bostonman

46 minutes ago, jeezifonly said:

Gay men + sarcasm = comedy gold. Usually. W&G as proof.

But when you’re posting a selection on YouTube or other platform, a more critical eye ought to be used.

I also simply question if "converting children" is really right for this much comedy anyway. Had the song maybe used it once, perhaps. But as a recurring lyric all the way through, it just seems very distasteful. (Something about "converting straights" in general might have gone over a little better - but I'm not sure that targeting the kids - especially/even for a laugh - is really right.) I'm not usually against edgy humor in general, but...

1 minute ago, tassojunior said:

But it is an unfounded prejudice that will never be gotten rid of by not confronting it. 

Yes. But is a song like this the way to do that??? 

Just now, tassojunior said:

gay does not mean pedophile.  

No, it doesn't. WE know that. But a lot of people don't, or won't get rid of their biases to accept that.

I agree with the majority of the posters here - though the "joke" may be well-intended, it doesn't come off well at all. And the right-wingers have no sense of humor anyway, so they certainly wouldn't get it even if they wanted to. There may be something darkly satirical intended here, but it's really not funny. 

With the constant mention of children, I think it does wind up sounding incredibly creepy. It's too blatant for its own good. (Compare this to Rodgers and Hammerstein's classic "You've Got To Be Carefully Taught" which does have a lyric about "before you are 6 or 7 or 8" but since the song doesn't focus on age otherwise, and doesn't play on a terrible stereotype involving converting kids' sexuality, it lands differently.)

To be honest, had I been asked to sing this, I would have said no and possibly have even left the group. It's way tone deaf, no matter what the intention. Shame on the writers, and the SF Gay Men's Chorus. It might be the kind of song that would be funny sung (and heard) by drunk queens at a gay piano bar (let's talk about stereotypes, huh?), but they never should have released it publicly. 

I haven't met him yet - we're making plans to meet a few weeks from now. It seems like he has very limited time this coming week. 

There's this guy in Boston. I haven't met him, but he's on my list...;-)

https://rentmen.eu/thewildwizard

5 minutes ago, CuriousByNature said:

Possibly a double-reeded woodwind

Well, a bassoon already is, though. :-)

5 hours ago, davebk said:

Here's my regular "if you know a provider who really gets into this" post.  I know some will do it, but I always like to know if it is something the provider actually personally gets into and enjoys for his own sake.

I met up a few times with a Boston area guy who was a great spitter, but I know he's retired now. But he was awesome and really seemed to enjoy getting things really wet and messy. I remember how he'd drench my face with his spit then rub his hands around in it - OMG that was so hot. :-)

I haven't done any spit play since the pandemic, though I'm now fully vaccinated - and would love to find a guy ready to let loose, lol. 

And I agree - such a huge difference between someone willing to do it and someone who really fucking into it. 

4 minutes ago, g56whiz said:

Last year I spent months in a hospital bed drooling over Appleby ads on TV while only getting hospital gruel three times a day. Can’t watch them anymore without remembering my frustration. 

I can now officially say that I am sick to death of the Welcome Back Kotter and Cheers theme songs. They really need to find something else, fast. 

Is he a new kind of musical instrument? 

7 hours ago, TruthBTold said:

They make the time.   😉

 

Do they even have time for "making time"?? 

His ad text shares quite a bit with the guy in this ad: https://rentmen.eu/LeoGallardo - who claims to be a 23 year old grad student (who is also currently in Boston). The pics in the ads are not the same, and I'm not sure that it is indeed the same guy, but something does seem fishy here...

I suppose it all depends on the encounter as well. If it's an escort who's just expecting anonymous fucking, so to speak, I suppose the less said the better (and his ad text would probably reflect that). But for an escort who takes the time in his ad to describe himself in detail (including real-life personal interests, etc), I would tend to think a friendly message would not only be welcome, but hoped for. So I guess I overestimated him? Meh...

Just now, lonely_john said:

The message above is just perfect. Below is the tricky part that might be sending providers away.

 

The scenario description was my 2nd message, deliberately written to hope to create more conversation, as I didn't get anything but a number in the first response. It doesn't seem as if it sent him away (as he told me that the scenario would be "do able" [sic]), but clearly it didn't get much more of a response than my first message. 

Honestly, I feel like I'm being picked apart here much more than any one needs to. It seems the guy just doesn't like to converse through text. So be it. it's just disappointing, that's all. 

3 hours ago, RadioRob said:

What are you exactly searching for?

Now there's a universal life question if I've ever heard one...

8 hours ago, lonely_john said:

@bostonman I've read in other threads that providers are particularly averse to long detailed chats and descriptions of scenarios because those are typical of time wasters. You are not one but the similarity in your way of communication is probably making them wary of you, hence giving these laconic responses.

I always assume that on any given day they are talking to several people not just me. So I send direct, brief, concise messages to get faster, specific responses. I also don't mind receiving an answer with 3 digits because that gives me an indication if the meeting will happen or not, before discussing hypothetical scenarios.

I see that providers' attitudes change after meeting because you're no longer a prospect. If you want to book again they will be more engaged in conversation and discussion of scenarios because they know you are real and of course they want to make another sale.

Usually an initial message from me might go something like this. "Hi - my name's XXX, I'm XX years old, and I really like your ad. I'm wondering what your rates may be, and hope to set up some time to meet you. I see that you're into XXX, which is great, because I'm really into that. Hope to talk to you."

If a message like that is a turn-off (and it seems that most of the time it is just fine), I'd rather just stop hiring. 

1 hour ago, Kevin Slater said:

If I were to spend 20 hours waxing poetic on text threads with prospective clients, I might gain one booking.  Simply not worth my time.  Those who are actually ready to book seem to appreciate directness, and we can be wonderfully engaged during the actual session.

Kevin Slater

Being direct is one thing, seeming curt is another. 

The difference between a direct but personable "Hey, thanks for the message - my rate is $200, and I'd be glad to meet you when I get to Boston" and a merely curt "200" is a big one. I treat my clients in my line of work with at very least that much respect, and I don't have all day to type either. Somehow, Kevin, I very much doubt that you simply bark a figure at a prospective client without saying anything else. 

One thing I always value in an escort profile is a decently written description that gives me a possible insight into the guy's personality as well as his attributes. And if a guy takes the time to sound human and friendly in his ad, I'm always hopeful that our initial online banter will feel the same - and often it does. 

So - I saw an ad on RM that I liked - nice ad text, as well as interests that drew me in and pics that I liked. I also was able to find out his true identity, and he seems like a really interesting guy. 

I sent him a message on RM, with a friendly introduction in turn, and asking about his rates. When he replied back, it was nothing but a 3-digit number representing his fee. No "hi there" or anything else in response. Just the number. 

I wrote back again, mentioning something else in his ad that gave us a real-life interest in common, and also described a scenario I was interested in exploring with him. His response this morning - "Ok. Sounds do able." [sic]. That's it. 

He sounds like a bot. I'm not necessarily asking for a love letter in his reply, but something even slightly friendlier would have been nice. To quote Cy Coleman, "I can't make love to a shadow," and I feel like I don't want to wait to meet him for his humanity to appear. The monosyllabic thing just turns me off. So I don't think I'm going to pursue meeting him after all, if he can't even take a second to say a friendly hello. I wouldn't want to hire him only to find out that he's a washout in person too.

Has anyone else had similar experiences - where you would have expected a guy to be a bit more gregarious based on his ad text, and yet he just can't communicate at all? 

I just noticed that this guy is coming to Boston in a few weeks. (He gives the name "Dantheman" in his contact info, but he does NOT seem to be the same "Danthemann," with 2 n's, that's been discussed out here before.)

Wondering if anyone has any info on him.

https://rentmen.eu/Straightfeetguy

13 hours ago, dcguy20 said:

Hate the Liberty Wet Teddy Bears guy. 

Car insurance commercial with the creepy singing hood ornament. 

The Volvo commercial which featured "The Parents" song by Pete Seeger.  I couldn't reach for the mute button fast enough every time that frigging song started

Agreed on the wet teddy bears (wtf??) and frankly all the Liberty ads (Doug and his stupid emu are really wearing thin...) - and the creepy singing hood ornament is, well, creepy. 

The Pete Seeger song ("Hard Times In The Mill") is a classic, and I don't mind hearing it. But to me it doesn't make any sense in relation to the ad. The song *seems* to want to tell us (in this context) that the couple HATES parenthood, comparing it to the drudgery of working at a mill. If so, they really should give their kids to more worthy parents. 

Just now, lonely_john said:

What age did he start in order to become a porn star by age 19? The new generation doesn't run, they fly!

Well, if we're to trust jockluver's account, and the ID he used was legit, he's at least 21 now, not 19 or 20 as his ads say. Though yeah, that timeline is still crazy in terms of the porn. I guess he was just in the "right" place at the "right" time?? 

Just now, Jostar said:

He used to do helix porn back then

Back then? Couldn't have been that long ago...

Just now, wsc said:

It looks like you could have this kid for lunch money.

Ha! I think it would be a pretty expensive lunch...not quite high school cafeteria fare...

5 minutes ago, Autumnal said:

He looks WAY under age. Not worth the risk of a long jail sentence in MHO!

Agreed. 

Just the kind of comments I expected, lol.