SHOULD we out them?

[best hotel]

tom....and those of you who agree with the opinion he finally articulated...please address rock hard's point about the ethics of a client outing an escort... i wish to learn something

[Guest alanm]

To take RockHard's point a little further.....

 

Often parents and family members of escorts are unaware of their sons'

profession. With search engines like google available, it would be easy to casually ask an escort a few basic questions over several months of appointments and find a way to contact his parents if the client-escort relationship ended badly.

 

Since I use part of my real name as my stage name on this site, it's clear that I could care less about being outed myself. But this is dangerous area for both clients and escorts, who may decide to identify a client publicly or go after an escort.

 

Personally, I do not respect Denver escort Michael Jones for him actions, despite the bad behavior of Ted Haggard. Where do you draw the line? What about a gay priest or minister who quietly opposes gay civil union and marriage just in his own church, rather as a major public figure like Haggard?

[+ Tom Isern]

This thread gets more interesting by the day. best hotel raises the intriguing question of when it would be appropriate to “out” an escort. Remember Jeff Gannon? The right-wing journalist who gained access to the White House with no journalistic credentials, writing against “gay rights,” all the while working as an escort in DC? There’s an example. What do people think? I was happy to see him bite the bullet. Does that mean I believe in outing escorts? I don’t think so.

 

alanm asks: “Where do you draw the line?” That was really the motivating question for me. I never had nor have now any intention of outing anyone. Yet I found myself thinking that Ted Haggard got exactly what he deserved. It was that ambivalence in my thinking which prompted me to write here and throw the question up for debate. I suspect many people here felt the same way about Gannon and Haggard. If you felt as I did, then the question I asked logically follows: “SHOULD we out them?” Those of you who accused me of promoting outing, reread that question (the title of this thread) and note the “SHOULD”—in all capitol letters—that is the very first word.

 

I would like to remind my reasonable critics here that asking ABOUT outing is not the same thing as PROMOTING it. And promoting it IS NOT THE SAME THING as actually DOING it. I would also like to point out that having conflicting thoughts and feelings is part of the human condition. I did not ask this question because I was thinking about outing anyone. I asked it because it presented itself in the news to the entire nation. I asked it because I thought it could lead to intelligent and thoughtful analysis. I appreciate those who have helped with that and I especially appreciate the e-mails I received in support. Thanks guys!

[+ Gar1eth]

In general I would say that no--as a client I don't believe escorts should "out' their gentlemen callers. About the only way I would condone done it is if somehow you knew definitely you would be preventing a murder/severe injury to someone or were preventing child abuse/exploitation.

 

And in the specific case going on right now--I am definitely not a fan of the evangelicals--but remember none of us really know what the Reverend did or didn't do. He has admitted to some indiscretions--but for all we know all he received was an erotic massage or less. In his mindset even less than an erotic massage may be "more".

 

Gareth

[RockHard]

RE: SHOULD we out Tom Isern?

 

"I saw RockHard's post, but I found that his statement is as limp as a dick that even stays limp after taking Viagra.

 

He's comparing two situations that cannot be compared."

 

Actually, Anton, as fabulous as I think you are, I wasn't comparing anything. Due to Isern's persistent and outrageously arrogant behavior on this board, I view any attempt by Tom Isern to engage in serious, reasoned discussion disingenuous.

 

"The preacher is spreading anti-gay sentiments, affecting other's people's lives, spreading hatred, discriminating, condemning other people, while he's doing the same thing as what he's condemning others for. The escort however, does nothing of that kind."

 

Something tells me Tom Isern is not so innocent an escort. (Try replacing the words "The preacher" with Tom Isern.) The only point I was trying to make with my contribution here is to simply say, you reap what you sow.

[D.A.C.]

Anton,"rockhard" judging by the posts he has made obviously lives in a fantasy world.

realize that this insignificant old man "rockhard" <<< ROTFLMFAO, is really deserving of our pity...so humor him.

His fantasys are all the poor thing has.

[Guest alanm]

You are right to remind us that you just raised the question.

 

I have been hiring escorts for a while & believe that escorts and clients have a sixth sense about whom they can trust and not trust.

That sixth sense only comes into play when you are able to get to know the other person. Escorts tell me that it is consistent for a deeply closed person like Haggard to have sex with an escort for three years and never reveal anything about himself, or get to know anything about the escort.

 

Would Jones have spoken up if Haggard had told him how deeply conflicted his life was, yet kept his identity hidden? As we get to know more about Jones, perhaps we'll know if he would have acted differently if he and Haggard got to know each other a little.

[Guest jeffOH]

RE: Interview with Mike Jones

 

Signorile interviews fallen-evangelical-leader Ted Haggard's male hooker

by John in DC - 11/06/2006 01:14:00 PM

from AmericaBlog

 

 

Signorile will be playing the interview on his show at 2pm Eastern - here are some excerpts:

 

The Preacher's Gay Hustler: The Signorile Interview

 

The revelations about Ted Haggard -- the influential evangelical leader who has now admitted to "sexually immoral conduct" and stunningly proclaimed he is a "deceiver and a liar" --- have rocked the Christian right and the Republican party on the eve of mid-term elections. Now, Michael Jones, the gay hustler who brought Haggard to his knees, sits down with Michelangelo Signorile for his first gay media interview.

 

Jones reveals for the first time how he was actually going to wire himself and use hidden cameras - as well as collect DNA - working with the local television news team, to get more evidence to "out" Haggard until the preacher seemed to get scared away. Jones responds to those who've called him a "hero" (and those who've called him some less flattering names), talks about Haggard's sexual fantasies and crystal meth habit, and issues a call to arms to other gay escorts, urging them to "out" clients who might be antigay hypocrites - particularly to those in Washington DC, whose clients are among members of Congress. Are we on the edge of a new gay revolution led by $200-per-hour call boys?

 

Excerpts from the interview, to be broadcast on Sirius Satellite Radio's OutQ, America's gay radio station, on Monday, November 6, 2006 on The Michelangelo Signorile Show, which airs from 2-6 p.m. EST.

Michelangelo Signorile: I'm here with Michael Jones, the man who of course is at the center of enormous controversy. We're in New York City, at the Waldorf-Astoria. He came to New York do the Today show.

 

What was that like flying in just to do the Today show about all of this, and then flying out?

 

Michael Jones: Well, in the last three days I've had three hours of sleep, so I'm exhausted. The whole process has been highly educational for me, but it's grueling.

 

MS: Tell me a bit about how you first met Ted Haggard.

 

MJ: It was approximately three years ago. Got a call from a gentleman who said his name was Art. He wanted to see if we could hook up. At the time I was advertising as an escort in gay publications. I only advertised in gay publications. So if someone was looking for me, they were looking in a gay publication. He said he was from Kansas City and he wanted to hook up. We hooked up at my place. Always at my place. I had never been to a hotel with him.

 

MS: Did he use the term "hook up?" I mean, what did he actually say he wanted to do?

 

MJ: He said he wanted an appointment with me. He came to my apartment. And the clothes came right off. The first time it was pretty much mutual masturbation, then in time oral sex. He was really pretty vanilla. Only once in three years did we try anal sex.

 

MS: Was he a top or bottom? What was he interested in?

 

MJ: When I was on the radio show in Denver, the question was asked: Did you practice safe sex? I said, 'We used a condom once." The talk show host goes, "You mean he wore the condom once?" I said, "Uh, no, I did."

 

MS: What about with oral sex. Was he the passive partner or the active partner?

 

MJ: You know, it kind of went back and forth --- and I can't say he was very good at it.

 

MS: Did he seem like he'd done this before?

 

MJ: I don't know. He didn't appear nervous to me. He was very quiet. Didn't talk much. Liked the lights low. He never was with me for more than an hour. Sometimes it was just 15 or 20 minutes.

 

MS: Did he want companionship or was it all sex?

 

MJ: It was pretty much in and out. Sex, no speaking. Do the thing, and then he left. I could see the street from where I live and I could see he would park a block away and when he would call me he would block the calls, at least in that in the first year. After that first year he started calling me from pay phones and I noticed the area code was Colorado Springs.

 

***

 

MS: And you'd had people who came from Colorado Springs, which is of course the center of evangelical movement, who were involved with the churches?

 

MJ: I can't tell you how many ministers, pastors, priests I've had. It didn't bother me, nothing surprised me. And when I saw that his calls were coming from Colorado Springs I figured he was involved with the church. But I was shocked that this guy, how huge he was, and taking such a risk.

 

MS: You felt that you had to do something before November 7th, if it was going to impact Amendment 43 and the elections.

 

MJ: And I don't know if it's going to change votes at all. I don't know what the outcome will be, it coming out before the election but I Had to point out the hypocrisy, that here is a gentleman enjoying all the benefits of marriage, all the rights and doesn't want two other people of the same sex who love each other to have those same rights and yet he can cheat on his wife.

 

MS: How did you go about reaching out to media?

 

MJ: Two months before it actually came out, I went to this reporter in Denver [at the NBC affiliate, Channel 9] who I respected, and investigative reporter who was well known. I went to her and immediately the station congregated around me. They go, "This is huge, we want this story!" But they go, "We need just a little bit more proof." They actually wanted to see film of him and me together somehow. They wanted some video of some type. And I was prepared to do that. I had video cameras lined up. I was going to hide them in my apartment. But Ted wasn't calling me after that last get together in August. My gut feeling was, with the Foley thing happening, and the election happening, he wanted to lay low.

 

MS: Did he always have an orgasm when he was with you?

 

MJ: Yes.

 

MS: And I guess if you were going to pursue this, to get more evidence, you were going to collect some of that DNA evidence. Was that part of the plan?

 

MJ: Boy, you hit it right on the head.

 

MS: But he all of a sudden wasn't calling you, out of the blue? You would meet once per month, but how often did he call?

 

MJ: Once per month, when he wanted to meet.

 

MS: So August was the last time he called. You would of course need the opportunity in September or October to film him and have more evidence before the election.

 

MJ: Right, and it wasn't happening. So I was listening to Peter Boyles, our big talk show host in Denver. And the subject was gay marriage. And I was hearing all the right wingers calling in and I was getting pissed. I knew I was sitting on this story - it was eating at me. I sent Peter an email and said, if you want a big story I have a big story for you. Well, two days later, they said, "Can you be on the radio at 6 a.m. tomorrow?"

 

I didn't reveal Ted Haggard's name. I wasn't ready to reveal the name. All the callers were calling in and saying I just wanted publicity. Well, when channel 9 heard me on the radio, they wanted the story so bad, they went down to Colorado Springs and they confronted Haggard, and then ran the story. That's how it really broke.

 

MS: So they really are the ones who outed him, after you spoke on the radio about "a preacher."

 

MJ: That's right.

 

***

MS: Tell me about this: You're having sexual encounters with him once a month. After about a year he just asks you about crystal meth?

 

MJ: He just goes, "Hey Mike, I have a question. What do you know about crystal meth?" I was a little bit surprised. I said, "I don't care for it. I've tried it but I don't care for it. But I have friends who do it and they think it enhances their sexual pleasure." He goes, "Do you think you can get me some?" I told him I'll see what I can do.

 

MS: And you hooked him up with somebody who could get him this drug. Then what? He would do it in your presence when he had sex with you?

 

MJ: Yes, he agreed it enhanced his pleasure and said that he used it when he had sex with his wife too.

 

MS: What did he get like after he took the crystal? How did it impact him?

 

MJ: I can't get into his mind or his body. He didn't act any differently. He seemed to be enjoying it. Definitely had a smile on his face.

 

MS: He said he was taking this when he had sex with his wife. Did he indicate he had trouble having sex with his wife? Did it allow him to have heterosexual sex more easily? Is he gay, bisexual, any ideas on that?

 

MJ: I really don't know. I really think he is a gay man. When you're in that business, you've got to put up a good front. I think he has enormously strong homosexual tendencies but he just told me the drug enhanced his pleasure with his wife. I don't know if he even really was having sex with his wife, or just said that. I think part it too is that he was a very busy man, traveling all over the country and the world. I think he enjoyed the drug too because it kept him going.

 

 

***

MS: You spoke about a fantasy he told you, his sexual fantasy. Tell me about that?

 

MJ: This was the only time he ever spoke about something sexual other than being with me. He goes, "Mike do you know any young college guys" I said, "Well, I know a few, why? "He said, "I would love to get about 4 to 6 young college guys, about 18 to 22, I'd love to have group sex with them.' I said, "Let me check around and see what I can do and see if I can organize that for you." I never pursued it.

 

MS: What have you been hearing from people in response to what you've done?

 

MJ: Well, I've had hundreds and hundreds of phone calls coming in. Deluged, saying, "Thank you Mike. God you got balls!" A lot of thank yous. I have had one threatening phone call - "You're going to be so sorry for what you did. You're going to get it."

 

MS: Some people see you as a hero, others say, "He's not a hero, he's a prostitute." What's your reaction?

 

MJ: I don't feel like a hero. I wasn't trying to be a hero. I'm at the age of 49. I saw a lot of my friends going through hell in years past, where one of the partners would die and the other family would come in and say get out of the way, and just rape the house, and there was a lot of crying. I felt like this was a responsibility to my fellow gay brothers to do this. I've had some people say "You're an immoral ####, bitch, fag." But I've been called all those names all my life. So it's not new. But I will tell you, when it finally broke, when he resigned, I have to be honest with you, I just broke down. I had so much emotion for so long.

 

MS: Do you feel other hustlers, like those in Washington DC, whose clients have been rightwing antigay politicians, should look to you like a role model and do the same thing?

 

MJ: I don't think I should be a role model, but if I saw some politician out there bashing gays, yes, I think they should say something. But I would say, after going through this experience, I would say to them, just make sure you are able to prove it! {laughs]

[edjames]

You pose a moral dilemma that thousands face everyday. Should we shop in a store knowing the owner is of another polictical party, or do we boycott a movie becasue an actor may have differing polictial opionions than our own? So many choices...

 

Your obligation as an escort is to maintain a certain code of silence. You are being paid for your companionship, not your political views. If these clients are so abhorant to you because of their political views and marital status, then you have but three options. First, continue accepting their business and keep quiet. Second, increase your rate for these guys and give the extra money to your favorite political candidate or organization. Third, decline their business in the future.

 

Outing them just because they're gay is serious business. You'd better have concrete proof of their sexual nature and be able to back it up honestly and truthfully before the press and the nation. Also, examine the consequences of what it would do to your own life. Are you ready for such publicity and the repercussions it would cause?

 

I say let sleeping dogs lie.

[menrus]

RE: SHOULD we out Tom Isern?

 

Rockhard brings up a very good point, if it's OK to out a client then it's certainly OK to out Mr Isern or any other escort.

And Anton, you find it very easy to say you have no opinion about Mr Isern's arrogance and calling anyone who disagrees with him terrible names. It only takes a few minutes to review some of Mr Isern's posts and total intolerance of anyone who states an opinion different from his.

Anton, just be truthful, you won't say anything about Mr Isern's posts because you agree with him.

[KY_TOP]

So where would the outing stop?

 

Do you also "out" the cop, prosecutor, judge that would arrest, prosecute, and sentence those involved on both sides of the Escort transaction?

 

Every Christian religion I'm aware of considers being Gay a sin. Do you "out" all clergy that hire?

 

Do you "out" the corporate CEO or board member who's company doesn't give same sex partner benefits?

 

Do you "out" the married client because he is cheating on his wife, as this escort also gave as a reason to out the minister?

 

Do you "out" all closeted clients because you think they are liars and hurting all gay men by not being out?

 

Do you out a physician because you don't like his position on abortion?

 

This list could go on forever depending upon each individual escort's beliefs or personal morals.

 

Even out gay men can have their lives turned upside down if someone knew they hired an Escort, including a liberal gay politician. In many states an arrest and conviction for prostitution or soliciting can cause one to loose their professional certificate or License.

 

There have been a few other high profile outings by escorts lately including an American Idol star.

 

I'm in no way defending the minister but just asking where does the outing stop once it starts with the escort? When will it start to effect ALL escort's business if any client cannot expect the escort to be discreet?

 

I agree that the escort community could set many a communities and peoples life's on end. But, is that what escorts and clients both really want?

 

Does this mean only Democrats can be gay and hire an Escort?

 

A final thought... should the client "out" the school teacher that is escorting to pay off student loans because they think an escort should not be around kids everyday? Unfortuately I know of 2 that have had that happen to them.

[+ Lucky]

RE: Interview with Mike Jones

 

Mike Jones goes way too ffar in this interview. He has made his pointabout Haggard, but detailing the sexual behavior itself and revealing Haggard's fantasy does not serve the original purpose. It merely makes Jones a grandstander milking his fifteen minutes.

[Flower]

>So where would the outing stop?

 

How about keeping it very simple and basic--live and let live UNLESS the person to be outed is actively, publically and intentionally making money or political favor by being anti-gay and is in the public eye or a position of power.

 

So the married guy down the street who is gay but not hurting anyone and minding his own business gets left alone even if he tells some gay jokes to maintain his cover; but the politician or self-righteous icon who's in a position of influence and power should get outed for their hypocrisy.

 

I'm not a religious person, but I have read the bible and the only time I remember Jesus getting pissed off was at the hypocrites and money changers--so out the hypocrites and I don't care about the bankers

[Guest msclonly]

Shouldn't a Hooker out himself, since he will not have any customers left to out? And isn't worth a damn?

 

 

 

 

}( }(

[+ ArVaGuy]

>Does this mean only Democrats can be gay and hire an Escort?

>

>A final thought... should the client "out" the school teacher

>that is escorting to pay off student loans because they think

>an escort should not be around kids everyday? Unfortuately I

>know of 2 that have had that happen to them.

 

KYTop,

 

I very much agree with you and what you have written here. What infuriates me about this political outing business is the hypocrisy involved in that process. It's fine to out a Republican or conservative who harms our rights but Democrats who behave the same are not even touched.

 

There are several people that I know in Democratic Party circles who are gay and deeply in the closet. A couple of them work for conservative Democrats in the House of Representatives. A couple of Democrats have closeted lesbians in high ranking positions. Years ago I knew of a staff member on a Senate committee who was Democrat, hired escorts, and had a Secret security clearance.

 

One guy I know works for a member of Congress who has voted for Don't Ask Don't Tell, the Defense of Marriage Act, and has even sided with Republicans on the Gay Marriage amendment votes. These votes reflect the sentiments of the district he represents. My friend has never once advised his boss against voting for these laws. He has never once stood up to his boss on any major gay related matter before the House in 25 years.

 

By all rights, advocated by some, this man should be outed. However, he is a registered and active Democrat so I guess he gets a pass. Those who seek to expose hypocrisy are even more hypocritical when what they practice is one sided and applied only in selected cases that fit their agendas.

 

In regard to the escort matter, I well remember the incident here in DC and it was devastating for the young man. One of the best guys I have known left the business.

[Louis]

Well now the good reverand is admitting that he lied to the media, and what the escort was saying is correct.

I listed to Christian radio up here, and they were just talking about him admitting that he lied about it. So now he has come clean.

Louis.

[+ Lucky]

"My friend has never once advised his boss against voting for these laws. He has never once stood up to his boss on any major gay related matter before the House in 25 years."

 

Doesn't your friend have any backbone? He is probably willing to take advantage of all of the advances in gay rights made by people who do have a backbone, isn't he?

[+ deej]

>It's fine to out a Republican or conservative who harms our rights

>but Democrats who behave the same are not even touched.

 

I don't think this has been said in this thread, and I certainly wouldn't agree with it. The democrats actively working against us while living a lie are just as much a target but their time hasn't come yet.

 

For a congressional staffer who's job is to run numbers and advise the congressman how the folks back home feel, I don't have a problem. In fact, if the congressman truly votes the preferences of his constituency he is a rare breed in Washington. He's doing his job! He is representing his constituency's voice in Washington. Damn few of them actually do that.

 

Someone who builds and actively promotes an entire platform based on hate, discrimination, and bigotry is a target.

 

When someone mounts a national campaign against gays and then goes out "on the DL" and sucks cock, he deserves to be exposed and I don't give a damn which party affiliation he prefers.

[+ Tom Isern]

RE: SHOULD we out Tom Isern?

 

menrus,

 

I am intolerant of a lot of things—homophobia, sexism, racism, xenophobia, hypocrisy, and stereotyping, to name a few. My initial conflict with Rockhead, for instance, began when I came to the defense of pedophiles, people he was stereotyping and labeling “sick” and “pathetic.” He said that pedophiles “don't know when to say no or where the crossed-line is.” Well, I felt that my celibate friend who just happens to be attracted to 14 year-old boys but has never hurt anyone deserved better. I also remembered wishing, when I discovered my sexual orientation at the age of 12, for a sexual relationship with an older man. Check out the thread if you want, and then tell me who lacks tolerance and a level hand:

 

http://m4m.m4m-forum.org/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=94949&mesg_id=94949&page=&topic_page=1

 

My political commitments have led me into heated debates with several people on this board—mostly in the politics and religion pages. The social evils I cited above tend these days to represent themselves in conservative politics, but are not limited there. I think if you would spend a few minutes looking through my posts, you’d find that I tend to reply in the tone I’m presented with. I don’t think it’s fair to say that I have shown a “total intolerance of anyone who states an opinion different” from mine.

 

Most escorts here seem to bend over backwards to be deferential, respectful, and passive. It seems almost assumed that client-posters are the customers and the escorts are here to be “checked out.” The roles get played out almost traditionally male and female, top/bottom, aggressive/pasive. I’m not interested in playing that game. And saying what I really think and taking on the horrible pontifications of genuinely intolerant people has won me support in private emails, from posters on this site, and new business as well.

 

Anyway, if I change your opinion or not, I wish you the best…

[Guest zipperzone]

>Outing them just because they're gay is serious business.

 

You REALLY don't get it, do you?

 

He was not outed simply because he was gay and if you still can't understand that then you have missed the point of this whole discussion.

[Guest zipperzone]

>I very much agree with you and what you have written here.

>What infuriates me about this political outing business is the

>hypocrisy involved in that process. It's fine to out a

>Republican or conservative who harms our rights but Democrats

>who behave the same are not even touched.

 

That statement is outrageously incorrect.

 

>There are several people that I know in Democratic Party

>circles who are gay and deeply in the closet. A couple of

>them work for conservative Democrats in the House of

>Representatives. A couple of Democrats have closeted lesbians

>in high ranking positions. Years ago I knew of a staff member

>on a Senate committee who was Democrat, hired escorts, and had

>a Secret security clearance.

 

So what? Presumably they were not going around advocating that gays be relegated to 2nd class citizens. So they did not deserve to be outed. Had they been preaching that homosexuality was a sin, like our dear friend in Colorado - then they would have been fair game!

[+ ArVaGuy]

>So what? Presumably they were not going around advocating that

>gays be relegated to 2nd class citizens. So they did not

>deserve to be outed. Had they been preaching that

>homosexuality was a sin, like our dear friend in Colorado -

>then they would have been fair game!

 

Sitting back and keeping silent while in such a position of influence is just as equally bad in my opinion. By doing nothing they are just as complicit as any raving right winger who spouts off at the mouth about these matters. The "outing" threshold is not equally applied and don't try to claim it's not.

[Guest ReturnOfS]

In my opinion ALL closeted gay-bashing homophobes should be outed.

[best hotel]

anton....why?

 

anton...you wrote that you would never out a client who is not hurting the lives of homosexuals...then why did you use my real first name in your reply to my question...and , since i have never met you,only inquired about your services over this site a long time ago, why use,or even recall, my real name?......

[RockHard]

RE: Tom Isern, sick and pathetic?

 

"I am intolerant of a lot of things"

Ya think?

 

"My initial conflict with Rockhead, for instance, began when I came to the defense of pedophiles, people he was stereotyping and labeling “sick” and “pathetic.”"

What a glorious display of manipulation and deceit, something Tom does well. I welcome everyone, too, to visit that thread and discover that Tom was, in fact, defending a single, so-called "friend in recovery." Of course, this little ditty didn't present itself until after Tom lunged for my jugular.

 

Most addicts are not in recovery. Most sex offenders never seek treatment. There was no stereotyping in my opinion (unless you're a blind, biased bully). Heroin addicts and pedophiles, who continually abuse themselves and others, and never seek treatment, are sick (ill mental health) and pathetic (deserving of our pity).

 

"Well, I felt that my celibate friend who just happens to be attracted to 14 year-old boys but has never hurt anyone deserved better."

Did you really, now? (Everyone else, read above.)

 

"Check out the thread if you want, and then tell me who lacks tolerance and a level hand."

Tom, you're a gay man of the worst kind: a man who believes his bullshit so strongly, not a shed of reasoned light can enter the scene or shine on your face. As far as I'm concerned, you are the rudest, ugliest, most blowhard escort I've ever encountered and I think it's no coincidence you sell yourself by using your reflection in a mirror.

 

"I think if you would spend a few minutes looking through my posts, you’d find that I tend to reply in the tone I’m presented with. I don’t think it’s fair to say that I have shown a “total intolerance of anyone who states an opinion different” from mine."

What a crock of bullshit! And spoken like a truly deluded man in denial. (Re-read my previous response.)

 

"Most escorts here seem to bend over backwards to be deferential, respectful, and passive."

I don't read every escort offering and passivity among escort contributors is not something that has raised any flags for me. However, being deferential and respectful, especially in the company of potential customers, is the mark of a smart, reliable businessman. It's also the behavior that defines a gentleman, gets my dick hard, and encourages me to be generous with my gratuities.

 

"It seems almost assumed that client-posters are the customers and the escorts are here to be “checked out.”"

It's more than an assumption and it's often a stated fact.

 

"The roles get played out almost traditionally male and female, top/bottom, aggressive/pasive."

Maybe in your fantasy "game" of playing bully/psychiatrist but I think this observation is bullshit.

 

"I’m not interested in playing that game."

Sweetheart, the game IS IN YOUR HEAD. No one else is playing with you. Wake up, OH VAIN ONE, this board isn't yours and it's not about you and your game. Damn, you need a ton of attention! No wonder you're for sale.

 

"And saying what I really think and taking on the horrible pontifications of genuinely intolerant people has won me support in private emails, from posters on this site, and new business as well."

Support from whom? Men who like to be pissed on? Men who get-off on being abused? The marketplace offers many kinds of guys and I truly believe there's a customer for everyone.

 

Only a pontificating, self-absorbed, self-righteous idiot, who doesn't know me and/or has no idea who I am, would ever call me intolerant.

 

Tom, you are one of the rudest, most intolerant contributors on this board. The proof is in the writing for all to see. You ARE the HORRIBLE PONTIFICATOR here and I'm too happy to take you on. I'm not selling anything here so I have nothing to lose. Why you haven't been banned is beyond me.

 

Maybe escorts get more slack here but you abuse the obvious deference afforded to escorts. Your selfish arrogance does your fellow escorts a disservice because, left unchallenged, you make escorts look like ugly, contemptuous assholes. You don't deserve one dime from a self-respecting, healthy-minded gay man.

 

Your vanity and ego are so large, they block your view of reality (however real things can be here). I think you and your "games" are sick and pathetic (see above for definition). Which explains why I continually state I will NEVER hire you.