Fin Fang Foom Would Love For BN To Answer A Question

[FinFangFoom]

Unlike RockHard, I WOULD like for you to respond to an event mentioned in the now infamous Review #43.

 

Did you, or did you not, allow a dildo to be inserted in your mouth that had just been removed from your, or your freak client's, ass?

 

Except for RockHard, we all await your clarification.

 

Enquiringly yours,

 

FFF

[FinFangFoom]

(impatiently tapping cyber-foot)

[augustman]

Maybe I am naive about things, but what is the difference between licking a dildo that came out of clients ass and rimming? Given I have rimmed most of the guys I have hired and a few have rimmed me I am puzzled by the importance of this question being answered or not. So I have rimmed a guy and then spent lots of time french kissing him and he has rimmed me and back to kissing so whats the hang up?

Thanks

[IceFireWizard]

>(impatiently tapping cyber-foot)

 

Why are you so obsessed with that?

[+ glutes]

Because if he did do such a act, it would be pornography?

 

Pornography defined as: material that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement.

[VaHawk]

>Unlike RockHard, I WOULD like for you to respond to an event

>mentioned in the now infamous Review #43.

 

I WOULD, I WOULD, I WOULD!, but guess what???, your multiple WOULDS, don't entitle you to even one WILL!!!

 

>

>Did you, or did you not, allow a dildo to be inserted in your

>mouth that had just been removed from your, or your freak

>client's, ass?

>

>Except for RockHard, we all await your clarification.

 

Ooops, I don't await a clarification either! I guess there is always an "exception to the rule", huh??

[Happy]

I think that tres F asks a great question. I would also be interested in the size of the dildo as it would enhance my fantasy about a big porn cock slamming BN's delicate and perfect boy pucker.

[KMEM]

FFF-

 

BN HAS already answered you.

 

"I don't do porn."

 

KMEM

[Quincy]

>Maybe I am naive about things, but what is the difference

>between licking a dildo that came out of clients ass and

>rimming?

 

Rimming isn't going deep inside. Unless your tongue is 8 inches long, the difference is that a dildo up the cleanest ass could still come back out with traces of shit, blood, and other body juices.

[augustman]

Thanks for the response, seems reasonable. After your response I went to the review for the first time and read it. I do not find anything particularly disturbing that I have not read in any other bondage reviews. We do not get very many of those on this review site, but if you were to look at a few of the advertising escorts including the one now advertising in travel section to Toronto, this activity seems right in line with that. But to the dildo issue specifically, I think guys into rimming are not going to be any more turned off and those not into that may be a bit more.

 

It would suggest if doing a three-way and one escort has fucked the other guy, safely of course and I were to come in after and do my job to get the other guy off orally and chose to rim the bottom, that there is increase chance of residue and we should all stop and go clean up before continuing.

Thanks

[Guest Fisher]

It Would Appear That The Answer is Yes.

 

F3,

 

You can stop cyber tapping your foot. I submit

the following facts:

 

Fosterchow, the client/reviewer of BN review #43,

is a long time reviewer on this site. He has

reviewed a number of escorts including Benjamin.

 

Fosterchow has hired/reviewed BN (#48) since

posting his appointment/review (#43), which gives

the impression that BN had no problem with review

#43 otherwise why would he agree to see a client

that fabricates reviews?

 

BN, the escort in question, is well aware of this

site and is a frequent poster here. He certainly

would have responded to review #43 if it warranted

a response.

 

Therefore, unless contradicted by BN, I think it

is very reasonable to come to the conclusion that

the review is accurate. With an established reviewer

reviewing a well known escort and that escort does

not make any response/correction/clarification to the

review – and that escort agrees to see this client

again, it is obvious that the review is accurate.

 

Is not the motto of this site “Honest is our judgments

and truthful in our reporting”?

 

Cheers,

Fisher

[KMEM]

RE: It Would Appear That The Answer is Yes.

 

Did you actually read #43? Hyperbole is often employed in these reviews or, in this case, written porn. Do you think it is possible that BN thought this review was so over the top that no one would believe it to be true?

 

Frankly, I don't quite know how M4M let it get through their oversight process, but stranger things have happened.

 

Best regards.

 

KMEM

[+ glutes]

Yes. Dildo to follow...

 

http://www.ayengel.v21hosting.co.uk/l34.jpg

[Guest Fisher]

Yes ...

 

>>> Did you actually read #43? Hyperbole

>>> is often employed in these reviews or,

>>> in this case, written porn.

 

Yes, while the review is quite cheesy, the section

of the review that refers to ass-to-mouth action with

a dildo is not hyperbolical but rather straightforward:

 

“Before we knew what had happened, the dildos, fresh

from our asses, were shoved down our throats, and held

there, while the men, this time very easily, slipped a

new dildo up our asses.”

 

>>> Do you think it is possible that BN thought this

>>> review was so over the top that no one would believe

>>> it to be true?

 

Are suggesting that fosterchow, who has written at least

three very favorable BN reviews – as well a numerous reviews

of other escorts, is fabricating them? Are you further

suggesting that BN is allowing false/fabricated positive

reviews about him to be posted? I think you owe this well

reviewed escort an apology for impugning his integrity

 

Review #43 is a bit over the top; however, I’m sure that

if it described a specific act (or encounter) that BN

does not do, he would post a response to the review.

BN regularly posts on this site; moreover, he has many

friends/fans who I’m sure would promptly notify him if

he missed a thread or review regarding him. While not

my cup of tea, I’m sure there are many potential clients

who would love to see him suck on a fecal covered dildo,

and it would behoove BN to post a response to the review

(if it is inaccurate) simply to weed out clients that might

be interested in a product that he is not selling.

 

>>> Frankly, I don't quite know how M4M let it get through

>>> their oversight process, but stranger things have happened.

 

They would have notified BN of this review. It would not

have been published without his acknowledgement that it

was a legitimate review. If he disagreed with some aspect

of the review, he would have been able to respond immediately

after the review. The fact that he has made no response to

the review after three months, and that the same reviewer

has since posted an additional review of another appointment

with BN, leads me to believe that the review is accurate.

While BN is certainly under no obligation to respond to

this thread, his silence seems to confirm review #43’s

accuracy – not that there is anything wrong with it.

 

Finally, fosterchow’s reviews may be a bit cheesy; however, I’m

sure he enjoyed writing them and I’m sure he had even more

fun living it. With all the boring white bread reviews

consisting of “What happened next is personal” … or “is

our secret” sometimes cheese is a good thing!

 

Cheers,

Fisher :7

[alanalt]

RE: It Would Appear That The Answer is Yes.

 

Or it's just not his policy to comment on specific acts mentioned in his reviews...

 

I don't see what all the fuss is about... if you're that curious about what Ben will/will not do during a session, why not set up a session and find out for yourself!! }(

[KMEM]

RE: Yes ...

 

>

>Are suggesting that fosterchow, who has written at least

>three very favorable BN reviews – as well a numerous reviews

>of other escorts, is fabricating them? Are you further

>suggesting that BN is allowing false/fabricated positive

>reviews about him to be posted? I think you owe this well

>reviewed escort an apology for impugning his integrity

>

 

I am suggesting that #43 was indeed a fabrication which I am sure was intended to be fun or even funny; constructed as pure porn in part to show how silly responses to requests for more details could be.

 

 

>Review #43 is a bit over the top; however, I’m sure that

>if it described a specific act (or encounter) that BN

>does not do, he would post a response to the review.

>BN regularly posts on this site; moreover, he has many

>friends/fans who I’m sure would promptly notify him if

>he missed a thread or review regarding him. While not

>my cup of tea, I’m sure there are many potential clients

>who would love to see him suck on a fecal covered dildo,

>and it would behoove BN to post a response to the review

>(if it is inaccurate) simply to weed out clients that might

>be interested in a product that he is not selling.

 

 

If an escort or client made a claim that they only had sex in the zero gravity of space, while possible, would it be believable? Would that statement require public affirmation or denial?

 

 

>>>> Frankly, I don't quite know how M4M let it get through

>>>> their oversight process, but stranger things have

>happened.

>

>They would have notified BN of this review. It would not

>have been published without his acknowledgement that it

>was a legitimate review. If he disagreed with some aspect

>of the review, he would have been able to respond immediately

>

>after the review. The fact that he has made no response to

>the review after three months, and that the same reviewer

>has since posted an additional review of another appointment

>with BN, leads me to believe that the review is accurate.

>While BN is certainly under no obligation to respond to

>this thread, his silence seems to confirm review #43’s

>accuracy – not that there is anything wrong with it.

 

Condemnation by inference. This is similar to, "have you quit beating your bf?" Yes or no? (Only if he wants me to.)

 

>Finally, fosterchow’s reviews may be a bit cheesy; however,

>I’m

>sure he enjoyed writing them and I’m sure he had even more

>fun living it. With all the boring white bread reviews

>consisting of “What happened next is personal” … or “is

>our secret” sometimes cheese is a good thing!

 

I am sure he enjoyed writing it and BN may have enjoyed reading it but I don't think either one lived it, with or without enjoyment.

>

>

 

Best Regards,

 

KMEM

[Guest Fisher]

RE: Yes ...

 

KMEM,

 

You posted:

>>> I am suggesting that #43 was indeed a fabrication

>>> which I am sure was intended to be fun or even funny;

>>> constructed as pure porn in part to show how silly

>>> responses to requests for more details could be.

 

Unless you are BN or fosterchow , I don’t think you are

in a position to state that review #43 is fraudulent. If

you do have some information that indicates that the review

is fraudulent, I strongly suggest that you forward this

info to Daddy, so the review can be deleted and fosterchow

and BN can be reprimanded.

 

>>> If an escort or client made a claim that they only

>>> had sex in the zero gravity of space, while possible,

>>> would it be believable?

 

Huh??? I’ not sure fosterchow or BN is the space cadet

in this situation. Review #43 describes a kinky sexual

encounter – nothing more. Probably much of what was described

in review #43 will be occurring tonight in Chelsea and/or

other NYC environs.

 

>>> Would that statement require public affirmation or denial?

 

Yes. BN is a profession escort. The reviews are an important

source of clients for escorts. Moreover, the escort review is an

invaluable guide used by many clients to help them decide which

escort hire. Fake and fraudulent reviews are not to be tolerated.

 

>>> Condemnation by inference. This is similar to, "have you

>>> quit beating your bf?" Yes or no? (Only if he wants me to.)

 

Sorry but your analogy is all wrong. Either way answer

the “beating your bf” question you admit that you beat your

bf. The question FFF asked was quite simple – did , as described

in Review #43, BN allow a dildo that was up his ass to be shoved

into his mouth? Yes he did or no he did not. There is no trick

or entrapping question here.

 

Moreover, you seem to be implying that BN would never do

the scene described in review #43. You also seem to be making

a judgment that this scene is immoral, sick or icky. I realize that

kink is not everybody’s cup of tea, but if fosterchow and BN,

both consenting adults, enjoy that scene (plus BN gets paid!),

I don’t think it for us to judge.

 

 

Cheers,

Fisher :7

[KMEM]

RE: Yes ...

 

Fisher,

 

Thanks for interpreting my own thoughts and words for me. I had no idea that I was making a moral judgement. I thought that I was merely stating my opinon that the review #43 was written porn and my opinion that BN, by his own words and deeds so far as the other 47 reviews indicate, that he doesn't do porn.

 

BN made that statement in another post and that seems to be his answer to these questioning posts also.

 

Best Regards,

KMEM

[Guest Fisher]

RE: Yes ...

 

KMEM,

 

You posted:

>>> Thanks for interpreting my own thoughts

>>> and words for me. I had no idea that I

>>> was making a moral judgement.

 

You are quite welcome. However, you also seem

to be making my point. You have made several

posting which caused me to come to a certain

conclusion – you now have, rather quickly, corrected,

albeit sarcastically, my misinterpretation of

your posting. Exactly what BN would have done if

fosterchow’s review #43 was fabricated or false or

misleading; however, BN has never made a response/

correction/clarification to review #43 which would

lead any reasonable person to believe that review

#43 is accurate.

 

>>> I thought that I was merely stating my opinon

>>> that the review #43 was written porn and my

>>> opinion that BN, by his own words and deeds so

>>> far as the other 47 reviews indicate, that he

>>> doesn't do porn.

 

I think your logic is a little faulty:

1) BN does not do pornography.

2) KMEM “declares” that fosterchow’s review #43 is written porn.

3) Therefore, review #43 is a fraudulent review.

 

I think perhaps you should read some of BN’s other reviews.

Many of them describe BN having sex – a few kinky sex (eke!),

so by your logic they must be porn; therefore, fraudulent.

 

>>> BN made that statement in another post and that

>>> seems to be his answer to these questioning posts also.

 

What thread is that? If that is the same thread that BN

states he doesn’t do porn, he nowhere in that post states

that he does not do the scene described in fosterchow’s

review #43. If there is another thread/post that answers

the specific question, please post a link.

 

If you are basing your opinion that the review is fraudulent

because fosterchow states that he filmed their encounter, I

think your reasoning is wrong. There is a big difference

between filming a porn movie and allowing someone to film

a sexual encounter for their own personal use. Fosterchow

is most likey a man of significant means (he is able to

travel all over hiring expensive escorts for extended lengths

of time), I do not know if he is out or closeted, but even

if he is out, I doubt friends, family, and business associates

know of his kinky activities. He probably has more to lose than

BN if this film gets out, and being a trusted regular client

it does not seem beyond credibility that BN would allow the

encounter to be filmed. So while this film might be pornographic

in nature, it is not the same a making a porn film.

 

Cheers,

Fisher :7

[Guest alanm]

RE: Yes ...

 

"BN does not do pornography."

 

Few top escorts appear in porn videos because the pay is so low.

[KMEM]

RE: Yes ...

 

Fisher,

 

It is amazing to me that two people can be so separated by a common language.

 

Because BN chooses not to be called out and answer any question by any poster, he must have done it.

 

Question for you: If BN replied that FC was using a LOT of hyperbole in that review and he did not do one of more of the things listed as part of the review, would you believe him? Would most of the readers of the MC believe him? Some don't care one way or another but of those that do, which seems to include you, what would your inclination be?

 

Best Regards,

KMEM

[Guest Fisher]

RE: Yes ...

 

KMEM,

 

I assumed that despite the fact that you are

a new member (May 27, 2006) with only five posts

(four of them in this thread), that you were a

long time lurker, or a banned former member, or

a well known poster who wishes (for some reason)

to hide your original name. Perhaps I was mistaken

and you are new to this site; therefore, in my

response I will try to clear up a few items for

you regarding this site.

 

>>> Because BN chooses not to be called out and

>>> answer any question by any poster, he must

>>> have done it.

 

There is an important difference between the review

section and the message board. The review section was

the raison d’etre for this site. Neither BN nor any

escort HAS to reply to any question by any poster in

the MC. But escorts should (and do) reply to misinformation

in reviews about them. If we follow your logic/reasoning,

for every review written the escort in question would

have to respond: “ Thank you for this review – it is

accurate.”

 

Moreover, BN is a professional escort. It makes sense

that he would not want a fabricated review that indicates

that he does a sexual act that he actual does not do.

There are two important reasons why – (1) He will be

bothered with inquiries from potential clients who

would want him to do said acts. (2) He might lose

some clients who might not want to be with an escort

that delves into the kinkier side of sex. BN is a

savvy businessman. He would not allow misinformation

about him to be published – at least without making

a strong response.

 

>>> Question for you: If BN replied that FC was using

>>> a LOT of hyperbole in that review and he did not do

>>> one of more of the things listed as part of the review,

>>> would you believe him? Would most of the readers of

>>> the MC believe him? Some don't care one way or another

>>> but of those that do, which seems to include you, what

>>> would your inclination be?

 

Actually that is three questions, but I will try to answer them.

 

>>> If BN replied that FC was using a LOT of hyperbole in

>>> that review and he did not do one of more of the things

>>> listed as part of the review, would you believe him?

 

Yes I would believe BN. If he does say that, I would also

suggest that perhaps fosterchow not be allowed to publish

anymore reviews since he is fabricating important details.

 

>>> Would most of the readers of the MC believe him?

 

Sorry, I’m not omniscient, so I can’t state what most

readers of the MC would believe. Nonetheless, BN does

have a fairly good reputation on the MC, so if pressed

I would guess that most readers would believe him.

 

>>> Some don't care one way or another but of those that

>>> do, which seems to include you, what would your

>>> inclination be?

 

I would say I don’t care one way or another – mild curiosity

only. I do not think that my concern in this matter is a

great as yours, but who knows?

 

Happy Pride,

Fisher :*