rob_otteast

Pauline north of Wakefield provides what you want. 

There used to be a lady called Raven in Perth. I never met her, didn't work out at the time, but we exchanged emails, seemed very open-minded. Advertised now and then on LL.

I know I'd prefer to be with someone who knows who the Beatles were and what the Apollo program was. 😀

These two MAs advertize on LL and seem to work in same area of the city. I can't locate any reviews. Any info?

All those guys who regularly manscape must be looking pretty furry by now. 🙂 

When this is all over, the spas will have to be careful about clogged drains.

I'm one of those people who has to stay away from cosmetic sections of Shoppers or The Bay. It's not so much allergies in my case, I simply don't like the smell of most perfumes, which makes me an outlier I think. For the purposes of this industry, since a lot of male customers are married the safest default choice would probably be not to wear any. But there is probably so much variation in people's attitudes that there cannot be a one-size fits all solution. Just another thing to discuss before meeting, I guess.

17 hours ago, OldandNerdy said:

Anyone ever just start feeling down in general and kinda want a little companionship, but at the same time don't quite feel like you're worthy of it so although you have a few people you have seen regularly and will probably help get you out of that funk, you just don't make that call?

 

Uh asking for a friend...

Not uncommon, and I'm guessing this happens more often among men than women. From the podcasts I listen to, older males do not, in general, make efforts to establish social connections. This is a mistake and results in many bad effects, physical and mental. I think we live in an alienating culture, it's easy to feel discarded.

This is compounded by the simple fact that unless rich, older guys get no attention from women. If one is not socially inept, you can change this, but that's a big if. Most guys I know are socially inept, as am I. And it's easy to wake up one day and realize that you've been  isolated for 10 years, just creeps up on you.

Which is one reason I cannot understand why sex work is illegal in our culture. Aside from the fact that I don't think it's any of the government's business who we have sex with or why, it would be in our best interests to find more ways for people to connect. Meeting with a sex worker is not a substitute for a happy sex life, but the choice is often not between a good and not-so-good sex life, sometimes the choice is being paying for it and no human connection at all. We pay money to be massaged when we ache, we pay therapists to essentially be our friends, why do we draw the line at intimate touch? It's a mystery to me.

Tell your friend to go spend an hour or more with an MA/SP. It's money well spent. If you want to socialize, how about volunteering at a community theatre or some other community occasion. Most of those groups are dying for help. You don't need any special talents, sometimes they just need people to pick stuff up with their car and carry it into the building. When you're done, go have coffee with the people there. 

It's a sad fact that we don't make many new friends after we leave school or after we get married or pair up. But most couples break up, kids move away, so those things are not necessarily your entire life, but it's just easy to fall into living as if they are.

You know those alpha males in the movies who always get laid and are always getting invited to parties, I've known maybe 2 guys like that in my entire life and I'm retired so I've been around a while. Everyone always feel inadequate compared to them, that's what marketing does, it makes you feel bad so that you buy the stuff they're trying to sell you.

I am curious about something and have nowhere else to ask. For the ladies who see female clients, what fraction of your business is seeing female clients. Rough guesstimates is good enough, 1%, 10%, etc. Is it increasing or staying level? I just don't see many references to this online and am just curious. Thanks.

I think mostly it's because that's the best they have come up with so far. Not every guy knows how to hit on women, or approach them, or even just talk to them. For every guy in high school who dates and has girlfriends, there are lots of others who don't have a clue. And maybe it's just that in their circle of friends or social circumstances they happen not to know any women and have no way to meet any. I think this is a common situation. Now I understand that people with normal social lives think this is nonsense, but that's just because they have no clue how others live. Personally, I believe that the vast majority of men spend most of their lives not being able to get a date and later if they are lucky enough to meet someone and get married, they spend years never getting laid by their wives, for much the same reasons that they didn't get laid when they were single. They don't know how to ask. (There's also a related issue that many wives insist on only agreeing to sex if the husband slays a dragon or two first, that is, it has to be earned and earned and earned. I have known many men in that situation.) And I'm not suggesting that they are creeps or losers, of which there aren't that many anyway, I think that the majority of them are normal guys who just happen not to turn heads when they walk into a room and have run out of ideas.

One other possibility is maybe that kind of boorish behaviour works. It's unthinkable, for sure, but you have to consider the possibility.

I think that's at the root of it. Why we see rude in-car behaviour is probably the same reason that people do all kinds of things in cars that they wouldn't do in real life, including giving people the finger or threatening others when they make a driving mistake. It's probably not unlike the pathology of most social media. 

Life would be so much easier if you could just walk into a place, get a quick $50 tug on the way to work, get it out of your system and go on your way, without worrying about being arrested. It's astonishing to me that we put up with that.

2 hours ago, WildTiger said:

 

As for visiting an SP, it boggles the mind that some clients don't think that hygiene is as important for them to take care of as it is for the SP.

I'm not that surprised. There are lots of people who think that because they're paying, then they get to do whatever they want. It's pretty common, lots of people are slobs. I had a summer job decades ago in a food court at an amusement park, you very quickly lose any illusions about people. I think that for a lot of people, if they don't have to clean up after themselves, they will go out of their way to make a mess.

Pay it. It's not much money, and since I didn't hear any protestations of innocence I assume the person was actually speeding. Funny thing traffic violations. People spend all kinds of time and money on all kinds of things that turn out to be a waste of time, but suddenly they get a parking ticket and it's time for a big debate.. I would say that the time that they have already spent thinking about this is more than $100 is worth. But that's just me.

41 minutes ago, Jessica Rain said:

I think that if the sexual relationship in the marriage has come to an end because one partner simply can not or fully chooses not perform for whatever reason, then I feel it is not selfish to seek that need from a professional. 

 

I also think it should be openly talked about, the non performing partner should be selfless in allowing their partner to have their sexual need fulfilled. 

 

In a case like that,  I don't think it is selfish. I think it is maturity to be honest. Something I think many people lack. 

In my experience, that situation is extremely rare. When one partner decides to no longer have sex, they expect that their partner will go along. I know one lady, a friend's wife, who explicitly said so. Her attitude was that if she was no longer interested, then he simply had to go along with it, end of story. I think that was just self-delusion, she simply turned a blind eye to his many absences from home.

All part of our culture's bizarre hangups about sex. Sometimes you just need to get off, why make it more than that. It's very nice when it is more than that, but sometimes it just isn't.

17 hours ago, TorontoMelanieJolliet said:

Could it be they are afraid that another woman will give you what you want to the point of leaving her? Then she risks losing everything...the house, the picket fence and a future full of vacations. Or, the simple fact that someone could be better at it than she is...and she will never know whether that is true...so it's a bit of insecurity?

No doubt there is some truth in that. It cuts both ways though. Years of being turned down for sex by a wife who supposedly loves him doesn't do much for a guy's ego. Makes him gun shy. Once you're turned down often enough, you simply stop trying, how much disappointment can one person stand.

One fellow I knew, who unfortunately passed away too early in life, was married to someone who said she was asexual. He would tell me that in bed she would say things like, "Can you hurry up and get this over with" or "I don't know why you bother caressing my breasts, I feel nothing there." Not a fun evening. In his case, he managed to find a girlfriend or two who worshipped him, with whom he had terrific sex. But you can see how someone who wasn't as talkative as him, a little more shy, not good at small talk say, who had very little chance of meeting someone socially, would end having a miserable life, sex-wise anyway. I was among that number, and fun meetings with really pleasant sex workers did wonders for my morale back in the day. At one point in my life, the nicest people I met were sex workers.

For that and other reasons, I have never been able to understand the desire to make sex work illegal. How is it any of the government's business who we have sex with or why? It's utterly insane. 

I don't mean to derail this thread but I have often wondered how odd it is for so many wives (or maybe husbands too for that matter) to take the attitude that sex is not important, but then object strenuously if their spouses sought solace elsewhere. I mean, if it is really NOT important to them, why would they object? If someone's wife is not interested in football, they simply don't watch football, they don't try to prevent their husband from watching a game, do they? I realize that sex is more intimate than sports, but still. 

I know that this is unanswerable. I have just seen this so often among the guys I know, it makes me wonder what is going on, is there some wider problem. Sex is fun, it's intimate, there's no downside, what's the problem?

And it's not the case that the guys I know are repulsive slobs either. If that were the case, I'd understand.

My first wife would not participate in oral sex. I don't mean she wouldn't give me blow jobs, that's depressingly common enough, what I mean is that she would not let me go down on her, even though the 2 times she allowed this, she loved it. I cannot understand prudery.

3 hours ago, dread pirate roberts said:

Let's add some numbers to give real meaning to "minuscule".

If you let a man who was HIV+ ejaculate in your ass, the risk of you becoming HIV+ would be 0.1%. That is, you'd be infected only one out of a thousand times doing that.

Now let's add condom usage, reducing the risk of infection by 98%: so now we are down to a one in 50,000 chance,

But that's assuming that you actually were exposed in that way to semen from someone who was HIV+. What are the odds that this wand actually had semen on it at all? First, we have to work out the odds it wasn't cleaned, which can only be a guesstimate - let's say it is cleaned 9 times out of 10, which seems insultingly low to the spa. In that case the risk is now down to one out of 500,000.

But THAT is just the risk of semen at all, so we need the odds that that semen came from someone HIV+. That percentage varies depending where you are in the country, but nationwide the rate is about 0.17%. Roughly speaking, we are now at odds of one in 30,000,000.

Even then it takes very unusual conditions for the HIV virus to survive outside the body - being at room temperature, for example, makes it unlikely to survive very long. Again hard to work out, but let's wildly exaggerate the risk that this other person somehow ejaculated onto the wand (causing us to wonder why the SP didn't make him wear a condom as well) and that that happened recently enough for this to become the first recorded case ever of anyone becoming infected by HIV being left on an inanimate plastic object for some period of time: let's say that's one in a thousand, but honestly I think the odds against it are ridiculously higher than that. But going with that number, the risk has now become one in 30,000,000,000.

And still we are wildly over-estimating the odds, because HIV is not that easily gotten into someone's body. Basically the SP could have given you a handjob using HIV+ semen as lube, and you would still have had no risk of infection unless you had a small cut on your penis allowing the virus to enter your system. What are the odds you have a cut like that which you don't know about? I'm going to guess pretty small - maybe one in a thousand? So now the odds are one in 30,000,000,000,000.

It sounds to me like the odds are in the range of thirty quadrillion to one against you having contracted HIV. Unless, that is, the odds are literally 0% because you don't have a cut on your penis. It would make more sense to worry that the International Space Station will randomly explode and a tiny piece of it will fly to earth and hit you than to worry about that encounter with an SP.

Thanks. That was one of the most enjoyable posts I've read in a long time. 

The very first stat you quoted, 0.1% risk with unprotected anal sex, is interesting. Seems low at first glance. How did HIV spread so widely then? High frequency of contact?

Watch here: https://vimeo.com/5351854 .

Or send another text later on saying, "I assume that you are not available, so please cancel my earlier request."

Years ago while living in GTA, a friend and I shared a ride to Ottawa for the weekend. He was visiting some college friends of his and I spent the weekend with friends of mine. On the drive home, he told about the marital troubles of one of his buddies. This buddy had been married since college, about 5-6 years, but the relationship was going south. One bizarre little anecdote was about how much of a prude the guy was. Apparently his wife wanted oral sex and he refused, saying, and I'm not making this up, that he refused to put his mouth where she peed from. I nearly drove off the road from the shock. At the time, my own relationship was going south, partly for related reasons as my ex would refuse to participate in any oral sex, giving and especially receiving. And I love going down on women, very much my favourite thing to do, so this was a huge thing to not be able to do. And this guy was refusing his wife's desires! Turns out the marriage didn't last long, only another year. His wife went to live with a female lover. This was a long time ago and I don't know what's happened since. It has always been a puzzle to me why people would deny themselves pleasure. 

I won't directly reply to the question but just want to make the comment that I am surprised that anything like this happened at all. I haven't been to a strip place in over 30 years, but back when I did go (in both Toronto and Montreal), physical contact of any kind was strictly off limits. I guess times have changed. I need to get out more, maybe.

However I would not be keen on this happening in a public place.

The main web site is https://www.soldinamericapodcast.com but it's probably available in many podcast servers. I have not listened to any of the episodes yet, only read the descriptions and the series sounds interesting.

The SpeakOut service at 7/11 is quite nice. They allow you to buy as little as $25 air time that expires after one year. With Bell and Telus, they want $100 minimum for a service that lasts one year, or at least that's how it used to be the last time I looked. I remember that with Bell, if you only bought $25, it would expire after 30 days. For someone like me, who only really needs a phone to call CAA if the car breaks down, an emergency $25 per year service is all I want or need. Of course you need to buy a phone and a SIMCARD from them, but it can all be done online or at the counter using cash. 

I used to live in that general area. There are lots of SWs in both spas or private apartments/houses in the general vicinity, so it's weird how the authorities thought that this business should be fought against in such a public way. I mean, even if you in general are against sex work, this is hardly that, is it? It's just guys jerking into a piece of rubber. 

At first I thought it was odd that guys would want to spend money on this when a massage with a real live woman wouldn't cost much more. But there are lots of guys who are intimidated by live females, can't cope with the face to face, so who can say that they shouldn't have sexual outlets. The sex doll industry has existed for a long time now, I remember seeing the web sites in the late 1990s, they must be making money, so someone wants these. Is it any "weirder" than any other fetish?

I have personally known guys who spent hundreds and hundreds of dollars on lap dances and beer at strip joints. I never understood why you'd want to blow your paycheque on teasing yourself, wouldn't it make more sense to spend it so that you actually had sex? That strikes me as every bit as weird as spending money on sex dolls.

I've thought for years that a good sci-fi book plot would involve a time in the future when all SW would be done by androids (think Blade Runner androids). It would be an interesting exploration of the topic to wonder how a society would react to underage-looking androids for example. We react to and outlaw child porn now to protect the abused children who are forced to participate in the making of child porn, but what if real children would no longer be involved? What would people think about that? My guess is that we'd continue to be repulsed but you can see the legal argument coming that since no real human was harmed....  I can't imagine a story with such a plot even being published but maybe I'm wrong. I don't read much sci-fi, maybe it has already been done.

Our culture (and others) seems to create so many hang-ups in people. Maybe that's why incels exist. I wonder if reality is more like those antelope herds in National Geographic specials. One dominant alpha buck gets to use an entire herd of females, but the ones who lost the head-butting fights go go sulk in the woods by themselves and never have sex with anyone. I always feel sorry for them.

Where does she advertize?

I've noticed that on some ads on Leo's List, advertisers hold up cards that simply say "leolist...". What's the reason for doing that?

(I didn't know where else to ask.)

Same here, been happening for a few weeks. I haven't been on much, so was just hoping it would be fixed.