1) This does not count as a new thread from me…this is on the B side to bring clarity. I’m done posting for a while as the bigger purpose has been served.
2) I believe there are certain truths to this game at a basic level that guide provider and that guide hobbyist. a. The provider is here to turn a profit. A provider can give you free-time and may want some mutual pleasure…. but they need envelopes in the long run be it for bills or be it for ego.b. The hobbyist is here to obtain pleasure. The hobbyist pleasure can be mental and/or physical.
The routes/experiences/journeys may be unique, but the ending results are the same.
3) The pleasure of the hobbyist can come from one or more streams of pleasure: a. Being made to feel attractive through the words of the provider even if it is a lie
b. Busting a nut with ease (trademark pending)
c. A provider that will experiment/teach to help you out in real life
d. Having sex on demand
e. Getting some strange
f. Doing it because it’s illegal/risky
g. Thrill of cheating
h. Companionship
i. A connoisseur of women that is on a journey to find the best overall provider, and that means seeing all sorts of women to see how they fit into the larger mold with a critical eye. Reviewing/Ranking women can be a pleasure like a movie critic that sits through movie types they do not like, but wants to see everything to be a better reviewer and could be highly critical. Simply a business review.
j. etc
4) I came up in the strip club 10yrs ago aka before I knew about TER and the hobby. I would go up to the stage and/or get a lap dance from the entire staff over a period of time to be a connoisseur and could effectively rank them all on looks, rank them all on performance, and rank them all on extras. My observations made for some cool talking points when I was a young pup with the business men that hit up the club on their lunch breaks. I enjoyed day shift girl 
Which brings me to the Molly (Melissa McCarthy) comment. I would consider her a cog in the review cannon of a connoisseur. I relate to guys with highly critical post because they are becoming a master of the domain on the journey to find the best, which means leave no stone unturned. And yes, I would see Molly again and her types because multiple streams of pleasure would be derived as in being a critic, as in busting a nut with ease, as in companionship (being a cool lady). Does a dude need to be 100% physically attracted when there are multiple pleasure streams at work? There is a penalty for being a connoisseur of a service?
5) The Hobby has a basic truth in that it is a group of women that will accept cash in exchange for services that men can receive on demand. The fact that women have preferences beyond the basic of being clean and not being a criminal turns it into a dating service by definition. If a lady does not like a critical review you can be in trouble all across the board for future women ….when a dude may just want to bust a nut with ease and enjoys ranking the ladies like the ESPN Power Rankings.
Most of the ladies want the guy to be attracted on their terms and derive certain pleasures, which is dating to me. Some dudes have a critical eye on looks, but they are here to experience epic performances. A hustler/business woman doesn't care the reason for the visit…just that someone is buying their services.
-- Modified on 3/8/2015 11:17:25 AM
but just clueless enough to draw me in. The act of wanting autonomy over my body makes this a dating service even if I require envelopes for said dates? That makes total sense.
I've eaten at a lot of top restaurants and can talk at length about the menu, food quality, depth of flavor, etc. I don't need to eat food I don't enjoy in order to have a better understanding of quality. In reality the more quality meals I eat, the more I can actually make distinctions between the "best" restaurants. It's refining your palate, not muddying it.
-- Modified on 3/8/2015 12:27:17 PM
I've eaten at a lot of top restaurants and can talk at length about the menu, food quality, depth of flavor, etc. I don't need to eat food I don't enjoy in order to have a better understanding of quality. In reality the more quality meals I eat, the more I can actually make distinctions between the "best" restaurants. It's refining your palate, not muddying it.
-- Modified on 3/8/2015 12:27:17 PM
I said its a dating service because of the "not a good match " based on body types issue. Some guys want to review/critique and that experience is being penalized. A lady still gets paid...but some guys enjoy critiquing things as part of the fun and I understand that mindset.
This is for fun here just like ESPN talking about athletes. The reviews in this space do not correlate to the real world aka non professional women. The lady in the hobby is not the lady in the real world...these are business personas
If you don't like Mexican food, why go around to all the Mexican places, spending your hard earned money, just so you can scurry over to Yelp and tell everyone that nope, you still don't like Mexican?
No one would care there either... Customers will just think "what a dolt" and the business will just think "then why bother?" And watch their review standing fall for no legitimate reason, kinda like here. Would it be a huge deal? Probably not. But it would say a lot more about you than te restaurant to anyone reading it.
If you were getting reviewed at your job, and the boss said "well Steve, here's the thing. I really, really fuckin hate your face. You've got a unibrow and honestly that haircut has got to go. Because of that, I'm telling corporate you're a shit worker and recommending they not give you that 2% raise this year. Preemptively recommending against it for next." Would you say to yourself "oh, all part of the fun!"? My guess is that you wouldn't be very impressed. It works kinda the same way here.
Methinks this isn't about "fair reviews" at all, but about the way you've outed yourself as an undesirable to the entire community. Ladies and gentlemen alike have no use for your particular brand of "fun"...
-- Modified on 3/8/2015 1:39:41 PM
No one would care there either... Customers will just think "what a dolt" and the business will just think "then why bother?" And watch their review standing fall for no legitimate reason, kinda like here. Would it be a huge deal? Probably not. But it would say a lot more about you than te restaurant to anyone reading it.
If you were getting reviewed at your job, and the boss said "well Steve, here's the thing. I really, really fuckin hate your face. You've got a unibrow and honestly that haircut has got to go. Because of that, I'm telling corporate you're a shit worker and recommending they not give you that 2% raise this year. Preemptively recommending against it for next." Would you say to yourself "oh, all part of the fun!"? My guess is that you wouldn't be very impressed. It works kinda the same way here.
Methinks this isn't about "fair reviews" at all, but about the way you've outed yourself as an undesirable to the entire community. Ladies and gentlemen alike have no use for your particular brand of "fun"...
They only know what the thread is, and singled that out
to be the meaning of what he is about
And bein I'm about my business, not minglin much
runnin my mouth, that shit kept lingerin
But no dummy, that's the shit I'm sprinklin
The forum width to keep the DC-board ringin
In real life, I'm much more distinguished
I'm like a bloke from London, England
Jeah, you jinglin baby
See I go right back and I bring 'em in baby
Business mind of a Ross Perot, but never lost my soul…
-- Modified on 3/8/2015 6:00:41 PM
By your posts here as well as your being a fan of ter's smartest poster here. Was it you who also said you dreamed of meeting a guy here who had hair on his head. Thus my question. I was with my second escort last nite she was yummy btw. But she commented "you have more hair on one of your balls than on all your head." This is a good thing right?
It's one thing to say you like a variety of different types of women, or want to try new experiences - another thing ALTOGETHER to say you are like a movie reviewer who goes to see types of movies HE DOESN'T LIKE just so he can be a "better reviewer." Do you really not get why ladies find this completely repugnant? You do realize you are dealing with real human beings, right?
He seems like he's lonely and helpless. Like another friend we have here.
Maybe I'll trademark "The Remix" thread :-P
Just trying to learn my way around here!
Are Stephen A and Skip on ESPN 2 going to far when they are critical of Lebron James? The service/business has nothing to do with the person.
...if they are discussing the threesome they had together and how Lebron couldn't get up his pea shooter, had breath that stunk worse than his arm pits after a triple overtime game, had nasty toe nails longer than his little fella, and had a smiling image of Justin Bieber tattooed over his heart. Yeah, then I'd say they went a little too far.
then you are even more ignorant than I had previously thought! I for one am going to stop reading the drivel you write here because I am tired of watching you bask in self-admiration; I'd prefer you just go away.
Review of a service is not personal.
Are Stephen A and Skip on ESPN 2 going to far when they are critical of Lebron James? The service/business has nothing to do with the person.
and let others do as they will?
I don't believe you are being misunderstood, I think quite a few who have posted simply disagree with you.
You have no need to clarify or seek approval.
We just think you're a douchebag. You are more than welcome to keep talking about how much of a boner you get from ranking human beings for the sole purpose of being a "connoisseur," "busting an easy nut on demand," and just being an all-around goofball, but no one here is going to give you cool points for that. We're all actually embarrassed for you.
One other thing:
"The fact that women have preferences beyond the basic of being clean and not being a criminal turns it into a dating service by definition."
"How is a paying customer not a good match as long as the rules are obeyed and you don't saying anything offensive in person?"
"And if you have unreasonable expectations of clients it's a dating service instead of a hustle"
So by your logic, since we're getting paid, we are obligated to forfeit any autonomy over who we share our bodies with, and should have to fuck any dude who has the cash, isn't foul, and has a clean criminal history? Seriously? Why would you even want to fuck a woman who finds you repugnant? There's a touch of rapeyness to that logic.
You are not entitled to determine what's reasonable or unreasonable in terms of our expectations and standards for our clients. If a lady will only accept cash for sex from redheads under 5'6" with 11 fingers who have written exactly 31 reviews, that's her prerogative. I wouldn't blame a single provider for turning you down just based on your weird misogynistic rants here. You have demonstrated pretty clearly that you get off on viewing women as objects (movies, specifically, since you keep talking about "on demand" and Siskel & Ebert) to be collected and ranked. And your insistence that we shouldn't be able to turn down a client based on our personal preferences is indicative of how little you value the concept of consent.
I'm telling y'all, there are two kinds of dudes who P4P: the ones who want to, and the ones who have to. Pretty easy to see into which category the OP falls. This is the kind of dude who had been rejected by women constantly over the course of his life, and now feels the need to objectify and degrade women through this venue. It sucks that these guys exist, but at least the OP offered himself as an example of the kind of client we all try to avoid.
YAZ girl!
It's pretty bad when you make one of us, let alone close to all of us say "oooooo, no. No. No money for me, thank you."
Which is a far cry from how I feel about the OP, who couldn't pay me double my rate just to sit in the same room as him for five minutes. Might as well get paid to do shots of ipecac...same degree of vomit-inducing, but only a fraction of the degradation.
.... the mention of ipecac reminds me of this FG scene (every time). 'K Bye
And I demand that you side*eye me the entire time!
I am all for multiple hawt women getting it on in one room. Count me in. And I am a watcher but I turn into an aggressive pussy eater, so I demand all ladies cum on my tongue! Ok thank you.
I guess the OP was right...this IS a dating service. For lesbians.
You know, I'm not COMPLETELY straight... where do I sign up?
...you can have all the side-eye you can handle. Awwww yeahhh.
And to display my being overcome with emotion I couldn't decide on (lol):
http://i.imgur.com/Gb6SwFk.gif
or ....
It's like she knew what was going on over here!! You guys crack me the fuck uuuuup!!! Hahahaha!
If we are ever in the same place... Lord. Just lord have mercy!
These memes tho!! X-D hahahaha
God I wish we had emojis 
One other thing:
"The fact that women have preferences beyond the basic of being clean and not being a criminal turns it into a dating service by definition."
"How is a paying customer not a good match as long as the rules are obeyed and you don't saying anything offensive in person?"
"And if you have unreasonable expectations of clients it's a dating service instead of a hustle"
So by your logic, since we're getting paid, we are obligated to forfeit any autonomy over who we share our bodies with, and should have to fuck any dude who has the cash, isn't foul, and has a clean criminal history? Seriously? Why would you even want to fuck a woman who finds you repugnant? There's a touch of rapeyness to that logic.
You are not entitled to determine what's reasonable or unreasonable in terms of our expectations and standards for our clients. If a lady will only accept cash for sex from redheads under 5'6" with 11 fingers who have written exactly 31 reviews, that's her prerogative. I wouldn't blame a single provider for turning you down just based on your weird misogynistic rants here. You have demonstrated pretty clearly that you get off on viewing women as objects (movies, specifically, since you keep talking about "on demand" and Siskel & Ebert) to be collected and ranked. And your insistence that we shouldn't be able to turn down a client based on our personal preferences is indicative of how little you value the concept of consent.
I'm telling y'all, there are two kinds of dudes who P4P: the ones who want to, and the ones who have to. Pretty easy to see into which category the OP falls. This is the kind of dude who had been rejected by women constantly over the course of his life, and now feels the need to objectify and degrade women through this venue. It sucks that these guys exist, but at least the OP offered himself as an example of the kind of client we all try to avoid.
That means dating service by defintion....I just want it to be realized and admitted. The hobby is a dating service that accepts cash instead of courtship. Well, preference/autonomy is used a lot to disguise racial issues in some cases. But I got you to prove my point!
It's not just about being clean and treating a lady well in person, which is objective imo. But how someone reviews and post is a factor, which has nothing to do with the actual experience
In this instance I think those terms are VERY apt descriptions what the OP is suggesting.
If a woman doesn't want to have sex with a man at all, yet is practically compelled to (if that became the adopted hobby standard as in the OP's dream), yeah, that would indeed be very RAPEY. It is honestly a bad enough situation when ladies have dire financial issues that may result in them lowering their standards and seeing guys they really don't want to IMO. But a GENERAL expectation that they will see ALL who meet some minimal standard, regardless of the their comfort level? Yeah, quite "rapey" indeed...
If a woman doesn't want to have sex with a man at all, yet is practically compelled to (if that became the adopted hobby standard as in the OP's dream), yeah, that would indeed be very RAPEY. It is honestly a bad enough situation when ladies have dire financial issues that may result in them lowering their standards and seeing guys they really don't want to IMO. But a GENERAL expectation that they will see ALL who meet some minimal standard, regardless of the their comfort level? Yeah, quite "rapey" indeed...
Reviews are the modern day saloon & dudes can't fully express be it TMI or harsh comments. The professional aspect has been lost when the lady's want to pick beyond certain minimums, which is dating. Now you see how my threads tie in!!! Willing to accept money, stripper slides in reviews, no black guys. All comes to it being a dating service, in which girls take Envelopes instead of fancy dates. The lady's admitted in plain English for all of us to see.
The business model keeps moving away from its roots year by year
They're all screenames, lookin' at themselves in the mirror backwards
Can't even face themself, don't fear no reviewers
They're all, weirdos, misogynist in practice
So, don't believe everything your eyeballs captures
It's mostly backwards, unless it happens to be as accurate as me
And everything seen in threads, you happen to see
Then, actually, believe half of what you see
None of what you hear, even if it's said by me.
Deeper than Hobby!!!
Life 85 > TER 55, Layup drills out here. Maybe I’ll drop 20-reviews in one day that will include some well-known area providers out of the blue....just to put it all in perspective once I start posting after hiatus.
Enjoy the boards
No one else could accommodate that swelled head of yours.
A book of Rasha's "quotes" woul be a best seller. You are too funny.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewall.asp?MessageID=11319&boardID=59&page=1#11319
Not snitchin. But we focus on my hypothetics for discussion and ignore the actual of someone....not one provider addressed the critical description and some offered to see him.
*yawn* I win.
Not snitchin. But we focus on my hypothetics for discussion and ignore the actual of someone....not one provider addressed the critical description and some offered to see him.
*yawn* I win.
Wow, that is actually a good point. *brain explodes* the responses are indeed night and day.
I'm an introvert by nature, and that being said I'm also highly sensitive to the opinions of others. So why on earth why would I not only for one, struggle against my shyness to meet new clients but also decided to see any client that offers me cash, regardless of who he is? I don't want to see someone who doesn't think I'm attractive, no matter how much cash he is offering. Money comes and goes, but an assault on your self esteem lasts for quite a while. If we couldn't choose who we want to see, we would all suffer from burn out sooner or later. Yes gentlemen, burn out is real. It typically happens when we choose to see clients we don't want to see and then we start to dread working. When we start to dread working, we work less, therefore making less money. So seeing the clients we want to see helps us from burning out, you understand? This is a highly personal business and most of us do take reviews to heart so we avoid the bad ones when we can not only for the sake of our business but also because it does not feel good when someone comments about every single flaw you have.
Go get em! Look how he described an actual provider as Mr Ed & Beetle Juice! A provider could get crushed in the future! But He's getting offers posted, lol. Am I missing something about that post?
Your points are valid! I have no problem with you how you go about business! But reviews don't represent the guy being clean, paying you in full, & treating you with respect during your time together. It's really not impossible to see a 5 in looks with a 8-10 performance if price is right with regularity....but you really wouldn't let him come back because he doesn't like you 100% on your terms? Or you wouldn't see a guy that did not like the appearance of a girl that looked similar to you?
I just thinks it dating when performance is not the main concern since that can actually be controlled. "She looks like *random insult*, but she fucks like a champ to make up for it! " seems problematic for you even though you are getting performance props! That's cool if you don't want to only be liked for your sex, but that crosses into real world territory instead of no conditions sex.
I just wanted admission that a guy has to watch how he reviews, which you all did. That proves that the review system is broken on several levels and guys shouldnt make the reviews identifiable unless it compliments looks and it compliments performance. "I saw her 5times in 2months...fugly, but fucked ohhh so well and Ill come back some more" may well cause that lady and ladies that look similar to cut a dude off
You're saying the whole point of this was to confirm that if you sound like an asshole we're not going to see you? YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS wholeheartedly, I do not knowingly schedule appointments with assholes. I have denied second appointments to assholes. We regularly blacklist assholes.
You have stumbled upon a holy secret my friend. We ladies do not like assholes*! We like basic human courtesy. So if you see someone who you do not like appearancewise, you would simply say they aren't your usual preference/not your cup of tea/not what you expected...not that they are fugly. Because you know what, we aren't in middle school.
So you've totally won. Your argument reigns supreme. We are biased against assholes.
*of the malcontented human form, can't speak for the actual bodypart that I'm slandering
P.S. how do the ladies replying to that other guys post fit into your theory exactly?
the sole premise espoused at the beginning of this long conversation is this: the activities embraced in this forum subject one and all to the possibility of rejection for any reason (or no reason at all) and, therefore, in that very limited respect, resemble conventional dating. The response to that premise, I think, is straightforward--so what?
As one responder already stated PERFECTLY, to expect anything less is merely indicative of "how little you value the concept of consent."
If the author's purpose was to demonstrate this slight overlap with the dating experience, it seems an awful waste of energy for an observation utterly devoid of consequence. If the objective was an attempt to strip away the mutuality part of the consent equation, it is as futile as it is deplorable