Details in reviews...

[cloudsurf]

As for the other review(s) being discussed in this thread, even though i do not necessarily agree with the wording used by the reviewers, that's nothing compared to many of the stories i've heard from sps & drivers over the years. It's actually quite lame.

.[/I]

Depends when you read those reviews. The Mods recently sanitized them and took out some of the more offensive language.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Depends when you read those reviews. The Mods recently sanitized them and took out some of the more offensive language.

Personally, i had no problem with the words being used in those reviews. I'm a grown man, i consider myself fairly intelligent, and i can read between the lines. I'm also pro-democracy & anti-censorship.

 

[Maria Divina]

I'm also pro-democracy & anti-censorship.

Me too. That's really important to keep the rights we could have in life.

And this, preferably without taking off or limiting the rights of others.

:smile:

That's a really big problem in our society, people will fight for their rights but not for their obligations.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I enjoy the exaggeration. Nothing wrong with that. It puts emphasis on things. When all you have is text to describe something, exaggeration is necessary in some cases. So sure we understand her breasts were not actually hanging to her waist, but we get the point of what you are trying to say. It also makes for fun reading and adds some humour to everything.

Finally someone who gets it! :thumb:

What people didn't realize when i posted my comment "a boob job would do wonders for her" was the fact that i've always been quite open in regards to my dislike for fake boobs. But i've always been honest about the fact i'm not against fake boobs in certain situations. For example, if a girl is a small 'A', then i can't blame her for wanting fake boobs. If a girl is so self-conscious about her small boobs & an operation would do wonders for her self-esteem (and she can afford them), then go ahead & get the enhancement. One of my favorite sp ever, Megane/Ann of Chloe Mtl happened to have a fantastic pair of fake boobs. I totally praised her on how her boob job turned out & loved playing with them. They looked so real! Everytime i'd praise them, she'd jokingly tell herself "Merci Docteur Bernier". I don't know if that guy is still around (she told me his clinic was in the Laval area, if i remember correctly), but he did great work! :thumb:

However, i've seen girls become prostitutes simply because they needed quick cash to pay for their boob jobs. Personally, i find this sad, no matter what their cup-size or self-esteem levels were at. One girl in particular returned to the biz for one last 'date'...with me...in order to make her downpayment on a pair of new boobs she'd be getting two days later. It's hard for me to justify doing this if it's simply to buy a new pair of boobs. But that's how things go sometimes....

I've also been with many women who had huge boobs, boobs that would look fantastic when these same women were in clothing or simply wearing a bra. But once the bra was off....they'd fall on the floor!!!!!

Yes, once again for people who don't understand my humor or when someone exaggerates in order to make a point, i'm exaggerating. Their boobs were NOT literally falling on the floor. But they were indeed very saggy, which were very disappointing considering i might have been anticipating my lovers having Playboy model-type of boobs.

 

[Maria Divina]

Doc,

I was not talking about your "saggy tits" in my interventions principally. I was talking generally.


But if you permit me to give you a hint to know if your words might look offensive or not... because you don't seem to see easily the difference:

Just imagine saying it in front of the person you are talking about and her eventual reaction.

If for you, it is a kind of exaggeration/joke really funny to make, I don't think the woman you have been intimate with, will laugh and take it as the most beautiful thing she ever hear from a man who happen to have been intimate and have a lots of fun with. ( I imagine you had fun both of you...)

 

[Doc Holliday]

i got your point too doc

I was just saying there is a big difference between posting exageration and posting about submission/forced stuff during an encounter.

I totally agree. But it depends on the nature of the exaggerations. In the case of the Bianka review, maybe the reviewer was also exaggerating. However, i am quite aware that this world is full of knuckleheads who believe everything they read & hear, so i do understand why some people might be against posting stuff that is way too graphic.

By the way, when i happen to write in a review about 'my big erect cock' or something to the effect, my goal isn't to get people to believe that i'm hung like John Holmes. Au contraire. I'm exaggerating in order titilate the reader. To make my review more interesting to read. The size of my dick is irrelevant. But writing "my big hard erect cock" sounds a lot better than "my small very limp penis" when writing a review about a sex encounter, right?

Reviews are to inform, yes. But in order to get people interested, you also need to entertain. If a reviewer develops a reputation as being a very boring reviewer, then no one will bother reading what he writes. However, if he has a reputation to be entertaining, then he'll have reached his goal.

 

[EagerBeaver]

I agree with Maria that these kinds of metaphorical descriptions, although imaginative and literate, can lead to hurt feelings. In reality, this is how men talk about women when they are at bars having drinks. Whether it should be posted on a public board where the lady who is the subject of those comments can read it, is another story. I have spoken about women like that privately in my "man to man" conversations with others, but I doubt I would do it in a review. I don't necessarily have a problem with others doing it, although I certainly believe that a lady who read that her tits sagged to her waist would not be happy to read such a comment. Even Maria got sensitive about my teasing her for posting right after the 3 consecutive, bizarre "saggy tit lover" posts by snoodle, gugu and man 77777.

I will once again reiterate I have seen posts similar to Akon's in "domination" forums on other boards. If an SP expressly offers domination services, I would think that it is fair to review them. MERB, however, does not seem to have a Domination forum into which such reviews can be deposited. So the Mods have to decide what they are going to do with these posts. Seems like "Fetish and Fantasy" is the place where they belong.

I recently saw an SP who I liked in Montreal, who had a mild acne problem. Despite this, I liked her. I did not mention the acne problem in my public review but a few posters sent me PMs asking about her and I mentioned it in the PMs. Someone recently posted a review in which the acne problem was mentioned, in which I believe it was a bigger issue for the reviewer, than it was for me. In any event, and I have to be honest, I did not mention it because I really liked the lady and I did not want to hurt her. In my reviews I have always erred on the side of not including info that might hurt the lady. This in my mind makes me a bad reviewer, and it is one reason why I stopped posting reviews, or detailed ones anyway.

 

[sak]

i think there's also a difference between a professional dominatrix or sub and a young woman who does not expect to offer that service but is overly polite. in the latter case, when she comes across the a client who initiates that, she might go along with it once or twice before she gathers the wherewithal to do say no. consensual doesnt simply mean lack of resistance, it means a clear consensus. one may think he's had a consenual dominating session because he doesnt get objections, but in reality he leaves the sp feeling like shit and abused.

 

[suikoden_45]

So how does one say, she has saggy tits? Or do you say it all? Isn't a SP's appearance relevant to the review? Should there be a perky/bouncy boob scale to be established?

As dehumanizing as objectification is, we ALL do it; so is judging appearance just a matter of semantics?

 

[Maria Divina]

Isn't a SP's appearance relevant to the review?

Oh! yes it is...

:nod:

As dehumanizing as objectification is, we ALL do it; so is judging appearance just a matter of semantics?

Semantics is a matter to express ourselves to say everything while choosing particular words/expressions.

Why choose a word or an expression much more than another?

If this is just a matter "to make a good show" or "to look cool for the guys" to used some kind of offending words/expression against women, or just to not look to be "not too much into a Sp" and look to have a distance when you are reviewing, and being more "credible"... at the end, maybe because of innert thinking or feelings, a reviewer finish to be manipulate and by doing a review really different of what he should have done, because he is living "pressions"... It seems that's not easy to be a reviewer at the end... You are so much more afraid to be negatively judged, I am surprised to learn that today. And I found it strange too that to be a reviewer with a good reputation is something really important for someone. But that's ok, to each their owns preferred activities... :smile:
And the point to say "ALL" are doing it, is not a good argument to continue do to something when you know that's probably wrong to do such thing, to employ degrading/pejorative terms upon women.


And I concord that's a mistake to believe that someone who is announced just as a "GFE" or "GFE+" in an agency could certainly satisfy the sadochist tastes of some, without any preparation. I remember the time I was in agency, that was the time I used to have the weirdest demands and meet the most strange people too, on the spot.

Just a chance that was exceptional and not reflecting the majority I met, because believe me, I would certainly not be here today...

 

[Doc Holliday]

one may think he's had a consenual dominating session because he doesnt get objections, but in reality he leaves the sp feeling like shit and abused.

True. And he also makes himself appear like a total scumbag.

 

[Lily from Montreal]

Hum, if you mean a actually lactating lady , prior breastfeeding the breast are hard as rock , once emptied it would be at it's softest...

and even without the saggy epithet I find the words tits to be distasteful anyway..
.you add saggy it makes for a very deratogatory comment...way past description of one's physical attribute...maybe the description could read like this:'' her breasts were natural and lacking the firm texture I , for one,prefer in this part of a women anatomy ....''

 

[Siocnarf]

The word “saggy” is not only derogatory, it is also misinformative. If the subject is to be mentioned at all, it is imperative to describe the position and orientation of the nipples relative to the infra-mammary fold.

Seriously, there’s a review I had trouble writing because of this ethical conundrum. I wrote “her body is not the perfection I imagined” implying that I am as much a victim of my high expectations as of her physical shortcomings. And then went on hinting at the less appealing features, while also stressing the positive points. Rather clever I thought.

 

[gugu]

2-We can be sure prostitution won't ever be legalized or plenty accepted by "society". And I truly believe the best will be that gouvernments won't legiferate on it, because they really don't know what it should be done, and they will make it worst for sure.
I believe all gouvernment are working for the beneficials $$$, not to promote a better living for their citizens.

You are off the subject discussed here. But since you bring it to attention:

1 Prostitution won’t ever be legalized? Prostitution is already legal in Canada as in most countries outside Africa and Asia.

2 Plenty accepted? Prostitution is a moral issue. Just like abortion, drugs, homosexuality and plenty of other matters. It will never be accepted by everybody. However, societies have different openness and tolerance levels, that is to accept others may do things you would not do yourself.

3 Legislating making things worst? Experience shows that legislating to make prostitution legal and regulated do not make things worst. It tends to improve the security of sex workers, at least those working within the legal framework. It is making it illegal that worsen the situation for sex workers.

4 Contrary to what you think, the fiscal has been the least preoccupation of governments when dealing with prostitution: legalization do not bring significant fiscal revenues anywhere, including Holland and Germany as all government reports show.

5 Governments do not legislate on prostitution to promote better living for their citizens. They do it for one and only one reason: to protect the security of sex workers.

***

Wannabe? What do you mean?

 

[montreal_monk01]

Thanks man7777 for initiating this thread. Violence against women should always be fought by all means. Whatever disagreements I can read here, the most important is that there is a debate over the imprtance to protect women against vile psycho peeps