When reading posts by both hobbyists and providers, I'm always surprised at the euphemisms that are used when describing activities, or especially, body parts.
No one is shy in the hobbyist/provider relationship and the descriptions of what goes on in a meeting certainly doesn't sound like either party is embarassed by what they're doing.
But I've read posts in which the provider's asshole is called the "backdoor"; a guy describes going "down there" when he's licking the providers' pussy. Even assfucking is referred to as "a trip to the Greek Isles".

Don't confuse "shy" with "respectful" or "discreet" or "decent"....Just because one doesn't use the brutish prose of JimMack doesn't NECESSARILY mean they are shy or embarrassed with the hobby or human body.  Come on, we get people from all walks of life here (and not all of them dropped out in 9th grade)

Dear JimMack,

Your query is interesting for a number of reasons, particularly because it brings some form of cognitive dissonance to light. Yes, why not call it "jizz" and "spoo" instead of "sperm" and why not call it "asshole" instead of "backdoor" or simply "anus" or "rectum?" Why is it that there are zillions of slang words and euphemisms for genitals, but not for other body parts? I mean, what are some slang words for lungs? Or kidneys? Metatarsal bones? Hmmm....

Could it possibly be because most of us have grown up in a culture where:

a) religion has had some influence - I give you the Latin "pudendum" for female genitalia which actually refers to "shame" and thus "sexual modesty"

b) consideration of developmental milestones in attaining cognitive faculties - as an example, in most literate cultures, caregivers tend to "cutesify"  and give diminutive forms to body parts and functions when speaking to their toddlers, e.g. it's a "peepee" instead of a penis, or "mommie's boobies" instead of "breasts" or "poopoo in the undies," as opposed to "defecation in your underpants"

c) the universal human propensity to seek privacy when copulating or otherwise engaging sexually

d) the desire to convey, through diction and choice of expression, a more intimate experience than something clinical and impersonal?

When you mash all of these factors together, what do you get? Most likely the average Westernized society with all its blessings and foibles. And guess what - in many ways TER is a microcosm of our Western socialization, which dicates that you do not necessarily create a linguistic atmosphere of stark clinical or even pejorative expression when in the company of individuals who are trying to "get it on" [ouch, my bad, another euphemism!] with one another.

I believe that we as cultured individuals, in the written form of expression used in this forum - the review site - are always apt to create metaphors that humanize and EMOTIONALIZE the experience. Nota bene that I haven't touched on the legalistic aspects of calling it "assfucking" versus "Greek isles gallivanting," but somehow I don't think it matters much. LE officials may not be Rhodes scholars, but they are not so dense that the meaning behind these flowery expressions have completely escaped them. Hence, I believe that it's less about LE and more about just being nice, "acculturated" folks if you will.

But hey, I get your point....that's why I recommend anyone with a desire for literality to read William S. Burroughs' "Naked Lunch." The jizz and shit will fly in your face like golden showers, e.g. megapiss from hell.

Gonna go crack up like a nutjob and lay a big dump in the can now,
the Love Goddess


-- Modified on 3/2/2009 9:57:37 PM

We're not shy, we've just evolved beyond the vernacular of adolescent school boys who have to communicate using vulgarity to mask their own insecurity about sex.

the explicit language of which you speak.  Personally, I don't use it in my reviews, but if you read them, you know what's going on.  It's just a choice some of us make, being shy has nothing to do with it.

Use whatever language you are comfortable with.

Swim

For example, especially in a place like Los Angeles, to say:  "Can I fuck you in the ass."  could be interpreted by the provider as meaning that the client wants to leave without paying her.

On the other hand, "Let's visit Greece." is pretty clear to one and all.

I know it's ironic, but there you are.

Okay, okay, I get it. I'll have to go back to find some of the reviews I'm referring to and copy and paste exact excerpts. My point though, and it doesn't have to be taken as a criticism, it's kind of funny, but take it as you will, is for example in a review the guy is talking about his "cock",his "cum", her "pussy", then in the same review refers to her "backdoor." It just struck me as funny that he'd suddenly revert to such a tame reference.
LG, in reference to your points b, c,and d, a review as I described above includes a mix of the explicit as well as the cutesified,defies the sought after privacy that you mention, and at least partially contradicts the desire to convey an intimate experience.
As for the refrence to Greece and/or the Greek Isles...why are those descriptions used? Certainly not to baffle LE. The reviewer often then goes on to further describe that particular experience in less than Homeresque terms.
So, in summary...I just find it somewhat funny to read a review in which the description of experience alternates between the explicit and the "cute" terminology, and sometimes inludes the "code words" that only we know.
No offense intended to anyone; just a bemused observation. Probably better suited for the General Discussion section.

reviews have been turned down for "lack of explicit details." Reviewers then go back and put some more "saucy" words for emphasis (and maybe veracity?) Frequently - and for good reason, considering their purpose - the reviews are written as titillating excitement. This does have something to do with human sexuality evolving in a private context. The "explicit" words are meant to be experienced "privately," even though they are written for everyone to see. The intimacy is there; you are not supposed to read these reviews out loud, you are meant to sit in a quiet place and get all sexed up when reading them - like erotic literature if you will.

The Greek Isles: Homer or not, it is a cultural reference to Greeks engaging in pederasty, which indeed involves "assfucking." I guess we could call it a trip to Sodom, but given Sodom's tragic end and its limited sexuo-historic appearance on the Western civ timeline, those Greek senators were buggering those little boys for a lot longer and with much more gusto.

Gosh, maybe this is straying into the Politics and Religion board - perish the thought,
the Love Goddess

I think if u had made it clear that u were referring to the alternating language within the reviews, you would not have received the responses u did.  After your clarification, your point is well taken (at least IMHO)

Nearly 100 years ago, D. H lawrence wrote sexually explicit novels that were later recognized as some of the finest of the 20th century.  Among other things, he hoped to take connotations of filth and shame out of basic words such as "fuck" and "cunt," and he largely succeeded in starting a movement that has resulted in people using these words in everday language.  As with most trends, there are good and bad results.  There are times when these words are appropriate, as when I asked an attractive friend at a party years ago if I could give her a ride home and she said, "whoever takes me home has to give me a good fucking," and sometimes when they are not, as when a child says "fuck you."  So, it's all situational, and as others observed, taste and culture are involved, as well as avoiding over-flowery Victorian euphemisms, such as "breaking wind," even though that phrase also has its appropriate place.