Pink Kitty Escorts 6195 Report post Posted February 19, 2010 Just read this article in the Sun.. This is the kind of charity work we love to support. :boobies: http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2010/02/17/12919936.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dexterS3 134 Report post Posted February 20, 2010 I don't like they way the used the hooker raised money could have used different title ex: Nice woman of the Adult industry help out Cause. But at least sun acknowledge good deed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
buggernot 588 Report post Posted February 20, 2010 Title used Escort, not hooker. No problem with how they phrased anything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lowdark 5613 Report post Posted February 20, 2010 Maybe there was a different article or wording online. This is how the article was worded/titled in the Thursday edition of the Ottawa Sun. It was great for them to bring up the work and contributions made by the community but the wording (men who visited SPs were referred to as "johns") was typically condacending. But CERB should take great pride in itself. It raised or contributed more money than many other people or businesses. Prime example, Rush Limbaugh, who signed a 400 hundred million contract with his Satelliete Radio company last year, refused to donate a single dollar. CERB members are more worthy of praise than him and his low-minded ilk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mod 135640 Report post Posted February 20, 2010 I would be upset if they printed the term "Hooker" in the paper as opposed to "escorts" the way the story is online. Please confirm this as the way the story is online I would expect it to be the same in the paper. Hooker is such a negative word. As for "John" see my post here as your not the only one who was offended by this.. and maybe this post can bring some light on that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seymour 3970 Report post Posted February 20, 2010 Hooker is such a negative word. I agree with this statement! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lowdark 5613 Report post Posted February 20, 2010 They did indeed use the term Hooker, MOD. I typed it as it appeared in the print version. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest f***2f*** Report post Posted February 20, 2010 There is always so much judgement inherent in the articles run in the main stream media. I heard it reported on KISS FM and they played it up like "Hey Go Figure,,,"hookers" giving away money....and you wouldn't believe who some of their clients are....hint hint wink wink!" nauseating shit. These people have no idea that they are talking about normal people who have lives and feelings and kids and jobs....such a bunch of phoney hypocrites. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VedaSloan 119179 Report post Posted February 21, 2010 I am so proud of CERB and all of its members for this! Great work. The use of the word "hooker" is downright disgusting. I'm tempted to write a letter to the sun giving them my "hooker" piece of mind. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
silverado17 12689 Report post Posted February 21, 2010 I am so proud of CERB and all of its members for this! Great work. The use of the word "hooker" is downright disgusting. I'm tempted to write a letter to the sun giving them my "hooker" piece of mind. that would be a good plan someone needs to tell them everyone has there own way of helping out and they should be told that and the ladies shouldn't be called hookers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capital Hunter 18263 Report post Posted February 21, 2010 I was initially offended when I read the word "John" used in the Sun article but later when I heard that the other word is also used on the ladies, some of whom I have been seeing or will be seeing, I am outright disgusted. I think, I for one may boycott the Sun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
belladonna 279 Report post Posted February 21, 2010 Posted via Mobile Device Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lowdark 5613 Report post Posted February 21, 2010 Its ironic that the Sun, which makes a good chunk of change advertising Escorts, Massage Attendants and Adult Services in their classified section and depends on its daily Sunshine Girl for a generous portion of its circulation (and once had a weekly feature devoted to local Gentlemen's clubs) would use such language. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dexterS3 134 Report post Posted February 21, 2010 Title used Escort, not hooker. No problem with how they phrased anything. If you read the title they used hooker, and for us they used john glad to see your happy with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest W***ledi*Time Report post Posted February 21, 2010 The original on-line article for the (Toronto) Sun posted the article under the headline: "Canadian sex workers raise money for Haiti". The on-line version of the (Ottawa) Sun used the header "Escorts raise cash for Haiti". Apparently only the print version of the (Ottawa) Sun ran it under "Hooker Site Solicits Donations for Haiti". I don't know how it works nowadays, but in the old days, as far as I recall, all the headlines were inserted into the newspaper after layout by one copy editor who had nothing to do with the content of the articles themselves. The article itself (as opposed to the headline) uses the terms "sex workers" and "escorts" repeatedly -- not a "hooker" in sight. So we likely have one single politically-incorrect copy-editor here, not a monolithic anti-escort news organization. Let's not forget that the article itself was a good positive one! Cheers, Wrinkled Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
