FewBricksShy

This made me chuckle. Interview!? Did it come with a questionnaire too? 😂

Methinks someone can’t admit when they’ve misunderstood or were (gasp!) wrong. I’m done.

Oh, I’ve been caught up because of the studious reporting of the diligent correspondents and epidemiologists in this forum in this very thread – my premier, singular source for all concerns Monkeypox! 

No I didn't  conflate them.  You did.

“Plenty” is probably relative term. Plenty when “well kept” includes financial benefits, I’m sure. A “well kept” 70 yo likely has a decent home, more than a few life pleasures, and enough income to be generous. I’m not suggesting it’s bad. I’m simply saying I struggle to believe the attraction is strictly age related or physical.
“There plenty of guys out there who really are attracted to men INSERT COMPARATIVE ADJECTIVE than they are.”
That can probably be said for any parameters  under the right constellation of circumstances. Dumber. Smarter. Thinner. Fatter. Poorer. Richer. Better employed. “Plenty” is a matter of perspective. To someone who has, plenty is a lot different than to someone who doesn’t.
The real test is if these younger guys, escorts in particular, would still be attracted and spending time with guys so much older than them if the money situation changed. “For richer, for poorer?”

Eh. Copout. Nothing is 100% except death. That’s 100%. 

Whenever anyone starts to complain about the obvious - that escorts are in it for the money-as though they are the first to have discovered this dirty little secret - it makes me think that they need a new hobby.

“Plenty” is probably relative term. Plenty when “well kept” includes financial benefits, I’m sure. A “well kept” 70 yo likely has a decent home, more than a few life pleasures, and enough income to be generous. I’m not suggesting it’s bad. I’m simply saying I struggle to believe the attraction is strictly age related or physical.
“There plenty of guys out there who really are attracted to men INSERT COMPARATIVE ADJECTIVE than they are.”
That can probably be said for any parameters  under the right constellation of circumstances. Dumber. Smarter. Thinner. Fatter. Poorer. Richer. Better employed. “Plenty” is a matter of perspective. To someone who has, plenty is a lot different than to someone who doesn’t.
The real test is if these younger guys, escorts in particular, would still be attracted and spending time with guys so much older than them if the money situation changed. “For richer, for poorer?”

“Plenty” is probably relative term. Plenty when “well kept” includes financial benefits, I’m sure. A “well kept” 70 yo likely has a decent home, more than a few life pleasures, and enough income to be generous. I’m not suggesting it’s bad. I’m simply saying I struggle to believe the attraction is strictly age related or physical.
“There plenty of guys out there who really are attracted to men INSERT COMPARATIVE ADJECTIVE than they are.”
That can probably be said for any parameters  under the right constellation of circumstances. Dumber. Smarter. Thinner. Fatter. Poorer. Richer. Better employed. “Plenty” is a matter of perspective. To someone who has, plenty is a lot different than to someone who doesn’t.
The real test is if these younger guys, escorts in particular, would still be attracted and spending time with guys so much older than them if the money situation changed. “For richer, for poorer?”

Call me cynical, but young guys who say they like daddies likely don’t like daddies nearly as much as they like the stability and security and pampering that comes with a financially established man. If a 28-yo could be a sugar daddy for these guys, they’d take that over a 40-plus-yo. 

Call me cynical, but young guys who say they like daddies likely don’t like daddies nearly as much as they like the stability and security and pampering that comes with a financially established man. If a 28-yo could be a sugar daddy for these guys, they’d take that over a 40-plus-yo. 

Call me cynical, but young guys who say they like daddies likely don’t like daddies nearly as much as they like the stability and security and pampering that comes with a financially established man. If a 28-yo could be a sugar daddy for these guys, they’d take that over a 40-plus-yo. 

If COVID is any indication how a POPULATION will respond to pandemic precautions, and especially vaccines, it’s also not going to stop it. The POPULATION won’t respond INDIVIDUALLY enough for it to be a panacea. 

This thread is the height of ridiculousness. This is literally the only place I keep hearing about monkeypox.
 

I would hardly call it “work ethic.” No one “earns” billions of dollars. No one. It’s obscene. 

Don’t fix it if it’s not broke! 

I find it cumbersome, more so than the current iteration. For all the money they must be raking in, you’d think they could come up with something more stabile. 

I was telling another friend who hires that I find it disingenuous when a provider says his goal is to make a guy happy. Not really. His goal is to make money. And the most money possible for the least amount of work and time possible. That’s perfectly fine. And acceptable. But let’s cut the crap. My goal is to have the most pleasure possible for the least amount of money possible. If everyone were honest and respectful about our intentions, then things would be better. I saw an ad today that said “There's nothing better than turning strangers into lovers.” Honey – you and I both know we’re never going to be lovers…Stop wasting my time with empty words. George Bailey promised the moon and only delivered on a drafty old house…When he accepted that and the reality of his actual life, he realized he had a wonderful life. He stopped living and wishing for a fantasy. We’re adults here and hopefully respectful. If we can’t accept that escorts want to make money and clients want to have a good time, if we want to think something else is going on, then we’re all delusional.

Agreed. And that’s what I was saying from my experience. I have done it and it wasn’t appreciated and there was no benefit. I don’t see any reason why there can’t be an agreement about what it means. Maybe it is just a tip. Maybe it’s not. For me, having done it, it wasn’t an equitable arrangement for me. If I felt it were appreciated or that there was some benefit to me, then I could entertain it. At this point, I feel like it’s not the best way for me to show appreciation. A tip is a tip. But RM sponsorship, from my experience, isn’t a beneficial to the client. No shit any arrangement, financial or otherwise, is beneficial to the provider if there are no strings/expectations/arrangements attached. If it’s just a sponsorship with no expectations, how could it be anything but positive? It seems to me the question should be, “Is RM sponsorship worth it if there are expectations?”
@FTL– If a provider isn’t going out of his way for you for consistently going above and beyond and treating you like any other client who wouldn’t go above and beyond, then I feel that’s unethical, or at least entitled. I can tell you I appreciate what you do for me and not really. I can say the sky is green too if it means it benefits me, especially if it doesn’t cost me anything more than saying the sky is green. As long as you’re paying and he doesn’t have to do more, why wouldn’t he keep up such an arrangement?

I would hardly call it “work ethic.” No one “earns” billions of dollars. No one. It’s obscene. 

Getting a vaccine is one thing. Saying we’re “losing the fight” is another. Getting a vaccine makes rational sense. Saying we’re “losing the fight” breeds panic. My mother died of COVID. A nasty, nasty death. I’m vaxxed etc. I still got COVID a few weeks ago. I took the therapeutics prescribed by my doctor and I’m fine. I’m moving on with my life. I’ll get vaxxed for monkeypox as soon as my pharmacy gets it. Until then, I’ll be careful who I’m exchanging bodily fluids with. I’ll do these things as precautions.

That “card” is offputting. It’s like he’s tried thinking of every eventuality so as not to engage in any kind of discussion before meeting. I had him on my list, but now I’m not interested. Next. 

I find the automatic responses from clients on messenger frustrating. It almost encourages them to overlook a message that you do send. And then add to that if you are using the messenger, you can see if they’ve logged in to RM since you sent your last message or even looked at your message since you sent it, and whether they responded or not. I love the double checks and no response for any apparent reason. I wonder if a simple “uninterested” is a lot to ask. It seems communication standards have really deteriorated since I was growing up…

@mike carey, thank you. Helpful…It seems to be wonky at times, but maybe that’s the VPN too? Also…I still have to get used to reading UTC for GMT.

Don’t fix it if it’s not broke!