JayBee

A waiter from Villa Rouge -- who's not underage and passed his drug test, so had no problems in Monday's raid -- told me that on Tuesday evening the bar had seven boys left dancing. There are reasons why this particular raid might have found such a high number of boys failing the pee test, other than their being intentionally drugged en masse by management, which seems a wild bit of speculation. On another note, if the test detects drug use spanning previous days or even weeks (and I don't know if it does), it would seem difficult for any bar to ensure its staff will pass the tests, no matter how vigilant one might be about keeping drugs, as well as boys on drugs, off the premises.

Any books you buy will appear as files in the Kindle management page of your Amazon account. You can transfer them to your Kindle via USB. (BTW, Kindle works in the USA via Sprint, not ATT.) I enjoyed 'Bangkok 8' very much, its successor less so, and the third one very disappointing (to me, anyhow).

You can get more information about the bill, and updates on its progress (if any), at this site: www.immigrationequality.org

Don't worry GT, a lot of people have trouble with the nuisances. An informative post, since I'd assumed yours meant... Gay Takes Hetero Admirers Into Lusty Assignations Nearly Daily As for another one, I was sure it at least started with Jaded Old Man.........

Some further confirmation about the LA flights: Thai announces board meeting results From what I've read, those planes don't have premium economy seats (at least for now). Also FYI, it appears that it's the Monday and Wednesday flights to/from LA that are being cut.

It's a function of the efficiency of the plane, along with its capacity, the fares you can competitively charge with a full load of passengers, and of course the cost of fuel. The total energy for a long nonstop might well be less, even factoring in the cost of hauling the fuel for the last part of the flight, but the passenger revenue and the cost of fuel still have to match up. As someone who flies from NY regularly, I've been following this pretty closely. Thai has cancelled all service from NY effective July 1. They are selling "all four" of their A340-500 planes, from the various news accounts I've seen. If so, this would eliminate the nonstop from LA, but it appears that they will continue LA service with a direct (instead of nonstop) service, starting later this year. I've read those flights will be on a Boeing 777-200ER. From what I've seen, I believe your January ticket will be OK but you might not be flying nonstop, and there's a chance they won't have premium economy on the planes for that route. For that you'll have to wait and see.

This is all about rising fuel costs, combined with the existing challenge of making these ultra-long-haul routes profitable. The problem is that for any flight, obviously, you need to take off with enough fuel to reach your destination, and haul it with you until it's needed. From what I've read, there are diminishing returns once you get past about 6,000 miles -- you're burning a lot of extra fuel just to carry the fuel you'll need for the final part of the trip. NY-BKK is about 8,500 miles, if I recall correctly. For this reason, ultra-long-haul flights on the A340-500 have had problems staying profitable for everyone using them. When you add the recent runup in fuel costs, it's made an already borderline situation impossible. Singapore Air just switched its Newark-Singapore nonstop to all business class seats, which should help if in fact they can keep the planes full enough. This is also one of the reasons why it's not, in fact, always more cost-effective to fly a nonstop route than to include a stop. In fact, I believe Thai has said they are also canceling the LAX-BKK nonstop later this year and replacing it with a direct route that stops in Osaka, using a different aircraft. As for the four A340-500s they're selling, it's possible that those include the ones used for the LA nonstops, and the article's reference to their all being used for NY is an error. Whatever its other problems, the A380 is irrelevant to any future NY-BKK nonstop service because it doesn't have the range. I'm disappointed that Thai isn't staying in NY with direct service, stopping in Japan (or wherever), even on a less-frequent schedule. But that's how it goes...

I agree with that too. I've stayed at the Cafe Royale numerous times and always enjoyed it. There are less expensive alternatives, but for a first-timer to Pattaya especially, it's a great choice.

I can't comment on the Pinnacle, since I've never stayed there, but I've stayed at the Tarntawan a few times and agree that it's a good choice. The small suites there aren't that much more than regular rooms, and are nice. For just slightly more money, I also like the Swiss Lodge on Convent Road - no problem if you have a visitor, but they take his ID at the front desk (a good thing), and it's very convenient to Silom Road. You can get better rates at Swiss Lodge online via sites including asiarooms.com than you can by booking directly.

The Rosetta Stone program is good as an introduction to Thai. You'll build some vocabulary and start to get used to the sentence structures, cadence, tones, etc. The Pimsleur CDs are also OK, but also limited in what you'll get out of them. Either (or both) will give you a bit of a start on learning Thai, but that's about it. Ultimately I think you'd need to progress to more intensive programs, and probably work on learning the written form, if you really want to learn Thai.

Are you saying that 'bpun bpun' means something in Thai, and 'Pan Pan' is a poor transliteration of the restaurant's Thai name? Otherwise, it seems to me that the pronounciation doesn't change just because the Thais can't manage to say it. If you're Mr. Smith, your name doesn't become Sa-MIT the moment you arrive in Thailand. Of course, it might occasionally be necessary to butcher a pronounciation (bpun bpun) if only to make yourself understood.

Visas to the USA are difficult but not impossible - for the right applicant. I have one friend from what seems to be a wealthy Thai family, with a very good job, who travels to the USA (among other places) without any trouble. I have another Thai friend from a similar background who tried to get a visa to attend a 2-month program to study English in the USA and was turned down - I assume because he didn't have a good employment history, but I'm not sure what reason he was given, if any. A third Thai friend got a visa to study in Australia, and now resides there, and plans at some point to apply for a US tourist visa from Australia - my guess is he will have a good chance at getting it, but who knows? I don't doubt that someone could help a Thai get a visa, but it would probably take quite some time and expense to help him become a "good applicant" with an employment history, a record of visiting other countries, etc. Here is an unofficial list of countries that Thais can visit without a visa, so it might not be competely accurate, but... http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=701425

Last year, a young Thai asked me for 10k baht, saying he could repay it the following month. I told him he could have it if he'd repay 5k when he promised to. The next month, without being asked, he repaid the 5k. I never asked for the other 5k, since my purpose was just to see if he'd actually repay anything. Needless to say, I was impressed that he did.

Gaybutton: The fine is high but there have been similar anecdotes related on the Stickman site of high fines for the same thing. Here's his comment following the most recent one: "Almost every story I have heard of Westerners getting caught for exceeding the allowances sees guys approached by officers after they have already cleared Immigration and Customs. And ouch, the fines are awfully stuff!" It's odd that they can nail you after you've cleared customs. In most countries, since the agents could never prove that you brought everything in yourself (perhaps other passengers brought in the "extras" legally and gave them to you after clearing customs...) this would seem unlikely to happen. But of course, TIT. The times I have brought extra cartons in, I have packed them in the bottom of my carry-on bag while on the plane, and left the bag from the duty-free shop behind, so as not to attract attention. Jomtien: The clear lesson of this story is for tourists to stop sneaking in extra cigarettes for expat friends, no matter how much they plead. It's just not worth the risk.

I returned via JFK last month and had no trouble at all. However, for the first time I can ever remember, there were two agents at the end of the walkway leaving the plane asking to see everyone's passport.

Hmm, well 'sponsor' would apply to you, not to them, so that still leaves us a word short. I like the honesty of 'sponsor' though, since it acknowledges openly that financial support is, if not all that the relationship is about, then certainly an essential ingredient. I agree it's different from 'fuck buddy' or 'friend' but I'm not sure it 'says more.' In some ways it says less, but it's a better fit. I'd be interested in hearing what Thai word or words the boys themselves use to refer to their 'sponsors' (and how those word/s translate). Or maybe that's how they came up with 'sponsor,' by translating what they already use among themselves.

This is true of more "conventional" arrangements too. Several Thais with "regular" jobs and boyfriends (that is, not ones who support them financally) have told me that they trust their BFs not to fool around on them - telling me this, that is, while naked and in bed, or soon afterwards. Of course, this is hardly a Thai phenomenon.

The situation - "offering a boy a good life and then snatching it back" - is indeed an extreme one and the penalty harsh, but I sympathize with the farang. The answer to "is someone reliable and trustworthy" is really yes-or-no. "Mostly," "generally," "usually" and the like are all just the same as "no." For the farang, the first indication that the boy viewed his new arrangement as flexible was enough. Plus, the boy understood perfectly well the risk he was taking when he decided not only to do it, but do it on the sly by going to what he thought would be a "safe" area of town. I'm not sure I buy the "didn't want to be rude" bit either.

Is there a male equivalent for 'mistress'? Perhaps 'ward' isn't far off the mark; it worked for Bruce Wayne. I've heard a certain type of boy you can encounter in the Silom cafes & discos, but who doesn't work in the bars, described as a 'professional boyfriend,' which I think is quite a good description - though it doesn't exactly fit what we're talking about here.

I think I have a different idea of what "totally versatile" means, but in any case... I've known escorts (socially) in NY and London who, as I recall, would generally prefer to be on the bottom with clients. Assuming they are good at their jobs, it's just easier - less effort not only physically, but if they aren't actually aroused by the customer then there's no real requirement to get it up, keep it up and perform through the whole business. Also, I'd guess, they know their bodies and business well enough to make sure things are clean, whereas to go sticking theirs elsewhere might just turn out unpleasant, shall we say. These are all just practical considerations, of course, and nothing to do with what Thais consider the typical roles of ladyboys, gay boys, etc. But I'm guessing there's a practical side to many of the barboys' preferences too.