Craig's List - cheapee's review
- Thread starter keenez
- Start date
I'll let you know.
But I got the best BBJ ever from a Jamaican 19 year old last night......I was absolutely moaning. Got kissed too.
Tonight is the second game of the double-header. CL lurker, a totally different type. Very smart.
As far as what Ballou says about the premeditiation, this girl obvious has given CL a lot of thought, even though she is new to the game.
But I got the best BBJ ever from a Jamaican 19 year old last night......I was absolutely moaning. Got kissed too.
Tonight is the second game of the double-header. CL lurker, a totally different type. Very smart.
As far as what Ballou says about the premeditiation, this girl obvious has given CL a lot of thought, even though she is new to the game.
And now for something completely different...
Proving my twin theories: high school imprints on us far more than we often realize, and you never know what's going to turn you on...
http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/ers/16199604.html
Proving my twin theories: high school imprints on us far more than we often realize, and you never know what's going to turn you on...
http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/ers/16199604.html
Actually, I find it kind of amusing, like the guy who called me a cocktease for not fucking him after he bought me an expensive dinner: when I told him he would have had a better shot if he'd just offered me the cash upfront (and saved us both a lot of time), he indignantly said that he doesn't pay for sex...
Quelle hoot! As they say in Paris, LOL...
Quelle hoot! As they say in Paris, LOL...
To clarify some points buddyyy made that I agree with, the problem that guys like him and me have with the use of terms like "benefactor" isn't that we think that sex and selling sex is dirtyimmoralnasty or anything. The problem we have is that it seems like the people who use those terms are trying to sugarcoat the commercial nature of the enterprise. Same with "hobby" and "provider" and all the other words that obfuscate that what you're doing is paying someone to fuck you.
Guys like buddyyy and me think the use of these euphemistic sugarcoated terms leads to sloppy or even deluded thinking about the nature of the relationship between the service provider and the consumer. More particularly, it leads johns to expect they're going to be more personal than johns have any right to expect.
There's a thread on the Stripper Board where people are arguing about the desirability and even possibilty of real friendships between sex workers and customers. I'm not talking about that issue here. I'm talking about the mindset with which the consumer goes into an ordinary session. I think it's dangerous for both participants if he thinks it's personal.
Guys like buddyyy and me think the use of these euphemistic sugarcoated terms leads to sloppy or even deluded thinking about the nature of the relationship between the service provider and the consumer. More particularly, it leads johns to expect they're going to be more personal than johns have any right to expect.
There's a thread on the Stripper Board where people are arguing about the desirability and even possibilty of real friendships between sex workers and customers. I'm not talking about that issue here. I'm talking about the mindset with which the consumer goes into an ordinary session. I think it's dangerous for both participants if he thinks it's personal.
To Jl's point
I fully agree w/ the obfuscation of the nature of commercial sex. While,most of us use words imprecisely,'benefactor' is even more misleading as it suugests some type of altruistic motive on the part of the giver,rather than consideration paid for services rendered.Obviously it also conotes some type of expectation of gratitude from the sex worker,which is dangerously delusional.
I fully agree w/ the obfuscation of the nature of commercial sex. While,most of us use words imprecisely,'benefactor' is even more misleading as it suugests some type of altruistic motive on the part of the giver,rather than consideration paid for services rendered.Obviously it also conotes some type of expectation of gratitude from the sex worker,which is dangerously delusional.
To the first: in his ego's mind, if nowhere else...
To the second: yes, under the right circumstances. (I.e. he touches you like a concert pianist, not a piano mover...)
Kafka, no offense intended, but I'm guessing you're a younger man, yes? I say that only because I find it hard to imagine an older man saying he "needs" sex so much that if the "love of [his] life" isn't in the mood, the intensity of the need requires that he find some sex, somewhere, no matter what...
Sex is a natural need/urge, to be sure, but going to a provider because the GF isn't available or willing isn't exactly like a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread...
To the second: yes, under the right circumstances. (I.e. he touches you like a concert pianist, not a piano mover...)
Kafka, no offense intended, but I'm guessing you're a younger man, yes? I say that only because I find it hard to imagine an older man saying he "needs" sex so much that if the "love of [his] life" isn't in the mood, the intensity of the need requires that he find some sex, somewhere, no matter what...
Sex is a natural need/urge, to be sure, but going to a provider because the GF isn't available or willing isn't exactly like a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread...
Last edited:
It's like you're trying to transform one of the more purely selfish types of commercial/consumer transactions into something noble. Like you don't want to admit that you're paying someone to gratify your urges.
I'd contend that people who have to use terms like that probably feel worse about commercial sex, deep down inside, than johns who are able to call it what it is.
I'd contend that people who have to use terms like that probably feel worse about commercial sex, deep down inside, than johns who are able to call it what it is.
Last edited:
The candy bar is an inanimate object, for one thing...
But who is asking you to jump through hoops to convince yourself of anything? Not me, that's for sure. My point is simply that when I see a client on a regular basis, who is decent and respectful and all that good stuff, I am grateful to have him as a client because every session I have with him is a session I'm not having with someone who is a complete stranger, or who is not so decent and respectful. (Plus, the longer I know someone, the more I tend to enjoy myself, outright...)
But true enough, just because I like him and am grateful for his patronage and consider myself lucky to have him as a regular client, shouldn't deprive him of his right to feel however he chooses about the transaction taking place. The customer is always right...
But who is asking you to jump through hoops to convince yourself of anything? Not me, that's for sure. My point is simply that when I see a client on a regular basis, who is decent and respectful and all that good stuff, I am grateful to have him as a client because every session I have with him is a session I'm not having with someone who is a complete stranger, or who is not so decent and respectful. (Plus, the longer I know someone, the more I tend to enjoy myself, outright...)
But true enough, just because I like him and am grateful for his patronage and consider myself lucky to have him as a regular client, shouldn't deprive him of his right to feel however he chooses about the transaction taking place. The customer is always right...
The candy bar was unfortunate. I'm sorry I used that analogy.
Let me try a better one. I don't feel like I'm David Bouley's "benefactor" when I go to his restaurant. See what I mean? I don't consider myself superior to him. I don't consider his cooking for me to be humiliating to him. But on the other hand, I understand that I'm buying something from him because I want it, not helping him out or doing anything particularly admirable.
Let me make another point. If one of your regular customers considers himself your "benefactor", in a way he's insulting you. Because he's implying that your services aren't worth what he's paying you. Because if they ARE worth what he's paying you, he's not "benefitting" you in any way: he's engaging in a fair exchange. "Benefactor" implies that his seeing you is sort of like an act of charity.
Let me try a better one. I don't feel like I'm David Bouley's "benefactor" when I go to his restaurant. See what I mean? I don't consider myself superior to him. I don't consider his cooking for me to be humiliating to him. But on the other hand, I understand that I'm buying something from him because I want it, not helping him out or doing anything particularly admirable.
Let me make another point. If one of your regular customers considers himself your "benefactor", in a way he's insulting you. Because he's implying that your services aren't worth what he's paying you. Because if they ARE worth what he's paying you, he's not "benefitting" you in any way: he's engaging in a fair exchange. "Benefactor" implies that his seeing you is sort of like an act of charity.