I Like Escorts... Are There Some Who Don't?

[Traveller]

>Oh...that's a much more pleasant image...Tammy

>Wynette's face superimposed over your

>ass....lol

>

Hey guy, I've had the hair on my ass clipped in Miss Wynette's image for years now. I alternate between the 70s 'do and her 80s look.

 

>

>(See Munroe, you aren't the only

>one knows how to use

>HTML commands to post italics..now

>figure out how to post

>images...dumb whore...smile)

 

Gentle sir, please don't use the term "dumb whore" as I find it truly offensive. Kindly use "stupid hooker" or "skaggy streetwalker," as they have much more affirming connotations.

 

Later.

[Guest Joey Ciccone]

>Gentle sir, please don't use the term "dumb whore" as I find it truly offensive. Kindly use "stupid hooker" or "skaggy streetwalker," as they have much more affirming connotations<

 

Guys, please, leave the floral euphemisms to the enchanted Charmers. If all we are to you is a quick bit of fun, then refer to us as fun. If instead we happen to be a dream come true, then call us a dream. Whichever the case, just be sure and call us a taxi when your money runs out.

 

:-)

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

Reg,

 

Because I started this thread, I’d like to take a crack at a response...

 

"Frankly, BG, I think the categories you folks have invented for clients are artificial and a bit silly."

 

Maybe a little artificial but not without merit, I think. We often group, classify, organize and yes, generalize to aid in our conceptualization, understanding, and discussion of the world. It has merit and it has limitations as well, but it is not silly unless done in a silly way, which I don’t think is the case here.

 

Nor do I think it makes any sense to criticize reviews or posts about escorts for being negative.

 

I agree... I have submitted a negative review and offered a negative post on an escort confirming another poster’s negative experience.

 

On a website that is supposed to provide information that is useful to consumers, what matters is that the information is accurate, not whether it is negative or positive.

 

I agree again. But I think it also matters how the information is delivered... the words and the tone, put differently, the attitude of the post. Just as in discourse between ourselves, when addressing or discussing escorts, there is no need for a disagreeable or a condescending attitude to be exhibited, or a high and mighty inquisitorial one either.

 

If a client has had many negative experiences, that is what he should report.

 

I have no problem with a client reporting negative experiences... If he has "many negative experiences" -- your words -- I have to assume he may have a problem just as I would with an escort with ‘many negative reviews -- my words.

 

If he conceals the true nature of his experiences for fear of being bashed as "too negative," he's doing a disservice to others here. And so are the people who bash him.

 

I do not believe in ‘bashing’ for any reason... but that doesn’t mean that one cannot take exception a respectful and civil manner… If one has negative facts or a negative opinion to deliver there is no need to serve it up with eggs and last weeks produce.

 

My own experiences with escorts have been almost entirely positive. One reason is that I'm extremely careful, even suspicious in dealing with escorts.

 

Happily I can report the same overwhelmingly positive experiences, and though I exercise care I think, I’m not suspicious going in. So what does this mean?

 

Many reviewers who report rip-offs of various kinds confess that they ignored what should have been obvious warning signs in dealing with the escort -- but I never ignore those things.

 

Neither do I.

 

A long time ago a very wise man told me something I've always remembered: you can only be betrayed by people you trust.

 

I guess that is true…

 

I don't know about "charmers," but some people who frequent this site strike me as "fans" rather than as consumers. Fans are people who want to enjoy an imaginary relationship with a performer whom they really don't know apart from his performances.

 

This is your judgment and you are of course free to make it.

 

In the case of escorts, these fans seem to want to live in a Runyonesque fantasy world in which hookers all have hearts of gold and never do anything wrong.

 

I read and maybe misread an attitude of condescension in this remark. I get the impression that you see charmers as simple-minded, starry-eyed, shallow-thinking romantics with feet floating three feet off the ground perpetually. I mention this because I hope it is not your intent to communicate this perception, if my perception is wrong please set me straight.

 

If people want to be escort "fans" rather than consumers, I guess it's okay with me. Their behavior may seem foolish to me, but it isn't really my business -- until they start taking the position that there's something wrong with anyone who isn't a "fan" and that people who don't want to indulge in such fantasies should leave this site.

 

Putting aside the definition of 'fan' , I agree. However, as with most gatherings, those who contribute negative behavior and ‘attitude’ on a continuing basis often wear out their welcome sooner rather than later -- resulting in an atmosphere of rancor and discord at the gathering (does this sound familiar?). And lest incorrect inference be drawn that you are a target of this paragraph, let me make it clear that you most definitely are not.

 

I personally do not want anyone to leave who is seriously interested in participating in the community, but I do think a little respect, civility and courtesy, for all, even for escorts (after all do any of us really know what it is to walk in their shoes?) would benefit the site and those attending. And should any of us fall occasionally, well we are human with frailties and emotions -- even escorts -- all that is desirable is a simple (heart-felt) apology to one or to all and then moving on from there.

 

And by all means let us disagree where we have disagreements, but let’s try not be disagreeable. Our best threads feature civil discourse with respectfull disagreement on thoughtful subjects. It seems to me that "less is not more" in this arena.

[Guest 7Zach]

A heart of gold, AND a pocketful of gold, perfect.

[Guest regulation]

>I agree again. But I

>think it also matters how

>the information is delivered... the

>words and the tone, put

>differently, the attitude of the

>post. Just as in

>discourse between ourselves, when addressing

>or discussing escorts, there is

>no need for a disagreeable

>or a condescending attitude to

>be exhibited, or a high

>and mighty inquisitorial one either.

 

 

And who is it who gets to apply the extremely subjective standards that you mention above? Did you have someone in mind?

 

 

>I have no problem with a

>client reporting negative experiences... If

>he has "many negative experiences"

>-- your words -- I

>have to assume he may

>have a problem just as

>I would with an escort

>with ‘many negative reviews --

>my words.

 

 

You "have to" assume? Why do you "have to"? One thing everyone here seems to agree about is that many, if not most, escorts are not very good at what they do. So it is perfectly possible for a client to have more negative experiences than positive ones simply by the law of averages.

 

>Happily I can report the same

>overwhelmingly positive experiences, and though

>I exercise care I think,

>I’m not suspicious going in.

> So what does this

>mean?

 

 

I have no idea. But I'm sticking with what has worked for me.

 

 

>I read and maybe misread an

>attitude of condescension in this

>remark. I get the

>impression that you see charmers

>as simple-minded, starry-eyed, shallow-thinking romantics

>with feet floating three feet

>off the ground perpetually.

>I mention this because I

>hope it is not your

>intent to communicate this perception,

>if my perception is wrong

>please set me straight.

 

 

Your perception is wrong. You are assuming that I am using this "charmer" category of yours when I have already said that I don't care for it. I think it is perfectly possible for someone who has and wants no emotional ties with escorts to expect nevertheless that an escort will provide a brief illusion of intimacy and desire, not merely the bit of friction and lubrication that constitutes sex. A "fan," on the other hand, wants to believe that the illusion is more than an illusion. I don't know where that fits in with the dichotomy you've created, and that dichotomy is not what I am talking about.

 

 

>Putting aside the definition of 'fan'

>, I agree. However, as

>with most gatherings, those who

>contribute negative behavior and ‘attitude’

>on a continuing basis often

>wear out their welcome sooner

>rather than later -- resulting

>in an atmosphere of rancor

>and discord at the gathering

>(does this sound familiar?).

 

 

And who is it who is extending the "welcome"? In a message board in which all are supposed to be equal, your words seem based on the assumption that some are more equal than others -- that some are the hosts while others are merely guests who can "wear out their welcome." I don't agree. Let each poster speak his mind without trying to censor any other. If you don't like what someone else has to say, you're free to say that. But telling him to leave or stop speaking unless he conforms to your standards is a very different matter.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

>

>>I agree again. But I

>>think it also matters how

>>the information is delivered... the

>>words and the tone, put

>>differently, the attitude of the

>>post. Just as in

>>discourse between ourselves, when addressing

>>or discussing escorts, there is

>>no need for a disagreeable

>>or a condescending attitude to

>>be exhibited, or a high

>>and mighty inquisitorial one either.

>

>

>And who is it who gets

>to apply the extremely subjective

>standards that you mention above?

 

While there is a bit of subjectivity involved, I dont think it is a real practical problem. I suspect most instances of such behavior are readily discerned by most people, after all we were raised, most ot us, to understand respect, politeness and courtesy, and the absence of them as well. We observe them much of the time in our courts, schools, town meetings, school board meetings, supermarkets... most places with the exception of the roads and Internet. In some instances the questionable behavior may be marginal. In those cases it is an easy call... the beneift of the doubt is extended. Good manners really isn't rocket science.

 

> Did you have someone

>in mind?

>

No, I don't and don't seek one. I pretty much believe in self-policing with community feedback when necessary..

 

>

>>I have no problem with a

>>client reporting negative experiences... If

>>he has "many negative experiences"

>>-- your words -- I

>>have to assume he may

>>have a problem just as

>>I would with an escort

>>with ‘many negative reviews --

>>my words.

>

>

>You "have to" assume? Why

>do you "have to"?

>One thing everyone here seems

>to agree about is that

>many, if not most, escorts

>are not very good at

>what they do.

 

Oh? I was unaware that this consensus had been determined. Would you direct me to the time and place this poll was published so that I may inform myself of the details. I'm not sure what 'many' means but most is clear -- a minimum of 50 % +1. This is startling news to me and probably several other clients.

 

Odd, that this consenus seems to fly in the face of our particular experiences (yours and mine) based on our comments, mine which you repeated here

 

>>Happily I can report the same

>>overwhelmingly positive experiences, and though

>>I exercise care I think,

>>I’m not suspicious going in.

>> So what does this

>>mean?

 

and yours made in your previous post to which I responded. I wonder what it means about us and how we differ from the 'average' client?

 

> So

>it is perfectly possible for

>a client to have more

>negative experiences than positive ones

>simply by the law of

>averages.

>

Sorry, I don't agree with your premise; I think it faulty thus the conclusion is fatally compromised IMHO, or at least highly suspect.

 

 

>

>>I read and maybe misread an

>>attitude of condescension in this

>>remark. I get the

>>impression that you see charmers

>>as simple-minded, starry-eyed, shallow-thinking romantics

>>with feet floating three feet

>>off the ground perpetually.

>>I mention this because I

>>hope it is not your

>>intent to communicate this perception,

>>if my perception is wrong

>>please set me straight.

>

>

>Your perception is wrong. You

>are assuming that I am

>using this "charmer" category of

>yours when I have already

>said that I don't care

>for it.

 

Thanks for pointing out my error, I meant to refer to 'fans' rather than 'charmers'. If you wish to entertain the question once again with 'fan' I remain interested.

 

I think

>it is perfectly possible for

>someone who has and wants

>no emotional ties with escorts

>to expect nevertheless that an

>escort will provide a brief

>illusion of intimacy and desire,

>not merely the bit of

>friction and lubrication that constitutes

>sex.

 

I see we agree once again.

 

A "fan," on

>the other hand, wants to

>believe that the illusion is

>more than an illusion.

>I don't know where that

>fits in with the dichotomy

>you've created, and that dichotomy

>is not what I am

>talking about.

>

Well, I have to leave this judgment to you because you have defined 'what consttues a 'fan' and seem to have a definite perception of him, his needs, and desires... I do not.

>

>>Putting aside the definition of 'fan'

>>, I agree. However, as

>>with most gatherings, those who

>>contribute negative behavior and ‘attitude’

>>on a continuing basis often

>>wear out their welcome sooner

>>rather than later -- resulting

>>in an atmosphere of rancor

>>and discord at the gathering

>>(does this sound familiar?).

>

>

>And who is it who is

>extending the "welcome"? In

>a message board in which

>all are supposed to be

>equal, your words seem based

>on the assumption that some

>are more equal than others

>-- that some are the

>hosts while others are merely

>guests who can "wear out

>their welcome."

 

The only assumption I see is yours or at least an intrepretation... I made no assumption and no statements along these lines. We are all guests and we are all members of a community and like any collective a consensus evolves regarding behavior and actions detrimental to the community. In loosely organized or unorganized communities the realization of this consensus is a chaotic process that my or may not yield a useful end result. We are such a community and we are engaged in a chaotic process of discussing the issues. We have some people yelling past each other, some attempting to thrash out the issues, and some denying the validity of the discussion.

 

> Let each poster

>speak his mind without trying

>to censor any other.

>If you don't like what

>someone else has to say,

>you're free to say that.

 

We agree once again -- I'm against censorship... I believe in self-restraint, one of the keystones of a democracy. Without self-restraint on the part of everyone the majority eventually will seek to dominate the minority and feel justified about doing it, wrongly so I think. A measure of restraint and tolerance by everyone is necessary to make a democracy of disparate groups succeed -- and that calls for respect and coutesy at some level.

 

 

> But telling him to

>leave or stop speaking unless

>he conforms to your standards

>is a very different matter.

>

 

I agree again.

 

Gee Reg, I'm impressed that we agree as often as we do.

 

But we have wandered off topic a little... do these guys, whoever they are, dislike escorts. if so, can they ever have a satisfying experience, ummm.... and might this account, in part, for the consenus you described above??

[Guest regulation]

>While there is a bit of

>subjectivity involved, I dont think

>it is a real practical

>problem. I suspect most instances

>of such behavior are readily

>discerned by most people,

 

 

Really? I don't suppose you have any poll results to back up that generalization, do you?

 

>Oh? I was unaware that

>this consensus had been determined.

> Would you direct me

>to the time and place

>this poll was published so

>that I may inform myself

>of the details. I'm

>not sure what 'many' means

>but most is clear --

>a minimum of 50 %

>+1. This is startling news

>to me and probably several

>other clients.

>

 

Is it? No one who frequents this site could fail to notice that even many of the positive reviews refer to previous negative experiences of the reviewer. Reviewers so often praise an escort by comparisons such as, "He was actually able to maintain a conversation, unlike other escorts I have seen," or "Other experiences I've had have been awful, but this one was great." What does that suggest to you?

 

>Odd, that this consenus seems to

>fly in the face of

>our particular experiences (yours and

>mine) based on our comments,

>mine which you repeated here

 

It doesn't fly in the fact of my experience at all. If I never catch cold because I take elaborate precautions against contagion, should I conclude that colds are not contagious?

 

>Sorry, I don't agree with your

>premise; I think it faulty

>thus the conclusion is fatally

>compromised IMHO, or at least

>highly suspect.

>

 

I'm afraid that unless you can produce a poll that confirms the opposite of my premise, you have no more basis for calling it faulty than I do for calling it sound -- less, actually, since I've actually cited a bit of evidence for it.

 

 

>>>I read and maybe misread an

>>>attitude of condescension in this

>>>remark.

 

>Thanks for pointing out my error,

>I meant to refer to

>'fans' rather than 'charmers'.

> If you wish to

>entertain the question once again

>with 'fan' I remain interested.

 

If I sound condescending when I speak of fans it's because that's the way I feel. I don't call them "crazy" or "deluded" as bluboy does in the "Different Kind of Service" thread in the Lounge or "sickies" as Losgatan does in the same thread, but I think it is very foolish to indulge in fantasy to the extent that fans do.

 

>We are

>all guests and we are

>all members of a community

>and like any collective a

>consensus evolves regarding behavior and

>actions detrimental to the community.

 

Sorry, but I don't think such a consensus exists here. I think some people are trying to impose a set of standards that they like and call it a consensus.

 

It reminds me of a conversation I once had with a friend whose politics are decidedly liberal. We were discussing the Christian Right and their attempts to influence legislation. I told him that I could see little difference between their desire to make their values into laws and similar efforts by the leaders of the civil rights movement. His shocked reply was, "But the values of the civil rights movement are something that everyone agreed with!" By "everyone," of course, he meant everyone who thinks as he does.

 

>But we have wandered off topic

>a little... do these guys,

>whoever they are, dislike escorts.

> if so, can they

>ever have a satisfying experience,

>ummm.... and might this account,

>in part, for the consenus

>you described above??

 

I really don't see what one thing has to do with another. Do you have to like your dentist in order to get a filling put in successfully?

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

I really don't see what one thing has to do with another. Do you have to like your dentist in order to get a filling put in successfully.

 

No, but it might influence my review of him if I were to post one on a relevant site, don't you agree.... his breath,how well he handles a needle and drill, his attitude and demeanor, ... j

As I consider this, I suspect a dentist review site woud be a riot... consider the horror stories. And our escorts probably fare like angels by comparison -- but that is speculation.

 

:-)

[Traveller]

reggy,

I can't pretend that I've read even a tenth of this thread, but it has piqued my interest in one regard. I'd love to re-read one of your reviews on this site. Could you please point me to your last one?

Thanks.

 

Later.

[MiamiLooker]

"Reviewers so often praise an escort by comparisons such as, "He was actually able to maintain a conversation, unlike other escorts I have seen," or "Other experiences I've had have been awful, but this one was great." What does that suggest to you?"

 

It might suggest the review is fake.

[Guest regulation]

>It might suggest the review is

>fake.

 

In that case there are many more fake reviews on this site than I thought.

[Guest regulation]

As a matter of fact I was looking for a review I posted a year or so ago in the L.A. section, and it is no longer there. I was one of two people who reviewed the escort, and both reviews are now gone. Do reviews expire after a certain amount of time? I didn't know that.

[Traveller]

>As a matter of fact I

>was looking for a review

>I posted a year or

>so ago in the L.A.

>section, and it is no

>longer there. I was

>one of two people who

>reviewed the escort, and both

>reviews are now gone.

>Do reviews expire after a

>certain amount of time?

>I didn't know that.

 

I have also had 2 reviews disappear. They were also of LA escorts. Others, much older, are still there. Who knows. The Shadow?

 

Later.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

"One of the things I love best about escorts is that most of them are out as gay and celebrate the kind of magic that male sexuality has.

 

Will, you are right on the mark here... and I think it adds to the whole experience -- mine anyway. I didn't REALLY come to appreciate this unitl I did overnights and went out and about in the company of some fine men who seemed proud of who they were and not ashamed to be seen with me.

[N.N.]

To answer the question somewhat indirectly: on several occasions, an escort I'd hired once or twice gave me a free session for one reason or another. In every instance, the unpaid session was better than the paid encounters I'd had with the same person.

 

I like seeing a good escort, but during a paid session it's usually painfully obvious that the escort and I are there for different reasons; the escort's interest and involvement has a markedly different quality than that shown by unpaid partners (even unpaid partners that I'd just met).

 

That's not to say that an experience with an escort isn't worthwhile. On the contrary; I've definitely had satisfying times with escorts. But there's a kind of involvement and attention that I get from partners in plain-old unpaid encounters that I usually miss when I'm paying.

 

I want to emphasize that I am not complaining about this state of affairs. That is to say, I think escorting is not an easy job, and I'm grateful when an escort is simply considerate and friendly. I don't expect the world from an escort.

 

I also acknowledge my role in shaping the course of a session. I mean, if I bring different expectations and demands to an escort session than I would to a casual unpaid encounter, that can't help but have an effect on the outcome. I've found that I usually have a better time with escorts when I am easygoing about letting the chemistry and activities develop spontaneously.

 

I'm curious to know what other clients' experience has been like. How do the better escort sessions you've had stack up against your better unpaid encounters?

[Guest BenDover]

I have been incredibly lucky, I guess. I've hired, perhaps, 20 escorts over the last two years. I've only seen two more than one time, one of them on an on-going basis, about twice a month. The only less than wonderful experience was with an escort that I hired on the recommendation of the first escort I chose but who could not arrange to meet me due to a conflict. The less than wonderful experience was probably due to him not being of my choice. I found him dull. And I didn't put much into it myself.

But, I have loved the guys I've been with. I've found them incredibly bright, attentive, honest and forthright about their lives. Not a single one ever gave me the impression that they were not doing exactly what they wanted to be doing at this point in their lives. And many of them have told me about future plans and dreams they have.

I have never had the expectation that our encounter was going to be "real" in the sense of a non-paid chance encounter. True to my nature, I give my all in our intimacy, I participate, I engage. I am not there solely to be pleasured. I, too, want to give pleasure.

If these guys are acting, then I am a fool. I don't mean the sex. I mean the sincerity during the time we are together. And frankly, I think a lot of it is me. I value human life, I'm not judgmental toward them or myself, and I let them know that I hope they feel wonderful about their current careers as escorts, because it must feel great knowing that you just spent some time making someone else feel so wonderful. And I truly mean that.

I really enjoy escorts because I have accepted the reality of my own life, my fading youth and beauty, my decreasing stamina. I appreciate someone who is so in touch with their own bodies that they can command performance, no matter what. And I honor the head space and hearts of the gentlemen who have loved me so well.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

A fitting conclusion to this thread, I think.