Phaedrus

This is just generally bad all round. If it's a genuine mistake/coincidence, any provider who was remotely serious about carving out her own identity would change things pretty quickly. One might also expect someone like that to have previously googled the name she was thinking of adopting for professional purposes, but that's another story. However, the longer she leaves it in place now she's been made aware of the clash, the more nefarious she starts to look...

Come on, spring. Come on...

Yes, I think so. Although it probably depends on the person doing it. I must admit, I'm really bad at things like that...

[URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/10704896/Paying-for-sex-what-type-of-man-does-it.html"][B]Who exactly are the men who pay for sex?[/B][/URL] The men who buy sex tend to call themselves 'hobbyists' or 'punters', the anti-sex work types call them 'Johns', and sex workers call them 'customers' or 'clients'. But who are they, and why do they do it? Dr Brooke Magnanti, a former call girl, reports. A controversial installation at Glasgow's Gallery of Modern Art is currently publicising entries from last year's 'Invisible Men' blog, which took selected quotes from escort review sites. The online kickback from sex workers who objected to the political content of the display followed almost immediately. But there must be something in the water right now as Woman's Hour gave over an entire segment to promoting the 'Swedish Model' of criminalising the men who buy sex on last week and has dedicated lots of airtime this week to prostitution. Meanwhile on Radio 4's Today programme Labour MP Gavin Shuker called for crackdowns on the 'kerb crawling' customers of sex workers. The men who buy sex tend to call themselves 'hobbyists' or 'punters', the anti-sex work types call them 'Johns', and sex workers call them 'customers' or 'clients'. But who are they, and why do they do it? The majority of clients are men - both of male and female sex workers. The famous Kinsey report estimated that over 60 per cent of US men had paid for sex, but that was the war generation - things would no doubt be different now. A paper from 2000 put the percentage of men in Australia who had ever purchased sex at 15 per cent, with about one in 50 overall having done so in the last year. There is a question of how accurate such figures are, though, because of the stigma attached to paying for it - with some estimates putting the real number closer to 20 per cent paying for sex at least once. [url]https://www.slixa.com/late-night/453-are-fewer-men-paying-for-sex[/url] In countries like Cambodia the figure is far higher at close to 70 per cent. Right now Canadian research is being thrown into the spotlight by media, not least because the Supreme Court there recently rules to strike down all existing laws regarding prostitution (thanks to the wonderfully coiffed Terri-Jean Bedford and her decade-long legal battle). The Sex, Safety and Security study has been polling buyers of sex and makes fascinating reading. The study, which initially conducted 855 surveys and 24 in-depth interviews in 2009, is being updated to cover another 1251 surveys and 18 in-depth interviews with the results due to be published later this year. As well as aiming to demonstrate trends over time, the survey also examines topics like attitudes towards the law, the age at which subjects started buying sex, and their other sexual relationships. Chris Atchison of the University of Victoria designed both studies. He notes that the later survey includes more questions about the nature of buying sex and client experiences with sex workers. "The reason we went more deeply into this was because the results of my 2009 study really indicated that relationships were much more complex and multi-faceted than we had been led to believe," he says. UK researcher Teela Sanders, meanwhile, wrote a book discussing the phenomenon of paying for sex. In it, she notes: "We have moved away from the sexist idea that bad women force innocent men to buy their sexual services, but the opposite view that clients are evil, violent, woman-hating brutes who victimise defenceless women is also overstated." Sanders's book describes "push factors" - things like boredom, loneliness, or unsatisfying sex life - as well as "pull factors" like availability and opportunity that influence men's decisions to purchase sex. With both in play, it certainly indicates that a straight "End Demand" approach, which only addresses pull factors but not push factors, could expect to only have a limited impact, and believing that forcing sex underground will make people not pay for it is incredibly naive. Interestingly, the research also suggests that one of the "pull factors" for men who buy sex is because it is illicit and they are attracted to the idea of getting away with it. No doubt while some people would be put off by criminalisation of buying sex, others would find the exact opposite. And indeed in the US, where both selling and buying are criminalised, there's no indication criminal status does much to discourage punters. Which brings us the big question (or money shot, if you will): has your man paid for sex? It seems that it is statistically less uncommon than most people imagine. As with so many things, whether or not you actually broach the subject should be the topic of much thought. Like with the question of your number of ex-sex partnersâ?¦ would you really want to know? Perhaps the best policy is, if the outcome would completely change the way you think of someone, then perhaps it's better left unasked. The case for criminalising punters has lately been made by Labour MEP Mary Honeyball whose report on sex work was voted on in European Parliament last month. I watched Honeyball's vote as it streamed online. If you are the sort of person who thinks fans of policy and sausages should not watch the creation of either, I can assure you Brussels is absolutely the Heston Blumenthal of sausage-making: long winded, impenetrable, with the outcome both expensive and of questionable taste. It passed, though it is only a symbolic victory. It does not have the force of law. It does however signal a move in this country, following Rhoda Grant's failed bill in the Scottish parliament last year, to continue pushing the criminalisation of punters. Do things need to change? Most people on both sides of the issue agree that yes, they do. But what's astounding are the column inches the 'Swedish Model' of criminalising punters has commanded when few if any benefits to public safety have been shown. (For example, both saunas and the percentage of men who have bought sex have gone up since the law was madeâ?¦ oops.) Meanwhile, the 'Merseyside Model,' which instead proposes to treat crimes against sex workers as hate crimes, has gained a staggering number of signees to a key petition - over 50,000 at last count - but very little in the way of mainstream publicity.

OK, not an awesome pic... but an awesome vid. For those of you who have 17 minutes to spare, and like bikes (or speed): a trip around the Snaefell Mountain course at the Isle of Man TT. Edit: OK, I lied. Bonus pic: Aurora Borealis from the International Space Station.

Well, the Fat Bastards sent a small* delegation to the CERB social recently. A couple of highlights: * small in number, not girth. Obviously.

I think it's great that the WaPo is giving space to this kind of debunking of the prohibitionist FUD. It's dry and tedious work, but it's essential. The more the average person who's uninvolved with sex work sees that the prohibitionist position is founded not even on distortion and exaggeration but on outright lies, the less influence they'll have.

Seems reasonable.

CERB socials are wonderful things. You get to have an evening out, have a few beers, meet old friends, meet new ones... what's not to like? You don't get to talk to everyone, of course, but and at the last social I was lucky enough to spend a little time with Ksenia. Not very long, but more than enough to convince me that she was someone I'd like to... get to know better ;) So, a convenient occasion rolled around... and I found that Ksenia is just as beautiful as I'd remembered. We talked, and talked, and talked some more... during which time the clothes came off, and the oil went on, and things slowly heated up. Unfortunately I found it increasingly hard to concentrate on my end of the conversation, and after a while I failed completely because I was rather distracted by the ever-increasing eroticism that finally culminated in a very sensuous end to proceedings. After that, it was time to clean up, and time for a little more conversation while finding the clothes and putting them back on. I left with a smile on my face... and I plan to be back to renew it before too long!

Yeah, the technical difficulties suck. As for the five minutes.... I have to say, that depends. If I'm in my car, then I'll wait longer. If I'm on foot and it's the middle of winter and I'm hanging around outside a hotel then I don't know that I'd even last five minutes before freezing to death....

Congratulations, Cleo - always love reading what you have to say!

I met Daisy a while ago... alas, I haven't been around the board much since then, or I'd have written a reco beforehand! Still, better late than never... I hope. Daisy is a fantastic addition to CMJ; lovely to look at, lovely to talk to, very good at what she does. The massage was a lot of fun, what followed after was even more so, and the highlight of the visit - when she decided it was time :) - was wonderful. And after all that, the shower at the end was a lot of fun too! I'll definitely be back...

Congrats, NJ. Here's to many more!

Honestly... for me what matters is the MA, not the spa. OK, the spa might matter a little bit, but the most important consideration is who I'm going to be spending time with. Having said that, I've never had an issue with any of the establishments mentioned here. The one thing I would mention is the showers... if they're big enough for two (comfortably) and in the same room, that's a definite bonus. But I'd still go for a good MA with a bad shower over a bad MA with a good shower :)

Fantastic. If you like a giant pile of burning stuff, anyway.

Wow. Congratulations, Angela!

So... the guys that happen to agree with SPs on an issue are being insincere, and are just posting stuff that they think will go down well? And they're doing it because they're needy? Sheesh. Is it too much to imagine that they might just be saying what they think? Is it completely implausible that they might genuinely agree with some of the ladies, irrespective of any perceived reward for that? If you want to hang out in an environment where clients and SPs line up like opposing armies and then have fights over things... I'm sure you can find one. I believe boards like that exist. This isn't one of them. Bear in mind that the people who have been around any forum for a long time will be a self-selected audience of the ones who like the way that forum operates. That applies anywhere. The ones who are looking for something else will tend to leave (or be kicked out) and will migrate to an environment that better suits their taste.

+1 on what Reddog said. You could also consider Erin, Katrine and Jessica. I don't think there's been much of a drop in indy MAs. There's turnover, yes, but people come and go from this industry all the time. However, there's two things which I think could give you that impression. First: quite a few of the indies have been around long enough that they have established clients who come back to see them on a regular or semi-regular basis. This means that they don't necessarily advertise all that much as they're filling their schedules without doing so. Second: Over the last year or so we've had a lot of MAs from the spas join as paid advertisers. That means that even if the indies post as often as they used to, they're still less visible.