Another thread on ASPD (and a poll!) about whether clients should post reviews.  Only about 18% always post reviews, but 63% do it “sometimes.”  Not very scientific, of course, and the answer might well be influenced by how often and in what manner the clients play.  Someone who only plays three or four times a year might find it much easier to review every session than someone who plays four or five times a month.  Someone who sees a different lady every time or tends to see a lot of new “flavors of the month” rather than established ladies might have more valuable information, and perhaps a greater obligation, to share as a result than someone who sees only a few regulars.

I suspect part of the differences may also be how long the client has been participating on P4P review/discussion boards.  Anyway,I looked back at my reviewing history.  After joining ASPD at the end of 2001 (and later other boards), I posted

• 32 reviews in 2002
• 15 reviews in 2003
• 13 reviews in 2004
• 10 reviews in 2005
• 3 reviews in 2006
• 2 reviews in 2007
• 6 reviews in 2008
• 2 reviews in 2009

83 total, on five different boards, not counting duplication when I posted the same review on more than one board.  But including some reviews that were lost when ASPD crashed in 2005 and were never reposted, as well as some reviews pulled from public view when the ladies retired.

Some of the change is probably because in recent years I haven’t been seeing as many new ladies, more often repeating with a few regulars.  I have reviewed some of my favorites multtiple times (one lady 8 times, two others 6 times apiece, and two others 4 times apiece — extra credit if you can guess at least four of the five without looking up my reviews ), but I suspect most didn’t want to be reviewed too many times by the same guy — those may come across as White Knight reviews and therefore less credible.

But maybe some of it is a normal decline after you’ve been writing reviews for awhile.  Not because it’s become boring or too much effort (although I am lazy).  Not because of disenchantment with review/discussion boards (although I’ve had some of that).  Primarily, I suspect, it’s because there’s an added motivation in the early years  – novelty. 

In 2002, it was all new to me.  You mean I can read about what other guys have experienced, to help me decide whom to see?  Even more, I can tell others about how great a time I had (or occasionally a less than great )?  People will actually read what I wrote and maybe see ladies I recommended?  They will be interested in my opinion?  WOW!!!!!  Reviews are great!!!!  I want to take part in that!!!!  Which also meant obsessively reading a lot of reviews.  The first year or so . . . well, I don’t remember for sure, but I may have been at least glancing briefly at the majority of reviews posted for independents and agencies in Dallas ASPD.  I was like a kid in a candy shop.

But after a few years, the novelty wears off.  Reviews are just part of the normal background.  Sure, they can be useful — although you start to realize perhaps not as useful as you first thought.  But you also recognize the downside of review/discussion boards.  I’m not talking about getting flamed for the review, or having Lady A mad at you because you wrote a review of Lady B, because frankly I went through very little if any of that.  Certainly not enough to dissuade me.  (Maybe I was lucky to come along during a kinder, gentler era.)  But you realize there’s a lot of hyperbole, “promotion,” and hidden agendas good or bad.  A review/discussion board isn’t paradise on earth; it’s a tool, one that can be used properly or poorly.

So you may back off a little bit.  You don’t participate in discussions as often.  You don’t read every review just because you can.  You also don’t write a review just because you can.  In the first year or two, that probably was part of my motivation.  I didn’t review every session, but probably close to half of them my first year.  There are still reasons to write reviews, and I’m still open to writing them.  But I don’t do them reflexively; I give more thought to whether a review will actually be worthwhile.  My opinion and perspective aren’t always as valuable as I wish they were.

————————

On the other hand . . . the more I read of threads like this, the more I feel as though I may be copping out.  For awhile now, I’ve mostly only written reviews if the lady asks for one (or for mediocre/poor service that prospective clients should know about).  That way I don’t feel as though I’m staking ownership, or stalking, or writing the review for my ego rather than the benefit of the lady and prospective clients.  She’s given me “permission” to write the review. Maybe that’s a cowardly approach, since some ladies apparently feel uncomfortable asking clients for reviews.  I don’t think they should be, but some are.  So there are occasional (and mild) twinges of guilt, that I’m letting down a lady who really would like a review but feels uncomfortable asking.  I’m not going to start automatically writing reviews every (or almost every) time I see a lady, as I was in my first year on ASPD; I’ll still only do it if the lady thinks it would be helpful.  But maybe I’ll make the offer explicitly, more often than I have been.  Although even that would sound a little bit egotistical to my ears.

Some amusing responses in this ASPD thread — the negative reaction by some ladies to the concept of a Plan B:

Excuse me but I detest the Plan B & C crap …

With a good, reliable Plan A, you won’t need any of the other options.

I’ve never cancelled on anyone. I always know my plans well in advance and don’t allow personal issues to get in the way.

or

If you do you home work and pick a reliable provider, and you should never need a back up plan….

Umm, excuse me, but that’s just ridiculous.

In the first place, it’s impossible to guarantee that you will never cancel.  You get a call that a family member is in the hospital with a life-threatening situation?  You’re busted by your last client (LE)?  You woke up this morning with a sore throat and think you might be contagious?  There’s a power failure and your alarm clock didn’t go off?  You have a civilian job and the boss just demanded you come into work that afternoon (and refusing may risk your discretion/privacy by making him suspicious)?  There are all sorts of things that can happen on the lady’s end for which a cancellation will be appropriate if not necessary.  Any individual lady may have a lower potential for cancellations — e.g., no kids or elderly parents, never get sick, no other job, etc.  Some ladies don’t have that flexibility.  And even if you never have cancelled, you can’t know for sure that you never will.  I have dealt with some very professional and reliable ladies who still wound up cancelling once or twice.  Hell, I’ve had to cancel occasionally, if an emergency project came up at work or I got sick or I had to take a family member to the doctor for an emergency medical situation.  (If on relatively short notice, I make it up to them, which makes sure I don’t cancel lightly — but I just can’t keep the appointment without sacrificing too much or risking the discretion/privacy necessary for P4P.)  Those of either side of the aisle who say they never cancel are not always very understanding that others may not have the same flexibility/advantages and may occasionally have to cancel no matter how good their intentions.

Second, “plan B” is not necessarily limited to having Lady Y in mind in case Lady X has to cancel.  Sometimes clients use that phrase in the sense of having an alternative plan if they are trying to schedule an appointment on short notice and don’t know yet whether Lady X will be able to see them.  Plan B then is not aimed at the possibility of cancellation but at the possibility Lady X will have other plans.  You sure can’t avoid that contingency.

Or, another version that’s pretty similar — if the client has a very short notice window of opportunity and it may take time to hear back from Lady X.  So, rather than wait to hear from Lady X — by which time it may be too late to contact Lady Y — he emails or leaves voicemails for both, not committing to an appointment but inquiring about their availability, with the idea that he would be glad to see either of them and will schedule with the first one to reply.  (Of course, that offends some ladies too.  The only interpretation I’ve been able to come up with for that attitude is that they always want to be the guy’s first — perhaps only — choice that day.  I think that’s a little bit extreme, but a lady’s entitled to take that approach if she wants; I just won’t contact her unless I’ve already decided that, if she’s not available, I don’t want to see any other alternatives that day.)

Third, that attitude seems to tell the clients that they should make reliability the most important criterion (or at least one of the most) in deciding whom to see.  Which seems somewhat presumptuous.  Every client makes different trade-offs; as long as he accepts that, he’s entitled to handle his participation in P4P the way he wants to, just as the lady is entitled to run her business as she wants to.  So, he schedules with the really hot chick who is great BCD, because he’s willing to take the chance of having to call a Plan B in return for being able to see her rather than some other lady who is more reliable but in whom he’s not quite as interested.  His choice. *shrug*  A lady who is particularly reliable may think that should be a more important factor for clients, just as the less reliable hot chich may think physical appearance should be the most important factor, but neither is going to be able to impose her perspective on clients who feel differently.

Plan B is often an entirely rational and appropriate approach for many clients.  As long as they’re not doing it by double-booking or leading the lady on, that’s their right.

By the same token, if he makes that trade-off of other factors for reliability . . . he should accept it and not bitch quite so loudly when he’s bitten in the ass by it.  Which a lot of guys do.  Hey, several years ago in Dallas, if you booked with Rebecca or Hooter, you should have been prepared for what might have happened.  Report it, so others are aware, and gripe about it a little bit, but recognize that you were taking a chance.

Deuce Bigalow has returned to full Admin status on ASPD.  See posts here and here.

Congratulations, and good luck.

Few people have noticed, and even fewer have asked about, an acronym I’ve been using for several months now: CASG.  For those few who are interested, it’s based on a very common phrase in a foreign language:

chacun à son goût: people have their own tastes or preferences: used to express the individuality or peculiarity of somebody’s taste or choice. Literally, “each to his or her own taste”

Pretty much means the same as WALDT (“We All Like Different Things”). Not that there’s anything wrong with just using WALDT [**] instead; it’s a perfectly good acronym itself.  (OK, technically an initialism rather than acronym.)  I just came up with CASG as an alternative one day, I think as a bit of word-play/private joke with Carrie Hillcrest.  Of course, she and I were the only ones who ever used the new initialism.  And probably will be even after more people know what it stands for.

At some point after I started using it, I noticed that it has been used before in the P4P context, although as the whole phrase not the initialism — see luv2luv’s signature line on ASPD. 

You thought it might be something more clever or witty or original, didn’t you?  Feeling let down by the explanation?

——————

[**]  I’m not sure if WALDT was “invented” as an initialism by Go4it, but if not, he certainly appears to have introduced it to ASPD back in 2001 before I even joined.  He deserves a lot of credit for one of the more popular initialisms on Dallas ASPD — and a very apt one for P4P. I liked it so much and used it so often that someone attributed it to me once, and I had to correct them.

A P4P client who has started a blog posted on ASPD seeking feedback on whether or not to continue — and to publicize — his blog.

Sure, why not?  But not necessarily for the reasons he’s thinking.

As a way to communicate your likes and dislikes?  Perhaps, as some ladies definitely like to know about that sort of thing in advance of a session.  Of course, the profile on a P411 account is also designed for that purpose.  And I’m not sure how many of the ladies really do read those.  Some undoubtedly do, but I suspect not all.  Hell, some don’t even actually check your profile after your give them your code for screening.  A blog is an alternative way to accomplish that as well, perhaps, although it might be used even less than a P411 profile.  The latter is likely more convenient.  Not only is the information all gathered together in one place — it might be spread over several different blog entries, although it could also be similarly summarized on a separate page — but it’s someplace they’re familiar with and more importantly a site they’re already looking at to screen you.  Very easy to check the profile at the same time.  So I suspect that the number of ladies checking a blog might be even fewer than those who really read the P411 profile info.

To provide a better sense of your personality?  Also possible.  Of course, that takes a lot longer for a reader than a simple list of interests, likes, and dislikes, and many ladies don’t have the time to do that.  On the other hand, if you write enough, a blog may give a more accurate sense of your personality than any brief self-assessment in a P411 profile.  (On my P411 profile, for example, I might say that I’m long-winded, egotistic, argumentative, analytical, old, and cranky.  Whereas someone who read my blog long enough would realize that wasn’t exactly true — I’m not really that old. )  But not all ladies will have the time or desire to do that much research just to find out a prospective client’s personality.  Some do, but I suspect relatively few.  It can take a lot of extra effort.  Unless they accomplish it as a natural by-product of their normal reading of a P4P review/discussion board where the prospective client is a prolific poster.

———————-

I suspect most of the ladies would read a client blog for the same reason that others would read a client blog — that they tried it once or twice out of curiosity and the content happened to catch their interest.  (Ditto with why people read general discussions on a P4P review/discussion board.)  And not a lot of people, ladies or others, will necessarily be interested. 

Escort blogs probably get a lot of traffic, whether because they include photos and titillating topics or just because there are a lot of prospective clients interested in finding out more about her.  Client blogs likely get less.  We’re less likely to include photos (and certainly not of ourselves *shudder*), and the numbers work differently than they do for escort blogs: there are fewer escorts than clients, so fewer ladies interested in finding out more about a prospective client.  Obviously a lot of this is speculation, but I assume that client blogs get a lot fewer readers than escort blogs.

I’m not sure whether the traffic on my blog is at all representative.  But in case it is:  Except when ASPD crashes and everyone is frantically trying to figure out what happened and run across my blog in the process, I probably average around 130 – 140 “views” per day.  (That probably translates into significantly fewer actual readers, as I think if someone goes to the blog and then also clicks on the link to read the rest of an entry that looks interesting to them, that counts as 2 views.  And if a long discussion ensues in the comments, every time a person returns to read the latest comments is probably a separate view.)  It took a couple of years to reach that level.  And my guess would be that, with the diversity of different items posted, most people find at most 1/3 of the entries (and possibly quite a bit lower than that) of interest and worth reading.  It’s just a different third (or less) for different people.  Deuce might be more interested in topics about board governance, as it’s an issue he cares deeply about.  lehuh might be more interested in topics about escorts’ ability to escape the “provider mindset,” as he has interesting thoughts/comments about that.  ptrleeds might be more interested in topics about emotional connections, a topic often addressed on his own blog.  Others?  Who knows?  A blogger can probably get a higher “interest index,” so that readers are interested in a higher percentage of the entries, but it might require a narrower focus and perhaps fewer readers in total.

The blog also seems, from time to time, to be a lightning rod for a few people who feel mistreated by local P4P review/discussion boards.  *sigh* Although that may be less likely for other client blogs.

A few ladyfriends whom I’ve seen BCD have read the blog occasionally and even posted comments.  Caitie Mae and Alice/Rumor come to mind.  But that might have been in part because they already knew me; if not, they might not have been as interested.  (Sometimes we’re more interested in comments by someone we know than comments by a total stranger.)  The delightful and delectable Carrie Hillcrest is quite possibly the only ladyfriend who read my blog before ever meeting me . . . and I suspect it wasn’t specifically to prepare for an anticipated appointment. 

A lot of my readers are guys, but even among the ladies, I suspect almost all have no anticipation of (and possibly no interest in) being BCD with me anytime soon.  It’s just not why people come here to read.  I suspect the vast majority, if not all, of my ladyfriends other than Caitie, Alice, and Carrie have not read the blog.  Of course, I haven’t made a point of encouraging ladyfriends to read it.  And I have never suggested it or provided a link to a new lady with whom I’ve scheduled an appointment.  But I doubt if very many would want to spend much time here before an appointment even if I did.  Come to think of it, seeing the mountain of stuff here (hopefully no more than 1/3 total crap — a/k/a the Rod Serling standard ** — but no guarantees) might make them more likely to put me on their Do No See list.

————————-

For the ladies, blogging may help promote their business.  But for a client? 

I think the real reason to do it is not the utilitarian purpose that sparks4you mentions in his post, or even in hopes of attracting a large audience.  The real reason is that you enjoy expressing your thoughts, ideas, yourself — and doing so by blog may have advantages over trying to do so through posting on P4P review/discussion boards.

As for the original poster on that thread:  If you enjoy blogging, have at it!

—————-

**  A possibly apocryphal story that Rod Serling said, of the many episodes of Twilight Zone that he wrote, that he was extremely proud of about a third, another third were OK but nothing to write home about, and a third were total crap.  That sounds about right.  He also supposedly said that (particularly when writing rapidly with short deadlines and having to fill an episode every week) that this ratio was pretty damned good.  That sounds about right too.

It’s almost like clockwork; every month or two someone will post on ASPD to suggest that the ladies be allowed to review clients.  Here’s the latest example.

Meg had the best response:

It is already allowed elsewhere, and seems to work.  I don’t see a lady doing a bad review, it would ruin her business.    We already talk about the bad ones privately anyway.  What it will do, is allow the lady to toot the guy’s horn w/o him tooting it himself in the review of the lady lol

Exactly.  You’ll almost never see a negative review; in fact, you probably won’t see a review that is only mildly positive.  They’ll all be glowing raves about how wonderful he is . . . whether he really is or not.  (Of course, a glowing rave about me would be pure objectivity, or even a bit understated. )  I suspect it isn’t done as information for the other ladies as much as marketing — both an extended form of flattery of the specific guy, to encourage him to return, and a way to indirectly communicate to other guys “see how appreciate I am of you wonderful men.”

Sort of like a White Knight review in reverse. As I’ve pointed out before.

I don’t see a lot of point to them, but I also don’t have any serious objection to them either.  No more harmful than a lot of what already goes on here.  It’s done elsewhere and it didn’t result in the end of civilization as we know it.

Some clients wouldn’t want to be reviewed.  That’s understandable, although the vehemence with which they greet such an idea always struck me as a little bizarre.  You can’t prevent, no much how much you huff and puff, ladies from sharing negative information.  They won’t do it publicly, but they certainly will privately.  If not on a regular P4P review/discussion board, they’ll do it elsewhere.  And if the objection is to any public discussion by the lady of your time together, even if not negative . . . in the first place, it would be a glowing rave rather than a ho-hum recommendation, and in the second place, if you don’t want to be reviewed, you won’t be.  Nothing to worry about.  The ladies aren’t going to do that without being fairly sure that the gentleman would not object.  Clients don’t give a lot of thought to the ladies’ desire for discretion, and some even oppose allowing a lady to have a “no review” policy (and presumably would not honor such a request from her personally).  But the ladies are faced with a different dynamic than the clients are.  They would be very sensitive to a client’s desire for no reviews, for the same reasons they would write glowing reviews in the first place — they don’t want any negative blowback that will harm their business.  I would guess you wouldn’t even have to tell a lady not to review you; that most would not post a review without first making sure you wouldn’t mind, and probably explicitly mentioning it to you.  [**]  So clients really have no need to feel threatened by this idea.  If they don’t want to be publicly reviewed, the odds are extremely high that they won’t be.

—————

[**]  Instances such as this might be based on an assumption (probably accurate) that the subject of the review wouldn’t mind, rather than explicit approval, and even then probably a very rare occurence.  Not to mention that the “review” might not even have been “public”; it might have been in a restricted access area that

I still have no idea who it might have been.

There’s a local P4P party tonight.  Not officially sponsored by ASPD, but familiar to many Dallas members.

I have a conflict and won’t be there.  Probably wouldn’t be even if there were no conflict.  I’m not currently actively looking for new ladies to see, and when I was, socials weren’t all that effective a way to determine whether we would “click.”  Plus, I’m shy and introverted — not really party material.  (A couple of ladyfriends have made similar comments about themselves, and believe me, they’re much more sociable than I am.  Plus would be surrounded at such parties by lots of guys eager to make their acquaintance. The reverse is unlikely to happen to me.   )  I may go to these occasionally, but not very often in recent years.

But there may be a misconception that perhaps I should clear up.

Someone recently mentioned my having said that I had been removed from the invitation list for these parties.  I don’t recall having said that (which, given my faulty memory, doesn’t mean that I didn’t).  I believe I was removed once, years ago, when they purged the invitation list of those who hadn’t attended in awhile, but was added back quickly when I asked about it.  I’m certainly on the list now; just don’t attend very often.  There have been a few times that I speculated that I might be removed from the list.  Mostly because there are occasional public discussions about removing from such lists (not necessarily this group) those who don’t attend regularly, or even those clients who attend but never seem to actually schedule an appointment with any of the ladies.  After all, the ladies’ incentive to attend these events, understandably, is mostly because of the marketing potential and someone who talks to and ogles them but never calls or emails doesn’t contribute to their business.

Other than that, the only thing I can remember is a discussion a few months ago on Deuce’s blog about his removal from the list.  From that discussion, it appeared that the reason for his removal might have been connected to his criticism of a staff member for a P4P review/discussion board.  Since I’ve also been critical of staff actions at times . . . .  Well, I don’t recall offhand publicly speculating that I might be removed as well for the same reason; if I did, obviously it should have been clearly stated as speculation/hypothetical rather than fact.  There’s never been any indication that I was in danger of such.

In any event, I am still on the list and still receiving invites.  I’ve seen nothing suggesting that I am not welcome at these events.  (Well, maybe a few of the attendees would have a problem with me , but not the hosts.)  If I did give anyone a different impression, my apologies to the hosts.

I have time and $$$ available.  My favorite ladies are available.  But I’ve got a #+$!(%!?~>&!* cold.  Or maybe it’s sinusitis (which I tend to get fairly often).  I feel basically OK, it’s pretty low-grade, whatever it is; just a little bit of congestion and a tickle in the throat.  (It was worse Thursday and Friday but that subsided quickly.)  But of course there’s still a good possibility that I’m contagious, so it’s not fair to the ladies to see them now.  And the damned thing has been dragging on since around Thanksgiving; God knows when it will be gone.  Aaaarrrrrgggghhhhhhhhh!!!!

It’s bad enough when my work schedule, or my budget, or the lady’s schedule interferes with having fun, but it’s really annoying when respiratory infections muck things up.   Missing work is one thing; missing time with my favorite ladies something altogether worse.

I hate this time of year.

[/petulant five-year-old]

An announcement posted on ASPD this morning:

BustyGirl, “Amber,” our ‘Mother Hen” who founded this site, has succumbed to her continuing illness and passed away.

Services, and arrangements for a memorial fund to support her child, are pending. If you would like to contribute, please contact support@aspd.net for details.

While many in the ASPD community may be devastated by this news, please know that the site’s operations are not materially affected. Amber more than a year ago made management arrangements for continuity here.

My condolences to her family and friends.  I only met her once in person, very briefly (less than a minute), and had only a couple of phone conversations with her, but a lot of people in the ASPD community were close to her.

———————

Whatever the current problems or deficiencies of ASPD may be, she built something that was virtually the only game in town for many years and was a great resource for many of us.  There will be a time to continue the criticism of ASPD’s problems and debate what effect the “management arrangements for continuity” will have.  But not this week, please, on this or any of the other related threads on my blog.  Thank you.

I read a thread on ASPD a week or so ago asking which ladies were best at “making love” compared to “fucking one another’s brains out.”  OK, mostly the thread devolved into the usual “name your favorites” responses, which were not particularly of interest to me.  I’m not actively looking for someone to add to my short list of favorites/regulars at the moment, and even if I were, that Mary clicked with Joe doesn’t say much if anything about whether Mary would click with me.

But there was one comment I found somewhat interesting, because it reminded of both parties’ responsibilities for a tryst reaching that level.  That fundamental point itself is fairly obvious; what was mildly interesting is the paradigm through which it was expressed, which I’m not sure is the best way to think of it.  Particularly when you look at it at a more granular level.

The basis thrust of Hotlips’ comment was:

“Our” skills depend on the man. We follow “his” lead. If he sucks in bed, we are not going to be of much use outside of the mechanical aspect. If he is good in bed, he will bring it out of us.

So to answer your question, it would depend on “your” bedroom skills.

and

Some of you guys are always screaming for that GFE experience, that illusion of passion. Well guess what..it’s not a one way street!

There can’t be a whole lot of passion if the male counterpart is just laying there doing nothing, and vice versa for that matter.

I don’t give a flying fuck if you are paying or not. You have to give to receive.

(emphasis added)  OK, that makes sense.

But “giving” and “receiving” — at least in my mind — seems a somewhat strange paradigm to make the point, because ”giving” suggests active participation and control, but “receiving” is a rather passive word.  When viewed through that paradigm, there is an ebb and flow over the course of the tryst, as first one then the other is more in control, depending on what you’re doing.   Isn’t there?  Kissing/caressing may be mostly shared giving/receiving.  But fellatio is much more about the lady giving than the man giving, and the reverse for cunnilingus.  Similarly, during cowgirl the lady is mostly in control of movements and the physical sensations, while the man is mostly in control during doggie.  (And WALDT/CASG.  Some ladies prefer cowgirl, whether because it “hits” just right or she can better ensure her pleasure through controlling the movements, while other ladies prefer doggie.  Me?  I enjoy them all, so whatever the lady prefers. )

The “control” and “active participation” need not be 100%, of course.  And that’s really the point.  

If a guy wants cowgirl but he just lays there like a dead fish, there really isn’t much excitement on our part. So he’s not going to receive our best.

But a guy obviously isn’t going to be just laying there like a dead fish during times when the particular activity calls for him to be more active or in control — say, cunnilingus or doggie.  If he is, check his pulse. You don’t need to remind guys to be active during those times.  I think the point is really that even during times when the activity calls for your partner to be the more active or in control, you still can and should be an active participant, at a lesser level or even indirectly.

During fellatio or cunnilingus, the “giver” is contributing most of the effort and primarily responsible for causing the pleasurable physical sensations for his/her partner.  Direct interaction by the “receiver” may be difficult, based on position, and too much can even be a negative for some activities.  For example, holding a lady’s head and controlling her motions during fellatio, particularly if carried to the extent of “face-fucking,” is enjoyed by some ladies but not at all by others.  But some direct interaction may be possible and there can almost always be indirect interaction — stroking, caressing, etc. your partner while they’re taking the lead.  And the “receiver” can almost always at least respond/encourage verbally or non-verbally.

Maybe ”give to receive” isn’t the best paradigm; I will have to give some thought to a better way to express the fundamental point Hotlips was making.  Or, at least the point I think she was making.

————————–

Passivity may be due sometimes in part to inhibition or feeling awkward.  At one time I felt somewhat strange/awkward or almost inhibited in reacting during fellatio; saying something would feel almost like being in a bad porn flick.  Call it poor social/interpersonal skills; I wasn’t very good at talking to attractive women out of bed either.  But I’ve gotten at least a little bit better.   And in the reverse situation, with a woman who was fairly passive, I would suspect this was the primary cause by far.

But I suppose there may also be an added element for guys: someone who is not particularly interested in his partner’s pleasure and just wants to be “serviced.”  (Could be the reverse as well, but my impression is that this attitude is probably more common among guys.)  I have no idea how common that might be, though it’s somewhat related to the perspective described here.  I suppose it might be more common in P4P than in civilian life, if guys with that attitude are attracted to P4P because they aren’t required to care about her pleasure.  Actually, I’ve seen what reads like that attitude be expressed many times on P4P review/discussion boards.  “Hey, I’m paying; it’s not about her, it’s about me.”  (Conversely, Violet Star used to joke that she considered that it was all about her; if her clients enjoyed it, fine, but that was clearly secondary.  At least, I think she was joking.  In any event, all her clients did enjoy it, as far as I know.)

I don’t think the guys who wrote that really meant that in the literal sense.  Most of them likely wanted the lady to enjoy herself as well, if for no other reason than bragging about how many orgasms they “gave” her. And I think most of them probably were indirectly participating and/or at least reacting/responding verbally and non-verbally, rather than just laying there like a dead fish.

But there probably are some dead fish out there, and maybe more common in P4P than in civilian life.  In civilian life, they may be less likely to get a repeat engagement, whereas in P4P, if the lady really needs the money, she may be willing to see him again and endure it.

I wonder how common it really is.