The Mean Girl Dynamic on Company of Men

[mike carey]

I don't think the emoticons are the problem. Just as is the case with typed words, they can  be used to convey justifiable responses to some posts, just as much as conveying unwarranted snark, or 'mean girl' dynamics.

[+ SirBillybob]

38 minutes ago, mike carey said:

I don't think the emoticons are the problem. Just as is the case with typed words, they can  be used to convey justifiable responses to some posts, just as much as conveying unwarranted snark, or 'mean girl' dynamics.

YMMV. There are few things more subjective than justifiability.

Interesting topic and piece, subject of course to critical appraisal, with I would think application to drop-down options as well, though I don’t think a ‘like’ response signifying read receipt in many instances would be deemed to represent any particular component of Big Five or Dark Triad. 

The Dark Side of Emojis | Psychology Today Canada

WWW.PSYCHOLOGYTODAY.COM

---

A communication strategy centered around self-promotion.

 

Edited yesterday at 12:54 PM by SirBillybob

[+ KensingtonHomo]

It’s good to see this raised. I do appreciate the moderators and know it often feels like a thankless job. In my experience, which is primarily in the Daddy’s Den sections, there are a few guys (and I’ll refrain from naming them) who are consistently mean and nasty about members and providers alike. Their participation here seems to be limited to saying members and providers are ugly, fat, unattractive, etc. Worse, they rarely offer any actual reviews or insight from their experiences. 

As I tend to call these guys out, I get lots of DMs from more conflict averse members who thank me. Personally, I think any negative commentary about a member or provider’s appearance- not including if someone is older, heavier, using fake pics - should be removed. If a provider is being honest about his appearance, there’s no need to comment on it. Rather we should stick to the quality of service, connection, personal experience, etc. As this Board is anonymous, it’s particularly galling to have members ripping into providers’ appearance. If members were subjected to the treatment they give to providers, I suspect many would crumble. 

And allowing these members to constantly make derogatory comments about providers appearance reinforces the terrible “beauty” standards that are common in the gay male community. I see guys my age or a few years older express that they feel ugly and undesirable. At a time when our community is under attack, can’t we be kinder to each other? 

[+ SirBillybob]

I think that one explanation for physical appearance putdowns by anonymous posters whose own physical representation is understandably redacted due to a board’s agenda is that it might be the only location where they can present ambiguity about their own appearance.

It may be a misdirected way to self-soothe their own harsh critical appraisal of self-perceived deficiencies. They can automatically decouple the societal tendency to conflate overall person value with physical characteristics particularly in the context of disagreement.

I’ve had a few experiences of chatroom posters asserting major deficits in my physical appearance. Upon crossing paths on a chance basis I was absolutely floored. Otherwise, in a neutral context I would simply view them as average joes. They essentially instructed me, predisposed me, to be harshly judgemental. 

Edited yesterday at 03:09 PM by SirBillybob

[BSR]

25 minutes ago, KensingtonHomo said:

and I’ll refrain from naming them

Oh, come on … to quote the late great Joan Rivers, “I’ll name names if you will!”

[+ SirBillybob]

8 minutes ago, BSR said:

Oh, come on … to quote the late great Joan Rivers, “I’ll name names if you will!”

Haha, the old who blinks first stalemate.

But she also asked select strangers if a piece of shit on their ring finger should be referred to as a diamond. 😏

Edited yesterday at 03:07 PM by SirBillybob

[Ali Gator]

About a year ago, I responded to a thread here on the forum. It was a 'general topic' (not about a provider or a review) and I had shared my experience concerning the subject matter. Nothing controversial, just my experience. (I believe the thread was about a chain retailer).

Anyhow, someone I never engaged with before decided to quote me, and rip me up one side and tear me down the other because my experience was opposite his. So be it. I didn't respond or defend myself, I just continued on here, enjoying the forum.

Within days, I got PMs from other members here (again, members I had not engaged with previously) giving me the heads up on this guy, letting me know he was 'trouble' and not to be bothered by him. Apparently, these other guys had dealings with him in the past. I thanked each one for their message of concern, and let them all know I wasn't bothered by him at all. But with the info they all shared as a community, I made the decision to skip over all his posts on this thread every time I see his distinctive avatar - no interest in him or his thoughts.

 

What's funny is he's PMd me on a couple of things in the past year, and I could tell he was itching for an argument. But again, I had no interest in what he said, and never replied. 

[+ SirBillybob]

With a carefully chosen deployment of emoticons you can make anybody like or not like you according to your whim, irrespective of positions on a topic. This only substantiates their artificiality and calls into question whether my own application of such reactions is honourable or disingenuous. 

[BrickBuilder]

6 hours ago, BSR said:

Oh, come on … to quote the late great Joan Rivers, “I’ll name names if you will!”

I have not been on this site for a bit because of the "Mean Girl" / "Toxic" attitudes here.  When I logged out I used other phrases but I will go with these.  Members attacking other members or providers...just sad.   But a friend sent me the link this thread to me and I immediately burst out laughing.  

So I will name the mean girls (see below).  Members that feel they have the "right to make you provide gory details" if you disagree with them, or through subtle jabs take aim at you, or come after you with the reactions.  All the while proclaiming their innocence or posting about "theoretical situations" or using CoM as their own personal Facebook pages or commenting negatively on providers that they have never met and hired.   Then when you reach out to the moderators they don't even acknowledge that you contacted them (plausible deniability I am sure).

Ali Gator - Mean Girl

PhileasFogg - Mean Girl

Public Assistance - Mean Girl

Vegas Millennial - Mean Girl

Archangel - Mean Girl

+ all the other members that attack provider's weight or build or or height or hair or age or tattoos or anything else they don't like about him.  Or attack a members view or opinion that is stated in more plain or generic terms or without the gory details.

Your turn.

Edited 20 hours ago by BrickBuilder

[+ José Soplanucas]

[+ PhileasFogg]

17 hours ago, Ali Gator said:

I honestly don't know if I'm understanding this correctly.

Are you saying escorts can't control their age and description of their appearance which they themselves submit in their ads ? 

Are you saying a 40 year old escort who stands at 5' 4" with a hairy body can't control the information he puts in his ad which says he's 5'10" with a naturally smooth body ?

Please correct me and tell me I misunderstood.

My opinion is that if you look at a picture of some who - let’s say - is REALLY 25, but LOOKS 40.   Are you going forward just because of his age?

To me, we read a number and we see a picture…we make a decision based on what we see, not what we read

People are smart enough.  Age is a number.  If they don’t look what the say and you don’t like what you see, move on.  But, if you don’t believe the number and you do like what you see, you’re probably going to move forward. Right?

[+ SirBillybob]

If it’s actually ‘public’, not ‘pubic’, then I’m SlirBillybob or SirBillyblob, either of which could conceivably track. 

Edited 22 hours ago by SirBillybob

[+ SirBillybob]

Where there’s smoke there’s fire. If a subset of escorts on a chat site subtly or overtly self-describe as the best and most skilled and attractive options, consumers within the same arena will naturally tend to comment on such variables with respect to the broader constituency of escorts.

It’s not necessarily shameless self-promotion because it’s just biz, but it does inherently lend itself to hyperbole at either end of the spectrum of subjective perception and critical appraisal of appeal, particularly within a monetary transactional context.

Rarely do we read, “Ya know, that fella looks like he’d be an OK bet for exchanging cash to get my rocks off.”

Edited 21 hours ago by SirBillybob

[+ MysticMenace]

6 hours ago, BSR said:

Oh, come on … to quote the late great Joan Rivers, “I’ll name names if you will!”

 

[Tom C. Sinclair]

Interesting read.

Cliques never go away. Best to accept that. Ducky Duck! 

 

[+ José Soplanucas]

5 hours ago, José Soplanucas said:

LOL. I came back to the thread and the list went longer.

[Ali Gator]

6 hours ago, PhileasFogg said:

My opinion is that if you look at a picture of some who - let’s say - is REALLY 25, but LOOKS 40.   Are you going forward just because of his age?

To me, we read a number and we see a picture…we make a decision based on what we see, not what we read

People are smart enough.  Age is a number.  If they don’t look what the say and you don’t like what you see, move on.  But, if you don’t believe the number and you do like what you see, you’re probably going to move forward. Right?

The post I was referring to implied guys can't control the information which they put in their ads - such as age, height and body description (at least that was my understanding). I asked how can they not control this ? There was never any mention about hiring / not hiring the guys.  

[+ PhileasFogg]

7 minutes ago, Ali Gator said:

The post I was referring to implied guys can't control the information which they put in their ads - such as age, height and body description (at least that was my understanding). I asked how can they not control this ? There was never any mention about hiring / not hiring the guys.  

Sorry, I misunderstood 

[marylander1940]

On 8/3/2025 at 8:30 PM, caliguy said:

I think some here are used to 

You're not alone and I could sure name a few. I've noticed they're usually the same types that rip escorts for things they can't control like age or appearance. 

Some people are just naturally assholes and that's about all you can say. 

 

 

Yes, they hide online to go after escorts. They also brag about getting the most amount of time/sex for the least amount of money. 

I've been called an apologist for escorts and I'm very proud of it. Escorts and clients are two faces of the same coin; there shouldn't be a "they versus us". 

A very admired escort and forum member kept being harassed about his real age and yet all his new pics always look great. 

Edited 16 hours ago by marylander1940

[marylander1940]

5 hours ago, SirBillybob said:

Where there’s smoke there’s fire. If a subset of escorts on a chat site subtly or overtly self-describe as the best and most skilled and attractive options, consumers within the same arena will naturally tend to comment on such variables with respect to the broader constituency of escorts.

It’s not necessarily shameless self-promotion because it’s just biz, but it does inherently lend itself to hyperbole at either end of the spectrum of subjective perception and critical appraisal of appeal, particularly within a monetary transactional context.

Rarely do we read, “Ya know, that fella looks like he’d be an OK bet for exchanging cash to get my rocks off.”

I miss Mocha, he was honest and mostly loved to come over here to vent! 

Some folks kept going after him for doing it but he simply ignored them. 

Self-promotion that sometimes is beyond obvious and undermines other post they make and made us doubt of their credibility. 

[+ KensingtonHomo]

7 hours ago, BrickBuilder said:

Ali Gator - Mean Girl

PhileasFogg - Mean Girl

Public Assistance - Mean Girl

Vegas Millennial - Mean Girl

Archangel - Mean Girl

I haven’t had negative experiences with three out of the five you mentioned, possibly because they gave me blocked. But IMHO Pubic Assistance is the Regina George of the group. 

I simply see no reason to degrade providers or our fellow members. Isn’t there enough awful in the world for queer people and sed workers without us dragging each other down?  
 

There’s a way to give critical feedback about a provider without dehumanizing them or being mean spirited. If you follow my comments you may realize I do not often find the providers the majority of you do appealing. But I do not comment on those posts because you don’t need me to yuck your yum. 

[marylander1940]

8 hours ago, BrickBuilder said:

I have not been on this site for a bit because of the "Mean Girl" / "Toxic" attitudes here.  When I logged out I used other phrases but I will go with these.  Members attacking other members or providers...just sad.   But a friend sent me the link this thread to me and I immediately burst out laughing.  

So I will name the mean girls (see below).  Members that feel they have the "right to make you provide gory details" if you disagree with them, or through subtle jabs take aim at you, or come after you with the reactions.  All the while proclaiming their innocence or posting about "theoretical situations" or using CoM as their own personal Facebook pages or commenting negatively on providers that they have never met and hired.   Then when you reach out to the moderators they don't even acknowledge that you contacted them (plausible deniability I am sure).

Ali Gator - Mean Girl

PhileasFogg - Mean Girl

Public Assistance - Mean Girl

Vegas Millennial - Mean Girl

Archangel - Mean Girl

+ all the other members that attack provider's weight or build or or height or hair or age or tattoos or anything else they don't like about him.  Or attack a members view or opinion that is stated in more plain or generic terms or without the gory details.

Your turn.

@Ali Gator I appreciate his contributions about "show business" (I wonder if the term is still in use), his "venting" about working with millennials, and the details of his interactions with masseurs. Certainly, working guys COULD learn a lot just by reading him.

@pubic_assistance is always honest about his opinions, life, businesses, appearance, hookups/hires, family, etc. He's consistent!

@Vegas_Millennial is also honest and shares good information about business and his MANY encounters with escorts. He could write a book about his sexual life.... 

I constantly disagreed with the last 2 members above on a certain subject that we can't talk about anymore in this forum, but they were around 80% factually right in their arguments and that's saying a lot about the other side. 

@PhileasFogg and @Archangel I don't know much about them, I usually agree with them. 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by marylander1940

[+ PhileasFogg]

9 hours ago, BrickBuilder said:

I have not been on this site for a bit because of the "Mean Girl" / "Toxic" attitudes here.  When I logged out I used other phrases but I will go with these.  Members attacking other members or providers...just sad.   But a friend sent me the link this thread to me and I immediately burst out laughing.  

So I will name the mean girls (see below).  Members that feel they have the "right to make you provide gory details" if you disagree with them, or through subtle jabs take aim at you, or come after you with the reactions.  All the while proclaiming their innocence or posting about "theoretical situations" or using CoM as their own personal Facebook pages or commenting negatively on providers that they have never met and hired.   Then when you reach out to the moderators they don't even acknowledge that you contacted them (plausible deniability I am sure).

Ali Gator - Mean Girl

PhileasFogg - Mean Girl

Public Assistance - Mean Girl

Vegas Millennial - Mean Girl

Archangel - Mean Girl

+ all the other members that attack provider's weight or build or or height or hair or age or tattoos or anything else they don't like about him.  Or attack a members view or opinion that is stated in more plain or generic terms or without the gory details.

Your turn.

You know, before you changed your name from AtlTopGuy, you were the one on the attack.  Don’t you deflect and gaslight   We all simply focused on the positives about the guys you attacked.  Call it like it is, but don’t deflect.   I don’t think you know what mean girl is, but you clearly need affirmation  

Edited to ask: have you ever said anything positive about anybody here?   Hell, when this post came up, you and two others were the poster children in my view 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by PhileasFogg

[rvwnsd]

Moderator's warning: Do we really need to tell you not to troll, attack, and talk about each other in a thread called "The Mean Girl Dynamic on Company of Men?" After reading several posts, it seems we do, so here we go:

Stop trolling, attacking and talking about each other, and veering off topic.

Also, just in case anyone was contemplating doing so, no sniping or fighting. 

 

 

[+ SirBillybob]

9 hours ago, José Soplanucas said:

LOL. I came back to the thread and the list went longer.

But Oh, I just want a remote control for my curtains to match my carpet.

Edited 7 hours ago by SirBillybob