Spa Roma Vs House Of Male- Compared?

[cosmosmariner2001]

Hi, In a few weeks I will be back in CM. In the past, I've had fun at House of Male. I've never been to Spa Roma. In a recent posting about CM Suggestions, I read some negative things about House of Male. I am surprised. What is negative about that place?

Also, How would you compare House of Male and Spa Roma in terms of the guys there and the ambiance of the places. Is it as much fun as House of Male? I've heard that fewer Thai Guys go there. Also, isnt it a bit difficult to get to? It is easy to get to House of Male. Thanks for your feedback.

[Bluelotus]

What is Nagaraj ?

[Ijustwannateach]

As I mentioned in another thread, it is personal behaviour that helps spread STDs, not a physical place. To view one sauna as safer than another is displacing your own responsibility onto a place, a rather dangerous approach.

[Paagai]

What is Nagaraj ?

Well established Sauna gym and massage, bit out of town (Chiang Mai) between the railway station and Big C - superhighway. Best to have your own transport and some patience to find it!

Its a Thai place, I believe the same owner as "Circle Pub". The gym is popular with Tai-Yai host bar boys for building that body beautiful , some also work as masseurs (including a couple of my acquaintences ). The Sauna is a haunt for gay Thais, but its mainly a Thai rak Thai thing; farangs are rare and may be disppointed, but never say never

website: nagarajsauna.com In Thai only...........

[PeaceBlondie]

Defamatory posts removed. In the process, we mods may have deleted a post stating that Spa-roma had closed.

[Paagai]

As I mentioned in another thread, it is personal behaviour that helps spread STDs, not a physical place. To view one sauna as safer than another is displacing your own responsibility onto a place, a rather dangerous approach.

Agree 100%, but my original comment ref the local nick name for a gay sauna in Chiang Mai (PB deleted it so I won't repeat it) should be put in context of the situation in CM. Unlike BKK where there is a proliferation of saunas, here it's almost the only game in town. I can think of at least seven Thais I know who are HIV positive who were (and some still are) regular customers and several claim to have been infected there (Two also still work in bars in CM and one has sadly since died).

Before anyone starts screaming that this can't be true, how does Paagai know this etc, etc, I should say that I'm not going to go into anymore detail about the individuals concerned, or how I know their HIV status, so don;t ask! However, scientific studies have been carried out (google them if you want to know) which back this up showing alarming rates of HIV infection among gay men in Chiang Mai (also in BKK of course) and in particular sauna customers.

The above is well known in the CM gay community, it's not just me saying it, though I'm sure some are in denial about the realities. Ijustwannateach is right in that what goes on there is no different from any other form of gay sexual encounter in terms of risk. But, it's the main option for sauna visitors in CM, it's thus rather easy to tag it with a particular stereotype.

Ignorance is bliss; if you don't know someone's status you can easily convince yourself the risk is small. Whereas, if you know there is a high probability the guy you're playing with is positive it certainly focuses the mind Let me ask a question: how many here would actually have casual sex (even if it's "safe") with someone they knew to be HIV positive?

Edited August 2, 2009 by Paagai

[Ijustwannateach]

How is meeting someone away from a sauna any different from meeting them AT a sauna, in terms of risk? Meeting them away from a sauna is no guarantee they *don't* go there and do- whatever.

Basically, ALL encounters with ALL persons should be approached as if they are ALL HIV positive in terms of behaviour and risk. Any other approach is whistling in the dark. Far from assuming the risk is small, no matter where you meet someone, people should assume the risk is maximised, each and every time, and develop behaviours that make the risk of putting their lives on the line more manageable- because that is what sex is about. If you wouldn't engage in a behaviour with someone you knew to be HIV positive, you probably shouldn't do it with anyone.

With that approach- where you take personal responsibility for your own behaviour- it really doesn't matter (and you really couldn't be sure) where your potential partners are- or have been.

[farang9]

Even though the earlier post has been deleted - Sparoma HAS closed.

[bungalowbill]

Basically, ALL encounters with ALL persons should be approached as if they are ALL HIV positive in terms of behaviour and risk. Any other approach is whistling in the dark.

I definitely agree with above from I justwannateach!

[bungalowbill]

As I mentioned in another thread, it is personal behaviour that helps spread STDs, not a physical place. To view one sauna as safer than another is displacing your own responsibility onto a place, a rather dangerous approach.

Agree 100%, but my original comment ref the local nick name for a gay sauna in Chiang Mai (PB deleted it so I won't repeat it) should be put in context of the situation in CM. Unlike BKK where there is a proliferation of saunas, here it's almost the only game in town. I can think of at least seven Thais I know who are HIV positive who were (and some still are) regular customers and several claim to have been infected there (Two also still work in bars in CM and one has sadly since died).

Before anyone starts screaming that this can't be true, how does Paagai know this etc, etc, I should say that I'm not going to go into anymore detail about the individuals concerned, or how I know their HIV status, so don;t ask! However, scientific studies have been carried out (google them if you want to know) which back this up showing alarming rates of HIV infection among gay men in Chiang Mai (also in BKK of course) and in particular sauna customers.

The above is well known in the CM gay community, it's not just me saying it, though I'm sure some are in denial about the realities. Ijustwannateach is right in that what goes on there is no different from any other form of gay sexual encounter in terms of risk. But, it's the main option for sauna visitors in CM, it's thus rather easy to tag it with a particular stereotype.

Ignorance is bliss; if you don't know someone's status you can easily convince yourself the risk is small. Whereas, if you know there is a high probability the guy you're playing with is positive it certainly focuses the mind Let me ask a question: how many here would actually have casual sex (even if it's "safe") with someone they knew to be HIV positive?

"here it's almost the only game in town. I can think of at least seven Thais I know who are HIV positive who were (and some still are) regular customers and several claim to have been infected there (Two also still work in bars in CM and one has sadly since died)."

Hi Paggai

It seems like you have some very interesting, if not valuable information about HIV infections. Do you also know how these guys contracted HIV in the sauna? Most of the research done over the years has reported that unprotected anal sex is very risky. Were your friends engaging in this? If so it's not suprising that they would contract HIV anywhere they have unprotected anal sex.

[Ijustwannateach]

Ok, to make my problems with the claims made by Paagai's friends more clear:

1. How would they know who gave it to them? Is it truly likely that the ONLY one time they chose to do risky sex happened in the sauna- on ONE occasion- or that it would more likely be an ongoing habit of bad behaviour (habitually not using condoms, for instance)? Would they know for sure the HIV status of ALL their partners?

2. Even if they happen to know someone in the sauna with whom they had unprotected sex and to know that individual developed HIV, it doesn't mean they got it from that individual, or on that occasion. Someone else, for example, could have infected both individuals at entirely different locations.

3. It seems awfully like a coping mechanism- "oh, it wasn't my behaviour (so I don't need to *change* that) but the fact that I was having sex at location A."

I agree with Bungalow Bill- behaviours are the problem here, and bad, risky behaviour can happen at any location sex occurs.