Much Ado About What?

[Guest Skeptic]

Having little need (and less desire) to visit Ohio (sorry for slamming a whole state, but the reason should be obvious to anyone who enjoys sex), I've been ignoring the 'Michale [sic] in Columbus' thread for what seems to be weeks now.

 

Finding it again at the top of the charts this morning, I finally decided to read the 40-odd posts it contains. Well, after a perfectly reasonable beginning, it soon turns into a three-way gabfest involving Rookie, Shooter & Steve (with an occasional contribution from Paul)--most of which I'd consider a lot more appropriately handled in private emails among the gentlemen involved.

 

Please note, I'm not challenging or dismissing anything they have to say; nor am I attacking these guys personally. It just seems to me that what their posts contain goes way beyond the general 'need to know' focus these forums, I believe, were intended for.

 

Ironically, the guy who started this lengthy thread has never been heard from again.

[Guest RO]

LAST EDITED ON May-13-00 AT 01:27PM (EST)[p]Welcome back, Skeptic. I've missed you. I'd speculated that your recent absence was possibly due to your having been romantically swept off your feet by a handsome & hung escort lovingly interested in you for "who you are" rather than just your bulging wallet. I guess such is not the case since you're still in a less than optimistic mood. In fact, sounds like the motherfucker may have made your mood worse by stealing you're wallet and disappearing with your houseboy! Hopefully not . . . (just kidding)

 

If you're tired of the Ohio thread, don't read the new postings. Simple enough, right? Or are you just stirring up trouble again?

 

On a totally unrelated topic, you've surely heard, Bumfuck is on fire. No flaming queen jokes, please. If you're interested, it's awful. They're better today, but please pray. Southern fire is getting less media than Los Alamos, though its forests were some of the most beautiful in the country. Enormously noticeable support from around the world - Thank you! (Sorry for hijacking your thread, Skep.)

[Guest Skeptic]

RO, I think you've literally 'missed' me. Seems to me I've posted something or other nearly every day this week, either here or in the other conference. (And today is virtually a 'Skeptic Festival'--to the chagrin of some, no doubt.)

 

There were a few phrases in your otherwise friendly post that troubled me, however. One apparently assumes that my oft-ascerbic tone is somehow based on a frustrated quest for romance. Surely you must know that 'romance' is the LAST thing I'm looking for when I pay for sex! (And, if I may say so, it's precisely that absurd, doomed quest that my most vocal opponents seem to be clinging to.) I seek out (and sometimes find) straight guys for what I like to think is a mutually agreeable animal encounter. And I wish to be appreciated neither for 'myself' (whatever that may be) nor my 'bulging wallet' (wherever I must have mislaid it): what I DO wish to be appreciated for is being a cocksucker of genius. (Are we all clear on that now?)

 

Another thing: I don't equate (as you seem to) skepticism with a lack of optimism. As the cover of 'Brill's Content' puts it, "SKEPTICISM IS A VIRTUE." While modestly shunning any claim to virtue, I wonder now if I shouldn't be writing a regular column on escort review websites for that fine & highly stimulating monthly.

 

Finally, please re-read my 'Much Ado' opener and see that I wasn't 'tired of the Ohio thread.' I HAD been skipping it, unread, for quite a while. It was only in reading the whole thing at one sitting today (precisely to find out why it was still around!) that I had the reaction expressed at the top of this thread: take it to the streets (or your email carriers), boys!

 

For all that, RO, it's nice to feel missed, & I thank you for saying what you did.

[steve]

GUILTY AS CHARGED! :-)

 

As one who has kept the Michael thread going, I admit the last few weeks there has been nothing added that is noteworthy. I kept it going on my end because of Shooter's continued insistence of throwing in reports about Jeff, hijacking, if you will. And, Rookie has been chiming in with his $.02 on both sides of the fence.

 

Skeptic, since you appreciate str8 trade, Michael, is one to consider. He doesn't reciprocate and is not affectionate, just a get-down-to-business kind of guy, who gets hard and stays hard and if you want a good pounding, he'll do that too.

 

He's one of the best tops I've hired along with Justin (Nyhotescort) and Chris #3 (also in NYC). I hate to admit it but, Mike4hire (NYC) was probably THE best. Although, his cock certainly isn't as big as his ego and attitude, which is the main reason why I haven't hired him since '97 and have no plans to in the future.

[Guest RO]

Yes, Skep, I knew the 'romance' comment would rock your world. That's why I wrote it. It's my contribution to mankind - whenever I'm taking grief from you I know a heavy burden has been lifted from another innocent soul. Besides, I think you are HOT.

 

Though it's been a LONG week, I think the reason I believed you to be missing was because I don't remember seeing posts from you in the controversial thread about high escort prices in which escort Sean actively participated. If ever there begged a response from you ... I have not re-read that thread, so I could be wrong about you being absent. For the record, I basically agreed with what Sean wrote. Moreover, he certainly has the right to his opinion(s). What I found unacceptable was HOW he conveyed his message. Also, while he only threatened a "sharp tongue", I find Skeptic's patented method of actually delivering a sharp tongue (heavily layered in bullshit) much more entertaining and effective. Tongue me, Daddy!

[Guest RO]

By the way, what the hell is an "animal encounter"? What is it you're doing to those helpless straight boys, Skep? Is it legal? Is it fun? Horizontal or vertical? I didn't know you were a SLUT in addition to your many other talents. Interesting . . .

[Guest Skeptic]

Whew! I've just read that "escorts' prices" thread for the first time, RO, and I see what you mean; but I think I'll re-read it slowly & more analytically before making any comments. Yes, the 'controversial' Sean was really asking for it, wasn't he? But it's thankless work parrying with his sort: they never stay on the topic, and tend to fall apart before too long (as Sean apparently did in the two deleted postings), and then you end up feeling sorry for them! (I hate it when that happens. . .)

 

I'm surprised that you think my sharp-tongued remarks are layered in bullshit. I think I've been guilty of verbosity from time to time (if that's what you meant), but I'm not aware of ever having said anything bogus. As you know, it's people who DO who raise my hackles.

 

As for my 'animal encounters,' now that you mention it, I see that it was a decidedly ill-chosen phrase. After all, not even submissive chimps go down on the alpha male. (Or do they?

Come on, LongTimeLurker, we know you're really Dr. Jane Goodall. Set us straight on that one!)

 

BTW, how was Sean's management of the chat room last night? Controversial?

[Guest RO]

Am I overly sympathetic towards your victims? I've always been guilty of supporting the underdog, even when it's you, so your accusation is likely truthful. And you've never misinterpreted a post, have you, Sweetie?

 

Aren't verbosity and bullshit arguably the same thing? Granted, your word is probably more socially acceptable. You're such a STUD, Skep. Can't we get together? I bet you're often in my area, right? Come on by. We've probably got as much in common as Emily Post and Bette Midler, but opposites sometimes attract . . .

[Guest longtimelurker]

How terrifying to be so accurately pegged.

 

Actually, though, I'm more of a cross between Jane Goodall and Truman Capote.

 

Since you ask (however facetiously), I cannot resist: homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom is a hot academic topic right now; as Cole Porter had it, even educated fleas do it, and it's finally attracting serious attention. (Bobobo apes especially: these really sexy primates don't seem to have a social activity that DOESN'T involve sex of WHATEVER variety.) We should be glad as it counters the "crime against nature" argument--not that people who raise it will pay any heed to reasoned scientific discourse...

 

I also cannot resist adding that my own very first scientific investigations into the topic were made at the infamous ROUNDS on East 53rd Street nearly ten years ago, and that it was there that I happened to make the (one time) acquaintance of the "controvertial" Sean.

 

He took me to his VERY conveniently located residence (not two city blocks away from the bar), exposed himself in the elevator (I was very impressed), and after making a great show of a promisingly aggressive sexuality, either passed out, or, as I rather suspected, having accurately taken my measure, simply pretended to do so in order to cut the encounter short.

 

Perhaps I shouldn't have attempted to explain about the Bonobo apes.

[Guest Skeptic]

Having started this very minor thread, let me end it, too. First, by saying how delighted I am to have lured the estimable Lurker out of the mists once more for the pleasure & edification of everyone here. His Sean anecdote is intriguing, and makes me all the more eager to research this controversial fellow. Seems to me he had a quite a set-to with another poster back in December, and made himself look worse & worse with every bitchy retort, sounding more like a piss-elegant queen with a drinking problem than an escort anyone would want to hire. Yes, yes, I know he has an impressive portfolio and more lovely 'homes' than Marjorie Merriweather Post, but if, as the Lurker suspected, he's not up on the latest findings in sociobiology, he's clearly not the stud for me.

 

Apropos of that, thanks for the tips, Steve! Will check them out. And I'm certainly not spurning your charming overtures either, RO. It's just that I can't picture you in that lacy collar & cuffs outfit. . .

[Guest Skeptic]

Having started this very minor thread, let me end it, too. First, by saying how delighted I am to have lured the estimable Lurker out of the mists once more for the pleasure & edification of everyone here. His Sean anecdote is intriguing, and makes me all the more eager to research this controversial fellow. Seems to me he had a quite a set-to with another poster back in December, and made himself look worse & worse with every bitchy retort, sounding more like a piss-elegant queen with a drinking problem than an escort anyone would want to hire. Yes, yes, I know he has an impressive portfolio and more lovely 'homes' than Marjorie Merriweather Post, but if, as the Lurker suspected, he's not up on the latest findings in sociobiology, he's clearly not the stud for me.

 

Apropos of that, thanks for the tips, Steve! Will check them out. And I'm certainly not spurning your charming overtures either, RO. It's just that I can't picture you in that lacy collar & cuffs outfit. . .

[Guest Skeptic]

Having started this very minor thread, let me end it, too. First, by saying how delighted I am to have lured the estimable Lurker out of the mists once more for the pleasure & edification of everyone here. His Sean anecdote is intriguing, and makes me all the more eager to research this controversial fellow. Seems to me he had a quite a set-to with another poster back in December, and made himself look worse & worse with every bitchy retort, sounding more like a piss-elegant queen with a drinking problem than an escort anyone would want to hire. Yes, yes, I know he has an impressive portfolio and more lovely 'homes' than Marjorie Merriweather Post, but if, as the Lurker suspected, he's not up on the latest findings in sociobiology, he's clearly not the stud for me.

 

Apropos of that, thanks for the tips, Steve! Will check them out. And I'm certainly not spurning your charming overtures either, RO. It's just that I can't picture you in that lacy collar & cuffs outfit. . .

[Guest RO]

Damn you, Skep, I intended to be the one wearing the mermaid outfit. That way I could smack you up side the head with my tail. Also, maybe we could get kinky with the costume... Who's your daddy, Skep?

[Guest Sean]

Drinking problem? I don't have a problem drinking I actually enjoy a few after a hard days work. Lurker I actually remember that night vividly since you are the only one I ever exposed myself to in that elevator. Afterwards they put security camera's in Skeptic babe, you should hire me after I'm done with my nationwide tour. I'll fuck your brains out and maybe just maybe afterwards your tongue will.......

[steve]

Hey skeptic, I would be remiss if I didn't mention Collin in NYC. Collin is a very aggressive top with an A+ body and huge cock. He's a great guy who focuses on the client. I've been in 2 3-ways with Collin and another escort and Collin has always been very attentive to me.

 

And getting back to Mike4hire, I do believe he has now placed himself in the $300+/hour category, and IMO, he's a complete waste of money. I've never been with him for more than 45 mins and each time it was all about him and NOT about me and each event happened like clockwork. It's a shame, because he has an incredible physique and the shaved head is very sexy, but it is obvious that if he didn't shave, his baldness on top would be most unflattering, and he is all attitude and image-conscious.

 

I forgot to mention that he's not that good-looking either. I was highly disappointed in the face when he opened the door. Still, the guy can fuck and has an ability to penetrate with very little pain and without losing his erection - and doesn't have to wear a cockring either.

 

BTW, Skeptic, Michael does travel. :-)