(This message modified by author to correct a few typos)

First, let's get this out of the way:  There is plenty of bad client behavior too.  Let's not get into a debate about whose behavior is worse, but instead agree at the outset that there is plenty of bad behavior to go around.

But the focus in this thread is on the root causes of bad provider behavior, which I am genuinely trying to understand.
I have my own theories, which can perhaps be a starting point.

Also, let me say at the outset that it is wrong to stereotype, and that my theories DO NOT apply to all providers.

Realistic adults will acknowledge that being a provider can put a woman in a position to be subject to particularly disrespectful behavior.  Providers properly insist on being treated with respect.  I think this sometimes makes them hyper-sensitive to what they perceive as disrespect even when the intention was not disrespect, and also particularly angry (and sometimes inclined toward revenge) on those other occasions when true disrespect toward them was indeed intended.

Another point:  I think that many providers have been in sexual situations in the past when they were not in control, and perhaps were so not-in-control that they were victimized.  Because of this, they have an especially strong need to be "in control" in siuations involving clients, to prove that they have the final, and greater, power.  This can lead to bad behavior.

If a woman is pre-disposed toward feelings of anger toward men,
perhaps rooted in "father issues", she may over-react to being wronged by a client, and feel justified in her own mind in punishing him.  Again, this can lead to bad behavior, which she herself may come to regret once she has cooled off.




-- Modified on 7/27/2003 1:50:19 PM

I myself think that clear and honest communication is the best start to a good session and a lasting client relationship.  Add a healthy dose of chemistry, and I'm happy.  I like men and I like sex, and usually get and give plenty of respect.  We all want to have a good time, so why push anyone's buttons in a power or respect struggle?  Maybe because as a Dominatrix, I get paid to push those buttons!  That means I have to be nice to everyone, or I'm giving the mean Dom stuff away for free!

I think you are either seeing the wrong women (I'm not sure how) or you may be doing something to bring out these things.  I have not found this kind of bad behavior in any of the many women I have been with.  I did see a 20yo college girl you was very new to this and did not want me to go down on her or get on top misc.  She was really scared but very nice.  The second time I saw her she was a real pussycat and the third time a true GFE with great 69 and BBBJ.  Just use your charm.

"We talked for a while. Then she told me there was no kissing. Then she held on to the bottom of the raincoat because she was concerned about it slipping off and that was very awkward. When I asked why she did that, she informed me that I didn't own her. With that type of comment, I asked her to leave. I would not recommend her."

Basically, you are saying, I think, that all provider bad behaviour is based on their sensitivity to possible slights by hobbyists....  And when it's not, it's excuseable.  Nice analysis (NTS) (note the sarcasm) EOM
BOB

...business they're in and wouldn't care if they did.  

Ever notice how the good ones don't have attitudes and have very few rules?  They don't tolerate abuse, but they also know how to treat another human being.  These are also the ones who actually put some effort into what they're doing, even going so far as to prepare for a session (what a novel idea!).

The girls you speak of would probably suck at a "regular" job too, and are only providing (for lack of a better word) because they think it's easy.

Preamble:

This comment will probably not ingratiate me to members of this board. But, hey, it's my opinion, deal with it. I'm not trying to flame people, or create a non-productive argument. These opinions are just wild generalizations, which can't be "proven", at least not on a web board, so there's really no reason to try to argue about them constructively anyway.

Answer:

What causes "bad" provider behavior? Providers are generally fucked-up little puppies.

Explanation:

There are some who aren't, who probably don't engage in bad behavior, but most are, and most do. To "be" in the business of fucking is radically outside of society's usual strictures, and although I'd be the first to congratulate anyone who broke strictures in their political opinions and daily life, it takes a certain rare breed of poor self-control to so radically break those strictures that you end up incapable of average commerce. (From a Freudian point of view -- and no I don't agree with Freud, but it's an interesting point -- doing anything outside the bounds of traditional civilized society is already an indication of a type of dysfunction, either in yourself or the society, and continuing to do it and failing to accomodate to the rules of the group around you simply leads to greater dysfunction.)

Basically, going that far outside of the rules will make you fucked up, even if in the first place it was the rules and not you, that was the problem. Being surrounded by so much input that suggests that what you do is "wrong," is probably going to hit your self esteem in some way, even if most of that input is inaccurate, even if your LOGIC can tell you it's inaccurate. And then, on top of that, women in general (I think this is a biological fact) require greater positive input from their peer group than men, for a sense of self-esteem in the first place. And then on top of that, the act of sex is exactly the sort of thing that causes a given peer member's input to be mentally enlarged by the recipient, such that for providers, all the input is skewed out of whack. The job itself wears ya down.

Furthermore, most women who engage in this business do so out of lack of options. How many lawyers, corporate executives, or surgeons also "sell drugs a little on the side just to get some extra spending cash"? The position of lacking options, bespeaks a problematic relationship with making goals, making plans and following through, generally taking responsibility for longer-term arrangements in your life. Other temptations sneak in. On top of all that self-esteem shit about the job and how it hits you, is the other self-esteem shit about the fact that you're probably not falling DOWNWARDS on your own personal totem-pole assessment of social value, when you choose to become a provider; you're probably perceiving it as climbing UPWARDS. It's a bad population sample in the first place.

Caveat:

Now, all this isn't to say that there aren't positive things about what providers provide, or how some providers can manage to arrange their lives despite the averages. And further, the providers we meet here on the TER discussion boards will be largely the cream of the crop -- people who are articulate, and have planned ahead enough at least to own a computer. Sure, there are some who have "chosen" this line of work over and above other viable, positive, socially accepted options (like law school, or whatever), and there are plenty of others who might not have "chosen" in that way but now realize they can still build a positive life on the advantages inherent in the life they've now fallen into. But those women, for a large part, don't represent what providing does to providers, or how providers get into providing. Mostly, they're fucked up little puppies.

That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. And it doesn't mean I don't enjoy fucking them, getting to know them, even having friendships with them. Cuz I'm fucked up in my way, too.

While I don't agree with everything you have said (!) I believe you have made some valid points. As others have pointed out on this and other board numerous times, the "population sample" of TER providers (or perhaps I should say providers on TER!) is not very representative of those "fucked up little yuppies" you speak of.

I'm also pretty sure that those providers here at TER will speak their minds very soon in this thread.

P.I.

I'd like to answer this but I don't know where to begin.  I'll let Singleton do the prose.  All I'll say is that our culture holds doing work for financial gain in high esteem.  If the providers are so "Fuck Up " as you say than what about the men giving them the money.  The Women are using the funds for support, whether for childred or a fancy car, but the men are taking funds that might be better used from a moral point on their families or friends in need.  Just Who is more "Fucked UP"?
Maybe you!

i suppose i should say SOMETHING, except since i originally intended to stay out of this one, i really don't have much to add other than to re-amplify the point you made:

if THEY are "fucked-up little yuppies" who are supporting kids, paying rent, going thru grad-school [cough], buying Prada bags and Jimmy Choo shoes, and generally investing in their futures, then WHO THE FUCK ARE WE?  ... all WE ever do is get our NUTS off and do so by PAYING FOR IT!  ... all the perverts in da house say YEAH! ... [echo] ... YEAH!

LOL

--

(this one was easy, thanks for your setup!

-- Modified on 7/27/2003 5:21:10 PM

I know you could do a better job!   I've met a much greater per centage of Fucked Up Little Puppies at bars than I ever have in the hobby.

-- Modified on 7/27/2003 5:32:55 PM

Well, what is bad behavior?
a simple answer is a failure to satify the customer and I agree that miscommunication is probably the major cause.
examples:
provider fails to tell client what services she will and will not do

client fails to understand what provider will and will not do

Provider claims she will do a service but won't (classic ripoff, provider says she will sex but won't)

Client is not what provider expected (too big, too dark, too etc)
Many more examples, not enough time.  Interesting topic.  Even the best providers are going to be upset by some clients and get provoked into what would be described as bad provider behavior.

on either end, provider or client....

Guess I've always been scared of drinking after watching an uncle waste away slowly due to way too much booze....

Why do you find it necessary to hide behind an alias, "someone else"?

That blarney about lawyers, corporate executives and surgeons... not selling drugs???  I'm thinking they are probably USING illicit drugs at a rate just as high or higher than general society (Doctors, not specifically surgeons, especially)?  I stopped reading at that point.

If you're going to post a lengthy post with a preamble and such, and we have NO IDEA who you even are, do you expect us to really spend much time or energy thinking about the post?

Posts are always more legitimate in my never humble opinion when made with your regular posting handle.

*smoooch*
Elise

-- Modified on 7/27/2003 8:34:16 PM

Let me guess, you're friends with Peckerhead on the San Diego board!?
This post doesn't even deserve my two cents..

While I have been in this "hobby" for only a short while, I think your mileage will very as to the quality of the woman you meet.  Yes, there will be some that have been in rough situations that none of us would want to imagine, but there are others that are earning a living like everyone else.  I am well educated and work in the technology industry where I have been in some pretty humiliating and frustrating situations.  Maybe this is the male in me talking but I think I would rather be a provider then work as a telemarketer or collection agent (both soul sucking, ego depreciating jobs I held while working my way through college...long hours for very little money I might add.)

Anyway, I have noticed the following about what I would define as a good providers:
* They have a support network in place
* They genuinely like the company of men
* They understand the business that they are in and market themselves according to the rules they set for themselves
* They do not seem to be in this for the long haul.
* They seperate themselves from the job.

This is what I have noticed about providers some men would call good but I would call scary:
*  Their support network is not very supportive
*  They seem to have this idea that sex is what they is good for or the only thing they is good at, and therefore does just about anything with no rules or their rules have no real meaning.
*  They do not understand or want to deal with the business end of things, but rather participate in it as an "employee".
* Runs hot or cold, depending on how she feels about what she is doing that day.  In other words, she as internalized the job.  This is something even those of us in a "normal" job should avoid.

Of course there is a broad spectum in between.  For instance, It would seem that the old a women gets, the more things she has to do to maintain clientelle.  Still, these woman have been around and all the aspects of a "good provider" seem to apply.

our SD friend could only wish to be so erudite in his misogyny.  

Man, talk about "Woman is the Nigger of the World"!  (For anyone offended by that line, it is the title a song by John Lennon...a master of offending himself).  I pity any woman who spends time with a man who so blatantly looks at them as vehicles for sexual gratification, a vagina without a soul, who can equally balance sexual desire and contempt, not only for the woman but for himself...which likely is where the source is for attitudes like this.

Misogyny!...Hooh!...Good God!...What is it good for?  ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!...Say it againnnnn...

I love this one.  Someone Else took a lot of wind out of my sails, but I had a few thoughts on this left over.

I recently posted about a bad date with Samantha.  I think that she demonstrated bad behavior.  I suspect that I rather tipped her over the edge when she asked if she could smoke and I said no, please don't.  She had been listed as a non-smoker.

When we got to her room after a 2+ hour dinner, I had reason to suspect that she was dragging the date out for more money.  This got me into a mood.  I really don't know if it is a fact, but that's how things seemed at the time.

I began to not value her as a person at that point and saw her as a comodity.  I was paying for something and not getting my moneys worth.  Hell, not getting anything.  That was, up to a point, a perception on my part.  But as soon as I started suggesting some activities take place, out came that bad behavior.

Was my behavior bad first?   hmmmmm?  See, there was point where the persons involved, fucked up or not, began to tread on eachother.  She was stepping on my wallet, and I was taking away the bounds of interpersonal relationship that had been established up to that point and moved them over to my side of the field.  She got pissed and so did I.  The difference is that I showed my hand overtly and she covertly.

Wait,...maybe she is just fucked up.

I always have a problem with people who post under an Aliases.  If you don't have the balls to use your real handle maybe you should step back and reconsider what you are going to post.  I think TER should not allow the use of Aliases especially from ball less punks who call our ladies sick puppies.

be the diary of every individuals lives..
Just shop anywhere; conduct business anywhere and tell me the zillions of scenarios of where you felt you got good customer service and poor CS; and what the 'poor' one could've done differently. And while that might have/have not worked well for you, that doesn't mean it would for the next person. The variables, and reasons are many. Ad infinitum..
Just look at drivers..notice how they drive? As if they don't see anybody else on the road - it's all about them. How many people drive in a way that reflects the type of PERSON that they are: selfish, inconsiderate, 'me, me, and only me'..You get the idea. Same thought can be applied elsewhere..
If you want to stop right here, I could say that Papercup really hit one big nail on the head (damn, he's batting 1000 these days-nah, a million!) as one lady dropping out of Corporate America and into this scene can say, that there's definitely a difference. Not a bad thing - a difference. We see things more business, and more customer service minded. We are time managers, money managers, etc. That's not to say others aren't. I'm trying to summarize here, so please don't fly off in other directions..
Rather than discuss in this thread why there's bad behavior, because there's a zillion reasons, just as there are people, why not ask how can one promote good business, and good behavior? One of my all time favorite Gents, with whom I'm very good friends, told me that many guys PM him and want to know why his review scores are so high, and imply suspicion. His answer is classic to him: he does his homework, so of course, these ladies are worthy. That was his intent when he did his research - to have the ladies worthy of 9's and 10's. He's not looking for LESS! Then again, there are those that the saying ' a fool and his money have soon parted' - would be quite appropriate. How many guys out there, are simply horny, pull up TER, grab the phone, and make a call? She looks ok, reviews are alright, but it was the fact that she was available right then that cinched the date? Maybe he scored. But if he didn't, are we supposed to be shocked? Just like anything in life, if we make bad decisions, we've made a bad decision. Maybe he picked her because he was horny; she accepted the date because she needed the money. Neither one of them really felt like being together but they have this co-dependent need. So, they get together. How can either one of them expect good results? Do either of them have the wherewithall to say, I don't think this is going to be right, and pleasingly satisying to either of us, so let's not?
I learn something every day in this Hobby. Mostly, I learn how blessed I am; and other times, I learn how incredibly naive I am (like the back-channeling thread - blew me away).
In the small circle of ladies I know locally, we are all very different; we don't think the same; don't have the same type of business; don't conduct our business the same; don't have the same attitudes towards it - all of us - completely different. None of them is right, wrong, better or worse, because we are all different people. Sometimes, they'll tell me, Sedona, why do you even care about that? Big deal, that he said this, or you feel insulted. As long as he's a paying customer, suck it up and see him. But, that's not me. I don't give a rat's ass how much you're PAYING me - I'm not paid to be insulted or offended. I date gentlemen - men I WANT to be with. Now, you may think well, isn't she hoity-toity? Do YOU (guys) want to be with someone you don't want to be with? Do you want to be with someone who DOESN'T want to be with you? I've got a business/personal decision to make, and you know what? For ME, it's not about the money - so he's out. If I CONTINUED to see him ANYWAY, do you think that would be a good decision? So, if some are making choices with their small heads, and others are making choices with their $$, you're bound for trouble. I'm not casting any judgements, any anything, just laying a foundation to answer the original question because think how many things can go wrong when you put two people together for all the wrong reasons. I've been blessed. About 98% of the Gents I've seen TOTAL, I would see again - you bet I would! Have I enjoyed meeting ALL of them? Of course. But, I too, try to do my homework, and so far, not only have i not been disappointed, but surprisingly pleased.
To do anything short of good research, homework, good communication beforehand, etc...well, maybe you'll have the same odds at the Blackjack tables..

Hope this helped.
Much love,
Sedona

If I could grab your face with both of my hands, I'd smother it with kisses!
I want the whole world to know that!

When you say "It's NOT all about the money" and you back it up with your personal reasons of how and why; You leave me breathless.

 Bravo Sedona; Bravo!!

  Cm.

or for anyone else to do the same.  A very good provider I know who is well grounded, and loves what she does, calls it "keeping some distance".  I'm not talking about coldness - this women is a very warm person.  But no one should ever give too much of themself to their job.

Providers who have internalized the job may be more prone to bad behavior.

The difference is that providers see what, 2 - 10 clients every day. We, the clients see 1 or 2 providers a week, maybe. We have the money to see them because we have regular jobs (this is a generalization of course).

In every walk of life and/or profession there are individuals in which their behavior is poor and/or unprofessional.  What I do find unsettling is that even those that participate in this so called hobby and do interact with the ladies, still take the stereo typical views of ladies in this profession to heart.  

Of course we want to be treated with respect as does every other human being.  Unfortunately, many are unrespectful without even realizing it for they are in the mindset that given what the ladies do, that many things are allowed to be said or done that they wouldn't even think of doing or saying to a civilian lady.  Yes, we are more open, but it does not mean that it is okay to belittle us and that is to often done.  Occupational hazzard I suppose.

As to the psychological theories as to why a lady would display poor behavior, well, I do think that is a load of bunk myself.  We are after all human and again those negative human traits come out in all of us and shows in our professional lives.  If I would take the theories at face value, then I suppose that I could apply that to any doctor, attorney, engineer or what have you that displays unprofessional or bad behavior.  

Lauren

attorneys, engineers and other, but the reasons may be different than the reasons for those providers who show bad behavior.  Everyone is different.

As I said, my theories DO NOT apply to all providers.

What she said, most definitely!

I tried to respond the initial post in this thread earlier and I just hit the "back to forum" instead of posting because I never seem to write the correct thing.  THANKS SEDONA for hitting it!

I love that you didn't leave us for too long, Sedona.  I miss your serious as well as your fun posts on the board when you take time for your other endeavors.

Your heart is so BIG and your mind so CLEAR.  You're nothing short of brilliant.

You're the VERY BEST in so many aspects.  So BLESSED we are to have you!

*smooch*
Elise

But, I got a 'spanking' today, for not having completed something I was supposed to, and he said to me 'you've been on the Boards, haven't you?! That's where you've been spending your time!' So, yes, all the while that I'm on the boards, I'm not doing what I'm supposed to be doing! I'm a bad girl...
But, I guess we have our addictions, and this is mine.
I do love the people, and the participation, that's for sure and it really gladdens my heart.
I had more oral surgery today (the last - yes!)and then will need to prepare for my trip to Vegas which will be great, but very intense with no rest! I am, however, hoping to take one quick trip while I'm in LV to see where my dad is buried and say goodbye, and also take a picture for my family.
I'm sure I'll go through TER withdrawals while I'm gone! LOL! And I'll be glad to be back!
Thanks, Elise, so much. You've really warmed my heart.

Love,
Sedona

Yes but first what behavior is the original poster refering to exactly?  Some would consider a CBJ bad behavior, LOL.

Laura

for it.

to do something which damages a client, and is not justified.

You address the person, as though his validity as a human were the important thing; rather than the question at hand.

I did the group the decency of addressing the question at hand. Your failure to do so is rude. And is, as well, why I 'hide' behind a secondary alias -- because people would flame ME rather than MY IDEAS, just as you have done.

I didn't call "our ladies" problematic. I called MOST PROVIDERS problematic and was very clear on the subject that I felt the providers HERE do not represent what MOST providers are like.

Please attempt to address the ideas in the post, not the person who wrote it. Otherwise it's a rude fallacy, called the "ad hominem," and a good way to start a flame war.



-- Modified on 7/28/2003 7:30:59 PM

I'm surprised some of you see me as intolerant or unsympathetic toward providers. Allow me to quote myself:

"going that far outside of the rules will make you fucked up, even if in the first place it was the rules and not you, that was the problem"

"is probably going to hit your self esteem in some way, even if most of that input is inaccurate"

"all the input is skewed out of whack. The job itself wears ya down."

"out of lack of options"

All of this sounds, to me, like someone who is unhappy about the sad state that unhappy people have had to put themselves into. Read the original post from the point of view of someone who wants to think, not someone who wants to be coddled and cooed to, and you'll see that all I was offering was an intelligent opinion or two, perhaps wrong or right. Read it from the point of view of someone who needs to hear that "ALL providers are OK people and don't you deny it EVER!" and you'll see that I've given reasons why I disagree with you -- something you haven't done for me.

I do think there's something to the simple math of it. An average provider probably sees 4 clients a day, as many as 100 a month; an average client probably sees no more than 3 providers a month.

(Oh, and the comment that Doctors and Lawyers USE drugs, in no way addresses my question about how many of them SELL drugs. In fact, because it is the OPPOSITE, it might be said to PROVE what I was suggesting.)

Look, I'm not a provider-hater, I'm certainly not a woman-hater. (To suggest I've said something misogynistic is to assume all females trade sex for money, by the way. THAT'S considered misogynistic by most of our society.) I am unhappy for women who get into difficult circumstances and "have to" choose a path in life they otherwise would not choose. (I'm perfectly aware that SOME providers, probably the best of them, choose this path even though other options are open to them. I addressed that already, quite clearly. I shouldn't have to repeat myself, but I just did anyway.) I am, in fact, very aware of the difficulties and sympathetic toward them. That's what my post is clearly about -- I just didn't sugar-coat it.

Let me put it differently. Providers are generally unhappy people, and their lifestyles make them even more unhappy. Here at TER we don't meet many of the unhappy ones. I'm unhappy for the unhappy ones. If you can't see that from my post, you're too busy looking for assent and not busy enough thinking clearly. The world needs more clear thinking people, doesn't it? Try to do some of it today.

For example, would you say it's the case that most providers are in their profession because they choose it over equally lucrative careers in something more socially acceptable? No, you wouldn't. If you do, you're lying to yourself. Would you say it's the case that most providers have happy sex lives with their significant others? No, you wouldn't. If you do, you're lying to yourself. Reality is, most providers are on the skids. Most people who live that far outside of society's rules HAVE TO be in difficult circumstances, even to survive, much less fit in.

I know, I know, it's not always so important to fit in. (I said that already as well. But I'm repeating myself, since people seem to be weak readers.) Being the maverick, or just the quiet but resistant type, is a wonderfully responsible way to live your life. Figure out your politics, figure out your priorities, and don't let some damn government tell you to be otherwise! But only if you can handle that situation, and only if you aren't FORCED into it. Would you say it's the case that most providers choose to provide because they are card-carrying members of the Libertarian Party who understand 100% of the implications of breaking the law, living a largely illegal life, flaunting the government's and their society's tacit and overt rules of sexual conduct, and basically being members of the demi-monde rather than average commerce? Would you genuinely say that every 17-year-old who's "forced" by circumstance or poor judgment or drug addiction into providing is so politically astute? If you would, then you're lying to yourself.

These are women in trouble. Don't kid yourselves when you insist that we be all nicey-nicey about how wonderful it is for people to open their minds and their pussies to all and sundry. Sure, it's wonderful for the few, far between, who can handle it, who have chosen it, who can make it work for them. Most of those women are probably here at TER. For the rest, though, they are bowled over and snowed under by the pressures of being an attractive young woman in a difficult and not so kind business. Don't do them the discredit of thinking they're happy with all the choices they've been stuck with, you namby-pamby Pollyanna's. They aren't. To pretend they are, is to look the other way in the face of major human suffering. They engage in "bad provider behavior" (the original question, I think) because their lives are bad and so they learn bad behaviors. Period. To think otherwise is to lie to yourself.

And now to this: What's wrong with hiding behind an alias? You're ALL DOING IT RIGHT NOW. I used an alias, and continue to do so, because the responses to my statements, I predicted (and I turned out to be right), would bear little relation to polite discourse. People would want to email me -- probably to say something nasty, at least to say something they don't want to put on the board -- and thus, clearly, they would be trying to flame. Those of you who are unhappy with my sub-alias, ACTUALYL WENT OUT OF YOUR WAY to try to find out how to contact me. What level of extremes would you go to if you knew a little bit more about who I was? What a surprise, the aliases in this thread who most wish to abandon polite discourse and get at my character instead are ... PROVIDERS. Maybe they need to think of themselves as perfect -- first sign of a problem.

By HIDING behind an alias, I am protecting myself and my open mind from your closed-minded views, protecting my identity from your attitude that if I disagree with you, then I ought to be excoriated. What sort of people are you, that you can turn a blind eye to the unhappy in this world; and then blame me for pointing out their suffering; and then want to make my life a little teeny bit more difficult through email, simply for having stated what I think is the truth; and then blame me again, for trying to keep this all on the board and OUT of real life? If you've got something to say, it doesn't matter what name you put on it. If you want me to tell you my "real" TER handle, that's because you don't have something intelligent to say, but rather want to get at my identity and person rather than the ideas on the board. If you disagree with me, SAY WHY, otherwise your opinions are of no value, neither to yourself, nor me, nor society at large.

To concluce:

If you think providers are all happy little cupcakes, you're nuts. If you think their many manifestations of anti-customer and anti-male and simply anti-human attitude are not related to their unhappy circumstances in life, you're even more nuts. Go to a mad house. But get out of the way of people who want to make providers' lives a little better as you pass, because you clearly don't.



-- Modified on 7/28/2003 8:07:24 PM

There are actually two things.  Your statement about the "validity as a human" sounds as if you feel it's secondary.  I believe you're totally wrong in this...& I'm not addressing your post in response to the oringinal question.  My value as a human is much more important that whatever my opinion on any subject might be.  Opinions can change for a wide variety of reasons.  But your statement leds me to believe that if I had an opinon that your opinion of me would be based more on what you thought of my ideas rather than the type of person I might be?  It's almost scary to contemplate something like that.

And if you've ever read any of my other posts on the issue, you already know my dislike for opinions stated under a secondary alias.  If you believe them to be right why not show the courage to post them from the open & not behind the smoke-screen of further anonimity.  IMO that makes such statements much less creditable than they otherwise might be.  These boards are supposedly to allow an expression of opinion, not about a popularity contest or anything else.  Why do you feel you're like to be flamed if people knew your real alias?  Do you feel you have a bad repututation?  Even if you think that, why should it matter?  Sorry..one reason were were all given two legs is so that we could each stand up on our own--personally I'm very comfortable with that.    

Like rat him out to his family or have him jumped/robbed? I've heard horror stories from men. I believe one reason a woman would do the former would be because he short changed her, or maybe a bad review,maybe he was a regular and said he didnt want to see her anymore, maybe she has a man or service to answer to and split the money with. As for the latter, well that would fall under the typical back alley scam. They have no regard for the future of their business or any cognition of reviews or boards, just a short term way to make a lot of cash, I would assume for drugs or what have you. With obvious blatant disregard for the man they rob. It happened to a regular of mine a few years ago. I felt so bad for him. Anywho, that's my take on what triggers bad behavior in providers.

Laura

Good questions. I just answered why I prefer to double-alias, in my post a little lower down, the one with "fascism" in the title.

I'm not buying your story at all.
That "I said MOST providers NOT the ones here" line. Interesting way to pull your punch.. again, I'm not buying it.  The ladies (and most likely the men as well) here understood EXACTLY what flavor you are dishing out.

You want to hide behind an alias,  you're welcome to do so. It would be rather difficult to get a TER date in the future, if you didn't.

You want to throw around "ideas", go ahead.
If I had something worthwhile and succinct to add to the original thread I may have added it.  I did not.
Instead I chose to challenge that "idea" about illicit drugs and attorneys, executives, and surgeons, without reading your post any further.

Don't like it, oh well.  I suppose you believe I should exist to please you?
Want to name call, No skin off my nose.  I just felt the need to challenge those "ideas" so that you don't think we just let that "hoooey" go by.

Have a nice latin lesson.
Go validate yourself.. I find your "human" opinion INvalid, alias or not.  So of what merit WAS the alias, then? You know, other than to keep your main handle free for dating?

Thanks for the giggle, by the way.

The Ever So Decent, Non Failing,
Elise

Argument ad hominum is a particularly pernicious form of invalid argument.  It attempts to discredit an oponent's OPINION by villifying the OPONENT.  It's an appeal to emotion, not reason.

That's plain wrong no matter what you honestly think of the person who made the original statement.

Again nothing I've said has to do with the original question posed..some of your points (not all) I might even agree with.

Your reply in the post you referenced addressed only the second paragraph of my post.  That's fine, but I'm still curious about your feelings with regard to what I surmized therein.

As to the double-alias issue, the two of us are probably at loggger-heads.  That's all well & good, but I've never had ANY of the problems you mentioned with respect to private email.  And if a person were so inclined as to become curious (or enraged LOL) as to attempt to gain that information I doubt the secondary handle would prevent it...unless I posted from a completely different location & PC.  So unless you take those additional precautionary steps, I fail to see how a secondary alias offers the added protection of privacy you mention.  If it's PMs on TER that concern you, isn't it a simple matter to merely block them?  

As to people attacking you...What you think I did I have no real way of knowing.  But it was no attack...I disagreed, admittedly with a slight touch of sarcasm perhaps.  But a slight touch of sarcasm is a long way from my attack mode!

I think we simply need to "agree to disagree"...we've both stated our opinions & our reasons for them.  And on second thought, you need not respond to my question about your failure to address the first paragraph of my prior post...if you are of a different opinion so be it, nothing you might say would change mine.