cat

[www.catherinestclaire.com"]http://www.catherinestclaire.com www.catherinestclaire.com"]http://www.catherinestclaire.com

http://www.catherinestclaire.com http://www.catherinestclaire.com

As most of our community are aware, the FOSTA/SESTA bill is moving through the US process and is going to become law. It will have a seriously impact world wide on sex workers ability to work safely and is the thin edge of the wedge for introducing other forms of censorship online. Take a minute to fill this out, time is of the essence... https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repealstop-fosta-now

APRIL 4th THROUGH APRIL 7th! http://www.catherinestclaire.com http://www.catherinestclaire.com

http://www.catherinestclaire.com http://www.catherinestclaire.com

Safe, sane, consensual is key. Like KarmaKiss, I use the traffic light method. If they are gagged, I have a small nerf ball that they hold. If they drop the ball, I stop... smiles, cat

http://www.catherinestclaire.com http://www.catherinestclaire.com

Here is a twitter thread from @kwetoday that is an excellent easy read for what the problem is with the Liberal position. She is an excellent source of information for the Canadian issues of the day for our industry... https://twitter.com/i/moments/975169876380737536

It isn't Luxe's place to confirm or deny the legitimacy of those photos. If you want to know, go see Shauna. Everything Luxe has said here, I agree with. These ladies know their business model and client base. Often they make far more than we "reputable" providers do so I can't fault them for being comfortable with their choices. I think it should be a personal choice and they shouldn't be judged. I know I don't live their lives, walk in their shoes or understand their situations and if not using their own pictures makes their lives more manageable then all the more power to them. This industry is a struggle for most and anything that helps it be more manageable should be a non issue. No one should be forced to release their image in this online smegma given the potential harm it could cause. I would actually prefer to return to the days of no pictures, where clients made their decisions based on a phone conversation... One of the legislative changes I'd like to see is the elimination of photos from Canadian advertising venues entirely. Photos can then be limited to a providers personal website where she can choose to protect them in a private area that requires screening before access is granted . Photos are used against us in everything from custody battles to border crossings. It's illegal for a sex worker to cross into the US even for a holiday and they are now employing facial/tattoo/scar recognition to data base us. It's a 10 year ban if you're caught trying to cross the border, with no opportunity for defence. As soon as there is corroborative evidence that a woman is a sex worker, CAS is immediately involved in custody cases and they stay involved adding more insult to injury. Square jobs are lost, families split and social shunning ensues. Pictures are most often the initial culprit. Once an adversary knows for sure those pictures are real; it doesn't take them long to track all of a providers online interactions and everything gathered can and will be used against her. I believe the industry demand that developed from the online marketplace has continually eroded both the privacy and service safety of the industry providers while simultaneously driving prices down. This has become the standard and providers have been desensitized to their detriment and we are dying on the cross for it in our personal lives. The only upside when a provider is outed is that it's inadvertently bringing attention to the industry on a very personal level to many who were previously oblivious to it. I've never seen the number of providers being outed to their loved ones at the rate I see today. What it means is that those families who actually do the work of healing will have more inclusive belief systems and a better understanding of the industry which hopefully will help shape tomorrows generations to be more tolerant. The ones that don't do the work live with nuclear fallout, sometimes indefinitely. My parents haven't spoken to me in over 15 years. The only thing photos have contributed to is clients getting an idea of what we may look like but real photos can be just as misleading. With enough money and expertise, I can look like anyone I want to who has a similar body type. What matters are the facts. Is she the size/shape she claimed, did she provide the services she promised for the price agreed to and was the appointment safe both in services and setting? Eliminating photos from the industry would actually implement a market correction that would benefit everyone. Then that's all that needs be promised and delivered. Today providers are forced to put themselves in compromising positions with privacy/discretion for an income that is often not worth the risk. 20 years ago the take home was substantially more and I felt it justified the risk; I contend that today for new providers it isn't. I'm now beyond the risk, I can't be outed because I am out to everyone but my life is an example of what happens when the news hits and should be a warning to all; providers and clients alike. I had 1 photo that was submitted to court, 1 solitary photo that didn't show my face but was inarguably me and the rest is history. Keeping it discreet and untraceable is key... I don't have a problem with not using real pictures, I only do it because I was forced to back when I landed in Canada. If someone isn't comfortable using their own pictures that is their choice. Being forced to use my own pictures is one of the reasons I haven't participated in advertising as actively in the industry over the last decade. It has been an immense struggle for me that makes me sick to my stomach, literally. I spend days not being able to keep anything down or even digest tea when I advertise. I'm working on it but it's not easy. If you want real pictures, then see providers who actually care about their business and invest in it. Make the investment in her, support the businesses that deserve it. Without question, we need better industry standards to protect all involved. I think if the demand for real photos is made, it should be partnered with mandatory minimum pricing. No provider should have to work for anything less than $200. If we can agree on a minimum pricing with no haggling then perhaps we could agree on other business practices like only using real pictures? smiles, cat

I've read your comments, word for word and you never once gave logical and viable alternatives to providing personal information that has actual accountability in any of your posts that you claim to have. You actually never provide anything asked of you to further the conversation, like statistics of violence against clients (which you claim is a genuine risk in todays industry) or ways to facilitate business transactions in this industry that meets both sides needs which you again, claimed to have. The fact you reiterate you get invited back screams "I'm a good guy!!!" Men who need to tell women they're good guys usually aren't so I do question your statement of respect and appreciation of women. You prefer women that are willing to negate keeping themselves safe which indicates you target women that probably struggle with self worth and self respect. Typical nice guy behaviour. ;) From what I can see, waterat doesn't quote you at all, let alone misquote or take you out of context. He obviously read your comments, doesn't demonize you; he simply disagreed with you. Telling him "you better post something better than a few misinterpreted or out of context comments!" is again not furthering the conversation given it didn't apply to his actual post but attacked him for simply speaking his truth. Once again, the insight is fascinating... smiles, cat

We don't need to put anyone anywhere. Everyone chooses their own abode whether they remain neutral or not... smiles, cat

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm a little slow but what does an RMT have to do with the sex industry or sex workers? How can we apply that business model to our own? To me it makes no sense and is not relevant or helpful to this conversation. If you don't have applicable examples of how to creatively implement ways of working safely for a sex worker and helping clients in getting services from a sex worker, then don't allude to having such ideas on a community sex work board. I find it's misleading and simply serves to confuse the issue and the readers. Congrats on you being able to entice your RMT into offering services tho. That's certainly a unicorn to display in your zoo. The industry has changed dramatically in the last 10 years and at break neck speed in the last 5 years. You want to time travel back to 1998 to try to justify your resistance is again, not relevant to this conversation or to the security risks we face now, in this moment in time. It's important to stay current with what is real in the industry today. You state you've had extended conversations with well reviewed and newcomers but you don't clarify you've compensated them for their time investment, which means more free emotional labour on the part of the provider. The number of clients that contact us "just to talk" is overwhelming because 99% of those men never book. Do you expect us to invest even more time than we already do chatting up those who reach out without any inclination they are going to book? Most of these men are bored and just want to us to entertain them. If you think that a genuine professional is going to find that is an acceptable screening method, it indicates delusional inclinations and is absurd. Good for you for being able to take advantage of a providers attention and time then actually booking with them. How many have you "chatted with" and never bothered to compensate them? This is quite fascinating, the entitlement is real and very telling... smiles, cat

Care to elaborate on how you define a legal business framework (or front) and on creative ways to safe work and get services? Sharing of information is critical in this industry and I'm definitely interested in your above statement. As for throwing someone under the bus, it's not a criticism but an actual warning. If a provider is willing to circumvent her normal screening, there is a reason. Does she find herself in a $ crunch and have to decide between her safety and paying the rent? Is she driven by an addiction? Does she make arrangements to have someone in the room next door in case of emergency? There is something going on and any man who is willing to take advantage is predatory in my opinion. Predators is why we screen. Predators can't be weeded out ahead of time, we can't guarantee our safety simply with information. The only real justice we may be entitled to after we are found strangled to death is a real name and real information. Our ability to keep those who have harmed others and are escalating their violence out of our space is key and in this day of anonymous accessibility, it's imperative we try our best to minimize the risk. Like Jessica, I don't like to brand all men who don't want to verify as predatory, rapists, thieves and potential murderers but this willingness to bitch, moan, complain and justify all the reasons we are wrong for verifying is disconcerting. Men default to the idea that anyone trying to verify has sinister motives, perhaps they are simply mirroring something within that providers should take serious note of... smiles, cat Additional Comments: And in this is where the problem lies. The only way to ensure our safety is if we stand together and insist on our safety. The day would come quickly if providers realized that... smiles, cat

By all means, please provide these statistics. I'd love to go over them in comparison to the assaults, rapes and murder stats of sex workers and do a risk comparison so we can start using accurate data to inform people... smiles, cat

Prior to C36, it was completely legal for the client. The laws were weighted and enforced against the provider and clients still balked at verifying even tho they were not at risk of LE laying charges. Yes, referrals can work but I know for a fact that clients can behave differently depending on who they are seeing. I've learned several of my ATF guests have had extensive bad date listings after the fact. I'm exceedingly hesitant to give a referral, not because I want to stand in anyones way of having fun but because I don't want my reputation damaged within the SP community if one of the men misbehaves. And it happens more than anyone cares to admit. The referral system doesn't work effectively because there isn't enough information on hand to hold clients accountable if things go very left. All that can happen is he doesn't use the provider he violated as a referral. He just moves on, continuing to use the couple of referrals where he behaves. It's calculated and cold but a fact none the less. Paid services in the US are in fact a nightmare for many providers should be a clear indication that it's a dice roll. Providers throw in referral acceptance to try and appease the online review gods imo but you can't file assault charges with an "Yes I saw him and he was ok." email, let alone a phone call. I will only take referrals from providers I've met in person and even then, I'm still on high alert the entire time. Not a great way to have fun given the circumstance at hand. The sites designed to ensnare are obvious to anyone who does modicum of due diligence. I don't know of a single provider who requires a credit card up front; there are numerous options if she is asking for a deposit here in Canada. Identity theft happens at point of purchase and sexworkers with cc merchant accounts protect them like they are Hope Diamond given how difficult they are to get. Blackmailed? This one actually makes me laugh because there is so much more risk of it coming from someone inside the clients inner circle or from a mistress than from his provider. I'd love to see the crime stats on that one. 99% of the time, a client outs themselves by not being careful with their communications. Previous procurer? I actually had to google this and can't see how it applies here in Canada. Yes, there may be details kept but LE can't come in and arrest us for what we do, let alone go thru our records without a search warrant and I have yet to hear of a situation where LE tried to get to our clients thru us. It isn't happening because they have no legal grounds to do it. I have had many SOs find my information however, causing untold grief. What isn't understood is that verification in Canada is about safety, not keeping LE out. We have little to no defence in the event a client becomes aggressive, violent or robs us. It needs to be understood that our safety is paramount and how a provider chooses to verify is a personal risk assessment choice and shouldn't be questioned. If you don't want to provide the information she requires, don't contact her but also don't disparage providers that choose to place boundaries they feel comfortable with. I also think clients on the boards need to stop fear mongering and trying to scare new comers. C36 has already done a bang up job at chasing away new clients, scaring the ones that actually decide to take the plunge with false data is simply making the industry more tenuous as a whole. Let them do their own risk assessments, they're fully grown men and can make decisions for themselves about what they are or are not comfortable with... smiles, cat

Why not simply see an SP that does massage? This city is full of SPs that have full massage studios and are every bit as experienced as an MA in the art of sensual massage. MAs are massage attendants BECAUSE they don't want to be full service providers and provide sexual services. Please, show some respect for a providers chosen industry boundaries. smiles, cat

Apologies for the small hijack of this thread but... Up until a couple of years ago, clients were not criminalized in any way and the number of police reports concerning trafficked persons were negligible. One can still report a concern anonymously by calling CrimeStoppers now so it shouldn't deter anyone. I find it interesting that providers always carried all of the legal risk prior to C36. Clients demanded things like incalls with impunity, refused to verify and disregarded of the position their refusal put us in. If we stood our ground on verifying, clients refused to book. If we voiced concerns either in person or online about it, we were vilified for being mouthy/opinionated. Now that clients are on the other side of the equation, I see it mentioned regularly online as if it's a huge risk and burden. No where in the country has LE changed it's enforcement tactics regarding the industry. They aren't setting up indoor stings for clients nor are they pressuring providers to hand over client information. They have maintained status quo of only concerning themselves with trafficked, outdoor and underaged workers. There has been no change, literally. I empathize with the legal situation clients find themselves in but it is difficult to sympathize given how little they did to alleviate our risk when the shoe was on the other foot. The legislation changed but the enforcement didn't. Don't let it stop you from doing the right thing if you see a provider you think is being forced to perform... smiles, cat

This is a tricky question to answer given the variables. For every "trafficked red flag" I can give you 5 reasons why a provider may willingly have these policies/procedures in place. Along with the complexities of seemingly "independent" providers who have a manager/life partner it is truly almost impossible to tell. The things I would be wary of are fairly simple to spot. 1. How old is she? The younger the provider, the higher the chance she has a handler. 2. Does she have an online presence other than sites that cater to transient lower end providers like BackPage? 3. How much does she charge? Providers who charge below market rate are either new or have a less than ethical handler. They know they will make their $ on volume which inevitably burns out a provider. A consensual provider knows her needs/limits both financially and physically and charges accordingly. A trafficked provider has no say in her prices and her handler knows he can replace her as soon as she crashes. 4. Does she actually have common sense policies in place? a. Does she verify? If she didn't, then she probably has security in place. The pushback on verification in Canada has always been an issue and you can't blame a provider for trying to stay safe and still make a living. If she does verify, it's because she's trying to mitigate risk, doesn't want to shoulder the costs to have additional security on site. Keeping overhead down is a distinctly professional approach. Low prices and no verification should be a red flag. b. Does she require a 2 call/location system? After she's verified you, does she give her actual address or require you to come to a specific location then call for the actual address? Again, an independent trying to stay safe usually utilizes this policy. c. Is she working out of low end motels? This could be because she's trying to get on her feet but if she's high volume and only in town for a limited time, some concern is warranted. d. Does she have non negotiable service boundaries prior to meeting? Independent providers are very upfront about what they don't offer, unethical handlers know they can say yes to everything and then simply intervene if the client gets aggressive over the discrepancy. The truth is that the seemingly dark side of genuinely trafficked women in the business is a small portion of this vast industry. There are many women who have partners who run the administration end of things and necessarily so. Some would call the partner a pimp, others would call them a manager. It's impossible to know unless you know them both. I've known managers that were brilliant at what they did and weren't parasitic and I've known MTV pimps that were wastes of oxygen. The problem is that you have professional providers, part timers and fast in and outs that are all consensual providers and their business models are varied which makes it's incredibly difficult to identify who is willing and who is not. What is easy is to see the consensual professional providers out there. They have a website, social media and usually some kind if board presence. Their prices are seemingly higher but that's because their overhead is higher. They pay their taxes, they maintain incalls and websites, they pay for their advertising on sites other than BackPage. They do their due diligence by verifying clients. They value their reputation and they protect their brand. It may be a little more out of pocket for you but is well worth the peace of mind that comes from knowing you are patronizing someone who is willingly working in the industry. smiles, cat

YMMV means that certain aspects of the encounter are up in the air until a provider meets the client. It can certainly apply to specific services when taking into account oral hygiene, overall hygiene etc. Poor dental care rules out kissing, dfk and *** for me. There are several other activities that I will not consent to until I meet someone. I've always said that there isn't a game I don't like to play, just people I won't play them with. I won't know whether or not they are a worthy play partner until I meet them so YMMV is always a factor. It's why I refuse to engage in menu type discussions prior to a visit. If all the boxes are checked in terms of hygiene and the chemistry is there, an intense session could very well happen depending on an SP's head space. If she's genuinely professional, you will have an intense session regardless of her mental focus or even if she doesn't like you. This is a job and "liking" isn't a prerequisite for doing it well. smiles, cat

@WIR What on earth would entitle you to think I'm unhappy? Only an assumption on your part; rest assured. You bowing out is appreciated given your inclination to dismiss and deny by claiming what I've said to be simple opinion. Again, that is the problem at hand I've been trying to address. Have a lovely Christmas and may all that you put into the world come back at you 10 fold... smiles, cat

@phaedrus - Yes, in Ontario at least the legal standing is that HE is legal in a spa but the spa needs a municipal business license which are limited in number and grandfathered in. This is why private members clubs have started. There was a spa who took on the legal fight and won years ago. I agree its in human nature to push and be self centered but it doesn't mean we have to. We can do better and we need to. Anyone who believes that their wants/needs trump all else consistently contribute to the abuse SWs experience as a whole. Each and everyone in the industry needs to realize that or else things will turn. Out providers will eventually start considering legal options. I've sat and listened to multiple no brand Dancers and MAs discuss it and the truth is that these women make up the bulk of workers in the industry. It would only take a small number of these women cooperating with LE to ensure industry wide disruption due to legal entanglements. Trust me when I say it's being seriously considered here in Ottawa so LE may be highly motivated to start book throwing. @WIR I'm unsure where the conversation here could be considered uncivilized. Perhaps if you point it out, those who have offended would I'm sure be happy to apologize. Of course Phaedrus was clear, concise and on point. He is an exceptionally considerate, articulate and self aware man. I would expect no less from him in any conversation and we have had more conversations over the years than I can count. As for your comment regarding MAs contributing here, perhaps you are unaware of the way the spas work. Most MAs don't participate on the review boards accept to post ads, it's the owner/managers that are active and I don't expect any of them to step in here given their unethical business practices. I'd be surprised if 15% of MAs have ever read anything other than their own review threads. Providers choose Spas to maintain their anonymity, having an online presence in the sex trade is at best uncomfortable for them, participating in threads isn't one of their pastimes. I think what you are missing is that if any provider chooses to offer services, they are welcome to do it. They just should have the decency to respect the service divides. Any contract worker that provides extras are escorts so why don't they just go work for an escort agency? It makes no sense. Please trust me when I say this service bleed is resulting in acts that are in fact sexual assaults on a daily basis and rest assured, there will be backlash sooner than later. I'm unsure why you can't grasp that what I'm saying is that service bleeds has led to sex workers being regularly assaulted in these venues. You can't deny my claim and I can actually back it up with proof. I'm trying to inform this community that there need to be changes because there could be serious legal fall out coming. Why you insist you are standing on the high ground is disconcerting and speaks to the attitudes that lead to this problem to begin with. Being the problem is a truth whether you choose to see it or not. Even if you haven't crossed a boundary, your attitude empowers those that do. I appreciate you are entitled to your opinion just as it's my right to explain why your opinion contributes to the violence workers experience in this industry. As for the judgement statement, the fact that I am in this industry and I'm immersed in it wholly means if I can't speak to the aspects of the sex trade that are dangerous, who then can? Who is suppose to try to protect and ensure workers aren't violated but the workers themselves? Are clients to be our protectors, the voice of reason here? Many could be, judging from the pms I've received; they understand what I've been saying but I don't have anything to be ashamed of being a sex worker and being non judgemental doesn't mean "anything goes". Rapists, sexual harassers and boundary pushers aren't the weird, creepy guy living in secluded safety of his mothers basement. It's anyone who thinks their behaviour is acceptable after being told it isn't and anyone dismissing or denying violence is happening after being told that it is happening. I think that's a fairly simple concept to grasp. And I'm trying to tell you, it's happening. I'm unsure how to make it any more clear. smiles, cat Additional Comments: This is exactly the issue, it's a good read... http://www.myajc.com/news/local/cheetah-dancers-allege-sexual-assault-top-atlanta-strip-club/6udoC3nhtw2JXJM9uzv3vJ/

The Whorephobia that the concept of a hybrid MA embraces is ludicrous and undermines the human rights we are fighting so hard to achieve. An MA that offers any services other than manual release is in fact an Escort, plain and simple. If it goes in a hole, any hole, that is full service. We are all sexworkers, there is no shame in being a full service provider. The issue I have here is ethics, SWs doing things that undermine their peers safety and security. As I explained, an escort (any provider that offers any kind of full service) can offer any services she is comfortable with but it's illegal and unethical to offer them in either a strip club, a massage parlour or club. Nicolette Vaughan clearly explains that in the facesitting thread that she offers both but she works alone and protects each service as individual offerings. I in fact, offer both; with a separate massage spa and a playroom for full service. As a independent escorts, that option isn't a problem because we are not undermining other providers either in price or adding the pressure to provide services outside of the service divide because we work alone AND we are full service escorts. Offering massage or dance isn't a problem as long as we consent to providing the services. Some of the opinions expressed in the OP and in part 2 of the subsequent post are suggesting if a client wants SP services (whatever comprises such) to only see an SP. If a client wants a massage to go to a MP and if one wants erotic dancing go to a Strip Club. I'm curious if any of these providers who posted on the previous thread feel at all targeted or agree with the OP's comments of being a part of or the problem itself? I don't see any reason anyone would feel targeted unless they know they are bleeding barrier divides (providing full service in spas and clubs) thus putting their peers in compromising situations. And if they are knowingly doing that, then they should be reflecting on their business practices and ethical position. They are on the wrong side of this and I'd be happy to sit down with pen and paper and show them exactly why. I guess another comment I don't quite agree with or fail to understand is the rational thinking behind the message stating MP owners/operators should fight for legal right or obtain a permit for providing anything more than a manual release. I may be unknowing so does such a permit exist? Do any SPs possess any type of permit for services they offer and render? Lastly, is the OP suggesting if a Provider offers massage sessions they should only offer this type of session at MPs, so no independent MAs or SPs should offer massage and SPs and MAs shouldn't offer Strip Tease? No, there is no permit to legally operate a brothel. It's illegal in every aspect. It would require criminal charges and pushing it through to a CSS challenge like Terry Bedford did. Then we would need to pray that the gov't in power made it legal instead of taking liberties away like they did with C36. So, the Spas and PMClubs allow full service while masquerading as legal enterprises when in fact what they are doing is illegal. They know what's happening and who it's happening with but they turn a blind eye. Only massage with manual release is legal in massage parlours and clubs. From a legal standpoint, owners who allow full service on site are endangering all of their contract workers if one of the workers is performing full service on site. Everyone in the location can be charged within common brothel laws; even the MA's who don't offer services and clients who don't receive them will charged as if they did and have to fight the charges in court to prove otherwise. From an ethical stance, owners are endangering their MA only providers ethically and legally. Even if they were to cover the legal costs of such fiasco, how do they repair the damage done with having a criminal record? They can't, you can't make the record of the charges disappear. But my concern isn't about the legal, it's about the day in day out abuse that SWs endure because of unethical clients and providers. Legally, independents can work independently and share space in small groups without issue for now but no one can own a business contracting workers and operating full service incall which includes strip clubs, spas and clubs. So, it's really quite simple. Independent sex workers can offer whatever services they are comfortable offering as long as they are in an independent location. Club contract workers, Dancers and MAs should offer what their location is legally in business to do. If a Dancer or MA wants to offer a client full service, take it off site into a separate location at an appropriate time. Not in the champaign rooms, not in the spa massage rooms. I hope this helps. smiles, cat

I'm trying to post a second part of a long post and I've divided it up to accommodate character limits but it won't let me post the second part. Can anyone help me with why? smiles, cat Additional Comments: It's trying to add my second post as "additional comments" which is why the character limit is coming in. Additional Comments: Fixed...

It might make things easier if most clients actually read anything worded in a backpage ad. ;) Rather than chasing down a local newspaper, most of us thought a website would fix that pesky "Is she real?" wonderment. All teasing aside, some kind of verification would certainly help but the issue is that girls who don't have a website usually aren't inclined to do so... smiles, cat

It's been around for a bit, there's some fun reading on it but I never thought to post it here. Just click Musings on my site... http://www.catherinestclaire.com