This is not a swing at ladies that have worked as providers prior to 2000. My own observations are that more providers that I have met in the last five to six years are the type of women that would have taken on some other line of work prior to 2000. I met women prior to 2000 that were typical of those I see now, one was in Med School and another was a wealthy upbringing, Ivy League coed - but they were the exceptions. Now, for me at least, it appears that the old exception is now the rule.
My belief is that changes in the economy and our culture has brought about the shift that I am experiencing. I am interested in knowing what your experiences and observations are on time based changes in providers that you see or have seen.

60's and 70's
1. no kissing allowed.
2. no "O's" allowed for provider.
3. Answering services, no cells or email then.
4. Multiple pops or anal not on menu.
5. Condoms rarely used. Just a short arm inspect.
6. Rates $20 to $50 max.
7. Locals worked with them to bring snowbirds in.
We all liked each other and had wonderful playtimes together.  Threesomes or more, no extra charge.  This was "strip" girls in Vegas.  Brothels were all you could buy until you ran out of money, and if your were a good boy, the madam might just throw in an almost freebie.

I beg to differ.I was in the hobby prior to 2000 and have found that the breed of women getting into this work are most often less educated and more enamoured with the financial gain and want to get it without really putting any "skin" in the game. Yes, there are still very bright women entering into this line of work some with college degrees and professional backgrounds and the silver spoons to match, but they will always be the exception. Much like the military in recent years, the women are mostly from poor and working class families struggling families and without little hope for a future other than what fast money can buy. When you look at sheer numbers, I think it's mind boggling and just because you spent time in college, doesn't make you any more  educated. Just recently I met someone quite "educated" and very articulate, very current on world affairs, and of course very street wise. On our third date she confided in me that her college degree got her about $50k a year job that was going no where fast. When she went independent, she found that outside of expenses she was earning sometimes as much as 10k a week. The sad part about it, she really doesn't understand money and though she is getting there in terms of what to do with what she is making, she is truly the exception. Most of this new breed is looking to get off the snide, pay overdrawn credit cards, fighting their way out of bad relationships, or worst, fighting horrible drug habits and doing it with the least amount of effort possible.  

So today, they are better "educated" at perpetuating the scam, perhaps better looking if you just go by sheer numbers, but really not any smarter than any other generation, though I would argue today's providers have more access to things and much of the stigma of being a working girl has given way to a porn crazy society where there are more "johns" with disposable income and more willing to throw it out as fast as they make it (sexual addiction is a real problem).

Who can blame anyone for making this choice? The rewards are greater than a minimum wage existence and with the right help, many will change their lives and fortunes and get out with a little bit of their souls. For the career ladies that don't fall prey to no account men and other various addictions, they often do very well because they understand for what it is and the many do it because they enjoy the ride. So in the end, no matter what choice your endeavor, it's your work ethic that often makes or breaks you. You can choose a number of paths, but people always know what "good" work is and often reward it (you) with longevity.

I would say that there are more mature women in the field than in the seventies and eighties.

I like these women better as they are more serious about pleasing and being pleased, also more sociable, though I hesitate to stereotype.  I have found a number of wonderful young providers in the last few years as well.

I suspect that most entered the field to support themselves after a divorce and/or found that this was a good way to satisfy their sexual needs.

Slowly, there is an acceptance of sex work among a large segment of society despite legal setbacks.

I credit the internet and boards like this for much of the changing attitude.

I have found of late that except for our respected perennials; the majority of gals coming into the biz are a bunch of dysfunctional, ADD ridden, narcissistic nitwits that couldn’t plan a clusterfuck let alone an appointment.

 The multitudes of misguided missies who thought that somehow the divorce laws were going to garner them a $90K/year child support income from some poor bastard earning $35K/year before taxes is astounding. These clueless twits tutored by the Army of Oprah and a composite of inane “tests” from Cosmopolitan Magazine are flooding the market en mass with their delusional idea of entitlement based on ‘just because I got a pussy’.

 All I can say is there is going to be a shit-load of homeless bag ladies in 20 years.    

Guys like you are why ladies like the oft bashed Kathy of 48th St have such chips on their shoulders.

I do have to chuckle though. Depsite your apparent antipathy for the "ADD ridden narcissistic twits" that are the focus of your angst, you apparently STILL pay them.

So who exactly is the fool in this scenario?

Once again, I cannot help but be grateful that I don't encounter fools such as yourself in my real life adventures. I would run screaming from a hobby that has provided me with such wonderful encounters.

If you are of the professional ilk of staid "perennials" I mentioned; you should have no beef with me.

If you are of the family of "narcissistic twits" then I guess you would have an axe to grind being that I NEVER pay them.

Sir have you ever wondered why you have to pay someone to not only spend time with you but have sex with you? maybe you should.

Now that you have shown your ass to all with the two posts here may I have back the $25.00 Word Dictionary you borrowed? It just seems to make you appear a bit of a TWIT yourself. Its just not working for you.

I said NOTHING derogatory toward you, her or the fine providers that conduct themselves in an organized, focused, professional manner.

I find it amusing that you debase me for paying for pussy on a discussion forum predicated to those very practitioners and the supply side entrepreneurs. I’m sure the male constituency around here is as curious as to the latent misandrist behind your alias as you are to the candid, discerning whore-monger behind mine.

-- Modified on 9/3/2006 8:16:02 AM

All the words I used are already in my daily lexicon, and if a check is done you'll see that they were all used correctly. Therefore your pages are neither smudged nor tattered and the edifying spirit of your contents is intact.

Another fair and balanced report from Fox News.

rather than another jejune argumentum ad hominem.

Are you sure there have been any changes at all?  Perhaps the Internet is bringing the number of ladies and all the different types of ladies out in the open where as before, perception was reality: You were only aware of what was around you and what you knew for sure?  

Before the Internet, perhaps these Ivy-Leaguers' clients were professors, parents of friends and their acquaintances?  A smaller, closer circle of clients?  Held in much more confidence since there was no Internet to facilitate screaming from the rooftops?  

In addition, there is a somewhat new mentality these days among my generation, time off being more important than money.  People negotiate more vacation time and flexible schedules as much as they negotiate for more money.  Travel is so available to the masses and affordable these days and it's not uncommon to live far from family, so we all want more time for ourselves, something this lifestyle brings.  

Kate Bishop

Personally, I think he has a point about the people entering the workforce, any workforce, over the past ten years, including, but certainly not limited to, "customer service professionals".

The omni-present media teaches young girls/ladies that having a vagina along with a pair of breasts will get you everywhere.  If you have the body and the looks to go with it, well, the sky's the limit.  Look at their rolemodels: Britney Spears, Fergie, Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Jessica and Ashlee Simpson.  What these girls don't realize is that dimwit but hot celebrities have PR managers and marketing managers telling them what to do and say, 24/7.  No one is telling these girls that brains are hot, too, and that intelligence isn't simply a back-up plan in case your genitals don't work out for you.

I don't think that 99.9% of the ladies posting on this board should take offense.  Clearly, he's talking about a certain group, the same that have loads of poor reviews, no calls / no shows, bait and switch, etc.

It is what it is,

Kate

It has brought greater selection and an opportunity to "study" a lady, via websites, that I did not have prior to 2000. I was a late convert to hobbying via the web, so maybe that has distorted my sense of what took place ten or more years ago.
BTW. Your post responding to Societal's post was on target. He was discerning between the professional ladies like you and the show me the money, upsell, bait and switch or cash and dash types that cause problems for all involved in this business. I am a hobbyist, so my expertise on escorting is non-existent. But being an experienced business person, I know that when any activity is done right and one prepares properly, rewards come in abundance. All of the ladies that are taking shortcuts could produce buckets more money weekly, over a longer timeframe than they can ever come close to producing shorting hobbyists.

A great topic ended well. Thanks.

if only to stop confusing the peanut gallery.

I have met many providers, the majority of them in the last 10 or so years.

I'd say about half are divorced - not one of them has collected a dime of alimony or child support, and not one ever expected to either, despite the ex's ability to do so.

So unless you have such bad karma that you keep running into the misfits that you describe (and I allow that that can happen) then you are engaged in hyperbole which comes across as insulting to the readers and you are being taken to task for that.

I have known a few providers who have already gone the retirement route, and not one is even close to being a bag lady.

Hopefully this is jejune-free enough for you.

-- Modified on 9/4/2006 1:33:23 PM

The net has improved the biz in general and has made it more attractive.  However, I think this includes both women who are over-qualified and unfortunately, under-qualified.

I think you just gravitate toward the former.  Unfortately, some women in both categories are just not cut out for it, whether for business and/or emotional reasons.    

I hate to say there's a little truth in what SS says.  I know lady, fortunately retired, who would give all her clients two-to-three hours for a one-hour appointment, angering her agency who then cut her loose.  She then became an indy, and she got busted because she stayed for weeks at the same hotel meeting clients, and paid for her room in cash every week.  She liked to become friends with her clients too much, she had no business savvy, and she had a stubborn disregard for the least precaution against LE.  What can you say?


-- Modified on 9/3/2006 2:39:20 PM

It is correct to have red wine with rare beef, it is not wise to drink a gallon of it.

Get the point?

I wasn't alluding to ANY gals collecting blue sky bucks child support; only that many learned the cold hard facts AFTER the hearing(s). THEN because they are the epitome of no self discipline and accustomed to having some man (any man) clean up whatever mess their impulsive, over enforced "ID" gets them into they decide to become SPs because it is the ONLY vocation in which their lack of self discipline, vapid demeanor, and total absence of professional conduct/courtesy could hope to garner them the money needed to satiate their drunken sailor spending patterns.

  Soon enough however; these long time coddled cuties discover that being a SP actually requires the ability to manage their time, keep rudimentary records, occasionally clear their voice mail so that a new message/client can be obtained, and even learn simple computer skills so that they can e-mail potential clients as well as check their reviews here on TER. For many of the new ilk mentioned earlier in this thread; these simple skills seem far beyond their ability or desire to learn.

THESE are the “narcissistic nitwits” that I was earlier referring and conversely comparing to the staid, practiced, professional perennials that we veteran hobbyists have come to love, count on, and respect.        


-- Modified on 9/3/2006 4:49:05 PM

We were NOT talking about hobbyists when this thread was started. Stilltryin25 was talking about a change in the climate of providers. I brought forth some objective(candid) observations I have made over time, and as expected a couple of oversensitive gals and its usual minion of WhiteKnights has taken POV and turned it into a one sided, shit-slinging dog-pile.

 You're very correct in "What applies to the hens applies the roosters" The discussion was NOT however about fiscal planning; but rather the noted lack of professionalism in the current influx of new providers.
 

-- Modified on 9/3/2006 4:43:10 PM

I don’t beat around the bush, I don't sugar coat shit. If you want to dumb down your vernacular to appease the vapid; have at it!
I'll write in the style I'm comfortable with.
If the reading comprehension challenged have trouble with it, and can only rebut with sophomoric character assassinations; they only prove their own lack of character.

 In short; stop defending the sub-standard.  


-- Modified on 9/3/2006 5:57:32 PM

I don't think he's belittling every provider, but the workforce in general these days lacks a certain amount of professionalism. Escorting is no different. However, looking at this business from another perspective, the Internet has created a better venue and more choices. Men are getting better service (GFE) too (if you go to the right ladies). Wink!

Hugs,
ciara

because I just keep meeting one great provider after another.

Perhaps Mr. S. has had some bad experiences, so I will cut him some slack and allow him his rant unchallenged hence.

I suppose it's the least one can do for someone so afflicted.

I apologise if I have seemed supercillious.

Your subtle debasing "I suppose it's the least one can do for someone so afflicted" is noted.
So too is your unremitting predilection for WhiteKnighting.

Mrfisher; get off your white charger of unctuous, servile BullShit and grow some hair.

  In my "rant" as you put it; I did nothing but honor the likes of CiaraPhx, KateBishop, and others of their ilk. If you so eagerly jump to the defense of the substandard of these ladies you are in fact doing a disservice to them.

A statement like: "they couldn't organize a clusterfuck" is not objective by its nature.  It involves guesswork, hyperbole and sarcasm. Is it supposed to be funny?  Objective comedy?  If it says anything candid it's about your emotions: disgust.  So, on that level, it's truthful.  As they say: tell us how you really feel.  

It's the same with the other criticisms you gave.  You talk about "multitudes of misguided missies" who expected to live on excessive child support and "clueless twits tutored by the Army of Oprah" (where did you pull that from?  Oprah is a prissy puritan.) it's all very witty.  Where's the objectivity?  Again, it's candid about your disgust, nothing else.

From what you wrote, I could only think you've transfered your disgust about the MTV generation, Oprah's audience, and Cosmopolitan's readership and projected it on the new crop of providers.  I can't say that's sound reasoning or objective. For one thing, the ladies who willfully enter this business are by definition non-conformists who at least don't buy into Oprah's prissy puritanism, but I don't know about Cosmo.  

Your disgust with the MTV generation is candid, though.  Why center it on providers, and do it with Bill O'Reily meanness disguised by statements that sound vaguely funny?  What I wanted to do by informing you that guys have these problems also was present the question: why aim this completely at newer providers when so many others have those "cultural problems?"  And my conclusion about it is: because providers are easy targets.  I can't stand that. A hint of that attitude pisses me off.  

If you'll notice my post below, however, I did what you didn't do. I gave an example that supported you. It's what you could have done to be objective and candid, and not create perceptions out of your emotions.    

So, I'm a WhiteKnight.  Nobody's answered my question: why is this a bad thing?  So, I won't be invited to many old boy parties.  Frankly, I don't miss them.    

Because you said it includes anyone or most people entering the workforce now; you don't restrict it to women, or more narrowly, providers.

I never went after you ad hominem until you fired at me.

  Look Mr Garrulous; I'm a bit more laconic in my delivery. I look for the root and expose it. I don't take 3000 words to express a thought. If you don't appreciate my direct veracity; fine.

 I used the MTV association for universal identification. Your PC fervor for fair and equitable representation does not excuse the absolute stupidity of gals with $$$+ riding on each appointment to walk around with their cell phone’s voice mail box full and not capable of taking a message or effect the ubiquitous 2-call system. I can't for the life of me figure out why any man would want to champion any woman OR man for being so short sighted and lame-brained.

As I have stated in other posts throughout this thread; the long standing "professionals" around here who manage their time, their phones, their e-mails and consistently afford great service deserve all the respect. The twits who can't even effectively manage the capital nature gave them and turn it into a moderately profitable cottage business for themselves don't even deserve food stamps.    

and thank you for owning that.

I own the white knight and all of that comes with it, unctiousness too.

Now that we are settled with that, the point remains that you observe that the recent state of escortdom is over populated with future bag lades of America types.

My experience is just the opposite, for the most part.

On this I guess we disagree and there's no harm in that.

My other point is that by engaging in hyperbole you do a disservice to the fine women who ply their trade and that, I, and others, felt needed pointing out.

Now if we are complete, life marches on.

If I could grow hair, believe me I would.

Thank you for pointing out my spelling errors,  I had actually looked it up and thought that it was two L's, but my eye sight isn't what it used to be.

This is a good thing!  EOM

I never wondered why you weren't Mr. Nice guy.  I was wrting about straying off topic in your original post.  I detected misogyny at the root of what you said, so I thought.        

Nevertheless, I realize right now that I should have seen what you were trying to say anyway.  Other people did.  So, I'm sorry.  I dug up and killed the wrong root.  I'll read these statements here much more carefully now; I'll not be so quick on the trigger.  I don't want to stifle honest discussion.      

You're right on another point:  I'm much too wordy.  I'll work at preventing it.

Actually, if you had given your original point of view like you have here I would have been very agreeable to it.  The things about Oprah, Cosmo, how befallen these women will be in 20 years, all of that deflected me from your point.  I took my eyes off the ball.