NikoLeto

Another chart I stumbled on that tells the story of Sweden in a particularly clear way.
 
Obviously whoever did that chart did it to make a point about Sweden. If you added Spain or Italy or France, it would look very different.
 
That said, the headline on Reddit that I found that chart in said this:
 
Sweden shows the world what "herd immunity" looks like: Hint: They're fucked
 
I don't disagree with that sentiment. This is a global science experiment in which nobody really wants to be the control group.
 
Note that the chart is a month old. What has happened since then actually reinforces the point.
 
Sweden is now at 3,743 deaths - even further ahead of the pack. Of that group of nations in the chart, Poland is now in second place, at 948 deaths. Denmark is at 551 deaths. Finland is at 301. Norway has 233 deaths. The most amazing example is South Korea. They have barely moved in the last month. They have 263 deaths.
 
What makes South Korea an even more inspiring example is that they have a population five times greater than Sweden. So adjusted for that, South Korea has 5 deaths per million citizens. Sweden has 371 deaths per millions citizens.
 
Anders Tegnell was 100 % wrong about how Sweden was going to stop the mass death of senior citizens. The "let's try herd immunity" approach actually induced the mass death of seniors in Sweden, by allowing the virus to run amok. I suspect he is also wrong about "herd immunity". He says that Sweden will achieve it relatively soon. Except, there is no evidence that suggests even a substantial minority of Swedes has been infected. Or that prior infection confers future immunity for any known period of time. So all we know for a fact is that the plan Sweden is following clearly results in a maximization of death, especially for senior citizens. Who wants that?
 
Meanwhile, there is no evidence that Sweden's economy fared better than others that endured harsher lock downs. That's because it makes sense that this virus is what is causing the economy to suffer. The lock downs are simply a response to it.
 
What seems unfathomable to me is that the approach that clearly prevents the most death is not always the most popular one. The closest brush I've has with death so far is one of my brothers, who I spent a year helping care for as he died of pancreatic cancer. If there were two treatments for pancreatic cancer, and one led to a 50 % reduction in death and the other led to no reduction in death, it's an easy guess which one him and his wife would choose. Right?
 
So the way I look at these numbers is that it is actually a pretty simple idea, even though it takes a huge amount of unity and discipline to implement it. The countries that have reduced or prevented death the most had one basic thing in common: they decided to stop death. Other countries, like Sweden, that have suffered the most deaths just have not tried. In the case of Sweden, they actually decided it was better to let things run their course.
 
There are, of course, big exceptions: France, Italy, and Spain in particular. They got hit hard, and have death rates relative to their population that are as much as double Sweden's. That said, they have also proved the point about how this is a choice that every country will make. They initiated some of the harshest lock downs. In some cases, you had to fill out a piece of paper just to leave your home for a month or so. The message was clear, and intensely enforced. And in every case, they cut the number of cases and the number of deaths by somewhere in the ballpark of 90 percent. Who would not want 90 less death?
 
Germany was never as bad off as its neighbors, because it was ahead of the curve. They seem to have the most aggressive testing, tracing, and treatment program of any of the large EU countries. Which is probably one of reasons why they've suffered a relatively low 98 deaths per 1 million residents, which is roughly one quarter of what Sweden has endured.
 
The final thing is that the countries that have really excelled at testing, tracing, and treating actually have not had to endure the kind of lock downs other countries have. So you can argue that Iceland or South Korea are excellence by exception, or islands, or whatever. But the whole point of the lock down was to quickly suppress the virus, so that after the lock down it could be controlled. In the countries that moved quickly, broad lock downs were not even needed. Or they were over quicker, as the nation got some sort of system to control the virus in place. And, at least so far, those systems are mostly working.
 
So those countries can have their economy, and their health, too. And the problem with that is .............?
 
I'm hopeful that some version of this will work in the United States.
 
The states that have really been off the chart in the US are New York - 1,472 deaths per million - and New Jersey - 1,192. They both had the misfortune of being the control group in the US. They got to be our herd immunity experiment, even though they obviously did not choose that experiment.
 
I honestly think it was just bad luck. It seems like it could have been California, where we now know the first deaths from COVID-19 actually occurred. That said, it may have helped that California was also ahead of the curve on shutting the state down temporarily to suppress the virus's spread early on.
 
The four other states that I think will be interesting to watch, with the number of deaths per million residents, are: Ohio (147 deaths per million), Florida (95 deaths per million), California (87 deaths per million), and Texas (48 deaths per million). Note that all four of those states are right in the ballpark of Germany. Meaning they have way fewer deaths than what happened in Spain or France or Italy, and fewer still than what happened in New York or New Jersey. This is good news. This is strong reason for hope.
 
I'll save any political comments for the political forum. But the reason I even mention politics here is I think that this is fundamentally pretty apolitical. These states all have very different political cultures. But the outcomes are still roughly equivalent. Compared to New York or New Jersey, the number of deaths have been small. Relative to population, Texas has had 30 times fewer deaths than New York.
 
Here's another interesting and relevant statistic about those four states. In all for cases, they have had no more death than than have from the season flu. Florida (2000 flu deaths a year) and Ohio (1700 flu deaths a year) have both has just about the same number of deaths from COVID-19 every year. California and Texas are still well below the number of flu deaths they experience every year. Of course, that's apples to oranges. W're only two months into the COVID-19 pandemic. And it took extraordinary lock down to avoid what happened in New York and New Jersey, which have both had about 10 times as many deaths as they suffer from the flu every year. My point is that I don't think we have to question why people approve of these lock downs. 90 % less death is always a good thing to most people.
 
I see this as having way more to do with human nature than politics. The simple fact about human nature is that people don't want to die. Nobody likes the idea of herd immunity when they are the part of the herd most likely to end up dead. And the best theory I've read about why Florida has fared relatively well is that it is chock full of well educated and resourceful senior citizens who simply would rather not die.
 
In each of those four states, somewhere right around 2 to 3 % of the population has been tested for COVID-19. I don't read or hear anything about resistance to testing or tracing here in California, where the state is well into building an army of contact tracers. The people I know don't particularly want to leave their home, and would be perfectly happy to be tested. Nobody I know wants to gamble on herd immunity. They'll take the vaccine as soon as possible, or a mask and social distancing for now, thank you.
 
So the notion that what is happening in Sweden is somehow inevitable seems like: 1) nonsense, and 2) a veiled death wish which is unpopular in most places, because it is contrary to human nature. Maybe we will all learn, sadly, that the patience of people in all these other countries that seem to have beat the virus, and are going back to work, has just worn out. Maybe the virus will beat us in the long run.
 
In the short run, it sure seems like other nations are beating the virus where ever they have actually tried. As a happy bonus, it also seems like beating the virus is actually better for the economy.

Sweden took the correct + courageous science-based approach in dealing with the SARS-CoV-2 virus ?
 
Those of us not brainwashed by our hysterical "news" media have been saying it since day 1.

Really? So 20,000 to 30,000 new infections a day and 1,000 to 2,000 deaths due to COVID-19 EVERY DAY - mostly of people over 65 - is just the new normal? Is this now the idea?

 
Or, to quote Dr. Fauci, "death lags."
 
So there were very few deaths in New York from COVID-19 around the middle of March, when the virus was silently spreading. Since then, New York became a morgue. The mass death and collapse of hospitals has subsided. But the economy of New York won't reopen quickly or effectively. That's regardless of any government plan. It's simply because seniors don't wish to die. They won't go to malls, or restaurants, or plays. Funny how that works, isn't it?
 
So the idea that we can judge the impact of a plane crash before it occurs - or simply pretend that it won't occur - is an interesting and magical idea. Under normal circumstances, we board planes everyday because everybody knows the chances of dying in a plane crash are almost zero.
 
There is a lot of magical thinking about COVID-19 still. Most people get that the chances of dying of COVID-19 are way worse than dying in a plane crash. Especially if you are over 65. Some people still haven't grasped this idea, though.
 
It is magic to think that a month from now, the virus won't have the same impact it did two months ago. It will. How broadly it spreads will be a matter of how the economy is reopened, and what precautions people take.
 
That said, the US is committed to not having a simple and effective national plan: TEST, TRACE, TREAT. Some states, like California and Ohio, are aggressively ramping up test, trace, treat. Others are not. It's pretty likely that the states that ignore what has been effective everywhere else in the world are simply asking to be morgues. That's the thing about a viruses like COVID-19. They are very scientific, and mathematical. They are smart little buggers.
 
Here's some interesting comparisons of other countries that have reopened, in terms of the numbers of deaths reported yesterday:
 
Australia - 1 death
Austria - 1 death
China - 7 deaths
France - 131 deaths
Iceland - 0 deaths
Japan - 5 deaths
South Korea - 1 death
Spain - 59 deaths
Thailand - 0 deaths
 
Meanwhile, the United States had 1,003 deaths yesterday. That's five times more than all those other countries combined. Which of these ones is not like the others?
 
The more important question is: WHY is the United States not like the others? The basic answer is simple: test, trace, treat. Other countries are using it nationally, and aggressively. The US is not. They are stopping the mass death of seniors citizens. We are not. It's pretty much that simple.
 
In past iterations of this discussion about numbers, what has been effective in reducing mass senior citizen death in every other nations has been dismissed: they are an island, or not an island; they are a big country, or a small country; they are Madagscar, or they are not Madagscar.
 
So @Unicorn and @bigjoey will believe whatever they wish to believe. But all these countries embraced variations of the same idea: shut down, then reopen with a very aggressive program of test, trace, and treat in place. So far, it is mostly working everywhere it has been tried.
 
Since it has not really been tried in the US yet, that would explain why we are losing 1000 people a day, mainly seniors. The scientists are all saying that that 1000 will go back up to 2000 and higher when the impact of reopening occurs weeks from now. Time will tell.
 
Most states have not met the minimal guidelines set by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx. Those two people are among the most highly respected experts in the country. Yet one wonders why their ideas aren't as respected. especially since their ideas seem to actually be working everywhere except the US. Maybe this is part of the multivariate "American personality" model @bigjoey posited. Does this have something to do with "the American personality", @bigjoey? I guess I don't understand that part of the American personality. Please explain.
 
I included France and Spain as two examples of countries that were hit by the mass slaughter first, and were also morgues not that long ago. They are two examples of how countries have used test, trace, treat to stop the mass death of senior citizens. Which, to me, seems like a pretty awesome goal. Why should we want 1000 or 2000 seniors to die of COVID-19 in the US every day? It makes no sense to me. None whatsoever.
 
Spain went from a peak of 8,271 new cases in one day in late March to 469 new cases yesterday. That's a 94 % reduction.
 
France went from a peak of 17,355 new cases in one day in early April to 358 new cases yesterday. That's a 98 % reduction.
 
The US went from a peak of 38,958 new cases in late April to 22,630 yesterday. That's a 42 % reduction. Again, which of these countries is not like the other? And why? The blunt instrument of a national shutdown stopped the bleeding, like it was supposed to and like it did everywhere. Other countries seem to have figured out how to actually contain the virus, drive the numbers down to next to nothing, and stop the mass death of senior citizens. In the US, we haven't really tried that yet.
 
This is as good as it gets for the US, probably. Because deaths lags. So we know that the 190 deaths that occurred in France and Spain yesterday will be lower a month from now. That's because the number of new daily cases has been dramatically cut by an effective nationwide test, trace, treat program in countries that were morgues.
 
The same thing could probably work in the US - notwithstanding "the American personality" - if it were tried. Why aren't we trying it? I don't get it. It seems like we are saying we would prefer the plane to be able to crash. Again, time will tell.
 
California and Ohio and some other states are ramping up small armies of contact tracers. So maybe what works in China, or Austria, or Iceland, or Australia could work here, of course. Or maybe somehow mass senior citizen death is just in the cards in the US. Like I said, time will tell.

Quentin Gainz

Tim Kruger

Nick Milani
 

 
Griffin Barrows
 

Just Block them you have business to run just like everyone else.. It was a time slot that somebody else could had used your service(s)
This has happened me soo many times I lost count.... If they don't Show up and don't let you know by CELL / TEXT / EMAIL etc... then don't bother with them again.... That's why I keep a list of Emails / Phone Numbers with dates when they don't show.... If in the Future they contact me again I tell them sorry no thanks... I tell them you made an appt in the past and never showed... Some people write back say they understand..
 
We have to understand things happens but to be RUDE and not let you know they can't make it with no communications is a big super BLOCK..

For what it’s worth, I find it easier, and less emotionally risky, to treat every new escort experience as if it were a physical therapy appointment with a new PT, or a workout with a new trainer. Then it becomes an exercise of his pleasure-giving skills, and of my capacity to respond, and give pleasure back. I don’t pay my PT or my trainer to be my friends — but if they’re doing their job, and I’m doing mine, then there’s a chance that friendship can grow out of mutual respect, even if the relationship remains an essentially commercial one.

Now don't go hating me or putting a bomb after my comment just hear me out. I'm old I've been fucking for 40 years so I know what I'm talking about.
 
Muscle hung escorts suffer from extreme narcissism. I've been in gyms all my life and no matter how beyond nice a bodybuilder is don't ever tell him he should work on his abs, you'll get killed. Its worse for muscle hung gays who are fukn worshiped by everone on apps social. Problem with muscle hung male escorts is that they're not ready to face up to the fact that they are whores, which is the most feminine career anybody can take. So to keep their male ego intact, they will say it's okay because they do not btm.
 
Here is a good example and I have many of them. This rentmen muscle hung guy visited Montreal lately. In his description he said "ask me" for safe sex and "ask me" for position, which I did. I messaged him that I was looking for muscle bareback sub-bottom that kiss rim and suck and here is his reply: "?? peace nigga"... This guy could not phantom that anybody could expect something like that from someone as hot as him.

U know me, dont give a shit about tops and its a lot easier for a top to bb than a btm. Where the hell can i find bb musc btms.
Stats, easy, just fake gps yourself in the middle of US and do search by distance

In the US, on rentmen (including Toronto and Montreal)


3700 escorts

17% bareback ("anthing goes")
27% tops
23% vers top
29% vers
9% vers btm
4% btm
(8% ask me, but who cares) 


1200 muscle escorts

16% bareback ( "anything goes")
35% tops
27% vers top
22% vers
5% vers btm
1% btm
(10% "ask me" but who cares) 
.
 
 
 

funny thing to say but.....whatever
 
https://rent.men/nikoleto

For me, it completely depends on the aesthetic of the guy. A guy that swings more toward twink status, I want him to have less hair. Muscle guys and daddies, I need a thick pelt I can nuzzle against.
 
Myself? I wish I had more hair. I have, what I consider, a weird configuration of hair on the bottom 75% of my pecs, a little bit around the naval, a small bit around my actual hole, and then the "normal" spots (crotch, legs, forearms).

Hairy. The hairier the better.

Both! Each suit different people. Some men look good with hair while other's don't. ???‍?

I have a grindr ad that I use to hire that doesn’t have any face pics. A very sexy guy that I was friendly with in high school messaged it.
 
I said I’d love to help him out, but that we were acquainted through school, and I felt bad knowing his identity while he didn’t know mine as I prefer anonymity when I hire.
 
He convinced himself that I was a teacher of his and I let him believe it.
 
He is a night attendant at a group home and invited me over at midnight after everyone was asleep. He immediately recognized me, said that the mystery of this was so hot, and that he was incredibly turned on.
 
We had a fun romp, I paid him, and before I could start my car, he had blocked me from all social media accounts and Grindr. It was still fun, and he definitely kept his sexyness, but I think he’s very scared to be outed, not that I ever would.

That is some incredible choreography. Holy fuck!

Remember that top models make exceptionally good income from modeling and are not going to risk that by being associated with escorting. And that's just as true with most aspiring wanna-bes.
 
However, many of the "models" on social media aren't.
 
And models are often not sexy in person at all. Pretty and sexy are not the same.

Instagram “models” and “fitness professionals” are going to be more inclined to get you to subscribe to their OnlyFans or have you fork up cash for “customized content” rather than meet you for a session. Instagram really isn’t the platform for that, nor is it welcomed, usually. These influencers with huge followings rack up a cute coin doing the bare minimum, alone, at home. One can’t be bothered with a one-on-one unless they really need it.

Start a casual chat catching up with an old friend and drive the conversation to what you want. Tell him he is better looking than hs, ask him how is work, money etc. I would bring up the ad as a last resort.

You are lucky. Just go for it. Don't overanalyse. Message him on insta/fb and see what happens. Be polite but direct. This is my advice.

I should feel bad for the original poster....but I don't. It's all part of running a business. I've noticed that even when Rentman ads expire, you can still contact the person....it just says that the ad has expired.
 
By the way, it cuts both ways. I've had experiences with Rentmen where they cancel at the last minute...and a few never showed up. One guy insisted on 50% up front and then he canceled on me......I did wind up seeing him 5 days later but he was about 4 hours late. He did, however, stay for 5 hours (I paid for 3) so he did make it up.
 
I even had an experience last week where the Rentman texted me several hours before our appointment that his hotel would not allow guests to come up to the rooms and that he didn't see how I would be able to see him. Wasn't sure if this was real....or if he got a better deal and decided to double book me. Whatever......

Considering that most clients want to retain confidentiality, how does a client get this "small deposit" to you if they have not previously met with you and do not know you?
 
Do you realize how much work and trust it takes to get an advance deposit to you? The client must give up his anonymity.
 
I know that I would not send an escort I do not know, an advance "small deposit" or send money via a credit card.
 
Doing such a thing would imply super trust on the part of a client.
 
As to the wedding planner getting 50% in advance for every event, a wedding planner usually works with numerous people and spends days planning a wedding and often pays out money for space rental and employees. Comparing wedding planning to escorting is a stretch too far.

Is the fee the same every month or do you pay for traffic?

True, but that also holds true to providers, as well. I can name three that did that to me in the last couple of weeks. While I was trying to “making a connection” and “confirming the basic essentials”, they ghost me and stop communicating. So, your frustration goes both ways, my dear.

There was an old thread a while ago about meeting someone socially that you'd previously hired. it's happened to me, I did just as you did; let myself be introduced. But I kept wondering if his boyfriend (who was at the social event) knew he escorted. I never asked, I think that'd set off red flags.

I don't know, I feel like because the nature of the job isn't that of an escort, it shouldn't be expected that the masseur will be aroused during an erotic massage. We are human, after all. To me, erotic goes beyond gently touching certain areas, it is more interactive, but doesn't necessarily have to involve the masseur getting hard. It could involve fingers, body contact, simulation, but I wouldn't fault a masseur for offering erotic and not popping a boner. An escort not popping a boner however, whose job it is to penetrate (if hired in an active role) would be an issue for me. But even then, I would still understand to a certain extent that some level of attraction (or Viagra) needs to be involved.