ThicMuscleJock Nick Bayne?

[+ SportBud7]

On 12/31/2025 at 1:12 AM, Gymowner said:

We're beyond excited to call him our husband? Isn't having multiple wives/husbands against the law? And if not married by state then I guess one could find a crack pot "reverend" to "marry" the thrupple. 

But hey, why not 6 or 7 within a marriage? None of them stay monogamous to a marriage anyways.

Thankfully, we only have to live by the rules we set for ourselves. And those of the state in which we reside. 🤣🤣🤣

[samuel]

On 12/8/2025 at 1:02 PM, gersonides said:

https://rent.men/Thicmusclejock

is this real?!

G

hes beautiful!!!

[JamesIntrigued]

Yes, the ad is real. Very high end. Looks exactly like the photos. 

[BCMan]

Bump. Anyone else with actual experience with him? Thanks!

[chadLA]

bump

[gniknab]

Hmmmm….

[guru68]

Gonna need a lot of sugar if there are three of them.

[Muscle_Admirer]

These three make for an undeniably hot throuple. Based on his OnlyFans content, ThicMuscleJock is appealing and looks like he’s worth every penny of his steep rates…if he actually delivers the fun sexiness in person.

What I find far less appealing is the tone of his profile.  His profile states:  “Looking for sugar daddy’s and regular weekly clients. FYI my rate is high so I’m really only interested in clients with deep pockets that can treat me right. Let’s chat and see if we’re a good fit.”   While I respect the upfront screening, the message lands as extremely off-putting, even for one who could technically afford it. He’s explicitly looking for sugar daddies and weekly regulars, stating his rate is $1k/hour and that he’s only interested in clients with deep pockets who can also provide assumably luxury clothing, a condo, a car and other gifts in addition.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but IMHO escorts are supposed to be in the business of selling fantasy. This profile does the opposite. It offers a cold, one-sided transaction that demands significant financial commitment while promising nothing beyond simply sharing proximity with this Adonis. That might be catnip for true cash slaves, but for a $4k monthly minimum spend, I’d expect more variety, reciprocity, and at least the illusion of mutual enjoyment.

I suspect he believes this blunt, high-value positioning will land him a sugar daddy. In my opinion, the opposite is true. I think men of means respond better to someone who plays the field, builds a loyal and satisfied clientele, and lets the deeper financial arrangements develop naturally. I can imagine very few clients, even wealthy ones, find the overt commodification of the relationship attractive when it’s spelled out so plainly in black and white.  Just my 2 cents…

Edited Friday at 03:16 AM by Muscle_Admirer

[+ Gar1eth]

32 minutes ago, Muscle_Admirer said:

These three make for an undeniably hot throuple. Based on his OnlyFans content, ThicMuscleJock is appealing and looks like he’s worth every penny of his steep rates…if he actually delivers the fun sexiness in person.

What I find far less appealing is the tone of his profile.  His profile states:  “Looking for sugar daddy’s and regular weekly clients. FYI my rate is high so I’m really only interested in clients with deep pockets that can treat me right. Let’s chat and see if we’re a good fit.”   While I respect the upfront screening, the message lands as extremely off-putting, even for one who could technically afford it. He’s explicitly looking for sugar daddies and weekly regulars, stating his rate is $1k/hour and that he’s only interested in clients with deep pockets who can also provide assumably luxury clothing, a condo, a car and other gifts in addition.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but IMHO escorts are supposed to be in the business of selling fantasy. This profile does the opposite. It offers a cold, one-sided transaction that demands significant financial commitment while promising nothing beyond simply sharing proximity with this Adonis. That might be catnip for true cash slaves, but for a $4k monthly minimum spend, I’d expect more variety, reciprocity, and at least the illusion of mutual enjoyment.

I suspect he believes this blunt, high-value positioning will land him a sugar daddy. In my opinion, the opposite is true. I think men of means respond better to someone who plays the field, builds a loyal and satisfied clientele, and lets the deeper financial arrangements develop naturally. I can imagine very few clients, even wealthy ones, find the overt commodification of the relationship attractive when it’s spelled out so plainly in black and white.  Just my 2 cents…

I'm all out of lemon juice and matches. Can anyone decipher this?

 

 

[+ azdr0710]

5 minutes ago, Gar1eth said:

I'm all out of lemon juice and matches. Can anyone decipher this?

 

 

you can try like you're going to copy and paste it.....click and drag across the blank spot and see if it appears

[BrklynNYC]

Wow!

[BuzzLiteQueer]

15 hours ago, azdr0710 said:

click and drag across the blank spot and see if it appears

that works.  but FWIW, the mysterious text is not that interesting.  Just a long, but well-written, broadside against the tone of the RM's marketing.

[+ MakeMeCowboy]

Here it is..... no big deal:

 

 

Posted 21 hours ago (edited)

These three make for an undeniably hot throuple. Based on his OnlyFans content, ThicMuscleJock is appealing and looks like he’s worth every penny of his steep rates…if he actually delivers the fun sexiness in person.

What I find far less appealing is the tone of his profile.  His profile states:  “Looking for sugar daddy’s and regular weekly clients. FYI my rate is high so I’m really only interested in clients with deep pockets that can treat me right. Let’s chat and see if we’re a good fit.”   While I respect the upfront screening, the message lands as extremely off-putting, even for one who could technically afford it. He’s explicitly looking for sugar daddies and weekly regulars, stating his rate is $1k/hour and that he’s only interested in clients with deep pockets who can also provide assumably luxury clothing, a condo, a car and other gifts in addition.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but IMHO escorts are supposed to be in the business of selling fantasy. This profile does the opposite. It offers a cold, one-sided transaction that demands significant financial commitment while promising nothing beyond simply sharing proximity with this Adonis. That might be catnip for true cash slaves, but for a $4k monthly minimum spend, I’d expect more variety, reciprocity, and at least the illusion of mutual enjoyment.

I suspect he believes this blunt, high-value positioning will land him a sugar daddy. In my opinion, the opposite is true. I think men of means respond better to someone who plays the field, builds a loyal and satisfied clientele, and lets the deeper financial arrangements develop naturally. I can imagine very few clients, even wealthy ones, find the overt commodification of the relationship attractive when it’s spelled out so plainly in black and white.  Just my 2 cents…

[Tandy Newton]

1 hour ago, MakeMeCowboy said:

Here it is..... no big deal:

 

 

 

Posted 21 hours ago (edited)

These three make for an undeniably hot throuple. Based on his OnlyFans content, ThicMuscleJock is appealing and looks like he’s worth every penny of his steep rates…if he actually delivers the fun sexiness in person.

What I find far less appealing is the tone of his profile.  His profile states:  “Looking for sugar daddy’s and regular weekly clients. FYI my rate is high so I’m really only interested in clients with deep pockets that can treat me right. Let’s chat and see if we’re a good fit.”   While I respect the upfront screening, the message lands as extremely off-putting, even for one who could technically afford it. He’s explicitly looking for sugar daddies and weekly regulars, stating his rate is $1k/hour and that he’s only interested in clients with deep pockets who can also provide assumably luxury clothing, a condo, a car and other gifts in addition.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but IMHO escorts are supposed to be in the business of selling fantasy. This profile does the opposite. It offers a cold, one-sided transaction that demands significant financial commitment while promising nothing beyond simply sharing proximity with this Adonis. That might be catnip for true cash slaves, but for a $4k monthly minimum spend, I’d expect more variety, reciprocity, and at least the illusion of mutual enjoyment.

I suspect he believes this blunt, high-value positioning will land him a sugar daddy. In my opinion, the opposite is true. I think men of means respond better to someone who plays the field, builds a loyal and satisfied clientele, and lets the deeper financial arrangements develop naturally. I can imagine very few clients, even wealthy ones, find the overt commodification of the relationship attractive when it’s spelled out so plainly in black and white.  Just my 2 cents…

Providers today are a different breed of people from those who chose this as a calling 15, 20, 30 years ago. The men who chose to be providers back then did it for a variety of reasons: altruism, compassion, sharing love and just a natural love of sex. But most importantly, it was the understanding that a lot of gay men never had an outlet to safely express their sexual identity without possibility of getting physically hurt, outed and ostracized. 

Today's providers are a different generation, they don't see same sex attractions as a introspective feeling that others are trying to understand. Its just who they are and they know they are hot and if you want a piece of this, you better have the means and ways they require to even be in their presence. With the advent of gay rights, abolished sodomy laws, gay marriage, the Internet, extremely progressive western countries with large LGBT populations and spaces where other handsome, muscular, virile men can meet each other without any fear (circuit parties, gay cruises, gay themed resorts) and then to top it off, Only Fans; today's provider is both justifiably entitled and empowered. 

Also, there are a lot of rich professionals who happen to be gay or bisexual; many of them work at the big tech companies or are lawyers. If you are an AI scientist making 3 million per year or more; spending 5% of that income on a provider is insignificant. Going forward, there will be new guys trying to break into the industry; being a provider is usually a start and sometimes this maybe the best way for some of us to meet someone of Nicks caliber before they go into the mainstream. 

[+ Gar1eth]

7 hours ago, Tandy Newton said:

Providers today are a different breed of people from those who chose this as a calling 15, 20, 30 years ago. The men who chose to be providers back then did it for a variety of reasons: altruism, compassion, sharing love and just a natural love of sex. But most importantly, it was the understanding that a lot of gay men never had an outlet to safely express their sexual identity without possibility of getting physically hurt, outed and ostracized. 

Today's providers are a different generation, they don't see same sex attractions as a introspective feeling that others are trying to understand. Its just who they are and they know they are hot and if you want a piece of this, you better have the means and ways they require to even be in their presence. With the advent of gay rights, abolished sodomy laws, gay marriage, the Internet, extremely progressive western countries with large LGBT populations and spaces where other handsome, muscular, virile men can meet each other without any fear (circuit parties, gay cruises, gay themed resorts) and then to top it off, Only Fans; today's provider is both justifiably entitled and empowered. 

Also, there are a lot of rich professionals who happen to be gay or bisexual; many of them work at the big tech companies or are lawyers. If you are an AI scientist making 3 million per year or more; spending 5% of that income on a provider is insignificant. Going forward, there will be new guys trying to break into the industry; being a provider is usually a start and sometimes this maybe the best way for some of us to meet someone of Nicks caliber before they go into the mainstream. 

I can't say whether you are wrong or you're right.  But if by chance you are here for the night, then all I need is an hour or two... whoops a daisy. I started channeling "Joseph And The Amazing Technicolor Dream Coat."

Let me start again. I can't say whether you are right. I'm willing to concede some of what you say may be correct. But I think for the majority of providers both then and now, the primary reason for escorting is the remuneration.  

There may be lots of secondary considerations like a high sex drive, probably some quirk in their personality that allows them to meet multiple guys over their career (even if I were in good shape and handsome, I don't think I, or most of us, could do it), chance to be their own boss, scheduling flexibility compared to a typical 9 to 5 job, desperation and no real other way to make money, and I'm sure millions of other reasons-some good and some bad or unfortunate for the person leading them to escort. But I think the root of escorting is still money.  

Edited Saturday at 10:40 AM by Gar1eth

[builder boy]

10 hours ago, MakeMeCowboy said:

Here it is..... no big deal:

 

 

 

Posted 21 hours ago (edited)

These three make for an undeniably hot throuple. Based on his OnlyFans content, ThicMuscleJock is appealing and looks like he’s worth every penny of his steep rates…if he actually delivers the fun sexiness in person.

What I find far less appealing is the tone of his profile.  His profile states:  “Looking for sugar daddy’s and regular weekly clients. FYI my rate is high so I’m really only interested in clients with deep pockets that can treat me right. Let’s chat and see if we’re a good fit.”   While I respect the upfront screening, the message lands as extremely off-putting, even for one who could technically afford it. He’s explicitly looking for sugar daddies and weekly regulars, stating his rate is $1k/hour and that he’s only interested in clients with deep pockets who can also provide assumably luxury clothing, a condo, a car and other gifts in addition.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but IMHO escorts are supposed to be in the business of selling fantasy. This profile does the opposite. It offers a cold, one-sided transaction that demands significant financial commitment while promising nothing beyond simply sharing proximity with this Adonis. That might be catnip for true cash slaves, but for a $4k monthly minimum spend, I’d expect more variety, reciprocity, and at least the illusion of mutual enjoyment.

I suspect he believes this blunt, high-value positioning will land him a sugar daddy. In my opinion, the opposite is true. I think men of means respond better to someone who plays the field, builds a loyal and satisfied clientele, and lets the deeper financial arrangements develop naturally. I can imagine very few clients, even wealthy ones, find the overt commodification of the relationship attractive when it’s spelled out so plainly in black and white.  Just my 2 cents…

Agreed 

[Tandy Newton]

4 hours ago, Gar1eth said:

I can't say whether you are wrong or you're right.  But if by chance you are here for the night, then all I need is an hour or two... whoops a daisy. I started channeling "Joseph And The Amazing Technicolor Dream Coat."

Let me start again. I can't say whether you are right. I'm willing to concede some of what you say may be correct. But I think for the majority of providers both then and now, the primary reason for escorting is the remuneration.  

There may be lots of secondary considerations like a high sex drive, probably some quirk in their personality that allows them to meet multiple guys over their career (even if I were in good shape and handsome, I don't think I, or most of us, could do it), chance to be their own boss, scheduling flexibility compared to a typical 9 to 5 job, desperation and no real other way to make money, and I'm sure millions of other reasons-some good and some bad or unfortunate for the person leading them to escort. But I think the root of escorting is still money.  

Yes, money is definitely a factor since it also meant a means of survival, plus if you are handsome and can attract a lot of clients back in the day. I remember watching a video from the early 80s and themale escort said he charged $100 just for oral. I just remember the actors name, Mickey Squire in Rammed, could be wrong. That’s $345 adjusted for inflation, which meant, you had the means to do it back then considering the cost of living. Then again, the average monthly income of a single male in 1982 was $1,700, splurging $100 wasn’t a deal breaker. But some of today’s providers are asking for 3 times that or more.

[BuzzLiteQueer]

7 hours ago, Gar1eth said:

But I think the root of escorting is still money.  

Agree 100%.  Always has been and will always be.

[Tandy Newton]

These are the kinda guys who can afford Nick Bayne's affection, estimated net worth 25.5. million.

 

[mike carey]

On 5/29/2026 at 1:45 PM, Gar1eth said:

I'm all out of lemon juice and matches. Can anyone decipher this?

On 5/30/2026 at 5:18 AM, BuzzLiteQueer said:

that works.  but FWIW, the mysterious text is not that interesting.  Just a long, but well-written, broadside against the tone of the RM's marketing.

Here's what's happening here. The comment this is about was posted in a format that works in Dark Mode, with the text in white rather than in a text colour that adjusts with the settings. In the default light mode that's white text on a white background, not the easiest thing to read. If you paste something into a post there will usually be a note about it being in rich text format, with the option to convert it to plain text mode. That will post in a way that adjusts to suit the settings being used. It may also remove some other formatting.

If you're reading something, you can't change the way it was posted. Instead, if you see weird text colours that are hard to read, or the post seems to be blank, try switching to dark mode. At the top of the page there's a row of icons for notifications, private message and some others. At the right end there are two (this is in dark mode)

The light globe here is to change to light mode, if you're in light mode it will be a little crescent moon. Clicking that changes modes. (The other one in the image allows you to customise your view palette.)

[aiseeya]

On 5/29/2026 at 11:12 AM, Muscle_Admirer said:

These three make for an undeniably hot throuple. Based on his OnlyFans content, ThicMuscleJock is appealing and looks like he’s worth every penny of his steep rates…if he actually delivers the fun sexiness in person.

What I find far less appealing is the tone of his profile.  His profile states:  “Looking for sugar daddy’s and regular weekly clients. FYI my rate is high so I’m really only interested in clients with deep pockets that can treat me right. Let’s chat and see if we’re a good fit.”   While I respect the upfront screening, the message lands as extremely off-putting, even for one who could technically afford it. He’s explicitly looking for sugar daddies and weekly regulars, stating his rate is $1k/hour and that he’s only interested in clients with deep pockets who can also provide assumably luxury clothing, a condo, a car and other gifts in addition.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but IMHO escorts are supposed to be in the business of selling fantasy. This profile does the opposite. It offers a cold, one-sided transaction that demands significant financial commitment while promising nothing beyond simply sharing proximity with this Adonis. That might be catnip for true cash slaves, but for a $4k monthly minimum spend, I’d expect more variety, reciprocity, and at least the illusion of mutual enjoyment.

I suspect he believes this blunt, high-value positioning will land him a sugar daddy. In my opinion, the opposite is true. I think men of means respond better to someone who plays the field, builds a loyal and satisfied clientele, and lets the deeper financial arrangements develop naturally. I can imagine very few clients, even wealthy ones, find the overt commodification of the relationship attractive when it’s spelled out so plainly in black and white.  Just my 2 cents…

I know of a provider who land a sugar daddy that (allegedly) willing to pay him $30k/ month (on top of multiple lux gifts eg AP etc). They live in different states so they would go on 1 or 2 weeks long trip every 2 months. Sugar daddy is fully aware that the provider has a long time BF. Sugar daddy even put up some serious cash to help that provider bought his house and lux cars. So I guess never say never.

[Muscle_Admirer]

4 hours ago, aiseeya said:

I know of a provider who land a sugar daddy that (allegedly) willing to pay him $30k/ month (on top of multiple lux gifts eg AP etc). They live in different states so they would go on 1 or 2 weeks long trip every 2 months. Sugar daddy is fully aware that the provider has a long time BF. Sugar daddy even put up some serious cash to help that provider bought his house and lux cars. So I guess never say never.

Interesting arrangement.  The only appeal I can see is perhaps a power dynamic?  Just having someone waiting in the wings at ones  beck and call no matter what?  $30K/mo can get anyone a small team of beautiful men on repeat if one is so inclined.

[dutchal]

I have over the years asked a lot of providers how they got started in the business.  By far the most common answer is that they knew someone else doing it and were attracted by the extra, tax free income.  Some got to the point where they could leave a job they didn't like very much.

The second most common answer was that they were propositioned a number of times and finally gave in, and it grew from there.

The third most common was that they started as porn stars, but that income for most is not enough to survive on, and added escorting.

 Of those who were recent immigrants, many of them seemed to need the money to survive.