ApexNomad

This is why I love me my 35 year old plus providers. (I can think of a few other reasons too.) 😉

Cash is king, especially if you’re a new client to a provider you’ve never seen before. I just add it to my day’s checklist before he arrives: douche (check); shower (check); brush teeth (check); bottles of water by the bed (check); pillow mints/snacks (because of course); wipes (just in case); extra underwear (in case he rips mine off 😉); lube / condoms (check); cash (check!!!) Viola!

Just to add, several legislatures, including those in California, Colorado, Hawaii, New York, and South Dakota, have placed measures on the ballot aimed at safeguarding LGBTQ+ rights, covering everything from marriage equality to anti-discrimination protections. If issues like these matter to you, please take the time to research these measures on your own in your state.

@azdr0710 PS the scarlet letter came off. You like me, you really like me.

As for the others, 2. Help Hospitalized Veterans: This charity has faced criticism for spending a high percentage of its donations on executive salaries and perks, while comparatively little is allocated to programs that directly benefit veterans. The organization’s spending practices led to an investigation by the California Attorney General and resulted in lawsuits due to questionable financial practices and excessive administrative costs. 3. American Veterans Coalition: This charity reportedly spends only a small percentage of its revenue on actual programs for veterans, with the majority of donations directed toward salaries, administrative costs, and fundraising. Watchdogs have flagged organizations like this for having low program-spending ratios, warning donors to exercise caution. 4. Cancer Fund of America and Related Charities: CFA, along with several affiliated charities, became notorious for spending the majority of their donations on salaries, fundraising, and administrative costs, leaving very little for cancer patients. This organization and its affiliates were eventually SHUT DOWN following a FTC investigation that exposed their financial practices. 5. National Veterans Services Fund: This organization has been flagged repeatedly for high administrative and fundraising costs, with only a small portion of its revenue reaching veterans’ programs. Like other charities with low program spending, it has attracted negative attention from watchdogs and received low ratings from organizations like Charity Navigator. Bottom line: It’s not uncommon for charities to allocate a significant portion of donations to administrative costs rather than direct services. These examples highlight the need for transparency and accountability. By scrutinizing where our contributions go, we can support organizations that truly prioritize their mission and ensure our donations make a meaningful impact.

Now they do! Back in 2016, Wounded Warrior Project came under intense scrutiny after reports surfaced of high administrative costs and excessive spending on staff events. This prompted an internal review and a significant leadership overhaul, resulting in the organization’s commitment to improved financial practices.

“I know” meaning “I know, it’s sucks. I agree.” But if you want actual names, here you go - here’s five: 1. Wounded Warrior Project 2. American Veterans Coalition 3. Help Hospitalized Veterans 4. Cancer Fund of America 5. National Veterans Services Fund

Non-profits can legally spend large portions of their income on salaries and administrative costs rather than direct services, though there are general expectations and standards for spending ratios. For instance, Charity Navigator recommends that most established non-profits aim to allocate at least 70% of their revenue to programs rather than overhead. However, in reality, some non-profits may have high administrative or fundraising costs—sometimes above 90%—and still operate legally. (I know.) The IRS’s primary focus is ensuring a non-profit meets tax-exempt requirements, such as not generating excessive private benefit for individuals, rather than scrutinizing every detail of its spending ratios. While large executive salaries can raise concerns, particularly if they seem disproportionate to the organization’s impact, they are not necessarily illegal as long as the non-profit can justify them as “reasonable” within the context of its mission. Watchdogs like Charity Navigator or GuideStar flag organizations where high executive compensation impacts program spending, but a 99% allocation to executive pay, while rare, could technically be legal if deemed reasonable.

Yes! It centers mainly along 32nd Street between 5th and 6th Avenues but has expanded, with Korean businesses, restaurants, and shops now found on nearby blocks, including 29th Street.

Yeah, the first photo looks photoshopped/spliced.

I’d be curious to understand then his definition of BFE.

Much love and happiness to you both!

I completely agree with you about the importance of maintaining boundaries to keep the experience enjoyable, professional, and uncomplicated—I’ve emphasized this several times throughout the thread. Where we might differ (which is fine of course) is on going into a paid encounter with the mindset that the provider is “out of your league.” I believe this mindset can impact your confidence in the time shared together, possibly making you feel inhibited or less desirable in the moment. I think that kills the mood. My advice is simply: don’t go there. Focus on enjoying the experience WITHIN that window and having fun. As I’ve previously mentioned, flattery outside that window can blur intentions and, depending on the context, feel ambiguous or even patronizing.

Fair enough! Sounds like you know exactly what works for you and what doesn’t.

I’m old enough to know that none of us really knows where we stand in someone else’s eyes. Thinking you’re “out of someone’s league” only sets you up to feel less than, even when the reality could be totally different. Going back to the original poster (and I’m paraphrasing here), the poster saw himself as an average, unassuming guy who hires providers he thinks are out of his league just for the experience. But then he found out the provider genuinely enjoyed his company and thought he was a catch. So what good did that self-doubt do him? None. Confidence isn’t about settling—it’s about realizing your worth and lettinf that show. Not arrogance, but confidence. Going in with that mindset changes the entire experience—for you and the person you’re with. And I’m also old enough to know that I’d never presume I could get anyone for free—more power to you!

You’re nice! I’ve never felt the need to spell it out like that with a provider—I just assume overall hygiene is a given and will be obvious within minutes of meeting. I don’t text my prospective tops my bottoming routine. One thing I do when we meet—sometimes they beat me to it—is extend my hand, then go in for a hug with a smile. While we’re in that hug, I’ll put both hands on their biceps, look them in the eye, hold, and say something like, “I’m really happy you’re here.” It’s face-to-face, so we’ll both catch each other’s breath, get a hint of their scent, and just feel the vibe overall.

Or until McDonald’s stops serving E. coli?