Life after escorting

[sexgayboy]

Hello,

 

I have always been interested in the demi-monde of escorts. I have always wondered, how do escorts who have been escorting full-time go back, find a job in mainstream society? How do you explain the gap between college and now? As a young working professional, wondering what it is like for people in this line.

[Bilbo]

You are seeming to make the assumption that most escorts want to go back, or into in the first place, the corporate world. Often not the case. Also, you seem to assume that most escorts are young. Not necessarily the case, but, yes, probably, since I used the word "most".

It seems to me that most escorts have a cover job, one under which they report their income to the IRS. Also, IMHO, escorting is for many not the only job that they have going, that they are quite often self employed in several different directions. So, whether it actually happens or not, this would leave us with an established job. So there is no gap in the resume to fill, n'est pas?

[+ deej]

The most powerful word on a resume: CONSULTANT

 

:+

[Rick Munroe]

>How do

>you explain the gap

 

I don't know; I lost interest after the Madonna ad campaign. Strictly Old Navy for me from now on...

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>>How do

>>you explain the gap

>

>I don't know; I lost interest after the Madonna ad campaign.

 

Madonna...Madonna...hmm...Oh! was that the slightly severe but admittedly hip-looking and undeniably buffed out and limber middle-aged woman who participated in those wicked supadupafly Missy Elliot ads?

 

>Strictly Old Navy for me from now on...

 

Cargo pants or low-rise jeans?

[Bilbo]

And there's a prime example of what I was talking about! Although he is still young, etc., and has no plans, far as I know, to go into the corporate world, I almost mentioned people posing as artists, but was afraid that Devon would think I meant him and he's a real artist. Just as I am a for real theater artist (actor, etc., etc.) = two professions which I imagine are faked on IRS forms and resumes all the time.

[Guest rohale]

I'm not an escort but I work in the corporate world. However I do know one escort up in the North eastern part of the country. I knew him before he got into the industry. He and I met in college and got to be friends in the process.

 

We're still very close friends and I know it was a difficult decision for him when he chose this profession. On top of that he had it hard in the transitional stage of trying to balance his personal life at the same time. He's been part of the industry for quite some time now. Earlier this year he made the conscientious decision of wanting to enter the corporate world while juggling escorting and his personal life in one go. He's survivor and he's maintaining a balance. How long this will last, only he knows the answer to that. We do agree upon that being in the corporate world is tough. The stress level is enormous. He's not used to of working up to at times twelve hours a day. From his point of view, he always says to me that escorting is not going to last forever. At this stage, he's maintaining a balance. I suppose for some escorts it works and for others it's a constant struggle. To each his own.

 

Rohale

[Rick Munroe]

>Cargo pants or low-rise jeans?

 

Honey, when you got a booty like this, you don't waste it in cargo pants. It's low-rise, ass-hugging boot legs for me. }(

[Guest DevonSFescort]

I think this is an extremely important topic, one which has been on my mind a lot. I've snipped the following excerpt from Bilbo's first post below because I think it's both too glib and too prevalent a way of looking at the closeted status of the sex industry. This is distinctly NOT intended to be a "gotcha" on Bilbo or an attempt to label him as someone prone to making glib statements. To the contrary, I think the fact that someone like Bilbo, who strikes me as someone who is, on the whole, NOT prone to making glib statements, and who has worked in the sex industry for many years in a variety of capacities, is doing so in this case, is indicative of the problematic position people associated with whatever corner of the sex industry find ourselves in.

 

>It seems to me that most escorts have a cover job, one under

>which they report their income to the IRS. Also, IMHO,

>escorting is for many not the only job that they have going,

>that they are quite often self employed in several different

>directions. So, whether it actually happens or not, this would

>leave us with an established job. So there is no gap in the

>resume to fill, n'est pas?

 

If I understand him correctly, Bilbo's saying, more or less, that many escorts' extenuating circumstances make it relatively easy for them to be closeted about their escorting when they apply for a new job. To what extent that's true, I just don't know, but we could say that generally speaking, if an escort either wants or is compelled by circumstance to seek employment, in many if not most cases he's going to need to choose between employment and having, to some extent, which could vary greatly from one escort to the next, depending on the nature of the job, his past credentials, and other factors like what else he's been doing and how important the escorting was to his income, etc., to lie in some way. It could be a lie of omission, a little or a lot of "fudging," a flat out whopper -- whatever -- in most workplaces, it's going to be important that the employer not know that the escort will need to make a point of their not finding out. For the purposes of this conversation I'm not talking about people who dabbled here and there or for whom it was really a very contained experience that wasn't important to their income, and whose primary motives weren't central to what you'd broadly call "their livelihood." (Resumes are supposed to be simple, and you don't necessarily list every part-time job you had to supplement your income, not because you're ashamed of them or are afraid you might be discriminated against, but because they're just not germane and distract from an orderly presentation of your pertinent skills. "Being truthful" does not have to, and usually shouldn't mean, bogging down in minutiae, and I'd like to get that out of the way up front.)

 

But what I'm getting at is that today, as things stand in most American workplaces (and this also applies to many if not most other countries, even those in which prostitution is perfectly legal -- in much of America it's perfectly legal to do porn or be a stripper, too), most former sex workers are going to feel as obliged to hide their sex work from prospective (and, if they get hired) actual employers if they don't want to be either discriminated against or fired, as they used to be (and in some places -- including those where it's illegal to do so -- still are) for being known or perceived to be gay.

 

So to say that "there's no gap" may be true in some cases, but generally speaking only if we're satisfied with meeting technicalities to feel like we're living honest lives. I imagine that most of us have heard someone say "Well, technically what I said was true..." to rationalize what was, effectively, a lie, and we knew that it was a lie, and thought we could tell that they thought it was a lie. We might not hold it against them because we think we understand why they're lying, or we might hold it against them for exactly the same reason, but basically, if we want to talk truthfully about "what's going on" we're going to have to concede that the person is lying, and then we might get into a conversation about to what extent their doing so is a reflection of character vs. circumstances, etc. "Ya gotta do whatcha gotta do," if meant to say you understand that someone's options were very restricted, is, or at least can be, a reasonable and empathetic statement as long as it isn't used to rationalize something that clearly doesn't apply (e.g., it's not reasonable to say that someone who beat the shit out of someone because the other guy "disrespected him" by stepping on his shoe, was "doing what he had to do"). (There are many examples in which that statement can clearly be abused and I'm not interested in itemizing them all.) And most people do take context somewhat into account when they say "Ya gotta do whatcha gotta do," especially vis-a-vis situations involving the closet.

 

A low-income person living in a small, very socially conservative town somewhere in rural California where there are very few employers and most people are anti-gay, would, it seems to me, have much better grounds to say that he has to choose between employment and lying about being gay (I don't mean on his resume -- I'm talking about the general lie, either of omission or outright statement or whatever, on an ongoing basis from the time he applies and the time he leaves the job), than, say, a well-educated person in San Francisco. Now, technically, that might not be true in the sense that California law forbids employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, so the guy in the rural down doesn't "have" to lie or not be employed, and there probably are still homophobic workplaces in San Francisco (even though it's extremely gay-friendly there are still homophobic individuals that live here, and some of them run workplaces where, even in 2004, they've managed to keep gays out of the workplace without getting into legal trouble).

 

But generally, most of us, I think, would say that the guy in the small town, as things stand now, has to lie if he wants to work, whereas in the overwhelming majority of cases in San Francisco, if someone's lying about being gay it's not because he has to. He is OPTING to do so, and whether or not any moral judgement should be made about his choice is an issue on which reasonable people can disagree. So whereas it's reasonable to say to the rural guy "Ya gotta do whatcha gotta do," that statement really wouldn't apply to a closeted San Franciscan (notwithstanding certain highly unusual situations that again I'm not interested in itemizing).

 

But if you're someone who cares about the rural guy, chances are you're not, for too long, going to be satisfied with "Ya gotta do whatcha gotta do" as a way of looking at his situation, because, even if you would generally characterize him as an honest person, you hopefully know that living a lie isn't good for him, and you're worried about his long-term happiness and the toll lying will take on him (and how bad it is for him may be compounded if others are involved, etc. -- and then he's affecting other people, etc. -- to keep things simple, for now I'd like to say let's assume he's single). In other words, it would be reasonable to say that his situation is unsatisfactory, to put it mildly, and if he wants to live a more honest life he's going to have to do something about it. Few people, I think, would argue that he is morally obliged to stay in the small town and become a gay rights activist -- though doing so could be a brave thing, worthy of great praise -- most of us rightly wouldn't expect it of him. But we might encourage him to take some kind of course where the goal is always to decrease the number of people he has to lie about who he is to, or to lay the groundwork for the possibility of a more honest life. Maybe he should save up so he can move somewhere where he'll have more options; or maybe he'll find small, subtle ways, to change people's attitudes in his workplace and/or prove his value to the company and/or his coworkers until it gets to the point that when they do find out they'll either say it doesn't change anything or at least that they like and value him enough to deal with it. So while he has to start with an unsatisfactory situation -- people shouldn't feel like they have to lie about being gay -- it doesn't have to stay that way, and it's probably usually fair to say that it shouldn't. The current status quo may well be that he has to lie, and many of us would not, on that basis, dismiss him as an untrustworthy person (we might, if we know him well, feel we'd trust him with our lives, even though we know he lies to his employer). But nor would we say "oh well, it's no big deal." It is a big deal. He has to lie, and it's not okay. This person needs to find a way to change something about his situation, or, unless he lucks out and the situation changes for external reasons, he's creating suffering in his life and could even be eroding his trustworthiness by getting too acclimated to lying. (A lot of the fucked up interactions that happen between gay men even after they've come out can be attributed to the fact that they got to used to living a lie when they had to, and let themselves believe they had to long after they really did, etc.)

 

Well, that's where I think sex workers stand now vis-a-vis workplace situations almost everywhere in this country. We're like the guy in a small, isolated town with few options and a long, difficult process ahead of him if he wants to make the situation better. In many cases it may be even worse, or more unfair, because if we're escorts who run our own businesses, for example, and/or used our careers in some way that harmonized with our ability to acquire or develop certain skills, the fact that we've escorted may actually enhance our value as an employee in ways that our mere sexual orientation really doesn't, apart from the general proposition that diversity is a good thing and it's good for people in the workplace to come into contact with a gay person.

 

I'm an artist and a writer, which means the profession(s) I'm trying to transition into are among the least likely to discriminate against me for having been an escort. I would say I'm cautiously optimistic that being honest about having escorted will not prevent me from making a living as an artist (which for my purposes I'll apply to all media I work in including writing). To the contrary, it's already started making it more possible. If the calendar year were to end today, 2004 would be the first year in which I've ever made MOST of my income from being an artist, and that fact has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that I've escorted and been open about it. It's given me the time and resources to do my art; it's given me an audience and markets for my work, along with exposure, both to more people whose advice and influence can make me a better and/or more marketable artist AND to more great art that I can learn from and be inspired by. While it might not be true that there's no other way I could have developed as an artist, it's almost certainly true that I am a much better, and much more marketable, artist, than I would have been if, when I was first obliged to supplement my income, I had just taken whatever part-time job I could get. Besides, I know for a fact that my position at my day job was eliminated within months of my leaving, and would have been even if I'd stayed.

 

So if I don't make it as an artist, it's less likely to be because of my having been open about escorting than because of something about my art and/or where the art market's at. I don't think I've ever made the case that the art and literary worlds are just too hostile to escorts and I won't be able to get a fair shake.

 

That said, we also know that most people, even most people who fancy themselves artists, are NOT able to make a living as artists, and it would be unbelievably glib for me to say that I won't be one of them after my escorting career ends. If that were to happen, I would be obliged to seek employment, and there would, indeed, be a gap on my resume, which I could try to paper over by exaggerating the extent and duration of my deriving my income from art during those years.

 

But basically, at that point, I'd either have to lie or I'd be screwed. The kinds of jobs I've always gotten had low barriers to entry and pretty low pay, but they were the kinds of jobs that there wasn't really a lot of pre-existing qualifications for: in other words the sorts of jobs where the boss can limit his search to people who have done that job before. They tend to be jobs where articulateness and the ability to adapt quickly to the specific skills the position requires, and although they haven't been readily transferable to one another, each one has left me with a little more skilled (speaking in the broad sense) and qualified either to start at the next workplace either a little higher up the food chain than I otherwise would or to be promoted quickly after entering at the ground floor. In fact I've usually maxed out whatever opportunities for advancement were available wherever I worked; it's just that there weren't many, so it didn't take long to climb as high as I could climb. There is no question in my mind that the time I've spent escorting has made me a much more potentially valuable employee than I was before I started, both in terms of tangible skills (I'd never run my own business before or done marketing campaigns, designed my own website, etc.) and the often less tangible benefits of having dramatically broaded my "weak ties" -- friendly acquaintances, people you like but who aren't really very entangled in your life -- the kinds of people, in fact, that most often help people get jobs.

 

(This relates to why I've never bought the facile argument that employment policies should be "color-blind," because in our society white people are much more likely to have more weak ties that can help them get the better jobs. I've never seen anyone who opposes affirmative action even pretend to address this point. I don't support affirmative action because I secretly think non-white people are inferior; I'm support it because I realize that race is too relevant, not necessarily in obvious ways, to the number and extent of most people's weak ties for anyone to say with a straight face that workplaces would be more meritocratic if we got rid of affirmative action. Many businesses know this, which is why corporations, especially the ones that employ more people, so often implement affirmative action on their own and/or staunchly oppose anti-affirmative action ballot measure. It isn't always because they want to look politically correct or are afraid of being sued, though those factors probably come into play; workplace cultures obviously vary widely.)

 

In other words, I, like any escort who wants to go into fields in which having been an escort would enhance his qualifcations, if not for the stigma attached to "prostitution" would be in the surreal, absurd, and unfair position of having to HIDE, or come up with false explanations for, skills that would make me a much more desirable candidate than I would otherwise be, but for (deja vu) the fact that it will be hard to find workplaces where the boss won't have a hang-up about my sex life. He may well have hired escorts himself, and it's not as though he's going to worried about whether applicants have ever hired escorts, or watched porn, etc., and that, of course, is part of what's so fucked up.

 

Gay men who rationalize the way our society stigmatizes sex workers, whether their occupation actually involves or requires them to break the law or not, are indulging in the most disgusting kind of hypocrisy. The Supreme Court only overturned the sodomy laws last year, so don't even fucking bother bringing up legalities, and besides, it's no more legal to buy sex than it is to sell it. Yes, you can quibble about the degree to which it is or is not as bad because sexual orientation is much more "permanent" and integral to who you are, but as I've explained, the discrimination is often even more outrageous because it involves punishing people for IMPROVING their credentials, often people who don't have many, or any other means available to do so. Linda Lovelace was cleaning toilets when she died at age 52 after a life in which she went from being a celebrity to never, EVER being allowed to live down having been a porn actress. Where were the millions of people she entertained when she needed them? However far away they could get.

 

And anyone who has ever, EVER participated in the sex industry as a consumer, who tries to defend the way the very people whose bodies he's used for his own entertainment or sexual gratification get treated in this country -- or who even tries to tell himself that it's not his fight -- is a fucking scumbag and a cowardly piece of shit who is probably right not to try and do that to my face. The only person who has, in fact, was my last roommate, a pathetic, miserable little man who'd been addicted to crystal meth for twenty years, was HIV-positive, picked up crackheads in the park and brought them into the apartment, and got Hepatitis C just before I moved out and didn't know/remember how he got it. But he insisted that while I lived there I could only do out calls because he simply couldn't abide "prostitution" in the sacred temple that was his home, even though he COUNTED on the money I gave him for rent (several months' worth in advance, which helped him out of many a self-imposed financial jam). He deliberately cut my income-earning opportunities in half during the period when their potential was the greatest, (both because I was a newer presence in the market and because the SF economy hadn't gotten as bad as it would get during the recession), just so he could have somebody to feel superior to -- and make no mistake, he fucking hated himself. And he had the fucking nerve to accuse me of "rationalizing" that I was doing it because I was an artist, telling me, in so many words, "you're not an artist -- you're a fucking whore, plain and simple, and that's all you are." I've been completely open about what I do and I've encountered people who I would have expected to be much more likely to have much more negative reactions, but no one has been anywhere near as harsh as this disgusting troll who was knee-deep in a much more destructive lifestyle than I can even fathom, one whose lifestyle had gotten himself and who knows how many other people infected with terminal illnesses, and who routinely brought home drug addicts who were so far gone that in any number of cases they had no clue what was going on -- I mean people so wasted and ravaged that you can't even describe in understated terms without sounding like you're making fun of them -- people who were at absolute rock bottom. (This is similar, though not usually as dramatic, as the arbitrary walls different parts of the sex industry often erect between each other: if who've done a certain type of sex work, or been in too many -- or any -- of the wrong kind of pornos, somebody's always got a reason why they can't be associated with you.) It's the same phenomenon we've noticed over and over again with homosexuality -- the more self-righteous the guy shrieking "Prostitute!" is, the more you can tell that the person he's really judging is himself.

 

Don't look now, but there's a reason it's called the world's oldest profession. We've had thousands of years to see if stigmatizing it will eradicate it or limit the harm it can cause. Not only has it not gone away, it's expanded more than ever and will continue to do so each time technology (or, say, the crumbling of totalitarian regimes) makes it possible. The closet has NOT made sex workers or their clients any less likely to be exploited, which of course is a reason we constantly hear for keeping prostitution laws on the books or persecuting pornographers. It makes it much, much worse, because the dregs of humanity use that cover to get away with whatever the fuck they want, while smug, santimonious pricks and phony "feminists" congratulate themselves for "combating" the exploitation they can feel good about ignoring. So much of the potential good is thoughtlessly, foolishly squandered, and the actual harm is both aggravated and made easier to perpetuate than if it were brought into the daylight. You can't reform something you can't see and that nobody can talk about. Who, in his right mind, possessing even an ounce of integrity, can explain how it makes sense that being gay has gone, in so short a time, from being illegal and taboo to, increasingly, not even a barrier to getting married and raising children, but that it would be terrible if we were to remove the stigmas and bans against prostitution? I'm sorry, but "old and popular" just doesn't cut it as a justification for why a taboo should stay a taboo. The taboo against homosexuality was old and popular too. Big fucking deal. It's time to stop trying to put the genie back into the bottle and just deal with the fact that it's out.

 

I'm not saying I know the course of action each individual should take to fight what can only be described as a systemic injustice. But since I'm one of the relatively privileged targets of this oppression, I've decided to be more out, and to stick my neck out further, than I would ever ask anyone else to do. And therefore I feel justified in asking the rest of you to be on the lookout for whatever ways, large and small, you can contribute to a fight that is not significantly different from the one we've just won, in some places, and are winning in others. It's time people showed the kind of courage and integrity it took, and in some places still takes, to enfranchise gay men and lesbians, and applied it to sex workers. If you've participated in any aspect as buyer or seller in the sex industry, please, come out, come out, wherever you are, to whatever extent you can, and keep looking for ways to push whatever the limit to that extent is, and keep going, and keep going. If you won't have your life ruined by acknowledging that you hire escorts, then speak up. Speak up anyway, even if you can't make that disclosure; object to offensive claptrap designed to keep us in our place, just as straight people have done on gays' behalf for years. Lie if you have to, but keep striving to make that lie smaller and less necessary. Being completely honest and free may seem like, and even actually be, a goal that is impossibile to achieve in your lifetime. That is what makes it all the more important that you make that goal your own.

[woodlawn]

> Just as I am a for

>real theater artist (actor, etc., etc.) = two professions

>which I imagine are faked on IRS forms and resumes all the

>time.

 

I don't know about resumes, but giving a false occupation on a tax return can be a problem, since returns are signed under penalty of perjury. DOJ has recently shown a propensity for charging people with offenses related to their candor in dealing with government inquiries as opposed to substantive offenses -- that's why Martha Stewart and Frank Quattrone are currently looking at prison time. Rather than put an occupation on your return that you wouldn't be able to substantiate in the event of an audit, it's far better to leave the line blank. There's no penalty for that.

 

What strikes me about this discussion, as about many discussions on this message board, is that although some posts purport to be about prostitution in general, they really have to do only with the small percentage of prostitutes who are of interest to the regulars here.

 

The vast majority of prostitutes in America are not young(ish) gay men who are escorting for a couple of years in order to pay for university or to help in the transition to another career, nor do they pick up skills in the course of their sex work that will make them more desirable employees for Microsoft or Genentech. Instead, they're women and children who are exploited by the sex industry, many of them suffering greatly as a result. Legislators can hardly be expected to change the laws regarding prostitution to suit a small group whose circumstances have little similarity to the circumstances of the vast bulk of those who would be affected by the change. It would be like denying all funding for computers in public schools on the ground that a small percentage of students have parents who can afford to buy them laptops to take to school with them. The point is so obvious it's amazing anyone would be so obtuse or self-centered as to need to be reminded of it, but here it is: any change in the laws regarding prostitution needs to take account of the affect on most of the people who are involved in prostitution.

[Doug69]

>The vast majority of prostitutes in America are not young(ish)

>gay men who are escorting for a couple of years in order to

>pay for university or to help in the transition to another

>career, nor do they pick up skills in the course of their sex

>work that will make them more desirable employees for

>Microsoft or Genentech. Instead, they're women and children

>who are exploited by the sex industry, many of them suffering

>greatly as a result.

 

You seem to think that this is an argument in favor of keeping prostitution illegal, but it is actually nothing of the sort.

 

Children are irrelevant to the discussion; I am certain that virtually everyone - including those who favor the legalization of prostitution - would agree the child prostitution ought to be illegal. This is so for exactly the same reason that most people who think that pornography should be legal still believe that child pornography should be criminalized: namely, that children are not capable of meaningful consent.

 

As for adult female prostitutes, the only ones who are not free to stop prostituting any time they choose are ones who work under the threat of physical coercion. But just as consensual sex with women is legal whereas rape is not, it is quite easy to criminalize the act of forcing a woman into prostitution while still allowing women who freely choose to do it the right to do so.

 

Thus, the existence of child prostitutes or female prostitutes who are forced into prostitution against their will is not, in any way, an argument against legalizing prostitution, notwithstanding the fact that you frequently raise these two groups as an argument against legalizing prostitution.

 

It's like arguing that adult pornography should be outlawed because child pornography exists, or arguing that sex with women should be criminalized because sometimes they are raped. It's quite easy to outlaw the problems you identify - child prostitution and forced female prostitution - while still legalizing adult prostitution that is freely chosen.

[woodlawn]

>Children are irrelevant to the discussion; I am certain that

>virtually everyone - including those who favor the

>legalization of prostitution - would agree the child

>prostitution ought to be illegal.

 

Children aren't irrelevant. The existence of an industry in which sex is bought and sold makes it easier for runaway children to participate in such activities, just as the existence of an industry in which tobacco is bought and sold makes it easier for children to smoke despite the fact that selling tobacco to minors has long been outlawed.

 

>As for adult female prostitutes, the only ones who are not

>free to stop prostituting any time they choose are ones who

>work under the threat of physical coercion. But just as

>consensual sex with women is legal whereas rape is not, it is

>quite easy to criminalize the act of forcing a woman into

>prostitution while still allowing women who freely choose to

>do it the right to do so.

 

As anyone who has worked in the area of spousal abuse or sex crimes can tell you, the neat, tidy, mutually exclusive definitions of 'consent' and 'coercion' that you imagine exist do not exist in the real world. There's nothing 'easy' about getting women who have been abused and exploited by men in various ways to cooperate in prosecuting them. In fact, the exact opposite is often true.

 

I'm aware you think our legal system should never operate to deny people choices that are harmful to themselves. You've said so over and over and over and over again. No need to bring up your staple argument about outlawing cheeseburgers -- I'm sure we all remember it. As is shown by a large number of laws currently on the books which do indeed deny people choices that are harmful to them, the great majority of your fellow Americans (including me) don't agree with you on this point.

[Bilbo]

I was in here looking for the long version of the short version you had in you diary today, Devon. So that I could say "hear, hear!" to it. I had absolutely no idea that it would have been written in response to me. (BTW, I liked the ending on the diary version a bit better. Anyone who hasn't seen it should check it out!)

 

I have been consciously trying lately to be a bit more glib. Not as glib as Rick, say, but someone who has a bit of a wit and is occaisionally a bit shorter winded than I have been in the past. Not only would I get more customers, even out of this Twink lovers paradise, I reasoned, but maybe more personal notes off the board and an invitation to meet someone for tea, no fee to me, the next time they're in Houston. I do try that every once in a while. Ah, well. Bravo for me if I was the occaision of your not, Devon, because it is something that needs saying every once in a while, and thinking all of the time. If I can, I'll just slide sideways and let most of it hit Woody - and I'll do that by saying that I have said many times on these boards that we all should be working towards making this business legal and that I expect it to be in about 20 years. Also, I had a lady in a new age/Wiccan sort of a store, The Magic Cauldron, just yesterday who asked me if I was a healer and I told her that yes, I am, and had been a licensed masseur until a couple of years ago when the state took exception to the Tantric side of my massages. I had expected acceptance and got a look where her eyes glazed a bit and she became a bit less interested in me. So, yes, our "props" are not always there, even where we expect them. Like in this board!!

 

However, I can't go on right now. Maverick just got back from four days away visiting his Mama and the family graves in Wisconsin. And I have to get off and go get hugs, kisses, etc.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Several Assumptions

 

Your question makes several assumptions, as different people, clients and escorts alike, have pointed out thus far. The most prevelant answer is the shortest one you have received, from Deej, of being a consultant, or among other choices, an independent contractor, a personal assistant to someone, an artist or any other number of ways in which people can gainfully apply themselves.

 

These can be actual experiences or simply something one states on a resume which someone else can vouch or verify (such as being a personal assistant). A young friend of mine who did adult films and escorted, went back to college and put that on his resume as his source of income while he was here in Los Angeles.

 

For anyone who is that young, the other simple answer is family money.

 

For those not as young, the possibilities are far too numerous and would depend on the type of profession, geography and any number of other factors.

[sexgayboy]

RE: Several Assumptions

 

Hello Franco,

 

I am so glad you posted. Please don't see them as assumptions, rather as asking a very specific question. I am concerned about those who are past college age, and are done with escorting and finding a mainstream job (as opposed to setting up their own business, which is always an option), what do these people do? as such, thank you to Anton for responding, but his response isn't exactly what i'm looking for.

 

In fact, this question was prompted by another post of yours, Franco. You said that you escorted, then quit escorting and looked for a job before coming back to escort. So, how did you explain your resume? How did you explain those years/ months?

[Bilbo]

RE: second reply to Devon

 

You are correct that living a lie can cause a person damage and anguish. But, from another angle, one cannot count on the government to protect one's privacy. If someone whom you don't want to have some information about you point blank asks you for it, what is one to do? One could say "I'd rather not say." If the other person/organization is polite, they might back off. A recruiter who has decided that he has a right to this information would probably get more interested instead. One could say, "That's none of your business," but is that a good way to start business with a company which thinks it is their business? Probably not. So, one turns away such questions however one feels comfortable doing it. If one lies to such people, well... (Nor does it necessarily imply that you are ashamed of the information, Woody, in some cases it only means that it is none of their fucking business and you are sparing them a fight.)

However, Devon, you have made a good argument for it actually being their business, in a positive way. In which case, more power to you. Tell them yesterday!

[BgMstr4u]

RE: Several Assumptions

 

What a great discussion!

 

I have met former sex workers on several occasions in other contexts, some of whom I knew professionally and some of whom I knew to have been in the business. In each case their social skills were superior to many others, they were more aware of what was going on interpersonally, and they were more aware of their own impact on others. These are significant skills in any business.

 

I asked a former escort, one of the above, more or less the same question we are discussing. He said he had in fact met some former clients and people who knew him "when", and in each case they were glad to see him, glad to have known him sexually and in that role, and glad that he was getting on with the next part of his life. They were also glad that he is very discreet and knew him to be a person who would never use the knowledge he had about them.

 

I don't want to paint too rosy a picture, but I think the advantages of having been a sex worker are worth considering. They are considerable, and I sometimes wish I had had the nerve and self-confidence to try it myself when I was marketable. If I ever was. Sigh.

 

So lighten up and enjoy your life, make the most of what it is bringing you, get a reputation for discretion and look forward to the next part with confidence.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

RE: Several Assumptions

 

>I don't want to paint too rosy a picture, but I think the

>advantages of having been a sex worker are worth considering.

>They are considerable, and I sometimes wish I had had the

>nerve and self-confidence to try it myself when I was

>marketable.

 

You've nailed it on the head, Big Guy, and I can't encourage you strongly enough to say so publicly as often as you can without getting tired of repeating yourself. If it is not safe for you to do so at this time, then you can empathize with the drawbacks of which I spoke. You are exactly the kind of person sex workers need speaking out for them, so that our future employers afford us as much dignity as you have -- so that they will consider the advantages to our having been sex workers.

 

>If I ever was. Sigh.

 

Well, maybe you could cut that part of the pep talk out. Makes you sound a little unsure of yourself. I happen to know a website where the proprietor is so big on big guys, he's made one his first coverboy! What WAS the name of it? Hmm...

 

http://www.devonsf.com/mybigfan1.jpg

 

>So lighten up and enjoy your life, make the most of what it is

>bringing you, get a reputation for discretion and look forward

>to the next part with confidence.

 

All excellent advice which I, for one, plan to apply as soon as possible...well, maybe not the lightening up part. I don't think I safely do much more lightening up, so let's not get too carried away with unattainable body ideals, alright? :7 :+

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Art Fag

 

>In fact, this question was prompted by another post of yours,

>Franco. You said that you escorted, then quit escorting and

>looked for a job before coming back to escort. So, how did

>you explain your resume? How did you explain those years/

>months?

 

I was employed for five years between my first initial experience as an escort and my current experience. My personal belief is that employers will only look at your most recent work, so when I first moved to Los Angeles, this never came up. Prior to that, when I moved to Atlanta, I simply stated, as I mentioned above and as Deej suggested, that I wrote, was an artist, studied, and also did consulting work. All of those responses were and are true.

 

When I decide to no longer escort, likely soon, there are a number of things I can explore as income sources where I simply would not be required to "explain" my past. In Los Angeles, for example, there are a number of people who have jobs in the entertainment industry, from hair dressers to agents, who have a reputation of mistreating their subordinates and assistants and being screamers. It does not, unfortunately, keep them from getting work. A movie studio fired its president for embezzlement and that did not keep him from getting another job heading a different studio.

 

In my own personal case, I may decide to cook professionally, which would only require the requisite skills, background and experience, which I have and could readily acquire, albeit at a much lesser pay rate than I have experienced in the recent past.

[Guest bakuboy]

Daddy sez: "Attack the issue, not the person"

[sexgayboy]

I secretly think non-white people are inferior;

 

Hello Devon,

 

please detail the ways in which you find non-white people inferior. I find it very interesting. Others, if you feel the same way, please join in.

 

sexgayboy.

[Guest DevonSFescort]

well done

 

http://www.devonsf.com/laxative.jpg

[Barry]

> I secretly think non-white people are inferior;

>

>Hello Devon,

>

>please detail the ways in which you find non-white people

>inferior. I find it very interesting. Others, if you feel

>the same way, please join in.

 

 

You took that totally out of context selectively dropping what comes before and after that segment. Devon did not say that's what he thinks.

 

Barry

[Guest bakuboy]

How do you know that? Did you notice that the guy fisting him in his high quality laxative Ad was non-white?

[Barry]

>How do you know that? Did you notice that the guy fisting

>him in his high quality laxative Ad was non-white?

 

Because I can read. I didn't say I knew what he thinks. I pointed out "Devon did not say that's what he thinks".

 

How do you know he was being fisted?

 

Barry