bcguy42

SexyLacy, Emily J, and Christycurves... together you have pretty much summed up all a man needs to know to enter into and fully appreciate the interactions between himself and his chosen partner. We, the gentlemen, should all aspire to be the "Mr Wonderful" Lara described in her blog. Thank you Lacy for launching this thread and thank you Emily J for contributing such an excellent find in the blogpost.

And I don't get this. This is at least the third time this has been expressed in this thread. Why would someone assume an SP could willingly provide a service directly opposite of what she advertises? Especially a service as polarizing as bbbj vs cbj? Am I missing something by taking an SP's website at face value?

Stoner - this was the OP.

I'm not sure people understand how what they say gets interpreted. I'm going to take a shot a couple of things here and if my guess is wrong, someone, especially the SPs, correct me. This statement diminishes, minimizes, and completely dismisses fortunateone's outlook, feelings, and perceptions. You may feel there is no need for resentment. The provider, fortunateone, clearly states this causes her resentment. The inference is that she should modify her feelings because you have told her not to feel this way. Yes, this is the second time in this discussion you've said this. You must have very different experiences than I. Can you help the casual reader to understand how you've arrived at this fact? Perhaps you could quantify the number of times you've received services specifically proscribed on the SPs site i.e. Site: No Greek! You: Hey, how about some Greek. SP: Sure thing - hop on! Or Site: CBJ or CBJ Only or Safe Sex Only. You: How's about we pop that thingy in there without the hood? SP: Say no more! Mmmppphh.. Three times out of five? Seven times out of eight? I'm genuinely curious. Perhaps I should change my approach. You do not imply or intend to exert pressure through your legitimate straightforward question. However, every communication has two components. That which the speaker intends and the manner in which the recipient receives it. fortunateone clearly states she sees this as carrot dangling and goes on to explain why. Stating that it should not be perceived as carrot dangling brings us back to the first point. The statement diminishes, minimizes, and completely dismisses fortunateone's outlook, feelings, and perceptions. As I said at the beginning, these are just my perceptions. Make of them as you will.

I love the last line of the article: "When the slut-shaming stops, everyone is likely to get laid more." This should be self-evident. The whole discussion takes me back to when I was initially exploring my place in the sexual world way back in the last century. Past of the educational process was you were looking for two types of girls. The ones that would "put out" and the ones you'd take home to mother. The two groups were mutually exclusive. The girls who, for whatever reason, enjoyed exercising their sexuality in a way known to the public were ostracized by the "good girls" and were to be avoided by the "good boys". The Good Boys, of course, were always looking to hook up with the slutty girls - just in a way where they wouldn't get caught. Some of us skipped school the day they were teaching that so instead, we grew up treating women as equals in all ways, including sexuality. So we missed out on the whole seduction thing and the "getting her to go all the way" game. Instead, in my formative years and all the years since, I've had a steady stream of sexual partners all of whom came into the encounter willingly and hopefully came away feeling they were treated fairly. Today, when I'm driving mixed gender groups on their nights out, I hear what some of the guys say to each other and observe how they treat the women in the group and give my head a shake. I've seen this movie before.

Timing is everything. Last week's Cnet newsletter was about recovering lost Windows Admin passwords. The discussion can be found here: http://nls.cnet.com/pageservices/viewOnlineNewsletter.sc?list_id=e497&send_date=04/11/2014

Depending on the mood of the group I do a variation of the Safety Speech when I do bus groups. It ends with "In the event of a water landing feel free to use your seatmate as a flotation device. "

I'm occasionally struck with a lack of imagination. I was trying to work out how a strapless dildo would work. Thanks to Mr. Google, I now understand. And yes... mmm.. that would be fun! :)

This is going to be great. Count me in please.

On the subject of mistakes, we've all made more than a few. For me, the funniest one was sending a PM to a lovely traveling lady confirming that all was good to go for our appointment scheduled a few days later - only to have her remind me of our PM exchange a week prior regarding having to reschedule. I'm just so damn happy I didn't wait until the (brain farted) appointed day and text her regarding the location information. D'oh!

Ozzie, Sharon, and the rest of the crew are safely in the air and on their way. That was fun.

One session down. One to go.

Getting to spend hour and a half with Black Sabbath. 45 minutes each before and after concert.

Waiting to meet Black Sabbath.

Since the OP is looking for advice at the beginning of his journey, perhaps it would be better to advise him to take a woman's word at face value. Asking an SP for something she clearly states is a no-go is not a good way to begin. Everyone's experience is different but for me, SPs that advertise CBJ are quite handy at getting that hoodie on there before the fun begins. YMMV

This was done for Woman's Day. It is 2:26 long. If you want to cling to the thought that all is sweetness and light, stop at 1:45. Published on Mar 4, 2014 ///////PLEASE BE AWARE: THIS VIDEO CONTAINS STRONG GRAPHIC IMAGES///////// "Woman's Day #throughglass" is a project whose only purpose is to make people think, on this special day, about the condition of women in our society. Google is not involved. We've just used the language of Glass to deliver our message.

This comes from a discussion I had yesterday with my SO about the federal government and the likely responses to the Bedford rulings. Various groups have proposed making it illegal for "johns" to purchase sex. An argument that keeps coming up is that the sex trade is riddled with women who are the victims of human trafficking. We know that there is a great business in smuggling cigarettes into Canada. Using the same reasoning as above, I call for the government to keep the sale of cigarettes legal but criminalize the purchase of cigarettes. Perhaps they could also establish "Joe Camel" schools to educate the apprehended purchasers about the sad facts of the smuggling trade and the very real effects it has on the people living near the smuggling routes. Disclaimer: I am not in anyway making light of situations where there is actual human trafficking. I find trafficking to be reprehensible and call for the government to investigate and eliminate trafficking using the laws presently on the books.

Nothing here.

If the provider in question was using a one word name such as Amber or Lydia (no offense meant to any authentic Ambers or Lydias intended) I'd lean towards giving her a pass. I've seen ads for many different providers using the same single name. But in this instance, if I read the original OP correctly, the provider has taken on both names. In that case, plagiarism is not really the right term. Identity Theft seems more appropriate. And just like ID Theft will cause a world of trouble in mainstream society, I would think it would do the same here. Exactly how well would a new provider fare if she chose the name SaraMQ? Not good...

There is this thing that goes by here on an occasional basis and that is commentary on the participation in this activity by persons who are married or in committed relationships. That ongoing discussion came to mind when I came across this item in Slate. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/03/esther_perel_on_affairs_spouses_in_happy_marriages_cheat_and_americans_don.html

On the face of it, this appears to be a simple question. However, if you would, could you be more specific? Do you mean someone who is transexual , a person who has not yet undergone sex reassignment surgery, yet whose anatomical sex may not match their psychological sense of personal gender identity? The short form, I guess, would be a T-girl. Or do you mean someone who has had sex reassignment surgery - feminizing genitoplasty or penectomy, orchiectomy and vaginoplasty and is now, for all intents and purposes a woman? In the first case, I lean towards disclosure as I can see where some might find it a bit disconcerting to find extra bits when things get interesting. In the second case, speaking only for myself, I don't think it is any of my business how she came to be a she. Additional Comments: You will find this column to be of interest: Why straight men love transgendered women

This appears to be a Google thing. If you are using the Gmail app or any other Google app (Maps, for instance) on you iPhone or iPad then Google also politely and unobtrusively tracks you, too. If you are good at Techno-geek, it is all explained here: Android: Location in Google Settings on Android Apple: Location Reporting & History for iPhone & iPad Creepy...

What you are seeing are people who belong to one of two groups - Cept-me and Sombody. The rules apply to everyone - 'Cept me! Everybody should park in the lot. They are not Everybody. They are Somebody. They are fun bunches of folks to watch.

Hearty congratulations for another great Social. The Socials have become an integral part of what makes the CERB community a community. I thoroughly enjoyed the brief time I could be there. I was called away with every intention of returning but I got a call on the way back that precluded my return. Looking forward to the next one!

There were two items related to child exploitation. It dawned on me the links violated CERB guidelines regarding depiction of children on the site. So move along. Nothing to see here...