ApexNomad

I’ll take your word (or should I?) about the website, but I’ll let @Jamie21 do the honors of checking to see if it’s real. 😜

There are so many other qualities to a MAN than just what the ruler says… But that’s just me.

That makes me an outlier too then. When I reach out to a provider, I stick to one until I hear back.

Tip: If he catches you staring, just pretend you’re lost in thought about something completely unrelated, like the economy.

You’re a gifted writer. This piece is incredibly vivid and erotic, with a natural flow that draws the reader in completely.

Thank you! I’m usually pretty serious—part occupational hazard, part American, part New Yorker. I trust your posts and had no reason to doubt you as I read it (which is why I asked); I just didn’t have my guard up. I was also reading this in order—from you and Benjamin both answering the same question. He mentioned there are boards and blacklists, then you referenced a website, so I admit I was a bit confused. It was funny! I truly appreciate your humor and the much-needed levity you bring.

Interesting how?

I checked and didn’t find anything. I take people at their word.

The Advocate for me.

Memories. 😂

Back in the day, we didn’t have the luxury of scrolling through profiles, sifting through headshots and dick pics, like folks do now on platforms like RentMen or Grindr. Things were… different. If you were looking for companionship—whether for an hour or a night—you had to rely on intuition, subtle signals, and sometimes pure luck. There was no GPS to lead you to a discreet meeting spot, no endless menu of preferences to select from. You might’ve had to cruise in bars, parks, or certain stretches of town you hoped wouldn’t attract the wrong kind of attention. It wasn’t glamorous, and it sure wasn’t convenient, but there was a certain thrill to it, a rawness that technology has polished away. You couldn’t pre-screen someone’s stats or preferences, either. You met people face-to-face, in the dim glow of a dive bar or the shadows of a bustling city street, where chemistry and charisma did the heavy lifting. I never saw their dick in advance or “selected” someone because of their dick size, so it was all a surprise. (Which is why dick size means nothing to me.) It was human, unpredictable, and sometimes messy. Classified ads often used euphemistic or coded language, such as “companions,” “masseurs,” or “models,” to discreetly advertise escort services without directly referencing sex work. These subtle codes were part of a hidden world where discretion and secrecy were paramount. The ads gave just enough to go on, often leaving more to the imagination than any photos or details could provide. You had to know the language to decode the message. I’ll admit, the modern way has its perks—privacy, efficiency, and transparency—but back then, there was an authenticity, a necessity to actually connect, even if only briefly. Every interaction carried risk, yes, but also possibility. In some ways, maybe we were braver—or just foolish. Depends who you ask.

Are you being facetious or is this a legitimate website and real thing?

I can definitely see the appeal of that—kind of like showing up to a high school reunion and leaving with the hottest guy in the room. That would be funny! And what a fantastic way to celebrate a 50th! It sounds like a memorable and bold way to mark the occasion. I bet that night will be talked about for years to come!

What kind of pictures are we talking about here? Face shots? Full-body? I recall one provider a while back whose ad featured just a shot of his bicep, and frankly, that didn’t convey enough for me to be interested. If a provider isn’t willing to invest time in offering clear, thoughtful images and compelling ad copy, then I’m left with two options: request a video chat or simply move on to someone who is more transparent in their presentation.

I would love to hear your story!

I don’t think you need to impress him or stage something to prove anything. It sounds like he values you for who you are, and a genuine connection will mean so much more than anything planned. You’re welcome to hire for whatever reason you want (again, as long as you communicate your needs and everyone’s on the same page), but you don’t need to go through this whole exercise for your straight best friend. Why not instead use the opportunity to have some sexual fun with the provider or maybe, if you’re so inclined, even fantasize they’re your straight friend to help you process those feelings? Friendships are invaluable, and it’s not worth risking yours over something that isn’t real. If I may, there’s something truly special about a genuine platonic gay/straight friendship. One of my closest and dearest friends is straight, and I wouldn’t risk that bond for anything.

It’s better to take the high road. There’s no need to keep the cycle going. Focus on what brings you peace instead.

When it comes to working with a provider, it’s a professional relationship with clear boundaries. As long as communication is upfront, mutual consent is present, and financial terms are agreed upon, it’s an interaction you control. The deeper question I think arises when you think about your best friend. You’ve gone from seeing it as a fun idea to feeling guilty about potentially lying to him. Does it matter to you that it’s not real? And how much do you value the relationship with him? Are you willing to risk the authenticity of that connection for the sake of a staged moment? Would he even care? Another element is your desire to impress him. But what would truly impress him? Would he appreciate seeing you connect with someone genuinely? If you’re willing to be his wingman, has he ever been willing to do the same for you in a gay bar? Maybe that’s where you can both see how real, fun interactions unfold naturally—without needing to stage anything or hide behind something that’s not true.

I adore Imelda Staunton. She’s terrific!

I’d let Jamie know—it may be something he might want to address.

Interesting profile. Not sure about the third bullet… LOL

Mama Rose is a role that traditionally demands a belter—a raw, powerhouse vocal approach. In my opinion, Audra’s voice is more head-driven, which makes me wonder how that will translate to such a force-of-nature character. That said, I trust her talent so I’m sure she’ll bring something unique to the role. If anything, I’m even more curious to see how her interpretation might reframe the character in ways I haven’t considered. The only role of hers that didn’t quite work for me was her portrayal of Lizzie Curry in 110 in the Shade. There’s something about Lizzie as a character that didn’t feel like the perfect fit for her. Lizzie is supposed to be plain and awkward, someone grappling with deep insecurities, and Audra’s natural elegance and sophistication made that a bit of a stretch. To her credit, she brought depth and power to the role, but I just didn’t find it entirely believable.

I stand corrected: The real thing is ALWAYS better… but most porn (except for Jamie’s) is also free.

I understand the distinction between recognizing someone’s looks and condoning their actions. But with a forum titled “Luigi Mangione Fetish,” it invites reflection on how much physical appearance influences our perceptions, if at all. Would this discussion even exist if he weren’t conventionally attractive? For some, I think the glorifying can be a slippery slope. Would the conversation be different if he were older, Black, Asian, Indian, or from any other background? It’s fascinating how appearance—always subjective—shapes the way we engage with and humanize people, often independent of their actions. This isn’t about judgment, but about considering the role appearance plays in shaping these conversations.

That goes without saying, but yes very true!! ❤️