tanyathetgurl

I travel a lot, and some of the time I spend is in the US. For many happy years, there used to be a US-based forum named MyRedBook, and I advertised on it, chatted, posted on the forum, and met friends and prospects. One of the main mods became a personal friend and it was interesting for me to see things more from her perspective. She, with MyRedBook management, ran a tight ship, but there were nevertheless some blatant violations by members of the same lousy laws as we're concerned about here. Even though MyRedBook was officially based in the Seychelles it had a local-to-the-US team. Not that long ago, the FBI swooped in, arrested the MyRedBook folks and confiscated (government-speak for "stole") all the servers, which had both providers and clients concerned because all this could be used as "evidence" which made it a lousy bureaucrat's wet dream. I really hate laws like these, and the folks who enforce them with with gusto don't rate highly with me either. Much as I love the US, in so many ways Canadian society is a more thoughtful and benevolent version of whatever happens south of the US-Canada border, and so I am glad that the folks on CERB (mods, escorts, clients) are taking some very pro-active steps to make it less likely that what happened "down there" would happen here too. Certainly, the LE and government vibe is much nicer here, but still .. it's better to be safe than sorry. ~Tanya

So this married guy is attending a convention and staying at a large hotel. He's brought his wife along, and she's up in the room getting ready to go out to dinner with him. While he's downstairs in the lobby area, waiting, a gorgeous escort walks past and propositions him. He's not really interested but he figured if she has a room there and it's quick, then ... maybe. So, he asks her the price for an hour. $300, he hears. He asks the price for a quickie. She's not really in that market, but fine ... $100 minimum, she says. He explains he wasn't really planning on spending more than $10 for this sort of fun, and in a huff, the lady departs. Later that evening, the guy, this time with his wife walking alongside, comes back from their dinner date. Walking towards them on the same sidewalk is the hot escort. When she's a few paces away, she stops and looks the wife up and down, and then tells the guy ... ... "see what you get, for $10!!" :-)

Although I'm happily in Vancouver, I'm also in the US part of the time, so I'm rather focused on what's happening in Washington DC, and what that seems likely to do to the street value of the US dollar. Bitcoin, arbitrary as it nevertheless is, has a much more objective standard than anything whose value hinges on the credibility of who's in the White House. I'm guessing the Democrats will rack up an insane amount of debt, and when things get bad enough a Republican will inherit the mess and then end up printing money to try to pay it off. At that point the whistling noise you'll hear through the trees along the southern border will be value of the US dollar plummeting in free-fall. In cynical preparation for that, I'm already welcoming bitcoin. Besides, as a free-market girl, I applaud private money in general. Practical expectations aside, I accept bitcoin on principle, sort of like pro-freedom folks who drank alcohol on principle during Prohibition. One bitcoin buys you 12 hours of my focused attention. I also welcome gold. Really. A one-ounce coin of Canadian gold buys you 24 hours of my enthusiastic attention. Perhaps I can bring back the gold standard in this way. If it's going to make a comeback, it has to start somewhere. I can't think of a better place than my bed.

I used chat for the first time yesterday and I liked it, but I noticed there's the potential for "dead air." It helps to be prepared for chat, as opposed to just leaping in without any sort of plan. So, one rule of etiquette that works well for me is: be prepared, with a few fun, semi-racy subjects to discuss ... As to less-than-polite people ... yes, they're annoying but it's good that they're showing their true colours in chat. Now I know I should tell them "no thank you" if they were to approach me in my capacity as a SP. Forewarned = forearmed.

<Zoom up to 30,000 feet> I'm sitting here literally blinking back tears after spending a lot of time this morning reading about the C-36 law, and the very thoughtful, logical posts on this board, including the quoted comments by the CBA. Yes, the law is unjust and I have many issues with it, and the horse it rode in on. But, wow. Here I sit, in Vancouver, and all around me including thousands of miles towards the east, is a massive network of bright sparks -- benevolent, thoughtful, logical, reasonable and articulate people. Having lived in many other countries, I can really appreciate the contrast. I'm proud to be here. </zoom>

@peacectryguy I'm tempted to applaud since I fancy myself as being an escort to the elite, but it probably would not be fair for me to expect everyone to change their buying decisions accordingly. I suspect there's room in the market, and a legitimate need, for not just fine-dining restaurants but also fast-food places. I presume the same premise applies to sexually themed work. I'm not even saying it varies from person to person; it might be the situation for that person on that day. I suspect that even Bill Gates knows what the inside of a fast-food restaurant, or the perspective from a drive-through lane, looks like. Could be that someone who normally likes to linger is in the mood for a quickie on that particular day ... I have to concede there is nothing wrong with that. :-)

I enjoy a good game of chess, so when I read about high-quality people planning several steps ahead, I like it. Kudos ... Here's a brief overview as to my background in case it's relevant to what I'd like to contribute: I've done my share of escorting work south of the US-Canada border, and several of my friends are colleagues; a close friend recently got "busted" by the local sex police. Her experience has convinced me that it's not a process I want to personally experience. That's why, when I work in the US, I'm so legally cautious that my clients' feedback reassures me that I'm one of the most cautious girls they've engaged. That includes clients who work in, ironically, law enforcement -- yet pay for my services. Here's a made-up story to illustrate the point I'm about to make: two acquaintances are out camping in the woods. They wake up, barefoot and in their pajamas, just in time to see a couple of cute grizzly bear cubs coming toward their tent. Beyond them, in the middle distance, is the mama bear, on the warpath, charging towards them. One of the guys hastily starts putting on his shoes. The other guy looks at him, puzzled, and says, "what are you doing? You know that even a grown man can't outrun a bear. The bear is faster." The first guy replies: "I don't have to outrun the bear. I just have to outrun YOU." The story illustrates my central point: if C36 passes, law enforcement is probably going to allocate a finite amount of time, energy and enthusiasm to arresting SPs and/or their clients. It's unlikely that they're going to spend months laying an elaborate trap for one brilliantly crafty girl as if she were a mastermind cat burglar who's already stolen the Crown jewels twice over. My guess it that they'll go after low-hanging fruit, with all the lack of enthusiasm that good law enforcement officers show for bad laws. Many of them, I'm clear, are aware how unjust laws like C36 (if it passes) are. They'll enforce such laws because they'll be instructed to, not out of a sense of zeal. My guess is that an informal minimum-quota system will drive the process. Hawaii is a good example. There are many violent criminals there and the Honolulu police relish being an effective counterforce. An annoying distraction for them is that they're also tasked with enforcing Hawaiian anti-prostitution laws. The numbers speak for themselves. Officially, the Honolulu PD is on board with enforcing anti-prostitution laws. But, a watchdog group analysed the statistics and found that out of 25,000 arrests that the Honolulu PD made in a particular context, maybe 7 of them were for breaking anti-prostitution laws, and the majority of these seven arrests occurred on a weekday night but before midnight. To me, that smacks of lack of enthusiasm, and I'm all for this sort of passive resistance by law enforcement, when it comes to bad laws. Nevada law enforcement, and much of the entire State of Nevada bureaucratic structure, works on the same informal premise. Clueless activists push unprincipled or misguided politicians to pass dumb laws. It happens. Even so, we all have lives to live, so let's see how we can minimize the impact that these dumb laws have, and let's try to allocate the time and energy of Nevada law enforcement to catching actual "bad guys" like bank robbers, guys who beat up their girlfriends or wives, etc. For example, when I'm in Nevada, I cheerfully drive 10 mph above the legal speed limit on freeways. I'm there often enough, and yet I haven't gotten a speeding ticket in maybe 15 years -- and when I did it was due to exceeding this "margin" -- a margin informally suggested to me by a kind State of Nevada Highway Patrol officer. Good advice, that. As I zoom along at 70+10 = 80 mph and I get passed by folks doing 90+ I'm pretty sure that they're going to get pulled over, and sure enough, I tend to be prophetic as such. Reno, NV is a good example. While I was there, there was a very recent much-publicized bust. As I understand the story (I didn't see the actual newspaper) a half-dozen clients' names and pictures were posted on the front page of the local newspaper, along with the names and pictures of the one or two service providers who were arrested. Most of Reno culture is very open-minded and the moral taint from being "outed" is pretty close to zero unless the person is a pastor or politician. Cynically, I think the real reason the Reno PD is working so closely with the newspaper and enabling the press to run the story up the flagpole is that this assuages the peanut gallery of zealous conservatives who pushed for these laws in the first place. When they see the newspaper, these folks are then convinced that the cops are "doing what they're supposed to be doing" because, the "proof" is right there, plus the conservative also gets the bonus of feeling Schadenfreude. As a consequence of all this, the mayor's office for a while doesn't get lobbied to "do something," the police chief doesn't get ordered to "do something," and the folks in blue don't get told to "do something" because the conservative lobby needs their pound of flesh yet again. So, for a while, the Reno PD can get on with focusing on catching the actual bad guys, which they do very well when they're left free to do that. Back to Canada: unless the government appoints a rabid and misguided C36 enforcement task force with the zeal and moral blindness of the Spanish Inquisition, my guess is that a few of the most careless SPs and clients in the business will get arrested in highly publicized events to fill quotes and appease the people who pushed for these laws. The rest of us will do business as usual as long as we're careful enough, meaning: if we avoid being the "low-hanging fruit" for law enforcement. Using my friend as an example, she hosted a hugely publicized New Year's Eve event with her as the center of ten guys' attentions, meaning she sold sexual services blatantly in a Bible Belt US state. The fact that she didn't use condoms, is a t-girl and looks like a mix between a beauty queen and a porn starlet ... that probably contributed to the publicity. One of the guys spilled the beans, a spouse lodged a vociferous complaint with the local PD and they sent out a stooge to bust her. My friend has a different alcohol and drug policy than I do, so during the bust, she was inebriated and hopped up on cocaine, so her mental defenses were totally down. Plus she was 20 at the time, and basically considered herself as able to get away with anything and everything. She admits to me that she was extremely careless at the time of her arrest. So, in practical terms, what the C36 law (if it passes) will probably end up punishing, really, is: carelessness.

I was working as an office manager when my boss suddenly interrupted my train of thought and said "I don't know what this name means in his home country, but here ... he should probably change his name." He showed me an invoice with the gentleman's unfortunate first name ... "Turdsuk."

Wow, that is hot!! Thank you for the suggestion. Yes! I just added it. I credited you anonymously for the idea. Is it OK to credit you and identify you as such? .Tanya

I'm cynical and thus a firm believer in justice, not as a theological post-grave construct or a magic-karma thing but as a particular variation of the law of cause-and-effect. This is why I think we'll prevail. In more detail: We affirm our right to make a living using, amongst other things, our bodies ... as part of the interaction with other consenting adults who are within their rights to spend their own money in exchange for our services. Of course, so do actresses, and butchers & bakers & candlestick makers -- but somehow the sexual nature of our work inspires some folks to want to demonize us. Long term and perhaps not just long-term, what gives me hope is that we have truth on our side, i.e., we make our points with honesty as our basic premise. The "other side" seems to be using confusion and obfuscation ... and often blatant dishonesty. That bodes well for us. If anyone had any moral fuzziness on this point, this aspect in and of itself ... it should help clarify things, greatly. I've met Dennis Hof (who runs a number of legal brothels in Nevada) and worked with him over the course of several days, while making a website for one of his business ventures. I learned quite a bit about how he operates. I like how he deals with critics. He invites them, individually, for an all-expenses-paid week-long visit to one of his brothels. The critic (stereotypically, a conservative Christian female reporter or a faux-feminist reporter from the left side of the political spectrum) is not supposed to interfere with business (e.g., go confront clients or ruin the mood) but is welcome to wander around, look around, eat meals with the girls, and ask any questions of anyone and everyone who works there. By the time they leave, they've lost many illusions and the most honest amongst these critics have become convinced that their animosity was misguided. I hasten to add that some of the people who push for criminalization have so dishonest an axe to grind that no amount of reasoning will sway them, but if we can get the word out to the relatively rational voting public, it bodes well. It's time for paraphrase my favourite philosopher, Ayn Rand: on our side of the battle, we have three powerful weapons: rights, reason and reality. Let's use them. .Tanya Additional Comments: The basic issue is one of rights. We have the right to use our bodies as we're doing. Laws don't change rights; they can at best make some activities illegal. Criminalizing prostitution morally changes nothing. It just makes the law wrong, and puts law enforcement on the side of prosecuting those who aren't doing anything wrong. So, it's an inversion of justice. One of my clients (and also by now, a friend) is a senior retired police officer. Even many years later, he recalls with bitterness and shame the injustice he enacted when he was sent out to arrest service providers. A great many law enforcement officers are basically good people. They signed up in the name of justice, to protect citizens from violent people. They resent being made the enforcers of bad laws. I'm not in Hawaii nor am I a Hawaiian, but still ... Hawaii makes for an interesting case study. The law enforcement officers in Honolulu are very focused on preventing and arresting for violent crime, and by contrast they generally attend to nominally criminalised prostitution (involving consenting adults) with a lack of enthusiasm that I consider to be quite refreshing. Even the formal legal commentary that's on the official Hawaiian law document states (better-worded than I can paraphrase here from memory) that criminalising prostitution makes little sense but when a loud enough portion of the populace pushes for it, such a law ends up being passed and so here it is but don't expect much good to come from it. I hasten to add that whoever chooses to spend his money on a service provider is also within his rights, so I take issue with the Scandinavian model. With all of that clearly in mind, there's one aspect that seems so peculiar that I'm surprised anyone can entertain the notion of criminalising voluntary-exchange prostitution as a serious idea. Let's agree that forced labour + abduction + holding someone against their will (slavery, essentially) is bad, and its eradication deserves of every iota of law enforcement resources we can muster. Were we to criminalise voluntary prostitution then this would divert resources from that just cause. For now let's ignore what the law enforcement officers would be doing as part of enforcing laws that criminalise prostution transactions between consenting adults. Let's say they just lit candles and held hands and sang Kumbaya. Even so it'd be a step backwards because such time and energy could and should have been allocated to going after the people who are, in precise terms, enslaving others. (The 90%+10% in my chart might be 80%+20% or 20%+80% instead, but you get the idea). Somehow voluntary sex work gets painted with the same tar brush as sexual slavery, as if the former were essentially the same as the latter. On such premises, agriculture should have been criminalized across the board at the time, because in the American South there were slaves involved in agriculture. The more I think about this proposed law, the less sense it makes. One more thing: One trick that faux-feminists will sometimes pull (and I resent their attempted usurpation of the title "feminist" since I am a true feminist) is a sexist twist on the notion "a hungry man is not free". To the extent that we agree with that premise, it's a slippery-slope argument towards our opponents' point of view. Of course, that critique, even if it held water (which it doesn't) would apply to many fields of endeavour, including the US miltary which, some claim, penalizes poor and/or black people by giving them an option that private industry would not. The "people are victimized even if they're politically free" premise makes a contradictory and jumbled conceptual mess, both north and south of the Canada-US border. .Tanya

@oldblueeyez: While I was reading the first few paragraphs of your post I was thinking something like "maybe we'll have to start using silver and gold coins" and then that's what you wrote too. :-) I'm very wary of government intervention in the economy and although I've studied economics at University and read much about the subject in subsequent years, I'm rare convinced by the typical arguments of why it's a good idea to have the government muscle in and do ... whatever. As to protecting good people from violence, domestic or international: yes. A courts system, yes ... as to everything else ... I'm not convinced. And that also goes for the role of the government as to: money. The sort of shenanigans that bureaucrats so often do, including essentially Ponzi schemes and running printing presses to inflate the money supply ... that's made me more wary yet. The premise of "I decree that this money should be valuable to you because as your bureaucrat, I printed it and I say so" tends to activate the independent-minded streak in me. Your solution of gold and silver coins, while not convenient, certainly has a "back to basics" sort of appeal to me. It'd be difficult for the government to muscle into that. The items being exchanged wouldn't even need to literally be gold or silver, just something of objective value and/or a valid claim check to that, whether that's a gallon of petrol of a specified octane, or an apple or a chicken egg or an hour of long-distance phone service from A to B -- anything that can't easily be watered down to where it's open to manipulation by the same mindset as (now that I think about it) is currently manipulating money supplies, in so many countries of the world. Somewhat relevant to "our" subject matter: the "Chicken Ranch" brothel got its name due to customers bringing in one full-grown chicken in exchange for a session with one of the girls who worked there. No credit cards, no checks, no fiat money. The customer got what he wanted, and the girls had food to eat as a result of this deal. Maybe I should set my prices in terms of ounces of gold (one overnight = one ounce of gold). Kinda hot, now that I think about it. No chickens, though ... As to the more on-point comments on this thread, I agree that a cashless society won't be viable any time soon, or hopefully ever ... especially in this business. .Tanya

I'm transexual (which describes me) and bisexual (which describes what turns me on). So, I love this group as someone who enjoys looking at pretty legs, plus some people like my legs too. Here are some pictures of me. And yes, if you're in Vancouver, you can see & touch them in person. And, no, that doesn't mean you're gay. :-) .Tanya