JoePlumber

I agree with Annessa and Erin. A really really good BJ takes way more talent/practice than regular FS. The original poster says it's not about the $$, but quite obviously it is. I for one am quite happy it's the $$ for time, as they should actually charge MORE for it. IMO most who offer discounts like that are not worth the effort. I've found that sometimes price for 'act' doesn't represent value, but rather represents what the SP dislikes the most. Why anyone would pay more, for something that is 'disliked' by the SP is beyond me. ( In prev comment I exclude acts that actually take more prep/effort... )

You and me both Meg.

The universities in town have great 'accessible' washrooms. Usually this means a full lockable door. (Shaved head punk girl with body to die for... if you are out there.... thanks for the memories!) Knew a girl once who had a thing for graveyards... but I won't go there... ;-)

In the past at least, I've found more really impressive diamonds in the rough in Gatineau than on the English side... something they put in the water? They just seem happier with life maybe?

If you don't have time to pre-screen, and you want your 'window' of time to have the most pleasure potential, if I were you I'd consider booking two girls two hours ( dinner + dessert ;-)), with the agreement you'd continue with the one you meshed with best for longer. This is assuming of course you can do this in a polite way to not make the ladies feel bad about the arrangment. Many of the SPs here are friends with other SPs and would probably not mind a bit of competitive dinner fun. Worst case, you end up not being able to decide and keep both for 6 hours.. Yum!

Moxies is alright, but Gracies Merivale is just as nice looking, and way more friendly and flirty (in a friendly way). My 2 cents.

brinston2004 - Other than point out that you didn't answer Ava's questions about what was wrong, perhaps I could offer this advice to both you, and SPs. For you, there are many established, and well written SPs that are on this board, and not very hard to identify. Any of them will give great service. If you are trying to match a picture of what you want (browsing the pic profiles) and a single review here or there, it is not surprising that the result is less than optimal. For SPs, perhaps you would consider offering a client makeover for the shy guys. Starting with entry level lessons in 'girl etiquette', kissing, oral etc, this might allow some guys out of their shell, right up to full blown taking them out shopping and a haircut to fine tune their look. Hmm... sounds interesting...

I can feel a tongue ring. It's not as important as skill, but it can turn me on that last 25% for mind blowing experience. I think for many it's also getting turned on by the 'kind' of woman who gets a tongue ring...

I think many of the um.. younger lasses, consider that they are charging for sex, and not for time. They perhaps don't consider themselves worth the money, but their assets somehow are? Many years ago, it was quite common among the Droit or Sun crowd to get dressed and leave after the main event, 5 mins, or 30 mins. Further, I'm sure many guys here have had an SP complain that they are 'taking too long' 30 minutes into an hour ( or 20 minutes into a half hour ). The ladies who have already commented have shown how lucky us Ottawa guys are these days.

Might be easier just to bring someone with you. You up for it Grass_Hopper.. weekend in Vegas? ;-)

Show me some data that shows our 'more informed' sub-population has different numbers? This poll on cerb, has so many statistical flaws, the results are nothing more than conversation fodder. The study quoted (and I admit was the fastest that google pulled up) gave numbers only for teenagers, which the study said had larger infection rates than older groups. Seeing as a goodly number of new escorts are 18 or 19.. they would fall into this category. I'm not trying to be a downer on the thread, I'm just saying that congratulating ourselves for being 'more informed' is hiding behind pseudo-science, and not helpful. From here: http://www.sexualityandu.ca/media-room/fact-sheets-1.aspx "In 2003, 854,817 people aged 15-49 who have ever had sexual intercourse reported ever being diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection" If we assume about 25 million people in the 15-29 range, that's about 1 in 26 people. With 90 people responding to the thread, 2 or 3 should have said 'yes.. had one.. got it fixed'. From here: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/std-mts/stdcases-casmts/cases-cas-08-eng.php For Ontario, general population the rates for Chlamydia were about 200/100,000. That would make for about 2000 people out of the 1 million greater Ottawa residents. Is that a lot? I don't know. But it's a real number to make decisions on, not a feel good poll number.

Ok, that title is misleading, as this is not a post to claim doom and gloom, but rather to say that casual polling aside, there are reliable statistics for STD detection etc. I found this data from 2002 (not really recent, but probably not far off the mark ). I added the bold myself. "The Youth in Canada study of 2.1 million young people released Wednesday shows that while few teenagers between 15 and 19 have AIDS, young women in this age group have the highest rates of gonorrhea and chlamydia in the country: 80 cases of gonorrhea per 100,000 in 1999; 1,139 cases of chlamydia per 100,000. "The incidence tends to be highest in young women, but it's very low in age groups over 25," said Colin Lindsay, the primary author of the study. For young men, the incidence of the diseases was lower -- 32 cases of gonorrhea per 100,000; 187 cases of chlamydia per 100,000" The only problem with the stats I just quoted, is that it doesn't give a timeframe.. such as 'per year' or something. Also, since 'rates' often don't change very much from year to year, this also means it's not spreading wildly (i.e. each infected person is not infecting 4 more or anything). As for the 'poor' response to this poll.. I think this topic scares the living crap out of many many people, who would rather hide their heads in the sand. I know it scares me, but my sense of responsibility is greater.

I would suggest that both cases could be accurate. Somone who takes antibiotics for 'another' reason, may end up getting an undiagnosed STD treated for free. Many people take anti-biotics from time to time for one reason or another (sinus infection, yeast infections etc). Not sure if everyone groups crabs as an STD, but if we threw 'crabs' into the mix, I'd find it hard to find very many people who haven't run into them at some time ( for me it was a long time ago at university...)