The end of BBBJ's?

[CristyCurves 169032]

That would be a valid argument except: all sps are not at liberty to decide for themselves what services to provide or not provide. Some are employees, many in fact, and they are and will be marketed and advertised as to offer popular services. There are some who do not wish to provide bbbjs, but due to pressure of the business, do so for the sake of their business. The pressure of what others provide, and provide cheaper, drives what they provide.

There is truth to this because I am one of I'm sure many who began to provide bbbj from feeling pressured, the need to be a so called "genuine" gfe and because more than not demanded it. But in saying that I could not justify allowing daty and then expecting the man to be covered.

Joining cerb was an eye opener because years before, when I was involved with services, offering that service would get you fired, it wasn't allowed, ever! Now everyone, or it seems like everyone is doing it.To be honest I'd prefer it not be allowed, but who listens to me, lol!

[canuckhooker 19202]

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.

[fortunateone 156618]

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.

 

 

They are employees. "not allowed' means the services are required as a condition of employment. Many agencies make it quite clear what services are required for new employees. Most sps know this. i think the only time a client knows it is when they mention the sp did a 5 second bbbj, then covered it up lol

[CristyCurves 169032]

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.

Yes there is a federal dept of bj's and it's run by Mr.Big, he lives in cocksville:),lol. My attempt at humor;)When you become an sp perhaps then you could address feeling "pressured". Unless you are selling such services how could you relate to the pressures felt, or perhaps you are, if so, I'll apologize. To speak to a topic, or as you put it, whine, is every persons right. To discuss personal experiences within the business, again, is a persons right. To assume someone is trying to rid their "competition" by discussing their experiences is absurd. Especially when many of us don't consider others as competition.

When any of us work for or with someone there are usually rules to be followed, hence, some things will be "allowed" some things will "not be allowed" . Back when I ran services bbbj was a big no, no, anyone back then that I knew who ran a service had the same rule. When I worked for services it was also the same. But that was then:)

Just curious, if this debate, rather discussion, bores you so, why keep posting or reading about it?

[WriteOn 3250]

This debate has gone on ad nauseum.

 

 

It has been brought up many times and it will come up again.

[canuckhooker 19202]

Yes there is a federal dept of bj's and it's run by Mr.Big, he lives in cocksville:),lol. My attempt at humor;)When you become an sp perhaps then you could address feeling "pressured". Unless you are selling such services how could you relate to the pressures felt, or perhaps you are, if so, I'll apologize. To speak to a topic, or as you put it, whine, is every persons right. To discuss personal experiences within the business, again, is a persons right. To assume someone is trying to rid their "competition" by discussing their experiences is absurd. Especially when many of us don't consider others as competition.

When any of us work for or with someone there are usually rules to be followed, hence, some things will be "allowed" some things will "not be allowed" . Back when I ran services bbbj was a big no, no, anyone back then that I knew who ran a service had the same rule. When I worked for services it was also the same. But that was then:)

Just curious, if this debate, rather discussion, bores you so, why keep posting or reading about it?

 

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.

[roamingguy 300291]

Maybe I'm off the mark here, but I thought agencies (real agencies) were so called because they were acting as agents (ie representatives) for the ladies, not as their boss. As agents they did their bookings, screening, driver, security and so on for the lady

The model used, where an agency is considered the employer and the SP an employee and the lady has to do what the employer says...sounds more like a pimp, and that already is illegal....not to mention as for being a pimp, since already illegal, do you really think then laws banning bbbj are going to deter him.

As for enforcing this no bbbj law, how is that going to be done.

Having a law is one thing, enforcing it is completely another

A rambling

 

RG

[CristyCurves 169032]

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.

 

Allow me to amuse you more then;) .Interesting when another provider had posted a while back as to how she too felt pressured to preform bbbj because of the number of calls she got requesting it. You did not post to her response sarcastically, you did not accuse her of " competing", did you miss it, or did she gain your sympathy? As far as sticking to my guns, not sure what you are intimating, but assuming that you mean because I perform bbbj and state that I'd prefer more wouldn't expect it, then here's some more examples of things I do but would prefer weren't expected, but since they are I do-I wear clothes in public, even though I'd prefer to be naked. I leash my dogs, even though I prefer not to. I drive with in the speed limit even though I prefer not to. I offer incall even though I'd prefer to be out only. There are a lot of things we all do because of demand, need, rules, laws or other reasons, that doesn't mean we can't "stick to our guns" lol. As far as your sympathy, that I want as much as warts;)

 

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.

 

Really, aren't you complaining? Or is this a speech?

 

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?

Chocolate starfish, lol, good one:) Isn't all greek performed safe? I think you could only use it as a comparison if they were to start offering it without protection. Bare vs not bare and that then became an expected service by many .Then you could make that comparison. Because some do offer greek as part of their service for no extra charge, do you hear me whining;)

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.

Well if you say it so, it must be! Realistically what we all do affects each and everyone of us, since many of us share the same clients and since condoms aren't 100%, or do you know something I don't.

Bottom line, and a point you seem to miss but like to assume, is-I could care less what anyone does but when the expectations of most clients are that bj's are preformed bare, then I and many others have and do feel the pressure to cave, even when we are consenting adults.

What we do agree on is that we all have the right to do as we please within this business, offer the services we choose to, but we should also be able to speak to what we experience without being accused of doing things we aren't .

I offer fs-in which the bj is covered, gfe-bbbj-pse-bbbj-how often do you think men choose fs over gfe/pse. I'll allow you to answer since you appear to know more about services and providers than I.

 

You can pretend it is not about competition, but most of us know it is.

Schuks, you got me , and I thought I was fooling you, darn! Lol.

 

Additional Comments:

Maybe I'm off the mark here, but I thought agencies (real agencies) were so called because they were acting as agents (ie representatives) for the ladies, not as their boss. As agents they did their bookings, screening, driver, security and so on for the lady

The model used, where an agency is considered the employer and the SP an employee and the lady has to do what the employer says...sounds more like a pimp, and that already is illegal....not to mention as for being a pimp, since already illegal, do you really think then laws banning bbbj are going to deter him.

As for enforcing this no bbbj law, how is that going to be done.

Having a law is one thing, enforcing it is completely another

A rambling

 

RG

Rg the Agencies I ran and worked for were real, I paid taxes, was registered as a business and ran it as such. You didn't have to tell ladies not to perform bbbj or bare sex it was just the norm not to. Back then bbbj was as frowned upon as bare sex was , that had nothing to do with pimping.

How agencies operate today may be different. I can only speak to how I knew it. Back then the ladies also asked for tips. Times change, people change and to each their own.

[Gabriella Laurence 301887]

That would be a valid argument except: all sps are not at liberty to decide for themselves what services to provide or not provide. Some are employees, many in fact, and they are and will be marketed and advertised as to offer popular services.

 

FO, I have read most of the thread so far and both sides have very valid points. Where I have an issue with (always will) is when someone mentions that SPs don't have the liberty to choose, independent or not.

 

We are all free to choose what works best for us and choose to do what makes us feel comfortable, what makes us feel safer and what makes us feel happier!

 

I remember before I first started in this industry. I googled "Montreal escorts", did extensive reading and contacted quite a few agencies. I learn about terms like SAFE GFE, GFE, GFE+ and PSE and what they meant according to Montreal standars.

 

Long story short, some agencies told me I HAD to be willing to provide BBBJ and preferably with CIM too (with swallow optional) to join their team. At the time, I wasn't comfortable with the idea of providing BBBJ so I thanked them for their time and kept looking. I did what was best for me, personally and I believe everyone can do the same if they truly desire.

 

They are employees. "not allowed' means the services are required as a condition of employment. Many agencies make it quite clear what services are required for new employees. Most sps know this.

 

The agency has "service requirements" that you don't agree with? No one is forcing those ladies to stay, and preventing them to go elsewhere (or even become independent). It is a CHOICE we make to stay or go or look for an agency that will respect our boundaries and comfort levels.

 

*Side note: of course, I am not talking about ladies with controlling pimps and/or who are being trafficked. These ladies are victims.

 

There are some who do not wish to provide bbbjs, but due to pressure of the business, do so for the sake of their business. The pressure of what others provide, and provide cheaper, drives what they provide.

 

It only drives what they provide IF they let it! They are the ones making that decison. It is their choice. Not the industry's choice.

 

I do not know how many requests "I lost" because I do not offer CIM and/or GREEK but I did not let that loss of income get to me because that income wasn't meant for me in the first place. I was not about to compromise on anything to get that income.

 

I can easily play the powerless victim here, start providing those activities and blame it all on the pressure of the business but I know deep down that it would be unfair and an easy way out.

 

I could say the same about my rates... Maybe I should lower my rates to attract the general hobbyist population but my rates are my rates and I am satisfied with them, same as to the activities I share with my patrons.

 

We all have the power to choose!

[Studio 110 by Sophia 150333]

As an agent, I clearly state that each lady has a choice in what kind of service they are comfortable with. I also encourage girls choose what rate is best for them, as long as it doesn't under cut my regular going rate.

 

Like one lady with me now prefers CBJ with the regular rate, but will consider BBBJ upon meeting and with an extra fee. And loves to kiss. Now this lady sometimes finds it harder to get her bookings, but at the same time knows that if she impresses them, then he will return because THAT client also prefers CBJ too.

 

Meanwhile...I have another that does offer BBBJ as a part of her GFE rate but does not kiss, so men do not like the fact that she does not kiss...so I have to clearly state this to them.

 

so at the end of the day, it is all about making sure both client and provider are completely satisfied in the style of service they offer. If an agent is precise in how and who to book CBJ or BBBJ should not be a problem, from my stand point. I suppose this does mean that I have to work harder, but then again

I WORK FOR THE LADY...NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

[fortunateone 156618]

FO, I have read most of the thread so far and both sides have very valid points. Where I have an issue with (always will) is when someone mentions that SPs don't have the liberty to choose, independent or not.

 

We are all free to choose what works best for us and choose to do what makes us feel comfortable, what makes us feel safer and what makes us feel happier!

 

I remember before I first started in this industry. I googled "Montreal escorts", did extensive reading and contacted quite a few agencies. I learn about terms like SAFE GFE, GFE, GFE+ and PSE and what they meant according to Montreal standars.

 

Long story short, some agencies told me I HAD to be willing to provide BBBJ and preferably with CIM too (with swallow optional) to join their team. At the time, I wasn't comfortable with the idea of providing BBBJ so I thanked them for their time and kept looking. I did what was best for me, personally and I believe everyone can do the same if they truly desire.

 

 

 

The agency has "service requirements" that you don't agree with? No one is forcing those ladies to stay, and preventing them to go elsewhere (or even become independent). It is a CHOICE we make to stay or go or look for an agency that will respect our boundaries and comfort levels.

 

*Side note: of course, I am not talking about ladies with controlling pimps and/or who are being trafficked. These ladies are victims.

 

 

 

It only drives what they provide IF they let it! They are the ones making that decison. It is their choice. Not the industry's choice.

 

I do not know how many requests "I lost" because I do not offer CIM and/or GREEK but I did not let that loss of income get to me because that income wasn't meant for me in the first place. I was not about to compromise on anything to get that income.

 

I can easily play the powerless victim here, start providing those activities and blame it all on the pressure of the business but I know deep down that it would be unfair and an easy way out.

 

I could say the same about my rates... Maybe I should lower my rates to attract the general hobbyist population but my rates are my rates and I am satisfied with them, same as to the activities I share with my patrons.

 

We all have the power to choose!

 

 

I believe, tho, that we are saying the same thing: that some agencies make certain services a condition of employment, which was my point. Not all sps, however, really have that many options, shall we say, as to going independent or being hired by another agency.

 

And I also have to include the asian micros, of which we have many here, and are cloaked within the guise of agencies in Ontario. They do not have a choice as to services, there is a SOPAM (standard operating procedure asian micros), where specific services are trained, required, advertised, expected, and to the point any sp who did not provide all (some exceptions would be greek, rimming, bbfs for example are not required, but clients may be requesting), would simply not get the appointments.

 

If someone else is in charge of the bookings, and the employed sp is not providing the services the agency required, she does not get the booking, which to me means not at liberty to decide. If your decision is based on working or not working, that isn't really a choice.

 

 

For myself, and others, the cbj is simply the boundary, i have no problem providing that only, as my health is more important than anything else to me. There are other things i also choose not to do that would probably make me more money, like 50 buck sessions lol. There is an agency nearby to me that is supposed to be a shared work place, but the 'manager' posts ads requiring back to back appts, 15 minute sessions, and so on. A requirement of not having one's own incall space, and needing a place to work out of, with limited options, is to hand over the booking process to someone who really does not care that much about your personal boundaries.

 

 

And to the ones who don't want to see/read/comment on the tired old topic, the title for this thread is self explanatory. No need to click on it lol

 

re: enforcement of the uncovered oral sex in NZ? I have to say, I doubt if you would get many sps voluntarily providing bbbjs if the result could be getting caught and facing a fine, but my first impression is that because they'd rather stay healthy and safe, they will be all over this as a regulation, you won't get too many complaining about it lol. One of the issues we have today can be linked to a lack of education about stds, transmission, testing, etc, for some groups of providers. Younger ones may have that immortal illusion that is typical of some younger people, meaning they take more risks even knowing the dangers. In NZ, education and information is a key part of disseminating the necessary information to sps and clients in brothels at least, by requiring health and safety information pamphlets, posters, and employment requirements. If the employer/manager is saying these are the conditions of employment here, these are the conditions of being a client here, it takes the unsafe options out of the hands of both sp and client.

[Gabriella Laurence 301887]

Thanks for the feedback, FO. I always appreciate your point of view :)

 

And I also have to include the asian micros, of which we have many here, and are cloaked within the guise of agencies in Ontario. They do not have a choice as to services, there is a SOPAM (standard operating procedure asian micros), where specific services are trained, required, advertised, expected, and to the point any sp who did not provide all (some exceptions would be greek, rimming, bbfs for example are not required, but clients may be requesting), would simply not get the appointments.

I am not too familiar with asian micros or what it really means. Would you mind giving me a little insight on it? From the way it sounds (from what I put in bold), it sounds like they are mostly like pimps/traffickers who specialize in Asian women?

 

If someone else is in charge of the bookings, and the employed sp is not providing the services the agency required, she does not get the booking, which to me means not at liberty to decide. If your decision is based on working or not working, that isn't really a choice.

 

Again, I believe if you are willingly working for people who demand you offer specific services you are not comfortable with, you have a decision to make--stay or leave.

 

If you are forced to work for them, then it's a different story.

[Hector17 9215]

And just as ladies shouldn't be forced to provide any services they do not want to provide, those same ladies shouldn't be telling other ladies what they can provide or not

 

 

RG

 

Exactly...

 

I see one Sp that does offer bbbj and another Sp that doesn't..luv em both

 

I dont ask the one that doesn't for a bbbj....Why?...because I know she doesn't offer that

 

In fact when I think about it we dont even discuss it...too much other fun stuff goin on....

[Phaedrus 209521]

 

This reminds me of a guy I once met. His name was Stone Wang.

 

Er... that's it. Apologies for the hijack.

 

And no, I don't know, so don't ask :)

[fortunateone 156618]

But you are still trying to explain in the context of consent, or in the context of being willing or not willing. When something is legislated or regulated for the good of the public health, it isn't a question of being willing or unwilling to risk health and safety.

 

So "ladies' are not the ones telling people what to do or not do. The whole point of this exercise is to describe what is already happening in a country that has decriminalized the same laws we had, and regulated it at the governmental level. It isn't like sp X is coming along and wagging a finger at sp Y and calling her dirty or whatever, which is what all this sounds like. It is simply one thing that actually could happen should the industry be regulated. Just as it already happens at brothels in Nevada, and so on.

 

In other words, don't shoot the messenger, it's the law: https://www.healthed.govt.nz/resource/health-and-safety-information-sex-workers

 

 

I am not sure about why this even should be hashed out so much: it's a health and safety issue. I don't think anyone is misinformed about the std transmission information, and the reality that bbbjs or any uncovered services come with higher risks? That's what is confusing to me, that we seem to be debating at the personal choice level, when the examples given take the choice away.

 

If you knew 100% that every time you drove your car you had a 100% risk of permanent physical injury just because you chose not to wear a seat belt, would you then follow the law that requires using the seatbelt, or would you simply continue to not use it and run the risk of a fine? Even if you drove your car 100 times and you didn't get in an accident, and you never got stopped by LE to check if you were complying?

 

It is a high risk activity, and that is all they need to know about it. Just as hard hats and steel toed boots are required for workers in construction, for their health and safety, so are barriers (which include dams and condoms) required for the health and safety of sex workers. It's a regulation because sex workers deal with the public in a commercial transaction setting, therefore, just like food servers, they are subject to increased or higher levels of regulations for the protection of the worker and the public. It's really a common sense issue and quite logical. It doesn't deal with emotions or feelings or desires, just common sense. A + B = C. If A is done without B, then there is no C. Just like if bjs are done with condoms, risk exposure is minimized, i.e. no C.

 

It isn't about choice, just as I mention before, if the government is regulating an industry, it regulates it period, whether we personally agree with it or not. And hard hats and steel toed boots are also, not a morality regulation. It has been determined that due to the specific risks 'inherent' in the construction industry, those safety features decrease the workers risk. And, since oral sex without barriers is proven higher risk, therefore a health and safety regulation as laid out by the NZ OHS folks, regulate that high risk activity by requiring safety equipment.

 

I have a hard time believing that any sp who is well educated about stds, risk factors, etc, doesn't know that bbbjs are higher risk. For me, I appreciate that they don't deny it is higher risk but they simply have chosen to accept the risk. Which again, is not the same thing as saying Canada is going to regulate anything at the OHS level. The whole point of this is someone saying that they can't, when in fact, they certainly can take the choice away from the clients and the sps, and the employers, as they have in NZ.

 

 

 

Vancouver area is interesting because agencies are not as popular as some other cities. So even if an sp is actually an employee, so to speak, the manager will probably post 10000% independent in many of their sp ads.

 

A micro is a 'mini' but illegal brothel. almost always run by an older woman or young man, usually Chinese, and staffed by Asian sps who are brought in from Asia on tourist or student visas. They usually live/work out of the apartment or house that is set up with various rooms. Some of the managers have more than one location, so an sp may be moved around from one to the other, based on how many they need at each location. The services are expansive, and the rates are low, even lower than low, like 140/hour nowadays, tho the typical micro offers a 45 minute rate, which always used to be 140, but now is typically 100-120. Even tho the rates are low, the sp herself usually gets more for each session here than she would in China. The sps are typically older like 30 plus, which is not an ideal age to be working in China. Ads also typically say the age is low 20s, and the pics are always 90% fake.

 

At just about every way you look at a micro, it is highly illegal, from being a bawdy house, to living off the avails, to working without a proper work visa, and probably unregistered tenants in the location. And the managers do get charged with the expected criminal charges that come along with running a micro.

[Miss Jessica Lee 43328]

Fortunateone I get what you're saying, but you're also assuming that just because something is "prohibited" that people won't do it. If any governing body was to start regulating or prohibiting specific services wouldn't bbfs be the one thing they'd be most concerned with?

 

It would be a perfect world if regulating bodies could just expect everyone to accept, and comply, with every rule, law, and prohibition, but that's obviously not the case.

 

Just the other day I picked my sister up from work and she was giving two guys trouble for being in the shop without safety footwear (she's on a joint health and safety committee).

 

Just because they ATTEMPT to regulate something doesn't mean they will be even a little bit successful. I mean are they gonna sit beside us and roll that condom on for us to ensure it's used?

 

I'm just stating the obvious here.

[fortunateone 156618]

Fortunateone I get what you're saying, but you're also assuming that just because something is "prohibited" that people won't do it. If any governing body was to start regulating or prohibiting specific services wouldn't bbfs be the one thing they'd be most concerned with?

 

It would be a perfect world if regulating bodies could just expect everyone to accept, and comply, with every rule, law, and prohibition, but that's obviously not the case.

 

Just the other day I picked my sister up from work and she was giving two guys trouble for being in the shop without safety footwear (she's on a joint health and safety committee).

 

Just because they ATTEMPT to regulate something doesn't mean they will be even a little bit successful. I mean are they gonna sit beside us and roll that condom on for us to ensure it's used?

 

I'm just stating the obvious here.

 

 

No doubt at all! I was coming at it more from the idea that it 'can't' be regulated or that there 'won't' be any regulations on this or other safety/health issues, and brought up the very noticeable fact that NZ (and Nevada) have actual regulations on this very thing. So in other words it can be regulated, like the safety boots and equipment, even tho some people, like your sister's coworkers, still don't follow the regulations. And in that particular example, she is the one to enforce it in the workplace, that particular workplace. It is assumed that other commercial workplaces would also have someone similar 'in charge' of it all.

 

Let's be honest here: the other sps working in a brothel in NZ are going to see the same clients as the sp (or sps) who provide more than the OHS allows. The client is going to talk about it, ask about, and name names. The other sps are going to report her, simple as that. The employer is at risk for non compliance, the other sps are under pressure from the clients getting something from that sp, and she will have to be let go, unless she follows the regulations I assume. Or she might end up with a visit from the Health department who fines her, or gives her a warning. I can see that there would be an incentive, financially, for not doing it in a brothel setting, where the clients have loose lips so to speak.

 

I can also see false reports, if business is down and one sp over the others is seeing more clients. And then of course, since education of the stds that can be caught via unprotected oral, the sps themselves would lack the incentive to provide it? Education on safer sex practises is one of the key things that helped slow down the spread of HIV, for example. Education is the key to anything.

[Miss Jessica Lee 43328]

No doubt at all! I was coming at it more from the idea that it 'can't' be regulated or that there 'won't' be any regulations on this or other safety/health issues, and brought up the very noticeable fact that NZ (and Nevada) have actual regulations on this very thing. So in other words it can be regulated, like the safety boots and equipment, even tho some people, like your sister's coworkers, still don't follow the regulations. And in that particular example, she is the one to enforce it in the workplace, that particular workplace. It is assumed that other commercial workplaces would also have someone similar 'in charge' of it all.

 

Let's be honest here: the other sps working in a brothel in NZ are going to see the same clients as the sp (or sps) who provide more than the OHS allows. The client is going to talk about it, ask about, and name names. The other sps are going to report her, simple as that. The employer is at risk for non compliance, the other sps are under pressure from the clients getting something from that sp, and she will have to be let go, unless she follows the regulations I assume. Or she might end up with a visit from the Health department who fines her, or gives her a warning. I can see that there would be an incentive, financially, for not doing it in a brothel setting, where the clients have loose lips so to speak.

 

I can also see false reports, if business is down and one sp over the others is seeing more clients. And then of course, since education of the stds that can be caught via unprotected oral, the sps themselves would lack the incentive to provide it? Education on safer sex practises is one of the key things that helped slow down the spread of HIV, for example. Education is the key to anything.

 

ok well let's then compare it to something that we can relate to ... that currently happens right now.

 

If a gent receives a service from a lady that's not advertised, or not usually part of her offering, he doesn't say much to anyone. For example, cim/swallow by a lady who doesn't usually offer.

 

He realizes it's part of a bonus he's received and mum is the word. He knows full well that by disclosing this to anyone, another gent, another lady, anyone, that he risks losing that privilege and maybe the future company of that lady. I only know this because I ran a poll a while back and the results were overwhelmingly in favour of keeping it quiet.

 

I'm not sure anything would change in that regard, just because there was a regulation.

 

The gent wants to look after his service, and his lady. He's not going to jeopardize that.

 

Gents? thoughts?

[Ice4fun 78396]

ok well let's then compare it to something that we can relate to ... that currently happens right now.

 

If a gent receives a service from a lady that's not advertised, or not usually part of her offering, he doesn't say much to anyone. For example, cim/swallow by a lady who doesn't usually offer.

 

He realizes it's part of a bonus he's received and mum is the word. He knows full well that by disclosing this to anyone, another gent, another lady, anyone, that he risks losing that privilege and maybe the future company of that lady. I only know this because I ran a poll a while back and the results were overwhelmingly in favour of keeping it quiet.

 

I'm not sure anything would change in that regard, just because there was a regulation.

 

The gent wants to look after his service, and his lady. He's not going to jeopardize that.

 

Gents? thoughts?

 

I agree even if illegal or regulations this would continue..

 

Just my opinion

[mrgreen760 37785]

This has always been very much a YMMV game so for me "Mom's" always the word.

 

Peace

MG

[The General 11309]

This type of thread surfaces with some great regularity... What is it, the great debate of the century?

 

Anyways, we all should be aware that there is some risks, but some risks are reasonable to accept. Anyways, I usually say too much on these types of threads, so will leave it at that.

[toklat77 4616]

It is interesting to read the various posts that my thread started, but it seems to me that it has gotten way off topic! My original point was if various strains of STD's become resistant to curing would this make SP's stop providing certain services such as BBBJ's and possibly threaten the whole industry? I mean one reason that BBFS is not offered is due to catching an incurable disease, but if other strains of STD's that are currently curable now become incurable would that not affect services such as BBBJ's and DATY?

[Miss Jessica Lee 43328]

It is interesting to read the various posts that my thread started, but it seems to me that it has gotten way off topic! My original point was if various strains of STD's become resistant to curing would this make SP's stop providing certain services such as BBBJ's and possibly threaten the whole industry? I mean one reason that BBFS is not offered is due to catching an incurable disease, but if other strains of STD's that are currently curable now become incurable would that not affect services such as BBBJ's and DATY?

 

its impossible to say as every individual will consider the risks differently, just as they do now.

 

The chance of contracting antibiotic resistant gonorrhea is slim at this stage as there's never been a case reported in either Canada or the US.

 

If someone is working or hobbying overseas, I hope they would take these types of facts into consideration when assessing risk.

[Phaedrus 209521]

The chance of contracting antibiotic resistant gonorrhea is slim at this stage as there's never been a case reported in either Canada or the US.

 

Wrong. It's been in Toronto for over a year now.

 

http://life.nationalpost.com/2013/01/10/antibiotic-resistant-gonorrhea-has-reached-north-america-for-the-first-time-ontario-mds/

 

And given it's been in Toronto for over a year, I'd be amazed if it hadn't spread.

[Studio 110 by Sophia 150333]

Wrong. It's been in Toronto for over a year now.

 

http://life.nationalpost.com/2013/01/10/antibiotic-resistant-gonorrhea-has-reached-north-america-for-the-first-time-ontario-mds/

 

And given it's been in Toronto for over a year, I'd be amazed if it hadn't spread.

 

Actually yes, there were cases reported in many locations ( yes the resistant variety ) , and this was at least 2 years or more ago. I think I had posted something at that time when there was thread on this same subject. I was in Ottawa when I learned about this. It is reported here in east as well.