Delusional "fans"

The member you refer to wears glasses,the rose tinted ones.

Hahah! Amazing

The babeshows are manipulation. Their intent is to cloud the user's proper perception over what is taking place over 'the airways'. It's always been this way. What's changed over the last 15 years is that the babes felt the need to lean ever more heavily into focusing on those guys that could be more easily convinced they (the user) were somehow special in their interactions. What was previously (and should've remained) a more healthily - and necessary - suspension of disbelief became, for too many, a warped sense of reality. Insiders realised that these users - perhaps those of a certain personality - were the bigger spenders. That pushing anything that convinced these guys they were a cut above the mob was good for business. (As a result, those users that were more aware of the limits of this famtasyland were pushed aside by the altered business model.) The sense of entitlement the big users feel these days - as referenced by recent posters here - comes as much from the idea they have a relationship with 'their' babe as from the spending itself.

Thesedays, the industry also encourages the idea of competition between users anyway, as it naturally pushes spending. Again, guys so inclined want to be seen as top dog to the babe in question, even if it's just in terms of spending.

(09-08-2025 14:38 )NobodyDoesItLikeBeth Wrote:  ... Sure they are great blokes off Babestation, but the slating of camera angles, lighting, music and anything else along with some of the other messages stinks of entitlement. ...

I would add, we should perhaps guard against going too much the other way. It's not as if spending doesn't entitle the payer to much of ANYTHING. This too, is too much of a babe narrative for me. I don't like the idea that the shows are too 'lowly' to have ANY standards. Not a decent customer service ethic? Not a decent standard of 'production'? Not an efficient and protective website functionality? In truth, any spender deserves these basics on the way to trying to achieve his 'satisfaction' (!). (Mike Jagger was so right to use that word,! lol.) The key is always proportion. The user's sense of what he should get for his money should be REALISTIC, that's all. To me, thinking guys don't deserve that much is in itself a kind of thinking oneself above our fellow perverts! ('I'm too educated to be pulled into this crap' is a bit elitist, iow. We are all here aren't we? That says that we all want to look, lol!)

Finally, the whole dm thing plays into the same 'making guys feel special', of course. Plus, it pushes the convenient idea that satisfaction can only come via exclusivity of content and a lack of public transparency of what happens with each interaction. Nowadays, in large part, no user knows EXACTLY what the other fella gets for his spends. This suits this industry of somewhat suspect ethics down to the ground. This way, users have less to compare to in terms of what they should be satisfied re. their 'servicing'.

It's good to be entirely honest about this stuff I think - as this thread is helping with no doubt. Only then can we hope to understand what we are all suseptable to. All of us... to some extent. And, hopefully, then we can be on the way to more satisfactory transactions as a result.

^Calling Babestation having somewhat suspect ethics is being extremely generous and kind.