beachchick

Not a bunch here I'd want to cruise with. Not a sense of humor among them. I thought it was inventive. Have spent 33 yrs working w/ convicts and the world would be a better place if more kids occupied themselves w/ what amounts to victimless and imaginative pursuits.

 

So you had to wait for another elevator. Were you on deadline? You're on VACATION.. roll w/ the punches..

Really? Stealing a cruise line employee's desk and chair, then dragging them into an elevator, and then thinking it's so terribly "funny" to go up and down with their "Do you have a reservation?" antics? This is going to make the world a better place with fewer children who grow up to become convicts? You've got to be kidding.

It is not victimless and it is not imaginative. Do you even give a damn about the passengers who can't just take the stairs instead? Not just those who are in wheelchairs or using scooters. There are other disabilities that are invisible, but that make climbing flights and flights of stairs quite difficult. How about the parent trying to get his or her cranky/tired/ill/needs to be changed toddler up or down several decks to get back to the cabin? Maybe the elderly passenger who needs to go lie down (or use the facilities) or a woman who needs to, um, "take care of something" back at the cabin? Or what about the fact that there are more than 2,000 other passengers onboard who have every right to expect that a couple of teens will not have stolen property and used it to take an elevator out of commission because they are too damn lazy to bother to find one of the hundred fun activities offered onboard? If they have to resort to that to have fun, they don't belong on a cruise ship.

beachchick

p.s., Yes, we are parents; yes, we love to have fun and laugh; no, we don't care to "roll with the punches" in this case.

I swim in my Depends and no one has ever complained!:D

Ah, but you see--that is against the rules too. They don't discriminate based on age. The rule applies to all passengers who are incontinent or have "potty problems."

(Yeah, I know you're no doubt joking; just thought I'd mention the actual regulation.)

beachchick

I did have the suggestion to bring a "Handy Dandy" appliance to do so.

But I guess you did not read that far

Yes, I did. I wasn't responding to that suggestion, except to basically say that I agree. I was responding to a suggestion that I believe to be a bad idea and unsanitary. I specifically bolded what I was responding to directly, sorry if it offends you that I didn't acknowledge your other suggestion specifically.

Frankly, I'm offended that your friend would use commercial coffee steaming equipment that way in her business. I have trouble believing that it's allowed by the health department. How is it possible to keep the equipment clean if they're holding a dirty cup, sippy, or bottle and using the milk steamer? Coffee machine steamers are not designed to be used as cleaning machines. To me, this seems a pretty straight-forward thing. And I still say that if 50 parents march in with 4 bottles every day, then it would be an imposition to the crew members. It is not the job of the cafe staff to steam out baby bottles; they should not be expected to do it, tip or no tip; other passengers should not have to wait for coffee in the coffee bar because anyone (parent or otherwise) wants the staff to use the milk steamer to "clean" a personal item for them.

Would 3 to 5 seconds really be long enough to kill bacteria? We are under a boil water advisory in the Atlanta, GA area and we are told to have the watrer at a full boil for 10 minutes.

I thought about that too. It takes more than a few seconds to sterilize with steam.

beachchick

You will find most folks helpful and kind

 

This how I would do it – in the buffet area there is a hot water dispenser for tea, use that to get your hot water. Place the nipple into a cup to rinse the nipple then rinse out the bottle too.

Also, if there is a Coffee bar on your ship they could steam the bottle & nipple for you.

There may be a handy dandy small appliance you could bring.

Good luck and have a great cruise!

I was going to stay out of this, I really was, because I think it's up to individual parents (and their pediatricians) to decide. But this is just too much, IMO. Sorry, but I think it is not a good suggestion at all. Parents who want/need to sterilize bottles onboard need to bring a bottle sterilizer or talk to the special needs department if their child has immunity issues that require it.

I cannot imagine the coffee bar staff being asked to sterilize nipples and bottles using the coffee-making equipment. Aside from how much time it would take when a bunch of parents come in every day to ask for it, I do not see how it can be at all sanitary for the rest of us to have babies' bottles being handled by the staff, around the equipment, and near drink/food items. I seriously doubt the CDC would even allow it. Plus, it is not the job of the coffee bar staff to clean bottles for parents. Bottom line is that coffee steaming equipment is not designed to function as a sterilizer.

beachchick

I am proud to be a British Citizen and am very happy to follow the laws of other countries when I am upon their soil. I look forward to smoking a nice Cuban cigar when I am in the Caribbean next winter.

I quite agree. Unfortunately, the Cuban cigar ban on cruise ships extends US law onto non-US soil and sea. It's not just while the ships are in US ports; it's that they're not allowed to sell Cuban cigars at all if they have even one US port. It's akin to requiring British citizens to follow US law while they are visiting Canada if they have an airport layover in New York on the way to Quebec.

beachchick

The US Goverment has ruled that if a cruise line has a single office in the USA, NONE of their ships - regardless of where they are flagged or where they sail - can sell cuban cigars onboard.

 

NCL got into a lot of trouble a few years ago when they tried to sell Cuban Cigars on their ships that did not call at US Ports.

The US Government threatened a $1Million fine.

They stopped the Cuban Cigars very quickly.

This is an area where I think the US Government has seriously overstepped and is acting like a bully. Not all passengers on the ships are US citizens, but our government feels it's appropriate to force them to follow our rules regarding Cuban cigars on non-US flagged cruise ships (many owned by non-US companies) while those ships are in international waters. While I am proud to be a US citizen, I am not proud of this. (Shakes head and sighs)

beachchick

I'm curious, you had Cuban cigars on an american ship ?

Mariner of the Seas is not an American-flagged ship; RCI is not an American company; the ship cruises in international waters. So yes, they were able to purchase Cuban cigars at a non-US port and smoke them on the ship. The cruise lines always "remind" passengers that they may not bring Cuban cigars into the United States upon returning to the destination port. (Yes, I know that US citizens are not legally "allowed" to smoke Cuban cigars even when they are outside the US, but I'd love to see them try to enforce that law.)

beachchick

p.s., Small point of clarification. We did not have Cuban cigars onboard the ship; we only accompanied others to the lounge. I have no idea if the cigars were as special as people say they are because I have no desire to try a cigar.

The best cigar bars I have seen are on Royal Caribbean's Voyager and Freedom Class ships. They are on deck 5, forward, at the lounge entrance. It's called the Aficionados Club.

We agree--and we haven't smoked even cigarettes for decades! My sister and BIL (both non-smokers, except my BIL has the occasional cigar) decided they "had to" experience Cuban cigars one cruise. On Mariner, it's called the Connoisseur's Lounge. In any case, we all went together after dinner one night. The lounge is elegant and understated with a ventilation system that is out of this world. We could barely smell the smoke anywhere in the lounge, not even right across the table, because the filtration/ventilation was so efficient. My DH has asthma now and didn't have the slightest issue. We had a very nice time.

beachchick

I'm still alittle confused about this whole swim diaper thing. Don't all kids probably pee in the pools regardless of swim diapers!? I would love to take our children on the carnival dream with the new waterpark, but are you telling me that because my 18 month old isn't potty trained she can't be in a swim diaper in the spray park?

It's not the pee that's the problem. It's the, um, solid "other" stuff. Swim diapers can often keep in solids, but the bacteria and other pathogens cannot be contained and leach into the water. In large public pools on land, you have two things going for you that you don't have on cruise ships: Very large volume of water to dilute contamination and extreme filtration with high chemical levels. Even with those advantages, there are news stories every year about 100 or 200 or more people who get ill from exposure to pathogens (some of them very serious, especially to young children) while swimming in public pools or water parks. Ship pools are small and do not have the same level of filtration or chemicals as pools on land. That's why the CDC and health dept regulations are so strict for cruise ships.

beachchick

Hm, interesting about the BC and only one parent listed. I know that it varies from state to state, but some states do not consider the fact that only one parent is listed as that parent automatically having all parental rights. I think that may be because a woman (obviously, not sexist here--it's we women who actually have the babies and who give the information for the BC) wants to keep the father out of the child's life for whatever reason (generally, good ones, no doubt). But a birth father in some states automatically does have parental rights, even if he's not listed on the BC. Of course, he has to prove paternity and so forth, but nevertheless, a single parent BC doesn't give the mother sole legal and physical custody just because she doesn't list the father's name.

I'd be interested to know what Mexico's legal stance is on this. As we all know, just because someone has never been asked to prove sole legal custody doesn't mean that no one in that situation has ever been asked. What does Mexico say specifically about a single-parent BC as proof of sole legal custody? Because I know for a fact that some US states do not consider it proof, I would suggest that having a court document verify it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to do.

beachchick

Generally, yes for some countries you will need a copy of whatever documents give you sole legal and physical custody. Even though the birth certificate only lists you, your child does have a father, and even though your daughter has a passport, neither of those is proof that her father has no custody rights. Immigration agents won't necessarily take your word for it that the father is not involved and that you are the sole legal guardian. Mexico is particularly touchy about this.

You don't need a notarized letter from the father giving permission. That's for when parents both have legal rights to a child and to prevent parental kidnapping out of the country. All you will need is a court document stating your sole custody, especially legal custody. If you don't have anything like that, I suggest you contact your county's Child Welfare Services (or similar). They can help you get through the process with as little fuss as possible.

Have a wonderful time with your precious daughter!:)

beachchick

For me, I never again want to go to Nassau, Bahamas. I have been there three times on three different cruises. Once was way more than enough.

Agreed. The only reason for us to get off the ship in Nassau is if we need to buy a bottle of Nassau Royal Liqueur to take home. Otherwise, it's a nice and quiet "sea" day on the ship without so many passengers onboard.:)

beachchick

Actually, we've never taken an excursion where there were any blatant tip signs, jars, or verbal "reminders" about tipping. (Note: We do not take ship excursions, just private ones.)

We have our own "tip rules" for various things. For example, if we're on a shuttle ride from place X to place Y and the driver handles our luggage, gives a bit of background and history of the area during the ride, and is pleasant, my DH tips him/her at the end of the ride about $5 or $2/bag he handles. If he/she has been particularly caring (helping someone with physical disabilities; making sure people are comfortable; generally being fun and professional at the same time, my DH will tip more for the "enjoyment" factor because let's face it, shuttle rides can either be a ride from hell or a pleasant beginning or ending to a trip.

Typically, we explore on our own, but we do take boat excursions often. On those trips, we tip a minimum of $10 and more if the crew has gone above and beyond expectations. Here's an example: One time on a Maui Dive Shop snorkel excursion during whale season, the boat captain (and I) saw a couple of spouts far away from our route back to Kihei. He decided to head toward the small pod. Now, it's illegal to get too close to whales and other marine life, so he was very careful to track their path (and got the excursion passengers involved in the "hunt"). Once he got the boat near the whale's travel path, he shut down (as required by law) and we waited. We were treated to the best whale experience we've ever had. It was a family pod with dad showing baby how to breach, etc. It was hysterical and so wonderful to watch. The captain asked the passengers if they were having fun and then radioed in to about what was happening and said we'd be 45 minutes or so late returning (didn't affect any afternoon excursions). As usual, the regular excursion was great, but what the captain and crew did that time made it special. When we got close to the boat docks, my DH asked the captain if there was a tip jar available. The captain said that there was and my DH put in $40, which prompted the other passengers to contribute as well. The thing is that the captain and crew had not mentioned tipping--not once and not even obliquely--until my DH brought it up. Usually, they will simply place the tip jar on the helm deck as the boat is brought into the dock. They do not say one word or point out that it's there because their feeling is that if passengers had a good time, they will tip accordingly and if they don't tip that's the way it goes.

For us, anything beyond a small notice or a tip jar at the end of an excursion is too much "pushing" for tips. To be reminded at the beginning and at the end, and to have it "hammered in" that the "employees rely on tips for a good part of their salary" annoys us.

beachchick

Thanks for all the good wishes above. Maggie aka Donder1

May I add my good wishes for you, both that you have a wonderful cruise and that you stay in remission! Good for you for getting out there and making the most of life.

beachchick

I have no desire to go on a New England / Canada cruise.

 

I guess familiarity breeds contempt, but I was born and raised in New England, vacationed almost every summer either on Cape Cod, or the Maine Coast. Been to Boston a gazillion times, done trips to Eastern Canada. It just holds little appeal to me as a cruise destination.

 

I guess I've seen the sights in this area so throughly that a few hour port visit just wouldn't be worth the cost of the cruise, given that for the same price I could cruise somewhere that I DON'T know like the back of my hand.

 

I'm not saying that I don't love and miss my native New England. We are spending a week on Cape Cod this summer. I just don't see it as a cruise destination for me.

Yeah, that's what a Pacific coast cruise would be for us: Boring.

I fully realize many people love the few repo cruises every year, and of course this year many more due to the swine flu concerns. I've read many posts by members who are thrilled with the change and wish the Pacific coast itinerary was a more frequent offering. But we already know the entire coast well and have no interest at all in cruising it.

beachchick

The Bus system is a main mode of transportation for commuters, day visitors, etc. It's not at all that they discourage public transportion to and from the airport, but they would need to have a fleet of buses designated solely for that purpose to take care of the thousands of visitors coming in and out each day. It's not reasonable (IMO) to expect all the residents who use the bus to get around each day to leave enough room onboard for visitors and all their luggage. That's what the shuttles are for. In fact, Robert's is basically considered "public" transportation for airport-to-hotel travel.

beachchick

Having taken The Bus around Honolulu and Waikiki, I can tell you that there is really no room for luggage. The Bus is a very popular mode of transportation and you're unlikely to find one that is not full. Yes, the driver will turn you away if you have full size (large) luggage. Plus, it takes much longer to get to your destination; you would have to fight for space and jockey all your stuff on and off the bus--all while others are trying to get on and off the bus and the driver is trying to keep a schedule. It's just not practical or reasonable in Honolulu/Waikiki to use the bus in that way.

There are inexpensive shuttles. A taxi would be more, but would get you to your hotel with no delays.

beachchick

I hate to say it because I'm sure I'll get flamed...But I have no intentions on ever going to Alaska...or anywhere else on vacation where the temp is below 80 degrees.

No flames from us. Alaska's coast holds no appeal for us. I know others love it (including a couple of family members). I think that's great, but I don't understand why they feel the need to tell us that we're somehow "wrong" for not wanting to go the same places they do. We understand what we're "missing," but still aren't interested. We might consider a land trip to inland Alaska, but there are many other places higher on our list, including Australia, Italy, Spain, Palma de Majorica, Portugal, Switzerland, and the Society Islands (which would be a first for me and a return visit for my DH).

I know that Alaska is completely different from Scandinavia, so the experience wouldn't be the same, but the beauty of the Norwegian fjords and northern coast are what suits us. The midnight sun and other "above the Arctic circle" experiences in Norway are what we cherish. OTOH, I was an exchange student in Norway in high school and spent some time in Denmark. We love visiting both countries. And yes, they have summer seasons too. In fact, they had one of the hottest summers on record (high 70s and well into the 80s for 2 months solid) the year I lived there. (Naturally I got teased about "bringing the California sun" with me.):)

Other places we have no interest in visiting: China, Vietnam, Thailand, and basically that entire region; most of India; the Panama Canal and most of Central America; Mexico; Africa. We have friends who say we're "crazy" or "narrow minded" for not wanting to visit these places. I say they should respect our choices and not ask that we "defend" our personal preferences.

I think it's wonderful that there are so many cruise (and land) options that we can all choose from for our adventures.

beachchick

Is it permissable to like cruising, but not love it to the point that it's the be-all-and-end-all of vacationing? I don't think it's necessary to put myself into either extreme category. I also don't think it matters why people don't care for cruises, even if they've never been on one. They are entitled to their preferences regardless of what anyone else thinks. Just as "cruise lovers" are entitled to their preferences, so are non cruise lovers. Neither "side" owes us an explanation.

beachchick

I LOVE to cruise, however, I also enjoyed our all inclusive vacation...where we EVERYTHING was included...including nicer restaurants as an option to a buffet, tips and alcohol. It depends on what you are looking for and your financial concerns/worth.

 

As far as the 3.95 late night charge on RCI? We never do late night room service, but I'll bet people will consider that the "tip." I hope the person delivering gets some of this money.

Which is one reason we aren't considering AI resorts these days. My DH doesn't drink and I don't drink all that much. I don't want him to subsidize anyone's alcohol consumption but mine. We used to run into that when dining out sometimes. If "the table" ordered three bottles of expensive wine and I had 1 glass and my DH had none, the idea of evenly splitting the bill was unreasonable. It's not as if we're ordering caviar and lobster in lieu, so there's simply no way that AI is the right fit for us. It doesn't matter whether we can afford it, we'd simply rather not use the money that way. That's not to say that AIs aren't a great option for many people. It can be quite convenient to pay the one price and not worry about it again.

We really enjoy the option of extra courses and desserts in the dining room, and my husband has even coined the term "triple double," meaning a meal where he's ordered 2 appetizers, 2 mains, and 2 desserts. However, as much as he enjoys this opportunity, I think he'd quickly curb the habit if a surcharge was introduced.

 

One thing I think I would be willing to pay extra for? Priority embarkation. The lines to embark are always a nightmare, often hot, and generally unpleasant. But we enjoy boarding in the early groups so we have a chance to find our way around the ship before it's too crowded.

If your DH is doing his triple double meals because he really enjoys them, then he should absolutely continue and have fun doing it. Why not? Unfortunately, some people order multiples just because they feel "I've paid for the food, I'm going to eat as much as possible" or they go to the buffet and load three plates high, but leave half of it on the plates. That kind of waste both raises cruise fares (to cover the food thrown out) and is, IMO, just plain wrong.

I agree that embarkation at prime time can be a PITA. If the cruise lines decided to offer such an option as a surcharge item, they'd have to have a limited number of spots available. Otherwise, you could end up with 50% of the pax having "priority" embarkation. That would kind of defeat the idea. Our method of dealing with it is to simply wait until just a bit later to get to the pier, but I know many people love to arrive as early as possible to start enjoying their cruise.

No one seemed to have an opinion on being able to stay later on the ship. I think that would be wonderful. Having to get up early, finish packing, dress, shower, whatever, and then stand and wait to be called off the ship in groups, around 8am, sux!! Sure, I will get up early to see the sunrise, or not miss a glacier, but I dread the last day. If we had a "late checkout", and could have a nice breakfast, a leisurely time to finish packing, maybe even an early lunch, one more time around the ship, a few more pictures, now that seems to be the way to end a cruise, not what i have read on here so far.

NCL does allow this--within reason. You do not have to leave your cabin at the "crack of doom" (as my DH calls those horrid early morning cattle calls). We had coffee, went to breakfast, came back and finished putting our things together, took showers, had a last cup of coffee, and exited the ship at about 10:30. We agree that the getting up and getting out and then being forced to sit in the passageways, lounges, or wherever while waiting to disembark is the pits.

Your idea seems good in theory, but is not possible because they've got to clear the ship before they can allow pax for the next cruise onboard. Not only do they have to clean, resupply, etc., but there are security issues. They simply cannot allow the previous cruise pax to stay onboard through lunch (not even an early one). Late morning is good, but anything beyond that means that we'd all be complaining about how we had to wait until after lunch to board because the ship hadn't been cleared early enough. It's a balancing act for the cruise line.

I'm in the nothing listed category also, and at the moment can't think of anything I would need or like to pay extra for. Aren't cruises supposed to be all inclusive??????????????????

No. We've never thought of mass-market cruising to be all-inclusive. There is no "supposed to be" about it. Even the premier lines have extra charge items. I think that many people have the perception that cruising is completely AI from shows, movies, and other things that depict cruising as "more" than it is.

beachchick

Actually, I beleive you know which posts I meant-that come off sounding like adolescent braggarts, I never meant all did.

 

Well, back to the point, I do not really care, as I said, what others do. I have never seen anyone having sex on ship-and if I did-I would turn away-I certainly would not watch a private moment between two people.

Yes, I'm sorry I "snapped" at you like that. I realized when I re-read your post that I had misinterpreted it. I think I was just irritated by the other posts that seemed quite insulting to those who just answered the questions with general personal experience or suggestions.

Some posts do sound like teenagers (of either gender) in their respective locker rooms.

beachchick

I did not see anything on the poll list that I would pay for.

Ditto.

beachchick

I have thought the same thing- I often wondered if some couples only "participate" on cruises-LOL! I can't help but be amazed that many make such a big deal out of something that should be normal in a healthy sexual relationship-some posts here remind me of teenage boys bragging about their first time.

It's true that some do seem to be "bragging," but you know, most of us are just answering a specific question asked. We base our answers on personal experience, cleanliness practices, and opinions. If you don't want to read things like this, then skip the darn thread.

Please. Now when I take MY cruise, I'll be looking for romantic encounters. Great. Just what i need to see :rolleyes:

 

So..I guess they're more private than I thought...ok, go for it!

:confused: Do you mean you'll be scanning the public areas of the ship for couples indulging where, IMO, they shouldn't (e.g., public hottubs/pools, the helicopter deck, etc.)? Or do you mean that you'll be peering around your balcony divider in hopes of "catching" your neighbors being intimate?

If the former, that's up to you. We have better things to do with our time around the ship than to spend any doing that. If the latter, well, just don't. It's rude beyond belief, IMO, for anyone to peer around what is obviously a privacy divider to look into someone else's balcony (and cabin, if the drapes are open). It's none of your (or my or anyone else's) business what people do on their own balconies unless it interferes with your own cruise experience.

I agree with you totally. You know they say people that brag about it are the ones not getting it!:D These posts are a total turn off to those of us who have to sail on the same ships. I'm sorry if I offended the people who want to have "Sex " or "Romance as they call it" on their balconys, but you are offending all of the others who like to keep....personal time with our loved ones private.When we are on these ships....they don't belong to us, its not like your in your own backyard..that is a different case.

As I wrote above, don't read the threads if you find them a turn off or offensive. Did you really not consider that pax might use their private balconies for private activities when the ship is at sea? Did you figure that if you didn't know about it, then it couldn't possibly have happened?

No one is giving graphic details. No one is posting pix (thank goodness). When we book a cabin with a private balcony, that's what we expect. That cabin and balcony do "belong" to us to use as we see fit (as long as it's legal activity and does not directly negatively affect others) regardless of how offensive the very idea seems to be to you. IMO, you being offended by these posts and by the idea of intimacy on the balcony is your problem. No one is asking to have sex in front of you, for crying out loud! I don't discuss the details of my private life with anyone except my husband and my doctor. Regardless of how some TV shows depict women discussing every encounter and every relationship in graphic detail, it is not the reality for anyone I know. We don't find it appropriate to go into specifics when we talk about our marriages. (Which doesn't mean one of us might not be particularly happy one day and mention that her husband has been "particularly attentive lately." We all get the idea with no more information needed.)

Anyway, the bottom line (again, no pun) is that if you are turned off or offended by threads about balcony activities, then skip the threads. No one is forcing you to read the posts--You choose to do that on your own.

beachchick

If you are concerned about contamination, bring Bleach spray, and whatever you do don't lay on or touch the bed spreads in ANY hotel or cruise ship.

We don't, that's for sure. The first thing we do is have the steward or housekeeping staff remove the darn thing for the duration. Most places do not change bedspreads between guests unless they are quite obviously soiled. Ick!

You and I usually see eye to eye on things, but I have to say on this one I do not feel I did or said anything wrong when I said I thought it was gross. I thought I had explained it so that it did not come across as a moral judgement. I could careless what sexual activities people do as long as they are consenting and between adults. But I do think I have the right to think it is gross from a sanitary point of view and not be personally attacked for feeling that way. Not saying you attacked me, but there have been several on here questioning my sexual abilities in the bedroom or stating what a prude I must be, etc, just because I don't feel it is appropriate for people to do things that would leave bodily fluids for the next pax. When I say I was attacked, of course not named by named, but anyone who thought it was gross or disgusting were all lumped into the group that must be boring in bed or must be jealous, etc.

 

I may have issues about germs, hell half the time I call myself a germaphobe. But again, I do not think that gives anyone the right to attack me just because I feel it is unsanitary.

Those who responded in such a way should be ashamed, especially because you specifically pointed out what you think is disgusting or gross about it--not the activities themselves, but how such personal behavior might affect the next pax. I agree with you on the sanitary aspects of it. That's why I wanted to mention that many or perhaps most people would lay out a towel or similar not just to protect the next pax, but also to protect themselves from the previous pax who may not have been so thoughtful or concerned.

beachchick

Trust me.. you are wrong. Some of us are disgusted that it is being done on furniture that will be used by someone else as soon as you get off the ship. THAT is why it is disgusting.

You have a point, but (not butt);) that assumes that anyone would be comfortable with their bare bottom (or whatever parts) on a bare chair. It's entirely possible to cover a chair with a towel (both comfortable and sanitary) and enjoy some balcony fun. I suspect most people would feel the same way. Certainly there may be those who would not cover a chair or lounge and that is most certainly icky and wrong because it shows no regard for others who will use the furntiture.

I certainly wouldn't sit my bare bottom on a balcony chair (or any other except at my own home where I "know where that chair has been and who has been on it") regardless of what activity I had planned. I can't imagine that those chairs would be comfortable against bare skin anyway.

Even naturists/nudists have proper customs regarding where they place their bare parts. They would never think of sitting on a chair, sofa, lounge, or any other piece of furniture used by others without covering it with a towel or similar item first.

beachchick