well with your intuition. This includes anything I’ve written. Sometimes as writers, as people, we’re blind to our own biases. Unarmed criticism can often be a tool in our growth. Also please be aware that with time, many of us change and this is reflected in our opinions at any given time.
And for you the muay thai blogger, journalist, content creator, as a person who has passionately been sharing this space with you for quite some time, I ask you maintain integrity in what you do. We have an opportunity to have voices in a space that isn’t yet fully saturated or commercialized. We have the opportunity to truly be heard; don’t squander that gift, for yourself, for those that share this space, and for those to come.
I understand that many of us define authenticity and transparently differently. I’d love to hear your thoughts about any of this in the comments below.
Update – In Response To The Generated Discussion
August 14, 2014
I wanted to take this opportunity to further express the position of this piece, to perhaps clarify my position. I want to thank everyone who has reached out publicly and privately. Let’s see if this clears some things up.
Sylvie von Duuglas-Ittu’s GoFundMe campaign motivated me to write about the topic of authenticity in muay thai blogging and journalism. The topic of authenticity, in of itself, is something I have been passionate about and contemplating writing about for awhile – not particular to Sylvie, but in regards to muay thai blogging/journalism as a whole. Sylvie’s GoFundMe campaign inspired me to do so. Why? Because I felt it lacked transparency and it dealt with money, other people’s money. I think that’s more than a worthwhile reason to speak out.
My intent of the structure of this piece, was to give you, the reader, an overview of my history blogging about muay thai. I also wanted to let you know that I have benefited from crowd funding. I wanted to be upfront. From there I went into my position on authenticity in general, hence the subheading. Sort of, this is who I am and this is my position. It then lead to how I feel about Sylvie’s GoFundMe campaign.
Perhaps I didn’t go into detail enough but I’ll make a second attempt now.
I’m not against crowd funding, in of itself at all. I’m not against Sylvie crowd funding (as stated in the piece). I am not against people doing it multiple times. I am not against Sylvie doing it multiple times. I wouldn’t have been against Sylvie not telling people about her previous Kickstarter campaign had I not felt that the way in which she tried to appeal to potential donators was misleading. I expressed how I felt this was happening above.
Selling often involves appealing to the emotions of other people. I feel this is fine when what you’re doing to appeal to those emotions is fully authentic and transparent. Sylvie’s written component to her campaign, in my opinion, was structured in a way that, as expressed in my piece, implied that that crowd funding wasn’t in her repertoire, that she doesn’t normally ask for help, aka, money. Here’s the opening paragraph of her post, Help Me Get To Fights – On My Way To 100 Fights In Thailand, which adds more context to my original argument:
I’ve hit an unexpected hurdle in trying to get to 100 fights in Thailand before I leave. I’m asking my supporters to help me cover travel expenses as I try to get to fights outside of the local areas of Pattaya. I don’t readily ask for help, I’m really a do-it-yourself person – but as my entire mission may be at risk, from a practical standpoint it seems best to invite others to give me a boost to help make it happen. The fact that others have recently been contacting me privately on how they might donate lets me know that there is a desire to help. Sometimes though, opening yourself up to the generosity of others is a personal lesson one has to learn and being open to accepting help from those who want to give it is part of any relationship, including between me and all the people with whom I share this experience. I’m about 2/3 of the way there, just when it can get a little tough – you either push hard or plod along with an increasing awareness that you might not get there. I’m a “push hard” kind of person.
Given how she structured her campaign, I’m of the opinion that people should have known she had a previous Kickstarter campaign. If Sylvie had not expressed multiple times and in various ways, either directly or through implying (as expressed above) that she doesn’t readily ask for help, then no, I don’t think it would have been necessary to tell people about her Kickstarter campaign at all. But given that she did, then yes, I think it’s misleading, thus lacks transparency and I have contention with that aspect of it.
I’m not inside Sylvie’s head, so I don’t know what she was thinking while she was writing, ie. if there was intent to manipulate. That being said, again, I think the delivery is very misleading.
To quickly respond to a comment below in which Sylvie’s husband Kevin pointed out that Sylvie has been repeatedly public about her Kickstarter campaign, my answer is this. Yes, I know and I knew while writing this piece. The issue is, that mention of it was not present in the campaign. I don’t think it is the duty of every potential donator to have to conduct a Google search. I don’t think it is the duty of every donator to read her homepage and deduct that ‘Supporters’ means from a previous campaign.
I published the piece with Sylvie’s photo because it was time sensitive; her campaign was the only example I gave; it was the motivating factor of me discussing the greater issue of authenticity in muay thai blogging and journalism ; and lastly, I truly believe that those interested in donating to Sylvie deserved to be fully informed, so they could make a more educated decision.
To be truly transparent, in case this is in question, what Sylvie is asking for and why doesn’t appeal to my sensibilities. This could be a completely different post, as it would take a long time to outline, particularly for the benefit of those who have never spent a lot of time in Thailand. This is not something I feel I need to express fully in this section however – I don’t know what the benefit of it would be.
Lastly, Sylvie has provided a lot of information and inspired a great number of people. I understand why people would want to support her and there is no judgement to that fact on my end. My contention, in this piece, lies with how she asked for it.
I hope this gives more light to the issue specific to Sylvie.
Update – 2009 Appeal For Funding
August 23, 2014
Thanks to the MBSB community member who sent this my way.
What I find most interesting about all this is how polarizing of a figure it’s proving Sylvie to be. Sylvie has clear goals in her muaythai career, as stated on her comprehensive blog. From comments I’ve read on Facebook, though, it’s clear she’s becoming a controversial figure: she has some major detractors annoyed with the fact that she’s asking for money, though from other comments and her ability to raise over $4,000 in such a short time, we can also clearly see that she’s well liked among her fans. Sylvie might not be a world-famous actor or politician, but she is a public figure in the muaythai community because she puts herself out there through her blog and other social media, and especially because her blog primarily features content about her own training and fighting, as opposed to third-person interviews or studies, etc. No public figure is universally liked or despised, and just like any other blogger out there who has opinions, she will connect with some and she will rub some the wrong way. It’s all exacerbated by the fact that it’s happening online, as opposed to in person or through old medium like newspapers. I find this part to be the most fascinating aspect. Internet lets us connect with each other across all spaces instantaneously and we all have opinions so all our voices can be heard. You’d never see this kind of stuff happening before the spread in popularity of the internet because there was just no medium to have such a massive dialogue.
Frankly, two crowd funding campaigns doesn’t justify the implication that this is part of her modus operandi. If Sylvie pathologically campaigned for crowd funding, required an online subscription or even advertised, I could maybe understand the rationale behind the criticism of her advocating for nak muay ying as not being genuine. But 2 campaigns doesn’t break the camels back.
Furthermore, the skewing of first person narratives has been a problem since the beginning of language. How is this detracting from authenticity?
Hey k that’s notmyname,
Thanks for adding to the discussion.
A couple of questions for clarification:
1. What modus operandi?
2. Where is the implication that her advocating for nak muay ying is not genuine? I think it is. If there is any confusion/I wasn’t clear, the entire post is not about her, rather a trend, and the example I’ve given (Sylvie’s crowd funding) is an example of an aspect of what I consider lack of transparency, which is a part of authenticity imo.
3. How am I skewing her narrative?
My interpretation of her mode of behavior is that she doesn’t produce content for economic return. And Even if she did, there’s no distinction that would make HER effort more or less genuine.
I definitely misinterpreted your post.
I don’t think that you skew her narrative, rather that we all are prone to do it in the retelling of our own.
Ah, it seems we’re in agreement – thanks for the clarification.
Wow, that is a very long post to write all because Sylvie did not add the word “again”….hmm. Maybe someone has an axe to grind? Over 70% of the post has nothing to do with Sylvie at all (over 1,300) words. My goodness. Okay, “again”. The truth is that Amanda’s video powerfully DID affect both Sylvie and me, and make the idea of appealing for help, even after initial help lead to the creation of the website 8limbs.us. Anyone who knows Sylvie would find it laughable that she somehow opportunistically preys on the generosity of others. An incredibly hard working, nose to the ground person. For the record, the invocation of the Amanda Palmer video did not begin with the Go Fund Me post. A quick journalistic Google would have told told someone that. Sylvie already posted about Amanda Palmer in November of 2013 when talking about why we might support the Kickstarter campaign of Ikkari Fightwear, someone else. She an advocate for the support of others. You can read the post here; http://8limbs.us/blog/value-kickstarter-crowd-sourcing-fighter-projects-ikkari-fightwear “Meaningful Kickstarter and Crowd Sourcing for Figlhter Projects | Ikkari Fightwear”,
What is even more ridiculous is the idea that Sylvie somehow has hidden the fact of her 8limbs.us Kickstarter, which you intrepidly have exposed. This is what she wrote in November:
“As some of you may know – and some of you might have indeed taken part in this – my website 8limbs.us was made possible through crowd sourcing, specifically Kickstarter. The cost of the domain, a year of hosting and actually designing the website were all paid for by the generous donations of “backers,” some of whom I know personally, some who have been following my YouTube for years, and some people I don’t know at all who liked the idea. That range of contributions is really beautiful to me. I was politically active in middle and high school, storming the steps of the capital building in Denver, Colorado to demand better funding for public education and writing strongly-worded letters to state representatives at age 14, standing outside of the brand new Whole Foods to hand out literature to patrons regarding the risks of GMO’s and calling for public outcry when I was 13. That kind of thing.”
Also, one if would bother to look at the front page of her website, you know, using good journalistic instincts, one would see that all the significant supporters are THANKED for making 8limb.us possible.
Could the wording have been more exact? Sure. But who knew that there was someone out there looking to write an expose uncovering how incredibly nontransparent Sylvie is. The abbreviated point was this. The Amanda Palmer video indeed inspired Sylvie (and me) to turn to people who appreciate what she does because we just could not solve the problem that we faced. If you actually watch the Amanda Palmer video you would see that the argument is for continuous openness, and a state of reliance that grows, not one that happens “once” and then is over. That is what the Amanda Palmer video changed in us. It inspired us – and hopefully others – to move toward reliance on those who care. Just as crowd sourcing does not only happen once, inspiration does not only happen once. In fact Sylvie is currently trying to put together a documentary on the extraordinary female child fighter PhetJee Jaa. It is very likely that THIS project will only be possible with the crowdsourcing of those who care. If you care enough about the project, the project needs your support.
The final insult of this post seems to be a veiled implication that Sylvie has somehow mis-reported, or disingenuously written about her Muay Thai experiences. My goodness. In the history of the Internet nobody has written more about training and fighting in Thailand, and with more rigorous detail than Sylvie has. It’s not even close. Has she told each and every single event that has happened to her? My goodness no, but I haven’t a clue where one would get the sense that she is somehow like the loafing blogger: “Or the nak muay on holiday who tells everyone of their grueling training schedule and their dedication, but leaves out their partying, regular missed morning sessions and general loafing.” (expertly used to cast aspersions, nice writing). It leaves to ask: What kind of crazyland is the author of this post in? Where has Sylvie carefully “crafted” her story for “social media”. My goodness. For someone who does not know Sylvie you certainly seem to know a lot about her. Did a little birdy gossip about trainer who became a little too flirtatious so Sylvie moved on, but because Sylvie didn’t write a full blown tract on the dangers of Thai men you’ve become upset? I know most certainly that there has been at least one prominent author friendly to this site who have hidden really significant portions of their story (sorry to be vague, but this dirty laundry game, not cool). Let’s not play the authenticity game. Bloggers blog as much of themselves that they can bear. They do the hard job of expressing their lives and experiences. Why waste so much time trying to tear another down, when there are so few.
I don’t know, it just seems like someone wants to start an Internet argument just to generate some website clicks, and bring more heat than light to the situation. I know this comment is probably a huge mistake, it just gives life to someone who used to blog quite well and beautifully, inspiring others like Sylvie, but now finds herself on the sidelines. It will happen to Sylvie too, she will stop blogging. But it was a sad day when you stopped blogging about Muay Thai Laura, and it will be a sad day when Sylvie does too.
The entire article is not about Sylvie. Please feel free to reread.
The example I used, of Sylvie, was this particular gofundme campaign.
Laura, can you please give a more substantive reply here to the women’s husband? Most of the article is about Sylvie- in content and in volume. [next step will be for you to deny this].
As a muaythai blogger myself, I find the subject of authenticity fascinating because it is such a paradox. There is no way you can portray every aspect of yourself, your environment, and your experiences there within in a blog, column, novel, book, study, documentary, anything, because there is just too much that goes into one’s human experiences while moving through this world. So how is authenticity achieved? How does an author know what to leave in and what to keep out? Does an author purposefully keep out parts of the experience that would make them look bad so as to avoid negative reactions in the audience, or should the author leave that stuff in, regardless of how others may condemn them, for the sake of “authenticity” or more importantly because it affects how the rest of their experience is viewed and understood when the piece is read.
How does Sylvie decide what to write about? She has clear focuses in her posts, mostly her training and fighting and some cultural commentary. But she doesn’t write much about her home life or her husband (at least I haven’t read too many posts about this). Does this make her inauthentic? Personally, I don’t think so, because her home life is not very relevant to her blog and she has only a finite amount of time for blogging, and her muaythai-loving audience would probably not be very interested anyway.
Is LDF authentic in her blogging as well? Many of the posts I’ve read on this blog mention dark times, but vaguely gloss over exactly what happened. I find this to be perfectly acceptable — those were Laura’s experiences and perhaps she doesn’t want to write about something so personal in such a public forum, or perhaps she finds explaining the events to be more cumbersome than relevant than the standard length of a blog post can handle. I don’t believe this detracts from the points of her posts and what she wants us to take away from it.
As for myself, the nature of my own blog changes as I continue to write. Lately I’ve been traveling around Thailand, going to events and interviewing people and writing about muaythai from a more anthropological/ journalistic perspective. But for a while there, when I first started blogging, I was training full time in Bangkok and I was writing primarily about my own personal experiences. Yes I too got some backlash for writing about first-person stories of sexuality in a muaythai gym. There were many negative comments, however, there were just as many positive comments, as well as private emails thanking me for being so transparent (as one commenter praised) and thanking me for writing about something that so many women experience when coming to Thailand to train at a gym. At first I was really put off about the negative comments but then I realized this was all a positive thing because it opened up a dialogue and started to a discussion, which is one of the beautiful things about having this internets thing. Sometimes controversy can be a very good thing because it engages people and raises awareness of issues. Crudely put, controversy online also means page clicks, and since when has that been a bad thing? If LDF is benefiting from the page clicks here, I would think Sylvie is certainly benefiting from page clicks on her site as well generated from this post.
On a personal level, authenticity is something I really try hard to achieve in my writing, though it’s a perilous balance between feeling like I’m putting out too much and not putting out enough. Sometimes it’s hard for me to write posts because I have so many thoughts and ideas and interpretations, often conflicting, about a certain person or idea or event that I’m writing about, so even to me I’m not always clear on my personal authenticity. And the problem, or the blessing, of a blog post is that it’s short (I aim for fewer than 1,600 words, and even that’s kind of long), so I really have to pare down to the essentials. As a result, I strive to achieve authenticity by being clear first with myself and then bringing it to the reader in a relevant way. Relevance, I think that’s the key.
I would be really interested to know anyone else’s thoughts on authenticity in blogging (or in any other creative pursuit, especially writing or filmmaking).
The one thing I don’t understand about Sylvie is that she’s racked up 80 fights, lives and trains in Thailand no less and still yet she’s still average in the art. One would think with all time spent in Thailand it would have accelerated the whole learning process of the art to great heights.
Considering that the majority of us have to work 8-10 hrs a day and then and only then go to training after the day is done well to be honest it just doesn’t add up.
To top it all off now you want money ? Yeah…ummm. no thanks…pass.
Not hating on the Von Ittus… Just saying ok.
Agreed. For all that money and all that experience, Sylvie’s a below average fighter. She gets a lot of attention (and no doubt funding) from her blog that she wouldn’t get on the merit of her fights alone. Watching her fights over time, can’t see any huge improvements in her skills and her fights are pretty uninspiring to watch. There’s an argument for quality vs quantity to be made here.
In my opinion all of her fights are purely transactional in nature and of a low quality. I saw her put her guard up and placed her head down and walk straight into an elbow in one of her fights…
How she came up with a round figure of 100 fights to aspire to is anyone’s guess, Why not 22 fights ? Why not 57 fights ? Maybe this will be used a platform for a personal straining business after all is said and done “hey you yes you I’ve had 100 MT fights in Thailand now pay me $100/hr ! Caveat emptor I say.
Good luck to her and her well versed in female Muay Thai affairs husband,
PS I meant to write straining
Better to take lessons from someone like Sylvie than a one-day certified fake kru! At least Sylvie’s done time in the sport.
Can you believe this crap???:
http://www.mymuaythai.com/archives/the-social-dynamics-of-muaythai-part-one/
Also I have found that what makes a good teacher is not the same as what makes a good fighter/performer. Mr. Liam, the head trainer at my gym in BKK, has never really been much of a fighter himself but he’s amazing on pads and is part of the reason why our gym has champions. Same thing, my Irish dance teacher back in the US was also never a good dancer but she can teach in a way that turns other dancers into national champions. Teaching and performing/competing require totally different skill sets and many people are better at one or the other.
Hello Redlotus
She’s done time in the sport but I don’t think it’s made much difference to be blunt. If you look closely there are massive holes in her game.
I’ve seen this accreditation stuff before and it’s a steaming pile of BS. It reminds me of this very commercial Australia wide martial arts school. This martial art business has unsuccessfully blended karate, tkd, boxing and MT and anything else they can find to throw in and to be honest it is an absolute disgusting mess. The students that have come out of these schools are woefully ill equipped to accomplish even the basics even though they are carrying black belts (Yes they have a grading system as well to go along with their $200/month direct debit scheme) Its heart wrenching to see but hey each to their own. Poorly skilled money chasing self-defence teachers = inept students.
I’ve spent a very long time in MT and if I could re-start all over again I would be damn sure to find a very accomplished, open minded and skilled teacher.
Doesn’t Sylvie have a dog that she refuses to travel without- thus making travel via bus impossible? Her GoFundMe sounds like a sham.
You say to Kevin that it’s not all about Sylvie, but you used a screenshot of her campaign at the head of the article along with the text “For those of you who have asked me how I feel about Sylvie von Duuglas-Ittu’s highly debated GoFundMe initiative, this is my response”.
I can’t speak for everyone, but personally that definitely sets a tone for the whole article, and it does read as a dig at her. If it was just about crowd funding, then the examples used would be reasonable, but how does that cross over with the authenticity argument if you aren’t speculating on whether Sylvie is, or isn’t? That could have been a separate (and interesting) post, but instead it appears to have been wrapped into a thinly veiled attack. Disappointing first-time reading.
Hey Jess – Thanks for the comment. I completely understand your position and I really appreciate you expressing it. It gives me the opportunity to go further go into mine. I’ve added an update at the end of the post. In addition, yes, in this particular piece I have questioned Sylvie’s authenticity on the GoFundMe campaign, not the entirety of her blog.
great post.
don’t get why Sylvie’s husband constantly comes into these forums passionately trying to defend her though. he’s certainly doing her no favors. she’s an active voice in the muay thai community, particularly the female community, and so it’s to be expected that her blog, her fights and her appeal for funding will be fair game for discussion, praise and criticism –that comes with putting herself out there as a blogger. kevin responds like there’s some personal grudge here — I’ve seen him do it in other posts as well — instead of allowing a healthy discourse to prevail. LDF has a fair point and I think many people out there agree with her.
on a separate, personal note, I find it annoying to read Kevin’s posts about issues relating to women in MT. he writes like he’s an authority on the subject because he’s married to Sylvie but his experience and opinions, for the most part, aren’t relevant at all. they’re universes away from what most single women experience when they come alone to Thailand to train and fight. I’ve been in Thailand in the MT community for 6 years now, and in my opinion, no one writes more authentically than LDF. she takes you deep into the cultural and emotional entanglements of being a non-Thai woman living and training in Thailand. not everyone’s cup of tea — but she does it well and for those of us who don’t come with our husbands or maybe go to more remote areas of Thailand to train, her posts and content are very relevant and important.
Kevin is an authority because he is married to Sylvie… that is just hilarious. I just coughed up my tom yum and Pad Thai !
why shouldn’t a husband defend his wife?
Wow reading this post along with the comments has been SO intense! I even had to grab some popcorn.
There are so many sides to the argument that it’s hard for me to see one side over another. That being said, I think it’s great that people are able to voice their opinions and share their input on controversial subjects like this one. Like Lindsey was saying, controversy is a good thing because it opens up a discussion where people are able to weigh out multiple point of views to come up with their own. I’m still on the fence with my opinion and I’m looking forward to reading more responses!
Totally agree with Sean here. It’s a really interesting discussion because there are valid points everywhere.
However in response to a comment above criticizing Kevin for defending Sylvie… Of course he’s defending Sylvie! That’s his wife, and he believes in her and supports her! I’d be pretty surprised if he *didn’t* come to her defense.
And as for him commenting on the female experience in a muaythai culture, he is entitled to his own opinion as gathered from what he has read, seen, heard, and witnessed. It’s a perfectly valid opinion because that’s what it is, an opinion. Sylvie’s take on being a woman in a muaythai culture is also completely valid as well, especially as she’s actually living it. However, neither of them can speak from personal experience what it’s like to be a single white woman in a muaythai gym. They can have opinions on it, of course, but they can’t speak on it from a standpoint of personal experience. Just as I cannot speak from personal experience what it’s like to be a man in a muaythai gym, or a woman with a husband of my same culture.
Personally, even though I don’t agree with what people may say about this or any other subject, I enjoy hearing their take on it because it makes me think more about my own assumptions, experiences, and beliefs. I’m glad for these discussions.
To be clear, I don’t have a problem with Sylvie’s husband posting comments to defend her, the issue is that he tries to take it down to a personal level — he gets outraged when anything negative is written about her and cannot look at the discussion rationally. This is why, in my opinion, his comments are more damaging than good.
When I refer to him commenting on matters relating to women in MT, thanks, but I don’t need a lesson on the validity of opinions lol. Nor do I suggest that his are not — I just say they’re just annoying because of the tone of authority he takes. In particular I’m recalling a discussion about the sex and power in MT gyms (http://milkblitzstreetbomb.com/muay-thai/gender-power-thailand-muay-thai-gyms/), in which he tries to devalue the author’s ‘negative sexual experience’.
Red lotus, I agree with you completely here.
Additionally, I suspect it can be difficult for some readers to separate Sylvie from her husband Kevin’s intent online. A better way to describe it is that, it is difficult to see them as other than a unified force and distinguish between both of their opinions, particularly as they both manage 8limbs.us together. Given how Kevin conducts himself publicly, even if we use this blog as an example in of itself, it would, I suspect, potentially have people question Sylvie’s mandate to support women blogging about muay thai (as a whole). Meaning the authenticity of that claim. Yes, potentially more damaging than good.
I tend to agree with all the comments, what gets me is you write something negative or disagree with her on her page and she deletes your comment and blocks you.
She only accepts comments from people who kiss her butt!!!
Her MT sucks for that many fights..Im sorry but thats the truth..She should look for QUALITY not Quantity !!
as for her husband/sidekick beaaatch ! he is just as annoying…
She pisses a lot of Thai’s off as well…look at her situation at Pattaya, training at not 1,not 2..but 3 gyms..lol..
Im sorry, your not a princess, your MT sucks dont expect the trainers to flock all over you. You need to respect them, stick to One gym and they will invest time into you if they think your capable. Obviously they dont think to highly of her…
Sylvie is a fraud. She ran to Thailand to fight tuk tuk drivers when she kept getting beat up in the USA. Watch any of her fights against non-tuk tuk drivers. She’s horrible. Technique is terrible. And she has the nerve to call herself kru. I’m sick of her and her childmolester looking husband. They need to just stop. Maybe take up fishing.
Hey people –
Criticism is fine, meaning of me, of Sylvie, of whomever, and the venting of frustration and anger as well, but keep the hardcore name calling out of it. (Using AJ’s example of referring to Sylvie’s “childmolester looking husband”).
Here’s my comment policy (copied and pasted from the Start Here page):
“In regards to comments, please feel free to express yourself. I believe we can all benefit from healthy discourse; this includes opposing opinions and at times, conflict. However, should you feel the need to satiate your ego at the cost of someone’s humanity; your comment will be deleted. We’re all equals here.”
I think LDF exemplified really diplomatic moderating after bearing some heavy and impolite criticism.
Authenticity is so subjective. We are farang. There are so many different experiences that I am happy to delve into the variety of “competing” sources.
Much appreciated k that’s notmyname.
Hey Laura,
I’ve just recently come across your blog and I am now reading through it and thoroughly enjoying it. It takes a lot of intangible qualities to do what you have done through the injuries and distance. Im a new fan.
I want to say before I get started on this that what follows are interpretations of facts that are all just my opinions and I want it to be known that I mean no disrespect by anything. I know things can get tricky online with disagreements so I just want it to be known that I love your blog and Sylvie’s too, and I’m only commenting on what I know and what I’ve read today in this post.
I think its worth it to note that motives matter. Although they may not appeal to your particular sensibilities they offer an interesting difference that deserves some attention. Sylvie’s first crowd funding campaign was to build a website so that she may produce content that her supporters would ultimately consume. Essentially she was asking to paid for her work in advance and mind you, comparatively, she was asking to be paid very little.
Her second crowd funding campaign is indeed to help with the mission itself. That makes it fundamentally different and a first for her in motive. This is evidence for the change in perspective that the TEDtalk had on her, and why she would cite that as the impetus for her second crowd funding campaign. One of the points to which you tie to her lack of authenticity, this is why the motives matter in this particular case.
Initially she seems to be going to Thailand with or without the website her Kick Starter campaign was funding (as evidenced by her previous travels and the video on the site). She created this campaign to see if her previously established audience would be willing to fund a website so that she may share her experience with them. They were essentially buying something from her (at a remarkably low price) and a product to which she has more than adequately provided.
She has been there for two years; there are two crowd-funding campaigns in question and only one of which can actually be deemed as selfish (which is a harsh word to use considering all the content she gives back).
I would confidently say that she has done this herself up to this point (the mission, not the website) and she has not readily asked for help and therefore has not misled anyone.
I would also like to point out that I think that your call for authenticity is hurtful in a very specific way towards Sylvie. It lacks evidence and its full of suggestions that are also lacking evidence. To have her as your only example of this idea is to point at her specifically. To use her picture and to cite her name first, and then to go on to the detailed explanations of “constructing persona”, “manipulation of events”, and the “omission of truths” (which is also what has happened in your article when you left out the motives, citing that they didn’t appeal to your sensibilities, however being truths that effect the discussion as a whole) is in my view, outright disrespectful.
You see, by making statements like “I’m not inside Sylvie’s head, so I don’t know what she was thinking while she was writing, ie. if there was intent to manipulate.” you are suggesting something pretty acutely. Not to mention the other horrendous examples that you provide of “people… crafting their experience on their social media platforms” in your “On Authenticity Online” section which basically reads like you’re saying those things specifically about Sylvie (just my opinion). You are suggesting a persona of Sylvie and making it easy to swallow to your readers by the trust that they already have in you (which I’m sure is large, because you have awesome content). So, without any further research they can begin to believe, based on your article, all kinds of things about Sylvie personally, and that she has now consciously manipulated things in order to simply make money.
However, honestly, I don’t believe this is your intention at all, but you have included all the required equipment for any random viewer who clicks this link off of their Facebook newsfeed to make the associations required to paint Sylvie in this way.
I think its wrong and I think it’s worth it to maybe follow your own advice about being responsible with your readership.
(I love your blog)
(i really do love your blog)
Offering an opinion in a respectful manner. I think Joe Miller sounds like a pretty stand up guy!
Lindsey, thank you! Your articles on Fightland and blogs like this one are so much fun to read!
Hi Joe Miller – I’ve been crazy busy here and haven’t been able to respond to your comment. I just wanted to echo Lindsey’s sentiment. Thank you for adding to the discussion (even if your viewpoint differs from mine). Glad you like the blog.
Just watched the video you added. The way Sylvie has managed to finance her Thailand fighting life might be controversial to some, but regardless, I think it’s admirable she’s so committed to her dreams.
I think you should just admit that you were attacking Sylvie. I honestly think you are the one who iis not being honest. You say this article is not about her but you quote her, you post a video that she posted (Amanda one), you posted a photo of her crowdfunding effort. 80% by volume of what you wrote is about her. You imply a lot of mean shit about her, that she’s not authentic, that she is devaluing the sport, that she’s not transparent. And in some weird f*d up way, you make a vague nodding threat to her by saying that by a person being too open and honest, its dangerous and you can get your hand broken for doing so (so better watch out, Sylvie?). wtf?
I supposed she could have mentioned that she made $3G in 2012 and after emigrating to a new country then 2 years later, asked for more money. I suppose you could criticize her that she hasn’t become the female Samart Payakaroon of the sport. But I don’t think she ever claimed she was or was going to be. She’s way better and harder than she was 3 years prior and she trains f*n hard and surpassed her goal of 100 fights. She’s won like 60+ times. If she really sucked, she would’ve lost at least half, right? No one would watch, right? No one would bet on her, right? I don’t really see this happening.
Ya, I’m defending her because she trains and fights f*n hard. She’s put up hundreds of videos of all of her fights, hundreds of blogs about her experiences, and films details down to her diet, training and conditioning, To a beginner like me, she’s f*n amazing. I know lots of girls, boys, men and women in Thailand train like her; I know lots of foreigners go to Thailand and train like her. These people too are pretty fantastic. What ordinary Joe can run 10K per day and train 6 hours of muay Thai 6 days a week?
I think you are the one who is not being forthcoming or honest. I think you need to dig deep down and see that you are jealous of Sylvie and being passive-aggressive. That means, you talk a LOT OF SHIT about somebody in a back-handed way on the Internet, even vaguely warn and threaten her, then say, “oh no, you are misreading what I wrote!”
Yes, I gave Sylvie my money. I’ll give her more too if she asks for it. Because Sylvie is f*n amazing.
I think you have a good blog but I think you are jealous of Sylvie. And yes, I am a double board-certified psychiatrist.
Karen, obviously this post is partially about her, but it’s not solely about her. I outlined all of this above, including why this campaign inspired me to write this post.
I think you’ve misread a lot of what I wrote, including some sense of veiled threats. Don’t know what to say to all of that.
Assuming that the above comment is directly solely at me, you’re also defending things about Sylvie I haven’t criticized. Don’t know what else to say to that either.
All the best in your journey.
And why do you post her video “Help send Sylvie to Thailand” and thank a person for sending it to you with no explanation to your readers about why you are posting the video? That is passive-aggressive. You imply all this SHIT about Sylvie then lie or deny or ignore that you are doing so. In the video, Sylvie looks very pretty; she is very polite and talks in a dreamy state about muay Thai then she asks for money (and goes on to fight 100+ times in Thailand). Is that so wrong?
I really think what you wrote in this blog is unfair. It also shows that you are jealous of Sylvie. You may deny it in the comment below.