Exactly.
which would make it safer for guys from rip-offs as well because they could report the theft equally like we can.
Client Ripping Off A Lady
- Thread starter barrowing
- Start date
which would make it safer for guys from rip-offs as well because they could report the theft equally like we can.
So I brought this thread to the naughty cougar lady’s attention today and she was completely overwhelmed, and in tears given the support and concern that was shown for the situation she encountered. She is not on here, though. I have encouraged her too, but had the follow comments; she always collects money upfront but on that day, she was quite exhausted and almost begun. They took the client then when the guy mentioned he left his wallet in the car he did so when he was pretty well, I’m dressed and was very smooth as she said he seemed like a good guy. She now realizes she shouldn’t have. Let her guard down as she got burned by it; there was a suggestion that she post info like his cell number car type, etc. but she felt too wrongs doesn’t make a right and she said to me in this industry discretion is Paramount, and even after what she went through she would not violate the discretion that she maintains for any client good or bad that visit her; as for calling the police, she said, being indigenous that she has been racially profiled and has no desire to have the police around her or her kids anymore than she needs to. She said that 99% of the guys that visit her are like the guys in this thread that have been very supportive and she tries to focus on the positive aspects of what she does and feel sorry she always that proves themselves to be pieces of shit.
Barrowing, thanks for letting her know about the support from us Terbites. I image this line of work can be isolating, especially when dealing with scum like that. Reading her response makes me want to see her even more now. I just need to get myself to Peterborough
Maybe look at the post I responded too. Where she says she is able to legally post that she is selling sexual services. I was just pointing out that yes, that is legal. But that it is not legal for the man to pay for sexual services.
I was not responding to anything about the sexual assault or of anyone ripping anyone off. Just responding to the post that I hilighted and responded too.
I am sorry for not asking your permission to speak.
Maybe look at who she was responding to. Context matters. We quote people to engage in conversation and keep it organized.
She was replying to someone and the conversation was about rip-offs and sexual assault. She was purposely pointing out it is legal for her in response to a other poster commenting about just purchasing time.
You coming in to say "but it is not legal for us" makes no sense in the conversation and clearly you are just saying it to have a "what about me" moment.
This is why I asked what you were posting has anything to do with what we are talking about.
Join in the conversation please but make it make sense instead of pouncing to point out something irrelevant to the conversation.
Honestly I am tired of girls like you. Coming in here and telling us all how to interact. You are not the queen of durham. And we don't have to bow down to you. You are so full of yourself it is ridiculous.
But there you are everyday on here telling everyone how to act....
How about Mind your own business.
I have a feeling you take issues with girls like for more then just posting. And it has more to do with you then us.
And this coming from a guy (with no reviews) who makes fun of people asking for info…. Too fucking funny. Projecting much.....
You came in playing the “but I suffer” game in a conversation that had nothing to do with you and called out for it. Deal with it.
Or cry about it. Up to you pumpkin.
Last edited:
valid point, but lets return to the original point of the topic
this is a very interesting thread, ....it might have been discussed before, but how is 'decriminalization' different from 'legalisation' vis-a-vis John's and SPs ? how would either/ or be beneficial?
keeping in mind most providers at the moment don't have the social capital in terms of status and the hobbyists arent the ones who would like to engage LE (either have a family, children and dont want a bad record in future)
the last time the law was amended was in 2014, but that was more of if we outlaw the demand, we can cut down supply, with a view towards cutting down the crimes against providers, which at that time was commendable and great, but you plug one hole and you open the floodgates to another.... and here we are still with providers possibly without status being ripped off, and Johns looking at what 60-70% scammers on Leolist?
Last edited:
If it was legalized or decriminalized- it wouldn’t stop the rip-offs and scams but it will help. Men could go to the police when robbed like women can now. Before 2014 - women couldn’t.
The main difference between legalized and decriminalized is the government involvement. We want to ability to go to police if something goes wrong but we don’t want the government putting their hand it as they make too many regulations that both sides would not like.
This is the quick run down.
When the laws changed in 2014 - scammers towards guys went up because men can’t go to the police. I don’t know if crimes against women actually went down but unfair prosecution went down and police assistance on crime went up.
When I had a guy try to stealth me (I caught him before he put it back in) I was able to go to the police. They were great. They didn’t judge, they took my opinion of what I wanted to have happen into account (which was I just wanted him discreetly spoke to about what he could have been charged with as a bit of scare tactic so he didn’t do this again) and they offered services like counseling for being the victim of a crime, not for trying to convince me I’m exploited and need to leave the industry. Before 2014 - this wouldn’t happen.
The only way to have this happen though is if a client, charged, challenges the laws and since sex is not a right - it will not pass. Sadly I think we are stuck with this unless there is a government majority willing to take it on. The reason it was changed in 2014 was because Bedford was charged and she challenged the laws on the grounds of safety and her constitution rights protected in our charter. The Supreme Court struck down those laws, forcing the PC government to either keep the laws off the books (which would have been optimal), change the laws (which they did and just reversed who could be charged) or legalize which thankfully they didn’t do, although I would have accepted that better then what they actually did.
Who is being disrespectful?Member since April.triggered and tire easily huh ?
always amusing to see dudes who have been around for something like 4 months , strut their words like some seasoned player. No reviews to your name since arrival , you don’t speak for “US” , dweeb . If the ladies here intimidate your little man-hood, maybe it’s time to take your fantasy gig and find a safer hobby or venue to project your faux frustrations And issues with women . Being disrespectful to the women here is not a good look . It does however speak to your frail and juvenile ego
And who cares what you think. Lol
I always have the cash in hand in my pocket. I would never walk in with no money or a plan on how to reimburse a woman in this business for her time.
This guy had zero intention of paying up front and when the opportunity presented itself he took it. I think the guy is a scumbag.
Don't participate in the hobby without the money to play. I don't understand how you look at yourself in the mirror ripping people off
2014 was such a long time ago! those were the days of $5 lunches and subway footlongs for $5, such good days. I was in uni those days and remember vividly all the protests on queens park regarding SW rights. The Bedford case is an interesting case, didnt know about it, was too young and not hobbying, lol
Your right about 'When the laws changed in 2014 - scammers towards guys went up because men can’t go to the police.' Sex workers (or whoever offered sexual services of any kind) protested, and got their justice
Im sure that for the providers in the industry, its like here we go again, since you've seen it all and most definitely explained it on review boards like this, but how the fuck did the lawyers arrive at 'its legal for a provider to advertise/ provide sexual services, but its illegal for a consumer to consume those services', like what was the sentiment at the time to completely disenfranchise one side!
its rather dumb from a legal perspective why they would take away one side's rights and give in to the rights of the other.....as a hobbyist (male/ female or whatever), does sex have to be a right for me to not be taken advantage(violent/ monetarily) of? There are plenty of activities which aren't a right, but but doesnt mean that you outlaw it..rofl
someone(or a large group of people, think me-too level ) would have to be massively ripped off for this individual or group to challenge the current laws
Last edited:
First - it wasn't lawyers who arrived at this conclusion for the new laws. It was politicians. They decided what they wanted and in their mind - the sale of sex would go down and thereby exploitation of sex workers if men, the perpetrators of that exploitation, were the ones who were criminalized.
Second - Bedford got the laws changed because the previous laws went against her rights granted to her by the Charter of Rights. Which is basically the only way, besides direct request and support from the government (like the decriminalization of weed) to get laws changed again. And for men - you have no Charter of Rights to fall back on. Purchasing sex or sex itself is not a right so you have no way to challenge the laws. That is why I said that. Being ripped off doing something illegal, even in a group, is not going to get the laws changed again. Especially when so many believe that sex workers are exploited.
This is why escorts protested for decriminalization. Why so many wrote letters, spoke at government readings, etc. because we didn't want men criminalized. We knew what would happen. We knew because of what we already went through. But thank the PC government. They, as conservatives, could never have had it go any other way.
A thread where the escort rips off the john would never go 4 pages with all of this community support.
Because those are called reviews, and plenty of guys and girls, myself included, do comment in support. As well as give tips on how to avoid these in the future and how to report to the hotel to get the lady barred from the hotel.
This turned into a discussion about laws and legality. Not just 4 pages of community support.
That is the difference
You plan on taking down that fake review yet? Just curious....
great explanation about the sentiment back then. Aah as always the politicians, they always got to keep us divided, fix it for one side and screw it for the other.
Yea, I understood your sentence 'Purchasing sex or sex itself is not a right ' you pay for the escort's time.... pre 2014, neither SW nor johns could go to the police if they were exploited. Providers couldnt go to the police even if there was violence or rape or any other force involved...And what happened in 2014 was for the better. Even now I see sometimes, providers have reviews where the hobbyist while inquiring, expected sex or some other acronym for the duration of a session, but on arrival they dont necessarily have to get all those expectations met.... its upto a provider's discretion and vibes you get if you as a provider want to partake or not; and its common sense for the hobbyist not go further or exert force, else is borderline rape, though consent can be argued.
Not sure if Im intellectualizing this a little too much, but I do feel it was looked at as a man vs woman thing back then, and this hobby really isnt just about that. The 2 sides of this world are hobbyists (which can be men, woman, trans and other genders) and providers (also can be men, woman, trans and other genders).
If it were to be tested today, it essentially is that providers (whether they have status or not in Canada) have agency to go to Law enforcement and get their justice, its a travesty that most trafficked providers don't even know this. Hobbyists, well if youre ripped off (by ripped off I mean blatant robbery, money changed hands and provider scrammed or took your valuables forcefully or any other sort of physical violence ) you have no recourse.
Last edited:
