Misleading Phone Sex Numbers

In an article about education in the UK, Students and phone sex: “Why not work as a phone sex operator and pay your way through University”, the author’s premise is “Why not work as a phone sex operator and pay your way through University to scale down the amount of debt you are left with at the end?” However, there are some misleading numbers or connections about the money to be made as a phone sex operator:

Despite the lack of adverts and official publicity, a report published by Durex revealed the 45% of the population have tried phone sex before, with 56% researching companies on the internet.

The report mentioned was condom company Durex’s 2009 British Sex Survey, of which little information is known (and likely bears the same concerns as their Global Sex Survey). Regardless of whether or not the survey results are accurate enough to provide any statistical data worthy of counting on, the author of the article, Nicole Froio, misuses the survey results.

First, while it is true that 45% of the respondents stated that they had participated in phone sex, the following “with 56% researching companies on the internet” is an unrelated matter. The survey question was “If you wanted to know about sex, where would you get the information?” It had nothing to do with phone sex. So, while 56% percent of survey participants stated they would go “online” to get information, it was to get “sex information.” Which sounds more like those answering the survey were talking about looking for “sex ed” information online, not necessarily performing research regarding phone sex companies or even shopping for phone sex services.

That leads us to the other issue.

Of the 45% who said that they had participated in phone sex, there’s no indication that they had ever paid for any of their phone sex. Just as roughly 40% also stated that they had participated in spanking, there’s no indication whether they had ever paid to participate in a spanking session (or if they were the spankee or the spanker). There is simply no data on whether any of these sexual activities were paid for.

The survey (amazingly!) did include “paid for sex” as an option for the “Do you own or have you tried any of the following…” question; and 5% of the survey participants said they had. But as for whether any of the 5% of people responding had ever paid for phone sex is unknown.

But that’s not the way the Froio presents the survey results. (In fact, omitting the paid for sex info entirely is also a problem.) And that’s a shame.

There is money to be made in phone sex; but we shouldn’t mislead people with numbers.

More PSOs Should Be Like Santa

I’ve got a long post about phone sex operators & social media in draft stages, but I just had to note this gem from Stacey Alcorn in 5 Steps to Working a Holiday Party Like Santa — and it was too long for me to tweet!

Santa would never show up at a home and tell the children there what he wants for Christmas. That would be absurd: Santa knows that Christmas is not about him.

Likewise, the networking event you’ll attend is not about you. It’s about everyone else in the room. When you meet people at an event, ask lots of questions about what they do for work, fun and happiness. Inquire how you can help them achieve their dreams.

Whether or not you realize it, blogging, tweeting, messages at phone sex platforms, etc., are not all about you. Yup, even if you’re a femdom talking to clients, this applies.

Coupon Codes For Wish List Shopping For PSOs, CamGirls, Etc.

Just a reminder about wishlist safety — for both clients and providers.

Also, if you shop at Sexclectic, for anyone at all this holiday season, I have exclusive codes you can use to save money:

* Enter code PHONESEXSECRETS and save 20% on any order.

* Enter code PSSTOYS and get $10 off any order of $50 or more.

Voice Actors & Actresses Needed For Paying Audio Erotica Gigs

alluring audioI’ve been contacted by a new company to give them a hand finding voice talent for their recorded erotic stories. They are looking for voice talent — especially male voice talent — to create (record) their erotic audio fantasies for women.

While I’ve no experience with this company, this could be a great source of extra income for female PSOs and an even more rare opportunity for men looking to provide erotic entertainment for women. Below is the “call for submissions” or “wanted” posting as they sent it; please follow their directions to be considered.

Who We Are

Alluring Audio is a new company creating erotic fantasies for women in an immersive audio format. Whether it’s a fling with a hot coworker, discipline at the hands of a pirate king, or anything in between, our fantasies are fun, extremely sexy, and place the listener in the center of the action.

Why We Need You

A voice that lends sex appeal to a slick sports car or even creamy alfredo sauce is great, but what we really need are voice actors who sound less corporate and more intimate. We’re looking for men and women who can take on the personalities of different characters in different scripts and bring them to life so the listener feels as if they’re really in the middle of the fantasy. We’re looking for people who can really act with their voices, who are willing to take some editorial direction, and who are comfortable with sexually explicit material, often including acting out the sounds of orgasm in a confident and natural way. For both explicit and tame examples, please see our web site.

We’re just starting out and only have a few scripts ready for production, but we are looking to build a solid base of voice talent that we can call upon on an ongoing basis as new scripts are written.

What You’ll Need

You need a home studio with a professional microphone to record audio. Excellent sound quality is important to the listener’s overall enjoyment of these fantasies.

What You’ll Get

Payment ranges from $200 to $350 per script, depending on the content. These are not lengthy scripts, with an average around 1,200 words.

If you’re interested in this opportunity, please fill out our informational form here and also email a short audio sample (30 seconds or less) to VO@AlluringAudio.com. The sample should let us evaluate your voice and your acting. It does *not* have to be professionally recorded.

Work Your Phone Sex Blog Like A Vintage Stag Film

You’ve probably heard about the old stag films, maybe even seen a few. But do you understand their magic?

Naughty and even nudie films have a long history, dating back to the early 1900s. While all these forerunners of today’s porn are sometimes referred to as “blue” movies, stag films held a specific audience and purpose — and they most definitely should not be confused with any old vintage porn.

Stag films were short, one or two reel films, which were sexually explicit — and therefore illegal. In order to avoid both censors and the law, these films were shown on an underground circuit which consisted primarily of “officially decried but socially tolerated”* semi-public male spaces. These were “members’ only” gatherings, where the members (no pun intended!) knew one another. Think fraternities, men’s clubs, and other men-only parties (often called “men’s smoking parties” or “smokers”).

(There’s a reason bachelor parties are also called “stag parties”!)

Because these were groups of heterosexual males (or closeted males passing as heteronormative), married or not, the literal focus of the films was most definitely the female form and male arousal. However, this was not to set off circle jerks. Instead, stag films were designed to be a form of homosocial entertainment designed to enhance male bonds of friendship and general “manliness”. In Latex and Lingerie: Shopping for Pleasure at Ann Summers Parties, Merl Storr provides a concise definition of gender scholar Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick‘s working definition of homosocial bonding:

Sedgwick defines male homosociality as a form of male bonding with a characteristic triangular structure. In this triangle, men have intense but nonsexual bonds with other men, and women serve as the conduits through which those bonds are expressed.

[If you’re confused how this actually works, just recall groups of men making catcalls at women, lewd jokes at the expense of women, or otherwise doing what Linda Williams accurately calls “verbal ejaculation”.]

After WWII, when film projectors for home use became affordable and popular, the traveling underground stag film circuit began its slow death. Now, individuals were able to purchase 8mm versions of stag films. But the viewing space & social construct of quasi-public, quasi-private places (i.e. the “men will be men” events held in fraternity house, Elk’s Lodge, or even bar room basements located in the atomic family home) didn’t change. The specific purpose, & therefore the craft of, this specific genre of adult films remained the same.

What makes the stag films such a specific film genre?  As Linda Williams states in Hard Core: Power, Pleasure, and the “Frenzy of the Visible”, stag films were designed “to arouse and then precisely not to satisfy”. In fact, a handful of early examples withstanding, stag films didn’t end with what we now view as the requisite cum-shot. Rather, they built up to a penetration shot — leaving more, including his dick, to come.

While showing complete nudity & real, not simulated, coitus (thus being actual hardcore productions and not the “pure” softcore pinup stuff we normally think of as tease), these films didn’t end with the usual porno bang. Instead, stag films left the viewers wanting — craving — a bang of their own.

This is why so many brothels played stag films for their waiting clients. Such films served as great tease, an extended sort of foreplay, keeping the men waiting for sexual services and companionship in the mood — and still in need of the sex services. The power of these films lasted even past the demise of fraternal organizations & men’s clubs in the 1960s. Then stag films moved into the coin-operated arcades & peepshow booths located in adult bookstores & sex toy shops. The income they raised went beyond the pay-as-you-go insertion of coins, fanning the flames of sexual desire, prompting additional need-driven purchases in the stores.

Now that you understand the magic of the old stag films, do you see how they compare to your blog posts or other website content?

Your website and/or blog is comparable to the semi-public space of a frat-house or Elk’s club and your content needs to get the guys going, make them want your services — but not let them “rub out” their need of you either.

It’s easy to say that a phone sex operator (or other sex worker) should “tease” their website visitors into paying for their services; but sometimes the word “tease” is translated as meaning your content “shouldn’t be so graphic”. But as stag films show us, that’s not necessarily the case. You can be as explicit and pornographic as you want. Just be sure that all your tease and foreplay leaves them seeking satisfaction — and your specific brand of satisfaction at that.

If you’re not sure just how to leverage the same sort of power at your blog or website, contact me for a one-on-one consultation appointment.

* The phrase “officially decried but socially tolerated” comes from an editorial printed in The Nation, July 4, 1936, regarding Shaw’s Mrs. Warren’s Profession; discovered via Eric Schaefer’s Bold! Daring! Shocking! True: A History of Exploitation Films, 1919-1959.

Ignore Lines, Financial Domination & Other Femdom Phone Sex Games

For those of you interested in understanding financial domination, ignore lines, and other erotic humiliations in phone sex, there’s a great article at Sex Kitten: Ignore Me, I’ll Pay You; Blackmail Me, I’ll Pay You Again. I would have linked to this article, even if I hadn’t been included in it. Really!

Oh For Gawd’s Sake, Learn How To Properly Blog

Not to be all bitchy-mcbitch-pants or beat a dead horse or anything, but…

I don’t think NiteFlirt (or whoever is in charge of their blog) really understands what they are doing with a blog &/or social media. I mean it is a chronic problem. And it’s starting to work my last nerve.

another-messed-up-niteflirt-blog-post

This latest example includes a blog post about “news”. It’s no longer news. The very video they use dates to 2012; it’s over two years old. But I would be inclined to forgive them the creative definition of “news” to create content if:

A) Their whole blog post wasn’t an obvious attempt to fetch search engine bots to phone sex listings rather than to entertain or enlighten readers/members — actual humans — with said “news”,

and

B) If they didn’t, once again, feed the search engine spider bots inaccurate information about NF.

[W]e know that no technology could ever replace the amazing pleasure of a human touch. What we offer can’t be found in any Chinese hospitals.

Why would you even suggest that phone sex provides the “pleasure of human touch”?! Phone sex is sex work, but it does most definitely does not involve touching the client. (Even alluding to a Flirt touching a client sounds like “arrange a meeting in the real world” — which is so very-very against NF’s own terms of service.)

Is the “pleasure of human touch” supposed to be in reference to the client’s own hand? Then say so! “Masturbation” would be a far wiser word to use in terms of humans searching online.

And that last line? What does that mean? That there’s no human touch at Chinese hospitals? That there’s no masturbation at Chinese hospitals? That there’s no phone sex allowed at Chinese hospitals? …Plus such phrasing and the use of a negative “can’t” evokes feelings of comparisons. Surely NF knows that it can’t compete with hospitals of any sort, right? Why end your post on such an ambiguous and, frankly, odd note?

Lessons: Write for people, not spiders. And, for pity’s sake, if you are going to try to feed spiders, feed them the correct information. Sheesh.

For the love of gawd, NF, hire me or someone else to educate you so that you can promote your phone sex business right.

Phone Sex Secrets — Three Years A Superhero?

phone-sex-secrets-lynn-superheroWhen I started Phone Sex Secrets nearly three years ago, I had no idea how important the site would be — or how busy I would be! In honor of nearly three years, I’ve decided to make the time to take my own advice and brand myself better. Step One: revamped the site — the “superhero theme” based on client feedback.

Speaking of the superhero theme…

To paraphrase from The Amazing Spider-Man, “We all have secrets: The ones we keep… and the ones that are kept from us.” At Phone Sex Secrets, I expose the secrets and help phone sex operators be successful.

There will be some new pages and information to come soon; but meanwhile, keep an eye on Twitter for quick blasts of news and helpful links!

Magic Numbers?

During yesterday’s consultation, a client asked a common question: Is there a best age for a PSO to be?

While platform sites often have a “member since” date showing in your profile (making math possible!), here’s some data on ages men find “attractive”:

Data_9780385347372_3p_all_r1.j.indd

Charts from OKCupid, showing how straight women and men rate each other based on ages. For women, the men they find most attractive are roughly their own age. For men, the women they find most attractive are roughly the same age – 20 to 23 – regardless of the age of the man.

Found via; more details here.

What Do I Think Of Phone Sex Platform TalkToMe?

I am often solicited to join other phone sex platform sites — if only just to try it out & review them here at Phone Sex Secrets. But why would I create an account, market myself etc., just to get a few callers to review the platform service? That’s a lot of work for a woman who is busy juggling phone sex with callers on other platforms (NF & MPS) and consulting with PSOs too. Usually these platform sites offer nothing new; and a number of them have come and gone already anyway. So what’s the point?

But since I mentioned the unethical TalkToMe (TTM) promo, I was asked a few questions about TTM — most of which I could not answer because I did not join the phone sex platform. That sparked questions about why I didn’t join the site. Seeing as this might just be helpful, both to phone sex operators in terms of evaluating companies and those developing platforms themselves, I thought I would discuss what I found when I went to visit TTM. So here’s my review of TTM as a potential “Talker”.

From the perspective of a prospective phone sex operator, the biggest problem with TTM is that the site does not clearly state their terms. There’s not even a simple page listing the percentage they take. At least there isn’t any info provided before you sign up; and why would I sign up for the unknown?

If you spend some time scouring for the Talker’s FAQ (and it does take some time to find it; you have to use search engines, not find it on the site), you’ll see that there are lots of caps and limits on what you can charge.

Per minute rate is:

The maximum you can charge for a minute is $2.99.

talktome-rates

However, if you search on the site, you have an option for “highest priced” — and that shows you that you can charge more than $2.99.

highest-per-minute-rate

So which is it? Is there some sort of preferential treatment? I guess that’s what they meant when they said, “If you have an argument to charge more, please do so via email and we will review and if approved increase your rate.” What is a preferred “argument”? Or maybe TTM just can’t keep up with their own policy changes. In any case, it just does not inspire confidence.

Webchat rates:

All webchats are 25 cents for each message sent by the caller.

Does that mean you don’t get paid if you send a message back?

talktome-webchat-fee

Rates For Messages (which seems to cover Pay Per Views aka Pay To Views aka Store Items)

ttm-message-fee-limits

You can charge a maximum of $2.00 for a message without any attachments. A message with attachments have a maximum of $5.00 per attachment.

Poor grammar aside, I don’t like the limits. Especially when the limits seem to think typed words have less value than recorded voices or images or whatever attachments are allowed. And I have no idea how many attachments are allowed per message. At least not at this point; I suppose I could continue to search and search… But if I have to work this hard, well, no thanks.

How much do you get paid?

Whatever the rates you can charge for TTM services, it’s still murky as to what percentage a PSO gets. As best as I can ascertain it is 50%. That’s based on this bit from the TTM FAQ regarding Direct Connect calls (which is apparently like dispatch calls, and participation is optional). Direct Connect rates are 99 cents per minute, and Talkers get 50 cents of that. But I still wasn’t sure if that “normal commission” rate meant half of the per minute rate, or if you just made 50 cents no matter what the per minute rate was…

talktome-direct-connect

In further reading, I found more about Direct Connect calls.

You will receive your normal commission off of these 99 cent per minute calls ($0.50/min)

ttm-direct-dial-phone-sex

(There too you find out about other programs, such as working for free on Talk-Chat lines. I suppose you can see this as a form of trolling; but I’m not a fan of talking for free. And not to someone calling a free chat line. They rarely cough-up the money to pay per minute.)

A few TTM Talkers have mentioned a 50-50 split before, so I’m guessing that’s true. At least for calls. But… Well, that’s not good enough. And I don’t just mean the split — I mean it’s not good enough for me to have to figure all this out for myself. Why can’t TTM just provide all that information up front?

Other things

The site plasters a 1-800 number for support; but all you’ll find there is a recording promising live help will arrive one day. Meanwhile, leave a message with your phone number and someone will get back to you. If you want anonymity, use the site’s contact form and keep your fingers crossed.

Also, when you are on the main page, category pages, etc., you are not able to right-click and open a profile or listing in a new tab or window — that makes for a lot of back & forth when searching. Not a cool idea of potential callers.