Yesterday

I have, for now anyway, removed from public view the entry I posted yesterday.  Several comments, by the same person, were posted to it.  The substance was a fierce, over-the-top attack on another individual, mentioned in my blog entry.  Arguably the comments may have been intended as an alert as well.  But the tone of the comments raised concerns that there may be something going on beyond what was shown on the surface, some vendetta of sorts.  Not to mention, of course, that there were serious allegations and I have no way of knowing if they are accurate or not.  In any event – such attacks and alerts are not what this blog is for.

So, for now, removed from public view.  If the person who commented on that blog entry wishes to contact me to discuss, my email is chevalierdallas-aspd@yahoo.com .

Commodity?

Awhile back on ASPD, Jarod responded to an analogy (see here and here) in a way that, I think, offended some people.  When he mentioned that episode in a comment on my blog, I questioned why he didn’t understand that his response would be offensive to many.  Among other things, I said:

And talking in terms of “trading in” can be interpreted by readers as thinking of the ladies as commodities rather than people.

His reply, among other things, said:

The concept of pussy as a commodity is not mine.

But it sure as hell is a fair statement though.

. . .

IS pussy a commodity?

The implication is that he thinks the answer to that last question is Yes.

My answer: No.  Emphatically.

Bumping

There was a discussion recently on ASPD about “bumping” — a lady cancelling an appointment with Client X in order to see Client Y instead.  The initial discussion was in the context of cancelling on a new client in order to see a regular, although a few people brought up the reverse: bumping a regular in order to see a new client.

There are a lot of factors a lady might consider when a conflict such as this arises, most of which are floating around one place or another in that discussion:

Stupid question

From here:

What do you think a truly fair price for a genuine GFE session should be?

To which, of course, the standard response would be: (1) a session with which lady?, (2) fair to which customer?, and (3) when/where/what.  There is no objective and absolute “fair,” only individual judgments based on those specific factors.

Of course, that would just make it a naive question, or one from someone who hasn’t thought through very well what they’re asking.  What makes it (IMO) a stupid question is

Turing test

Of course, as a moderately well-educated person, I’ve heard of the “Turing test.”  lehuh mentioned it in passing in the comments here (with brief references thereafter by Jain), and then I ran across this newspaper article about the latest test — which the computers failed, but not by much.  A somewhat more detailed explanation and background about the test at Wikipedia here.  To vastly over-simplify — a tester “converses” with several “people,” through words displayed on a screen, and the computer passes the test (considered by some a test of “intelligence”) when the tester cannot tell if the other end of the conversation is being typed by a human or a computer.

When I saw those recent references to the Turing test, I started thinking about . . . P4P discussion boards, of course.  (And it would also apply to other Internet-based discussions.)  Because that’s exactly how we communicate, through words displayed on a screen, rather than face-to-face.  And my first (somewhat amusing, at least to me) thought was:  most of the posters on P4P discussion boards might not pass the test either. Not that they couldn’t, necessarily, if a skilled interrogator was putting them through an actual Turing test, engaging them in conversation and trying to probe in order to determine whether they were human or not.  But if you were only looking at their posts, well, a lot are short, not tremendously logical, and at times might almost have been generated randomly.  How confident are you that “Poster X” is real rather than a clever computer counterfeit? (Misspelled words and bad grammar don’t count, by the way, because as the Wikipedia article points out, that can be programmed into the computer specifically to fool the interrogator.)

OK, we assume that the posters are real because why would anyone register a handle on a P4P discussion board to be used by a computer?  No rational basis for it; it’s certainly not a controlled environment that could be used for an actual Turing test.  So it’s inherently unlikely.  But without that assumption?  Would you be convinced?  Certainly for some people, but how many?

Heartbreaking

A couple of video interviews of street prostitutes: here and here.

No, I don’t approve of the Video Vigilante or John TV.  No, I don’t think these stories are “typical”; certainly VV would choose subjects for the shock value.  Of course, neither are high class call girls, or the independent ladies who are comfortable with and very successful at P4P, ”typical.”

Every now and then, it’s good to be reminded of some of the darker sides to P4P.  As Carrie put it:

Some of the interviews with the ladies are heartbreaking, and I hope anyone who has ever taken advantage of a street walker’s desperation watches them.

I suspect most clients shut their eyes to the desperation, in order to take advantage of it.

It’s about to start

The World Championship match between Vishy Anand and Vladimir Kramnik, that is!  First game starts on Tuesday, the 14th.  The games start at 3:00 pm German time, which is 8:00 am U.S.  Central time zone.

Official site

General chess news, will have coverage

A site where you can follow the games while being played.  (There are others as well.)

(I know, it’s so nerdy to get this excited about chess.  *sigh* )

Negotiating

Is it ever acceptable to negotiate with the lady concerning the amount of the donation? 

Every time I’ve seen this topic on a P4P discussion board, most say “No,” although there are a few clients who say “logically, why not??”  The rationale expressed most often by those who say “No” is that negotiating is insulting to the ladies.  The implicit reason seems to be that the client is telling the lady that what she has to offer is not worth the price she asks.  Offering less makes her feel “cheap.”

I’m not sure that exactly captures what bothers the ladies about the question of negotiating.

Sap? Chump?

So . . . a lady in distress; one whom I’ve visited BCD several times.  I drove over and dropped off some cash for her over my lunch hour today.

Yeah, I know exactly how a lot, probably most, clients on a discussion board like ASPD would characterize my action.  That I’m being a sap or a chump.

A good summary

of how a lot of clients relate to P4P discussion boards, here, from foX.

Some find the pseudo-celebrity of being a “famous john” on the board a powerful narcotic, and they become deeply involved in the hobby and in the life. [and particularly in participating on the boards] . . . Most of the “old guard” are—by the nature of them being the old guard—at the mature end of the cycle and have come to the conclusion that being a famous isn’t as much fun as it used to be.

foX used “famous john” in the ironical sense, of course.  Nobody is as famous as they think they are.  (Some people pretend to be, e.g., using it as leverage to try to convince a gullible lady to give them a freebie for a review because their reviews carry so much weight.  We call such individuals “scum.”)  Some people may think they really are famous, and that such fame means something . . . but they learn eventually.