Clients Are You Embarassed

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

You lie about your age, your name, your background, your drug use, your HIV status -is it due to embarassment? After all most of you claim that you are in a honorable profession so my the games?

Yes I know there are exceptions, I am interested in the vast majority here who definately are not the exception to the rule.

 

Michael

 

Funny how things go two ways here huh Ritchie

[guyinsf]

I didn't read the other thread (about escorts allegedly being embarrassed) because it seemed like baiting to me (not to mention untrue as a general statement). I hope the same is true for clients, but perhaps I am just an exception in my not lying to any escort I've hired.

[Guest Ant415]

Ditto..

 

That has to be the most brilliant and well-written post I have seen.

[Guest Charon]

Yawn.

[Guest andorrian]

No escort has ever asked me about my age, name, background, drug use or HIV status. All they seem to care about is my money.

[Bilbo]

I may not always remember to ask about your drug use, but their have been clients I have turned away at the door, so to speak, because they seemed to me to be on drugs other than grass or poppers. And, yess, your money is nice, but I also really, really like your ass! (I don't think we've met, but that is a safe bet!) :+

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

LOL sorry boys, was bored and wanted to see what the census was, good game

[chrismac]

>LOL sorry boys, was bored and wanted to see what the census

>was, good game

 

And it's raining here in San Diego - what else is there to do? So much for landscaping the yard today.

[Guest andorrian]

>LOL sorry boys, was bored and wanted to see what the census

>was, good game

 

I think the answer to your question is we clients aren't usually called on to provide info about our personal characteristics because we are not selling those characteristics the way escorts are.

 

There seem to be a lot of threads like this one that show the contradictions in this business. Escorts make a commodity out of themselves to earn money but they don't want to be treated like a commodity. Clients want an intimate experience but because they're paying for it they want to get value for their money and they have to act in a businesslike way that is at odds with having an intimate experience. These contradictions cause some resentment on both sides and that is showing up in these threads.

[chrismac]

>There seem to be a lot of threads like this one that show

>the contradictions in this business. Escorts make a

>commodity out of themselves to earn money but they don't

>want to be treated like a commodity. Clients want an

>intimate experience but because they're paying for it they

>want to get value for their money and they have to act in a

>businesslike way that is at odds with having an intimate

>experience. These contradictions cause some resentment on

>both sides and that is showing up in these threads.

 

That's the best and most succint sumation of the main issue in the escort/client interaction that I've seen on this board yet, in my opinion.

 

I think you hit the proverbial nail on the head with that one, without the need to employ caustic or derogatory remarks. Bravo.

:-)

[Guest Thunderbuns]

>Ditto..

>

>That has to be the most brilliant and well-written post I

>have seen.

 

Next we'll give it a Pulitzer prize!

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest andorrian]

Thanks to all of you who commented on my post. If anyone finds what I write interesting enough not only to read it but also to comment on it, that is very flattering.

[Uncle Bill]

Great comment. I truly hope you continue to post -- this board needs people like you to improve the quality of the discussion.

 

By the way, I'm one of those (possibly very few) clients who honestly tells the escorts a whole lot about myself from the very beginning (as part of the MUTUAL screening process) and who answers whatever questions the escort might have (within reason, of course). I like the same from the escort, but I always make it clear that he doesn't have to answer any questions that might make him uncomfortable. It's part of getting the more intimate experience that you mention (or making a momentary connection/bond) -- as well as making sure that we are compatible (I think of both myself and the escort as having choices regarding who we see, and I want to make sure that those choices are made with as much relevant information as possible). A lot of my approach has to do with the romantic fantasy that clients often have about a date with an escort, and while I know that it's not a real "date", it can be made to seem that way if just for the brief time we are together.

[Guest elwood]

Andorrian,

You have very well described one of the contradictions that is central to the escort/client relationship and which no doubt makes us all a bit uneasy at times. There are some other contradictions too. Despite them all....I still hire..though more and more seldom. I don't reveal everything about myself to an escort...most are not interested,thank God..but I don't lie about name,age,stats..I usually describe myself in advance and sometimes send a pic. This is mostly to allow the escort to discreetly decline if he thinks it won't work physically. I have hired many escorts in a little over a year. Overwhelmingly they have been fun experiences for me. Most of these encounters were brief and superficial involviing sex and some light conversation and the escorts were professional and good at what they do. A few times I have encountered some dishonesty...but usually not in a major area. Some not so recent pics,maybe a few extra years but nothing extreme. The worst experiences were either with escorts who clearly did not want to be there (this only happened twice) and one clearly professional and well reviewed escort who simply did not perform and did not seem to care. A handful of escorts have been what I would call outstanding at what they do...truly memorable experiences ( Brad,from Raleigh, Alec Martinez,Joey Ciccone) Several others have been superb as well but perhaps one level down. A very few have been a total waste of money. Most of the no shows have been at the younger end of the age spectrum ( I've had three no shows).My youngest escort was 20 and was very good and my oldest was in his upper thrities and was superb.Most of these encounters left me feeling good. A couple left me feeling depressed. Only once did I get the feeling that the escort might have been doing this out of financial desperation..he is the only one who worked for an agency. I have met a wide variety of age and physical types and personalities and levels of professionalism. I have reviewd many ( only one somewhat negative review).The majority,I have not reviewed.I found no one truly dishonest or dangerous.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Familiarity Breed Contempts

 

>>LOL sorry boys, was bored and wanted to see what the census

>>was, good game

>

>I think the answer to your question is we clients aren't

>usually called on to provide info about our personal

>characteristics because we are not selling those

>characteristics the way escorts are.

 

The thing which I believe most escort took exception to was not if it was appropriate to ask those or any other questions nor that the asking was only going to be one way. You are precisely correct in one sense. This is, first and foremost, a relationship predicated on the oldest of concepts: good merchandise and ready buyers. Offense was taken, and here I speak solely for myself and here also believe your idea was not fully expressed to its logical conclusion, to the suggestion that in order for this relationship to be fruitful at either or both ends, dishonesty must be a necessary component.

 

 

Love is no substitute for sex.

[Guest Willy]

>There seem to be a lot of threads like this one that show

>the contradictions in this business. Escorts make a

>commodity out of themselves to earn money but they don't

>want to be treated like a commodity. Clients want an

>intimate experience but because they're paying for it they

>want to get value for their money and they have to act in a

>businesslike way that is at odds with having an intimate

>experience. These contradictions cause some resentment on

>both sides and that is showing up in these threads.

 

 

When you go out to a restaurant and have a great meal and tip the waiter 20% because the food and the service were fantastic, does each of you seethe inside because the waiter's attitude wasn't "sincere" on account of money being exchanged?

 

Escorts are not commodities, they are custom-made. I don't have any illusions about them being in love with me. But then I never had similar illusions when I went to gay bars, either. I have a partner anyway, and I love him. The occasional escort is entertainment. It's like going to a play, but you're in the scene. The best escorts make you feel like you walked into a bar and you got lucky.

 

As for the role of "truth," well, if the reality is too far at odds with the description then it's a problem. That's why this site is so helpful. Do I care what the escort's real name is? Hell no! Why on earth would this matter?

 

Do I care if he's actually 38 but says he's 32? No, but if he says he's 32 and he looks like he's 49, then we have a problem. Or if he says he's a tough, muscular cop but he's really a skinny twink with an ill-fitting security guard's outfit.

 

If it's a uniform thing (something I tend to have a special interest in, but not exclusively so) do I care if he's REALLY in the Marine Corps? Shit no! Trust me on this one, I know a lot of real cops and military guys, and they often have less "presence" than the fakers.

 

Escorts are in the illusion business. "Plausible" is the word. They've got to understand what they have to offer and then offer it. And, one way or the other, they've got to be a "people" person, just like anyone in a service business has to be.

 

Drugs? I don't think I've ever hired an escort who was visibly under the influence. These guys tend to work pretty hard and drugs get in the way. Who knows, maybe I've hired someone was was whacked out and I didn't know it, but I doubt this.

 

HIV? That's a tougher one. I treat them all as if they've got it. If they had it I'd appreciate being told, but I don't ask.

 

Conclusion: I have yet to hire an escort who I didn't get along with. Some are better than others, but I've liked them all and treated them with respect. A good escort is an artist, and I appreciate art.

[Bilbo]

Bravo, Willy! Excellent post.

[Guest regulation]

>When you go out to a restaurant and have a great meal and

>tip the waiter 20% because the food and the service were

>fantastic, does each of you seethe inside because the

>waiter's attitude wasn't "sincere" on account of money being

>exchanged?

 

"Sincere" about what? I assume no one would tip handsomely unless he thought the waiter had made a sincere effort to provide good service.

 

>Escorts are not commodities, they are custom-made.

 

 

Then it wouldn't make sense for an escort to quote a price and justify it by saying, "That's what all the escorts charge, that's the market price." And yet that is exactly what many of them do. They price themselves that way precisely because they know that there is a market for escort services, as for any other commodity, and if they price themselves far above the market many clients will go elsewhere. Like it or not, it's a commodity business.

[Guest Willy]

>Then it wouldn't make sense for an escort to quote a price

>and justify it by saying, "That's what all the escorts

>charge, that's the market price." And yet that is exactly

>what many of them do. They price themselves that way

>precisely because they know that there is a market for

>escort services, as for any other commodity, and if they

>price themselves far above the market many clients will go

>elsewhere. Like it or not, it's a commodity business.

 

 

My comments were partly literal and partly figurative, and you have a reasonable point. Maybe it's more accurate to say that escorts provide a customized service. Or maybe they are luxury commodities. Or maybe semi-custom. Take your pick.

 

It's true that sex is at the core of an escort's service, and sex in and of itself is a commodity. It has a commodity-based price. And the customization surrounding it, while different in each case, also tends to have a uniform price, which suggests a commodity aspect. Escorts aren't Picasso. Maybe they are Thomas Kinkade, "painter of light?"

 

If you want sex and little or no customization, it's available cheap on the street at a price approaching pure commodity. The higher the level of customization and differentiation (the "wrapper") the more you'll pay. This is why, for example, some escorts who are really good looking, famous or who do a particular kink well will charge more. It's a matter of supply, demand, entry barriers, rivalry, etc. ... the reference text on the subject is "Competitive Stranegy," by Michael Porter, a Harvard Business School professor who would doubtlessly be amazed to see his work cited in reference to the pricing of male prostitution. But I'm sure he'd agree with the validity of my comments.

 

I find that I enjoy myself more when I establish some level of familiarity and connection with the person. Otherwise, no matter how attractive the face and body, everything is too impersonal and I am not happy. One thing I am buying is personalization, which is certainly no crime. Except in Mississippi.

 

You see, I have a difficult time treating another human being as a thing, which to me is what "commodity" tends to imply. It turns me off, which makes my dick soft. The fact that I'm buying a service that includes sex does not, as some popular culture (especially from ascetic conseratives) would imply, that I regard the provider as merely an instrument or an object.

 

In some cases there might be an objectifying element to the sex. Such as when I find some hard ass, stiff-dicked top man who will stick it in my mouth and say tough things to me while he's wearing a set of marine corps class C's and I'm on the floor looking up at this big, strong, tall, proud, tough man-god. In this case, we are not discussing the unique attributes of his mutlifaceted personality; there might or might not be time for that later, as the mood might dictate.

 

But in the case I've just cited, the objectification is part of a highly customized service, and is the square jaw and thousand-yard stare that comes with it. As part of this commercial relationship, am I going to act as if my new-found artist, who might charge me a few hundred bucks for an evening as the gallery, as if he is interchangeable?

 

My dad taught me never to say never, but I'll say it now: Never!

 

p.s.: It's been a while since I last found the escort I have described. If someone should know of another one on the East Coast, I am all ears and wallet. Plausibility is key. And I don't like camouflage uniforms. :9

[Guest regulation]

>My comments were partly literal and partly figurative, and

>you have a reasonable point. Maybe it's more accurate to say

>that escorts provide a customized service. Or maybe they are

>luxury commodities. Or maybe semi-custom. Take your pick.

 

I think it is more accurate to say that an escort who truly provided a unique service could charge whatever he wished, since there would be, by definition, no one who could compete with him by offering the same service at a lower price. Instead, escort prices tend to be fairly uniform in a given geographic area; that's because if any escort charges much more than the market rate for that area clients go elsewhere to get the same service at a lower price.

 

>You see, I have a difficult time treating another human

>being as a thing, which to me is what "commodity" tends to

>imply. It turns me off, which makes my dick soft. The fact

>that I'm buying a service that includes sex does not, as

>some popular culture (especially from ascetic conseratives)

>would imply, that I regard the provider as merely an

>instrument or an object.

 

Each of us has his own little quirks. Thinking of an escort as a commodity has absolutely no effect on my enjoyment of the experience whatsoever, I'm pleased to say.

[Guest Willy]

>I think it is more accurate to say that an escort who truly

>provided a unique service could charge whatever he wished,

>since there would be, by definition, no one who could

>compete with him by offering the same service at a lower

>price.

 

For every good or service, be it custom or commodity (and most are somewhere in between) there is a range of quantities demanded at particular prices, and there is a range of quantities supplied at different prices.

 

Those ranges are commonly protrayed in graphical form as "supply" and "demand" "curves." The meeting point of those curves is called the "clearing price." Everything has a clearing price. A variety of factors will cause demand and supply curves to move and change their slope (a/k/a "elasticity"), but no one can ever charge "whatever he wished" for any good or service unless "whatever he wished" happens to be "what the market will bear," in which case further examination will usually reveal an element of what we might call self-censorship (commonly called, in the vernacular, "being realistic") with regard to what is wished.

 

 

>Instead, escort prices tend to be fairly uniform in

>a given geographic area; that's because if any escort

>charges much more than the market rate for that area clients

>go elsewhere to get the same service at a lower price.

 

Not "the same service," but rather "similar" or "substitute" services. But not "the same" services. A blowjob from Arnold Swartzenegger is not the same service as a blowjob from Tom Arnold. The blowjob itself might be a commodity given that only a few square inches of flesh are truly involved, but when you hire an escort you are buying not just a blowjob but a blowjob from a particular person with characteristics that get your dick hard.

 

This lifts the whole thing out of the realm of pure commodity. Even street hustler services, which I would call closer to commodity sex than most others, are far from undifferentiated.

 

 

>Each of us has his own little quirks. Thinking of an escort

>as a commodity has absolutely no effect on my enjoyment of

>the experience whatsoever, I'm pleased to say.

 

Fair enough. Whatever floats yer boat. I think regarding an escort as a "commodity," i.e., having no differentiating characteristics, defeats the whole purpose of the activity. In more colloquial terms, I think the word here is "jaded?" Or you might say "realistic." Or maybe "honest," to which I would retort, "brutal" and "dehumanizing."

 

But, even if you think of it this way (which you are free to do, and which freedom I would defend on grounds that a hardon has no conscience, and shouldn't be asked to have one), I also believe that to treat an escort as a commodity, unless perhaps this is part of the nature of the service you are buying, is likely to prove problematic on a number of fronts, not to mention depressing and maybe even bitterly desperate (or desperately bitter). Or so I imagine. But, as Dennis Miller likes to say, that's just my opinion. I might be wrong.

[Guest regulation]

>>Instead, escort prices tend to be fairly uniform in

>>a given geographic area; that's because if any escort

>>charges much more than the market rate for that area clients

>>go elsewhere to get the same service at a lower price.

>

>Not "the same service," but rather "similar" or "substitute"

>services. But not "the same" services.

 

That sounds to me like a distinction without a difference. If people are willing to accept one in place of the other then in their perception one must be the same as the other. And if they were not willing to accept one in place of the other prices would not be as uniform as they are. That is the reality.

 

>I also believe that to treat an escort

>as a commodity, unless perhaps this is part of the nature of

>the service you are buying, is likely to prove problematic

>on a number of fronts, not to mention depressing and maybe

>even bitterly desperate (or desperately bitter). Or so I

>imagine. But, as Dennis Miller likes to say, that's just my

>opinion. I might be wrong.

 

If you think it's not a good thing to do, then don't do it. I have been involved in this business longer than any of the escorts who post here and have never encuntered the problems you predict. But I would not presume to tell you how to behave, just as I do not want any advice from you on how I should behave. :-)

[Guest Willy]

>That sounds to me like a distinction without a difference.

>If people are willing to accept one in place of the other

>then in their perception one must be the same as the other.

>And if they were not willing to accept one in place of the

>other prices would not be as uniform as they are. That is

>the reality.

 

Consider the following three examples:

 

1. The restaurant is out of steaks, so you have chicken. Therefore steak is the same as chicken?

 

2. There are six primary care doctors in town; their prices are within 10-15% of each other, which doesn't really matter anyway because payment is an insurance issue. But there are two you will readily go to, two you won't go to (one is a jerk who you've heard graduated last in his medical school class and was successfully sued for malpractice; the other has bad breath and dirty fingernails and makes no secret of his hatred for queers) and two that you'll consider only if your two favorites are booked (one is from India and speaks in such a heavy accent you can barely understand her, and the other is fine for simple stuff but doesn't seem very smart once you get past the basics). Are primary care doctors in your town a commodity, or are they people offering a differentiated, semi-customized services?

 

3. You are in the mood for a really nice dinner and are willing to fork over $300 for two. But the places you call are booked. You say to your partner, "Ah screw it, let's stay home and have frozen pizza instead." Therefore, because you've substituted frozen pizza at home for fine dining in a nice restaurant, are they the same because they both involve the consumption of food?

 

 

>If you think it's not a good thing to do, then don't do it.

>I have been involved in this business longer than any of the

>escorts who post here and have never encuntered the problems

>you predict.

 

I didn't predict any problems. I described a grim, hostile and jaded attitude that, the longer our exchange goes on, the more I think you've got in spades. By the way, perhaps it was a mere typo rather than a Freudian slip on your part, but when I call a male escort I do so partly because I have no wish for anything resembling an "encunter"

 

 

>But I would not presume to tell you how to

>behave, just as I do not want any advice from you on how I

>should behave. :-)

 

On this, we agree. If the escorts will tolerate you (or me, for that matter ... let's face it, you and I share one thing in common which is that we find it necessary to, on occasion, pay for sex) in return for money, that's the bottom line.

[Guest regulation]

>Consider the following three examples:

>

>1. The restaurant is out of steaks, so you have chicken.

>Therefore steak is the same as chicken?

 

 

If I pay the same price for both, it can only be because I place the same value on both. If I don't value both equally, I will not pay the same price.

 

 

>

>2. Are primary care

>doctors in your town a commodity, or are they people

>offering a differentiated, semi-customized services?

>

 

Since they must all meet certain minimum standards in order to be licensed to practice, they should all be capable of doing all that a primary care doctor is meant to do. That is the whole point of the certification process presided over by the medical board of my state (and of yours).

 

 

>3. You are in the mood for a really nice dinner and are

>willing to fork over $300 for two. But the places you call

>are booked. You say to your partner, "Ah screw it, let's

>stay home and have frozen pizza instead." Therefore, because

>you've substituted frozen pizza at home for fine dining in a

>nice restaurant, are they the same because they both involve

>the consumption of food?

 

Your comparison has nothing to do with the subject of our discussion because it involves a decision based on the unavailability of the good or service one wishes to buy.

 

>I didn't predict any problems.

 

Then why did you use the word "problematic" in your post? My dictionary defines that word to mean "posing a problem." Or were you being "figurative" again?

 

 

> I described a grim, hostile

>and jaded attitude that, the longer our exchange goes on,

>the more I think you've got in spades.

 

As I already said, whatever my "attitude" may be it has never interfered with my enjoyment of the services of the escorts I've hired. That really seems to bother you. I guess like many who post here you expect others to tolerate your values and ideas, no matter how different yours are from theirs, but you don't feel obligated to extend the same tolerance to them. Instead, you disparage and insult those whose values are different from yours. That's very common here.

 

>>But I would not presume to tell you how to

>>behave, just as I do not want any advice from you on how I

>>should behave. :-)

>

>On this, we agree. If the escorts will tolerate you (or me,

>for that matter ... let's face it, you and I share one thing

>in common which is that we find it necessary to, on

>occasion, pay for sex) in return for money, that's the

>bottom line.

 

If you make it a practice to pay people to pretend that they find you sexually desirable, I think it's ridiculous for you to accuse anyone else of engaging in "dehumanizing" behavior, as you did in a previous post. If what you really want is a genuine "human" experience, then go and get yourself a date with someone who actually wants to be with you. If you want to or need to have someone pretend with you, on the other hand, then you can hire someone to do that, but don't presume to tell me that there is something wrong with me simply because I don't care to engage in the same pretense that you enjoy. You're not paying me, after all.

[Guest Willy]

>>Consider the following three examples:

 

>Then why did you use the word "problematic" in your post?

>My dictionary defines that word to mean "posing a problem."

>Or were you being "figurative" again?

 

Indeed, I was being figurative. Gore Vidal once called America the home of the dull and the land of the literal. I try not to suffer from either of these.

 

>my "attitude" may be it has

>never interfered with my enjoyment of the services of the

>escorts I've hired. That really seems to bother you. I

>guess like many who post here you expect others to tolerate

>your values and ideas, no matter how different yours are

>from theirs, but you don't feel obligated to extend the same

>tolerance to them. Instead, you disparage and insult those

>whose values are different from yours.

 

I'm not disparaging you. I feel a bit sad for you, though. You're patronizing escorts yet you plainly seethe with resentment toward them.

 

 

>If you make it a practice to pay people to pretend that they

>find you sexually desirable I think it's ridiculous for you

>to accuse anyone else of engaging in "dehumanizing"

>behavior, as you did in a previous post.

 

You're presuming two things. One is that it's "dehumanizing" to pay for sex and the illusions that go with it, and the other is that all forms of dehumanization are equal. I disagree with the first proposition, but even if it's true then the second proposition is foolish.

 

 

>If what you really

>want is a genuine "human" experience, then go and get

>yourself a date with someone who actually wants to be with

>you.

 

You argue that commercial sex completely lacks any genuine human element simply because money is being exchanged. How quintessentially American in the saddest possible sense.