cyclo

I think most men are uncomfortable receiving genuine compliments. I don't think it's necessarily because of low self esteem either. We just don't understand how to graciously accept a compliment and as a result end up doing or saying awkward things such as "I bet you say that to all the guys." I know it's hard to believe that we're stumped by such simple social etiquette, but we are. Women participate in more of a "culture of compliments" which are given and received much freely and graciously: "Those are gorgeous shoes... Yes, aren't they to die for, I got them at..." "I love what you've done with your hair... Thanks, it was time for a change and I've been thinking about trying something different for the summer..." "Thanks so much for the thoughtful note you sent... Oh, when I heard what happened my heart went out to you right away..." At best, amongst ourselves, most men can only get out back handed or tongue in cheek comments that are compliments or thanks in disguise lol. When receiving a compliment from an attractive and usually younger woman, it's no wonder many men screw it up. Ladies, they're not really calling you liars. When you reflect upon all the basic etiquette topics that have been discussed on CERB (hygiene for crying out loud!!!!!) it shouldn't be all that surprising that men don't know the finer points of graciously accepting a compliment. It's just one more thing you can help us with! I used to feel awkward receiving compliments and felt that I never really held up my part as a gracious recipient. So I went to "social grad school" and watched and listened to how women talk to each other. I think I've mastered it now :-) with respnses that range for a simple smile to "Thanks, that's very sweet of you to say"... "Thanks, I try to... (fill in the blank...)"

Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode with George's father and Kramer inventing and marketing the "bro" for man boobs lol

Valentine's Day: "Valentine's Day is being marketed as a Date Movie. I think of it as more of a First-Date Movie. If your date likes it, do not date that person again. And if you like it, there may not be a second date." Originally Posted by Roger Ebert "Battle: Los Angeles" is noisy, violent, ugly and stupid. ... Young men: If you attend this crap with friends who admire it, tactfully inform them they are idiots. Young women: If your date likes this movie, tell him you've been thinking it over, and you think you should consider spending some time apart. Looks like I should have titled this thread "Roger Ebert's Dating Advice" lol It's very good advice.

The attached article brought the following reflections to mind. Many, many years ago I stumbled upon a rape in progress. Time slowed to a crawl for a brief moment. What I first noticed, and will never forget... was the look of absolute terror in the young woman's eyes. I can still see her face all these years later. The second thing I noticed was the knife at her throat. Then I was snapped out of my shock by the sound of her voice, not screaming, but pleading. Pleading with both her attacker and I. With her attacker not to harm her, and with me not to walk away. There should never be any doubt that regardless of the circumstances, rape is an act of violence. Several months later when the case went to trial the young woman was still suffering, in counselling and having difficulty coping with her studies and daily life. In this case the man was convicted, probably because there was more evidence against him than you would see in a typical rape case. Flash forward a few decades and I was a juror in a rape case involving two people who knew each other. There were no other witnesses and I saw how difficult it can be for the prosecution to reach the threshold for a criminal conviction, which is "beyond a reasonable doubt", when there aren't any witnesses or evidence of violence (bruising or cuts etc.). Nevertheless, you could see that the woman was still traumatized. In a civil case the standard is "on the balance of probabilities" which would be a much more reasonable test for cases such as this. As the father of a young woman who managed to get through her teen years safely, I sadly realize that the threat of rape will always be with her, even from men who are supposed to be friends, lovers or husband. Yes, there are any number of misfortunes that could befall her in life, but none has the emotional and social consequences that rape does. We all know women who have been raped, whether they've told you or not. Generally they hold their suffering close to themselves and remain silent except with their dearest friends and maybe their families. [B]LOWE: Grappling With Sad Truth of Being a Girl[/B] April 12, 2013 - 6:34am BY LEZLIE LOWE LEZLIE LOWE The sad, awful truth about Rehtaeh Parsons? Her story, of being raped, harassed and taunted for it and being let down by her school and the police, is, in many ways, just the story of being a girl. Take the case of a woman I know. A woman who was raped last summer. A different case than Parsonsâ??s, no camera-phone photos of the assault making the rounds, no online abuse, no end in suicide. An old-school rape, if you will. Boy knows girl; boy attacks girl. But the same sexism came into play in the aftermath. When this woman went to police, the interviewer questioned if an assault had happened at all, said perhaps there was sex, but it was consensual. This woman, her interviewer suggested, had gotten intimate with her attacker and then changed her fickle mind. Silly girl. There is reluctance â?? perhaps logical â?? to prosecute crimes with a dearth of physical evidence. That was the case with this woman. And, we have learned, with Rehtaeh. But implying that the woman I know had made up the whole thing? Itâ??s flat-out victim-blaming. She left the station without pressing charges. The episode was a humiliation, a failure. Yet, it was further than most women ever get. I can count a handful of friends whoâ??ve been raped over the years, by strangers, groups, friends, boyfriends. Not one took the matter to the cops. Statistics Canada says about 10 per cent of assaults get reported to police; 72 per cent of women only tell friends. My pals, it seems, are like most women. They swallowed their rapes and kept chugging along. Shocked? Oh, please. The risk of being raped goes along with being a woman. Donâ??t twist that into acceptance or resignation or anything else. I didnâ??t grow up expecting that rape or abuse was my lifeâ??s lot. I donâ??t resign myself to the immutability of rape stats â?? 500,000 women a year, Statistics Canada guesses. But I have seen (and experienced) enough drunken advantage-taking and heard enough tearful or stoic stories of assault to know it happens. It happens so much. Iâ??m outraged over rape. But hereâ??s what Iâ??m not â?? surprised it still happens. Reporting rape, in all but the best evidence-collection circumstances, ends infrequently in victory. Itâ??s plum-dandy to tell women to report assaults, to hope theyâ??ll connect with the right cop or the right nurse and to urge them to forge ahead with court cases. Nothing will change, it might be argued, if women donâ??t get these assaults, and these alleged rapists, into the system. But my, isnâ??t that a terror of options. Either report your rape and get a cheesecake-slice chance at conviction, while peers jeer, cops hint youâ??re making it up and CNN laments the ruin of the â??promisingâ? lives of your attackers, as it did last month after the conviction of the Steubenville rapists. Or you keep quiet and wonder â?? as I know at least one friend of mine has â?? whether a rapist has been left free to attack others. Do I judge my friends and the 90 per cent of women who donâ??t report their rapes? God, no. Out-of-the-box thinkers might rightly wonder if a convenient solution lies in just expecting men not to rape. Thatâ??s cultural change, absolute in its necessity. But in the meantime, we need to look at a system that stops women from reporting crimes and when they do, too often leaves them with nothing but the sad, awful truth that they are just a girl â?? and nothing can be done. Lezlie Lowe is a freelance writer in Halifax. Follow her on Twitter @lezlielowe. ([email protected])

I walked into my local video store today. (Ya I know, that's so 20th century!) They had a section of movies devoted to Roger Ebert with short quotes for each one. The fun part was that some of them were movies he had given a "thumbs down" to. Valentine's Day: "Valentine's Day is being marketed as a Date Movie. I think of it as more of a First-Date Movie. If your date likes it, do not date that person again. And if you like it, there may not be a second date." Pearl Harbor: "Pearl Harbor is a two hour movie squeezed into three hours." Witness:Armageddon: "The movie is an assault on the eyes, the ears, the brain, common sense, and the human desire to be entertained. No matter what they are charging to get in, it's worth more to get out." Of course Ebert wasn't just a master of the thumbs down put down. He displayed a great sense of insight and empathy and used his reviews as a springboard to touch on many subjects. "We are put on the planet only once and to limit ourselves to the familiar is a crime against our minds." "Your intellect may be confused, but your emotions will never lie to you." "What I believe is that all clear-minded people should remain two things throughout their lifetimes: curious and teachable." "I began to realize that I had tended to avoid some people because of my instant conclusions about who they were and what they would have to say. I discovered that everyone, speaking honestly and openly, had important things to tell me." "I believe empathy is the most important quality of civilization." "The problem with being sure God is on your side is that you can't change your mind, because God sure isn't going to change his."

I think it's a great idea Peachy and I'm sure there's a market for this type of service. Being physically active together is a great way to interact socially and have a shared experience. Plus you get the endorphins going and there's always the post workout shower to look forward to :-) Just as in real dating life, not everyone wants to have a talking heads date. It's one of the reasons for the growth of co-ed recreation clubs that get together and play volleyball, softball or go skiing and cycling etc. I see your proposed service as a variation on the GFE date. GFE service is always about more than just the bedroom activities so appointments which include physical activities which you and the client enjoy are consistent with GFE service. Personally I've discussed going skiing with a couple of sp's and the only reason it hasn't happened is that the logistics for skiing, travel and scheduling are a little more difficult than saying "Hey, let's go for a run" or "Let's go zip lining." I don't have anything knowledgable to say about the legal/liability question.

Samantha raises a good point about who is and isn't getting tested. In addition to "who" gets tested, "when" you or your partners get tested is also critical for managing risk. HIV is most cantagious during the early stages of infection. In the first 8-12 weeks after being infected, a person has more of the virus in their blood because their immune system hasn't had a chance to fight back yet. (The virus peaks again to similar levels in the late stages of AIDS after the body's immune system has essentially been defeated.) If you are engaging in the high risk sex acts identified in the first post, frequent testing will not reduce your risk of becoming infected, but it will reduce the risk of you infecting your partners if you've become infected. Additional Comments: I agree it's not easy. Most researchers seem to acknowledge this also. A research article in the the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes entitled "Heterosexual Transmission of HIV-1 is Associated with High Plasma Viral Load Levels..." states "Risk factors for heterosexual transmission of HIV are not fully understood. In fact a proportion of people with sexual exposure to HIV remain uninflected despite multiple and continuous intercourse with HIV infected partners." In part this goes to show that where risk/probability is involved, you can't say with certainty what will happen to a specific individual, only what can happen in a larger population. Just like the link between smoking and cancer. We know many people will be affected, but we don't know which individuals. We've all seen the harty pack a day smoker. Experiments are definitely out of the question, but there are some studies that are pretty close. In this particular study they followed 38 heterosexual couples in which one partner was infected and the other wasn't and who continued to have unprotected sex!!!! "... despite intensive counseling and behavioral intervention." (This is just another example that knowledge alone doesn't necessarily eliminate risky behaviours.) The frequency and type of unprotected sex acts and occurence of other STI's wasn't significantly different for the couples. The most significant factor in determining which uninfected partners became infected was the "viral load" (amount of infection in the blood) of the originally infected partner.

This column is related to the previous article I posted about Rehtaeh Parsons, but also addresses the Steubenville gang rape in the US which was similar in many respects. The primary difference of course being that in the Steubenville case, charges were laid and the rapists were convicted. Even after the convictions however there was still an unbelievable amount of victim blaming that continued. Rehtaeh Parsons: Yet Another Rape Victim to Blame? Toula Foscolo: Huffington Post- Posted: 04/09/2013 12:23 pm When I recently wrote a column about the two young men in Steubenville who were found guilty of raping an unconscious 16-year-old girl, I received a number of thank-you emails from readers - both male and female. I also received a 1000-word diatribe from a reader, about how the girl in question was inebriated, drank way too much to handle herself, and shouldn't have been there at all. To make a long reply short, the reader basically felt the need to explain that she deserved what was coming. He felt so justified, and so unapologetic about his explanation, that, not only did he sign the letter, he also left his professional credentials as a... life coach, should I feel the need to contact him again. After all, the way that girl drank herself into a stupor, what choice did those two boys have BUT to rape her? I stared at that letter for a solid ten minutes. Having written an opinion column for the better part of seven years now, I'm used to the accolades and the anger. Few reactions faze me. But this reader's casual and flippant dismissal of the rape charges against these young men, his easy justification of a brutal and violent act, left me deeply troubled, and only served to reinforce what - deep down inside -- I already know. That, despite what we tell ourselves, what we hear, what legislation has been enacted over the years, we still live in a world that prefers to justify rape - or at the very least, excuses it away, case by case. The evidence in the Steubenville case was undeniable and was to be found - for all to see in horrifying detail - on social media, in texts and video footage shown in court. These boys dragged her around like a rag doll, violated her repeatedly, and urinated on her as others watched on. They recorded themselves doing this, while all along laughing and yelling that she was"'deader than OJ's wife." We're not talking about drunken high school shenanigans. We're talking about the unflinching, callous, and violent degradation of a young woman. A young woman their own age and running in their own circles, whom they should have protected, and yet chose to prod, poke, violate, and rape, like she was an inanimate object; a sex toy for their amusement and pleasure. The way CNN and other major media outlets reacted to the verdicts (the way they bemoaned the fate of these "promising young men") was appalling and worthy of the public outcry it generated. The way Barbara Amiel justified it made me sick to my stomach. And yet, despite the cringe-worthy video evidence, people still had the gall to question and publicly shame and blame the victim. Because, like I stated in my column, rape is still the only type of violence where the victim is questioned, doubted, and sneered at. The only type of violence where women's skirt hems are measured, alcohol consumption judged, past sexual history used against them and as a barometer of how much fault they should be assigned. Because, that one silent, accusatory question still continues to fester in many people's minds: she must have done something to bring this on, right? Just like 17-year-old Halifax student Rehtaeh Parsons must have done something to bring on what happened to her, when she went to a friend's house 17 months ago (only 15 at the time) and was allegedly raped by four young boys. Four young boys who, not only violated her, but then decided it would be hysterically funny to take pictures of her and distribute them at her school and her community. The victim-blaming culture that we live in, the fallout was inevitable. Rehtaeh was shunned, sneered at, mocked relentlessly. Depression, anger, and thoughts of suicide overtook her. Police were slow to investigate, and even slower to lay charges. Despite the pictures going viral, there was apparently "not enough evidence" to prosecute the four boys. Last Thursday, Rehtaeh hanged herself in the bathroom. This past Sunday, her family took her off life support. We, as a society, recoil in horror at such tragedies, but fail to see the triggers that normalize violence against women. We shrug them off as unrelated. But they're not. About a week ago, I read about rapper Rick Ross getting into hot water for his lyrics encouraging date rape, by extolling the hours of fun one can have with MDMA, also known as Molly. "Put Molly all in her champagne, she ain't even know it. I took her home and I enjoyed that, she ain't even know it." Aside from the atrocious grammar that Ross is guilty of, he's basically rapping about slipping a drug to an unsuspecting woman and then raping her without her knowledge. When women's groups reacted with outrage, Ross backtracked and issued the lamest non-apology you've ever heard of. "I would never use the term 'rape'," he said, taking the opportunity to condescendingly refer to his female fans as "queens" and "sexy ladies". "Hip hop don't condone that." Only thing is, hip hop does condone that. All the bloody time. "See me I'm all up on your bitch means I'mma rape her/ All I got for these hoes is dick, duct tape and a stapler." -- Lloyd Banks featuring Akon and Eminem - "Celebrity" And here's DMX rapping about raping a minor. No big deal. It's just music, right? "Tryin' to send the bitch back to her maker/ And if you got a daughter older then 15, I'mma rape her"- DMX - "X Is Coming" Most rappers have such heinously disrespectful lyrics, I have a hard time repeating them here, but one must confront the ugly, misogynistic truth if one is to discuss it. Out of all the songs whose lyrics I looked at, there was only one "romantic" song I found that Snoop had written. It's title? "I miss that bitch." I know; it brought a tear to my eye too. We can say what we like, women's groups can make as much noise as they can, but the truth remains; we live in a culture that normalizes violence towards women, justifies its existence, seeks to blame the victim instead of the perpetrator. Especially if the perpetrator looks like a good kid from a good family with a good future ahead of him. According to the American Medical Association, sexual violence, and rape in particular, is the most under-reported violent crime. Of every 100 incidents of sexual assault, only six are reported to the police. Six... I think of the other 94 that remain in the dark, and I want to cry for them. My heart aches for the women who stay silent, keeping their shameful secret like a festering wound that never quite heals; potentially foregoing therapy and grappling with lifelong issues of sexual intimacy and trust, asking themselves time and time again what they could have done differently. Is it any wonder that so many women choose not to report a rape, when one sees the public blaming and ruthless finger-pointing that takes place, the moment a woman finds the courage to expose her raw wounds for all to see? When one sees the public sympathy expressed for the poor "promising" young men and the one silly mistake that took them and their "bright futures" down? When one sees rappers, like Rick Ross who is paid by Reebok to be a paid sponsor by the way, get to backtrack and issue statements that reinforce and justify the rape mentality we're surrounded by? If you've incapacitated a woman to the point that she doesn't even know where she is, and then you have sex with her, that's called rape, Rick. Even if you coyly don't refer to it as rape in your song, it's still rape. Just like you can call something an apology and have it be anything but an apology. Words matter. Public reactions matter. Justifications matter. The reticence to investigate matters. Sometimes they speak louder than the legislation we have in place protecting us. Sometimes they tell us a story we don't want to hear. Follow Toula Foscolos on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/toulastake

When AIDS was first discovered homosexual men, hemophiliacs (due to infected blood transfusions), intravenous drug users and Haitians (Haiti is where the HIV virus first arrived in North America from Africa) were the four groups affected. Since then the proportion of male and female heterosexuals affected by HIV has increased. "When HIV reporting began in 1985, men who have sex with men (MSM) accounted for over 80% of all cases. Although MSM is still the predominant exposure category, the proportion has decreased significantly over the years. In 2010, 47.6% of all positive adult HIV cases with known exposure category were attributed to MSM. Heterosexual contact, at 30.8% of case reports among adults in 2010, was the second most reported exposure category (13.2% attributed to having sexual contact with someone with no identified risk, 11.0% attributed to having sexual contact with a person at risk, and 6.6% to those of origin from an endemic country)." Source: Public Health Agency of Canada report "At A Glance - HIV and AIDS in Canada: Surveillance Report to December 31,2010" There is far less social stigma attached to identifying as homosexual today than there was in the late seventies and early eighties when AIDS symptoms and HIV were first being discovered. The increase in heterosexual cases is therefore unlikely to be based upon a larger number of people being embarrassed to say they have had sex with other men. It is more likely that more heterosexuals are engaging in the highest risk behaviour for transmission... unprotected anal sex. I'm sure many of the women on this board can attest to the increased interest, requests and curiosity from their clients regarding Greek services. (I realize that no one on CERB would offer bare back anal and I'm not suggesting that.) So regardless of whether you're gay, bi, bi-curious, transgendered, heterosexual or got drunk one night and took a walk on the wild side... the sexual practice of unprotected anal intercourse (being the receiver) is your highest risk for HIV transmisssion. In the early days of AIDS it was possible for heterosexuals to feel complacent, immune or at extremely low risk of contracting HIV. As heterosexual behaviour changes, the risk increases and the number of infections increases.

Thanks for this article Emily. I agree that everyone should have access to sexual health information and contraceptives. A related and larger concern is also the Catholic church's role in opposing distribution of condoms in HIV epidemic areas such as Africa. You mentioned that "The only known real solution to poverty (is) Birth Control." It's often mistakenly assumed that population growth is the main cause of poverty and it's worst consequences; hunger and starvation. Other factors have a much greater impact upon poverty, hunger and starvation. These include: - inequitable political and economic systems; - concentration of land, production, infrastructure, distribution and therefore wealth amongst a minority; - war and and the displacement of large populations as refugees; - reliance upon cash crops for export which concentrates revenue in a few hands and limits access to land for subsistence farmers; - poor agricultural and soil management practices causing deterioration of soil nutrition and/or permanent loss of soil through erosion; - poor food storage and distribution systems causing waste before it can get to consumers; and - natural disasters (droughts, floods, storms and earthquakes). Any of these problems can result in poverty, hunger and starvation. When you get the convergence of several of them as often occurs in developing countries, you're virtually guaranteed to increase poverty, hunger and starvation. Generally in developing countries, poverty in rural areas is characterized by lack of access to productive land and in urban areas lack of access to living wages. If we look at poverty in North America, we certainly can't say that poverty results from lack of birth control. Living wages, affordable housing, workforce skills and lack of employment opportunities in certain regions are significant factors. Here are a few links to sites discussing the underlying causes of poverty, mostly in developing nations. http://www.wfp.org/hunger/causes https://www.freedomfromhunger.org/world-hunger-facts http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm

There has been some discussion recently about prostitution cases involving 16 or 17 year old girls. This is a very shocking story involving a 13 year old girl. I've heard of girls this age being forced into prostitution in Asia, but not very often in Canada. I'm glad to see that the two men have been charged and the young girl is getting assistance but I doubt that she'll ever truly recover from this. By Stephane Massinon, Calgary Herald February 23, 2013 Two Lethbridge men have been charged following a child-prostitution investigation involving a 13 year-old girl. Police say the girl was working as a prostitute and allegedly giving the proceeds to a 32-year-old man. On Feb. 13, police say she was with a 61-year-old client in the downtown core. Both men have since been arrested and charged. â??Itâ??s always alarming when you have someone as young as that involved in the sex trade,â? said Insp. Bill Kaye. Memphis Mathew Gros Ventre Boy, 32, is charged with procuring prostitution â?? aiding, abetting and compelling â?? and invitation to sexual touching. Robert John Gerard, 61, is charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, procuring a youth for sex and invitation to sexual touching. The 13-year-old girl will not be charged and police say social agencies have been brought in to work with her. â??Our intent is to provide her with the help she needs to get out of the lifestyle,â? said Kaye. By court order, Gros Ventre Boy is prohibited from going downtown and cannot contact the 13-year-old. He will be in court Feb. 27. Gerard appears in court March 1. He is now prohibited from being in contact with anyone under 16 unless accompanied by an adult and canâ??t be within 100 metres of any place where children may be present. [email][email protected][/email] © Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

I agree with you. Everything I've read on the topic of sexual satisfaction, and my own personal experience supports this idea. Personal responsibilty involves feeling good about yourself and your body; knowing what gives you pleasure (physically, emotionally, mentally); and here's the kicker being able to communicate that verbally and non-verbally (moans, groans, body movement...). All of these elements are part of being responsible for your own sexual pleasure whether your masturbating or with a partner. We all hope our partners (service provider, romantic, fling, friends with benefits) are empathetic, intuitive and creative but we can't expect them to be mind readers. No one knows how to touch us or turn us on better than we do ourselves ;-) Of course sometimes part of the pleasure of being with a new sexual partner is the novelty, unpredictability and discovery of a new pleasure. When we learn something new about our bodies, minds or emotions, that's a great bonus. It plays a part in why some of us like to have multiple sexual partners. We certainly have a right to expect our sexual partners to be attentive, in the moment and open minded. Still the responsibility for our satisfaction should never be exclusively in our partner's hands. Personally I find it's a real turn on when I'm with a woman who's comfortable stimulating herself while I'm stimulating her also. The same goes for me. Sometimes it just takes pressing that special button that you know, to take you to the next level or over the top. I recall reading an advice column in which women wrote in and provided advice to men on how to perform great oral sex. It was all over the place "Stick your tongue in.... Never, ever stick your tongue in"; "Nibble on my clit with your teeth... If you use your teeth on my clit I will tear your head off"; "Use your fingers and tongue... Only do one thing at a time, it's too distracting if you're using your fingers...". The obvious conclusion of the advice column was... for both partners to communicate, especially the person on the receiving end of any stimulation. In other words... Take personal responsibility. I know the women on this board want every client to leave weak kneed and with a smile on their face that they can't hide :-) At the same time I'm sure you've seen it all from clients in terms of self awareness and personal comfort communicating needs and desires.

Further to Samantha's post, the solicitation laws really are addressing "public nuisance". It's important to remember that the client can be charged with solicitation in addition to the service provider. Women can find themselves being solicited by men while walking down the street in an area used for street prostitution. This can be embarrassing, uncomfortable or threatening depending upon the circumstances. This is one of the public behaviours that the solicitation laws are designed to address.

In addition to prostitution, there are a few other circumstances, activites and relationships that fall into the "exploitive" category and raise the age of consent to 18. These include pornography, authority, trust, dependency and Internet luring. The following excerpts are from a Dept of Justice FAQ regarding the age of consent for sexual activity.. "... the age of consent is 18 years where the sexual activity "exploits" the young person -- when it involves prostitution, pornography or occurs in a relationship of authority, trust or dependency (e.g., with a teacher, coach or babysitter). Sexual activity can also be considered exploitative based on the nature and circumstances of the relationship, e.g., the young person's age, the age difference between the young person and their partner, how the relationship developed (quickly, secretly, or over the Internet) and how the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person." "The Criminal Code protects 16 and 17 year olds against sexual exploitation, where the sexual activity occurs within a relationship of trust, authority, dependency or where there is other exploitation. Whether a relationship is considered to be exploiting the 16 or 17 year old will depend upon the nature and circumstances of the relationship, e.g., the age of the young person, the age difference between the young person and their partner, how the relationship developed and how the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person. As well, 16 and 17 year olds cannot consent to sexual activity that involves prostitution or pornography." "No one may make, distribute, transmit, make available, access, sell, advertise, export/import or possess child pornography. Child pornography is broadly defined and includes materials that show someone engaged in explicit sexual activity who is, or seems to be, under the age of 18 years; or show a young person's sexual organ or anal region for a sexual purpose. Child pornography also includes written and audio material that encourages others to commit a sexual offence against a child, or is primarily a description of unlawful sexual activity with a child that is intended for a sexual purpose." "No person may use a computer system, such as the Internet, to communicate with a young person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a sexual or abduction offence against that young person. This offence is sometimes called "Internet luring"." Here's the full link: http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/clp/faq.html

Hi Angela. I agree with everything you said in response to my post. Obviously I didn't express myself very well. I wasn't trying to provide advice on screening clients and all of the communication required before meeting. I defer to any advice sp's such as yourself have on this. I was just responding to the question about how does a client find the room without the sp revealing her identity. I also agree that prostitution is legal in Canada, that there is no need to use the term "donation" and that the communication you've described is legal and is not solicitation. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify any misinformation which my post may have appeared to contain.

In this thread it looks like you're getting contract advice based upon two different business models/relationships. After reviewing all of the advice I'd suggest you put it aside for a day or two and then write a simple clear statement for yourself, your lawyer and associates describing your business model. This will provide the lawyer with very clear direction when they are drafting the document. Without a clear idea and articulation of your business model it's very easy to start mixing and matching things that don't belong together. Kind of throwing everything into it just to be comprehensive. Each business model defines the business relationship between you and your associates differently and will likely have an affect upon how you interact at times. Here are the two basic business models I see. 1) You are the employer and have an employer/employee relationship. You specify the conditions of employment (hours, fees, wages, attendance, behaviour, benefits etc). Your employees represent your agency/brand and you define the conditions of work accordingly to build and protect your brand. 2) Alternatively, the women are self employed and they contract you to provide services (marketing, booking, possibly access to an in service location provided by you etc). The marketing can be under one brand for all of the women you represent or alternatively they are each responsible for their own brand. I get the sense that you are very close to the women you work with. Business and friendship can be a difficult balancing act. Obviously you are trying to maintain healthy personal and business relationships. Entering into a formal contractual arrangement is a good way to avoid conflict and confusion about roles, responsibilities and liabilities. As I mentioned earlier, defining the relationship through a clear idea of your business model/relationship is the first step and a prerequisite to drafting a contract. It's also a conversation you should have with the women you work with. If you can agree on what your business relationship is, in simple english before a lawyer gets involved with the necessary legalese, you will all be better off. I hope this helps. I can't offer specific advice, but business is business so the same principles apply.

Go to the CERB homepage. Near the top you'll see a number of tabs. Click on the "Social Groups" tab. On the right hand side of the Social Groups page you'll see a listing of "New Groups". Go to the bottom of New Groups and click "View All Groups". You're almost there ;-) Scroll down to The Feet Worshipers Group and click on it. At the bottom of the Feet Worshippers Group page you'll find the option to "Join Group"

Snowballing involves 3 things I love. French kissing, cumming, and all things wet and slippery! I tried snowballing because I was curious. What are my partners tasting and how does it feel swallowing? What do I taste like? Good, awful or neutral? My partners knew all these answers and I didn't. That didn't make sense. Plus I never want to ask a partner to do something I wouldn't do myself. The first time I tried it was after masturbating. Instead of the usual clean up, I grabbed a handful and licked it up. So what did I learn about myself? I taste very neutral and I have no problem swallowing. I have a much, much harder time swallowing oysters, clams or raw eggs! Doing it with a partner, I enjoy both the intimacy and the sloppiness of the kisses :-) Plus it feels kind of edgy! Joyful C and a few other posters have mentioned that what seems desirable and sexy before you cum, can quickly lose all of its appeal after cumming. That's of course true and maybe it is why some guys back out. Maybe there's other psychological reasons. Who knows. If it's just a case of maintaining interest or stage fright, here's a couple of suggestions. You know how they say "Don't try this at home." Well, this is something you can try at home. The other suggestion is regardless of whether you're doing it "home alone" or with a partner, make sure you or your partner keeps stimulating you after you cum to keep you turned on. We're super sensitive after cumming so it won't be difficult to stay turned on with a few gentler strokes while you make your first snowball ;-)

I must be an early to bed guy (in the daytime and nightime) ;-) so I've never run into that. Thanks for the correction Emily.

I can't recall any Halifax hotels that require a security pass for the elevators. The 2 Deltas, Marriott, Prince George, Cambridge Suites, The Courtyard Halifax, Westin, Four Points Sheraton, Lord Nelson. None of these require passes. They're all downtown. Take your pick.

First a response to the original poster's question. Searching through the recommendations for your area and checking out the web sites for sp's in your area will give you a good idea of who offers bbbj. It's not hard work ;-) As for the public health question that's been raised, Emily J is right on the money! Oral sex obviously has some risks for transmitting STI's, but swallowing semen doesn't increase them. The digestive tract is a pretty harsh environment and there's unlikely to be a tear, cut or sore allowing a virus or bacteria to cross into your body/blood stream. Instead of worrying about swallowing, the more important concern for safer oral sex is to ensure that neither partner has any sores, cuts or bleeding in their mouth or on their lips. This is also why you shouldn't brush your teeth within a half hour of engaging in oral sex. You may irritate the gums and cause bleeding which will increase the risk of bacteria or viruses crossing "into" or "out" of your body/bloodstream. The same principal applies to bare back sex (vaginal and anal). It's a higher risk sexual activity because of the potential for tears during vaginal or anal sex and therefore exposure to the bloodstream. The urinary tract of course is also a potential entry point and doesn't produce the same harsh defensive environment as the digestive tract.

First a trio of Canadian cliches... but I do really love them. I just came in from being outdoors (-20) so that's what made me think of the first one. 1. The crunchy squeaky sound of walking on snow when it's really cold. 2. The call of a loon at dusk or dawn. 3. A foghorn. 4. The sound of a clock ticking in an empty house. I don't think I really understand why I like this last one. The sound of a clock is always there, but you never notice it until the house is empty and quiet, usually late at night. It's a sound of solitude and almost loneliness but without the sadness that accompanies loneliness. It also reminds me of being a child when I visited older relatives who all had large/loud clocks so there's an element of nostalgia also.

There's been a fair amount of discussion in this thread regarding the obligations a client has in determining an sp's age. The Criminal Code indicates that a client must take "all reasonable steps" to confirm that the sp is of legal age. So what are considered "reasonable steps"? The test the Court would take is what steps would a "reasonable person" take in the circumstances to determine the sp's age? In a trial, these factors would include: 1. How well does the client know the sp; 2. Physical appearance of the sp; 3. Age and appearance of the people with the sp; 4. Age difference between the client and the sp; 5. Demeanour or behaviour of the sp; 6. The time and location of the alleged sexual assault; and 7. Any other relevant times or places the client and sp were in contact. The less familiar the client and sp are with each other, the more steps the client is required to take to determine her age. In addition, the bigger the age difference between the client and sp, the greater the expectation that the client would make more inquiries. In other words, just because she showed you a fake id, that's not enough! That's not a winning defence! Like it or not, the burden is on the adult, not the teenager! So that's the law, but why else would you go the extra mile to determine the age of the sp? Here's my top 5 reasons: 1. You're a decent and good man! 2. You don't want to let a teenager make life altering decisions for you! 3. There are literally thousands of wonderful, gorgeous, sexy, skilled legal sp's in the country that you can meet! 4. You don't want you and your family dragged through a court case as an accused sex offender and place your fate in the hands of a legal process that you don't understand and have no influence over. And finally, the scared shitless reason... 5. You don't want to risk being convicted, becoming a registered sex offender, losing your family and every friend you've ever had and going to prison as a sex offender, where you will be abused by your fellow inmates or isolated for your own protection for the duration of your sentence!!!!

If she takes offence or refuses, walk out the door... Fast! Additional Comments: It doesn't matter what your purpose was in posting. You have a responsibility now and you know it. The legal age to be a prostitute is 18. Look, I understand that when we were young we all made various poor choices. Choosing to be involved in prostitution is a choice that should be made with some maturity. Regardless of what age we believe someone really becomes mature, I think someone less than 18 is too immature to make this choice.

If anyone suspects child sexual abuse, they have a legal, and ethical, responsibility to report it. The appropriate authorities will get to the bottom of whether the facts confirm child sexual abuse. It doesn't matter whether she's doing it voluntarily or is coerced. It's still child sexual abuse in the eyes of the law. I'll explain why below. Too much of the history of child sexual abuse involves people who have had suspicions but did not report them for various reasons ("I'm not really sure... I don't want to make a wrongful accusation... I should mind my own business..." etc). You'll never be certain because you can't investigate the facts from afar. Contact the authorities who can. All reports can be made anonymously. The criminal code identifies various "age of consent" for sexual activity. It's lower where both parties are consenting youth ("young lovers"). Underage prostitution falls into the category of of "exploitive sexual activity" and the age of consent is 18. Since there is likely to be a pimp involved with someone who is under this age, it's fairly obvious why it is called "exploitive sexual activity". As for who to call, call the Police. The NS Child and Family Services Act only applies to children under 16. This leaves a gap for 16-18 year olds under the Provincial Act and the potential for an investigation to get lost in the bureaucracy. If she's under 18, the Criminal Code will still apply. The Halifax Police have repeatedly shown their willingness to take action on underage prostitution and the Crown lays charges against the pimp, not the victim.