Alex & Rob review today.

[Funseeker 22]

A first negative review for these guys and I can see both sides. The reviewer admits he has a quite noticable deformity that he never divulged to the escorts before the meeting. They maybe over reacted and cut the session short apparently due to his physical condition.

If the reviewer had mentioned this ahead of the meeting then the boys would have known what to expect and to accept or decline the arrangement.

Although a first time M4M reviewer, the poster did say that he had no previous problem with other meetings.IMHO the poster should have been upfront and saved the uncomfortability factor for all involved.

Thoughts ?

[Boston Guy]

>IMHO the poster should have been upfront and saved the uncomfortability factor

>for all involved. Thoughts ?

 

I have to agree.

 

Thalidomide disabilities can be quite shocking at first sight. I think it was unfair not to let the escorts know in advance. If they had decided not to pursue the session, he would have avoided the cost and the embarrassment of another rejection. On the other hand, knowing in advance may have allowed them to proceed, with benefit all around.

 

That having been said, my heart goes out to the reviewer. His statement that he just wanted to touch a beautiful man without being rejected was quite heart-rending.

 

BG

[Guest alanm]

I agree that the first time reviewer should have told them before finalizating the appointment.

 

I read Alex and Rob's reviews for the first time just now. Every review is so positive (about the sex & the two guys as people). It must have been a heart breaking experience for today's reviewer. If Alex and Rob respond, I hope they do it gently.

[+ Lucky]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

I disagree. Escorts are in the business of pleasuring people and this guy wanted that. Why does he have to reveal his deformity? Just what facts does anyone have to reveal before the meeting? Suppose you are plain looking? Or even ugly? Slightly fat or really heavy? How much is too much? Just one leg? A small dick? How do you decide that this is a factor that has to be revealed upfront?

 

It seems to me that it is up to the client who then takes the risk that the session would be diminished by his perceived lack of attractiveness. But to have tell the escort ahead of time means that he will almost always get rejected. By meeting the escort in person, he at least has the chance to show a warm personality or other aspect of himself that may change his desirability in the escort's mind.

[Steven_Draker]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

I think is a courtesy of the client to inform the escort of his condition.

 

On the edit: After reading the review I think they shouldn't have collected the whole fee.

I have mixed feelings. My heart goes with the reviewer.

 

Steven Draker ~

http://www.rentboy.com/location/getrb.asp?rentboy=67391&Location=71

[Funseeker 22]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

>I disagree. Escorts are in the business of pleasuring people

>and this guy wanted that. Why does he have to reveal his

>deformity? Just what facts does anyone have to reveal before

>the meeting? Suppose you are plain looking? Or even ugly?

>Slightly fat or really heavy? How much is too much? Just one

>leg? A small dick? How do you decide that this is a factor

>that has to be revealed upfront?

 

And if you hired an escort who appeared with any or all of the above without advance notification what would you do ?

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

Lucky, you're right on target.

 

IMO, it is an escort's job to make whoever they feel like a million bucks, whether they're a young stud looking to experiment with something new, an older gent wanting to experience a younger touch or anything in-between. I suppose it's the escort's right to say no to a potential client, but why would someone get into this business to nitpick on who they will and won't see? I'm continually amazed at how some escorts use escorting as a paid diversional hookup rather than a serve-all industry.

 

McDonalds is a successful company for many reasons, one of which being they serve a multitude of people and persuasions: Rich, poor, black, white, gay and straight. They don't cater to one branch in-particular, but instead bill themselves as the 'everyman' of fast-food. Considering their success, it's not a bad business ethic.

 

Am i wrong in thinking that the most successful people in business are those who have the versatility to schmooze with just about anyone they come across?

 

Why should escorting be any different. As an escort, it's my job (and with a great sense of pride) to keep my guys happy and continually interested. What good does it do to make someone you're seeing feel self-conscious? People see us to IMPROVE their moods, not bring them down. You might as well offer a complimentary Xanax with every hourly if you're going to get judgemental.

 

I understand situations that can make an escort uncomfortable, but you've got to discern between something the client can and can't help. If he's high, drunk, wanting to play unsafe, dirty or something of that ilk, then yes, leaving the scene might be in your best interests. Now, if it's something he can't help, like surgery scarring, obesity, physical handicap, speech impairment, etc, then you need to seriously consider another line of work. As i said above, escorts are here to make their guys feel great. We don't get paid good money to sit around and judge.

 

 

I simply hope today's reviewer is able to slough off this not-so-wonderful meeting and chalk it up to communication error. He should also realize that there are MANY other professional escorts out there who would gladly see him.

 

 

 

~BN

[bigguyinpasadena]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

>I think is a courtesy of the client to

>inform the escort of his condition.

>

>On the edit: After reading the review I think they shouldn't

>have collected the whole fee.

>I have mixed feelings. My heart goes with the reviewer.

>

>Steven Draker ~

>http://www.rentboy.com/location/getrb.asp?rentboy=67391&Location=71

"Hump?What hump?"

From young Frankenstein

You know I think this is one more case of a breakdown of communications which-surprise!-led to a dissapointing session.

The client obviously knew he had an appearence which might freak someone out.But rather than being a gentleman(or at least showing some balls)he failed to mention this condition to someone he hired to perform a very intimate act with.

Hookers are not saints.There are those who react with disdain and contempt for those of us with less than passable(let alone perfect)bodies.

I am a very fat man.There are folks that would have such disdain for fat men that sex,if it were to happen,would be performed with utter disgust.Of course I have no interest in paying for something like that.So I am very honest about this when I am setting up an appointment,and yes-I have been told"not interested"before.I have never had an embarassing moment with a 'scort because of this policy.

 

I do think the fellas should have returned half the fee-but I also think the reviewer should not have written this review.

[Boston Guy]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

>I simply hope today's reviewer is able to slough off this

>not-so-wonderful meeting and chalk it up to communication

>error. He should also realize that there are MANY other

>professional escorts out there who would gladly see him.

>

>

 

I hope you're right. In fact, I do think you are likely to be. But most escorts are young and the thalidomide tragedy happened a long time; it's reasonable to think many young people may never have even seen someone with thalidomide limbs.

 

Disabilities are most certainly not anyone's fault, least of all the unfortunate souls who suffer with them. Those of us with good health bear a responsibility to the less fortunate among us and should always try to err on the side of support and compassion.

 

In fact, in many cases, we try to treat disabilities as if they aren't there and encourage those with disabilities to live life as normally as possible. This is a laudable goal and one I support.

 

On the other hand, life is complicated and few things in relationships end up being a one-way street. Chief among the things that is most definitely two-way is communication. The reviewer has a major disability but is evidently attempting to live a happy, normal life. One cannot blame him for that. But, on the other hand, one cannot escape the fact that he has a major disability, either.

 

Surely, when he made the escort appointment, he must have at least considered telling them about his disability. Just as surely, he chose not to. None of us will know why, unless he responds to this thread. But my suspicion is that he feared rejection up front and reasonably so. His desire for sex and human touch may have been strong enough to overcome his fear of rejection. If so, that's pretty damned understandable. We've all been in situations where we thought with our little heads.

 

But I think that in proceding in this manner he let down his side of the bargain. When hiring an escort, we need to let the escort know what we're looking for. We've heard it here a million times: communicate, communicate, communicate. And he didn't. Not about the one central fact that would most certainly be the elephant in the room the moment he showed up at their door.

 

As I said in my previous post, my heart goes out to this guy. I found his post heart-rending. But even still I think he made a mistake and did a disservice to himself and the escorts by not being forthcoming about his disability up front. Who knows what these guys would have said or done if they'd had a couple of days to think about it. Maybe they would have come through. Maybe they would have rejected him out of hand. We'll never know. But he should have given them the chance to act in a thoughtful manner instead of showing up on their doorstep and expecting them to immediately and nonchalantly enter into a sexual relationship with him.

 

Lucky's comments, above, about being too fat or too ugly miss the point, I think. Escorts are people, too, not robots or slaves. Communication ahead of time is the key to any successful escort encounter and the reviewer here, for reasons that are understandable and hugely sympathetic, still let down his side of that bargain.

 

BG

[Boston Guy]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

> I also think the reviewer should not have written this review.

>

 

I'm with you up to this point. I'm not sure the review should be taken as it was intended but I'm glad he wrote it. This thread wouldn't have occurred without the review and I can't remember the last time we discussed disabilities here in any context.

 

If the reviewer is following the thread, then he should have already learned that yes, there are escorts he can call who will be happy to have him as a client. That's a very good result.

 

But he's also heard that communication upfront is critical, especially about major issues that may impact the escort session, if the chances of a disappointing session are to be lessened. That's probably a good thing, too, and one we should all heed.

 

BG

[Mouth]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

As someone who has been following the reviews of Alex and Rob for quite some time now, I've been in impressed with their level of service to their clients. I'm also impressed that Benjamin is the MacDonald's of escorts. Good for him. And how self-serving. He must be a robot. Escorting has a huge emotional element to it. I've read many reviews where heavy men say they always tell escorts upfront that they are obese. I respect them for telling the truth. Some escorts can't handle that kind of client. So be it. It'a a human element, not the Golden Arches. Better to know upfront. The whole vibe of the encounter can be disrupted. I've also viewed reviews that revealed someone on the receiving end of a kind escort who helped them through their first sexual encounters following accidents and surgery. But in those cases, there was upfront discussion of their condition.

 

I am by no means an unattractive person, but I am now solidly moving into late middle age, and I could lose 20 pounds. For some escorts, this is a problem. I've had sessions with guys who were universally admired for their beauty and ability to deliver a sensational erotic experience, but didn't work at all for me. It's called chemistry.

 

I do feel compassion for the client, but isn't he asking for trouble by not being revealing his physical condition when he's making an appointment? I think so. Why would you put yourself in that kind of situation? In the end, it sounds like manipulation, and that is really unfair. From the many reviews I've read here, there are many escorts who do offer good excellent service for men with physical or medical conditions (perhaps this client should hire Benjamin, forthwith!).

 

Alex and Rob have done a good job for their clients as their many fine reviews demonstrate. They are not bad guys here.

[+ Oliver]

Disability - when and what to say

 

There have been a few discussions of this in the past with some very excellent points made each time, as in the present thread.

I especially liked a point made by the former Devon of SF in the following tread:

 

http://babydb.male4malescorts.com/m4mdc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=5&topic_id=6558&mesg_id=6558&listing_type=search

 

where he said: “ … I'd recommend a client disclose any information that's likely to have a bearing on his physical comfort and/or capabilities during sex. Even if the "disability" amounts to no more than the fact that he's taking medication that makes it very difficult for him to get hard, it's best to let the escort know so he won't be watching the proverbial pot that won't boil and wondering what he's doing wrong. And if, as Jeff mentioned, some escorts won't want to see him, it would be much better to find that out via email in advance of making the appointment than to put himself through the humiliation of the escort's "guess who's coming to dinner?" reaction. But more importantly, it will give the escort he does plan on seeing a chance to get a sense of what he'll (need) to do differently with this particular individual …”

 

I have used that analogy for my own “minor” (but different) disability and found nothing but total acceptance. I realize mine is nothing compared to that of the OP, but I think it would have been wise to inform the escorts.

 

Other threads which have had good thoughts:

http://babydb.male4malescorts.com/m4mdc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=5&topic_id=598&mesg_id=598&listing_type=search

 

http://babydb.male4malescorts.com/m4mdc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=7&topic_id=49382&mesg_id=49382&listing_type=search

 

It never hurts to bring up topics like this again, for those who missed the previous threads.

[Boston Guy]

RE: Disability - when and what to say

 

Oliver,

 

Thanks for doing the research and posting this. I note BN's post from January of this year, copied here in its entirety.

 

BG

 

___________________________________

 

BT, good topic~

 

From my POV, i would prefer if someone i was going to see disclosed a major handicap.

 

Now, if it's something that wouldn't effect the meeting or situation, then it's probably best to leave it alone and concentrate on having a ball (... or two) together. I don't necessarily need to know about missing testicles, multi-colored foreskin, a nasty case of psoriasis or stretch-marks: It's beside the point and such info can be saved for dinner conversation later that evening

 

It's funny you mention this BT, as i was recently in this situation in Vegas, meeting with someone for the first time then discovering he was in a wheelchair. While i've had many guys with varying degrees of handicap, this was the first guy who had never mentioned anything beforehand. It didn't shell-shock me the least bit, but i did let him know afterwards that in the future he might want to let other escorts know BEFOREHAND to avoid any issues.

 

I think this is just another topic based on communication. I know it's been beaten to death, but you can never ask too many questions regarding an initial meeting. It's better to be safe than stupid. With any amount of money on the line, i would suggest taking the time and effort to get to know someone before assuming things will be copasetic. 'Do your homework'

 

 

Warmest Always,

 

 

Benjamin Nicholas

[+ Charlie]

I hadn't read the review before I encountered this thread, so I went back to read it and their response, and I came away feeling somewhat less sympathetic towards both sides. I think it was disingenuous of the reviewer to have simply warned the escorts that he was "unattractive", a vaguely subjective term that even objectively gorgeous people might use to describe themselves. The claim that his deformity has never proven a problem in the past is improbable, especially combined with his pathetic statement at the end that he only wanted to touch someone beautiful. I had a very dear gay friend with notable thalidomide deformities, and I can assure you that it was not something that all potential sex partners dismissed as irrelevant--I once saw someone completely freak out when my friend accidently touched him in a gay bar.

 

On the other hand, the tone of disgust and self-righteousness that Alex and Rob express in their response isn't very attractive, either. I don't know if they were as brutally blunt in their post-appointment phone conversation with the client, but he really does seem to be struggling to be reasonably fair in his review of the entire situation, which doesn't sound like a pretty one.

 

I suspect that both sides of the story have been slanted somewhat, and I agree with other posters that more complete communication before the appointment would have been better for all concerned.

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

Somethings i prefer being put into my mouth, but un-original words aren't one of them

 

I was admiring Mc's business practice, but not directly comparing them to my own. Calling me a robot couldn't be further from the truth, as emotion for me plays a HUGE role in any meeting. I'm simply against those escorts who use escorting as a way to hook-up with who they consider 'hot' and get paid for it.

 

Agreeing to disagree,

 

 

Benjamin Nicholas

[BigD]

RE: Disability - when and what to say

 

I feel for the client. The escorts, in this review, appear to

lack empathy for this man who is willing to spend good money for

his pleasure. I always share with potential escorts that

I am too overweight and 57 years of age, but the escort is not

spending time with me because of appearance, but because of the cash.

I give the personal information about myself upfront because I want

to avoid escorts who might not be able to "function" well because

of my appearance. But the good escorts don't care what you look like.

They are in the business of client gratification. Yes, escorts

are human too, but they are in "show" business. A favorite

escort here in Dallas always refers to his client contacts as

"shows." I have grown to understand and enjoy that term.

Good escorts are actors who never let you know they are acting.

Those are the ones I want to spend time with.

BigD

[Epigonos]

RE: Disability - when and what to say

 

This situation is incredibly difficult and I feel for both the client and the escorts. As a person who absolutely abhorrs suprises, of any kind, and that includes pleasant ones as well as unpleasant one I can understand the plight of the escorts.

Being 65 years old and having encountered a few escorts who are loath to deal with someone my age I can empathize with the client. In order to avoid situations like the one encountered by the poster I ALWAYS describe myself to escorts I am considering hiring. In that describtion I include my age and a physical description as well as my sexual likes and dislikes. I then request that the escort email me if there is NO problem with the information I have sent. During the last four years only two or three escorts have not respondeded. Their lack of response lets me know that my age, most likely, is a problem BUT at least I have avoided a situation like the one encountered by the poster.

Businesses frequently post signs stating that they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, certainly escorts have that same right. While we may not agree with their exercising that right I sincerely believe we must respect their right to do so.

[VaHawk]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

As someone who has dealt with this duo in the past, I would not have anything positive to say about them, other than they're handsome and have nice cocks. Nothing really negative, unless exhibiting the attitude that clients are merely atm's to be dealt with as swiftly and coldly as possible, is a negative, according to your preferences. Reread the reviews and you'll notice the trend to get the client off and out the door as soon as possible, usually way under the hour mark.

[VaHawk]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

>And if you hired an escort who appeared with any or all of the

>above without advance notification what would you do ?

>

 

Probably the same thing he'd do if he woke up and the world was inverted, with the sky green, the grass blue, Antartica a warm paradise island, and Hawaii covered in a sheet of snow and ice hundreds of miles deep!

 

WTF?????

 

This has got to be silliest question ever posed on any thread ever in the entire history of this site, which is why I gave it the appropriate response.

 

Professional escorts, note I said professional and not the amateurs who post on CL and chatrooms, are the ones who advertise and post pictures and offer to provide a service for pay, so how would the scenario you propose ever occur?

 

Most of the "amateurs" that post on CL and chatrooms, so often times demand pics, as they will only condescend to get with clients that they find attractive, physically and age-wise. As BN alluded: looking to get off with someone that they find attractive and get paid to do so! That, imo, is NOT a professional escort!

 

IMO, once again, BN was on target as to what a professional escort should be!

 

Rob & Alex, are NOT amateurs posting on CL and the chatrooms, for help with the "rent" on a one-time or occasional basis, but supposedly "professional" escorts with ads posted on many sites, including the Washington Blade and RentBoy, so they shouldn't act like the "amateurs" on CL, but the "professional" escorts that they advertise as being!

[VaHawk]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

>The client obviously knew he had an appearence which might

>freak someone out.But rather than being a gentleman(or at

>least showing some balls)he failed to mention this condition

>to someone he hired to perform a very intimate act with.

 

No ONE should feel so low as you demand them to do so, that they must announce themself a FREAK! Individuals are not freaks, just because they are different than what most others deem as "normal", whatever the fuck that means! They're just who they are, and having been "born that way", they are just as "normal" as any other person on Earth!

 

>Hookers are not saints.

 

Well, imo, the reviewer would not have had any problem with a "hooker", as to me that means someone working the streets, who will do anyone who pulls up to the curb with enough money to pay the fee, as long as the hooker feels safe, regardless of the trick's physical appearance.

 

>There are those who react with disdain

>and contempt for those of us with less than passable(let alone

>perfect)bodies.

>I am a very fat man.There are folks that would have such

>disdain for fat men that sex,if it were to happen,would be

>performed with utter disgust.Of course I have no interest in

>paying for something like that.So I am very honest about this

>when I am setting up an appointment,and yes-I have been

>told"not interested"before.I have never had an embarassing

>moment with a 'scort because of this policy.

 

Sheesh! Are you for real??? Do you really think that becuase you are overweight and have been rejected for being so, by what, 1% of the "professional" escorts, and maybe 15% or less of the "amateur" escorts from such sites as CL, that your situation comes even remotely close to that of someone, who even you, yourself deems a FREAK????

 

One needs to go no further than your comments alone, to realize that advocating your policy of "honesty" has probably resulted in a 100% rejection rate for this reviewer, and that is just sad! Really, I for one, don't see any thing that is even remotely repulsive about someone, just because of the fact that he has "thalidomide arms", or no legs, or 3 eyeballs, or 4 ears, or whatever! If he has 2 or more cocks, then I'd be especially grateful if you'd tell him to give me a ringie dingie!!

 

> I do think the fellas should have returned half the fee-but I

>also think the reviewer should not have written this review.

 

I think they should have physically expressed their obvious mental discomfort/disgust by quietly closing the door, while telling him "not interested". That would have been the honest, even if ugly, thing to have done, rather than inviting the reviewer inside, giving him a less than enthusiastic "hand job" and shoving him unceremoniously out the door, quicker than you'd dump the garbage!

 

The fact that they didn't just goes to show how "classy" they are, as the client was just an ATM to them. If they had been honest in their reactions, then the reviewer wouldn't have posted the review, and they wouldn't be making "sorry" excuses for their boorish, unprofessional behavior as escorts.

 

Given all of that, HOW can you opine that the reviewer shouldn't have written his honest review???? That is his right to do so, and he doesn't have to get your pre-approval to do so.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I'm glad that he posted his review, as it showed these two in their "true colors", no matter how rosey their prior reviews have been.

[Guest TNT Ted]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

>I think they should have physically expressed their obvious

>mental discomfort/disgust by quietly closing the door, while

>telling him "not interested". That would have been the

>honest, even if ugly, thing to have done, rather than inviting

>the reviewer inside, giving him a less than enthusiastic "hand

>job" and shoving him unceremoniously out the door, quicker

>than you'd dump the garbage!

>

>The fact that they didn't just goes to show how "classy" they

>are, as the client was just an ATM to them. If they had been

>honest in their reactions, then the reviewer wouldn't have

>posted the review, and they wouldn't be making "sorry" excuses

>for their boorish, unprofessional behavior as escorts.

 

>As far as I'm concerned, I'm glad that he posted his review,

>as it showed these two in their "true colors", no matter how

>rosey their prior reviews have been.

 

 

I agree. These guys missed some opportunities to turn this unfortunate incident around. First, they most certainly (if they were any good at all) should have realized prior to or during the encounter that the client couldn't get what he wanted. At that point, they should have admitted their inability to perform their best, refused any money, and sent the guy on his way. Definitely not pleasant, but honest.

 

Second, when the guy called to express his disappointment -- another opportunity to make things right. Apologize, return money.

 

Third, when the review came out, still another opportunity to apologize and offer some sort of recompense. But instead, they write a self-serving, insensitive and defensive response. To call the client dishonest and cruel was totally uncalled for. Dishonest? Why? Because one guy's 15 minutes is another's 45? Cruel? Why again? Because the client wrote a less than stellar review and it resulted in a blemish on the "good thing we have going"?

 

Sorry -- these guys have shown no class.

[Guest alanm]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

Here is the final paragraph of Alex and Rob's response. These guys may have good reviews but wonder how many people who have read the review and response would hire them now. As was just pointed out, they have three chances to be decent about this and struck out on all three.

 

Again the final parargraph from Alex and Rob's response:

 

"Maybe it did not last a complete hour but we guarantee that he was in our home for at least 45 min. Not to mention, he showed up 30 min late. In closing, it is very disappointing that someone could be so cruel and try to damage a good thing that we have going because of their dishonesty. Once again we treat our clients with honesty and respect and that is all that we ask in return."

 

In this situation, the word "cruel" more accurately describes the life of the reviewer who is disabled, rather than "damag[ing]the good thing we have going."

[Boston Guy]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

I think you're right: they had several opportunities to take a step to make things a bit better and failed to do so. It's unfortunate that they weren't able to turn a bad situation around.

 

My suspicion, based on their response, is that they think they are operating on the moral high ground. I suspect they feel they were duped and deceived and that the actions they did take were "above and beyond" what was required.

 

Why do I think this? Because of something we sometimes forget: they're young. I don't know these guys at all but they're described as being in their 20s, possibly early 20s. That's more than old enough to know how to treat someone with respect. But, like it or not, guys in their 20s frequently act in ways that guys in their 40s generally don't.

 

Younger guys are still learning a lot about who they are and where they fit in the world and how they should act as adults in lots of different situations. Don't get me wrong: I'm not apologizing for them or excusing their failure to act more graciously when given an opportunity to do so. But I do think their behavior is understandable and pretty predictable.

 

This thread is a good example of how the Message Center can help escorts and clients learn from each other. Perhaps other escorts, when faced with a disabled client, will be more sensitive. Perhaps other disabled clients will see how important it can be for them to help escorts understand their disability in advance. In the end, it's about treating the other party with respect.

 

BG

[Curitibano]

RE: The Duckling...Ugly Enough?

 

>How much is too much? Just one

>leg? A small dick? How do you decide that this is a factor

>that has to be revealed upfront?

 

 

I would say that a client with any type of "unusual" physical traits would be wise to inform his potential escort before the meeting. Then, no one will be surprised, or caught off guard. If the escort declines to meet the guy because of the information provided, then that is even better for the client. Because the meeting would have been a total waste of money anyway.

[Orson Kane]

RE: Alex & Rob review today.

 

>

>Here is the final paragraph of Alex and Rob's response. These

>guys may have good reviews but wonder how many people who have

>read the review and response would hire them now. As was just

>pointed out, they have three chances to be decent about this

>and struck out on all three.

>

>Again the final parargraph from Alex and Rob's response:

>

>"Maybe it did not last a complete hour but we guarantee that

>he was in our home for at least 45 min. Not to mention, he

>showed up 30 min late. In closing, it is very disappointing

>that someone could be so cruel and try to damage a good thing

>that we have going because of their dishonesty. Once again we

>treat our clients with honesty and respect and that is all

>that we ask in return."

>

>In this situation, the word "cruel" more accurately describes

>the life of the reviewer who is disabled, rather than

>"damag[ing]the good thing we have going."

>

 

 

I have to say that I too was totally turned off by the last part of Alex and Rob's response. The client probably should have given Alex and Rob advance notice that he had a significant deformity, so that they could have responded and avoided what was obviously an unpleasant situation for them. Given that he didn't, Rob and Alex still could have called things off when they met him. Given that they invited him into their home, they were responsible at that point for making it good experience, just as they would for any other client.

 

As to the last part of the review, I would not think that this client was cruel. It seems like the bad behavior Alex and Rob are referring to is writing a review that damages their reputation (well deserved - I have been with them). Like any other client, this particular client has the right to describe and evaluate his experience with an escort (or two in this case). Escorts can always respond to a bad review with their version of the facts, but they shouldn't think a bad reviewer is cruel or dishonest. As anotehr poster has noted, maybe this is an experience others can learn from -- it seems like everybody came out unhappy on this one.