General Reports

[QUOTE=Syzygies;2226580]Indian guys can answer this, Is there a lot of discrimination based on skin colour in India, as well as in Thailand?

My GF was watching an Indian Soapy dubbed into Thai. "Phaen rak luang jai" was it's Thai name and available on you-Tube (originally showed at 21.10 on channel 8). There was a group of people getting ready for a marriage event. They all had very light skin, and most of them looked to have Farang blood in their ancestry, some looking like 50% Farang or more. Sort of Hi-so Indians I guess. The girls were quite pretty. Not much body hair if any. Not one darker skin person appeared for the duration I was watching. Can this just be due to a region in India? I doubt it. It looks like light skin is as highly sort after, as in Thailand, with possible prejudice against the darker ones.

My GF is medium coloured skin (a lot darker than me), and I like it, personally. Have had some light skin Thais, but it makes so little difference to me. Not a selection criteria. I do like natural Thai upturned noses if not too broad. I do like slim legs and a nice waist to thigh ratio, and very little body hair other than on the head. My GF meets all the criteria well, no sag.[/QUOTE]I am Indian, and an very proud one at that. What you have noticed & mentioned is very true all these soaps have only beautiful people and rich and savvy. If a dark skin toned person is portrayed he has to be from south of India or a doubtful character. Even in south India the girls are shown to be only light skinned. I think India would be the country where lots of creams and lotions are sold to get light skin even for men. Most of the males prefer a light skinned bride, or vice a versa. Caucasian are revered and dark skinned abhorred as a general tendency.

[QUOTE=MrEnternational;2226625]This is due to colorism and happens all over the world. White is right. They have all the skin lightening products just like Thailand. But in a case of show production they go look for people who are lighter instead of rolling with everyday people. Same as Hollywood before. White person played the role whether it was of an Asian or African. The darker people only get the role of the help. Now Hollywood is changing. It will be a long time off until Hollywood does the same.[/QUOTE]I sometimes go to movie theatres in Pattaya. The Thais in the pre-movie advertisements are always very white looking. It is very noticeable and disturbing. It just doesn't look natural.

[QUOTE=MrEnternational;2226625]Now Hollywood is changing. It will be a long time off until Hollywood does the same.[/QUOTE]I guess you intended to write Bollywood here.

I do notice in Hollywood movies, generally the lighter dark women are chosen. Generally I like it. Of course I am biased to the prettiest ones. O.K. for the guys to be much darker, like Eddie Murphy. Zoe Saldana looks just fine to me, even when she is green.

No of black female No. 1 leading characters in Hollywood movies? Not many, but occasionally happens, and usually if they are very light black. I face facts. Nubian black might just be a bit too much for me to get used to immediately, but certainly liked a few girls out of Africa. I look at nose as usual for all races and like upturned, which is probably rare in India, or is it only rare in the light skinned movie stars? LOL I have not been to India.

I really liked Denzel Washington movies with a few favourites, and liked his leading lady a lot in Deja Vu (Paula Patton). I also liked a lot his movie Fallen, which hardly had a leading lady. Every one likes Morgan Freeman no matter how ugly he was. LOL It is hard to name a lot of big movie star back females. Sure there is Halle Berry (part Farang I think), obviously I like Zoe Saldana, Sharri Headley (from way back), Kerri Washington, Gugu Mbatha-Raw (from England half Farang), and Nathalie Emmanuel. Most guys will struggle to name a lot. There are a lot of older ones of course that I liked years ago. Can't really name a favourite black actress that is not somewhat pretty for me, or used to be.

Exotic looks are working for me, and I liked Asian a lot ever since James Bond only lived twice in Japan.

[QUOTE=Allover;2227007]I sometimes go to movie theatres in Pattaya. The Thais in the pre-movie advertisements are always very white looking. It is very noticeable and disturbing. It just doesn't look natural.[/QUOTE]Almost all Thai advertising is of a juvenile nature, basically an insult to intelligence or childish, trying to be amusing or entertaining without much substance, and prone to extremely exaggerated scenes and acting. Seems to suck the Thais in to watch the ads. I find 90% of them to be just annoying. Perhaps all western advertising will head in the same direction. Ads could easily be about how white her skin could be or white underarms, or dazzling hair or teeth, mouthwash, etc. Or junk food ads are plentiful.

Where 50% of Indian ads seem to be about manly cologne or underarm deodorants. LOL, at least this is the case on a sports channel. I don't watch regular channels.

I find it very disturbing when Thai females put very white makeup on the face and of course the rest of the body does not match at all. The Ghostly look. LOL Does put me off, but tolerate it for my regular girls. One of them sometimes comes with exaggerated makeup and other times with none. LOL

Thais are biased by region. look down on dark skinned Isaan girls from Buriram as being Lao, when actually they look very little like Laotians of Wian Jan (Vientiane), probably more Khmer blood from old times. They generally believe that southern people have "Black Hearts", and yet I found southerners including muslims to be very friendly and easy to get on with for my limited time there (at least outside of the conflict 3 Malay oriented provinces). Generally a very honest community such that was a huge shock for one Satun girl to report her property was burgled, and lost some valuables including cash. Never dawned on her that would happen in her peaceful province Satun.

If anything I found the Northern Thais to be the least trustworthy. Always better to evaluate individuals, naturally. Northern Thai girls with a big square shared face don't appeal to me. That is not all of them, I have selected several supposedly Chiang Rai girls in Soapies with slimmer faces.

[QUOTE=Syzygies;2224586]I am sorry but this goes totally against the scientific evidence and makes your statement seem very silly. We all know very well that Sildenafil does not take anything like 2 hours to take effect, even if it varies due to eating etc. I have had occasions to feel the flush on face from it after 20 to 25 minutes. However science says should reach peak absorption between 30 mins to 1 hour(slightly delayable by certain foods). Can it really take much longer to work for you and then last at least 4 times longer as well. Seems very unlikely. I would like to hear a scientific explanation of how your body could fail to get rid of it compared to others. So very hard to believe you could be so extremely different.

...

Link to a scientific study which I did not think mentioned any great variation in the test subjects.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1874258/[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=BubbaBoy;2224773]I have a friend that experiences the same results in that Sildenafil takes an hour or two to start working but when it kicks in lasts for around 24 hours complete with horrific side affects. He has less side affects with Cialis but actually started to use levitra and it is much better so definitely give that a try.[/QUOTE]Syzygies and Bubba Boy got me thinking about how long Sildenafil can last. Syzygies provides a link to data that looks valid, but Bubba Boy's friend and I both notice Sildenafil takes much longer to start working and lasts much longer than Syzygies data would suggest. One data point for me was last Friday I took about 50 MG at 7:30 PM and didn't get laid until about 3:30 PM on Saturday, it was still working good enough (it would have been better hours before).

I found this article:

[URL]https://www.healthline.com/health/erectile-dysfunction/how-long-does-viagra-last[/URL]#additional-factors.

It supports both Syzygies' position plus Bubba Boy's friend's and my experience. Some important points: (1) normally takes 30 to 60 minutes to start working, but, it may take up to 2 hours to work. I'm definitely in the 2 hour category. (2) It normally lasts 2 or 3 hours before the effects start to diminish. It can last 5 hours or longer. I'm definitely in the longer than 5 hour category. (3) Viagra works for a longer period when you're 65 or older. Sadly, I'm definitely 65 or older. I first noticed it working extra long when I was about 62.

Based on my reading and personal experience over many years, it is clear that this stuff affects some of us differently.

[QUOTE=HorseTrader;2228082]Based on my reading and personal experience over many years, it is clear that this stuff affects some of us differently.[/QUOTE]Yes of course. All medication affects us differently. The human body has a wide range of physiological traits and that is what ensures our survival in the evolutionary pool.

[QUOTE=HorseTrader;2228082] One data point for me was last Friday I took about 50 MG at 7:30 PM and didn't get laid until about 3:30 PM on Saturday, it was still working good enough (it would have been better hours before).
[/QUOTE]Might I suggest that the period of getting no sex allows your dick to be possibly working well enough, with almost zero effect after 20 hours. Naturally depends on the girl too. Would be interesting to see what gets reported with a placebo.

There are several possibilities.

I would be unwise to be relying on Sildenafil working at 20 hours (5 normal half lives). Should be having no effect.

If more than one person experience the same, then a possibility is you are getting something that is actually Tadalafil or a cocktail, which has a much longer half life.

I don't see any scientific mention such vast variation in how long it lasts. To reach full working at 2 hours is a bit easier to swallow, however again I don't see anything reported about real Viagra to take that long.

I am a very sceptical scientist type, so I prefer the scientific data than anecdotal evidence from uncontrolled tests. I am not aware of the psychological effects as well. Maybe any time I used with weak results, could be caused by delayed onset, but I don't jump to the conclusion easily. Always alternate explanations.

I don't see a big problem for my dick with GF with no medication. Psychological factors, or just a fucking nice pussy, or sex starved?

[QUOTE=Syzygies;2228167]...
If more than one person experience the same, then a possibility is you are getting something that is actually Tadalafil or a cocktail, which has a much longer half life.

I don't see any scientific mention such vast variation in how long it lasts. To reach full working at 2 hours is a bit easier to swallow, however again I don't see anything reported about real Viagra to take that long.

I am a very sceptical scientist type, so I prefer the scientific data than anecdotal evidence from uncontrolled tests.[/QUOTE]My experience from Friday/Saturday used name brand Viagra purchased from a pharmacy in USA. Very doubtful that it was anything other than as labeled.

I'm also a skeptical scientist who spent a career dealing with informal observations that often turned out to be erroneous when recorded data was available to confirm or refute the informal observations. I'm highly confident that my observations are not placebo effect, but they still aren't part of a blind test. I know how lousy I perform when unsupported by ED meds and the 50 MG Viagra definitely worked good enough at 20 hours.

It would be difficult to conduct a blind study of longevity of Viagra because the side effects are so nasty. Would need a placebo that had the similar side effects.

[QUOTE=HorseTrader;2228186] I know how lousy I perform when unsupported by ED meds and the 50 MG Viagra definitely worked good enough at 20 hours.
[/QUOTE]I accept my performance varies without always knowing why, with and without meds. First 3 days I was excessively horny in Thailand and cum very easy. Two days later it all changed for no good reason I could think of. Can be tired, ate too much, drank too much, girl's pussy does not suit, many things. I know cough medicine completely destroys my dick feeling. Being sick can have bad effect too.

Yes I accept USA Viagra should be okay.

[QUOTE=Syzygies;2228198]I accept my performance varies without always knowing why, with and without meds. First 3 days I was excessively horny in Thailand and cum very easy. Two days later it all changed for no good reason I could think of. Can be tired, ate too much, drank too much, girl's pussy does not suit, many things. I know cough medicine completely destroys my dick feeling. Being sick can have bad effect too.

Yes I accept USA Viagra should be okay.[/QUOTE]Bring my late 50's I too find my performance is erratic so pretty much every day in Pattaya I take a 50 MG every lunchtime and top up if I have to. I'm sure it's the abundance of sex that I'm not used to and age that contribute to my need for assistance.

At home I'm lucky to laid by the wife once a week so it's not an issue.

[QUOTE=Syzygies;2228167]Might I suggest that the period of getting no sex allows your dick to be possibly working well enough, with almost zero effect after 20 hours. Naturally depends on the girl too. Would be interesting to see what gets reported with a placebo.[/QUOTE]Psychological effects are significant. There's a substantial boost from simply knowing you're on ED pills and unlikely to go down.

In fact, for me, when not taking ED pills, the main cause of going down occasionally is the thought that I'm about to go down.

[QUOTE=RobJones;2228209]
At home I'm lucky to laid by the wife once a week so it's not an issue.[/QUOTE]That is not too bad. LOL Or should I say depressingly normal. Even having a Thai Mrs. Can be a bit irregular.

Many are conservative about having sex of any type during period.

Her Period was over end of last week and Mrs got home a bit drunk from fermented rice wine (called Saatuu) yesterday. I took advantage of her lack of control promptly, and pulled her clothes off. This allowed me to get one two days running. Quite abnormal, unfortunately.

If she smokes weed and drinks beer, that can get her in the mood too.

Pity we have to rely on substances to improve chances.

[QUOTE=RobJones;2228209]Bring my late 50's I too find my performance is erratic so pretty much every day in Pattaya I take a 50 MG every lunchtime and top up if I have to. I'm sure it's the abundance of sex that I'm not used to and age that contribute to my need for assistance.

At home I'm lucky to laid by the wife once a week so it's not an issue.[/QUOTE]All of us 50 plus need to get those testosterone levels tested and if they are low, go on TRT.

[QUOTE=Syzygies;2228592]That is not too bad. LOL Or should I say depressingly normal. Even having a Thai Mrs. Can be a bit irregular.

Many are conservative about having sex of any type during period.

Her Period was over end of last week and Mrs got home a bit drunk from fermented rice wine (called Saatuu) yesterday. I took advantage of her lack of control promptly, and pulled her clothes off. This allowed me to get one two days running. Quite abnormal, unfortunately.

If she smokes weed and drinks beer, that can get her in the mood too.

Pity we have to rely on substances to improve chances.[/QUOTE]Do true. Mine is Indo and usually is too tired after work to engage In marital intercourse. Occasionally I will get 2 times in 2 to 3 days but usually it's a Saturday night special LOL.

When in Pattaya my frequency increases to at least girls and I know from experience that after 2 to 3 days regardless of the quality of the girls my dick doesn't want to know about it LOL.

[QUOTE=Goatscrot;2228599]All of us 50 plus need to get those testosterone levels tested and if they are low, go on TRT.[/QUOTE]I have a check up tomorrow, I will ask the doc to include it.