forrestreid

To quote Wikipedia: "Luk khrueng (Thai: ลูกครึ่ง, literally "half-child") is a colloquial Thai term referring to a person whose parents are of different nationalities". In the specific example above, I thought the guy in question looked like he had a European father and a Thai mother, or vice versa.

I see that Moonlight posted a video from Saturday night https://www.facebook.com/MoonlightBangkok/videos/976617829654662 You get a very clear view of the models physiques in it. (It may only be viewable if you are logged in to Facebook) Two things that struck me. -the first guy that appears in it- he really looks like a "luk krung" to me in that video. Turned out to be a handsome combination in his case anyway, if that is the case. -as you watch the video, you can see there is a guy standing at the front of the stage putting garlands of ten 1000 (or is it 500?) baht notes on most of the dancers. Not all, however. I wonder if he is staff or a customer. Seems like too much a an assembly line operation for a customer to do so...

Thanks for the explanation

As I said in my post, the fact that the boxing ring was situated about 200 metres from a gay sex district meant that it was probably a bit unique in Thailand as regards the awareness and receptivity of the guys to approaches...

I would be interested to know a bit more about how the difference between floor guys and models plays out in the bar. Do the floor guys never get on stage at all? And what is the difference between a floor guy and a waiter?

Probably the biggest problem is the language barrier. How to make your intentions clear if you can’t understand each other? Places like Pattaya or Bangkok will probably be your best chance, where waiters and bellboys in establishments frequented by gay customers probably know the score. I have read in the past about guys who even managed to hire str8 Muay Thai boxers. However, this was from a place just outside Walking Street in Pattaya. Until a few years ago there was a bar, located on the left as you exit from Walking St onto Beach Road, which had on the premises a Thai boxing ring. This was intended as an attraction to punters; they had exhibition matches of Thai boxing. The bouts were pretty fake from all accounts. After the bouts, the guys would go around soliciting tips. If you gave them a few 100 baht tips, it would get their attention. I remember reading about a guy who started buying them drinks, and eventually after much compliments on how muscular they were, and telling them what a fine "puu chai" man they were, etc, he was successful in enticing them to his hotel hotel for some compensated fun. Not sure if all the guys were up for that option, but that uncertainty was what made it more exciting for those that partook in the chase. However, I believe that bar is now closed, and your chances of success in this might be somewhat different in the rest of Thailand, most of which wouldn’t happen to have a gay sex district within 200 metres, as that boxing ring had.

This is one of my pet hates as well, but there is nothing you can do about it. If they feck off away from the boards after the trip, you have no power over them. At least with a regular troll you can demonstrate that you recognise them, which might annoy them, but if they are somebody who got loads of good info but never log in again how can they know that we are sitting here righteously fuming at them...

My tuppence on this is: Although the presence of fakes and trolls can be very irritating for regular users of a message board, I think a greater threat is if the board fails in attracting new members and becomes moribund. There is a type of entropy with regards to message boards, where a lot of people join and become a contributor for two or three years and then fade away (of course a minority do stick it out). Therefore,if you want to have a functioning board, you want to be attracting a certain number of newcomers every year. Obviously, most of these newcomers would prefer to be reading about genuine exploits of posters, rather than ramblings of someone who makes it up in his bedroom. But the efforts to prevent trolls and fantasists also make it hard for new posters to gain proper access to a board. I fully understand the reasoning behind the requirement for requirements like needing to make more than 10 posts before you can see the more salacious topics. However, this must be viewed against all those prospective posters that you have never seen contributing to the board because they were put off joining, because of such restrictions. I once knew somebody who is thinking of travelling to Thailand for the first time, and I recommended a useful message board to him (not this one). He joined up, and asked a simple question, and of course the first reply was an instruction to use the search function. Then he was accused of being a sock puppet account of some long established troll on the board. Needless to say this did not exactly encourage his further participation! In the end, he did go to Thailand and had some interesting adventures,which he recounted to me but not to any board as far as I know. Personally, I Think that a board would probably be more successful in the long term if it prioritises being more welcoming to new members rather than worrying too much about the dangers of fantasists and trolls, and the results will be in the longer term a healthier and more lively board

Please provide a report back if you do.

It does not come up in a Google search. However, if you do a Google maps search for a business in Pattaya called "The Clubhouse, Home of ANMC & MDMC", you will get the business right next to it. You will have to search for the full name of the Clubhouse as given above however, as there are several other places in Pattaya witth "The clubhouse" as part of the name. This is what the Friendly Club looks like in streetview:

I am afraid you have to be logged in to Facebook on another tab for it to work. Otherwise you will just get the Facebook log-in page.

If you are interested in karaoke bars with male hosts , there are several in Pattaya which are a good bit cheaper. In a recent review elsewhere of Friendly Club,in Soi Korpai the poster stated "there are line-ups every hour or so and you have to call the boys down to join you for a ‘drink’ – about 200 baht a boy, and the boys are yours to talk to, dance with or flirt with until the next line-up". Mostly Thai for Thai, but as it is Pattaya there are a few tourists a well. Might be a cheaper way to experience it. You can see the FB page of Friendly Club here: https://www.facebook.com/Friendlyclubpattaya/

Yes, Sorry, I had the wrong person there. I will put my hand up and admit I mixed up one big purple S for another. (Really, one off you guys should change the colour to yellow or something...). I am not too proud to admit it.

Bit of an awkward way to back down and apologise, but anyway - Lucky seems satisfied. A word of advice Slvkguy - nobody on a board likes liars or fantasists, but nobody much likes a Robespierre either.

Hi Slvkguy You have made a rather incendiary accusation against a very long standing poster here that he once contacted a poster’s place of employment and outed him as a sex tourist, but when asked to back this up you moved the conversation on to complaining how Lucky had been taking sides against a poster you quarrelled with and to "move on". I am no particular friend of Lucky, but I have been reading his posts for mote than 10 years on this board and on its previous incarnations, and this story is news to me. I would be interested in you substantiating this accusation before we all "move on".

A Russian man’s view of Putin's propaganda. For several years I have been watching a YouTuber called NFKRZ. It is run by a young Russian guy called Roman, who used to post videos about daily life in Russia, including politics culture etc. With the outbreak of the war he, like a lot of other liberal minded Russians, has fled the country, in his case to Georgia. This week, he posted an interesting video looking at some of the left-wing propaganda outlets to Russia controls, and is using to spread its line about the Ukraine war. It is quite commonly known that Russia pumps out a lot of propaganda on Facebook and the RT News channel, usually praising Putin as a proper conservative and aimed at FOX News watching types. But they also control other, left-leaning websites, and that churn out propaganda that is meant to appeal to left wingers, usually focusing on perceived or real western hypocrisy. I kind of knew this already, but it was interesting to see it from the perspective of an anti-Putin Russian person. Watch below:

Éire Abú! (Not really into team sports so I put up a pic of Rhys McClenaghan, one of our hopefuls for Paris 2024)

I am looking forward to reading your trip report Taikonaut. Thanks for making the effort, in my opinion trip reports are the best part of this site. I’ll be particularly interested to see how you get on in your trip to Ilha Grande. That is a side trip that I’ve been considering for my future travels to Rio. Taking a guy there is something I’ve gotten very tempted to do also, although, like you, I had a feeling maybe it was not the best idea for a newbie. However if you take somebody I’ll be fascinated see how it goes.

Yep, It will almost certainly end badly, in that Ukraine will be either physically destroyed or will be forced into a humiliating surrender. Extending to WWW III and ending up with the use of nuclear weapons is less likely, thankfully. By the way, I think the Taiwanese are very well aware that the USA is not going to physically intervene in any invasion from the mainland, and probably has a greater understanding of this than the Ukrainians had. But, like Russia, I think China may be surprised surprised at the strength and depth of the sanctions that take place. Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Chinese government took pause from what a strong defense of their country Ukrainians are putting up, beside despite being hugely outnumbered by Russia.

But in general in this topic, the main thing to keep in mind is there is a tragedy unfolding now in Ukraine. I dont disagree that many aspects of US foreign policy in the last twenty years (such as the invasion of Iraq or the the support of the extremist Likud position on the occupation of Palestine) have been shameful, but to harp on about these issues in a thread such as this, while also minimizing the blatant use of cluster bombs, the intentional targeting of civilian targets and the confirmed use of vacuum bombs THIS VERY WEEK in Ukraine, in a blatant attempt to shift the narrative, is unsavory. And I must say that the way in which what I would call "foreign policy leftists" from the USA, in particular, tend to frame this is very irksome to me as a European. The main geopolitical issue at hand is Russia (or the current ruler there at least) trying to regain the position in Ukraine that it had in Tsarist times. One can argue whether that is a good or bad thing (personally I think it is bad), but one thing it actually has rather little to do with is what the USA were up to in Iraq in 2004 or in Nicaragua in 1985. But if you read many threads on Ukraine with posts from US (not just here) "foreign policy leftists" seem to be ranting on about irrelevancies such as what Billy Kristol said onetime, or how much Blackwater might make out of Ukraine, or whatever. The sense in which they are not engaging with the lived reality of an international world system in flux, or the biggest single refugee situation since WW II, is frustrating. It seems like in their head they are still arguing with that annoying fellow student who was a foreign policy hawk in a university seminar in 2006.

To extend this argument a bit, if the US were to, say, threaten Iran with devastating missile attacks unless it halted its nuclear programme, presumably the Iranian government should be regarded as being "not halfway intelligent" if they did not immediately accede to the request, as otherwise they would find themselves in a war with a nuclear power? Just how generally should this principle be applied?

I understand why people are nervous about the threat of nuclear war. It is not something you can take chances about. But if you look objectively, America under Biden is demonstrating a considerable degree of restraint with its support for Ukraine struggle, for this very reason. Biden has opposed Russian aggression with sanctions and some arms to Ukraine. But he is very clearly said that, as Ukraine is not part of NATO, the US and NATO will not get involved in assisting Ukraine with either troops or a "no fly zone". In fact, the United States has even decided that simply allowing the Polish Mig fighters to be transported from Rammstein to Ukraine would be too much of a provocation. I do not like the fact that all this is helpful to Putin. But I do accept that Biden’s motives are genuine in not wanting to extend to conflict. I think Biden has clearly shown that Russia will have absolutely no genuine excuse to extend the conflict to a confrontation with NATO, or God forbid, a nuclear war. But some posters on this site, and others I read, seem to be very exercised on this point and keep going on about how Biden may be about to bring us all to the brink of global nuclear war. Interestingly, I have noticed on this and other sites that they seem to be the same posters who are very exercised about the plight of Russian speaker in Luhansk and Donetsk. A coincidence I am sure

If you think this is a good argument to persuade people to not support the Ukrainian people in their fight against Russian imperialist aggression, I am afraid that you are wrong

Well congratulations Tassojunior, you are now reduced to using the excuse of every thug and bully: "Look, if you had given me your lunch money when I asked you first, you wouldn't have a bloody nose now. Why do you have to make it hard for yourself?"

Just a bit of context on the figures of deaths in the Donbas conflict that Tassojunior quotes in almost every post. The number of civilians who died in the Donbass conflict went from over 2000 in 2014, to 26 in 2019 and 27 in 2020. This was a more or less frozen conflict in military terms. In the wake of the Russian invasion last month, more civilians are being killed every hour in Ukraine than died annually in the Donbass conflict in recent years. Obviously every death is more than just a statistic, but Tassojunior quoting the figure of 14,000 overall in the conflict is misleading when many posters who are unfamiliar with the Donbass conflict may assume it was still going at that sort of level. Also remember that the conflict was started when Putin unilaterally invaded Crimea and aided an insurrection in the Donbass region. Perhaps the most famous incident in the early years was when Putin, with incredible recklessness, sent Buk missiles to the rebels, along with people could operate it, and they promptly bombed a civilian aircraft out of the sky, in the Flight MH17 tragedy. Another issue that Tassojunior continually raises is the failure of the Minsk process. However, the failure of the Minsk II process was not purely a stubborn refusal by Ukraine to accept a fair deal from Russia. Although France and Germany tried for several years to get the Minsk instruments to work, they came up against what has been referred to as the “Minsk conundrum.” This is how Al Jazeera explains the problem. I’m just using Al Jazeera here as example of a news website that wouldn’t be necessarily pro-Western. “Ukraine sees the 2015 agreement as an instrument to re-establish control over the rebel territories.It wants a ceasefire, control of the Russia-Ukraine border, elections in the Donbas, and a limited devolution of power to the separatists – in that order. Russia views the deal as obliging Ukraine to grant rebel authorities in Donbas comprehensive autonomy and representation in the central government, effectively giving Moscow the power to veto Kyiv’s foreign policy choices. Only then would Russia return the Russia-Ukraine border to Kyiv’s control” Full article here: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/9/what-is-the-minsk-agreement-and-why-is-it-relevant-now The real stumbling block was that Putins real aim was never rights of self-government for Donbas, but instead his demand that the terms of the agreement would result in the Donbas region having a veto in international treaties and agreements by Ukraine, which would result in Ukraine being prevented joining NATO or the EU, even if a huge majority of the rest of country wanted to. In other words, Putin would have control over Ukraine is foreign policy, despite the policies of whatever person was elected democratically as the President of Ukraine.