Theologians as Clients

[Guest ncm2169]

< you'll post what you heard in public.

 

If you can read, I referenced private conversations. And no, you won't read about it here unless you're a Catholic Priest, in which case I make no apologies.

 

Beyond that, whatever. You live your reality and I'll live mine.

 

Furthermore, I respect your dual role here as both a Moderator and a poster; however I suggest that you compromise your objective role as a Moderator when you trash both an escort and a client with a single post. I'll trust the other readers to draw their own conclusions, but to perpetuate the absurd myth that no escorts (or only "indiscreet" escorts) share private details about their escorting life is ridiculous beyond belief. And I'll say it once more - clients, if you think it doesn't happen, guess again. (I'm not talking about real names and phone numbers and addresses).

 

That time of the month again, eh? }(

[+ deej]

>< you'll post what you heard in public.

>

>If you can read, I referenced private conversations.

 

Which you posted in PUBLIC.

 

>And no, you won't read about it here unless you're a Catholic

>Priest, in which case I make no apologies.

>

>Beyond that, whatever. You live your reality and I'll live

>mine.

>

>That time of the month again, eh? }(

 

Interesting addition to your first post.

 

So you won't blab "unless..."

 

That means guaranteed to blab when YOU decide it's OK.

 

Any escort that takes discretion seriously knows that and wouldn't be talking to you in the first place.

 

DJ is looking more and more like a mouthpiece to the world.

[Guest ncm2169]

Maybe it's your experience that no escort has chosen to be open with you, but I can assure you that I have had both phone and email conversations with more than a couple escorts who post here regularly who have "spilled the beans" way more than once.

 

I repeat: to assert that it doesn't happen, or that only "disreputable" or "indiscreet" (my words) escorts do it in private conversation is just so ludicrous that you'd have to be delusional to believe it. (Not to mention certain escort blogs, but that's a whole other topic).

 

Chalk it up to different experiences on different days. And save the trashing and holier-than-thou lectures, thank you very much. They're beneath any decent objective Moderator here. IMHO, of course. :7

[+ deej]

>Maybe it's your experience that no escort has chosen to be

>open with you, but I can assure you that I have had both phone

>and email conversations with more than a couple escorts who

>post here regularly who have "spilled the beans" way

>more than once.

 

And you can't wait to make it public, right? You've decided it is your unalienable right to publish at your own discretion.

 

Look, I know for a fact that Stef LaCoste (and several others) had conversations with Hooboy about the size of my dick. (All stories were true. ;-)) I don't have a problem with it. We were all friends.

 

I never saw it in public.

 

Things you are told in private should stay there. It's a pity you don't see that. It makes you completely untrustworthy and it makes anyone you associate with untrustworthy.

 

Some of those new MPLS boys are cute, but I wouldn't touch them with someone else's 10-foot pole because I'll likely see your commentary up here the next day.

 

Some people value discretion and some don't. You clearly don't.

[Guest ncm2169]

LOL.

 

Okay, just keep piling on, if that's your chosen style for the evening. I really could care less. If you think I'm scared of your insinuations (veiled threats?), guess again. I have no illusions that you influence more than one iota of client hiring by virtue of your posts on this Message Board.

 

And, to suggest that you have anything definitive to preach about proper escort etiquette and discretion betrays an arrogance that I daresay even the most fawning and wanna-believe viewers here would find most hard to swallow.

 

The word that we're all avoiding here is the dreaded word, "gossip." Well, guess what, Hoovilians (now Daddyites): OMG!!! It actually happens. Ann Landers isn't often quoted here, but to embellish her famous words, "Wake up and smell the FUCKING coffee."

 

I'll give you an example, Deej. Or, rather, an oblique reference. I didn't hear about your "dental condition" from the Tooth Fairy.

 

Finally, by way of saying G'Nite, I'll just say that I have now received 17 ... Count 'em - 17 emails from members here who prefer to pass on their moral support and their own personal experiences with respect to "escort gossip" privately,rather than subject themselves to being trashed by a MODERATOR here. Yeah, you could say I'm making that up, but I'm not. Frankly, not many people admire the Thought Police.

 

So anyone else here who wants to have at it, go ahead. I'm off to slumberland. }( }( Pleasant Dreams, Everyone!! :+

[+ deej]

I won't compare your 17 (woo hoo) with what's in my inbox because frankly it's immaterial and unproveable. Only Rockhard (and well, a few dozen names all of which resolve to one person) pounded that approach and expected it to be taken seriously.

 

As for my "dental condition" I'm wondering why you care. It has nothing to do with this discussion but further reinforces the fact that you can't be trusted with anything.

 

I don't shy away from it and don't deny it.

 

But you've now made it a public issue.

 

Why?

 

Trying to sling dirt are you?

 

By the way, I haven't been a moderator here for two years. Our self-respecting moderators, wonderful folks that they are, would probably appreciate it if you'd stop lumping me in with them.

[Guest zipperzone]

Louis: I don't think ALL priests take a vow of poverty. And I very much doubt if the bishops do as they seem to have lots of loot and manage to lead a very luxurious lifestyle. Perhaps a Catholic member would care to enlighten us on this point.

 

And I should mention that the financially astute priest I referred to in my earlier post, was an Anglican priest.

[Guest ncm2169]

< the fact that you can't be trusted with anything.

 

No, actually, if you thought about it, it was the person who remarked on it to me that fits that description. He passed it on to me. I only used it as an example of the gossip which permeates this scene. You really ought to get out more, Deej, or at least clean the wax out of your ears. It's kinda amazing what you'll pick up.

 

I haven't been to any of the LA Hooville gatherings (and after this I may never be), but I invite ANY of those who have attended to tell me, truthfully, swearing on their "instrument" of choice, that they've NEVER shared even a "private tidbit" about an escort or another client.

 

And before that happens, I can assure you that one early attendee who was a prolific hirer and a close online buddy of mine until he left the scene a couple years ago, passed on several items of interest about both escorts and clients which he gleaned from his attendance at those events.

 

So, cut the fucking holier-than-thou sanctimonious crap. To repeat: only the most delusional suck-up here would believe you.

[Guest zipperzone]

I have to say that I think this whole discussion is much ado about nothing. Please correct me if I'm wrong - but.....

 

1: He never referred to the priest by name

2: He never identified the parish

3: He never even specified the city

 

So where has he compromised anyone's privacy?

 

Would you be as upset if he had said my roomie fucked a mechanic last night? Or an Air Line Pilot? Or a school teacher? To me there is no differance. No one was compromised. Period.

 

Deej - sorry, but I just can't see your point here.

[Guest ncm2169]

Even though it's after the Curfew in Louis' time zone, my roomie has suggested I end my part of this discussion on a high note.

 

When all is said and done, whether it be about escorts' discretion, or clients' behavior, or attitudes about either, this Forum gives all of us an opportunity to share, compare, and yes, even to let off steam occasionally. That is a VERY good thang, and I thank Daddy for the opportunity.

 

Now, this time, I REALLY AM off to bed. }(

[+ deej]

I'm not the one standing here spilling private details in public and saying it's OK to do that.

 

Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.

 

(Thank you Judge Judy!)

[Guest ncm2169]

Oops, woke up here for a pee break and saw your post.

 

Thanks, Zip.

 

Now, you and Louis get some Canuck sleep, dammit!

 

}(

[Guest Merlin]

Catholic priests should be seen as victims. Most are placed in Catholic shools at an early age, and grow up being indoctrinated and encouraged to be priests with little exposure to other views. Of course, few actually become priests, but since homosexuality is seen as a serious sin, the priesthood is often seen by the boy as a place to hide and suppress his orientation. The church views all sex outside marriage, including masturbation, as a serious sin, and the vow of chastity is a vow to have no sex at all, not even masturbation. It seems doubtful if any student or priest is able to

be completely faithful to his vow.

[a_nice_guy]

>Does anyone want to comment on theologians hiring escorts? }(

> Either from the standpoint of being the client, or being the

>escort?

>

>In particular, I'm curious about how Catholic Priests figure

>into the equation (the need for anonymity, the use of Church

>funds for sexual release, etc.).

>

 

I’ve learned from posts in response to your query about clergy/theologians and that’s why I enjoy being a member of this forum. I had thought that catholic priests would not have any personal funds, but I now know that is not necessarily true. I say, “Live and Let Live.” They are the ones who have to live with the moral/religious decisions they make.

 

>Part of my curiosity is driven by my escort roommate having

>been recently hired by a Catholic Priest who actually saw him

>in the Rectory early in an evening, seemingly leaving

>discretion aside.

>

>Btw, the priest was a bottom. }(

>

>As an afterthought, I think the issue is not theologians in

>general hiring escorts, as much as it is Catholic Priests in

>particular, who enter the realm of gross hypocrisy when they

>do so.

>

>Also, I want to note that my escort roommate is very discreet

>and rarely discloses details of his clients to me. In this

>case, he was so taken aback by what seemed to him to be the

>client almost blatantly flaunting his behavior.

 

 

> I'll trust the other readers to draw their own conclusions, but to perpetuate the

>absurd myth that no escorts (or only "indiscreet" escorts) share private details

>about their escorting life is ridiculous beyond belief. And I'll say it once more –

>clients, if you think it doesn't happen, guess again. (I'm not talking about real

>names and phone numbers and addresses).

 

NCM, I enjoy your posts and your ability to converse on many topics, but…I believe the additional info, that your roomie provided and that you subsequently posted, was unnecessary to stimulate this particular conversation. Am I naïve? No; I know that any experience with any escort is subject to public “outing” at some point in the future. I have to say that I believe it is naïve to think that posting the info provided by an escort would not hinder his chances for future clients. In regards to discretion, there is a risk factor that a client considers when hiring an escort—sadly, that risk factor was removed and one may believe there is no chance for discretion when hiring one of your escort associates. I say sadly because it would have been nice to meet up with some of those guys.

 

> To repeat: only the most delusional suck-up here would believe you.

 

I guess I can be considered a “delusional suck-up.” In all honesty, after reading your first post, I had already decided that I would need to stay clear of your escort associates. Deej and other posters were able to iterate what I was thinking before I read their posts…

[+ Tom Isern]

If anyone is interested in a very compelling but serious read about priests, the closet, RC theology, etc. I highly recommend "The Silence of Sodom: Homosexuality in Modern Catholicism" by Mark Jordan, former professor of theology at Notre Dame and now at Emory. If you grew up RC it will rock your world. If you didn't, it might shock the shit out of you.

 

from Amazon.com:

The Silence of Sodom by Mark D. Jordan, a professor of theology at Emory University, is a smart, graceful, important book about homosexuality and modern Catholicism. It transcends discussion of sexual identity and contends that theology cannot, fundamentally, be argued--it must be lived. "Serious moral theology cannot be principally the framing and manipulation of quasi-legal propositions. It must begin and end in the discovery of particular lives under grace." Consequently, Jordan writes, "lesbian and gay lives will have to become audible to the church, readable within it, before their graces can be discerned and described." The way for gay lives to become audible in the church, Jordan argues, is to demonstrate an intimate relationship between "'homosexuality' and holiness--that is, human fullness." To demonstrate that relationship, gay people must rethink their notions of identity by questioning the descriptive power of terms such as gay and homosexual, and perhaps even abandoning such terms.

 

Gay Catholics, Jordan says, "should feel contrition for having pretended to have a sexual identity, when what we had were desires, memories, and loves. To be good homosexuals is, for Catholic men, to conspire with our old persecutors in a sin against ourselves. The homosexual is only the sodomite in approved drag." Abstruse jargon, sloppy thinking, and excessive pride are common pitfalls for writers who address simultaneously the subjects of Christianity and homosexuality. Jordan avoids all of these dangers. In plain language, with humility, he gently insists that readers join him in learning how to talk about sexuality and physical pleasure in a way that amounts to talking about Christian love. --Michael Joseph Gross --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

 

From Publishers Weekly:

Jordan, author of the prize-winning The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology and professor of religion at Emory University, argues that the culture of Catholicism and gay culture have much in common. Analyzing Catholic documents on homosexuality, Jordan determines that the Church is often vague and imprecise, its rhetoric designed to confuse readers. Despite the Church's teachings that homosexual sex is a sin, says Jordan, Catholicism is shot through with homoeroticism--the musical, incense-filled Catholic liturgy attracts gay men, and gay men's "coming out" is not dissimilar from Catholic seminarians' demonstration of a priesthood call. Even the Eucharist is drawn into this analysis: according to Jordan, male Catholics eating the perfect body of a perfect man is a homoerotic act, too, and the "priest without faith who celebrates Mass" recalls "a hustler having sex with his client." This treatise is provocative, but not convincing. Jordan's modest claim at the beginning of the book--that the Catholic Church needs to honestly recognize its many gay Catholics, some of whom occupy positions of leadership--is compelling. However, his suggestion that Catholicism and homosexuality are somehow inherently bound up with one another because the stereotypical gay man's fixation with fine clothes is reminiscent of priests' suiting up in vestments reads more like a Saturday Night Live skit than a serious effort to reshape Catholic discussions about sexuality. (May)

Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

 

From Library Journal:

Jordan (religion, Emory Univ.; The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology) considers the conceptualization of male homosexuality within the context of the contemporary Catholic church. The first of the three sections seeks to "analyze the rhetoric of the church's bureaucratic speech about sexual morality" by examining Declaration Regarding Certain Questions of Sexual Ethics (1971) and Letter to all Catholic Bishops on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons (1986). Jordan then investigates the hypocrisy and secrecy that surrounds clerical homosexuality. Finally, he dreams of ways to ameliorate the present situation, focusing on various approaches, such as those by organizations like Metropolitan Community Church and Dignity. The self-conscious sentences and fragmentary nature of the text, modeled on Walter Benjamin's The Arcades Project, are not completely successful at teasing out the complicated nuances of this controversial subject. Recommended for collections specializing in religion and Gay Lesbian Task Force issues.

-James E. Van Buskirk, San Francisco P.L.

Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

[Chuck50]

Much Ado about Nothing

 

While many are talking about this and that and condemning the whole world. It is easier to pick on others when avoding ourselves. I have always known I was not perfect but many want me to be even when they think that they know who I am and know me but, they dont. Judge not lest you be judged. I sure dont. Dont want to , Dont need to thats the bottom live. HUGS

[Guest zipperzone]

>Am I naïve?

 

Well you may not be naive, but you are delusional if you think a persons confidentiality has been compromised.

 

Will one of you bleeding heart liberals please tell me WHO EXACTLY WAS COMPROMISED?

 

A priest? OK. You might just as well have said the grocery delivery boy. We don't know which one.

 

WHAT IS HIS NAME? Oh gee whiz, you don't know.

 

WHICH PARISH DOES HE BELONG TO? Well, come on - tell me.

 

WHAT CITY IS THAT PARISH IN? An escort travels all over the country. Was it Boston, New York, San Francisco? Once again - you don't have a clue.

 

Could it be that you are all so naive as to think that no one ever even imagined that a priest could possibly be gay and hire an escort and therefore HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS BEEN OUTED?

 

>I know that any experience with any escort is subject to public

>outing” at some point in the future.

 

Very true. But in this case, the escort did not out anyone.

 

This whole discussion has taken on the appearance of "The Mad Hatter's Tea Party"

[+ Charlie]

The client's personal information has not been revealed here because the MB has definite rules against that. However, the client, if he reads this MB, knows that his confidentiality has been compromised, because DJ has passed information to ncm, and he does not know exactly what DJ has told ncm beyond what has been posted here. DJ's other clients now have no idea what he may have told ncm about them, either, no matter what ncm may claim about DJ's usual practice. I think ncm has damaged DJ's reputation by his own indiscretion in starting this thread.

[Barry]

I agree.

 

Barry

[Lookin]

RE: Much Ado about Nothing

 

> Judge not lest you be judged.

 

Amen.

[Guest zipperzone]

If you feel that is compromising someone, then all I can say is I hope no one ever boasts about doing the cute pizza delivery boy and Rick should hang his head in shame about telling us about his UPS driver.;(

[+ Charlie]

I think we can safely leave it to our gentle readers to decide how comfortable they are hiring DJ, if they know that he may tell his roommate ncm2169 who his clients are and what he does with them, especially given ncm's delight in letting us all know that he has an escort roommate who confides in him.