Posted by Matiz on February 05, 2001 at 12:03:36:
|
Where are the sex symbols of yesteryear? Where have the superstars gone? Is this the twilight of the sex goddesses? There have probably been "superstar" chicas as long as the World's Oldest Profession has been around, courtesans who stood head and shoulders above the other prostitutes and the "doing" of whom was a kind of rite of passage for men, a "must" on their dance cards. And, in the past, these boards have been no exception in touting certain women as "superstars". When I first started reading the old World Sex Guide and paranoia.com and ASPT, the posts referred to Rosie at CC and Tania at AB. Later, it was Dulce and Gabby at CC and Gina/Esua at Hong Kong Club. Honorable mention to Scorpio at Manhattan. Samantha was briefly touted, but turned out to be a flash in the pan. Guys spent a lot of time arguing about who qualified as a superstar and what the qualifications actually were to be heralded into that select group. For the last year or so, though, there's been markedly little talk about "superstars". This, I think, is probably a good thing, since it tends to lower unrealistic expectations, decrease overall demand for a particular chica, and allow guys to focus more on reacting to the moment rather than spending all night waiting for some fantasy woman. But still, I wonder why the phenomenon took off like it did, and why it has almost vanished. A wonderful session with Tania last week stimulated my thoughts on this subject. I have no answers, just observations and questions. Perhaps others have some insight and can contribute better than me. First, it seems obvious that, to a certain extent, being a superstar is a function of celebrity (of a sort) and a phenomenon of marketing, i.e., of developing and having a "reputation" and a "following". In an activity as discrete as mongering, the internet is the logical place for a chica to develop such a following. If there's no reputation and no following, isn't she just another chica giving great service? It's kind of like that story, "if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one there to hear it, does it make a sound." Well, if a chica gives great service to everybody, but no one is aware that she provides great service to anybody else, is she still a superstar? Maybe not. And in a funny way, it's the very celebrity itself that adds to the mystique of having one of these chicas. I mean, if you had a choice of spending the night with........fill in the blank, Cindy Crawford, Madonna, Selma Hayak, Sharon Stone, etc., or simply a woman who looked and acted exactly like CC or Madonna or SH or SS, wouldn't we all opt for the real McCoy just so can say we had that experience and can tell our friends about it? Second, the chica has to appeal to a very broad demographic. She can't just appeal to young guys, or old guys, or Asians, or guys who like big tits, or whatever. She's got to have appeal that transcends all market categories, in looks, attitude, and service. Without this broad appeal, she never develops the reputation that elevates her above the puta masses. The more difficult question, and one for which I have no answer, is whether she accomplishes this by having qualities with truly universal appeal (for example, looks that almost all men appreciate), or by having a talent for figuring out what a particular customer wants and tailoring her service to provide it. Either way, she is the exception to YMMV that proves the rule. Comparing some of the "superstars" of the past, I've noticed they seem to share certain qualities. First, they never have an attitude. They are not stuck up, or obsessed with their looks, or visibly proud of their status. To the contrary, they usually seem completely unaware of the effect they have on men, and this is yet another appealing trait in itself. Second, they all have an ability to make the guy they're with feel special, to feel really good about himself as a man. One way that's accomplished is by focusing all their attention on the guy, making him feel like he's the center of their universe. No matter what your age, looks, or background, it's always flattering and enjoyable to have a beautiful woman focus all her attention and energy on you alone. Finally, again in my experience, they all have the ability to make the sex itself fun and natural. It's never some illicit, sleazy, "lights out" experience. Rather, it's a completely wholesome, natural, fun, and mutually enjoyable experience. When a chica can accomplish all of this for one guy, he is likely to become her regular customer and she may even become his favorita. When she accomplishes for virtually every guy she encounters, and if she receives enough favorable press, voila!, you have a new superstar. Interstingly, though, that's a term you don't hear much anymore. Is it because the collective experience level here is now higher and guys are more sophisticated about their experiences? Or is it because of an absence of quality women who can lay claim to being "first among equals"? Or is it because we just don't share information about them anymore they way we used to? Are they out there, but we just don't talk about them? Quien sabe? I for one do not mourn the departure of "sex icon" status in TJ. With fame comes more customers; that means less availability and less opportunity for each guy. And I'm not trying to revive the concept by this post. It's just an observation about where we've been and where we're heading that I find interesting.
|
|