fortunateone

Interesting facts revealed: [url]http://sexualintelligence.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/attacking-sex-trafficking-byattacking-sex-workers/[/url] [QUOTE]How many people do you think are sex trafficked in the U.S. every year: 200,000? 300,000? If your bloodâ??s boiling about what sounds these days like an epidemic, hereâ??s good news: According to the U.S. Justice Department, the actual number of people trafficked into the country for all reasons (mostly for labor rather than sex) is about 17,500 people year. In a rare show of bureaucratic consensus, the U.S. State Departmentâ??s estimate is between 14,000-17,000. â??But,â? you say, â??surely thatâ??s too low? What about the numbers I hear from all these anti-trafficking organizations?â? Good question. And hereâ??s the answer: if you define trafficking broadly enough, it does look like there are a million or more victims. The numbers also sound enormous if youâ??re vague about whether the trafficking involves the U.S. or semi-functional countries like Moldova, Haiti, and Bangladesh. Some non-profit organizations define sex trafficking to include all prostitutes. Others include all porn actresses. Still others include anyone giving hand jobs in a massage parlor. Forced marriage of teen girls and older men is uglyâ??and virtually unknown in the U.S.. But some anti-sex trafficking activists count these young people as well. No wonder these activists or â??researchersâ? get such enormous, scary, numbers. Most manipulative of all, activists keep warning of the number of people â??at riskâ? for being sex traffickedâ??millions of women and children. â??At riskâ? because theyâ??re poor, or unloved, or drug-addicted, or have trouble with English. Using that logic, 45 million Americans are â??at riskâ? of dying in plane crashes every month, and twenty million Californians are â??at riskâ? of dying in car crashes every week. No oneâ??s in a panic about that, of course, because such definitions of â??at riskâ? are meaningless. The results of this muddled thinking are great for fund-raising but bad for public policy. Our anxiety increases at a far greater rate than the supposed problem weâ??re being told to fear. Which brings us to the SAVE Act, passed overwhelmingly this year by a proud Congress. It supposedly criminalizes the advertising of trafficking. But because of the way that activists define â??trafficking,â? it actually criminalizes the advertising of all commercial sex work (neatly undermining that pesky First Amendment at the same time). This extends to websites like BackPage.com and MyRedbook.com, which not only advertised sex work and related services, but also served to create and focus a vibrant community. Websites like these are places for sex workers to get emotional support and medical information, and to alert each other to dangerous clients and helpful public resources. And so the SAVE Act attempts to protect us from a very small amount of sex trafficking by undermining the health and safety of a fairly large number of sex workers. It would be hard to design a worse system if you tried. Letâ??s review the differences between sex work and sex trafficking. Sex Trafficking: Always involves coercion. Generally involves being removed from oneâ??s home. The person is always being controlled while not working, often hidden from the public. A person canâ??t voluntarily leave this situation. Sex Work: Mostly done by choice (while many have only limited life choices, that still doesnâ??t make it coercion). Typically stay in or near oneâ??s home, and usually still connected with loved ones such as children, parents, or spouse. The person generally has a near-normal private life when not working. Most such persons can voluntarily leave if they choose to do something else. These are completely different phenomenaâ??except in the minds of many anti-trafficking activists, who canâ??t seem to imagine treating sex workers as actual human beings making adult choices about their lives. The SAVE Act takes resources earmarked for ending traffickingâ??a horrendous crime of coercion by truly evil peopleâ??and instead uses them to undermine sex workâ??a dramatically different â??crimeâ? that primarily involves willing adults, most of whom are ordinary people. As are their customers. Itâ??s simply immoral to take money and time that could be used to fight evil and spend it instead to fight a moral crusade that most people donâ??t care much aboutâ??unless activists spread the myth that prostitutes and escorts are victims of sex trafficking who must be rescued. The SAVE Act also undermines the fight against trafficking in these other ways: * By eliminating U.S.-based websites, it pushes sex workers to use offshore-based websites (just as Americans moved to offshore gambling websites when domestic sites were criminalized in the U.S.). Historically, these offshore sites have been much less cooperative with American law-enforcement than domestic sites in pursuing and catching real traffickers. * It creates a heavy incentive for content platforms and third-party hosts to obtain identifying information from every person using their internet service. Given sex workersâ?? reasonable fears of police action, hacking, blackmail, and public exposure, compromised privacy is the last thing any sex worker wants. * It undermines everyoneâ??s rights of free expression, creating a new class of speech outside the First Amendmentâ??s protection. Legal, protected expression is eliminated along with newly-criminalized expression when websites are shut down. This is never good, particularly for people whose lifestyle or political ideas attract criticism. The people the SAVE Act is supposed to helpâ??sex workers â??at riskâ? for traffickingâ??oppose it almost unanimously. They know it will make them less safe, less able to vet customers, less able to maintain a community where they help and support each other. When a law designed to help a group is opposed by that group, you know itâ??s a bad lawâ??almost certainly passed by cynical (or ignorant) politicians trying to score points with a gullible public. The SAVE Act saves no one and benefits no oneâ??except those determined to inflate the number of those supposedly trafficked year by year until we have the (media-driven) â??epidemicâ? they claim to be committed to preventing. As each website is shut down, expect activists to proudly note the number of â??at riskâ? people it has â??saved.â? So get ready for the alleged trafficking epidemic the SAVE Act is supposed to eliminate. In our perverse world, the larger the alleged epidemic gets, the more it will be used as â??evidenceâ? that activist efforts are somehow very necessaryâ??and effective.[/QUOTE]

^^^ yes, get in the habit of saying goodbyes, and directions out of the building with the door closed. When opening the door either to let them in or out, stand behind the door in case someone has left the elevator and is walking down the hallway with them, or actually exited in front of them (lesson learned the hard way). always have the door open, if you can hear the elevator arrive even better. I can hear that with my door open, and the sound of footsteps, people only pass one apartment door before they are at my door. Choose your apartment location if possible if there is a choice, find one that doesn't have a neighbour directly across the hall. Even when managers spend the day in an office by the front door, they aren't always looking to see where a guest is going. another good idea for your guests to push a different floor, and to never ever (ever) come down to the lobby in short shorts, high heels and red lipstick several times a day. When looking at apartments and filling out applications, try to look dull, boring and older than you are. :) Try to look like the before picture in a makeover! look like someone who isn't likely to have friends coming over to have parties or especially multiple boyfriends lol actually try to do this anytime you have to leave your apartment, especially where you might see other tenants, like the laundry room or taking out the trash.

It's difficult to rise above a long history of socialization, i agree. some of the most successful native communities are the ones who take control of their land, and their government, but that can include healing circles and education and even re education. It is not an easy fix, and as that woman does, it is simpler to blame everyone else. This is not the only story about an sp being killed by someone and the guy getting light insignificant sentencing. the courts tend to get the easy hit, rather than risk a miss with a heavier charge, imo. manslaughter they can get the guy to agree to, if they charge anyone at all. A case in burnaby barely got any followup story at all, no idea if they charged anyone, the #1 suspect is the exBF. Cases in New Westminster under a publication ban, so no idea what if anything the guy is getting charged with, for 3 murders (2 sps, one other person) Is he also going to get a deal because they want information about the drug trade he's involved in?

That is not the tone of the article that I read. It seems clear that the intent of the article is to rehumanize the victim, and show everyone why she matters more than her killer. And that she had a family who misses her. The thing i regret is their adamant denial that she was an sp, and that goes into the comments as well. the tone of the family/friend comments is that of judgment, and trying to distance her from it doesn't actually help. I'd rather they focus on the fact that regardless of what she did, she did nothing to justify the killer's actions. i got confused by the term 'massage parlour', when what it is is an apartment set up for sps. Everything i remember reading about this case at the time led me to think that she had been in vancouver for a while, working as an sp. to me, if that hadn't been evident, then the sentencing might have been quite different. He doesn't just claim she was, there would have been copies of the ad, the phone #, etc. In some report i read elsewhere, there was an owner of the apartment, who had the security cameras for the front door of the building set up, and recorded those who entered. Something that aided in helping to prove the guy wasn't as inebriated as he claimed.

I get lots of notifications of 'you may know', befores, and I have never known any of them. I also got a bunch of emails from FB asking me if I know some folks, which is nice of them, but that email account is not linked to any facebook account.

i also remember reading something about a number of sex workers also receive assistance. Which also makes sense. I've talked to more than a couple of sps who do get disability assistance, they cannot work a fulltime job due to physical and health issues, however anyone can tell you that there is no kind of assistance that provides enough income to pay all the bills and provide for a family. That's why many of those sps are part time, they work when they are able to, and take the time off when they need to.

You point about an sp providing her real name is not a valid point. The sp who is requesting a reference has already provided a wealth of information about herself, including photos, general location, email contact, phone # contact, general description including age, and references in the form of multiple reviews. You would not be asked for references or real name info from anyone with less than a solid reputation. Which means that providing a real name isn't going to make her any more reputable or reliable, or trustworthy. All of that is and has been proven many times over, in the form of her reputation thru longetivity, never seeing anything negative about her, her posts either in forums like this or on a blog or twitter, etc etc. All most sps ask from you is consistent contact information, and two names of other sps that you know of that are also reputable and reliable, and you know this because you have met them, spent time with them, and reviewed them positively. so these are the ladies you have trusted with your own time and $$, and these are the ladies who are going to confirm to another sp that you yourself are a reputable and reliable client. And what leads sps to think someone is not reputable and reliable is a person who changes his contact information, phone #, email address and even his fake name, or even his review board handle frequently (to avoid 'detection') So that and what has already been mentioned: when you contact someone who requires references, you don't just email back the names and website of those 2 sps, you first contact the 2 (or 3) and let them know you will be providing their names to be your references to,, for example, Mature Angela, who will then be contacting them to ask about you. In those emails you will remind them 'here is the email i used to contact and book you, here is the day and time of the appt, and here is the session i chose". You'll note that during that exchange i haven't mentioned that you provided the 3 sps there with your real first and last name, your home address, or your work contact information. Just whatever you used to contact the other sps, and had successful appts with them. We can debate all day about whether or not sps deserve the right to demand personal info from clients, (they do deserve that, and most have earned the right to demand it), or that they aren't giving out as much personal info as they are asking for, but at the end of the day, they've already given everything except their real first and last names, so what more could you possibly need from them. they are easy to find if you wanted to cause them trouble, you wouldn't also need their real name to do that.

oh, bah humbug, that got x'd out as well. and now i don't remember, so you should just google that topic 'how to use female condom video' and you'll find it.

It's kind of misleading then, for the Georgia Straight to pick that stat and make it look like that many sps are providing intercourse without condoms? But also, does 'non vaginal sex' mean that condoms may not be used during greek? And there is a high number of male sps in this study, is this stat maybe something that occurs more in M4M situations? Thanks for finding the reference tho, i have only gotten thru half of the report.

Because you mention Costa Rica, I feel i should mention that sex work is legal in CR. i've heard that sps have to get some kind of registration, (i am trying to remember info from a couple of years ago), the gist of which is that it will show they are of age. There seem to be both massage parlours and clubs to meet sps. the downside for yourself is that the majority of sps may be younger than you would prefer to spend time with, and of course, English may not be great. I have interacted with a number of sps and clients who visit places like the Phillipines and Thailand, (those who see the independent escorts, booking longer sessions, weekends, day trips, 7 days etc), and if you want to set something up with a local, who can also act as your tour guide, you don't have to go the route of the budget conscious sex tourists who frequent the bargirls. Not that i am not saying don't take an sp with you for a travel date, just you had mentioned if finding someone local would be an option, and the answer of course is yes. You just have to find the right advertising venue for the location you want to visit.

A little adhesive around the rim might reduce the need to check all the time. I could totally see that daty would be possible. The FC is not rigid (or glued) in place, it can be moved aside quite easily, i imagine. This is a video. pretty sure i saw a better one at one time, but this gives you a good if shakey-at-the-end idea. http://www............./video641801/how_to_use_female_condom

I think one reason why sps dislike the 'your daughter' question is that it kind of presumes that as parents, sps failed the test if we say that we are OK with it. It also presumes that as sps, we are more likely to encourage our children to choose sex work. The reality, in some cases for some sps, we are simply more open minded about sexuality and sex activity choices, perhaps. So if we are OK with our female or male relatives choosing sex work over something else, it is because we know it can be done safely and healthily and by choice, so of course we would be OK with them choosing it. We know also that it is entirely possible to do this without coming to any harm, over many years, achieve one's goals in a short time period, and have fun along the way. If i wanted my daughter (or son) to be able to enjoy their live, not live pay cheque to paycheque, afford to go to university, afford to travel, and afford to pay their bills and not do a lot of struggling, then I am going to be OK with the type of (legal) activity that allows them to do this. now that's a lot of rambling. :)

name in the ad appears to be Jordun Jamez , but the photos do have script saying Jordyn James, which probably only means she stole those pics and the name. But i have to say, nothing good ever comes from an ad that does what this one does in the ad. Few real letters, all symbols, practically incoherent, plus the badly spelled but still present word "party'. You never go to any ad that uses the word 'party' unless you also enjoy hard drugs, just the way the word is used.

I have used them a couple of times, with at least 2 people saying they really didn't like them. One situation it was the best solution, and he didn't seem to have a problem at all. On a US forum that i used to be on, there were a lot of sps and clients who raved about them, making me think they are much more commonly used there, or at least known about. For me all the downsides have been mentioned as well as the upsides. no one when this was discussed on this other forum seemed to be aware of or cared about the look of them or the awkwardness of putting them in, or anything of the sort. I guess it is a case of getting used to them. Maybe an sp can use them exclusively with one client until they are both more experienced and relaxed about it, then either one can spread that know how lol. rambling guy, i think they only way you could 'miss' is if you are an exit/enter guy, and most guys aren't doing that, they aren't going all the way out, then all the way back in again. I don't think they are ideal for someone who does that. I do think they are ideal for someone who is just too large for XL condoms. or someone who is too aware of the condom to maintain the erection. if you google, you will find an XXX rated instructional video that is really great.

After he testified in the 2nd reading, the abolitionists created a hate website about Chris trying to debunk and undermine his research (which again, i have to say, he didn't just slap up some polls on review sites, it was more than one person research university approved supervised study) I say 'his' for simplicity sake. And MPs also tried to undermine the research, sneering at the findings and the method. Same people will accept Farley's socalled research about clients in Scotland. Self reporting or face to face interviews, clients are obviously going to be considered to answering the questions in ways to make themselves look 'better', according to these anti sex worker types. But to me, you can't then say one study about clients (with such bad methods that people doing the interviews quit rather than be associated with it) is acceptable simply because it gives the results you want, and the other, with so many more participants, isn't OK.

Wiinipeg in general is not getting the best reputation for how they are dealing with sex workers and women in general.. Good for her for going to the media. Compare this to the story posted about LE in New Zealand dealing with a street worker and her customer who didn't want to pay. They picked the guy up, took him to an ATM, got the donation and delivered it to the sp. Guess where prostitution is decriminalized and regulated?

That was looking for the underage street kids. Visited 26 places, found 3 underage kids. And at no time did they say these kids were sex workers, or that the 4 guys were looking for or expecting underage sps. But the headline and storyline are trying to link the two things together, two things that are not related..

There are massage parlours now where you have to show ID. You might consider it an age verification as well? There are few sps who ask to see the ID or ask for it to be sent to them or a photo to compare to the person showing up. Each sp determines how much info they need to feel secure, and it is up to the client to decide how much info they are willing to provide to feel secure . Very few sps have only one single way to proceed. Someone may say they want photo ID, but their 2nd option for screening is 2 references from established sp, plus a name (not necessarily real name) and phone #. It's pretty rare for any sp to have only one way, and that way being for clients to provide all kinds of personal info.

C36 needs to be thrown out. There is nothing in it that is necessary to actually protect underage and unwilling participants. All existing laws not only do that already, they are being used to lay charges recently.

I think you will prefer it, also for your own personal safety and discretion. A camera at the front door ensures that the client buzzing is entering by himself. I think what concerns guys is easy access, multiple rooms and more than one entry/exit. So houses with two stories make them nervous, but a one bedroom high rise does not.

i didn't realize they had another day. I don't think much of the police association guy, but glad Alan Young is presenting. Geogia Lee Land is with the Evangelical Fellowship, and I seem to remember someone Evangelical speaking on Thursday already. so with limited space and time, are two non sex work related organizations from the same camp ground necessary? here you will find Kady O'Malley's updates during the hearings https://twitter.com/kady Scrolling down to Sept 11, you find the answers to questions and briefs recaps from Achison, and the male sex worker, and an actual manage of an actual body rub licensed mp. tweet regarding Chris Atchison's presentation (she is telling Timea, one of the abolitionist organizations creators with their hands out for govt $$). And more continued attempts to discredit the research that Chris presents (even tho he did not do the research by himself, after all, nor without peer review and/or advisors) https://twitter.com/kady/status/510145028183064576 https://twitter.com/kady/status/510098158832353281 This is true. Apparently in Sweden, the number of Thai massage parlours tripled after 1999 when the law was enacted, (their term is thai massage parlour, i am assuming all staff is asian, working with visas, not necessarily citizens). And a reporter investigated several of these mps a year or so ago, and found that as a new customer, 25% of them offered him happy endings. (I think there were 30 mps in a major city, the number grew to 90?) i've posted about this elsewhere before. For those who want to read the briefs submitted, and presented, there are some here. http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/412/lcjc/C36Briefs-e.htm

The border agents are also falsely accusing young women of being sps, detaining them and refusing entry.

There are dozens of stories regarding what LE could be doing instead of rustling up the clients of street workers. Lots of people are being charged with running underage sps, coercion, etc, and all seem to be happening since the SCC decision. it's like they suddenly realized, oh gee, here's some stuff we could actually be doing instead of trying to arrest street workers and their clients. It's astonishing how many people were arrested in the Toronto area in June alone. if the clients were seeing sps that were underage, great, but my guess is that they weren't. They say 'prostitution related' charges, but all they really mean is 'talking to an sp in public". The other term? Makes it look much more sordid and predatory.

There is a lot of good TV now, with some mainstream movie actors. There is usually one show each season on HBO that I have enjoyed. Transporter, followed by Banshee, followed by Penny Dreadful, and just finished is The Leftovers. Showcase,Bravo and FXC also have shows each season that i follow. Which i appreciate because i don't want to have 15 shows each week that i 'have' to watch, it's all broken up. So Defiance ends this week, and next week Haven will show up again. Before Definance i think it was Continuum. I'm finding the more interesting tv is on those stations not regular network tv shows.

I'm just not sure what you mean by 'secured' building because i'm not sure what your alternative method is. If you are providing in hotels now and are considering a change to an apartment with a buzzer entry system, i say for discretion the apartment setting is fair superior. no one knows where the person is going in the building when they are buzzed in, no one knows what you are doing there either.