YMMV: The conundrum of reviews and discretion

I don’t like reviews nor do I want any. There, I said it.

I understand the need to verify the veracity of a provider’s status and whether or not she’s fraudulent. Regardless of the context, no one likes being taken in by a fraud and when money and security are involved, then of course the need for truth is absolutely necessary. But far too often, reviews are a platform for vulgarity, petty revenge, or obnoxious insults. No, I haven’t received a bad review, but I’ve read those for other female providers. Few are written with any sort of class or elegance and while I understand how excited and happy some reviewers are after seeing a wonderful provider (or upset and angry following a negative encounter), I can’t help but to think that there is way too much information publicly given about what occurs during these appointments. That’s extremely worrisome from a legal standpoint.

Moreover, as many other providers have said in the past, reviews can also set up unreal expectations. To paraphrase the wonderfully awesome Amanda Brooks, I don’t provide a service, but an experience. A client who wants to have a personal one-on-one experience with a true Companion must understand that any provider who is true to the art does not comply with a checklist of duties. No doubt, there are providers who do this: some perform a menu of duties with vigor and vitality; many more perform them as drudgery. That is neither what I want to provide nor experience.

Companionship, for me, is not merely something to make ends meet. It is a career, a calling, an art form, and yes, a business. I do this willingly and eagerly and nothing turns what should be a good experience into a bad one quicker than mindless repetition and resentment.

When I agree to see a potential client it is not just for the money, though do not take this as an opening that my required honorarium is anything close to optional. However, just because a gentleman has a lot of money and time to spend does not automatically translate into an appointment. Through emails, interactions via comments on this blog or at Courtesan Culture or perhaps, Eccie, we establish a rapport. As a Companion, I do not consider performing an Academy Award-caliber act a genuine, much less personal and intimate, experience: it cheapens my art form and disrespects the client.

Discretion and reviews also stand at odds. Many potential clients who may be unaccustomed to providers who care about their safety enough to do thorough screening balk at the idea of having to give actual, verifiable information. I prefer to do my own screening instead of relying on a third-party. I have a well-honed intuition and I can usually sense when something is “wrong” or “not quite right” before many others. Furthermore, what may be “no big deal” to a third-party screener may be a very “big deal” to me; this is also why I will not accept most provider references, unless I know the provider very well, over at least a year of interaction and/or at least one in-person meeting.

Jeanne Duval, courtesan and mistress to Baudelaire

Yet, some of these same clients who don’t want to undergo screening want extremely intimate details about a companion, not for their own safety but merely just to know. When providers screen, it’s for our safety, not because we want to spend hours verifying your information as a passing fancy. Believe it or not, I do have other things to do with my time and every provider I know considers screening the most tedious and annoying yet absolutely necessary part of the job. Again, providers who screen, we care about our safety and our lives and we want to continue being happy, hale and hearty. Furthermore, this establishes a comfort level so that our enjoyment of each other can be freely and pleasurably pursued.

Another provider who I definitely respect, Cat Elliot, gives a reminder that I thoroughly agree with and want to quote here: “I do not confuse discretion with anonymity.” Indeed. These are two very, very different things. Discretion is about keeping sensitive information a secret, whereas anonymity is about a complete lack of knowledge, a state of ignorance. This world is in an unfortunate state: those of us who are involved on the provider side of the intimacy industry are often considered disposable. Those who foolishly wish violence upon us professional intimates, even as society more often than not looks the other way if not outright condones it, prefer to commit their horrible crimes under the cover of darkness and anonymity. Arguing, negotiating with a provider about screening, and attempting (or intimidating) her to do otherwise, only sends up red flags. Very big, “let me warn my colleagues”, very red flags.

Happy Claudia. You'll want to meet her!

My personality will be on full-display through this blog, as well as at Courtesan Culture, the only forum where I spend extended amounts of time, albeit not on a daily basis. This is for you to make the right decision about seeing me or not. It also serves a starting point for in-person conversation.

About Claudia Christophe

Professional, sensual Companion for discerning gentlemen. I am based in Chicago, but I am available to travel worldwide.
This entry was posted in Companionship, Courtesanry and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to YMMV: The conundrum of reviews and discretion

  1. Amanda says:

    Thank you for the mention!

    And damn…you really said it well. Your eloquence on this topic is needed.


  2. You’re welcome, Amanda!

    I feel like this is such a taboo topic to talk about on a lot of boards, because a lot of providers don’t want to run the risk of upsetting a potential client. And I understand that, but I’m not going to do anything that could threaten my safety. This time around, I also have little to no patience with euphemisms, etc. A lot of us talk about raising the standard in the industry but then most people do nothing and just continue like they always have.


  3. I couldn’t agree with Amanda more, Claudia!

    And I too wouldn’t have any reviews if I didn’t understand the reasoning behind them. Reviews are like any good thing. Their purpose can be manipulated into something evil. I think of reviews as if I were a guy. I would love to know that a lady isn’t LE, or provides the Experience that she says she can. Look at all the false advertisers, bait and switch artists, and guys getting beat up by the pimps of so-called independent providers. It’s enough to make a really GOOD potential client (and I would think we would agree on how we define this guy) do his research. Word of mouth and being the best, or at least good by association is something that takes time.

    On the flip side, men have turned reviews into a way of manipulating a lady into feeling like her career is made or broken by his whim. Reading reviews of some serial reviewers can be comical. It is obvious that some have issues with themselves. And Cat did say it best. Discretion and anonymity are two different things. And from my experience, with a little cleverness you’ll attract those you want to attract, even amongst the wolves.



  4. Thank you, Tiffani!

    I’ve been working on a way to create a form of review that only verifies the veracity, or ‘truthiness’ as Stephen Colbert would say, of a provider. Straightforward, yes or no, questions– close-ended. Because, as we all agree, the reasoning behind them is understandable. But…it’s way too manipulated right now. I don’t trust a lot of reviews even outside of this industry because people can be so catty and vengeful or overly positive and manipulative.


  5. i would never allow reviews.you can judge a cow, you cannot judge an experience


  6. LOL! Very true. Although, I think I look rather fetching in a blue ribbon.


  7. Pingback: Study Hour | The Claudia Chronicles

Comments are closed.