macaroni21

Tell that to straight men especially in conservative societies. To get pussy, they have to commit to lifelong marriage.

This map should help. https://shamelessmacktwo.travel.blog/2023/12/14/map-of-pattayaland-area-december-2023/

@spoon you beat me to it 😂

I am not disputing that. But it is one thing to discuss economic realities dispassionately (however these realities are created), but quite another to gloat about the (I think imagined) imminent collapse of the West.

It isn't meaningful to compare 2024 figures with 2023 when china only reopened to travel in 2023. A better comparison would be against the last full pre-covid year, which is 2019. In the same way, Thailand speaks of the 39million visitors it received in 2019 as the measure of recovery from the pandemic. As I pointed out, if we annualise the 17 million till July 2024, we may see 34 million visitors to china in the full 2024. It is below the pre-covid figure. Perhaps I should have said "shrunk market" rather than "shrinking market" because only time will tell what 2025 brings. Will it grow or shrink further? My understanding too. In any case I have been told by a Shanghai tour guide that the majority of Chinese tourists headed to Europe are in packaged group tours. They are price sensitive and would more likely use Chinese airlines rather than European airlines (also Chinese-speaking cabin crew and Chinese meals on board). So even if outbound Chinese tourism (to Europe) grows strongly in the next couple of years - not likely given the economic doldrums in china - it won't be the European airlines benefitting.

I think the debate so far is missing the main point, albeit that the thread is about Euorpean airlines cutting back on flights to China. This statistic is key, especially if we see it from China's perspective. It is likely that 2024 will end with about 34 million foreign visitors, only 70% of the 49 million the country received in 2019. Lots of small businesses in China catering to foreign visitors must be suffering. Tourism in China is of three broad types: The very biggest, by far is domestic tourism. You go to any attraction and chances are that domestic tourists will outnumber foreigners by a few multiples. This sector currently has its own problems but it is outside the scope of our discussion, The second biggest group, I believe, would be the cross-border "tourists" from countries that adjoin China, such as Vietnam, Myanmar, Mongolia, Kazakhstan and Russia. They come in for a day and rarely go beyond the border town. Many are traders. For the purposes of this discussion (about flights), they're irrelevant. The third group are those who fly in, or maybe cross from HongKong and then travel around other cities. When we are discussing flights from Europe, we're really talking about a segment of a segment. Europeans are a portion of the third group. All the rest (from other Asian countries or America) are irrelevant to this discussion about flights from Europe. Wikipedia has stats from 2019, giving you a sense of the breakdown by country of origin. The first big table there lumps the cross-border visitors with the fly-in visitors; it even includes Hong Kong and Macau. Not helpful, though you can see how big the cross-border numbers are. It's the second table "Foreign arrivals in Beijing" which gives a better sense of the make-up of the fly-in segment of visitors. The numbers themselves refer to Beijing, but it's the proportions that interest us. What is interesting is that, excluding those from Hong Kong, the top four (USA, Japan, South Korean, Taiwan) are NOT from Europe. The top ten in 2019 were: 1. USA 629,000 2. Japan 247,000 3. South Korea 242,000 4. Taiwan 222,000 5. Germany 198,000 6. UK 153,000 7. Australia 141,000 8. Singapore 127,000 9. France 120,000 10. Canada 100,000. The total for these top ten is 2,179,000. Of these, 471,000 (22%) were from Europe. Very roughly then, the issue of discontinued flights affects only about a fifth or a quarter of fly-in tourists. The rest fly in from neighbouring countries such as Japan or across the Pacific, such as USA and Canada. The point is that even as Chinese Airlines are in a position to take nearly 100% market share of the European traffic due to the withdrawal of European Airlines, it does not amount to all that much. They'd still have to compete against Southeast Asian airlines, Japanese and Korean airlines for the much larger segments that do not come from Europe. Above all, 100% market share of a market that is 30% smaller than 2019 - and I think it is significantly more than 30% down, because the cross-border numbers are likely to be holding up, so that means the fly-in numbers must be much lower - is no cause for celebration. The minister or officials in charge of tourism in Beijing must be far more concerned about the drop in total numbers, not about the pick-up in market share in a shrinking market. It's important to see things in perspective.

Famished is not good either. Distracting. What I do is to go to a nearby 7-11 and get an ice-cream. The sugar keeps hunger at bay for a couple of hours. The ice-cream melts into liquid inside you, unlike a bun which has bulk and takes a while to digest. I think @vinapu once mentioned he did the same ice-cream trick.

Both maps have problems. Referring to the second map, I noticed: 1. Scandinavians should be shown as less hairy than other Europeans(as @Keithambrose has already pointed out. 2. China, Mongolia and Korea should be as yellow and smooth as southeast Asia. 3. Japan maybe should be light green i.e. way smoother than the map shows. Hairy Hokkaido is only if one refers to the original Ainu population who are now just a tiny percentage of the current population of Hokkaido who are no different from the rest of Japan. 4. Central Asia - from what I have seen of Uzbeks, Kazakhs and khirgiz, are no hairier than southeast Asians, Chinese and Koreans. However, these places have a significant Russian minority, so it makes the average a bit hairier. 5. Iran should be as black as north Africa and the Levant. 6. Northern India is as hairy as France and Germany (rust red), while southern India only slightly less so, maybe dirty blue-green as currently painted. Of course these are averages. In countries with considerable immigration, the variation within a country can be great.

I have seen this too. I call it the satyr distribution. Look up images of satyrs and you'll see why I refer to it thus. It also happens that satyrs are supposed to have insatiable appetite for sex. 😂

The thing about shows is that the participants have to have talent for dancing, acting, comedic timing and general musicality. Moonlight models are pretty useless in these respects. They know how to pace and pose... and that's about it. I won't have any expectations except to be faced with higher prices.

I'm always amused how easily people are taken in by these online rankings of penis sizes. They're virtually all rubbish. There are serious methodological weaknesses, based on self reports, by self selecting volunteers. No standardized way of measuring. Huge selection bias, huge pride bias. The few (very few) scientific reviews of more controlled studies (still imperfect but better than self reports by self selected volunteers) arrive at an average erect penile length of about 13 to 14 cm, or 5.5 inches. A true 6-incher is already above average, not the normal guy. As for differences by nationality, the best correlation is with average male height in the country. It stands to reason. Taller men need larger shoe sizes; they have longer thumbs, generally speaking. So a country with the tallest men such as Netherlands will probably have the longest and thickest dicks. Countries with shortest men e.g. central American countries, will probably have the smallest. But in any case, unless you're a resolute bottom, how does dick size matter? There's a lot more to erotic fulfillment than length or girth.

From 4 years ago in 2020: https://shamelessmacktwo.travel.blog/2020/04/07/blind-optimism-blah-outcomes/

I think it was the old Tawan in the first video (1248234). The back wall of the second video is very familiar, but I can't place it.

Agree +1 It depends on what sort of bar we're referring to. If it is drinking bars (with or without hosts) then yes, these are semi-social places and therefore culture-dependent. It's not a simple Asian-Farang divide. A bar that caters to Chinese tastes will look and feel different from one that caters to Japanese tastes or Indian tastes. And does "Western taste" include Country-and-Western American tastes? As for gogo bars, these places are more about flesh than culture, and flesh is flesh. The gogo bars of Bangkok have equal appeal, I think, to gay men of any culture. See my story about the Chinese visitor in Fresh Boy in my story https://shamelessmacktwo.travel.blog/2024/09/27/pouffes-ahoy-at-fresh-boy/ This guy took to things like duck to water. However, when the gogo bars put on shows, then the question of cultural taste kicks in. What kind of show? What sort of humour? What genre of music? What situational references? What sensitivities to avoid? I am pretty sure that the invitation to women in bars is driving much of the adaptation in less-than-positive ways. Much has been said about their preference for clothed men rather than naked men since they enjoy the company of men for the illusion of romance rather than the carnal; with that, there follows a bias towards just sitting and chatting instead of offing and bonking. W hen host/bar boys can earn enough out of tips for charming the girls at the sofa, they become less interested in being off'd by men. For a glimpse into what girls (Japanese girls in this case) want out of a boy bar, see this post: https://shamelessmacktwo.travel.blog/2024/04/18/host-bars-that-arent-for-us/ As Thai bars adapt in a similar direction, it's no wonder we feel frustrated with them.

Why resort to laser pointers, or causing embarrassment to customers, as @emiel1981 experienced? What's wrong with a low-tech solution like wearing numbers? Why dispense with it?