maninsoma

Yes, but it also sounds like he was gone for a while the first time so why would he think he could find something the second time at an even later hour?

Well, that certainly changes things. I would certainly question why someone needs something to eat only a couple of hours after you met and then says he needs to go out again a couple of hours later. Maybe a sign of a drug problem he wanted to hide from you, or maybe he was seeing other clients for short appointments during your time together? Even if he was just looking for food because he lifts a lot and likes to eat frequently, he should have brought some protein bars or a shake or something instead of leaving you to look for food repeatedly.

If you had a 14 hour appointment, it sounds like it began at 7pm since he left at 9am the next day. If that's the case, then you should have arranged to have a meal at either the beginning of your appointment or, if you were worried about one or both of you being clean enough for anal sexy, had sex right away (or maybe after one drink) and then gone out to eat. In my experience an overnight appointment that truly is an extended appointment (not just hooking up from midnight to 6am or something) should include at least the evening meal if not breakfast. So, if you did anything "wrong" other than starting out with an overnight instead of just an hour or two appointment, it's that you didn't factor in the need for the guy to eat dinner and instead spent hours drinking alcohol with him. (I assume you were drinking for hours since you said he went out to get something to eat and came back at midnight, so unless he was absent for a long time then you probably were hanging out drinking and chatting for quite a while.) I don't really get a sense that the escort did anything wrong other than maybe not guiding you into a more explicit conversation about how your appointment would be structured. Since he knew you were new to this and he's apparently experienced, he should have raised some of these issues in advance (including the time in the morning he anticipated leaving) so you could have structured the time in a way that met more of your needs. Therefore, I definitely don't think it would be appropriate for you to contact him to complain about his behavior other than maybe you wish he had helped you figure out some structure in advance. It's more of a live and learn circumstance. I'm interested in alternate perspectives. Maybe some believe that the escort should have taken more control in the moment, guiding you to eating dinner instead of drinking when more dining establishments were open, and then initiated play in the morning early enough that you could enjoy it without feeling like the clock was ticking. Maybe some will call into question the escort leaving to try to find food not once but twice (which does seem a bit odd to me). Maybe some will even argue that the escort knew exactly what he was doing -- getting you to pay his fee in exchange for mostly time spent drinking and sleeping -- but for all we knew the escort actually believed that allowing you to set the pace was the best thing for you. Assuming you decide to schedule another overnight at some point with him or anyone else, I suggest having more communication in advance to see if you are both on the same page as to what's going to happen during your time together.

Just to be clear: You don't believe anyone should be held pretrial?

I assume I am the poster who is being accused of conflating two different cases. My point in bringing up the other man's case wasn't to equate it to Wolf's. It was in response to others claiming that they knew what the disposition of Wolf's case would be. Sometimes the eventual conviction and punishment is far less than one might assume based on the initial charges and evidence.

Yes, that's the difficulty here. Unless one wants to believe some sort of conspiracy (the evidence was planted, someone else was using his account to trade the videos), then regardless of the fact that he hasn't faced trial yet he's guilty in my eyes. It's like if someone gets caught in the act of some other crime: They are still entitled to their day in court, and maybe through some legal wrangling they will end up being convicted of a charge that's less severe than the crime they actually did. In the case of Wolf, it's just hard to conjure up any sympathy for someone trading videos of prepubescent kids getting raped, especially when some of his previous behaviors made him out to be a not very likeable guy already.

That was my point, and the point of the person to whose post I replied.

The entire reason some people are held pending trial is that they are deemed a serious threat if they were to remain free. It seems like prosecutors argued and the judge agreed that there's reason to believe Wolf would continue to be a risk to children through his online behavior if he were in home confinement. That isn't an unreasonable position to hold. While I don't think anyone deserves to be assaulted or murdered in prison, I wouldn't argue that Wolf deserves special treatment so he entirely avoids this risk. What should be true is that everyone being held pending trial is physically safe, and if they remain incarcerated following conviction then they should still be physically safe.

I agree. Typically when I reply to a post that I think is disingenuous, I begin with something along the lines of, "Assuming you are serious..." What makes the OP highly questionable is that the poster wants to hire the lawyer at the firm, even though he apparently finds his personality off-putting while, at the same time, admitting that he really only "knows of" the guy but doesn't really know him.

I'm not sure why you wrote that the Daily Mail story would leave readers shaken. It contains no new information other than than Wolf was not released to home confinement. I'm not shaken by that; it seems like the right decision for someone with these allegations against him. Note: I removed the second link you provided because we were asked not to share Wolf's legal name on this site and that link clearly indicates his real name.

I won't go into much detail because I took this class several years ago and cannot say that I have all of the details memorized, but I attended a training from a psychologist with decades of experience in research and treatment of child sex perpetrators and the most surprising thing she said was this: A large percentage of men experience sexual arousal when shown sexually suggestive images of children. She basically said the difference between the men she treated and those she didn't was not the physiological impulse but rather the control of those impulses.

My point is that at this time, we don't know what charges (if any) Austin Wolf will eventually be found guilty of. The other guy was able to plead to one "attempted" charge even though the government found scores of porn videos he produced where he was with the 16-year-old and then sold online. His actual, not attempted, actions were documented on camera. If that guy was able to plea down, it's entirely possible that Wolf could be able to do so as well. Then again, the videos described in the article regarding Austin Wolf are clearly beyond what this other guy produced. They clearly involved prepubescent kids, not older but still not legal teens, and it sounds like at least one was a brutal rape scene. Maybe prosecutors are less inclined to give someone an opportunity to plead to lesser charges when the content involved is clearly much more depraved.

Not just you. I think I'd like this guy a lot more with a still muscular but much smaller physique. And if someone wants to be this much of a bodybuilder, he needs to focus on all body parts. At least in the photos in the ad, it looks like he doesn't work his legs out proportionate to his upper body work outs -- particularly his calves. As to men using Rent.men just to bring traffic to their Fans pages, this is sadly all too common. If I like what I see in an ad, I might subscribe to a guy's page for a month. A lot of the time just watching some videos makes me not want to meet the guy anyway, but sometimes it becomes clear that they really are just porn actors, not escorts.

Any speculation about what will happen to Austin Wolf is just that. There's a fairly recent case involving a guy in his early twenties who had sex many times with a 16 year old, filmed it, and posted it on Only Fans and Just For Fans. The guy fled to Puerto Vallarta from Kansas and was working under an alias until he was arrested and sent back to the US to face charges. Despite having many videos of him and the victim having sex, he was allowed to plead guilty to "attempting" to create child pornography. I don't think he's been sentenced yet, but apparently he faces a minimum of 15 years in prison with a maximum of 30 years. I know the allegations against Wolf that are public so far only involve him distributing and receiving child pornography, not producing it himself, so I didn't bring up the above case to say they are equivalent. I just thought it might offer some insight into how the government might prosecute someone in Wolf's circumstance.

My question is this: When someone says they want a "bodybuilder," are they necessarily meaning someone who looks like Stu on the right, with not only very large muscles but also so little body fat that individual muscle fibers and some veins are visible?

No, it was removed and I got a warning. I didn't pay attention and the photo I linked had an erection which isn't allowed to be embedded into thread here. Here's a replacement photo suitable for this site.

I'm always confused by the "bodybuilder" category since some people seem to use it to mean anyone who's particularly muscular and other people reserve it for people who have a physique that would qualify them to enter a bodybuilder contest. Here's a photo of Stu of Sean Cody fame. The left shows a muscular man that surely "built his body," but the right is him after quitting porn and entering the world of bodybuilding competition. I actually find the image on the left more appealing, but I know that some people are more interested in physiques as shown on the right. There are guys with builds similar to Stu in his Sean Cody days who are advertising currently on Rent.men in San Francisco (though maybe no one as cute as him!), but there isn't anyone who looks like Stu on the right.

I get the joke, but I think it's based on a very distorted impression of what Craigslist offered. At least in San Francisco, there were a lot of gay men who would dip their toes into the escort and/or erotic massage pool. I still vetted guys I hired and I took precautions when meeting men for the first time. Even though I occasionally ended up with providers who misrepresented what they were offering, I had far more successes than failures. I never found myself in a position where I felt concerned for my physical safety.

When I was a young adult (40+ years ago), "trade" definitely meant either a straight identified guy who is nonetheless having sex with men or a hyper masculine gay guy. Watching Ru Paul's Drag Race, and looking at the Wikipedia definition page, it's clear that usage of this term has evolved to now mean basically someone who is particularly sexually desirable. The queens on RPDR will say who the "trade of the season" is and sometimes it's a guy who looks particularly masculine out of drag but other times it's a very cute, somewhat feminine looking guy.

One of the scams that seems most common is that someone different shows up and either (a) the client goes through with the appointment anyway because they deem the guy to be "good enough" or (b) if the person advertising is really just a thief, the guy demands money in a threatening manner, so the client turns over the fee and gets nothing in return other than intimidation. Sadly, just because someone pays for an ad on Rent.men doesn't mean they aren't a thief. A thief isn't going to keep the same ad running a long time, but think about how easy it would be for someone to advertise for a month and rob people who contacted him, and then do it again using a different name, different photos and a different "burner" phone number. It's safe to say that most men who are ripped off in this way aren't going to go to authorities because of the nature of the meeting, so the thief can get away with this with a very low chance of getting caught.

Assuming your post was made in earnest, I'd suggest canceling whatever appointment you made and then taking a step back. I'm not saying that hiring someone for your first-time experience is the wrong thing to do, but I think it might be in your case. You wrote that you are expecting this to be the only sexual experience of your entire life. Why? Might it not be more helpful for you in the long run to figure out why you have been avoiding potential intimacy your entire life so far when it seems like that's something you want? If you want to go ahead with hiring someone to be your first and potentially only experience, I suggest that it makes more sense to hire someone where their legitimacy is not in question. Find someone who has been discussed here whose looks you like, and reach out to him; or, second best (because I think reviews on advertising sites like Rent.men can more often be fake), reach out to someone with a history of positive reviews elsewhere.

I'm not sure that you, as a client, are in the position to figure this out unless it's so blatantly obvious that even a moron would know something is wrong. For example, some escorts in the past worked for a well known agency (now defunct) which took a percentage of their fee in exchange for handling inquiries, making referrals, and scheduling appointments. This was a voluntary arrangement from what I could tell (I never saw anyone suggest that these men were somehow coerced into working for the agency). I never quite understood why that agency was so popular in its geographic area since I'd rather communicate directly with a provider and I don't know why a provider would want to give up part of his earnings for the services being offered by the agency, but it obviously worked for some guys. This is entirely different than someone who meets a young homeless person, sets them up with their first appointment, and then controls their bookings and cash flow. I once hired a guy with very limited English language skills, something I did not know until I showed up for my appointment with him. Obviously someone else communicated with me in advance to arrange the appointment and didn't let me know they weren't actually the provider I was seeking to hire. The appointment turned out alright and I'm pretty sure the guy wasn't being exploited/trafficked; he probably just had someone else handling bookings from him due to his language issues (not speaking English fluently in a country with mostly monolingual English speakers).

I think the truth is in the middle. No, you didn't bully FaustOust, but I think you may be off base in your criticism. He's only been a member of the site since May 22, so it's entirely possible that his original post was not knowingly pot-stirring but genuinely naive. Unless you have good reason to believe that FaustOust has actually been around a lot longer under a different name (which I know has happened with some forum members), I think that taking his questions at face value is the right thing to do.

Pretty sure this is the same guy who worked with Will (TantraWill or whatever name he used) years ago in San Francisco. I remember reading good things about them. I tried to connect with Will but he never replied to either my messages or texts. Kev should update the age in his profile since it isn't flattering to claim to be an age which he's clearly not. It's one thing to age shave a bit if you can pull it off, but just glancing at his current photos and the age my first thought is that for someone in his early forties he looks old. That isn't exactly great marketing.

I hired more off Craigslist and Adam4Adam than Rentboy or, later, Rentmen. I hired a lot of guys who never ended up advertising on any of the major escort or masseur websites.