Fin Fang Foom on Mark Dalton's Response

[Guest tmbg]

I wonder if the pic of Mark is even real. It looks like Val Kilmers head pasted on some muscle stud's body -where is BON when I need him

Cheers! Ritchie

[hiJinX]

>I wonder if the pic of Mark is even real. It looks like Val

>Kilmers head pasted on some muscle stud's body -where is BON

>when I need him

>Cheers! Ritchie

 

Oh the photo is him alright. As many bad things that may be true of him, he can't be accused of not being very physically attractive.

 

hijinx

[+ bigjoey]

i'm in agreement with FFF. as i have posted before, the gaiety is great for eye candy like mark dalton. however, for hiring, there are wounderful new york escorts for the same money (or less) who will give you exactly what you want.read the reviews. at the gaiety, i've gotten suggestions from NYO who seems to know what guys will give a good private and who is gay(the gay guys have less hangups for the most part).

 

as for mark dalton, there are guys who look as good or better than him at my gym and they can be seen for free if all i want is to look at them. i do not like seeing a guy like mark dalton make money off people he seems to dislike and doing something he hates. let him get a real job and see how much he can make. so guys, just join a good gym for eye candy.

[BewareofNick]

>I wonder if the pic of Mark is even real. It looks like Val

>Kilmers head pasted on some muscle stud's body -where is BON

>when I need him

>Cheers! Ritchie

 

Ritchie, to summon me, it goes like this: Beetlejuice! Beetlejuice! Beetlejuice!

 

On that note, I don't really have much of a problem with what went on here. Mark Dalton is very upfront about the fact that he is muscle worship only. The client knew and understood that there was no sex. So there is no issue on how Mark presented himself. Mark obviously enjoys the attention he gets from men otherwise he wouldn't do this. Perhaps he is conflicted about his sexuality. Perhaps not.

 

As for the client, I couldn't help but cheer a little. Mark had no business taking phone calls during the session. It is unprofessional. Even if Mark hadn't made those condescending remarks, the client would have been well advised to leave anyway. Mark was compensated for the short amount of time he was 'worshipped'. Better luck next time.

 

Mark's poor makes him look even worse than the client's review did.

 

As to your question, Ritchie, see mark at http://www.VistaMen.com

In fact, that's probably one sure way to get Mark uninterrupted: buy his video!

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

BofN,

 

I think you have this about right.

 

I don't know Mark or the client and I wasn't there so I don't really know what happened. But at this point I think the interesting question is:

 

How will Mark conduct himself after this episode?

 

If he really has contempt for the 'scene' then I doubt he can mask it for long... leading to another dissatisfied reviewer. Or if this is important to him then maybe he'll be more sensitive to his clients -- he is young and probably has some things yet to learn. I'll have to leave this for others to explore because muscle worshipping straight guys is not 'my scene'. I'm satisified to catch Mark (and similar guys) from the third row seats at the Gaiety.

[Justice]

>As to your question, Ritchie, see mark at http://www.VistaMen.com

>In fact, that's probably one sure way to get Mark

>uninterrupted: buy his video!

 

If you want to see him even "more" of him, you'll have to buy one of his Musclehunks videos. (The bad news is that Musclehunks is notorious for their slow delivery times and poor customer service.) Here's a link: http://musclehunks.com/mark/

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

You can simply make a duplicate of the videotape

 

In this country, that is still legal. Then you need never pay more than the rental fee and cost of the tape.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

You can simply make a duplicate of the videotape

 

In this country, that is still legal. Then you need never pay more than the rental fee and cost of the tape.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

No defense

 

>i'm in agreement with FFF. as i have posted before, the gaiety is great for eye candy

>however, for hiring, there are wounderful new york escorts for the same

>money (or less) who will give you exactly what you want.

>

>as for mark dalton, there are guys who look as good or better than him at my gym and

>they can be seen for free if all i want is to look at them. i do not like seeing a guy

>like mark dalton make money off people he seems to dislike and doing something he hates.

 

I cannot speak for Mr. Dalton. I agree with all the comment made herein and above but if you read the several "straight threads" it is quite clear that these is a market among gay male clients for "straight acting" and "straight looking" escorts.

 

It also seems to me that Mark has stated he does not "dislike" queers. Whether escorting is something he hates is a totally different issue which may be very close to the mark but you are the first poster to address it. It may be that he needs therapy, but there are a number of reasons why he may be escorting. If he just wants to be watched, he needs to hit the nightclub circuit where he can strip and dance on stage without being touched and leave it at that.

 

 

If you cannot be with the one you love, love the one you can touch.

[Guest Fin Fang Foom]

RE: No defense

 

>It also seems to me that Mark has stated he does not

>"dislike" queers.

 

Do you REALLY expect him to say otherwise?

 

Exasperatedly yours,

 

FFF

[Guest alanm]

RE: No defense

 

FFF is building a whole case on one phrase in an private conversation. Robert Caro's new book on LBJ called "Master of the Senate," claims that Johnson used the word "nigger" on occasion.

Yet, Caro believe that LBJ did more for African Americans than any president, but Lincoln. Would I hire Mark Dalton? Absolutely not.

But the reviewer knew that Dalton was only into "body worship."

Is my Johnson comparison out of left field? Sure. Isn't Dalton also from Texas. See there you go!

[Guest Thunderbuns]

RE: No defense

 

>Is my Johnson comparison out of left field? Sure. Isn't

>Dalton also from Texas. See there you go!

 

Funny you should mention.......... so is George W.!

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest Thunderbuns]

RE: No defense

 

>It also seems to me that Mark has stated he does not

>"dislike" queers.

 

What more do you have to hear. The mere fact that he used the word "queers" instead of "gays" tells the true story.

 

Thunderbuns

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

In the words of John Paul - mea maxima culpa

 

>>It also seems to me that Mark has stated he does not

>>"dislike" queers.

>

>Do you REALLY expect him to say otherwise? Exasperatedly yours,

 

Mr. Dalton's exact words were:

 

.... lastly, my best friend in the entire world, the person who i owe everything i have to....... is gay and i love him

as the best friend and best human i have ever known and i would never use the word queer or fag in a negative fashion as i would

never want to hurt him.

 

Therefore my statement that he does not dislike queers is a paraphrase, as point one. As point two, we can ask how many angels can dance on the head of the pin. Mr. Dalton, as has been pointed out, did not precisely say he would use the words "queer" or "fag" in a positive fashion and has yet to respond to FFF's request that he do so. However this omission is not implicit admission that he uses the word at all. The impression I received from his response, and my preference is to accept anyone on here for their word until and unless I have been given good cause otherwise, is that he would not use said words in a derogatory fashion as such use would hurt his best friend and that he clearly does not dislike at least one fag, said friend.

 

Once again, while pursuant to the policies of this site, Mr. Dalton was given the last word on his review, he clearly has not had the last word on the subject. We can go back and forth and forth and back but to what purpose? Peace in the disputed territories? A cure for HIV? Universal healthcare, including free STD check ups weekly for working boys?

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

He said / He said

 

>

>What more do you have to hear. The mere fact that he used

>the word "queers" instead of "gays" tells the true story.

>

 

Heresay, for one. Denied for another. Not disputed thus far by the original reviewer, who to date has yet to be heard from. In point of fact, let us hear from him and ask him to forward the disputed email from Mark Dalton requesting additional payment. If the gentlemen has deleted it, it can be recovered with Norton Utilities and through other means as well.

 

Such evidence would clearly show Mr. Dalton as a dishonest man or the reviewer as less that accurate with his facts. Otherwise, I vote for no angels can dance on the head on a pin and we can let Sparklet do the tally, no?

 

 

Sometimes, it is better to ask the questions than know the answers....

[Guest alanm]

RE: No defense

 

The Texas connection is where the similarities between the Johnsons and George W. Bush end. You probably know that Lady Bird Johnson defended Walter Jenkins, LBJ's top aide, both publicly and privately (LBJ tapes) after he was picked up at the DC YMCA in 1964 for

soliciting homosexual acts.

[guyinsf]

RE: You can simply make a duplicate of the videotape

 

Renting videos is illegal? In what country? COPYING rented videos is illegal in the U.S.; renting them isn't.

[guyinsf]

RE: You can simply make a duplicate of the videotape

 

Renting videos is illegal? In what country? COPYING rented videos is illegal in the U.S.; renting them isn't.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Copyright law

 

>Renting videos is illegal? In what country? COPYING rented

>videos is illegal in the U.S.; renting them isn't.

 

Renting videos is legal. Making copies of rented videos for your own use, for personal viewing in the home, without presentation either for profit or not, remains perfectly legal as does making a copy of record. Digital material falls under a different protection, which is why the legislature in your country is presently discussing the point of what is considered "fair use" and what is not.

 

To find a segment of some ten to twenty minutes in length featuring Mr. Dalton and to copy it, in order for an individual to be able to view Mr. Dalton's segment while said individual ad his or her pants and underpants around their ankles has, perhaps not precisely in this scenario, been upheld as legal by various courts in the United States.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Copyright law

 

>Renting videos is illegal? In what country? COPYING rented

>videos is illegal in the U.S.; renting them isn't.

 

Renting videos is legal. Making copies of rented videos for your own use, for personal viewing in the home, without presentation either for profit or not, remains perfectly legal as does making a copy of record. Digital material falls under a different protection, which is why the legislature in your country is presently discussing the point of what is considered "fair use" and what is not.

 

To find a segment of some ten to twenty minutes in length featuring Mr. Dalton and to copy it, in order for an individual to be able to view Mr. Dalton's segment while said individual ad his or her pants and underpants around their ankles has, perhaps not precisely in this scenario, been upheld as legal by various courts in the United States.

[Guest Thunderbuns]

RE: You can simply make a duplicate of the videotape

 

>Renting videos is illegal? In what country? COPYING rented

>videos is illegal in the U.S

 

Amd we would worry about this why?

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest Thunderbuns]

RE: You can simply make a duplicate of the videotape

 

>Renting videos is illegal? In what country? COPYING rented

>videos is illegal in the U.S

 

Amd we would worry about this why?

 

Thunderbuns