I’ve always loved the fawners – those hobbyists who pander to providers at any cost. On the internet, these putative Casanovas like to portray themselves as self assured “gentlemen” when, in reality, they’re passive purchasers of sex scouring the internet for a companion who will feed their fantasy for a few hundred bucks an hour.
I stumbled upon one of these naive souls the other night when I was reading Adrianna Carter’s crusade against review boards like The Erotic Review. This dislike for reviews has gained momentum with many of the “high end” providers who are generally older and using airbrushed photos and polished websites to portray themselves as more desirable than they really are. So, I get their desire not to be reviewed. If too many people tell the truth, the fantasy is ruined and business falls off.
Of course, Carter and her cohort make some good points. Prolific reviewers and career hobbyists do sometimes use their on line status to extort free services and other nefarious things from naive providers. It happened all the time on the Midwesttimez board and on TER, I understand it’s even worse.
But, review boards serve a purpose. Before reviews, it was easy for a provider and/or her manager to misrepresent pricing, appearance, and even service and get away with it. To suggest that this is OK by calling for an end to boards like TER ignores the fact that the escort business has dishonest people on either side of the transaction.
That’s where this refined gentleman enters the story. In a foolish attempt to look like a friend to all providers, Captain Sav-a-Ho wrote an entire blog post decrying review boards. Rather than discussing the pros and cons, “Gentleman Client” (his words not mine) provides eight reasons why review boards have a negative effect on the “industry.” His pandering post earned him some positive attention from some providers. But, his reasons are nothing more than sophistry intended to promote his own self interest.
The internet has leveled the playing field in many different industries by decentralizing and democratizing information that was previously hoarded to the advantage of a few. And, that’s why review boards will always be a good thing. Sure, some of the information will be false and a few bad actors will try to manipulate the process. But, in the marketplace of information, the bad people will ultimately be exposed. And, all of us benefit from the free flow of information. Advocating an end to this is naive. It’s asking for a return to the days of the newspaper classifieds.
Here are Gentleman Client’s eight reasons and my (in italics) comments:
- GC: Virtual monopolies fly in the face of a free market. The provider argument that he’s restating here is that TER is their only source of advertising and therefore they’re at the mercy of those who run TER. But, he’s wrong. The internet is a huge place and there are plenty of places to advertise. I know many women who make a good living without TER.
- GC: Collusive hobbyists cajole, harass and threaten providers. While this is true, it’s easily dealt with when exposed to the light of day like people have been doing on the local boards for years. And, it’s no reason to call for a cessation of the free flow of information.
- GC: Authenticity, legitimacy, and safety are seldom what they claim. What does this even mean? I’ll agree wholeheartedly that the women who hide behind the carefully crafted photos and flowery marketing prose are “seldom what they seem.” And, that’s all the more reason to have the free and open flow of information that’s provided by the boards.
- Hackers have the potential to publicize a central database of private data. Nobody with a modicum of intelligence would use their real information to register for one of these boards.
- Law Enforcement (LE) use boards to arrest clients and providers – with increasing impunity. Specious. Use of TOR or a VPN, combined with a hush mail account and a modicum of caution counteracts this. Moreover, LE enforcement against the boards is arguably unconstitutional.
- Board administrators are understandably motivated by money – which too often opposes safety. See 5 above. No one should rely on strangers to protect them. I’m stealthed. I don’t do anything illegal. I couldn’t care less who operates a site that I post on.
- Frequent reviewers (“Slobbyists”) earn undue reputation from a board, rather than a true safety network. This is more sophistry. Who cares? We take the information we want using the critical thinking skills we should have honed in school. I like how he adopted his favorite provider’s term for “hobbyists.” What a fawning, Beta.
- It may be old fashioned, but to “kiss and tell” for all to read speaks volumes for the gent’s lack of discretion. Irrelevant. Reviews themselves tell you no more than the reviewer didn’t get arrested or ripped off. Everything else is fiction or part of a personal service that could never be the same for any two individuals.
The guy who wrote this concluded it with some trite advice for all providers on how they should market themselves. This is the kind of drivel we used to see on Scorpsguide when the Captain-Sava-Hos would all come out and tell the providers how to conduct business.
The TLDR version of this is that Adrianna and her over-the-hill cohort of providers who may or my not be as attractive as they once were want to limit the flow of information. And, this blogger is simply a fawning minion hoping to curry favor.
The internet has disrupted every industry by distributing information to anyone with a computer and an internet connection. It’s had a positive effect on the sex industry and saying otherwise is self serving and disingenuous.