A comment made about "Risk"

[Whispers]

Originally Posted by Netx9

Very generally, You pretty much covered it... Given my age, education, career, family, etc,... Of course I consider it.



I read your use of demographics to compare who has 'more' to lose or risk as a quantitative one whereas others, and myself, are adding the qualitative dimension to it. Do I have more to lose given my age, education, career, etc, (new car, house, job) than a single mom, little education (used car, apartment)? Quantitatively, sure.... Maybe.

Try this... Do I have less to lose than another gentleman who makes more money than I do? I may risk my ability to park my ford in a 3 car garage and ability to enjoy a steak at Texas Roadhouse while he risks parking his lexus in a 6 car garage in one of his 3 homes and miss out on Smith and Wolensky. Sure, quantitatively. But we both risk prestige, family, a place to live, money, etc... Qualitatively similar risk I propose. Given my age, children (custody) aren't an issue but a single mother living in a small apartment who risks losing her kid(s), apartment, etc, qualitatively I think has more to lose than I do. We both, however, apply similar importance to our own risks.

Of course, these are broad generalizations and I haven't even addressed the legal risks but suffice it to say, if I were outed, I'd probably not be able to visit san antonio as much as I do, if at all and that, too, would suck.

It's unfortunate, but in many cases, the single moms here with custody do not always have that custody because it is challenged. A majority of the time here is a deadbeat dad in the picture that could care less and so long as he is not being bothered for more than what he considers a mangeable amount he is not racing to rescue the kids from a hooker mom. If mom is not seeing clients in the home with the kids there or have other issues Family Protective Services will make any decision based on the safety of the kids. The system is over worked and placements are in short supply. I've seen many kids returned to mothers that hooked.

Now if we are talking about the affluent young lady that turned to prostitution because she wants new toys and was cut off from daddy's money.... well in that case the father and families may want reason to get involved but that type is not as well represented in the demographics.

Society is much more forgiving of the young lady that errs than the guy that owns the local McDonald Franchise and leads his kid's Sunday School classes.

So when a hooker with a couple of preteen sons is discovered hooking and her pictures make news she is not going to be welcome at the PTA meeting or his boyscout gatherings and the kid is going to deal with some humiliation but a relocation and new school can yield a fresh start.

A guy suddenly living alone with the expense of supporting himself as well as the family he has for years to come because he was outed by the jealous ex wannabe boyfriend of some hooker that shared too much during pillow talk is possibly financially ruined and carrys a mark that could damage him for years to come professionally. It could set him back or even require a total reeducation and change of career paths.

One of the pimps here in Austin was known to gather information on clients as well as use that information to threaten those very same people. people carry hobby phones but drive their personal cars to an appointment and have their life opened up when pimpdaddy or boyfriend snaps a quick picture of the license plate for future reference...

There is no possible way we can ever totally alleviate the risk. We can however take every opportunity to nip in the bud any transgression where information about us is misused by those we interact with.

[Netx9]

I ignored the allusions to the other topic/individual you've been focused on in favor of discussing the merits of the risk/loss argument instead but I'll take this opportunity to point out that you're direct attacks on said individual are to be at least respected for that directness... These indirect references and allusions to it have the air of obsessiveness and vindictiveness.

Bottom line... And you should know this after 15 years... Providers talk to other providers and hobbyists. Hobbyists talk to other hobbyists and providers. You have quite often mentioned (albeit unnamed sources for the most part), that providers have shared information with you about other hobbyists. One 'named' one was Francisca re: the Laz thing. You openly comment on that information you've received privately about other hobbyists or providers... Usually under the guise of righting some perceived wrong, to justify your use of that information. You may be adept at wordsmithing to avoid either too much specificity or guideline violations but you still use information shared with you by others about individuals who have not personally given you that information. How does that make providers and other hobbyists feel knowing that there are providers who will share information about them with you if they feel they've been wronged or has just have an axe to grind?

I point this out just to illustrate that your absolute prohibition on the misuse of personal information does not mean you nip any transgression in the bud... Especially when it involves information you have or receive.

[sms918]

This comment made me chuckle, "Society is much more forgiving of the young lady that errs than the guy that owns the local McDonald Franchise and leads his kid's Sunday School classes."

wives, girlfriends, families, friends, co-workers, and church people maybe but a lot less than you make out.

Society in general is not more forgiving of the young lady than the guy. In election years LEO cares, otherwise look at terms used.

guy- john, johns, hobbyist, cheater, adulterer

girl- whore, hoe, slut, prostitute, hooker, tail, provider

Any more proof. Look at how women are referred to on this board in both open forums and private ones. or ads at the top of the screen.

RISK can be defined so many ways

[flinde]

you sunk my battleship

[Ms Francisca]

Originally Posted by Netx9

Bottom line... And you should know this after 15 years... Providers talk to other providers and hobbyists. Hobbyists talk to other hobbyists and providers. You have quite often mentioned (albeit unnamed sources for the most part), that providers have shared information with you about other hobbyists. One 'named' one was Francisca re: the Laz thing. You openly comment on that information you've received privately about other hobbyists or providers... Usually under the guise of righting some perceived wrong, to justify your use of that information.

Netx, you are incorrect.

I did not give Whisp any information in private. I sent Whisp a pm asking him, and I quote "Will you be a little extra mean to Laz"

Never gave Whisp details of my issue with Laz until after Laz brought the issue about the house in coeds.

Laz contacted Whisp in private with his side of the story regarding the house, not me.

Whisp got my information from what I posted in coeds, not in private.

If you go back and read the thread.... I never posted any details concerning the house until AFTER Laz brought it up in the thread.

Whisp commented on information I gave in public.

That being said... I will take the opportunity to comment on "Risk"

My attorney in the house issue is a hobbyist on this board.

A well known and respected provider (a favorite of Laz and many others that is perceived as sweet and innocent) on this board outed my attorney to Laz.
Another example of how devious most providers are, and how easy it is for a pretty lady to fool most men.

My attorney received an email from Laz telling him (in a threatening manner) "I know who you are on eccie"

After my 15 years in this hobby, I would trust a hobbyist with my life before I would trust a provider.
I really wish it was different, but from my personal experience, and from what I have seen in the past 15 years, providers will cause a lot more harm than a hobbyist ever will.

Hope everyone is having a great weekend!

[UTRDaisy]

to my suprise, i agree with whispers.

[SA Angel]

The problem I have with the original post is that it is obvious that Whispers assumes all providers come from the working class. That is certainly NOT the case. Some ladies have as much as to lose socially, personally, and professionally as men if they are outed.

Why do you think I waited until I moved several states away to jump into the hobby? I certainly could not fulfill my fantasy until I was assured that my future client would not be a close friend of the family's. Not to mention the threat of being disinherited, socially shunned, and have my future career closed off from me forever.

Yes, those threats seem petty compared to other ladies losing their home and children from being outed. I just felt that the OP was ignoring a whole sections of companions.

As for the rest of it...no comment. Please, do carry on.