pissed off escort

[Rudynate]

So is it improbable? Yes. Is it impossible? Just ask the 1000th guy in line at the 1:1000 statistical odds estimator.

You must understand that your laws, just for the fact that they are laws in your country doesn't intrinsically make them right and cannot be used universally outside your country, right? I know that in your country the law (and the culture behind it) allows for all sorts of forms of speech that violate all rules of kindness, civility and human compassion. You can even say things that are outright untrue with impunity. That is exactly what I am talking about.

 

In your country meanness, rudeness and lack of civility are legally sanctioned. This is not an attack on the moral fibre of your country, it's only a cultural reality.

 

That allows for religious nuts to picket funerals, for radio hosts to utter the most primitive forms of racial slurs, for the media to entirely destroy the character of any person just for the sake of entertainment. "It's my right! It's in the Constitution!"

 

This is not a principle universally accepted as positive.

 

 

 

You are right to a point. In our Charter Of Rights And Freedoms Freedom of Speech is considered a protected fundamental freedom. However, this freedom is not without limits. There are many instances in which the citizens through their political representatives chose to limit the stuff that can be said. Not to suppress dissension but to foment and protect basic human respect amongst one another.

 

Some of the very strict limitations to our freedom of speech are hate speech, public obscenity and defamation to name a few.

 

Sure. If you have a well formed opinion that is respectful, please let us know. If what you are wanting is to spread hatred, ignorance and ill will, your right stops that very second.

 

It's no surprise this has created a society that in spite of being incredibly diverse is perfectly able to listen to one another, learn from our differences and grow into a society that is more accepting and humane.

 

Some people like the fact that they can say whatever the fuck they want. Personally I prefer living in a place where you are made accountable for the integrity and intelligence behind your words.

 

There's something for everyone!

[Rudynate]

 

It's the same in the US - the First Amendment right to free speech is not an absolute right, and it has been limited here in most of the same ways that it has been limited in Canada.

[Strafe13]

I've read this entire thread with quite a bit of interest and curiosity, as I feel that one can usually tell where these BB-themed threads are going to go, but the ride is usually fun anyway.

 

I'm curious, however, as to how this morphed into both persons in the initial encounter being deceitful, so what's good for the goose... . From my recollection, the OP essentially conceded that he acted in a deceitful manner towards the prospective escort, when he stated that he agreed with many posters' conclusion that he had intentionally acted to deceive the escort. However, I never saw where the escort acted to deceive the OP. Some people asked whether the escort had initially listed "safe only" (whatever that means) or "no BB" in his ad, positing that if this was so, then the escort had also been deceitful. The discussion then seemed to evolve to this hypothetical being accepted as what actually happened, but I don't recall the OP ever confirming that this was the case. Many escorts choose to leave the selection blank on their ads, apparently agreeing with one poster's conclusion that they are damned if they do or don't on the highly charged question. That being said, I don't have a problem with a client asking a potential hire about BB if the escort's ad is silent about it. I find that to be similar to one asking about multi-hour rates, or overnights, where the escort's ad is silent about that. But if the ad clearly provides an answer, and/or if the escort agreed to act in accordance with that during initial contact, then inventing a fake persona so as to elicit a different answer is beyond deceitful.

 

It's also telling that many in this thread are trumpeting deceitful tactics, while there is another thread asking why escorts are loathe to engage in protracted discussions with potential clients. Of course, many escorts have responded in that other thread that that they find these discussions to be time wasters, and detrimental to their business. I'd wager that the kind of exchange that prompted this thread is the precise reason why so many escorts prefer simple and concise communication (usually by text), and don't want to engage in long e-mails or telephone conversations. I found it surprising to learn a few years back that one poster described initiating secondary contact through a fake email address to learn whether escorts might BB if asked (even though the escort agreed to use condoms with him in the first interaction!). I'm even more distressed to learn from this thread that such deceptive practices are apparently routinely used by other clients. I now understand why so many escorts talk about not wanting their time to be wasted in such a manner.

 

 

After I asked "Why is it that you find this a bait and switch?" you're replying with your personal definition of deceit, which is something different. Juan, please check page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bait-and-switch . I also find your personal definition of deception is a bit ... eerrr ... adapted to the current situation to make the current situation appear like deceipt, which it is not.

 

 

And now you are surprising me.

 

Are you trying to say that when Jake messaged back that he didn't play with guys who BB, he was "spewing all sorts of offensive and insulting invectives"? If it is, please let me know where and when, because I couldn't find it. If it's not there, why start about "spewing all sorts of offensive and insulting invectives" ... ?

 

 

 

Sure, let's make sure that we don't get the escort's feelings hurt. Let's make sure that we create a situation in which the escort feels okay and comfortable in continuing his deceit. Let's make sure that he makes appointments with future clients, clients who find their health important and who ask -according to the standards of many here- if the escort practices safe sex, after which the escort responds "always".

 

What we get is a situation in which escorts think they can do whatever they want, because we are making sure that the escort's feelings are not getting hurt. What is it that we find more important, an escort's feeling not getting hurt (an escort who was apparently dishonest himself) or the well being and health of ourselves and others?

 

You know what, I find it perfectly okay to get someone's feelings hurt if that person was dishonest and deceitful to begin with.

 

What I find a problem is that a lot of people here apparantly find it okay when an escort is dishonest about his "safe sex" standards, while at the same time the client in question is supposed to maintain the highest ethical and moral standards possible ...

 

Sincerely, Anton.

[jakeleyman]

From the OP: Not to make a point, but since posters asked about this, the escort who is the subject of this thread advertised on Rentboy.com (San Francisco) as being "Always Safe". I would like to mention that his response was not a rational negative reply like "I think your question was unfair and here is why," but it was about as volatile as the written word can get. He was out of control angry. This is why I queried the forum. It truly perplexed me. Again, I am grateful for the responses, though they are extremely varied - from one end of the spectrum to the other. I learned from the ethical issues posed on all sides.

[MiamiLooker]

From the OP: Not to make a point, but since posters asked about this, the escort who is the subject of this thread advertised on Rentboy.com (San Francisco) as being "Always Safe".

You don't think you should have mentioned this earlier?

[jakeleyman]

Miami Looker: I did not know when I originally posted that this info was important, but when I realized the question was being asked, I answered it.

[instudiocity]

I'm surprised.

 

Why is it that you find this a "bait and switch"? I think that if the escort had responded "no I don't do BB", Jakeleyman had made the appointment. How does that make this a "bait and switch"?

I'm surprised you don't know what a 'bait & switch' is because this is an example of a classic bait & switch.

 

"Oh, Anton? Have you stopped beating your spouse?"

[Amoco]

My understanding of a "bait and switch" is when someone advertises one thing, and when a customer shows up in response to that advertisement, the product is either not really available or not what was promised, but another product takes it place.

 

The first time I saw it used was when a car dealer advertised a ridiculously low price for a well known car,band when people flocked to buy it, it turned out to be unavailable, "but hey, this other shiny penny is really cool - you should try it". It's a technique to get customers to respond - to come to your store,Mir you will.

 

The escort -equivalent of a bait and switch would be false advertising to get someone to hire you, then when they show interest in what you're selling, they learn that the product they want is unavailable.

 

For example, a hypothetical escort posting spectacular pictures of themselves from an earlier time in which they're buff and totally worked out. The potential client responds to those pictures, makes an appointment and finds out the escort is older, out of shape, and not really the person advertised. The client was "baited" with the inaccurate pictures and switched to the "actual" out f shape, older escort. It's another version of false advertising...

 

Or perhaps, an escort that says he kisses, gets hired, and ultimately doesn't kiss.

 

The only "bait and switch" that I see are the escorts who lure clients in with inaccurate photos or statistical details, and when the client shows, they offer their true selves. Many escorts are guilty of this in regard to age, pictures, condition, stats,band activities.

 

The event being discussed, whether you support him or not, is not a bait and switch - the potential client isn't selling anything. Is it duplicitous? Technically, I don't see the deception: "Do you bareback" is straightforward and direct. It's not a trick question. If the escort says "Yes" but advertises "no", he's a liar. Is the client remiss if he asked him two direct questions and the escort answers dishonestly? And on a Board where escort false advertising is rampant and frequently discussed, why wouldn't a client have the right to know the truth?

 

Only on this Board would the benefit of the doubt go to the dishonest escort. Separately, however, we all have responsibility to protect ourselves, but what does that have to do with guys pretending they're always safe when they're not? Or looking all buff in their pictures, when they're not?

[rvwnsd]

My understanding of a "bait and switch" is when someone advertises one thing, and when a customer shows up in response to that advertisement, the product is either not really available or not what was promised, but another product takes it place.

 

The first time I saw it used was when a car dealer advertised a ridiculously low price for a well known car,band when people flocked to buy it, it turned out to be unavailable, "but hey, this other shiny penny is really cool - you should try it". It's a technique to get customers to respond - to come to your store,Mir you will.

 

The escort -equivalent of a bait and switch would be false advertising to get someone to hire you, then when they show interest in what you're selling, they learn that the product they want is unavailable.

 

For example, a hypothetical escort posting spectacular pictures of themselves from an earlier time in which they're buff and totally worked out. The potential client responds to those pictures, makes an appointment and finds out the escort is older, out of shape, and not really the person advertised. The client was "baited" with the inaccurate pictures and switched to the "actual" out f shape, older escort. It's another version of false advertising...

 

Or perhaps, an escort that says he kisses, gets hired, and ultimately doesn't kiss.

 

The only "bait and switch" that I see are the escorts who lure clients in with inaccurate photos or statistical details, and when the client shows, they offer their true selves. Many escorts are guilty of this in regard to age, pictures, condition, stats,band activities.

 

The event being discussed, whether you support him or not, is not a bait and switch - the potential client isn't selling anything. Is it duplicitous? Technically, I don't see the deception: "Do you bareback" is straightforward and direct. It's not a trick question. If the escort says "Yes" but advertises "no", he's a liar. Is the client remiss if he asked him two direct questions and the escort answers dishonestly? And on a Board where escort false advertising is rampant and frequently discussed, why wouldn't a client have the right to know the truth?

 

Only on this Board would the benefit of the doubt go to the dishonest escort. Separately, however, we all have responsibility to protect ourselves, but what does that have to do with guys pretending they're always safe when they're not? Or looking all buff in their pictures, when they're not?

 

+1thousand

[Rudynate]

My understanding of a "bait and switch" is when someone advertises one thing, and when a customer shows up in response to that advertisement, the product is either not really available or not what was promised, but another product takes it place.

 

The first time I saw it used was when a car dealer advertised a ridiculously low price for a well known car,band when people flocked to buy it, it turned out to be unavailable, "but hey, this other shiny penny is really cool - you should try it". It's a technique to get customers to respond - to come to your store,Mir you will.

 

The escort -equivalent of a bait and switch would be false advertising to get someone to hire you, then when they show interest in what you're selling, they learn that the product they want is unavailable.

 

For example, a hypothetical escort posting spectacular pictures of themselves from an earlier time in which they're buff and totally worked out. The potential client responds to those pictures, makes an appointment and finds out the escort is older, out of shape, and not really the person advertised. The client was "baited" with the inaccurate pictures and switched to the "actual" out f shape, older escort. It's another version of false advertising...

 

Or perhaps, an escort that says he kisses, gets hired, and ultimately doesn't kiss.

 

The only "bait and switch" that I see are the escorts who lure clients in with inaccurate photos or statistical details, and when the client shows, they offer their true selves. Many escorts are guilty of this in regard to age, pictures, condition, stats,band activities.

 

The event being discussed, whether you support him or not, is not a bait and switch - the potential client isn't selling anything. Is it duplicitous? Technically, I don't see the deception: "Do you bareback" is straightforward and direct. It's not a trick question. If the escort says "Yes" but advertises "no", he's a liar. Is the client remiss if he asked him two direct questions and the escort answers dishonestly? And on a Board where escort false advertising is rampant and frequently discussed, why wouldn't a client have the right to know the truth?

 

Only on this Board would the benefit of the doubt go to the dishonest escort. Separately, however, we all have responsibility to protect ourselves, but what does that have to do with guys pretending they're always safe when they're not? Or looking all buff in their pictures, when they're not?

 

 

May not have been bait-and-switch in the strict sense, but it was a trick question.

[Amoco]

It really wasn't a trick: "Do you bare back?" Is as direct as it gets. And it's in direct conflict with his ad. You may argue that if everyone wears a condom the whole question is moot, but that's not the existing system. Once someone advertises something, they bear the responsibility to deal with the response. Obviously, the escort was lying. Does that merit any response? Are you upset because it was unfair to catch the escort in the lie? You realize, of course, that the reason any claim has to be validated is because human beings tend to cover their ass and lie. The guy hung himself.

 

But let's talk about bait and switch for a second...If an escort advertises himself as buff and in great shape, and when you get there, he looks nothing like his picture, is that bait and switch? How about age? Or 'interests'? There are professionals on this Board and specifically on this thread that are guilty of several of those behaviors. Intentionally and consciously. Do most do it? I don't think so, but I think some do, and I'm not sure why people of good will wouldn't agree that lying about health related issues is unacceptable.

[Steven_Draker]

... lying about health related issues is unacceptable.

 

 

I'm with you, Amoco.

 

 

[notforme]

Oh, yeah, I can see the escort's perspective -that you pulled a bait & switch maneuver on him.

where was the bait & switch? I don't think you understand the concept. Asking if someone bb is a direct question and doesn't imply that the seeker was looking for that type of action if he had ask do you practice safe sex the reply would have been yes and that would be correct for that fee advertised. if he was ask if he always practiced safe sex and answer yes. that would have been deceptive. There is nothing shady in being direct.

[+ Funguy]

A number of you said basically that when he answered, you knew you weren't going to see him and you should just move on. I disagree.

These guys (or at least most of them) are people just like you and me and at least deserve an answer instead of just leaving them to hang. Whether you just tell him that you don't see bare backers or you've decided not to hire, etc. is simply manners. So many clients rant that escorts don't answer their emails - it can also be felt that clients do the same.

[instudiocity]

 

The escort -equivalent of a bait and switch would be false advertising to get someone to hire you, then when they show interest in what you're selling, they learn that the product they want is unavailable.

 

 

So, if the client hadn't asked bareback question, shown up and fucked the escort, that's a bait & switch?

 

You're splitting hairs.

[Guest]

Well, my activities with escorts are pretty low-risk for myself (and the escort). So I just assume that anyone I have sex with has HIV and don't worry too much about it. Yes, all being equal, I would prefer escorts who are negative and don't BB, but I would never make that assumption based on the escort's ad. As we have seen with the escort who is the subject of the original post, many escorts lie. The OP apparently likes to be screwed from behind, so I can understand why he would want to be more cautious than I would have to be. He might not know until it's too late if the escort was sneaky and pulled off the condom. The OP found out that the escort he was interested was, in fact, a liar. The OP did not have to lie himself in order to find this out. He did not say "I'll hire you if you'll BB for me." He asked the escort if he would BB, and the escort confessed to being a liar.

It's not too surprising that the escort got bent out of shape when he was caught lying. Often liars seem to have twisted beliefs that they have a "right to lie" and if someone catches them, that the liar is the victim. Not too infrequently, I have office visits in which I have to confront "patients" who come in claiming to need a controlled substance (most often Norco) for a medical ailment, but whom I have caught lying (i.e. the "patient" is either a drug dealer and/or an addict). I know from experience that I often have to have security on standby outside the door, because very frequently the person caught lying, rather than apologizing, will act as if he's the victim and go into an angry tirade (often drug-induced, of course). So sometimes I have to throw out the "patient."

So the escort lied to the OP. The OP asked a question (without lying himself) out of concern for his own safety/health. In doing so, he caught the escort lying. Well, no huge surprise: rather than apologize, the escort blew up. I support the OP and applaud the way he protected himself. I feel bad that had to suffer flak while doing so. Next time, just feel grateful you avoided the asshole.

[MiamiLooker]

Not honest advertising.

Is there any other kind? If so, whose?

[+ purplekow]

I have read the entire thread but it has been a few days so I am not sure if this was mentioned, but the OP was acting in a manner to protect himself from a possible threat on his life. That, for me, trumps any argument the escort in question may have. He was duped. He was misled. Bottom line, the truth was told, eventually, by both sides

[MiamiLooker]

In answer to “safe sex”, how do most clients interpret “sometimes” in an escort’s ad? I know there can be various nuances of what the definition of “safe sex” is, but don’t most consider it basically as condom use is safe sex and bareback is not safe sex? If I see an ad where the escort answers “sometimes” in response to “safe sex”, I interpret this to mean that either the escort offers bareback, or at least will consider it, as part of services offered, probably for an additional amount of money to their usual fee. Is that how others interpret this?

[Steven_Draker]

I think it depends on the escort.

Some escorts consider barebacking on PrEP as being "safe sex".

Others "negotiate" condom use. I've seen ads with "sometimes safe" where the escort will engage into condomless sex as a top, but not as a bottom.

 

It's hard to interpret these vague indications, without talking to the escort and asking the right questions.