CAVEAT EMPTOR: An Open Letter to Hooboy

[Guest jizzdepapi]

Hi Hoo:

 

Hope this finds you well. Very much enjoyed your London diary. Hope things are better now. And you got with Arnaud, the one boy on these pages that I think is more beautiful than my most delectable papi! If he ever discovers Latino roots and turns into a swarthy top please email me!

 

Anyway, there is a point to this:

 

Today's coverboy, Tony #2--Chicago, advertises on bareback.com. So sad 'cause he's such a beauty. I just happened to notice the bareback website and that the reviewer was so thrilled to deliver the squirt of death. But was thinking about a possibly inebriated or stoned shopper, or one who gave a review a quick read, who might not notice this important consideration and might make a date with an escort who might or might not be forthcoming about his practices or HIV status. There is also some discussion about Jeff Palmer coming from a post by Butch Harris that might backfire but is generating important discussion.

 

There's already been angry threads about this topic, as you know. The fact is that growing numbers of young gay men are barebacking and our preaching would most likely have no effect. But it is good to inform us older or more cautious geezers and notice would be out there for younger more frisky readers who might think about their sexual practices.

 

A little light went off in my head thinking about this. At first, I was going to ask if you could place some sort of black picture frame around pics such as Tony #2's, when it was clear the escort barebacked. I assume you confirmed the review with him and he confirmed or at least didn't deny that he barebacked.

 

But then I realized that you also allow reviewers to warn about no-shows and scam artists. So I would propose two ideas and I would even be willing to do a little net research to help you.

 

One idea would be to set up a folder: something like, "Buyer Beware." In that, posters could identify escorts like Tony #2, no shows and people like Anthony Holloway for both regular and new readers. To keep it optimally useful, as you do with Escort Travels, you could even state that the escorts name and location should be listed in the subject. That, by itself, is the most useful information. Posters could engage in any amount of discussion on individual threads in that formum in replies but the information is out there for all to see in a simple viewing of the forum, which is useful by itself.

 

Another idea might be to use a little icon in the review of escorts. A clip-art black rose might be used for a barebacker. A Dali-esque melting clock might be used for a no-show or escort that always runs seriously late. Maybe a masked figure pointing a gun at the viewer might decorate Anthony Holloway's or Kirk's reviews. This might be a little dicey but posters complaining about straight escorts who get serviced only (Vicente Rene NY and Florida and Brian AKA James NY come to mind) might warrent a little Disneyesque pussy icon. (Wouldn't your mama be proud?)

 

Think you'd provide a valuable service and your readers would be well served by instituting something like this.

 

Hope I don't start some flaming here, which sort of brings up the point that really heated posts that are clearly centered on the sort of situations above could be moved from the Lounge or Deli forums into the Buyer Beware forum as well, as long as it's clear that the warning really is warranted and legit.

 

Best,

Jizz-de-wild-but-safe-papi-every-time

[Guest Thunderbuns]

>One idea would be to set up a folder: something like, "Buyer

>Beware."

 

Well Jizz - aren't you the brave one ;-)

 

You may recall I posted a comment a few weeks ago under the heading of "Buyer Beware" and was attacked by many members for having the audacity to do so. Go figure.......

 

The recurring theme was that one should always assume your partner is poz and take all precautions. In a perfect world, that may work. But the last time I checked, it wasn't so perfect!

 

Good luck to you in your suggestion - but don't hold your breath.

 

Thunderbuns

[Donnie]

>The recurring theme was that one should always assume your

>partner is poz and take all precautions. In a perfect world,

>that may work. But the last time I checked, it wasn't so

>perfect!

 

What are you saying? That if the escort has no "bareback warning", then you can go right ahead and have unsafe sex & take his load?

[Donnie]

If you're going to have unsafe sex with anyone, escort or not, then you're a moron. You have to always act as if the other person is pos & play safe everytime. A warning such as the kind you are suggesting is really pointless. A client that is going to want unsafe sex is not going to care about such a warning anyway!

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>You may recall I posted a comment a few weeks ago under the

>heading of "Buyer Beware" and was attacked by many members

>for having the audacity to do so. Go figure.......

 

Probably because the escort you were warning buyers to "beware" of was being honest and straightforward about his HIV status on his website. A label like "Buyer Beware" in a case like has the potential to stigmatize an escort for doing the right thing.

[+ deej]

Jizz,

 

This has indeed be beaten to death. I doubt you'll see HooBoy adding MORE icons to the review process since he's been actively REMOVING icons because they're a pain in the ass to remember to add to individual reviews.

 

As for advertising on barebackcentral.com, please remember that the webmaster at that site KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY POSTS FALSE ADVERTISING LIFTED FROM OTHER SITES. I'm not saying that is the case here, but please keep it in mind with ANY escort you see advertised there.

 

Do we really *need* another forum? I dunno. It's HooBoy's call. We already *have* a forum for discussing escorts though. I don't see what problem a new forum would solve. <shrug>

 

Just my $.02

[Guest Thunderbuns]

>What are you saying? That if the escort has no "bareback

>warning", then you can go right ahead and have unsafe sex &

>take his load?

 

No - that's not at all what I was trying to say.

 

I meant that although we all know it should be imperative to wear a condom, in the heat of the moment I'm sure some guys just don't bother to take that precaution. So - for these types, a warning on a web page or a cautionary logo on a review probably would not make much of a differance.

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest Thunderbuns]

>Probably because the escort you were warning buyers to

>"beware" of was being honest and straightforward about his

>HIV status on his website.

 

True - but what about a client that bases his hiring decision on the strength of this sites good reviews of that escort, but does not take the time to check out his web page?

 

>A label like "Buyer Beware" in a

>case like has the potential to stigmatize an escort for

>doing the right thing.

 

Why would the escort mind if his status was brought to clients attention by a Buyer Beware caution if he has already posted it on his website? He can hardly claim he was being outed against his wishes.

 

Thunderbuns

[Guest jizzdepapi]

squirt where?

 

hmmm... to all of the above but I still think it’s a good idea and I hope Hoo thinks about it.

 

Thunderbuns: Sorry I didn’t know of your proposal; I would have chimed in with support if I did.

 

Donny, IMHO, your reaction is sadly indicative of why AIDS service organizations are having a hard time reaching young people. You’re pretty much preaching to the converted on this board, though who knows who’s not speaking up? Pro-barebackers probably don’t feel like they’re on level playing ground here. If we give them attitude and state or act like their choice is a dumb one, we’ve lost the chance to encourage them to change their behavior.

 

Jeff Palmer sounded pretty angry and confused and made what most of us thought was a dangerous choice; I would rather someone like Jeff noticed a little icon or a forum that emphasized HIV/AIDS status and chose to ignore it or maybe just read it or think about it without anyone else’s judgment. Hope he comes to the same conclusion that we have but he has to do it on his own and on his own time. I can almost understand a young person thinking, “So how come these old guys got to take it raw up the butt but I don’t?”

 

DEVON: I understand your feeling and the fact that some escorts might hesitate to tell the truth about their status if we pay undue(?)emphasis to this. Still, since AIDS is a deadly disease, I think we should do it but not beat it to death. My suggestion about a separate forum was for just that intent. If shoppers could open up a thread and, in the subject line, see a list of names of escorts who raise a red flag for a few very good reasons, that’s sufficient. Of course, people will reply and any post—especially those that claim escorts are a ripoff or scam—should, be removed if Hoo or someone else proves it false.

 

I think most of us will ignore this thread and don’t know how many replying posts there will be. Much of this discussion happens in the other forums anyway and people have moaned about that for awhile. So let’s put it all in one place where it logically belongs and where other people don’t even have to see it.

 

Actually, what if we just called the thread “Consumer Reports” or what if we used an icon which was just a cute little puddle of cum instead of a black rose? Any idea to make it less judgmental is fine in my book.

 

DEEJ: I’m aware of the bullshit that’s taken place at bareback.com; been stated here a number of times. Since Hoo posted the review and listed the contact site, I’m assuming he’s gone through his usual rigorous (though not infallible) verification process and posted it anyway. I’m assuming a similar process happens with reports about no-shows and ripoffs.

 

Dealing with data on computers, as do many of us to some extent, I’m sure you’ve dealt with the fact that enterprises collect data; IT folks often just need to present it in the right way and to the right audience. That’s what I’m suggesting.

 

Not trying to make work for Hoo. This idea, if a forum, would give posters the chance to initiate information exchange, which actually would take the onus off of Hoo. It would also give, for example, Tony #2 a place to speak up immediately and deny or affirm information, as well as Anthony Holloway, who could reply from the latest computer he had ripped off.

 

I’m not especially wed to my proposal but think it’s a good one.

 

Besides, I think cum puddles are cute.

 

Best,

Jizz

[+ deej]

RE: squirt where?

 

<<This idea, if a forum, would give posters the chance to initiate information exchange, which actually would take the onus off of Hoo. It would also give, for example, Tony #2 a place to speak up immediately and deny or affirm information, as well as Anthony Holloway, who could reply from the latest computer he had ripped off.>>

 

And that differs from the current forum *how*???? :7

 

I'm not against the idea, I just don't understand what "new" function it brings to an already interactive message board. Everything you're proposing, discussion-wise, is possible the way we're set up now.

 

As for reviews, HooBoy really tries (with a few eggregious exceptions) to stay extracted from the contents and I think that's a good idea. Let the reader reach their own conclusions. Otherwise, he is editorializing from a bully pulpit.

[chrismac]

I have thought about this myself several times after being with a couple of escorts who clearly preferred not to play safe, but did so on my insistence. This had a somewhat negative effect on the session, but didn't ruin it altogether. After these instances, I would have liked to have been able to put something in the description section of the review (you know, in the areas where we list their contact info, dick size, etc.) that states whether the escort plays safe or not, or don't care (like we state about smoking). This would not be as abrupt or perhaps as offensive as an icon.

[Guest JON1265]

>But was thinking about a possibly inebriated or stoned shopper,

>or one who gave a review a quick read, who might not notice

>this important consideration and might make a date with an

>escort who might or might not be forthcoming about his

>practices or HIV status.

 

If we assume EVERY escort or trick is POZ...why is it necessary to even ask? You should always play safe...makes me wonder how many clients actually ask the status of their escorts...I will be honest - I don't.

 

 

 

 

 

>One idea would be to set up a folder: something like, "Buyer

>Beware." In that, posters could identify escorts like Tony

>#2, no shows and people like Anthony Holloway for both

>regular and new readers.

 

Why do we need another folder? I think these forums are enough...we are discussing it here...

 

>Another idea might be to use a little icon in the review of

>escorts. A clip-art black rose might be used for a

>barebacker. A Dali-esque melting clock might be used for a

>no-show or escort that always runs seriously late. Maybe a

>masked figure pointing a gun at the viewer might decorate

>Anthony Holloway's or Kirk's reviews.

 

Whilw we're at it - how about: 1) A little black lung for smoker's breath. 2) A little pair of undies with tire tracks for unclean bottoms. 3) A little bottle of SCOPE for escorts with bad breath.

 

Where does it end?

 

 

 

Assume all escorts are POZ...play as safe as you are comfortable with...and if all this freaks someone out...stop having sex.

[Justice]

>If you're going to have unsafe sex with anyone, escort or

>not, then you're a moron. You have to always act as if the

>other person is pos & play safe everytime. A warning such

>as the kind you are suggesting is really pointless. A

>client that is going to want unsafe sex is not going to care

>about such a warning anyway!

 

 

Sad, but true. Unfortunately, today's Los Angeles Times is reporting that there is a rise in STD's in the gay population in urban areas, thus raising fears that there will be a rise in HIV transmissions. Here's a link:

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-032702syph.story?coll=la%2Dhome%2Dtodays%2Dtimes

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

That is a bull shit philosiphy, if what you write is true then we can go ahaid and jut not worry about it. A better idea, The government, for that matter HooBoy since he is god here ( no disrespect meant HooBoy ) require all Positive escorts as well as clients, so we escorts arent infected as well (yeah you never hear about this brought up ) to just Tattoo a scull on their forhead so you know who is SAFE and who isnt. It would solve all the problems in the world.

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

Again I ask, how do the escorts know if it safe to play wi th the client? If this is the case we should get the same choice as to if we even want to be hired or not. THINK ABOUT IT.....................

[Godiva]

As some of you might remember, I posted a heavily debated thread(Should An Escort Reveal Their HIV Status) a while ago. It was based on my expierence with and escort which stopped the moment I found out he was pos but it was never in his bio. Some of you wanted his name and some wanted my head for merely suggesting the idea. The prevalent answer then which has surfaced here too is the "assuming that everyone is positve tone" while I might not agree totally.. I respect others opinions.

 

While Hooboy may never Flag and escort for their status you all have done more here than any flag will ever do..One of you brilliant posters spotted the "cumming in the ass" and brought it to the attention of everyone here. I am almost certain the much discussed Tony (although he may be a nice guy) will not be getting my services and from what it sounds like most of yours either. We now know who he is and what he likes to do..

 

Plan A will never happen..but plan B will if we all look out for each other and read between the lines in those reviews.

 

My 55 cents

G

 

I'd rather live in his world... than live without him in mine...

[+ Lucky]

>That is a bull shit philosiphy, if what you write is true then we can go ahaid and jut not worry about it. A better idea, The government, for that matter HooBoy since he is god here ( no disrespect meant HooBoy ) require all Positive escorts as well as clients, so we escorts arent infected as well (yeah you never hear about this brought up ) to just Tattoo a scull on their forhead so you know who is SAFE and who isnt. It would solve all the problems in the world<

 

I think you have it absolutely right. There are people who disdain anybody with HIV and are determined to tell them what is right for them. We see it here repeatedly when men are attacked for making a decision on sexuality that goes against the thundering heroes of morality.Tattoos are just the beginning.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

>... I am almost

>certain the much discussed Tony (although he may be a nice

>guy) will not be getting my services and from what it sounds

>like most of yours either. We now know who he is and what he

>likes to do..

>

 

This is why jizz's proposal is most likely counter productive. Loss of business associated with notoriety will cause these guys (and their willing clients) to hide their proclivities -- so while there was some notice before, there would likely be none after this got around. Reading it in the body of the review seemed to work fine this time. That is probably where it belongs... an individual;s comment about 'his' experience.

 

Hoo should not be in the position of branding people based on anonynous hearsay or unverfied claims from known addresses.. I'm not so sure people should be 'branded' anyway. Assume everyone is poz... and let the information flow in the reviews.

 

FWIW

[Guest jizzdepapi]

okay, i give! now get over here, adrian sf, and pound the shit out of me!

 

jizzdepoundingpapi

[+ Lucky]

RE: CAVEAT

 

In San Francisco, the number of new infectious cases grew from a historic low of 26 in 1998 to 139 last year. Officials there say the total could easily top 250 this year--which would be the highest in more than a decade.

That's a cut and paste from the LA article. SF health authorities have previously trumpeted statistics showing drastic trends and have had to eat their words.

Notice the article says the total "could" easily top 250. How scientific. How many of these are the same guy getting repeat infections? And 139 cases in a year in a city the size of SF? How many were gay? How many were HIV+?

The caveat is to wonder who is trying to stir the shit and why.

[BewareofNick]

Jizz, I admire your desire to keep the public informed. Certainly a forum to warn people of the likes of Nick, Anthony and Kirk is a good idea.

 

As for the bb escorts, most of the active ones on here are very up front about the fact that they engage in bb.

 

If you look at some of the known bb escorts (Tony #2, Brandon Keadin, Antonio Vela, etc), and then look at who else the reviewer has reviewed, you can get a fairly good idea of what other escorts might bareback.

 

I would also advocate visiting such websites as bareback.com and barebackcity.com

 

Stroll through the escorts and you may be surprised who you find there! Of course, as deej mentions, sometimes the ads aren't valid, but a lot of times they are.

 

If anyone is interested, I would be happy to do the leg work and post the names of those escorts currently posting on the bb sites. It would serve two purposes: one to educate the public (without violating the message center rules) and might make some escorts aware if there are false advertisements palced there. Let me know.

[Guest JON1265]

>If anyone is interested, I would be happy to do the leg work

>and post the names of those escorts currently posting on the

>bb sites. It would serve two purposes: one to educate the

>public (without violating the message center rules) and

>might make some escorts aware if there are false

>advertisements palced there. Let me know.

 

Oh, by all means, let's start a "list"...

 

Have some of you gone completely mad?

 

If you want to know if your escort is HIV Poz...ask him...if he says yes...then you know...if he says no...make pretend he said yes and SILL practice safe sex...

 

How many of you ask anyway? I don't.

[Guest 7Zach]

My memory is that the guy who reviewed Tony usually says something about turning them over and then letting them take a two day load or whatever. It was usually less than certain that he was barebacking, but I checked once and a couple were on the bareback sites, or in their websites, used the expression "uninhibited bottom".

Some of the escorts advertise on standard sort of sites and then the bareback ones. Their replies often are "where did u see me?" And then answer accordingly, or at least that has been my experience.

I think it is way out of line to ever put a black rose or a black border around anyone's picture. Not because it would hurt their business, but it reminds me too much of a pink triangle or a yellow star of david. Just like so many people are in the closet, it seems a lot of people lie about their status. Because prostitution is illegal, there's no "truth in advertising" and nowhere to go to complain.

I don't know anything else to say except one just has to accept the fact that everyone is probably positive that they sleep with, and act accordingly. To do otherwise would only allow you to ask their status, if they knew, if they were bright and concerned, and then accept their answer. But why would you risk your life based on their answer when you didn't know them, and they have nothing to lose? Or alternatively, if you did, why would you care if they were lying or just wrong? Because it is just silly to both care and rely on them, or, to accept their answer as true and then be angry and bitter when you have been "hosed", pun intended.

I think poz escorts have a place in the business, and they certainly could have a niche in it, based on some of the ads. A lot of them seem to advertise, and perhaps other pos people are more comfortable with them, I really don't know. Perhaps too, some people just like them and are more careful or just follow their standard routine, which is not bottoming, or whatever, and then rely on the statistics. But it is one thing to condemn barebacking or pos escorts in general, or to comment on the fact that they bareback, but I just don't like the idea of associating their status with public symbols of death and plague. If it were legal to sell their services, then some sort of statement, such as the guy in Houston does, would be welcome.

[+ deej]

<<If anyone is interested, I would be happy to do the leg work and post the names of those escorts currently posting on the bb sites. It would serve two purposes: one to educate the public (without violating the message center rules) and might make some escorts aware if there are false advertisements palced there. Let me know.>>

 

NOTE: THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION AND NOT A POLICY STATEMENT FOR THIS SITE.

 

No lists, please. It's too McCarthy-ish. The sites are out there for anyone who wants to go look.

 

Barebacking and HIV status doesn't mean much to me. The guys I hire certainly won't be barebacking with ME!

 

You mentioned Antonio Vela. I actually want to hire him some day. We KNOW he barebacks. On video, even. But with me there's gonna be a condom on the dick going into his cute little butt.

 

There's no reason to put a cattle brand on guys. Let the reviews stand, let the consumer do his research. Let the buyer beware.

[+ deej]

<<ask their status, if they knew>>

 

Those last three words are critical. They can't know unless they already know they're poz.

 

You can have the results of your most recent bloodwork in your hand and proudly proclaim NEGATIVE. But you may have sero-converted 10 minutes after the blood was drawn for that test, long before you got the result you proudly waive.

 

Assume your partners are Poz, and proceed accordingly. It's the only sane thing to do.