Riobard

I respect that the towel etiquette is normative in NoAmer and European baths. Always abided in the day. One of the first things that struck me in Brasil was the custom alteration (towards flex) in those settings. Catechism teacher asks what makes the Pope infallible, kid answers "so who's to stop him?" I do not need to come close to infallibility assertion at 117.

This is articulate, to be sure, but sitting in my pad here, this assertion is frankly unhinged. Where I see other customers, logging now 9 months cumulative access to the venues, clothing is optional and NOT non-normative. Maybe you have vision-filtering that categorically divides between your desired attire and Emperors who have no clothes. But I witness both sides of the clothing optional spectrum. Everyone there knows it and thinks it is copacetic ... erm, almost everyone. Let us depict accuracy for readers prospectively visiting.

Only behaviour is ugly or not. Physicality is all unugly with a gradient or degrees of unugly ... no binary.

Sodomy decriminalization is secure. Was just an example of what M2M commercial sex is up against legally, attitudes and what not. It might help if we neutralized our terms to dissociate from the male-female commercial sex spectrum. Eg, Our hires are, simply, "men". More than straight men, we (myself included) excitedly use reference terms that highlight the physiological aspects of intimacy surrogacy. We might consider altering our language choices so they sound less objectifying and genitally focused. These habits only perpetuate being dumped into the same soup as commercial sex at large.

"Thou shalt wear a towel" and "you are strictly in a sauna environment because I say that is the place you are in" are briefly worded dictates. They are simple admonishments on the face of it. Anyone who thinks they are not bossy in tone is 'simply stupid', to use language that is relatable here (not my personal choice). This is reminiscent of dictates here about price fixing. Too many crossing guards. I could not unpack the rationale of these apparently inflexible rulings but tried to deconstruct and describe what lies behind my point of view on the subject. OK, let's put an end to the psychological warfare that emerged, certainly not my intention. Truce, dude(s). We can all stay in the dark about stretching our mutual comprehension efforts. Pissers tucked away ... contest done and dusted. So now: I go to one-of-a-kind bathhouses in Brasil. They are not, dare I say, bordellos. I do not enter the steam or sauna but I am symbolically in an environment that I (for my own good) term a sauna, also for the sake of harmony. I would sauna Finnish off the mandatory ritual and demonstrate meek compliance, exchanging my clothing for a towel or stylish panties, than incur the disapproval of my sauna peers. Erm ... I promise to keep in line with my towel or undies and will happily be subject to inspection in this regard. Though my footwear does not get wet and I use orthotics, I will wear flip-flops so as not to deviate from the required sauna uniform. Though I am not de facto in a sauna ... I will take the hit and behave according to essentially being de jure in a sauna. Sidenote: I like oatmeal cookies and hot cocoa before being tucked into bed. A simply stated preference. If out of cookie stock, I like the crust cut off my sammich. Order in the world will now, it is intended, be restored. Latbear, you have been served manifest notice. I hope you can adapt and not be one of the missing.

Good idea. I connect in Panama most of the time. USD currency involves stop-loss planning but sights are do-able in a short time. The fly in the appointment: quality is OK but fare prices have inflated far more than other airlines I use.

Or be up that early!

I question the lineup you could recruit over a week away, likeohmygod. Solo Caribbean vacations can be isolating if you land in a sex-arid zone. You are clever and have already likely thought about it, but a local sugarbaby tagging along, perhaps? I can think of a few candidates for myself that I would happily take to, say, Mexico. Of the genre you describe.

Kkkkk ... it really should be clothing optional, for many reasons. But to clarify, fee structure varies according to in situ attire, in my experience. Clothing is partially and subtly associated with availability and intent aspects of communication, on both client and provider side. If you do not think those factors seep into exchange negotiation we might not be frequenting the same places. I am not attempting to endorse any particular experimentation, but how behaviour patterns evolve is typically related to perceived subjective reward. Sometimes the reinforcement is quantifiable. That is usually a requirement for sustaining my own choices. I have done both towel and streetclothes in bordels, eventually settling on the latter. Further, the dressed garoto upticks appeal for me. My own simplistic clothing projects a tad ambivalence while as wearer I salaciously or diffidently (who cares which) signal interest through other levels of presentation. This all happens very quickly so as not to squander time for whom the clock is important. There are other eroticized aspects of attire on either side that escalate my excitement, nothing to do with garment fetishism. I like the prospect to tease me through and under conventional fabric barriers and I like to discover him through a bit of archeological excavation. I like us both to work a little and build up to the main course, with broad yet pragmatic distance between starting blocks and finish line. If you think this is quirky, realize we have all done the same outside of the 117-type setting. And of course, the choreography can help substitute for limits imposed by language proficiency. Unless creatively replicating the dance of the 7 veils, towel removal is a split-second strip. Why the rush? There is already enough push for the Gatorade, rinse, suck and fuck routine without totally having to capitulate to sterile cookie-cutter experiences. What floats your boat may be a big yawn for me and vice versa. But I would never summarily dismiss your preference to look like you just emerged from the shower, especially if it has utility beyond convenience and conformism. I suspect it doesn't. The sole thing in common with the footballer referenced is a single 7-letter R name. Latbear posed the question. I sense he got more than he bargained for. Bottom line: no restriction or inadequate rationale for either style choice. If you still fail to grasp why clothing can add an edge at the personal level, no explanation possible. Not for lack of trying.

Kkkkkk ... when you tire of the unicorn, what species next? I am stumped.

A ruling in T&T on recently challenged anal sex criminalization (illegal though rarely enforced, any 2 people either gender) comes down in a few days.

Enjoy Iguaçu! Lovely.

Yes, in several Caribbean nations. But be grateful living in the western world. Also reflected in highly disproportionate STI rates. Just be careful. Maybe consider Dominican Republic to avoid the legal risks.

Love the quote, but his insightful logic is up against the legally formalized counterargument that central to the ills of commercial sex and its definition is that clients are solicited indiscriminantly. Nonpaid hook-ups come with more discretionary and empowered selectivity, notwithstanding that providers have the prerogative of client selectivity. But again, conflict theory repudiates the notion that female sex workers' screening methods are analogous to the choice factor intrinsic to noncompensated sex. Just another illiustration of the challenges to dismantling vice law and its theoretical underpinnings. If my life depended on winning the debate in these times I might take the criminalization position, antithetical to my values. None of this impacts much on me ... I average a day per year on U.S. soil, but I am somewhat riveted.

Jamaica ... hmmmm ... clack click clack click ... erm, computah says No. Commercial sex illegal but "tolerated". Sodomy/buggery punishable by life imprisonment. Me not likey that combo. Just be sure to wiki before you sticky.

Oh virgins like aubergines?

I will PM "Jack" and remind him. Spring still ongoing.

Me shocked! Such rigidity unlike you. Eyebrows knit, gaze upwards, rubbing chin. I do not go to saunas though I fuck garotos at the places loosely called "saunas". I don't get bent out of shape or inflexible about the shorthand nomenclature used to label these venues. As I opined before, they are hybrids of establishments, and I now append this ... establishments conceptualized within a USAmericocentric context. Diehard positions about it can be little more than amusing. Let me riddle you this: I like my body just fine but the nuances of complex commercial sex mating rituals there pretty much supplement the cost of the wardrobe I wear while enjoying my time at a comfort and preferential level on my terms. Clothing projects a little bit of messaging that never yields 'disadvantage Riobard'. Not that money is a huge factor or motivator for me. Only a minor consideration in a place geared to feeding libido. Earlier joking aside, I wholeheartedly agree with the axiom regarding not sweating about your body, though your body should sweat without clothing in the sweat areas.

Internal contradiction: shortsighted support for sodomy criminalization positioned in tandem with sodomy (conjugal intimacy) as a requirement to verify same-sex couple definitional criteria for immigration purposes. Sorry ... cannot make it any gomorrah clear than that. Sexually green couple? Green card more out of reach.

As well, a central basis for sponsoring a foreign national same-sex spouse is evidence that oodles of conjugal cornholing occurs!!!! Stupidity is truly our undoing.

Downright viaggravating.

And little more than a decade previous to gay marriage legalization one-third (!) of the Supreme Court justices voted against rolling back sodomy law. (I neglected to mention earlier.) Many of us will not see commercial sex decriminalized in our lifetime.

I think that consumers where commercial sex is illegal invest considerable psychological capital suppressing the stark reality that the terrain is peppered here and there with tripwires of prosecution and associated consequences. These defenses are difficult to shore up at a time when vice law is shoved into our faces. The anxiety is naturalistic and realistic, for now. When consumers became indictable in neighbouring Canada 3 years ago barely a blip was registered. And law enforcement certainly did not go full-SWAT on it. Any site containing the non-neutral non-inocuous moniker "boy toy" is now going to raise more eyebrows and perk up the wrong ears more than ever. It worked fine for a long time. It does not merit internal criticism but is worth being vigilant about in these turbulent times. Any language legitimately colloquial is twistable and spinnable in the wrong hands.

If 117 garotos do not meet your standards, the day of the week at MR will not be too relevant. Depends on your tastes.

Some of us prefer a more drawn out process working towards the creamy centre. Give me a surfer beach over a naturist beach