- Sep 1, 2014
- 288
- 2,589
- 113
- 38
- Twitter Username
- @DeezNeedsAmmo
- MFC Username
- DeezNeedsAmmo
- Chaturbate Username
- deez_na
I'm surprised there seems to be some offence taken by Mavs description of the kind of girl he is seeking
Surely you're allowed to discriminate when it comes to your own sexual partners?
Obviously he could of worded some things better, the post was quintessential "man" lol
As a professional (we assume, given that he presented himself as an established model with experience) model, one knows that first impressions and selling yourself are pretty damn important. It's possible to recover from a flubbed sales pitch but it takes a bit of work.
I, for one, tried to assist in the only aspect I could salvage from his true intentions since it was only clearly conveyed that he did not seek monetary profit or business assistance; merely a "practice" partner to hopefully aid his Adult Film aspirations in the long run. This is not inherently a bad thing, but it's essentially just looking to get laid, if we're being honest. So in that essence, yes, one can absolutely discriminate in sexual partners, but overtly lying about intent when trying to lure in young women (including teenagers) is just flat out disgusting. Business is business - consenting adults performing, certain personalities and/or looks working together, some matches work, some don't. Any other intentions... kinda gets a bit sketchy.
If we could just drop the "quintessential 'man'" stereotype, just as a culture, I think we would get a lot fewer misinterpretations like this. It's not manly to obfuscate one's intentions - it's either sexual predation or just bad advertising. Unfortunately, neither of those options are really preferable...
I don't want to keep dwelling on all this or keep poking a hornet's nest, I just think it's very important to learn from what went wrong here and why. Misconceptions, misinterpreted intentions, all that kinda stuff and the fallout following it can easily be avoided by just... communicating a little bit clearer. But hindsight's 20/20, right?