Proposal: New term for "safe-GFE" style service

[Just-ass-weet]

Now before we have people bash me for legitimizing such services, remember that your preferences are not the only preferences out there. You may prefer a BB with you BJ, but some actually gravitate more towards the CBJ, or lfk, or none at all. Plenty don't enjoy giving DATY so let's not even go there. OK - so how can we make a better term, that gives you the "feeling" of intimacy (non-sexual and sexual), but is completely safe?

I am liking the idea TLC (tending to loving chubby), it is often associated with caring for someone, but it is also associated with nurses, and health care practitioners. So it really applies if the lady is the kind of lady that can make someone forget they are in a service, and yet, she is careful to play completely safe. Does that make sense? Can we find an acronym that gets that feeling across like the term GFE does?

Personally, I despise the term GFE, because it is completely undefined, everyone argues over what the heck it means, and that is because it is over-used. Let's not allow my new term to get muddled, so here is my definition. Anyone using my new term incorrectly will be subject to a good old fashioned whipping at triple charge (yea, I know there are some MoFo's out there that will try to take advantage of such an offer ~ lol). If a lady uses the term, remember the code! lol!

~CBJ
~LFK (or non at all)
~CFS and absolutely no bare contact at all
~No BBDATY
~There is an element of emotional connection, if you cannot like the client, you shouldn't see him.

What do you think? This is as much serious as it is Tongue in Cheek (albeit lightly ~ lol)

xoxox
JAWS

 

[NHBrat]

I don't believe there is any need for more terms that will only confuse matters further. As far as the tem GFE goes, it IS, very well defined and should be understood by anyone. If they do not understand, they are either not being trueful or are a novice to the hobby. There is nothing wrong with being a non-GFE lady. Many would rather be with a non-GFE. Futhermore, the only probelm has been with those who advertise themselves as GFE and are NOT. Trueth in advertising is all that is needed. There is something for everyone and only honesty will clear the confusion.

 

[breadman]

GFE doesnt belong in the description, just say she provides safe service. Nothing wrong with that, Toronto is full of girls who provide this service. From an outsiders point of view I really cant imagine Montreal providing a whole lot of support for non-gfe girls, especially those who want to charge high end fee's.

Ive seen many non-gfe girls who's looks, attitude and service (that they agreed to give) rocked...but they were all in the LDH catagory. Ive seen Karma couple of years back right when she first started...had a great time (made the mistake of booking her as my first call of the trip basically rushed things a bit). Would I book her again as a non-gfe and be happy with the service? Yes I would...but only if her rate was in the LDH range.

 

[picaron]

safe gfe = ordinary. Just the way i see it. Why give a "normal" baseline service a name? Redundant.

Sure you can say "oh but i will be more affectionate then other ladies..." etc, but bottom line is if we wanted affection we'd have gf's.

 

[oobe]

safe gfe = ordinary. Just the way i see it. Why give a "normal" baseline service a name? Redundant.

Except that agency owners like to sell their girls, so they'll put labels to make it look better.
They used to label digital cameras 'filmless', but they stopped: it sounded negative. The anti-abortion bigots prefer to call themselves 'pro-life'...

I think safe-GFE is good because it sounds positive (safe is positive, and GFE is an attention grabber) even though WE know it's redundant. Since they'll put something anyway, it's better to have 'safe-GFE' we can decode as 'regular' than other bullshit.

Just my 2 centavos.

 

[EagerBeaver]

Personally I feel the term ``safe GFE`` is a distortion of reality. I have never had a girlfriend in real life who did not give me a . If you took a poll and asked guys, ``did your real life girlfriend insist on giving you a CBJ?``, guess what the overwhelming response would be? I therefore agree with Breadman, that it should be called ``safe service`` not ``safe GFE.``

As I recall the poster Robin started a similar thread proposing something that he called ``CGFE.`` The response to that thread was largely to ridicule Robin, if I recall correctly. All of these phrases are marketing ploys, but they really should have some basis in reality in terms of being reflective of the actual sexual experience a man has with his real life girlfriend. Otherwise, we are talking about some level of fraud in the use of these terms in the marketing of escorts.

 

[Rex Kramer]

There is no need to define another new term.

Given that the predominant service offered by SPs in the MERB/c universe is GFE, it is probably easier to note the difference from GFE rather than defining new terms, e.g. GFE with CBJ.

There is nothing wrong with providing "safe GFE" services (whether it is CBJ or no BBDATY or no DFK or no LFK etc.), but to define a term for each possible combination is going to be very confusing. For CBJ/BBDATY/DFK/LFK alone there are 16 possible combinations!

GFE service is very well understood by most of the MERB/c community. The last major discussion was the thread I believe started by Eager Beaver.

P.S.
"CFS and absolutely no bare contact at all " is a must for all services!

 

[z/m(Ret)]

When I still worked I never advertised any and I never expressed them anywhere on my website. I offered what I offered depending on the client and the mood. I never charged extras. I always asked clients to not give too detailed accounts because I did not want to raise expectations.

It goes to say how contradicting it is, in a way, to gather reviewers and advertisers under the same umbrella: reviewers describe a service they managed to obtain from such and such SP which can be either corroborated or contradicted by other reviewers. To keep the same language, reviewers are encouraged to use acronyms, each one defined specifically. When a given SP receives several mentions of such and such service (acronym), the said SP is labelled as one who provides the said services as standard practice. Where there's contradiction, we speak of YMMV.

And then you have the advertisers recuperating all this information for self-endorsement and, in the process, definitions are sometimes corrupted, especially when packaged under consolidated acronyms such as GFE and Safe GFE.

Where I see a contradiction comes from my sense that, if it wasn't for the purpose of marketing and if it was really left up to them, most SP's would not describe their services at all - as JAG pointed out, at least not with such surgical precision. The fact though that many do describe their services with generic labels like GFE or Safe GFE can be misleading and should not be viewed as anything more than a marketing ploy. The problem is, I'm pretty sure about this, too many reviewers fall for the marketing ploy and tend to be influenced by it while reviewing.

Personally, I would like to see acronyms disappear completely from agencies and indies banners and websites and leave those to the reviewers.

 

[Just-ass-weet]

Damned - how is it that you can explain my thoughts on this better than I!

xoxox
Anik

Personally, I would like to see acronyms disappear completely from agencies and indies banners and websites and leave those to the reviewers.

 

[CoolAmadeus]

What about this... (Let's KISS - Keep It Stupid Simple)

GFE Attitude
and
GFE Services

Two different beasts altogether.

CA

 

[WAMCD]

My 2 cents: For me Save-GFE is CBJ, no daty, LFK and MSOG. If LFK or MSOG is not allowed, that may be called YMMV with GFE-Attitude, or maybe Save-YMMV with GFE-Attitude.

 

[Just-ass-weet]

As I stated, I started this thread as a discussion

and sort of tongue in cheek.

Everyone may believe that GFE is well defined, however, I am of a different opinion, and to me it is not. Just look over how many reviews say the girl offers GFE, but she doesn't like to DFK, or except she only offers one SOG, or well, the exceptions go on and on. On the other hand, there are girls who have offered all the GFE services, with out the attitude or "clicking" - generally, they are not labelled GFE, even though their services clearly indicate that they are. Again, another of the changes is those who DO offer GFE services, and even at times the attitude, but charge extra for it. That is why I view it the way I do.

For this very reason, the term GFE is NOT as valuable as some might think, because what is important changes from guy to guy. Also, you cannot search GFE here without getting threads like this, and anywhere else that those 3 letters might come up. Then they still have to sort through those to find someone who defines GFE the same way they do, without EXCEPTIONS. You see what I mean?

Any pre-packaged set of acronyms really shouldn't be used by the ladies or their agencies, since the more they are used, the more they become distorted, so a new word is useless... that was my point.

Thanks for everyones feedback and have a great weekend.

xoxox
Anik

 

[z/m(Ret)]

I always asked clients to not give too detailed accounts because I did not want to raise expectations.

Some clients will comply to such a demand others won't depending on how strongly pledged one's allegiance to the community is. Prospective clients thrive on details and there's always enough reviewers out there to disclose the juicy details. In a hobbyist way of saying things, we call these details: "information". These boards mission statement demanding to produce and share such information and reviewers being somewhat indebted to each others (some other mental dispositions that would require further analysis probably come into play but that would be another subject), it's difficult to think that false expections are not being raised.

Solution? A standard disclaimer could be posted as a sticky note stating that all the services described in reviews are YMMV. I mean, I'm surprised by how some hobbyists react sometimes as if they completely fail to recognize that some - say - "chemistries" and - come on let's not fool ourselves! - "clients" are granted more mileage, duh!

 

[bumfie]

I didn`t hobby for a number of years. When I returned a little while ago (and I am considering re-retirement), the biggest confusion seemed to be the blurred line between GFE and PSE. What we old-timers used to call GFE now seems to be called ``PSE`` by a lot of posters.

What I used to call PSE was TC swallow, come in face, Greek, BS, prostate massage, that sort of thing. Now it seems anyone who gets deep-kissed and a (TC or not) claims it to be a PSE.

 

[z/m(Ret)]

True. I can imagine that a lot information not 'publicly released' as requested does make its way through the back channels...

t76

With all the necessary and unnecessary colorations, indeed.

 

[z/m(Ret)]

I didn`t hobby for a number of years. When I returned a little while ago (and I am considering re-retirement), the biggest confusion seemed to be the blurred line between GFE and PSE. What we old-timers used to call GFE now seems to be called ``PSE`` by a lot of posters.

To me, GFE, Safe-GFE, PSE, are unreliable appellations I don`t bother with because any of these can bundle arrays of services that may suffer too many exceptions. Advertisers use these as a marketing ploy and the reviewers who do the same without providing details are just as unreliable.

Reviewers: is it so hard to write: ``CIM, Daty, DFK, MSOG, MPOS and she`s nice too`` instead of breaking our heads over the significations of GFE?

 

[z/m(Ret)]

of course it is hard to write those terms. Why? once SPs announce that they cannot back out and not provide , for example. and then also if they write terms, say missing , then they would fear having less clients (which means less money).

I`ll make myself clear by repeating what I wrote here on this thread: I know very well that SP`s would rather not describe their service in such precise terms, for the reason you brought up, but also because they`d rather not raise false expectations (as JAG also pointed out). Therefore they use instead acronyms such as GFE and PSE and, lately, Safe-GFE which vaguely consolidate different services: this would be a marketing ploy, the operative word being ``vaguely``. I have no problem with that: I basically just ignore it, book SP`s based on various criterions, reviews, recommendations, pictures, whatever, quite often on guts feeling and, from there, go with the flow.

I`m not naive to believe one second that SP`s will post themselves the complete breakdown of their services. What I have a problem with are reviewers who don`t, I mean, who are describing their encounters in terms of GFE, PSE and Safe-GFE acronyms without providing further details. Those who do that I give practically no credibility. In my book it`s quite fine not to disclose graphic details, some don`t use acronyms at all and would rather review in terms of emotions and if somehow such a review catches my attention, I`ll make the best of it. But to throw in ``GFE`` assuming that everyone has the same understanding of it is not useful at all, it`s not even entertaining. Hence, my question: ``is is so hard?`` was not addressed to SP`s but to reviewers (I`ve edited my post for clarification).

 

[montreal_monk01]

Just-ass-weet,
You came up with a very interesting/constructive debate.
I personally find myself sometimes torn in between what our merb community
defines as GFE and what I expect from a GFE experience (Merb`s definition should of course prevail in my reviews) .
By re-reading some of my own reviews, I noticed that I should more accurately just describe what the girl offered as service instead of mentionning GFE. From now on, I will just mention what services were offered:
for ie,
Dfk, or no dfk, lfk, or no lfk, or no , daty or daty refused..etc
And to avoid raising false expectations, I`ll try not to forget that lil mention ***this is what she
provided to me ... your experience with her may differ from mine**** (I just hope that
some wont argue with the lady because she provided this and that to another one but not to him...)
So that we stick to the content instead of the container.

 

[Just-ass-weet]

Thanks for the feedback Z and Monk

The problems with the term GFE goes even further though... since there are men who would rather not even attempt DATY or DFK, or one go for one SOG, or prefer mish... etc..., what if they are not attempting any of these services, however, for them they got GFE services up to their own definition. Then Mr.X comes along and turns out the SP doesn`t offer the service the other guy wasn`t interested in anyhow?

GFE is much more useful for the ladies as a marketing tool than it actually is for the client, because it is an umbrella term, that can quite easily be manipulated to suit the advertisers need, where saying - I do is much more ``commited``

Anyhow... I am glad everyone was able to continue this in a respectful manner.

xoxox
Anik