P4P clients

And from one of the comments to the Peridot Ash blog entry referenced in my last item:

You complain aloud about the issues these johns have, never realizing that they are pretty much mentally ill. You wonder when you’ll finally meet a “normal” sex seeker that just follows directions and respects your boundaries. Perhaps a decade will go by and you’ll realize that these guys are sick and are not capable of respecting boundaries. That’s why they pay for it, because they do not have patience to become intimate with a partner on the level that requires them to give and take (as is found in real love). And perhaps you’ll one day come to realize that you’re as messed-up as they are, and you’ll wish to cease being that way.

While I am not going to argue that P4P clients are always completely well-adjusted individuals . . . I’m not sure we’re all quite as bad as he seems to think.  Hell, even Ms. Ash has some clients with whom she’s “overall pretty happy. But from his perspective (or hers) perhaps almost all of the client population really is that bad.  I hope their perspective isn’t representative.

Anyway, here again is the link.

Selectivity

One reaction to poor economic times that I guess I haven’t focused on before.  Some ladies don’t encounter difficulties in such times at all; their business is doing fine and they can and do continue what they’re doing.  For those who are not doing as well, the standard suggestions are to improve their service (which sometimes means “do things you weren’t willing to do before”, sometimes means “try harder to convince us you enjoy being with us, sometimes means “be more professional about returning calls/emails and about keeping appointments rather than no-showing us”) or to offer temporary discounts.  (Whether it’s even appropriate to offer such suggestions is another question.)

But there’s another response that some ladies may find themselves forced into: being (somewhat) less selective about whom they’re willing to see.

Challenge

This idea has been percolating in my brain the last few days.  First because of that discussion about extras.  And then there was an entry on Peridot Ash’s blog about a guy who read her blog and wanted to see her — and her question was why he would want to see her, after he’s read about her attitude toward sex work?

I think “challenge” may explain some aspects of both.

Popping up all over

With ASPD out, some of the boards that were already in existence have been getting new members, and occasionally new boards are popping up. TER, AHC, HD, and ML were already around; TOB was around and is now expanding from Colorado to Texas; P411 added a message board function; there’s the “temporary replacement” site for ASPD; and just a few days ago I got an invitation to a brand new board: ECCIE (Escort Client Community Information Exchange).

I’m a member of all of the above other than AHC. And as long as I occasionally find something useful or interesting, I’ll probably continue to swing by at least occasionally.

A day late

I had thought about this a few days ago, but somehow either my life was too hectic or my memory is getting even worse than it was before.  And suddenly I realized that I’d let the day slip.

I have relatively little “personal” information about any of my P4P ladyfriends.  They understandably want to keep their private lives private, and separated from their P4P lives.  That sometimes means providing some misinformation as well.  So even when a lady includes her birthdate in profile information on a review/discussion board . . . well, it might be fake.

I have, in the past, sent e-cards for a few ladies on their birthdays, although I’ve been cutting back on that a bit.  It’s a little bit messier, potentially, for the ladies who’ve retired.  I may not have a valid — and safe (i.e., not discoverable by her family and friends) — email address that she checks regularly and to which I could send a friendly birthday c-card.  Some of the e-cards are never picked up, and even if they are, unless it’s clearly an email address that is used for P4P, I’m wary of the possibility that she would be asked “who is this guy who is sending you email?” by family or friends.

For that matter, posting her nom de amour (P4P “stage name”) here could present problems.  It’s a very small risk that family and friends would run across this blog, see a reference to the birthday, and connect that name to the lady they know in civilian life.  But perhaps a risk she would prefer not to run.

So . . . recognizing that it may not even have been her birthday . . . and since I’m not sure I have a valid and safe email address for her . . . and maintaining her privacy by not mentioning her name . . . but in case she happens to read this . . . and since I’m rather fond of her . . .

HAPPY BELATED BIRTHDAY!!

YMMV and reviews

Someone brought up the issue of reviews disclosing that the client got something “extra” in the session; whether that should be disclosed, and whether the review board should edit it out on her request.

It’s always seemed a fairly clear answer to me, although others have different perspectives, of course.  But it’s not a strongly-held opinion; I’m open to persuasion, and it would be interesting to hear others’ perspectives.

It’s a serious subject

but one that probably elicits a lot of jokes.

Sex surrogates.  (Ran across this on a private board; thanks to the guy who posted it there.)

With the inner 12-year-old that most men retain, when I read something like this:

The rationale for surrogates is simple, according to Lawrence. While patients with a regular sex partner can do therapy “homework,” single men and women, who, after all, might be single because they need sex therapy, don’t have study buddies.

juvenile responses come to mind.  Like “Study buddies? Right!” or More homework please!”

(Perhaps the juvenile humor that comes out is an indication that it’s a subject that makes us a bit nervous.)

But it’s not only a serious subject but also an interesting one.  It makes me think of several of the discussions I’ve read over on Gillette’s blog.

Enjoy.  Both the article and Gillette’s blog.

How I select

Awhile back I posted something about whether I use reviews in selecting ladies to see.  But after some recent discussions, I’ve been thinking it’s also an issue of how I use reviews . . . and what other information I use.  I touched on that briefly before, but there’s more to it.  Either that, or I’ve changed since then.

I’m becoming increasingly convinced that a lot of clients use an entirely different approach than mine – whether that’s a minimalist approach using ladies’ ads or profile only (without using P4P review/discussion boards at all), or an approach that depends very heavily on reviews, or something else entirely.  Maybe it’s just another demonstration of WALDT, or past experiences, or personality, and how those influence how you select someone.  Maybe it’s a temporary mood that will change at some point and I’ll revert to the norm.  Maybe I’m just doing it wrong; some people certainly would think so.

An economist’s view

I ran across an interesting article by an economist, concerning how to assign a price to P4P.  It was refreshing because it was — mostly — written from a neutral, perhaps even sympathetic, viewpoint.  That’s not all that common among civilians. And it also wasn’t just theorizing, or based on data from interviewing the more stereotypical streetwalkers.  She talked with an escort from New York, who charges $500 an hour.  For New York, I assume that’s not especially high; perhaps equivalent to around $300 in Dallas?  (That’s what she charged in San Franciso.)  But I really have no idea.

It was interesting to see her perspective, including her identification of a few standard concepts (but not well known to civilians) in P4P.  She has examined P4P before.  On the other hand, some of her conclusions seem a bit flimsy.

Daydreams?

Conventional wisdom is that young men think about sex only once every ten seconds or so, whereas old farts like me are less obsessed and think about sex only once every ten minutes. Daydreaming about sex is a favored preoccupation with many of us, although I think I may be a little bit (?) different.

For one thing, a lot of guys seem to fantasize about fabulously beautiful and famous women they’ve never met.  Models, cheerleaders, actresses, celebrities.  I don’t seem to do that much.  I do react to and appreciate feminine beauty.  Fashion and style as well, which most guys would consider a worrisome sign. But that’s rarely if ever accompanied by thoughts of having sex with those women I’ve never met.  Their attractiveness may take my breath away, but in a somewhat abstract way.