What does versatile means to you and escorts

[+ harey]

See also:

 

http://www.companyofmen.org/threads/versatile-annoyance.102267/#post-940958

I really did laugh out loud. This is funny because it's an observation about homophobia. The wrong-thinking won't go away if we ignore it. Guys who are compensating and label themselves as "strict tops" or "total tops" should be subject to a little eye-rolling and mockery.

 

I have always been versatile, because position really depends on my chemistry with the other guy. Although I'm not considered a "bossy bottom", I do often direct the action with my partners who top me. Being the catcher doesn't mean giving up anything (power, masculinity, etc.). That's about energy, not anatomy.

 

Back to the topic at hand...I'm confused about the confusion. Most people have the same idea of what "versatile" means in general. But of course you should confirm the specifics with an escort before a first date if you have a strong preference either way. That's Hiring 101.

[Nvr2Thick]

My man,

 

If someone came here and made racist or sexist jokes I'd very happily point out the grossness of it and would try to rile up people against this. This is not because I am trying to establish myself as anything; I'm still just an old, dumb, latino faceless hooker. I am sorry if you think any intelligent argument against your self-hating, homophobic post is trying to achieve intellectual superiority over you.

 

This is actually not effortful at all. It comes very naturally whenever I see or read something that is designed to keep us (fags, blacks, latinos, women, bottoms, bisexuals, transexuals, you name it) ashamed, belittled, afraid, hating ourselves.

 

You are wrong, I am not interested in aggrandizing myself; I don't need to work hard for any further achievements in life; anyone who has had his cock sucked by me will be able to attest that I have already earned my place in heaven.

 

My "interpretation" actually is perfectly in line with your "defence" post, which is nothing but an attack, calling me overtly dramatic, insecure, self-aggrandizing, belittling my intelligence and trying to bring the attention to me, rather than intelligently discussing the issue at hand, which is homophobia and internalized shame and self-hatred.

 

If you have any problem with my posts, don't read them if that will spare you the shame of feeling unintelligent and judged. I, however, cannot just ignore this poison and whenever anyone tries to spread it, I will gladly point it out, dissect it and try to diffuse the bite of it's hatred so that other people may become aware of something they were carrying within without knowing.

 

I don't have any hope that my writing might change your mind at all, but I think it might help others who are on the fence to see this situation with different eyes. Don't, worry, I am not trying to convince YOU of anything.

 

If you think you are allowed to keep spreading this vile, I think it is my right and duty to -in a civil way and without resorting to childish name calling- point it out and fight it.

 

All the best!

 

You must be in great physical shape to pat yourself on the back like that. Sorry, Juan. You're dead wrong. You have, intentionally or otherwise, failed to differentiate between criticizing your behavior and name-calling. It's the same thing you have done to me; characterizing my behavior as homophobic and self-hating. If you believe that I'm name-calling, then you should use the same logic to accuse yourself.

 

You have to admit that it's fairly stupid of you to suggest that I shouldn't read your posts if I have problems with them when 1) I'd have to read them to know I'd have problems with them, and 2) you're providing a response/attack to my post -- you sought me out. While we're on the subject of how limber you are, it was fairly deft maneuvering to attack me in that manner and then characterize my defense as the real attack. Arrogant of you to suggest that if I don't like your posts I should somehow skip them retroactively, while if you don't like mine you're on a higher calling to save defend society from my words (which are actually your words).

 

An intelligent argument might have started with, "Hey, friend, have you thought about the homophobia and hurtfulness in what might have been a well-intended joke..." You instead resorted to basking in the glory of a soapbox opportunity to inject a vile interpretation into my post, and to slamming the door by declaring, "it's only because of the internalized shame you are carrying inside." It takes a special breed of pseudo-intellectual to attempt that type of judgmental personality analysis based on a few paragraphs of discussion. You must think you're a very special "old, dumb, latino faceless hooker" to believe you're capable of that sort of armchair psychoanalysis based on a social media post. You're right, in a way, you're not trying to convince me of anything if you take such a stilted, darkly critical, and hopelessly negative approach. From the start I have not been your target audience. You don't scorch the earth and then try to have a picnic.

 

An event like this certainly doesn't shame me, and nothing you can say will make me feel less intelligent. After all, these are your own vile words you're judging. I just made light of the fact that often we discover that we like to bottom, and that men that think they like to top may actually often like bottoming more than they realized. All of the really horrible homophobic bits are your own invention; your words not mine. The long journey from my little list to your overblown declaration was yours alone. Man up and own it. If you believe that you're intelligent enough to apply all of your additional poisonous, damaging, self-loathing, hateful rhetoric to my comment and attribute it all to me you're deluding yourself.

 

Good for you if you think you're fighting the good fight by standing up against homophobia in front of a few dozen mostly-disinterested men and women on a small escort forum. Even if I were responsible for what you created and attributed to me you're making a mighty stand against an oil spill in a coffee cup.

 

What you've stirred up here is very shitty behavior on your part. If there was a point to be made you blew it by coming on so strongly with excessive drama. You've developed a particularly nasty straw man argument, but that's becoming fairly common on social media. No, I don't expect to simply not read your posts. I cannot just ignore this poison and whenever anyone tries to spread it, I will gladly point it out, dissect it and try to diffuse the bite of it's hatred so that other people may become aware of something they were carrying within without knowing. You make for a shining cautionary example.

[Becket]

The topic is, "what does versatile mean TO YOU." Therefore any answer will be acceptable. I agree with the point both are making; each is clear and make sense. But the escalation and vitriol seems unnecessary to adequately respond here, IMHO. Of course, like many around these parts, I confess to enjoying the more heated exchanges. It explains why I read every post on a locked thread.

[vabballfan]

I think that an escort advertising as bottom, versatile bottom, versatile, versatile top or top varies by locality. In D.C., historically, top means versatile and anything else just ups the "bottom" level of the escort. Years ago in DC one of the agencies employed a lot of active duty marines - a lot said they were top but were almost always all bottom. Even the super hung guys that were advertised as aggressive, total tops seemed to be 50/50 versatile with me.

 

I remember one three way I did with a marine and a european guy with a 10 inch uncut monster. The marine was billed as a top man with an 8 inch cock. He was 8 inches - but that was seeing it hard while he was on his back taking it full force and begging for more. The european guy was 10 inches - especially when I was railing his ass while he fucked the marine. He kept asking the marine to fuck him but the marine said he was having too good a time bottoming.

 

My experience in LA was top meant top, versatile top meant top, versatile meant more top than bottom and versatile bottom was versatile.

[Juan Vancouver]

Sorry, Juan. You're dead wrong.

 

Yeah, I don't expect you to think otherwise. And I am not expecting to be able to have an adult dialogue with you.

 

You be yourself, and may this work out for you.

 

Best wishes!

[+ José Soplanucas]

Because of all this hanging on meaningless labels, I am pretty sure many clients are missing the chance to enjoy amazing escorts, and many escorts are missing a significant amount of potential business. I think escorts should lobby websites to drop the category "Position" out of their profiles. It would be up to the escort how much detail about provided services is shared in the profile Intro. The conversations about the wanted scene should multiply and the deals too.

[down_to_business]

Omg... every ad will now say ... "ask me" for the answer to every single question, and 50% of them don't respond anyways! Of course 75% of us, never ask in the first place, and 99% of us make up statistics

[Nvr2Thick]

Yeah, I don't expect you to think otherwise. And I am not expecting to be able to have an adult dialogue with you.

 

From the very start that's not what you were expecting. If you started with adult dialogue you might have been able to continue with one. Don't flatter yourself, Juan; that first post was never about adult dialogue. You started with a nasty attack using a straw man argument; the most tired of social media tropes. Trying to reverse-append the idea of adult dialogue onto your vitriol is laughable hypocrisy.

[adventurous old guy]

I think that an escort advertising as bottom, versatile bottom, versatile, versatile top or top varies by locality. In D.C., historically, top means versatile and anything else just ups the "bottom" level of the escort. Years ago in DC one of the agencies employed a lot of active duty marines - a lot said they were top but were almost always all bottom. Even the super hung guys that were advertised as aggressive, total tops seemed to be 50/50 versatile with me.

 

I remember one three way I did with a marine and a european guy with a 10 inch uncut monster. The marine was billed as a top man with an 8 inch cock. He was 8 inches - but that was seeing it hard while he was on his back taking it full force and begging for more. The european guy was 10 inches - especially when I was railing his ass while he fucked the marine. He kept asking the marine to fuck him but the marine said he was having too good a time bottoming.

 

My experience in LA was top meant top, versatile top meant top, versatile meant more top than bottom and versatile bottom was versatile.

 

Wow!

 

Just taking a deep breath and time out from the controversy to let this story fully sink in.

 

Once again, Wow.