maninsoma

I think I've done this only once. As background, I will say that I have paid the full amount when I've simply been disappointed and also when I've been satisfied but the escort cut the time short. The one time I paid less than agreed upon involved this situation: I arrived on time and the escort had me walking around his neighborhood killing time because he wasn't ready. When he was finally supposedly ready, I was invited inside but then he spent five minutes smoking pot before we began. We started our session and I wasn't 100% clean down there, though I would quantify the "accident" as exceedingly small (nothing visible on his sheets). The guy had an exaggerated response, ran to the bathroom without saying anything other than that I wasn't clean, and then spent over 10 minutes in the bathroom. He came out fully clothed and told me to pay him and leave. It's been years, but I'd say we spent maybe 10 minutes at most in bed. I thought I was being generous when I gave him half of the agreed upon fee. He got upset, but I reminded him that he wasted my time by not being ready on time and that he could have handled the situation by returning to bed with me if he wanted to earn his fee. I could have understood him not wanting to try to fuck me again, but he behaved as if I was a leper. I could tell he was still angry, but so was I. I told him he should consider himself lucky he got paid what he did considering the poor job he did. In retrospect, I could have just paid him the full fee to avoid confrontation but I really did view his behavior as beyond the pale.

My experience with the forum: An escort I hired in 2000 told me about Hooboy's site and asked me to submit a review, which I did. I appreciated being able to read reviews as well as discussions about providers. Over the years I have participated in a few other forums as well, and like most forums I simply ignore the vast majority of what gets posted here -- not because I think the subjects are invalid but simply because they aren't pertinent to me. For example, I'm unlikely to read a thread discussing someone who doesn't work in my area unless that person is also known from porn and I'm curious what others have to say about him. I've seen some people come and go. Sometimes it's clear why some people leave, but sometimes I find myself wondering whatever happened to certain people. Then again, I think I took a multi-year break from this site several years ago; I don't even think my current forum name is the one I used when I first signed up. I've appreciated the intelligence and/or sense of humor of some forum members and found some others irritating beyond belief. Thankfully there is an ignore list, though I confess I sometimes unhide posts from people I've ignored simply to gaze at their current drama.

I certainly am not defending Evangelical anti-sex propaganda, but from the sidelines it really does seem curious to me that a company that brings in as much money as OnlyFans does isn't able to better moderate content. They don't have the money to hire people to (a) review evidence of signed consent of all participants in the videos prior to posting and (b) review evidence that said people are of legal age to consent? I simply don't think that's true. Maybe the site owners don't want to spend their money on this, and maybe my understanding of their profit is wrong -- i.e., maybe most of the 20% they collect goes to other expenses. If that's the case, then they can change the split to something else that brings in enough revenue to hire staff for verification work. I say this because I do think it's important that a site like OnlyFans prevents itself from aiding people who would exploit others sexually for monetary gain and profiting themselves along the way. I don't think it's right-wing to think this way.

Is he older than when you met him 20 years ago? According to his ad, he is 39. I'm pretty sure that's the age he's been since I first noticed his ad 20+ years ago. Note that I do think men who are 60 can be sexy and I have no idea what Jake looks like today, but I just think it's beyond reason to shave not just years but decades from one's age.

I am attracted to a variety of types, and one of those is twinks. The danger in being attracted to twinks is that as they age, a lot of them make choices that make them less attractive to me and one of those choices is to get a lot of tattoos. I realize that they don't exist to conform to my idea of what's sexually attractive, so if someone changes his looks enough that I no longer find him attractive I just stop watching his porn. I'm sure there are others with the exact opposite taste where they don't like particularly like the clean-cut look at any age and would rather someone look rougher around the edges.

I figured there had to be a connection between the two of them since they both visit San Francisco frequently at the exact same time.

Discussed more than once. Just type "miguel_andres" in the search and you'll find the threads that mention him. Here is one of them:

I recall reading here that some people had appointments with him and when they showed up at his location he wasn't there (or didn't answer the door). That alone made me never attempt to book him even though I think he's incredibly hot. I'm guessing that he must provide a good experience for some clients or he wouldn't still be in this business.

They'll be lucky to pull in 10% of that next year if they really do pull all explicit content. That being said, I've already noticed that some content providers post naked photos in their feeds and then either send out sex videos in messages or offer them for sale for an additional amount. I don't mind the former so much, though it seems like only relatively short videos are sent out via messages. As for the latter, I've never taken a provider up on such an offer. If I'm already paying to subscribe to someone's feed, I'm not paying them more just to see a single video. There's no way I'd pay what seems to be the going rate for a single video, either -- $10 for one sex scene? No, thanks.

Finally -- and not surprising it's from the BBC versus a U.S. news source -- I understand what's happening. In a nutshell, there is just so much content posted to OnlyFans that they haven't been doing a good job of removing sexually explicit materials featuring minors or others being sexually exploited. They are not only under pressure from payment processors but also are facing increased government scrutiny. Too bad that they cannot figure out a way to ensure that all content posted is from consenting adults and then allow that content to continue to be posted, but I guess it's easier and safer for them to simply keep their millions and effectively close up shop. (I know they aren't officially ending the business, but I doubt many content creators or customers are going to stick around once sexually explicit videos are banned.)

I haven't noticed a significant increase in visitors listed on Rentmen. Filtering San Francisco ads to just visitors leaves 3 pages of listings, and many of those are for upcoming trips and some of them are somewhat local guys who, for whatever reason, have their ads set up so they are included when one filters to visitors. To answer the question, though, I don't think anything specific is happening in the area this weekend.

I get needing to do something if they are having difficulty with payment processors, but why do they need "institutional investors?" They are supposedly on a path to gross $12.5 billion next year. I've never run a business like this, but if one is pulling in that kind of cash and what one needs to provide is simply the platform for others to post the content that's actually being sold I don't understand why they would need outside investment to keep the business running.

Must be a browser issue, or maybe it was just a temporary glitch. I am not logged in and Position shows for me in Firefox.

I thought he lived in San Jose. I've certainly seen an ad for him in that area quite a lot. I agree with everything else you wrote. Sounds like Mike is on top of his game if he can manage his schedule and not accept requests where he will ultimately let other people down by either having to cancel or not providing his best. I give props to any escort who at least has the business acumen to give a short reply indicating they aren't available because they are booked versus just ignoring requests, particularly when they have an active ad that indicates they are visiting an area and available.

Thanks for bringing back an amusing but also off-putting memory for me. Back when I went to a chain gym versus just using the gym in my condo complex, there was a middle aged guy who was in good shape but was far from an Adonis. He liked to wear provocative clothing, however, and approached almost every male at the gym at some point. Some of it was clearly sexually motivated (he managed to give a brief shoulder/neck massage to a very cute guy one morning), but I also think he was just a chatterbox and outgoing so it was natural for him to want to talk with everyone. Though he never tried to sell anything to me (maybe because it was obvious I wasn't a likely customer), I also heard that he was working a side hustle of attempting to sell "supplements" to bodybuilders.

I'm sure that part of what gets me going is Cade's thickness. Not that the rest of him fails to impress, but he sure does have a pretty cock.

I don't know specifically what it is about him, but Cade is one of my favorite current porn performers. I wish I had hired him before he became "famous" via porn because I assume he was much more affordable then.

Why would any escort divulge here that he doesn't like some of his clients, leaving the forum members who are that escort's clients to wonder if they are among the disliked?

I think he meant "San Fransisco" which should be "San Francisco."

Looks like a new ad. Phone number would indicate that he either lives or used to live in the Los Angeles area, but the ad says San Francisco is his location. Three cute photos but not much else to go on. https://rentmasseur.com/Bodywhisperer

I think you missed my point, which is that it's logical to assume that both porn performers and escorts are likely to have a lot of sex partners. I wouldn't assume that an escort is less "overused" (your word, not mine) than a porn performer.

I understand that point of view, even if the point about being "overused" really isn't logical since a successful escort is going to have also been with a lot of other people. It just isn't in front of a camera so you don't know who the other people are or what kind of sex the escort had with them.

Click the Reviews link at the top of this forum and you will be taken to https://www.companyofmen.org/escorts/ . Not formatted the same as the legacy site, but I think the information is still there.

This is Jason Momoa in his Baywatch days. I can get the interest in him when he looked like this, but not his current disheveled look.

Is there a certain "type" you are looking for in terms of age, build, etc?