squirtingmilf

I'm mixed race Craig, so I do indeed know what the term racism means ..smh..

Actually it is your opinion, you as pooner don't get to dictate how ladies can take safety measures and state who we can and not see for whatever reasons, just like we don't do that to you. I could equally cry racism for guys who don't see squirters, mature ladies or curvy ladies, same thing, different pile. BTW I don't ask people's ethnicity when they inquire either, never have. I just tried give you a different perspective of why some ladies choose not to and they have that right to choose not to based on whatever information they are given in terms of safety. Have a nice day.

I've converted and uploaded the transcripts - they are in pdf format, so safe to download and in English and French. Oct 29th Transcript Oct 30th Transcript

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but I disagree and let me clarify this is collective data from a couple hundred ladies, NOT just one. If there are possible risks that involve a ladies SAFETY and if she can reduce those risks, that is her right do so and half those points are safety risks, some more serious than others. You're also on the other side of the phone and process, numbers don't lie. Your concern as a client is how a lady treats you and the clients she does choose to see is it not? I think you would be very shocked at how some people act and speak towards ladies. If 3 out of 4 men of a certain ethnicity asked for BBFS between the ages of 27 to 40, that's a very dangerous number to be playing with and I can tell you in one city, that does happen. Risk is higher in some cities based on numbers and sorry if you think it's racist, but unless you experience it firsthand you really have no right to pass judgement wherein a lady may be putting her safety at risk. Safety is always a number one priority. For the record craig and to those reading, I'm certainly not saying that ladies should make a generalization of certain ethnicities across Canada, that would be racist imho. I'm saying wherein some cities the risk of potential harm can be reduced then ladies should do what they feel is best for them and judgement shouldn't be passed.

It would depend on what city you are living in and some cities have much higher ratios of certain ethnicities than others do and the data is based on several sp's experiences via ladies lounges, not just one ladies experience. My point is, that some people are suggesting that a decision was made to not see certain ethnicities due to a sole ladies personal preference when in fact that may not be the case at all. White is an ethnicity and my data could be about them. I'm not going to say which it is, however, I can't say to those of you that have problematic issues with white men in Eastern provinces that your choice not to see them wouldn't be justified, if you so chose to do that. Just like you can't say if some lady in a western province makes a decision not to see brown guys because the majority of problematic clients are brown. I've worked in almost every province in Canada, so my data is not limited.

I'm going to add some information to give some enlightenment a bit further. I've been working in this industry for almost 30 years, I've also been a member and moderator of a few ladies lounges. So let me ask those of you who claim that it's not appropriate to not see members of a certain ethnicity, if you had statistical data of lets say the following; -rude and verbally abusive clients -clients that ask for bbfs -clients that have very poor hygiene and refuse to shower -clients that repeatedly do no-shows -clients that have the highest tendency to do walks outs -clients that are aggressive and physically abusive -clients that have the highest tendency to haggle or name their own price And lets say for arguments sake they were all of one ethnicity and a certain age bracket. Would you want to waste your time allowing that to continue when you net pretty much zero income from that ethnicity anyway or would you just scrap the idea altogether? My personal screening process is based on attitude. However, I'm just trying to bring in a new perspective as to WHY there is a VERY great possibility that some ladies will not see certain ethnicities either.

I don't see really young guys, because I have sons in their 20's and one of their friends could show up at my door, I'd rather pass on that possible outcome. One time I was working in Calgary, a guy called me to prearrange an appointment for the next morning. The next morning I show up and a young pimple faced kid answers the door and I'm like, think I got the wrong house and he's like no I had my friend call you. I'm super uncomfortable at that point but proceeded anyway, asked him for ID, the whole nine. That was the MOST uncomfortable session I ever had and I've dealt with my fair share of weirdness in the almost 30 yrs I've been working and I gave him some advice while I was leaving and told him to ensure that next time he tells a lady how old he is. Something else to add to this with the ethnicity aspects, I don't think it's anyone's business to judge anyone else for not wanting to see certain ethnicities people have a right to refuse anyone they don't want to see. Just like pooners have the right not see someone either for whatever reasons. And some people get really rude and ignorant, even threatening when they are refused service during the screening process. And when some people think they are entitled to service just because they have money, I'll pass on that, as well as their condescending attitudes with yelling at you on the phone and YES people do that to some of us. There's nothing like getting a one word text RATES!!! AVAILABLE???

They don't pay the workers and it's very similar to that video I posted above, where Cambodian HT rescued victims make $80 a month in the clothing factories. Everything is about what they can do for their orgs. BTW FO, if you watched that video I posted The High Cost of Cheap Clothes, you will also find out that the US is Cambodia's "largest investor" in cleaning up "human trafficking" and I'm pretty certain, we're not too far down on that list, since a lot of our clothes are made in third world countries as well.

Thanks for the PM Tanya, much appreciated. The one thing that was really irritating to me after I read the bill (a couple of times) was that NOT one media outlet and barely even anyone else for that matter was informing the general public about how this bill was going to affect them. Wherein ANY PERSON can be questioned about their relationship. And if that one little, but major point would've been focused on and pushed all over the place the general public would've been outraged over it. Personally it is of my opinion that this bill really had nothing to do with us, we were used as a means for them to put that piece of law into place. Human trafficking is not about rescue, it's about money and it's a very profitable business to be in. I don't have any stats handy, but I'd be pretty certain in saying it's probably MORE profitable than our industry. Some of the HT orgs, sell their rescued victims to sweatshops or big ags for cheap labour, there's TONS of testimony available about that. And if you can tell a really good story, they hone and train you and put you on the HT speaking circuit, all in the name of telling a great sob story and getting people to donate to their org. So they're exploiting people even further, but it doesn't matter, because you're not being paid for sex. Some of the orgs also have their own items that they make the "victims" provide labour for, I've seen everything from weaving baskets, to bags, book deals, movie deals, you name it. So at the end of the day, who exactly is exploiting who here, really? I can't "exploit" myself willingly, but your org can exploit me into weave some baskets so you can make money from me? I'll take my $260 an hour, wherein I keep ALL of my money, thanks and get to make my own choices. Here's an example of what I'm talking about From Sexworker to Seamstress

Yeah you'd think some common sense would be had, but apparently not. Even with Somaly Mam you'd think Oprah's people would've been smart enough to check her out too. And I thought that was a part of a talk show hosts job? To investigate things before airing or endorsing them? At least it used to be. But I do have a comment, how on earth and seriously for how long did this guy seriously think he was going to get away with this scam? How long did any of them think they would get away with it? When it gets high profile, someone's gonna do some digging. This stuff is so common with Human Trafficking and those rescue orgs make a fortune off it.

Senate meetings update, they have been rescheduled to Wed Oct 29th 4:15 PM and Thurs Oct 30th - 10:30 am Webcast: http://senate-senat.ca/webcast-e.asp Diffusion web: http://senate-senat.ca/webcast-f.asp

I wanted to take some time and go over some details with a few activists before I made this post so you can understand the inner workings of abolishment agencies, those who support and pushed for C-36 to be brought forth. There are two main groups of people that support C-36. As you may have guessed some are run by religious factions and funded by church organizations. I do believe (and this is if my memory serves me correctly) that MP Joy Smith attends a church that supports or funds a Human Trafficking organization and that's how she got involved in the whole pro abolishment issue. When I say religious factions, I'm referring to strong religious beliefs that are anti pretty much everything, extremists. The other group consists of man haters. They blame men for everything, so no real explanation is needed for that and they too are extremists. They get their funding from the government (under a couple of misled idealisms), churches, sexist domestic violence organizations, programs and misleading the public about their organization. One of the largest agencies that runs a "man hating" organization and partook in the hearings is based in Vancouver. So this is what they do, they usually troll anti-C36 organizations on news articles, university studies, boards etc, anywhere that is public and they can "refute" claims made by sexworkers. They troll and look for any kind of "disparaging information" on review boards and I know two rather large abolishment agencies that do this on a regular basis. They'll take snippets of information here and there and put it all together and there's their "evidence". So how you talk to and about sp's on review boards and with some people it's not so nice, is taken by them, conflated 10 times worse than what was posted and voila, there's their evidence. Words on review boards, very much matter and although people have the right to express their views, understand you're not dealing with people that "get" someone may say something out of context or because they're having a bad day or week, whatever, it's used against us on an extremist level. And well, again some people are just not so nice to women in general on review boards, we've all seen it at one point or another. This is how they come up with their statistics in a lot of cases; let's say you're a 25 year old service provider and happen to look very young, underage in fact. You will automatically get put on the child trafficking list, they'll go through craigslist, backpage and other ad sites and they will purposely look for ladies that look young. They will then purport that there are X amount of ladies that are child trafficked and pimped (btw in their minds everyone is pimped) but they'll push the agenda more so the younger ladies are pimped and trafficked. If you're a minority and in particular of Asian descent you're a triple whammy. So they take the X amount of young ladies and minorities (one of the bigger agencies that if I recall correctly, did stats for Somaly Mam used this particular method) times that by .39 and this is how they come up with their "guesstimates" of how many "children are being human trafficked" and how many "minorities are being trafficked" .. so understand that they have NO real statistics at all, they are all just guesstimates. Now .39 may not seem like a big number but believe me it turns into a real large number when they're all said and done. Now as you may have guessed if they conflate stats for young women and minorities they surely must conflate their human trafficking stories and you would be right about that. Somaly Mam has been one of the biggest perps where this is concerned (google her, there are literally hundreds of stories about her and the celebrities, news agencies and other media outlets that supported her and her cause, with ZERO research being done into her story). Oprah, Susan Sarandon are just a few of her supporters - ZERO research. She's walked on more red carpets than your A-list celebrity has. And you know what the excuse is for her actions? Who cares if she lied, she saved thousands of women and children. YES, this is the garbage being spewed to our members of parliament based on ZERO FACTUAL evidence. Chong Kim is another big perp in this arena, she made the movie Eden which won several awards at many film festivals and her story is just beginning to unravel by our supporters. Her story was supposedly based on "true" story, which is false. So not only do they lie about stats, they also lie about being human trafficked. I'll post some more information sometime tomorrow, so you get an idea of what we're up against and EVERY effort, petitions, online or off, is a good attempt at getting attention and this is what we need, ATTENTION is a valiant effort, don't disregard it, take action. BUT to truly defeat Bill C-36 in a lot of orgs beliefs is by unraveling truth about how human trafficking is a big fat lie for the most part (it is a problem, don't get me wrong, but conflation is the biggest problem) and how the perpetrators are an even bigger problem. Tomorrow, I'll discuss what really happens to "rescued" victims. Additional Comments: If you read these articles it will give you a good idea of what I stated above, human trafficking victim fraud is very common and how they lie and conflate the stats, which makes for a nice chunk of change in their pockets. Junk Science - Sex Trafficking Study http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-03-23/news/sex-trafficking-fake-study-womans-funding-network-deborah-richardson-nick-pinto/ Myths and Facts about Sex Trafficking during major sporting events http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2014/01/just_in_time_fo.php Somaly Mam foundation closes http://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/somaly-mam-foundation-closes-down-70300/ Somaly Mam's ex-husband blames media http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/cambodia/140926/cambodia-somaly-mam-Pierre-legros Hollywoods Dangerous Obsession with Human Trafficking http://www.salon.com/2014/06/10/hollywoods_dangerous_obsession_with_sex_trafficking/ Cong Kim- Trafficking Fraud exposed http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/12/eden-sex-trafficking-fable-falls-apart Trafficking Victim Fraud in Calgary http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/alberta/Australian+woman+centre+false+trafficking+claims+Ireland/10267012/story.html

I received a message from one of my colleagues in the Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform informing me of the following; A bunch of meetings in regards to C-36 in front of the senate were cancelled today. There are scheduled meetings tomorrow but we have reason to believe at this time they will be cancelled as well. I will keep you updated if there are more changes and if those meetings tomorrow are indeed cancelled as soon as I find out. The current date for the bill to go into effect, signed, sealed and delivered, is Dec 19th

That's not necessarily true at all. I've seen some great clients that have only seen a lady one time. Not every client is a regular in this hobby, some see ladies very infrequently. And just as not taking references it all comes with an inherent risk. As a general comment I would also like to say that just because a lady does not partake on review boards does not mean you should devalue her worth as a provider either or her judgement with clients. There are many reasons why some providers partake very minimally or not at all and I happen to be one of those providers. My posts are very and always have been minimal because I run other businesses, this past year I was also in school, travelling and had a lot of things going on in my life, so boards were not a priority for me. I've been a member of this board for a few years and just started posting on it and it's basically because of Bill C-36. I'm a very private person for the most part despite that I know a lot of providers, pooners in the industry and have rave reviews, I just like doing my own thing. I'm also very old school and we never had review boards, let alone internet when I first started. I also would not recommend using an untraceable number to contact the reference either as someone suggested, in my opinion it will devalue you as a provider and they may not give you the information that you require. Being honest is always the best policy.

I wouldn't accept a booking like that either and I seriously can not stand when guys use a term of endearment to address me, I have a name and prefer that I was addressed by it, Squirtingmilf, Smilf.. My ad firmly states no explicit or graphic language, those don't even get answered half the time. My ad also states that you visit my website before contacting me, what I offer is there and everything is YMMV after that. I too require a voice call in order to confirm an appointment, this way I can pick up more about your attitude, if you are using substances or not etc. You always, always respect and follow ladies booking protocol.

Some ladies keep detailed clients for many reasons, if you are licensed you are required to keep them, especially agencies. Depending on what city you live in some ladies require a referral, so they too would have to keep them (that's becoming more common now, for referrals). And most of us maintain a blacklist of sorts and I definitely keep all of those to save time not answering the phone the next time said person calls (they always do for some reason) and wherein someone is really bad, it's used as a warning to other ladies. Terri-Jean's been around for a long time and if your client is in the public eye, it's not too hard to remember things about your encounters, when they're a constant reminder.

I thought Harper and his cronies had some kind of deal going on with CBC earlier this year? I remember there was a big "stink on" about it, but I don't recall what happened. I'm not one for news or media on mainstream television at all. I just watch what I want to via recommendation from friends and colleagues and this bill and the FIPA deal with China is all I've been taking note of. I figure if the world is going to end, someone will FB me lol

P.S copies are being sent to Harper and well if it annoys the heck out of him getting those emails, so be it, like we should give him an ounce of respect in that regard. You can also unsubscribe, after you get the initial message thanking you, if not, just send it to the spam folder.

That happens with pretty much every petition site, so change is not the exception to the rule at all. It also happens with fundraising sites like kickstarter, gofundme etc. It's not an ideal facet, but at the same time a lot of the people that sign petitions as a general rule are those whom are activists on a lot of levels and that's why they do that. Lot's of sites have pre checked boxes when you submit your info for their newsletters etc. it was the standard procedure for a number of years. Anyway Evangeline is just trying to do her part and who knows what can happen with it. Awareness is always the key. Sad part is the general population has no idea this law affects them too, despite whether they partake in this industry or not and nobody seems to be talking about that at all.

Exactly, that makes zero sense to me as well. The only time I've ever heard of a reputable sp giving up anything to do with a client is when she experienced abuse. And what would an sp have to gain by outing a "normal" client? Nothing! The next thing you know, she'd be blacklisted on reviews boards from all clients, this type of logic makes no sense what so ever.

I'm going to give you all a bit of advice, been a long time member, but not an active poster. I've been seeing a lot of panic about this topic and because my other business is internet related (not in this industry) I do know a lot about internet law and how it applies to governing laws and having worked in the porn industry for numerous years, I know ways to circumvent issues of these sorts. First of all, the general police do not have access to review boards or those that contain adult/explicit content. I can not speak for that being true for EVERY police department, but I do know it's certainly true for vpd, so you may want to find out if your locale has access or not. I don't know if RCMP still does or not, because of them being busted with CP (will not post those words in full on the board) You do not need to shut down your web sites, they just need to be moved over to offshore web hosting and this board should be moved to offshore hosting. ie: http://shinjiru.com/ is a reliable host. The police have ZERO jurisdiction with an offshore host. This board should also have a head office offshore, backpage did that in case everyone hasn't noticed, so now they can't be touched by Canadian or American laws, because of backlash when some media outlets and celebrities were complaining about them having escort advertising. Easy to do, bit costly at first, but a good lawyer can help you set that up. I'd personally change the name of the board now, set up the new name as a redirect to this name until the new laws take effect. Then switch it over to the new name completely. As for we the sp's, when you think about it logically, police departments do not have the manpower to go around busting every single sp in this industry and furthermore when you think about it logically, their main targets of interest are going to be agencies, micro's and brothels with gang ties. Any place where they deem that there may be human trafficking ie: asian massage parlours, micros etc. There are literally thousands of those places across Canada, they will be busy for a VERY long time, years in fact attempting to clean that up. So my suggestion to the pooners that currently partake in those, get your fixes in now, because the abolishment agencies have made it quite clear that they want those shut down as a priority. Their next targets will be regular agencies ("pimps", if you will) possible minors and new/young ladies, anyone they feel that they can "rescue." Police aren't stupid and having had personal dealings with them, they know established sp's that have been in the industry for a long time aren't going to budge. I work in Alberta and we have some of the strictest bylaws in the industry and I've never had a problem with police, they just ask general questions (and yes they have come to my incall) and that's about it. When they've left, all they've said was, take care of yourself, be safe, type of thing. They've never asked me anything about clients, to see my phone, laptop whatever. Total of 4 dealings with them in over 20 years, they've got better things to do. What clients need to do in order to protect themselves, are not to take risks with unestablished ladies and they need to google numbers that they see in ads. Web sites are not used by vice, that was not even brought up as a means to bust "john's" and there's some type of provision in our laws that prevents them from doing so. Reviews are not used by vice either to entrap clients. So if a lady has a web site, you can find some history on her in google and she has reviews, chances are, you'll be pretty safe seeing her. I'm not changing anything on my site at all, I'm not taking down my rates or services, I'm just moving my site offshore and good luck to them trying to get rid of my site. I'm not a primary target for them to begin with, so I'm not worried about any of it in the least.