George Alan Rekers Was Ready to Give Jo-Vanni Roman 5 Stars on Yelp

Before the shit hit the fan, George Alan Rekers was taking calls from reporters, like the Miami New Times‘ Brandon K. Thorp. At the time it appears Rekers had no idea how this was all going to end for him, which is a shame because Jo-Vanni Roman could’ve really used some great feedback.

In acknowledging he used Roman’s services, Rekers says, “He was advertising himself as a travel companion, as I cannot lift luggage. … And he was very good as a travel companion. He did carry my luggage and that sort of thing.”

Listen to the phone call between Rekers and Thorp here:

And for what it’s worth, when someone uses The Google and searches for “travel companion,” this is what comes up. No mention of Mr. Roman, but WHAT IS THIS!

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #georgealanrekers #jo-vanniroman #prostitution stories and more


  • B

    QUEERTY kind of blew it.

    First, when someone says they did a google search for a travel companion, that does not mean that “travel companion” is the search string or the only one used, or even that a link was found on Google’s page as opposed to some web page on a site Google showed.

    Second, Google’s search results for a given search string change all the time as they adjust page rankings based on a number of criteria including the number of pages that link to a given page and how many pages link to those pages.

    Third, as an experiment, I searched for (no quotes), “ travel” and found on the first page. The search result text is “Jullian- in Los Angeles I’m a great travel campanion and in general just a great positive vibe. Oh btw everyone says I look better than my pictures! ^_^ I’m Open all things as for …” (the “…” was produced by google).

    Aside from Julian’s spelling issues, unless you notice the URL shown in green (which mentions, you could easily think the link is to a bona fide travel companion. If you visit his page, you’ll see otherwise (an ad for a naked male stripper on one side although may change that frequently), but whether that is visible or not depends on how wide your browser’s window is. If you don’t read much of anything, the most prominent thing shown is a phone number. It would be very easy to simply call to find out more.

    Now, if Rekers actually typed “ travel”, you’d have to wonder, but I put in the site restriction merely to get only pages, and it clearly shows that you can find ones that initially look like someone providing travel services.

    So, Rekers claim about google is plausible, but not terribly believable as it would require a coincidence.

    Finally, if you search for “ Lucien” “Lucien” is not there but someone named “markontheblock” is. The picture has a circle with a line through it, yellowish instead of the traditional red. The textual description sort of fits.

  • WalkderDC

    The point is, Rekers is claiming Jovani advertised as a travel companion. Yet not only has he not produced any other ad, nor the website where he found him. But Jovanni has said that he only advertised on Rentboy.

    B you have now been on 4 threads defending Rekers. What is your agenda?

  • romeo

    Yeah, B, I’m for freedom of speech and all, but you really need to stfu. Rekers is indefensible.

  • schlukitz


    “B you have now been on 4 threads defending Rekers. What is your agenda?”


    Yeah, B, I’m for freedom of speech and all, but you really need to stfu.

    Gentlemen, B sees himself as a self-appointed moderator whose agenda is to make everyone who posts on these threads, including look dumb, while attempting but failing to make himself look smart, flag posters he disagrees with and trying to get folks like 1EqualityUSA and myself banned from this site.

    I have no doubt that B is the person responsible for every post that 1EqualityUSA and I make being moderated for the past several months now.

    I have also noticed that many of the commentators with whom we are familiar no longer post on these threads. I can readily see why.

    B apparently believes that he alone is entitled to freedom of speech but that is all other posters on this site that should stfu. For that reason both 1EqualityUSA and I rarely post on Queerty anymore.

    B takes all the fun out of it.

  • B

    o. 2 · WalkderDC wrote, “B you have now been on 4 threads defending Rekers. What is your agenda?” I’m not defending Rekers – given his homophobic activities, he deserves to be seriously disrespected – but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to be accurate. My only agenda is to encourage people to get the details right.

    You claimed, “Yet not only has he not produced any other ad, nor the website where he found him. But Jovanni has said that he only advertised on Rentboy.” Well, think about it. I’ve sometimes found something using Google and then tried to find the same thing later and couldn’t. On the second time, either I failed to reproduce the search string I had stumbled on the first time, or the page ranking changed. Google in part bases its search results on the number of links going to a page, plus the number of links going to the page that links to that page. All of that changes as web pages get modified. When I checked, I found that google can point you to a person on and you don’t have to hit an “agree” button to load the page. So, Rekers could have started somewhere else, landed on a “contact” page of, and simply not noticed the URL, or even pornographic images on the page. Why? Well read which points out, “The most prominent result from the new eyetracking studies is not actually new. We simply confirmed for the umpteenth time that banner blindness is real. Users almost never look at anything that looks like an advertisement, whether or not it’s actually an ad. (Indeed, banner blindness is moving beyond the online realm, for example into ballot design.)” The author of this statement is an expert with a Ph.D. in human-computer interaction.

    QUEERTY’s argument (giving Google a simple search string such as “travel companion” and noting that a rentboy was not prominently displayed) is simply inadequate to draw any conclusions.

    That doesn’t mean Rekers did not use, only that the so called “proof” that he did is just innuendo. That Jovanni said he only “advertised” on is also irrelevant, since search engines can see those advertisements and people looking at such pages tend to not notice the URLs, treating those as “visual clutter”.

    The more damaging statement is the nude massage one – (assuming Jovanni is telling the truth) that is not one that is easy to explain away. It is also one that could get Jovanni in trouble for breach of contract if he signed an agreement with Rekers promising confidentiality, unless Rekers gave him permission to talk about the massages.

  • Bill Perdue

    If it’s rightwing, if it defends bigotry and religion, if it denigrates the LGBT communities – then B is for it.

  • B

    No. 5 · Bill Perdue lied again. I have no respect whatsoever for Bill Perdue due to his habit of lying about anyone he disagrees with. He’s really as bad as Rekers.

  • Bill Perdue

    @B: There are dozens of us who say the same thing and we’re pleased not to have your respect.

    If you liked us it’d be very damaging to our reputations.

  • B

    No. 7 · Bill Perdue wrote, “There are dozens of us who say the same thing”. You are lying again. There are a handful of people who behave as you do, and you are perhaps the worst.

    People can disagree, but you try to turn every disagreement into a personal attack that consists of nothing but one lie after another. Quite frankly, you need professional help. Your behavior borders on being pathological.

  • Bill Perdue

    @B: It’s simply an accurate description. If you see it as damaging then the solution is to modify your behavior.

    I suspect you can’t so people will continue to oppose you. Deal with it and stop trying to cut off discussion with lies about our motives.

  • B

    In No 9 Bill Perdue lied again by saying “I’s simply an accurate description.” Trying to imitate Hilter with the “big lie”
    technique? Perdue, you really are slime.

  • Bill Perdue

    @B: Oh, now I’ve gone and upset you. Awful me.

    Get used to it.

    As ye sow so shall you reap.

  • B

    No. 11 · Bill Perdue showed his ego by writing, “@B: Oh, now I’ve gone and upset you. Awful me.”

    No, you didn’t upset me – I just consider you to be a mindless bore with no integrity, based on your behavior. People like you unfortunately slow down progress on gaining civil rights: if you want to make progress, you have to assess the “enemy” accurately, and you are trying to prevent that.

  • WalkderDC

    No B

    You aren’t Just trying for accuracy. What you are doing is inventing scenarios to pretend that he isn’t lying. First you attack the reporters for not contacting him, then when it was pointed out to you in another post that he was contacted you immediately scramble and say “But maybe he didn’t understand what they were talking about!”

    So you are desperately trying to find any reason as to why he is somehow the victim here, and I am curious as to why.

  • B

    No. 13 · WalkderDC wrote, “No B You aren’t Just trying for accuracy. What you are doing is inventing scenarios to pretend that he isn’t lying.”

    No, WalkderDC, I’m simply “trying for accuracy” as I said. Read my first comment (No 1). I pointed out the flaws in QUEERTY’s example of what you find in a google search, and then stated, “So, Rekers claim about google is plausible, but not terribly believable as it would require a coincidence.”

    That means you could reasonably guess he was lying but you haven’t proved he was.

    Then in No 4, I added (after a technical explanation regarding the flaws with a “guilt by not being able to reproduce a search” and “the rentboy only “advertised on” argument) that “The more damaging statement is the nude massage one.”

    All the statements I made about specifically about Rekers, as opposed to statements about the technology he claims to have used, were negative.

    But maybe you could answer a question. Why to you believe the claim that Rekers must have searched for a “companion” using when (See No. 2) you are basing your claim on the statement of a male prostitute who claimed he only advertised on Hint: 20 year old kids making some extra cash that way typically have very little understanding of computer networks and related technologies – if they did there would be more lucrative options to bring in some extra cash.

    Finally, if you search google for “travel companion hire male” (don’t include the search) you’ll find articles about Rekers and curiously also which talks about a suggestion to a woman that she hire a gigolo because her husband hasn’t had sex with her for 20 years. You’ll also see which points to the page of a straight “male escort” marketing his “services” to women. The description Google provides is “Hire a straight male escort in London, UK and abroad. … extensive foreplay emotional and physical connection, companionship and understanding. …” with the words “Hire”, “male”, and “companionship” in a bold font. Someone in hurry could see those words and not notice the rest (there is a well known tendency to skim rather than read on-line material). With all the hits about Rekers for that search string, there is enough clutter that I’d rather not try to guess what Rekers might have seen with a similar string over a month ago.

  • B

    In No. 14, “(don’t include the search)” should have been “(don’t include the quotes in the search).”

  • Bill Perdue

    @schlukitz: Glad to see you comment got uncensored. ‘B’, pro bono lawyer for racism and any self loathing scum that comes down the pike must not like you much.

  • Jesse Helms

    George Alan Rekers should be prosecuted for underpaying his travel companion.

  • schlukitz

    @Bill Perdue:

    Truth be known, I never got the impression that ‘B’had any special love for me (or anyone else on these threads, for that matter), from day one.

    And that’s what I get for having the unmitigated gall to disagree with “B’. Who do I think I am? ;P

    What I find particularly noteworthy, Bill, is the fact that ‘B’ has never once denied that he might have had anything to do with getting OneEquality1 and my comments moderated on this forum.

    Which would seem to prove the old adage that it’s not always what one says that speaks reams about the person who is doing the attacking, but rather what they don’t say.

    And that is what one really should pay mind to.

Comments are closed.