Delicate Subject...

[Ryan1967]

Hi all,

There is a thread in one of the review forums that became hijacked (I know, happens all the time...) and rather than continue with the hijack, since I do want to hear other people’s opinion on the subject, I am creating a new thread in the General Area.

Recently a provider advertised that she was only interested in seeing clients of a particular race, I won’t provide the name and I do not want this thread to be about her, since that will elicit emotional reactions from her clients, and various other defences that are not germane to the subject. I don’t really want to discuss her; I want to hear opinions on what you think of this practice. I of course realize that a provider can absolutely choose who she chooses to see, I am not arguing that, but choosing based on race does raise my eyebrow.

I have heard responses like “since I as a customer am able to choose what type of providers I see, then it only seems fair that the provider should be able to choose” or “looking at dating sites, if a person states they only want to meet black people...that does make them racist...?”. All valid points, but I do not feel that they resonate correctly in this industry. Yes, customers get to choose, we always get to choose without any fear of reprisal or recrimination. Same way that I get to choose what type of restaurant I frequent based on my tastes, if I don’t care for <insert ethnic food choice here> food, I will simply not choose to frequent a restaurant that serves that kind of food. But a restaurant cannot choose its clientele, certainly not based on skin colour. And providers are not “dating” customers...the customers are paying them for a service; it is a business transaction in the end; so I am not sure that the dating analogy holds. Of course when dating or hooking up both parties have needs and they need to mesh in order to form a connection, which is generally not the case with a provider/client connection. I am certain that some providers “enjoy” some clients more than others, but there is no expectation of mutual attraction as there is in dating.

I am not trying to compare this industry with service in a restaurant, the level of intimacy clearly sets them apart, and I do not expect providers to act like automatons and not react to whom they are spending intimate time with. I am certain that providers have to put up with many male forms that would otherwise not turn their crank, but the race choice is of course very tricky, since there is a societal reaction to any form of...well...discrimination.

Again, please do not think that I am calling anyone a racist, I am not...I am simply asking for opinions. I am also not questioning an SP’s right to pick and choose who they see – it clearly is their right and it is unequivocal. And I have no clue on the background on why this provider chose to only see a certain race of people...nor do I really want to debate that...I just want to hear opinions on the practice in general.

 

[elmo]

If you want to compare it to a business transaction - which it is - there is no reason a seller in any private business has to sell his goods/services to any particular client. I have potential customers I won't sell to based on their reputations for being difficult to work with, slow payers etc. I'd love for one of them to launch a suit against me as a private business owner, it would give me a chance to tell them to fuck off...again.

 

[Ryan1967]

If you want to compare it to a business transaction - which it is - there is no reason a seller in any private business has to sell his goods/services to any particular client. I have potential customers I won't sell to based on their reputations for being difficult to work with, slow payers etc. I'd love for one of them to launch a suit against me as a private business owner, it would give me a chance to tell them to fuck off...again.

Good point, and SP's do that all the time, people that are intoxicated, rude, vulgar, threaten safety, etc. Those are all completely valid reasons for not selling a service to them...very similar to your analogy of not selling to people that are difficult to work with, slow payers, etc. But those are both examples of a choice that you are making to protect your business, same for an SP making similar choices based on safety, etc. It seems different than making a choice based on skin colour. Again, my opinion...

 

[elmo]

Perhaps but the reality is that the SP does not have to sell to anyone she doesn't want to. This is an underground, unregulated business. SP's don't have to justify their reasons.

 

[Aardvark154]

Ryan, I'm unsure what question you actually have given that you've already stated:
"I of course realize that a provider can absolutely choose who she chooses to see" and "I am also not questioning an SP’s right to pick and choose who they see – it clearly is their right and it is unequivocal."

Given the above, what difference does it make whether that decision is based on age, weight, race or whatever. Otherwise, what you are talking about is some variation on the theme of involuntary servitude (i.e. my body is not my own). We are not talking about refusing to serve someone at Tim Horton's.

 

[Aardvark154]

Perhaps but the reality is that the SP does not have to sell to anyone she doesn't want to. This is an underground, unregulated business. SP's don't have to justify their reasons.

Even if it isn't "underground and unregulated" the same can apply. I can absolutely refuse to represent you and I do not have to tell you why I choose not to represent you. In the same way a Physician or Dentist doesn't have to take you as a patient.

These are closer analogies to an SP than the local Tim Horton's.

 

[Ms.FemmeFatale]

This was posted on another board about the same topic as this topic of Racism and SP's right to choose comes up all the time.

We like to believe we live in a society where OUR rights come first, and yet time and time again we find that many of these rights may be in competition with one another... My right to enjoy my home is superseded by the neighborhoods right to peace and quiet... My right to free speech is curbed by the right of others to enjoy a safe and tolerant society free from hate speech... ect.

The crux of this issue seems to be two competing rights; One one hand you have service providers and the right of all clients to expect equal treatment, and on the other you have the right to have control over your own body and a woman's right to choose.

This is not the same case as person's right to equal treatment and service at a restaurant, or to purchase goods even though there is a service being provided and it is transactional in nature because it is coming into direct conflict with rights that our society holds in greater esteem. While there are cases where the state may impose on one's body (ex late term abortions, can't commit suicide), in this instance; No matter how lamentable or outdated ones ideas may be when it comes to race, and were that even their sole motivation for denying service to legislate a woman into having to engage in sexual activities against her will would be akin to institutionalizing rape.

Which would cause the greater injury - the loss of inclusion and equal treatment, or the loss of the right to control one's body and who they choose to share it with? I think when viewed through that lense it is, and always will be better to support the right's of the body, and one's choice on who to share it with.

I think it is the best answer I have seen to date.

 

[Aardvark154]

Yes, Ms.FemmeFatale excellent post.

 

[Ryan1967]

That was indeed an excellent post on the subject Ms.FemmeFatale. I do appreciate the dialog here, it is open and inclusive and I have to confess I had not thought about the things raised in Ms.Femmefatale's post nor yours Aardvark. I do believe that the rights of the body are indeed sacrosanct and will trump all others.

To your question Aardvark as to what was my question...I clearly agreed that an SP can choose based on race (and anything else for that matter)...my question was more should she...Should we consider that practice ok (not sure whom "we" is in that sentence).

Again, thanks for the alternative viewpoints, I really do appreciate it and it has opened my eyes on a few fronts.

 

[richaceg]

that's one way of politely telling someone...instead of taking your money and give you a less than average service, might as well save your money and look elsewhere...
but i don't know...maybe the particular sp just have the "Niles Standish Theory"in effect...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HteJ3MoDQNA

 

[Ryan1967]

nothing new there ... we have always had our individual rights balanced against the rights of society as a whole. It is as it should be. The man's individual rights do not trump the rights of all service providers. That would be ridiculous.

Indeed, it is a balance that needs to exist. To be clear...I was never suggesting that a man's individual rights to equal and fair treatment should ever trump the rights of all service providers...

 

[elmo]

That was indeed an excellent post on the subject Ms.FemmeFatale. I do appreciate the dialog here, it is open and inclusive and I have to confess I had not thought about the things raised in Ms.Femmefatale's post nor yours Aardvark. I do believe that the rights of the body are indeed sacrosanct and will trump all others.

To your question Aardvark as to what was my question...I clearly agreed that an SP can choose based on race (and anything else for that matter)...my question was more should she...Should we consider that practice ok (not sure whom "we" is in that sentence).

Again, thanks for the alternative viewpoints, I really do appreciate it and it has opened my eyes on a few fronts.

Should we consider it OK for whom?

 

[Ryan1967]

Should we consider it OK for whom?

I meant "ok" as a business practice...so no specific "whom" was implied. All of that said, the provider's right to choose what she does with her body has helped me better understand the situation, again, I appreciate the dialog folks.

 

[trod]

Ryan, I'm unsure what question you actually have given that you've already stated:
"I of course realize that a provider can absolutely choose who she chooses to see" and "I am also not questioning an SP’s right to pick and choose who they see – it clearly is their right and it is unequivocal."

Given the above, what difference does it make whether that decision is based on age, weight, race or whatever. Otherwise, what you are talking about is some variation on the theme of involuntary servitude (i.e. my body is not my own). We are not talking about refusing to serve someone at Tim Horton's.

This.

It boils down to personal preference/choice. To give another analogy, have you gone to an MPA only to see some old asian lady in her 50s open the door ? I'd say you would walk away 9 times out 10 unless of course you are thinking with the wrong head. Does that mean you are discriminating against uh massage veterans ?

Why would anyone want to pursue a session with an SP that won't be interested in you ? Who cares if the choice is based on race, age, grammar, dick size or a combination of these from past experiences or anything else under the sun. There are other options and quite frankly, I'd spend my hard earned money on a SP that is interested in the session.

 

[movzzz]

Great response Femme.

My thoughts may have poor composition but bear with me....

I would like to add that using the filter of race gives the provider some control in terms of safety, choice and comfort likened to in Elmo's post. We live in Canada and the year is 2012 the immigration polies of our country alone should be evidence of the tolerance of our society. I know many providers who are by no means racist, but, when it come to their business (which it is) they prefer to deal with specific clientel. However, the issues of stereotype and prejudice creates a hurdle that admittedly are hard to overcome without appearing to be racist.
Some guys like sending pics to address this, some girls inflate their prices to provide that buffer, there is no prescribed format for the way one person will recieve another until the actual encounter. With this in mind, we should leave the choice up to the ladies and if you absolutely must have that flavor to satisfy your carnal desires use some good old fashioned charisma in your civilian life.

 

[DemLatsSoClose]

Why would anyone want to pursue a session with an SP that won't be interested in you ?

Excellent question. I couldn't fuck a girl with the knowledge that she's not enjoying any part of it. Maybe my logics flawed, I don't know...

 

[Ms.FemmeFatale]

Excellent question. I couldn't fuck a girl with the knowledge that she's not enjoying any part of it. Maybe my logics flawed, I don't know...

You would be surprised by the amount of men who just want to because they were told no.


Then you would be surprised by the amount of men who don't give a shit if the girls is enjoying herself or not. Her "O" is only to boost his ego - which is why sadly - a lot of women fake it and please themselves after when the man is gone.

 

[Curious36]

To add to this thread, many people believe that since they have $ in their pocket/bank that they are entitled to a service. This is simply not true. Through my businesses I can pick and choose who I sell to. If some one wants to call me predudiced then go ahead. I am predudiced against being previously stiffed by certain clientelle in terms of non-payment, late payments and/or partial payments. "Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Bottom line it is up to the seller on whom they choose to do business with. Not all business transactions are performed at the retail level/walmart check-out line.....

 

[Aardvark154]

This.

It boils down to personal preference/choice. To give another analogy, have you gone to an MPA only to see some old asian lady in her 50s open the door ? I'd say you would walk away 9 times out 10 unless of course you are thinking with the wrong head. Does that mean you are discriminating against uh massage veterans ?

Why would anyone want to pursue a session with an SP that won't be interested in you ? Who cares if the choice is based on race, age, grammar, dick size or a combination of these from past experiences or anything else under the sun. There are other options and quite frankly, I'd spend my hard earned money on a SP that is interested in the session.

Seems to me we are saying the same thing from different perspectives.

 

[Aardvark154]

However, the issues of stereotype and prejudice creates a hurdle that admittedly are hard to overcome without appearing to be racist.

This is part of our modern political correctness "thing" - God forbid that someone should ever drop the thermonuclear accusation "you're acting racist" or "that's a racist attitude."

To tell you the truth, I don't care what the motivation is of an SP who posts "will only see young Japanese men born overseas.” I may be disappointed that she does not, but it is absolutely her right to do so, and I'm certainly not going to harass someone about sexual activity they don't want to do.