solacesoul

I have zero reason to believe that four independent board members — three of which are long-time, well-respected members with extensive travel history and imparted knowledge on the boards — would make up the same / similar story about him. One of them is arguably one of the most respected, storied, and universally well-liked members / travelers on these boards. So... they’re ALL lying and just out to get this poor old harmless sap? At this point, the only person who is gaslighting and saying it didn't happen, “so who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?”, is the accused with multiple independent accusers. And as we all know, this is the very same person who, in spite of clear, well-established mounting evidence that he posts across the gay sex tourism / pay sex forum-verse under at least three different usernames, he denies it is he. Everything I say can be backed up with documentation and correspondence. Remember, he wouldn’t have run to mods at that other place to shut down a case of mistaken identity.

You keep focusing on ONE young man that you feel you can easily malign. Now, explain away the others you doxxed and made inappropriate contact with. Maybe you forgot because you do it so often.

Genuine question: Even if what you’re saying was correct — which again, is highly doubtful considering your warped perception skills over your posting years — why would anyone owe you their curriculum vitae, if all you’re doing is discussing the joys of hiring for sex and then possibly meeting at a sex work establishment, maybe even a meal before or after? Why would you feel this somehow entitles you to know anything at all about their personal lives, including but not limited to their educational or employment history?

On these types of boards and in saunas over the years, there have been (verifiably) posters / members who in real life are: federally elected politicians, appointed judges, famous fashion designers, (legitimate, non-porn) film directors and producers, award-winning journalists, airline pilots, plastic surgeons, US attorneys, music business executives, college professors, and the list goes on. No one knows (and very few care) because these posters / members aren’t so obnoxious, and they aren’t violating other members / clients’ personal space and right to privacy.

It’s so bizarre how he doubles down on this — when a simple, “yeah, it’s me, so what?” would’ve worked.

“This is who he is. This is what he looks like. This is what he did to me. Here is our correspondence. Be warned.” I hope that answers your question. Trust me. I certainly did not go looking for it. I leave the USA to get away from pasty old stuffy white guys. I am certainly not looking for them (or to hang out with them) when abroad.

I mean, seriously. He wants to pretend as if multiple, independent sources don’t already know who he is offline. (And before he starts freaking out and running to moderators at this site too, rest assured: no one cares enough about you to reveal your actual name / photo. Honestly, you’re not even that remotely interesting.)

Ok, Rachel Dolezal. I guess you can be a black woman, too!

Here’s an OP related tale, Pre-Karen term: First visit to Apolo Sauna in Santo Domingo (maybe 2009-2010?), an obviously gay white American wanted a full refund for his “unproductive” sauna visit. The owner (a Cuban now living in the DR) refused. White American Gay Karen immediately says: “if you don’t give me a refund, I’m going to write a VERY negative review on Trip Advisor about your establishment! And ALL the American and European tourists will see it!”

This was a defense in your behalf, Bobert. My mistake. I’ll never do that again.

Bobert: You keep harping on this one younger guy, the one you fished around for information on, but there are 4 separate, unrelated posters / board members / travelers. The one that you keep posting about thinking it’s (only) him is not even the main one who, after having direct contact with you, made the grave warning about you. You can try to malign all of their character all you wish in your attempt at self-defense, but it won’t work. At least two are highly-respected, longterm posters who have no reason to trash anyone, and quite frankly, in all of their years of contributions to boards and travel, it’s never been part of their displayed character. In fact, other than you, I’ve never really seen or heard them say anything untoward about anyone. And when it was said about you, it wasn’t mean-spirited, vicious or catty, it was just matter-of-factly, in a “this is what transpired between us and this is why I recommend maintaining distance.” So, maybe, just maybe, Bobert, it isn’t them. Maybe it’s you. So… Circling back to the original subject: taking accountability of one’s own actions.

Oh, Bobert. We all know that your own various threads through the forum-verse get very little traffic and responses, but please… try to keep your projection down to a minimum. I am really beginning to think your twisted end game is just to get posters that you don’t like or who call you out banned, and if you have to go down with the ship, then you’re fine and dandy with it. I am not interested in playing out publicly here (in a thread not even on that topic) what was already perfectly stated at another forum where you also post. I am not going to play that silly game with you, So, if you have something to say that is unrelated to the original post here, then take it in private DM or start another of your own threads.

What this particular customer did for you doesn’t require much scrutiny at all. It was called kindness, or in modern generational American circles, it’s referred to as “paying it forward”. He may have been considering that time is greater than money in his case, but instead of shouting you or “the help” down, or being a “Karen”, he chose to pay your way. I don’t understand what stereotype you think would come into play in this instance. Are you suggesting that older male Canucks receive harsh racial discrimination of some sort?

Back to the original post’s topic: As has been suggested by other forum members here, this Google Review might have some hint of truth to it, or it could simply be another case of intent vs. impact (I.e., the offenders aren’t meaning to come across as racist, but the impacted party receives it as such). OR, it could just be a maladjusted cliente feeling slighted, ignored or ripped off, using online reviews as his source of revenge. Using hyperbolic terms such as “Blacks should avoid this establishment if they care anything about their life” doesn’t really help his case, though. First of all, there aren’t too many actual Black people who use the term “blacks”. That’s very reminiscent of Trump’s infamous comment, “The blacks”. And combining that with “Queer”, another uncommonly used term (though it has gained usage in some younger black LGBTQ+ circles) might suggest that the reviewer might not even be Black himself. Maybe he posted it for a traveling friend? And secondly, hyperbolically making it seem like a bad sauna experience with staff was life-threatening seems a bit absurd — especially when there are far more actual life-threatening racist situations in the USA right now, involving guns, supermarkets, malls, schools and police. Also, as mentioned before, some traveling gringos (in Brazil, anyone not Brazilian, no matter the race, color or nationality, may be referred to as a “gringo”) act like real entitled assholes. USAmericans and Russians probably have the worst reps for this, although assholery can span the globe. But I especially hate to witness it from Americans when abroad, and even more especially for me, black and brown Americans, because believe it it not, it leaves a lasting global imprint. As just one example, last year, I was checking out at Point 202, and there was a small group (3) of Black American travelers in front of me and a few others. None of them spoke any Portuguese, but that didn’t stop one of them from raising his voice and arguing with the front desk attendants about their bill. Now, we all here have had “issues” at one sauna or another with an incorrect bill at checkout, so disagreement or pushback about the bill is not really the problem here. What made this one so problematic was the underlying fact pattern — the group seemed to have had a table near the stage and they hosted several garotos at the table who ordered food and drinks from a waiter while at the table with the clients, and at the end, the clients thought they shouldn’t have to pay for the garotos’ food and drink, since they ordered it! Yes, this is what these clowns were so outraged about — that they were responsible for the ordered food and drinks at their table consumed by the working boys that they had seated at their table with them! They tried every Americanism in the book — being loud, argumentative, aggressive, threatening to call the police for robbery (??), making sure they let everyone in earshot know how much supposed money they supposedly make and how supposedly influential they are with the US Embassy, demanding to speak to the manager / owner, blah blah blah. They read the American Obnoxiousness Handbook and studied it well! In the end, Junior came out and after arguing with him too, they ended up paying all of the bill, and they left in a huff, calling everyone in the place “crooks part of a scam”. This held up the entire checkout line for about 10-15 minutes, and everyone in line behind them — about 5 deep — including me, waited patiently. When they finally left, Junior just shook his head and said, “Gringos”. This is just one story of many in the book of “Clients Behaving Badly”. I’m not proclaiming that all garotos and sauna workers are perfect little angels either, but some of us in more privileged situations really do need to take accountability of our own behavior.

Thanks for posting this. Even with my NYT digital subscription, I somehow missed this article. This path is literally my 5:30 am Rio run / walk, when there.

Sucks to be them, I suppose. #BottomWorldProblems

For the third time, I’m not interested in responding to someone else’s bad experience, as they perceive it. I only posted this here for discussion’s sake, not to defend or attack the original reviewer’s position.

To be fair, there are a number of clientes that are not exactly favored in those spots. Verbosity is only one drawback.

I see what you did there. I doubt there are many melanated Québécois with an axe to grind for 202. And the infamous non-melanated one seems to like it very, very much.

Yes. Both of these things can be simultaneously true.

Not a direct response, as I stated (not suggested) above.

You seem to have missed some clues that the review is most likely from the US. — His only other Google Review is a business establishment in the US with a 202 area code, a car detailing service. — His usage of the terms “black” and “queer”. Arguably, this is less indicative than the first, but these are more Western-embraced terms than not — the latter being far more embraced in younger than older generations. But would it matter if he were not from the USA, and were, say, from London, for example?

As I mentioned above, I am not going to discount his own experience (or his own perception of it). I’m also neither going to lie and state there is no racially motivated preference in any business establishment in Brazil (or anywhere else, for that matter), nor going to exaggerate with the reverse and state that any and every perceived slight or disrespect is racially motivated as well. I’ve also never directly responded to another’s review of a business establishment that’s not mine, and don’t understand why I should start now. But if that’s your thing — have at it.

4 months ago, an “R Gueirra” posted this really brutal review of Point 202 (inexplicably labeled as “Termas e Academia Ibiza”) at Google Maps in the reviews section: ”Black Travelers and Black Queer people AVOID; this is a racist establishment that is hostile and abhorrent towards black foreigners. The amount of open racism towards people inside this establishment is a disgrace; given that these establishments are marketed to be inclusive to all. White customers are allowed to enter and pass and treated totally different. They assume in Rio that all blacks are uneducated, poor, and servants for white men. The behavior from the reception was unprofessional and 100% racially motivated. Blacks are only good in this establishment if they are commodities being sold to white men. The owner would never communicate with black customers and looks down on them. I hope that the management educates themselves on the definition of racism and discrimination. It’s a reason why it’s hardly any black customers inside. Blacks should avoid this establishment if they care anything about their life.” Far be it from me to discount anyone else’s negative experience. He must have left bad enough of a taste in his mouth to feel it necessary to post and warn others. But as a regular, longtime (decade-plus) black / Afro-Latino traveler and patron of these “South of The Border” establishments, including this one, I’ll just say that this reviewer’s experience at Point 202 has not been my or my traveling friends’ experience. Racism and colorism and classism do exist in Rio, Brazil, and all parts South of The USA, and often manifests itself ways differently than are seen in the US. I don’t know what this poster experienced or witnessed, but most likely it was not much different from what he would encounter at the other clubs and saunas like Club 117. The owner Junior, like many Brazilians who grew up in or around poverty, makes initial sweeping class assumptions about color and race, but most traveling black and brown North Americans and Europeans would be far removed from those class assumptions from Brazilians. To put it bluntly, that traveler of color with the American “blue passport” and a 5:1 BRL:USD currency conversion is going to be treated a lot more kindly than the kid from the favela in Jacarepaguá. So… “hostile to black foreigners”? Seems like a reach, to me. And sometimes, as I have semi-regularly witnessed, some customers / clients (of ALL races, colors, nationalities) can be obnoxious, entitled, arseholes. Not to say this is what happened here, but let’s not act like “the customer is always right” (as was mistakenly the motto of 20th Century Western retail, pre-Karen).

Hilarity ensues when a verbose poster across multiple platforms — without one ounce of self-awareness — runs to a moderator to report his detractors, and winds up getting himself suspended from that very same platform. What’s bizarre is the poster seems to believe that no one can figure out he’s the same poster under different screen names across different platforms. That being said, some very fine people in the past have been suspended (or chased away) from that platform.