Aaron Lawrence is Back

[Karl-G]

After a six months' mysterious disappearance, Aaron Lawrence is back on the web. He just announced his return on the Atkol forums. His website is back up and running, and he has a brief message for his fans, although no explanation of his disappearance. He apparently is escorting again at his old rate of $350/hour, which some readers are finding surprising. He writes that he intends to keep a blog now on his website and he will write frequently.

[Guest zipperzone]

Yahn and double yahn.

[bigguyinpasadena]

Zipper,in the US it is spelled YAWN and Double YAWN -And I agree toatally!$350!!!Please-skinny lil 30ish fella with a biggish dick.

I don't wan't to start up a 6 page barebacking thread again-but I just do not know how Aaron Lawrence can sleep at night knowing how many young lives he has put at risk through the unsafe sex that is practiced by the VERY young guys in his videos.

[+ glutes]

Triple yawn. I read one of his books where he was tricking out of a Hoboken hourly hotel on steamy July afternoons, now @ $350/hour??

The Gaiety dancers are now charging $250/hour, seems like a bargain!

[+ Lucky]

Does this triumphant return compare to FIn Fang Foom's?

[kjun]

It is my belief that escort fees are getting too high. But, I see no reason to bash Aaron for his fee. If he can get it fine by me. I see more escorts charging $300.00. When there are people stupid enough to pay high prices, escorts will, like other businessmen, charge it.

 

the Cajun

[Guest ncm2169]

< I just do not know how Aaron Lawrence can sleep at night knowing how many young lives he has put at risk through the unsafe sex that is practiced by the VERY young guys in his videos.

 

What? No impassioned diatribe here from Doogie? ;-)

 

Btw, where is Doogie? Has he been gone or have I missed his posts? Is he perhaps stuck in his 69 mode? }(

 

BGP, of course you're right on. x( I think I called him a scumbag for producing bareback vids ... words I have no regret in using.

 

Finally, it looks like much, if not most of his new blog is re-hashed advice from years ago. BFD.

[Guest zipperzone]

>Zipper,in the US it is spelled YAWN and Double YAWN

 

You're quite right. It's spelled that way in Canada too. But when I'm typing at 2 in the morning, there's no telling what my sleepy mind will conjur up!

 

-And I

>agree toatally!$350!!!Please-skinny lil 30ish fella with a

>biggish dick.

>I don't wan't to start up a 6 page barebacking thread

>again-but I just do not know how Aaron Lawrence can sleep at

>night knowing how many young lives he has put at risk through

>the unsafe sex that is practiced by the VERY young guys in his

>videos.

 

He's a creep and in my experience, creeps usually have no trouble sleeping. He has to be the ultimate example of how far one can get selling sex without an oz.of scrupples or morals.

[Guest LG320126]

Who cares?

[Doug69]

>Who cares?

 

I love how you are always whining and crying whenever anyone says anything like this about YOUR favorite escorts - you prattle on about how mean and rude it is to do anything other than stick your tongue as far up an escort's asshole as possible - that is, when the escorts being discussed are your favorite ones.

 

But here's a long-time escort who is trying to make a living returning to escorting, and all you can do is spittle up a snide, bitter insult.

 

I have always heard many gay people claim that homophobia exists because straight people need someone to feel superior to and to condemn in order to feel better about themselves.

 

Whenever a discussion about Aaron Lawrence arises, I am reminded that gay people aren't just the target of this psychological tactic, but also vicious propagotors of it.

[Guest LG320126]

Sorry asswipe but your diatribe gets nowhere with me. Game over!

[+ Lucky]

This is one of those times doug, when you are full of it! There are those who think that Mr. Lawrence expoits poor underage boys and uses them to bareback in his porno movies so that he can make lots of money. He has never chosed to respond to these allegations.

Any escort of a certain age and lacking the general physical attributes of youth and beauty is appealing to a niche maket if he escorts. Consequently, it is hard to say if his fee is justified. It simply depends on the market.

But, for someone not to care about the above in reference to Mr. Lawrence does not deserve a put down from you.

 

For you, though, that seems to be the purpose of the board. If averybody here agreed that you were superior to us, where would you go then?

[Doug69]

>There are those who think that Mr. Lawrence expoits poor

>underage boys and uses them to bareback in his porno movies so

>that he can make lots of money. He has never chosed to respond

>to these allegations.

 

Apparently, Aaron has better things to do with his time than whittle it away bickering with old ladies who spew out accusations without having any idea if they're true and all to make themselves feel better. I know it may hurt your feelings that he doesn't pay you the attention from him that you crave, but I can't say I blame him.

 

How do you know he uses underage models for his videos?

 

And what do you mean when you say that he "exploits" models to bareback? Did he put a gun to their head or threaten their families if they said no, or did he simply offer them the choice to make money and they accepted?

 

>Any escort of a certain age and lacking the general physical

>attributes of youth and beauty is appealing to a niche maket

>if he escorts. Consequently, it is hard to say if his fee is

>justified. It simply depends on the market.

 

Exactly. If he can get $350/hour, I can't imagine what emotion - other than rank jelaously and bitterness - would compel people to complain about that.

 

>But, for someone not to care about the above in reference to

>Mr. Lawrence does not deserve a put down from you.

 

I was commenting about one specific poster who frequently lectures the Board about how wrong it is to say bad things about escorts WHNE IT COMES to the escorts whom he likes. That sermon of his is one that he obviously feels free to violate whenever the escort in question is one which he does not like. If you don't like that I pointed that out, I don't actually give a fuck.

 

As I said, gay poeple often accuse those who are anti-gay of being that way because they need someone to feel superior to and someone to condemn. And I do so enjoy watching the very same gay people who complain about that engage in the exact same behavior whenever it comes to Aaron Lawrence:

 

"Yeah, I may suck dick and get fucked in my ass and lick assholes and pay young guys to have sex with me, but at least I'm not Aaron Lawrence, so I'm not THAT bad."

 

How much more obvious can it be that every single post ever written here sermonizing against Aaron Lawrence is actually saying NOTHING other than that?

[+ Lucky]

Well, on occasion I do like to lick assholes if they are pretty, but that has nothing to do with raising issues about Mr. Lawrence. The bareback videos are sold so there is common knowledge of the barebacking. There were also pictures of his models posted here indicating very, very young boys might be in his employ for sexual purposes.

 

Just because I lick ass, suck cock, and pee on hairy studs like you...oh, wait, I don't do that...doesn't mean that I support barebacking and child exploitation or have otherwise forfeited my right to denigrate said practices.

[FourAces]

>This is one of those times doug, when you are full of it!

>There are those who think that Mr. Lawrence expoits poor

>underage boys and uses them to bareback in his porno movies so

>that he can make lots of money. He has never chosed to respond

>to these allegations.

>

The above amounts to little more than misinformation from someone who does not have access to facts. Anyone can write such allegations about anything. The paragraph is void of any legit content whatsoever.

 

Why should Aaron have to defend himself against such unbalanced remarks? There is absolutely nothing in your statement that holds value.

 

If Aaron or others in his video bareback so be it. If Aaron has hired very young looking models of leagel age so be it. Instead of Aaron having to represent himself because you've commanded him to I strongly suggest you post some substance to back your useless insults.

 

If you're unable to do so then you owe Aaron a public apology for your unfounded and unjust comments.

 

I will add a personal comment as well, the above coming from you is very disturbuing.

 

RT

[+ Lucky]

Not nearly as disturbing as a couple of the pictures posted as "Stud of the Day" I believe one of them was "Alexi #3."

 

Here is what I wrote Hooboy at the time:

Dearest Hooboy

 

As you know, I enjoy participating in the male4male forums and reviews. Your website has grown to have a considerable following and I am just one of the lucky ones to have found it.

My question here is why you want to have advertising such as Aaron Lawrence's Stud of the Day. These boys may be of actual legal age but they are presented in a way that suggests that they are not. Today's model has no pubic hair under his arms or between his legs and looks about 12 years old. In light of all the crackdowns on child pornography, why would you want your website to be associated with even a whiff that attracts the lollipop crowd?

 

Sincerely,

Lucky

[woodlawn]

>My question here is why you want to have advertising such as

>Aaron Lawrence's Stud of the Day. These boys may be of actual

>legal age but they are presented in a way that suggests that

>they are not. Today's model has no pubic hair under his arms

>or between his legs and looks about 12 years old. In light of

>all the crackdowns on child pornography, why would you want

>your website to be associated with even a whiff that attracts

>the lollipop crowd?

 

 

I don't know whether Lawrence has ever used underage models -- I suppose it depends on what country we are talking about when we use the word "underage" -- but I do understand why some people would find it disturbing that he uses models who, whatever their actual ages, APPEAR under 18. There can be only one reason for doing so, and it is to appeal to people who want to have sex with teenagers. In asking whether this website should be associated with people like that I think Lucky raises a legitimate issue.

[+ deej]

>I suppose it depends on what country we are talking about when

>we use the word "underage"

 

Not really. Aaron Lawrence sold pornographic videos through the mail in the United States. 18 U.S.C. 2257 applies.

 

ALL models must be 18 years of age when the shooting happened, and the pornographer must have proof of age on file with their custodian of records. Further, those records must be available for inspection should the feds pay an impromptu visit.

 

Aaron's boys were 18 or he was brazenly breaking the law.

 

And that's where the black & white of his situation stops.

 

Assuming he had his legal ducks in a row, any other criticism is content-based and is therefore subjective. Declaring content "right" or "wrong" is a slippery slope.

[+ Lucky]

"Declaring content "right" or "wrong" is a slippery slope."

 

Yeah, tell it to the judge! Personally, I don't care whether Mr. Lawrence comes back or not. My concern was that I did not want to participate in any website that attracts the lollipop crowd with pictures like Alexi #3. If this boy is of age, then "so be it," but it seems to be that someone must have taken a razor to him. Why?

 

Hooboy did respond to my email. You will notice that pictures like this one are no longer used on this website..

[+ deej]

>Yeah, tell it to the judge!

 

Given your standards, I may not get that chance.

 

You've just declared that you (or any other citizen, like John Ashcroft) can ban content without regard to legality. You are advocating censorship and Ashcroft's army will be more than happy to run with it.

 

Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it. x(

[+ Lucky]

RE: Alexi #3 Is Not Back!

 

I think I am advocating good judgment. The bottom line is that this web site is designed to appeal to gay men who hire escorts. In doing so, a limit is placed on the number of people who would be interested in visiting here. Straight people, for example, will probably not be interested. If the lollipop crowd finds a niche here, then I would venture to say that a significant number of the people who regularly visit this site would not want to be associated with that. So it is a business judgment as to whom you want playing in your park.

[Boston Guy]

>There can be only one reason for doing so, and it is to appeal to people who want to have sex with teenagers.

>In asking whether this >website should be associated with people like that I think Lucky raises a legitimate issue.

 

I agree. I think there's also another legitimate issue: If sexually-oriented pictures of underage guys end up on this site, then those who view the site will end up with those pictures on their own computers.

 

I don't see how any of us could prove that those boys were of legal age if challenged -- which means we could easily be on the wrong end of the law in the unfortunate instance that our own PC's were to become the subject of legal action.

 

BG

[Doug69]

>I agree. I think there's also another legitimate issue: If

>sexually-oriented pictures of underage guys end up on this

>site, then those who view the site will end up with those

>pictures on their own computers.

 

In case you haven't noticed, this site is - and always has been - filled with old guys looking to hire what they call "young boys" as prostitutes. They can call the young objects of their lust "twinks," or "boys" or whatever; everyone knows what they are looking for, and nobody seems to mind, until the subject becomes Aaron Lawrence.

 

Between putting some kid in a video where he has sex with other guys his age, versus getting him to prostitute himself for old guys with whom he has to pretend to be intimate, I think it's pretty clear which is the less harmful. How come so many people here consider the former to be horrible exploitation but the latter to be just oh-so-fine?

 

Here's a picture of an escort who posts here frequently and who half the Board goos over whenever he does:

 

http://www.male4malescorts.com/images/bobbythompsonla1-3-03.jpg

 

Is someone going to seriously maintain that the appeal of this kid - and on this Board, the appeal is great and intense - isn't that he looks adolescent? And yet, whenever the old codgers here come and prattle on about how "hot" this "boy" is and what a great time they had fucking him, that's just ducky.

 

But Aaron Lawrence pays a kid like this to be in a video and all the Victorian Sex Preachers here run around screaming "pedophile" and "exploiter."

 

I have frequently commented, and not in a complimentary way, about the borderline-pedophlic tendencies of the "twink lover" crowd here, but I am usually in a tiny minority when doing so. That's why it never ceases to amaze me that the minute someone says "Aaron Lawrence," the crowds come out to condemn videos with underage-LOOKING guys in them. Does anyone look around at this Board before doing that?

[Guest gentle guy]

An implied preference?

 

I just visited Aaron's website to get some first-hand info.

 

His hourly fee is $350, which I agree is exorbitant (and the first person who posts anything about "what the market will bear" will be cursed with impotence, lol).

 

However, his overnight fee is $1200 and his full day fee is $1500, which sound very reasonable. So, it sounds to me as if Aaron is discouraging short appointments and encouraging longer, companionship-type meetings. IMHO, that is. :+

[taylorky]

whoa big guy,i just visited his site(had to see who this guy was and what he looked like)

 

$350.00 an hour,american dollars???.

 

nobody can possibly be that horny...$350.00...for him,per hour,whoa he is either delusional or has a great sense of humor.

 

i'm the first to admit that i have never paid a hooker and probably never will,but if i was to pay one, he would have to at least be minimally attractive and (at least appear to be) physically robust.

 

i'm skinny, but i look really good,i'm tight,defined and,very healthy looking; hell maybe i should take up hooking,if this guy really can make $350.00 per hour i could make..............uhh never mind just kidding.