Brain-teasing Escorts

[Will]

It's often said that the brain is our most active erogenous zone, and recent posts suggest to me that I am not alone in being as much or more interested in what's between an escort's ears as I am in what's between his legs. Looking back over some of the more interesting (to me) threads, I see that Rod Hagen, first and foremost, Gino Mancuso, and Rick Munroe are among the escorts who have exceptionally witty and wise ways with words.

 

Are there other escorts who are as good over the dinner table as they are in bed? I'm not talking about formal education. You don't have to be smart to be educated and not all really smart people have had the privilege of an education. I have four "best friends." Two of them have Ph.D.'s and the other two never went to college at all. But all four are among the smartest men I have ever known.

 

Who are the escorts really skilled in using words? Who are the great conversationalists? Who know how to make sex as much fun with what they say as with what they do?

[Guest torjon]

Brain Teasing Escorts

 

Will, I couldn't agree more with your premise here. Having an intelligent conversation with a man you are about to have sex with is a real furnace stoker. Not necessairly a deep philosophical type of conversation,(such as several of the "deep, philosophical" posters to these threads, not that there's anything wrong with that! ) but about anything. My somewhat limited experiences with escorts has shown me that the ones I want to revisit are always guys who have intelligent conversational skills in the living room, and unbridled passion in the bedroom. Mighty potent combination. I live in Toronto, and among this "potent" group, would definitely put Mike Conway, Jason, and when he makes his pilgrimages here, certainly Matt of Vancouver. (I suspect young Aarronn will meet this criteria as well.) I do think these escorts take their lead in this area, as they do in matters of sex, from the client. It works for me, and just makes everything else that much better. Nice post, Will.

[Losgatan]

I couldn't agree more with the theme of this thread. If you are ever in San Francisco, look up Patrick (reviewed on this site). In his other life, he's a widely published author on gay and other themes. Definitely someone to enjoy a wonderful dinner with!

[Guest red]

Will, I have been very pleasantly surprised by the generally high level of intelligence encountered in the escorts I have been with---then again, I read these reviews carefully to find guys who seem to be articulate and reasonably smart. Two very bright guys are Jake Walker (my "first date", and one of the best guys in the world for beginners!) in San Francisco and Mitch Musl in LA. Rick Munroe, with whom I've spoken several times, also seems to be the absolute antithesis of a brainless bimbo (male version). Perhaps the most erudite and mega-knowledgeable guy I've talked to, and plan to see soon, is a San Francisco escort whose AOL handle is "sfvstl4hyre." This guy is about 6'4" with a lanky swimmer's body, and a very good brain.

[Rod Hagen]

LAST EDITED ON May-22-00 AT 03:03PM (EST)[p]Great topic Will. Of course I normally approach Brainy chit chat from a Science, or philosophy of Science angle. Bring up Evolution vs. Creationism, or why global warming is or isn't baloney, and I am INSTANTLY turned on. Unfortunately, here in Los Angeles, the majority of conversations deal with Abs routines, cell phone service, and the "new and exciting stage" someone's screenplay is at. "There's an election coming up? An opportunistically weak Euro? Superstring theory?" "That's well and good, but anyway, after I did 3 sets of 20 crunches, and was moving on to leg lifts, my phone rang, and you know how awful the reception can be in the gym. So anyway, I answered the phone and it was my agent, so I said Hello, and......." SIGH, get me outta here!!

 

Graduate Degrees are perhaps not the most accurate measure of a man, but I have ALWAYS regretted not pursuing mine in one of my fields (Biology, international relations or Engineering). But how could I EVER return to the scrimping and saving of university life? I couldn't. Still I do appreciate them and no surprise, some of the clients I have the Hottest sxperiences are MDs; better yet, MDs who also hold Phd and/or is specialized, that is always a plus.

 

Will, do you find scientists (escorts or not) are often limited in their range of conversation, or do you find Liberal Arts men, such as yourself, to be too sweeping in their claims with very little grasp of specifics to back them (not you of course)? Or neither. Example I just had a client who was a research scientist at UCLA, sounds right up my alley, but all he could talk about was his work. Like so many scientists he had an overinflated opinion of the importance of his work. On the other hand, I also had a client recently, arts and humanity degree, who could not grasp the idea that all objects fall at the same rate! Anyway, LOVE your posts.

 

-Hagen

[Boston Guy]

LAST EDITED ON May-22-00 AT 12:38PM (EST)[p]Very interesting question, Rod.

 

As someone who has a very strong bias in favor of the liberal arts, both from a philosophical (I like the idea) and a pragmatic (to survive today, people really NEED to have a wide-ranging background) point of view, I prefer guys with broad backgrounds.

 

But, expanding upon the traditional definition of liberal arts, to be an educated man today I would include a rigorous education in the fundamentals of science and mathematics in the mix. I would also include at least a familiarity with the social sciences, including economics. And I think that acquiring at least a working familiarity with at least one foreign language should be considered fundamental to an appreciation of other cultures.

 

I am sometimes saddened and sometimes appalled by new college grads who tell me they were too busy to take arts courses or music or language. When asked last December by a soon-to-graduate senior what he should take in his final semester, I discovered he had none of these; his whole course of study had been in his major in the sciences and in closely related fields. I advised him to take a music course, an art history course, a semester of language, a history course and a class in English composition -- advice he took. The last I heard, he was enjoying his semester immensely.

 

Of course, a more fundamental error many of us make is to view learning as something that stops at college or grad school. In a world that is changing as fast as this one, if you aren't learning you are slipping behind -- quickly.

 

So, to answer your questions, I personally find people who have taken a liberal arts approach to life most interesting: learn the fundamentals of as many fundamental disciplines as possible, learn a great deal about at least one subject (the purpose of a major is, after all, to develop the ability to acquire and utilize strong knowledge and expertise in a field), and keep on learning.

 

Folks who have concentrated all of their learning on one area are often too focused to be much fun.

[Paul Revere]

Boston Guy;

 

You are totally cool! (And I am way to old and better educated than to use the word "totally" in any sentence.) We should have coffee some time, you are a fascinating man.

 

And even though I agree with most of what you say, I still have some affection for the philosophy espoused by Julie Brown in her famous song "I Like 'em Big and Stupid" I guess it depends on my mood. I figure I have lots of friends that I can discuss world issues with, but for an escort/dancer situation I'm looking for something different sometimes. Although too stupid can be scary.

[Rod Hagen]

>Folks who have concentrated all of

>their learning on one area

>are often too focused to

>be much fun.

 

Great Post BG. I agree, however nothing can prepare someone for really hard work like rigor. And nothing hardens a persons resolve like watching the sun rise and then set again from your chair in the computer lab while trying to get your Assembly language program to GODDAMN COMPILE. Or being required to spend 8 hours a week in the Organic Chemistry Lab, in addition to the 3-4 hours a day one must spend simply working out the equations.

 

Carl Sagan wrote a wonderful book, which I loaned out and never received so I can not say much about the title except that it had the word "Candle" in it, where he discussed america's often proud ignorance of science and math. From what I observed while in a Economics track in International Relations, I have to agree. Just as so many science students will conspire to take only the barebones of liberal arts courses (shortsighted of course, because as you mentioned a second language and solid writing skills, can be most beneficial), i found that History and English majors were clepping out of chemistry and math, by taking a SPEACH or PHILOSOPHY class that counted. Biology alternatives came with snappy titles like "Earth in the Balance". Do they come out of these classes with any better understanding of the fundamental laws and equations that effect us all every day, such as physics and physiology? No! And the science majors are doomed to life of sports television and beer, because nobody taught them the beauty of Arthur Tress, or inspired them too see the world they would have learned about, had they made the effort, in History and/or Economics class. This, and the poverty involved with being a student, was the most frustrating aspect of Academia. Everybody is too busy focusing. BOTH liberal arts majors and scientice students.

 

Of course the best solution is to double, or tripple (as I did) major. But who has the patience to submit to poverty for that long? Most people feel that education now, is for making money later. The quicker they are out of there, the better.

 

Being an escort while in college is a genius idea and I tip my hat to those young men comfortable enough with themselves to do so. They will make more money than their friends at Starbucks, and be introduced to a world few get to see. All during study breaks.

 

Oh dear, I seem to have appropriated this post. The original question is: You like brainy escorts, is that a turn on? I don't know about that, but brainy clients sure are.

 

-Hagen

[Boston Guy]

:-) I completely agree with you on the need for a fundamental understanding of science. In fact, I think it should be (it's not) one of the major issues facing us today: in this ever-more-technical world, the US population's understanding of science seems to be going downhill. And it makes me shudder when I see examples of politicians making critical decisions on science-related issues with clearly no understanding of what's involved. Oh, well.

 

By the way - I was amused by your image of the sun rising and setting. But let us not forget that assembly language programs aren't compiled; they're assembled. :-)

[Will]

This time, I promised myself, I'm going to keep my fingers off the keyboard for at least two days. Yeah. Sounds like the last time I swore off of ice-cream. I was already warming up my hands when BG mentioned the science vs. arts types, but when Rod mentioned Arthur Tress, I hit the "Reply" button so quickly I didn't know what had happened until the message panel popped up.

 

I promise, I promise to be brief. (1) I think the dichotomy drawn between "liberal arts" and "science" is bogus. The sciences help us to find answers to our "how" questions, and the arts help us to find answers to our "why" questions. Both sets of questions are natural to human beings, and human beings have to seek answers or they go crazy. Both ways of questioning require skill, rigor, discipline and critical thinking. Neither one is better than the other, and neither has any meaning in the absence of the other. (2) There are people who appropriate what they call "scientific thinking" or "artistic sensitivity" for their own purposes, which are frequently narcissistic, irresponsible, and pathological. I don't have any more time for "artists" who spend their lives picking lint out of their navels than I do for "scientists" who believe that everything important can be quantified. Both sets of folks are in full retreat from life.

 

That's why I brought up this thread. What turns me on like a switch is a guy who is engaged, who is plugged in, alive to the world around him; a guy who is curious and capable of wonder; a guy who can get as excited as a kid; whose response to mystery is a combination of laughter and tears. Physical beauty is powerful; men are hard-wired to be attracted by someone's looks and there's just no denying it. But men are also hard-wired to get bored with somebody's looks, and bored quickly. The hottest men I have ever known were hot not because they looked like Ken dolls designed by Bruce Weber, but because they were so interesting that I knew I could never get enough. In the end, sex for me is about life itself, and nothing else. Sparkle. Zest. Snap, crackle, and pop. Call it what you will, it's the stuff of great lovers and, consequently, of great escorts.

[Guest Matt In Vancouver]

duh!: ) what is this about?

although I agree a meeting is exciting when you can stimulate both the mind and the genitals, there is something to be said for straight ahead raunchy debauchery! Sometimes a cock is a cock is a cock, and I want them in every orifice!

There are times the interaction is best suited for all out pig sex: ) WOOF! On the other hand if you can have all out pig sex, and still have something worthwhile to say to each other after the festivities, extra bonus!

Matt

[Bilbo]

While the two disciplines are moving away from each other in many directions, they are also moving together in many. One point of intersection - computers and .... For example, for a theatrical lighting designer not to be able to work a computer is suicide anymore, a self imposed glass ceiling. It seems like most of the theaters (and other venues) which would employ a designer utilize computers to perform the many changes between lighting cues. And as another example, a musician who doesn't know how to use computers is doomed to dependence on other people to mix his music, etc.

[Guest longtimelurker]

LAST EDITED ON May-22-00 AT 08:14PM (EST)[p]Rod--

 

the Sagan book is "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" (Random House, 1996; Ballantine Books 1997)

 

A thread on "M" Theory, anyone?

 

God, I love this place!

[Rod Hagen]

>But let us not

>forget that assembly language programs

>aren't compiled; they're assembled.

>:-)

 

Assembly language programs, i think the most laborious of all languages, can be "proofed" by using the compiler, just as you would do after writing in C, Fortran, Open GL, Pascal etc...

[Boston Guy]

Are you offering to explain how a black hole can have high entropy?

 

Or are you simply suggesting that the "M"4M room as a whole is a highly disorganized place? :-)

[Rod Hagen]

Sorry, my example compeled you to respond early Will. What about my AT reference ignited the flame beneath your feet (hands)? He has some wonderful erotic, and non-erotic, stills. I was in Cambria, his home, this weekend enroute to my first-ever tour of Herst Castle, and stumbled upon one so stark and intriguing, I almost threw down the AMEX so I could bring it home (for an extremely princely some) just so I could study it at length and try to figure out just why it's so fixating. Because this was a recent sighting, I threw it in here assuming he must be integrated into some universities intermediate art courses. You dislike him?

 

I agree that both How and Why are fundamental to a full human experience. And nobody, as Bilbo stated, needs to pit science against art. Yet that is exactly what people do when they dismiss one or the other. Thank goodness we, and the people we are drawn to, are better than that :-)

 

>Call

>it what you will, it's

>the stuff of great lovers

>and, consequently, of great escorts.

 

...and great clients. These traits are what escorts point to when they hope to differentiate between Hustlers, Prostitutes, and Escorts, linking the intellect and companionship escorts provide to that of Geishas and Courtisans of the past. I stay out of these debates because as stubborn as I was on the straight vx gay issue, leave it to other cynics, like myself, to cling just as stubbornly to a "prostitute is a prostitute" angle. And who can argue with that?

 

Brains are hot. And brains on top of a hot body, are to many, REALLY hot. Others rightly say that they have friends and lovers for debates and/or companionship. They don't need the extra weight of a deep conversation with someone they are paying to titilate them. Different strokes for all the folks. -Hagen

[Guest sport989]

I used to date a Texan who said, "They say you can't fuck a mind--but I'd sure love to try!"

[Boston Guy]

Yes... but it's called an assembler not a compiler when the language is Assembly Language.

 

Actually, it's not just a case of "a rose by any other name." Compiled languages are generally taken to be "higher level" than assembly languages and the target of a compiled language can itself be another higher-level language (as in the example of a cross-compiler); this would be very unusual with an assembly language, because pretty much by definition the target of assembly language is some kind of machine language.

 

While both compilers and assemblers perform some of the same processing (lexical analysis, token generation, code generation), a compiler's task is generally more complicated, if for no other reason than the much more flexible definitions provided for compiled languages.

 

At one time, assemblers were pretty simple beasts but they have grown in power and flexibility over time as techniques developed for compiled languages have crossed over. For example, the idea of optimization of assembly language would have been seen as a bad idea at one time, because it was assumed that the assembly language programmer was putting code precisely and exactly where he or she wanted it to be. But today most assemblers offer optimization options.

 

Actually, the study of the processing of artificial languages, especially compiled ones, is kind of fun. The different levels on which the language is analyzed correspond to what we do with natural languages, only more rigorously: lexical analysis to put the symbols into tokens (words); parsing to determine if the words can be put together into valid sentences; and semantic analysis to figure out what it means. So it's really not all that different from what we do internally as we scan or read natural language.

 

Sorry this got to be so pedantic: I was actually trying to make a light-hearted comment that didn't succeed.

[Rod Hagen]

> Compiled languages

>are generally taken to be

>"higher level" than assembly languages

 

Right, hence the word "assembly". My assemby language code often ran 1000s of lines. At different stages I must have been sending it to some type of "optomizer", like you mentioned, and perhaps lumped it into my very involuntary habit of sending all programs belonging to other languages to the compiler nearly line by line. OR perhaps I did, or could not do, no such thing and that, combined with the girth of the programs, frustrated me so. I'm trying to put that part of Comp. Sci. behind me.

[Boston Guy]

Definitely understandable! :-)

 

But, having learned at least one assembly language, you will forever have a better understanding of what actually happens inside a computer at the software level than those who have not had such an opportunity.

[Guest Skeptic]

Hey, Sport, thanks for bringing up the F word again at long last! I was just about to throw in something like 'Doesn't anybody fuck & suck around here anymore?' but your contribution was more graceful by far--besides being still on topic.

 

Good thing I read this whole thread, too, because the other bit I was about to throw in was Julie's immortal "I Like 'Em Big & Stupid" (my theme song)--already cited by the estimable Paul Revere. (Paul, I had NO idea you were into C&W, too!)

 

What next? Aaron Lawrence reviewing Umberto Eco's latest?

 

BTW, I can't wait for Traveller's take on this whole thing. . .

[Rod Hagen]

LAST EDITED ON May-22-00 AT 11:38PM (EST)[p]Aaron knows better than to entertain you. I have yet to learn that lesson.

 

So, in his absence, let me know the title of your favorite Umberto Eco novel since "Foucault's Pendulum", and I will post a review for you in a couple weeks (you self-loathing twit).

 

-Hagen

[Guest longtimelurker]

Hmm--come to think of it, I seem to remember that some black holes are thought to be "hairy"...

 

No wonder French physicists have adopted the term with such reluctance...

[Guest longtimelurker]

C.P Snow, anyone?

[Guest Skeptic]

You don't entertain me in the least. (Would that you did!)

 

As for Eco, I have no 'favorite' among his works, although the recently published translation of "Kant and the Platypus" is valuable for demonstrating--even to die-hard enthusiasts--that most of his writing (rather like your own) is so much hot air. He, however, is paid handsomely for it.

 

And, despite your pretentious claim of knowing better, I have a wonderfully warm & loving relationship with myself. I do hope this doesn't come as a disappointment to you.