ApexNomad

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!! ❤️

I love you. LOL Wow! Thank you!

For first-time providers, I always put the cash in an envelope on a table or stand, and it’s always visible when they come in. They know it’s there, I know it’s there. I don’t hand it to them directly—call it a bit of caution on my part or stupidity. For regulars, I hand it over directly, still in an envelope, since there’s already trust established. Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t like handing over paper money right after our encounter. “Don’t treat them like a commodity, and don’t treat me like an ATM.” It’s a reminder to me to always maintain respect and dignity in this transaction, emphasizing that both parties should be valued beyond just the exchange of money.

The real thing is ALWAYS better… but porn is also free.

Not to veer off topic, but I think it varies and depends on each client and provider. For example, if I’m paying for a “boyfriend experience,” I want the full experience for what that means to me and how I articulate that to the provider. That means I expect the provider to engage with me on a level beyond just physical pleasure. If I specifically express that I want things like “Tell me you love me during sex,” then I want that to be part of the experience—I want whatever fantasy expressed for that encounter. If, on the other hand, I’m looking for a purely physical encounter with zero commentary, then I expect to skip the commentary and focus solely on the physical pleasure. The key is clear communication and setting boundaries that work for both parties. It’s important that both the client and provider feel comfortable with the arrangement, and that those boundaries are agreed upon upfront. If a provider is comfortable with my desires and we both agree on what the experience will be, then I think everyone gets what they want out of the encounter.

I give you an enormous amount of credit for getting back on the horse after repeated negative experiences, especially the one where you were drugged. Honestly, that would have ended this as my hobby entirely. I’m really sorry that happened to you, and I sincerely hope the end result wasn’t what we often fear in situations like that. I don’t know the details of what happened, and I’d be remiss to speculate. However, if any physical harm was done, I would consider seeking legal action. In situations like this, it’s often referred to as drink spiking or, in more severe cases, drug-facilitated assault. As for the statute of limitations, it varies by jurisdiction, but many places have a period ranging from a few years to several decades, especially for serious crimes like assault. It might be worth consulting with a legal professional to understand your options going forward. Your resilience is impressive, and I truly hope any future encounters are much more positive and fulfilling.

Is he a porn star?

It’s all strategic. Three potential reasons: 1. Leverage in Plea Negotiations: A terrorism charge significantly raises the stakes, potentially pressuring Mangione to accept a plea deal. 2. Public Perception: Labeling the act as terrorism emphasizes the severity of the crime and signals to the public that the State views the act as having broader societal implications, reinforcing their commitment to addressing such violence. 3. Unclear Motive or Evidence: The prosecution may have evidence that hasn’t been disclosed yet, which could tie Mangione’s actions to the statutory definitions of terrorism, such as attempting to influence government policy or intimidate a population.

I haven’t seen this production yet. Did you see this new production of Gypsy or is this your overall assessment of Ms. McDonald from other performances you’ve seen?

This case extends beyond the courtroom and touches on larger societal issues. While Mangione’s background positions him within the privileged elite, his supporters—many of whom come from marginalized communities—might view his actions differently. They could perceive his act not just as a crime, but as a challenge to the very systems of power they feel have long excluded them. In this light, Mangione may be seen as a martyr, with his supporters framing his actions as a form of resistance rather than a criminal act. This is reflected in the fundraising efforts for his defense, which seem to resonate with those who see Mangione as someone taking a stand against the status quo. The framing of his actions is likely to differ significantly depending on the social lens through which they are viewed. What’s fascinating, and concerning (especially for the prosecution I’d imagine), is that the legal and media narratives surrounding the case may do little to shift this perception among his supporters. In fact, they may only serve to deepen the divisions in the public’s understanding of justice, reinforcing the idea that the system is either working against or for certain segments of society, depending on one’s perspective.

The indictment on a terrorism charge significantly changes the dynamics of this case. It frames the defendant’s actions not just as a personal crime, but as an attack on society itself. The prosecution will likely focus on proving premeditation, showing the defendant’s actions were part of a larger, ideologically driven agenda. They’ll use any evidence of extremist beliefs, communications, or behavior to argue that the crime was motivated by more than personal grievances, thus justifying the terrorism charge. This also opens the door for harsher sentencing under terrorism statutes. For the defense, the challenge has now intensified. They’ll need to argue that the defendant’s actions, while tragic, were not ideologically motivated and do not meet the legal definition of terrorism. This could include bolstering arguments for diminished capacity, such as an insanity defense or extreme emotional disturbance, in an effort to show that the defendant was not in full control of his actions. They will also likely emphasize personal struggles or mental health issues to humanize the defendant and counter the terrorism charge. It’ll be interesting to see what plea the defense enters, as this will significantly shape the trial strategy. In high-profile cases like this one, where the charges are severe (e.g., terrorism and murder), the decision for a jury trial is more likely, especially given the emotional weight of the charges. However, the defendant may still request a bench trial, depending on their strategy and legal counsel’s advice.