Riobard

Decoding anybody? I have been to Bangkok. Most of this would have dissuaded me from visiting but I quite enjoyed the several interesting weeks there.

I follow skating enthusiastically and have met a few notable Canadian competitors socially. My peers and I don’t objectify skaters based on physical attractiveness factors. That level of commentary is just dumb, contextually. The spoken word poetry in Malinin’s music has been criticized in some camps but I don’t mind it. It might be deemed too ‘precious’ for a less stellar athlete. He and Hanyu have in common excellent Canadian choreographer Bourne and there was a brief slow sequence some years ago in Hanyu’s program that mesmerized me. Looking forward to the Milan event. I watched Ilya thru the recent circuit with NBC commentary due to my location. Johnny and Tara try to bring a little bit of fashion fun and flare and play well off of each other. It is nonessential but otherwise broadcasters tend to simply list off jumps and rotations. Weir would be brattier if he were to be given more rope. I will prolly tape both American and Canadian broadcasting to amputate the approximate 40% of time riddled with repetitive commercial breaks. Right now I’m in 35 Celsius weather but will be back soon in a state of freeze and the Olympics will be a welcome treat by my fireplace, bridging the span to a subsequent ‘snowbird’ trip.

Hahahah … I was wondering when the panic would set in as it’s down almost 2 weeks. In short, to be reinstated em breve. I think it will be a reset without the post history. There have been a few other changes too inconsequential to list, not that any represent improvements regarding the venue’s deficits. These things sometimes occur when nobody is designated as backup for accounts and passwords and the social media organizer has moved on. IDK in this case. The onsite A/C bar screen ads are reinstated, I would surmise a harbinger for Instagram, X, &c reappearance.

Like the man said. The notion of deprivation is primed more robustly when something is taken away, but it’s both a flimsy argument and accompanied by the absence of comparability in such a way as to circle back to the deprivation narrative. That additionally contributes to the perception and assertion that the practice is essentially heinous. Yet if it shoulda coulda woulda been limited or restricted there’d be no additional data to support the same idea regarding sensitivity and function. Only a ratio shift in terms of the circumcision binary. An extant sufficient proportionality among billions globally has yet to yield consensus. Anchored beliefs are hard to crack. We know this as well based on other platforms whose language and imagery supports the concern that paedophilia adjacency is subtly if not overtly endorsed to the extent that interested members are turned off and refrain from explicit descriptions of trade experiences due to the risk of inadvertent association with perversion.

Try not to get too sucked in, @unicorn

That you describe it as mutilation is a thing. I need to know the BMI of anybody weighing in on this topic … that and other adult variables influence my response.

I find the difference impossible to gauge due to where the member is predominantly positioned.

Just over 17? One would think some think it’s more flexible. I’m not one of them. They are also sad cases hiding behind an arbitrary age setpoint when some areas of autonomy are undermined by the expediency of access to life’s necessaries. Forced choice. As you know, and as some sex tourists integrate sensitively into opportunistic play.

I haven’t met a circumcised man in my personal life incapable of robust orgasm. I have met uncut men incapable of arousal and orgasm. I haven’t treated a man in my practice who proclaimed an association between circumcision status and sexual response … yet inquiring about sexual function was boilerplate in my practice. The substantial majority of men in my practice presenting with function concerns had exercised the adult autonomy of doing shit do their bodies. Some went on to pursue major invasive surgery, costly rehab, etc etc, in attempts to mitigate the sequelae of that shit. I have about half of foreskin tissue residually present at about complete lower circumference, a little less aesthetically idiosyncratic than if it were 21:00-03:00. The northern boreal doc must have been abruptly called to an emergency mid-procedure that left my southern half unexposed. Not one iota of sensitivity differential. Sensitivity is too uniformly high to discern a difference. I don’t add this to make a case, as anecdotes aren’t worth the splash of half and half in your coffee while the trajectory of my emissions is not governed by hemispheric variables.

No, in fact, what a boring vocal minority and pill you are, still trolling here, generic Aubnocksius, brand Ahzwhole, streetname ‘Keethqueef’ for its noteworthy hit of induced boredom. As well as an apt intrafamilial reference point for an inlaw’s take on a presidents’ personality. Yet easy for any smart person to exposed to metabolize. Nice try to distract from your actual relatability to the topic and reality that the proportional age-associated weighting of your personal genital observation in a LMIC would add another layer to her psychodiagnostic formulation. Tell her I had a Keethqueef slipped into my caipirinha and see her knowing nod, the one distinct from nodding off to the Nobody 1 & 2 film series streaming on Apple.

IDK, but former club dancer and sometimes sauna masseur (non-erotic) gives a decent rubdown. https://www.instagram.com/massoterapeutariodejaneiro?igsh=cWxwMzBtdTY1Mmsz

There’s a rabbit hole somewhere, I’m sure, whose inhabitants have ordered one from UberEats, and prolly a seminar on this tailored just for you.

Because while both in possession of a both a penis and grey matter, that is, two head sizes, they do not share them or the same subjective impression of tactile stimulation. There would be no valid objective measurable gradient of pleasurable sensation.

The vocal minority endlessly pushing the abuse narrative, consent vitiated, etc, always has a leg to stand on because getting to zero sum and putting the debate to rest is impossible given that procedure pros and cons exist across variable categories of reality and meaning. They are mainly qualitative and not amenable to quantity ratings that can be positioned either side, although epidemiology can measure certain incidence and prevalence aspects. No complete adult male referendum will easily shift the practice to the point where age of majority choice is the default. Sexual sensitivity impairment can only be within-person evaluated pre- and post surgery in later life as no other male matched demographically is a valid comparator. A developed male’s subjective impression of altered (ie, attenuated pleasurable sensation), only subjectively accessible at same cognitive developmental level such as young adult intervention, cannot stand as proxy for the up or down regulation of infants in general latent sexual function years subsequent. It’s not as disparate as losing baby teeth and wisdom tooth extraction but it is apples/oranges. Isolated outlier deleterious consequences don’t reinforce the soapbox. The absurd comparison of female genital mutulation is an insulting disservice to the female population subject to that horror.

Well it is mystery meat.

Stop shitting in the street during the fitting and you’ll eventually get there.

I got it and when I inquired as to the worm’s viral load (VL) to determine STI risk it wiggled out of the offer, as bug-chasing invertebrates are flatly inclined to do. It can eat my shit when I’m dead and buried.

Since everybody is now prolly wondering, STI screening, and possibly antibiotics for antimicrobial resistant bacterial infection, is accessible at a Rio prefeitura public SUS clinic near the Catete Metro and a few blocks west of the Republican Palace … Rua Silveira Martins, 161. Bloods and urine. Queues up to a few hours. Oddly, although standard panel dictated, oropharyngeal and anal anatomical site swab sampling is not offered. Counterintuitively, a full range of tests one would expect at a general physical with one’s PCP is thrown in to the sexual health screening package, essentially unnecessary and a waste of resources that would be better allocated with inclusion of swab procedures. I haven’t drilled and doubled down enough to ascertain options for rounding out the screening package. Cocksuckers left holding the bag … unite. Hospital Glória D’Or nearby, private system, will insist on charging 1600 reais simply for a consultation of a few seconds to inquire about their STI screening playbook. A local lab offers oral swab but required a requisition beyond the SUS format issued containing the restricted venipuncture format that can miss current infection. This meant returning to SUS to wait a few hours for a revised set of requisitions, if even it can be printed from their system, or going to a local physician for same. Fun. I think there must be a better way that I have yet to discover and I have yet to be in on it. My sense was that Brazil was very much on top of comprehensive screening. I can get my needs met back home but I wouldn’t mind some capacity to have my desire for broad-based protectionism facilitated as appropriate when in Brazil.

I think it beggars relief when by standard love hotel duration the cost is 5 times that of Alameda. LOL. One need only attend a few steps away to realize what a rip-off. Here’s an idea: take the money you are robbed of and buy more sex with more guys that are happy to accommodate and enjoy the amenities upgrade. Roll on the floor with a ménage if you like, or a bed with pillows, sheets that stay on, and tailored lighting. For similar cost output. After the initial sticker reverse shock of low hire fees that seems compensatory, one eventually catches on to the exorbitant venue costs and who is benefiting. Takeaway is all the rage anyway.

What if you lose your phone or its charge? The only Uber will be uber anxiety. Getting everywhere that way without incident simply reinforces the notion that the respective areas are menacing. In a decade I have only ever walked to and from these venues, including Meio Mundo, from lodgings or Metro station and it’s wise to experientially grasp options if you ever have the misfortune of being stranded. I rarely attend 202 because I only pay for attractive acompanhantes, so rarely eat in the area. There are several dining or snack options right by 117. I have eaten at Vila Rica only two or three times on my own as I don’t care for it and prefer other places or street food outlets in the vicinity but it’s where the working guys prefer to be treated. The ratio of 117 trade to 202 trade in which I am prepared to hire is about 20:1 but sadly the 117 suites leave much to be desired considering their outrageous rental fees, and the love hotel directly across knows by now the room number I’ll request.

Risk assessment travelling in Brazil is not unlike my playbook for HIV acquisition consultation ed with patients and their partners where relevant. If the incidence rate is low, say condomless insertive anal at 1/909 (.0011) with a receptive partner poz and unsuppressed viral burden, but comparable to the risk of victimized pedestrian robbery over the course of a single week … BTW the greatest targeted interest by felons is cellular phone … a short trip is associated with a low likelihood of mishap, but cumulative risk at 52 such fucks or one year of total visiting out and about with phone is not unsubstantial … 5.56%. If I have been present in Rio a total of 52 weeks over the past decade, the chances of being mugged over the next weekly iteration amount to an unquantifiable probability metric between 0.11% and 5.67% because the probability of at least one robbery occurrence is now tallied at 53 weeks. But only a fool would put his money on the newbie enduring pedestrian robbery because my good fortune looks somewhat poor at 19 in 20 … except I carry a decoy phone with valued phone obscured.

WYSIATI. The vast majority of tourism visits proceed without incident as event probability governs it. Nothing-burgers attract little to no attention unless they are positioned to counter the view that the statistically improbable does not trend to zero. The limited poorly analyzed and depicted narrative here is that a nothing-burger can consist of either an uneventful visit or some degree of risk equivalency geographically elsewhere. Neither cancels out risk. All individual personal accounts amount to nothing-burgers and have zero predictive potential for an isolated untoward incident amounting to trip ruination. In 11 years and dozens of visits here, often extended, I have had no unfortunate incidents. That is a nothing-burger upon which I suggest nobody rely. Where two things can occur, irrespective of the metric of relative probability, the more one of them happens the more likely the other eventually will. Similarly, assertions of risk assessment and avoidance skill along with virtue-signalling superior culture-related acumen amount to nothing-burgers and the only lead I would follow is that of my own.

I think that @Mavica is among a very small handful here that stay or have stayed in the Glória/Catete zone recently, if not longer ago, and lives to tell the tale, no thanks to Our Lady of the Glória Hill. I think he hoofed it mainly. You can find him by searching for the most prolifically hair-triggered downvoter, as is anyone’s prerogative. In fact, certain aspects of his unique trip account itself might impel one to downvote on the area as a viable lodgings option. I take a more neutral view and have put visiting gringo friends up in the area without having been a last will and testament beneficiary. —- Alternatively, if you have a few days to spare, and can tolerate high effort output with low answer yield, try searching the safety topic here using key words.

UnSAFE, where SAFE = satisfactory answer for everyone. Safe combines intuition and narrative. Unfortunately one must see for oneself. Safe if nothing untoward happened. Fallacy of probability logic if one’s opinion bias is based on one’s personal history. Any bad event follows a period of being spared and subverts the sense of safety that previously existed; a bad event does not predict a subsequent one, but that’s not how the average brain works. One key variable is the radius size surrounding either venue. This reality also defies a single correct answer. My ‘money’ is on 117 being preferable in terms of safety level. But that’s a dumb bias because there is no smart money, only wise precautions. YMMV. My take is at the same level of stupidity as contrarian ones. If you think Ipanema is the epicentre of maximum safety in the context of a gradient of risk I am sure there are punters here eager to disabuse you of such a naïve notion. Risk differential is based on geographic pockets, not an escalatory distance from some overidealized zone. I would be far more willing to stand or sit for an hour at midnight on the corner of Glória and Candido Mendes than on an Ipanema thoroughway corner. —- Let us know. I would add be safe but it’s not up to me. I can only hope your visit is bulletproof and that you are only in danger of having a good time.