Outing Clients - Discussion

[squirtingmilf 1982]

In almost every thread I read about C 36 someone brings up sp's might get some idea to start outing clients for whatever reasons.

 

Come on guys seriously? Established ladies are not going to do that and that whole thing has been taken out of context by some.

 

 

Terri Jean Bedford, specifically said she would name names of the supporting parties, conservatives, who voted for C .36 BUT see ladies, because she felt it was hypocritical. At no time did she say she was going to hand over her entire black book and out everyone, just conservatives who voted for C 36. She was also very angry when it was said initially. I haven't had a personal conversation with her in weeks about it, as I've been busy, so I can not give you a direct answer on what her decision is regarding it.

 

For the record, Terri Jean is retired, she is VERY sick and has a fatal illness, so in her mind, she has nothing left to lose. I know there's been a lot of back and forth about this and it's making a lot of people question the integrity of ladies possibly outing clients, so I just wanted to clear the air about it. I know there was a poll taken on one of the major news sites (can't recall right now) but I can tell you the Canadian public were overwhelmingly in support of it. When I checked it last, it was well over 75% and that was weeks ago, there were 100's of votes.

 

Please don't jump to conclusions about ladies discretion, just because this happened is all I'm asking.

[Andee 220524]

This topic has been discussed before in other threads. I don't think Terri Jean Bedford's comments to the Senate are representative of what most of us are thinking or willing to do.

 

The bottom line is that no established companion would risk their reputation to do something like this. There is no end reward for them and would basically be business suicide.

[Meg O'Ryan 266444]

Idiocy I say, complete idiocy!

[roamingguy 300292]

Ladies would no more do that to their clients than clients would do so to the companions they see...generally speaking

And me thinks the threat made of being outed by Terri Jean Bedford was when (btw not justifying, but trying to understand) she was treated badly during hearings and ousted. Her threat was less a threat (I'm guessing, don't know for fact) against her former clients as a whole, as it was against clients who may be politicians (maybe cabinet ministers) supportive of this legislation publically while in private practicing what they preach against (is that making sense)

Clients have nothing to fear, ladies respect their confidentiality.

Besides, nothing except a handshake, watching some tv, discussing great works of literature, maybe dinner out at the most, that's all that takes place. No special hugging takes place god forbid LOL

A rambling

 

RG

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

I started a thread on here not too long ago about outing clients. I posted it only after reading TJB's threat in the paper AND after reading sympathetic posts from a few other Business operators towards outing.

 

I didn't really believe this would happen but given the heated debate at that time I thought it might be appropriate to have a discussion on its merits, as opposed to ignoring it. The clear consensus was no one would seriously consider doing it.

 

Besides, now there is nothing to out! ;)

[squirtingmilf 1982]

I'd just like to know why some people - "guys" keep suggesting it in some of the threads?

 

Oh maybe they'll retire or be blackmailed by police, some of the suggestions are pretty out there.

 

That's just ridiculous!

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Has anyone ever congratulated someone for their 69th post?

Either way, congrats squirtingmilf!

[roamingguy 300292]

I'd just like to know why some people - "guys" keep suggesting it in some of the threads?

 

Oh maybe they'll retire or be blackmailed by police, some of the suggestions are pretty out there.

 

That's just ridiculous!

 

Probably just the same type of guys who object to being screened/verified.

And they believe their privacy is most important. More important than a lady's safety and security

 

RG

[squirtingmilf 1982]

Has anyone ever congratulated someone for their 69th post?

Either way, congrats squirtingmilf!

 

Thanks Steve, I'd invite you to celebrate it, since I'm having some wine right now, but you're a little far away and even my 10 ft feat, can't reach that far lmao :)

 

Additional Comments:

Probably just the same type of guys who object to being screened/verified.

And they believe their privacy is most important. More important than a lady's safety and security

 

RG

 

I suppose you're correct RG with that statement. For me it just seems really ridiculous to make statements like that against ladies who work hard to maintain their reputations and level of service. Like I said in another thread, the police better have a grave dug for me already if they think I'd give up that info.

 

I've outright called McKay a disgruntled pooner, he definitely looks like one.

[star99 4852]

well not sure if im following this thread properly, but I must say that whenever the new laws come into effect, it wont change very much about my hobbying.

 

over the last few years being here ive met a lot of great people (SP's & MA's). also a few hobbyist as well

 

ive been able to keep the frenships ongoing, and most likely will continue to see them, as ive asked several of them if anything will change, and most said nothing will change.

 

chances are I wont be seeing anyone "new" to this industry, but the ones that have been here for sometime I will continue to see them, as long as our schedules meet of course!

[Highsexdrivebabe 11800]

I am paid namely for my privacy, my I am a 'serious' lady not wanting to out U to anyone type of thing so this does not and will NEVER apply to me!!!

 

If gentlemen cum to us it's quite simple... they don't want to have to deal with that type of situation and I TOTALLY agree with that.

 

I AM a profesional and will still be now and after the bill. I understand the full importance and reliability of being an independent profesional and will NEVER let any client down as a matter of fact for I just know for a fact that they TRUST us and R paying for it.

 

My humble saying and thinking.

 

Barbara

xxxxooo

[mrgreen760 37785]

I'll provide what I've always provided. My charm and wit, seems to have worked well so far :)

 

 

Peace

MG

[Nicolette Vaughn 294340]

When someone asks me next time about why I won't negotiate my rates...now I have an even better answer. You're paying for discretion. Good quality service and discretion don't come cheap.

Posted via Mobile Device

[fortunateone 156618]

From what i can see, part of the paranoia comes from the fear mongerers who don't understand the bill. They claim that there are things in it that LE can charge sps with, and so in exchange for getting info on clients and to testify against them i suppose, these mythological charges will be dropped.

 

They are unable to come up with what those charges would be tho, if you press them. Some may vaguely imply that the sp could be charged with running or being in a bawdy house, but seem to forget that 210 is being dropped due to the SCC ruling. No 210, no bawdy house charges.

 

 

There is some suggestion that abolitionists with long time handles on some forums are now posting in a style to create fear, and paranoia.

[Ice4fun 78407]

The Bill has people scared and nervous and afraid because it greatly changes the risks associated with the hobby.

 

I think it is pretty safe to state that up till now most Hobbiests knew they were engaged in illegal activities but they assumed that unless they were hiring street workers then the majority of the risk was actually the workers and that indoor work was not even on the radar of LE.

 

Until we have operated under the new law for awhile and we get a comfort level for how the law will be enforced by LE and the courts there will continue to be fear mongering.

 

In the interim i would just remind everyone that under the old laws the activities of this hobby were illegal and we did not see ladies outing people.... so if we could trust ladies then why not now?

 

Just my Opinion

[roamingguy 300292]

The Bill has people scared and nervous and afraid because it greatly changes the risks associated with the hobby.

 

I think it is pretty safe to state that up till now most Hobbiests knew they were engaged in illegal activities but they assumed that unless they were hiring street workers then the majority of the risk was actually the workers and that indoor work was not even on the radar of LE.

 

Until we have operated under the new law for awhile and we get a comfort level for how the law will be enforced by LE and the courts there will continue to be fear mongering.

 

In the interim i would just remind everyone that under the old laws the activities of this hobby were illegal and we did not see ladies outing people.... so if we could trust ladies then why not now?

 

Just my Opinion

 

What was illegal under the old laws?

Prostitution was a legal activity. Certain activities surrounding prostitution were illegal, but prostitution itself was legal

And the activities could take place perfectly legally in the past within certain parameters. Such as she meets you at your place, not you at hers. Now not the case

Concerns, if there were truly any, about outing, might be because a client

did not want his family to find out, his workplace to know, if a politician, could cause a scandal. But why would LE have cared, the core activity, prostitution was legal

I do agree, the ladies could be trusted before, and they can now.

A rambling

 

RG

[Guest N***he**Ont**y]

The only change this will mean for me will be not seeing any new providers that I haven't built up any trust with. Emails will be sent from a specific account and I have other ways of communicating with those I have met before and have established a friendship with.So gentle men set up a Email account for communication only and get a Hobby phone for that use only and make sure you use SMS Protection software that is available to secure your texts and erase them.

[Ice4fun 78407]

What was illegal under the old laws?

Prostitution was a legal activity. Certain activities surrounding prostitution were illegal, but prostitution itself was legal

And the activities could take place perfectly legally in the past within certain parameters. Such as she meets you at your place, not you at hers. Now not the case

Concerns, if there were truly any, about outing, might be because a client

did not want his family to find out, his workplace to know, if a politician, could cause a scandal. But why would LE have cared, the core activity, prostitution was legal

I do agree, the ladies could be trusted before, and they can now.

A rambling

 

RG

 

If I visited a lady at her place of work (condo / home/ hotel) i was participating in an illegal activity and given the amount of inservice I saw advertised that would implicate a lot of clients and ladies.

 

However that said the main point of my post was that the new law has increased the element of risk due to the increase in what's illegal ... however if we could trust these same ladies before when there was legal risks why not now... i don't see how the new law has made the ladies i see less trustworthy.

 

Just my Opinion

[roamingguy 300292]

If I visited a lady at her place of work (condo / home/ hotel) i was participating in an illegal activity and given the amount of inservice I saw advertised that would implicate a lot of clients and ladies.

 

However that said the main point of my post was that the new law has increased the element of risk due to the increase in what's illegal ... however if we could trust these same ladies before when there was legal risks why not now... i don't see how the new law has made the ladies i see less trustworthy.

 

Just my Opinion

 

It was the seeing her at her place that was illegal

But the actual act of prostitution itself was not

If the lady saw you at your place that was legal

And I do agree that since the ladies were trusted before, and they can be trusted now

 

RG

[fortunateone 156618]

It was the seeing her at her place that was illegal

But the actual act of prostitution itself was not

If the lady saw you at your place that was legal

And I do agree that since the ladies were trusted before, and they can be trusted now

 

RG

 

 

His point i think is that it was simply being in the incall that led to charges. The charges were and still are (well up to the last couple of months) the main charges laid against any sps and any clients found in them.

 

At the end of the day it doesn't mean much that the charge isn't actually against paying for certain activities that was against the law, only that the place you went to in order to pay and receive them was. I don't think many care that being in a bh is a different criminal charge that leads to time in LE custody and court time than simple paying an escort gets the same results.

[Nicolette Vaughn 294340]

Law enforcement is NOT on a moral crusade here. They enforce it when they're told to. If and when, that is. And if they have the budget to do so.

 

I've seen all the fear mongering "what ifs" and imo, people are scaring themselves for nothing. They are not going to be waiting outside your favorite local lady's apartment waiting to bust anyone. They would have a hell of a case trying to prove that. Stay away from the streets or ads on BP that look to good to be true. Someone is eventually going to take one for the team so ask here if anyone has seen a particular lady.

 

Stick to ladies that you know have been around and are NOT LE. Just because some guys can't pick and choose who to call up at the last minute or ask the good old "Are you available now" and "Rates, services and location?" does not mean their hobbying lives are over forever. Do your research and you will most likely avoid the risk of receiving sub par service or bait and switch.

 

It is your government that is only using this new law as a tool to win the next election. We are all just pawns in their game. Don't vote for them in the next election. It's as simple as that.

 

I would like to re-visit this thread a year from now and see what has changed. Probably nothing.

[Ice4fun 78407]

It was the seeing her at her place that was illegal

But the actual act of prostitution itself was not

If the lady saw you at your place that was legal

And I do agree that since the ladies were trusted before, and they can be trusted now

 

RG

 

You are quite right... thank you for taking the time to tease out all the details so as to ensure that we all were reminded of the obvious as opposed to focusing on the actual point of my initial post... if the lady was trustworthy before the law when there was also illegal activity involved why would we trust her less now?

 

Just my Opinion

[peacectryguy 12547]

Well, earlier today I had a lengthy post all typed up in response to this thread but it seems somewhere in there I had a word on the censor list. Couldn't find it and just gave up. Oh well, the point of it was that this has all been discussed so much, I'm just tired of it. Those of us with somewhat rational minds are all more or less in agreement that things are very unlikely to change a whole lot for those of us who already use our big brains.

As for the main topic of this thread, I cannot see any lady giving up her clients under any conditions and I honestly don't see L.E. even trying to get one to.

[Nicolette Vaughn 294340]

Most of the clients I see don't even know about this new law or they have heard something about it but don't quite know what it entails. I have been telling them all one by one and letting them know that asking for explicit services will now be illegal and in full effect December 6th.

 

It may take quite some time for everyone to at least have an inkling of what's going on. I don't expect there to be mayhem next month. Those who are up to speed on the issue may drop out of the game while others will have a wait and see attitude. Others will stick with who they know. I'm thankful I have an established client base.

[innocent77 110]

At any given time there are a least 500 escorts in Toronto advertising on the internet every day.

 

Not including backpages, streets walking and tons of asian places in T-Dot.

 

If they catch 200 people a year, what's the odds of being caught ???

 

About 1 in 4000.

 

Or, about the same as the older laws.