bcguy42

Is there any possibility you (the OP) have the person in question included in your contact list somewhere? Gmail will "suggest" based on your contacts. Keep in mind, Google considers everywhere to be here (or vice versa) and if you included the information on one device but not another, Gmail may still see it.

It is not illegal for someone to advertise as you stated. What is illegal is for a third party to publish said advertising. Just another nonsensical bit of the law.

This is actually four highlights and two different days so it's a stretch. #1 Getting to share wine, time and companionship with an exciting lovely woman. #2 Having the opportunity to take said woman to dinner. #3 Actually being able to have a drink at the Social plus winning a door prize! #4 Getting a call from the establishment where we had dinner and learning I'd won a free dinner for two. Nice

I add my thanks and congratulations to the organizers of what turned out to be a wonderful evening. For those that haven't been to one, Socials are an opportunity to make new friends and reconnect with old ones. If you missed tis one, signe up early for the next. For there will be a next, right?

Actually, you and I and the rest of Canada have that same question. Nowhere in the bill does it specifically spell out what actions of a sexual nature are prohibited! That will be left for the courts to decide. Which takes us back to the old definition of porn. Can't define it but I know it when I see it.

In what context? It can be a woman's name. Urban Dictionary defines it with an S as "love you like a sister". A bit of context might bring a better answer.

No, not over. But the rules of engagement have changed. There are a multitude of treads in the General Discussion - All of Canada section.

Ohhh... Used to listen to this when I started driving up to Ottawa from Chicago at the beginning of that adventure that became my life in Canada. That would have been 30 years ago. Still love the song.

I'm no lawyer, but on first blush I would think the new law would not affect the Groups as those are people exploring common interests and are not commercial activities. Even under Harper's Government, consenting adults can still gather together for free.

Agreed. This has been discussed nearly to death here amongst ourselves. But for me, what we were lacking was input directly from LE. As I listened to him, I was thinking his priorities might get changed if the Chief or the Mayor went loopy and decided to "clean up Dodge" and arrest everybody. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

I had the opportunity last night to have an in-depth discussion about C-36 with an Ottawa policeman. All this was off the record, he was speaking only for himself and his situation may change but none the less it was interesting. Based on what he's been told, he does not see any major changes on the horizon. They will continue the occasional street level John Sweep. The guys will get charged. The SPs most likely won't. As for SPs working from their home, condo, apartments or agencies, they have no interest in pursuing them. The probable results are not worth the investment in time and resources. Besides, he said, those people are paying their taxes just like any other person so barring any complaints, why would they bother them? He said this was the same for agencies, independents and "rub & tugs". He explained that they, the police, are generally in a reactive mode. There is only so much money, manpower, and resource available so they will react to community issues (complaints). The closest thing to proactive effort he mentioned was a Sergeant who was reaching out to women working from ....... to make sure the SPs were aware of the resources available to them in case they had problems. Apparently this Sergeant got into difficulty when he got a little too friendly with the SPs but that's a different story. He's not aware of any new money being allocated to address this "issue". Bottom line: Don't go looking for sex on street corners. Be discrete. Life will go on.

With all due respect, might I suggest all public responses here be worded with the utmost discretion. The casual reader might see something and go to a club with "great expectations" much to the chagrin of those dancers who spend all night explaining no, they don't do this. PMs seem the best response for those who have the information this good gentleman seeks. My two bits...

I uses KeepSMS on my Android device (Samsung). All the txts are kept in under pass code. The only drawback is that when I received a text from one of the numbers inside KeepSMS I don't get the normal indicator that there is a text. An icon appears at the top of the screen. OK, I guess under certain circumstances that's a benefit. But if I am having a text convo I need to keep opening that icon. The replies don't show up when I'm in the app. Small price to pay and really doesn't take much longer than doing a regular text exchange. If you want the regular notifications during a convo, you can move the convo out of KeepSMS for the duration of the convo and move it back when you are done. Just remember to move it! And if you've done that, be sure to clear your phone log as the sending of the clear texts registers there. There is no register if you keep the convo within KeepSMS. I periodically go through and delete all the convos within KeepSMS just incase I'm ever asked what's in there.

Regarding the efficacy of the PSA test as a screening device, this was the subject of discussions I had recently with my family doc and a urologist. The crux of the study is the the PSA test can give up to 20% false positives and goes on to explore the unnecessary costs in dollars and resources caused by those false positives. Both Docs acknowledged the false-positive issue but pointed out that 20% false means 80% accurate. What drew me into these discussions was a PSA result this year some 400% higher than last year. We all agree that any marker that changes that much is worthy of a look-see. Just as you wouldn't ignore an active fire alarm just because it's probably just a faulty battery, this change should be investigated. We are taking the approach that there are a lot of things that could cause this that are not worth getting excited about so we're not getting worked up about it. Once we have biopsy results we'll reevaluate how excited we should be. I like to think of this whole exercise as my personal Movember project.

Wanda's moved from 382 Bank Street to 327 Bank Street on September 1. So when you get where you thought it was, turn around and look across the street.

Sure enough, if you make it through October, Movember happens. The point to Movember, in case it has gotten lost in all the moustaches, is to raise awareness about men's health issues especially in the areas of prostate and testicular cancer and mental health (see http://ca.movember.com/mens-health).

Something else for women to worry about when the police stop them. [URL="http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/10/28/california_highway_patrol_officers_share_naked_photographs_of_women_in_their.html"]To California Cops, Stealing and Sharing Naked Photos of Women in Custody Is a â??Gameâ?[/URL] On Aug. 29, officers with the California Highway Patrol stopped a 23-year-old driver in a Bay Area suburb on suspicion of driving while drunk. The womanâ??s blood alcohol level registered more than three times the legal limit, and she was arrested and brought to the Martinez County jail for processing. Five days after her release, the Contra Costa Times reports, the woman was tooling around on her iPad when she discovered that explicit photographs of herself had been forwarded to an unknown number while she had been sitting, deviceless, in jail. CHP officer Sam Harrington later admitted that he had seized the womanâ??s confiscated phone, searched it for nude photographs, sent five of them to his own phone, then forwarded some along to two fellow officers. Harrington had attempted to erase the evidence on the womanâ??s cellphone, but her synced iPad revealed the trail. According to court documents obtained by Matthais Gafni and Malaika Fraley of the Contra Costa Times, Harrington described the behavior to investigators as a â??gameâ? he had learned in the CHPâ??s Los Angeles office. Officers across the state play along, passing around naked photographs along with disgusting commentary about the women they pick up. Sometimes, the material is sent to civilians, too. Harrington said that heâ??d done the same thing a â??half dozenâ? times over the past few years. In a second known incident, this September, Harrington scoured a DUI suspectâ??s phone while she was receiving X-rays for her injuries and sent bikini shots to another officer. He replied: â??No fucking nudes?â? Since uncovering the scheme, Gafni has detailed similar incidents in police stations across the country, none of which have produced criminal charges against the cops. In Houston in 2005, two patrolmen were fired after picking up a DUI suspect, downloading nude photographs from her phone, and showing the pictures to other officers and attorneys. In May, a Long Island woman sued New York City, alleging that when she was locked up last year, her arresting officer forwarded 25 photographs and videos from her phone to his. When she reported the incident to police, they asked her to call the officer to confront him in a recorded conversation; he flirted and told her â??not to worryâ? about the pictures. The officer remains on duty while he awaits a disciplinary hearing. And in 2011, a police corporal in Morgan Hill, California, confiscated the phone of a woman who had been arrested on suspicion of public intoxication, found a nude photo, and uploaded it to the suspectâ??s own Facebook account. After claiming that she had uploaded the photograph on accident, the corporal was demoted, but not fired. In cases of cybercrime, victims are often told that local police forces lack the training to investigate incidents that unspool online, or else are too ignorant of the technology involved to even understand them. These episodes show that plenty of police officers have the technological knowhow to commit the offenses themselves, and, in fact, their supposed ignorance of technology can be proffered as an excuse to cover for their acts. (How exactly do you upload a naked photograph to another personâ??s Facebook account â??on accidentâ??) An attorney for the woman in Morgan Hill told the Contra Costa Times that his client's case reveals that â??Officers are not being appropriately trained.â? He added: â??They're acting like a bunch of junior high students.â? Iâ??m not sure itâ??s training thatâ??s needed. Proper technological understanding is essential for police officers to investigate the full range of offenses committed in their jurisdictions. But it won't stop a police culture that dismisses online crimes against women, including when the offender is one of their own.

Should have left well enough alone? What's a few women abused or killed because of the unsafe conditions recognized by the Supreme Court versus a guy's desire for fun and games.

Initially wondered if this would be posted under the Things That Suck thread but it turned out to all be good. On the occasion of my annual physical, my MD told me his office would be calling to advise me of my appointment after he got the lab test results. He has never done this in all the years I've been seeing him so I've been wondering if he saw something during the physical and was waiting for tests to confirm before he mentioned it or what. Saw him today. My vitamin D level is low (take some vitamins) and my PSA level is twice what it should be. He did another digital exam of my prostate (is it normal to enjoy that? lol) and said he didn't find anything out of the ordinary so a urologist will call me in about a month to advise me when I will be seen by him. So I asked Doc why the change in procedure. He explained that he's slowing down his practice and now routinely schedules follow-up appointments after lab tests. Ah, good to know. Next time tell me so I don't mess with my mind trying to figure out what's wrong! :)

Add me to the list of attendees, too, please and thank you. :)

The officer's justification? "Groubert's defense attorney said that Groubert was justified in shooting Jones when Jones reached for his license "aggressively."" Reached for it aggressively? SMH Dashcam Video Shows State Trooper Shooting Black Man Reaching for His Driver's License Police dashcam video shows a now-former South Carolina state trooper named Sean Groubert repeatedly shooting a black man named Levar Edward Jones as Jones reaches into his car to produce his license after being pulled over for a seatbelt violation. The video of the Sept. 4 incident was released Wednesday night by law enforcement officials. Groubert has been fired and charged with felony assault and battery. Jones survived the shooting. In the video, Groubert can be heard asking to see the Jones's license. When Jones then reaches into the car, Groubert yells, "Get out of the car! Get out of the car!" and begins shooting. Groubert's defense attorney said that Groubert was justified in shooting Jones when Jones reached for his license "aggressively." The video's release coincides with an event in Washington D.C. at which the parents of Michael Brown and Eric Garner in Washington D.C. called on federal authorities to completely take over the investigations of their sons' deaths. (Garner is the New York City man who died after being put in a chokehold by police.) The Justice Department is reviewing Brown's case to determine whether or not officer Darren Wilson should be prosecuted for violating Brown's civil rights, but the investigation into other potential charges against Wilson and the investigation into Garner's death are being conducted at the local level. Update, Sept. 25, 2014: This post has been updated to note that Jones survived the incident.

A really good time! Sorry, couldn't resist. See the previous post for the correct answer.

Thank you one and all. My lifespan now exceeds 2 billion seconds and I've loved pretty much all of them. A special thanks to a few that have made some of those seconds really exciting!

Hi Maddie, you've raised an interesting question. You said you were most interested in responses from other SPs but I'll take the liberty in throwing in my two bit's worth. As noted by the Supreme Court, every person has a right to a safe, secure working environment. In this industry, how one defines that when it comes down to the details is a matter of personal choice. In your case, your choice is full disclosure by the client. You also say you prefer a small number of clients. That's a good match. As some responses have said, some potential clients will not ever provide that. A few have indicated they might. In setting this as a requirement you narrow the pool of potential clients which, in your case, is not necessarily a bad thing. As a returning player, as it were, if an established, trusted SP were to vouch for you (nod to Angela), I personally would have no problem supplying the required information. Even if you were brand new to the game you would most likely know at least one other SP who could attest to your trustworthiness. One last thing... The issue of "I will show you my ID if you will show me your's" is not, IMHO, a fair trade-off. In general, I pose more of a treat to you than vice versus so no, I would not ask for your ID.

I can now speak to this subject with some experience. Strictly on the subject of my pleasure, oh wow! Just like back in the good old days. From the standpoint of her pleasure, she seemed to have enjoyed it, too, but my guess is she would have found the external condom to be better. As far as DATY, the way it was "installed", that would have been quite possible. The downside was that there was a lot of checking to make sure everything was where it was supposed to be. As I care a lot about my partner in any episode I just accepted that as part of an exciting event. But I can see where some would find that part off-putting. Would I use them again? Absolutely. Would I swear off external condoms? Not a chance. I find the female condom to be another interesting item in the toy box.