Archangel

Let’s hope it’s a glitch…I find when user-driven sites are censored that way, especially for a 21+ crowd, it’s extremely off-putting.

It’s hard to believe he’s able to all those things to the same degree of quality or with the same degree of enthusiasm. You simply can’t be all things to all people. That’s what I mean by desperation. I would prefer he actually tell us what he’s best at, not just click off every box and list every dichotomy or option known to appeal to clients.

But not GLP-1s for weight management.

Up front: I didn’t meet with him. Just wanted to share what strikes me as a desperate attempt to be all things to all men. The ad isn’t useful in that nothing seems discriminating. Dylanswilly - Male Escort, Gay massage - Salt Lake City | Rent.Men RENT.MEN Dylanswilly Gay Escort in Salt Lake City, Utah, available for Gay Escorting,Modeling,Bodywork. | Find...

My issue with “hey” is that it lacks any kind of seriousness that points toward a professional transaction.

Raping, perhaps? Banning that specific word?

@DznNYC, thank you for the clarification! I myself love a good conversation. You can learn a lot, both in person and in text (chat or messages). I actually learned German and became fluent primarily through online chatting. If everyone is engaged, it can be rewarding. Back to the topic: clients having a profile to check out presupposes communication through RM, it seems. I’m curious. Do most potential clients reach out over RM or via text? I prefer texting. I’ve never had an escort ask me to know my username on RM.

@DznNYC, I looked at your RM profile. Although you list yourself as a bottom and I wouldn’t be reaching out because of that, I do see you have this— But here you seem to suggest that “endless chatting” vexes you. Which is it? If you put something like that, and weren’t a bottom, I might reach out to you thinking you were willing to actually do what you say. Yet here in the forum you seem to say the opposite. You seem to say here, “Get a move on with it; don’t waste my time!” How exactly are you going to learn my needs if you have, without judgement, already judged that there’s a high probability for “endless chatting?”

Ironic how long your post is 😉 Maybe I’m an anomaly here, but I don’t understand fully the aversion to texting and chatting. Here and in general. People will often say they are so busy they don’t reply to texts etc. I don’t find texting is at all a major imposition on my time. What I believe is the actual issue is texting means accountability to someone else, to a degree on their terms, and that rubs people wrong. In a personal setting, I can see that as more legitimate than in a professional sense. I handle all texts related to work aa soon as I see them and until I’m sure who texted me is satisfied. I will also say that the line I quoted above and others like it that inveigh against “endless messaging” or the like are a huge turn off. Do you want my business or not? It’s as welcoming as a “no loitering” sign. When I go to Lowes to make a purchase, I ask questions if I have them. I will keep asking questions til I’m sure what I’m purchasing is what I want. The associate doesn’t say in the middle of the exchange anything about it because it’s part of the job. Sometimes it’s not what I’m looking for and after asking all those questions, I leave without making a purchase. If it’s not at Lowes, it might be a place where salespeople get commission. That doesn’t affect my asking questions. They might invest energy into answering my questions but not make the sale. That’s how it is. I once worked in retail. I know. You may not like customers who ask questions but it’s part of the job. All that to say, “endless messaging” in an ad will disincline me greatly from reaching out. It sends the message that a potential provider is parsimonious with their offering and prejudiced about the meetup already before it’s even been discussed as a chore more than an opportunity. I want a provider who wants to give it his all, not one who wants me to understand from the get-go what we already know – “This is a transaction.”

I’m glad you said that. It seems we have apologists here for providers who reply with such responses but argue it’s not any kind of indicator. It is. If you as a provider can understand something from “hey,”…especially if it’s “hey,” so can clients 🙂 To the OP – I don’t see it as at all necessary to have a profile as a client. I don’t typically reach out over RM so he wouldn’t be able to look me up anyhow.

I always wonder how stupid these guys think we are that we look at them in their 30s and they say their 22…Right… 🙄 And I’m Marco Polo.

Here’s an idea: it’s a spectrum! Not wholly nature, not wholly nurture. I’m sort of surprised that we’re still debating that dichotomy. 🤨

We live in a world today where politics infuses everything (one of the reasons I don’t like that it’s a verboten topic here). If it seems appropriate to the course of the conversation, I see no reason not to ask. The fact that we think we shouldn’t is part of the political radicalization that infects our society. It’s not on my list of items to address when selecting a provider, but if I get a vibe that puts me off, I could see me asking.

“Straight” listed in the biographical details is enough for me to say, “pass,” to say nothing of it in all caps in his username.

If you had read 😉 you would understand it’s not for the fuck and run meetups. So a bit more concern about compatibility is appropriate.

Look at that. Nothing new under the sun!

Just providing lots of primary source material for that PhD who will do their dissertation on the escorting industry 🤣

Not sure if it needing “approving,” per se. Below from the webmaster…It was either approved or administratively taken care of. Either way, it went through in the end.

I contacted the webmaster and said I thought it unnecessary. Also did this as the verification:

I found your post fine til this unnecessary dismissive zinger. For the record, it’s not at all impossible to find either; I’ve had good success with my approach finding and hiring guys that meet and exceed expectations through the whole experiencee. Maybe you haven’t had much luck because you think you fish for unicorns; unless you’re looking for a narwhal, unicorns are terrestrial fauna 🤓 I believe if they are looking for “discerning” clients, providers should expect to put effort into all parts of the transaction. Of course if it’s a fuck and run situation, then expectations can be lower. But for extended BFEs, some level of expectation and compatibility is just perquisite. I don’t find that at all unreasonable; in fact, not having some level of expectation and compatibility for extended BFEs strikes me as foolhardy. It’s not a unicorn, by the way. It’s a svelte rhino 😉

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding you, @TyrEngineer, but if I’m not, then the client would be at a perpetual disadvantage economically because he’d be gambling by investing monetarily simply to determine if it’s a worthwhile investment—“pay to play.” Do I understand you correctly? I can see how that would be a crapshoot for a client, but how is it for a provider? A provider who is paid, irrespective of performance, wins, transactionally speaking. The point of vetting from a client’s perspective is precisely to avoid those providers who view the transaction solely, whether consciously or unconsciously, as a monetary endeavor with the potential to have a good time. Not all providers see it that way, and from my experience you can’t necessarily judge the book by its cover in those instances, but you definitely can make an informed guess if it’s good literature based off reading the prologue.

Are you saying you reserve judgement until after a monetary transaction? I feel like you can determine in many instances—as do providers vis-a-vis clients—if you’re likely to “click” with a guy. There are red flags—such as the loutish “U ready to book” within three texts…

I’m not flying someone in for an hour or two. As you said, a phone call is a good way of clearing up uncertainty if there is any before meeting up. But it was clear, to me, from the exchange that I posted, that it was never getting to that—let alone the weekend. I’ve had great success. I don’t need to change my approach. I’m saying that some providers in fact suck at providing a holistic experience. And to the point of the OP, it’s perfectly legitimate to broach the topic of preferred activities when booking. Why in the hell wouldn’t it be?!

So…in order to reply to this, I had to go back to the post I didn’t read in its entirety and read it in its entirety 🤣 ✅ Task 1 Now…Task 2… See below screenshots for context. This is an example of the type of poor interaction I’m referring to. This is not an uncommon kind of interaction. Feel free to point out what I’m doing wrong, if anything… I think one of the core issues for many clients, myself included, is that while the experience is inherently transactional, it shouldn’t feel transactional. Of course, we all understand that there’s an exchange happening here, but it’s important that the interaction feels more than just business as usual. When a provider’s response is too flat, generic, or rushed, it can leave me feeling like I’m just a human ATM—or worse, not even seen as human at all. What I’m really looking for, because this is an extended BFE, is a connection that goes beyond just the physical aspect—or at least feels like that. It’s about chemistry, ease, and shared presence. I want to feel that my provider is genuinely engaged, emotionally intelligent, and responsive to what I’m asking for—not just ticking off a checklist of purported services. When a provider shows enthusiasm and clarity, it makes me feel like I’m more than just a transaction to them. For example, when he acknowledges the emotional or relational tone of what I’m saying, it reassures me that he’s on the same page. Something like, “I hear what you’re looking for—and I love creating that kind of experience too” makes all the difference. It shows he understands that this isn’t just about meeting a physical need, but about creating a meaningful interaction. Also, I want to know that he’s considering compatibility beyond the logistics of timing or rates. When he responds with something like, “I prefer to connect with people I feel a real vibe with, and from what you’ve shared, I think we could really click,” it lets me know he’s thinking about more than just the basics—it’s about the vibe, the connection, the chemistry. That’s what makes the experience more satisfying, and it lets me know he’s invested in the interaction, not just the transaction. When it comes to pricing, I understand there are clear expectations, but I also appreciate when a provider takes the time to communicate that thoughtfully. A response like, “For longer engagements, I typically charge X, but I’d love to chat more about what you’re hoping for and see how we can make it work,” feels far better than a flat “4k.” It shows that they’re open to discussion and care about the experience rather than just locking things in without any engagement. It also opens the door for me to say, politely, I prefer not to haggle, which I do say if a provider has said he would negotiate Lastly, when a provider engages with my language and tone rather than shutting it down, it helps me feel seen and heard. “I really like how you’ve described what you’re looking for—it’s the kind of connection I try to create, too” goes a long way in showing they’re not just looking to complete a task but are interested in creating something meaningful. I guess at the end of the day, it comes down to this: I know these interactions are transactional, but I want to walk away feeling like I was treated as a person, not a payment method—or simply an anal orifice for him to get his dick wet while getting paid. Thoughtful communication, emotional engagement, and a genuine desire to connect make all the difference in turning what could be a simple transaction into something truly satisfying. Moderator Note: Screenshots removed as they violate community guidelines around sharing of personal information. OP Note: Screenshots readded with personal information redacted.