dreamblade said:
What I choose to pay is my own business, and you missed the point of my post . . . [a] misogynist attitude makes the rest of clients look bad . . . for some poster on "an anonymous board," you seem to jump to a buttload of conclusions about me
Well dude, I'm sure neither of us gives much of a fig about each other's viewpoint, and other lobby-goers still less, so it's probably pointless to wonder who missed whose point. But for the record, I agree with your first point, that decent dudes should censor misogynist attitudes. So we're in the same boat on that one. But you then seemed to think I was making assumptions about you, which I was not. I might be stoopid Brad, but I'm pretty sure there is a difference between an assumption and an hypothesis. I was venturing an hypothesis, that alot of white knights talk the talk without really walking the walk. I was then suggesting that wherever that was in fact the case, women and men combined should be wary of watering down what it really is to walk the walk. That is, real chivarly takes place not just on an internet board, and yeah, that might mean if we're not walking the walk off the board we ought to be 'man enough' to criticize ourselves. That is what I meant when I asked for white knight and chivarly to be kept separate. To be frank, if you walk the walk off the board too, then you're the kind of guy I would think highly of. If not, it's better to be a bit self-critical than to over-compensate on an anonymous board!
But no-one ought to care about our views on that matter. Now that my 69th post is out of the way , and ironically devoted to reviewing a classy and beautiful woman, I can offer another comment on the high-end provider question. I still think talk of raw ability to pay probably obscures the point of high-end providers, and I also think talking about what they offer might be less important than talking about what clients want. I guess it's the old economics question, of whether particular sectors of the market are supply-side driven or demand-side driven? I tend to think, though am open to good counter-arguments forcing me to think about it differently, that there is a demand for certain levels of escapism. The perfect woman, where perfect means not actually real. The great sex, the fantastic conversation, the sharing of secrets, without the rest of the woman, the rest of the human, who has preferences and interests and so on that might get sublimated because that's what the paying is about. That's what I mean about paying for perfection, not reality. And of course, anyone who has been in a really good relationship would say reality beats perfection any day.
So what I'm wondering is whether the high-end providers are really demand-driven, where the demand is for a chimera, a women where you don't have to work hard to either appreciate the so-called 'flaws' or to just get over ourselves and be OK with a great woman who doesn't always do what we would like. Maybe that's why I wouldn't go for a high-end provider, because I already struggle to get over myself and take women for themselves (see, some self-criticism doesn't kill us), and so seeing a high-end provider might be like confirming my worst habits?
