Reasons Why We Screen Clients (Please take the ti

[Gregsand 6116]

I understand your point of view, but you also need to understand the other side. Not all counter-arguments are "rubbish excuses". If every aspects of the sex-trade were 100% legal and everyone was honest, most men(and women) would have no problems providing minimal information. On top of that, there many fake ads and fake verification websites made for the sole purpose of identity theft, credit card fraud and blackmail. There also the question of where and how the the information is stored. A provider can be careful on how she handles and uses customers details. But if she gets busted by law enforcement or a previous procurer, all bets are off.

 

I agree providers should be able to verify who they're dealing with, the same way most men do here. But there other ways to do it. I prefer by far the reference system and provide the name of SP's and MA's I seen before. It does the job and no private information is shared. The only downside, is making it complicated for newcomers. But again, no system is perfect and some compromises are expected from both sides.

 

Many providers and lobbyists got burned from not knowing enough or by sharing too much. Up to both sides to work on a safe middle ground.

[Jasmine Rain 23126]

I understand your point of view, but you also need to understand the other side. Not all counter-arguments are "rubbish excuses". If every aspects of the sex-trade were 100% legal and everyone was honest, most men(and women) would have no problems providing minimal information. On top of that, there many fake ads and fake verification websites made for the sole purpose of identity theft, credit card fraud and blackmail. There also the question of where and how the the information is stored. A provider can be careful on how she handles and uses customers details. But if she gets busted by law enforcement or a previous procurer, all bets are off.

 

I agree providers should be able to verify who they're dealing with, the same way most men do here. But there other ways to do it. I prefer by far the reference system and provide the name of SP's and MA's I seen before. It does the job and no private information is shared. The only downside, is making it complicated for newcomers. But again, no system is perfect and some compromises are expected from both sides.

 

Many providers and lobbyists got burned from not knowing enough or by sharing too much. Up to both sides to work on a safe middle ground.

 

 

Wait? So we have to understand your side of the coin AND make that system better for you? For what you like better? BTW - you do realize this was written by an Austrailain SP, where it is legal to work as an escort. They are still screening over there too. Legal has nothing to do with harm. Sorry

 

So no. Her body first and foremost. SHE makes the rules for her and if that works for both of you, great! If not, move on.

 

Men seriously need to stop telling women how to screen. You like the SP reference system better. Ok, so? Maybe that doesn't work for others. Can't always be about you, or what you want. We get it doesn't work for all of you. That is okay. We accept that, why can't you?

 

When something goes wrong for you, it is lost money, lost time and could be a lost wife/family or a normal job. When things go wrong for us, it is all that PLUS possible loss of LIFE, on top of physical harms. So I am sorry but it is a no-brainer. Your right to get your d$ wet will never trump a lady and her right to live and not be murdered.

 

I wish men could give me the numbers of how many men last year were screwed over by an escort outting their personal information? I know we can give you numbers of how many sex workers were killed.

 

Hobbyist, {don't know why you insist on using the term lobbyists as it means something different} have their tools, and we have ours. Sometimes that matches up, sometimes it does not. Look at the screening just like services. If you like DFk and she doesn't do it, you move on. Do you keep going up on boards complaining that a woman you want to see doesn't do DFK? No, you move on.

 

I am done "HAVING TO UNDERSTAND THE OTHER SIDE" of the coin. Because let's be real, I can pull up a dozen threads from the last 3 months on a variety of different boards on this very topic, and in most of them, men are not at all understanding our side of the coin. It is nothing more than women trying to politely explain our reasons for screening, different options to get screened, how to help newcomers, etc etc. while being bitched at by non-understanding men. This is litterally my second thread on this subject today.

 

and the last response I got was that I am apparently admitting to overdoing MY screening because I can refer a lady similar to me who requires less. Yup, you read that right folks. Stupidity holds no bounds.

 

Sorry, but most men are not looking to work with providers on a safe middle ground for both sides. Most men are looking to say their name is john, with a text app and $80.00 and wanting to put it all on us when they don't get it that easy and for that price.

 

So no. We don't have to understand anymore. We are in control of ourselves and if you don't like it, move on to the next. We are perfectly happy with that. It is not an insult to us, it is not a threat to us. By all means, spend your money elsewhere. But don't worry, you won't get the same rude, insulting and disrespectful responses from us when you do, like we get from many men when they don't get their way, yourself included.

[Gregsand 6116]

Wait? So we have to understand your side of the coin AND make that system better for you? For what you like better?

 

No - Sorry. Her body first and foremost. SHE makes the rules for her and if that works for both of you, great! If not, move on.

 

Men seriously need to stop telling women how to screen. You like the SP reference system better. Ok, so? Maybe that doesn't work for others. Can't always be about you, or what you want. We get it doesn't work for all of you. That is okay. We accept that, why can't you?

 

 

From the start, the quoted article is a bit one sided by dismissing any counter-arguments as "rubbish". I agree ladies should have the ability to know who they're dealing with, but I reject the notion lobbyists lives are never at risk. There been plenty of incidents of men getting beaten, robbed and a few occasions killed by a lady with a procurer/accomplice(s).

 

Both sides share a similar level of risks. And both gain from knowing enough from the other to feel safe. If they want to share information as if it was a normal date or job interview, that's perfectly fine. But not everyone(providers and hobbyists alike) will be on board with this level of familiarisation with so much potential of abuse.

[cat 262460]

Prior to C36, it was completely legal for the client. The laws were weighted and enforced against the provider and clients still balked at verifying even tho they were not at risk of LE laying charges. Yes, referrals can work but I know for a fact that clients can behave differently depending on who they are seeing. I've learned several of my ATF guests have had extensive bad date listings after the fact. I'm exceedingly hesitant to give a referral, not because I want to stand in anyones way of having fun but because I don't want my reputation damaged within the SP community if one of the men misbehaves. And it happens more than anyone cares to admit.

 

The referral system doesn't work effectively because there isn't enough information on hand to hold clients accountable if things go very left. All that can happen is he doesn't use the provider he violated as a referral. He just moves on, continuing to use the couple of referrals where he behaves. It's calculated and cold but a fact none the less. Paid services in the US are in fact a nightmare for many providers should be a clear indication that it's a dice roll. Providers throw in referral acceptance to try and appease the online review gods imo but you can't file assault charges with an "Yes I saw him and he was ok." email, let alone a phone call. I will only take referrals from providers I've met in person and even then, I'm still on high alert the entire time. Not a great way to have fun given the circumstance at hand.

 

The sites designed to ensnare are obvious to anyone who does modicum of due diligence. I don't know of a single provider who requires a credit card up front; there are numerous options if she is asking for a deposit here in Canada. Identity theft happens at point of purchase and sexworkers with cc merchant accounts protect them like they are Hope Diamond given how difficult they are to get. Blackmailed? This one actually makes me laugh because there is so much more risk of it coming from someone inside the clients inner circle or from a mistress than from his provider. I'd love to see the crime stats on that one. 99% of the time, a client outs themselves by not being careful with their communications. Previous procurer? I actually had to google this and can't see how it applies here in Canada. Yes, there may be details kept but LE can't come in and arrest us for what we do, let alone go thru our records without a search warrant and I have yet to hear of a situation where LE tried to get to our clients thru us. It isn't happening because they have no legal grounds to do it. I have had many SOs find my information however, causing untold grief.

 

What isn't understood is that verification in Canada is about safety, not keeping LE out. We have little to no defence in the event a client becomes aggressive, violent or robs us. It needs to be understood that our safety is paramount and how a provider chooses to verify is a personal risk assessment choice and shouldn't be questioned. If you don't want to provide the information she requires, don't contact her but also don't disparage providers that choose to place boundaries they feel comfortable with. I also think clients on the boards need to stop fear mongering and trying to scare new comers. C36 has already done a bang up job at chasing away new clients, scaring the ones that actually decide to take the plunge with false data is simply making the industry more tenuous as a whole. Let them do their own risk assessments, they're fully grown men and can make decisions for themselves about what they are or are not comfortable with...

 

smiles, cat

[Jasmine Rain 23126]

From the start, the quoted article is a bit one sided by dismissing any counter-arguments as "rubbish". I agree ladies should have the ability to know who they're dealing with, but I reject the notion lobbyists lives are never at risk. There been plenty of incidents of men getting beaten, robbed and a few occasions killed by a lady with a procurer/accomplice(s).

 

 

Please back that up with stats. Please. I will take stats from any year in the last say ... 10 years on both and we will see who comes out on top.

 

Because let's be real, we know more sex workers have been killed by clients than the other way around.

 

Playing word games, which I know you like to do, does not negate the truth and the truth is in the numbers. We know violence happens more to women PERIOD.

 

So unless you are backing up your claim, it is another counter-argument that is RUBBISH! I have not said it doesn't happen to men but it happens a hell of a lot more to women.

 

 

Both sides share a similar level of risks. And both gain from knowing enough from the other to feel safe. If they want to share information as if it was a normal date or job interview, that's perfectly fine. But not everyone(providers and hobbyists alike) will be on board with this level of familiarity with so much potential of abuse.

 

I will continue to disagree on the same level of risk based on what I wrote above. I am far more likely to be killed then you in this hobby. That is not similar.

 

And while not everyone is on board with screening, thankfully my clients are and that works for me. Same with all the other women who are successful with it. Which is clearly happening more and more because more and more men are bitching.

 

So my point is simple, no I don't have to understand your side of the coin. I don't have to make a system that works for you, and I will continue to wish any man who wants to remain anonymous, all the best with the next provider because I have no interest in seeing him.

 

What I ask, is for men who don't want to be screened, to just move on. Stop complaining like a little kid who lost his ball and just move on already. There are plenty of women still who don't screen. Us screening ladies are not making multiple threads on here or other boards, generalizing all men who refused to get screened, insulting them by calling them closest rapists and murderers. We just move on.

 

So maybe lets at least get on the same "moving on if it doesn't work for you" page. If we can't even get on the same page there, how to do you expect a better system to be layed out at your feet for you?

[NotchJohnson 214136]

Why on Lyla does the reference process shouldn't work? I have read a nice recommendation about a well known lady from Lyla and I have communicated with her to set up a rendez vous, she wants to screen me and so far I have no issue with that.

 

I give my real name, my cell # and the name of a few providers I have seen since a year. One week goes by and nothing, I send another email and I get a reply saying that what I gave her was not enough to book a rdv. I gave her my phone number at work and she can call me at anytime during the day, I also supply more reference from well known provider that I have seen a few years ago and we are still in touch. That is still not enough.....I do not want to do a etransfer because I share the account with my wife and she can find out so explanations have to come out. So I'm at the point to give up on this fine lady that I'm sure we would have a lot of fun together. I hate having to send a photo ID with my address and my credit card # and all of my personal information. Is that necessary?

 

I know I will be missing out on this fine lady but there are a lot more out there that I can see.

[cat 262460]

There been plenty of incidents of men getting beaten, robbed and a few occasions killed by a lady with a procurer/accomplice(s).

 

 

By all means, please provide these statistics. I'd love to go over them in comparison to the assaults, rapes and murder stats of sex workers and do a risk comparison so we can start using accurate data to inform people...

 

smiles, cat

[Jasmine Rain 23126]

Why on Lyla does the reference process shouldn't work? I have read a nice recommendation about a well known lady from Lyla and I have communicated with her to set up a rendez vous, she wants to screen me and so far I have no issue with that.

 

I give my real name, my cell # and the name of a few providers I have seen since a year. One week goes by and nothing, I send another email and I get a reply saying that what I gave her was not enough to book a rdv. I gave her my phone number at work and she can call me at anytime during the day, I also supply more reference from well known provider that I have seen a few years ago and we are still in touch. That is still not enough.....I do not want to do a etransfer because I share the account with my wife and she can find out so explanations have to come out. So I'm at the point to give up on this fine lady that I'm sure we would have a lot of fun together. I hate having to send a photo ID with my address and my credit card # and all of my personal information. Is that necessary?

 

I know I will be missing out on this fine lady but there are a lot more out there that I can see.

 

 

You don't know the other woman and her reasons. They may be very necessary for her. But unnecessary for you. And that is OKAY!

 

Because as you said, there are more for you to see and you are moving on. Example of being a gentleman right here. Thanks

[Meg O'Ryan 266444]

Notch...you know i love you. This is not targeted at you. If a lady's screening practices dont work move on there are plenty of providers out there. Dont complalin or tell us how to proceed. And if you are seeing ladies who have a "procurer" you shoumd guve yourself a huge shake and feel remorseful for being part of the culture that has demonized thjs profession.

[Gregsand 6116]

Please back that up with stats. Please. I will take stats from any year in the last say ... 10 years on both and we will see who comes out on top...

 

I agree more ladies are beaten and killed than men, I'm simply making the point men also risk a lot more than losing a few dollars. Many lobbyists including myself are always a bit nervous when knocking at an incall location for the first time. More than once, discovered at the last second she was working with others or had a "bodyguard" present. Outcalls don't always feel safer with some micromanaging drivers. On a first meeting, will leave the wallet in the car and carry the minimum amount of cash to cover the agreed services and possible tip. Most times it's been incident free, but on a few occasions the vigilance paid off.

 

I'm not saying your way of doing business is wrong, quite the opposite. If the formula works for you and others, who am I to judge. It's simply not for me and I shouldn't be judged because I prefer alternate ways to meet. Without a legal industry standard, there many ways things can be dealt with. You got yours, I got mine. Let's just agree to disagree.

[Tempted Monk 5057]

Wait? So we have to understand your side of the coin AND make that system better for you? For what you like better? BTW - you do realize this was written by an Austrailain SP, where it is legal to work as an escort. They are still screening over there too. Legal has nothing to do with harm. Sorry

 

So no. Her body first and foremost. SHE makes the rules for her and if that works for both of you, great! If not, move on.

 

Men seriously need to stop telling women how to screen. You like the SP reference system better. Ok, so? Maybe that doesn't work for others. Can't always be about you, or what you want. We get it doesn't work for all of you. That is okay. We accept that, why can't you?

 

When something goes wrong for you, it is lost money, lost time and could be a lost wife/family or a normal job. When things go wrong for us, it is all that PLUS possible loss of LIFE, on top of physical harms. So I am sorry but it is a no-brainer. Your right to get your d$ wet will never trump a lady and her right to live and not be murdered.

 

I wish men could give me the numbers of how many men last year were screwed over by an escort outting their personal information? I know we can give you numbers of how many sex workers were killed.

 

Hobbyist, {don't know why you insist on using the term lobbyists as it means something different} have their tools, and we have ours. Sometimes that matches up, sometimes it does not. Look at the screening just like services. If you like DFk and she doesn't do it, you move on. Do you keep going up on boards complaining that a woman you want to see doesn't do DFK? No, you move on.

 

I am done "HAVING TO UNDERSTAND THE OTHER SIDE" of the coin. Because let's be real, I can pull up a dozen threads from the last 3 months on a variety of different boards on this very topic, and in most of them, men are not at all understanding our side of the coin. It is nothing more than women trying to politely explain our reasons for screening, different options to get screened, how to help newcomers, etc etc. while being bitched at by non-understanding men. This is litterally my second thread on this subject today.

 

and the last response I got was that I am apparently admitting to overdoing MY screening because I can refer a lady similar to me who requires less. Yup, you read that right folks. Stupidity holds no bounds.

 

Sorry, but most men are not looking to work with providers on a safe middle ground for both sides. Most men are looking to say their name is john, with a text app and $80.00 and wanting to put it all on us when they don't get it that easy and for that price.

 

So no. We don't have to understand anymore. We are in control of ourselves and if you don't like it, move on to the next. We are perfectly happy with that. It is not an insult to us, it is not a threat to us. By all means, spend your money elsewhere. But don't worry, you won't get the same rude, insulting and disrespectful responses from us when you do, like we get from many men when they don't get their way, yourself included.

 

With all due respect Jessica, this topic can be considered at a bit different angle as well.

 

First of all I want to make clear that I absolutely agree with two things:

- Screening system must be in place. Period.

- SP chooses which system to use, it is her right, absolutely. Period.

 

But escorting is a business first of all. And providers and clients are two sides of this business which are, actually, interested in the same thing: well working and acceptable for clients screening system.

SP can have perfect screening system which is unacceptable for 90% of the clients and this system will just kill her business. The situation is much better if system works and is acceptable for 90% of clients.

 

So, the question if screening system is required has simple answer - YES, nothing to discuss here.

Which system works AND is acceptable for clients - possible topic for discussion and clients opinion is worth to consider, providers are interested in such a system.

 

Personally, I had problems in the past after providing my personal data for verification and I will never do it again. So, the girl who requires personal data of first time clients will loose me as a client, and I am a good client, any girl I met could confirm this. Too restrictive system can affect the business and screen out good clients.

And I don't see anything wrong in the discussion how to make this system better for both sides.

[Meg O'Ryan 266444]

Its mind boggling that this thread has become what it is. What we offer is not a necessity but a luxury. Dont wanna play by the rules then move on. Yes Tempted it is a business but just like any other private business the business owner decides how to conduct their business and if it adversely affects their income they will reevaluate their practices. But at the end of the day you cant please everyone nor should you try to. If i own a store and refuse to sell apples but Joe keeps complaining that i dont does that mean i have to sell apples? Joe can go next door for his flipping apples.

 

Ugh i am frustrated beyond all belief at some of the xomments posted on this thread....its almost a how dare you say that outloud tyle of reaction

 

K peace y'all

[Gregsand 6116]

When a lady is too desperate and drops her screening standards this could be a sign that maybe she is higher risk to go see.

 

Not sure it's necessary to throw under the bus providers and lobbyists who got different ways of doing business.

 

The key issue are the illegal aspects of the trade that involves a certain amount of risks for both participants. And don't fool yourself with the effectiveness of verification websites. Those are only as good as the information provided. With identity theft, someone who want to slip through the cracks of the system can easily do it for a few dollars.

 

I only provide my information when a lady provide services via a legal business framework(or front). There been creative ways to safely work and get services. Up to people involved to choose what works for them. Again, there are no perfect systems.

[cat 262460]

I only provide my information when a lady provide services via a legal business framework(or front). There been creative ways to safely work and get services. Up to people involved to choose what works for them. Again, there are no perfect systems.

 

Care to elaborate on how you define a legal business framework (or front) and on creative ways to safe work and get services? Sharing of information is critical in this industry and I'm definitely interested in your above statement.

 

As for throwing someone under the bus, it's not a criticism but an actual warning. If a provider is willing to circumvent her normal screening, there is a reason. Does she find herself in a $ crunch and have to decide between her safety and paying the rent? Is she driven by an addiction? Does she make arrangements to have someone in the room next door in case of emergency? There is something going on and any man who is willing to take advantage is predatory in my opinion.

 

Predators is why we screen. Predators can't be weeded out ahead of time, we can't guarantee our safety simply with information. The only real justice we may be entitled to after we are found strangled to death is a real name and real information. Our ability to keep those who have harmed others and are escalating their violence out of our space is key and in this day of anonymous accessibility, it's imperative we try our best to minimize the risk.

 

Like Jessica, I don't like to brand all men who don't want to verify as predatory, rapists, thieves and potential murderers but this willingness to bitch, moan, complain and justify all the reasons we are wrong for verifying is disconcerting. Men default to the idea that anyone trying to verify has sinister motives, perhaps they are simply mirroring something within that providers should take serious note of...

 

smiles, cat

 

Additional Comments:

Everyone has their own way of doing things.

 

And in this is where the problem lies. The only way to ensure our safety is if we stand together and insist on our safety. The day would come quickly if providers realized that...

 

smiles, cat

[Gregsand 6116]

Care to elaborate on how you define a legal business framework (or front) and on creative ways to safe work and get services? Sharing of information is critical in this industry and I'm definitely interested in your above statement.

 

I got a few examples but I'll limit myself to only one that's been a recurrent topic here, and it's RMT's. I always hate bringing that up, as many confuse "a few" and "most of them". RMT's should be respected. And if they want see someone off the clock it's none of our businesses. They run a legitimate business and the extra collected(if any) remains under the radar.

 

As for the rest, I mostly meet reviewed ladies and newcomers with who I had extended conversations. If she feels comfortable in meeting me without my full name and other private info, I won't treat as a lesser person. Never been an issue in the past 20+years. Not sure why it should be a problem now.

[Meaghan McLeod 179664]

I always find it amusing when slobyists come on boards and say things like "wait, but, but, but, you need to listen to why I disagree with the way you want to run your business. I've been seeing providers for 25 years and I know everything about the industry".

 

Until the slobyists put their picture online, post an ad and start taking calls, they have no idea how it is to be on this side of the business.

 

Stop lobbying for providers to do things your way. If she wants to screen fully, it's her choice. If you don't like that method, move on. If you find her reasons rubbish, move on. Quit complaining about YOUR RISKS. I get it, you mistrust providers.

 

I've been raped, assaulted, robbed, mistreated, my safety treatened. Even knowing their real name, where they worked, where they lived, it hadn't protected me. I was alone with a man who choose to disregard me and my right to be safe. Never once have I used the information inappropriately.

 

Quit whining over why YOU feel we should not follow a system that at least gives us some options in the event things go south.

 

I even had someone who refused to give me his name and insisted his online board presence was sufficient. I didn't care less, told him my rules. He begged me for months yet refused to give even the slightest bit of information.

 

I'm not a heavy screener and will work with the client to find something that works for both of us. However, the moment someone tries to get me to bend the rules for them, the result was ALWAYS the same.

 

I was raped

I was assaulted

I was robbed

My safety was compromised

 

All because the guy said his safety and security was more valuable then mine. This didn't happen just once. It's a real issue for providers. I despise it when slobyists try to tell me or my sisters how to run our business.

 

You don't like it, get the fuck off my runway. There's a dozen other guys who treat me with respect, love and adoration. They follow my rules and would never jeopardize their opportunity to see me.

 

Peace and love.

[Jasmine Rain 23126]

I agree more ladies are beaten and killed than men, I'm simply making the point men also risk a lot more than losing a few dollars. Many lobbyists including myself are always a bit nervous when knocking at an incall location for the first time. More than once, discovered at the last second she was working with others or had a "bodyguard" present. Outcalls don't always feel safer with some micromanaging drivers. On a first meeting, will leave the wallet in the car and carry the minimum amount of cash to cover the agreed services and possible tip. Most times it's been incident free, but on a few occasions the vigilance paid off.

 

I'm not saying your way of doing business is wrong, quite the opposite. If the formula works for you and others, who am I to judge. It's simply not for me and I shouldn't be judged because I prefer alternate ways to meet. Without a legal industry standard, there many ways things can be dealt with. You got yours, I got mine. Let's just agree to disagree.

 

I never dismissed your risk, but you don't need to call an escort. As stated, it is a luxury item for you. Take your risks or don't but you are making implications in your posts that I and other escorts are somehow responsible to make your risk level one that you can handle. With, maybe unbeknownst to you, comments that undermine what risk level I am willing to take.

 

Plus, it is really hard to agree to disagree when you do indeed imply that my way of doing business is wrong. How many times do we read, like below, the threat of lost income, lost client? How many times are we all lumped in with that one escort that may have done something to a person one time 20 moons ago? It is all in attempts to dissuade a system that is helping us lower our risk level.

 

You admit that more violent actions happen to women so I have to ask, why can we not sort out our risk level before we get to the lower risk level issue that you as men have while purchasing a luxury. Why the need to insert your risk level at all at this point in the topic of discussion?

 

And I will even take it further and remind you that you and your fellow HOBBYISTS, not lobbyists, have boards like this one to do so much research that is almost laughable that you expect such an unequal sharing of information.

 

This is not an "anonymous" business. That is a misconception. Privacy and anonymity are not exclusive in this case. As I have stated, I have clients come into my personal private home. Where I live alone as a single woman. My clients come in and sit in my living room, they look around my house at my family pictures, art and decor from around the world, they discuss with me things about my life. This is all open to them. This is all a sharing of information. It is equal. That is the service I offer. You think I am going to be stupid enough to offer that to "john" with text app # 555-555-5555 because he assures me he is a good client? LMAO Come on now.

 

 

With all due respect Jessica, this topic can be considered at a bit different angle as well.

 

First of all I want to make clear that I absolutely agree with two things:

- Screening system must be in place. Period.

- SP chooses which system to use, it is her right, absolutely. Period.

 

But escorting is a business first of all. And providers and clients are two sides of this business which are, actually, interested in the same thing: well working and acceptable for clients screening system.

SP can have perfect screening system which is unacceptable for 90% of the clients and this system will just kill her business. The situation is much better if system works and is acceptable for 90% of clients.

 

So, the question if screening system is required has simple answer - YES, nothing to discuss here.

Which system works AND is acceptable for clients - possible topic for discussion and clients opinion is worth to consider, providers are interested in such a system.

 

Personally, I had problems in the past after providing my personal data for verification and I will never do it again. So, the girl who requires personal data of first time clients will loose me as a client, and I am a good client, any girl I met could confirm this. Too restrictive system can affect the business and screen out good clients.

And I don't see anything wrong in the discussion how to make this system better for both sides.

 

Except we are not having a discussion. You are making passive aggressive threats of lost business to ensure your needs are met. That is not a discussion. That is an attempt at power and control.

 

I am not losing you as a client because you were never my client to begin with. Remember, a client is not an actual client unless he has actually seen the woman and repeats. Which means that he is accepting of her screening. The point of most screening is to ensure that 90% of uselessness, don't make it past the door. The other 90% are not compatible anyway.

 

I "lose clients" on a regular because I am too old, too fat, too expensive, too unavailable, too {insert next issue here}. The list goes on an on. I am not compatible with so many hobbyists, so what?

 

And I will say that your argument is rubbish as well because if we applied that same logic to service level, then you will see how all these "discussions" are more about pushing a standard that men want that intern leaves an escort open to harm.

 

Would it be fair to continue to have these "discussions" about say GREEK, or CIM WS for example? If day after day men complained about how their needs for release in a woman's mouth are not being met. How for how much they pay they should be able to release where they want? How there is a risk to pregnancy so escorts should ensure the client is comfortable by disposing of said sperm internally instead of leaving it in a condom. Because escorts will want to use that get pregnant and blackmail their clients. LOL, It is all rubbish.

 

It is all complaining because it is not what you want, when you want, how you want. That mentality comes from a place in people that I find, I want nothing to do with.

 

I want my clients to feel comfortable. I love the feeling of knowing and holding their trust, and being able to develop that trusting relationship with them. If that can't happen, I wish you well often with a referral for someone else to try. Do you want to know what I get back most of the time? Some sort of Fuck you, or being called a bitch or cunt or some other insult being tossed at me. All that tells me was that I made the right choice to stick to my guns and screen. Because it works. It works for my business regardless of whether you don't think so.

 

Screening is a system that works. Which is why more women are doing it and being successful at it. Will I maybe miss out on a possible good guy? Sure, but you are equally missing out on a possible great escort? So again I am left with asking, so what?

 

Am I safe? Am I seeing the clients that I want to see? Are the clients that are seeing me, comfortable with me and enjoying their time with me? Am I with a client who equally wants me to feel safe and comfortable? These are the questions I feel are worth asking and discussing.

 

Not why won't you just see me with a text app, because I am a good client to have and you can take my word for it? Ummm, I think not. Thanks.

[Gregsand 6116]

I always find it amusing when slobyists come on boards and say things like "wait, but, but, but, you need to listen to why I disagree with the way you want to run your business. I've been seeing providers for 25 years and I know everything about the industry".

 

I get where you come from and can honestly say I couldn't put myself in your shoes even if I wanted to. I sympathize completely with what you live through and there's nothing I can say or do that can change the way you feel about it.

 

Again, I fully agree with the main topic. But it's a case where the tone of the article pretty much hijacked the message. Like everyone else, I'm sharing my opinion and don't expect everyone to embrace me for it.

 

We all see life from different perspectives, and all led differently. No need to take or make things personal over a disagreement.

 

Sorry if I may have hit a sensitive nerve, was not my goal.

 

Have a nice day.

[Meg O'Ryan 266444]

I think the nerve was hit because you come off kinda condescending. You may not be but... Just saying.

[cat 262460]

I got a few examples but I'll limit myself to only one that's been a recurrent topic here, and it's RMT's. I always hate bringing that up, as many confuse "a few" and "most of them". RMT's should be respected. And if they want see someone off the clock it's none of our businesses. They run a legitimate business and the extra collected(if any) remains under the radar.

 

As for the rest, I mostly meet reviewed ladies and newcomers with who I had extended conversations. If she feels comfortable in meeting me without my full name and other private info, I won't treat as a lesser person. Never been an issue in the past 20+years. Not sure why it should be a problem now.

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm a little slow but what does an RMT have to do with the sex industry or sex workers? How can we apply that business model to our own? To me it makes no sense and is not relevant or helpful to this conversation. If you don't have applicable examples of how to creatively implement ways of working safely for a sex worker and helping clients in getting services from a sex worker, then don't allude to having such ideas on a community sex work board. I find it's misleading and simply serves to confuse the issue and the readers. Congrats on you being able to entice your RMT into offering services tho. That's certainly a unicorn to display in your zoo.

 

The industry has changed dramatically in the last 10 years and at break neck speed in the last 5 years. You want to time travel back to 1998 to try to justify your resistance is again, not relevant to this conversation or to the security risks we face now, in this moment in time. It's important to stay current with what is real in the industry today. You state you've had extended conversations with well reviewed and newcomers but you don't clarify you've compensated them for their time investment, which means more free emotional labour on the part of the provider. The number of clients that contact us "just to talk" is overwhelming because 99% of those men never book. Do you expect us to invest even more time than we already do chatting up those who reach out without any inclination they are going to book? Most of these men are bored and just want to us to entertain them. If you think that a genuine professional is going to find that is an acceptable screening method, it indicates delusional inclinations and is absurd. Good for you for being able to take advantage of a providers attention and time then actually booking with them. How many have you "chatted with" and never bothered to compensate them? This is quite fascinating, the entitlement is real and very telling...

 

smiles, cat

[Gregsand 6116]

I stand by everything I said as I'm sure many agree with me but prefer to remain neutral on the subject. I'm not gonna elaborate more. If you ladies want to put me in the virtual dog house for it, no problems.

 

It's just another Monday.

[cat 262460]

I stand by everything I said as I'm sure many agree with me but prefer to remain neutral on the subject. I'm not gonna elaborate more. If you ladies want to put me in the virtual dog house for it, no problems.

 

It's just another Monday.

 

We don't need to put anyone anywhere. Everyone chooses their own abode whether they remain neutral or not...

 

smiles, cat

[Jasmine Rain 23126]

I stand by everything I said as I'm sure many agree with me but prefer to remain neutral on the subject. I'm not gonna elaborate more. If you ladies want to put me in the virtual dog house for it, no problems.

 

It's just another Monday.

 

If you feel that we are being hard on you for being more concerned about bringing up the lower risks to men when we are discussing the higher risks to women and therefore the need to screen, then you go ahead and take only that from these last 3 pages. Really shows where your head is at.

 

But I will ask since you have repeatedly said it now, where in that article was the "tone" was not to your liking? Where was the author being rude, insulting, or anything that you accuse her of?

 

I mean other than using the word rubbish, which was used in comparison to our risks.

 

She was polite, shared a horrible story of what was done to her, and then went on to debunk some of the rubbish excuses used with her. Which when compared to our safety, some of the excuses are actually complete rubbish.

 

It seems that is your big beef. That she wrote an article about her own experiences and her own opinions on her own site and she used the word rubbish. And because of that, you feel the need to dismiss or diminish our need to talk about safety for us, by reiterating over and over your lower risk level.

 

Honestly, that is like the lone white guy explaining to a room full of black men, that one scary time he got pulled over by the police.

 

And you wonder why people think and feel the way they do about you? Really? I didn't think it was that hard to figure out but to help, I will let you in on the secret then. Your narcissism is showing.

[Meaghan McLeod 179664]

Getting back to the topic. Reasons why I screen.

 

On a daily basis, I receive random inquiries from those that have no intention of booking. They are bored, want to fulfill a fantasy but don't intend to actually pay, or just like wasting my time. I adore new inquiries that are serious. However, if they have sent a couple dozen email and don't actually book, I consider them time wasters.

 

I also receive inquiries from some who only want to collect my address. They pretend to be serious, then after getting the address, they vanish. So, now comes the scary part. There is someone out there that knows where I live, but I have no idea who they are. So when a strange new vehicle drives by my place at 2am, I don't know if it's the guy earlier who got my address and then didn't show up.

 

The pic collectors. They use different means to contact me, claiming they want to see me, but want to make sure my pics are real. They want a face picture but balk when I ask to see theirs first. So, you really want me to send you a picture of my face, so you can go show your buddies? Post me on the dirty? Find my social media account to let my friends know? So you can stalk me and I have no idea who you are?

 

Hotel/residence calls. I've had guys hiding in closets, multiple guys at the location, hidden cameras, guys in the other room who think hell you're here, if I give you an extra 20 will you do us both? Or, my favorite. The address doesn't exist, they are not in the hotel room and down the hall and just want to see a whore knocking on someone else's door. They get great kicks out of this.

 

They don't want to give the actual address and will meet me at the highway exit and I can hop into their vehicle and he can drive me there. Their explanation is that's it's too hard to find. Yea right, I'm really going to go somewhere and not have an actual location. By the time the cops find my body, the scavengers have picked my bones clean, and there no way to determine who I went to see.

 

I need a number I can call you at in the event something changes. Emergency, illness etc. I've only had to cancel twice and I made it up to him, but I need a working number to contact you. Or I need to call you to say "you're at the wrong address".

 

I've blocked them because they want unsafe services. Even one who took his condom off and tried to pin me down. He had sore balls I'm sure, but had the audacity to try to see me again from a private number. I recognized his voice so was able to avoid a murder. Cause in reality, as an Irish Aries, I have a shovel AND a bag of lime. It ain't happening.

 

These are just some of the reason I screen. I don't really care if you like it or not. I've had a steady presence online for 9 years. If I was the type that wants to do you harm, it would be reported by now.

 

So, again, if you don't like the screening methods, move along. I don't really care about your reasons. I have my reason and quite frankly I don't owe anyone an explanation.

 

Don't tell me how to run my business. I do quite well thank you.

[waterat 20911]

I stand by everything I said as I'm sure many agree with me but prefer to remain neutral on the subject. I'm not gonna elaborate more.....

 

Gregsand I'm hoping you don't respond to my post though I realize you may, given your posting pattern. I have no idea whether many will agree with me but given the positive approach here on lyla I would hope there are some. I'm not neutral. I agree with the ladies' posts. If you carefully read the posts the message is quite straightforward and clear. Screening: Just do it. Or move on.

 

I've only been seeing sex workers for a little over 7 years and I've only been asked once to provide a reference (6 years ago). The ladies I visit are almost exclusively lyla members so it is easy for me to get a sense of their approach and reputation but I always marvel at their calm and poise when this stranger (me) shows up at their door. They are strong women and I respect and appreciate them.

 

Cheers.