Most providers are attracted to money. The veteran professionals don't seem to care whether it's in a pocket or a purse before it comes to them. Exclusion of same-gender customers seems to me to be more often in Newbie and very young providers. Just my own observation.
Straight up honesty. Not speaking for all but some if not many can "turn on the switch " when they got a fish on line that wants that duo experience . For double rate of course.
.... who opted out of a session with me were either under 23yo and/or a newb. There are exceptions, of course. Some providers are lesbian and told me that they don't want to mix business with too much pleasure 
-- Modified on 1/1/2018 1:17:13 PM
really a suitcase . . . . on wheels. I keep my fortune in quarters.
... that it's unlikely that MOST escorts are bi-sexual... based on TER numbers at least.
There's a little over 260,000 providers with profiles on TER. Of those, only about 31,000 are "really bi" according to their profiles.
Of course, this is just one segment of the world's escort population and there's no way to know if the "really bi" flag is accurate for every provider. But I think if most providers were bi-sexual, there would be many more "really bi" profiles than there are.
You bring up good points AND show exactly why some of the TER profile questions should be answered by the provider, or at least have the provider's input.
How accurate can the profiles be when the author either guesses or selects, " Don't know" for many of the questions???
That "really bi" in the profile is most often put up by men after a doubles session. I would be surprised if Lesbian hobbyists would bother putting that in the profile because they would NOT consider their session a "bi-sexual" experience, so there may be thousands more that see both men and women but their profile doesn't indicate same. If I'm wrong on this I will defer to Lopaw.
Modified to correct typo
-- Modified on 1/1/2018 3:19:14 PM
What I've observed over the years is that nearly all provider profiles are created as singletons before those providers are mentioned in doubles reviews. Thus the "really bi" gets into profiles when they're originally created (or when updated through a problem report), not when the provider is mentioned in a doubles review. Just because a doubles review gets published doesn't mean the two providers' individual reviews will be updated with "really bi", if they didn't already say that.
Anyway, my post above wasn't only about lesbian hobbyists. It was a direct response to the OP's question about whether most providers are truly bi-sexual. I provided some facts to show that, at least amongst the TER escort community, it seems unlikely that most providers are truly bi-sexual. My reasoning is that if that were the case, many more than 30,000 of a population of 260,000 would have "really bi" in their profiles.
Also, my search included doubles profiles, and a big percentage of those should logically be "really bi". Which means there's relatively few individual provider profiles that say "really bi".
GIGO, The figures based on profiles are meaningless. Most "hobbyists" would know if a girl was really bi if she had it tattooed on her ass. Of all the unreliable stats you could pull from the reviews here, it is the single most unreliable.
I know a couple of providers who PREFER women over men who are/were not listed as "really bi" and I know a few others, including my last serious GF who was listed as "really bi" but who was only "gay for pay" Which of course doesn't prove anything except that a LOT of reviewers are clueless
1) Ask. Or just listen.
2) Observation/experience.
And if you read my posts above, you'll notice I mentioned the problems with accuracy on profile data. My point is not that the "really bi" in profiles should be treated as sacrosanct, but the low percentage of "really bi" individual provider profiles doesn't support the notion that most escorts are truly bi-sexual. It's not a small numerical difference, but well over 100,000 (considering the impact of doubles profiles on the numbers). That covers a LOT of profile errors.
... or how many are gay for pay, especially based on TER profiles. When a profile isn't created by the woman herself it is questionable, especially concerning attributes that most clients would have no clue about since it isn't a part of their typical session. The "2 Girl Action" category is wrong more often than it is right, just as you'd expect when someone else fills it in other than the provider herself. Most guys filling in that stat wouldn't have a clue and just assume one way or the other. I long ago stopped looking at provider profiles here except to see her personal page link where I have a much better chance of finding or her true client preferences.
... is to have the providers create them. However, when I suggested that, the idea got very little support, and in fact you were one of the few people (and only woman) to support that suggestion.
No... instead we put up with "worthless" profiles and complain about the validity of the data.
Then why in the fuck do you still quote said data and use it as the basis of your argument.
You still haven't addressed the biggest flaw in your argument, just how is a guy supposed to know if a woman is "really bi" unless he sees her with another woman? To simply "ask her" is absurd, you might as well ask her if she REALLY has a graduate degree.
Good question! Other questions related to profiles--how does the first reviewer know:
* Whether the provider smokes but not in session?
* Measurements... not just guesses, but actual bust size etc.?
* Age... not just a guess, but actual?
* Breast implants? Sometimes it's really hard to tell.
* Massage quality... if the first session didn't include a massage?
etc etc etc
Sometimes the first reviewer says "don't know" if they have no info. Sometimes the reviewer uses info from the provider's web site and/or the provider herself. Maybe her web site mentions how much she likes playing with other women, or she talks about it during the session.
But since its info about a person, wouldn't it be better if that person provided the info herself?
We can move on to your other point later, but for the meantime, I read your post as a concession that the numbers are bullshit and not to be relied upon. Is that a fair statement?
You're asking me to concede something I already conceded. I said in my OP that there's no way to know if the "really bi" flag is accurate for every provider. My point wasn't about whether each data point in a profile is reliable. My thought was that if MOST providers are TRULY bi-sexual (which was the OP's question), there would be many more "really bi" profiles than there are. (For one thing, many of those truly bi-sexual providers would want to advertise that by ensuring their profiles reflected it.)
That was all. You and others seem to want to make a lot more out of this than was there.
But it's funny how you love to trash the validity of data in profiles, but don't seem interested in doing something constructive about it. No, you favor the status quo whereby it's the first reviewer who fills in the profile. So the problem continues.
You state that bi-sexual providers would want to advertise this fact "by ensuring their profiles reflected it" but in the very next breath you lament the fact that the profile is NOT created by the provider. Talk about talking out of both sides of your mouth, but lets move on to your argument that the profile should be created by the provider herself.
Ok, I will concede there are several areas where the provider would be the most reliable source of info, things like her menu for instance, it would most definitely be in her own interest to be truthful about her menu, I am sure no provider is going to advertise being "greek friendly" when she is not, that would just be dumb, but there are a LOT of problem areas where the profile would become nothing more than an ad than an actual profile.
How do you feel about the provider answering these questions about herself?
On Time
Services Delivered As Promised
Build
Age
Photo Accurate
Breast Appearance
Massage Quality
Full, No-Rush Session
Do you REALLY want the providers answering these subjective questions about themselves?
Why is that a contradiction?
Some of these can only be answered relative to experiences during sessions, eg on time, services delivered as promised and full, no rush session can't be answered until services have been delivered. So why not let the first reviewer fill those in, and there's also the ability to make changes down the road if warranted. In other words, when the provider creates the profile, she fills in only the info that's not session-dependent, and the rest gets filled in initially by the first reviewer.
But I think some of those you listed could be answered initially by the provider, eg build, age, breast appearance, and (I know you'll love this one) photo accurate. Why that one? Because sometimes providers intentionally use photos of someone else for privacy. I think it would be good if the provider could be up front about that if that's what she does. And then if the photos really aren't accurate, or at least a very close likeness, that can be pointed out in reviews and then, based in review comments, the profile can be changed via problem report.
-- Modified on 1/2/2018 7:44:39 PM
By your way of thinking, why even have reviews at all? We can just take the lady's word that her pics are accurate, she really is 25 and not 45, 120 lbs, not 180 etc etc etc.
The system as it is, is certainly not perfect, but your idea quite frankly SUCKS BALLS and it's no wonder it has been ridiculed every time you have brought it up, but thanks for proving what a BSU you are.
and then wonders why I question whether he has ever written any reviews himself. Geez.
I didn't say or even hint at anything like that. I was clear that reviews serve as a verification device in case of a profile being inaccurate (and there's also problem reports).
But if you can't make your point through logic and civil discourse, you just make up something that you wished the other person had said, attack that, and toss in a few random insults on top of it.
I guess it works for you, based on how many people love you here. But personally I think it's a bullshit way to have a discussion.
Agree... you cannot assume anything "personal" about a provider based on their profile or even the specific activities you observe or engage in with them.
.
I've met people who work at McDonalds who are vegetarians, I know some who sells weed (legally now in California) that don't smoke it or take any recreational drugs. I know people who work at a church who are atheists. There are sure to be providers who are heterosexual, homosexual, bi-sexual, pansexual, and even a-sexual in there personal life, and yet they provide services to clients that don't correlate with their own sexual (or non-sexual) preferences or desires.
.
At the end of the day, who the fuck cares? You are booking sessions with providers for specific services for a specified amount of time - nothing more. If you must have sex with someone who's personal sexuality aligns with your preferences, we call that a relationship... and even then, you could (will? 
end up disappointed.
to argue that your opinion has credibility as a hobbyist, but you do it from your alias. If you showed your reviews and I could see that you have seen a lot of providers that were "really bi" or a good number of doubles sessions you have reviewed, I would be more inclined to think you have the personal experience to back up your arguments. As others have said, just crunching numbers requires too many assumptions. I would rather hear about things you know from your OWN personal experience, like GaG, Lopaw and others post. Vague allusions to "over the years" tells us nothing.
Modified to correct typo
-- Modified on 1/1/2018 10:19:32 PM
... and any other posts from aliases if you wish. I have the right to post under my alias, and you have the right to ignore my posts if you choose. Since you think I'm lying in my posts about my experience, it's probably better you don't waste your time with them.
And while you're at it, you'd better ignore posts from other people who don't have enough reviews to meet your standards for credibility.
So defensive. I was just suggesting that if you've come to argue, you should show, or give, your credentials as to why you should be taken seriously. You have been here less than a year, unlike other alias's or member's without reviews that have been here 5 or 10 years, TALKING ABOUT THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES. You post a lot of "opinion" but don't say how you learned these things through specific examples that would lend credibility like they do. I'm just suggesting how your arguments could be more persuasive or effective. You are free to ignore ME rather than feeling compelled to respond from such a weak position.
... of a self-professed troll. 
I wasn't arguing. I put forth an idea, in response to the OP's question. Then YOU attacked my integrity, basically told me I'm lying because I don't have reviews attached to my alias. Others disagreed with my idea, and that's fine. They disagreed with the basis for my idea; they didn't demand that I post under my handle, with its review history, in order to earn the right to make a post like I did above.
I've been around more than a year (hint: search for posts by "envelope"). I often post about my own experiences, including my doubles experiences. But that's not enough for you. You demand a review history, because obviously without that I'm lying. Never mind that lots of others post here without any review history. Never mind that a lot of posters here have been around a lot less time than I have. According to your position, none of these posters is credible.
And you talk about my having a "weak position." LOL.
-- Modified on 1/2/2018 10:35:24 AM
have been the fat, white and yellow envelopes in the past? If that's true, then yes, being around that long gives you some credibility on a variety of topics, but it raises the obvious question, why did you have to keep changing your name?
You're taking this way to personally. You make the leap that without reviews, you are lying. I didn't say that. Lying is black and white, credibility is a sliding scale. You are right about one thing, if a guy has been here less than a year and has 25 reviews, I would give him more credibility than an alias, except for the alias' like Jake and a few others that I PM with that I know are legit hobbyists from the things we discuss privately. For me, credibility of an alias is on an individual case by case basis, and there is no blanket formula except that I am naturally suspicious with ones I have not yet come to know. Maybe its a character flaw of my own, in which case I will have to deal with it. There are other topics where I would have no suspicions about what you post with your alias, but when it comes to the topic of reviews, you don't show any, so where does that leave us?
I have started a few train wrecks, but that doesn't make me a troll. A troll doesn't know anything about a topic and just posts to stir up shit. I think I have demonstrated I have at least SOME knowledge to contribute about the P4P industry garnered over the past 9 years. A troll would have none, like certain people that post negative things on the Kgirl board and don't see Kgirls. THOSE are trolls.
..... if they can fall in love with women?
Two different issues.
Is it safe to assume that you're attracted more to men? Do you see women? Are you a bottom or top or both? What is your preference? Im a straight male. I know some women that are truly bisexual and have periods of only wanting women...providers and civvies. However, they always come back for the D. I feel that there is a smaller percentage of truly bi women. I cant put a number or percentage on it...noone can. But i have learned that the majority of providers I know arent truly bi...they do it for the money. In your real life, how many ppl do u know that are truly bi?
but I've found that most providers enjoy being with women, myself included
I was visiting a house and made a selection. As we headed up the stairs, we were followed by another member of the staff who popped into the room with us and asked if I was interested in a 2-girl session. I declined. She left and me and my first choice got down to business. While she's riding me CG, I was talking to her about the girl-girl stuff (and other stuff) and she said to me, "Actually, I'm a lesbian and I prefer girls." I managed to finish, but it was kind of a mood killer. 
Kinsey said:
Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects. While emphasizing the continuity of the gradations between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual histories, it has seemed desirable to develop some sort of classification which could be based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or response in each history […] An individual may be assigned a position on this scale, for each period in his life. […] A seven-point scale comes nearer to showing the many gradations that actually exist.
And there is other data for females. I do not know if Kinsey had separate tables for Providers (circa 1948). And Kinsey also noted,
Kinsey himself avoided and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals, asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behavior can be understood BOTH AS PHYSICAL CONTACT AS WELL AS PURELY PSYCHOLOGICAL PHENOMOENA (desire, sexual attraction, fantasy).
.
And noting that orientation can change with age is consistent with lopaw's observations.
.
Poll Suggestion: Post the Kinsey 1-7 scale (or a more up to date 10-pt scale) and ask participants to mark their orientation, age, and gender.
.
Rating Description
0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual
X No socio-sexual contacts or reactions [That rules out TER!]
Posted By: sasha2cute
Are most escorts attracted to the same sex, or are they attracted to the opposite sex, or are most providers truly bisexual?
probably a 2
interested in certain TS providers and have a Mfm fantasy
Ive only ever had one great FMF threesome and it was with a lesbian couple where we all enjoyed each other
There is no reason to assume that escorts have gender preferences that differ from the general population. Therefore one would expect the same distribution as in the civie world. Not accounting for the monetary motivation to appear so.
I guess that if we are talking about "real life," then the distributions should be roughly similar. (But maybe hobbyists and Providers are, in general, more adventurous and less inclined to suppress sexual feelings,compared to Kinsey's samples. That might skew things a little.)
.
Within the hobby, I quote lopaw (above): "Some providers are lesbian and told me that they don't want to mix business with too much pleasure." And I quote me (above), when a Provider told me, "Actually, I'm a lesbian and I prefer girls," at least girls that she knows.
.
I guess the Kinsey Scale Poll would have to break it down or specify "in your REAL life" and "in your HOBBY life."
Posted By: souls_harbor
Re: Similar
There is no reason to assume that escorts have gender preferences that differ from the general population. Therefore one would expect the same distribution as in the civie world. Not accounting for the monetary motivation to appear so.
The myth that most providers are lesbians has been bouncing around for a long time. One possible source is a 1968 Playboy interview with Truman Capote. While discussing the Holly Golightly character from “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” Capote made the unsubstantiated claim that 80% of prostitutes are lesbians. Both Capote and Playboy were pop culture icons at the time, so their words had a credibility even without any evidence to support them.
If Truman Capote was taking the poll, maybe they told him "lesbian" to have an excuse to turn him down. (Like the Samoans telling Mead what they thought she wanted to hear, rather than the truth.)
.
I wonder how many of my dates switched teams after meeting me?
Posted By: rrasha88
Re: Urban myth.
The myth that most providers are lesbians has been bouncing around for a long time. One possible source is a 1968 Playboy interview with Truman Capote. While discussing the Holly Golightly character from “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” Capote made the unsubstantiated claim that 80% of prostitutes are lesbians. Both Capote and Playboy were pop culture icons at the time, so their words had a credibility even without any evidence to support them.
have expressed an interest in lesbian activities, or at least FMF activities. I've engaged in the latter with quite a few of them.
Only one provider comes to mind who was adamantly against being with another woman.
I would say I'm a Kinsey 2... maybe 2.5.
I am unlikely to initiate one-on-one sex with a woman, but I can't say I _never_ have. Men have almost always been were my heart takes me, but my eyes tend to lock on women. No offense guys, but women are better looking than you and I bet you think so too. When women come on to me, I am very receptive... but it doesn't happen as often as I'd like. Once I'm in the moment tho, and we've already gotten going, I am equally enthusiastic about male and female lovers. I may be a little less confident with women than men, because I play with a lot more men than women. I think if I lived in a world where women approached me as often as men, I might be at least 50/50 bisexual but we are products of our environments and I grew up in (and still live in, really) an environment where there is little stigma against same-sex activities but the bulk of my experiences have been with men, and those experiences play a big part in making you who you are. For the purpose of doing duos, seeing couples, or participating in other group activities, I am "truly bi" and that's also what it says on my profile I think. I have never had a solo female as a client. I think it would be fun, if she was experienced... but I might be a little awkward about initiating a newbie into the world of sapphic pleasures if it wasn't part of a FFM or group thing. I think I would explain my reluctance and give that hypothetical client some recommendations for other ladies who could be more confident in that scenario.
Metaphorically, men are a '55 Chevy while gals are a Ferrari.
"No offense guys, but women are better looking than you and I bet you think so too. "
You got that right. If I was a woman I'd definitely be a lesbian.
... her lack of experience and/or confidence with another woman 1-on-1. It is nice to know that right up front so that neither of us wastes the other's time. As experienced a lady monger as I am, I do prefer providers to be a bit aggressive and take the lead in our session. Nothing sexier to me than a sexually aggressive woman who has no hesitation in taking what she wants. Fortunately there seems to be no shortage of ladies who are eager to take control of a horny woman
As long as I can get mine too, I just like to fuck! I'm definitely bi sexual, tri sexual... whatever, I just like to fuck. I have to say though, sex with a man is different than sex with a woman but it's ALL fun as long as we all get off. I couldn't "fall in love" with a female, I can certainly enjoy fucking her brains out 😚
XOXO
TL
The saying may come off ignorant but idgaf. I've been out for over 10 years at as a bisexual woman. Yes, I even went through the awkward, "sitting parents down on the couch" event.
"Not all gay girls are hoes, but all hoes are gay"
This may be in correlation to sexual fluidity. Within civilian life the more sexually confident women I meet who also happen to "be for EVERYBODY" tend to dabble with both sexes and then some. Because who cares, a good time is a good time. So, toss in getting compensated$ for it, and "hell yea I fuck girls!"
However I feel like we ALL fall on the Kinsey scale somewhere. So what is bisexual?
I like women as friends, and havs had a few bi experiences...but prefer men, But yes most women ive met in this business are Bi Sexual..😚
but since hookers tend to be more open minded about sex in general and most can separate sex from all the emotions that go along with sex with most other women, I do believe the number of providers that are at least somewhat bi is higher than in the general population at large. Or perhaps they are just more likely to act on their "curiosity".
As for myself, I know exactly where I fall on the Kinsey scale, I am a solid ZERO. I am not even the slightest bit "curious" about being with another man. I am not exactly a homophobe, and I do believe that many if not most actual homophobe fall somewhere ABOVE zero on said Kinsey scale, but I know that when watching a movie or TV show, I find myself turning my head at the very sight of two men kissing. I support their right to be gay, but I confess to throwing up just a little bit in the back of my mouth if I am forced to actually see it.
So its nice to. know..Your Heterosexual Man..👿
Women can be straight, gay, bi, or simply "bi curious"
Guys are much simpler. A guy can pound nails for a lifetime and never be labeled as a carpenter, but if that same guy sucks even one dick, he's a cocksucker for life. lmao
Are you denying that you played the Construction Worker in the Village People from 1977 to 1979?
He's always running around calling people "Cocksucka!" What does that tell you?
Say what you want about me, but I am still very much alive.
Plus, I can't sing to save my life. lol
I have no idea how such rumors get started.
THAT is funny as hell, not to mention true. lol
If someone called you a cocksucker, whether true or not, you would just challenge them to mortal combat. If you killed them, then it was deemed that they were lying. If he killed you, they would stand around your body and say, "The cocksucker's dead" but at least you didn't have to hear it again.
Guys are much simpler. A guy can pound nails for a lifetime and never be labeled as a carpenter, but if that same guy sucks even one dick, he's a cocksucker for life. lmao
A young man walks up and sits down at the bar.
"What can I get you?" the bartender inquires.
"I want 6 shots of Jagermeister," responds the young man.
"6 shots?!? Are you celebrating something?"
"Yeah, my first blowjob."
"Well, in that case, let me give you a 7th on the house."
"No offense, sir. But if 6 shots won't get rid of the taste, nothing will."
-- Modified on 1/4/2018 3:17:25 AM
