canuckhooker

It doesn't bore me, in fact it amuses me. Sorry if I assumed that everyone here was a consenting adult capable of making up their own mind. If someone coerces you into doing a BBBJ physically or with threats then it is a different issue. But if you feel the need to compete and can't stick to your guns, then I have little sympathy. Again, if someone works for an agency that has a no-BBBJ policy then that is a house rule. I have no argument with that, but I do when people start using this forum to complain against people who ask for, or offer that service. What if some provider was offering "safe' Greek as an option for no additional charge, and you feel that your chocolate starfish is exit and only and won't consider it, would you get on here and lobby and complain like so many are doing here about BJ's? Again, bottom line, and something you didn't address in your response was that if a provider offers BBBJ they are not putting you at risk if all your offer is CBJ. You can try and make up all sorts of reasons why that is not true, but they would be false. You can pretend it is not about competition, but most of us know it is.

This is where it gets silly.. "not allowed" ?? By who?? is there some super-secret Federal Department of BlowJobs? The bottom line is this. If you feel comfortable providing a BBBJ then do it. If you don't feel comfortable providing one, then do a CBJ. You need to do what is comfortable for you. But getting on here and whining about feeling pressure or competition is a non-starter. How can anyone on this board believe that some of this is not a way to eliminate competition. This debate has gone on ad nauseum. If you don't feel comfortable with a BBBJ then don't do it. But again, don't try and constrain other providers with your ideas. If you think a CBJ protects you and prevents disease transmission, then there is no validity in the argument that those who give BBJ's are putting you at risk. A CBJ only policy should protect you from that if your arguments are true.

There is no real magic in this. Make eye contact with the girl you are interested in and 9 times out of 10 she will come and see you. They are as interested in meeting people who want to meet them as you are in meeting them. It is in their financial interest. If that doesn't work walk up and talk to her. Say Hi. Pretty simple. How to avoid being bothered by ladies you are not interested in is more difficult.

I was reluctant to respond to this as then we go into more details about individual business models but I will try and do it in a way so as not to put anyone in an awkward position. You are quite right there is case law regarding a lower court ruling that an HJ received in a licensed body rub was not a sexual service. The famous Bill Clinton defense, which in my mind is absolutely stupid and illogical, but regardless the ruling was made. And you are right it has not been appealed, probably because of the Bedford case and they want to fight one war at a time. Regardless that ruling was a criminal ruling on a specific event that took place in a Licensed body rub and much was made about the policeman's conduct in that case as well. It had nothing to do with local regulation of body rubs. Cities still have the right to limit the number of spas and the activities that take place in a body rub. In many jurisdictions in Ontario they explicitly rule out touching the genitals, breasts or anal area of customers. And that is well within their rights. That is not in the Ottawa by-law but it does state that attendants must be dressed in clean clothing at all times. It also regulates lighting levels etc. So showers together, nude attendants, body slides etc are reasons for having your licensed pulled and being shut down even if the only release offered is manual. That is if you have a license. If you are unlicensed then the city could shut you down at anytime. That is if you are offering a body rub. If you are using some other legal loophole such as the SCC ruling on "swing clubs" you might be safe. However if someone made the case that one of the parties in the private club was not a member but actually paid, then that is a whole different ball of wax, and could lead to problems. So that being said, I will say one more time, no spa that I know of in Ottawa, licensed or unlicensed complies with the regulations regarding the activities that go on within the spas. They all advertise activities that are not allowed. So to perpetuate the myth that HJ's are OK, but anything else is not, is false. Why does LE or bylaw leave them alone? Most likely because as long as they operate as they do now, and the authorities receive no third-party complaints it is not worth their effort. Much the same as Strip Clubs where by requlation there must be a sign posted that warns of no touching between customer and dancers, and advising that sexually transmitted infections can be transmitted through unprotected physical contact. But we all know that contact goes on, it is expected. By-law and LE will not take action until they get a complaint.

Wow this is getting so far out of hand it is ridiculous. Lets start with the fact that despite claims to the contrary, no spa in Ottawa, licensed or not follows the regulations set out by the city. Other jurisdictions are more explicit in stating that attendants should not touch the genitals etc of the client. Nowhere in this country is it legal to get a hand-job from nude employee. Whether or not by-law and the police turn a blind eye is a different matter. So now we are talking about "conventions" and breaking house rules. That is a totally different matter. True if word got out that a spa was openly offering FS then maybe LE would scrutinize more closely, but that is merely a supposition. If you feel that being a snitch is the way to go, and you want to turn an employee into the boss then go ahead and do it. It is not something I would do. Of course the word would probably get out, and I don't think many people would trust you much any more, or ever try and be a little generous with you. If you feel uneasy about an offer, tell the person offering you and then put it out of your mind.

Thank you for clarifying. It certainly puts a different spin then what I thought when I first read your post. I am sure management will like to know about that. What people do on their own time is one thing. If they are working then it is a different matter.

I too would like to know what you are talking about. Inappropriate can mean a lot of things and as I have been told most of the dancers like the place because they are treated with respect by the owner and staff.

They haven't been there for a while. Not sure where they went, but there are lots of gorgeous ladies who took their place.

So sad. A great author. I read all of his books eagerly as a youngster. Another great Canadian passes.

Tease does a $2 lunch special only on Wednesday. (from the restaurant attached to the bar) Friday is all you can eat wings from 3-8 pm for $5.

It boils down to one simple principle. I, and many others believe that a provider should be able to set their own price, and when they do then they should not be bullied or pressured by others to change that price. You do not believe that. You believe that others should decide what a provider charges. I am sorry but even from the provider's comments on this thread, there is a huge difference in opinion on that amongst that community. Who is going to set these prices? Is there going to have to be a "hookers union" or professional association? Will it vary from province to province? Will we allow happy hour pricing? Are you really proposing that we set a mimimum wage for prostitution? Given the many varieties and types of sex work how would that work? A certain price for MA's because they only give manual release? X Dollars for Oral, Y Dollars for Greek etc etc? No extras in the Champagne room, because as Chris Rock says, There is no sex in the champagne room? Sorry for getting a bit absurd here, but the whole idea to me is ludicrous, not to say also a little totalitarian.

First off this thread should have been closed because it started with an SP complaining about another provider's rates. That is a taboo subject on this board. It has carried on with several others jumping on the bandwagon bitching, making some unfounded generalizations about other providers, and clients. Secondly, as a gentleman I should have no opinion? At the very root, I believe I am part of the industry and can have an opinion, for without clients there is no industry. But to answer your question, not that it is any of your business, I am employed peripherally in a segment of the industry we discuss on this board. And no I am not a pimp, nor directly manage providers in their provision of service. Finally, I didn't dictate to anyone. I stated my clear opinion that nobody has the right to dictate to any other provider what service they should provide, and what rate they should charge. If telling someone not to dictate is me dictating, then so be it. On who I am referring to about knowledge of the business model, I am referring to nobody in particular and everyone in general. If any one opens a business, offers a product and sets prices for that product (or service) and gets no customers, then maybe they have to look at their business model and adjust. That is common sense. As for the rest I am against, collusion, peer-pressure, name-calling, blackmailing and any other way that someone tries to fix prices, by dictating to others. Or, people who use that means to try and eliminate the competition. To suggest that it happens in other industries is just wrong. It is the market that lets businesses know what price they can sell at. Fixing prices is actually illegal in this country, and businesses who collude to do that could find themselves in legal hot water. Here is what the Government competition bureaus says on the subject.: The provisions 45, 46 and 48 of the Competition Act prohibit agreements between two or more persons to prevent or unduly lessen competition or to unreasonably enhance the price of a product. Agreements between competitors to fix prices, to allocate customers or geographic markets, or to restrict production of a product by setting quotas among competitors or other means are considered to be "hard-core" cartel activities, with no socially redeeming features. Anti-competitive agreements harm both consumers and businesses, and enforcing the conspiracy provisions is an important priority for the Bureau.

I am actually shocked that this thread has been allowed to stay open so long. It is certainly against the spirit of this board. This isn't a reasoned debate it is akin to a bunch of nosy neighbours peeking their heads over a fence and then gossiping about the state of your neighbours yard, complaining about what they are doing in the privacy of their own yard etc. No one has the right to dictate to any provider what they think their rates should be. That is up to the individual provider. They decide what services they offer and at what rate. Face it, this is a business in what is essentially a free-market economy and subject to all the pressures that every other business faces. Despite what the service is, you are still selling a service. You are the provider and you need customers to buy your service. The market decides if the service you are selling is what the consumer wants, and is value for the money. You can charge $400, minimum 2 hour appointment, CBJ, no greek and be happy with that decision. You believe there is a market for that service. It should not matter to you that another provider is doing BBBJ in 15 minute sessions for $80. They feel they too have a market for that service. If either of them don't have clients for their service then maybe they have to look at their business model and adjust. That is how business works in our society. We have had these debates before about rates, BBBJ vs CBJ, sliding rate scales based on service etc. This is not the place for it. It is just collusion in disguise. Setting up a "hooker marketing board" like we do with milk, and eggs etc is not an option, and is a pretty absurd idea. I will say it once again, Nobody has the right to dictate what another can charge for their service. Mind your own business and stop blaming others for your lack of knowledge on the current business climate. If people don't value your service the same way you do, then maybe you should look at alternate types of employment, and not try and stifle your competition.

Do you even pay attention? I will ignore your vitirolic and ill-informed attack and concentrate on what has happened in the past on a similar issue. Harper personally is clearly anti-abortion, and has declared that numerous times. However, he does not believe that it is right for the Government to dictate on the issue as it is a complex and personal question. For that reason he has stifled all attempts by the anti lobby to raise it again as an issue in the House. Something that goes against his own interests and beliefs but that he sees as an issue that the government should not dictate on. This issue is much the same, and I know he does not want to live or die on it. He may be opposed to legalization because of his own beliefs, but he does credit most Canadians with being able to decide for themselves what is right and wrong for them, without having the Government dictate it for them. Stop reading the Toronto Star and listening to CBC radio, Robert Fife and all the rest of the sensationalist journalists. See what the law says before we start crying gloom and doom.

Well Tease isn't as far out, but it is a quiet little bar in a rural setting. And the girls are hot.

Hurry if you are going to go. I was told yesterday it has been sold and will close sometime later this spring. Being torn down to build condos.

Requiem for a Dream?

Most of them are so full of shit it is not funny. "That is what we used the old laws for, to catch the traffickers." Such a load of crap. Why are there so few human trafficking and coercion cases in the courts? Because that actually takes some police work. Instead they set up stings to hit "johns" picking up streetwalkers and send them to John school. Then they pat themselves on the back, meanwhile those street-walkers are still on the street, no better off than before. They want the easy wins.

There are a lot of really good spas in that area, like Perla. You would be better spending your money there. Would be cheaper in the long run, and you will know what kind of mileage you are getting.

Does she even do the math? The CBC "expose" here in Ottawa claims the average cost for a session with one of these girls is $200. So at that rate the trafficked victim has to see 1300 clients (or sessions in a year) which amounts to 3.5 clients every day 365 days a year. FFS really? And of course the claim that there are at least 150-180 of these girls in the Ottawa area. So do that math and on the low end that means there are 195,000 sessions a year with trafficked women in Ottawa. Really? At least make the lies believable. I mean by that math, if no guy sees more than one girl in a 24 hour period, there are 520 men having sex with trafficked women every day in Ottawa. Who the hell are these guys and where are they hiding?

This has been asked and answered several times on this board already. But to summarize: - the fee is nominal ($10 a year) and when you pay it the first time you join it is applied against your first visit. - the private club aspect allows the establishment to vet prospective members and weed out undesirables, (potentially dangerous folks, trouble makers, LE etc) - Membership and booking in advance means no unknown "walk-ins" coming into the club. A lot of trouble in non-member establishments come from that quarter. - There is an agreed and shared expectation of service and what one can expect from the club that is not evident on "one-off" encounters. In my mind for $10 it is totally worth it.

I see the puddle of mud and I am resisting jumping in. Sorry but an online petition is not your voice. The piece of paper with the "X" on it you put in the ballot box is your voice. The rest is just "sound and fury signifying nothing". Why start a petition? To show that some people do have a different opinion. It is the basis for debate, and questioning and sober second thought. It was never an election and if you extrapolate the results of online petitions as an indicator of the political outcome, then you are the person that Shakespeare referred to in the above quote.

Do not mistake a petition for any indication of public sentiment. The only thing you can really say about a petition is that it does indicate that there is a segment of the population that supports a certain view. (i.e. that there is grass roots support for support for a certain opinion) However petitions have plenty of flaws, as may be seen in this excercise. 1. Names are easy to forge particularly online. You can "stuff a ballot box" by making up false names, using others names, (e.g. signing the petition on behalf of unaware third parties, like friends or family) 2. The petition may not have reached its intended audience. Did all the stakeholders really know about the petition? The pro-legalization groups, in my opinion, this site notwithstanding, haven't the same mechanisms and machinery in place to motivate people to sign, that the abolitionists have. 3. Privacy and security issues. Because certain aspects of this industry are still effectively "criminalized" and LE is still being somewhat pig-headed in its views and actions (pun intended) many people may not have wanted to express their opinion in this manner, (disclosing names and addresses for example). Also they may still sense the stigma of the industry and did not want others to see they supported it. Those are just a few of the reasons. The petition shows that people have an opinion but it is not a statistically accurate way to predict the opinions or voting intentions of society.

Only have sex on days that have a "y" in their name.

As we used to say in the army, the only problem with wrestling with pigs is that you both get muddy and only the pig really enjoys it. And lest I get accused of calling you a pig, let me explain that what I said is called an analogy and is used here as a rhetorical device to explain the futility of trying to reason with you. I am in no way implying that you are porcine. However I do wish you would pick one side of an argument and stay on it. I had issues with ad hominem attacks, circumstantial ad hominem attacks, (look it up you might be surprised) and other logical fallacies in your friend's statements. The same faulty logic you are now applying. I was clear in my last post, judging the validity of someone's actions or trying to attribute their motives to some unproven fact is wrong. I said that and then you post a George Bush video accusing me of the informal fallacy of False dilemma aka "You are with us or you are against us". Again something I never said or implied. All I am asking for is reasoned debate based on provable facts, not supposition and biased attacks. Why would I say that? Well statements like " And for that matter, why should the government be free to implement any laws they want, even those which fly in the face of the SCC ruling? " Well there are two different ideas there, and false assumptions. Addressing the second assumption or statement first, "flying in the face of the SCC ruling" where is the proof of this? There is none, but the OP assumes that there will be a new law, and that it will contravene the SCC ruling. Well gee I wish I had his crystal ball. And yes, if he wants to say he has that feeling, then fine, we can all disagree. But for him to repeat it in every thread where he sees an opportunity is not helpful and really lowers the quality of the debate around here. The first question, "why should the government be free to implement any law they want?" . Well the answer is simple. It is called parliamentary democracy. That is how things work in this country. We hold elections, to choose our representatives, then they propose new laws, policies, and regulations. They study them, they debate them, they get passed in the house, the senate and, are given Royal Assent, then they become laws. If those laws contravene or conflict with any other law, or the constitution, or the charter etc, then we can challenge them in the courts. If we don't like what they have done, then we hold them accountable at the next election. You don't like that I am sure there are a lot of other places you can live without this unfair system of government. "Crimea anyone?" So again, everyone is entitled to their opinions. But they really need to be careful about making statements for which there is no proof, or which are contrary to fact. The fact that his argument is based on a personal bias against one political party and assumptions he has no basis in making shows how poorly he understand the complexity of the issue. Turning this into a rant against one political party merely devalues the case that many well-informed, well-intentioned people are making in this forum and other places. The fact that you choose to defend him not by debating my points or proving me wrong, but by personal attack is also wrong. I am not a totalitarian despot, nor am I George W. If you think that then you seriously misunderestimate me. (that last sentence is sarcasm, in case you need an explanation)