Playing Rules

[Guest C*****tte]

What I have heard happen is for ladies to be kicked out of hotels rather than arrested. If they are charged it is for not having an escort license (certain cities have these). These happen with LE stings with fake clients (which is why ladies request references not just board handles and names/numbers when screening). I have not heard from a reliable source that clients were with the ladies when asked to leave a hotel.

 

I also was told that the ladies in question were not discrete. They went downstairs to meet clients in revealing clothing and stripper heels. Or clients were touchy feely in the elevator or hallways while be accompanied to the room thus bringing attention to the lady's situation to the maids.

[Seymour 3970]

Or clients were touchy feely in the elevator or hallways while be accompanied to the room thus bringing attention to the lady's situation to the maids.

 

Good point Charlotte, some hotels, motels, and apartment buildings do have security cameras in hallways and elevators. Keep that in mind (hobbyists) if you are being accompanied so as not to be obvious about what is going on. After all, one does not want to attract unwanted attention to oneself or one's lady friend.

[kih 458]

It's all about perception.

[Guest Ou**or**n]

1 - My top rule is to be careful with the law. I always take outcalls (legal) and never incalls (illegal). Doable for me as I am single. This rule has been and will be costly over summer months when I usually have a visitor. Also have missed the chance to see some beautiful ladies who do incalls only in the past still never have broken or will break my strict rule. Better safe than sorry.

 

3 - Never accept those services which have documented cases of hiv transmission, like BBBJ (I broke this rule once only), or similar services.

 

I think a couple of these points merit expansion and debate.

 

1. In terms of full legality there is always the risk of having sex with a minor. I was a bit surprised by this poll - http://cerb.ca/vbulletin/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=193 - which showed over 15% of SP respondents were under 18 when they had their first client. Now this was a general poll here on CERB where we have SP's in all age groups. Imagine the response rate if you were instead to take a group of SP's that self describe their ages as being between 18 and 21 years of age. Surely there would be a higher level. How much do we really trust that agencies verify age? What then about the CL girls that are working independently?

 

From a moral point of view this possibility bothers me enough that one of my personal playing rules is to avoid SP's that describe their ages as being under 22.

 

2. In terms of making a statement such as Never accept those services... then we must recognize that there have been documented cases of heterosexual HIV transmission during intercourse with a condom. While condom usage obviously greatly reduces the risk, it does not eliminate it completely. Condom slippage or breakage has occurred and their has been HIV transmission during condom use.

 

Thus both the legal aspects and the safety aspects are Not ever black or white, but always a matter of the degree of risk being taken. We instead each make our own educated rules to balance risks and enjoyment of this hobby.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

I know you made general comments but since you quoted me, then I respond.

 

In regard to your first comment, I will turn down the SP if I suspect underage and I have done that once in the past when a very young girl showed up ( in Montreal) claiming to be 18 and refusing to show ID. Since most ladies I see are either (private) nude dancers (which means their ID has been checked out by SC already) or agency ladies (which I expect the lady to have been checked out thoroughly, and I only call RELIABLE agencies and I am very careful with those from CL) together with my own intution, this risk is very minimal, but yes still exists for everyone in the hobby.

 

The possibility of those describing themselves as 22 or over being underage still exists but possibly less. So, it is always good to be on guard for underage SPs regardless.

 

With regard to your second comment, yes accidents can happen (like condomn breaking which that explains why I keep on changing cover every 10 minutes) but BBBJ transmission of hiv is not an accident, it is a choice. You are right that risk is always there no matter what (even DATY/DFK carries theoretical risk but no documented case has been reported), however, for as long as it is an accepted level of risk (and everyone has a different acceptance level) I will take it otherwise I won't.

 

The fact remains there is no such thing as totally risk free activity in life. Even for outcalls, I would suspect my neighbours may have begun to wonder as why I have such a variety of girlfriends consisting of blondes, brunettes, orientals, latins, africans, redheads and changing every week!!!! (as we walk back together to the elevator or parking lot sometimes hand in hand or even kissing, when I give them a ride back). But I assess that as acceptable level of risk and being significantly lower than in an incall hotel room where neighbours would see or hear traffic or noise (of 10+ clients in one night) and call the police or if the police or cleaner lady or management knocks on the door and/or enters, while I am in action.

 

In summary, it all comes down to taking all possible steps to minimize the risk as much as possible and my rules are based on this criterion but as you said quite correctly, it is impossible to totally eliminate all the risks associated with this hobby.

[YoungStud 468]

The fact remains there is no such thing as totally risk free activity in life. Even for outcalls, I would suspect my neighbours may have begun to wonder as why I have such a variety of girlfriends consisting of blondes, brunettes, orientals, latins, africans, redheads and changing every week!!!! (as we walk back together to the elevator or parking lot sometimes hand in hand or even kissing, when I give them a ride back). But I assess that as acceptable level of risk and being significantly lower than in an incall hotel room where neighbours would see or hear traffic or noise (of 10+ clients in one night) and call the police or if the police or cleaner lady or management knocks on the door and/or enters, while I am in action.

 

Uhm, I don't think many women doing in-calls in hotels have 10+ clients a night, or ever more than 3+ clients in a night. Lol. Compared to college boys who've rented a hotel room to have a "good time", for example, the average experienced independent escort undoubtedly comes across in a very low-key way, usually just as another quiet business woman traveling on her own

 

However, if you want to flaunt having escorts visiting your place of residence in the manner you describe, it could be all you need is one nosy social conservative neighbour to cause you problems.

 

It's not where you do it, it's how you do it. As other have noted in this thread, it's a question of discretion, common sense and balance.

[mod 135639]

which that explains why I keep on changing cover every 10 minutes

 

 

HMMM, Correct me if I am wrong... but... Condoms are 98% reliable so changing them 1 time every 10 minutes in a hour appointment increases your risk from 2% risk to 12% risk of failure. does it not? maybe 10% as wear over extended use probably factors into the equation but no mater how you look at it... I suspect you are actually increasing your risk slightly by doing this.

[kih 458]

HMMM, Correct me if I am wrong... but... Condoms are 98% reliable so changing them 1 time every 10 minutes in a hour appointment increases your risk from 2% risk to 12% risk of failure. does it not? maybe 10% as wear over extended use probably factors into the equation but no mater how you look at it... I suspect you are actually increasing your risk slightly by doing this.

 

 

Back in the 90's - I frequented a lady that insisted that two condoms be worn in case of breakage. This was her safeguard.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

HMMM, Correct me if I am wrong... but... Condoms are 98% reliable so changing them 1 time every 10 minutes in a hour appointment increases your risk from 2% risk to 12% risk of failure. does it not? maybe 10% as wear over extended use probably factors into the equation but no mater how you look at it... I suspect you are actually increasing your risk slightly by doing this.

 

Hoops, I didn't know that. I thought that like everything else it wears out, that is the likelihood of breakage/failure increases with length of use. (i.e. close to 100% safe the first few minutes and gradually decreasing to 98% reliability or less over time). That was why I change them every 10 minutes or so . Obviously I had an incorrect assumption. Thanks for the tip. Saves me on the cost of condom and it will be safer too!!!. BTW, I have never had a condom breakage myself, though have read or heard it has happened to others. That is why I thought I was doing the right thing here lol.

 

Also for me only the last 20-25 minutes of the 45-50 minutes date (I give every lady 10-15 minutes to shower and dry up) is usually FS (using average 2 condoms for a date).

[buggernot 588]

HMMM, Correct me if I am wrong... but... Condoms are 98% reliable so changing them 1 time every 10 minutes in a hour appointment increases your risk from 2% risk to 12% risk of failure. does it not? maybe 10% as wear over extended use probably factors into the equation but no mater how you look at it... I suspect you are actually increasing your risk slightly by doing this.

 

That doesn't make sense - each condom would be subject to the 98% reliability rate. I understand that you're taking it as 2% of condoms fail so using 6 would up the odds to 12%, but there's only one condom being ejaculated into so it doesn't matter which one it is.

 

Still, it's a little bit on the overkill side of things regardless...

[buggernot 588]

And in other news, this thread has got WAY off topic!

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Obviously I don't know how many YS. 10+ was just a guess, based on 10 hours of work taking both full hour and half hour sessions. But your figure is more likely lol.

 

In my case it is a very quiet condominium. Everybody minds her or his business. Even in an extremely unlike senario, if a nosy neighbor calls for police, still it is outcall, in the privacy of my home and legal. That is the main issue here.

 

I could adopt a more discrete approach, however, I always walk back ladies to the elevator or give them ride if they need one. Having a variety of girlfriends (as likely my neighbors think they are) attracts attention but it is not illegal for anyone wanting to call the police. So, I am not concerned about the attraction I may have created with my neighbors lol.

 

On your last note, you are only responsible for your own behaviour in a hotel incall (cautious and discrete) but have no control or knowledge on the client just before you or ones before who may have been drunk or noisy attracting lots of attention on the floor. And the cops may show up while you are in there in action while the guy just before you may have made all the disturbances. Not to mention that a small hotel room is not as noise proof as my apartment either.

 

Mod said that he has NEVER heard of hotel incalls busted (though he also says he suspects it has probably happened). So, this is good news for incalls takers that the above scenario is very unlikely to materialize.

 

In all it comes down to a personal choice and what makes one more comfortable with that choice. Some feel more comfortable taking outcalls like myself and some with incalls (and some have to take incalls because of family constrainsts) and I fully respect everyone's personal choice. I was just responding to the question in the thread that my personal choice as my main rule is outcalls only lol.

 

PS - Since the last few posts don't related to the original topic of the thread, may be as a suggestion, we could move them to a new thread, entitled, outcall versus incall from legal/risk point of view or something like that (just a suggestion).