I'm going to take a vacation some time this year (probably late August/early september or mid-october). Will probably have anywhere between 9 to 12 days. I've whittled down the list to Bangkok, Tokyo, L.A., and San Fran. I will be flying out from either Charlotte or NYC. That being said, the main contenders are essentially Bangkok and Tokyo. In your opinion, which is better for a vacation? A few specifics on what I'm looking for (in no particular order): flag, culture/good time, nightlife, and food. But I'm also mindful of costs and bang for buck (figuratively and literally). For background, I'm asian american - take that for what you will in the context of getting flags and/or pipelining.
My cursory understanding of the two places is as follows: Japan has some of the most coveted women on the planet (and on this forum among Asia-philes), along with perhaps the most fascinating culture (just so much shit to see and so many nooks/crannies to explore); but on the flip side, the women are very fickle/complicated (I hear you really have to "get" Japanese culture), it's expensive, and you might need a local to get the most depth. In contrast, Thailand has amazing women and culture in their own right, but perhaps less layered (or not, I don't know) than Japan, and is cheaper (but i don't know by how much). Both have phenomenal food. Is this right?
My cursory understanding of the two places is as follows: Japan has some of the most coveted women on the planet (and on this forum among Asia-philes), along with perhaps the most fascinating culture (just so much shit to see and so many nooks/crannies to explore); but on the flip side, the women are very fickle/complicated (I hear you really have to "get" Japanese culture), it's expensive, and you might need a local to get the most depth. In contrast, Thailand has amazing women and culture in their own right, but perhaps less layered (or not, I don't know) than Japan, and is cheaper (but i don't know by how much). Both have phenomenal food. Is this right?