Fin Fang Foom Muses on Mark Dalton's Bad Review

[Guest Fin Fang Foom]

This morning had an interesting review of Mark Dalton. The section that we'll of course all focus on is:

 

He asked if he could take a few minutes to take this "important" call. He went in the washroom, and I went near the door to easedrop (sic). I heard Mark say to whoever was on the other line - "Oh I'm with a Queer".

 

Granted, none of us were there, but in my opinion, it just feels right.

 

I would love to see him come out onto the stage of The Gaiety and have everyone boo him. It would be bliss.

 

Optimistically yours,

 

FFF

[phage]

Interesting that this comes on the heels of the “Straight Guys’” thread in the Lounge. If you ask me, that review is probably a more accurate representation of what sex with a straight guy is like. Not the willing partners described in the other thread who are obviously not straight and just playing with labels.

 

Perhaps there is room in our lives for “gay for pay” entertainers, but that would be for the truly open-minded ones. If all they are doing is hiding their sneers, they don’t deserve to be supported.

[Guest jrpSCORP]

Had I been the client, I would have said as I was about to exit, "Oh no, you're not." I hope he did not stay and, even worse, I hope he didn't pay this loser. This is what I mean about guys getting caught up in escort fantasies about the escort truly caring about them outside of the bedroom yadda yadda yadda (and all the other unrealistic fantasties I often read from clients). I fantasize during the session ONLY because, within that time frame, is ALL that matters (and sometimes--as in THIS case---not even then)

[hiJinX]

>

>I would love to see him come out onto the stage of The

>Gaiety and have everyone boo him. It would be bliss.

>

>Optimistically yours,

>

>FFF

 

Lead on wise one.

[guyinsf]

It will be interesting to see if Mark Dalton responds to this review. There is nothing particularly outrageous in it, so I tend to believe it; it was written by a first time reviewer, however, who claims to have hired versatile escorts in the past. I find it puzzling when experienced clients (who seem happy hiring escorts) wait to write their first review about an escort they DON'T like.

 

I can understand the guy wanting to leave after hearing what Mark Dalton said. But in my defense of Mark Dalton (whom I don't know and whom I would never hire, because I wouldn't pay $250 just to some hot looking guy) -- and because I like to play "devil's advocate" -- I submit the following:

 

a. Mark does not market himself as interactive or even gay, as far as I know. He may have been unskilled/unenthusiastic at even a "muscle worship" scene, but you were basically getting what you contracted for.

 

b. He indicated he wanted to make the call private. The client chose to eavesdrop. I can understand the urge to do this, but that really was a mistake. Yes, Mark should have had his cell phone off for an hour-long call, so that was a mistake on his part, too. If Mark was having a lengthy conversation after going to the bathroom, it would have been appropriate for the client to go to the bathroom door and tell him that if he needed to continue talking that his "money" was walking out the door. Clearly he shouldn't expect a client to just sit there and wait for him to conduct other business (personal or professional). If he was on the phone only a minute or so -- even though this is unprofessional behavior -- I think the client should have just waited on the bed for him.

 

It sounds to me like the reviewer realized that he wasn't enjoying the thought of paying $250 for "muscle worship" and used the excuse of Mark's phone call and derogatory comment to get out of paying. If the client hadn't heard the slur and Mark returned after a minute to complete the session, would the client have felt the need to write this review and not pay Mark's full fee?

 

Ps. I ONLY hire gay or bisexual escorts who actually want to have sex, so I'm not trying to defend homophobic escorts generally. But if a client encounters something like this when hiring a straight guy to "worship" his body, he shouldn't be TOO surprised. I'm sure there are some comfortable "straight" guys who don't mind guys touching and getting off on their bodies, but I would suspect that most "straight" guys who are in this line of work have conflicted feelings, at best, as to how they make their money.

[Rod Hagen]

We all know I'm no fan of Gay for Pay nonsense. But for the record Mark Dalton doesn't think he's completely straight (whatever that means). He says he's figuring out how gay he is or isn't. Perhaps doing so at clients expense isn't the best form of therapy, but it may also be good for him (and them?). I didn't know I was gay at 22, but I wasn't for hire then either.

 

Anyway, the real reason I'm chimming in is I don't believe the review. At all. It has every element of nightmare tales spent with "Gay for Pay": the ringing cell phone, the homophobic comments, the cold fish. This shit all happens, and maybe simutaneously, but it's suspect.. Especially since this gentleman has written no other reviews. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

[+ deej]

<<He indicated he wanted to make the call private. The client chose to eavesdrop.>>

 

This is the thing that sticks out in my mind as well. Anyone who chooses to snoop deserves to find out stuff they wish they hadn't, and it almost invariably happens.

 

A client of mine was worried that his employees might be abusing their internet access and surfing to "naughty" sites on his nickel so he installed "spyware" to record who visited which sites.

 

They were visiting the naughty sites alright, but repeated analysis of each week's logs showed that his MOST productive employees were the worst offenders. :o

 

The spyware was uninstalled and nothing was said.

 

If you don't want to know, don't eavesdrop.

 

The rest of the review is plausible, although it sounds a lot like sour grapes from a guy who admits at the top that he didn't know what to expect.

[phage]

>I find it puzzling when experienced

>clients (who seem happy hiring escorts) wait to write their

>first review about an escort they DON'T like.

 

It may be exasperating since this is a review site and we are just as interested in hearing the positive as the negative, but it shouldn’t be too surprising. Isn’t it just a fact of life that people are slow to praise and quick to complain?

[Guest Thunderbuns]

It never fails to amaze me how some people can rationalize anything!

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest Thunderbuns]

>We all know I'm no fan of Gay for Pay nonsense. But for the

>record Mark Dalton doesn't think he's completely straight

>(whatever that means). He says he's figuring out how gay

>he is or isn't.

 

And might we expect to hear the results of his deliberations sometime before manned tourist trips to the moon become a reality?

 

Give me a break! If he is that confused he should spend some of his hard earned money on a shrink.

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest bluboy]

I had a similar experience with Mark Dalton. No phone call but the whole tone of my experience fit in with what was said here..and I am a cute gay guy. blu

[+ Axiom2001]

>Interesting that this comes on the heels of the “Straight

>Guys’” thread in the Lounge. If you ask me, that review is

>probably a more accurate representation of what sex with a

>straight guy is like. Not the willing partners described in

>the other thread who are obviously not straight and

>just playing with labels.

>

>Perhaps there is room in our lives for “gay for pay”

>entertainers, but that would be for the truly open-minded

>ones. If all they are doing is hiding their sneers, they

>don’t deserve to be supported.

 

Amen to that, bro!

[Guest jizzdepapi]

wait a minute. aren't you the guy with the Denevue chignon?

[Guest Ant415]

First thing that came to my mind was the evesdropping.

 

While impolite to take a call, he did ask to be excused.

[Guest HenryK]

I agree about listening into a private conversation, unless it went on and on in the bath room. Mark Dalton should not have had his pager on or taken the call. But, I just can not image listening in on some

one else's private call like that. I understand that the client was

paying for the time the call took, but it is difficult to be totally

in sympathy with the reviewer. Also, he know what Dalton was into,

almost nothing. Yet he complains about that also. Strange review.

[ready4boi]

That's what has been valuable about this site. Those of us who want to know have a way to hear about escorts like this. It is a resource for those of us who want to hire escorts who are totally comfortable with homosexuality and can give us our money's worth. Answering their cell phones during our time and laying there like a log is ripping us off in my book. The straight escorts who can't deal and treat the buyers poorly never last. Look what happened to Kirk/Voltaire and his brother. Fortunately we have this site to thank cause it warned many of us who were not informed.

[Guest JackLA]

One of the great things about this site is that aside from telling you who's hot, it also tells you who's not, so clients can potentially avoid making major mistakes and having bad experiences. Mark Dalton is an incredibly hot looking guy...one that I would might certainly be interested in hiring in the absence of negative information. This site is a GREAT service to us guys who hire escorts and we should constantly be thanking Hooboy for all the effort he takes to maintain it. So, all things being equal, until some positive information comes along, or Mark Dalton himself at least posts a response, he will be one of the ones I avoid,and I would bet most of the rest of us will too. Why take a chance when there are so many other choices out there?

 

And the propriety of eavesdropping notwithstanding, I am TOTALLY on the side of the client (presuming his story his true). An escort shouldn't be making phone calls on a client's dime anyway, and it was reasonable for the client to want to know what was going on, for safety's sake if for no other reason. I would think that hearing Mark say he was "with some queer" would have been a major red flag to most of us. Good information for the client to have so he at least had the option to get the hell out before something worse happened.

[Guest HenryK]

It is ok to listen into a personal conversation "for safety reasons."

What is someone who frequents this site doing hiring an escort who poses a real threat? There are more escorts available in NYC than any other city in the US. Yet the reviewer picks one who is a potential danger? Sounds like a dumb rational to me.

[Guest JackLA]

Well Mark Dalton DID post a response in the main daily review section today, said the incident described in the prior review never happened, and said he would never call a gay person a derogatory name. Have to give him credit for stepping up to the plate and posting a reply, and guess we should give him the benefit of the doubt and take him at his word unless we get some future evidence to the contrary.

 

And Mark, there are LOTS of us that would LOVE to give you positive reviews....you are an incredibly hot looking guy....bet you could find LOTS of volunteers from this site that would be glad to help restore your credibility if they had a good experience...maybe we can work something out....<smile>....

[Guest Thunderbuns]

>Well Mark Dalton DID post a response in the main daily

>review section today, said the incident described in the

>prior review never happened, and said he would never call a

>gay person a derogatory name. Have to give him credit for

>stepping up to the plate and posting a reply, and guess we

>should give him the benefit of the doubt and take him at his

>word unless we get some future evidence to the contrary.

 

And I have some swamp land in Florida I'd love to unload on you. Bet you'll be a pushover...........

 

Thunderbuns

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Benefit versus risk assessment

 

There is rarely any benefit for an escort to comment in a thread such as this so let me preface with the following: (a) my opinions on the straight fantasy trip are clearly delineated elsewhere - I'm against them -- I do not even like paying $9 to see a movie replete with heterosexual love scenes; (b) by and large, I believe the whole gay for pay thing to be, in part, a salve to a confused man and a reflection of poor self-image, self-esteem and maginalization amongst homosexuals; but © finally, I would also add that in a n escort - client relationship the entire gay for pay thing is an abuse, in my opinion, of the relationship to the paying client's disadvantage.

 

However, the client by his own admission stated that he was told what he was getting into; that he was told "no sucking" would be permitted. This follows what I have stated time and time again: communicate. Talk. Find out what you are paying for before you enter into an agreement. If Mark Dalton had agreed to fuck the client and not done so, then this is a different issue. If the client was/is confused about muscle worship, he should ask for complete clarification before making the appointment. Mark Dalton should have put his cell phone on vibrate and let it go into voice mail. He should have warned the client beforehand he might need to take a call but would extend the hour accordingly. He should have not taken the call. The client should not have evesdropped. If the client felt so uncomfortable about the state of the room and the circumstances of the call when he got to the hotel room, he had the option of saying, "I am sorry but I cannot go through with this" and walked out the door.

 

There are any number of men who look as good if not better than Mark Dalton who are not confused about their sexuality in any way, shape or form. Particularly in New York and at the Gaiety.

 

Finally, I have no idea who Mark Dalton is and I do not know Rod Hagen.

 

These are two way streets, gentlemen. If you were not there, it does not achieve much in the way of productive comment to focus so much attentionon the words of one man, particularly now that there is a response and the originally reviewer has not made any additional comments.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

RE: Benefit versus risk assessment

 

>... (b) by and large, I believe the whole gay for pay

>thing to be, in part, a salve to a confused man and a

>reflection of poor self-image, self-esteem and

>maginalization amongst homosexuals;

 

I suspect this is far from a universal truth -- which I think your wording concedes. Seems to me some of these guys are seeking economic convenience and no more. Muscle worship providers make easy money it would seem and there a few women and fewer straight guys :-) willing to pay for it. So they go where the demand is... That simple. (THis is also not a universal truth. )

 

:-)