even two or three days in advance? I am very frustrated - in more ways than one!
Note new add today for Sexy Selena. Try her.
...from all the experiences I read about, it's easier, safer and cheaper to find a red-hot freebie off a non-professional. Just as I did this weekend. All it costs me is $80 a month for a gym membership and some decent clothes.
In all seriousness... I actually think that's what the pressure from LE is trying to achieve. I've come close to picking up the phone and then think it's just not worth the hassle, and go to uptown Mpls instead. It honesty and seriousness, it seems as if my hit rate is more reliable than I see on on here, with NCNS, rip-offs, fake pics and all that stuff. I just would never pay anyone $300 for sex.
So it's a darn sight cheaper too.
-- Modified on 9/12/2011 8:13:24 PM
"I would never pay $300 for sex "
Remember...
You're not paying for sex, you're paying for time and companionship
and if you aren't willing to pay for anything then WHY are you here?
Are you saying a random bar hag you find uptown is safer than a highly reviewed escort?
Well did you know the chance of STD risk is higher for civvie gals than that of a pro?
statistics have proven .
Maybe some of you have a hard time booking because you either don't have references or refuse to be screened by them?
Perhaps its just as simple as they're busy.
Time and companionship - um, OK.
The reason I'm here is because I'm at a certain point in my life where recreational sex (i.e. not within a relationship) works for me and of course, seeing a provider for her, ahem, time and companionship is an option. Plus it's something of a fantasy too, if I'm honest. I joined TER because I wanted to see if the reality is capable of matching the fantasy. The conclusion I've reached to far is yes, but you have to be darned lucky. But you know, I live in hope and haven't given up yet.
As for the claim of 'less STDs than a provider'... source for such evidence - statistical evidence? It's OK to use a condom with a 'civvie' as you call them (I prefer to call them 'women' but whatever). You can justify it to yourself that way if you like, but the facts don't stand up to a stiff breeze. 'Providers' are 'civvies' too, unless you're claiming that they only ever have sex with people who are paying for their 'companionship'? I think a lot of providers would find that massively insulting. They have personal relationships and emotional bonds too, and definitely have sex for fun. They really are not a different species of woman. Or are you saying that they have some kind of immunity or that they know how to use condoms better? Please explain.
You seem to start with the assumption that any woman who wants a random fling is crawling with disease. You do know that you can contract HIV and HPV via unprotected oral sex, right?
I think you miss the original point of my post. I have no problem at all with the concept of 'provision' and as I've said previously, the law as it stands doesn't seem to be able to discriminate between a healthy exchange between two willing participants and the things it claims to be addressing. It's wrong and kind of immoral to put everyone in the same basket.
The point I was making is that it seems to be the modus operandii of LE to restrict supply and make it so difficult that it's not worth bothering, and judging by the OP (and I see more and more of this) the strategy, you have to say, is working to that extent. What it doesn't do unfortunately is protect vulnerable people, and that's what has me shaking my head in disbelief.
This coming from the same person who won't call any provider with a driver.
if you're not gonna hobby then you really have nothing to say here.
You're idea of fantasy meets reality is hopes that a well reviewed provider with NO DRIVER is going to give you freebies just because of your alleged good looks
All the while telling fellow posters to go uptown for chicks .
Most schulbs here aren't gonna get by let alone in a ladies pants just by their looks.
See what you're looking for is a model material fuck buddy for free, this isn't really the venue .
Your posts reek of Bacon and fish at the same time. How can that be?
Oh 'that's why! Not one review thus far & have accusing postings that read like you're trying to steer hobbyists away.
Thought y'all had a site already called "badgebunnies or something
The reason I'm here is because I'm at a certain point in my life where recreational sex (i.e. not within a relationship) works for me and of course, seeing a provider for her, ahem, time and companionship is an option. Plus it's something of a fantasy too, if I'm honest. I joined TER because I wanted to see if the reality is capable of matching the fantasy. The conclusion I've reached to far is yes, but you have to be darned lucky. But you know, I live in hope and haven't given up yet.
As for the claim of 'less STDs than a provider'... source for such evidence - statistical evidence? It's OK to use a condom with a 'civvie' as you call them (I prefer to call them 'women' but whatever). You can justify it to yourself that way if you like, but the facts don't stand up to a stiff breeze. 'Providers' are 'civvies' too, unless you're claiming that they only ever have sex with people who are paying for their 'companionship'? I think a lot of providers would find that massively insulting. They have personal relationships and emotional bonds too, and definitely have sex for fun. They really are not a different species of woman. Or are you saying that they have some kind of immunity or that they know how to use condoms better? Please explain.
You seem to start with the assumption that any woman who wants a random fling is crawling with disease. You do know that you can contract HIV and HPV via unprotected oral sex, right?
I think you miss the original point of my post. I have no problem at all with the concept of 'provision' and as I've said previously, the law as it stands doesn't seem to be able to discriminate between a healthy exchange between two willing participants and the things it claims to be addressing. It's wrong and kind of immoral to put everyone in the same basket.
The point I was making is that it seems to be the modus operandii of LE to restrict supply and make it so difficult that it's not worth bothering, and judging by the OP (and I see more and more of this) the strategy, you have to say, is working to that extent. What it doesn't do unfortunately is protect vulnerable people, and that's what has me shaking my head in disbelief.
if you're not gonna hobby then you really have nothing to say here.
All the while telling fellow posters to go uptown for chicks .
Most schulbs here aren't gonna get by let alone in a ladies pants just by their looks.
See what you're looking for is a model material fuck buddy for free, this isn't really the venue .
Your posts reek of Bacon and fish at the same time. How can that be?
Oh 'that's why! Not one review thus far & have accusing postings that read like you're trying to steer hobbyists away.
You know, not everybody becomes a 'hobbyist' without asking themselves a few questions first. Some guys for sure wouldn't mind engaging the services of one without thinking about the person on the other end of the deal, with a little human compassion and asking some moral questions of themselves. I'm not one of those people and it seems that fact upsets you. Why do you care about my opinion? All I'm saying is that LE tactics to limit supply for sure work, but don't really seem effective to protect the people that need protecting. That's not a slam against LE either, it's just the result of social hysteria and the ill conceived legal system that always follows that.
So in other words, we're having two different conversations and your comments are nothing more than white noise to me.
There's no short supply so to speak its people being either too too picky or the natural cycle of how the hobby works
New hobbyists join everyday replacing the retiring ones just like on the provider side of things and with people also not wanting to be screened or no references, they're unfortunately SOL and it leaves a lot of room for tactical errors and risks I;e B&S rip offs . No offense
But basically you need to earn your chops at some point like everyone else. If a lady doesn't wanna see you well don't get bent out of shape, keep on keeping on
-- Modified on 9/13/2011 11:55:53 AM
I agree with that - if a girl does a NCNS, she may well have some kind of reason to think either you're not legit or that she's just plain not attracted to you. She has that right - even though she's a provider, it doesn't mean she has no say in the matter. As the adverts imply, "anything else that occurs is between two consenting adults". If one doesn't consent, well game off, I would think.
Of course, it's nice to establish that way in advance, and if no form of 'companionship' whatsoever is forthcoming, then taking money from a client is theft...
Why would you spend your time on providers when, as you say "it's easier, safer and cheaper to find a red-hot freebie off a non-professional. Just as I did this weekend. All it costs me is $80 a month for a gym membership and some decent clothes."
You can hang out here if you want obviously but it seems pointless to me.
I guess irony doesn't carry well on here...
You can hang out here if you want obviously but it seems pointless to me.
I can feel ya. The Demand is definitely greater than the Supply when talking about MPs. Its already tough getting time off from your work schedule, but you have to book these girls at least a week in advance to get your desired time. And plus these popular girls only works business hours and no weekends. Hows a business guy like me gonna find time for them?? Its frustrating and I'm left calling a random chick from a bp ad.
Try Ally or Kim - see reviews. Both were very prompt responding to e-mails. As Khiladi said, they only work business hours. So you will have to find time off of the M-F 8-5 if that's your schedule. Both are great.
You've seen both, hardyhar. Nevermind. Yes, I needed more than three day notice with both Ally and Kim. They are both very popular and in demand. I miss the independent Christine and some other options I used to have. Same day appointments never used to be a problem.
I've experienced the same thing. I don't understand how the ads on BP work, because an ad will come up for a person yet there is no answer to phone calls or replies to voice messages nor replies to e-mails.