Poll: Discriminatory practices of providers

What are your feelings on the discriminatory practices of providers based on race?

  • I think it's deplorable and I refuse to patronize anyone that I am aware of who practices this.

    Votes: 29 17.0%
  • I think it's deplorable, but I admit I will see them if they will see me.

    Votes: 10 5.8%
  • Although immoral there are instances in which I think it is acceptable or a necessary evil.

    Votes: 11 6.4%
  • I think it's deplorable, but a woman's right to choose is more important.

    Votes: 32 18.7%
  • I don't care, I just want to get laid.

    Votes: 34 19.9%
  • I think its acceptable and have no problem with it.

    Votes: 55 32.2%

  • Total voters
    171
Originally posted by justlooking
Also, if my views about prostitution in general seem assymetrical, it's because I think people who get paid assume a lot more obligations than the people who pay them.
I've never been in a completely symmetrical relationship, commercial or otherwise. What's it like?
jras
 
I really am done with this thread. Since it's moved into the current subject, here's a a quote from an ****** I received the other day... I almost started a thread based on this alone, but I never know when to start new threads, so...

"Hope you will forgive me but I am going to cancel my appointment with you on December 3rd. It is not that I do not want to spend time with a beautiful, intelligent woman. I have been thinking and dreaming about you all the time. However, my conscience has also been prodding at me and, in the end, I have made the decision not to be one of the multitudes of straying husbands. My wife may no longer be interested in a sexual relationship, which is a shame, but she has been dedicated and I just can't do this to her."

I don't know who owes what to whom, and I'm not going to pretend that I know how you're supposed to tell...

'Night, kids, talk to y'all later...
 
Last edited:
It is one paragraph from a much longer ****** -- and while I'm not sure whether you intended "heartfelt" to sound sarcastic, I can only say that his letter is easily one of the most touching pieces of correspondence I've had since I entered this arena...
 
"heartfelt" to sound sarcastic
it was a direct question , not ment to be sarcastic nor is what I am writing right now ment to be , lol I feel like everytime I post I must post a disclaimer .but I do find it odd and IMHO unethical that anyone would post a personal mail or any clients mail on a PMB , some of the topics on this thread was about ethics ??I always thought this subject would fall in the top 10 list ,I assume you had his permission to post it or oviousley you would not have . I would think that some clients would feel uneasy sending a mail to a provider if there would be a chance she would post it , I could be wrong , it wont be the first time , just my thoughts on that topic . not a flame just my observation and opinion .

nuff said
 
You'd be right, FoxyM, if there were any way to identify Cat's correspondent from what she quoted, but there isn't. So no confidence has been betrayed. It's no different from if she posted the simple fact that she had a client change his mind about hobbying because of the way he felt about his wife, without quoting anything.
 

Wwanderer

Kids, don't try this at home
Re: Rigorous symmetry

Originally posted by Wwanderer
In a truly symmetrical relationship you can't tell which one is you and which is the other person.
The above is what jl was referring to in the post hvb quotes above, for those who might have forgotten (which probably includes most since 3 weeks is at least a Great Age and a half in UG time).

-Ww
 
Last edited:

justme

homo economicus
The 'recent date' records not just the last post in the associated thread, but also the last vote made in the poll.

I agree that it's irrittating.

It's exactly why you'll see like 20 polls in a row in the new posts section.

Someone new to the board has stumbled onto the poll section.

I find it hilarious that they generally respond to every poll, even the ones that aren't 'eternal' or 'universal' (Ww's SAT score, for example).
 
Here's my take on this

I have no problems if the provider doesn't want to have sex with ugly guys

I have no problems if the provider doesn't want to have sex with smelly guys

I have no problems if the provider doesn't want to have sex with psychos

I have no problems if the provider doesn't want to have sex with a rude guy.

I have every problem if the provider thinks that a guy is ugly or smelly or psycho or rude based on the race. That is racism whichever way you look it. That is not 'right to choose'. That is racism. She is a racist because she has pre-judged the person's character just by his ethnic looks. Right to choose can happen only if the provider knows for certain that he is smelly or psycho based on previous experience
 
Cat_Ballou said:
Your point is duly noted, Monica, and I agree, but no, I did not betray a confidence in this instance, nor would I ever intentionally do so...
...and I don't see any problem with posting excerpts that don't have identifying information in them. That's always been legitimate in all walks of life.
 
Top