FaustOust

No, it’s a coded dog whistle.  
Everyone knows of whom you speak without you mentioning race.  That’s why the word works to convey the sense you feel you can’t say. You can thereby back out of it semantically when called on it.  
If you were simply speaking of behavior and nothing else, like drinking in the street and fighting, you wouldn’t have categorized the type of people, in your view, engaging in the behavior, let alone call them “hood people.”  You would just describe the behavior.  You chose not to do that and instead refer to where you thought they were from as being the hood or ghetto for one obvious reason — to convey a more powerful image, a racially loaded image, of the people without you having to say it explicitly.

No, it’s a coded dog whistle.  
Everyone knows of whom you speak without you mentioning race.  That’s why the word works to convey the sense you feel you can’t say. You can thereby back out of it semantically when called on it.  
If you were simply speaking of behavior and nothing else, like drinking in the street and fighting, you wouldn’t have categorized the type of people, in your view, engaging in the behavior, let alone call them “hood people.”  You would just describe the behavior.  You chose not to do that and instead refer to where you thought they were from as being the hood or ghetto for one obvious reason — to convey a more powerful image, a racially loaded image, of the people without you having to say it explicitly.

“Crowded with hood people” sounds like it’s just a euphemism for there were too many Black people present for your comfort level at what you expected to be an almost exclusively white gathering — which many Pride celebrations are.

Yes, it is a huge leap to think that, because @MeatHead wasn’t talking about Irish ghettos in New York or European Jewish ghettos. It was clear to whom he was referring and why he chose that reference in the context of his comment about “hood people.”  He knew he was talking about Black people and how to convey it.  His own race is irrelevant to that. The etymology of “ghetto” is merely a history lesson that might explain how it evolved to current usage, but @MeatHead was obviously not using the word in an historical context as that would be nonsensical.

Yes, it is a huge leap to think that, because @MeatHead wasn’t talking about Irish ghettos in New York or European Jewish ghettos. It was clear to whom he was referring and why he chose that reference in the context of his comment about “hood people.”  He knew he was talking about Black people and how to convey it.  His own race is irrelevant to that. The etymology of “ghetto” is merely a history lesson that might explain how it evolved to current usage, but @MeatHead was obviously not using the word in an historical context as that would be nonsensical.

No, it’s a coded dog whistle.  
Everyone knows of whom you speak without you mentioning race.  That’s why the word works to convey the sense you feel you can’t say. You can thereby back out of it semantically when called on it.  
If you were simply speaking of behavior and nothing else, like drinking in the street and fighting, you wouldn’t have categorized the type of people, in your view, engaging in the behavior, let alone call them “hood people.”  You would just describe the behavior.  You chose not to do that and instead refer to where you thought they were from as being the hood or ghetto for one obvious reason — to convey a more powerful image, a racially loaded image, of the people without you having to say it explicitly.

Yes, it is a huge leap to think that, because @MeatHead wasn’t talking about Irish ghettos in New York or European Jewish ghettos. It was clear to whom he was referring and why he chose that reference in the context of his comment about “hood people.”  He knew he was talking about Black people and how to convey it.  His own race is irrelevant to that. The etymology of “ghetto” is merely a history lesson that might explain how it evolved to current usage, but @MeatHead was obviously not using the word in an historical context as that would be nonsensical.

Hey man honestly I would move on from hiring him.. it sounds like he is taking major advantage of you and is not willing to do what he’s being paid for.. as a provider I can also tell you his feelings are fabricated… I personally am uncomfortable with faking the lovey dovey stuff.. i did it with a regular for a bit because that’s what he was paying me for… but he kept telling me he was falling in love with me and I would not say it back. So it created this awkward  vibe. The second you stop paying him his “feelings” vanish. I think it’s damaging to your mental health and happiness to continue seeing him. Now I tell clients first off that I don’t love them but we can be friends and have a good time. Because I tend to enjoy my clients for more than just the sex most are really cool guys that I actually learn quite a bit from. But I’ve had clients text me full screenshots of my rm profile and tell me when they saw me the fell in love.. that’s not love and is a big red flag for me as they tend to get obsessive and that can be dangerous so I avoid it.. I think you should see someone new and just focus on having fun!

Unfortunately, as much as your feelings are real, they are based on a lie.  He is an escort having sex for money and you are a client looking for acceptance and intimacy.  A great escort can fake intimacy for a long time, years, even a decade or more, but, a closer examination reveals that this kind of relationship is very one sided.  The money flows one way and most of the affection and attention flow the other way.  Escorts, for the most part, reveal just enough of themselves to make the experience you have with them have a basis in reality.  Ultimately, there is a lot you do not know, will never know and that, I am afraid, is the nature of these interactions.  There are exceptions.  Many of us, including myself, have thought that this is one of the real ones.  Ultimately, it is usually self delusion and the wishing for it to be so. 
As hard as it is, move on.  You are paying for a service and you are getting tsuris.   Translated from the Yiddish  Aggravation, Heatache.  

Yes, it is a huge leap to think that, because @MeatHead wasn’t talking about Irish ghettos in New York or European Jewish ghettos. It was clear to whom he was referring and why he chose that reference in the context of his comment about “hood people.”  He knew he was talking about Black people and how to convey it.  His own race is irrelevant to that. The etymology of “ghetto” is merely a history lesson that might explain how it evolved to current usage, but @MeatHead was obviously not using the word in an historical context as that would be nonsensical.

“Crowded with hood people” sounds like it’s just a euphemism for there were too many Black people present for your comfort level at what you expected to be an almost exclusively white gathering — which many Pride celebrations are.

No, it’s a coded dog whistle.  
Everyone knows of whom you speak without you mentioning race.  That’s why the word works to convey the sense you feel you can’t say. You can thereby back out of it semantically when called on it.  
If you were simply speaking of behavior and nothing else, like drinking in the street and fighting, you wouldn’t have categorized the type of people, in your view, engaging in the behavior, let alone call them “hood people.”  You would just describe the behavior.  You chose not to do that and instead refer to where you thought they were from as being the hood or ghetto for one obvious reason — to convey a more powerful image, a racially loaded image, of the people without you having to say it explicitly.

No, it’s a coded dog whistle.  
Everyone knows of whom you speak without you mentioning race.  That’s why the word works to convey the sense you feel you can’t say. You can thereby back out of it semantically when called on it.  
If you were simply speaking of behavior and nothing else, like drinking in the street and fighting, you wouldn’t have categorized the type of people, in your view, engaging in the behavior, let alone call them “hood people.”  You would just describe the behavior.  You chose not to do that and instead refer to where you thought they were from as being the hood or ghetto for one obvious reason — to convey a more powerful image, a racially loaded image, of the people without you having to say it explicitly.

No, it’s a coded dog whistle.  
Everyone knows of whom you speak without you mentioning race.  That’s why the word works to convey the sense you feel you can’t say. You can thereby back out of it semantically when called on it.  
If you were simply speaking of behavior and nothing else, like drinking in the street and fighting, you wouldn’t have categorized the type of people, in your view, engaging in the behavior, let alone call them “hood people.”  You would just describe the behavior.  You chose not to do that and instead refer to where you thought they were from as being the hood or ghetto for one obvious reason — to convey a more powerful image, a racially loaded image, of the people without you having to say it explicitly.

No, it’s a coded dog whistle.  
Everyone knows of whom you speak without you mentioning race.  That’s why the word works to convey the sense you feel you can’t say. You can thereby back out of it semantically when called on it.  
If you were simply speaking of behavior and nothing else, like drinking in the street and fighting, you wouldn’t have categorized the type of people, in your view, engaging in the behavior, let alone call them “hood people.”  You would just describe the behavior.  You chose not to do that and instead refer to where you thought they were from as being the hood or ghetto for one obvious reason — to convey a more powerful image, a racially loaded image, of the people without you having to say it explicitly.

“Crowded with hood people” sounds like it’s just a euphemism for there were too many Black people present for your comfort level at what you expected to be an almost exclusively white gathering — which many Pride celebrations are.

I wonder if he engages in race-play? 😈

“Crowded with hood people” sounds like it’s just a euphemism for there were too many Black people present for your comfort level at what you expected to be an almost exclusively white gathering — which many Pride celebrations are.

“Crowded with hood people” sounds like it’s just a euphemism for there were too many Black people present for your comfort level at what you expected to be an almost exclusively white gathering — which many Pride celebrations are.

“Crowded with hood people” sounds like it’s just a euphemism for there were too many Black people present for your comfort level at what you expected to be an almost exclusively white gathering — which many Pride celebrations are.

Many have been in this hobby long enough to notice shifts —some subtle, some seismic. And lately, I’ve found myself wondering: where is this all going?
I don’t just mean how or where we find escorts (though that’s changed too over time), but what the whole dynamic even means anymore. Is the traditional client-escort relationship evolving? Is it at risk? 
There’s a lot packed in there that individually may have been points of discussion , but as far as macro-impact, a few trends and questions have been on my mind:
Has digital replaced desire? With OnlyFans, X  (Twitter), and other platforms offering endless virtual engagement, are fewer guys actually booking in-person time? And if so—why? The BFE shift: Most escorts seem to offer some emotional connection as part of the package. Is that real, or just something to say in clever marketing? Pricing, professionalism, and polish: There’s been a definite rise in high-end presentation with online platforms such as OF, JFF, even among newcomers. Is the industry becoming more professional—or just more performative? Client anonymity and risk: With online visibility, reviews, and social platforms, is client confidentiality at risk? Legal and logistical concerns: Do current laws and payment platform crackdowns make this work harder to access and sustain for everyone involved? To fellow clients: Have your booking habits changed? Are you finding it easier or harder to connect meaningfully?
To the escorts: How do you see your role changing? What are clients doing now that feels different from even 5 years ago?

How important to you is eye contact during sex?  
I like it, particularly in a position that lends itself to eye contact, but I have noticed that some guys, even then, close their eyes or look elsewhere. 
I remember once when a guy ordered me to look him in the eyes as I was blowing him.   It was very hot.  I think eye contact can be used to turn up the heat in a situation, and I am surprised how many guys seem like they are drifting off somewhere else with their eyes shut or looking somewhere else while doing the deed.

When you’re not paying.

Although I am sure they are being truthful in your case, that is something escorts say to clients. Addressing the client as “Handsome” is Escorting 101.
It can also be a way of not having to recall your name in that moment.

There have been a couple of occasions, either following several hours or overnight together, I have asked a provider, “What is your name?”  or “Is such and such your real name?” On one of those occasions, one told me he was not willing to share his name yet, and on the other, the provider just said that he had an uncommon first name and would rather not say.  In each of those cases, I respected their wishes not to reveal their first names to me and didn’t pressure.   I said something like “oh I understand, no problem,” and dropped it.  In each of those cases, the guy knew my real name and in one case, he could have known both my given name and surname.
However, I am not sure why, but after having established what seemed to be a connection with someone, I wanted to call them by their real name — rather than a pseudonym or a screen name.  
Is this a reasonable desire — or is everyone, clients and providers, just sharing fake names with one another as part of some invented identity for escorting? Do people know the real identities of their regulars?  For me, it seems to have been a one way street, where I have not hidden my name or even facts about my life, but the escort won’t be equally as honest or forthcoming.