What we look like - Why does it matter so much now?

[Whoisyourdaddy]

The last guy who asked me for a picture stood me up for another client. I walked past them in the hotel lobby. For the record, he had negative reviews on RM and here, so I was being foolish.

What made me most upset was that he made me go to the hotel. I wasted a week talking with him and then another day trying to meet him.

[jeezifonly]

11 hours ago, mtaabq said:

Good morning. It would appear that my take on it is very different. I’ve always assumed that I was being asked for a pic so the provider would know for whom he was opening his door or whom he could expect when the door was opened when he arrives for the session. I’m sure there are providers who’ve chosen not to work with me upon seeing my photo or reading my profile. And, for me, that’s all right. I do not wish to work with someone who doesn’t wish to work with me. Apologies if I do not have a firm grasp on the topic being discussed. 

If personal safety is the issue, the pic can be requested once the appt is booked. Requested ahead, it's obviously used as an "I don't feel like it" filter.

I live in a large market, have never been asked, but have decent recent face shot to send. Happy to move on to another provider if I don't feel like it.

[pubic_assistance]

12 hours ago, mtaabq said:

I’m sure there are providers who’ve chosen not to work with me upon seeing my photo or reading my profile. And, for me, that’s all right. I do not wish to work with someone who doesn’t wish to work with me. Apologies if I do not have a firm grasp on the topic being discussed. 

I think you have the firmest grasp of the subject. The people who are declaring it "wrong" and "unprofessional" to ask.for a photo are the ones who are lost. 

[viewing ownly]

A very few advertisers put in their ad that it doesn't matter what you look like, just arrive clean and with a positive vibe, treating him like you'd like to be treated. Those tend not only to be the best hires for me, but also the best people to be around more than once. 

The most surprising guy I saw who listed this was a handsome stud in his late twenties who has now been out of the massage biz for about two years. Could he gel well with a guy nearly twice his age? I was clean, I was nice, as was he, and it was tremendous. 

 

[+ Pensant]

I’d guess that less than 5% of the providers I’ve met requested a face pic. I’m decent looking for my age, so I was willing to oblige. They all responded “handsome!” and we ended up with a hot session.

[jackcali]

I don't provide a face pic, but several times I've had providers hosting incalls meet me on the street near their places.  I assume that's partly for safety but also partly so that they can walk away if I am extraordinarily ugly.  But, since I'm only ordinarily ugly, it's never been a problem.

[+ sniper]

On top of the personal safety issue, it could also be to make sure you aren't someone they know from their regualr life,  which could get awkward. Say the provider turns out to be your coworker? Or brother-in-law?

[la_connor]

1 hour ago, sniper said:

Or brother-in-law?

You just planted a fantasy I hope my sister's husband doesn't see in my eyes at dinner next week.  Sis would kill me.  

[Braziliancutee]

Sometimes I like to ask bc I am very curious. Just if I am talking a lot before to meet. Like weeks before… but I respect who don’t want share, and is one of the reasons that a lot guys are paying and I respect that. They want discretion.
 

Edited Tuesday at 09:08 PM by Braziliancutee

[Sfteenboy]

I think it’s a bit of curiosity. I personally kind of enjoy the anonymity and mystery of not knowing how a guy will look. It’s a turn on when we just meet and start. I think it helps me get started and makes me more uninhibited 

 

 

https://rent.men/sfteenboy

[+ KensingtonHomo]

I have to go with @DznNYC and @Jamie21 here. Providers who are asking for face pics are not actual sex workers; they're guys who think they're hot enough to get paid for sex that they would likely have done for free. I don't recall ever being asked for a face pic as a condition of meeting. If someone is asking that, let's take the advice of our professional advisors here and move on. 

A provider asking to FaceTime sounds more like he's checking that you're real and not a serial killer. I'd do that no problem. 

Thankfully, I am not attracted to my brothers-in-law.  

[jackcali]

1 hour ago, KensingtonHomo said:

Thankfully, I am not attracted to my brothers-in-law.  

Neither am I attracted to my brothers-in-law.  One of my nephews, on the other hand . . . 

[d.anders]

On 3/23/2026 at 7:25 PM, Pd1_jap said:

bouncer at a night club. They have the authority to turn away people who are not aesthetically appealing. 

I don't think it's legal to turn people away based on looks. I think keeping them on the line and not letting them in is a way to skirt the law.

[Pd1_jap]

10 minutes ago, d.anders said:

I don't think it's legal to turn people away based on looks. I think keeping them on the line and not letting them in is a way to skirt the law.

From Gemini pro: 

 

Technically, yes, nightclubs can and often do turn people away based on their appearance, provided the reason doesn't violate specific civil rights protections. While it might feel unfair, "attractiveness" is not a protected legal class in the way that race, religion, or disability are.

Here is the breakdown of how "velvet rope" policies work and where the legal lines are drawn.

1. The "Right to Refuse Service"

Nightclubs are generally considered private property. This gives owners broad discretion to decide who enters, as long as they aren't discriminating against a protected characteristic.

 * Lookism: Being "unattractive" or not "cool" enough is generally not a protected trait under federal or state laws (like California's Unruh Civil Rights Act).

 * Atmosphere: Clubs often argue that their "product" is a specific vibe or aesthetic. To maintain this, they use "selective entry" to ensure the crowd matches the brand they are selling.

2. The Dress Code Loophole

Most clubs use dress codes as their primary tool for turning people away.

 * Enforcement: While a club can’t legally say "You’re too ugly," they can say "Your shoes don't meet our standards" or "We’re at capacity for your attire type."

 * Legality: Dress codes are legal as long as they are applied consistently. If a club lets in a "conventionally attractive" person in sneakers but rejects someone else for the same sneakers, that inconsistency can be used as evidence of illegal discrimination (e.g., based on race or gender).

3. Where It Becomes Illegal

A club crosses into illegal territory if their "attractiveness" standard is actually a proxy for something else:

 * Racial Discrimination: If "not the right look" consistently applies only to people of color, it violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

 * Gender Bias: In California, for example, "Ladies' Nights" or charging men more/less for entry based solely on gender is illegal.

 * Disability: A club cannot turn someone away because of a physical deformity or a visible disability under the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act).

Summary Table: Can They Deny You?

| Reason | Legal? | Why? |

|---|---|---|

| "Not the right vibe" | Yes | Subjective "coolness" isn't a protected class. |

| Wrong shoes/clothing | Yes | Dress codes are permissible private policies. |

| Race or Ethnicity | No | Federal and state civil rights violation. |

| Physical Disability | No | Violation of the ADA and state civil rights acts. |

| Gender/Identity | No | Most states prohibit discrimination based on sex or identity. |

If you feel you’ve been unfairly targeted, some cities (like Houston) have recently passed ordinances requiring clubs to clearly post their dress codes at the door to prevent arbitrary or biased "look-based" rejections.

Would you like me to look up the specific nightclub entry laws or "Right to Refuse" regulation

s for a particular city?

[d.anders]

In the early days, I think Studio 54 used to say "your outfit doesn't qualify."

[+ KensingtonHomo]

13 hours ago, d.anders said:

In the early days, I think Studio 54 used to say "your outfit doesn't qualify."

I'm dating myself but getting past Kenny Kenny at Limelight was always a trip. My fellow gays (late teens, early 20s) and I were always picked immediately. But occasionally we'd have a girlfriend who wasn't completely stunning and they'd turn her away. 

[maninsoma]

I only ventured into the territory of needing to meet approval to enter a club once, and I think it was the Limelight in the early '80s.  My friends (some of whom lived in New York City, others just visiting like me) suggested that it wasn't just whether someone was attractive (face, body) but the clothes/overall vibe.  I stupidly spent way more money than I could afford on an outfit so I would be deemed cool enough to enter and then pay what was then a high cover charge (as far as I was concerned -- probably not high for people used to living in New York).  I guess it's better than having spent the money on the outfit and not getting selected to enter.  The other thing I remember about the selection process was that we played it cool, by which I mean we walked up and situated ourselves in a way to be noticed by the doorman but we didn't approach him or communicate in any other way that we wanted to gain entrance.  According to my friends, displays of eagerness to get in were pathetic and a higher likelihood of being ignored.  The doorman motioned for us to enter rather quickly, so I guess we did the whole thing right.

My only other memory was that Boy George was there, not performing but just as a customer.  This was between his fame with Culture Club and his modestly successful (in the US) solo career.  I felt sorry for him because a lot of people approached him to confirm it was him, and once he would nod or whatever they'd walk away.  Maybe he was giving off the vibe to them that he didn't welcome their company, but I just found it odd that people weren't just approaching him to dance but were obviously most interested in confirming their celebrity sighting.

[theplayerking]

What if we take this to its logical conclusion? Say you hire a provider that is a total top. Is it reasonable to expect him to get fucked just because you’re paying? Does he have no autonomy or choice over what he does with his body?

In the end, it’s a business transaction between two willing parties. If a provider has enough demand to be able to turn down business, that’s his choice. It’s obviously annoying, and painful to ones ego, but in that situation, I would just move on.

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 3/24/2026 at 11:34 AM, sniper said:

On top of the personal safety issue, it could also be to make sure you aren't someone they know from their regualr life,  which could get awkward. Say the provider turns out to be your coworker? Or brother-in-law?

That's happened to me...an escort said he recognized me from work after we were finished with the session. No big deal.

But, thankfully, I haven't accidentally hired my brother yet (he's not my type, anyway).

[Wings246]

8 hours ago, Vegas_Millennial said:

an escort said he recognized me from work

Did you bump into him at work after the encounter?  If so, was it awkward or did you guys simply pretend nothing had ever happened?

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

1 hour ago, Wings246 said:

Did you bump into him at work after the encounter?  If so, was it awkward or did you guys simply pretend nothing had ever happened?

Not awkward at all.  We were in a meeting together once. At the end of the meeting, he texted me to join him for sex in the bathroom at work.  🥳 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 3/24/2026 at 4:57 PM, d.anders said:

I don't think it's legal to turn people away based on looks...

Attractiveness is not a "protected class" defined by law.  As long as the business is equally rejecting ugly people of all races, ages, national origin, and sex equally, then it is not illegal.

For example:  if you turn away an ugly white guy, then you must also turn away an as-equally-ugly asian guy.

[AlexW]

I reached out to a provider, we had great communication, everything was going smoothly—I even told him I was looking forward to meeting him and that he was very handsome.

Naturally, his response was to thank me… and then immediately ask for my height and weight.

When I asked why (because… obviously), he said he needed to know who he was meeting and—wait for it—so he could adjust his table accordingly.

Ah yes, of course. Nothing says professionalism quite like turning a meetup into a furniture calibration exercise. What absolute nonsense! 😂

"Had a first yesterday: I messaged a provider, we hit it off, and I mentioned I was looking forward to meeting him (and that he was very handsome). His response? He thanked me and immediately demanded my height and weight! When I asked why, he claimed he needed to 'adjust his table' for me. Absolute bollocks—since when does a table need a custom calibration for a first meeting? 

"Had a first yesterday: I messaged a provider, we hit it off, and I mentioned I was looking forward to meeting him (and that he was very handsome). His response? He thanked me and immediately demanded my height and weight! When I asked why, he claimed he needed to 'adjust his table' for me. Absolute bollocks—since when does a table need a custom 

[+ KensingtonHomo]

On 3/26/2026 at 10:58 AM, theplayerking said:

What if we take this to its logical conclusion? Say you hire a provider that is a total top. Is it reasonable to expect him to get fucked just because you’re paying? Does he have no autonomy or choice over what he does with his body?

In the end, it’s a business transaction between two willing parties. If a provider has enough demand to be able to turn down business, that’s his choice. It’s obviously annoying, and painful to ones ego, but in that situation, I would just move on.

The distinction is that most providers say they're tops or total tops (or vers, bottoms, etc.) in their profiles. I have seen maybe two or three profiles where the guy is explicit that he doesn't want overweight or older clients. People are objecting to what feels like a bait-and-switch. A "provider" who seems to take all comers and then says, "Send me a photo," so he can accept or reject based on attractiveness. 

I'm in a top/bottom couple. When we're perusing, we're generally looking for top-vers or vers guys. If someone lists themselves as a "total top" (usually meaning they don't give oral, may or may not rim, may not kiss, etc.), we don't even bother. Now, if a provider listed themselves as a "vers top" and then as we're chatting or worse once we meet up, they say "I don't kiss, rim or give head," I'd be furious. 

[Monarchy79]

Simple Issue/Simple Solution.

If an escort asks for a picture and you don’t want to send one, don’t send one. 
 
Move on.