Review from a lady?

[Guest PWIT]

I was/am a little puzzled by the review from a lady for Alex_LV. I am not sure what level of credibility to give the review. Any thoughts from others? Seems an odd posting on a male for male review site.

[KYTOP]

>I was/am a little puzzled by the review from a lady for

>Alex_LV. I am not sure what level of credibility to give the

>review. Any thoughts from others?

How can how an escort relates to a woman give me any idea at all on how he would react with me? She complained he wouldn't go down on her, hell I wouldn't either. Very disappointed that this review was even posted.

>Seems an odd posting on a

>male for male review site.

Very odd, hopefully his will not a common practice o f this site. If so the male4male title and purpose is useless.

[Guest ScottAdler]

>Very odd, hopefully his will not a common practice o f this

>site. If so the male4male title and purpose is useless.

I may be wrong but TECHNICALLY this website is called MALEESCORTreview.com ... male4maleescortreview unfortunately doesn't exist anymore.

While I agree that the website does have a particular intent ... in theory the reviewer was within her realistic rights. But yeah, I think one has to question why he saw the woman in the first place if he didn't want to work as an escort for female clients.

I've done threeways with bf/gf couples in the past and they were actually really fun -- everyone's hot and the girlfriend just wants a threeway done "her" way. In advance I told them what my limits were and they agreed and everything was great.

So I think from woman CAN say a lot that can be of use to male clients because we (yes I hire) can figure out if an escort will keep up their end of the bargain and their intentions.

HOWEVER ... reading the review halfway through this reply it doesn't take much to see through it for what it way. Kinda seems like an angry ex girlfriend who found out about her boyfriend the escort and wanted to do something to get back at him.

Donation (though the correct legal term) is definitely a straight sex-work term that I don't think many gay male escorts would really ever use. The reviewer seemed like she was writing the review strictly to cause detriment to him and I can't wait for his response since the review managed to actually be posted.

[Guest PWIT]

i have a vision of Scott with pussy juices all over his face like a glazed doughnut! :7

hehe

[KYTOP]

>I may be wrong but TECHNICALLY this website is called

>MALEESCORTreview.com ... male4maleescortreview unfortunately

>doesn't exist anymore.

Thank you for correcting me.

>While I agree that the website does have a particular intent

>... in theory the reviewer was within her realistic rights.

At the point this site becomes a female review site of men I see no reason to visit here or any similar site.

>But yeah, I think one has to question why he saw the woman in

>the first place if he didn't want to work as an escort for

>female clients.

>

>I've done threeways with bf/gf couples in the past and they

>were actually really fun -- everyone's hot and the girlfriend

>just wants a threeway done "her" way. In advance I

>told them what my limits were and they agreed and everything

>was great.

But I and most of the GAY men here do not have gf's and don't relate to this at all. Who cares if you have sex with women, it doesn't relate to me hiring a MALE at all.

>So I think from woman CAN say a lot that can be of use to male

>clients because we (yes I hire) can figure out if an escort

>will keep up their end of the bargain and their intentions.

So he won't go done on her, does that mean he won't go done on me? Doesn't help me at all in deciding to hire.

>HOWEVER ... reading the review halfway through this reply it

>doesn't take much to see through it for what it way. Kinda

>seems like an angry ex girlfriend who found out about her

>boyfriend the escort and wanted to do something to get back at

>him.

Sort of wondered the same thing.

>Donation (though the correct legal term) is definitely a

>straight sex-work term that I don't think many gay male

>escorts would really ever use. The reviewer seemed like she

>was writing the review strictly to cause detriment to him and

>I can't wait for his response since the review managed to

>actually be posted.

I have had 5 or 6 Male escorts use the term out of over 100 I've hired. Two of those were in Vegas.

[Guest comment]

"Donation" is a word I see spread all over Craigslist M4M community. I've found the use of the word to be quite common with male companions and their clients.

I find a review from a woman's point of view to be useless beyond confirming the escort's statistics. Men and women related differently with each other than men and men.

I believe accepting any review from a female client is not in the best interest of this site. Web sites need focus and the visitor should set the tone of that focus. My feeling is that less than 1% of the visitors here are women. Chalk the current review up to an unintentional misstep by Tampa Yankee.

[Guest BostonGuy]

At the risk of being a lone voice, I'd like to kindly suggest the reaction to this review is a bit over the top.

It's not like there have been hundreds of reviews by women. There may have been one before but, if so, I don't recall it. So we have exactly one review by a woman. That doesn't really seem so threatening, at least to me.

In fact, I found the review somewhat interesting, if only for its different perspective. Unfortunately, I also doubted its accuracy, so I pretty much discounted it. But I wouldn't mind the occasional "real" review of an escort by a woman. Lots of male escorts advertise their availability for women and mixed couples, so seeing a review of someone by a woman might very well show some new interesting side of the escort's personality or performance.

I don't think there's any danger of reviews from women crowding out reviews from guys... it's just more ingredients in the pot. Guys who aren't interested in the opinions of women can just ignore them.

When I read the opinions posted above, it was almost like people were saying "I don't want anything to do with a site that has anything to do with women." I like this site, I like the fact that the audience is composed of men who are interested in escorts and I hope it stays that way. But I certainly won't find the occasional review by a woman cause for alarm and I thank TY for posting this one.

BG

[Guest deej]

>male4maleescortreview unfortunately

>doesn't exist anymore.

Actually it does. OZ owns it. But that's being dictionary correct and doesn't have any bearing on this thread.

This is a review site for MALE ESCORTS. Nothing in the name says they have to only see men. I suspect more than a few escorts would be disappointed if they could no longer see their lady friends.

This escort, in particular, says in his profile he's "mostly str8". An escort using the pictures he's using and labeling himself "mostly str8" is likely to pick up a female client from time to time.

Why shouldn't she be able to review him?

The pussy-phobia is getting a little thick.

That said, this review is either a jilted gf or a jilted bf, and either way it reeks more than the pussy he wouldn't eat.

[KYTOP]

>At the risk of being a lone voice, I'd like to kindly suggest

>the reaction to this review is a bit over the top.

How so, just because one expresses their opinion? Should one lie about their reaction?

>It's not like there have been hundreds of reviews by women.

>There may have been one before but, if so, I don't recall it.

>So we have exactly one review by a woman. That doesn't really

>seem so threatening, at least to me.

No but if this site starts accepting these reviews, where do you stop if more come in? 100, 200 etc...

I will not use a review site if I go to a city listing...say Las Vegas... and have to wade thru all the reviews talking about how someone fucked or ate her pussy in order to find a man to hire for a gay man.

>In fact, I found the review somewhat interesting, if only for

>its different perspective. Unfortunately, I also doubted its

>accuracy, so I pretty much discounted it. But I wouldn't mind

>the occasional "real" review of an escort by a

>woman.

He responded today and says the woman was real but her pussy stunk. Really a turn on for all of us gay folk. Don't they all stink, especially after they are excited and start to secrete their natural lubricating fluid. Ever tried to get stinking pussy juice off your face or cock? WOW, look forward to reading about that more in the future.

>Lots of male escorts advertise their availability for

>women and mixed couples, so seeing a review of someone by a

>woman might very well show some new interesting side of the

>escort's personality or performance.

So how does eating her pussy relate to sucking your cock? If he kisses a woman will he kiss a man?

>I don't think there's any danger of reviews from women

>crowding out reviews from guys... it's just more ingredients

>in the pot. Guys who aren't interested in the opinions of

>women can just ignore them.

I hope you are right. But again if I must wade thru reviews about eating pussy in a city listing to find a guy... I'll go elsewhere.

>When I read the opinions posted above, it was almost like

>people were saying "I don't want anything to do with a

>site that has anything to do with women."

I am not a woman, so I don't see where a site about women hiring escorts relates to me. If I did I'd visit one, I understand a few exist.

> I like this

>site, I like the fact that the audience is composed of men who

>are interested in escorts and I hope it stays that way.

That is exactly why I visit and contribute as much as I can to it by providing reviews when I hire. If reviews by women keep popping up and it becomes a mixed site, then for me...no real reason to be here.

[TotallyOz]

The site has no intention of becoming a site for lady reviews. However, we have two of them that came in and discussed it and decided to post them.

My rational was simple. The guys that were reviewed were listed as willing to see both men and women. If someone places himself into a market, then it is no surprise that they get clients.

I want to know if someone is also seeing women as well as men. For me, this makes me less likely to hire them. I am usually looking for only gay guys and the ones that see the girls as well are usually not someone I would hire.

I often find reviews are often a double-edged sword. When I attended the Gaiety years ago, there would be women show up and hoot and scream. When this happened and the guy on stage gave them more attention than he would a guy, which just made my decision not to hire him easier.

I know a lot of gay men do not like ladies in bars and clubs. But, I enjoy it. I much prefer an open mixed environment than only a group of gay men. I like that sometimes as well, but I don't like excluding women just because they are women.

The decision to post the 2 reviews we received was tough ones. It came down to the decision that there was information to be gained from the reviews. In my mind, it was not a big deal.

The site was established to become a male for male site. And while 99 percent of all reviews will be from men, I think good information can be obtained from that other percent from time to time.

[KYTOP]

>The decision to post the 2 reviews we received was tough ones.

> It came down to the decision that there was information to be

>gained from the reviews. In my mind, it was not a big deal.

So you will post another one. Where does it stop as women see men reviewed here. I respectfully disagree that it is not a big deal. Tell me what a gay male got from the review. He doesn't eat pussy, doesn't help me, she said he didn't kiss he said he did. So would he kiss a guy or not.

>The site was established to become a male for male site. And

>while 99 percent of all reviews will be from men, I think good

>information can be obtained from that other percent from time

>to time.

It is 99% because women did not know they could review guys. Now that they can we will see how fast the % changes.

I respectfuuly but strongly disagree with your decision and actually take offense as a gay male to it.

[Guest PWIT]

>I was/am a little puzzled by the review from a lady for

>Alex_LV. I am not sure what level of credibility to give the

>review. Any thoughts from others? Seems an odd posting on a

>male for male review site.

Interesting where this thread is going, but anyone with more thoughts on the credibility of the review? Now that we have a response, the credibility of the review seems even more suspect. I hadn't picked up on the time spent - wouldn't you cut things short if going bad?

[TotallyOz]

>It is 99% because women did not know they could review guys.

>Now that they can we will see how fast the % changes.

The numbers will not start pouring in from women. If they do, we will revisit the issue. We are a gay site.

>I respectfuuly but strongly disagree with your decision and

>actually take offense as a gay male to it.

We appreciate this view and will take it into account for the future.

[TotallyOz]

>Actually it does. OZ owns it. But that's being dictionary

>correct and doesn't have any bearing on this thread.

Are you sure? I didn't know that. Really, I didn't. I am not discounting your claim but I did a search for the name and don't have it in my records. Can you get me the username and password for the registrar so I can make some modifications?

[Guest StuCotts]

I wonder if the woman, or alleged woman, who submitted the review expected the onslaught of hostile reaction. Unless she is the kind of person who gets off on provoking people she may hesitate ever to submit another. It could be practical to make any other (alleged) woman inclined to submit reviews to MER aware of the remarks in this thread. If she goes ahead she will at least know what to expect.

Those people who are afraid that the trickle of reviews seeming to be from other than gay male sources will turn into a tsunami are not giving TY enough credit for knowing his business.

My own reaction to the review: I have never found more than minimal common ground with any woman on the subject of what we think about men, how we see them, what we expect of them, how we deal with those who delight us or disappoint us, or almost anything else. The review is massively irrelevant to me.

[TampaYankee]

I am pleased and not surprised to see some interesting and passionate responses to the posting of this review.

When I received this review I was very dubious about publishing it. I let it age several days while I pondered what I should do. I also discussed the situation with Oz but the deicision to post was ultimately mine.

I became of two minds based on the pros and cons that I considered. I also considered asking the community about their thoughts on whether to post. I decided that it was not the better choice to ask members to comment on something they hadn't seen. Thus I posted the review to evoke comments from the membership. I suspected and was hopeful that those comments would ensue. A follow-up forum comment was planned about the pros and cons after the intial flurry of responses. This is it.

The Pros:

It identifies this escort as seeking female clients. Many escorts seek mixed clientele. Some clients find that objectionable from a hiring point of view.

Even if our member base cannot relate to all of the experience it does provide a perspective on the professionalism of the escort relating to business practices and customer treatment.

It provides information on an active escort. That some of the information was negative made it potentially more valuable, especially if the escort responds to the review. Often responses reveal more information about the escort than the review.

The Cons:

Because the client was female, it is uncertain how useful this review is to this community. The 'personal' experiences potentially are too different to permit our membership to relate to it.

Accepting reviews from female clients might have the effect of drawing more such reviews eventually diluting m4m information database. This is very undesriable.

Accepting reviews from female clients might increase the number of m4f escorts seeking to join and advertise. (It is our policy not to accept such profiles.)

Although I do lean in one direction on this issue I think it does warrant discussion by the members because the site strives to meet the needs and desires of the membership. There are probably other good reasons to publish or not to publish. Feel free to share.

My bottom line is the integrity of the review database. It should contain only useful and relevant information. This is a discussion to help define what is useful and relevant to the community.

TY

[Guest epigonos]

Frankly and simply stated as a gay male, who hires escorts regularly, I see little or no value in writing reviews for a site the includes reviews written by women. I am NOT remotely interested in reading reviews of escorts written by women and resent wasting my time having to wade through them to locate the ones in which I am interested. Finally I sincerely believe that the integrity of the site is compromised by the inclusion these reviews

[Guest VoxPennae]

>Frankly and simply stated as a gay male, who hires escorts

>regularly, I see little or no value in writing reviews for a

>site the includes reviews written by women. I am NOT remotely

>interested in reading reviews of escorts written by women and

>resent wasting my time having to wade through them to locate

>the ones in which I am interested. Finally I sincerely

>believe that the integrity of the site is compromised by the

>inclusion these reviews

I am in agreement with these sentiments. To carry it one step further I usually avoid any escort that states he's "bi", "mostly stright" or claims anything other than "gay".

Some may see it as an over reaction but the last time I checked this was a gay site. (Soon to be a membership site based on my login prompt this afternoon. Not a surprise there either. But why would I consider the enhanced membership levels if this site takes reivews from women?)

For me it will be an instant turn off for any escort who has a review from a woman. He will automatically be struck from my list of options. Now I know that many of the guys out there will also do women or couples but for me such information is a quick turn off. I don't care if an escort works with women I just don't want to know about it.

I do not think that this or the other reivew should be taken down either. However, it may be advisable that the site not accept any other reviews from women in the future. But managment should act as it sees fit is best for its business.

[Guest SouthernMan]

Quick!! Someone call Ringling Brothers and see if they can spare a lion tamer, because there is one big bad pussy prowling our jungle. One litte meow of a review and the natives are restless and on the verge of revolt.

I'm with TY on this one, as I'm not interested in an escort who has female clientele either. But that aside, if he does, then how he performs with that segment of his clientele can be an indication of how he performs with all his clients regardless of the client's gender. That seems just as legitimate as someone who promotes himself as versatile, but all his reviews are from tops, finally getting a review from a bottom.

Doesn't the bottom client have to wade thru oh, those so many other reviews where the escort bottomed?

And wading thru all those reviews by females? I suppose that it could be just too time consuming, as a gay boy just has only so many hours and we need those to browse escort sites, craig's list, male review sites, and gay chat rooms. Not to mention the needed time to bitch about how a litte meowing pussy has us cowering under the table crying for mommy, or is that daddy?

[AdamSmith]

SouthernMan, pitch-perfect!

If the juice rises above ankle level, clearly TY can shut the tap. But meanwhile I'm with you on all points.

[Guest JockStud4Hire]

If there was a point in this post it was lost in the personal attack.

[Guest epigonos]

SothernMan as far as I can tell with the following quote:

Doesn't the bottom client have to wade thru oh, those so many other reviews where the escort bottomed?

you indicate that you miss the entire point of this discssion. Even if both the client and the escort are bottoms potential future clients will learn some important fact:

1. They will learn whether the escort will or will not suck a man's cock.

2. They will learn whether the escort will or will not kiss a man.

3. They will learn whether the escort will or will not cuddle with a man

If the reviewer is a woman potential future clients learn NOTHING!

[Guest deej]

>If the reviewer is a woman potential future clients learn NOTHING!

With all due respect (because I DO respect you) I disagree.

Clients learn that 1) the escort is currently working and seeing clients, and 2) the escort has had problems pleasing those clients.

Combine the facts that the escort advertises as "mostly str8" and has trouble pleasing a female client and I think potential clients learn a LOT. If he's mostly str8 and can't please a woman, what are the chances he can rock your world?

Now that we have a response, the escort says she had a smelly pussy. (Honey, they all are.) How many responses in the past blamed the client's smelly/fat/dirty/whatever? What does that tell you about this "mostly str8" guy?

I see a lot of pussy-phobia here, but not a lot of honest evaluation.

We got information about this escort. I don't see a bad thing in that.

[Guest StuCotts]

If TY was looking to stir up the multitude to righteous (with a few exceptions) wrath, he got his wish.

Any plans to smite him hip and thigh?

[Guest PWIT]

>Now that we have a response, the escort says she had a smelly

>pussy. (Honey, they all are.) How many responses in the past

>blamed the client's smelly/fat/dirty/whatever? What does that

>tell you about this "mostly str8" guy?

>

>I see a lot of pussy-phobia here, but not a lot of honest

>evaluation.

No Stu, they are not all smelly! Maybe some pussy phobia of your own? :+

OK....lighten up everyone. :7